WEBVTT - Mikaela Testa's 'Hard' Launch, Ashy Bines’ Controversial View on Cheating & Matt Poole Takes Aim

0:00:01.840 --> 0:00:05.600
<v Speaker 1>On today's show, Matt Paul takes another swipe at Ollie Frost.

0:00:05.840 --> 0:00:09.879
<v Speaker 1>Mikayla Testa hard launches her new boyfriend as she binds

0:00:09.920 --> 0:00:13.039
<v Speaker 1>this controversial view on cheating and what are your rights

0:00:13.080 --> 0:00:17.160
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to getting a nightmare haircut? Hello, and

0:00:17.200 --> 0:00:20.200
<v Speaker 1>welcome to Outspoken. It's your dose of the hottest influencer

0:00:20.280 --> 0:00:23.720
<v Speaker 1>and pop culture news twice a week. I'm Abe Torba

0:00:23.760 --> 0:00:26.079
<v Speaker 1>and people who are working from home and taking the

0:00:26.120 --> 0:00:29.240
<v Speaker 1>piss need to take notice because this week it was

0:00:29.280 --> 0:00:32.760
<v Speaker 1>reported that an Australian woman was fired after being caught

0:00:32.760 --> 0:00:36.040
<v Speaker 1>out not doing enough work from home, so her work

0:00:36.120 --> 0:00:38.840
<v Speaker 1>went to the extreme length of putting a key stroke

0:00:38.920 --> 0:00:42.480
<v Speaker 1>monitoring device on her computer. What do you guys think? Look,

0:00:42.560 --> 0:00:44.400
<v Speaker 1>I want to start off by saying we're not accusing

0:00:44.440 --> 0:00:47.240
<v Speaker 1>any of our listeners for bludging whilst they're working from home,

0:00:47.280 --> 0:00:49.360
<v Speaker 1>because that's what I hate. I hate that it's implied

0:00:49.400 --> 0:00:51.400
<v Speaker 1>that if you work from home, you're not doing anything,

0:00:51.440 --> 0:00:53.680
<v Speaker 1>because there's so many people who are doing the right thing.

0:00:54.040 --> 0:00:56.600
<v Speaker 1>But in this case, I actually don't have much sympathy

0:00:56.640 --> 0:00:59.920
<v Speaker 1>for this woman because she's clearly been caught out taking

0:01:00.080 --> 0:01:02.520
<v Speaker 1>a piss and ruining it. For other people. I do

0:01:02.600 --> 0:01:04.840
<v Speaker 1>think it's a little bit unfair that they tracked her

0:01:04.920 --> 0:01:08.000
<v Speaker 1>computer because it really should be based on your output.

0:01:08.120 --> 0:01:10.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, if the woman isn't doing enough work, surely

0:01:10.840 --> 0:01:14.200
<v Speaker 1>her employees should talk to her rather than basically stalking her.

0:01:14.319 --> 0:01:17.080
<v Speaker 1>But it's not stalking her. I actually think it's really clever.

0:01:17.200 --> 0:01:20.360
<v Speaker 1>You can always tell that a lot of officers will

0:01:20.360 --> 0:01:22.679
<v Speaker 1>set up a morning meeting to make sure that their

0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:25.360
<v Speaker 1>staff are actually awaken of doing stuff he're working for.

0:01:25.520 --> 0:01:27.840
<v Speaker 1>But that doesn't do anything. That just means that people

0:01:27.959 --> 0:01:30.320
<v Speaker 1>are available on the zoom and then they could literally

0:01:30.360 --> 0:01:32.120
<v Speaker 1>close their computer lid and fuck off for the rest

0:01:32.120 --> 0:01:35.119
<v Speaker 1>of the day. The keystroke monitoring, yeah, but at least

0:01:35.160 --> 0:01:37.880
<v Speaker 1>it means you know, they're at their house, they're away.

0:01:38.040 --> 0:01:40.520
<v Speaker 1>But the thing is, it depends what job you're doing.

0:01:40.560 --> 0:01:43.600
<v Speaker 1>But the keystroke monitoring might not even reflect like this

0:01:43.640 --> 0:01:46.319
<v Speaker 1>woman worked for an insurance company. Was she on the phones? Like?

0:01:46.360 --> 0:01:48.960
<v Speaker 1>Did she need to be typing? So apparently a lot

0:01:49.000 --> 0:01:51.000
<v Speaker 1>of her job was typing stuff, so they were able

0:01:51.040 --> 0:01:54.720
<v Speaker 1>to identify that she wasn't doing her work. I am

0:01:54.800 --> 0:01:57.560
<v Speaker 1>in two minds about the working from home situation because

0:01:57.600 --> 0:02:00.320
<v Speaker 1>as someone who runs a small business. I would feel

0:02:00.320 --> 0:02:04.120
<v Speaker 1>really nervous employing someone knowing that they're not in the

0:02:04.160 --> 0:02:06.520
<v Speaker 1>office with me. I can't see what they're doing, particularly

0:02:06.560 --> 0:02:08.400
<v Speaker 1>if there's someone new, But I don't know if you

0:02:08.400 --> 0:02:10.600
<v Speaker 1>can trust them. Yeah. But the thing is from having

0:02:10.600 --> 0:02:13.120
<v Speaker 1>an office job, it is so easy to not be

0:02:13.160 --> 0:02:15.880
<v Speaker 1>doing your work and be on social media during when

0:02:15.919 --> 0:02:17.919
<v Speaker 1>you're in the office. Yeah, people can bludge when they're

0:02:17.960 --> 0:02:20.440
<v Speaker 1>in the office as well, because you just literally look

0:02:20.520 --> 0:02:22.600
<v Speaker 1>like you're doing work, but you're on social media or

0:02:22.639 --> 0:02:25.560
<v Speaker 1>you're doing your own thing unless you have someone standing

0:02:25.560 --> 0:02:27.680
<v Speaker 1>over your shoulder watching everything you do. You need to

0:02:27.680 --> 0:02:30.280
<v Speaker 1>actually have trust in the people you employ in both

0:02:30.320 --> 0:02:32.960
<v Speaker 1>situations in the office and also from working from home.

0:02:33.040 --> 0:02:35.760
<v Speaker 1>It's actually such a skill though, when you're at a

0:02:35.840 --> 0:02:38.200
<v Speaker 1>job and you've got nothing to do, to look like

0:02:38.240 --> 0:02:40.320
<v Speaker 1>you're busy, it's actually work. I heard a lot of

0:02:40.360 --> 0:02:43.760
<v Speaker 1>people during COVID were actually using those those systems on

0:02:43.800 --> 0:02:46.320
<v Speaker 1>their computer where it would automatically move their mouths around

0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:48.399
<v Speaker 1>just in case they were being tracked by those keys.

0:02:48.880 --> 0:02:50.760
<v Speaker 1>It's so they look active on team. Yes, yeah, yeah,

0:02:50.800 --> 0:02:53.040
<v Speaker 1>it says if you're away or if you're there. I

0:02:53.080 --> 0:02:54.800
<v Speaker 1>do find it funny when bosses are like, you need

0:02:54.840 --> 0:02:56.520
<v Speaker 1>to come back to the office for the culture, and

0:02:56.560 --> 0:03:00.000
<v Speaker 1>the culture is literally just silence and people not even

0:03:00.080 --> 0:03:03.000
<v Speaker 1>talking or working together. Well, what's horrifying is that there

0:03:03.040 --> 0:03:05.240
<v Speaker 1>has been a lot of media coverage on this case.

0:03:05.320 --> 0:03:07.120
<v Speaker 1>Is this going to mean that a lot of businesses

0:03:07.160 --> 0:03:09.639
<v Speaker 1>are going to start using this technology or now will

0:03:09.680 --> 0:03:11.440
<v Speaker 1>work as having the back of their mind? Shit, I

0:03:11.440 --> 0:03:13.640
<v Speaker 1>actually better do my job because I might be caught

0:03:13.639 --> 0:03:14.160
<v Speaker 1>out next.

0:03:15.440 --> 0:03:17.200
<v Speaker 2>Would you make me a Walldorf?

