Being a celebrity does not automatically come with a golden ticket to perfection. Stars may look like a million bucks when they hit the red carpet, but as many — like Kristen Bell and Chrissy Teigen — are quick to remind fans on social media, they are human just like everyone else.
Amber Tamblyn joined the Celebrity Club of Realness on Saturday when she shared an Instagram photo one week after welcoming her daughter with husband David Cross into the world. In the pic, Tamblyn shoots herself from the neck down wearing a stained gray shirt and jokes about her breasts leaking milk. “Who Wore It Better? Left tit or right tit?” she wrote, choosing the comical captions #MilkLife and #StarsTheyreJustLikeUs!”
A post shared by Amber Tamblyn (@amberrosetamblyn) on
Even though Tamblyn captured the moment with her unique and biting sense of humor, her photo offers an intimate look at her experience with new motherhood, as well as a moment that’s too often considered a social taboo to share. Instagram changed its policy in 2015 to allow breastfeeding pictures after it came under fire for claiming such images fell under its “No Nudity” clause, and that was only the beginning of bringing this daily experience out into the open. TV shows like Jane the Virgin have started tackling the subject in more real ways to publicize the hardships new mothers face, but Tamblyn’s photo is another kind of an opening point. She doesn’t have to bare it all to say it all. By keeping her shirt on, she reveals the demanding, exhausting and downright confusing moments mothers experience as they adjust to life after giving birth.
In other words, leakage happens.
Nursing often and using a breast pump are two ways to offset leakage and, as Tamblyn shows, it is natural, it is normal, and it is nothing to hide. Her photo offers a gateway to having a conversation about breastfeeding for new moms navigating the shared experiences of their bodies after giving birth. She reminds women everywhere that throughout the ups and downs of new motherhood having a sense of humor (and perhaps a breast pump) is key.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Nick Viall faced a tough decision the week before hometowns on this season of The Bachelor: Corrine or Kristina? As much as we all loved to hate Corrine (hello, female Chad), she and Nick shared an instant physical attraction, so much so that she kept interrupting other contestants to spend more time with him and his lips during her first night at the mansion. But, even though it took longer, Nick also sparked with Kristina in what seemed like a more genuine way. At least, to her.
I wasn’t surprised when Nick ultimately chose to send Kristina home and keep Corinne for another week. Nick’s season has been a strange one with quiet than exciting moments, and Corinne served the show's producers much-needed ratings gold between her “platinum vagine ” and her poop-shoveling excuses. But there’s one person it did surprise and Kristina won’t stop talking about it.
Speaking with The Huffington Post’s Here to Make Friends podcast on Friday, she insisted Nick sent her home much too early. “Our time came so late, and I’m the type of person to want to try it all before we call it quits,” she said. “And to this day I’m left with ‘what if’ but I’ve come to terms with it.”
Kristina and Nick didn’t have a lasting connection. Did they get along? Did they have fun together? Sure. But their relationship never dove beneath surface level. By the time it came time to choose between Kristina and Corinne, it’s easy to see producers urging him in one specific blonde-haired direction because they didn’t want the show to lose its one big draw.
Nick has dutifully played his part even after Corinne left the week of hometowns. He opened up about how hard it was to let her go in his weekly People blog. "Saying goodbye to Corinne was terrible,” he shared. “Corinne is an exceptional woman who made such an impact on me during this journey. There are so many memorable moments we shared together.”
Kristina got the boot because she played the game wrong (and it is a game). She played honestly and with her feelings on the line. In the end, viewers (and apparently Nick) wanted a little less reality.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
The Department of Homeland Security is proposing a new immigration policy that could separate mothers from their children. Reuters reports that to deter illegal immigration to the United States, the Department of Health and Human Services could detain children crossing illegally with their mothers. The government would be able to keep parents in custody while they await asylum hearings or contest their deportation. Health and Human services would send the kids to U.S. relatives or find a state-sponsored guardian in the foster care system.
Under current law, families going through the court process can stay in the U.S. until their cases get resolved, but President Trump is calling for an end to this so-called practice of "catch and release."
According to The Guardian, supporters of the new policy state that some women are willing to face the often-dangerous journey to America with their children because they believe that the system will allow them to stay in America while they await their court dates.
Of course, people are seeing the proposal as inhumane and a violation of human rights. The American Academy of Pediatrics Department of Federal Affairs opposes the proposed changes, saying that the emotional stress could prove to be traumatic.
"Federal authorities must exercise caution to ensure that the emotional and physical stress children experience as they seek refuge in the United States is not exacerbated by the additional trauma of being separated from their siblings, parents or other relatives and caregivers," it wrote in a statement.
U.S. Representative Henry Cuellar, a Democrat from Texas, told Reuters, "Bottom line: separating mothers and children is wrong. That type of thing is where we depart from border security and get into violating human rights."
Twitter users took to the platform to voice their concerns, as well.
Reports that the Trump Admin is considering separating children from their parents demonstrates the inhumanity of its immigration policies
— Senator Dick Durbin (@SenatorDurbin) March 3, 2017
Parents shouldn't have to worry about who will take care of their children. We need to fix broken immigration system, not separate families. https://t.co/ZmlZEw1js3
— Senator Cortez Masto (@SenCortezMasto) March 4, 2017
Make things worse, there are even more changes on the horizon. According to Politico, President Trump is expected to sign a new executive order addressing his travel ban this Monday.
