Weekend question I
On October 16 Matt Lauer interviewed Angelina Jolie on NBC’s Today Show re: her new film, Changeling. The full interview is below, but there were a couple spots to investigate others’ thoughts on.
The first came when Jolie described her character in Changeling, at 4:06 in the video…
She reminds of my mom, not my mother just by the way she looks, but there there was something about my mother’s face and the kindness and the warmth and the openness and the frailty, where she wasn’t this modern woman that I am with the confidence maybe that I’m able to have.
She was shyer and she was more feminine in a certain way, and there’s something so beautiful about that that the modern woman feels we should maybe not – we should stay away from a little bit because we want to be so strong. But there is so beautiful and lovely about a natural soft woman mother that I felt – was very pleased to play.
Do you agree modern women have lost or are afraid to display their feminism, ironically thanks to the feminist movement?
The second came Laurer probed Jolie/Pitt’s plans for more children. They currently are parents to 3 biological and 3 adopting children. Look for this segment at 11:13 in the video:
Lauer: And you’ve talked about having more children, adding to the group, would you consider adopting again? Yeah? Do you have anything in mind?
Jolie: Yeah.
Lauer: Come on [laughing], “yeah,” yeah period. Is it something you’d do soon?
Jolie: It depends. I mean it’s important – you can’t adopt – you can’t even start the process until any new children are 6 months old to understand how the new family has settled to see what you can absorb into your new family. And I think it’s a smart thing anyway, to understand, you know, when it’s the right time to bring another child in.
What are your thoughts on Pitt/Jolie’s large brood and plans to add to the brood? If you’re favorable to their adopting, would you have the same inclination if they added natural children instead or in addition to adopted children? Large families are no longer the norm in American culture. Do you find Jolie/Pitt’s large family intriguing or with merit?
Here’s the interview:
[HT: proofreader Laura Loo]; photo of Jolie, courtesy of The Improper, taken on October 4 in NY, is of 2 new tattoos displaying the longitudinal and latitudinal location where twins Knox and Vivienne were born in France under the birth locations of her other 4 children]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I’d be a lot more impressed if she and Brad Pitt would stop shacking up and actually get married.
Honestly, I don’t care. They have 6 children, but a large amount of the time they’re off shooting in different parts of the world. I’m pretty sure a lot of the actual raising of the children is done by hire. At the same time, if they adopt, a kid could do way worse than nanny care paid for by Pitt and Jolie.
Erin do you think Palin has some nanny care for her kids? What do you think is more work and more time consuming, making a movie or running a political campaign?
In a lot of ways I feel I am strong, I’m able to take care of myself, I don’t need a man, a husband. I would like one though, if the right guy ever came along. It’s hard though, my Dad is such a wonderful man, a wonderful father and I would want my kids to have what I had, such a wonderful family. I can guarantee that I will do my part but it’s hard. People aren’t always honest and you have to put yourself out there and hope that you find a man who’s strong enough to be true, strong enough to be good to you.
Honestly, I don’t care. They have 6 children, but a large amount of the time they’re off shooting in different parts of the world. I’m pretty sure a lot of the actual raising of the children is done by hire. At the same time, if they adopt, a kid could do way worse than nanny care paid for by Pitt and Jolie.
Posted by: Erin at October 18, 2008 10:53 AM
————————————————
I have seen nothing to indicate that they leave the raising of their brood to a nanny. They appear to be very hands on parents.
As a mother of six, I think it is great to see large families portrayed positively. They would get more flack, however, if all six were biologically theirs… there is a certain amount of slack in the MSM for having “rescued” three of their children from being orphans who would likely have become street children.
First off, I can’t stand either of these two people. I’m not impressed with Pitt who simply abandoned Jennifer Aniston and Jolie is creepy weird. Maybe she’s straightened out but I see the possibility of a future where she has 8 or 9 kids and is on her own. I hope not, but this seems to be the way in Hollywood.
