Katie Holmes covers the latest issue of Glamour. She’s promoting Rare Objects, a film in which she stars and directed. It’s adapted from a 2016 Kathleen Tessaro novel. She’s wanted to direct for a while, and you can tell that she’s very proud of her efforts and being able to put this project together. She spends a good chunk of this interview talking about her fashion and why she wears weird stuff (because she wants to) and what it’s like to rewatch Dawson’s Creek. Some highlights:

On Dawson’s Creek: “I was just 18 when we started, and I really appreciated the writing because I felt like, as a teenager, I had so many different feelings, trying to go from being a girl to a woman. And I felt like [creator Kevin Williamson] had this way of putting words to those feelings. So for me, playing that role, I was like, “Oh, that’s what that means. Oh, I get that.” I loved doing it. It was a really fun, profound experience.

She’s rewatched the Creek & whether she thinks the show holds up: “In some ways, yes. Some ways, no. We had our big episode where Jack comes out and I’m so glad we had that episode, and I’m so sad that that is what was happening for people. And I’m so glad that it’s not happening, hopefully, to that extent in today’s world. But I think it [was also] just this combination of Wilmington, North Carolina—so beautiful. There was that sense of innocence. Kevin wrote the simplicity of teen emotions really well.

On social media: “In my life now, I don’t go on social media that much. I don’t scroll that much because I don’t want all that information. And maybe because I did come up where there was a time and place for things, even with our show—it started airing on Tuesday nights and you had to wait a week. So you got to think about that one episode. The work was limited to that. We also were protected. We were in North Carolina, we were working 14 hours a day, and we were really contained and not really distracted by the outside world, which was to our benefit and to the benefit of the show, so we could do what we had to do.

She didn’t want to play the sexy young thing: “I didn’t want to be the sexy young thing. I am not sexy. I used to have a friend of mine come to all my photo shoots to make sure that they didn’t try to make me that way.

Whether there was a role she wanted but didn’t get: “The [2002] movie 40 Days and 40 Nights. Originally, there was a read-through, and it was going to be me and Ashton Kutcher and [American Pie star and Holmes’s The Wanderers costar] Eddie Kaye Thomas. And I didn’t know this, Eddie just told me, but he had gotten into a fender bender on the way to the table read and the reading just didn’t go well. There were executives and all that, and you could just feel it. I remember leaving going, Oh, my God, what just happened? It wasn’t meant to be. They ended up making it with another cast.

Why people are fascinated with her fashion: “I really don’t know. I enjoy [fashion]. I mean, I enjoy the craftsmanship. I enjoy putting things together. And I work with [stylist] Brie Welch, and she’s very detail oriented, and that inspires me. I think it is very creative. I love vintage shopping. I love the art of design.

Seeing her daughter embrace ‘90s style: “I think the ’90s style is exactly back. Makes me feel old. We lived through that already! My mom says she should have saved things. I should have saved things.

[From Glamour]

I’m actually glad we didn’t try to save things from the 1990s because what we wore then wouldn’t have held up physically for the most part. I mean, vintage everything was in style, your clothes were supposed to be cheap and threadbare, hopefully ripped. You never wore new jeans. The ideal outfit involved combat boots, ripped jeans and cheap flannel. But yeah, it’s funny to watch the youths try to reinvent that. The one thing I’ll say is that jeans were so much better in the ‘90s. I’ve never really thought about it this way, but I guess Katie Holmes is sort of a ‘90s fashion icon, in that she’s trying to navigate all of the weird fashion trends with her ‘90s eye even today. As for all the talk about Dawson’s Creek – I agree that the show captured something special about teen life in that era, but I also agree that parts of the show really don’t hold up.

Cover courtesy of Glamour, additional photos courtesy of Backgrid & Avalon Red.

Several weeks ago, Robert DeNiro announced that he and his girlfriend Tiffany Chen welcomed a baby recently. DeNiro is 79 years old, and this newborn baby girl (named Gia Virginia) is his seventh kid. Well, DeNiro has significant company in the Old Dad Club. His friend Al Pacino is expecting a child with his 29-year-old girlfriend. Pacino is 82 years old. What is up with these two, my god.

Robert De Niro’s got nothing on Al Pacino … the 82-year-old actor’s girlfriend is a month away from giving birth … multiple sources tell TMZ.

Noor Alfallah is 8 months pregnant, our sources say. The 29-year-old has been linked to Pacino since April 2022.

