Brad Pitt

so Rhe, all those PPD mothers who have had not so charitable things to say about how they feel about their newborns should also stay silent? By speaking out about it PPD has become much more accessible and women can ge the help they need. Being a mom is not all madnonnas and halos 24/7. I think AJ is being honest and yes sometime down the line should Shiloh read those comments it may hurt but she'll probably understand the sentiment behind it. I think a lot of people are reading a lot into that quote.
Originally Posted by FreeCurls
I agree. She could have worded it better, yes. But her feelings are her feelings and she has a right to express them as best she can. As for Shiloh growing up and reading that and being traumatized, I seriously doubt it. It is one statement among days and months of love, I think those days and months of nurturing will far far outweigh one comment a reporter made and she laughingly agreed with.
Democracy is not a spectator sport.

You know why pandas are endangered? Cause pandas ain't got no game.

Jesus loves you, but I'm his favorite.
plus she could have been misquoted in that she was joking or being sarcastic or whatever and it was then relayed as a serious statement.
I'm really not looking for a reason to explain away the comment but I am open to the quote itself being portrayed inaccurately.
Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce & FreeCurls


Plus, her adopted kids are children of color. Their lives will never be as easy as Shiloh's, even with all the money in the world. I think she knows that.
Originally Posted by medussa
Exactly. You're on to something there. There's so much media attention on Shiloh's good genes and how "beautiful" she must end up being, and the media make sure they refer to M and Z as adopted (like there was any doubt), almost treating them like charity cases, and treating them as if they are "exotic", to recall that thread. Look at the huge difference in the way the media treat Isabella and Connor (the kids Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman adopted) and Suri. Did M and Z or I and C ever have photo shoots even approaching the hype Suri and Shiloh got? Nor do the bio kids of celebrities of colour generate that kind of hype, no matter how cute they are (Will and Jada's kids!)
Originally Posted by Amneris
I agree except for the bolded. They beautiful genes thing comes from Brad and Angelina being beautiful(at least on the outside) people, not because they are white. I have heard a lot in the news about how cute M and Z are too.
I didn't think she meant it that way. I took it to mean: Without a doubt, the second Shiloh was conceived (let alone born) she was a blessed child. She will always have the best medical care, food in her tummy, a nice heated/cooled roof over her head. The chance for a good education, and many luxuries in life most of us dream of. Her other two most likely would not have had these things had they not been adopted by her (or someone so rich, lucky, whatever). It doesn't mean they wouldn't have had a good life, just maybe not as 'easy'. I don't think she loves Shiloh less, or wants her less, I think she just meant, in the big picture of life, the other two are 'special'. Out of ALL the children anywhere in the world, that weren't born 'blessed', these two got 'lucky'. Just by conception (from THOSE two parents), Shiloh was born 'lucky' and blessed.

I'm not a huge AJ fan, trust me, but I just didn't think she meant it as it's being taken - just my opinion.
Handle every stressful situation like a dog. If you can't eat it or hump it.....Piss on it and walk away.
Location - WI
so Rhe, all those PPD mothers who have had not so charitable things to say about how they feel about their newborns should also stay silent? By speaking out about it PPD has become much more accessible and women can ge the help they need. Being a mom is not all madnonnas and halos 24/7. I think AJ is being honest and yes sometime down the line should Shiloh read those comments it may hurt but she'll probably understand the sentiment behind it. I think a lot of people are reading a lot into that quote.
Originally Posted by FreeCurls
I agree. She could have worded it better, yes. But her feelings are her feelings and she has a right to express them as best she can. As for Shiloh growing up and reading that and being traumatized, I seriously doubt it. It is one statement among days and months of love, I think those days and months of nurturing will far far outweigh one comment a reporter made and she laughingly agreed with.
Originally Posted by gekko422
I agree too.
I think he looks great..a little older and more settled looking, like a dad. Consider that he and George Clooney are close to each other in age. Angeline looks frighteningly bony.
My blog - http://suburbanbushbabe.wordpress.com/
My FOTKI - http://whatsnew.fotki.com/suburbanbushbabe/


Playing with my hair is a hobby. Fluffy, fine natural 4a. Goal= Healthy, beautiful hair that retains its length.
Quote:
Hear that crash? It's me falling off the CG wagon.
so Rhe, all those PPD mothers who have had not so charitable things to say about how they feel about their newborns should also stay silent? By speaking out about it PPD has become much more accessible and women can ge the help they need. Being a mom is not all madnonnas and halos 24/7. I think AJ is being honest and yes sometime down the line should Shiloh read those comments it may hurt but she'll probably understand the sentiment behind it. I think a lot of people are reading a lot into that quote.
Originally Posted by FreeCurls
I think it is totally different though. Does Angelina have PPD? I haven't read anything saying so. No doubt she will blame that comment on it if she gets totally flamed for saying it. I still stand by my belief that I think she shouldn't have said that. No doubt one comment won't cause a child to feel unloved, but sometimes one comment DOES change how someone feels, especially when it came from their parents about them. I can remember times when one hurtful thing was said to me or about me and it has always affected either how I feel about the person who said it, or how I even feel about myself...

