Tuesday, February 3, 2009

If only we got paid for this...

...there would be a new definition of job security.

Oh, sweet bunnies. It's only been about 14 hours since our last post, and yet, so much has happened. First, the Handmaiden of Passive Aggression got a haircut:



































And THEN she showed it off to the rest of the Trio, of which JAB couldn't resist sharing some of her world-class witty conversation:


* Mary: I'm not like spiky hair crazy girl.
* Me: You are now!
* Mary: I look like a dyke from the back.
* Me: This is true. But a hot one.


Oh, but bunnies! Julia then consulted her BloggingLifecasting for Dummies handbook and realized that perhaps she does not want to offend the Gays (even the lady ones). So she amended it:

* Mary: I'm not like spiky hair crazy girl.
* Me: You are now!


And then, while we were asleep, Our Lady of Introspection, true to her name, decided that it was an important time to give back to the world. You know, *do* something. She writes (Feb 3 - 2:14am):

Do something

I’ve always been a huge advocate for animal rights - in high school, I was president of the Animal Protection Club, I volunteered and sent part of my allowance to a no-kill cat shelter. (It’s also the reason I don’t eat meat.)

But I’ll be honest - I haven’t done much with the cause since I graduated from college. I’ve donated a few times, but nothing more than that. I don’t know why that is, exactly. I wonder if it’s something that happens to a lot of young people when they leave school and enter into the work world: career survival mode kicks in and they put blinders on.

Perhaps that’s what’s happened to me.

Perhaps, Jules. Because you speak for all "young people" and you know exactly how much they give back in their 20s.

Anyway, Julia wasn't completely oblivious to fighting the good fight in her post-college youth:

Two years ago, I tried to start a charity that delivered “gently-read” magazines to women’s shelters. My thinking was this: I had subscriptions to about 14 publications, which I would read, then stack in the hallway for recycling (or, in the case of The New Yorker, look at the cover, then stack in the hallway for recycling). On more than one occasion, as I was lugging the 27 pounds of perfect good escapism, I thought, “I really wish this were going somewhere useful.”

To me, that was battered women’s shelters - a place where, more than anything - you just want to get your mind off your own life for an hour. (Despite this whole “internet” thing, magazines are still pretty good at doing that.) Anyway, my idea was to set up boxes at the bottom of Manhattan apartment buildings, so that people could leave once-read periodicals at their convenience. Then, every week, we’d pick them up and drop them at the interested shelters.

Great plan. Except … when we called the shelters, they weren’t as interested as I had expected. And I didn’t even have money to pay for rent (at the time), let alone fund and organize a start-up charity.

Out of all the things you could have done, Jules, in your pretty, privileged existence, this is what you came up with? Maybe you should stick to dropping off used magazines at the gym. Or Mary's gym. Hell, I suppose just recycling them is a big step for you.

Anyway, she continues:

I’ll be honest - I still don’t have the money. Not even close. But I can do something, and that’s start a conversation here.

Hold on, Jules. We don't know much about your financial situation, other than the fact that it's widely reported that Star paid you six figures to be its talking head. But listen, sweetie. You're flying around the world (business class, as you made sure to make it clear; that is, when you're not on other people's private jets), spending $300 a pop to rent designer dresses (or did you get that for free?) and milking whoever you can for free goods. Maybe the money you're spending on your little business endeavor could be used for a better cause. One question: How much of your future "Fuck You" money will you allocate to charitable expenses?

While in Davos, I had the pleasure of meeting Nancy Lublin, the founder of Dress for Success and the CEO of Do Something!, a charity aimed at increasing teenage activism. I’ve asked her to be a guest on the TMIweekly episode we’re taping about women’s charities on February 10th, and hopefully her schedule will allow it.

In the meantime, I want to start doing little things - and I DON’T mean attending Charity Galas. Those have always struck me as … well, you know, I was about to say “disingenuous,” but who am I to say how organizations should raise their capital? I just want to do something more personal.

I guess it takes one to know one.

So - how is it you give back to the world? Especially when you’re in the Career Survival Mode and you can’t write a check?

Email Julia@NonSociety.com

Quite the Mother Teresa, she is. Inspirational.