Al has 3 children from 2 different women … 2 with Beverly D’Angelo and 1 with Jan Tarrant.

Alfallah has had previous relationships with Mick Jagger and billionaire Nicolas Berggruen.

Pacino would be 100, God willing, when the child turns 18. Al beats 79-year-old De Niro, who just had a baby with Tiffany Chen.

[From TMZ]

Pacino’s rep confirmed the news after TMZ’s initial reporting, so it’s really happening. We’ve known about Pacino and Noor for a while – we talked about them in April 2022, when they went to dinner with Jason Momoa and everyone was joking about Pacino’s Shrek phone case. True story: Noor would have been seven years old when Shrek originally came out in theaters. She wasn’t even born yet when Scent of a Woman – Pacino’s Oscar-winning role – came out. I’m also fascinated by the life Noor has lived thus far – a jet-set lifestyle which sees her thrown into the paths of wealthy septuagenarians and octogenarians, men she sees as her romantic peers. I mean, she dated Mick Jagger when she was like 25 years old. And now she’s having a baby with Al Pacino. Whew.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instagram.

Last week The Hollywood Reporter released the video for their male actors’ roundtable, a conversation with 6 actors (Jeff Bridges, Kieran Culkin, Damson Idris, Michael Imperioli, Pedro Pascal, Evan Peters) THR believes to be leading candidates for Emmy nominations in the drama category this year. As Kaiser covered, the runaway hit of the video was Kieran and Pedro playing off each other. The camaraderie started right off the bat when moderator Lacey Rose asked the men to describe their fan encounters. Kieran opened with fans being too comfortable with touching him (in one instance he was pushing his kid in a stroller and snapped at the too-tactile fan “No touchy!”). And then Pedro upped the ante:

Pedro Pascal… sat down with fellow actors Jeff Bridges, Kieran Culkin, Damson Idris, Michael Imperioli and Evan Peters for a roundtable discussion with The Hollywood Reporter on Wednesday to discuss drama acting.

The group’s conversation turned to fan encounters they’ve had with their viewers, to which Pascal seemed to top.

Pascal recalled that after “Game of Thrones” fans saw his character Oberyn Martell’s brutal death in Season 4, fans began to recreate the scene in which Martell’s eyes were gouged out during a fight to the death with Gregor “The Mountain” Clegane (Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson).

“People were super into taking selfies with their thumbs in my eyes,” Pascal shared. “And at first, I was so earnest and happy about the success of the character in the show, I’d let them.”

That all came to a halt, he said, explaining, “And then I remember getting a bit of an eye infection.”

“Succession” star Culkin responded, “Wow, that’s a lot of trust.”

Pascal went on to other popular roles, including HBO hit “The Last of Us” and Disney+ show “The Manalorian.”

[From USA Today]

So let’s get business out of the way first: people should keep their hands to themselves. If they simply must, they should at least ask the actor first. They should also assume, under any and all circumstances, that if they are permitted to touch, that does not include the eyes. Kapish? Look, I get that this particular homage was specific to the character, but come on.

But of course what really matters is how adorable Pedro is. He has the relaxed energy of someone who’s worked towards this career for a long time and is clearly enjoying the moment. And his playful energy is just infectious. By contrast, I’ve loved Evan Peters in everything I’ve seen him in, but when the moderator asked what fans say to him on the street, all he had was “can I take a picture.” You can do better than that, Evan.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Hollywood Reporter (@hollywoodreporter)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Pedro Pascal Daily (@pedritodaily)

Photos credit: BauerGriffin/INSTARimages, JPI Studios/Avalon and via Instagram

Ice Spice & Taylor Swift performed “Karma” together in New Jersey. [LaineyGossip]
Blue Ivy Carter has joined her mom on stage at Beyonce’s concerts. [Just Jared]
Trying to predict the end of Ted Lasso. [Pajiba]
Look at the good service dog with his diploma! [Dlisted]
Orlando Bloom bares his chi-chis at the beach. [OMG Blog]
Did we talk about Scarlett Johansson’s striped Prada? I can’t remember. [Go Fug Yourself]
The fashion at Cannes this year was so… boring?? [Jezebel]
Okay, Fan Bingbing did look amazing in Cannes. [RCFA]
Hailey Bieber supports Big Dairy. [Egotastic]
Were the 1990s the “saddest decade” in film? [Buzzfeed]
The ladies of This Is Us reunited. [Seriously OMG]
Tina Turner was prepared for Mick Jagger’s Live Aid stunt. [Towleroad]

