Well, well....look who is starring in a movie that portrays the real-life anguish of a Mother who loses HER child! I couldn't believe it when I saw the first ads and saw that scene where she cries out, "I want my OWN child!!!" or something to that effect.Yeah, Angie....so do we.
This is from the woman who is the epitome of those who think that mothers and children and natural families are, somehow, interchangeable. Rather than collecting children like Beanie Babies, she could have helped these disadvantaged families hold together. So why does she do it? Why does she go on baby raids to third-world nations to find another kiddie for her collection? BECAUSE SHE CAN. She has the money, and like most people with money and in the public eye, she probably feels entitled to whatever the Hell she wants.
She doesn't even have infertility as an excuse so she can only be searching for that adopter halo. This is the woman who has been tattooed with lovers' and husbands' names, carried around a vial of one of her husbands' blood on a chain around her neck and gave her BROTHER a deep, soul-kiss in front of photographers. I guess she feels she needs some good press and this country, unfortunately, is besotted with the idea of adoption.
As we at SMAAC reach out to get the truth to the nation about how we Senior Mothers were subject to horrendous mistreatment in order for the industry to procure our newborns for adopters, we also try to keep an eye on what is happening now, as well. No, friends....things haven't changed that much. Jolie is just one more example of why we exist and why we blog and why we boycott and why we speak out. Family preservation is not just an ideal. It is doable if we stop criminalizing single parenthood and poverty.
Here's the link. Please take time to read our press release concerning this boycott.
4 comments:
Well said, Sister Robin. The news will get out, and we will be heard. Thanks for posting this, and thanks for being a SMAAC!
I have no intention of ever seeing an Angelina Jolie film (unless she somehow ends up in the next Star Trek movie, which I highly doubt).
The fact that she obviously cannot correlate her own baby-snatching with her latest movie role puts her on a pedestal as a prime example of an entitled adopter. Someone who feels she is "rescuing" all those kids, and as for the actual parents? Well, no need to worry about them if you have enough money. There are Angelina Jolies spread all throughout this country. Maybe we should thank her for putting a public face on the problem, except that all I can think about are those poor adoptees and their lost families.
Prior to reading an article about the movie in the L.A. Times, I had no idea what the plot was about. I have no intention of seeing Jolie either and when I saw the billboards promoting her, I knew I wouldn't be interested. The movie's plot, however, is based on a true story of a mother who sent her son to the movies one day and never saw him again. What gets me is that Clint Eastwood, who directed the film, said that he thought that Jolie could easily handle the role, "because she's a mother." Well, she is now, of course, but for a time there, she was only pretending, as she still is with those children that she adopted.
I had a comment, that I rejected, on this subject that stated "you people are 'WACK' jobs. Poor troll doesn't even know how to spell "whack." LOL
Post a Comment