What is up with Brad Pitt?

[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.

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.

At the very beginning, yes. And they clearly adored their kids. But they often seemed tense and not affectionate with each other.

[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.

Brad kept his friends—the ones that mattered. He wasn’t friends with her pals. Her friends are self-absorbed celebs who do nothing charitable. He pivoted to Angelina and maintained friendships with the Clooneys, Matt Damon, and other celebs who lead normal family lives and are known for philanthropy.

He wanted kids. He wanted to make a difference. Remember his efforts in NoLa post Katrina?

Jen didn’t want kids. She’s self-centered and from a dysfunctional family. Her dogs and party animal celeb pals are her family. Remember the guy who died at one of her parties in Mexico?

[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.

Brad kept his friends—the ones that mattered. He wasn’t friends with her pals. Her friends are self-absorbed celebs who do nothing charitable. He pivoted to Angelina and maintained friendships with the Clooneys, Matt Damon, and other celebs who lead normal family lives and are known for philanthropy.

He wanted kids. He wanted to make a difference. Remember his efforts in NoLa post Katrina?

Jen didn’t want kids. She’s self-centered and from a dysfunctional family. Her dogs and party animal celeb pals are her family. Remember the guy who died at one of her parties in Mexico?

Not Clooney, he was loyal to Aniston, never liked AJ. The Damons remained friendly to all involved, but I don't remember any time their family socialized with Brad's. So who are these friends that mattered?

[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.

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.

At the very beginning, yes. And they clearly adored their kids. But they often seemed tense and not affectionate with each other.

I don't disagree. I think she said in an interview she wasn't a hugger. She seemed to operate at extremes, either PDA makeouts or a cool remove. She's an odd duck, from a very messed up family.

[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.

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.

At the very beginning, yes. And they clearly adored their kids. But they often seemed tense and not affectionate with each other.

Yeah I think the reason the Aniston-Pitt split was so shocking is they were always so warm and affectionate with each other. Jolie-Pitt split was shocking mainly because of the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He is an ACTOR.

True. I don't buy the aw shucks corn fed persona at all. Not really surprising that two narcissists ended up hating each other. Especially if they couldn't agree on anything parenting related.

I think both probably had positives on the parenting front though. She is probably more permissive but I bet also did the bulk of the emotional labor for the kids while he was off doing his thing and turning into an unpleasant drunk. I also think he's right about wanting a home base and regular schooling for the kids. That many kids, fundamental disagreements about how to raise them, nothing much in common beyond the kids to begin with...easy to see how mutual resentment could turn into growing dislike and eventual toxicity. Both have massive egos, and both should have worked to set aside their differences and come to an agreement for the kids' sake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

At the very beginning, yes. And they clearly adored their kids. But they often seemed tense and not affectionate with each other.

Yeah I think the reason the Aniston-Pitt split was so shocking is they were always so warm and affectionate with each other. Jolie-Pitt split was shocking mainly because of the kids.

100%
He and Angelina seemed miserable together after maybe the first year. He and Aniston seemed happy together until the end. That’s why it was all such a soap opera.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is an ACTOR.

True. I don't buy the aw shucks corn fed persona at all. Not really surprising that two narcissists ended up hating each other. Especially if they couldn't agree on anything parenting related.

I think both probably had positives on the parenting front though. She is probably more permissive but I bet also did the bulk of the emotional labor for the kids while he was off doing his thing and turning into an unpleasant drunk. I also think he's right about wanting a home base and regular schooling for the kids. That many kids, fundamental disagreements about how to raise them, nothing much in common beyond the kids to begin with...easy to see how mutual resentment could turn into growing dislike and eventual toxicity. Both have massive egos, and both should have worked to set aside their differences and come to an agreement for the kids' sake.

Although I’m not a huge fan of anyone involved I think they aw shucks thing is real. He’s from the Midwest. His family is normal and he seems close with them. He has a large friend group but he’s been close with for decades. Everyone in Hollywood talks about what a nice guy he is. He just got in over his head and then managed to mess everything up along the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is an ACTOR.

True. I don't buy the aw shucks corn fed persona at all. Not really surprising that two narcissists ended up hating each other. Especially if they couldn't agree on anything parenting related.

I think both probably had positives on the parenting front though. She is probably more permissive but I bet also did the bulk of the emotional labor for the kids while he was off doing his thing and turning into an unpleasant drunk. I also think he's right about wanting a home base and regular schooling for the kids. That many kids, fundamental disagreements about how to raise them, nothing much in common beyond the kids to begin with...easy to see how mutual resentment could turn into growing dislike and eventual toxicity. Both have massive egos, and both should have worked to set aside their differences and come to an agreement for the kids' sake.

Although I’m not a huge fan of anyone involved I think they aw shucks thing is real. He’s from the Midwest. His family is normal and he seems close with them. He has a large friend group but he’s been close with for decades. Everyone in Hollywood talks about what a nice guy he is. He just got in over his head and then managed to mess everything up along the way.

I don't think he does have a friend group that goes way back, just a lot of superficial Hollywood acquaintances who find him very pleasant. True that he's close to his family. Polar opposite of Jolie in that regard.

[Anonymous]

As a fellow "aww shucks" midwesterner from the same region as Brad Pitt (and Ashton Kutcher, who lived in the same town as me)- take it from me that that cornfed, wholesome narrative is a myth, like Bigfoot or tasty nonalcoholic wine.

The midwest is full of drugs, booze, premarital sex, violence, etc- just like everywhere else. Brad is a guy, like a guy from anywhere. For better or for worse.

Upon reflecting about his dreadlock beard, worse.