Discussion thread: Biological vs. Adopted
April 15, 2008 by Sherry
Okay folks, back by popular demand, let’s start up another discussion thread. Several of you have asked for another one after we had a few really great discussion threads over the past few weeks, especially since we’re pretty much getting crickets chirping from the Jolie-Pitt homestead right now. Which is good, of course - it means Brad Pitt is getting whatever filming remains taken care of for Tree of Life and it means Angelina Jolie and the kids are enjoying a bit of privacy without worrying about cameras in everyone’s face.
I did some thinking to try to come up with a good topic for us to discuss and it finally came down to this one since so many of us have expressed annoyance over this issue in the past. Why is it that so many media sources constantly differentiate between the Jolie-Pitt kids as far as whether they are adopted or biological? It seems like just about ever story I read has some blurb along the lines of “Brad and Angelina have three adopted children and one biological daughter with another biological addition (or two) on the way” and it drives me completely insane.
They are all their children. I don’t understand the point of bringing it up in every single article out there. I’m quite certain that when it’s time for dinner, Angelina isn’t calling out, “come on adopted children and biological kid, time to eat!” Why does the media do it? Is it because people are so fascinated by such a blended family that they feel it’s important to mention it at all times? Is there underlying snark? Is it that journalists are, perhaps unwittingly, pitting them against each other like there are two teams of children? Is it because they think that there are still two or three people out there who don’t know who Brad and Angelina are and aren’t aware that they’ve both adopted and conceived children together?
I don’t like it. If it’s an article specifically about adoption then it makes sense, but just throwing it in the middle of every article or blog post about them is annoying. I don’t differentiate because they’re all children. Maybe it’s just because I’m used to adoption. Two of my cousins were adopted and I don’t go around making references like “my adopted cousins and my biological cousins had a great day together”. It was just a general known fact and it didn’t need to be discussed ad nauseum because they were just my cousins and I didn’t really care how they arrived in my family. I also have some friends with adopted children and we don’t differentiate there either, there’s no discussion of “let’s have all the adopted and all the biological kids over for a playdate!” it’s just “the kids”.
So why? Why does the media do this all the time? Let’s talk!
Technorati Tags: brad pitt, angelina jolie, jolie-pitt kids, adoption, pittwatch,
Yay another discussion thread!
Thanks Sherry! This is a good topic. I’ve seen it crop up in a bunch of different places, people seem to have a lot of interesting viewpoints on it.
Maybe it’s unusual but it really doesn’t trouble me too much. I’m sure that in their day to day life the children aren’t differentiated on the basis of whether they were adopted or not (the people who they’re going to be interacting with obviously already *know* they’re adopted, so they don’t need to mention it). When journalists mention it in articles I usually find that it’s by way of introduction, just like they list the ages of the kids and whatever project Brad and Angelina are currently working on. People who aren’t too familiar with the kids might find it helpful to have some ‘backstory’ on who joined the family when and from which country. Not that they’re valuing some kids more than others, just that they’re acknowledging that they joined the family in a different way.
Anyway, as huge BAMPZS fans we probably have a different perspective than most, since we know so much about them that it seems silly to constantly remind people of their family story, LOL. My mum saw an article from a magazine about Angelina the other day and asked me “how many kids does she have?” It surprised me for a second - how could anyone not know?! :p Of course, she knew that some were adopted and some not, but she didn’t know their stories, how old they were or even how many kids were in the family.
Well, I’ve seen media outlets do the same thing when children come from different relationships. Maybe this kid was from marriage #1 and the other is from marriage #2. They have to tell you the kids have different parents. A perfect example is Heidi Klum and her children. I’ve read many times that her daughter Leni is from a previous relationship. But we all see her with Seal and her brothers and I don’t ever really think, “oh Leni isn’t Seal’s kid.” So I don’t think it’s restricted to Brad and Angelina. Media sources do it to several celebs on different levels.
And maybe they feel that they need to report the facts accurately. And articles always include a little bit of bio info anyway (like Angelina Jolie, born to so and so, is this age, partner of Brad Pitt with four children named this and this…). It sort of sets up the rest of the article. Plus her adoptions have been life altering for her and for Brad. Why shouldn’t they by proud to say they have 3 adopted children?
