Sure, but there is a big difference between having some say and what the article wants readers to believe, which was that Reese Witherspoon took a check for $900M to sell all of Hello Sunshine to two Disney bros. That is why everyone had such a negative reaction to the article.

Thank you for providing what the article didn’t. Even without your contribution of the quote from Blackstone, it made sense to me that if someone or some entity invests literal hundreds of millions of dollars into an enterprise, they’re going to want to have some say in its operation.

Witherspoon brings viewers. The project has a better chance of getting picked up by a studio or streaming service with her attached. That’s just business in H-wood. A lot of white women will watch something Reese is in, and perhaps the subject matter is domestic abuse, racism, etc. and these women may become a little…

$900M. That's all that really matters to all the players in this story.

I agreed on the last paragraph, the rest was a bit confusing tbh.

“And while it’s true that Witherspoon’s company has produced a great deal of content focusing on women, those women have usually included Witherspoon and have mostly been white, as have the authors of the books they’re based on.”

What happened was a newly formed company made an investment in Hello Sunshine which resulted in a majority stake in Hello Sunshine being held by said company. Reese didn’t just pack the whole business up and hand it off to two guys to do what they will. Under the terms of the agreement the current CEO of Hello Sunshine…

Feels like “Goopify” is being misused here. Reese and Gwyneth have entirely different forms of asshole tendencies and the ven diagram overlap is maybe 25%.

I’m not sure what Goopify means in this context. Whatever the issues you have with Witherspoon and her company, surely something like this is more positive than a site that promotes science-denial and dangerous practices.

Somebody needs to explain to Reese that the real meaning of feminism is a women getting paid to mischaracterize the actions of another white women in order to criticize them for compromising their progressive purity and succeeding the wrong way. Truly groundbreaking stuff.

I don’t think there is a single person in the entire history of humankind who passes a progressive blogger’s purity test.

She didn’t get 900 million. That’s the valuation of the company as part of the deal, but the company has a ton of investors. Stop the fuckin clickbait.

Carrie was fun? When? She didn’t even seem fun in bed for a sex columnist.

I think SJP has it even worse. She’s so smoothed, it pains me to look at her face.

Cynthia Nixon, however, looks wonderful, as she did every season after she let go of the short magenta hair, which, for my tastes, was too dark and severe for her soft features.

Didn’t realize there was a strict age limit on having long hair and wearing certain dresses. Better set an appointment to cut my hair the appropriate length once I hit middle age.

Oh this post reminds me of the good ole days of the internet when even trolls had personalities and the quality of the feedback, while privileged and white white white, was still organic and community/topic based. 

Right? Looks like she’s wearing panty hose about to rob a bank.

I don’t know. It seems Catherine did have some but not full independence growing up and just preferred the comfortable gilded cage so when it came to the royals she decided she would be willing to dance the tune to have it. It’s not like Diana, who bought into the romance and never checked the small print (which makes…

I’m struck by how similar the public presentation of Kate & Ivanka is. The polished photos, the nods to causes, the careful use of their children as props at this stage, etc.

“Her public image—not Kate the person, but the figure of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, future Princess of Wales and eventual Queen Consort—is synonymous with a very specific, very white vision of motherhood.”