TomKat, for those of you who weren’t around back then, was the celebrity portmanteau for Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes who told Seventeen magazine in 2004 that “I used to think I was going to marry Tom Cruise” and then actually started dating him about six months later in the spring of 2005. Their child, Suri, was born a year after that in April 2006 and they were married six months after that in November 2006 in Italy. TomKat was one of the biggest celebrity stories of the 2000s. I’m sure I don’t have to revisit all the reasons why.
They were married for almost six years. And then, suddenly, on Friday June 29, 2012, news broke that Katie had filed for divorce, apparently blindsiding Tom who was filming in Europe at the time. There were rumours about burner phones and secret meetings, and an eventual extrication. Basically it seemed like Katie went full ninja to reclaim her freedom. From what? Well the prevailing assumption is that she was rescuing herself and her daughter from the Church of Scientology.
So the divorce was handled quickly and in the years since, neither Katie or Tom have really talked about what happened. All we know is that Katie has full custody of Suri and that Tom never sees her. For some reason though, the Daily Mail this week has published multiple stories about TomKat, leading on Monday with this “exclusive” about how Suri, now 16, is applying to college and Tom “won’t get a say in where she goes because he has no part in her life”.
OK but we already knew that he has no part in her life. So why would he get a f-cking say in where she goes to college?
The Daily Mail says they have a “source close to Katie” who is telling them all this sh-t which… WHYYYYY would a source close to Katie Holmes, who has done nothing but try to distance herself from Tom Cruise, want the Daily Mail of all f-cking publications to put a microscope on her daughter’s life? Katie, for the most part, has protected Suri from the heat. She isn’t out here doing brand partnerships with her kid, she doesn’t share much about her kid on social media, like in comparison to other celebrities who seem more like talent agents for their children, Katie keeps is pretty low-key with Suri. So I’m side-eying this source and this story…
Because I can’t understand why Katie would want this leaked.
But it is interesting that the Daily Mail, in subsequent stories this week, seems to be leaning into the estrangement between Tom and Suri. He’s not seen his child in ten years – not since Katie Houdini-ed herself out of his orbit. He pays child support until she’s 18 though, in the amount of $30K+ a month, for a total of just under $400K a year, plus other medical and required expenses. And apparently he’ll be paying for her college education.
So is the takeaway here supposed to be how unfair it is for him that he doesn’t get to see his daughter even though he’s writing all the cheques?
As we know, Tom spends more time in London than anywhere else these days. So it’s possible that he’s developed a cozy relationship with the British tabloid media. And if that’s the case, then for whatever reason, has the Daily Mail decided to take up his crusade and portray him in a positive light? Because, again, there literally is zero benefit to Katie to have this out there, to have people revisiting her TomKat era. She quit that life, she has no interest in being associated with it.
What, then, is the play here? Why is the Daily Mail bringing up sh-t that was already public knowledge (most people are already quite aware that Tom and Suri have no relationship) and giving it a new twist? Who does it benefit?
Attached – Katie Holmes out in New York the other day.
