Cele|bitchy

---

• Linda Evangelista claims Francois-Henri Pinault asked her to get an abortion
• Tanning mom on her detractors: “they’re jealous, they’re fat and they’re ugly”
• ITW: Angelina Jolie hates her engagement ring, didn’t wear it during a UNHCR trip
• Jennifer Aniston cancels wedding plans, now plotting revenge on Angelina Jolie
• Beyonce’s trainer: Bey was working out 5 times a week, doing lunges post-baby
• Elizabeth Taylor’s family thinks Lindsay Lohan’s casting is a “slap in the face”
• Bethenny Frankel hooked up with The Situation & totally regrets it
• David Gandy: “I’m very self-critical: I hate my hair, my lips, my nose.”
• Gabriel Aubry asks for $20k a month in child support from Halle Berry
• Should Duchess Kate chop off her hair, or just learn how to style it?

Linda Evangelista claims Francois-Henri Pinault asked her to get an abortion Posted: 04 May 2012 09:20 AM PDT Last summer, I was genuinely surprised to learn that the father of Linda Evangelista's son Augustin was none other than Salma Hayek's husband, Francois-Henri Pinault. Pinault fathered Augustin before he and Salma met and married (although the timeline seems wonky to me). Linda kept the paternity under wraps for several years, but then she sued for child support and now the whole thing is being worked out in a New York City courthouse. Linda is still asking for $46,000 A MONTH in child support, which Pinault is fighting tooth and nail. I'm including photos of Linda in court yesterday, and a photo of Salma and Pinault at a Lakers game a few weeks ago. Linda and her lawyers have officially "taken the gloves off" in the legal proceedings – you can read the NY Post's extensive coverage here, and I'm including some of the juiciest parts below. Linda's lawyer says that Pinault asked Linda to get an abortion. Linda Evangelista’s billionaire French baby-daddy Francois-Henri Pinault wanted her to have an abortion, the supermodel’s lawyer claimed as their contentious child support trial kicked off today in Manhattan Family Court. The two spent the afternoon embroiled in a bitter child-support trial set to determine Pinault’s obligations for their 5-year-old son, Augustin, conceived during the couple’s fleeting, four-month affair from 2005. The gorgeous Evangelista, 46, has presented Pinault with a list of Augie’s monthly expenses totaling more than $46,000 a month — in hopes Pinault will pay all or most of it. Pinault, meanwhile, has blasted Evangelista for seeking not just child support, but “mom support” as well, claiming through anonymous sources that the cover girl’s requests “don’t pass the smell test.” Augie’s expenses include $15-16,000 a month for gun-toting, ex-NYPD detective chauffeurs, plus a 24-hour nanny costing almost $7,000 a month. “After some initial happiness, he told her he wished she would terminate the pregnancy,” Evangelista’s lawyer William Beslow told a support magistrate, taking the gloves off in describing a conversation from Jan. 2006. Evangelista, who was then in her early 40s, told Pinault she would keep the baby. “She would support the child herself,” Evangelista told him, “since he had made it perfectly clear to her that he had no interest in doing so,” the lawyer said. “And she did. ” On the stand, Pinault said he met Evangelista in May of 2005, began dating her in September, and learned of the pregnancy in early 2006. “I asked her what was her intention with the pregnancy. I was not involved in the decision of having babies,” he said. “We were dating four months and I didn’t even know her very much.” The Frenchman admitted he dumped Evangelista because he wanted nothing to do with the baby. “She was so happy to be pregnant,” he remembered. “But it was not planned. I decided to stop the relationship at that point.” Asked then by Beslow whether he believed Evangelista had intentionally become pregnant, he answered: “Well, she can answer that but I guess… I was not involved in the decision of having a baby," he said. "Then of course, I told her I would recognize the baby which I did. I would take my responsibility and I did. ” The four-month affair crashed and burned before — four months later — Pinault met his future wife, actress Salma Hayek. He was due to spend most of the afternoon on the witness