What is up with Brad Pitt?

[Anonymous]

Ugh the Aniston, I don't know what to call them, stans? have arrived.

What I have never understood is the desire to paint any of the three of them in stark black and white relief. They are all humans, they have all leveraged the scandal, and Brad Pitt clearly loved both of them at different/the same times. This is not a special story, it happens all the time. The people involved can be terrible and can be nice people who made mistakes. We don't know and we never will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jen didn’t want kids. She wanted to advance her career by doing films and endorsements.

Brad wanted kids. That was Angie’s appeal. Plus, Angie was deep and dedicated to charity. Jen does charity, but isn’t very involved.

I don’t think Jen milked the failed relationship to boost her career. I do think her team curated a victim narrative that included the baby/is she pregnant/is she struggling with fertility issues that kept her on the cover of magazines.

... I don't think having kids was Angelina's appeal. It might be that family is what kept them together so long.

I don't understand people that don't see this. They got together and ended up with six kids!

Obviously they HAD lots of kids together. But it seems clear that what would attract a person to Angelina Jolie is that she was phenomenally hot and basically sexy in a way that no one else in the world at that time could come close to touching. She was WEIRD hot. And I would imagine that whatever instigated that relationship has more to do with her overpowering sexual attraction than anything to do with them building a family down the line.

Who in the world could or would have turned down Angelina back in the Mr and Mrs Smith days? I'm a straight woman and I would have ditched my husband in five seconds if she's set her sights on me. And no not because we decided we wanted a family together.

I think their kids are why they stayed together so long. I don't think it's why they got together. Also that weirdly blames Aniston for the breakup - like "oh look at you barren waste of a uterus, you couldn't keep Brad Pitt because someone who wanted to procreate provided a soft shoulder)

[Anonymous]

Yeah, up until she got pregnant with the twins she was always saying she didn’t want kids! Also supposedly part of the knock on Jen was that she wanted to stay home and knit and he wanted more of an exciting party life.

He has a reputation as a hard worker as an actor so I don’t think the knock on him being lazy is right. It seems like he’s a pot head in his spare time but takes his craft seriously. Look at something like Moneyball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jen didn’t want kids. She wanted to advance her career by doing films and endorsements.

Brad wanted kids. That was Angie’s appeal. Plus, Angie was deep and dedicated to charity. Jen does charity, but isn’t very involved.

I don’t think Jen milked the failed relationship to boost her career. I do think her team curated a victim narrative that included the baby/is she pregnant/is she struggling with fertility issues that kept her on the cover of magazines.

... I don't think having kids was Angelina's appeal. It might be that family is what kept them together so long.

I don't understand people that don't see this. They got together and ended up with six kids!

Obviously they HAD lots of kids together. But it seems clear that what would attract a person to Angelina Jolie is that she was phenomenally hot and basically sexy in a way that no one else in the world at that time could come close to touching. She was WEIRD hot. And I would imagine that whatever instigated that relationship has more to do with her overpowering sexual attraction than anything to do with them building a family down the line.

Who in the world could or would have turned down Angelina back in the Mr and Mrs Smith days? I'm a straight woman and I would have ditched my husband in five seconds if she's set her sights on me. And no not because we decided we wanted a family together.

I think their kids are why they stayed together so long. I don't think it's why they got together. Also that weirdly blames Aniston for the breakup - like "oh look at you barren waste of a uterus, you couldn't keep Brad Pitt because someone who wanted to procreate provided a soft shoulder)

I think that it was both. Not disregarding the extreme hotness of 2000s angie. They didn't just get together and have smoking hot sex, they got together and immediately started building a family.

Re the bolded I do not think that at all. To have kids or to not have kids is an enormously fraught issue in many marriages. If she didn't want kids then she is not a barren waste of a uterus, she just didn't want kids! Which is fine! But I have yet to see a marriage work when they had diametrically opposed desires about having kids. It also doesn't excuse him cheating or the way it went down. Just makes me think the marriage was already doomed if that was an issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jen didn’t want kids. She wanted to advance her career by doing films and endorsements.

Brad wanted kids. That was Angie’s appeal. Plus, Angie was deep and dedicated to charity. Jen does charity, but isn’t very involved.

I don’t think Jen milked the failed relationship to boost her career. I do think her team curated a victim narrative that included the baby/is she pregnant/is she struggling with fertility issues that kept her on the cover of magazines.

... I don't think having kids was Angelina's appeal. It might be that family is what kept them together so long.

I don't understand people that don't see this. They got together and ended up with six kids!

