Here’s Conor McGregor trying to convince you he’s a not a monster who savagely attacks innocent people … he’s just a family man doing the best for his kid. You buyin’ it? Clearly aware that his image is in the garbage right now ……
File this under the Welp, We've Never See THAT Before category…
A couple in Louisiana gathered together many friends and family members this week in order to reveal the gender of their unborn child.
But they didn't use any balloons or cakes to surprise everyone (themselves included) with this piece of information.
They used an alligator.
Mike “T-Mike” Kliebert and Rebecca Miller are both trained alligator handlers and they took full advantage of their skills in this unique area by inviting one of their favorite reptiles to their party.
In the following footage, which has been viewed over 7 million times on Facebook, Mike feeds the alligator a small watermelon.
You can see the creator's mouth snap shut, prior to blueberry Jell-O pouring out forth, thereby indicating that Mike and Miller are having a little boy.
Family and friends are seen cheering along with the husband and wife.
The clip has gone viral because, well… you did read that a man used an alligator to reveal his baby's sex, right?
Among those who commented on the video was Chrissy Teigen, who has never met a social media moment she did not fully embrace.
"aaah yes the classic jello watermelon alligator snap gender reveal, who could ever get enough of these precious moments," she wrote in response to the reveal.
For whatever it's worth, meanwhile, the alligator is named Sally and has appeared in American Horror Story and is set to appear in upcoming movie Louisiana Caviar starring Katharine McPhee and Richard Dreyfuss.
What does the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries think of this stunt?
It does not recommend using alligators for gender reveals.
“It wasn’t harmful to the animal,” a spokesperson told The Huffington Post.
“But we discourage and don’t condone anyone using an animal as exhibition piece. Also, it is not wise to have a dangerous animal in such a demonstration so close to humans, especially children."
That's a fair point.
Watch the footage now:
Kylie Jenner’s recent hiatus from social media until she announced that she’d welcomed her baby girl had some wondering: Has she lost any social media clout during her absence?
The answer is no.
With one tweet, Kylie Jenner may have just delivered the killing blow to Snapchat. And it’s already cost them $ 1.3 billion.
Kylie Jenner spent months without pumping out new content on social media.
Part of that was because her body was busy constructing a tiny life form. That takes a lot of time and it also takes a lot out of you.
(We do think that precious baby Stormi Webster was worth it, and we imagine that Kylie agrees)
But mostly, she chose to spend her pregnancy in seclusion because she didn’t want to stress about social media — not about her output or over how others might reply to her.
That is totally her choice. She’s since apologized to fans for not sharing that part of her life with them, and made up for it by sharing a baby video of her pregnancy and the birth of her daughter.
Also, she’s back on social media.
So, did Kylie’s influence ebb while she was playing the role of a build-a-baby workshop?
It did not.
But it seems that her love of Snapchat, of which she was once more or less considered the reigning queen, sure has waned.
On Wednesday, the makeup mogul tweeted an innocuous question that’s been asked by countless others for the past few weeks.
We wonder if, at the time, she knew the devastating effect that it would wreak.
“Sooo does anyone else not open Snapchat anymore? Or is it just me… ugh this is so sad.”
Not only has Instagram introduced its own Stories feature, complete with more options than Snapchat offers, but Snapchat’s most recent update has infuriated long-time users and caused them to put down the app.
Clearly, Kylie is among them.
She followed that by tweeting:
“Still love you tho snap … my first love.”
That profession of love, however, did not save the app’s stock.
On Thursday, the market value of Snapchat dropped by 7.2 percent.
That’s by 1.3 billion dollars.
Though there were other factors — such as a recent influx of strongly negative reviews from users after the app’s recent update.
Market analysts have Twitter too, folks. They could see Kylie’s tweet and they could see the sentiment mirrored in replies by her 24.5 million followers.
Outrage over an update is nothing new — countless apps and video games see backlash from furious users after “helpful” updates alter or destroy their ability to continue to use the things that they love.
But when the Queen of Snapchat herself doesn’t find the app usable anymore? That’s beyond a warning sign.
It’s no wonder that investors decided to jump ship.
No one could be happier at this news than Mark Zuckerberg.
It wasn’t all that long ago that the Facebook founder and billionaire offered to buy Snapchat for a cool $ 2 billion.
Snapchat declined. Internet denizens note that Instagram then came out with a Stories feature that many users find preferable to Snapchat’s, effectively making Snapchat (in some people’s opinions) redundant unless you’re just sending nudes.