stand, describing his finances under questioning by Beslow. In opening statements shortly after 2 p.m., Beslow insisted that Evangelista is not seeking to elevate either her or her son’s station in life. But for the first four years of Augie’s life, she has paid all of his expenses, “without one penny, franc or euro in financial contribution from the father,” Beslow said — despite Pinault’s in excess of $3 billion dollars in worth, plus annual income approaching $5 million. Evangelista suffered a “tremendous diminution in her income in 2011,” Beslow said, due to the conclusion of her contract as the face of L’Oreal. “Ms. Evangelista is not looking to piggyback on the lifestyle of Mr. Pinault,” Beslow insisted. “She is looking for a continuation of the reasonable lifestyle of Augie.” Pinault’s lawyer, David Aronson, countered in his own opening statement that Pinault had repeatedly tried to broach the topic of support payments with Evangelista’s prior lawyers, only to be met with a “deafening” silence. Now, she is trying to shake Pinault down for what is, in effect, alimony, he complained. “Most of the expenses [in Evangelista's list of $46,000-a-month in child care expenses] do not relate to Augie but they relate to Ms. Evangelista,” he said. “It is the classic case of someone trying to bootstrap herself to something that is alimony. Is Mr. Pinault a comfortable man of substantial means? Yes.” Aronson said. “But in the four years preceding 2011, her average income was $1.8 million,” he said. “These people have more money than a lot of people,” Aronson conceded. “But our position is that what we understand is being asked for is just ridiculous.” Evangelista hasn’t been able to provide a clear accounting of how much the chauffeurs work for Augie, and how much they work for her, Aronson has complained in prior hearings. “The great majority of these expenses … are expenses that Ms. Evangelista claims on her tax returns are deductible business expenses,” he said today. But Augie is just seeking a comparable lifestyle to what Pinault lavishes on Valentina, his 4-year-old daughter by Hayek, Beslow argues. Pinault spends $50,000 a month just on the taxes, upkeep and loan payments for the $12 million Los Angeles home he’s put in trust for the girl, Valentina. [From The New York Post] So… Linda supported her son herself until 2011, and that's when she asked Pinault to contribute something to support his son, and his lawyers balked. So she sued for $46,000 a month. While I can't even imagine how awesome it would be to be have $46,000 a month, when you think about it… that's $552,000 a year, presumably until Augie turns 18, which will happen in about 12 years. So… if Linda gets what she wants, Pinault will be paying out about $6.6 million for his son. Once again, a huge amount of money. But Pinault is a billionaire and he's spending much more than that on his daughter Valentina, with Salma Hayek. I don't know… I think both Pinault and Evangelista seem kind of crazy here. *shrugs* Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

Tanning mom on her detractors: “they’re jealous, they’re fat and they’re ugly” Posted: 04 May 2012 08:05 AM PDT Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy The Today Show had a follow-up story today on Patricia Krentcil (video is above), the 44 year-old New Jersey mom who is being investigated for child endangerment after allegedly letting her five year-old use a tanning salon. Krentcil plead not guilty in court on Wednesday to the charges. She claimed that her daughter just accompanies her to the tanning salon and that she would never let the girl into a tanning bed. She’s free on bond until a follow up court appearance scheduled for June 4. The original story first came out a couple of days ago, and the angle about the potential child neglect (which was essentially a non-story since the kid was never in the tanning bed according to Krentcil and the salon owner), was quickly surpassed by speculation about this lady’s face. She’s so brown she looks like an overdone turkey, and her voice is as raspy as a 70 year-old smoker. Well Krentcil has a message to all her haters, one that was significantly lubricated by the fifth of Smirnoff she apparently downed. Here’s what she said to a paparazzo