Anyway, moving on. Then we learn, bunnies, that JAB's tweet about the inappropriate crush (see post below) has been deleted. Scandalous!

And finally, new intern Lisa lays down the law over at the QOD:

QOD Commenting Policy:

1. All responses that pertain to the question at hand will remain.

2. Answer the QOD as if you are writing to someone you respect (your mother, maybe?).

3. If you have any CONSTRUCTIVE criticism for Nonsociety, then congratulate yourself by repeating this phrase four times: "I am smart and wonderful".

Good Luck!

Lisa
P.S. The deletion machanism is buggy, please be patient.


Wait, so does that mean that constructive criticism is allowed, or that only then may we congratulate ourselves for it? You need to be more clear, Miss L.

Ah, and there's an addendum:

I forgot to add...

If you do not have anything nice to say, please do not visit this site! These ladies have hundreds of thousands of fans and do not need the page views from haters anyways. So go F yourself haters!!!

Wow, another intern schooled in the Mary Rambin methods of page-view analysis and reader-relationship-building. How refreshing. Anyway, we tend to agree, Haters. Leave your comments here!

44 comments:

  1. "... (or, in the case of The New Yorker, look at the cover, then stack in the hallway for recycling). "

    Awesome.
    Universally regarded as the best-written (if a bit left-leaning)magazine in America,routinely putting a personal face on "Big Ideas" and shaping the opinions and tastes of thinking america, AND proudly giving voice to a particular point-of-view of her adopted hometown, JA dismisses the New Yorker as a weekly one-panel cartoon.
    Awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mary Rambin is such and ugly desperate stereotype. Honey, all the Botox, working out and haircuts in the world won't mask your ugly, empty and offensive mind. She tries so hard to be beautiful on the outside, but her insides are rotten and ugly.

    Plus, it's so obvious that Ty is obviously sabotaging her with his "free" haircuts for her. Anyone with half a brain knows it's insulting to give your hairdresser a celebrity picture and demand the same cut. Mary, your hair, body and face is completely different than Katie Holmes'. The outcome? You end up with a horrible cut that makes you look even worse than you did before.

    Oh well. It's clear that these desperate women are just trying any stunt, spectacle and scandal in a last gasp for page views before their venture folds. Hey Mary - try shaving your head. It worked for Britney!

    ReplyDelete
  3. So JA claims to egoblog with a focus on posting 'chronologically' and in 'real-time'. I think by now she's been proved to be lying time and again by this site and others.
    But I'll tell ya, they certainly delete in real-time!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. What exactly is Julia doing in those "yoga" pictures anyway? Uh, those aren't actually postures or proper stretching techniques. She looks like she's warming up for flashdance or something.

    At any rate, I 100% agree that it is distasteful and gauche to pal around with married men. Yes this is 2008, and we're liberated and all, but seriously, even if you have zero intentions of seducing the man, it's tacky. Once the ring goes on, out of respect to the wife, you BACK OFF. And you continue to BACK OFF until the divorce papers are official. Get it? Otherwise you look like some sort of desperate vulture. Those types of women are the lowest of low. Put yourself in the wife's shoes and have a little respect.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Poors don't need to read about empty consumerism and have their self-esteem eroded by the type of glamour rags a twit like Julia would subscribe to.

    Maybe she can start carrying ziplock baggies to parties and donating canapes* to the homeless.

    *sorry, don't know how to type an accented e

    ReplyDelete
  6. Offensive shit like Mary's conversation above is why readers need to screen cap the hell out of their blogs, including the pink backgrounds and Julia's picture. She's such a vile, conniving liar, she can say it never happened and the haters made it all up (because it really is almost too stupid to be true!)

    I also think ALL of intern Lisa's posts and comments on QotD today are fake. Someone is just having a little fun at her expense.

    Julia, your sympathy MO is so tired and not working anymore. Quick! Trot out another bulimia story!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Way to disregard The New Yorker and its substantive content to which they should aspire and yet she dismisses it so foolishly. I suppose I state the obvious when I say: content is really not her thing, whereas images, oh boy, that's what we should be gobbling up. Seriously--this is all an insult to any thinking person.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wait.....we have to talk to them as if they're our mothers? What exactly does that say about how they view their relationships with their readers?

