GoneTrending

Last year, Tinashe garnered positive reviews with her September EP, BB/ANG3L, as she joined the wave of US artists reviving the UK garage and drum-and-bass styles. Supported by an immersive video project, The BB/ANG3L Experience, a Tiny Desk Concert, and a co-headlining tour with Shygirl (which was unfortunately canceled for medical reasons), BB/ANG3L debuted a thrilling new direction for Tinashe, whose penchant for blending pop and R&B found its most effective outlet yet in the dance music revival.

It looks like she’ll continue going in that direction as today, she announced BB/ANG3L PT. 2 — Quantum Baby is coming soon, sharing a pre-save link with a unique, Mad Max-ish trailer. In the video, a sports car tricked out to look like a real war machine is chased through the desert by drones, evoking a futuristic, somewhat dystopian world for the new project — which is right in line with much of the world-building Tinashe has done around her music since going independent some years ago. (Maybe she’s been playing the hell out of Cyberpunk 2077 and its anti-corporate ethos really resonated with her after her misadventures in the major label system.)

BB/ANG3L is “coming soon,” which means a release date will likely be announced shortly.

Kim Kardashian is one of the most famous celebrities in the world. It would be intimidating for anyone to film a sex scene with her, but especially someone who had never gotten “intimate” on screen before.

“I was nervous and body-conscious, and to find out my first sex scene is going to be with an icon known for their beauty was a lot,” Dominic Burgess, who stars alongside Kardashian in FX’s American Horror Story: Delicate, told Variety. But the actor, who has also appeared in Ryan Murphy’s Feud: Bette and Joan, as well as The Good Place, The Leftovers, and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, had a “wonderful” experience shooting the sex scene.

“But there was a great intimacy coordinator who asked what we felt comfortable with, and the director was John J. Gray, who I worked with on Feud — and Kim was wonderful. It ended up being a really pleasant experience,” he said. They even bonded over a shared love of Shania Twain.

Burgess has never seen an episode of any of Kardashian’s reality shows, and wasn’t sure what to expect. The actor had been scolded early in his career for talking to the main actors on a set, and has learned to exercise caution when approaching stars. “But she was really friendly,” he says. “We talked about travel and Broadway shows and Shania Twain!”

“Let’s go girls” is what I say every time I see Jessica Lange and Frances Conroy in a Ryan Murphy show.

(Via Variety)

Victor Wembanyama came into the NBA with more hype than any prospect since LeBron James and, much like LeBron did 21 years ago, Wembanyama has more than lived up to the sky-high expectations placed on him.

The Spurs rookie big man is almost assured the Rookie of the Year award, even with Chet Holmgren having a great year in OKC, and he has a strong case for Defensive Player of the Year, with his late season push flipping some prominent opinions of whether he’s deserving of it even with the Spurs struggles — most notably, Draymond Green’s. On a seemingly nightly basis Wembanyama does things we just never see on the basketball court, and he often leaves opponents dumbfounded and/or in awe of what he’s capable of doing.

With unicorn already taken (and at this point, overused) the best way to really describe Wembanyama is “an alien,” as he simply does things no one else can do or ever has done. He’s embraced that moniker, wearing PE’s of Nike sneakers with an alien logo on the back, and the sneaker giant is starting to give Wemby the full promotional treatment. On Monday, they took advantage of the total solar eclipse that passed over Texas and much of the central United States to release a terrific new ad spot for the Spurs young star.

Nike has long been among the best at athlete ads, and this is some very good (and opportunistic) work. Wemby crop circles in Texas is good stuff and after years of brands and players forcing monogram logos on us, I’m very excited to have a player with a unique logo that’s not some mashup of his initials. The alien head in a basketball is grade-A work and I hope they keep steering in to the supernatural/otherworldly element with Wembanyama going forward.

It’s back-to-school time (yaaassss!), but that means it’s also the time when you have to tackle those super-long, super-specific school supply lists (uggghhhh!).

You know what I’m talking about — the 15-plus-items-long list of things your kids need for school.