0:03:17.440 --> 0:03:22.320
<v Speaker 1>Shout Tammy Hambrose. Former fiance Matt Paul has taken another

0:03:22.400 --> 0:03:26.280
<v Speaker 1>swipe at Nicky Westcott's fiance Ollie Frost. Now, the well

0:03:26.320 --> 0:03:28.920
<v Speaker 1>known boyfriends of Instagram are in the midst of a

0:03:29.040 --> 0:03:32.640
<v Speaker 1>very nasty business dispute that has been playing out publicly

0:03:32.720 --> 0:03:35.200
<v Speaker 1>for the past few weeks, and as we mentioned on

0:03:35.280 --> 0:03:38.680
<v Speaker 1>last week's episode, Matt is claiming that Ollie has squeezed

0:03:38.720 --> 0:03:41.600
<v Speaker 1>him out of his stake in popular Burlyhead's restaurant A

0:03:41.720 --> 0:03:44.960
<v Speaker 1>Man Now. Matt alleges that Ollie asked him to invest

0:03:45.040 --> 0:03:48.520
<v Speaker 1>thirty thousand dollars in the business in twenty twenty three

0:03:48.640 --> 0:03:51.320
<v Speaker 1>years on and the business is now in liquidation and

0:03:51.320 --> 0:03:54.200
<v Speaker 1>Matt has no idea where his money is. And as

0:03:54.240 --> 0:03:56.920
<v Speaker 1>we touched on last week, despite the Gold Coast restaurant

0:03:56.920 --> 0:04:00.360
<v Speaker 1>closing down, Ollie and his business partner Jonathan Eddings have

0:04:00.520 --> 0:04:03.840
<v Speaker 1>recently opened a bunch of new companies with similar names.

0:04:04.200 --> 0:04:06.480
<v Speaker 1>And this isn't the first time that Olli and Jonathan's

0:04:06.480 --> 0:04:09.520
<v Speaker 1>companies have faced trouble. The pair were the founders behind

0:04:09.560 --> 0:04:12.080
<v Speaker 1>the defunct Grass in the Green music festival that went

0:04:12.120 --> 0:04:15.760
<v Speaker 1>into administration late last year. Now, this festival ended up

0:04:15.760 --> 0:04:18.839
<v Speaker 1>owing more than three million dollars to artists, fan suppliers

0:04:18.920 --> 0:04:22.479
<v Speaker 1>and the tax office. And after we dropped last week's episode,

0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:25.000
<v Speaker 1>we had quite a few listeners contacting us saying that

0:04:25.040 --> 0:04:27.359
<v Speaker 1>they had been caught up in that debacle and still

0:04:27.360 --> 0:04:29.680
<v Speaker 1>hadn't had their money returned to them. And in an

0:04:29.680 --> 0:04:32.800
<v Speaker 1>interesting twist, an investigation found that more than seven hundred

0:04:32.839 --> 0:04:35.600
<v Speaker 1>thousand dollars in festival funds were loaned to Ollie and

0:04:35.680 --> 0:04:39.240
<v Speaker 1>Jonathan's restaurant companies, which will never be paid back. The

0:04:39.320 --> 0:04:41.279
<v Speaker 1>man was found to be one of the businesses propped

0:04:41.360 --> 0:04:43.880
<v Speaker 1>up by the festival funds. So now they were all

0:04:43.960 --> 0:04:46.760
<v Speaker 1>up to speed. This week, Matt Pool took a major

0:04:46.800 --> 0:04:50.000
<v Speaker 1>swipe at Ollie Frost On Instagram, Matt shared a story

0:04:50.040 --> 0:04:52.479
<v Speaker 1>of his desk with his laptop sitting on top of

0:04:52.520 --> 0:04:55.680
<v Speaker 1>a newspaper and it just so happened that the newspaper

0:04:55.800 --> 0:04:58.760
<v Speaker 1>was opened to an article about Olli and Maman and

0:04:58.800 --> 0:05:02.000
<v Speaker 1>you clearly read the head line, which said restaurants firms

0:05:02.000 --> 0:05:05.640
<v Speaker 1>facing two point three million dollar debts. Matt then captured

0:05:05.680 --> 0:05:08.719
<v Speaker 1>the story back in the office for an honest day's work.

0:05:08.839 --> 0:05:11.680
<v Speaker 1>I personally love this pettiness. This is something that I

0:05:11.720 --> 0:05:14.039
<v Speaker 1>would do, and it's something that you have done before, Amy,

0:05:14.160 --> 0:05:16.839
<v Speaker 1>it is something I've done. Unfortunately, my name was in

0:05:16.880 --> 0:05:19.320
<v Speaker 1>the media a couple of years ago with stuff to

0:05:19.320 --> 0:05:22.279
<v Speaker 1>do with a former employer, and I did enjoy putting

0:05:22.279 --> 0:05:24.560
<v Speaker 1>in little newspaper articles that we just happened to be

0:05:24.640 --> 0:05:27.440
<v Speaker 1>next to my breakfast in the mornings. And that's the thing,

0:05:27.480 --> 0:05:29.599
<v Speaker 1>when you are locked in a legal dispute, you have

0:05:29.640 --> 0:05:32.760
<v Speaker 1>to be subtle and giving a reaction like this, even

0:05:32.839 --> 0:05:35.880
<v Speaker 1>though it might be sort of detrimental to the case,

0:05:36.200 --> 0:05:38.120
<v Speaker 1>it makes you feel a little bit better. See, I

0:05:38.160 --> 0:05:40.240
<v Speaker 1>don't know how subtle it is, because he added that

0:05:40.279 --> 0:05:42.560
<v Speaker 1>caption that was pretty telling. Yeah, you can't get in

0:05:42.600 --> 0:05:45.120
<v Speaker 1>trouble for that. I actually, yeah, I'm with Sophie. I

0:05:45.120 --> 0:05:47.800
<v Speaker 1>think that's funny. I did laugh because I also saw

0:05:47.839 --> 0:05:52.680
<v Speaker 1>that Matt Paul liked our Instagram post promoting last week's episode. Yeah,

0:05:52.760 --> 0:05:55.719
<v Speaker 1>so that was also a bit of a subtle swipe. Now,

0:05:55.880 --> 0:05:59.479
<v Speaker 1>the recent article in the Gold Coast Bulletin was quite damning.

0:05:59.560 --> 0:06:02.440
<v Speaker 1>It out line that, according to reports, Lodge with asig

0:06:02.800 --> 0:06:05.679
<v Speaker 1>Ollie's restaurant companies have debts of more than two point

0:06:05.720 --> 0:06:10.360
<v Speaker 1>three million to unsecured creditors, and the article also revealed

0:06:10.480 --> 0:06:13.839
<v Speaker 1>the liquidatas were currently attempting to sell the business through

0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:17.479
<v Speaker 1>a public advertising campaign. Now, Ollie and his business partner

0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:20.520
<v Speaker 1>Jonathan have enlisted the help of a PR firm, but

0:06:20.640 --> 0:06:23.719
<v Speaker 1>they declined to provide a comment to the paper. I

0:06:23.760 --> 0:06:25.919
<v Speaker 1>do find that quite interesting that they have got a

0:06:25.960 --> 0:06:29.000
<v Speaker 1>PR firm involved, because they know how detrimental this is

0:06:29.040 --> 0:06:32.160
<v Speaker 1>to their image and also to the image of Nicky Wescott.

0:06:32.360 --> 0:06:34.480
<v Speaker 1>I'm surprised that the PR company would take them on,

0:06:34.600 --> 0:06:37.159
<v Speaker 1>considering it's been publicized that they owe so much money.