asking her about the attention to this story. (This is in the video above. TMZ has a longer video with more slurring words of wisdom from this lady) “There’s somebody out there my whole life that doesn’t like me because they’re jealous, they’re fat and they’re ugly.” They’re also much more sober than she is that’s for sure. After airing that priceless clip, the Today Show then went into a whole segment about how it’s dangerous to tan and you can get addicted to it. Many of you mentioned in our earlier story that you knew people who are or were “tanorexic,” which is a real thing. We’re looking at it. A dermatologist interviewed on The Today Show said the obvious about people who get addicted to tanning. “Their skin begins to look prematurely aged. They look dark, they look leathery… they have lots of wrinkles. They look much older than their age. The longterm skin cancer risk from UV radiation is not reversible.” According to the Today Show, Krentcil’s membership in her local tanning salon has been revoked. You know she’ll just go to the place down the street. Here’s an earlier follow-up video in which they show Krentcil in court. She uses bronzing gel too, right? It’s like she switched out the shoe polish for a more orange tone. Check out the lady giving her the side eye at :40. Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy Photo credit: Dan Callister, PacificCoastNews.com

ITW: Angelina Jolie hates her engagement ring, didn’t wear it during a UNHCR trip Posted: 04 May 2012 07:30 AM PDT *Note: Angelina is not wearing her engagement ring in this photo, taken in Ecuador on April 22nd. In Touch Weekly has a story that is called, no joke, "Angelina Hates The Ring: Newly engaged Angelina Jolie thinks Brad Pitt doesn't 'get' her." Obviously. I'm including some photos of Angelina in the field during her April 22nd UNHCR trip to Ecuador – while she was in the field, meeting refugees, she was not wearing her ring. In Touch notes that she also wasn't wearing her ring for the official meeting she had with Ecuador's foreign minister. So what does it mean if Angelina doesn't want to wear her $500,000 rock while she's tending to her UNCHR duties? It means she hates Brad, of course. It's only been a few weeks since Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt announced their engagement. But as she met with the foreign minister of Ecuador on April 22, the ring finger on her left hand was noticeably bare. While some claim she thought the $500,000 sparkler wasn't appropriate for a serious meeting, everyone knows that engagement rings are meant to be worn always. So why did Angelina really ditch the ring that Brad helped design himself? "She isn't fond of it," a friend confides. "Nothing against Brad's design. She's just never been enamored of white diamonds." Indeed, the friend says Angelina had been hoping for a less traditional stone. "Emeralds are her favorite." And she's been complaining that Brad's choice of the 10-carat diamond, rather than an emerald, "shows how little he knows her." Of course, her hissy fit over the ring shows a lot about her, as well. "She's so demanding," an insider says. "She's acting like a bridezilla." [From In Touch Weekly, print edition] I like emeralds too, but I don't think I would like an emerald engagement ring. But I'm a traditionalist like that… for the most part. If a dude was hellbent on NOT giving me a white diamond for an engagement ring, I would also accept a sapphire – just because those are MY favorite gemstones. I just feel like sapphires, emeralds, rubies and the like are better suited for anniversary presents or Christmas presents or birthday presents rather than an engagement ring. Once again, just me. As for Angelina not wearing her ring while she was in Ecuador – I get it. She didn't want to wear her huge diamonds while she was in the field, working with poor refugees. She really only wears big, blinged-out pieces when she's on the red carpet anyway, so I think of her normal, everyday style as pretty bling-less generally. So while I think Angelina probably loves her ring and plans to wear it most of the time, I hope Brad isn't expecting her to wear it every day, no matter where she is or what she's doing. Because that won’t happen. Photos courtesy of UNHCR/WENN.