As a bonus, they’re often brand-name specific. Seriously. Because Elmer’s glue is apparently just that different from generic store brand glue.

Based on the venting ( “OMG, everyone is sold out of pre-sharpened Dixon Ticonderoga #2 pencils!”) and cries for help I’m seeing from my fellow parents on social media (“Where did you find three wide-ruled draw-and-write composition books?” — OK, I admit that was my question), a lot of our public school kiddos are being given supply lists quite similar to this one:

Sample school supply list created from actual lists I’ve collected. Some items have been switched between lists to protect the innocent.

While many public schools send these lists to parents, in certain states they’re “requests” not “requirements” (even when not clearly presented that way) because some states cannot legally require students to provide their own school supplies.

Optional or required, however, these school supply lists are important.

I know, I know — lots of us parents have many feelings about them, like:

• We didn’t have to buy a specific list of supplies when we were kids (walking uphill both ways, two miles, in the snow).
• This is public school, not private school! Can’t the glue sticks come out of my taxes?
• This list is so name-brand specific. Are Elmer’s glue sticks reallllyyyy that superior to these cheaper, generic ones?
• Seriously?? So many glue sticks?! Just … what?

And we can all agree that it’s not right that public school budgets are regularly slashed and aren’t big enough to cover the basic necessities essential for our kids’ success. (You know, like pencils.) And in some cases, budgets are misused, and that’s not right, either.

But as much as parents dread shopping for school supplies, our children’s teachers probably dread having to ask.

Katie Sluiter, a mom of three and teacher of 13 years, shares in parents’ frustrations about supplies — just from a different perspective. “I struggle every single August with having to ask for [supply] donations. I hate it,” she says.

She’d love to stop asking parents to bring in a combined total of 800 pencils and 1,000 glue sticks and just buy them herself. But as a teacher, she simply cannot afford to do it.

“I hate that we have two full-time salaried workers in our house. … I have an advanced degree, and we are still living paycheck to paycheck. It feels shameful to have to ask every. single. year. for donations. Teachers don’t want to ask for handouts. We just want to teach.”

“Teachers don’t want to ask for handouts. We just want to teach.” — Katie Sluiter

Nicole Johansen, a mom of two who was a teacher for 12 years, echoes Sluiter’s sentiments. She cites never ending budget cuts as well as the need to stretch other funds, like PTO-raised money, further and further as the reasons supply lists exist and adds, “It is frustrating knowing that schools should be appropriately allotted funds for supplies — this said from the parent AND teacher standpoint.”

So most of us are on the same page here. Class supply lists are the pits … for everyone!

The most significant thing to remember, though, is that if your budget allows, it’s important to purchase the items on the list.

If you’re not purchasing the supplies, it’s very likely your child’s teacher will have to — with his or her own money.

Image by Thinkstock.

And we’ve already established that teacher salaries aren’t cutting it when it comes to taking care of their families and their students.

And maybe it’s not so much that teachers have to spend their own paychecks on classroom supplies, but they want to because an overwhelming majority of teachers genuinely care about their students.

“I wish all parents knew how much teachers love and sacrifice for their students,” Johansen said. “Pretty much all teachers I know will be spending for their classroom despite having to cut back the grocery bill for their family.”

“I wish all parents knew how much teachers love and sacrifice for their students.” — Nicole Johansen

“No, we don’t have to spend all that time and money on our classrooms, but it makes it a quality experience when your children have things like science experiments, books, art supplies, and a comfortable, cozy classroom environment.”

OK, but seriously, what do they do with all of those glue sticks?!

I know I’m not the only one who opened up that list when my daughter was in first grade, choked on my coffee, and exclaimed, “THREE DOZEN GLUE STICKS?! What, are the kids eating them? [Probably. Little kids eat all kinds of gross stuff.] Are the teachers selling them for profit? [I wouldn’t blame them. See above about teachers’ salaries].”

Image by Thinkstock.

“We glue kids’ mouths shut,” Sluiter told me when I asked.