That may still have played a role in Snapchat’s apparent downfall, but Zuckerberg surely couldn’t have predicted that Kylie would so mournfully tank Snapchat’s brand with a single tweet.
The question is: did Kylie have any idea that she might be effectively euthanizing Snapchat?
And did Snapchat realize how much their brand hinged upon one barely-20-year-old?
Harvey Weinstein wants one of the class action lawsuits against him dismissed, and says Gwyneth Paltrow and Jennifer Lawrence prove the case has some major holes. Weinstein filed docs responding to the suit … which claims he — along with the…
Just four days ago, Logan Paul returned from hiatus with more followers than he had before his shameful “suicide forest” controversy, in which he filmed and mocked a suicide victim.
A million new followers does not amount to a lesson learned. And Logan Paul just filmed himself doing something else awful and disturbing.
This time, YouTube has taken action by suspending all advertising from his channel.
Towards the end of Logan Paul’s video in which he announced his return to vlogging, he bragged about his increase in followers:
“I know for a fact everything I do from this point on will get criticism, it will get backlash, because I’m a very polarizing dude. You either love me, or you hate me.”
He forgot to mention that some people are blissfully unaware of his existence.
“So internet, please, use me, bro. Crucify me, vilify me, and I can promise you one thing, guys. I’m not going anywhere. I’m going to be here for a minute.”
One, not the first time that he’s referred to criticism of his unconscionable behavior and compared it to the literal crucifixion of Jesus.
Two, straight out of the monologue of an insufferable anime villain.
For reasons that we cannot begin to fathom — because surely, even if he wanted controversy, he should have known to wait a couple of weeks — Logan Paul filmed himself tasering a dead rat.
He shows himself finding a couple of dead rats on his porch.
(Which is obviously massively suspicious; how many mansions have dead rats show up? We don’t see neighborhood cats leaving them as gifts)
He then repeatedly tasered one of the dead bodies. It’s always reassuring to see a privileged man taking out his violent impulses on dead animals. That’s one of the signs of a healthy mind, right?
So, obviously, it’s in poor taste and is massively inappropriate.
The fact that this is right on the heels of his video in Japan’s infamous “Suicide Forest” makes things even worse.
After that first dreadful video in Japan, which was culturally insensitive and also just, like, objectively insensitive, Logan Paul faced consequences from YouTube.
They reduced his cut of advertising revenues.
Now, however, YouTube has taken things a step further by cutting off all of Logan Paul’s advertising.
Being an obnoxious little s–t on camera while also being super handsome is how Logan Paul made his millions.
Alot of that is merchandising, but he made seven figures in 2017 from advertising revenue alone.
YouTube released a statement explaining why they had taken the drastic step of this suspension:
“This is not a decision we made lightly.”
Of course not. Logan Paul is a huge source of revenue for the streaming platform.
Suspending his ads hurts them, too. Imagine if NBC stopped airing ads on This Is Us?
(But also imagine if Kevin Hartley were an insufferable little fame monster instead of the talented, handsome actor that he is)
“We believe he has exhibited a pattern of behavior in his videos that makes his channel not only unsuitable for advertisers, but also potentially damaging to the broader creator community.”
YouTube is right to be concerned about a ripple effect. If YouTube stars get a bad reputation (well, a worse reputation), parents might start limiting access to YouTube rather than taking a close look at who is just giving a makeup tutorial versus who is ruining lives for fun and money.
Logan Paul was YouTube’s darling son, and now he’s hurting the brand so much that even his massive number of subscribers aren’t worth it.
This suspension is temporary, however, and it looks like YouTube is hoping that he will mellow out.
Unfortunately, when you reward a terrible young man’s behavior with fabulous wealth, it doesn’t exactly discourage him from being obnoxious.
Is Logan Paul even capable of learning his lesson now? He’s not a child, folks.
Or will he return after this suspension ends with some new terrible stunt to feed his martyrdom complex?
Eminem is an intensely famous — and polarizing — rapper. From his persona life to his lyrics, he’s a deeply controversial figure.
Among other things, Eminem has been accused of homophobia more than once. Not unusual within rap lyrics, but also not acceptable.
So color us surprised when Eminem casually mentions that he’s been been looking for dates … using Grindr.
We want to give you background and we will, but this is so unexpected that we want you to go ahead and see what he said.
In an interview with Vulture, Eminem talks about what he’s been up to lately.
“Since my divorce, I’ve had a few dates and nothing’s panned out in a way that I wanted to make it public.”
That is a very, very common post-divorce experience.
“Dating’s just not where I’m at lately.”