Like Allison, I’d at least find them tolerable IF they got married.
I have to admit though, that the pregnancies and children seem to be softening Angelina based on her recent comments about Brad and the children. In fact, she unknowingly has come to realize some basic “theology of the body” concepts. John Paul II would be proud.
Angelina’s actor-father is strongly pro-life. I’m praying for the day that Brad, Angelina, or one of their children become a pro-life advocate. Now, that would be something.
If you want a big family, have a big family. More power to you.
My boyfriend and I are planning on 32 kids–that’s 31 boys (men in his family can only have boys–a genetic defect) and an adopted daughter. :)
Re:feminism
Women who shame other women away from displaying “femininity” (however one chooses to define that) are not feminists. They are an embarrassment. Can’t women be whoever they want and do whatever they want? Isn’t that the point?
Patricia: I gained a lot of respect for Brad Pitt as an actor after I saw Fight Club (for its philosophical value, of course), though I think he has freaky pelvis muscles. As for his personal life, I honestly couldn’t care less.
I have a friend who called JP II “the REAL Pope,” as though Benedict did him some huge wrong. She’s hilarious.
Femininity is a societally-constructed concept that has no value to me whatsoever. I am who I am, regardless of my genitals. If you want to go with what society traditionally defines as feminine, go, do. I don’t care. Just don’t force it on people, for the love of the gods.
Ditto big families. Personally, I would feel different if she had that many natural children: I think it’s a waste. There are so many children in the world without loving homes that I don’t understand the need to go out and procreate for no other reason than wanting to spread your genetics around.
I find the hero worship of these two very disturbing. First of all, Brad was married when he and Angelina began their affair.
Secondly, they refuse to get married. Brad has said he will get married when gays are allowed to get married everywhere.
Neither of the above impress me.
Human, how do you rectify that with the concept that some people of one sex feel they are “really” the other. If there is no difference, then why would transgenderism exist?
Either gender is a social construct and transgenders are reacting to the social construct and not biology, or gender is innate and transgenders are innately the wrong gender.
Thoughts?
gender is not a social construct: it is a reflection of God “who made them male and female”
We are complementary to one another and as such are a reflection of the Triune God.
“I am who I am, regardless of my genitals.”
No you are who you are BECAUSE of your genitals. Your femininity/masculinity is reflection of who you are – your body is an expression of who you are whether you like it or not.
And, children are NEVER a waste. Shame on you for having this view. How terribly intolerant.
Sex is the biological and physiological reflection of an XY or an XX chromosome: genitals, secondary sexual characteristics, etc. It’s perfectly possible to feel that you’re a different sex, and maintain that gender, which is the socially-sanctioned ‘performance’ of that sex, is entirely arbitrary. For example, having a penis is a sex characteristic. Not expressing emotion is a stereotypical socially-sanctioned personality trait associated with that sex, i.e. gender.
Unless you can prove that gender is more than a social construct, patricia, I’m not inclined to particularly care about your views. I’m not Christian, and while I believe that the Christian God exists, I’m not a fan. His views aren’t at all important to mine.
People are complimentary to each other based upon personality characteristics; occasionally the genitals of those people are also complimentary. My body can be an expression of who I am, but my personality isn’t based around my vagina. It’s far more complex than that. I choose to have tattoos, and in that way, my body is an expression of who I am. My breasts, however, are a physiological expression of my sex chromosomes, and aren’t tied to my personality at all.
Like I said, choose to have however many children you want. I, personally, believe that having biological children into the double digits is ridiculous, as it harms the environment, and is essentially saying: “Nyeh, sorry orphans across the world. My desire to have children who bear some of my genes is far more important than your desire to have a loving family.”
I don’t care if you have kids; I understand its a biological imperative that’s difficult to resist. But, don’t whine when I follow my own biological imperatives. You don’t get it both ways.