0:06:37.200 --> 0:06:39.320
<v Speaker 1>We've had that recently, so for we had a company

0:06:39.320 --> 0:06:41.039
<v Speaker 1>reach out to us that was in the papers, and

0:06:41.080 --> 0:06:43.120
<v Speaker 1>that was clearly though in liquidation, and we're like, why

0:06:43.120 --> 0:06:44.800
<v Speaker 1>would we take you on you're clearly not going to

0:06:44.839 --> 0:06:47.280
<v Speaker 1>pay your bill. I mean a lot of companies do

0:06:47.360 --> 0:06:49.560
<v Speaker 1>have to deal with crisis management, but as you say,

0:06:49.600 --> 0:06:52.000
<v Speaker 1>I wouldn't feel that confident taking them on board. I

0:06:52.040 --> 0:06:54.560
<v Speaker 1>would want the money up front before I started doing

0:06:54.640 --> 0:06:56.640
<v Speaker 1>any work with them. And it's also important who you

0:06:56.720 --> 0:06:59.560
<v Speaker 1>align yourself with though as a PR company. I'm actually

0:06:59.560 --> 0:07:02.320
<v Speaker 1>surprised that they're not commenting. I think it looks like

0:07:02.360 --> 0:07:04.599
<v Speaker 1>they're wiping their hands of the whole thing. I just

0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:06.640
<v Speaker 1>think they probably get themselves in more trouble if they

0:07:06.640 --> 0:07:08.760
<v Speaker 1>start putting comments out. I do think that it's best

0:07:08.800 --> 0:07:11.520
<v Speaker 1>probably not to say something, because when they comment, it's

0:07:11.560 --> 0:07:14.160
<v Speaker 1>just going to generate another story where they rehash all

0:07:14.160 --> 0:07:16.800
<v Speaker 1>this negative information. They're waiting for the story to die.

0:07:17.240 --> 0:07:20.240
<v Speaker 1>That's the strategy all were then hearing is one person's

0:07:20.240 --> 0:07:22.360
<v Speaker 1>side of how terrible they are at business and how

0:07:22.400 --> 0:07:24.080
<v Speaker 1>much they are with But I'm not seeing the other

0:07:24.120 --> 0:07:26.200
<v Speaker 1>side to the story. They might be genuine reasons. Well,

0:07:26.240 --> 0:07:28.440
<v Speaker 1>they might be crafting a positive news story if they're

0:07:28.480 --> 0:07:31.400
<v Speaker 1>launching another business. You know, I really want to know

0:07:31.480 --> 0:07:34.000
<v Speaker 1>what NICKI Westcott is thinking because she is having to

0:07:34.040 --> 0:07:36.800
<v Speaker 1>front up and do a podcast every couple of days,

0:07:37.080 --> 0:07:39.160
<v Speaker 1>and it would be really awkward when all of this

0:07:39.200 --> 0:07:41.520
<v Speaker 1>is going on in the background. Because she's huge on

0:07:41.560 --> 0:07:44.280
<v Speaker 1>the social scene. She and Lucy are always out and

0:07:44.320 --> 0:07:46.880
<v Speaker 1>about at restaurants. I just think it's very awkward for them,

0:07:46.920 --> 0:07:50.160
<v Speaker 1>the association. It is awkward, but it's her partner. It's

0:07:50.160 --> 0:07:52.800
<v Speaker 1>not her. I get that it's not her, but the

0:07:52.880 --> 0:07:56.400
<v Speaker 1>person that you're marrying, and your financial situation is merged

0:07:56.440 --> 0:07:58.920
<v Speaker 1>with the How can you not? I don't know. I

0:07:58.920 --> 0:08:00.640
<v Speaker 1>feel like it'd be interesting to say, see how many

0:08:00.720 --> 0:08:03.800
<v Speaker 1>DMS she's receiving over this. Please? Can all of the

0:08:03.840 --> 0:08:05.840
<v Speaker 1>boyfriends and husband stop staring at my ars every time

0:08:05.880 --> 0:08:07.720
<v Speaker 1>I stap outside because I feel really bad for all

0:08:07.760 --> 0:08:12.320
<v Speaker 1>the wives and girlfriends. TikToker and OnlyFans creator Mikayla Tester

0:08:12.440 --> 0:08:15.520
<v Speaker 1>has debuted her new boyfriend by sharing an X rated

0:08:15.520 --> 0:08:17.760
<v Speaker 1>photo of him, as well as a taste of their

0:08:17.840 --> 0:08:21.760
<v Speaker 1>late night text message exchanges. Now. The new relationship comes

0:08:22.000 --> 0:08:24.880
<v Speaker 1>just a year after Mikayla split from her longtime boyfriend

0:08:24.880 --> 0:08:27.360
<v Speaker 1>Addis Paul. Now, so if this has put new meaning

0:08:27.600 --> 0:08:30.440
<v Speaker 1>into hard launching a relationship. Yeah, a part in the pun.

0:08:30.480 --> 0:08:33.439
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I was quite taken back when Mikayla's Instagram

0:08:33.600 --> 0:08:36.200
<v Speaker 1>story popped up, and for those who haven't seen it,

0:08:36.520 --> 0:08:39.400
<v Speaker 1>she shared a screenshot of a text message exchange as

0:08:39.440 --> 0:08:42.920
<v Speaker 1>you said, Amy, which included a photo of the new guy. Unfortunately,

0:08:42.920 --> 0:08:45.360
<v Speaker 1>we didn't actually get to see his face in the photos. Oh,

0:08:45.360 --> 0:08:48.160
<v Speaker 1>I though you're gonna say something else. No, this photo,

0:08:48.200 --> 0:08:50.520
<v Speaker 1>the best way I can describe it is this guy

0:08:50.760 --> 0:08:53.720
<v Speaker 1>has grabbed his phone, he's standing in the nude, and

0:08:53.720 --> 0:08:56.360
<v Speaker 1>he's positioned the photo up so you can't quite see

0:08:56.360 --> 0:08:58.160
<v Speaker 1>his groin. I mean, if he had any pubes, I

0:08:58.160 --> 0:09:00.720
<v Speaker 1>feel like you definitely see a hint of pubes and

0:09:00.760 --> 0:09:03.640
<v Speaker 1>his face and his privates was strategically cut off. You

0:09:03.640 --> 0:09:05.800
<v Speaker 1>can see his very chiseled body though. Yeah, he was

0:09:05.800 --> 0:09:09.600
<v Speaker 1>absolutely ripped. And in this text message exchange, Mikayla says,

0:09:09.920 --> 0:09:13.079
<v Speaker 1>they know and they don't mind. They like hearing about it. Though,

0:09:13.280 --> 0:09:16.680
<v Speaker 1>I assume that she is talking about her OnlyFans, audience

0:09:16.720 --> 0:09:18.960
<v Speaker 1>and her followers on Instagram, saying that they don't mind

0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:21.040
<v Speaker 1>her being in a relationship. See. I wondered if that

0:09:21.160 --> 0:09:24.280
<v Speaker 1>was about Adams Paul. I actually don't mind this reveal

0:09:24.320 --> 0:09:26.240
<v Speaker 1>of a new relationship. It's better than just having the

0:09:26.400 --> 0:09:28.240
<v Speaker 1>arm with the watch and the photo. It kind of

0:09:28.240 --> 0:09:30.400
<v Speaker 1>takes it to a different level. It's quite funny because

0:09:30.400 --> 0:09:34.800
<v Speaker 1>in this text message exchange, Mikayla responded saying, ah delicious.

0:09:35.040 --> 0:09:38.200
<v Speaker 1>And it's funny because she actually tagged him in this

0:09:38.320 --> 0:09:40.800
<v Speaker 1>Instagram story. So I of course had a bit of

0:09:40.800 --> 0:09:44.360
<v Speaker 1>a stalk. And this guy's name is Emmanuel. He's eighteen

0:09:44.440 --> 0:09:48.400
<v Speaker 1>years old, a body builder and also a fellow OnlyFans creator.

0:09:48.520 --> 0:09:51.040
<v Speaker 1>They sound perfect together and many people were surprised to

0:09:51.160 --> 0:09:53.480
<v Speaker 1>hear that there's a five year age gap between the

0:09:53.480 --> 0:09:55.840
<v Speaker 1>two of them, because Mikayla is twenty three. But I

0:09:55.880 --> 0:09:59.240
<v Speaker 1>think those people must be quite unaware of her dating

0:09:59.360 --> 0:10:02.840
<v Speaker 1>history with k Leroy because kid Laroi is nineteen years

0:10:02.880 --> 0:10:06.520
<v Speaker 1>old and they dated, I believe when Mikayla was eighteen.

0:10:06.760 --> 0:10:09.400
<v Speaker 1>But do we actually think this is a relationship or

0:10:09.480 --> 0:10:13.359
<v Speaker 1>is this just an onlyfan's collaboration. I think this relationship

0:10:13.480 --> 0:10:16.760
<v Speaker 1>is genuine because Mikayla then shared that it was the

0:10:16.840 --> 0:10:19.040
<v Speaker 1>end of her eurosummer and that she's been there for

0:10:19.080 --> 0:10:21.600
<v Speaker 1>three months, and she wrote I miss Australia. My cats

0:10:21.600 --> 0:10:24.360
<v Speaker 1>and my boyfriend so much. It's been a long three months.

