They just had a fawning,
fawning, article on The Brant Brothers, and I tell you
what?
You don't know who The Brant Brothers are?
That, as it turns out, is the point!
You don't, and, quite frankly, you don't want to!
NOBODY should care who they are, except for the doofi at the NY Times Style Section who have decided that they are going to push them as the New Hilton Sisters!
Anyhow, the
NY Times Style Section had a fawning, fawning article on The Brant Brothers, which has such brilliant phrases in it as
Harry, 15, and his 18-year-old brother are the well-spoken product of cross-pollination of the Übermenschen.
“Everybody loves celebrity children,” said Stephanie Trong, the editorial director of The Cut. “But perhaps the biggest appeal is that these guys live in the lap of luxury and they’re extremely open about their exploits. How many teens go to couture shows or fashion parties, much less document them on their joint Twitter feed, in such a hilarious, uncensored way?”
I could go on, or possibly suggest that you go read the original article, but I don't happen to have a barf-bag handy. Luckily, Drew Magary at Gawker has got this covered. To wit
We at Gawker have warned you previously that the
New York Times Style section exists solely to
introduce you to society's biggest shitheads,and yesterday's profile of
the Brant Brothers is no exception. At this point, it feels as if the
Timesis going out of its way to troll us all. No one at that paper could possibly think these two teenagers—who have yet to contribute anything meaningful to society—are inherently interesting. A much more reasonable explanation is that someone at the Times Style section sits down every week and is like, "Oh hey, how can we piss off everyone this week? I KNOW! Let's profile a pair of privileged dipshits!" Look at this fucking article:
Harry, 15, and his 18-year-old brother are the well-spoken product of cross-pollination of the Übermenschen.
I want to take this sentence, drag it out into the backyard, and beat it to death with a shovel.That sentence alone justifies every single conservative criticism that the Times exists with its head perpetually up its own ass. These two kids are the product of rich people. No pollination was involved. Terms like "Übermenschen" exist strictly so that pretentious assholes will use them to no effect.
"Everybody loves celebrity children," said Stephanie Trong, the editorial director of The Cut.
No, they don't. That's wrong. Just last week, I prayed to Jesus that Jaden and Willow Smith would each get hit by a milk truck. No one loves celebrity children. Even Tom Hanks couldn't be stopped from siring obnoxious offspring. What fucking galaxy did this lady emerge from?
"But perhaps the biggest appeal is that these guys live in the lap of luxury and they're extremely open about their exploits."
There's nothing appealing about that. Everyone loves celebrity children, and you know what? They REALLY love it when those celebrity children live a repulsively decadent lifestyle and won't shut the fuck up about it. Americans can't get enough of that. It's an Übermenschen thing. You wouldn't understand.
"How many teens go to couture shows or fashion parties, much less document them on their joint Twitter feed, in such a hilarious, uncensored way?"
It's true. Thank God that we have stumbled upon that rarest of breeds: a privileged set of teenagers tweeting about all the fabulous parties they get to go to that you don't. I can't possibly see how the world would react aversely to such a thing.
There is a whole bunch more - I strongly suggest you go read it, but this time you won't need the barf bags...
Comments