I've got a better idea. Let's stop being joyless, hypercritical douchenozzles.
COSMO: Knock it off with the daddy pictures.
ME: Okay (runs picture of Meghan holding the baby).
COSMO: Is that all women are to you? Baby-making machines?
COSMO: Knock it off with the daddy pictures.
ME: Okay (runs picture of Meghan holding the baby).
COSMO: Is that all women are to you? Baby-making machines?
4 comments:
I have no interest in Harry and his wife. Nonetheless, I wish young Mr. Mountbatten Windsor well. A new life is always worth celebrating. Cosmo has been a sick magazine for a long time.
Not cray-cray about the whole Prince Archie thing, though.
I'm agreeably disposed to the British royals, but they do have their foibles. Over time, certain inhibitions and rubrics have disappeared, some of them not to be missed (e.g. the one which held that those holding a royal style could not operate a business or professional practice, something quite disruptive in the lives of a couple of the Queen's cousins) and some to be missed (e.g. not airing your dirty laundry publicly, thanks Diana). I'm going to wager the Queen's given up enforcing certain standards, in part because no one expects it of her anymore and in part because she rather likes her 4th born grandchild the way he is. And the way he is is serially tasteless. (Marrying a Hollywood figure whose previous marriage lasted all of two years and who has a mess of clownish relatives; commissioning a clown-bishop from the States to offer an embarrassing ramble at your wedding; and baptizing your son with a diminutive).
Me, I think that the birth of any baby is something to be celebrated no matter who his parents might be.
Post a Comment