    ReplyDelete
  9. A Note:

    May's dog is Mase not MAason

    JA's dog is Lilly, Marshmellow and Monster

    Meghan's dog is..

    NS now has no interns

    ReplyDelete
  10. Oh, Julia. Starting another one-sided "conversation" (remember "turning the other cheek"? How'd that work out for you?) that quickly pass into oblivion.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I cannot fathom that JA takes pictures of herself at the gym. Who does those types of things? I would laugh if I witnessed someone photograph themself working out. Their blogs are just getting more sad and pathetic each day.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Julia Allison: advocates for animal rights don't get little dogs because they think they're cute, and them dump them off at a dog sitter's house for weeks at a time because they're too busy traveling to take care of them. Advocates for animal rights don't disrupt their dog's schedule, routine and feeling of "home" and safety by dragging them all over the city in a bag. You are cruel and uncaring to your own pet. Wake up, hypocrite.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This is hilarious.
    Meg wonders, first, how her online profile got so dirtied up in the last year. Then reveals she's been doing online research on how to "scrub" it clean.
    Honey, these services are a sham. But dream on. I'm sure you can somehow erase all the critical comments about you and your friends off all the site son all of cyber space. You can do it on your own site, right? Why not every where.
    Post below:

    ReplyDelete
  14. URL4U

    Do you have dirt on the web? The Internet has become a place where attackers have an advantage with the ability to taint your reputation. With recruiters, college admissions offices, acquaintances, and even potential dates searching for your name on the Internet, wouldn’t it be nice if you could erase some of your web persona mishaps?

    A little over a year ago, my Google search was completely clear without a blemish. You could barely find my name, except for being on the Dean’s list in college. Now, it seems you can find more posts, articles, and comments on everything from who I’ve dated to what words I’ve misspelled (gotta love a lifecast!). I’m not complaining, but I would be, if I was working in an environment where all theses little details could deter me from getting a promotion. I know that most people are not so hip to broadcast their life on the Internet, so for those of you looking to scrub the interwebs and clear your name, I suggest you visit Reputation Defender. I’m stunned that there’s actually an answer to clearing those smarmy search results, here a little description of what Reputation Defender offers:

    * To SEARCH out all information about you and your family throughout the Internet and present it to you in a clear, easy-to-understand fashion
    * To provide DESTROY assistance, helping to remove, at your request, inaccurate, inappropriate, hurtful, and slanderous information about you and your family using our proprietary in-house methodology. This same mission extends to your personally identifiable information, like name, address, and phone number.
    * To deliver CONTROL over how others are able to perceive you on the Internet

    They offer four different products to combat online slander for you and your loved ones:

    MyReputation: Allows you to review everything about you online. Best part is that not only reviews the open Internet, but also the ‘Invisible Web’. Yes, there is an ‘Invisible Web’; I’ll post on this phenomenon later.
    MyChild: Scours the Internet for all references to your child and teen.
    MyEdge: Allows you to own your search engine results and control you’re online reputation.
    My Privacy: Let’s you remove all your personal information from people search databases- from one dashboard.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The above is from Meghan.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "want to do something meaningful" post comes conveniently after clearly having wasted time and opportunity at DLD and WEF, growing opinion that the venture is fluffery with zero true goals and/or meaning, and next to two gratuitous "working out at the gym posts". HOW. FUNNY.

    it really just looks like all her most recent posts were attempts to make her look less-than-flaky (or in the case of the rich guys - whose hands she unquestionably shoved her biz cards into - that might visit, future trophy wife attractive) to those she glommed onto btw CES and Davos.

    it's like scrambling to save face for when they google nonsociety, visit the sites, and find out the real deal. it'll be hard for her to recover, no matter WHAT impression she'd given them THERE when they find out how they really are and what they're really about. in fact, they'll probably be further disenchanted that this woman who claimed to be one thing ends up being something else entirely. all that networking for naught really.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Way to go, ladies! But you don't need to tell us here at NSRB to not bother visiting your sad little site, since we've all stopped going there since the emergence of this place.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Megs post something insulting about Ty giving her a bad 'do right before this recent trip to Europe? I can't seem to find it now, but you know how that goes...

