I was thinking about writing something along these lines yesterday, but I’m glad I waited. It seems the backlash continues to grow against this week’s Life & Style cover featuring Shiloh Jolie-Pitt’s tomboy ways. Perhaps this is because L&S did the craziest, most hysterical, most disgusting piece on how “Angelina is turning Shiloh into a boy” and the piece even featured a snotty quote from a spokesperson from Focus on the Family who farted out some nonsense about “Little girls have never been women before… gender distinction is very healthy.” The overwhelming majority of commenters on this site, and others, were outraged by the cover, and the now the story has become “Jesus Christ, leave the little girl alone, and everyone associated with the story should have their careers end. Now.” Gawker even ran a piece called “Can We Stop Calling Shiloh Jolie-Pitt a Lesbian?” Here you go:
The tabs are freaking out that Shiloh Jolie-Pitt looks like a LITTLE BOY; this issue was of such pressing importance that Life & Style put it on the cover.
But people have been freaking out over this for a couple months. In January Bonnie Fuller wrote on her blog Hollywood Life: “In recent photos she’s been decked out in a fedora, tie, camouflage pants, boy vest, pirate sword, navy knit skull and crossbones hat, black jeans, gray jackets, black and white skull socks and sneakers. Even the stuffed animal she carries is blue. Never ever is Shiloh dolled up in anything remotely girlish. Her blond hair is hidden under hats or left unbrushed and pushed to the side of her face. Her sister Zahara Jolie-Pitt, however, is allowed to have her girly touches. HER Mary Poppins hair was pulled into a purple barrette and a pretty bracelets escaped from under the arm of her coat.”
Fuller also quotes a “psychiatrist” who says that the way Shiloh dresses is because it’s a way for Angelina to express her bisexuality.
And the Early Show this morning picked up on the Life & Style story; co-anchor co-anchor Maggie Rodriguez “posed the question of whether or not that could confuse a child about their gender identity.”
What is this, 1950?
At least Salon came through with a voice of reason. Mary Elizabeth Williams writes that if she had as many kids as the Jolie-Pitts, her daughters would have buzz cuts.
[From Gawker]
Ugh, do you know how much I hate the demon named Bonnie Fuller? Meanwhile, that VH1 stylist, Alana Kelen, who was quoted in the L&S story, has sent a note to Jezebel about the situation. Just to recap, Kelen told the magazine: “Shiloh is pushing the boundaries of a tomboy look and crossing over to cross-dresser territory.” Here are the basics of Kelen’s “apology”.
I have lost sleep these past 2 nights due to the horrible thoughts and comments they included and attributed to me in this particular story for Life & Style, as they were taken completely out of context. They use me often for style quotes, so I had no idea they would twist my words, and they always contact me for final approval, which they did not do this time around.
I left this post as a comment to your story: “My career has been all about personal expression through clothing, and I am the biggest believer that any person should wear anything they choose, regardless of age or sex. The quote I did provide to Life & Style actually praised Shiloh’s parents for letting her be who she wants to be, and included that she has two cool older brothers who she is probably trying to emulate, and that she looks up to, and that there is NOTHING at all wrong with it … quite the opposite. I was hoping it would influence other parents to let their children do the same.”
Again, I am sorry that my words were misinterpreted, and please be assured that I would never say anything bad about any person, especially a child.
Really, I am in tears right now because this just makes me sick. In the past, L&S have often used me for style quotes, and they always give me final approval, so I trusted them for this piece, mistakenly. The actual quote began with “Some might think …” but they conveniently took that out to make it seem the thought was my own, and did not contact me for that final approval.
Many of my friends in life & at work are in fact lesbian, gay & transgendered, and that is why this is most upsetting to me. They can vouch that I would NEVER say such things. It’s just not the person I am.
Would love if you could include my thoughts, less about restoring my reputation, but more for helping people believe that is is natural and right to let children and people in general express themselves any way they choose, in clothing & in life.
[From Jezebel]
I don’t get it. Either she wrote that Shiloh was a cross-dresser, or she didn’t. I get that she didn’t want the “cross-dressing” comment to be published (now that it has been published and scorned), but I still don’t see how you can take “Shiloh” and “cross dressing” out of context. You’re still putting those words together in a sentence.
Meanwhile, GLAAD is getting involved now. GLAAD’s Senior Director of Media Programs, Rashad Robinson released a statement saying in part: “Perpetuating gender stereotypes and targeting children for ridicule about the way they dress is unacceptable, regardless of their parent’s celebrity status. Media has a responsibility to differentiate between credible authorities and politically motivated (and usually self-proclaimed) ‘experts’ like Focus on the Family’s Glenn Stanton, who is not an expert on developmental issues or gender identity.” Well said.
i hate brangelina but everyone, except them, need to leave this little girl alone. it’s disgusting the things that are being printed about Shiloh and if i were her parents, i’d sue.
why are people talking *ish about a kid?!? what is wrong with everyone?
I don’t like Angelina and I don’t like Brad but most of all, I don’t like it when innocent kids are involved in this hatred. These kids are just victims of the circumstances, they don’t have the slightest idea what their parents represents to the media, much less why are they liked or disliked so much.
But the one thing I can say, that has nothing to do with my dislike of Brangelina, is WTF happened to Shiloh’s hair? Her’s used to be light blonde and thin. Now is darker and fluffier. You don’t get that by just cutting it. It looks as if she was wearing a wig, which she obviously is not.
Poor little cherub, she can dress how she wants – I had an older brother I looked up to and wanted everything he wanted.
However, we must remember that it was Shiloh’s own parents who turned her birth into a media circus, sold her out to the press when she was barely a week old and have continued to use her (and her siblings) as a promotional tool. It’s unsurprising, then, that the tabloids see commenting on those kids as fair game.
