Gwyneth Paltrow Is Consciously Uncoupling From Her Lifestyle Brand, Goop

The patron saint of meticulously instructing her maid to double-seal her imported bags of organic Chia seeds, Gwyneth Paltrow, is leaving Goop. The “Shallow Hal” star and doting mother of a human child tragically named Apple has been running the lifestyle brand Goop since she first released the newsletter in 2008, but now she’s decided to set her sights elsewhere.

During her speech at the 2016 Sage Conference (possibly the most Goop event imaginable) this week, Paltrow revealed her plans to consciously uncouple (a term she coined) herself from the brand, revealing that she believes the brand’s continued growth is dependent on her separating herself from its image. This admission, although possibly a necessary step for the inevitable world domination of her basic-yet-niche brand that recommends readers purchase $300 cable-knit cashmere turtlenecks, seems depressingly self-aware and off-brand. After all, this is a woman who once non-ironically told a talk show host, “I’d rather smoke crack than eat cheese from a tin.” Yes, really.

What harrowing self-realization has caused her to connect the dots and accept that her public image might be hurting the brand? And what’s more, is there anything remotely interesting about Goop’s brand of lily-white organic preferences once the endearingly faux-spiritual Paltrow is removed from it.

In what I imagine was an assembly full of people who smelled of hand-picked lavender, Paltrow shared her decision to divorce her image from the brand, saying:

“So I always think, ‘How can I grow the brand? How can I separate myself from the brand?’ And I think its going to be more its own brand. More and more I would like it to be its own brand — my dream is that one day no one will remember that I had anything to do with it.”

You heard the woman, she wants us to forget she ever composed a holiday wish list that included $15,000 dumbbells, a $42 condom dispenser (because sometimes condoms are really hard to pick up with human hands), and a $1,621 tank for JELLYFISH. You know, all the silently suffering jellyfish in your home that have been needing an upgraded home.

Really though, my main question is why would she want us to forget about her association with Goop? Goop is nothing without Paltrow. Without the quotability and inexplicably endearing, out-of-touch elitism that is a cornerstone to her persona, Goop is just another nameless catalog for Manhattan socialites cruising for the latest $244 dollar toothpaste squeezer. Everything that has succeeded about Goop is because of Paltrow’s antics, not despite them, and while I can conceptually comprehend her decision to let the brand float on its own, it might be a mistake.

Goodbye, sweet money-soaked Paltrow. And godspeed to the 12 Goop employees sweating it out in a converted barn in California.