And seriously, shame on me? Are you my mother?
I’m not Christian, and while I believe that the Christian God exists, I’m not a fan. His views aren’t at all important to mine.
Too bad Human A. because your views ARE important to God.
And people’s experience proves that gender is not a social construct. You cannot take a person who is genetically a woman and make them a man – as Tracy Beattie so aptly demonstrated this year. Men and women are complimentary due to their sex – hence a man looks at a woman and knows such. The body speaks the language of who we are. Our physical bodies therefore reflect who we are – they are one component of who we are but an important component.
Yes shame on you for saying that children are a waste. It is a shameful, intolerant attitude. AND I love how you liberals just can’t take a dose of your own medicine.
Intolerant would be saying that no one should go out and have kids. I really don’t care if you do, I disagree, but it’s not something I disagree so strongly with that I want legislation passed, or that I’m going to go picket about it, or anything like that. It’s like how I disagree with people using PCs, or how I don’t like Wal Mart. I don’t care that much about it.
Your God’s views are intolerant and sexist. *shrug* They aren’t views I ascribe to, nor ones that I believe in.
I look at both women and men and would be equally capable of having a relationship with either. You can’t take a bisexual or make them homosexual and make them straight. You can’t take a female and make them into a male if they don’t want to be a male: I’m quite happy being female, but I’m certainly not feminine. I like my breasts and my curves, but I have short hair and would much rather work and not bother having children, and I don’t have any sort of maternal instinct. My physical body is fun, particularly in sexual situations, but it doesn’t make me who I am.
Have any more information about this Tracy Beattie? Or any other verifiable proof that gender is a concrete thing? Personally, I ascribe to the feminist existentialist theory, particularly Simone de Beauvoir, and can cite the documents which form the basis of my belief.
Oops, HumanAbstract up there.
yes I know all about Ms Beauvoir and she was wrong. Despite the fact that she is considered a great existentialist philosopher by people who ought to know better….
You might try the readings of JP II and his theology of the body and his ideas on “new feminism…”
It’s really quite refreshing…..
….from the disgusting rants of the proabort, man hating de Beauvoir…..
I find the hero worship of these two very disturbing. First of all, Brad was married when he and Angelina began their affair.
Secondly, they refuse to get married. Brad has said he will get married when gays are allowed to get married everywhere.
Neither of the above impress me.
Posted by: Joanne at October 19, 2008 1:01 AM
That’s the worst excuse to not get married I’ve ever heard. I wonder if Angelina is OK with it. They will probably never get married.
Today I heard that 37% of babies are born out of wedlock. I don’t believe it.
Patricia, I’m not Catholic. Nor am I Christian. Nor do I have any interest in text that portray the relationship between men and women as unequal. If you’re going to suggest reading material, perhaps try one that’s useful in a secular sense.
I read JP’s Theology of the Body, incidentally. Not interested.
Janet, that’s why I’m not getting married. I’ve no desire to participate in an institution that discriminates against a population that has done no wrong.
Also, the above post was me.
yeah I’m not surprised Human A.
When I read the garbage put forth by de Beauvoir I was amazed. She became an aethiest at age 14.
“I had always thought that the world was a small price to pay for eternity; but
it was worth more than that, because I loved the world, and it was suddenly God
whose price was small: from now on His name would have to be a cover for nothing
more than a mirage.”
To de Beauvoir men are the superior sex because they kill. Women who give life are the inferior sex. Is it no wonder she embraced abortion, although she never had one herself as she onced claimed.
Her early fiction focuses on men and women who share no love for one another and who conceive a child. There is total disgust shown at the presence of the child in the mother’s womb – a deep hatred and disgust.
Try this on for size:
“I went to bed with him three months ago and I’m pregnant. I don’t know what
will happen to me.”
Andree gazed at her friend with horror, though she could not yet quite believe
her. It seemed impossible that a mysterious bit of rot should be spreading in that slim,
graceful body. . . .