“Totally kidding. They last like 12 seconds … [and] no matter how vigilant we are in supervising the picking up and putting away of supplies, each time we get the tub of glue sticks out, there are about three to five dead soldiers and lone caps rolling in the bottom of the bin.”

(I love teachers with senses of humor!)

But back to the actual issue.

My friend Shannon summed up the class supply list conundrum perfectly, if bluntly:

She wants parents who can budget in school supplies without experiencing a financial burden to “quit complaining about some of the items being communal. Vote for politicians who will quit cutting money from schools. I don’t remember my parents having to buy 20 glue sticks, but I certainly don’t think any more should come out of teachers’ pockets.”

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

This story originally appeared on 08.11.15.

Have you ever wondered why people don’t seem to say “you’re welcome” anymore?

The phenomenon has really caught on lately but it’s roots go a back further back. Back in 2015, author and professor Tom Nichols tweeted out an angry response after receiving what he thought was poor customer service:

“Dear Every Cashier in America: the proper response to ‘thank you’ is ‘you’re welcome,’ not ‘no problem.’ And *you’re* supposed to thank *me*”The angry tweet elicited a number of mocking responses from people on social media.

— (@)

But eventually one person chimed in with a detailed and thoughtful response that just might give you pause the next time you or someone you know says, “no problem.”

u201cDear Every Cashier in America: the proper response to “thank you” is “you’re welcome,” not “no problem.” And *you’re* supposed to thank *me*u201d

— Tom Nichols (@Tom Nichols)
1442104313

It’s not about being polite. Our views on gratitude are evolving.

In a response that is going viral on Reddit, on person writing under the name “lucasnoahs” laid it all out:

Actually the “you’re welcome/no problem” issue is simply a linguistics misunderstanding. Older ppl tend to say “you’re welcome,” younger ppl tend to say “no problem.” This is because for older people the act of helping or assisting someone is seen as a task that is not expected of them, but is them doing extra, so it’s them saying, “I accept your thanks because I know I deserve it.”

“No problem,” however, is used because younger people feel not only that helping or assisting someone is a given and expected but also that it should be stressed that you’re need for help was no burden to them (even if it was).

Basically, older people think help is a gift you give, younger people think help is an expectation required of them.

Nichols took a lot of flack for his comment. But the insightful response reveals something important about gratitude.

The thoughtful response from “lucasnoahs” doesn’t apply to everyone. After all, there are certainly a lot of people of any age group for whom acts of kindness and gestures of gratitude are “no problem.”

Still, his message conveys an important idea that doing well for others does not have to be a grand gesture. It can be a simple act — and the additional act of letting someone know that it’s really no problem helps relieve any potential sense of debt or guilt the person receiving the gesture might otherwise take on.

Most of the time, doing the right thing is indeed no problem. In fact, it might be the solution to a lot of the daily problems we grapple with.

This article originally appeared on 08.15.18.

Any time conversations about wealth and poverty come up, people inevitably start talking about boots.

The standard phrase that comes up is “pull yourself up by your bootstraps,” which is usually shorthand for “work harder and don’t ask for or expect help.” (The fact that the phrase was originally used sarcastically because pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps is literally, physically impossible is rarely acknowledged, but c’est la vie.) The idea that people who build wealth do so because they individually work harder than poor people is baked into the American consciousness and wrapped up in the ideal of the American dream.

A different take on boots and building wealth, however, paints a more accurate picture of what it takes to get out of poverty.

Author Terry Pratchett is no longer with us, but his writing lives on and is occasionally shared on his official social media accounts. Recently, his Twitter page shared the “Sam Vimes ‘Boots’ Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness” from Pratchett’s 1993 book “Men At Arms.” This boots theory explains that one reason the rich are able to get richer is because they are able to spend less money.

If that sounds confusing, read on:

u2026 He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of okay for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollarsu2026n2/5

— Terry Pratchett (@Terry Pratchett)
1643144843

Pratchett wrote:

“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.

Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.

But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that’d still be keeping his feet dry in ten years’ time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.”