0:10:24.640 --> 0:10:27.480
<v Speaker 1>And then she revealed that Emmanuel has been looking after

0:10:27.559 --> 0:10:29.800
<v Speaker 1>her cat Eddie, and she shared a photo of him

0:10:29.840 --> 0:10:32.080
<v Speaker 1>cudled up with Eddie in her house. I'm sorry, so

0:10:32.600 --> 0:10:36.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't think this is a genuine relationship. Why would

0:10:36.559 --> 0:10:38.840
<v Speaker 1>you launch it by sharing that kind of photo Because

0:10:38.840 --> 0:10:42.000
<v Speaker 1>it's her brand, it's teasing your audience into it. We're

0:10:42.040 --> 0:10:44.560
<v Speaker 1>going to be collaborating soon. That's how I bet she'll

0:10:44.640 --> 0:10:46.800
<v Speaker 1>do that. Anyway, It doesn't mean it isn't her boyfriend,

0:10:46.880 --> 0:10:48.960
<v Speaker 1>Like she was doing stuff on OnlyFans with Adams Paul

0:10:48.960 --> 0:10:51.160
<v Speaker 1>and that was a genuine relationship. I mean, this guy

0:10:51.280 --> 0:10:54.160
<v Speaker 1>has I think thirty six thousand followers already, Obviously that

0:10:54.280 --> 0:10:56.600
<v Speaker 1>number is going to climb. But I just think it's genuine.

0:10:56.640 --> 0:10:58.920
<v Speaker 1>I mean, it makes sense that she would date someone

0:10:58.960 --> 0:11:01.720
<v Speaker 1>who's in a similar to her, who understands it. I

0:11:01.760 --> 0:11:03.440
<v Speaker 1>wonder if this is the guy that she was talking

0:11:03.480 --> 0:11:05.760
<v Speaker 1>about in her White Fox boutique interview, because she said

0:11:05.800 --> 0:11:07.520
<v Speaker 1>there was a guy living in the US who was

0:11:07.559 --> 0:11:10.240
<v Speaker 1>actually from Melbourne, and I think he recently might have

0:11:10.360 --> 0:11:12.920
<v Speaker 1>moved back or was visiting, so maybe he's made his

0:11:12.960 --> 0:11:13.800
<v Speaker 1>stay more permanent.

0:11:14.640 --> 0:11:16.480
<v Speaker 2>If you don't call him, I will no, no, Cram,

0:11:16.559 --> 0:11:17.400
<v Speaker 2>I don't want you to do that.

0:11:17.440 --> 0:11:18.120
<v Speaker 1>You can't do that.

0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:19.040
<v Speaker 2>I'm gonna call Gino.

0:11:19.080 --> 0:11:20.840
<v Speaker 1>You're gonna see him, and we're gonna get that haircut

0:11:20.880 --> 0:11:24.120
<v Speaker 1>fixed up. I don't want you to call her. Rage Gee.

0:11:25.040 --> 0:11:27.440
<v Speaker 1>I was scrolling on Facebook the other night and I

0:11:27.679 --> 0:11:30.560
<v Speaker 1>came across a post from this poor woman on the

0:11:30.559 --> 0:11:34.720
<v Speaker 1>Tee Time Facebook group who has had an absolute nightmare haircut.

0:11:35.040 --> 0:11:37.680
<v Speaker 1>So she asked for a trim and a few face

0:11:37.760 --> 0:11:42.560
<v Speaker 1>framing layers and she's ngured up having a hair completely butchered.

0:11:42.559 --> 0:11:44.720
<v Speaker 1>I can't even describe. How would you describe it? You've

0:11:44.760 --> 0:11:48.160
<v Speaker 1>seen the photo, Oh, my worst nightmare. So she had

0:11:48.320 --> 0:11:52.079
<v Speaker 1>layers done, and I mean lucky thing. Her hair's very thick,

0:11:52.120 --> 0:11:54.840
<v Speaker 1>but the layers they were literally like you could see

0:11:55.120 --> 0:11:58.040
<v Speaker 1>each layer that had been cut in. It was It's

0:11:58.040 --> 0:12:00.000
<v Speaker 1>sort of like when you cut a Barbie doll's hair

0:12:00.400 --> 0:12:03.480
<v Speaker 1>at different lengths. It was a night looked like weird Barbie,

0:12:03.520 --> 0:12:06.800
<v Speaker 1>didn't it. Yeah, poor girl. So apparently the hairdresser she

0:12:06.880 --> 0:12:10.000
<v Speaker 1>went to had over twenty five years of experience, and

0:12:10.040 --> 0:12:12.640
<v Speaker 1>she went onto the Facebook group to ask if anyone

0:12:12.720 --> 0:12:15.640
<v Speaker 1>knew how she could fix this haircut. It was quite

0:12:15.640 --> 0:12:18.000
<v Speaker 1>funny because someone in the group said she can actually

0:12:18.040 --> 0:12:21.280
<v Speaker 1>claim for personal injury damage. So she said the same

0:12:21.320 --> 0:12:23.960
<v Speaker 1>thing happened to her, and she was given eleven thousand

0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:27.600
<v Speaker 1>dollars for personal and emotional damage. So the hair salon's

0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:30.560
<v Speaker 1>insure it decided on the amount based on how long

0:12:30.600 --> 0:12:32.960
<v Speaker 1>it would cost to pay for extensions for her for

0:12:33.080 --> 0:12:36.400
<v Speaker 1>three to four years. I actually think that this woman

0:12:36.480 --> 0:12:39.600
<v Speaker 1>deserved more than eleven thousand dollars. As someone who has

0:12:39.880 --> 0:12:43.760
<v Speaker 1>very slow growing hair. Yeah, and the amount of money

0:12:43.800 --> 0:12:46.280
<v Speaker 1>that you invest to get healthy hair as well, it

0:12:46.320 --> 0:12:49.120
<v Speaker 1>is emotionally damaging as well. Imagine if you had an

0:12:49.160 --> 0:12:51.040
<v Speaker 1>important event coming up that you had to go to,

0:12:51.080 --> 0:12:52.720
<v Speaker 1>you probably have to buy a week If someone botched

0:12:52.760 --> 0:12:56.679
<v Speaker 1>your face, they'd be liable. Or she was commenting saying,

0:12:56.720 --> 0:12:58.600
<v Speaker 1>do I just shave it all off and get a wig?

0:12:58.800 --> 0:13:01.480
<v Speaker 1>You do put so much trust in your hairdresser, and

0:13:01.600 --> 0:13:04.199
<v Speaker 1>it's really scary going to a new salon. What actually

0:13:04.240 --> 0:13:06.679
<v Speaker 1>is you're right when you do get a bad haircut. Well,

0:13:06.679 --> 0:13:09.720
<v Speaker 1>I was pleased to learn that haircuts are actually covered

0:13:09.800 --> 0:13:14.000
<v Speaker 1>under Australian consumer law, so hairdressers are required to ensure

0:13:14.000 --> 0:13:17.160
<v Speaker 1>that their haircuts are delivered with reasonable skill and care,

0:13:17.559 --> 0:13:20.079
<v Speaker 1>so depending on what happens to your hair, you can

0:13:20.160 --> 0:13:24.040
<v Speaker 1>get a refund, a part refund, or a restyle. The

0:13:24.080 --> 0:13:26.880
<v Speaker 1>biggest advice I took from reading about this is that

0:13:26.920 --> 0:13:29.560
<v Speaker 1>you have to make your feelings heard when you're actually

0:13:29.679 --> 0:13:31.680
<v Speaker 1>at the salon. And I think a lot of people

0:13:31.760 --> 0:13:34.360
<v Speaker 1>find that difficult because how many times have you got

0:13:34.440 --> 0:13:37.040
<v Speaker 1>a bad haircut and you've just gone like, yeah, yeah,

0:13:37.040 --> 0:13:39.440
<v Speaker 1>that's all good and walked out and just cried and

0:13:39.440 --> 0:13:42.040
<v Speaker 1>not said any Yeah. I've been listening to the Bride

0:13:42.080 --> 0:13:44.440
<v Speaker 1>to b podcast, which is done by Adoor Beauty. I've

0:13:44.480 --> 0:13:46.800
<v Speaker 1>really been enjoying binging those episodes, and they had a

0:13:46.840 --> 0:13:49.560
<v Speaker 1>hairdresser on and the hairdresser was saying, this happens all

0:13:49.600 --> 0:13:53.000
<v Speaker 1>the time with bridal trials, and the bridle will be

0:13:53.160 --> 0:13:55.520
<v Speaker 1>just too shy to say that they actually fucking hate

0:13:55.559 --> 0:13:57.760
<v Speaker 1>the whole thing, and they'll either end up going and

0:13:57.760 --> 0:14:00.280
<v Speaker 1>getting someone else to do it for them, or the

0:14:00.440 --> 0:14:03.400
<v Speaker 1>day just being unhappy with it. Yeah, it is really

0:14:03.400 --> 0:14:06.080
<v Speaker 1>hard to say that you don't like something in person.