Wurd.
Bonnie Fuller and Focus on the Family need to help themselves to a steaming cup of STFU.
They are not commenting on the kid pookie, they are disparaging the kid, pathologizing something they have no idea about based off a couple of recent pics, and imputing nefarious motives to one of the parents. This is well beyond the pale, well beyond what I have seen on the cover of any gossip magazine and stepped completely over the line.
You think there would be this much outrage, nearly universal despite warring camps on brangelina, if it hadnt violated some boundary of public discourse?
So what are you saying, dooky? Because your “however” statement about her parents sounds like their behavior justifies it. I sincerely hope not.
There should be strict laws about this kind of thing. Anyone under the age of 18 should be fully protected from being the subject of unauthorized ‘journalism’.
I remember a lot of pictures of Shiloh when she was a baby dressed up in pretty little dresses. It’s obvious that this is how she choses to dress. She’s three. Maybe it’s a phase, maybe it’s not but in any case, toddlers don’t have a sexual orientation and to speculate on that–regardless of how couched your speculation is–is disgusting and pathetic.
C’mon people atleast leave the kids alone. Brad and Angelina please sue this magazine!!
Okay, I’ve made no secret of my passionate dislike for Brangelina, but this is absolutely ridiculous. Leave the child alone.
When I was 7, I decided I wanted a pixie hair cut (my hair was down to my rear end); my mother allowed it. I hated it at first, but I got used to it and I loved it. I hated pink, preferred jeans to frilly dresses, played with Tonka trucks instead of Barbies, rode a dirt bike, and played tackle football with the boys in the neighbourhood. I now have 3 children, and I am not gay, so no one should be judging this little girl or her parents.
When my daughter was 4 or 5, she decided she wanted a Halle Berry haircut (my daughter and oldest son are of mixed heritage); I allowed it, and she looked adorable. It was also much easier to care for. She also hated pink, preferred jeans and t-shirts, and played with whatever toys she chose. She’s now a teenager who likes boys, so there was absolutely nothing to worry about (not that I did).
Bottom line: let your children express themselves how they so choose, no matter what others say, provided it is not harmful to them.
Like a few others have said, I do not have a high opinion of Brad or Angelina, but feel that their kids, and all Hollywood kids, should be left alone. They did not choose to become famous, and this sort of scrutiny is completely unfair and ridiculous.
Good grief, I had pixie cuts every summer when I was little. Mom got sick and tired of me screaming when she’d brush out the tangles. BUT I was forced to wear what Mom wanted me to wear. I, in turn, let my two girls chose their own style as bizarre as it was at times. Ballet outfits with flip flops,bathing suits with cowboy boots. I wouldn’t trade those memories for anything.
Am not a fan, but i totally agree that shiloh needs to be left alone.
I don’t see a problem with the quote if it had an “some might think…” and a different ending, it’s common to state the comment of the opposing party before making your reasons as to why they’re wrong. Also agree w/ Jill that kids need to be left alone through law-making.
Your site ate my comment. So, in brief, read the article and it is clear as the sky how Kelen could have said the quote and been defending Shiloh.
Second, compare Cruise kid’s refusal to wear pants. Both make choices, rags only recognize one.
I’m certainly no fan of Angelina or Brad…but this crosses over the line – she’s a little girl and she has NO business on the cover of these Tabloids!! This is the exact reason why I hate that any celebrity parent starts selling their kids images from birth – they become fair game and they are not!! They all need to leave this poor child alone.
i completely agree with jill…i don’t care who their parents are, no little kid should have this kind of thing written about them…this is sad and disgusting and should be illegal.
in some other countries (france is the only one i can think of) it actually is illegal to publish picttures of celebs kids until they’re adults, idk if it’s also illegal to write about them but I would imagine.
Seriously, why all the sexualization of this little girl? She’s just a toddler, dressing the way she likes. It has nothing to do with sexuality or gender identity… and even if it did, what’s the problem? Should Brangelina not allow her to be whoever she wants to be?
I swear, Focus On The Family makes me sick. More like “Focus on Forcing Every Family into the Exact Same Mold.”
snarf # 5 .. my sentiments exactly!!!
Leave Shiloh alone.. she’s just a little girl who likes to wear pants because you can’t keep up with your big brothers in a dress!! and who wants to spend all morning doing hair when you can wash and go…
Bonnie Fuller would look very nice with a size-8 footprint on her butt. (I’d be more than happy to volunteer to put one there.) So now the bitch is ragging on Shiloh because she wears black, blue and gray? Little Knox was seen slurping a pink gelato. Does this mean he was eating gay ice cream?
@mollyb: I remember seeing a photo of Shiloh and Z shortly after the twins were born, when they were wearing black cotton sun dresses. The haters had a field day screaming that Angie was initiating the girls into Satanism.
why would ADULTS be speculating on the sexuality of a THREE YEAR OLD?! those so-called experts need a punch in the face and some therapy. because THAT is effed up.
When a so called advanced society goes as far as violating a child integrity, that society as a whole is bankrupt to the core.
I don’t care whose her parents or what they did, everyone who sexualize a child wether in the media, on blogs, because of his/her clothes or behaviour or parents is at fault and responsible of THIS insanity.
There is NO justification EVER to act paedophilic like and transfering adult sexual orientation and perception to a child this young, any child !
Obscenity at its best. It baffles my mind everytime people are criticizing Brangelina as the insane ones when they are in fact part of a process where hysteria is the main driven force and participate deliberately to such insanity put at a level never reached before where children are ridiculed, insulted trashed in a way that would be traumatizing to any sane adult.