I don’t really have a problem with how they list the children since Brad and Angelina are the ones parenting and are more than likely making each child feel connected to each other and to their background. I’m sure the kids aren’t picking up the gossip rags and reading about themselves…so who cares how the media sources state the listing of the children…if they get their names correct and ages, then that’s an accomplishment for them right there
What bothers me most about how the media handles Angelina & Brad’s as well as Tom Cruise & Nicole Kidman’s kids is that there’s always, ALWAYS stories about Shiloh and Suri like they are the only kids these couples have. They are put on a completely different category than Max, Z and Pax or Tom Cruise’s kids Isabel and Connor. And I don’t think it’s just the cute 1-2 year old factor either. I think it’s more than that. I think it’s about the fact that they Suri and Shiloh are the biological children of these celebrities and the media treats them differently which I think is horrible.
Angelina and Brad always talk about their kids as as just OUR kids. Not our ADOPTED and BIOLOGICAL kids. I also hate the fact that the media coverage is completely different. There’s tons and tons more news about Shiloh and Suri than any of the other kids. Whaddup with that?!
I mean sure, I wish they’d leave all the kids alone
but if you gonna write and take pictures of the kids, take pictures of all of them, not just make big articles about Shiloh and Suri and pretend like they don’t have any other kids. Especially in Tom Cruise’s case. It’s always about Suri and never about Connor or Isabel.
i kinda agree with matilda and susan’s explanations. very well said i guess.
as long as the media won’t comment on something like, the biological kids are more loved by brad and angie than the adopted ones cause that would really make me feel bad and would make me feel mad.
My “favorite” (aka I hate it) is when the magazines talk about Brad and Angelina splitting up, but saying that brad is taking shiloh, like the other kids don’t even matter. It always surprises me that people never say anything about that. When you adopt a kid, it’s YOURS! You love that child as much as your biological ones. I don’t understand how the tabloids get away with making it sound like Brad would just abandon his responsibilities to the other children if he and Angelina split.
Thanks Sherry for this new discussion thread. Great topic. I have a real problem with thinking of these people that write for the gossip magazines or do the writeups on TMZ as journalists. The people that are doing these type of articles are pitting the readers against each other. Madd, Pax, Zee and Shiloh are to young right now to understand this, but as they get older they probably will start paying attention to the magazines that are in the stores and reading the headlines. Real journalists I believe are just giving all of the required info. It is amazing how the detracters of the Jolie-Pitts are the ones who make a big deal out of it. I wish that my husband and I could have adopted a child that needed a home but money wise we only could take care of our three children. I don’t know if I have mentioned before that before Brad and Angie became a couple I just thought of them as two good looking movie stars. But when they started seeing each other I was thrilled. And the first time I saw the picture of Brad with Madd I knew that they belonged together. There are alot of nice couples in the industry, but I believe that the Jolie-Pitts are the most powerful couple. And believe me they are treating all their children the same and these kids will grow up loving each other. Their children are no different than our children, they just have the opportunity to travel all around the world and their parents don’t have to worry about money.
Well, I was an adopted child. I had the most wonderful parents in the world and one side of the family treated me as though I was biological and the other side treated me like I was something else because I didn’t carry their bloodline. I think in the beginning if you want to refer to a child as adopted, thats fine. But, after hearing it again and again it really becomes offensive to me. Adopted children are wanted children and when those papers are signed, they are your children, blood has nothing to do with it. It will probably never make any kind of difference with this family but I think the news media who keep bringing it up all the time are making it very insensitive and “tacky”. Life comes with enough problems for kids, lets don’t give them something else something else another one!I think that the Jolie Pitts are a wonderful family and I think it will probably have no effect on any of these children, but I just hate to keep hearing that adopted thing so much. What these two amazing people have done with their lives should be an inspiration to all of us.
sherry you’re so funny: “I’m quite certain that when it’s time for dinner, Angelina isn’t calling out, “come on adopted children and biological kid, time to eat!” ” it made me laught!
i don’t want to exprim myself cause i think you’ve already said what i think girls! your opinions are the same as me: i think they make this distinction for people who don’t know really good the JP (but i think everybody know the JP!), to “make a context” (like susan said so good!).