0:14:06.520 --> 0:14:09.480
<v Speaker 1>There are instances if you have like a color goes wrong,

0:14:09.520 --> 0:14:11.520
<v Speaker 1>you can actually come back, but you've just got to

0:14:11.559 --> 0:14:14.160
<v Speaker 1>do it asap, and if you're not happy with the

0:14:14.200 --> 0:14:17.640
<v Speaker 1>response from the hairdresser, you can actually contact the Office

0:14:17.640 --> 0:14:19.920
<v Speaker 1>of Fair Trading in your state. That's the thing though,

0:14:20.400 --> 0:14:23.200
<v Speaker 1>if someone has fucked up your head this badly, like

0:14:23.320 --> 0:14:25.720
<v Speaker 1>this poor person who posted the photo, you would not

0:14:25.720 --> 0:14:27.200
<v Speaker 1>want to set foot back in there. You'd want to

0:14:27.240 --> 0:14:28.840
<v Speaker 1>just go somewhere else to get them to fix it.

0:14:29.000 --> 0:14:31.720
<v Speaker 1>This happened to Dale. He came home once and his

0:14:31.960 --> 0:14:36.280
<v Speaker 1>haircut looked atrocious. They'd shaved it all weirdly at the back,

0:14:36.640 --> 0:14:38.920
<v Speaker 1>and I said to him, this looks terrible, and he

0:14:39.040 --> 0:14:40.840
<v Speaker 1>just thought I was being picky because he went to

0:14:40.880 --> 0:14:43.960
<v Speaker 1>this really cheap hairdresser. And then it actually took someone

0:14:44.000 --> 0:14:45.920
<v Speaker 1>at work saying mate, did you cut your own hair

0:14:45.960 --> 0:14:48.640
<v Speaker 1>for him to go back. They fixed everything up, but

0:14:48.720 --> 0:14:51.720
<v Speaker 1>still he looked terrible for a couple of weeks. For guys,

0:14:51.720 --> 0:14:53.400
<v Speaker 1>I don't really see the back of their head doing that.

0:14:53.400 --> 0:14:56.840
<v Speaker 1>They're not looking. So there's hilarious TikTok. This woman saying

0:14:56.880 --> 0:14:59.000
<v Speaker 1>things that weren't her business. And she said, the back

0:14:59.000 --> 0:15:01.080
<v Speaker 1>of her hair is not her business. If she didn't

0:15:01.120 --> 0:15:03.800
<v Speaker 1>straighten it properly. That's not her business. Do you remember

0:15:03.840 --> 0:15:06.600
<v Speaker 1>when we first got our hair dyet and I had

0:15:06.600 --> 0:15:09.640
<v Speaker 1>that mishap where I think they put the heat on

0:15:09.760 --> 0:15:12.520
<v Speaker 1>for too long and it went all checkerboard. I need

0:15:12.560 --> 0:15:14.720
<v Speaker 1>to note this was BEFO. When our hairdresser, our much

0:15:14.720 --> 0:15:17.800
<v Speaker 1>beloved hairdresser, was away, we went to one of those

0:15:17.880 --> 0:15:21.280
<v Speaker 1>cheap places. It was as attack. Yeah, that should have

0:15:21.280 --> 0:15:23.280
<v Speaker 1>been the red flag, but that was a nightmare because

0:15:23.280 --> 0:15:25.560
<v Speaker 1>my mum complained because I think I was thirteen. I

0:15:25.680 --> 0:15:27.920
<v Speaker 1>had to redo it, jacking eleven thousand dollars worth of

0:15:27.960 --> 0:15:30.440
<v Speaker 1>damage for that checkerboard. Oh streets. I would have liked

0:15:30.440 --> 0:15:32.360
<v Speaker 1>that because I had to redye my hair my natural

0:15:32.360 --> 0:15:34.640
<v Speaker 1>color again. It just looked awful. A telltale sign that

0:15:34.680 --> 0:15:38.840
<v Speaker 1>someone's a bad hairdresser is if they've got bad hair themselves.

0:15:38.880 --> 0:15:42.720
<v Speaker 1>I've advocated for so long for women to use their voice,

0:15:43.080 --> 0:15:44.720
<v Speaker 1>and then I was silent.

0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:48.320
<v Speaker 2>Were you silent or were you silenced?

0:15:49.520 --> 0:15:52.600
<v Speaker 1>Speculation is mounting that Megan Markle is set to return

0:15:52.640 --> 0:15:55.760
<v Speaker 1>to Instagram. The Duchess of Sussex was forced to shut

0:15:55.800 --> 0:15:58.920
<v Speaker 1>down her personal social media accounts five years ago when

0:15:58.920 --> 0:16:02.840
<v Speaker 1>she married Prince Worry The discovery of Meghan's apparent secret

0:16:02.840 --> 0:16:06.359
<v Speaker 1>Instagram account follows rumors that the former actress is exploring

0:16:06.560 --> 0:16:10.600
<v Speaker 1>new career opportunities as an influencer Amy can you tell

0:16:10.640 --> 0:16:14.480
<v Speaker 1>us more? Well? An Instagram account with the handle Meghan

0:16:14.520 --> 0:16:18.320
<v Speaker 1>has attracted tens of thousands of followers overnight, despite not

0:16:18.440 --> 0:16:21.800
<v Speaker 1>having a single post now. The account's profile picture is

0:16:21.800 --> 0:16:24.600
<v Speaker 1>of flowers and it is set to public now. Other

0:16:24.680 --> 0:16:28.880
<v Speaker 1>than sharing Meghan's name, there is no other identifying features

0:16:28.880 --> 0:16:31.640
<v Speaker 1>that it is actually her account. But despite this, many

0:16:31.680 --> 0:16:35.760
<v Speaker 1>people are certain that it's Meghan's personal Instagram account, so

0:16:35.960 --> 0:16:38.560
<v Speaker 1>much so that at the time of recording, the account

0:16:38.600 --> 0:16:42.040
<v Speaker 1>has attracted over forty five thousand followers. How did she

0:16:42.160 --> 0:16:44.920
<v Speaker 1>get the name just Megan? Surely that name would have

0:16:44.960 --> 0:16:47.600
<v Speaker 1>been taken by somebody. Maybe she's purchased it, and that's

0:16:47.640 --> 0:16:49.920
<v Speaker 1>why people are certain that it's Also what if she

0:16:50.040 --> 0:16:53.400
<v Speaker 1>maybe not just shut down her original one, but not

0:16:53.480 --> 0:16:56.480
<v Speaker 1>deleted it and then reactivated it. It wasn't Megan. She

0:16:56.640 --> 0:16:59.560
<v Speaker 1>can't really come back as Meghan Markele while everyone knows

0:16:59.600 --> 0:17:02.040
<v Speaker 1>her as Meghan Markle. It's the same with Kate Middleton.

