Man's been dead for 14 years, it's not like he's gonna come out with a new collection anytime soon
Are you sure she isn't buying a new one each time?
Absolutely not, I would never! I throw my coat away each time I use one, and buy a whole new set at the beginning of the week. What a peasant!
Page Six
Well there's your problem
Reminds me of Daniel Radcliffe (I think?) wearing the same jacket or something for months because it made the paparazzi photos useless as people just assume they're all from the same day if someone is wearing the same clothes
Obvs this is my main concern about eventually becoming famous. I wear the same clothes all the time.
Will my fame save me from this? Some famous people get away with it. I never hear anyone saying "you know, JFK always wore a suit".
I'll never become famous because I'm doing absolutely nothing to pursue fame. However, if I were to one day become famous, the paparazzi would be bored as hell because I wear the same outfit every day. Except when it's above 10 degrees, then I swap the jeans out for shorts and ditch the hoodie - but then that's my outfit for the next 5-6 months.
Which actor made it a point to always wear the same outfit in public to fuck with the paparazzi? In my head I remember Daniel Radcliffe doing that.
Yeah, always wore the same thing out of the same buildings to make it so all of the photos they got looked like it could be the same day, rendering them nearly worth as much.
I think it was him
it's okay to wear the same clothing multiple times if you're a man. if you're a woman you have to throw away everything that you've ever even slightly touched
Steve Jobs and Mark Zuckerberg would get commentary about always wearing the same outfit
Well what gender are you presenting as. That'll answer your question.
Thats why you have to get your fame from wearing the same clothes
Vermin Supreme for President
Steve Jobs and Zucky Wucky got away with it. Maybe just make sure you get famous in the tech industry.
They made them signature
But none of their stans are clicking on articles about what they're wearing unlike Katie here.
The paparazzi version of Zuck or Jobs is writing an article about some stupid thing they do, even potentially damaging behavior, and convincing the reader it's evidence of brilliance.
They wear the same shit because they have no fashion sense. But it's been spun as "I can't waste any precious brain power on mundane decisions" which is such a load of BS. What it's actually demonstrating is they're both dunces, incapable of picking up basic social skills, unable to engage in basic social behavior, uninterested in exploring something simply for the sake of relating to others.
There's all sorts of conclusions to draw.
But nope, the things you or you do daily well enough by glancing at others, and checking out a store or two is IS JUST TOO MENTALLY TAXING AND WASTING THEIR BRAIN JUICE
Global News did an experiment a while back. The men wore the same thing, on-air, for a week. Then the women did the same thing on the following week. Wanna guess what the results of this experiment were?
I’m glad the emails to the station were curious and not complainy, from the couple I saw. Kind of seemed like “yep women are observant and intelligent and naturally asked a question about a rare occurrence out of curiosity“
Presumably some of the people writing in would structure the world in a less misogynistic fashion, were we to give them magic wands, but they still made observations in today’s world. I would’ve been really sad if all the emails were taking digs at the anchors!
Wanna guess if it was men or women who sent the emails? Lol
I see no mention of it so why don't you enlighten us with the facts instead of guesses.
and I get your silly little point. But there is such a thing as internalised prejudices and internalised discrimination; so your "clever" little point does nothing to take away from the fact that the scrutiny was greater on women than the men-presenting anchors. lol.
For those wondering, Page Six is basically the shitty gossip part of the New York Post. It's a rag within a rag – an almost unprecedented level of raggery.
Thank you for that context
Wait until you hear about 4x underwear.
Normal
Reverse normal
Inside-out
Reverse inside-out
I want to unread this
You guys wear underwear?
yes, just underwear
I go front, I go back, I go inside-out. Then I go front and back.
Heck you can re-wear your underwear, too. Only really need to change when they start getting hard.
Well, you can do it without question. You’re a pleb. I’m personally appalled that someone of her status would do such a thing though, like some sort of degenerate, homeless jezebel.