Mary Ann: i think the same thing, it teerified me especially when there was a story with the biological mother of Zahara: i said to my sister: “can you imagine? when Z’ll be older, she ‘ll know that she was born after her mother was rapped when she was only a teenager! Z’ll see the pics of her biological mother, only cause the medias want to make some money”!!!!! it bring me out of myself!
i loved angie before she met brad (i didn’t interest me to brad before lol!), but i’m really fan since they build their family. i think they are such models for everybody, i admire them; great people, great parents, great humanitarians, great actors (but it’s not the most important for me). i think they are far from all the bad things people can say about them.
i just want to say that the JP kids are all really cute kids
Thank you Sherry for another discussion ( I love these threads ) I personally dont think there is ill will behind people saying 3 adopted and 1 biological. My mother said she thinks its racial but (This might sound kind of naive) but I believe people always bring up Shiloh as the biological b/c she comes from the 2 most beautiful people on the planet
Thats why theres always so much hype around her pregnancies
I really get offended by it. It is basically common knowledge in the entire world they have adopted. And it should be of no one’s concern which one’s are which. I’m like Sherry, it’s annoying if it’s nothing else. I personally really think “news” stories about these children should be illegal anyway especially like suri and shiloh, I think it puts them in danger.
as far as why Shiloh and Suri get the covers, that’s pretty obvious: they sell magazines!! People (for whatever reason) want to know more about these 2 little girls. It’s a business and the magazines are always going to cover the stories that can sell the most copies. So I really don’t believe it’s an attack on the other kids or a neglect of recognizing their existence. A headline such as “Brad takes Shiloh and leaves!” will probably sell more mags. Is it right? Of course not. But I doubt that Brad and Angelina are worrying themselves with the headlines of tabloids. As the kids grow older, they will know more about these things, but there are plenty of previous generations of celeb kids that grew up healthy and well adjusted to the unwarranted attention. I don’t think tabloid headlines will give the kids a complex or make them feel less of a person. How they feel about themselves comes from parenting and as long as Brad and Angelina provide equal love and nurturing to each child, then they should be okay. I think a bit more is being made of this than there should be.
I can only say, don’t make a big fuss about tabloid writing. I always wonder why tabs tend to state people’s age, even when they get it completely wrong. For example Catherine Zeta-Jones, her age is always stated as 37 and this for years now. It makes me laugh.
Same thing with all these children and some other unnecessary information tabs seem to feel obliged to mention in every single article.
As for the adopted children, again it’s only the media making a big fuss. whenever someone adopts a child it gets mentioned in the papers.
Sharon Stone, Meg Ryan, Mia Farrow, it was even mentioned that Denis Quaids twins where from a surrogate mother.
I have an adopted daughter and of course all our family and everyone else talks about “the kids” and nothing else, no differentiation there.
In some cases where the kids have different skin color it is obvious anyways.
One should believe so anyways. although I have to say, I do get silly comments from people from time to time when someone asks: “Is these your daughter’”. My usual reply then is - what do you think?
I believe it has to do with the general curiosity of people. That’s all there is. No big deal.
Well, I think it’s wrong for them to constantly mention it. It does seem like the media takes delight in trying to make a distinction between the children. I have biological grandchildren, step-grandchildren and adopted grandchildren. I love all of them. And when I introduce them to people I call them my grandchildren - I don’t make a distinction between them. All of them have my heart. And I’m sure that Brad and Angie are the same with their children.
Pamela
there is a new post on JJ about brad angelina and their (adopted
) children! they went to the cinema in austin.
http://justjared.buzznet.com/2008/04/15/brad-angelina-texas-theater/
hope they have a great time
nice to see the pics were taken from a long distance
maybe they ‘ll welcome the new member of the family in texas, they seem to be in peace there… what do you think about?
One thing about the pictures in Texas. Texas laws are quite different about self defense ect. That may be the reason people don’t seem to be hounding them quite as much.
Had a friend that go shot in Texas, no laws were broken it was after dark and he was on someone else’s property.
I think this is all very true and yeah you’re right the media does go on a bit about this. It’s not like Brad and Angie love Shiloh more because she’s biologically theirs! They love them all the same. They have watched them all grow and learn new thing. There’s no difference! And both Brad and Angie give each kid time of their own, they seem like great parents! There’s people in my family who are adopted and it makes no different they get treated the same as the rest of us! I think it’s really good that Brad and Angie adopt, it gives kids a chance for a real family!