Jennifer Aniston cancels wedding plans, now plotting revenge on Angelina Jolie Posted: 04 May 2012 05:06 AM PDT Shortly after Brangelina's engagement was announced, every tabloid and celebrity weekly carried various versions of Jennifer Aniston's reaction to said engagement. By far, one of the my favorite versions was the hyper-melodramatic story in The Enquirer. The Enquirer had Jennifer "collapsing" and then Justin Theroux came in as Jen was sobbing, and they had a huge fight and then Jen made it up to Justin by planting a bunch of stories about them together. Well, the Enquirer ups the ante this week with a story that is so funny, you will literally laugh out loud. Jennifer and Justin have called off their engagement, you see. Because Angelina – specifically, ONLY Angelina – managed to announce the engagement in order to destroy Jennifer Aniston. Oh, and Aniston WILL HAVE HER REVENGE. BY GOD! Jennifer Aniston has called off her wedding to Justin Theroux – and it's all Angelina Jolie's fault! "This was going to be Jen's big year for love and happiness," said an insider. "She and Justin were knee-deep in wedding preparations when Jen got the shattering news that Brad and Angie were announcing their engagement and making plans to wed this year." After Aniston's "collapse" after she heard the news, she and Justin Theroux got into a huge fight. "At that point, Justin said it would be best if they indefinitely postponed their wedding plans," continued the insider. "He doesn't want to be drawn any deeper into the twisted soap opera of Jen, Brad and Angie." Meanwhile, Jen feels that Angelina intentionally blind-sided her, said the insider. "She wholeheartedly believes that Angie engineered the timing of the engagement announcement to Brad to get in another dig. Jen is more furious than heartbroken. She feels like she's been stabbed in the back all over again, after enduring the pain of having Angie steal her husband seven years ago. Jen and Justin's marriage would have been THE wedding of the year, but Angie went hijacked Jen's special moment. Now Jen wants revenge. She wants to get back at Angelina for overshadowing her once again." The insider continues: "This year has gone from bad to worse for Jen. She took a $500,000 loss on the sale of two Manhattan apartments after her East Coast relocation with Justin failed. Then their movie didn't do very well and now her wedding plans have been upended by her archenemy. Angelina better watch her back, because Jen's making plans to retaliate." [From The Enquirer, print edition] What are Jennifer's options for "retaliation"? Pregnancy? Eh. I mean, I guess that could happen, and if it did, Jennifer would definitely soak up a lot of attention and Brangelina's engagement would be the "Number Two" celebrity story. But pregnancy is the obvious choice, and I'd like to think Jennifer (or her people) are smarter than that. What about a series of photo ops with Jennifer and Justin? Go down to Mexico, call the paps and pose in a series of thong bikinis for weeks and weeks. You laugh, but that would totally work too. And it’s less work than a pregnancy too. Oh, and do people really think like this? "She feels like she's been stabbed in the back all over again, after enduring the pain of having Angie steal her husband seven years ago. Jen and Justin's marriage would have been THE wedding of the year, but Angie went hijacked Jen's special moment." Let me correct that question – do people outside of high school think like this? Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

Beyonce’s trainer: Bey was working out 5 times a week, doing lunges post-baby Posted: 04 May 2012 05:03 AM PDT For whatever reason, people are still talking about what Beyonce did to take off her "baby weight" (“pillow weight”). Beyonce tried to discuss her postpartum weight issues, but much like everything else in the interview involving the discussion of her pregnancy, everything seemed slightly… "off". It reminded me of that scene in The 40-Year Old Virgin, where Steve Carell's character is trying to describe what a boob feels like using really weird descriptors and suddenly everyone realizes he's never touched a boob ever. Anyway, Beyonce told People Magazine that her post-baby weight loss was simple: "I counted calories. I worked out maybe three to four times a week. I did a lot of walking in the beginning and now I'm running. But I had to work my way up. I couldn't just go right from being pregnant to running." So it's weird that Beyonce's trainer says something different, right? It’s hard to believe that Beyonce Knowles gave birth just four months ago. The singer, 30, confidently showed off her svelte post-baby body in a sexy black swimsuit in St. Bart’s April 9 — and with good reason. Knowles hit the gym five days a week with trainer Marco Borges. “We do cardio and plyometric moves like lunges and jumps on and off a bench, the pro tells Us Weekly. The 5-foot-9 star, who is breast-feeding, avoids processed fare, sticking to whole foods like vegetables and grilled meats. “You don’t have to eat only celery sticks,” Borges advises. “Be sensible and exercise constantly." Currently rehearsing for her first post-pregnancy show on May 25 in Atlantic City, Knowles — mom to daughter Blue Ivy with husband Jay-Z, 42 — “is loving her body!” a pal tells Us. [From Us Weekly] "Exercise constantly." Lunges. Jumping off a bench right after you've given birth? Sure, maybe the trainer is talking about what Beyonce is doing NOW, not just after she had "given birth." Sigh… I don't even know anymore. By the way, Beyonce keeps adding photos to her Tumblr. She just added the one of the "BLUE" necklace yesterday! I kind of like the Blue bling. Photos courtesy of Beyonce's Tumblr, Fame/Flynet.

