Nerdy and unashamed of it
USA
Joined January 2024
- Tweets543
- Following49
- Followers50
- Likes438
Oh, Paul-
Your instincts are normally correct. Kathy Griffin's are not. That second observation should have alerted you to the pitfall of pitying Kelly Clarkson.
So, Clarkson is "right" because she's ... consistent? I'll give you that, but consistency doesn't earn Clarkson a medal, or restore her formerly "nice" reputation.
This isn't about right or wrong, winner / loser. Neither party comes off smelling great here - especially after the store raised the price of the bird to $15 million. (Give me twenty bucks at Hobby Lobby and I can probably make my own.) This is about a botched opportunity for celebrity schmoozing on one hand, an unseemly twitter tantrum on the other, and two parties trying to save pride, face, and reputations - while yet losing that elusive character trait often described as "grown-up behavior."
Of COURSE, Kathy Griffin would favor the celebrity. She IS a celebrity. Of COURSE Griffin wants apologies and flowers for offended celebrities ... except Donald Trump, who should only have his head severed ... figuratively, of course.
Out of Kelly Clarkson's own mouth- she was offended because she was given the "Pretty Woman" treatment. She wasn't catered to quite enough. The store tried to 'help' her as if she were poor. The nerve.
Wise of the store? Probably not. Offensive? Only to some upper-class people like Clarkson, Kathy Griffin, and Clarkson's uber-fans. Clarkson accused the store of was classist "rudeness" because they suggested cheaper alternatives. The HORROR. But I'm one of those freak-show cheapskates that likes it when a store clerk tries to save me money. I'm just weird that way.
Clarkson, on the other hand, shamed an employee globally just 15 minutes after a five-minute interaction. She could have posted a helpfully negative Google review and left it at that, as most of us do, but she chose to go celebrity-nuclear. She called the store rep an "idiot" and "liar." And she did it with an audience of millions, hundreds of whom turned their own wrath directly on the store with scornful messages, calls, and visits. Insist that Clarkson is incredibly nice if you like ... but incredibly nice people don't normally do what Clarkson did unless they are having a very, very bad day.
So we have the store's perceived snobbery on one hand, vs. documented character assassination, a global insult, an attempted business cancellation, and an attempt to become the most aggrieved self-made martyr since Meghan Markle and Jussie Smollett. But wait ... there's more:
Kelly Clarkson charges $140 MINIMUM for a concert ticket and $3,000+ for a VIP seat. She can afford an absurdly priced bird toy because she commits a reciprocal 'crime' from the one she experienced: She treats poor people like they're rich while running their credit cards. This is far more offensive than a 'snobby' store offering a "nice" lady a better deal on a one-trick wooden bird.
But do take comfort Paul, that just this one magical time, for one "Moment Like This," (sing it, Kelly ♫), you and Kathy Griffin see eye-to-eye.
I shall take comfort that I've only paid Kelly Clarkson less than a dollar for one song on iTunes.
When both Kathy Griffin and I agree that Kelly Clarkson is the right one in the Art of Play store incident, then you really know the Brooklyn store messed up. It still feels weird to say I agree with Griffin, but it’s the truth.
Griffin said today that she’s “Team Kelly” in the Art of Play feud and called the store “petty.” She said she’s known Clarkson since the night she won American Idol, thinks Clarkson has become more real since her talk show ended, and doesn’t believe Clarkson would invent a story that could hurt a small business. I wish Griffin could be this sensible about everything.
Griffin’s take is that the store would’ve been better off saying they were embarrassed and that the employee had a bad day, then sending flowers. She thinks that would’ve helped their business instead of making them look small. That’s the same point I’ve been making. A simple apology and an invitation back would’ve ended this. The store owner playing the victim and raising the price to $15 million didn’t.
Agreeing with Griffin still feels off. She and I don’t line up on much. On this one, though, she’s right that Clarkson’s version has been consistent and that the store’s response made it worse. Treating a customer decently the first time still costs less than the cleanup.
At this point the Art of Play store co-owner is so dug in with his unfounded victimhood that I doubt he’ll ever do the right thing. At best he’ll probably just stop talking about it and pretend it never happened.