When you're in a beauty rut, it's a little like looking in your closet and seeing absolutely nothing to wear. Sure, you have the bones to create a killer look — a bold liner here, a bottle of texture spray there — but sometimes you just need a boost of inspiration. That's why we created Short Cuts, a series of quick, easy-to-follow videos meant to educate, empower, and excite the beauty nerds in all of us. Whether you're looking to learn something new or to refresh your current routine, there's a Short Cut for you.
For a makeup technique that really only requires skill in blending, smoky eyes are so damn intimidating. There's something about the lack of rules that makes the look incredibly hard to master. How much product is too much? How long do I have to blend? These are all questions that have entered our mind while trying to create the sultry eyes of our dreams.
To give us all a much-needed informational, we called upon Sam Sasso, R29 's editorial assistant and resident smoky eye queen to show us how it's done. The best part? It only requires two products. Check it out in the video above.
Step 1. Apply some black eyeliner onto your lower lash line and your entire upper lid. (We used this one!)
Step 2. Blend out the black liner using a fluffy eyeshadow brush and (optional!) matte brown eyeshadow.
Step 3. Gently tap silver eyeshadow onto your inner corners and extend the color onto the inner-third of your eyelid.Repeat on the lower lashline.
Step 4. Finish off the look with a few coats of black mascara — it's that easy!
Like what you see? Follow Short Cuts on Facebook for more videos.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
When we were 5, we prided ourselves on a lot of things, like our doll collection and our ability to ride a bike sans training wheels. Our sense of style, however, wasn't much to brag about (and still causes us to simultaneously laugh and cringe when we see old photos). In Japan, though, there's one 5-year-old whose fanny packs, beanies, and monochrome socks-and-sandals combos are a far cry from the pastel polka dots, light-up sneakers, and over-the-top bows that fill our childhood scrapbooks. In fact, her style is so good that she landed her own published fashion book at the age of 3 (yeah, you read that right).
Rin's minimal, ultra-polished aesthetic and knack for pulling off of-the-moment trends takes microfashion to new levels — and has helped her gain more than 36,000 followers on the WEAR app since her first post in May 2014. Through her work with the company, Rin was dubbed one of 23 child WEARISTAs — its version of an influencer — in August 2014, which led to the style book featuring more than 200 of her most on-point outfits. Talk about serious life goals.
Ahead, we chatted with the mastermind behind Rin's killer looks — her mother, Rica — about what it's really like living with one of the most fashionable kids around. Get ready for a big dose of style envy from one of our smallest fashion icons.
At 5, Rin has more than 36,000 WEAR followers and her own personal style book. How did she become such an influencer? "Rin was authorized as a WEARISTA in August 2014, and she has gotten a lot of exposure because of it. WEAR sometimes features Rin on its social, so she's gained a large following thanks to that."
All of Rin's outfits are so on-trend. Where do you shop for them? Are there specific brands you prefer? "We shop for clothes both at retail stores and online. The brand doesn’t really matter, as long as the clothes are cute and look good on Rin."
Would you say that her style mirrors your own aesthetic? "I do think her style is definitely influenced by mine."
What's your process when you're putting together a look that you want to share with her followers? "I usually think about time, place, and occasion first. The next step is color coordinating. When I have a specific item that I’d like to use, though, I usually build the outfit around that one piece."
Does Rin need to sign off on a photo before you share it on WEAR? "Yes, she does. She's definitely become more curious about how her pictures look recently."
Considering how fashion-forward Rin's outfits are, is there anything she refuses to wear? "Nothing in particular, but she doesn’t really like printed clothing and frilly dresses, which might be because she's worn black dresses since she was little."
Sounds like you have a minimalist in the making, at least in her color choices. What's her all-time favorite color to wear? "She immediately said black!"
Does she have one favorite piece to wear? "She prefers wearing trousers to skirts because of their mobility."
It's amazing that Rin is so young and already has a style book. What was that process like? Were you heavily involved? "The book went on sale [in 2015] when she was 3 years old and has more than 200 of her looks in it, including ones that are not on WEAR. I tried various kinds of styles so that the book fits various readers’ preferences. I think Rin did really well considering her age at the time. When we first got the offer [from WEAR], I couldn’t believe it at all. It was like a dream that my daughter would have a book published. It felt like an amazing treasure. I hope that someday when she reads this book in the future, it will help her."
Speaking of the future, does Rin have a dream job? Do you hope she pursues a career in the fashion industry? "I have no idea, to be honest. She says she wants to be a model, but she also says she wants to be a painter."
How has this experience impacted your own goals? Any interest in going into fashion? "Well, when I have an outfit design in mind for my daughter but can't find it in stores, I actually make it myself. I’m sometimes asked to make clothes for other kids as well. Being a children's clothing designer would be amazing, but for now, being a great mother of two is the most important job for me."
Other than having a style book to look back on, how do you think Rin's work with WEAR will positively impact her future? "She has to meet various people and deal with various situations during photo shoots, and I believe she is learning a lot from that. Also, I think it’s good that she can cultivate a sense of color by being surrounded by lots of clothes."