I’m not surprised by the nonsense in this magazine, it is a tabloid rag after all. That said, there is nothing wrong with being tomboyish and it’s massively sexist to suggest otherwise. My generation has a far more broad set of options for gender and THAT is healthy. Shiloh should be so lucky she has parents who let her find herself and dress the way she feels. It’s very healthy for children to feel accepted as they are and to not have parents force things on them that don’t suit their individuality. Given that her parents are artists, I am unsurprised by this and happily pleased.
Alana Kelen did apologize-and she said that her statement should have starting with “Some might think”. In other words, she herself does not believe the statement but that some people (likely strange people) might.
It is really very wrong to talk about a child in a tabloid magazine, especially about the sexuality of one. A three year old has no sexuality nor real gender identity yet. Why anyone would attribute that to one is beyond comprehension.
Raven, the tabs talked about Suri all the time when her parents were parading her around New York in dresses but no coats and no shoes (sometimes). They also got on them for letting her wear kitten heels. There is no double standard here.
Big celebrities (not just Ang and Brad) have ‘sold’ pics of their babies so they can control who takes the first pics and, most importantly, so the paps aren’t chasing them down every second trying to score the first shot – it has nothing to do with PR and everything to do with safety, control, and charity in some cases.
There have been other celebritities who have also sold their first baby pics and donated the money to charity…
#24 Chana i don’t agree.
They didn’t sexualize Suri for putting high heels. They didn’t say she was turning into a woman with her precocious sexuality. they didn’t crossed that line. They could have used that element to do but didn’t.
They just talked about how it would ruined her legs, they didn’t transferred any obscene observation and over the top perception of what she was turning into by putting high heels…but they did it with Shiloh.
They let Suri be a child, they however put Shiloh in an adult perspective hence, a product you could trashed like she was an adult. She is the only child with whom they use that freedom.
Here is the double standard.
Firstly, I believe Life & Style and ALL magazines need to stop putting children on the covers. It’s just plain WRONG and there should be laws in place to protect these kids. Exploiting children is exploiting children, period.
Having said that, celebrities need to stop the practice of selling photos of their kids for ‘exclusives’ when they are born or at any other time so as not to confuse this issue. They often share in the blame of exploiting their kids. It starts to be a very fine line when it’s okay for them to pimp out their own kid, but not for anyone else to do so. That’s not to say it would stop this absurdity, but it’s a start.
i think it’s really skeevy for adults to be thinking about a child’s sexuality, period. are they pedophiles or something?
@ Cheyenne:
Hey, I’ll fight you for that foot! I’m a size 11……want me to do it? I think mine would hurt a little more. Let me know….LOL!
Love the comments here. I have become really fed up with all the gender bashing that Shiloh is getting.
Like bellaluna and Ann I had really short hair throughout my childhood; having curly hair in the 60s and 70s was a bitch. Went to Catholic school so I did the dress drag every day.
My boyfriend’s daughters dress a lot like Shiloh when they’re at our house. They’re very active and they like wearing superheroes, skulls and cargo pants (lotsa pockets!). The youngest one is Shiloh’s age; her favorite clothes are a monster truck sweatshirt and Cars slippers. They love having the freedom to dress the way they want.
I really love what Johnny Weir said about Canadian announcers questioning his gender, “There’s a whole generation of people that aren’t defined by their sex or their race or by who they like to sleep with. I think as a person you know what your values are and what you believe in, and I think that’s the most important thing.”
Bonnie Fuller is a cockroach crossed with a flea. And I speak from personal experience. She’s a complete moron. But she WAS, you know, a top model.
i too don’t like Angie or Brad — they are stupid and i mean really stupid in the brain dept. and they both are looking wrinkly and old way before their time — probably from all the flying they do.
that said — i confess that it’s my opinion that someone does probably encourage this little girl to dress as a boy. and her hair does appear to be darkened — but until we see the roots grow in, we won’t know if that’s artificial. sickening.
growing part of a large group like this one is not easy on these kids. they clearly have to wait in line for attention from the so-called parents — hope the 2 dopes who created this fine mess see that one day.
#8 Jill
In France, you cannot feature a child on the cover of a magazine without his/her parents consent and the face of celebrity children are blurred.
Also this kind of report of L&S wouldn’t be possible because i don’t think that any magazine would risk being sued. They would be sued without a doubt by child protective associations in no time and/or the parents, there would be a huge backlash from everyday people and even from certain politicians will have their say in it like those who work in the department of the ‘Protection de l’enfance’ (Child Protection)…That magazine in France cif it had reached the shelters could have been seized within the very few hours because of all these offences and because it crosses many laws in France (like putting Shiloh on the cover without her parents consent for one)
And i am absolutely sure that no expert would risk to be featured in it because he/she may very well lose his/her licence to practice by their own peers even before the Court weighs in it.
Not only did I have a pixie cut as a kid, my youngest son’s favorite shirt is a PINK polo shirt. Gasp! We’re such freaks…
All these people at Life & Style need to STFU. I agree with everyone else here and am just as disgusted that anyone is sexualizing children. UGH. And for the record, I can’t stand the Brange. Totally backing them on this one though…
focus on the family has the social values of the friggin taliban.
they are the american taliban.
32 — save it for the duggards.
oh god tey, shut up will you? you dont know anything about ‘someone encouraging this girl to dress like a boy.’ you have nothing, nada, zip, to back that up and its borne of your own bias. plenty of others on this site dont like the brange, but it doesnt blind them to the stupidity of this article. you also dont know anything about blonds in wintertime, who get darker. also, even if she did darken her hair, which is probably 99% unlikely, I hope you find gwen stefani and gavin ‘sickening’ for their dyeing their kids hair when he was this age too.
