text:
Jennifer Garner and Halle Berry Testify for the Kids
- August 14, 2013
- 0 Comments
- Sasha Stone
- Posted in News
The paparazzi are the thorn in the sides of famous people, no doubt. I think they assume their lives are their own? They figure, we're just in this for the work, not the fame. Jennifer Lawrence recently said in Vogue how much she is "not okay" with it:
"It's as simple as that," she said. "I am just a normal girl and a human being, and I haven't been in this long enough to feel like this is my new normal. I'm not going to find peace with it."
Well, welcome to the big bad world, honey. You don't go pursuing fame as an actress at the age of 15 and not know what you're in for. Old school celebrities, who remember when it wasn't this bad have an excuse, but Ms. Lawrence knew perfectly well the world she was about to enter. There isn't a single teenager I come across who doesn't hear this lecture from me. And if I were Jennifer Lawrence's mother I would have told her exactly what to expect. You are sacrificing your life for stardom. Your fans want to see everything and know everything about you – what you eat, when you sleep, whom you are fucking, what you are thinking, reading, doing 24/7. This is the new normal for famous people. The paparazzi are not the problem – they are the ones selling the drug to the fans. You can get rid of this drug dealer on the corner but another one will sprout up in his/her place. The people are hungry for it and the photographers make their living servicing that need.
So, I have very little sympathy for an actress who starts her career with Winter's Bone and then does Hunger Games, X-Men and wins an Oscar. Um, you were expecting, what, obscurity? Rilly? Kristen Stewart, by contrast, is constantly toyed with in a way Lawrence isn't. They seem to want to upset her and it is non-stop as the press tries to paint a picture of someone unstable. It's all made up nonsense. At least with Lawrence, though there is constant attention, it is the kind of attention you only get once in a lifetime. It means people love you.
My sympathy does lie, however, with the kids of celebrities who never set out to be famous. It isn't their fault their parents are narcissists. Every time I see a photo of a child of a celebrity I feel guilty and weird because I imagine what's on the other side of that photo, what kind of madness do these kids have to endure? It's one thing to be gracious enough to not complain about photographers – it's wholly another to not be expected to have children. What must the children of the Affleck/Garner brood have to endure day in and day out? The websites I read have a continual flow of photos of their kids. I know what each of them looked like as babies, where they go to the Farmer's Market, what kinds of activities their kids do during the day. They're cute kids, to be sure, and that beautiful family is partly what helped Ben Affleck win the hearts of voters last year. But.
I don't really need to see pictures of celebrity children. Sure, they're cute. They're beautiful. Any pictures of kids are. But I think it's morally wrong to deny these particular children their rights because their parents are famous. There should be conditions – wouldn't you agree? Either way, Jennifer Garner and Halle Berry went to bat for their kids recently in an effort to change the laws to spare the kids.
Share this
About author
Sasha Stone has been around the Oscar scene since 1999. Almost everything on this website is her fault.
Related Posts
Yeah… um…. I've seen far too many pictures of both their children. (And I don't usually go to the gossip sites unless a larger story drags me there.)
However, I can think of plenty of celebrities who keep their kids out of it. Call me evil all you want but I think both of these women used the paparazzi in the last year. Berry in her custody battle and Garner to help her hubby win the Oscar. I could be wrong. It could be coincidence. They could really be forced to frequent paparazzi hot spots. What's that one place they all go for ice cream or breakfast? Something farm?
Anyway, they may have no choice but to raise their kids in LA. But when I was growing up reading celebrity magazines I didn't see any of my favorite stars' kids. I remember Bruce Willis and Demi Moore raising their kids out of state while both being at the top of the box office charts. I never saw Tom Hanks or Sylvester Stallone's kids. Right now, I don't know what Julia Roberts kids look like. As much as Gwyneth Paltrow gets all kinds of crap for being out of touch I have a vague impression of what her kids look like. I know they're blonde because they get their pics taken too but not to the extent of these people who live in LA and go where the photogs are. I think if I saw Jennifer Garner and her daughter Violet out and about somewhere, I'd probably recognize Violet first. And that's all because last year during the Oscar campaign there were pictures of them EVERY DAY. Maybe there really was no possible way they could have shielded them from that, but I think if their kids privacy was top priority they'd be raised and schooled away from the flashbulbs. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Both those women made their own money. They could raise their kids away from LA but close enough to work which neither of them needs to actually do money-wise.