Taylor Swift X Ice Spice

pic.twitter.com/iU1nSNObY5

— Ebro In The Morning (@EBROINTHEAM) May 30, 2023

Taylor Swift and Ice Spice perform “Karma” together on the Eras Tour in N.J. pic.twitter.com/xzysvfiGWj

— Variety (@Variety) May 27, 2023

Once again, the knives are seemingly out for our fair Katie Keen, the Princess of Wales. Is all of this solely about Kate’s thunder-stealing at the Chelsea Flower Show, or is this a larger shift to openly criticize Kate for some other purpose? I do not know. But it’s interesting. So, the basic gist is that Kate is sort of a patron of Action for Children, and the chief of AfC is a convicted murderer. Kate had no idea when she met this guy in Glasgow in May 2022. William was there too, but the Daily Mirror didn’t put his name in the headline, nor did they use photos of William in the same frame as this dude.

Paul Carberry stabbed a father-to-be on a train five times and wounded another passenger. Colleagues knew of his past when he became the £154,500-a-year chief of Action for Children in March. But charity patron Kate and her husband Prince William had no idea of his crimes when they met him at a primary school a year ago.

Carberry, 60, was photographed smiling with the couple – then the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They then joined others in a discussion about teaching children emotions.

Carberry was a teen himself when he carried out his fatal attack, age 16. But it did not stop him becoming boss of AfC, which aims to “protect and support children and young people”. Nor has it prevented him securing a role on the Serious and Organised Crime Taskforce in his native Scotland – with a brief to curb youth gangs.

Today, when we confronted Carberry about his past, he told us: “That’s something I’ve regretted every day of my life. A family did not have their loved one because of me.”

Carberry stabbed John Murray, 21, on a train carrying Scottish football fans to London for a match against England in 1979. Court reports said Carberry, who had been drinking beer and vodka, was in the Govan Team gang – named after a tough district of his native Glasgow. The court was told violence began after a member of Carberry’s mob molested a woman on board. Carberry was reportedly brandishing a flick knife as he chased Murray and two pals through the crowded train. He first stabbed Michael McBain, 22, who was asleep on a carriage floor. Then he repeatedly plunged the knife into Mr Murray when a locked door stopped him escaping, reports said.

Carberry served time at a youth jail and in adult prison before being freed in 1985. He got a job as a social worker and rose high in the profession. He joined AfC and was its Scottish boss when he met Kate and William – patrons of a string of charities – at St John’s primary in Inverclyde last May. He said afterwards: “The Duchess is a great supporter of our charity. I was honoured to discuss our work with the Duke and Duchess.”

AfC said the Palace was informed about Carberry’s murder conviction when he became CEO this year. None of the charity’s literature refers to his crime. And there is no sign Carberry ever mentioned it during public appearances or articles.

[From The Daily Mirror]

So, it’s insane that he effectively only served a sentence of about six years, even if he was only 16 years old when he ran around, stabbing multiple people on a train. It’s also bonkers that… like, no one ever brought it up again? Hello, background checks? Just a cursory background check by the charity OR the palace? I get why a charity might not have the resources to do a deep dive on all of their employees, but what I don’t get is why the palace didn’t catch Carberry’s criminal record before Kate and William did the photo-op with him and his charity last year? That’s what this is – it’s not specifically a criticism of Kate for shaking hands with a murderer, it’s that palace staff are half-assing these events and no one is doing their due diligence. No one thought it would look bad to have Kate posing with this guy, just like no one thought to run background on various other shady people Kate has posed with recently.

I remember this event in Glasgow last year, people were saying that Kate seemed like she was medicated. She was so extra at this event.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid, Instar.

If you’re a card-carrying member of the Snake Fam and you want to know more about Taylor Swift’s new boyfriend, this New Yorker piece is probably where you should start. I’m not saying I like Matt Healy now or that I no longer find him deeply unproblematic, but I do understand a little bit better how he got to this place. The New Yorker’s Jia Tolentino had been following him and interviewing him for months before the Taylor Swift stuff started happening, when he was already in “his current persona: a post-woke rock star, switching unpredictably between tenderness and trollishness.” It’s a portrait of a self-conscious douche who tried to do “the right thing” for a while, then grew tired of that persona and so he developed a new one. Or maybe this was always who he was: a guy who does Nazi salutes and says racist sh-t in interviews. Some highlights from this New Yorker piece:

Taylor Swift’s appearance at The 1975’s show in January. “It was really based of Taylor to do the show,” he said, seeming a bit awed that it had happened. Healy had skipped his make-out routine during the previous night’s show. “I’m not kissing anybody in front of Taylor Swift, have some respect,” he’d said

On Harry Styles: In the British press, Healy is sometimes positioned as Styles’s Wario, his evil twin. Their bands became popular around the same time; both men are straight-leaning but, like Mick Jagger and David Bowie before them, enjoy revelling in sexual ambiguity. Healy said the band had asked Styles to come. “He gave us a hard no,” he added, laughing. “He’s afraid that he would have to say something.” Healy found it annoying that, at a certain level of fame, celebrities can cultivate liberal auras while avoiding the risk of taking real political stands.

Music & love in his 30s: “All of the things that used to define my work, or the nihilistic part of one’s twenties—postmodernism, addiction, individualism—they’re all cool and sexy and appropriate at the time, but, for me now, are those the things I yearn for?” In his personal life, he had found himself wishing for consistency and reliability, “the things we get from a partner that we don’t get from the rest of the world.”

His politics: Healy often laments that “we used to expect our artists to be cigarette-smoking bohemian outsiders, and now we expect them to be liberal academics.” He has also said that, although he doesn’t count his political views as particularly educated or authoritative, he knows that they stem from impulses toward empathy and freedom that are important.

The debacle of his interview on ‘The Adam Friedland Show’: I asked him about the podcast. He’d been doing so much promo, he told me, that he wanted to do something that felt more like simply talking with his friends. But, of course, he had done this all in public, on mike. Had he baited his fans on purpose? “A little bit,” he said. “But it doesn’t actually matter. Nobody is sitting there at night slumped at their computer, and their boyfriend comes over and goes, ‘What’s wrong, darling?’ and they go, ‘It’s just this thing with Matty Healy.’ That doesn’t happen…If it does, you’re either deluded or you are, sorry, a liar. You’re either lying that you are hurt, or you’re a bit mental for being hurt. It’s just people going, ‘Oh, there’s a bad thing over there, let me get as close to it as possible so you can see how good I am.’ And I kind of want them to do that, because they’re demonstrating something so base level.”

His thing with Taylor: Neither of their representatives would comment on the record, but I kept getting texts from people who knew them, and who insisted: this time, it’s real.

[From The New Yorker]

His answer to how people are *still* responding to his racism, bigotry and problematic words and behavior is basically “the only people who care are too online.” Not even that, he doesn’t believe that it should be or actually IS important that Taylor Swift (arguably one of the most famous women in the world, a woman who encourages a parasocial relationship with her fans) is dating someone like him, someone with a long list of problematic behavior. The snake fam will cry that Taylor is not responsible for Healy’s sh-t and I agree, she’s not responsible. She wasn’t the one calling Ice Spice “Inuit Spice,” complete with a fake “accent.” No, Taylor was the one trying to clean up her boyfriend’s mess by bringing Ice Spice on stage as a prop. Anyway…

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

Since March, the Heritage Foundation – an American right-wing think-tank- has been openly trying to “deport” Prince Harry. The Heritage Foundation is where a lot of British right-wingers work too – there’s a direct line, these days, between the American and British neofascist ideologies, and British right-wingers clearly believe that they’re influential in American politics and culture. That’s why Heritage Foundation people are working on this special project on behalf of the British newspapers. Heritage is suing the Biden administration to get their hands on Prince Harry’s visa application. Harry wrote about doing drugs, and Heritage is trying to claim that Harry’s drug use affects his visa. It does not. And as such, Immigration has shrugged off Heritage’s FOIA requests and now they’re shrugging off Heritage’s dumbf–k lawsuit.

The Joe Biden administration has been accused of “stonewalling” a legal bid to uncover details of Prince Harry’s US visa application using Freedom of Information laws. A request to have the application fast-tracked on the grounds of exceptional public interest has been turned down, which has been described as an “outrageous” decision by the Washington-based think-tank pursuing the case.

The right-wing Heritage Foundation has now asked a judge to overturn the decision by the Department of Homeland Security and two of its agencies, with a hearing expected next month. The Heritage Foundation demanded the immediate release of the Duke of Sussex’s visa records in March after he admitted to drug-taking in his memoir, Spare.