What's been the most exciting part of this journey for you and Rin? "It's really exciting when brands reach out to us and invite us in for catalog shoots; she's worked with Frankygrow, Kaorinomori, nunuforme, and GeeWhiz. And she was featured in MilK Magazine France in 2016. I'm also happy that I’ve made lots of connections with other stylish kids and their mothers through Rin’s WEAR and Instagram profiles."
Do you get a lot of positive feedback from other parents on Rin's style? "We get a lot of nice comments like, 'Your kid is so stylish!' It makes me very happy when other moms or people my age give us positive feedback."
Social media can be a scary place. Any drawbacks to Rin being in the spotlight? "It rarely happens, but sometimes strangers who know Rin on social and have actually seen her by chance leave comments like, 'I saw Rin the other day!' I don’t really like this because it makes me worry about [her safety] and how many people recognize us."
Do you consider your daughter a style star? "I’ve never seen her status as a style star. She is just a 5-year-old girl with a cute smile."
After an altercation at Los Angeles International Airport last night, police arrested former One Direction member Louis Tomlinson.
Billboard reports that Tomlinson and his girlfriend, Eleanor Calder, arrived at LAX after a flight from Jamaica with a layover in Las Vegas. Paparazzi immediately surrounded the couple when they were at baggage claim. Tomlinson and Calder did not have security with them.
According to TMZ, Tomlinson pulled a photographer's leg, which caused him to fall and hit his head on the ground.
After the altercation, airport security placed Tomlinson under citizen's arrest until the authorities arrived. He was then taken into custody by the Los Angeles Police Department and charged with simple battery. The charge is a misdemeanor.
The Sydney Morning Herald adds that Tomlinson grabbed the wrist of a woman who was filming the incident. She suffered an injury to her eye and received treatment at the scene. "Yeah I’m going to press charges," she said told British magazine The Sun. "The guy socked me. He’s going to go to jail. The guy just grabbed me and threw me to the floor, and he socked me, and that’s it."
According to The Sun, the LAPD arrested the photographer, as well. "He was actually smaller than me, but he got my leg and then I was off balance," the photographer told the magazine. "He lunged for the camera then he lifted up my leg, and then he hit me, and I hit my own head."
"The paparazzi provoked and caused the altercation that occurred with Louis at the airport this morning," Tomlinson's lawyer, Martin Singer, said in a statement. "This is not the first or last time that a paparazzi has created an altercation with a celebrity. While the altercation was going on with the paparazzi, three other individuals were attacking his girlfriend during this incident and he came to her defense."
The Sun reports that the LAPD released Tomlinson on Saturday after he posted a $20,000 bail. However, Billboard reports that he was not required to pay bail. According to both publications, Tomlinson is set to appear in L.A. County court on March 29. He could face a small fine and/or up to a year in jail.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
It’s a tale as old as time. An enchanted, secluded mansion in the French countryside. A girl in a yellow dress, swinging around a ballroom with her hairy courter-captor. A sassy candelabra with a French accent, an plump and overprotective teapot, an uptight British clock.
Yes, I’m talking about Beauty and the Beast, the classic Disney animated film that challenged our ideas of Prince Charming long before Shrek came along. The studio's highly anticipated live-action remake is finally out March 17.
While the Disney cartoon made the story famous, the fairy tale has actually been in rotation for quite some time. In 1740, French novelist Gabrielle-Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve wrote La Belle et la Běte, her version of a folktale that has actually been around for about 4,000 years. Bearing only nominal resemblance to the Disney flick, the original French tale is a dark metaphor instructing women to learn to love whom ever they’re betrothed to, whether he’s a beast or guy who acts beastly.
But do you know what’s more astonishing than a fairy tale with roots in the patriarchy? A fairy tale that’s based on a true story. And, believe it or not, Beauty and the Beast stems from real-life events dating back to the 1500s.
Wikimedia Commons
The boy’s name was Petrus Gonsalvus, and he never wanted to be called a beast. But it was the year 1537, and in that time, people with interesting “peculiarities” were a hot commodity in royal courts. As a result, at the age of 10, Gonsalvus and his own personal peculiarity were sent to King Henry II’s court.
So, why was this boy shipped from his home in Spain to court jester in France? Because Gonsalvus’ body was covered in long, thick hair.
Likened to being a real-life wolf-man, Gonsalvus the “monster” was a monster hit amongst curious noblemen and women. People awaited the reputed "man of the woods” to bare his teeth and reveal his savage side. But that day never came. Gonsalvus’s even-keeled temperament persisted.
Today, we know that this wolf-man was no beast — just a kid who suffered from an extremely rare condition called hypertrichosis, a disease that results in hair growing all over a person's body.
The king took a liking to the boy, situated at an odd juncture between perception and reality. In a ploy right out of My Fair Lady, King Henry decided to take on Gonsalvus as his little pet project. Giving him a wardrobe makeover and a quality education, the king groomed Gonsalvus to be a nobleman.
The only ingredient missing? A wife. Catherine de’Medici, King Henry II’s wife who took over the throne after he died, made finding Gonsalvus a wife her personal mission. She had ulterior motives, though — in marrying Gonsalvus off, she also hoped to reproduce his genetic condition in his offspring.
Acting as the Tinder of the 16 century, she kept Gonsalvus' condition a secret. She was seeking a strong woman who wouldn’t be put off by someone unconventional. After a thorough search, Catherine settled on a woman who shared her name — Catherine.