    ReplyDelete
  19. Meghan: "I know that most people are not so hip to broadcast their life on the Internet. . ."

    Yes, I am not so "hip" as to broadcast my life on the internet. Not hip at all.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Their seats to Munich were in COACH as evidenced by their ad nauseum pictures. Megan stood next to the Business Class sign to pose in the terminal, most likely at the behest of phony frivolous one. Christ, I always check in through First Class, the lines are always shorter, I just never snapped photographic evidence of myself to trick anyone into thinking I am special.
    PS Has Randi Z. heard about the complaints the Burda family has received about gutter mouth JA from her fellow panelists?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anon 12:05
    I actually read "not so hip to" as meaning "not so keen on" broadcasting their lives on the Internet. But I did have to stop and consider it for a second.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Also: Mary, no amount of pageviews is worth that haircut. How did you let yourself get talked into this??

    ReplyDelete
  23. 1. Mary is wasted drunk in the video she posted where she shows off the new cut to Meg and JA.

    2. Mary, Julia hates your haircut and thinks it looks terrible. Genuine surprise doesn't last that long and one wouldn't cover their face with their hands for that long if they genuinely liked something. She's trying to hide how she really feels.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Maybe Julia can start with "animal rights" but telling her friend Mary that snakeskin is incredibly cruel to harvest. It's one of the most sickening processes in our already f-cked up world.

    I emailed Mary about this (and it was an extremely polite, as I used to be a fan), and got a terse response in return that basically she doesn't feel responsible because she's only "reporting on trends." My email is posted here: http://maryrambin.blogspot.com/2009/01/maryrambin-happy-hopeful-monday-does-it.html. This is one week after they filmed a TMI segment about sustainable fashion and living.

    HYPOCRITICAL MUCH?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hollie: Julia was covering her face because she wasn't wearing makeup. That is the only reason.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Right on, Marshmallow! My sister and her hubby pay for my RT airfare so I can dog-sit for them whenever they go on vacation. They don't think of their dog as a toy or a fashion accessory.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Ignoring everything else that doesn't sit well about JA's comment... It really irritates me that she keeps talking about how little money she has. I don't know how much money she has or doesn't have, but I do know that she was in a job where she was making WAY more than most people her age can ever hope to. For someone who gets so much free stuff, she should've learned how to sign up for a free savings account at the bank.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Remember what happened the last time Julia Allison wanted to "start a conversation" on her blog? Isn't it so nice of her the way she "starts conversations" (immediately after being publicly criticized for yet another now-deleted screw up) consisting of one post by her plus 1 or 2 emails written by others and then forgots about the topic entirely from that point on?

    And RBNS, I love your "parsing" of the charitable animal rights/women's shelter piece.

    --Ineff.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Doesn't the Singles/Velantine's Issue of Time Out come out this week? Wouldn't that mean that Julia would have had to coordinate a photo shoot or at least write a column? What happened to her column about matchmakers? Time Out would have gone to print last week for this week's issue.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Sorry, I meant Valentine's

    ReplyDelete
  31. K, not sure if this is funny or sad but...

    I PREFER MARY DRUNK.

    It's like she takes herself less seriously and is just so much more REAL (and funnier, in a cute rather than bad way!) when she is. Hm.. maybe that's sad?

    Re: Julia, gonna agree with Jane. How odd that of the $250k/yr she was making (for no good reason apparently) at Star she didn't save very much of it? And why do these "start a conversation" pieces always strike me as being:

    a. For show or recovery purposes to make her seem less shallow.

    b. Less like they really ask the readers about their volunteerism (that's more like an excuse for content because what follows is verbatim posting of the email responses) and more like she's just trying to harvest ideas for herself. Very strange because it's not as if there aren't insane amounts of resources for her (as simple as a google search) if she were ever really interested in "doing something". Again - laziness, though to some extent I'd say this is transparent (that one, not in a good way).

    ReplyDelete
  32. K, not sure if this is funny or sad but...