I *do* understand the difference, as 2happy explained, and how her child wasn't the same as the adopted kids, but I still think she didn't have to say it publicly. It just isn't the same as PPD to me.
plus she could have been misquoted in that she was joking or being sarcastic or whatever and it was then relayed as a serious statement.
I'm really not looking for a reason to explain away the comment but I am open to the quote itself being portrayed inaccurately.
Originally Posted by FreeCurls
I can see that too. I know it is unfair and we've been over this (not you and I specifically, but "we" as in the people on this board...), but celebrities need to watch what they say double. Yes, she should have worded it better... she could have meant it differently, but when you're famous and you say something the least bit 'controversial,' it will be out there for everyone to read, ya know? Like it or not, it's just part of the price of fame.
I thought he looked great for a change. I'm not necessarily a big Brad Pitt fan, but I have thought the last few years he went out of his way to look bad. . . messy and scruffy. If this is what Angelina has done for him, good for her. I liked the cleaned up Brad look. Thought they made a gorgeous couple. . . and I LOVED her dress!
3b/c
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,210
medussa wrote:


Plus, her adopted kids are children of color. Their lives will never be as easy as Shiloh's, even with all the money in the world. I think she knows that.
Exactly.
Originally Posted by Amneris
Hey, I was born in 1980, 15 years after 1965 when the world was a LOT different. A LOT has changed during my years, and let's hope that a lot more will change for the next generation. Let's not automatically assume their lives are going to be WAY more difficult. Let's HOPE that they aren't.

If anything, Angelina's adopted kids MIGHT have a better work ethic after realizing where they came from.

Feeling differently about your biological children vs. your adopted children is probably one of the reasons people are afraid to adopt. By making such a big deal about Angelina's comment, maybe we are making adoption more taboo. Maybe there are some things that we shouldn't talk about (if we're a celeb that everybody listens to)?
Yeah I've actually read something like that into things after seeing recent pictures of them. I often wonder if they hooked up because they were sort of considered the hottest male and hottest female by many, so they found commonality there or it fit their egos. There's so much you can read in. But I agree with the spirit of CGNYC editing her post, as well as her original post.

They could be tired as they're new parents, but something along the lines of what the OP mentions courses through my mind sometimes. Piecing together stranger's lives is always going to be hit and miss, and the inability to know which one you're doing takes the motivation to do it away.
“It was only a sunny smile and little it cost in the giving but like morning light it scattered the night and made the day worth living.” - F. Scott Fitzgerald
It just isn't the same as PPD to me.
Originally Posted by Rheanna83
Isn't that feeling of detachment one of the definers of PPD?
I can completely understand, and sympathize with someone who would have feelings of attachment to their child. I also wouldn't judge someone who had PPD and felt distanced from their newborn. It's a horrible thing to go through, and not a fun experience for the new mom. However, that doesn't mean she should be comparing her feelings for her biological child to those of her adoptive ones. She IS going to feel differently at the beginning - maybe even some resentment b/c the biological child came to her more difficultly than the other two, but to say that she's more inclined to feel for the other two just isn't fair. It would be one thing if this was her only child, but to compare them is not right.


Frankly I'm so sick of these two and their "we're too good looking to smile" expressions they have in every photo.
~ the artist formerly known as babywavy ~

Please excuse any typos. For the time being, we are blaming it on my computer.
Feeling for and loving are not the same thing. I took her quote to mean that she has a bit more "heart tug" for the two adopted children b/c of how hard they had it before they came to her and b/c of how much people try to marginalize them. I noticed from the moment the baby was born, the media stopped referrring to M & Z as their son and daughter and started qualifiying it with "adopted." I've never read an interview where either parent has used that qualifier. I think she knows she's going to have to be more vigilant in terms of how others treat her two oldest children and have to work a little harder with them to make sure they know they are just as valued by her parents as their sister. Society will always be out there telling them that they're not as "good" b/c they are not as genetically "lucky" or biologically related to their mother and father.

I think it's going overboard to say she's said or meant she loves the newest child any less. My girlfriend who've had children have pretty much all said, their newborns weren't all that interesting for a while aside from the "lookie what we did/made" aspect. I'd rather she be honest than do the whole everything is lollipops and roses, my perfect baby sleeps through the night, I got my figure back in two weeks without any help lie that so many others do.
I However, that doesn't mean she should be comparing her feelings for her biological child to those of her adoptive ones. She IS going to feel differently at the beginning - maybe even some resentment b/c the biological child came to her more difficultly than the other two, but to say that she's more inclined to feel for the other two just isn't fair. It would be one thing if this was her only child, but to compare them is not right.