Elizabeth Taylor’s family thinks Lindsay Lohan’s casting is a “slap in the face” Posted: 04 May 2012 05:03 AM PDT Everyone has been wringing their hands over Lindsay Lohan's casting as Elizabeth Taylor, for good reason. Even though it's just a dumb, obviously budget Lifetime disaster, it's the principle of the thing! When talking about one of the greatest beauties (and one of the greatest activists/philanthropists/actresses) of the 20th century, it speaks volumes about the lack of respect *SOME* people have when it's considered acceptable to cast a busted crackhead in the role. Even if it is a Lifetime movie, they seriously could have gotten a higher-quality actress for the role. That's basically how Elizabeth's family feels too: Elizabeth Taylor's family and friends are furious that Lindsay Lohan has been cast to play the screen goddess in a TV movie, insiders say. "Liz's sons, Michael and Chris Wilding, feel there are many other actresses who are far more qualified to play their famous mother," a family friend told The Enquirer. "They think gorgeous and talented stars such as Cate Blanchett or Emily Blunt should have been short-listed for the role. Liz's children feel their mom deserved better!" "Liz was not only a great movie star, but a great philanthropist, and it's a slap in the face to her memory to have this errant party girl play her," huffed the family friend. "She'd be screaming bloody murder over this whole fiasco!" [From The Enquirer, print edition] Well, La Blanchett and Emily Blunt would never deign to appear in a Lifetime movie, but producers definitely could have looked around to find someone who… I don't know… LOOKS like Elizabeth Taylor. The thing about Lindsay Lohan is that she could have easily worked her Ann-Margret sex kitten appeal (and stayed ginger and sober-ish), but the Cracken spent years trying to remake herself into some kind of Marilyn Monroe crackie drag queen. I take that back – most of the Marilyn drag queens I've seen look worlds better than Lindsay. What was my point? Ah, yes. They should have cast someone famous for being a brunette. Like, Jessica Szohr or Kat Dennings or something. Oh, and producers still haven't cast the Richard Burton role. They start filming in the beginning of June! There's not much time to find whatever poor bastard takes the role. And yes, I saw that LaineyGossip suggested Eddie Cibrian for the role. That would certain be a… layered comedic performance. Trying to watch Eddie do a Welsh accent, trying to watch Eddie "act", trying to watch Eddie and the Cracken deny their love. One last thing – Radar has a story about whether or not the DA will actually charge the Cracken with any crime for all of the hitting-and-running and stuff. You can read the story here. Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet and PCN.

Bethenny Frankel hooked up with The Situation & totally regrets it Posted: 04 May 2012 05:01 AM PDT You know, after writing up a number of posts on the “Jersey Shore” crew, I’ve built up quite a tolerance to their requisite element of tastelessness, but even I am grossed out by this particular story. Apparently, this is all based upon a relatively recent item from Blind Gossip about a bizarre, unexpected hookup between two reality stars of varying shows and statuses. Some of the guesses from the site’s commenters included Kim Kardashian and any number of “Jersey Shore” men. If given the opportunity, I probably would have guessed Kim K. and a few of the “Shore” dudes for a tag team, but that’s just me. Oddly enough, Kim has nothing to do with the reported true identity of the female subject of the blind item, who is allegedly … Bethenny Frankel. The dude? Mike “The Situation” Sorrentino. Seriously! A story in this week’s Enquirer states that Bethenny is completely mortified: Skinny girl Bethenny Frankel has a serious “Situation” on her hands! Rumors are swirling that the 41-year-old former “Real Housewives of New York City” star hooked up with “Jersey Shore” [cast member] Mike “The Situation” Sorrentino — and the fallout from the cheating scandal is threatening to destroy her already troubled marriage! What’s more, the whispers are making waves just as she’s getting set to launch a new talk show. The embarrassing story began to unfold in October, when a website printed a “blind item” that read: “Strangest hookup ever…This controversial female married A-list reality star spent a good five minutes making out with this second fiddle reality star who thinks he is way better than he is.” On April 21, the site revealed that the subjects of the item were Bethenny and 29-year-old Sorrentino! “Bethenny has vehemently denied it, calling the rumor ‘a lot of B.S.,’” a source at the Bravo network said. But her husband of two years, Jason Hoppy, isn’t so sure. “She’s been suspicious for