I absolutely agree that it's not nice for the children and something should be done about everyone's privacy. But these people make money from their celebrity. They know they make more than the actors and actresses who aren't splashed all over Just Jared. They're trading on their fame. They could walk away and take less money.
Well I'm one of those who hates paparazzi and everything they stand for and will never blame anyone, no matter how egotistical they are for not liking them. I get this is a complex issue and that some people use fame and then complain about it yada yada yada, but it just is what it is.
I hate them and I'd fully support a law forbidding celebrities' children being photographed without the consent of their parents (in other words, if the child is walking down the street with or without his parents, they cannot be photographed, the parents take the child to a hollywood party filled with photographers, then it's fair game).
Bryce Forestieri
…used the paparazzi in the last year…Garner to help her hubby win the Oscar
Yup. 100%. You speak the truth right there. Hypocritical and shameless 180.
Jpns Viewer
If my mem serves me far too well: last year I spotted a clip on the 'net of Berry about to go into a drugstore, a restaurant of sort, or simply a grocery store, with her little kid, well, in order to find a small host of papa photogs — some, funnily, speaking with accent (no: thank UFO Gods, not Japanese accent) — awaiting and hollering at them like scrubs. Berry, apparently, got angry and started, let me put it this way, raising her voice so they would have left her and the kid alone….
I'm not making fun of Berry.
En plus I think these photogs could use some lesson to learn how to keep the distance.
For those who genuinely don't fancy reading tabloids at all, they might simply say, leave these celebs alone. Or they could simply shrug…. Or the list goes on….
But to me, while I do not strictly consider myself a tabloids fan, #sometimes I check out one or two of the sites as part of my free-time ritual: watching cables mute, enjoying my music, checking out the tabloids, etc. all simultaneously….
So, to me, those photogs, again, should learn how to keep the distance when needed. I myself would be #hypocritical if I go to extreme against them.
Talking about dog and butterfly, well, if you know what I mean….
"moviewatcher" has already given a good example and somewhat spoken my mind. So, I'm going to quote the username's remark:
"(in other words, if the child is walking down the street with or without his parents, they cannot be photographed, the parents take the child to a hollywood party filled with photographers, then it's fair game)."…. Thanks, moviewatcher.
Note: Matter-of-factly speaking, I though am not interested in their kids' pix. But I guess other (tabloids) readers are since some kids are even the headline themselves. Here's your sign.
Does this mean we can finally go back to blaming black teens for their drug use and gang violence instead of blaming the system, cycle of poverty, etc.? Because according to you they know what they're doing when they pick up that pipe or that gun or join that gang. But no, I'm guessing that's different because it's easier and more entertaining to attack a famous white girl than a bunch of poor black kids.
Wow. Just wow.
Simply because it's normal, it's not OK. Just because it's expected, it's not OK.
"It isn't their fault their parents are narcissists."
Just ask Kate Hudson.
I have no issue with JL finding the situation unacceptable. Maybe she can lead a new generation to try to change things. She doesn't seem to be asking for sympathy as much as demanding new rules. And that I applaud.
The logic here is questionable. So no one should complain about paparazzi stalking celebrities 24/7 because "well that's just the way it is?" Huh? It is one thing to reasonably expect some loss of privacy in being a celebrity. It is quite another to be completely dehumanized and harassed during every waking moment of your life. That is not the norm and doesn't have to be accepted. Maybe if people like Ms. Stone stopped being so envious and drew a line as to what constitutes reasonable behavior it would stop being the norm.