Frankly I'm so sick of these two and their "we're too good looking to smile" expressions they have in every photo.
Originally Posted by babywavy
That is how I feel, Even if this statement doesn't cause great psycholigical harm to the child, its not going to feel good. As a parent famous or not, your job is to make your child feel secure, and cared for.

And seriously why don't they smile? It doesn't make sense, getting their picture taken is their job, why act like its such a bother? I like celebrities that seem to have appreciate what is expected of them.
~~jax
2c or 3a Cut most of my hair off in July '12 and am working on regrowing it.
It just isn't the same as PPD to me.
Originally Posted by Rheanna83
Isn't that feeling of detachment one of the definers of PPD?
Originally Posted by Munchy
I'm sure that it is, but I don't think that is the case here, as babywavy explained better than I can... What it comes down to for me is that I can see how she would feel that way, and I see now that she didn't say she "loved" the other kids more, just that she felt more for them (maybe she should have used the word 'empathesize' instead of 'feel'?) but I still don't think it is right or fair to say what she said. I'm not going to change my opinion of that, and I'm not sure why it is getting picked on so much about it really... I've seen lots of people who are mothers, and even those who have experienced PPD and the feelings of detachment that come along with PPD, who have agreed that it isn't a smart thing to say what she said, especially since she is famous. If she is suffering from PPD and is trying to speak out about this condition, then fine, but I really don't think that is the case here.

I don't get this whole bandwagon of defending celebrities really. What baffles me is that we bash them for their looks (something they can't help) and then defend them for their stupidity (something they can). It makes no sense to me, and this isn't directed to you, Munchy, just throwing it out there. As far as Angelina goes, I don't feel sorry for her. I just don't. If she has PPD, then yes, I feel bad for that. But it doesn't look/sound like PPD to me in the least, and it isn't the same as speaking out about a condition that so many women deal with. I'm sure that this will end up getting blamed on PPD, even if it isn't the case in the least. Just as every stupid thing celebrities say gets blamed on alcoholism or drug abuse when it isn't always the case, either. She never said she felt detached or that she didn't love Shiloh, and she doesn't seem that way from her comments either. I guess I'm cruel in how I feel about her, but I don't feel sorry for her. She is a loon, totally aside from this comment, and I just don't see that she is some wonderful and amazing person. Her comment about the expense of raising kids didn't sit well with me either, honestly. I mean, my God... I hardly think her money supply will run low. That is a perfectly legit comment from a normal & average person, but Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt not having the money to raise a 4th kid? C'mon. If she doesn't want to have another child, fine. I don't care in the least, but to say that they were costly or however she worded it? C'mon.

I can't believe I'm getting this riled up over a celebrity that I pretty much don't give two ****s about .
I However, that doesn't mean she should be comparing her feelings for her biological child to those of her adoptive ones. She IS going to feel differently at the beginning - maybe even some resentment b/c the biological child came to her more difficultly than the other two, but to say that she's more inclined to feel for the other two just isn't fair. It would be one thing if this was her only child, but to compare them is not right.


Frankly I'm so sick of these two and their "we're too good looking to smile" expressions they have in every photo.
Originally Posted by babywavy
That is how I feel, Even if this statement doesn't cause great psycholigical harm to the child, its not going to feel good. As a parent famous or not, your job is to make your child feel secure, and cared for.

And seriously why don't they smile? It doesn't make sense, getting their picture taken is their job, why act like its such a bother? I like celebrities that seem to have appreciate what is expected of them.
~~jax
Originally Posted by Jaxie
That's what I'm trying to say too. I don't think it is fair how we expect more from celebrities, but I think they are well paid for the price of it all really. They need to realize that saying something dumb will be out there, and therefore they do have to watch what they say moreso than any Jane Doe out there... And I do think it would hurt me to know that. I have a family member who's mom wanted to abort her and it gets to her decades later, feeling like she wasn't wanted. That's the same type situation... I can understand her mom feeling that way, but I don't think her mom should have said it. Same as Angelina.
After All That Goodness, a Sudden Fall From Grace
By CARYN JAMES

Before she set a toe on the red carpet at the Golden Globes last week, Angelina Jolie’s carefully molded image as humanitarian and mom was already showing some cracks. The Internet had been flooded with reports, picked up from European interviews, that she had called her biological daughter “a blob” with less personality than her two adopted kids, and had criticized Madonna’s adoption of a baby boy from Malawi. Women’s Wear Daily reported she was being difficult about designs from St. John, the staid company whose ads she appears in and whose conservatively elegant gown she wore to the Globes.

