Meghan’s latest Archwell podcast- Paris Hilton

[susan12345678]

Having started threads on earlier editions of the Archewell podcast, I felt compelled to comment on the latest - an interview with Paris Hilton - on the theme of the Bimbo.

I’ve not listened - but have read a summary - and the premise strikes me as rather hypocritical.
Meghan apparently mentions taking part in a diplomatic motorcade in Argentina during an internship at the Embassy, a role she claims to have received for her intelligence and education, but neglects to mention that her uncle arranged the (very brief) role for her or the small matter of failing the diplomatic exams. The implication seems to be that she should have been destined for a stellar professional career but sabotaged these possibilities by taking on ‘bimbo’ roles in a short-sighted effort to pay the rent.

The truth of the matter is that she may never have succeeded in a more intellectual or professional career and being a ‘bimbo’ actually served her extremely well - after all, she is someone of middling talent and would never have gained the prominence she has, or access to a wealthy husband, without these ‘bimbo’ roles.

In general, one only has to look at Instagram, Only Fans, Sugar Daddy sites to appreciate the true scale of the ‘bimbo’ economy which was Meghan’s natural habitat. It’s not going anywhere- and it’s an amusing conceit to imagine, now that she’s in her 40s and safely married to a rich man, that it was all somehow beneath her all along

We know people listen to it, or indeed NOT listen to it, to level massive criticism at someone they don't like. (That's being polite). It is habit forming to do this

I genuinely avoid the odd famous person who annoys the hell out of me, on MN and everywhere. Much better for the blood pressure

I can get someone listening tonight to find something they can complain about. But those who do not listen and flatly state they do not want any information about her and wish she would go away, then go out and start threads and continue communicating about her.

I really do not understand why? I would love to hear a psychiatrist comment on the practice.

Because those people cannot stand the narcissists rounding up the baa-ing lambs who bleat that she's saying such amazing things without pointing out to said lambs that there are holes, lies and misdirections all Omer the place - smoke and mirrors make an 'our truth' they don't reflect the actual truth

@onlylarkin

Have you listened to the interview? Paris was abused at the boarding school she was sent to by her parents when they objected to her teen behaviour. The sam place is now under investigation for a whole slew of horrific abuses, including student deaths.

Paris has previously talked about how her behaviour and persona in subsequent years was partially a coping method to help her manage what had happened to her during that time.

She had profited from the bimbo persona but it was created as a way to mask horrific trauma.

So to discuss it in this airy way seems so glib and silly. Especially when Meghan frames the conversations using her discomfort with a job she had freely taken. Whereas Paris was abducted with her parents consent to a behavioural school that sought (and succeeded) in breaking teenagers.

I really do not understand why? I would love to hear a psychiatrist comment on the practice.

Insinuating that people who have a different opinion to you are crazy? Gosh, if only there was a podcast to break down why that’s a lazy criticism…. 😀

And strangely they ignore me and defensive

I never would label anyone crazy, your words not mine. I mean, I did state that last weeks podcast resonated with me because of mental health issues in my family. I can still be interested in a discussion with a mental health expert to discuss the behavior of someone who obsessively continues to seek out someone they have stated they dislike for the express purpose of finding more things they do not like about them. I just wonder why. Why would a person, any person, do that?

I absolutely did listen to the interview. As I have all of them. The point is that no matter a woman's background, they all have to conform to the nature of the business. It is not ok and speaking out against the stereotype helps propel a movement forward.

I also never said that because your opinion is different than mine I think there is a problem. I am just curious about the behavior. That is my nature, to be curious about why people do the things that they do.

I welcome your answer actually. Why would you spend so much time searching out information about someone you dislike, just so you can find more you dislike about her?

“Why would you spend so much time searching out information about someone you dislike, just so you can find more you dislike about her?”

It really is interesting isn’t it - I wonder why they do it.

The point is that no matter a woman's background, they all have to conform to the nature of the business. It is not ok and speaking out against the stereotype helps propel a movement forward

Do you think that not only speaking out against the stereotype but also 'doing' against the stereotype may be an even more powerful action to propel a movement forward? Speaking out against the stereotype while simultaneously embracing it risks sending a mixed message. Speaking out against the stereotype and not engaging with it would be altogether more powerful.