I assume non of us was ever exposed to this kind of media attention even, so I'm just gonna say one thing. You can not judge anybody over here. Garner, Berry, Lawrencea and a lot more women have had their life (that including their children) exposed to the media, despite their will, in ways we can only imagine. We just read about it. You cannot simply say "If I were her I'd…". No. You can't. You are not Berry or Garner or Jolie or any of the mothers who have suffered due to media exposure. They are just women who are trying to protect their private life, and children are a huge part of that. Sure, having media exposure to yourself may cause you fame and glitter, but the "media" shoud know the fucking difference between an actress posing for a shot and a mother taking her kid out for a walk. More so, Lawrence's words aren't bullshit. She knows what she is dealing with right now, and at some point she'll probably want to start a family, have kids and settle. Maybe that's what she's talking about when she's saying – "I'm not going to find peace with it."
I'm tremendously sorry that Jennifer Lawrence won the Oscar, but a woman speaking out against a normalized form of harassment isn't going to get snark from me.
This is the, "big bad world," but must it always be this way, and must Jennifer Lawrence shut up and silently accept harassment? I'd rather hear even a lone voice calling out shitty behavior than a hundred saying, "Maybe she deserves it for being in X-Men."
You know if anyone bothered to stalk Jessica Chastain, Ms. Stone would be all over it. Kidding aside, "normalized harassment" is a good description.
Mark I
I suppose you would be perfectly okay with the paps following you everywhere; Jennifer Lawrence's dad was interviewed by a local TV station in Louisville…he spoke about how one of paparazzi in
England hit in the face, leaving a bruise, in order to get a reaction out of her; plus they yell demeaning comments at celebrities to get a reaction from them. NO one should have to put up with or expect that kind of harassment is to be expect, regardless of what level of fame they are.
Rethink your thoughtless comments
I find Sasha's dismissive approach to Jennifer Lawrence unfounded and uncalled for. So what if she wants to act in blockbusters? That does not make her public property in any way.
so what did jennifer lawrence say wrong again? im not seeing it… just seems like another attack against her for no reason at all.
Well said on the difference between Jennifer and Kristen. She doesn't get even 50% of the crap that Kristen gets. Jennifer is like the golden girl that even getting 'caught' smoking dope didn't tarnish. People didn't castigate her and call her trashy. Kristen was pictured smoking dope when she was 18 BEFORE she was mega famous and she has never heard the last of it.
They really do want to make her look unstable and DRIVE her to be unstable. They are so disgusting and abusive to her. Let them take their pictures but the constant baiting and goading is so gross and crosses the line. Thank you Sasha for being one of the few who don't go with the pack of hyenas and actually speak up in her defense.
I also think children need to be left alone.
This article is the most gross piece of shit I have read in a long time. The asked for it mentality, akin to rape victims is disturbing. The fact that you are telling a woman to shut up and accept her fate is disturbing because you are not only shutting her up and preventing her from exercising her right to speak, but to protect her basic rights of privacy.
Did you read the rest of the article? She made a point. Paps sleeping on her lawn, calling out gross things from the sidelines, trying to get a pic under her skirt? She is right when saying the police do nothing, but when it's a regular girl they are all on it.
Lawrence set out to act because she enjoyed filmmaking, movies, and acting. It was a creative outlet for her. She took days to even accept the Hunger Games and did it after Ross really cajoled her. She didn't know she would be winning an Oscar this year. And she isn't complaining about the fans, or the obligations, she is complaining about the paps on her lawn. She has a right to do that.
this is Jennifer's fault how? It is so easy to invalidate a problem, ok , well Emma Watson , Emma Stone? They hate it as well.
Kristin's problem is the fact that she lets the paps goad her, and comes of unstable herself by cursing at them or looking like she is losing it. Jennifer gets mad, but doesn't go off the rails. Plus, Kristin always looks angry to be anywhere, is notorious for not signing for fans, being rude, etc.
When my sister had her baby she asked that family and friends not post the pictures we took on facebook because she and her husband don´t want their childs face "all over" the internet. Every parent should be able to choose how little or how much they are willing to have their child exposed online.
There are several reasons why this law should be put into affect but one is the narrative that often comes with the pictures taken. Describing these children, often young girls, in ways not appropriate. A 1-year old was describe as "a mini versions of her mom", and an 8-year old was "a leggy beauty".