In other words, people who have the money to spend a little more upfront often end up spending less in the long run. A $50 pair of boots that last five years essentially cost you $10 a year. But if you can only afford $10 upfront for a pair of boots that last six months, that’s what you buy—and you end up paying twice as much over a five-year period.

There are so many areas in which this principle applies when you’re poor. Buying in bulk saves you money over the long run, but you have to be able to afford the bulk cost up front. A reliable car that doesn’t require regular repairs will cost more than a beater, but if the beater is all you can afford, that’s what you’re stuck with. You’ll likely spend the same or more over time than if you’d bought a newer/higher quality car, but without the capital (or the credit rating) to begin with, you don’t have much choice.

People who can afford larger down payments pay lower interest rates, saving them money both immediately and in the long run. People who can afford to buy more can spend more with credit cards, pay off the balances, build up good credit and qualify for lower interest rate loans.

There are lots of good financial decisions and strategies one can utilize if one has the ability to build up some cash. But if you are living paycheck to paycheck, you can’t.

Climbing the financial ladder requires getting to the bottom rung first. Those who started off anywhere on the ladder can make all kinds of pronouncements about how to climb it—good, sound advice that really does work if you’re already on the ladder. But for people living in poverty, the bottom rung is just out of reach, and the walls you have to climb to get to it are slippery. It’s expensive to be poor.

When people talk about how hard it is to climb out of poverty, this is a big part of what they mean. Ladder-climbing advice is useless if you can’t actually get to the ladder. And yet, far too many people decry offering people assistance that might help them reach the ladder so they can start taking advantage of all that great financial advice. Why? Perhaps because they were born somewhere on the ladder—even if it was the bottom rung—and aren’t aware that there are people for whom the ladder is out of reach. Or perhaps they’re unaware of how expensive it is to be poor and how the costs of poverty keep people stuck in the pit. Hopefully, this theory will help more people understand and sympathize with the reality of being poor.

Money makes money, but having money also saves you money. The more money you have, the more wealth you’re able to build not only because you have extra money to save, but also because you buy higher quality things that last, therefore spending less in the long run. (There’s also the reality that the uber-wealthy will pay $5,000 for shoes they’ll only wear a few times, but that’s a whole other kind of boots story.)

Thanks, Terry Pratchett, for the simple explanation.

This story originally appeared on 01.28.22

Earlier today, Billie Eilish officially announced her new album, Hit Me Hard And Soft, will be out next month on May 17. In her Instagram reveal post, Eilish said she would not be releasing any singles, as she wants fans to hear it in full for the first time that day. However, not all of her rollout today seemingly went to plan, especially after the tracklist leak.

She caught the internet’s attention after calling out Rolling Stone on her apparent now-deleted Instagram stories. “F*ck Rolling Stone,” she wrote in one. “F*ck you guys @RollingStone,” Eilish allegedly added in another, which included a clown emoji. The publication has since updated the article, but it made the rounds on Reddit shortly after.

Despite the hiccup, Eilish still raised anticipation through various promotional stunts, like making headlines by adding everyone to her close friends story. Her album announcement post finds her underwater, which seems to play a role in the themes of the upcoming record. Once again, she co-wrote it alongside her brother, Finneas.

“Finneas and I truly could not be more proud of this album and we absolutely can’t wait for you to hear it,” Eilish captioned. “Love you love you love you.”

Check out Billie Eilish’s rumored posts about Rolling Stone below.

Hit Me Hard And Soft is out 5/17 via Darkroom/Interscope Records. Find more information here.

John Mulaney‘s most recent Netflix special Baby J hit the streamer last year. Now that he’s moved on from baby to toddler, he is ready for a brand new batch of comedy specials, this time live from Los Angeles, famously the least funny place on Earth.

Mulaney’s latest endeavor will be John Mulaney Presents: Everybody’s In LA, a new Netflix event which will consist of six installments featuring the Oh, Hello comedian as he “explores the city of Los Angeles during a week when every funny person is in it.” The term “funny” is subjective, but there will probably be some chuckles! Netflix teases that the special will be “comically unconventional” which is common in the state of California.