some time because of all the problems they’ve had,” the source continued. “Bethenny’s marriage to Jason has already been hanging by a thread, and this could finally sink it.” Bethenny is also worried how the rumor could affect her new talk show, which will begin test run on FOX stations in June. “Getting mixed up with someone like Mike Sorrentino, who has just been through rehab, is the last thing Bethenny needs right now,” added the source. “The timing couldn’t be worse.” [From Enquirer, print edition, May 14, 2012] Is this story true? At the deepest pit of my soul, I hope that it’s absolutely made up, but it is entirely possible that these two famewhores swapped some reality-based spit. Regardless of the veracity of the blind item, this wouldn’t be the first time that someone worried about Sitch ruining their reputation, but as gross as this story is (on both ends), it would only (in Sorrentino’s eyes) help him out by quashing the gay rumors that so threaten his nonexistent brand. Here’s Sitch out for lunch in Beverly Hills on 4/12 with his “dudes,” who may or may not be part of his highly paid entourage that (let’s face it) won’t last forever. Photos courtesy of WENN

David Gandy: “I’m very self-critical: I hate my hair, my lips, my nose.” Posted: 04 May 2012 05:00 AM PDT Ah, I love writing about British model David Gandy. He's just so pretty, and I just get so tired of writing about some "celebrities" – David’s a nice break. I'm kind of surprised by how long Gandy can go without doing any interviews – I mean, obviously, he's just being paid to look pretty and pose, but still, he's arguably the biggest male model in the world. Give an interview every two months or so! So Gandy appears on the cover of the new Men's Health UK. The interview is awesome – he talks about his breakup with Mollie King (who probably just got dumped by Prince Harry), and he talks in general terms about what a neurotic mess he is. Whatever, ladies. I find neurotic messes very attractive. And he's anal retentive too! Kismet. Workouts: "I can't train in the morning. I've never been a morning person. It will always be late afternoon to late evening: about four o'clock or after a day of work at 9.30pm. That's when I feel most energetic. But everyone is different. You have to read your own body." His diet: "I'm not hugely strict. I don't really believe in dedicating your life [to a diet] as some do. My mum used to say I hum when I eat and I still do. I'm happiest when I'm eating but I do eat good stuff. I keep away from certain foods – anything white, anything processed, anything in a packet. The other thing is to beware when things say 'low fat', because they often have more sugar or salt as a result. One thing I always have to hand is a wholewheat wrap – great to chuck in with a few raw vegetables, a bit of chicken and hummus. It takes two minutes. I eat raw vegetables like there's no tomorrow." Alcohol: "I love my booze. My job involves a lot of socialising so I probably drink more than a lot of people think. I like red wine, but if I have anything else I'll have a double vodka, lots of ice, lots of fresh lime. Clean alcohol. The cleaner the spirit the better you feel – especially the next day if you want to work out." Going crazy on the biscuits (actual biscuits): "I do enjoy a few biscuits, but I'll always feel guilty at the end of the day. I'll never really go crazy. My motto is that whatever you put into your body, you've got to work out." On hating his looks: “In terms of my looks, I’m very self-critical: I hate my hair, my lips, my nose. And I can’t grow a full beard. People assume I think more of myself than I actually do.” On being an outsider: “I’ve never really fitted in anywhere. I've always felt a little on the sidelines, like I never fit into one category.” On his intelligence: “I’m clever in many respects, but not academically. I wouldn’t be doing this job if I could be a vet.” On not making friends in fashion: “I can’t say I have many [friends] from the fashion industry. I've been modeling for 10 years, so that says quite a lot.” On why he broke up with his last girlfriend: “My perfectionism can make it difficult. I know my ex-girlfriend [Saturday's singer Mollie King] struggled. Things have to be perfect — everything in the house, every car I buy. That’s incredibly hard to live with if you don't understand it.” [From Men's Health UK & NY Magazine] So he broke up with Mollie King because she didn't understand that everything has to PERFECT? God, he really does seem like a piece of work, doesn't he? Neurotic, beautiful bastard. I love him. Be mine, David. Men's Health UK has a video of David explaining his workout as well. Is it okay to admit that I watched this like I was viewing p0rn? No? OK, I take it back. *pulls up pants* Photos courtesy of Men's Health UK.