Under US Freedom of Information laws, applications can be fast-tracked if there is “widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exist possible questions about the government’s integrity which affect public confidence”. The Heritage Foundation argued that the Prince Harry case had cleared that bar, but the fast-track application has been turned down on the grounds that British-based publishers including The Telegraph, which had demanded answers over the visa application, were not sufficiently mainstream in the US to count.

Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Centre for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, said: “The Biden administration is clearly stonewalling here and they are trying to avoid releasing any documents. They are trying to do so by undermining the credibility of the British Press, which is outrageous, and by concentrating their fire on the British Press even though we have submitted articles in the US press about the same subject.”

The Heritage Foundation has submitted Freedom of Information requests for the Duke’s visa application records to the Department of Homeland Security, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services and US Customs and Border Protection.

In its written opposition to the fast-track request, the Department of Homeland Security described The Telegraph and other British publications as “niche” and also said it was not persuaded that there were exceptional circumstances that made an urgent response necessary.

[From The Telegraph]

“The Department of Homeland Security described The Telegraph and other British publications as ‘niche’” – OH MY GOD. The Telegraph and other British outlets have spent a lot of time and resources putting together this whole “case” for why Prince Harry needs to be deported and then Homeland Security just laughed at them and called them niche. I mean, is IS niche. Homeland Security and Immigration are huge departments dealing with millions of different issues every day. What the Heritage Foundation is doing – in concert with these niche publications – is waste everyone’s time, money and effort. DHS was never going to give a f–k that a rich, white, Christian man did drugs and that he included that fact on his visa!

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Instar.

When you’ve been reading royal gossip for years, you do get a sense when the narrative starts to shift, and when certain royals are being “punished” by the palace. That’s absolutely happening right now to the Princess of Wales. Kate thought it would be a keen idea to overshadow King Charles and Queen Camilla’s visit to the Chelsea Flower Show and she’s been paying for it ever since. To be clear, Buckingham Palace hasn’t gone Full Anti-Kate – they’re not trying to destroy her, they’re just trying to “put her in her place” and ensure that she gets some bad press. What’s also funny is seeing how the royal rota is furiously trying to make it sound like that’s not happening in plain sight. From this past weekend’s episode of “Palace Confidential” from the Mail:

The Princess of Wales’ popularity is ‘unsettling’ for King Charles and Queen Camilla – but the Palace see Kate as a ‘great model for the monarchy’, royal experts have claimed.

Kate Mansey’s take: Mansey insisted that the Princess of Wales ‘was not competing’ with her in-laws with her top-secret engagement. The expert said: ‘I think she’s a great model for the monarchy [and] for the Royal Family and they appreciate that. They wouldn’t have had her there if they didn’t think it would be brilliant so I think there’s a way they can all exist.’ What’s more, the royal expert noted that the King and Queen were in Northern Ireland where they’re engaging in ‘high level diplomacy’. Kate added: ‘So a bit of glam and glitz from Catherine [is welcome]. There’s room for everybody!’

Richard Eden’s take: Before the Queen passed away, the royal expert highlighted how there were royal aides who wanted Charles and Camilla to complete as many engagements as possible with William and Kate.He explained: ‘I think that was a chance to show that this was the future of the monarchy and it’s in safe hands, that sort of thing. Now that [Charles and Camilla] are King and Queen, it is slightly different. They want lots of attention for their causes and the things that they feel strongly about so it could be a bit unsettling if they don’t get that attention.’

[From The Daily Mail]

“A bit of glam and glitz from Catherine [is welcome]. There’s room for everybody!” – Mansey is literally saying that to Buckingham Palace. She’s telling Charles’s musty courtiers to ease off on the Kate attacks. I believe Robert Jobson did the same – it’s like the courtiers are giving Charles and Camilla a pep talk, “it’s okay sir, Kate will get attention, it’s good attention!” Except the problem is the suggestion that Charles and Camilla don’t have enough glitz and glam on their own, that they need Kate running around in Sister Wife dresses and Shamble Wiglets to provide a dose of royal glamour. And yes, Charles and Cam are “unsettled.” You might even say they’re angry, short-sighted and punitive.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

The British media will sometimes make up stories about the Sussexes to comfort themselves. That’s what I believe – sometimes, there isn’t some conscious projection or long-term strategy at play, it’s that the British papers are sad that they’ve been cut off from the Sussexes so they’ll make up dumb stories about how, any day now, Prince Harry will leave Meghan and come running back to them. It’s pathetic more than anything else. Camilla Tominey recently tried to convince people that Harry is constantly renting hotel rooms just to get some peace and quiet… which sounds more like something William would do, but I digress. Now Richard Eden’s Mail column has this little tidbit called “Home alone Harry.”