Good topic up for discussion because it really bothers me so much that the media will differeniate between the adopted and biological kids as if that has to be mentioned every single time. Hater Alert!
You would think the child’s full name is “Maddox Adopted Son of Brad and Angelina”… My Lord, it the media should give it a rest now, it’s getting way old. Those babies are human beings, male and female and someone’s children - that’s it - that’s all that should be said - nothing else - none of this three adopted, two biological stupid stuff - it’s ridiculous. I guess it’s going to take a long time for the media to get over themselves - because if you notice, now wghen we read about Tom and Nicole’s kids together, they just say “Connor and Isabella, Tom and Nicole’s children” - where for years they would say “Connor and Isabella, Tom and Nicole’s adopted children”.
Who was the famous person who said something like “I have four children, two are adopted, but for the life of me I can’t remember which two”. I LOVE that quote because it says it all.
All I know is that if I were blessed to be able to afford to adopt any children, as soon as I saw and fell in love with them, they will have my heart just as much if I had carried them in my own body - because whether you bring them into your life from the inside of your body or on the outside of your body, they are part of your heart and the heart beats for everyone.
Peace Out!
Dear Sherry: Thank you again for this web site. Come’on, now Sherri, you good and well that all media is hype these days, and when I see an article that mentions their adopted and biological children, I just breeze on by it, like it is the nothing that it is. Nothing will drive me crazy, as long as I get to hear what the J-P’s are doing. I am from Texas, and believe me, the law is pretty strictly followed by Texans, and are forcefully enforced by the law enforcement. No one in their right mind would attempt to invade their privacy. I think when the media writes “adopted” in an article, the writer is trying to show the J-P’s as philanthropic, and benevolent people, as we all know they are. I am sure a lot of people who don’t follow them as closely as we do, don’t know that they are the type of people that are worthy of emulation. I surely have become more philanthropic since I have seen how they contribute to mankind as a whole, from adopted children saved from a horrible life, to the Katrina victims, also being helped to retrieve their homes. As long as the media gives them credit for being the finest of human beings, I don’t care about their silly slips about adopted vs. biological.
I don’t mean to be off topic, and I will weigh in on this topic after I give it some thought, but if you go to Charlierose.com and search Angelina Jolie their are some great interviews from just recent to 2000 for girl interrupted. Also some good interviews with Brad as well.
You act like you are soooo concerned about paparazzi taking pictures, and so caring about their global family, but really you are just as much a sponge as all the rest of the paparazzi. You got nothing to say, that’s why you have this thread.
When I read through Sherry´s lines I thought “Oh no! everyone will go on and on about how mean it is to always mention the adopted factor”, and I was going to write my own opinion which is basically Matilda and Susan´s put together, only I couldn´t have formulated it so well (I am not a native speaker). I have a “step”-cousin (she´s from her father´s first marriage, before he married my dad´s sister, and her mother died at her birth, so she was raised by my aunt and her father), and even though there was no “blood relation”, that never made any difference at all. It was just a fact, but she was my cousin just the same. Just like all the other cousins.
There was no need to mention it, because everyone knew. However, as much as we think the world knows all about the JP´s, that´s not true. Most people only have a very rudimentary knowledge about them. Sure, they themselves are known, but not their family situation. Unless you´re a fan, that sort of thing is not something people would remember. When I was at the hairdresser last, paging through gossip magazines, all the customers suddenly joined in a discussion about the JP´s, and the general knowledge was “they have lots of kids, and some are adopted and some are biological”. So, it really is just a way of introducing facts about this family, just like they always mention the number of kids, and the age etc.
Melodie I also saw the picture of them at the movies. Did you by any chance read any of the comments on that thread. As usual there was the lovers of the JP’s and then there was usual bad mouthers of the JP’s. Some of course were making a big deal that Shiloh was left at home. These people that makes these dumb comments must not have children, because we all know there is no way you take a 2 year old to the movies. Their attention span can’t handle it. But of course there is the usual comments that Angie only loves the adopted ones.