Naturally, Eminem’s interviewer asked if he’d used any dating apps.
“Yeah, Tinder. And Grindr. I also used to go to strip clubs.”
Before we dive into that Grindr revelation — and it’s a lot — we should talk about the idea of a celebrity using regular-people dating apps.
Imagine flipping through Tinder to make some snap judgments about people’s faces, only to be shown the face of the guy whose music played at one of your middle school dances.
There are celebrities-only dating apps — like Raya — to prevent starstruck fans from using them to stalk their favorite celebs.
It may be that Eminem figured that he’d try his luck with those starstruck fans.
Also, just for the record, going to strip clubs seems like a terrible way to find a date. Also, strip clubs are definitely not an app.
As for the Grindr bit … it’s really, really hard to tell if Eminem was joking or not.
If so, he was probably joking about Tinder, too. If not … well, Grindr is just for dudes.
Grindr does have a straight version — but that’s called Blendr.
Just because it’s by the same people doesn’t mean that you can use the names interchangeably. If you get a new iPhone, you’re not going to refer to it as your MacBook Pro or whatever.
Grindr is for gay men and for bi men and for men who use other labels (or none at all), and while some folks use it to “make friends” and while it’s opening up to some nonbinary folks … it’s really, really not the app to use to meet women.
So, has Eminem been dating men?
Among various other controversies, as we said, Eminem has been accused of homophobia.
He’s been very casual about throwing around anti-gay slurs that we wouldn’t care to repeat, but when asked if he hates gay people by Anderson Cooper on 60 Minutes, Eminem replied:
“No, I don’t have any problem with nobody. You know what I mean? I’m just like whatever.”
He’s also said that he grew up with those slurs and other anti-gay remarks thrown around as generic negative terms, rather than as anti-gay weapons.
We’d point out that the idea is to grow up and stop using those words. Eminem’s daughter is in college, which makes him more than old enough to have some self-awareness.
But have his offensive lyrics been some sort of veneer? Might Eminem be bisexual and casually revealing it in an interview?
Fans are divided.
Some fans on Twitter were freaking out:
“Eminem casually mentions in an interview he uses Grindr and the reporter DOESN’T follow up?? Worst journalism of the year.”
Others dismissed it as a joke:
“Am i missing something or is it not obvious the eminem grindr thing was a joke”
Billy Eichner seems to be taking it seriously:
“IMHO I don’t think Eminem was really joking when he said he uses Grindr. He is very smart and self-aware. I think he knows people will *think* he’s joking – and that his rep will say he’s joking – but I don’t think he’s joking. And good for him!”
Colton Haynes actually responded to Eichner’s tweet with:
“Didn’t u know he and I used to date?”
That, at least, we’re pretty sure is a joke. Maybe like … 80% joking. Probably.
We don’t really know if Eminem’s history of domestic violence accusations and homophobic lyrics are likely to get him welcomed into the LGBT+ community with open arms.
On the other hand, Eminem’s been singing about hating Trump a lot lately. That’s a solid way to endear himself to a majority of the country.
In the span of just a few short years, Meghan Markle has gone from Deal or No Deal “briefcase girl” to star of a USA network legal drama to future royalty.
It’s a trajectory that’s sure to inspire both misty-lensed Hallmark Channel romances and 99 cent erotic e-books with titles like The Finger Prince.
We don’t blame the public for being fascinated with Meghan’s story.
We all like to think we’ll be saved from our desperate, mediocre lives when someone with tremendous power and influence recognizes how special we are.
Basically, Meghan is Harry Potter and Harry is Dumbledore and … well, we won’t get into the importance of knowing how to work a wand in both stories, but you get the idea.
The point of that confusing and oddly profane metaphor is that Meghan and Harry’s romance is the stuff of bestsellers.
But it won’t be J.K. Rowling telling the tale.
No, it appears the first to cash in on the international Harkle obsession will be British writer Andrew Morton, a provocateur who’s previously authored biographies on Tom Cruise, Madonna, and Angelina Jolie.
Somehow, not having not been smothered to death by the avalanche of smug that came from researching those three, Morton lived to tell tell the tale of Harry’s mother, Princess Di, in a bestseller titled Diana: Her Story.
Despite the fact that the book was based largely on a secretly recorded conversation between Diana and a friend, Morton was able to secure the late princess’ approval of the project.
In other words, this is a dude who knows where the bodies are buried, and now he’s coming for MegMar:
“I was a fan of Meghan’s long before she met Prince Harry,” British writer Andrew Morton wrote to Fox News.