Wikimedia Commons
It’s rumored that, at first, this arranged marriage was a bitter pill for the young beauty. Clearly, Catherine hadn’t been expecting a nobleman in a hairy wolf’s package. Yet in a series of events straight out of Beauty and the Beast, Catherine was eventually won over by her “beast’s” personality.
Wikimedia Commons
We don’t know what happens after the wedding in Beauty and the Beast, but we do know what happened to Catherine and Pedro Gonsalvus. The pair was married for 40 years and they produced seven children, three of whom were born with hypertrichosis, the same condition their father had. Sadly, Europe’s traveling sideshow fever snatched those three children up and sent them as gifts to royal families, a fate that mimicked Gonsalvus’ own.
The Gonsalvus girls were well educated, well respected members of court, but doomed to be separated from their parents. One daughter, Antonietta, was famously memorialized in a series of portraits.
After these tragedies, the fairy-tale couple settled in a secluded estate in Italy, where they lived a life that wasn’t written down.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Recently, McDonald's has developed a bit of a bad reputation when it comes to its McFlurries. We don't know if you've been affected by this, but many people have reported that nearly every time they head to the fast food chain to get their McFlurry fix, the machine that makes this ice cream treat is broken. Even if you haven't experienced this miserable situation, any ice cream lover can surely imagine how tragic it would be. Well it looks like McDonald's can no longer ignore the magnitude of the problem, so it's finally springing into action.
The Wall Street Journal recently reported that McDonald's will be doing away with the old McFlurry machines that always seem to have issues. When we first heard this news, we immediately started to worry that we'd never again get to taste that sweet frozen treat, but it turns out there was no need for the anxiety. According to WSJ, the chain will replace the machines with new and improved ones in its U.S. and European locations.
Unfortunately, there still aren't very many details on when this transition from one machine to the other will take place, so we may have to endure a few more McFlurry mishaps. We don't mind waiting a little while longer, but we definitely hope the replacement machines are up and running by the time summer rolls around. Once it gets hot, our McFlurry cravings get pretty powerful, so it's probably best if McDonald's gets everything in order sooner rather than later.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
In 2002, Jennifer Lopez reminded us that no matter where her career successes take her, she'll always remember her Bronx origins. (Yes, that's a paraphrase of her classic "Jenny from the Block.") But in an appearance on The Daily Show Monday, Lopez revealed that she might not be as familiar with her home city as she used to be.
The episode hasn't aired yet, but the Daily Show shared some teasers on its Facebook page. In one clip, host Trevor Noah asks Lopez how much a single ride's subway fare is in New York City, to see if she still knows the city's ins and outs.
Lopez admitted that while she spends five to six months of the year in New York, she doesn't know the current cost of a subway ride. She said the last time she rode the subway, it was $1.75, and she was shocked to find out that now, a one-way ride actually costs $2.75.
Lopez also noted, though, that she "starting riding the subway when it was 50 cents." She's still a New Yorker, through and through.
We have to cut her some slack, too. It's not as bad a gaffe, say, as when Sen. Bernie Sanders suggested last year that New Yorkers still use subway tokens, which were phased out in 2003.
The singer fared better when Noah asked her about her old subway line, and the 6 train she used to ride. He asked what the last stop on the 6 was. Lopez correctly answered that the 6's southern-most stop is the Brooklyn Bridge in Manhattan, and its northernmost stop is Pelham Bay Park in the Bronx.
Lopez managed to squeeze her Bronx roots into another question, too. When Noah asked about her success and whether she looks in the mirror and says, "Damn, girl!" Lopez had the best response. "Dude, honestly, I have that moment all the time," Lopez told Noah. "'Cause I'm such a Bronx girl, and my family's so Bronx — I'm serious! — that I'll stand in the middle of my living room and be like, this is crazy. Honestly, I get goosebumps thinking about it. It never escapes me how fortunate I've been..."
We'll give her a free pass on the subway fare question — it sounds like she's definitely still "Jenny from the Block."
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
It's no secret that the Trump administration plans to defund Planned Parenthood. The idea terrifies us, because getting rid of PP clinics wouldn't just affect women's health, and it wouldn't just get rid of abortion access.
It would also make it incredibly hard for people to get the healthcare they need.
A new video from the Bridge Project — an organization "committed to holding Republicans accountable for their words and actions" — questions a Republican plan to shift that healthcare should Planned Parenthood clinics become extinct.
The idea is that community health centers could take over for PP clinics. But Hands Off Our Care, the new initiative from the Bridge Project, says that's just plain wrong. And they've built a report to prove it.
“Not only is the GOP endangering the lives of Americans with their promise to take funding from women’s health clinics, but their excuse is based on nothing but smoke and mirrors,” American Bridge President Jessica Mackler, said in a statement shared with Refinery29. “If Republicans had their way, women around the country would not only lose access to trusted clinics and doctors, but in some cases, they would lose access to the only care they have."
Community health centers don't have the space or the ability to provide the contraceptive care that PP clinics offer, according to American Bridge. And low-income families could also lose access to important health screenings.
"Public health officials who have witnessed Planned Parenthood’s absence in their communities have said that the loss of Planned Parenthood have hurt thousands of women," American Bridge says in the statement.
