don’t worry, I excuse people’s behavior when they’re not famous too, if they pose no risk.

she’s not that close to the photographer though - I guarantee it’s beyond 6 feet, it just doesn’t appear that way in the top photo b/c the photographer (of that photo) is using a zoom lens. All the photographers that were close to each other are presumably wearing masks, like the visible photographer is.

I’m not sure if this is trolling or serious... but he’s not really that close. That would be a terrible photo up close.

they probably are close to each other, but you can see the one photographer is wearing a normal mask in the photo

But it’s not like she’s having intimate convos while not wearing a mask... she’s taking a few photos, the photographers are going to be 6+ feet away... and then she puts on her normal mask. 

that reminds me of a family story about my grandfather’s grandfather (or father?) who was Italian - Marfino -and at the time the Irish were disliked but seen as great workers, whereas Italians didn’t have that reputation - so when they called for a “Murph” (y) at a factory that was hiring and no one stepped up,…

HM I need to see this doc. I know some of the background for Dolezal but not all of it and I’m forgetting.

I agree not wearing the mask, even for a few seconds, was a bad look. Every public person just needs to be on their game 100% for that.

but there’s nothing wrong with having real people, especially when they’ve consented to it, regardless of whether they changed their mind later....

In reading more about it, it honestly seems like she wanted, as the kids say, “the clout.” She had a protestor “alter ego” that had a Latina accent and said things like this, that did not age well in the slightest lol:

Your comment held up as soon as I checked out the NYT post on her, apparently it was ANOTHER person fudging their background that got the convo rolling:

I guess that’s kinda what I was thinking too but she seems too self-aware, even of her mental illness, for this to click? I’m not buying that “therapy” was all it took.

her apology is weird to me because she honestly hits the nail on the head with identifying

“He’ll be so far in debt and be using what little money he actual has on legal fees.”

it’s stupid because it’s untrue, but at the same time, does it even matter? Even if medical care dramatically improved in the future to where we have NO mortalities and even no serious side effects, that wouldn’t impact abortion - would it? Because it’s about more than just personal risk.

that was a classic. Just re-reading it, I imagine what this article could have been... but perhaps was not

Ummmm I appreciate the bare minimum effort to Journalist (Which Is Your Job), I guess

ironically, I (a stupid person) didn’t take birth control pills because I was afraid the hormones would cause cancer later in life. 

I looked into this more, but IDK - what more proof can there really be other than screenshots and charge backs? And there’s seemingly both? I don’t think people are deluded enough to think “ONLYFANS = ONLY NUDITY” unless someone specifically says that’s what they’re offering, so it does seem like she has one thing on…

hm that’s actually a good point. (though if it weren’t true, I think she would be clarifying? even the BBC reported it this way)