I apologize in advance for the abundance of Kardashians and Jenners in this week's Shade Court. Their presence reveals that even I am but a humble spoke in the wheel of this celebrity machine that they've built to ensure that they'll have more money than anyone could possibly spend in a lifetime. Either that, or people simply love talking shit about this family.
In this week's Shade Court, our old friend Paris Hilton makes an appearance, Kendall Jenner receives some Instagram hate, and we are all witnesses to the unparalleled shade abilities of mothers-in-law.
Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000031
The Case: Kim Kardashian used to clean and organize Paris Hilton's closet. After Kim had sex with Ray J on camera, she got a TV show and became famous and didn't have to clean and organize Paris Hilton's closet anymore. And once Kim became famous, she and Paris stopped being friends because there are only so many mink eyelashes available for purchase.
For some reason, both women were in attendance at the SNL 40th anniversary after party last week. They arrived separately, posed for a photo together, and then each went on living her life because not all friendships are forever.
The Defendant: VH1
The Deliberation: I have to begin by giving my complete and utter condemnation of VH1's new segment "Throwing Some Shade." If I had the power to throw the creator of this abomination into a gulag that played The xx's music on loop, I would.
The segment involves three people and two you might vaguely recognize sitting around a table while misusing the concept of shade and wondering what their childhood selves would think of them now. According to one of these people, "spies" at the party said that Paris and Kim took a picture together and then walked away like "UGHHH" [*INSERT REALLY TERRIBLE FAKE SIDE-EYE HERE*].
You know what it sounds like? It sounds like they were asked by photographers to take a picture together so they took a picture together and then went inside and enjoyed a party.
The Ruling: Not shade and I find this entire concept offensive to this esteemed court.
Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000032
The Case: Amber Rose and Khloé Kardashian had a bit of a scuffle on Twitter.
The Defendant: CNN
The Deliberation: I have to say, I was originally inclined to throw this case out altogether for being such a sham, but then then I remembered that no one is ever going to learn if I don't publicly berate them. I'll keep this brief. Let's take a look at the offending line:
"That's when Rose unleashed the shade by pointing out that although she may have stripped, West's wife, Kim Kardashian, is well-known for having a sex tape."
AMBER STRAIGHT UP CALLED THIS WOMAN'S SISTER A WHORE. Dorian Corey just spun all the way around in her grave. Her legacy doesn't deserve this bullshit.
On a related note: The Amber-Khloé docket was quite full this week, but we did get some inquiries about something Amber said during the original Power 105.1 interview. When pressed about Kim and Kanye's relationship, Amber said, "They're a match made in heaven."
Mind you, that comes after Amber talked about how she doesn't think Kim is dope and how shitty it was of her to send nude photos to Kanye while he and Amber were still together. What's great is that she was able to position her comment as a sign of her taking the high road, which, she sort of was. Amber was taking the high road except for that part where she essentially said that two shitty people deserve each other. It's really a perfect iteration of shade: Turning a statement that is technically a compliment into cunning slander.
The Ruling: CNN: Not shade; Amber: Shade.
Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000033
The Case: Kendall Jenner is a legitimate model now. With her career booming, there have been stories about other models who resent the obvious nepotism on which Kendall has built her modeling career. A somewhat unflattering photo of Kendall was posted on Vogue Germany's Instagram account this week and two other models, Binx Walton and Lexi Boling, took the opportunity to comment. According to Complex:
Lexi replied with "never looked better," which was punctuated by the crying-from-laughing emoji. Soon after, Binx replied with "that's fucked up," which also featured the crying the emojis that we all know imply shade. According to Styleite.com, both models have attempted to delete the evidence.
The Defendant: Complex Style
The Deliberation: Never mind shade, as far as basic insults go, both of these comments are elementary at best and really aren't even worth my esteemed analysis.
My issue is with the dubiousness of this phrase: "the crying the emojis that we all know imply shade." Oh. Who knows that? I don't know what. Perhaps I don't know that because the entire statement is patently false. That emoji might be used as a reaction to witnessing shade, but a crying emoji in and of itself doesn't not indicate shade. That is ridiculous. It's hard for me to even unpack that because it makes so little sense.
I really need everyone to be clear on this. If you throw out some lame-ass insult and then include a crying emoji, that doesn't make it shade. You will look dumb. Do not try that at home. And, speaking of trying: Come on people, at least try to use words you're actually familiar with. The court begs of you.
The Ruling: Not shade.
Shade Court Docket #2015JZ000034
The Case: This case comes from a reader we'll call KJ. KJ has some questions about a recent gesture from her mother-in-law.
The Defendant: Our anonymous reader's mother-in-law
My husband received a Valentine's card from his mom. He usually gets one every year, and I think it's sweet. But this time she closed the card with: "From the woman who loved you first."
The Deliberation: It helps to have a bit of background information on the relationship between the two parties. KJ explained that her mother-in-law seems to feel like she's in a competition with her son's wife for, I assume, his love and attention.
What I like about this is that her husband's mom sends a Valentine's Day card every year but only this time decides to switch it up. In a way, it's rather brilliant and really shows her commitment to playing the long game. Many people like to believe that being the first at something makes you the best at it. That is absolutely what KJ's mother-in-law is saying. Also, this reference to time! She might as well have added, "AND I'M GOING TO BE HERE FOREVER. I AM GOING TO OUTLIVE YOU AND YOUR MARRIAGE."
Further, shading a person through a gift to someone else is phenomenally economical. Such an amazing use of one's efforts. Sorry girl, but at least try to learn from your mother-in-law. She's good at this.
The Ruling: Shade.
Images via Getty, Style Du Monde's Instagram, Shutterstock. Top image by Tara Jacoby, featuring the shade artist at a young age.