Part of the advice of dealing with narcissistic behaviour is either grey rocking or going low/no contact. I’m unclear why people seek her out - they don’t have to listen to the podcasts, they don’t need to read the interviews, they don’t need to read the newspaper articles about her, they don’t need to watch the TV shows about her.

She is a money maker for media (especially in the UK) because of the almost insatiable demand for negative content about her. So - want to stop hearing about her? Stop clicking on the articles. Stop listening to podcasts. Stop driving the negative economy by starting threads with the sole aim of piling on. In time media interest will start to decrease - and if media interest in her (them) abates then perhaps their fortunes will flounder as many people seem to wish.

Speaking out against the stereotype while simultaneously embracing it risks sending a mixed message. Speaking out against the stereotype and not engaging with it would be altogether more powerful

indeed. A brief look at Meghan’s recent photoshoot (linked above) suggests she still wears fake tan, fake lashes, fake hair and cultivates a very artificial look, yet she complains that doing so was expected from her as an extra on a game show.

it’s certainly a head-scratcher

Why would you spend so much time searching out information about someone you dislike, just so you can find more you dislike about her?

Seriously? Same reason people watch Big Brother or Made in Chelsea. It's entertaining to watch self-important people make fools of themselves.

It was an interesting episode. A theme through the series is of Meghan’s sense of self as the “smart one” (her anecdote about Chris was one I could identify with). She grew into her looks in her late teens and twenties - and so her sense that she wasn’t the pretty is a theme that she spoke about with Mariah and now with Paris.

It was nice to peak behind the curtain of the deal or no deal set and challenge our conception of who the women were (all intelligent and thoughtful) - I hadn’t really thought about them and it made me wonder what they had all gone on to do. I wonder what the lady who told her to stand up straight and suck in her stomach thought of Meghan’s anecdote about her 🤣.

She spoke about the contrast of this role versus her diplomatic role and wondering how she got there (basically being eye candy on a show).

I think it is challenging for actresses to find the right line - they need camera time and sometimes that camera time is being a bag girl or behaving questionably with a burger (something both Paris and Meghan have in common).

I think however this was the weakest episode - I felt sometimes that Paris and Meghan were talking at each other not to each other. And the criticism I have of this series continues of not finding a narrative voice - interview or commentary/discussion?

I was frustrated because I felt that the troubled teen industry needed a longer and more in depth discussion. I also felt that the discussion about women in comedy could have been an episode in its own right.

I’m not sure why Meghan said twice that she wasn’t trying to rehabilitate Paris but humanise her (I’m paraphrasing here) - it was established that Paris actively engaged in her own caricature but of course she was young and perhaps wouldn’t have made the same decisions- but that’s it. Is there something else Paris did besides that? It certainly sounded ominous and I don’t want to Google because I don’t want Paris Hilton and Meghan commentary sliding across my news feed over the next couple of days. Way too invested in the shit show that is politics today to want anything else to kick it off my main feeds.

Meghan said that she and the women on the show had to conform to a uniform look - the key is uniformity and interchangeability.

You have no way of knowing if she has enhanced her look (fake as you put it - nice but of misogyny here) in that shoot - I certainly can’t tell - she looks the same as she always has done.

@skullbabe thank you for an insightful post regarding the podcast that you obviously listened to. I agree with this being the weakest of them all. I dont much relate to this topic though, so maybe that is it. Maybe Meghan will dig deeper into these subjects in the next season, if she is renewed? The long conversation of these topics would need more than a 45 minute conversation.

I can see why Meghan felt the need to humanize Paris. Because people seek out famous people for the express purpose of talking shit as entertainment apparently.

Also if you’re going to be disparaging please could you do it in the right way - Meghan was not an extra on Deal or no Deal. Extras are actors - Meghan was not acting on Deal or no Deal. She was a bag girl - she was there to look pretty.

I read you post again skullbabe. Paris went through some celebutante crap back in the day. A DUI, fights in clubs. She was hanging out with Britney and Lindsay. All 3 of which had to grow up in the public eye, which never seems to go well. (not saying that Britney and Lindsay are bad influences, just that they all 3 struggled with the paps and being treated horribly in the media because of sterotypes) All 3 of them melted down in public, and the paps were endlessly chasing them in order to get the photos so the likes of DM et. al would pay for them. The photos were never in a flattering light. Because nice photos would not sell papers to people who are entertained by other's mental health problems.