Gabriel Aubry asks for $20k a month in child support from Halle Berry Posted: 04 May 2012 04:59 AM PDT I’m surprised how long it’s been since we’ve heard news about Halle Berry and Gabriel Aubry’s custody battle. Things have been relatively quiet since Halle confirmed her engagement to Oliver Martinez in mid April. Halle has made it clear through her actions in court (and with various happy family photo ops) that she’s looking to replace Gabriel with Oliver as Nahla’s father. She’s been working to push him out, and Gabriel has been pushing back to assert his parental rights. His latest move involves asking for a “substantial increase” in his child support from Halle, to $20,000 a month. He didn’t have the right paperwork when he went to court with his request so the judge postponed a ruling on it. It sounds like a huge amount to me, but I’m far from that income bracket. I think that if the tables were turned and we were talking about a mother making substantially less than a father this wouldn’t be an issue. (Or maybe it would. This is around the same amount that Melissa Etheridge’s ex gets for two children, she’s asking for more than that, and it sounded outrageous to many of you.) Here’s more, thanks to TMZ. Radar also has this story, but they don’t have a firm amount on the support Aubry is asking for. As I usually mention in these stories, Radar gets their information from team Gabe and TMZ is team Halle. Gabriel Aubry is asking the judge in his custody war with Halle Berry for a half a million bucks in attorney’s fees, and $20,000 a month in child support, TMZ has learned. Gabriel was in court this morning, expecting to argue his case for the huge increase in child support, but the case was continued because the paperwork wasn’t filled out properly. Gabriel was extremely upset the matter was put off. Sources tell us … Gabriel believes he’s entitled to the money because he needs a proper environment to care for 4-year-old Nahla. As we first reported, Halle wants to move with the child to Paris, which would have a direct impact on Gabriel’s request for additional support. [From TMZ] During their split, it came out that Aubry made an estimated $700,000 a year working as a model. US Weekly claimed at the time, back in 2010, that Halle used to mock Gabriel and call him a “loser” for not earning multi-millions like she did. I don’t think this is about the money for Gabriel at all. He probably does fine on his own and doesn’t necessary need the extra child support from Halle. I think this is about him making sure that he’s asserting his rights as a parent, and that his daughter remains nearby. Some will call him greedy though. $20k a month is what K-Fed got for two kids and he had primary custody. It’s customary in these type of cases for the richer parent to pay the other’s attorney’s fees. Halle Berry’s net worth is estimated at around $70 million and some reports claim she earns $16 million a year. Given the crap movies she’s been in lately, that’s probably no longer accurate. Gabriel is shown picking up Nahla at school on 4-24-12. Look at him carrying her Hello Kitty bag! photo credit: Juan Sharma, PacificCoastNews.com. Halle and Oliver are shown at the beach with Nahla on 4-21. Halle is also shown with her friend at the mall on 4-27-12. I liked her hair better before! Credit: Osvaldo/FameFlynet Pictures

Should Duchess Kate chop off her hair, or just learn how to style it? Posted: 04 May 2012 04:56 AM PDT The Daily Mail has an extensive article/opinion/essay today about Duchess Kate's epic hair. The thesis seems to be "Kate should cut her hair and find a more mature, professional and elegant hairstyle." Which is a bit rich, because The Mail – and several other UK papers and tabloids – have treated Kate's hair like "The Curls That Saved A Nation" ever since Kate and William got engaged. You can read The Mail's piece here, and here are some highlights: No one can be in doubt that The Duchess of Cambridge has behaved impeccably in her first year of marriage to Prince William. Middle-class Middleton has crossed the class divide with grace — she's courteous, elegant and never stops smiling, especially when her beloved husband is at her side. But is it just me or has something rather strange happened to Kate recently? It's not her whittled-down waist. Nor is it her fashion sense, the love of High Street brands such as Reiss and LK Bennett, which earns her brownie points with the public and is turning her into a fashion icon. No, it's those famous locks, which seem to be getting longer by the day. Her Royal Highness is turning into her Royal Hairness with that dark, glossy