Andree shivered. She looked at Monique but without being able to overcome an
immense disgust. Under the blue silk dress, under her belly’s satiny skin there was
something shapeless, something living, that grew and swelled with every minute. . . .
(, pp. 85-86).
Her book “The Blood of Others” is all about the right to have an abortion. From this book comes the beginnings of the proabort mantra, “my body, my choice”.
Gloria Steinem merely continued as a student of de Beauvoir, to ask, in an article on abortion rights, not what gets decided, but who decides.
Because de Beauvoir believes that men are the stronger sex as a result of their ability to kill and dominate, the only way women can become equal is to also have the right to kill – through abortion. de Beauvoir’s version of feminism has killing as the key to it’s mystery.
Human Abstract: you having nothing but my pity if this is the philosophy you run your life by. I pray God will convert your heart…..
It’s no wonder you would reject anything John Paul writes, although I doubt very much you have read anything of his. The beauty in it would likely sicken you…..
Like Angelina, Human ABstract, you must believe in marriage to some extent. If you are living with a man you are in effect “playing at marriage”. You wish you were but you aren’t.
“I read JP’s Theology of the Body, incidentally.”
All 600 pages?
exactly Bobby! It’s pretty dense and heavy reading too…
I’m reading Mary Healy’s Men and Women are from Eden.
Very good and very succinct.
Well, it’s not that I don’t believe her Patricia. It’s just a very long, hard read. I haven’t even read the whole thing. Plus there are several books that have the title “Theology of the Body” in them like Christopher West’s TOTB for Beginners, so she may be thinking of the wrong book.
@Patricia: I became an atheist when I was 13.
Actuaally, I’ve read all but the last hundred pages or so. I got bored, and I’ve since sold the book. Icome from a long line of philosophy majors, and I was baptized catholic. So, I read it out of curiosity. I disagreed with the ideas there presented that I left the church soon after.
Patricia, do you have any quotes to support your idea that beauvior believed men to be the dominant sex because of the ability to kill? That is not at all what I took from the philosophy. But then again, I doubt very much that you’ve read anything she’s written: you seem more the type to rabidly parrot quotes without knowing their meaning.
With regards to my relationship, I’m actually not living with the man. Even if I was living with him, coupled have been living together without marriage for thousands of years; my living with him reflects a desire to be in his proximity more than any feelings towards marriage. Besides, if homosexuals are ever legally allowed to get married, I will go through the legal process as well. Until then, I will have a commitment ceremony, at the most, and not worry about it.
Patricia, do you have any quotes to support your idea that beauvior believed men to be the dominant sex because of the ability to kill? That is not at all what I took from the philosophy. But then again, I doubt very much that you’ve read anything she’s written: you seem more the type to rabidly parrot quotes without knowing their meaning.
Thanks but I’ve read several of her books including The Second Sex. She has a very warped view of feminity. And she is considered the mother of the abortion/feminist movement, ironic since she herself chafed at the idea of motherhood and did everything she could to avoid being a mother.
I”m not interested in discussing this further. Makes me wonder why you’d believe something you hardly understand or know the details of.
I have no such “philosophical” pedigree in my family, other than to say that we are from a long line of devout Catholics. It appears my children will continue this “pedigree”….
Some women dislike motherhood. Why is being feminine defined by the ability to produce a child? I’m not any less feminine because I dislike the idea of being pregnant: pregnancy and childbirth is an aspect of being female, not necessarily the be-all end-all of the experience. That’s like saying that fathering a child is the be-all end-all experience of masculinity: guess Jesus wasn’t very masculine, was he?
I’ve read the Second Sex. I still don’t understand how you get that males are the superior sex out of it. Unless you can provide some documentation, I’ve pretty much proven my point.
Today I heard that 37% of babies are born out of wedlock. I don’t believe it.
Janet,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-11-21-births_x.htm