Obviously they HAD lots of kids together. But it seems clear that what would attract a person to Angelina Jolie is that she was phenomenally hot and basically sexy in a way that no one else in the world at that time could come close to touching. She was WEIRD hot. And I would imagine that whatever instigated that relationship has more to do with her overpowering sexual attraction than anything to do with them building a family down the line.

Who in the world could or would have turned down Angelina back in the Mr and Mrs Smith days? I'm a straight woman and I would have ditched my husband in five seconds if she's set her sights on me. And no not because we decided we wanted a family together.

I think their kids are why they stayed together so long. I don't think it's why they got together. Also that weirdly blames Aniston for the breakup - like "oh look at you barren waste of a uterus, you couldn't keep Brad Pitt because someone who wanted to procreate provided a soft shoulder)

I think that it was both. Not disregarding the extreme hotness of 2000s angie. They didn't just get together and have smoking hot sex, they got together and immediately started building a family.

Re the bolded I do not think that at all. To have kids or to not have kids is an enormously fraught issue in many marriages. If she didn't want kids then she is not a barren waste of a uterus, she just didn't want kids! Which is fine! But I have yet to see a marriage work when they had diametrically opposed desires about having kids. It also doesn't excuse him cheating or the way it went down. Just makes me think the marriage was already doomed if that was an issue.

Sure, but what if it's that she struggled with infertility? He said in an interview (Diane Sawyer) accounts of her denying him kids were BS, and she's alluded to having fertility problems when she was with Theroux.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jen didn’t want kids. She wanted to advance her career by doing films and endorsements.

Brad wanted kids. That was Angie’s appeal. Plus, Angie was deep and dedicated to charity. Jen does charity, but isn’t very involved.

I don’t think Jen milked the failed relationship to boost her career. I do think her team curated a victim narrative that included the baby/is she pregnant/is she struggling with fertility issues that kept her on the cover of magazines.

... I don't think having kids was Angelina's appeal. It might be that family is what kept them together so long.

I don't understand people that don't see this. They got together and ended up with six kids!

Obviously they HAD lots of kids together. But it seems clear that what would attract a person to Angelina Jolie is that she was phenomenally hot and basically sexy in a way that no one else in the world at that time could come close to touching. She was WEIRD hot. And I would imagine that whatever instigated that relationship has more to do with her overpowering sexual attraction than anything to do with them building a family down the line.

Who in the world could or would have turned down Angelina back in the Mr and Mrs Smith days? I'm a straight woman and I would have ditched my husband in five seconds if she's set her sights on me. And no not because we decided we wanted a family together.

I think their kids are why they stayed together so long. I don't think it's why they got together. Also that weirdly blames Aniston for the breakup - like "oh look at you barren waste of a uterus, you couldn't keep Brad Pitt because someone who wanted to procreate provided a soft shoulder)

I think that it was both. Not disregarding the extreme hotness of 2000s angie. They didn't just get together and have smoking hot sex, they got together and immediately started building a family.

Re the bolded I do not think that at all. To have kids or to not have kids is an enormously fraught issue in many marriages. If she didn't want kids then she is not a barren waste of a uterus, she just didn't want kids! Which is fine! But I have yet to see a marriage work when they had diametrically opposed desires about having kids. It also doesn't excuse him cheating or the way it went down. Just makes me think the marriage was already doomed if that was an issue.

Sure, but what if it's that she struggled with infertility? He said in an interview (Diane Sawyer) accounts of her denying him kids were BS, and she's alluded to having fertility problems when she was with Theroux.

He was clearly fine with adopting children. I don't think infertility was the issue. Maybe it wasn't kids but I think it was something. The angie thing was not a fling.

[Anonymous]

He's a not-that-bright, good-hearted guy who ended up way over his head in the Hollywood gossip scene.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, up until she got pregnant with the twins she was always saying she didn’t want kids! Also supposedly part of the knock on Jen was that she wanted to stay home and knit and he wanted more of an exciting party life.

He has a reputation as a hard worker as an actor so I don’t think the knock on him being lazy is right. It seems like he’s a pot head in his spare time but takes his craft seriously. Look at something like Moneyball.

Both he and Jen seem beloved in Hollywood. No one has a bad word to say about either of them, and they're surrounded by friends. IMO that means something (as opposed to Angie).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jen didn’t want kids. She wanted to advance her career by doing films and endorsements.

Brad wanted kids. That was Angie’s appeal. Plus, Angie was deep and dedicated to charity. Jen does charity, but isn’t very involved.

I don’t think Jen milked the failed relationship to boost her career. I do think her team curated a victim narrative that included the baby/is she pregnant/is she struggling with fertility issues that kept her on the cover of magazines.