I don’t think that’s much of a big deal; I work as a jorunalist and sometimes, when there’s not much of a news to be discussed, we just try to “fill the empty lines” of our articles: for example; writing
“angie and her four children” is one thing, but making it become “angelina and their two adopted kids and biological baby had to brad pitt” is another, as it takes more space to reach the end of the article fast.
I’m am pretty much sure that’s why they do it!
Thanks Sherry… to me this is the greatest trend and issue to address. Thank God for your life, you are a woman of honour and great sense.Thanks once more…… Need i say more, everybody’s writeup is completely and perfectly correct and this is so sad. My happiness is that i have controlled myself that no matter how their cover stories are, i would never buy those blogs again, even when they write a good one, i still dont buy them, there is still something in disguise. They really suck and its so very upsetting. need we say more. Thanks everybody.
Thanks Sherry,
I understand that people want to rationalise the media’s need to differentiate these children, but to me it smacks of prejudice and an unwillingness to accept that these two could create a peaceful and loving home.
Most of the magazines/blogs who raise this issue also attach the “a lot of kids”, “brood/clan” or “crazy household” type snark to their story. The impact on readers is that mixing races does not create a happy or peaceful home. Each article seems to be escalating on themes of neglect, lack of care, danger and an inability to cope. All of this inspite of the obvious to the contrary that we see and hear from Brad and Angie. They both also said it’s tough but they are handling it. We see the kids, polite, quiet and inquisitive. Not problematic
I don’t think they(media) distinguish between the kids to inform people, they do it to create a division. It’s as simple as that. They are setting them up for future problems, because we all know these kids will come across what has been written about their family; in some format or other. They are also telling people that these adopted children are the problem/cause of discourse in the home. I mean poor little Shiloh can’t even get any love from OWN parents. And her adopted siblings are hurting her…
The other plain fact is that a lot people still have issues regarding Brad and Angie. They are given another platform on which to display their ignorance. Therefore help perpetuating the issues, mag sales and blog hits.
So after all that rambling, I think it’s wrong and I think it will hurt the kids in the near future if Brad and Angie are not careful in how they manage it at home.
Oh and distinction which proves my point??? :
*Dustin Hoffman has 5 kids, Mel Gibson has 6plus I think! And one other well known actor but I need to check first.
I think it is has more to do with racism. By referring to the children as adopted, inferrs that Brad and Angelina gave some sort of charity by taking in a child. This inferrence justifies, or gives reason to the racist notion as to why a white couple, the most desired couple of planet would choose to have non-white children versus white. There are several celebrities, dignitaries, politicians, athletes of the like who have adopted white children which are never referred to the “adopted” children. For example, Jamie Lee Curtis’s daughter is never referred to the adopted daughter. It has been mentioned by Jaime that she adopted her daughter but rarely does the media refer to her as the adopted daughter. Even when it is well documented that the child is adopted, if it is white then it is okay and therefore the couples child. However, if it is a non-white child, the child is always deemed the adopted child. It’s unfortunate, but it’s racism. Hugh Jackman’s son Oscar looks like a Tan version of Hugh, but because it is apparent that he is bi-racial the media refers to him as the adopted son. People discuss it on celebrity blogs. It’s their way of being racist and identifying the child as being non-white by referring to the child as adopted. There is never a differientation when all the kids are white.
How many of you knew that Sen. John McCain has adopted kids. He is running for the President of the United States. The media typically scruitinizes and picks apart everything about a candidates life. He has been a Senator for over 20 years. His kids have campaigned for him and been in the spot light, they are not called his adopted kids. Roy Rogers, Sally Jessy Raphaël, Sammy Davis, Jr., Sen. Jesse Helms, Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, Sen. Paul Simon, Sen. Paull H. Shin, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson,Sir Christopher Guest , Steven Curtis Chapman, Susan Ruttan, Taurean Blacque, Ted Danson, Teri Garr, Valerie Harper, Walt Disney, William Delahunt , Willie Mays and the list goes on, all have adopted kids. The media never refers to their kids a adopted just their kids. Walt Disney’s kids have been in the media their entire lives. They sit on he board but never does the media never refers to them as Walt Disney’s adopted sons.