    I PREFER MARY DRUNK.

    It's like she takes herself less seriously and is just so much more REAL (and funnier, in a cute rather than bad way!) when she is. Hm.. maybe that's sad? And also, what was in the video she posted that "no longer exists"?

    Re: Julia, gonna agree with Jane. How odd that of the $250k/yr she was making (for no good reason apparently) at Star she didn't save very much of it? And why do these "start a conversation" pieces always strike me as being:

    a. For show or recovery purposes to make her seem less shallow.

    b. Less like they really ask the readers about their volunteerism (that's more like an excuse for content because what follows is verbatim posting of the email responses) and more like she's just trying to harvest ideas for herself. Very strange because it's not as if there aren't insane amounts of resources for her (as simple as a google search) if she were ever really interested in "doing something". Again - laziness, though to some extent I'd say this is transparent (that one, not in a good way).

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anon 12:53

    Re: b: I don't think it's laziness because until I actually see her following up on this, I don't believe she has any intention of actually doing something. This is a weird way of rehabilitating her image. Why can't she just say, "I know I've been kind of a douche, so to mitigate my astounding douchitude, I'd like to help out some charities"?

    Also, Julia, what about volunteering your TIME? Your connections? Why not start using the "782 business cards" you acquired from Davos and DLD on behalf of a charity instead of for personal gain?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Methinks Julia 'face coverup' was a little bit of both, but muuuuuch more the whole 'zero makeup and camera in vicinity' thing. Notice her hands drop from her face when she bends down (out of view) to yell to Mason (for what? random) LOL. That and I always got the impression that even her so-called no makeup looks back when she'd post them weren't exactly so, she just wasn't wearing it war-paint style as she typically would.

    ReplyDelete
  35. She takes the same approach towards finding charitable endeavors as she does her columns -- have someone else (see: readers) do the bulk of the work!

    ReplyDelete
  36. This may have already been mentioned, so I apologize if I'm repeating someone, but I really think we need a Day Without NonSociety. One day when no one, not even the rebloggers, visit NS. I'd wager their page views would drop significantly. I would say it would teach them a lesson about treating their readers better, but that's doubtful. Still, I think it would be good for our souls to ignore them for at least one day. Maybe make it Julia's birthday?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anon 12:05 Here's the JA twitter about Meghan wanting to "knife" Ty. They are all a bunch of loons, including this hairdresser for being part of it. http://twitter.com/juliaallison/status/1145383781

    ReplyDelete
  38. Methinks Ty gave Mary a little payback for her friend trashing him like that. That haircut looks like Edward Scissorhands did a number on her head.

    I knew one of them trashed Ty in the recent past and when I searched their blogs I could not find it. What I did find were all sorts of other incredibly offensive gay jokes about Ty being a hairdresser and "he's not even gay ladies!"

    They are disgusting and deserve every bad haircut they get. If I were Ty I would have "accidentally" cut a bald spot into Mary's hair.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Mary's bald spotFebruary 3, 2009 at 3:04 PM

    That explains a lot

    ReplyDelete
  40. The funniest thing is that Ty probably endures these obnoxious twits because he thought it would bring him lots of new business, but being associated with these braying losers is like business repellent.

    Same goes for Dr. Bobby. I'd rather that my face look like a relief map of Sicily than ever let anyone recommended by that trio anywhere near it.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Julia, I recommend that you read up on a guy named Lawrence Cann. Actually, you can just download a podcast episode about him if you're too lazy. My friend has a radio show called Provoke! that's available on iTunes. Episode 82 is about the Artworks Football Club, a homeless soccer team that Lawrence founded in the course of his work with the Urban Ministry Center in Charlotte, NC.

    You see, Julia, most people who make a real difference find a need in their community and use their skills to address it. They don't try to create a need that can be addressed through the dumping off of shit they don't want anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  42. As someone who knows, the deleting mechanism is NOT buggy.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Anyone notice how Julia has been reading the comments and "addressing them" ie recent mentions of: her weight gain, volunteering/charity, the TONY Article and matchmaking aspect, how someone mentioned that if she didn't had internet she should go to a coffee shop...

    ReplyDelete