... I don't think having kids was Angelina's appeal. It might be that family is what kept them together so long.

I don't understand people that don't see this. They got together and ended up with six kids!

Obviously they HAD lots of kids together. But it seems clear that what would attract a person to Angelina Jolie is that she was phenomenally hot and basically sexy in a way that no one else in the world at that time could come close to touching. She was WEIRD hot. And I would imagine that whatever instigated that relationship has more to do with her overpowering sexual attraction than anything to do with them building a family down the line.

Who in the world could or would have turned down Angelina back in the Mr and Mrs Smith days? I'm a straight woman and I would have ditched my husband in five seconds if she's set her sights on me. And no not because we decided we wanted a family together.

I think their kids are why they stayed together so long. I don't think it's why they got together. Also that weirdly blames Aniston for the breakup - like "oh look at you barren waste of a uterus, you couldn't keep Brad Pitt because someone who wanted to procreate provided a soft shoulder)

I think that it was both. Not disregarding the extreme hotness of 2000s angie. They didn't just get together and have smoking hot sex, they got together and immediately started building a family.

Re the bolded I do not think that at all. To have kids or to not have kids is an enormously fraught issue in many marriages. If she didn't want kids then she is not a barren waste of a uterus, she just didn't want kids! Which is fine! But I have yet to see a marriage work when they had diametrically opposed desires about having kids. It also doesn't excuse him cheating or the way it went down. Just makes me think the marriage was already doomed if that was an issue.

Sure, but what if it's that she struggled with infertility? He said in an interview (Diane Sawyer) accounts of her denying him kids were BS, and she's alluded to having fertility problems when she was with Theroux.

DP but she married Theroux when she was 41. Fertility issues at 41 doesn't mean that fertility issues are why she didn't have kids in her 30s. And she could have used a surrogate or adopted if she wanted kids - she's super rich. It's fine not to want kids but there's something strange about Aniston where the people who take up for her want her to be all things at all times - living her best single life on the beach in Mexico not thinking about Pitt at all but still somehow she's more motherly than Jolie because even though she doesn't have kids she must obviously have wanted them because she's so girl-next-door and sweet? It's weird.

Pitt & Aniston gave an interview during their marriage where they said they don't think people are hardwired to be with one person forever and that they'd only be together as long as it was fun (or as long as they were growing in the same direction? Something like that). I'd forgotten about it but when Oprah's 20th Anniversary thing came out I saw it again and it struck me as insane that she made a cottage industry out of being devastated by divorce after having that on the record.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jen didn’t want kids. She wanted to advance her career by doing films and endorsements.

Brad wanted kids. That was Angie’s appeal. Plus, Angie was deep and dedicated to charity. Jen does charity, but isn’t very involved.

I don’t think Jen milked the failed relationship to boost her career. I do think her team curated a victim narrative that included the baby/is she pregnant/is she struggling with fertility issues that kept her on the cover of magazines.

... I don't think having kids was Angelina's appeal. It might be that family is what kept them together so long.

Agree, why on earth would you choose someone with her history of obvious mental illness to procreate with? He was drawn to her for excitement primarily. Aniston retained all their friends after the breakup. They clearly felt she was wronged, and that seems unlikely if she were "denying" him children. Her friends insisted in that famous Vanity Fair article she was the one who wanted kids. It's possible she had trouble conceiving and he met someone else he was hot for and didn't want to hang around and work it out. And Jolie, who said she never wanted bio children, got knocked up in a red hot second. Who knows how long that relationship would have lasted if there weren't kids involved. Not long, probably. I think he was miserable, but stayed (too long) for the kids.

Agree he was 100% miserable with AJ but is ultimately a good guy and wanted to keep the family together. What a mess.

[Anonymous]