mane. And I'm wondering if now, a year on from her wedding, it might just be time for the chop. Now I'm not suggesting for a moment that Kate should be sporting a Mia Farrow crop or middle-aged bob. But the blanket of hair which arrives five minutes before she does has to go. Take last week, when Kate was greeting children at a charity event. Dressed in a dark blue tweed skirt and jacket, she looked stylish, professional and charmed everyone. Yet every time she bobbed down to talk to one of the youngsters, her face was completely obliterated by a cascade of dark curls. She would flick it out of the way, fondle and fiddle with it and I lost count of the number of times she had to tuck it behind her ear. At one point she looked like Cousin It from the Addams Family — all hair, no person. It was so distracting. Even Princess Diana realised early on in public life that people wanted to see her face. She cut her droopy bangs and settled for a much more sophisticated short style. It worked, showcasing her enormous blue eyes and strong features. So why is Kate clinging to her own over-long mane? Even she must have been infuriated by being overshadowed by her hair, because at her very next event she attended at the Imperial War Museum she'd put it in a back-teased half-up, half-down style. But even that style was more WAG than HRH. For goodness sake, she's a member of the Royal Household now, not Cheryl Cole. Every time I see her fondling her hair I'm waiting for her to look into the cameras and coo: 'Because I'm worth it.' Kate's mane has none of the elegance of Mary, the Crown Princess of Denmark, also a young woman of ordinary birth who has risen to the highest position in the land. On Kate and William's trip to Copenhagen in the autumn, Mary's shiny, shoulder-length brown hair looked far more elegant than the Duchess's tumbling curls. Surely an image-conscious young woman like Kate can't be oblivious to this? Yet there are probably a number things stopping her cutting her hair. First there is a long Royal tradition of establishing a look, then keeping it. The Queen is the perfect example. Apart from the colour, her hair has hardly changed since she took the throne six decades ago. Less successfully, Princess Anne revels in the same unflattering hairstyle (and the same frocks) she wore half a century ago. It's widely known that Camilla's hair-stylers have tried for years to tease her out of the rather dated 1970s Farrah Fawcett flick she's been sporting since she was a girl. Yet she always responds: 'Charles loves my hair this way.' [From The Mail] The piece goes on to say that Kate might be clinging to her long hair and sausage curls because that's how she looked when she met William, and he may prefer her hair like that too. Another theory: Kate is clinging to the youthful long hair as a way to cling to her youth. The writer goes on to admit that she wore long hair for years, and she recently got four inches taken off (it now comes to her shoulders) and now she loves it and feels and looks younger. Which is always what the short-hair brigade says!!! Look, I have long hair too. My hair is probably about at Kate's length. I love long hair. It suits me. I barely do anything to it (Indian genes!) and it looks fine. I don't have an issue with Kate having long hair – at all. She had long hair in college and throughout her 20s, and this is the length that makes her comfortable, and so be it. My problem isn't with the length – it's how she styles it. In her 20s, before the engagement, Kate wore her hair in a much simpler fashion – like, she probably just gave herself a blow-out, and her hair had a natural wave, and it was fine. But since she's become a royal, Kate is obsessed with the giant, time-consuming sausage curls, and the look is pretty tired. I’m exhausted just thinking about how long it takes her to get ready. The Mail is right on that count – her hair is simply "too big" in general, and "too big" specifically for public functions. Plus, she does spend so much of her time in front of the cameras fiddling with her hair, stroking it like a security blanket in outing after outing. My thesis: Kate just needs to learn how to style her hair and mix it up according to the occasion. For black tie events, her hair should be up. For professional day outings, do it half-up so it's not in her face. Try French twists and chignons. And don't fall back into the "sausage curl" comfort zone every single day. Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet and WENN.

You are subscribed to email updates from Cele|bitchy To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610