Travis and Taylor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The perks of having a billionaire girlfriend!

Sounds right. People were asking us a couple weeks ago if we'd try to get Super Bowl tickets if the Ravens made it (oops) and I just laughed at them because it's never even occurred to me that I might actually attend a Super Bowl. Basically you have to be billionaire to be able to "afford" to go to the Super Bowl.

Travis has already been gifted a free suite at the stadium so this suit must be for all her friends and family.

Oh god, I just realized this means she's going to be at the game with "her squad" maybe including, likely: Cara, Blake/Ryan, Selena, the Haims, Karlie, Sophie, etc. People are going to lose their minds. This is going to be SUCH a circus.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the 49ers personally invite TK’s ex Kayla Nicole and put her in a suite. KN is also really close with a lot of the 49er WAGs. Now that would be exciting to see TK’s girlfriend and ex on the Jumbotron!

They could stick Kayla Nicole in a sweet with Joe Jonas, John Mayer, and Matt Healy, just to see what happens.

What a lovely idea. Serves Taylor right for just living her life and existing. B deserves what’s coming to her.

No one is trying to punish Taylor for existing. The point is the whole thing has become a circus.

When Taylor started hanging out with Sophie Turner after Joe Jonas filed for divorce (they were not previously friends), was that Taylor trying to punish Jonas for existing?

You are insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

She’s 34, not 44.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

She’s 34, not 44.

Age 34 delivery at 35 means BEST CASE any pregnancy moving forward will be a high risk geriatric pregnancy.

[Anonymous]

*face palm*
Cue DCUM fearmongers around women who choose to have children later. Or — GASP — not at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

She’s 34, not 44.

Age 34 delivery at 35 means BEST CASE any pregnancy moving forward will be a high risk geriatric pregnancy.

No. After 35 there's some extra recommended testing (which is no big deal, especially for someone with a lot of resources) and the pregnancy is categorized as AMA but is NOT high risk unless there is a known risk factor, which usually there is not. No one uses the phrase "geriatric pregnancy" anymore, and no OB I know considered 35 "old" for having a baby. Approximately one in 5 babies in this country are born to women over the age of 35.

In any case, who even know if Taylor wants kids? It's a crazy thing to fixate on. But if she does want them, she could absolutely have one.

BTW, I had my first baby at 37 and my send at 39. Conceived naturally both times, no complications in pregnancy, vaginal births, healthy kids. You are more likely to need fertility treatment after 35 (which is totally fine -- plenty of women under 35 need fertility treatments too) but it's not always necessary and there are a lot of us who conceive without assistance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

She’s 34, not 44.

Age 34 delivery at 35 means BEST CASE any pregnancy moving forward will be a high risk geriatric pregnancy.

No. After 35 there's some extra recommended testing (which is no big deal, especially for someone with a lot of resources) and the pregnancy is categorized as AMA but is NOT high risk unless there is a known risk factor, which usually there is not. No one uses the phrase "geriatric pregnancy" anymore, and no OB I know considered 35 "old" for having a baby. Approximately one in 5 babies in this country are born to women over the age of 35.

In any case, who even know if Taylor wants kids? It's a crazy thing to fixate on. But if she does want them, she could absolutely have one.

BTW, I had my first baby at 37 and my send at 39. Conceived naturally both times, no complications in pregnancy, vaginal births, healthy kids. You are more likely to need fertility treatment after 35 (which is totally fine -- plenty of women under 35 need fertility treatments too) but it's not always necessary and there are a lot of us who conceive without assistance.

The top of your check out sheet from the doctor had a medical code for geriatric pregnancy. It was there in your file some where. Insurance companies and doctors offices definitely use that term.
I remember laughing when I saw it on mine.

Taylor can figure out when, how and if she wants kids. Or she can adopt or surrogate or whatever. Her body her life her choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

She’s 34, not 44.

Age 34 delivery at 35 means BEST CASE any pregnancy moving forward will be a high risk geriatric pregnancy.

What? This is ridiculous. 34 is not “high risk.” Its rare nowadays to have kids at 24, at least in urban areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm getting increasingly curious as to whether this relationship can ever live up to the hype now surrounding it. At this point it feels like if they DON'T stay together, get married (in a wedding that puts Kim & Kanye's to shame), pop out some kids to trot around, start a production company, Kelce becomes the star of a tent pole action adventure film series, and Taylor eventually runs for president, I think it's going to be feel like a let down of sorts.

And if they do break up in a few months, I think some people are going to feel, uh, disappointed. Like the PP who wants NORAD to provide a tracker for her private jet.

lol...your synopsis of what is expected of them is spot on. If there's even a wiff of anything wrong, people will have a field day. Because, you know, if a real relationship, everything is always perfect.

Because the relationship is so public. If you don't want people picking apart your relationship, don't put it on display in this way.

Honestly, this is a lesson even regular people learn. I learned to be discrete about my love life and be thoughtful about who I discussed it with, because the truth is that most people are not cheering you on and wishing you well. Plenty of people enjoy watching others screw up (it makes them feel better about themselves). So I would NEVER put my relationship on blast the way these two have. It's really asking for trouble, if you ask me.

This is not the way for most people.
Find better friends.

*discreet

[Anonymous]

Wow I went to Owen Benjamin’s twitter and he has a ton of really racist jokes about Black people. Just one right after the other.

And I remembered why I hardly ever go on Twitter since Elon Musk took over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow I went to Owen Benjamin’s twitter and he has a ton of really racist jokes about Black people. Just one right after the other.

And I remembered why I hardly ever go on Twitter since Elon Musk took over.

Wow…his tweets are even worse than I imagined! How is he not banned from Twitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

She’s 34, not 44.

Age 34 delivery at 35 means BEST CASE any pregnancy moving forward will be a high risk geriatric pregnancy.

What? This is ridiculous. 34 is not “high risk.” Its rare nowadays to have kids at 24, at least in urban areas.

You’re conflating popularity with risk and science. Yes, many women wait too long and are forced into high-risk pregnancies, if they can even get pregnant. Fertility clinics are big business because millions wait too long. Swift will likely require a doctor’s help to get pregnant at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is over the target. Millennial and gen X women were sold a bill of goods by mass media and feminists. Taylor Swift at 35 unmarried and childless and rich isn’t aspirational, it’s sad.

She is absolutely young enough to have kids. Cameron Diaz had her first child at 47, Janet Jackson at 50, Naomi Campbell at 52, Jane Seymour had twins at 50 and so dod Adrienne Barbeau, Cheryl Tiegs had twins at 52, Brigitte Neilson just had a child in her mid-50s, Donna mills had her first at 54, Chole Sevignry, etc.... In Hollywood 34 (Taylor's age) would be a "young mom."

I think you’re confusing had a kid with literally bought a kid.

Oh, please. And the point is Taylor didn't miss some sort of window.

She very likely missed out on getting pregnant naturally without a doctor’s help. She missed out on 10 years or so of seeing her kids and grandkids growing up.

Lol! How have you gotten to your age and not know not everyone prefers/chooses what you choose?

For a good number of us have things we want to do and accomplish before having kids - if we want kids at all. We all know fertility decreases as we age. It's a risk like any other. I didn't want kids in my 20s or early 30s. I had an exciting life that I loved and fulfilled me. I couldn't have had it with kids.

I don't think Taylor will feel like she is "missing out" on 10 years of kids and grandkids. I have no regrets at not having my first until 37. I'm now 59.