In a new ad for the special, they heavily imply (but do not confirm) that comedy legends like Jerry Seinfeld, Chris Rock, and David Letterman will appear in the special. It also features Mulaney doing his best John Hughes cosplay:

The series debuts live on May 3 from the annual Netflix is a Joke Fest, with additional episodes streaming May 6-10 at 10 p.m. EST on Netflix.

This is just Netflix’s latest venture into live streaming as the company has been experimenting with live televised events, like the recent SAG awards and other stand-up specials. All of this is just a trial run for the highly anticipated Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson event that will stream this July. Everyone’s been waiting for that one, right?

(Via Deadline)

The Bruce Springsteen biopic just took a major step towards becoming a reality. Deliver Me From Nowhere has been acquired by 20th Century Studios, and yes, Jeremy Allen White is in talks to play The Boss in the film that will center around the making of his legendary 1982 album Nebraska.

Hostiles and Crazy Horse director Scott Cooper will write and direct the film, which is based on the book Deliver Me from Nowhere: The Making of Bruce Springsteen’s Nebraska by Warren Zane.

“It is a once-in-a-lifetime honor to be collaborating with Bruce Springsteen, an inspiring and incomparable artist who represents so much to so many,” 20th Century Studios president David Greenbaum told Variety in a statement. “The deep authenticity of his story is in great hands with my friend Scott Cooper whom I am thrilled to be collaborating with once again.”

Via Variety:

Nebraska, the follow-up to Springsteen’s hugely successful album The River, was widely expected to be a rock album with the E Street Band. Instead, it was a stark solo album made on a 4-track recorder. The book and the film tell the story of Springsteen’s artistic journey in the creation of the record, which is regarded as a watershed in his musical odyssey.

Springsteen and his longtime manager Jon Landau will be involved in Deliver Me From Nowhere, which is slated to start production this fall.

(Via Variety)

Missy Elliott is returning to the road and leaving the Earth with her new tour, Out Of This World — The Missy Elliott Experience. The tour begins on July 4 in Vancouver, BC, in Canada, and features openers Busta Rhymes, Ciara, and Timbaland. It’ll be Missy’s first headlining tour in the US in nearly 20 years. The groundbreaking Virginia rap pioneer was recently inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, and soon, fans across the United States can see why in person.

When Do Missy Elliott’s Out Of This World Tour Tickets Go On Sale?

A presale for Verizon subscribers begins Tuesday, April 9, with additional presales throughout the week. The general sale starts on Friday, April 12, at 10 am local time. You can get more information at missy-elliott.com. See below for the full tour dates.

7/4 — Vancouver, BC @ Rogers Arena
7/6 — Seattle, WA @ Climate Pledge Arena
7/9 — Oakland, CA @ Oakland Arena
7/11 — Los Angeles, CA @ Crypto.com Arena
7/13 — Las Vegas, NV @ T-Mobile Arena
7/16 — Denver, CO @ Ball Arena
7/18 — Austin, TX @ Moody Center
7/20 — Houston, TX @ Toyota Center
7/21 — Fort Worth, TX @ Dickies Arena
7/24 — Tampa, FL @ Amalie Arena
7/25 — Sunrise, FL @ Amerant Bank Arena
7/27 — Atlanta, GA @ State Farm Arena
8/1 — Baltimore, MD @ CFG Bank Arena
8/2 — Hampton, VA @ Hampton Coliseum
8/3 — Belmont Park, NY @ UBS Arena
8/5 — Philadelphia, PA @ Wells Fargo Center
8/8 — Washington, DC @ Capital One Arena
8/9 — Newark, NJ @ Prudential Center
8/10 — Boston, MA @ TD Garden
8/12 — Brooklyn, NY @ Barclays Center
8/15 — Detroit, MI @ Little Caesars Arena
8/17 — Montreal, QC @ Bell Centre
8/19 — Toronto, ON @ Scotiabank Arena
8/22 — Rosemont, IL @ Allstate Arena

Missy Elliott is a Warner Music artist. Uproxx is an independent subsidiary of Warner Music Group.