I admire Paris for taking back her life, and I love hearing her real voice. I love that she is showing all the girls of the world now that you do not have to be a "bimbo" or a "dumb blonde" to be successful.

I think the one thing that keeps standing out to me after hearing all of the episodes is that these rich and famous people are just that, people. They are human. I cant imagine how I would be if the entire world was watching my every move in order to talk badly about it. I would not want to be judged on my past decisions and I especially would not want to be judged by things outside of my control.

This conversation still needs to be had because for every girl who has made it in Hollywood, there are 10X trying to make it big. They need to know the truth of how it is for women in Hollywood by the people who were living it.

Yes they signed up for it. But they shouldn't have to, that is the point. And nothing will change unless we continue the conversation and expect a difference. Until something changes, there will be the possibility of a new Weinstein around every corner for all future starlets.

Do you understand how misogynistic that comment is? Do you think women who wear make-up, fake lashes etc are brainless non feminist bimbo’s?

Oh, honestly give over. That argument is ridiculous. MM is putting herself out there as the saviour of humanity, questionably, so of course her fans and her critics will be commenting on that.

As much as you’d love it to be obsession etc it’s not I’m afraid (well in most cases anyway)

@onlylarkin

Were you responding to my posts about Paris?

She doesn’t need humanising by Meghan. She’s spent the last year or so speaking out about the abuses she and others suffered at that school.

It wasn’t ‘celebutant crap’ but real emotional, physical, sexual abuse of vulnerable teens.

What Meghan is doing here is piggy backing off of Paris’ own exploration of her abusive childhood. She had nothing worthy to add but was just getting Paris to re-hash her story through the lens Meghan wanted to explore.

I listen to a lot of podcasts about cults survivors (including one from another student who attended the same school as Paris) and they are always so careful and sensitive about re-traumatising people. This is not how to do it.

I think Meghan comes across a bit Mean and childish in this episode.

she wants to talk about her briefcase days, fine , but she didn’t need to bring someone to make herself feel better about her career choices back then.

Im almost 40 and I remember the Paris days very well , She was the original socialite/ party girl ,/it Girl of the early 2000s, she’s actually very successful , her perfume line still sells apparently.
we all know that there were two versions of Paris. The one doing all these silly reality shows and the troubled version. She really had it bad , a
leaked sex tape , her private photos and medical records were leaked online , numerous DUI , jail sentence , and that’s before we learn of her abuse at that school in Utah.

Paris was clearly the wrong choice for such topic.

Just pointing out that the poster is reflecting Meghan’s own comments on the podcast there, not necessarily her own views. Meghan said:

“All the girls, we would line up and there were different stations for having your lashes put on, or your extensions put in, or the padding in your bra. We were even given spray-tan vouchers each week because there was a very cookie-cutter idea of precisely what we should look like. It was solely about beauty and not necessarily about brains.”

“I didn't like feeling forced to be all looks. And little substance. And that's how it felt for me at the time being reduced to this specific archetype the word bimbo.”

So your point about misogyny might be better addressed to Meghan…

Also interesting to see that Whoopi Goldberg has been critical of Meghan’s comments, and also how she was essentially reducing all her fellow suitcase girls to bimbos by her comments.

“When you’re a performer, you take the gig,” the talk show host, 66, explained on Wednesday’s episode of “The View.”“You take the gig. Sometimes, you’re in a Bozo suit, sometimes you got a big nose, and this is just the way it is.”
Goldberg continued, “We’re not journalists. We’re actors. We’re trying to get to another place.”

Goldberg concluded, “My point is if you see it, and that’s how you feel, just maybe you don’t want to make the other women feel bad because maybe they’re trying to make a living, too.”

Whoopi’s comments bring up another element of this podcast that I find interesting - Meghan chose to be a performer. She made the decision to build a career as an actor in Hollywood (not doing theatre in Chicago, say) of her own free will. Of all the industries she could have chosen, she went for one of the most appearance-focused, objectifying and least mentally taxing of them all. Presumably she did this because it was fame and money she was aiming for, not intellectual challenge. It’s a bit rich to turn around now and say “But I was capable of so much more!” That’s on you, Meghan, no-one else.

Just pointing out that the poster is reflecting Meghan’s own comments on the podcast there, not necessarily her own views

@Serenster

Thanks - yes, exactly