0:17:02.360 --> 0:17:05.760
<v Speaker 1>They actually no longer have those names. When she married

0:17:05.800 --> 0:17:08.680
<v Speaker 1>Prince Harry. Normally what happens is if you marry into

0:17:08.680 --> 0:17:11.600
<v Speaker 1>the royal family, you drop your last name. You're literally

0:17:11.680 --> 0:17:14.120
<v Speaker 1>just known as your Christian name. Yeah, I get that,

0:17:14.160 --> 0:17:16.360
<v Speaker 1>but I'm saying that she had so many followers on

0:17:16.400 --> 0:17:19.360
<v Speaker 1>her original Instagram account that did she just did? Why

0:17:19.359 --> 0:17:21.560
<v Speaker 1>did she just deactivate it then come back and just

0:17:21.640 --> 0:17:23.920
<v Speaker 1>change the handle. She's not going to have any issues

0:17:23.920 --> 0:17:26.360
<v Speaker 1>with attracting new followers at all. We can see these

0:17:26.359 --> 0:17:29.440
<v Speaker 1>blank accounts got forty five thousand. It's quite interesting though,

0:17:29.440 --> 0:17:32.760
<v Speaker 1>because I think this whole Meghan thing is a big

0:17:32.800 --> 0:17:35.560
<v Speaker 1>part of her rebrand because she's copped so much flak

0:17:35.600 --> 0:17:39.200
<v Speaker 1>for holding on to her title of the Duchess of Sussex,

0:17:39.240 --> 0:17:42.160
<v Speaker 1>and on her podcast she always signed off as Meghan.

0:17:42.600 --> 0:17:45.520
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I know, I know in the actual show

0:17:45.560 --> 0:17:47.600
<v Speaker 1>notes and at the end when they were reading the credits,

0:17:47.640 --> 0:17:49.840
<v Speaker 1>it would say the Duchess of Sussex. But I think

0:17:49.840 --> 0:17:52.480
<v Speaker 1>she's really trying to make just Meghan a thing, because

0:17:52.560 --> 0:17:55.680
<v Speaker 1>trying to make Meghan happen. Yeah, because Prince Harry, he's

0:17:55.680 --> 0:17:57.280
<v Speaker 1>just known as Prince Harry, and so she just has

0:17:57.320 --> 0:17:59.520
<v Speaker 1>to be just Meghan. And it's pretty ballsy to go with,

0:17:59.600 --> 0:18:03.160
<v Speaker 1>because Meghan isn't like an unusual name. It's not like share.

0:18:03.200 --> 0:18:05.919
<v Speaker 1>There's not just one Meghan. You've got Meghan trainer, you know.

0:18:06.280 --> 0:18:09.439
<v Speaker 1>So I wonder if Megan is going to try and

0:18:09.560 --> 0:18:12.960
<v Speaker 1>trademark Meghan like Kylie Jenna did during when she did it,

0:18:13.000 --> 0:18:15.280
<v Speaker 1>and then Kylie Minogue was like, hang on a second,

0:18:16.080 --> 0:18:19.359
<v Speaker 1>I'm Kylie. Yeah. It's actually believed that this account was

0:18:19.400 --> 0:18:22.960
<v Speaker 1>created a year ago, even though it's just attracting attention now,

0:18:23.160 --> 0:18:25.239
<v Speaker 1>and that was around the time that Meghan launched her

0:18:25.280 --> 0:18:28.879
<v Speaker 1>Spotify podcast Archetypes, and in an interview with The Cut

0:18:28.880 --> 0:18:31.359
<v Speaker 1>to promote the podcast, Meghan said, do you want to

0:18:31.400 --> 0:18:34.840
<v Speaker 1>know a secret? I'm getting back on Instagram. However, she

0:18:35.040 --> 0:18:37.320
<v Speaker 1>is said to have changed her mind shortly before she

0:18:37.440 --> 0:18:40.960
<v Speaker 1>launched the podcast, so this account has potentially just been

0:18:41.000 --> 0:18:44.040
<v Speaker 1>sitting there. Do you think she's changing her mind again,

0:18:44.240 --> 0:18:47.320
<v Speaker 1>because there is a lot of speculation that she's in

0:18:47.400 --> 0:18:50.760
<v Speaker 1>talks with Cartier to become a brand ambassador after signing

0:18:50.840 --> 0:18:54.919
<v Speaker 1>with Hollywood talent agency WMEE. She's always been big on

0:18:54.920 --> 0:18:57.560
<v Speaker 1>social media. Before she married into the royal family, she

0:18:57.760 --> 0:19:01.080
<v Speaker 1>had her blog The Tig I feel like it would

0:19:01.080 --> 0:19:03.440
<v Speaker 1>just be natural for her to fall back into having

0:19:03.520 --> 0:19:06.280
<v Speaker 1>a social media career. It's a little bit more complicated

0:19:06.320 --> 0:19:09.160
<v Speaker 1>now though, with the whole Royal family thing, because apparently

0:19:09.240 --> 0:19:12.440
<v Speaker 1>Cartier are a little bit nervous because if they partner

0:19:12.480 --> 0:19:14.719
<v Speaker 1>with Meghan, they're going to piss off the Royal family,

0:19:14.760 --> 0:19:17.000
<v Speaker 1>who have been clients for over one hundred years. I

0:19:17.200 --> 0:19:20.600
<v Speaker 1>get why she can't be an influencer. I love her.

0:19:20.640 --> 0:19:22.200
<v Speaker 1>I want to see what she's up to. I want

0:19:22.240 --> 0:19:23.840
<v Speaker 1>to see what brand deals she's choosing. I want to

0:19:23.840 --> 0:19:26.520
<v Speaker 1>see what makeup she's using, what skincare products are using.

0:19:26.600 --> 0:19:28.840
<v Speaker 1>But when you say influencer as well, it's not like

0:19:28.880 --> 0:19:31.520
<v Speaker 1>she's going to be spooking teeth, whitening or anything like that.

0:19:31.640 --> 0:19:33.800
<v Speaker 1>Though I know Fergie copped it at the time when

0:19:33.880 --> 0:19:35.480
<v Speaker 1>she went to the US and she was doing a

0:19:35.520 --> 0:19:37.840
<v Speaker 1>lot of brand deals. But I think Meghan's team are

0:19:37.880 --> 0:19:40.359
<v Speaker 1>going to be very careful about what products she promotes.

0:19:40.359 --> 0:19:42.639
<v Speaker 1>They'll be high end brands and it won't be consistently

0:19:42.720 --> 0:19:45.320
<v Speaker 1>every week she's spreaking something. It's not that she's an influencer,

0:19:45.359 --> 0:19:47.760
<v Speaker 1>it's just that she's a celebrity. And now the way

0:19:47.840 --> 0:19:51.680
<v Speaker 1>that celebrities do brand deals has changed Jennifer Aniston. Jennifer

0:19:51.680 --> 0:19:54.080
<v Speaker 1>Aniston's actually been doing quite a few brand deals, but

0:19:54.119 --> 0:19:56.720
<v Speaker 1>in a classy way. She cops a little bit for

0:19:56.760 --> 0:19:59.960
<v Speaker 1>having no idea about social media etiquette. The thing with Megan,

0:20:00.280 --> 0:20:02.760
<v Speaker 1>she's always been a massive style icon, so she could

0:20:02.800 --> 0:20:06.639
<v Speaker 1>easily be a fashion influencer quote unquote, I mean, you

0:20:06.680 --> 0:20:10.560
<v Speaker 1>see Jade, tun't she getting to promote designer brands? Surely

0:20:10.600 --> 0:20:15.240
<v Speaker 1>Megan could easily earn a lot of money promoting Louis Vuitton, Katier,

0:20:15.359 --> 0:20:17.520
<v Speaker 1>all of those brands and do it in a taste

0:20:17.520 --> 0:20:20.960
<v Speaker 1>away by posting really high fashion image. I just don't get.