The Duke of Sussex, who attended his father’s Coronation without his wife, Meghan, cuts an increasingly lonely figure back home in California. Or, that, at least, is the claim from well-connected journalist Petronella Wyatt, daughter of the late Queen Mother’s confidant Lord (Woodrow) Wyatt.

‘Friends of mine who live near Harry and Meghan are always bumping into Meghan at parties these days,’ Petronella says.

‘She tends to leave Harry at home.’ Saves paying for a babysitter…

[From The Daily Mail]

I’m reminded of the fact that the paparazzi believed that Meghan would attend the Ms. Foundation event in New York solo, and they were surprised when Harry joined her. Whatever they had planned that night, they planned it for Meghan. Maybe. Anyway, as I said, these people are just desperately trying to convince themselves that Harry and Meghan are having problems or that Harry will somehow “return” to the UK. Speaking of, they got some random butler to talk about how the Sussexes could “come back.”

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle could be planning a move back to the UK, a former royal butler has claimed. There are claims the couple could be looking to set up a base in Britain by buying a property so they can visit more often.

King Charles’ former butler, Grant Harrold, told the New York Post: “I’d never say never, it’s always possible that one day he might want to come home, it’s possible that he might buy [a property] here if he wanted to come over [more] and Meghan didn’t want to come over. Meghan doesn’t really have any family here as such, all her family are in the States and that’s where Harry has decided he wants to set up his home.”

Harry was born in raised in Britain and Grant thinks his ties to his home country will be too tough for the duke to sever. He explained: “He’ll want to have that association with Britain just in case one day he does want to come back and I don’t think Harry will want to sever ties.”

[From The Daily Mirror]

Harry has literally spoken multiple times about his desire to visit the UK with his family, so that his children can know his homeland and his side of the family. That was the whole reason why the Sussexes kept their lease on Frogmore Cottage and why they paid back the extensive renovation costs for that dilapidated shack: so they would always have a home in the UK, so they could visit family and do charity work in the UK. Then King Charles evicted them from their family home. So… yeah. Whatever, peeps.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

Taylor Swift and Joe Alwyn broke up in March/April after more than six years together. Everyone wondered what happened between them, but then Swift jumped bajingo-first into a relationship with The 1975’s Matt Healy, a Nazi-saluting British rocker with a long list of racist comments and problematic behavior. The Snake Fam has been in the trenches and Taylor’s team has been trying to downplay and ignore the backlash against Taylor for this Healy relationship. How would Taylor wiggle her way out of this one? Well, last week, Taylor released a new song from her vault on the “Til Dawn Edition” of Midnights. The song is “You’re Losing Me.” This, apparently, is Taylor’s version of what happened between her and Joe Alwyn. In-between a chorus of “Stop, you’re losing me,” she included these clues about what went down:

Every mornin’, I glared at you with storms in my eyes
How can you say that you love someone you can’t tell is dyin’?
I sent you signals and bit my nails down to the quick
My face was gray, but you wouldn’t admit that we were sick

And the air is thick with loss and indecision
I know my pain is such an imposition
Now, you’re running down the hallway
And you know what they all say
“You don’t know what you got until it’s gone”

How long could we be a sad song
‘Til we were too far gone to bring back to life?
I gave you all my best me’s, my endless empathy
And all I did was bleed as I tried to be the bravest soldier
Fighting in only your army, frontlines, don’t you ignore me
I’m the best thing at this party (You’re losing me)
And I wouldn’t marry me either
A pathological people pleaser
Who only wanted you to see her
And I’m fading, thinkin’
“Do something, babe, say something” (Say something)
“Lose something, babe, risk something” (You’re losing me)
“Choose something, babe, I got nothing” (I got nothing)
“To believe, unless you’re choosing me”

[Lyrics from Taylor Swift’s “You’re Losing Me”]

“And I wouldn’t marry me either” has apparently convinced the Snake Fam that Taylor is once again “the victim” in love, that Taylor and Joe broke up because Joe didn’t want to marry her, because he wouldn’t fight for her, because he didn’t want to fight for their relationship. Maybe that’s the case. I have no idea. But I do know that following the release of this song, no one’s talking about Matt Healy being racist anymore!

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, Cover Images.