By the time she reached the end of a haughty, humorless walk down that red carpet on Brad Pitt’s arm, the Good Angelina image had crumbled to dust. In the next days columnists from The Washington Post to LA Weekly attacked her for a television interview with Ryan Seacrest on E! that made it clear she was above such drivel. His red carpet questions were drivel, but that was no reason to sneer the words “Cereal, we made cereal” when asked how the family had spent the morning.

Video of the interview was spread and ridiculed on Web sites like TMZ and YouTube; Mr. Seacrest complained about her on his radio show; the current issue of Us Weekly reported on more behavior fit for a queen in an article headlined “An Angelina Backlash?” There was really no need for the question mark.

Once famous as a tattooed wild woman, Ms. Jolie has soared to the saintly realm and plummeted again in record time. Madonna, her only rival in shape-shifting, has maintained the devoted wife and mother image for more than six years now, despite her recent adventures in adoption. Good Angelina didn’t even last two. That shattered image, a lesson in the limits of spin, is the product of a lethal combination: a public that never bought into the reformed persona and a star who may have bought into it too much.

The backlash had been building all along, and not simply because, while married to Billy Bob Thornton, she wore a vial of his blood around her neck. (No fair blaming the press for her vampirish image.) She adopted her son, Maddox, from Cambodia just before that marriage broke up, and has always seemed sincere about motherhood. But from the minute her name was linked to Mr. Pitt’s, there was plenty of snickering at her claim that they were just friends while filming “Mr. and Mrs. Smith,” when he was married to Jennifer Aniston. Only the Jolie-Pitts know the truth; let’s just say the public remains skeptical. Once they became an acknowledged couple, Ms. Jolie assumed a saintly manner, deglamorizing to the point of wearing a bandanna on her head for a “Today” interview while visiting orphans in Africa; did she think viewers wouldn’t spot her cat’s-eye makeup and heavily glossed lips?

Such doubts about the noble Angelina accelerated especially fast over the last month. In the January issue of Vogue, talking about how her relationship with Mr. Pitt developed, she restated that they were “very, very good friends” for a long time, sounding as disingenuous as ever. And she added, “It was clear he was with his best friend,” which on the surface is matter-of-fact, yet manages to desexualize Ms. Aniston. Venom in the guise of kindness?

The new Us Weekly article reports that Ms. Jolie was “a nightmare” during the Vogue photo shoot with Annie Leibovitz; that she pushed through a crowd at the premiere of “God Grew Tired of Us,” a do-gooder documentary about the lost boys of Sudan that Mr. Pitt helped produce; and that she coolly pulled him away from a conversation with Courtney Cox Arquette, Ms. Aniston’s close friend, at the Golden Globes. Even if some of those incidents are exaggerated, the backlash is real. A kitschy painting of Ms. Jolie as the Virgin Mary holding her children and hovering saintlike above a Wal-Mart, a work too banal to be half-good as satire, made a media splash when it was shown at Art Miami 2007.

The backlash isn’t entirely her fault. The press helped it along by playing fast and loose with her quotations, gleefully picking up the Shiloh-is-a-blob comment without context. In the full interview in British Elle, when Ms. Jolie hesitated in describing her newborn daughter, the reporter suggested the word blob. Ms. Jolie foolishly responded: “Yes, a blob! But now she’s starting to have a personality.”

In response to a question about Madonna, she did tell the French magazine Gala that adoptions are illegal in Malawi and, “I prefer to stay on the right side of the law.” You can almost hear her coo her superiority as she says it, and you can almost hear anyone who reads it thinking, “Witch.” But her first response was to say that the happiness of Madonna’s child is all that matters; most second-hand reports made that seem like an afterthought.

Still, at best her own bumbling led her to this state. At worst, blame her self-importance. When she was interviewed on the Globes red carpet for “Access Hollywood,” she was shown an old clip of herself jumping into a swimming pool fully clothed after the 1999 awards, not exactly a tough reminder of her wild past. Yet New Angelina seemed royally unamused. And while she looked ultra-glamorous at the premiere of her latest film, “The Good Shepherd,” the perfectly upswept hair and self-contained demeanor of her recent appearances have also made her seem plastic.

In part she is suffering from a common problem: movie stars who make too few movies and are forced to coast on their fame. In “The Good Shepherd,” as the wife of a buttoned-down C.I.A. agent (Matt Damon), she goes from vibrant young femme fatale to brittle, middle-aged alcoholic. It’s a fine performance but a minor part. Her next film, “A Mighty Heart,” isn’t scheduled to arrive until June. That leading role might help restore her saintly image; she plays Marianne Pearl, whose husband, Daniel, was kidnapped and murdered while reporting in Pakistan.

But as Ms. Jolie’s horrific month has shown, reshaping an image is harder than you might think. Despite the charity work and the bun on her head, the burning question all along has been: Who is that woman in the St. John suit, and what has she done with Angelina Jolie?
Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce & FreeCurls


Trending Topics


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2011 NaturallyCurly.com