@Jill .8 – totally agree. Not to be an alarmist, but there are a lot of disturbed people in the world that we try to protect our children from. Featuring them on magazine covers and articles only invites unwanted attention and I am loathe to say it, but potentially unwanted actions among those predisposed to sick behavior with kids. What crime has to occur to protect these kids from such exploitation? It just infuriates me that this is allowed. If photos of our own underage children were slapped on magazines for sale, would that be okay? Or how about the Editor’s children? I wonder how they’d feel about that?
Ms. Fuller should be arrested for harassment of a minor and her magazine should be put of business. I think their actions have been unconscionable and revolting.
This should be foremost a safety issue regardless of who is at fault for feeding the exploitation. There is no control over these images once they hit the internet. The only good consequence of that could be that federal authorities in the US can go after sickos for child por*ography because the laws against it are narrow and clear–but other forms of it involving adults exist in a murk of poorly defined copyright and internet law. My concern as a parent would be….my god, some sicko out there is going to get obsessed with my child because her images are all over the place.
As long as threads like this one have 160 comments, magazines won’t stop saying bulls*it about those poor children (Suri Cruise included).
Agree with grisgris.
It’s sorta child abuse.
Tey, you say someone is encouraging her to dress as a boy. Can you explain why they are encouraging her to dress as a boy, carry swords, were soccer cleats etc? Why did this someone put her in dresses until she was 3 y.o. and then stop allowing her to wear dresses?
@Solveig .40, I respectfully disagree with that statement. When we BUY the magazine, we are indeed encouraging it, but to hold them accountable for potential damage to a minor is calling attention to an issue that needs to be addressed.
Looks like a case of a child trying to cut their own hair – and that haircut was the best “fix”. Plain and simple. Looks like a lot of people that don’t have kids, like to be in the judge’s seat.
When my daughter was 3 she cut off her own waist length hair, as a result we ended up with a pixie cut just like Little Miss Shiloh. It was adorable and easy, she’s 7 now and we still cut it off once a year, as per her request. As for the clothes, they’re adorable. She’s not dressing like Noah Cyrus (but maybe that’s the way these judgemental freaks like it, better to dress like a tramp than an original). I think Shiloh is sweet, her parents obviously cool enough to let her express herself. Good for them.
ok — i’ll say it again.
it’s my opinion that someone is encouraging shiloh to dress like a boy.
i’m entitled to my own opinion. i don’t have to back it up.
@ tey – Who? And why?
And for those who are accusing Shi’s parent/parents of coloring her hair: Naturally blonde hair (like mine) is lighter at the ends because that hair is the oldest & has been exposed to sunlight (& thereby lightened) more than the hair on the top of the head. Basically, when she got her haircut the lightest part of her hair was removed & the darker hair remained. It happens every time, to every natural blonde. Blonde hair is not a uniform color; it varies all over the head
I hope everyone commenting here DOES NOT BUY THESE MAGAZINES!!! EVERYTHING they put on the cover is designed to sell the most issues. so quit buying the swill they’re selling and get your gossip for free on the internet! 🙂
Give me a break Focus on the family. ALL FAMILIES are different. Hellooo. This is 2010, get with the program and get out the ignaramous dark ages.. you wierdos.. FOTF – they gross me out.. yuck
ugh. i can’t stand brad and angelina. don’t even get me started on featuring their babies in people. however, no matter what my opinion of them is, L&S is disgusting. i share 90% of the sentiments on here that condemn the L&S article regarding a child. as somebody else said, shiloh did not ask to be born into a famous family. leave the kid alone.
and tey, i am allowed to my opinion, too, and it is my opinion—it seems others view you as such—that you are a dimwit. you refuse to back up your your statement because you can’t really support its inanity. your refusal to do so simply shows your lazy or lack of intellect.
why do people keep thinking that the parents dyed shiloh’s hair darker?? i thought it was common knowledge that kids who have light blonde hair tends to get darker as they grow older. so it shouldn’t be surprising that her hair is a bit darker.
and her pixie cut is adorable as hell. when i was a kid, i had short hair and it made me look boyish. it was just easier to take care of.
The other Mel, you are probably right, and probably I’m quite extreme on this issue, but I’m convinced that minors should’ve be left out of everything that involves exploitation and “public exposition”, even if this means to ignore something as awful as the bs printed on L&S, even if this means ceasing to write how cute those babies are and stuff like that.
It’s not just a matter of being respectful of their private life, it’s above all because those children have never asked to be famous and they have the right to live a safe and normal life.
everything you read in the media — apart from direct quotes — and that’s not always fact — it’s all nothing but speculation, so if you think an opinion (such as mine) needs to be backed up by more speculation, well — sorry for you.
and by the way, grow up those of you who like to call other bloggers dimwit and the like — stop the stupid name calling.
it’s pathetic.
Solveig, I do agree with you there…it would probably be more effective for all of us to write the magazine editor to express our disgust (as a couple people from yesterdays post did) and also to boycott it altogether. Unfortunately, I doubt it will matter because there are enough people who do buy it who don’t give a thought to the welfare or rights of minors.
The concept of cutting Shiloh’s hair is nothing controversial. With children of almost all races, their hair needs to be trimmed. The fact that it was cut into a pixie cut is nothing new. The “darkening” of her hair is also natural, as it happens. I have a friend whose baby pics show a blonde toddler, but now her hair is almost as dark as mine and I dyed mine black.
Now, onto the “gender confusion” mess: My 4 year old daughter wears skirts, knee boots, dresses and earrings…yet she prefers to play rough with boys as she has two older brothers. She is the ultimate clothes horse! Shiloh is raised in a home with older boys, and it’s possible that she wears hand me downs like my daughter does. As for Zahara, she may prefer to be more girly.
