Katherine Schwarzenegger Pratt’s Picture-Perfect Life

[Anonymous]

She is totally on the right track but it’s a lifetime race that’s hard to maintain in the spotlight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anna Farris is so likeable.

It's not one or the other. No one has a perfect life anyway . I certainly wouldn't want to be a stepparent or have a high profile cheating dad for instance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really drives the bitter malcontent wannabe girl bosses here nuts when an idle woman is pretty, skinny, rich, married, with kids — and devout. Clutch the pearls - she CAN’T be perfect. Or maybe she is and it makes you jealous as hell.

Nope, none of us need her advice, that's what we are mocking.

Pretty can be made with enough money.
Skinny can be made with enough money.
Rich = money.
Married= is it really a good deal unless you have money?
Kids= made way easier with money
Devout= I personally believe religious indoctrination-especially evangelical- is the main source of evil in this world so nope not interested in her opinions

That fact that she thinks she has something original to say when her entire existence is because of mommy and daddy money.....she is just a snake-oil columnist.

Judging by the photo posted, pretty cannot he made with enough money.

PP that posted the photo - I posted it because I actually think she IS pretty and I've seen a lot of photos of her looking much better. I feel like this photo was another dig at her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is totally on the right track but it’s a lifetime race that’s hard to maintain in the spotlight.

No she is not.

She married crap.

[Anonymous]

10 yr age gap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How tedious.

Are we being punked? This reads like it was written by a ChatGPT and this is a bizarre picture:

No, I think she’s the one getting punked.

I’ve never seen any other photos of her, but in this one, she looks like one of the least attractive famous people I’ve ever seen.
Putting this photo under the headline is a total dig, and if she doesn’t know it, she’s stupid or delusional.

I think she looks fine — maybe not glamorous, sure, but attractive enough. But the article is definitely making fun of her. I’d be so pissed at NYT if I were her PR person.

I think they’ll be fine with it. It will even help her with her Target political audience. Most Republican women would LOVE to get this shade from the NYT. It’s ideal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How tedious.

Are we being punked? This reads like it was written by a ChatGPT and this is a bizarre picture:

No, I think she’s the one getting punked.

I’ve never seen any other photos of her, but in this one, she looks like one of the least attractive famous people I’ve ever seen.
Putting this photo under the headline is a total dig, and if she doesn’t know it, she’s stupid or delusional.

I think she looks fine — maybe not glamorous, sure, but attractive enough. But the article is definitely making fun of her. I’d be so pissed at NYT if I were her PR person.

I think they’ll be fine with it. It will even help her with her Target political audience. Most Republican women would LOVE to get this shade from the NYT. It’s ideal.

Good point. An article like this really solidifies the Persecuted Christian Victim Narrative. She’s got bona fides to sell to conservative Target Moms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How tedious.

Are we being punked? This reads like it was written by a ChatGPT and this is a bizarre picture:

No, I think she’s the one getting punked.

I’ve never seen any other photos of her, but in this one, she looks like one of the least attractive famous people I’ve ever seen.
Putting this photo under the headline is a total dig, and if she doesn’t know it, she’s stupid or delusional.

I think she looks fine — maybe not glamorous, sure, but attractive enough. But the article is definitely making fun of her. I’d be so pissed at NYT if I were her PR person.

I think they’ll be fine with it. It will even help her with her Target political audience. Most Republican women would LOVE to get this shade from the NYT. It’s ideal.

This +1000%

She's a girfted, crap total crap hocking her wares. Nothing to see but crap.
Good point. An article like this really solidifies the Persecuted Christian Victim Narrative. She’s got bona fides to sell to conservative Target Moms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm. I don't like men who leave their first wives to chase after someone a little younger, a little richer and more connected.

You need to become more tolerant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really drives the bitter malcontent wannabe girl bosses here nuts when an idle woman is pretty, skinny, rich, married, with kids — and devout. Clutch the pearls - she CAN’T be perfect. Or maybe she is and it makes you jealous as hell.

Nope, none of us need her advice, that's what we are mocking.

Pretty can be made with enough money.
Skinny can be made with enough money.
Rich = money.
Married= is it really a good deal unless you have money?
Kids= made way easier with money
Devout= I personally believe religious indoctrination-especially evangelical- is the main source of evil in this world so nope not interested in her opinions

That fact that she thinks she has something original to say when her entire existence is because of mommy and daddy money.....she is just a snake-oil columnist.

Judging by the photo posted, pretty cannot he made with enough money.

PP that posted the photo - I posted it because I actually think she IS pretty and I've seen a lot of photos of her looking much better. I feel like this photo was another dig at her.

I don’t find her attractive at all. YMMV and all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm. I don't like men who leave their first wives to chase after someone a little younger, a little richer and more connected.

You need to become more tolerant.

Says the amoral cheater.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm. I don't like men who leave their first wives to chase after someone a little younger, a little richer and more connected.

You need to become more tolerant.

Why do we need to be tolerant of crappy people?
Maybe crappy people should be better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really drives the bitter malcontent wannabe girl bosses here nuts when an idle woman is pretty, skinny, rich, married, with kids — and devout. Clutch the pearls - she CAN’T be perfect. Or maybe she is and it makes you jealous as hell.

Nope, none of us need her advice, that's what we are mocking.

Pretty can be made with enough money.
Skinny can be made with enough money.
Rich = money.
Married= is it really a good deal unless you have money?
Kids= made way easier with money
Devout= I personally believe religious indoctrination-especially evangelical- is the main source of evil in this world so nope not interested in her opinions

That fact that she thinks she has something original to say when her entire existence is because of mommy and daddy money.....she is just a snake-oil columnist.

Judging by the photo posted, pretty cannot he made with enough money.

PP that posted the photo - I posted it because I actually think she IS pretty and I've seen a lot of photos of her looking much better. I feel like this photo was another dig at her.

I don’t find her attractive at all. YMMV and all.

NP. I think she’s pretty. But if she weren’t a Kennedy/Schwarzenegger there is no way in hell she would be married to Chris Pratt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm. I don't like men who leave their first wives to chase after someone a little younger, a little richer and more connected.

You need to become more tolerant.

Why do we need to be tolerant of crappy people?
Maybe crappy people should be better.

+1

She is not a role model. And he is just a POS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really drives the bitter malcontent wannabe girl bosses here nuts when an idle woman is pretty, skinny, rich, married, with kids — and devout. Clutch the pearls - she CAN’T be perfect. Or maybe she is and it makes you jealous as hell.

Nope, none of us need her advice, that's what we are mocking.

Pretty can be made with enough money.
Skinny can be made with enough money.
Rich = money.
Married= is it really a good deal unless you have money?
Kids= made way easier with money
Devout= I personally believe religious indoctrination-especially evangelical- is the main source of evil in this world so nope not interested in her opinions

That fact that she thinks she has something original to say when her entire existence is because of mommy and daddy money.....she is just a snake-oil columnist.

Judging by the photo posted, pretty cannot he made with enough money.

PP that posted the photo - I posted it because I actually think she IS pretty and I've seen a lot of photos of her looking much better. I feel like this photo was another dig at her.

I don’t find her attractive at all. YMMV and all.

NP. I think she’s pretty. But if she weren’t a Kennedy/Schwarzenegger there is no way in hell she would be married to Chris Pratt.

I don’t know what he does but he’s not attractive either.