The article also went on to discuss how Lawrence realizes this is a difficult topic:
"Lawrence is well aware that no one likes to hear famous people complain about being famous. (And surely her publicist has told her that it is a losing proposition.) But it is a subject—"a dangerous topic," she calls it—that we come back to several times because she is obviously having a difficult time adjusting. "I teeter on seeming ungrateful when I talk about this," she says at one point, "but I'm kind of going through a meltdown about it lately."
Interesting how we can perceive her (Kristen Stewart) in so different ways 😉 I´ve always found that she gladly signs and takes pictures with fans. And seriously, wouldn´t you look angry or want to curse when being followed around and shouted at by a bunch of men with cameras shoved in your face?
Sonia zee
What about poor leann rimes who calls the paps and shares in the profits when the photo is sold? And they aren't even her kids, but her step kids? You didn't see her testify, did you? And she won't. She makes too much mo ey from playing the narcissist game.
Jerry Grant
Paparazzi culture is wrong across the board. And J.Law has my sympathy. I don't get the "she asked for it" argument. I don't understand why a talented actor or actress should be complacent about this idiotic and destructive practice.
No. People's personal lives are not the property of the public, no matter what line of work they are in.
Anyone who thinks different has never had their privacy dragged through the mud or had lies spread about them on a national or even global level. They have never felt the daily and ever present harrasment.
It is a psychological attack potentially as damaging to a person's life as any physical attack.
Choosing a way of life that relies on your harrassing, hurting and lying about other people is disgusting beyond words. Defending it is only closely behind.
Never being able to leave your home without being observed, judged, called out and pulled at and always having to put on a friendly face and demeanor to EVERYBODY at ALL TIMES, is already a high price to pay for fame. The addition of paparazzis and other lowlife stalkers is something I wouldn't wish upon even my worst enemy.
So equal shame on any consumer putting money indirectly into the hands of the paparazzi and to the people who choose that line of work.
Using Sasha's drug analogy, most of the blame does lie directly with the people who choose to supply the drug to the addict. You are not excused from responsibility just because there's a potential demand for your product.
And it is NOT the choice of the people stalked to be so. They do the work they love and take the best deal they can, as would anyone else. The paparazzi and those supporting them cannot escape their complete responsibility just by saying "it means people love them" or "there's more possitive coverage than negative". It is out of the hands of the individual person how they are represented, because others feel they have the right to make the decision on what is good or bad for them. And that's bullshit and no one should have to endure that or just accept that as something that comes with the job.
She's notorious for not signing for fans? Well that is absolute lies because she ALWAYS signs for fans unless there is a good reason such as loads of paparazzi surrounding her and it's a safety matter. Just the other night she was on her way home from filming and she pulled in and posed for pictures for fans who were waiting at the exit and signed. Fans said she looked exhausted but she still did it. There are hundreds of fan pictures of her, if not thousands.
And i'm not blaming Jennifer, i;m sure it's scary to have so much attention but she knew that was going to happen, she saw what happened to the stars of Twilight. She doesn't really have a lot to complain about. The media have been fine with her and even a potential drugs scandal blew over because the press didn't decide to run countless stories about her going off the deep end. If Jennifer had the harassment from paparazzi that Kristen does you can guarantee she would flip out at some point and curse and God forbid, not SMILE!!!! She flips the bird to the media on oscar night and everyone says 'haha Jlaw is so funny and charming'. Kristen does it to paparazzi who are harassing her and people act as if she is evil. There is a huge difference and Sasha is right, Jennifer knew what was going to happen. Nobody had any idea that Twi was going to explode like it did and Kristen was 17, Jennifer was 20 when she signed for THG knowing full well what was ahead of her. I like her so i don't want to make this into a Kristen V Jennifer war but Sasha has a very valid point.
Go back to your playground!
Quote from Cate Blanchett:
"There's this sense that of course you want to be famous. When you're a performer, of course you want an audience, but it's very, very different from courting fame"
That is what Jennifer Lawrence is talking about. So Sasha Stone, your article is a good-girl-gone-bad moment. And its not pretty
Another quote from Cate Blanchett: "When they want to pull us down, they call us celebrities, not actors"
Funny thing, when the surveillance of innocents is done publically, the outrage is aimed at those doing the stalking, but when it's done secretly (at the public at large) the anger is aimed at those reporting such activity.