In the end, there’s no need for experts to be involved because she’s a freaking TODDLER! She’s been raised all around the world, and who are we to decipher what they may deem normal? Is Shiloh bruised? Is she dirty?
No..she’s just not wearing Suri’s clothes…
This cover definitely crosses a line and should never have been allowed to begin with. Whoever gave the final approval to print should be fined and/or fired. I hope that all other mags/rags take heed and refuse to ever do anything like this, on any child. Just disgusting.
3 year olds are extremely opinionated. I know I have one. My son could care less about what he wears but most of my mom friends with girls say that about age 2 the girls started getting opinionated about what they were wearing. I saw lots of interesting pattern combos. Some are very girly and some emulate older brothers.
As for the hair if you look at the picture with the longer light blond hair you can see that the hair underneath is darker about the same color as the short hair. And as a person with thin fine hair you certainly can make the hair look thicker with a layered shorter cut. I had my hair cut shorter than this when I was a little girl because my hair snarled horrible and i hated my mom fixing it so short hair=happy mom and kid.
I hope they sue the magazine.
Look if we all lived how Focus on the Family wanted us to live we’d all be a bunch of repressed, closeted, opinionless, pink and blue, idiotic, choiceless, gay hating assholes.
And if hair and clothes make a woman a woman than what’s with all those bowl ‘mom’ haircuts those FOTF fag hags are wearing? And yeah their fag hags. Because every last one of FOTF’s male members is nothing more than a sad, angry, self hating, repressed homo. They tap more toes than a Senator in a bathroom stall. Just like the CA Senator. A gay hater. Waddya know? Also an actual gay. Fucking hateful hypocrites.
Shiloh is a toddler. If she grows up gay or straight is so out of my universe. Right now I’m pretty sure she just wants cotton candy and hugs from her mom and dad.
Tey, I have to agree with some of what you say. I know that children want to wear what children want to wear BUT! I have never met a three year old who wanted to wear a suit with a NECK TIE. GROWN MEN do not like to wear neck ties, so, I do find the suit/tie/top hat combo she sometimes sports as her parents thumbing their noses at convention, which is fine, but brings controversy.
I for one think children should never be the subject of tabloid bs and I am glad people are finally seeing how idiotic and how they just plain liars they are.
They don’t care who they screw over. I mean if they would do this to a child, can you imagine the whoopers they print week after week and people jut eat it up.
I blame this whole fiasco on the American judicial system. If we had laws in place to protect celebrities (from harassment and rabid paparazzi) and their children from being featured in a magazine without permission, like in Europe, then we probably wouldn’t even know what the Brangie clan looks like. Instead, magazines go unchecked like the banking and healthcare industries.
tey. you’re pathetic for being ignorant. why don’t you grow up and stop living in the 50s.
@yeng
I don’t think they were exploiting children like say Jon and Kate plus 8. I remember when she was pregnant with Shiloh, New York magazine had said that never since Jesus had a baby been so highly anticipated. Ridiculous. That kind of media expectation is enormous. Controlling who gets the money was a smart way to protect themselves from paparazzi stalking. The money went to their charity foundation so they didn’t personally profit from the photos. They would have been featured in a tabloid regardless of whether or not they sold pics. Halle Berry’s kid is in mags and she did not sell baby photos. No child is immune.
“A gay hater. Waddya know? Also an actual gay.”
Peach, I’ve often theorized that the most outspoken homophobes (or politicians who try to pass anti-gay legislation) are almost always big, fat closet cases.
The list of politicians and “preachers” who have railed against the “homosexual lifestyle” and then been exposed as gay is longer than…well, Shiloh’s hair before it was cut.
and tey, you are speculating. your mere ignorant opinion is speculation. you’re contributing to the myopic view of L&S regarding Shiloh and her parents.
we do not need to dig deep in the internet to know that the child was dressed in girly clothes up until lately. who the heck do you think encouraged her to wear dresses and skirts then? it appears to me that her parents tried to adhere to the conventions of gender identity, but shiloh, even though a child, is an individual with a unique personality and is asserting her say in the matter of her apparel choices. it wouldn’t be surprising if it was she who refused the girly clothes and decided to pursue a style that best fits her fancy.
it’s so ignorant to think that a child wouldn’t be expressive and have a keen sense of individuality at such a young age. don’t undermine kids.
@ tey – What the tabloids and magazines write has nothing to do with the issue of you backing up your opinion. I read tabloids and magazines, and certainly do not believe half of what they write, as you stated. But that is a completely separate issue from you backing up your opinion. Of course you are entitled to your own opinion, but if somebody questions that opinion and you can’t substantiate it, it reflects more on you than the person who questioned you.
xena, i can accept that argument, and i can accept that money was gained for charity, but i still feel that it was a form of exploitation. it was at the expense of their children’s privacy. having those pictures come out hasn’t minimized the pap and tab interest in the children. maybe in the short term brad and angelina’s baby photo ops were effective and thwarted the papaparrazi from making more money than they could have made if no photo shoot took place. but in the long run, i believe the baby pictures in people only elevated the interest in the chilren.
What is slightly irritating in this nonsense is that people think that the child “is an individual with a unique personality” because she doesn’t wear girlie clothes.
Every child, regardless of what they wear, is an individual with a unique personality. Some little girls LIKE girlie clothes and are individuals with unique personalities.
seems to me this has given a few bloggers an opportunity to pitch their hate on folks who don’t agree with them. how myopic is that?
Praise St. Angie and Peach: have you guys seen “Outrage” ??
Its a fantastic documentary on EXACTLY what you are talking about-its very compelling and makes you despise these self-loathing hypocrites even more seeing the kinds of policies they have worked to put in place to discriminate.
