Lah dee freakin' dah.
"NEW YORK (Sept. 8) - Brad Pitt, ever the social activist, says he won't be marrying Angelina Jolie until the restrictions on who can marry whom are dropped. 'Angie and I will consider tying the knot when everyone else in the country who wants to be married is legally able,' the 42-year-old actor reveals in Esquire magazine's October issue, on newsstands Sept. 19."
I have a lot of problems with this. Want to hear a couple of them? Okay!
- Obviously, Pitt and Jolie don't respect the sanctity of marriage anyway. They're using marriage (or lack thereof) as a political statement. C'mon.
- What's the point? What's their incentive for getting married? Gettin' the milk for free...
- Are they talking about gay couples? Because they could be referencing underage teenagers, multiple marriage partners, or even just those of us who WANT to be married but aren't.
- Not only are they using a sacred bond as a political statement, they have children who are in the middle of this "union" who are innocent of all political inclinations and are facing the consequences of activist (and maybe extremist?) parents. (I guarantee Cambodia will look pretty good to little Maddox when he's in his teens. Okay, maybe that was wrong to say.)
- Pitt goes on to give parenting advice in the article. Thanks. I'll really have to abide by those pointers when I have children of my own. Or maybe I could use Marx's Kapital or Neitzche as a handbook for raising my children. Jerk. Hippie. Hippie jerk.
posted by Lauren | 4:21 PM
7 Comments:
I totally agree with you! Mike and I saw this yesterday and had pretty much the same thoughts as you.
Oh, the Brad Pitt + Jennifer Aniston days . . . Well, I guess he's standing for what he believes in? If more people did that, who knows where our country would be -- and I do think it would be better because I believe the majority of people aim toward the good.
Whoa. Soapbox time.
I don't think it would be better.
I believe the majority of people aim toward the good, too. But there are people who don't.
People that bomb abortion clinics are standing up for what they believe in.
Al Qaeda stands up for what it believes in.
The Crusaders stood up for what they believed in.
Your idealism is commendable though, Sara.
Sometimes people think they believe something because others are doing it (or at least they THINK others are doing it). I mean sometimes people mistake their own personal beliefs with those of others (friends, media, and sometimes parents), even if it's not what they really desire. People are great at pretending, even when it comes to beliefs.
Maybe she means if people were doing what they truly believe/desire, independently of others, then it could work. You know, the really deep inside beliefs we all have. Like the one I have of being a performer on SNL with my sister. So why do people bury their beliefs/desires at times? Usually because of fear of rejection from others. Or in my case, a bunch of tomatoes being thrown in my face. This is partly why I believe most people are "followers" (which isn't always a bad thing).
This was funny:
"Are they talking about gay couples? Because they could be referencing underage teenagers, multiple marriage partners, or even just those of us who WANT to be married but aren't."
What I'm saying is that if people like you and me and your aunt Terri, for example, stood up more for what WE believed in, maybe people that bomb abortion clinics wouldn't stand a chance.
BUT, you're right about Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's ridiculousness. Why even get married, if it's just for a political stand? What will it mean for them when/if they finally do get married? That all their political hopes and dreams have come to pass, and their legal union is like their blessing on the state of U.S. marriage affairs?
I respect that they're trying to use their influence for something they believe in, yet I think it's a tad imbalanced. I mean, why don't they move out of their English estate and live in a modest home in a suburban area until they can be sure that all the poor people of the world are living in suitable housing?
It's crazy. But then, I do some pretty selfish things, too, I guess. Do you think they see the flaw in their lifestyles?
Marriage... the next endangered species.
Now you're talkin', Sara. I agree with you there.
I still don't believe that if everybody stood up for "what they believed in" it would be a perfect world -- or maybe even a better world. But I guess that shows the difference between idealists and realists/pragmatists. Agree to disagree. 'Cause THAT'S what I believe in. :)
Post a Comment
<< Home