Is that logical, or is my perception skewed?
Wow, Sasha, I am so dumbfounded by your, for lack of a better word, attack on Jennifer Lawrence. It's not like she broke down and cried or hauled off and attacked a pap or anything. She wasn't even doing a "woe is me" story. The girl spoke her opinion on them in a truthful way. Up until now, I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt of your extremely one-sided articles lately, but wow, it's really starting to show. I'm not quite sure why you seem to hate the girl, and for that matter, why Kristen Stewart gets a pass on everything, and truthfully I don't much care, but I used to like this site a lot, and with each passing article I'm liking it less and less.
I like Kristin too; so i am not making this a contest. and i agree with her reactions- i am not a huge fan of her, but i always defend her when it comes to her distaste for the paparazzi and i do think she gets treated badly. I was just pointed out her reactions as reason why some people think she was headed for a breakdown. She does let the paps goad her. I haven't seen this happen to Jennifer yet. And yes, Jennifer does receive bad press. Often. Even from this Vogue article bc supposedly know she can't voice her opinion on this matter without attack. So you go back to your Twilight land.
Also, this does not discount Jennifer's issues with them. She got into this business to act. She didn't know HG was going to be so massive, she wanted the role because its rare that such a role is created for women. Its rare. And why should she not? But it doesn't mean that she can't voice her distaste for them. No, she didn't know what she was getting into. Nobody her takes on this kinda role does. Thats a ridiculous thing to say.
Your perception is right on!
Cate Blanchett is a good example of someone extremely famous whose children I've not seen, if she has any. I feel like she's mentioned some. I know her husband runs a theater or something. But she's a good example of one of the hardest working and best actresses we have who seems to have kept her private life private.
"She didn't know HG was going to be so massive,"
Hahahahaha! Try again. She knew it was going to change her life and that's why it took her a few days to make a decision to accept.
Jennifer hasn't had the intense stalking and the name calling/rude questions that Kristen has on an almost daily basis. When she went out walking with her brother and Nicolas Hoult she was annoyed that paparazzi were following her (but keeping a respectful distance) and flipped the bird. Guess what, gossip sites ran all the pictures EXCEPT the finger flipping ones. Yeah, they didn't even show those ones. If that was Kristen they would be the ONLY pictures they showed alongside a nasty story about how sullen and moody she is. I've seen it so many times. I see the full set of pictures on a fansite where she is smiling and happy yet sites only buy the ones of her frowning or whatever. Every star is given a narrative when they become famous and it's very hard to shake that off especially if tabloids make $ out of you. They will always go for the salacious angle. Jennifer has escaped it so far but they probably will turn on her one day too, but it isn't now so she really should feel lucky that with her huge franchise fame that the press is so positive.
And even the comments on the VOGUE interview aren't bad. Some say she is a bit ungrateful but a lot are understanding and change the subject back to some joke she made.
And yeah, you still haven't admitted pulling the 'Kristen is so rude to her fans' out of your ass either.
Wow. I have nt been on here in awhile, but isn't this when one of Sasha's flying monkeys comes to her defense?
I used to enjoy coming here as well…jeeez, Sasha, this is a new low for you. I feel sorry for you because you seem to be full of hate and bitterness. I think you also need to come to terms with this obsession you have about Jennifer Lawrence…get some help.
I guess I missed the chapter in the Book of Rules for Being Famous that says a celeb automatically gives up their right to privacy on any level once they hit the big time. Where is it written that a celeb must endure swarms of paps inches from their face yelling vulgar things trying to get a reaction for the "perfect" pic? What page says a celebs children must endure being swarmed and cornered and called "bitch" and "brat" by ex-cons taking a million pics?
There's a fine line between doing a job and harassing someone and the paps cross that line all the time! Celebs have the right to walk down the street or go out in public without being abused and chased like they're wild animals. Paps can take all the pics they want but should be required to be at a respectful distance from the celeb…this shouldn't be a problem since they have camera lenses that will get a pic a mile away!