What happened to him, was that he got airs! I will always judge him by the report of the body guard who reported that Pitt asked him how to go about getting coffee.
They were in a hotel or something and he and Jolie were confused about getting down to a bar. He reported that they had no common sense about simple things, that is how removed they are from the world, Brad and Jolie, that is.
Now, if you think about that, that is nothing but posturing for Pitt. I can kind of see for Jolie, she grew up in Hollywood, but Brad? Come on, corn grown home boy!
That is fake. Unless his brain is eaten by drugs, he know hot to go to a bar.
"How do we get down to that bar?" Really! Yeah, no! That's nothing but pretense.
I understand that none of the weird Hollywood are normal people, not any more.
The idea that Pitt was Jolie's victim!!! is an appalling patriarchal abomination!
He would be ripped apart in Family Court!
I drink and yell and want kids to have a normal life and she is insane mom who let the kids run loose?! Really! And the sad thing is most of the women bought into that and took his side!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What happened to him, was that he got airs! I will always judge him by the report of the body guard who reported that Pitt asked him how to go about getting coffee.
They were in a hotel or something and he and Jolie were confused about getting down to a bar. He reported that they had no common sense about simple things, that is how removed they are from the world, Brad and Jolie, that is.
Now, if you think about that, that is nothing but posturing for Pitt. I can kind of see for Jolie, she grew up in Hollywood, but Brad? Come on, corn grown home boy!
That is fake. Unless his brain is eaten by drugs, he know hot to go to a bar.
"How do we get down to that bar?" Really! Yeah, no! That's nothing but pretense.
I understand that none of the weird Hollywood are normal people, not any more.
The idea that Pitt was Jolie's victim!!! is an appalling patriarchal abomination!
He would be ripped apart in Family Court!
I drink and yell and want kids to have a normal life and she is insane mom who let the kids run loose?! Really! And the sad thing is most of the women bought into that and took his side!

Um you do realize the courts seemed to take his side (once he stopped drinking)? The kids now go to regular schools and have a stable home base like he wished. She wants to roam the world, dragging the kids with her. Two very different parenting philosophies--hers is pretty selfish. She's now doing everything to delay proceeds to stall the 50-50 split that seems to be coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happened to him, was that he got airs! I will always judge him by the report of the body guard who reported that Pitt asked him how to go about getting coffee.
They were in a hotel or something and he and Jolie were confused about getting down to a bar. He reported that they had no common sense about simple things, that is how removed they are from the world, Brad and Jolie, that is.
Now, if you think about that, that is nothing but posturing for Pitt. I can kind of see for Jolie, she grew up in Hollywood, but Brad? Come on, corn grown home boy!
That is fake. Unless his brain is eaten by drugs, he know hot to go to a bar.
"How do we get down to that bar?" Really! Yeah, no! That's nothing but pretense.
I understand that none of the weird Hollywood are normal people, not any more.
The idea that Pitt was Jolie's victim!!! is an appalling patriarchal abomination!
He would be ripped apart in Family Court!
I drink and yell and want kids to have a normal life and she is insane mom who let the kids run loose?! Really! And the sad thing is most of the women bought into that and took his side!

Um you do realize the courts seemed to take his side (once he stopped drinking)? The kids now go to regular schools and have a stable home base like he wished. She wants to roam the world, dragging the kids with her. Two very different parenting philosophies--hers is pretty selfish. She's now doing everything to delay proceeds to stall the 50-50 split that seems to be coming.

Yeah, no I don't realize anything, bcs I do not follow that freak show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jen didn’t want kids. She wanted to advance her career by doing films and endorsements.

Brad wanted kids. That was Angie’s appeal. Plus, Angie was deep and dedicated to charity. Jen does charity, but isn’t very involved.

I don’t think Jen milked the failed relationship to boost her career. I do think her team curated a victim narrative that included the baby/is she pregnant/is she struggling with fertility issues that kept her on the cover of magazines.

... I don't think having kids was Angelina's appeal. It might be that family is what kept them together so long.

Agree, why on earth would you choose someone with her history of obvious mental illness to procreate with? He was drawn to her for excitement primarily. Aniston retained all their friends after the breakup. They clearly felt she was wronged, and that seems unlikely if she were "denying" him children. Her friends insisted in that famous Vanity Fair article she was the one who wanted kids. It's possible she had trouble conceiving and he met someone else he was hot for and didn't want to hang around and work it out. And Jolie, who said she never wanted bio children, got knocked up in a red hot second. Who knows how long that relationship would have lasted if there weren't kids involved. Not long, probably. I think he was miserable, but stayed (too long) for the kids.

Agree he was 100% miserable with AJ but is ultimately a good guy and wanted to keep the family together. What a mess.

I wonder what the rationale people like you have is. They didn't even actually get married until 2015. They adopted and gestated multiple children together. They seemed glowingly happy for most of their relationship. I assume it was volatile because of the nature of how they got together and how they both seemed very passion driven but to act like he was unhappy but staying there for the family but ALSO that he now hardly sees the kids? How does that track?

They were CLEARLY into each other for most of it. Anyone who doesn't see that is letting their blind hatred of AJ prevent them from seeing reality.

[Anonymous]

I have never understood the appeal or interest. I don't find him attractive or talented, and he seems dumb and boring AF.

He literally morphs into his partners. He seems like the ultimate beta pothead loser. Yes, I know he's rich and famous and that a lot of people see him as the pinnacle of male attractiveness. I don't see one bit of it.