But Stephen Speilbergs’ Black kid, Theo, is the only one of his adopted kids labeled the adopted kid, and Speilburg has several adopted kids. Sharon Stone has three adopted kids, who are white and are always labed her sons, not adopted sons.
Frankly, it’s obviously racist. It’s irritating. The thing I love about the Jolie-Pitts is that they are so tight with their kids. As we watch them grow up and change they are so much like their parents. You see the huge imprint their parents have left on them. Mad has become a little Brad.
Some celebrities like Tom Cruise appear to not have as obvious of an imprint on their kids. Although, Connor appears to be like Tom, his sister Isabella dosn’t seem to be like their parents. Behavoral imprints are not genetic. It comes with time and relationships. Children who are raised by their grandmother are more like their grandmother than their parents. I said all that to say that it’s racism. I think that is why it is such a big deal to people that Shiloh is not with them. Nobody asks were is Isabella and Conner when Suri Cruise is with her parents. However, if it is a minority child then the public seems to feel that minority child is unworthy of being loved and needed as their parents kid and that the kid is not their “real” kid. When in fact, The Jolie-Pitt Kids obviously saved Angelinas life and changed Brads. Family gives parents purpose and reason, no matter how you build the family. It’s called love.
I once again feel that too much is being made of this situation (as I stated earlier). Obviously the reason we hear a lot more about Brad and Angelina’s adoptions or pregnancies versus someone like Valerie Harper, Ted Danson or even John McCain (even though he’s the GOP nominee) is because they are two of the most popular and famous celebs on the planet nowadays. People want to know more about them and as long as the demand is there, the headlines will continue.
I really can’t buy the claim that all media sources are racist and want to purposely differentiate between white and non-white children. It’s beginning to sound like a conspiracy theory. And as I said earlier, Maddox, Pax, Zahara and Shiloh will view themselves based on the parenting of Brad and Angelina (and not the tabloid headlines). If they create a comfortable environment of equal love, support and care, then each child will feel connected to their culture and each other.
After all, parents raise their children- not tabloid headlines. And these are not the first celeb kids to face the brutality of the press. While nothing excuses poor behaviors of the press, it is something that has almost always existed. It’s a lose-lose situation.
I like the way this Huffington Post writer described the family:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/29/brad-and-angelina-marry-_n_94061.html#postComment
****The couple has four children together: Maddox, 6; Zahara, 2; Shiloh, 1; and Pax, 4.**** To call their family diverse is an understatement: Maddox, Zahara and Pax were all adopted (from Cambodia, Ethiopia and Vietnam respectively), and all originally by Jolie. Pitt legally adopted Maddox and Zahara in 2006, giving them the surname “Jolie-Pitt”; Pax was adopted in 2007 by Jolie alone because Vietnamese law makes it difficult for unmarried couples to adopt, but his name was subsequently changed legally to “Jolie-Pitt.” ****Shiloh was born to Jolie and Pitt in May 2006 (as a Jolie-Pitt), amid much publicity; Jolie is currently pregnant, possibly with twins.****
So much has been said about this and I agree with what many of the posters here have said. It is really disappointing that so many others always make the distinction, when in the minds of Brad and Angie, there is none. The kids are their kids, period. Fortunately, I think these two are making it clear to their children that they are a true family unit, no matter what the children might later read or hear.
Once again Susan said it best. I also can´t buy into a big racism thing by the media. If it´s really true that Maddox, Zahara and Pax get mentioned more as “adopted” than other, white, adopted kids (I have no idea whether this is really the case), then I would think that it has absolutely to do with the fact that they are not “white”, but not in a racist way. They obviously do not look like they could biologically be Brad and Angelina´s children, hence by way of explanation the adjective “adopted”. Just my opinion. I don´t think there´s something so negative about it, and it shouldn´t drive anyone insane. It is not biological VERSUS adopted. Not like anything is “better”. It´s just a fact, same as one child is older, one is younger. I´m sure within their family and close surroundings no-one makes an issue out of it, and that´s what´s important.
hi:)
I just think that’s not so wrong- it’s the way to make adoption more popular. When you here how many stars adopted ,you can start considering it by yourself.. I’m so surpirised by the second Angie pregnancy. I still remember the interviev in Namibia when she said that she never thought about biological child, she wanted just adopt but Brat changed her poin of viev.. Wow, do you think that she could have a third biological child?