If you havent seen it, you should rent it. all speculation will be confirmed.
chana, you clearly missed the point. point being that shiloh, regardless of whether she wears girlie clothes or tomboyish outfits, most likely chose to assert her personality in the matter! stop twisting my words. i wasn’t even implying that kids who choose to be girly in their appearance do not have unique personalities. of course, every child has a unique personality and can wear whatever he/she wants. i was pointing out that a kid even for her age can have a say in what she wants to wear, that it’s not all the parents’ fault.
tey … tsk tsk tsk. shall i call you pot or kettle?
obviously, you’re none too happy that people are disagreeing with you and demanding that you substantiate an ignorant comment. you stated an opinion, and others have stated theirs.
yeng: I didn’t miss the point at all. Plenty of others have expressed similar ideas and it annoys me.
Even the person who wrote the first story about this made a comment that erroneously labeled girls who dress in girlie clothes as “the perfect little anal-retentive princesses who never play and carry their own makeup bags at the age of 3.”
You did imply as such when you mentioned that the parents tried to adhere to gender conventions and put her in girlie clothes but she, as an individual with a unique personality, bucked the norms and pursues a style that fits her fancy.
Chana, well, I think you chose to focus on a different point. I was not thinking such and was not aiming to imply such. Yes, it is my belief that Brad and Angie chose to dress her girly back then. I may have worded it wrong, but it was my aim to stress that children shouldn’t be underestimated and they are expressive even for such an age and that regarding fashion, their sense of independence trumps the parents’ encouragement. That was my whole point, and that was why I ended my post with that. We’ll just have to chalk this up to simple miscommunication, as I don’t think we’ll see eye to eye on what it is I implied or didn’t imply.
Can’t recall who made the uninformed and ridiculous comment about Shiloh’s hair being darker and some “dying” going on. My hair was exactly the same, and got darker as I got older. If Shiloh spends time outside this summer she may have some pretty blonde highlights and I’m sure the same dumb-o’s will start up again with their nonsense.
Well come on everybody. Where are your adorable stories about your three year old insisting on wearing a suit and tie like a corporate muckity muck? The Brange brings this crapola on themselves.
@DoMaJoReMc: Size 11? LOL, be my guest — and make sure you put on a pair of extra-heavy Birkenstocks. That Fuller bitch won’t be able to sit down for a week.
People like her should be stuck in the stocks and pelted with rotten eggs.
Um… she wore a tie… not a suit
Chaz Bono certainly looked feminine as a little girl. This may be parental influence, or a little girl imitating dad and bro’s.
She identifies with John in Peter Pan, carrying a sword and looking like a little boy makes sense to me.
(I prefer the scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz, If I only had a brain)
I think the reason these ragmags are focusing on Shiloh and the way she dresses is because they are disappointed. Shiloh has not turned out the way the rags wanted her to. They wanted a beautiful, blond, child who dressed like a princess so they could make up stories about her and how wonderful she is. Instead, they get a little girl who loves to play rough with her brothers and wear pants and look like a tomboy. The nerve of Shiloh to go against their wishes!!
Do you all notice that Zahara is the perfect girly girl and yet the tabs don’t bother talking about how she dresses. In fact, if the girls were opposite (Zee a tomboy and Shi girly) I’m betting there would be not one story about Angelina turning Zee into a boy!! The rags just want Shiloh to be like Suri so they can make up story after story about how Angie pays millions for Shiloh’s clothes and how Shiloh crys for high heels to wear, just like Suri. I mean, there is no way in the world the tabs can say Angie spends millions for Shi’s clothes. Everybody knows the clothes must come from Target!! (They mostly are from expensive Bon Pointe, but don’t tell the ragmags.)
Anyway, I’m happy L&S is getting flack from their stupid cover story. The writer was on CBS This Morning (go to the website) and she looked so smug and pleased with herself, I felt like slapping her. I was so frustrated that the host didn’t call her out on what she was saying but she didn’t. I would hope the show got some flack also, but nobody watches it, so I doubt that will happen.
For the sake of argument, a challenge and fun, and because I admit I am annoyed by the accusation that I implied that a unique personality is exclusive to girls who don’t dress girly (whatever the heck girly means to each person), Chana, I have to address your post again. This post is redundant, but admittedly, I’m not eloquent and I truly don’t know how else I can explain myself without my words being twisted into something else it isn’t. I can only argue and stand up for my opinion, but I don’t expect some to understand what I write (ahem, Tey).
Chana, I read my statement again, and while I can somewhat understand or see what you think it is I implied, I also can’t help but feel that you’re grasping at straws, parsing a simple statement and turning it into a convoluted thought. You persisted on twisting my words with this paraphrase: “You did imply as such when you mentioned that the parents tried to adhere to gender conventions and put her in girlie clothes but she, as an individual with a unique personality, BUCKED THE NORMS and pursues a style that fits her fancy.”
Let me say this: I know I have asserted that a child’s individual voice—specifically, Shiloh’s—as having more to do with the clothes they wear than their parents’ encouragement, but Chana, do you think Shiloh is even aware of gender conventions?
This was my statement: “it appears to me that her parents tried to adhere to the conventions of gender identity, but shiloh, even though a child, is an individual with a unique personality and is asserting her say in the matter of her apparel choices.” And from that you gathered an implication that Shiloh was consciously “bucking the norms” and because I only mentioned Shiloh and didn’t bother to liken her to other children, you thought I was implying that only girls who don’t dress girly are the only ones with a unique personality? Ooookay. To be blunt, that’s some twisted reading into my sentence. I only mentioned Shiloh in that sentence (and in the near entirety of my post) because Shiloh is the subject of this thread, and I am speaking about her unique personality, not the unique personality of other children. Also, I figured it would go without saying that all kids, no matter how they dress, have a unique personality. Because I excluded the mention of boys and their personality with regards to the way or how they choose to dress, did that mean I was implying that little boys don’t have a unique personality and still dress however they want??