"It’s imperative that Republicans stop deluding the public into thinking that community health centers can just replace the incredibly important services that Planned Parenthood provides to women and their families — with no negative consequences," a Bridge representative told Refinery29. "Defunding PP would only rip away health care options for women."
Watch the video below:
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Saturday Night Live might have some new set designers on its hands. Drew and Jonathan Scott of HGTV's Property Brothers stopped by the studio to watch the taping of Saturday night's episode. After the credits, the home renovation stars caught up with big time fan, Leslie Jones. Together, they hatched some pretty daring plans.
A post shared by Jonathan Scott (@mrsilverscott) on
"When you go to SNL and Leslie pulls out reno plans to review," Jonathan captioned the photo. "Haha any other cast renos I can help with? How about a meditation room for Vanessa, karaoke studio for Kenan and a karate dojo for Kate?"
These plans came about thanks to a charming back and forth the two hosts had with the comedian before the show.
@Lesdoggg: tonight you make me laugh...I'll plan your kitchen 😝 #snl
Jonathan promised Leslie that if she made him laugh, he'd help plan her kitchen. Leslie was confident she could do just that, replying "and OH IM GONNA MAKE YOU LAUGH."
Then Drew got in on the fun.
.@Lesdoggg I'll up the anti...make ME laugh so hard I pee myself...I'll build you a new house!! 🏡 @MrSilverScott
"One of the funniest people I know!" Drew posted. "Thanks for a great show @Lesdoggg!!!"
It's unclear if Leslie actually followed through on her promise to make the brothers pee their pants, but if she ends up with a new house anytime soon, then we'll know exactly what went down in the audience that night.
Either this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship, or of a seriously amazing new home renovation show. We'll take both.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
On Wednesday, February 22, 2017, in Kansas, a white man confronted two Indian men at a bar, and told them to “get out of my country” before proceeding to shoot, injuring two men and murdering another. It is the use of those words, “get out of my country,” that is leading the FBI to investigate this crime as not just a murder, but a hate crime. His words matter. And the words he heard before that day, the ones that made him feel that his hateful actions were okay? They matter, too.
In President Donald Trump’s America, hate spewing is the new orange, and it doesn’t seem like it will let up anytime soon (even if he managed to stick to a teleprompter for an hour during his Congressional address). Women, immigrants, refugees, Muslims, Jews, transgender Americans, Mexican Americans, Black Americans, etc., etc., have all been on the receiving end of this onslaught of increasingly normal and hateful rhetoric. In turn, these groups have seen a horrific rise in violence committed against them. The number of anti-Muslim hate groups more than tripled in 2016 during Trump’s campaign. Over 100 Jewish Community Centers have received bomb threats in the last month. In the week and a half after the election, the Southern Poverty Law Center documented 867 “bias-related incidents,” including over 300 that targeted immigrants or Muslims. This reality is both painful and shameful.
But despite the well-documented history of hateful words leading to hateful actions, people continue to shy away from clamping down on hate speech for fear of trampling “free speech.”
People continue to shy away from clamping down on hate speech for fear of trampling “free speech.”
The irony of course is that free speech actually is threatened right now, but not by those of us who refuse to buy into hate. It is threatened by a president who calls the press the “enemy of the people.” By a White House that bans certain press outlets and props up others. By a man who would use his government-appointed power to silence his critics with the end goal being a populace that only hears his half-scrutinized message and harmful ideology. That’s where “free speech” ends — with this new government’s interference. We private citizens have the ability, perhaps even the duty, to sanction and discern the speech of others. And if we’re going to pretend that corporations are people, then they have the same responsibility.
“Free speech” means that you can say whatever you want without government interference. It also means that I can say whatever I want, be it in opposition to you or not. And everyone else is free to do the same. And ‘speech’ here means words, dollars, clothing, you name it. So I am free to not buy what you’re selling and organize my friends and allies to do the same. Free speech doesn’t mean that everyone gets the same platform. In a capitalist democracy, it means that the market, for better or for worse, gets to control which messages are spread.
“Hate speech” on the other hand is language designed to oppress and reinforce discrimination, and it is incredibly vile, dangerous, and bad for America. In Europe, it has been made illegal in response to their firsthand experience of unchecked hate speech turning into genocide. But just because hate speech is not technically illegal here doesn’t mean we have to stand idly by and let it infect our culture.
At the end of the day, protecting “free speech” absolutely should not require gifting hate speech a microphone.
At the end of the day, protecting “free speech” absolutely should not require gifting hate speech a microphone. And yet, that is exactly what we have done. Rather than protect civil society, we have lifted up these hateful narratives and given them prime real estate on our TV screens, in our book stores, and on our computers. Is it any wonder then that we’ve increasingly seen hate rise in our homes, in our schools, and in our communities? We’ve prioritized profit, power, and ratings (not coincidentally following Trump’s lead). We’ve normalized bigoted views and hate speech. And we’ve betrayed our core American values.
We watched Trump crown Miss America instead of firing him for his intrusion into women’s changing rooms. We gave Corey Lewandowski a primetime contract, rather than arrest him for assault. We gave Milo a book deal, and the KKK a TV pilot. We advertised our products next to Breitbart headlines that read “Young Muslims in the West are a ticking time bomb,” or “The solution to online ‘harassment’ is simple: women should log off.” Because hey, “It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for [insert your CEO, company, or shareholder name here].”