sorry for mistakes, its not my mother lenguage
I have never commented here before but sometimes come to see the pictures and the current news. I saw this topic and felt compelled to put in my two cents for what it is worth. I agree with those who say that there should be no distinction between biological or adopted children. I wonder, though, if perhaps this is brought up in articles and on television because AJ and BP sometimes mention it? I can remember AJ saying something about the adopted children needing more of her sympathy than Shiloh because of what they went through before coming into her life. I don’t think that is exactly what she said..but something like that. Also, I can remember Brad noting in an interview that it is amazing how they are all just brothers and sisters in spite of their different ethnic backgrounds and how their lives started. Again, I dont think that is what he said exactly..but something like that.
Alecia. I agree it is racism. The adoption identity hits home with me.
I didn’t know there was a difference between adopted kids or biological kids until other kids told me. At 5 years old, I asked my mother where babies come from. My mother said she ordered her kids from the stork and picked us up at the hospital. Other people made the difference, not us. My sister and I are adopted. Yet she is called the adopted daughter because she is mixed with asian ancestery. She was born in California not china. My parents had boys, they wanted a girl, and they chose the adoption rout. That is it. My sister wasn’t saved from an orphanage, she was a new born, and they chose her. That is it. Angelina is accommodating. I use to be defensive and answered those silly questions with a question. My Dad overlooks everything. I think people focusing on my sister’s asian ancestry caused my mother to change from an adoption support group to an interracial support group. She then pressured my Dad to move to a (as she calls it) more “progressive” neighborhood, that was more racially balanced. Then we weren’t the exotic family anymore. My mother is racially sensitive, and when we hurt she hurts. Somehow she passed that sensitivity chip down to us. We don’t identify as an adoptive family, we identify as a multicultural family. The JoliePitts have helped me to understand my parents made us a family unit no matter what anyone else thinks. When people see family pictures, the first thing they ask is, “is she adopted”. My brothers and I say we all are adopted; even though my parents are my brothers’ birth parents. I look distinctly different from my brothers and parents and no one has ever asked me was I adopted, or my real national origin. We have some adopted friends who came from Russia,who aren’t probed about their heritage either. Of course my father over looks everything, he sounds like some of you, but my mother and I agree it is racial. I agree that the media trys differintiate and pit the JoliePitt kids against each other by constantly comparing the biological kid to the adopted kids. It is racist. Good thing the JoliePitts are racially sensitive, they have handled the racism well.
BRAVA!! Alecia. Well-done & beautifully written. You’re exactly right. Thanks for posting that & doing all the research.
An example - of thousands I’ve seen over 4 years - to illustrate your point (from perez):
“What HE needs to do is start a grassroots movement to get Brad away from the controlling, adoption-crazy, lesbian-loving, globe-trotting Angelina….****TAKE SHILOH AND HIT THE DIRT, BRAD.**** Your “partner” is a major, self-aggrandizing a####e — not to mention a homewrecker. Moreover, she’s the worst parent ever, dragging those poor kids — and YOU — from pillar to post and stuffing Cheetos in their dirty faces. If she had any conscience at all, she’s settle down and let Maddox stay in one school. But, you must understand, it’s all about Angelina, the phony world ambassador and publicity w###e…”
So I guess since Shiloh is both White & Biological, she’s the only kid worth being with Brad. Could this be any more racist & biologist (I made that word up)? And to top it off, when Shiloh had just been born, I read the most obscene & evil post threatening to violate her just because of who her parents were. That was before h8ters learned to love Shiloh – The Chosen One, The Great White Hope (according to Lainey & others).
BRAVA!! Alecia. Well-done & beautifully written. You’re exactly right. Thanks for posting that & doing all the research.
An example - of thousands I’ve seen over 4 years - to illustrate your point (from perez):
****TAKE SHILOH AND HIT THE DIRT, BRAD.****
So I guess since Shiloh is both White & Biological, she’s the only kid worth being with Brad. Could this be any more racist & biologist (I made that word up)?
BRAVA!!!, Pamela, Jen and BlessBrangelina. I completely agree with you. Jen, your mother is such an angel – her commitment to your family is exceptional. The 2 main points I’ve thought about are: 1) are the kids being harmed?, and 2) is this racism or something else? The ”too many children” thing will have to wait for another time.