Between Shiloh and her parents, Brad and Angelina, the adults who have been conditioned growing up about how boys and girls should dress, were probably dressing her in a manner that adhered to the general conventions of gender identity, but the Shiloh we see now is dressing in a manner that she probably wishes, most likely without any regard to her sexual identity or what it is she’s bucking against. She’s following her own unique personality. In simple terms, she’s just being who she is, and her parents are just letting her express who she is, just as Suri and a lot of other girls and boys are being bestowed that kind of freedom by their parents. That was my point in my original statement along with this heavier emphasis: don’t dismiss Shiloh (and other children) as not having enough personality to express their individuality via their style because they’re too young.
I feel the only way that could have ameliorated your thought on my post is if I included footnotes, expounding that all children are unique individuals and can wear whatever they want w/o answering to adult or societal conditions or if I had said what I just wrote. Who knows …
Chana, thank you for the challenge, and while I am aggressive with my words, I do have to respect your posts because your thoughts were conveyed with intelligence, and I think basically, we do share a similar opinion when it comes to children and their expressive ways.
Ah, let me correct, lest I be misconstrued:
“Let me say this: I know I have asserted that a child’s individual voice—specifically, Shiloh’s—as having more INFLUENCE on the clothes they wear than their parents’ encouragement, but Chana, do you think Shiloh is even aware of gender conventions?”
Melanie – I could introduce you to a 4 year-old boy and a 1 year-old girl who both like wearing ties. My boy even wears a vested suit at least once a week. Both kids think it is a hoot to wear neckties with everything including their pajamas. Daddy wears a tie so why not?
I will admit though, that the 1 year-old girl may think it is a necklace, or she just wants to wear a tie because her brother does, but then doesn’t Shiloh have a couple of brothers?
Kids are opinionated. Those of us that have them know that it can be pretty hard to make them wear something that they don’t want to wear. This tells me that Shiloh probably has at least some say in what she wears.
Well if Shiloh is wearing a tie to mimic daddy, I can’t see Brad’s tie under his full and lush beard, so sorry for the misunderstanding there. You are correct. Children love to wear formal mens wear.
Yep. Half of girls grow up in pink for half their childhood. The other half grow up in pants and short haircuts for half their childhood. Welcome to America, my new friends from outer space. That’s the way we do it here, and by the old photos I’ve seen, that’s the way we’ve been doing it for several generations. (Sorry 19-year-olds who just thought they invented the non-gender wheel.) Heck, when my grandpa was a boy, boys had long hair and wore dresses. Yes, welcome to Earth.
Also, as someone of Northern European descent who grew up in an ethnic-Swedish American town, I would just like to say to the confused folks out there: If you see someone getting older and their hair is still blonde, if they’re not 100% Finnish, the BLONDE is coming from a BOTTLE. O yes it is. Most blonde goes brown 1) in winter & 2) with age. You’re welcome. Good luck with your travels through the confusing and mysterious multicultural world.
LOL, children love to wear lots of funny things, don’t limit that (or them) by ruling out formal men’s wear. You’d be surprised.
Ambassador from earth love your post:)
Also perhaps the children play dress up at home and have access to ties as part of their dress up. Maybe the time she has a tie on she had been playing dress up and didn’t want to change. I took my 3 year old to Target in a Clone Trooper costume because he didn’t want to change and it frankly wasn’t worth fighting over. It seems we are all over analizing a bit when all we see are pics on the street and nothing of home life.
Many children her age like ties and accessories. She is three going on four. It’s a stage where you like at times to borrow things to resemble daddy or mummy.
There was a picture Brad did with Z around the same age Shiloh is now and she wears Angelina’s hat and high heels.
Since Shiloh is a tomboy, she will borrow one of the most symbolic and easiest accessories of daddy (since she has already her bro pants) : the tie and the hat.
My little bro when he was 3/4 years old wanted to marry mummy and often took our father’s tie to emulate him and seduce mummy . After a while he wanted to put cotton leggings and even skirts to emulate the big sis he admired.
He turned out to be a very precocious teen boy, including in the dating department and he is now an atheltic, muscular 6’5″ – 115 kilos (250 lbs) very sporty engineer who is terribly manly and happy to interract with his own son..
I saw a little girl/model in an on-line advertisement on Overstock.com the other day, and she had on a Fedora, a loosely knotted black/striped tie, a white button-down shirt, and a pair of dark pants. She was holding a single rose. She obviously was imitating Shiloh’s style, and she looked cute as a button. Overstock.com obviously thought so too. As far as this tabloid and article, this has crossed the line in a way I’ve never seen before. I hope somebody defends Shiloh’s future dignity, and lobbies to have the laws changed and sues on her behalf, and on behalf of all children whose privacy is invaded in this manner.
You’ve all covered the zillion ways this is wrong toward Shiloh, and I completely agree. I’d just like to add, though, that it is insanely misogynistic of the cover to “blame” the mother alone, not both parents. If you ever look at the Brangelina cover stories, it is always, ALWAYS Angelina who is the demon, the controlling, insane, whorish bitch who Brad desperately wants to escape. I don’t know if it’s as simple as people being so jealous of her they can’t control it, or if it’s that they so lust after Brad that they cannot accept that this stunningly beautiful woman is actually what he wants, but it is ridiculously sexist either way. They put a scarlet letter on her and they will not take it off.
Oh good God! When I was growing up I was a complete tomboy. I slavishly wore my brother’s cast-offs and would get a real thrill when someone asked my siblings about their little “brother”. It was a phase.