What he actually has to do after his reactions since the incident with Clarkson is apologize for the incident and also apologize for his response. Don’t make any excuses, just say his store was wrong, he was wrong, and Art of Play has taken steps to fix how they treat customers.
As for Griffin, she’s never apologized for the horrific political displays she’s made, so I won’t consider her anywhere near balanced. But when it comes to Clarkson, her take here seems right.
Kelly Clarkson and I have not spoken lately (well, ever), so I should not judge her. However:
Is it possible for a talk show host with a reputation for being super-nice to also come down hard on people when they are displeased?
Hmmmmm ... You tell me.🤔
A classic example of the classic disingenuousness of trans ideologists:
"Calling something an ideology doesn’t make the science behind it disappear. It just saves you the trouble of engaging with it."
Calling something an ideology isn't a slur. Conservatism and liberalism are ideologies. I even agree with one of those. Identifying an ideology makes it easier to describe and identify a commonly observed mode of thinking.
What actually makes it harder to engage with ideas and assertions? Being blocked by someone ... as X explains the original poster and Mir poster did to me ... as Mir accused ME me of not engaging.
Mir also employs tactics common to those who advance the trans ideology: Make a passing reference to "science" while appealing to so-called "experts" and authority instead of actual, observed and reviewed/challenged facts and data ... then silencing dissent as much as possible and walking away from the debate.
What you’ve done here is compile a list of scientific facts, medical concepts, ethical positions, political disagreements and outright straw men, label the whole thing an ‘ideology’, and then congratulate yourself on having demonstrated its existence.
The distinction between sex and gender isn’t an ideological belief, as it’s recognised in medicine and psychology. Neither is the existence of transgender people. Besides, being transgender isn’t classified as a mental disorder by the WHO.
You can disagree with particular policies or medical practices without pretending that an entire field of scientific knowledge is some sort of organised ideological conspiracy.
Calling something an ideology doesn’t make the science behind it disappear. It just saves you the trouble of engaging with it.
Is Kelly Clarkson right? Or is the store?
It doesn't matter. When one os famous, successful, and incredibly rich, one doesn't win by shaming a small business on the world stage. She could have, and should have, walked away - writing off an unpleasant interaction that didn't go the way she had hoped - because that's what most of us do when they're out of our size, they are closing for the day, they don't accept our coupon, or they forget to put the fries in our order.
Kelly's mistake: She portrayed herself as a victim. She wasn't denied lifesaving care- She had her pride hurt. When one is in Kelly's position, and can buy so many things ... almost anything one wants ... it is pretty hard for the rest of us 'normal people' to feel sorry about it. We have much bigger concerns than being denied the sale of such a ridiculous extravagance.
Kelly Clarkson is probably a genuinely nice person, or so I've heard. But she made the mistake of making a public scrap over a first world problem. And this is why people think so many celebs are so insufferable - even if they are in the right. Most of us have learned to pick our battles, and this is one where Clarkson should have just walked away, and maybe just found another business to put in a positive spotlight.
What "Miffy" fails to mention: "Trans" access to women's spaces opened the door to this.
What Jo Rowling has consistently mentioned: NO male, 'trans' or otherwise, should be in women's and girls' spaces ... and the insistence of so-called "trans women" that they are entitled has permitted access for people like the offender here - because once you base access on "feelings" ... no one can be denied access.
Trans-advocate, who argues with reality on a daily basis, thinks he (?) is a superior debtor to J.K. Rowling, who has not only revealed trans extremist assertions to be inconsistent, contradictory and irrational ... she has done it with ease and style.
"Miffy" doesn't have to hold her breath for half a second: Rowling already condemned Neil Gaiman, a straight man, for his alleged abusive behavior towards women, comparing him to predator Harvey Weinstein and questioning why the literary community was so hesitant to voice disapproval of Gaiman's behavior.
Perhaps the silence results from Gaiman's vocal support of 'trans rights.'
Anyway, "Miffy" must be miffed that Rowling's "silence" on abuse isn't actually a thing, and one of the most vocal and prominent voices of trans advocacy turned out to be one of the abusers.