I think the main result h8ters & tabloids/blogs are hoping to get from all the attacks on them is the breakup of Brad’s & Angelina’s relationship & their family. How vicious & cruel – deliberately trying to destroy 6 lives. If the h8ters aren’t happy, Brad & Angelina shouldn’t be happy. The tabs main motivation is $$$ from sales & hits. IMO, based on their posts, most h8ters are seriously disturbed, perhaps need professional help, and delusional to boot (recreating their fairy tale version of B & X).
very good topic sherry! I think that is a part of racism! every time i read a magazine even here in hongkong they will differntiate the biological and the adopted anyway brad once mention in one of his interview that he and angelina treat all his adoptive same as natural birth, and they are brothers and sisters. and i really admire both of them in treating their adopted soooh good. not all are same as brangelina, i read an article one of the oldest actor before treat her adopted daaghter sooh badly and some really adopt just for publicity and have you even notice many actors now are planing to adopt and copying angie and brad? so you can see that they are good examples and my opinion is that brad and angie are very sincere persons and i really admire bth of them.
Lilianne I agree with you. I think the media picked up on the biological vs adopted because Angie made a point of it. Angie said in 2003 that she would never have a biological child because she would always feel that could have been a child who was in desperate need of a home. Then she met Brad and got pregnant so people thought she got “knocked up”. So Angie told the press that Brad changed her mind and that she loves her children all the same. Then there is the famous “blob” comment. Angie was the one who told the reporter that she felt differently about her biological child than her adopted ones because she felt that they struggled more and Shiloh was born privileged. She was the one making the differences not the press. After that comment the media jumped on her and that is when the “Where is Shiloh?” “Angie Doesn’t Love Shiloh” comments started. If Angie had used better words to describe her feelings for her children I don’t think the press would have felt the need to.
Not True Shirley. The media hounded Angelina from the moment she had Maddox. They always asked her would she have children. She always said probly not because there is no difference. She use to make joke by saying she prefers to show up in any place in the world and find her next child. The media hounded her about having children before she and Brad ever met. They also asked her if she would get married, or if she was involved in a serious relationship. She said met lovers at a hotel and never introduce them to her son. He is her man, her main focus. The media focused on her kids and their differences. From the moment she annouced she became pregnant the media focused on the the baby as being their real child. They always referred to Shilo as their first biological child. Not that it matters, it seems the kids are growing up and fairing well so far. I suspect they will all grow up like Mia Farrows kids a family from around the world connected by love.
Human’s are such judgemental creature’s,most of whom need to sweep under their own rug. Congratulation’s Brad & Angelina for having the desire and resources to raise children in such an unforgiving world. I wish you all peace,hope,happiness and much love in the future. God bless.
it angers me when i read magazines that they always focus on shiloh i mean once their was a whole 2 pages saying tht shiloh was brads little princesse of corse she is but they didnt mention zahara been brads little princess. i think this is because zahara is adopted and shiloh is the first biological child of brad and angielina, they think she is more special and worthy of more attiention. and how much was the pictures of shiloh worth when she was born a lot more than when maddox pax and z were adopted. and when shiloh is anywhere to be seen everyones ‘wheres shiloh’ but when maddox pax or z isnt anywhere to be seen of corse no-one is asking abot them. to me the media is treating shiloh and suri like they are the only children in the only ones to bother with because they are biological
WOW, I guess your post was in moderation a long time.
I totally agree with your feelings, Caz. I share your concerns & have for a long time. It upsets me when the basis for disharmony between adopted & biological children is set up by the tabs & those who hold on to those prejudices. And when race is factored in, it’s like time-bomb ticking away.
also i have read that brad and angelina and shiloh all have wax figures of themselves but again why hasnt maddox, pax or zee got a wax figure of them (even though i think its wrong for children to be made into wax figures). and also another article in a certain magazine about the best dressed little girls shiloh was in it and zaharah wasnt. also so was suri !!!
Again, I agree Caz. It’s been a little over 2 weeks between your posts. Are you a regular lurker here, or did you just come across the website?
i came across it looking for a article on something else and now i come on it whenever i can !