@twokids2 – I have blonde hair that looks different colours in different light. Also, in winter, it goes quite dark and mousey. And when it’s long it looks fine and like there’s not much of it but when I get it cut shorter it seems to “bulk up”, especially just after the cut.
All hail the Ambassador From Earth! If I have to claim a leader, mind if I claim yours?
Quick show of hands, how many of us girls had the infamous Dorothy Hamill as kids? Yeah, hordes. So many of the little girls in my neighborhood had that haircut that I didn’t realize some girls had long hair until I was in kindergarten. That was a surprise. Since the bowl of long ago I’ve grown my hair to my waist and cut it straight to a pixie (donated it, of course) more times than I remember. At no point in there did I change gender identity, sexual orientation or major clothing preference. (I try not to store those things in my hair, thanks.)
Kudos to Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams for pointing out they’ve got a zillion kids. If I had that many they’d all have exactly the same haircut and seven copies each of an identical outfit so I wouldn’t have to keep straight what they wore and what was clean. The fact that there are as many of them with what would appear to be very distinct personalities in clothing is nothing short of miraculous in my book.
Wow, as usual I’m amazed at the outrage over a tabloid story. It’s one think to visit this site and write something snarky and read others’ comments and have a laugh, but people….with all the real issues in the world this is what everyone is most concerned with? Sure it was a stupid story, but the subject is 3! She’s unaware of it and it will not scar her for life. Let her parents worry about it!
Yeah…that’s a “kid cut her own hair and we fixed it up” picture. Idiots at L&S obviously have no children to think it has to do with sexuality or even fashion preference of any kind.
She is just a baby and I think it is so horrible the things people say about her. It SHOULD be illegal, I agree. This little girl had no say in being born nor to whom she was born. Yet, due to heartless people, she will one day be able to read on the internet the nasty things people said about her. Think about that…that could mess her up more than anything else! Stick to adults….and even then, comments should be tasteful.
#92
It waswn’t just a stupid story, it was peadophilic inclined thoughts made by adults who are making a joyous fest about their young target speculating about the sexuality of that target who is three years old.
Pretty sick and universally an extremely serious matter when a society target its own children in that despicable matter.
It must freak out any sane adult about their children and how certain adults perceive them and can traumatize them with their peadophilic perspectives and twisted perception about a child’s clothes and tastes, a deviant perspective that they advertise massively through the media as being the ‘norm’, the way one must perceive and define sexually a child based on his/her clothes…again a dangerous peadophilic like route.
I am just glad Shiloh cannot read! This constant picking and shit, if she was 10 years older, would send her spiralling into depression and body issues.
Exactly, Rianna!
Shiloh doesn’t read yet but Maddox can and it’s absolutely vommiting and revolting what is said about his sister and even things implied about him in this L&S despicable demonstration of trashiness and cowardice of epic proportions..
She looks adorable. That’s how half of us girls raised in the 70s and 80s looked when we were little!
It should be illegal. How would these tabloids workers like it if we were looking at their babies and commenting on them?
Angie mentioned Maddox learned how to read at age 3 so its possible they can all read . They travel w/ 2 teachers according to AJ’s Vanity Fair interview. Brad mentioned in Rolling Stone that tabloids are not allowed in the house hopefully they monitor internet use
For goodness sakes. Leave the child alone!
Grown adults discussing what a small child wears in terms of sexuality is outright perverse.
yeng, we certainly do share a similar opinion. I apologize for making it seem like you were on the bandwagon of those who think girlie girls are basically simpering little princesses who have no personality of their own; I think I was already a tad rankled from a previous post and chose to be a bit prickly toward someone who expressed a slightly similar, but ultimately disparate belief.
Your second post did expose very much your actual opinion and we are completely in the same frame of thought on the subject.
“Don’t dismiss Shiloh (and other children) as not having enough personality to express their individuality via their style because they’re too young.”
An excellent point and one the people who wrote that article should have been aware of.
Chana, you’re fantastic, and I can understand where you’re coming from. I am sorry that I came off a bit more aggressive than I would have liked towards you, and that’s possibly because I was very much annoyed with one of the posters above 😉 Unfortunately, my annoyance with one poster may have spilled on over to my post to you yesterday. I apologize for that. I’m glad all has been cleared up. And it is certainly nice to see that almost everybody here shares a similar opinion regarding the L&S feature. This is one of the rare times when fans and non-fans of Brad and Angelina seem to be in agreement with each other.
@Chana: You rankle quite easily, have you noticed that?
I think it should be illegal to put children on the cover of tabloids. It is so creepy and I imagine extremely unhealthy for the children involved.
I was just about getting sick of this issue. And yes, Bonnie Fuller is full of it.
I have 6 kids. First 5 boys, then a girl.
I wasn’t trying for a girl, she just showed up. People started inundating us with pink and lace. My daughter, between the ages of 2 and 4, wanted to wear nothing more than jeans and no shirt. So much for frills, right? I left her alone. Then she went to a nothing but dresses and skirt stage.
Again, I left her alone.
Her clothes, her hair, herself.
Who cares?
My 3-year-old little girl went through a phase during potty training when she wanted to “pee standing up.” One day she wants to wear what she calls boy shirt, the next she insists on a frilly dress. That’s how we learn what we are or who we want to be. Seriously, no big deal.
To everyone who keeps saying they’ve dyed the poor kid’s hair, YOU’RE INSANE! Many kids start off with blonde hair that turns brown as they get older – me included!
And the very thought that you could turn a child gay by putting her in pants and a short haircut is about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. Can you make a gay person straight by changing their clothes? Idiots.
Let her wear what she wants!