But now it’s time to wake up. Is this the culture we want? A culture where we say protecting the humanity of those who look, pray, or speak differently than us is of lesser value than making a buck? Where we value power and control at the expense of empathy and collaboration? Where we give up any pretense of a civil society and devolve into smaller and smaller factions who despise each other?
No. Not anymore. Not in our America.
It’s high time we use our free speech to never, ever buy hate.
We live in a democracy and for that to work, we have to be able to respect each other. Join in partnership to advance the common good. See each other as equals.
Hate speech undermines all of that. And when hate speech prevails, everyone becomes the enemy. Instead of lifting up the most marginalized, we scapegoat them and blame them for their lot in life. Instead of coming together from a place of empathy, care, and collaboration, we rely on power, dominance, and aggression to ensure hierarchy and control.
Together, let’s demand that the companies we support are aligned with our values.
Our public and private sector leaders may still be showing us that they value power above all else, but we the people can chart another way forward. We can show that our power is based on our inherent potential as citizens, consumers, and human beings. We can use our ability to work together and strive for the better angels of our human nature — valuing, not sacrificing, the common humanity in each and every one of us.
Human beings create culture, and so we can also recreate culture. We create the market and we can sway it. Together, let’s demand that the companies we support are aligned with our values, and that they uplift not undermine our democracy and civil society. We cannot allow these companies to privilege money over democracy, profit over civil society. No, we must isolate the hate speech-ers and their apologists. We must take away the microphones of those who spread hate.
That's why on Wednesday, we're expanding our #NotBuyingIt campaign to target hate speech and to let Amazon know that if its ad dollars support Breitbart, we can’t support them. Sign up to tweet at Amazon Help and create a chorus of voices demanding that mainstream companies and products do not give a penny to the likes of Breitbart. And starting on #DayWithoutAWoman, show Amazon your purchasing power by not buying a single product from them until the company changes its ways.
Together, let’s continue to hold brands accountable for their words and messages and therefore the values they promote and propagate. Together, let’s remind our leaders that hate speech does not deserve a microphone, no matter the dollars at stake. And together, let’s demand a culture that uplifts us all.
Jennifer Siebel Newsom is the filmmaker behind the documentaries Miss Representation and The Mask You Live In , CEO & Founder of The Representation Project, wife to California Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom, and mother of four.
Editor's note: The views expressed here are the writer's own.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Notorious BIG and Tupac Shakur are two of the most iconic names in not only the hip-hop industry, but in the music world in general. The two rappers started as peers in the scene, but then became pitted against each other in an East Coast versus West Coast battle royale that would, in a way, cost each of them their lives. And now, the two men are receiving a scripted true crimes show based on each of their unsolved murders, tentatively called Unsolved: The Murders of Tupac and Biggie.
Marcc Rose who will play Tupac Shakur
The news of the show was released late in 2016, but now we know who will be playing two of the biggest names in rap. First, there is Marcc Rose, who will play Tupac, who was shot and killed in 1996 while driving through Las Vegas. He died days later, on September 13, from the wounds he endured. He was only 25. You may recognize Rose because he has already played the late rapper and poet in the 2015 hit movie Straight Outta Compton. However, he was not the only one to portray Tupac — another actor, Darris Love, was cast to record the rap scenes in the film, CinemaBlend reports, because Rose, 24, did not sound enough like the talented wordsmith to accurately portray his voice on film. I guess he's gotten some more practice for this upcoming role (or we can expect another name to be given credit on IMDb for those scenes).
As far as Biggie's role, USA enlisted a fresh face to play the East Coast legend, a new actor named Wavvy Jonez. Biggie (who also went by Notorious BIG and Biggie Smalls in addition to his birth name: Christopher Wallace) was just as prominent in the '90s rap game as Tupac. Jonez was chosen to play the lead role after sending in a video audition in response to an open casting call for the part. Unlike Rose, Jonez is a rapper in real life and has a mixtape titled, "R.E.D. D.O.P.E." which stands for Real Everyday Drama Doing Over People’s Expectation.
Notorious BIG was even younger than Tupac when he was shot and killed while driving in Los Angeles just six months after Tupac's death. Like Tupac, Biggie's death is still unsolved and much speculated over, thus the popularity of the topic. (There have been many other projects looking into the untimely deaths of both artists.)
In addition to our title lead characters, there are a few other familiar Hollywood names who will be appearing in the series, like Westworld 's Jimmi Simpson, who will play Detective Russsell Poole; Las Vegas ' Josh Duhamel as Detective Greg Kading; and FX Fargo 's Bokeen Woodbine as Officer Daryn Dupree. The series will be directed by Emmy-winning director Anthony Hemingway, who is responsible for the stand-out 2016 series, The People v. O.J. Simpson. The drama will be based on the book Murder Rap: The Untold Story of Biggie Smalls & Tupac Shakur Murder Investigations, which recounts the investigation around the murders and was written by Duhamel's character in real life.