0:20:21.040 --> 0:20:23.080
<v Speaker 1>I don't get people's point of saying, oh, because she

0:20:23.200 --> 0:20:25.719
<v Speaker 1>was a royal, she can't have an Instagram account just

0:20:25.720 --> 0:20:28.480
<v Speaker 1>because in the past, Like, yeah, Princess Darna didn't have

0:20:28.520 --> 0:20:30.280
<v Speaker 1>one because it wasn't around. I bet you she would

0:20:30.320 --> 0:20:31.720
<v Speaker 1>have jumped on there as soon as she left the

0:20:31.760 --> 0:20:34.080
<v Speaker 1>role fan. But the thing is, I think because they've

0:20:34.119 --> 0:20:37.120
<v Speaker 1>over exposed themselves so much with their doco and their

0:20:37.160 --> 0:20:39.639
<v Speaker 1>podcasts and all the things that come out in the media,

0:20:39.680 --> 0:20:42.280
<v Speaker 1>they have to be careful about how much of their life. Again,

0:20:42.320 --> 0:20:44.639
<v Speaker 1>they're just a regular celebrity in the sense of a

0:20:44.640 --> 0:20:47.960
<v Speaker 1>lot of the time celebrities get oversaturated. Look at the Kardashians. Yeah,

0:20:48.000 --> 0:20:49.840
<v Speaker 1>but there's a group of people who are always gonna

0:20:49.880 --> 0:20:53.360
<v Speaker 1>hate you, always gonna love it. How to influencer, People think, oh, well,

0:20:53.359 --> 0:20:56.520
<v Speaker 1>she's just gonna be like the influence of vologging her life. No, no,

0:20:56.560 --> 0:20:58.040
<v Speaker 1>that's not what she's gonna be. It's gonna be a

0:20:58.040 --> 0:21:02.399
<v Speaker 1>different caliber of influence. Even though apparently they have shared

0:21:02.440 --> 0:21:05.200
<v Speaker 1>too much, according to the critics, people are interested the

0:21:05.240 --> 0:21:07.640
<v Speaker 1>fact that there's an account called Meghan that's only got

0:21:07.640 --> 0:21:09.879
<v Speaker 1>a photo of flowers up and like fifty four thousand

0:21:09.880 --> 0:21:12.280
<v Speaker 1>people or whatever have followed her. It shows us huge

0:21:12.280 --> 0:21:15.240
<v Speaker 1>interest in her. I also personally haven't heard from Meghan

0:21:15.240 --> 0:21:16.840
<v Speaker 1>in a while. I've seen a lot of Harry, and

0:21:16.880 --> 0:21:19.440
<v Speaker 1>I think that that's been a really clever strategic move

0:21:19.520 --> 0:21:23.040
<v Speaker 1>because years ago it was it's all Megan's fault. But

0:21:23.119 --> 0:21:25.359
<v Speaker 1>now Harry has, you know, everyone saying his book is

0:21:25.400 --> 0:21:28.280
<v Speaker 1>called where and like making fun of him, which is horrible.

0:21:28.440 --> 0:21:30.359
<v Speaker 1>But at the same time everyone's thinking, oh, actually is

0:21:30.400 --> 0:21:33.560
<v Speaker 1>him who's complaining about her? She's doing what Any sort

0:21:33.560 --> 0:21:36.720
<v Speaker 1>of influence or a celebrity does when they get oversaturated.

0:21:36.760 --> 0:21:39.159
<v Speaker 1>She she's doing a Taylor swift. She's gone quiet, and

0:21:39.240 --> 0:21:41.800
<v Speaker 1>I do think we will see her return to Instagram

0:21:42.200 --> 0:21:44.520
<v Speaker 1>and sort of do a Kate Middleton in a way

0:21:44.840 --> 0:21:47.000
<v Speaker 1>and be silent but very stylish.

0:21:47.680 --> 0:21:50.439
<v Speaker 2>And I value my energy. I value present time with

0:21:50.480 --> 0:21:52.720
<v Speaker 2>my kids, I value going to the gym. I value

0:21:52.720 --> 0:21:53.240
<v Speaker 2>my sleep.

0:21:54.680 --> 0:21:57.480
<v Speaker 1>Ash Bienes has divided opinions during a Q and A

0:21:57.600 --> 0:22:01.399
<v Speaker 1>on her podcast Glow and Grow Influence. It was asked

0:22:01.440 --> 0:22:03.920
<v Speaker 1>by a listener if she would stay in her marriage

0:22:03.960 --> 0:22:07.440
<v Speaker 1>if her partner cheated on her. This was Ash's response.

0:22:08.000 --> 0:22:11.520
<v Speaker 2>I would take some responsibility into as to why he cheated,

0:22:11.680 --> 0:22:13.360
<v Speaker 2>Like I feel like people cheat when their needs aren't

0:22:13.359 --> 0:22:15.520
<v Speaker 2>getting met over a long period of time and is

0:22:15.960 --> 0:22:18.919
<v Speaker 2>lack of communications. I would take some responsibility, but I

0:22:18.920 --> 0:22:20.719
<v Speaker 2>feel like if I stayed, I would throw it back

0:22:20.760 --> 0:22:23.399
<v Speaker 2>in his face and I'm like heated or triggered and

0:22:23.440 --> 0:22:26.280
<v Speaker 2>they wouldn't be that trust there, so his life, I

0:22:26.280 --> 0:22:29.000
<v Speaker 2>don't feel like we'd be living our best, happiest lives.

0:22:29.000 --> 0:22:30.760
<v Speaker 1>It'd be hard to build up that trust again, to

0:22:30.800 --> 0:22:32.600
<v Speaker 1>fully trust them.

0:22:32.520 --> 0:22:34.840
<v Speaker 2>And open yourself up again to be hurt. So I

0:22:34.880 --> 0:22:35.720
<v Speaker 2>don't think so.

0:22:37.240 --> 0:22:38.840
<v Speaker 1>Oh, this is pretty funny. Poo in public?

0:22:39.640 --> 0:22:41.600
<v Speaker 2>What do you mean in a public toilet or just

0:22:41.680 --> 0:22:42.159
<v Speaker 2>in public?

0:22:43.119 --> 0:22:45.000
<v Speaker 1>So what do you guys think about Ash's comments? Do

0:22:45.040 --> 0:22:47.640
<v Speaker 1>you think it's your fault if someone cheats on you?

0:22:48.160 --> 0:22:50.320
<v Speaker 1>I was pretty shocked when I heard Ashy say this,

0:22:50.440 --> 0:22:52.840
<v Speaker 1>and I do not agree. I think that the person

0:22:52.840 --> 0:22:56.400
<v Speaker 1>who cheats is solely responsible for their behavior, not the partner.

0:22:56.760 --> 0:22:58.400
<v Speaker 1>And I think that there are a lot of things

0:22:58.400 --> 0:23:01.800
<v Speaker 1>that you can do if you're not happy relationship before cheating,

0:23:02.040 --> 0:23:04.560
<v Speaker 1>Like why don't you go to counseling, set some boundaries,

0:23:04.600 --> 0:23:06.680
<v Speaker 1>talk to your part I do get all that, And

0:23:06.920 --> 0:23:09.080
<v Speaker 1>hearing that quote back, you go, oh, wow, she's really

0:23:09.160 --> 0:23:11.800
<v Speaker 1>victim blaming the person who's been cheated on. But I

0:23:11.920 --> 0:23:14.199
<v Speaker 1>kind of understand where she's coming from in terms of

0:23:15.000 --> 0:23:17.280
<v Speaker 1>sometimes there are cases where someone just goes out and

0:23:17.320 --> 0:23:19.520
<v Speaker 1>cheats because they're a bloody dickhead. But then there are

0:23:19.520 --> 0:23:22.720
<v Speaker 1>sometimes cases where maybe people have been in a marriage

0:23:22.760 --> 0:23:25.280
<v Speaker 1>for thirty years and they're just not meeting each other's needs.

0:23:25.280 --> 0:23:27.760
<v Speaker 1>They might not be giving that person enough love or attention,

0:23:28.119 --> 0:23:31.000
<v Speaker 1>and so sometimes people go and seek out these emotional

0:23:31.040 --> 0:23:34.159
<v Speaker 1>affairs and it's not saying that it's that person's fault,

0:23:34.160 --> 0:23:36.719
<v Speaker 1>but it's clearly this breakdown of people. Actually, yes, but

0:23:36.760 --> 0:23:40.239
<v Speaker 1>the thing relations is cheating actually hurts someone, Whereas if

0:23:40.280 --> 0:23:42.919
<v Speaker 1>you're upfront and communicate that you're not happy on your

0:23:42.920 --> 0:23:45.680
<v Speaker 1>marriage and your needs aren't being met, then you can

0:23:45.720 --> 0:23:48.280
<v Speaker 1>work through that without going and cheating on the person.

0:23:48.480 --> 0:23:51.040
<v Speaker 1>I do think Ash's response is quite a female one,

0:23:51.080 --> 0:23:54.320
<v Speaker 1>because often female's default response is what did I do wrong?

