Jolie: 'I believe in open relationships'
edonline
Jolie: 'I believe in open relationships'
Thursday, December 24 2009, 4:13am EST
By Rebecca Davies
Angelina Jolie has revealed that she believes in open relationships.
The actress, who has six children with partner Brad Pitt, said that
she does not believe fidelity is essential as long as both parties are
honest.
"I doubt that fidelity is absolutely essential for a relationship.
It's worse to leave your partner and talk badly about him afterwards,"
The Daily Telegraph quotes her as saying.
"Neither Brad nor I have ever claimed that living together means to be
chained together. We make sure that we never restrict each other."
Talking about their fiery relationship, Jolie added: "The sparks fly
at home if the nice Brad fails to see that he's wrong and reacts in a
defiant way. Then I can get so angry that I tear his shirt."
Marianna
> http://www.digitalspy.com/showbiz/news/a192668/jolie-i-believe-in-ope...
>
> Jolie: 'I believe in open relationships'
> Thursday, December 24 2009, 4:13am EST
>
> By Rebecca Davies
>
> Angelina Jolie has revealed that she believes in open relationships.
...and the world yawned.
> The actress, who has six children with partner Brad Pitt, said that
> she does not believe fidelity is essential as long as both parties are
> honest.
>
> "I doubt that fidelity is absolutely essential for a relationship.
> It's worse to leave your partner and talk badly about him afterwards,"
> The Daily Telegraph quotes her as saying.
Oh, great. Now we'll have another round of Jennifer Aniston answer
quotes to this just when I was hoping to enjoy my eggnog in peace.
> "Neither Brad nor I have ever claimed that living together means to be
> chained together. We make sure that we never restrict each other."
uhhh....wha?
> Talking about their fiery relationship, Jolie added: "The sparks fly
> at home if the nice Brad fails to see that he's wrong and reacts in a
> defiant way. Then I can get so angry that I tear his shirt."
Violent control freak much, Angelina?
Marianna
Smokie Darling (Annie)
...and I was thinking... a year, they'll break up within a year.
Wasn't it about a year after Susan Sarandon said something very
similar about her and Robbins (except their case involved him writing
poems to other women)?
Big J
news:comadrejoagua-133...@news.giganews.com:
> In article
> <532d97ed-c229-4ed1...@m25g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>,
> edonline <eron...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> http://www.digitalspy.com/showbiz/news/a192668/jolie-i-believe-in-open
>> -relatio nships.html
>>
>> Jolie: 'I believe in open relationships'
>> Thursday, December 24 2009, 4:13am EST
>>
>> By Rebecca Davies
>>
>> Angelina Jolie has revealed that she believes in open relationships.
>
>
> "Your honor, I present my first piece of evidence that open
> relationship do not work, the "open relationship" of Simone de
> Beauvoir and Jean Paul Satre"..
>
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jun/10/gender.politicsphilosophyan
> ds ociety
>
>
> However, if open relationships mean that they can produce works like
> "No Exit" and "The Second Sex", and less Second Empire furniture, then
> all the power to open relationships..
>
>
>>
>> The actress, who has six children with partner Brad Pitt, said that
>> she does not believe fidelity is essential as long as both parties
>> are honest.
>>
>> "I doubt that fidelity is absolutely essential for a relationship.
>> It's worse to leave your partner and talk badly about him
>> afterwards," The Daily Telegraph quotes her as saying.
>>
>> "Neither Brad nor I have ever claimed that living together means to
>> be chained together. We make sure that we never restrict each other."
>>
>> Talking about their fiery relationship, Jolie added: "The sparks fly
>> at home if the nice Brad fails to see that he's wrong and reacts in a
>> defiant way. Then I can get so angry that I tear his shirt."
I've seen many open relationships that work. By far, most of those are
ones that were open from the very beginning.
Big J
-----
S. Fu
>> By Rebecca Davies
>>
>> Angelina Jolie has revealed that she believes in open relationships.
>
>
> "Your honor, I present my first piece of evidence that open relationship
> do not work, the "open relationship" of Simone de Beauvoir and Jean Paul
> Satre"..
>
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/jun/10/gender.politicsphilosophyands
> ociety
The real miracle is that Sartre got any woman to sleep with him!
Smelly, pretentious dwarf seems to have been the consensus among his
less-entranced observers of the time. Obviously a world-class
intellect and a critical thinker during the segue to "decentered
dicta," as Derrida might say. I like my Existentialists rugged ala
Camus or Beckett, and ultimately "No Exit" seems a secondary work to
me, although "Hell is other people" is one of the greatest lines of
written dialogue in the last two hundred years..
But then again, when it comes to charming the pants off the chicas with
silver-tongued charm, I really shouldn't be casting stones at ol' Jean
Paul....
> However, if open relationships mean that they can produce works like "No
> Exit" and "The Second Sex", and less Second Empire furniture, then all
> the power to open relationships..
Indeed. I don't think sexual fidelity is going to be the ultimate
issue with la folie Pitt-Jolie. Rather, saddling themselves with twice
as many kids as they can responsibly rear, no matter how many nannies
they can afford, will ultimately break their relationship, their film
careers, their children, or some combination of the above. You just
can't be gone for months on film shoots and still be a good dad to six
kids, let alone blow time on idle, Roarke-ish dilletantism with Frank
Gehry. Who cares if you slip away for a lost tryst with some honey,
provided you're safe, discreet and maintain your emotional fidelity to
yer baby mama? What really counts is being there for the birthdays
(times 6!), soothing nightmares, kicking around the soccer ball,
explaining the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle--hah, gotcha there,
Brad! I can intelligently discuss the work of Rem Koolhaas versus
Gehry (citing Gaudi liberally in regard the latter) as well as natter
about quantum physics...but not for six kids! Not without letting
something slip.