No release date has been set yet, but we can't wait to tune in.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Stella McCartney has long used new collections as a space to introduce new ideas — not just in terms of how we dress, but also in how the industry can create, source, and produce responsibly. The self-described "vegetarian company " has long been committed to proving you don't need to use animal products to sell luxury designs. McCartney did this first with her can't-believe-it's-not-fur coats, and now, for fall '17, she's doing it with a new type of faux leather she dubs "skin-free skin."
The brand has used vegetarian leather in its accessories offerings for awhile now. (We would be remiss to gloss over the outstanding success of the Falabella and Elyse, both silhouettes that have become synonymous with her business.) But the designer admitted to The Guardian that she'd hesitated to incorporate it into her ready-to-wear "because it never looked luxurious enough," which could theoretically cheapen the brand's look.
The introduction of "skin-free skin" is not only a step forward for the brand, in terms of its choice of fabrics to work with for each collection, but also for the industry, according to McCartney. "I am so excited that we have finally developed fabrics that look just as good as the real thing, and therefore genuinely pose a question to the industry about why anyone needs to use leather any more," the designer told The Guardian.
The new material is sprinkled throughout the collection, be it front-and-center in patchwork faux-suede-and-leather dresses or more subtly embedded into the detailing on jersey sets. The fall '17 range of accessories, which include cap-toe heels and top-handle totes, are also rendered in the innovative "skin-free skin" fabric. No details about the make-up of this new-and-improved faux leather were immediately available — although, because of the brand's fierce commitment to transparency, you can read all about what Stella McCartney clothes are made of on its website.
Photo: Courtesy of Stella McCartney.Photo: Courtesy of Stella McCartney.
McCartney launched her eponymous brand in 2001 as a vegetarian luxury brand — a label that was somewhat hard to convince others of, she's said in retrospect. Over the years, she's continuously experimented with different materials to offer ethical alternatives to what was available on the market. There was the fur-free fur she introduced for pre-fall '15, and the sustainably-sourced viscose she committed to using moving forward in spring '17.
The designer's mission has been to reduce the damage and waste created by her products, and encourage others in the industry (including those also owned by Kering, which includes Stella McCartney on its roster of brands) to do the same. "I don’t support [the use of leather and exotic animal fabrics], but [Kering] supports me and my beliefs, and I’m a firm believer in infiltrating from within," she said at the parent company's annual talk at the Center for Sustainable Fashion at London College of Fashion last year, according to Forbes. Let's see if any of the luxury conglomerate's other brands get the hint.
Photo: Courtesy of Stella McCartney.Photo: Courtesy of Stella McCartney.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Maybe you're majorly into deviled eggs, maybe the mere idea of them sends a shiver down your spine, OR perhaps you've never even eaten one (let alone know how to make a batch for starters). But regardless of your level of eggs-perience here, read on cause we've got you. A shelled, halved, and stuffed hardboiled egg usually served up as appetizers, these springtime bites have tended to carry the reputation of being mayonnaise-heavy — but it really doesn't have to be so!
There are plenty of other delectable yolk mix-ins (from avocado to Sriracha and many more) that can take deviled eggs past Grandma's Easter starters to new levels of fresh springtime snacking success; And thanks to Pinterest we've rounded up the ten most popular below. So scroll on and join us in giving this once antiqued dish a trendy and tasty new name.
What if you could go into the writers' rooms for your favorite Netflix shows and rewrite the endings? Would you save your favorite character? Doom another to a life of misery?
This seemingly impossible scenario could become a reality. In a report on The Today Show, hosts shared that Netflix is developing technology that would offer the ultimate interactive experience: The chance to choose your own ending. In theory, this would mean that you could watch the same episode or movie multiple times, with a different outcome each time.
What The Today Showdidn't say is that this technology already exists, but in a limited format. Netflix debuted this kind of interactivity last summer, but has, for the time being, limited it to some its kids' content.
In answer to questions regarding the expansion of the technology, Netflix said the following in an email to Refinery29:
"Netflix is constantly exploring ways to create a better experience for its members. We first introduced interactive elements to our Kids series, Kong, in April 2016. We will continue to experiment in this format to learn more about what our members enjoy."
In a Reddit thread discussing the possibility of a "Choose Your Own Adventure" TV series, commenters seemed excited about the idea, but bring up the inherent challenges. Namely, it would take longer to film shows and cost more. Others compared it to another, similar form of entertainment: video games.
If the technology were to be expanded to other Netflix shows, feedback would likely be mixed. After all, part of what makes a show so emotionally powerful is that is has one ending. Would Titanic have made such an impact if you got to choose if Rose and Jack ended up on a piece of ice big enough for both of them? I doubt it.
For now, there's no word of a "choose your own ending" for Stranger Things season two — but it might not be far off.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Ever feel like your tongue is a little itchy after eating your morning avocado toast? It's more common than you might think! And, as this recent video from SciShow explains, a real medical condition — oral allergy syndrome (OAS) — may be to blame. Basically, your immune system is getting overly cautious and majorly confused.
Normally, your tree and pollen allergies are caused by proteins in those plants. When you come in contact with them, your body mistakes those proteins for dangerous intruders, causing all those symptoms you know and love (e.g. runny nose, watery eyes, sneezing).
But, in the case of oral allergy syndrome, your body has taken a couple more overprotective steps and is now confusing the proteins in your food for the proteins in whatever plants you're allergic to.