“She has star quality, what some have called ‘the Markle Sparkle.'”
As a man who has the sack to use the phrase “Markle Sparkle” publicly, you can bet that Morton won’t shy away from all the gritty details of Meghan’s 36 years.
Or, he’ll just engage in 400-plus pages of ass-kissing, because the royals have basically made his career.
Based on his comments on the project, we’re guessing it’s the latter:
“Confident, groomed and camera ready, she is a dramatic contrast to the blushing, coy royal brides of recent history,” Morton recently told Fox News
“The warmth and affection Meghan and Harry displayed during their engagement interview years is light years away from the stilted ‘whatever love means’ conversation with Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer in 1981.”
“Meghan is an exciting and genuinely charismatic addition to the royal family – she makes the House of Windsor seem relevant again. Hers is a fascinating story and I can’t wait to tell it.”
Basically, it sounds like dude is a living Instagram filter.
His version of Meghan has a flower crown and shoots out rays of angelic light when she smiles.
So yeah, you may have to wait a bit longer for Markle to get the warts-and-all treatment.
Or you can just go ahead and download The Finger Prince to your Kindle.
We’re not here to judge.
Tom Cruise is a real-life action hero on the set of his movies — but his ass is even realer … according to one of his co-stars. We got Annabelle Wallis — who starred alongside Tom in “The Mummy” this summer — and she…
Brownies may just be the perfect dessert.
So it would stand to reason that anyone who supplies them for a school book sale would be lauded as some kind of culinary hero, right?
Most of the time, yes.
But an unnamed woman recently faced scorn and derision for this act, sharing her confusion on Facebook by telling the story of how she didn't have any milk when she went to make the brownies, so she used her own breast milk instead and now she doesn't understand why…
… wait, WHAT?!?
This actually happened?
Yes. Read the woman's account and see the social media reaction to this tale below:
1. Brownies Are Delicious
2. Okay, Our First Question:
3. Urine Trouble, Lady
4. Let This Person Explain:
5. Why Not Just Masturbate Into the Brownies?
6. Something Fishy is Going on Here!
Walmart says it’s really, REALLY sorry for using the most inflammatory word in the English language to describe the color of a wig cap being sold on its website.
The controversy blew up on Monday morning when Twitter user Kwani Lunis shared a screenshot of the product page in which the cap’s color is described in detail.
As you can see below, Walmart is advertising that this item is available in “N-gger Brown.”
For real. It really did say that.
“Hey @Walmart what are you doing?” Lunis asked as a simple and understandable question as a caption to the photo:
Many others quickly took notice of the Walmart.com page, with author Roxanne Gay writing, “Oh @Walmart, why is this on your website? So far past unacceptable.”
Perhaps, you may be thinking, this isn’t Walmart’s fault.
Perhaps this is merely the name of the color.
Comedy writer Travon Free Tweeted that he found the same cap for sale on Amazon and, “for context,” he pointed out that the description is “minus a certain word.”
Following the social media outcry, the racial slur was taken off from the description for the wig cap, which the site explains is sold by Jagazi Naturals.
However, astute Twitter users noted that the epithet was still listed further down on the page, even after Walmart looked into the problem.
Shortly thereafter, the store took the listing down entirely and said that the information for each product is “provided by manufacturers, suppliers and others, and has not been verified by us.”
It further said the following in a mea culpa released to The Huffington Post:
“We are very sorry and appalled that this third-party seller listed their item with this description on our online marketplace.
“It is a clear violation of our policy, and has been removed, and we are investigating the seller to determine how this could have happened.”
This is not the first time Walmart has been at the center of a scandal, based on what it was selling or how it was advertising an item.
In December 2016, the retail giant got in trouble after third-party seller offered a mug reading “Got Retard?” on the website.
A mug saying “Got Hitler?” was also complained about and removed around that same time.
Then there was the way Walmart tried to cash in on 9/11 by hanging a banner that read “We Will Never Forget” above a display of soda cans on sale.
In this case, Ragan Dickens, Walmart’s national media relations director, says the wig cap was sold by a third party, NOT by Jagazi Naturals, the creator of the item.
Walmart is in the process of suspending their account and are further investigating the issue.
According to Walmart.com, the company explicitly prohibits third-party retailers from selling “offensive” products through its marketplace.
This includes products that display “vulgar language.
It also includes “products that either portray, glorify or promote in an insensitive way animal cruelty; any historical or news events; criminal or illegal activity; derogatory stereotyping based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or nationality; hatred; intolerance; natural or man-made disaster(s); tragedy; violence.”