0:23:54.359 --> 0:23:56.200
<v Speaker 1>And how can I make him love me again and

0:23:56.240 --> 0:23:59.439
<v Speaker 1>stop cheating? And it's total bullshit. Women should not be

0:23:59.680 --> 0:24:02.439
<v Speaker 1>taking responsibility if their partner cheats on that, but a

0:24:02.480 --> 0:24:05.119
<v Speaker 1>man as well. But what about the other scenarios. So

0:24:05.280 --> 0:24:07.440
<v Speaker 1>say there's a woman and you know, or even a

0:24:07.480 --> 0:24:10.520
<v Speaker 1>same sex relationship, what if their partners not providing all

0:24:10.520 --> 0:24:12.320
<v Speaker 1>the things that they need. I mean, my view is

0:24:12.320 --> 0:24:14.439
<v Speaker 1>that if you're not happy in a relationship, you should

0:24:14.440 --> 0:24:16.920
<v Speaker 1>just leave the relations Actually, you shouldn't cheat on somebody.

0:24:17.000 --> 0:24:19.359
<v Speaker 1>But that's exactly what I'm saying. I don't think that

0:24:19.359 --> 0:24:23.000
<v Speaker 1>there should be any scenario where your default is, oh, well,

0:24:23.040 --> 0:24:25.240
<v Speaker 1>I'm not getting enough from this relationship, so I'm just

0:24:25.280 --> 0:24:28.200
<v Speaker 1>going to cheat on this person. Like surely you can

0:24:28.240 --> 0:24:30.440
<v Speaker 1>just separate. Surely you can break up before you get

0:24:30.480 --> 0:24:32.840
<v Speaker 1>to that point where you want to explore a relationship

0:24:33.040 --> 0:24:36.520
<v Speaker 1>with someone else. I do agree that people need to

0:24:36.520 --> 0:24:40.000
<v Speaker 1>actually put effort into their relationships because I think what

0:24:40.040 --> 0:24:42.399
<v Speaker 1>you're getting at is that, you know, as soon as

0:24:42.440 --> 0:24:44.720
<v Speaker 1>people get married, maybe they don't go out on dates,

0:24:44.720 --> 0:24:48.120
<v Speaker 1>maybe they stop communicating. Lives get really busy, and people

0:24:48.200 --> 0:24:50.040
<v Speaker 1>might not put the same effort in as they did

0:24:50.040 --> 0:24:52.680
<v Speaker 1>when they first started dating. And I think that that's

0:24:52.720 --> 0:24:55.800
<v Speaker 1>where you need to be really good with communicating with

0:24:55.840 --> 0:24:57.800
<v Speaker 1>your partner that, hey, this is what I want from

0:24:57.800 --> 0:25:00.879
<v Speaker 1>our relationship and I'm not getting it on cheat on someone?

0:25:00.960 --> 0:25:03.400
<v Speaker 1>Do you think though, that you could get over somebody

0:25:03.520 --> 0:25:05.960
<v Speaker 1>cheating on you? Or is that just the end of relationship?

0:25:06.119 --> 0:25:09.760
<v Speaker 1>It's very circumstantial. I mean my instant reaction is no.

0:25:10.320 --> 0:25:12.600
<v Speaker 1>But in the past, have I taken someone back that

0:25:12.680 --> 0:25:15.600
<v Speaker 1>has cheated on me? Yes? And it was an extremely young,

0:25:15.720 --> 0:25:18.600
<v Speaker 1>toxic relationship where I was in the mindset like, oh,

0:25:18.680 --> 0:25:20.520
<v Speaker 1>what did I do wrong and how can I make

0:25:20.600 --> 0:25:24.000
<v Speaker 1>this person like me? But obviously that relationship was not

0:25:24.119 --> 0:25:26.600
<v Speaker 1>successful and I shouldn't have taken in back. What about

0:25:26.680 --> 0:25:29.639
<v Speaker 1>emotional versus physical cheating because I feel like a lot

0:25:29.680 --> 0:25:32.200
<v Speaker 1>of people have differing opinions on it. Would you rather

0:25:32.240 --> 0:25:34.280
<v Speaker 1>find out that your partner was having an emotional or

0:25:34.280 --> 0:25:37.359
<v Speaker 1>physical effort? Again, I think it's very circumstantial and like

0:25:37.400 --> 0:25:40.760
<v Speaker 1>where you are in your relationship, like we were talking about,

0:25:40.760 --> 0:25:43.280
<v Speaker 1>if you're not putting effort into your relationship, you're not

0:25:43.320 --> 0:25:47.879
<v Speaker 1>actually spending time together or communicating. You could kind of,

0:25:47.920 --> 0:25:50.640
<v Speaker 1>in a sense understand why someone would feel the need

0:25:50.680 --> 0:25:53.200
<v Speaker 1>to get an emotional connection with someone else. Again, you

0:25:53.200 --> 0:25:55.439
<v Speaker 1>would hope that person would actually bring it up with

0:25:55.560 --> 0:25:57.800
<v Speaker 1>you before they got to that stage. I think the

0:25:57.840 --> 0:26:01.560
<v Speaker 1>emotional affairs are often more dangerous because for men, if

0:26:01.560 --> 0:26:04.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm just talking about heterosetrical relationships, I feel like for men,

0:26:04.920 --> 0:26:07.520
<v Speaker 1>sometimes they can just go out and sex isn't a

0:26:07.600 --> 0:26:09.320
<v Speaker 1>huge thing for them. Obviously it is when they've got

0:26:09.359 --> 0:26:12.439
<v Speaker 1>a partner, but sometimes it's actually more of a threat

0:26:12.480 --> 0:26:15.400
<v Speaker 1>to your relationship the emotional side of things, Like if

0:26:15.400 --> 0:26:17.600
<v Speaker 1>someone's having an emotional affair with somebody at work, I

0:26:17.640 --> 0:26:21.200
<v Speaker 1>would actually find that more threatening almost well, I mean,

0:26:21.240 --> 0:26:23.760
<v Speaker 1>it just depends what you're willing to accept. I mean, oh,

0:26:23.800 --> 0:26:26.520
<v Speaker 1>I don't think that you would accept your partner physically

0:26:26.560 --> 0:26:29.639
<v Speaker 1>cheating or not either. So I would if anyone cheated

0:26:29.680 --> 0:26:31.720
<v Speaker 1>on me, I would dump them immediately. I suppose it's like,

0:26:31.760 --> 0:26:35.119
<v Speaker 1>what would you find worse the emotional or physical cheating question.

0:26:35.720 --> 0:26:37.879
<v Speaker 1>It's hard because I think your initial reaction is that

0:26:37.920 --> 0:26:40.240
<v Speaker 1>you would find the physical cheating worse because it would

0:26:40.280 --> 0:26:42.560
<v Speaker 1>be awful to think about your partner doing that with

0:26:42.600 --> 0:26:46.520
<v Speaker 1>someone else. But then again, I suppose from a deeper level,

0:26:46.680 --> 0:26:48.639
<v Speaker 1>it would be kind of offensive to know that your

0:26:48.640 --> 0:26:51.639
<v Speaker 1>partner had built this emotional relationship with someone that was

0:26:51.680 --> 0:26:53.800
<v Speaker 1>deep and they were It kind of seems like the

0:26:53.840 --> 0:26:56.639
<v Speaker 1>emotional affair is more based on the fact that they

0:26:56.760 --> 0:26:59.960
<v Speaker 1>found someone that they're more suited to, whereas a fear

0:27:00.000 --> 0:27:02.960
<v Speaker 1>physical affair seems like it was spare of the moment

0:27:03.000 --> 0:27:06.080
<v Speaker 1>and it was just sexual attraction. Well, I think that's

0:27:06.119 --> 0:27:08.200
<v Speaker 1>all we've got time for today. Thank you so much

0:27:08.240 --> 0:27:12.080
<v Speaker 1>for listening to another episode of Outspoken. This podcast was

0:27:12.119 --> 0:27:14.600
<v Speaker 1>recorded on the traditional land of the Ghana people of

0:27:14.640 --> 0:27:17.560
<v Speaker 1>the Adelaide Planes. We pay respect to elders past and present,

0:27:17.720 --> 0:27:19.760
<v Speaker 1>and if you do like the podcast, please leave us

0:27:19.760 --> 0:27:20.240
<v Speaker 1>a review.