If you have OAS and your allergies are normally triggered by birch, for instance, they might also be set off when you eat apples, carrots, plums, or, sadly, avocados. But if you're allergic to grass, it's more likely you'll have a reaction to melon or tomatoes. And the most frustrating thing is that OAS doesn't usually develop until your teens or early 20s — after you've had years and years of eating delicious guac without any problems.
The good news is that the OAS reaction tends to be much milder than full-on food allergies. Rather than having your throat swell shut, you'll probably just get a kind of itchy, irritated feeling in your mouth and, maybe, a bit of an upset tummy later. That's because the proteins are digested and taken out of your system, which isn't the case for pollen proteins.
Even if your reaction is mild, though, it can unexpectedly become more serious. That means that, in general, it's still a good idea to avoid the foods that give you these reactions. Some people report that their OAS symptoms are worse when their seasonal allergies are also at their peak. Talking to an allergist is the best way to figure out what's going on — and how concerned you should be about it.
However, there are some things you can do to avoid the worst of your reactions: Since most of those troublesome proteins tend to be concentrated in the skin of fruits and veggies, the video explains, you can try to eat around that part. You can also cook whatever foods bother you, since that heat breaks down the reaction-causing proteins.
Unfortunately, that's probably not gonna work with avocados. So you might have to skip the guac altogether. For more ideas, check out the video below.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Even if you're not the type to carefully curate your Instagram grid, most of us still choose to post photos of ourselves where we're looking our absolute best (even if the same can't be said for the friend that's also in the photo — admit it). There's nothing wrong with choosing your most flattering angle, but we often seem to forget that other people are doing the exact same thing.
Fitness blogger Madalin Giorgetta took to Instagram last week to post side-by-side "transformation" photos of herself, one in which she is slouched with "bad posture" and another where she's "flexing."
Giorgetta made the point that a flattering pose can make all the difference — and that we should keep this in mind when we start comparing our bodies to other people's.
A post shared by Madalin Giorgetta (@madalingiorgetta) on
"Ahh the difference a flattering pose can make," she wrote in her caption. "I love seeing these photos on my feed as it reminds me that we allll have our best angles that we choose to share. The girls you see on Instagram don't walk around with one leg bent and one hip popped and flexed abs the whole time!"
While Giorgetta still looks great in both her photos, her post is an important reminder that what you see on social media isn't always real, and it's pointless to compare yourself to others, no matter how tempting that may be.
"But there's also nothing wrong with posting your most flattering angle, it's only human," she clarifies. Still, she wanted her followers to get a reprieve from the constant barrage of "perfect" photos on their feeds.
"Constantly seeing the same carefully posed pic on my feed can get tiring, so it's always nice to see a crappy photo and think, 'ohh hey, she's a bit like me,'" she wrote.
After all, as great as social media is, it can also leave us prone to self-critique when we don't feel as perfect as our friends look. As Giorgetta reminds us, perfection is an illusion, and comparison is the thief of joy.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Somehow, everyone in Hollywood simultaneously decided that Robin Hood is the next big thing. There are not one, not two, not three, but FOUR new Robin Hood films in the works — with at least two more potential projects in flux — and we can't quite figure out why everyone in tinseltown is suddenly obsessed with the storied English folk hero. Is it the badass bow-and-arrow? His band of Merry Men? Or maybe it's the social justice tie-in — you know, the whole robbing from the rich and giving to the poor thing. (In that case, perhaps we should be thanking Bernie Sanders here.)
But the only re-imagining of Robin Hood we're truly here for at this point is Marian, which is set to turn the age-old tale on its head. The Hollywood Reporter confirms that Margot Robbie has been cast in the title role.
In this version, Robin Hood's love Maid Marian is shifting from supporting character to star of the show: Marian takes place following Robin Hood's death. "The titular maiden then picks up his cause to lead her people into a pivotal war that will not only decide the fate of the kingdom, but also see her don the mantle of the man she loved," writes THR.
Oh, hells yes! We're psyched to see the Suicide Squad star turn a hero's romantic interest into a strong leader in her own right. And this exciting, progressive casting move is what's going to separate Marian from the pack of Robin Hood movies, which include Disney's Pirates of the Caribbean -like franchise based on the folklore; a thriller named Hood; and a dark, gritty take on the story starring Jamie Foxx and Jamie Dornan. But like we said, we're #TeamMarian for now.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
Sometimes getting motivated to exercise can be harder than the workout itself. That’s why it helps to think of your gym time as a middle school dance: You’re going to feel awkward and hug the wall until a really great song comes on.
With that in mind, we’re rounding up our favorite workout tracks, from fresh remixes to old favorites. Get ready to catch yourself humming through your jog, training circuit, or yoga practice. And, don’t worry, Beyoncé makes an appearance.
Don't be surprised if you end up keeping a steadier pace while listening. Music with a strong beat has been found to help people's movements stay consistent during exercise. Today, we've added five songs from some of our favorite women of hip hop, in honor of Women's History Month.
This is the playlist to get you moving — the gym's never been so much fun.
Check out our past seasons' playlists below.
Here's last summer's playlist, if you're yearning to return to Summer '16.
And don't forget to check out our playlist from Spring '16, too.
Check back in the following weeks for more of your favorite tracks.
Like what you see? How about some more R29 goodness, right here?