The pro-trans solution for those who want to be an ally AND watch Harry Potter on HBO: Theft. Show your niceness, love, and integrity by taking what isn't yours, because you feel entitled. Steal from J.K. Rowling and all the people working on the series who aren't JKR because you have a 'right' to enjoy new Potter content. You aren't obligated to pay- you disagree with JKR's view on what a woman is, so it's free to you. Have the mouth to speak your mind, but the backbone to actually give-up a favorite fandom isn't required. Just help yourself to whatever (a TV series, a women's restroom, a womens' sports tournament) because you declare it's yours too ... just because you want it.
It all tracks. The entire trans movement is built on dishonesty, bullying, manipulation, taking things that aren't yours, and feeling righteous about it.
What they believe about women and men makes them deluded. How they treat other people makes them sociopathic.
True, there are some anti-JKR activists who say they will not watch the series, and encourage others to do the same. But most of them won't hold out for long: They'll watch the series covertly, because they can't deny themselves anything they want.
unavailable
The number of posts I have read calling J.K. Rowling a hateful bigot because she is not on board with everything 'trans' activists demand must number in the hundreds.
The number of posts I have read referencing J.K. Rowling's actual hateful and bigoted statements:
Zero.
Have looked over hundreds of tweets, trying to find examples of how @jk_rowling has behaved meanly to "transgender" people, and I'm coming up entirely empty-handed.
Such a disappointment when one gives internet trolls the benefit of the doubt, only to have the rug yanked away.
We are so fortunate and blessed to have J.K. Rowling: She got an entire generation of young people to read voraciously and intelligently. As it turns out, a significant portion of them disavowed her for her careful and wise perspectives on the dangers of current trans ideology - because opinion-makers in media and universities didn't approve ... but all is not lost.
Had Rowling not written the epic Potter series, this generation would not know her at all, and much of the resistance to this diabolical movement that abuses and butchers young people for money would not have existed. Thanks to Rowling, young people have a chance to access the wisdom of an actual friend, mentor, and literary "mom."
Yes, many of today's young adults hate Rowling and will always hate her. But most of the millennial generation sees her as the voice of their childhood, and a voice of reason as they enter adulthood and parenthood. Had it not been for Rowling, her voice, and her bravery, we would be in a much darker place today than we are. There is light, and with it comes hope. LUMOS! 🪄
I challenge every single person who believes minors should be enabled and even encouraged to transition to read this first person testimony to the end.
1/3
via @IWF independentwomen.com/2026/05…
If you use Flipboard, consider not. It bills itself as a news aggregator - but it's really into content filtering and propaganda.
Take a look at what happens when I type "Harry Potter" or "Rowling" as a topic of interest. J.K. Rowling's name is conspicuously absent, but this is what I get instead.
It can't even bring itself to display Rowling's name.
Flipboard news is a fraud.
Was called a "facist" yesterday for saying women have the right to consent (or not) regarding who undresses in in front of them, and in front of whom they will undress themselves.
I swear - people have developed a weird, sick relationship with the word "facist," sticking the word to anything they don't like like a drunk supermarket stocker with a loaded price-tagging machine.
"Conservatives: FACISTS."
"Having to work is FACISM!!!"
"Men can't use the ladies' room? FACISM!"
"Only FACISTS don't want drag queens performing for kids."
"All men, women, and non-queers are FACIST!"
"Broccoli is FACIST food!"
"I heard Michael Phelps is the FACIST swimmer in the world. He disgusts me!"
Ugh ... let it go. Find a new word.
Juo says consent isn't needed. Women: Make a note. Your consent is not needed - because of a declaration he makes about YOUR bathrooms.
Tell him: He doesn't get to remove the consent requirement for men to enter women's bathrooms. The word "Public" does NOT cancel the word "women's" - and the protections that come with it.
This isn't really about bathrooms. This is about taking away consent - anywhere and everywhere.
unavailable
Paula, the fact that you feel compelled to use the word "cis" to describe women who identify as women, and you don't just call them "women," demonstrates how very deeply all true women have been affected by this. Who they are is being redefined by someone else, to accommodate a fantasy. It's a big deal.