I'm tired of the paps being given a free pass for bullying and harassment. I feel strongly the paps and the gossip media have paid all the right people so they can legally stalk and harass the stars without any accountability. If anyone else did what the paps do, we'd be arrested without a doubt!
Also a response to Tye-Grr: you think Kristen Stewart gets a pass "on everything"? You've got to be kidding me! Kristen is harassed and bullied on a regular basis by the paps. There are a team of them that stalk her and Rob 24/7! I guess you consider the recent pap video of her being cornered in a dumpster area and begging them to leave her alone "a free pass"?! How sad you are so willing to dismiss her being tormented :((
I applaud these comments…just wish more felt the same way regarding privacy.
I'm sure Ryan Adams will be swooping in any minute now.
Agree on Jen Law…she DID know THG will change her life.. she even said in an interview she knew she will no longer be able to go in a place without peoples asking pics, watching her… she knew it
No, no… I did not mean Stewart got a pass from the paps or the media, but from Sasha. She always defends her when she has, and you have to admit, done questionable things (the whole cheating scandal, which has blown over thankfully). I just don't understand why Sasha goes out of her way to post articles to come to her defense, but then tries to take down Jennifer Lawrence who is only 22, an Oscar winner, and seemingly doing everything right (no major scandals, no sex tapes or leaked nude photos, everyone seems to love her). It just really looks like Sasha is picking on her for her popularity, and that's her right, but it's really transparent and childish at this point.
And so did Stewart… So, why does Jen get the 5th degree here? Please, someone explain, other than what can only be described as jealousy at this point.
"I used to enjoy coming here…"
At least you can still enjoy telling Sasha she needs psychiatric help and chiming in to say I'm Sasha's flying monkey.
What have I ever done to you to deserve that, Charlotte? I was fine staying out of this all day until you decided it would be fun to take a poke at me. — Minding my own business; hoping for a little privacy.
I suppose your unprovoked attack is part of the price I pay for being in the public eye.
"I suppose your unprovoked attack is part of the price I pay for being in the public eye." According to Sasha there's nothing wrong about it, so you should just play ball and not make a fuss. Right?
"I suppose your unprovoked attack is part of the price I pay for being in the public eye." According to Sasha there's nothing wrong about it, so you should just play ball and not make a fuss. Right?
In fact, it doesn't bother me, Koleś. I can talk about things aimed at me even if they don't bother me, right?
If you think my response to Charlotte is how I make a fuss then you don't know me very well.
Do you think it troubles me at all if Notenoughtime and Charlotte want to make cracks about me being Sasha's flying monkey? Dude, I'm doing what I love and getting paid for it.
sure, I could wah-wah-wah and quit and give up the perks and give up the money. But these little aggravations and invasions into my peaceful day are absolutely worth it. Furthermore, it's part of the job I signed up for.
You know what would make it even easier? If I had to "play ball" and endure some nagging annoyances for a salary of 40 million dollars.
Thank you! I am disturbed by this article, too. I seriously do not understand how someone like Sasha and others cannot differentiate between an actor or actress posing for a red carpet, movie premiere, or some sort of promotional duty than a woman stepping out of her house to walk down the street for a coffee and having a swarm of paparazzi assault you from all sides, oftentimes yelling obscenities at you and trying to take incendiary pictures of you.
And what is with the random mention of Kristen Stewart? So she's the only young actress allowed to complain about the paparazzi? So it's shit's luck for Jennifer Lawrence, Emma Stone, Emma Watson, etc.?
Sasha will just never get over Jennifer Lawrence's win because she hated her character in that film.
Yeah, whatever. I'm glad you like shit flung at you and I'm also happy that you're paid for it. But here's the kicker. Not everybody does like that, no matter how much money they make. And remind me that the next time I stumble upon 40 million dollars, I should come by to see you. I can only imagine the size of the shit sandwich you're so willingly wanting to eat. But hey, It's all about the money, innit? I'll leave it on the table on my way out.
julian the emperor
I don't understand why Sasha feels sympathy for Kristen Stewart and not Jennifer Lawrence, but other than that, I think she is right to a certain degree.
The thing is, you cannot expect to live a "normal" life when you are being paid millions of bucks for doing stuff that's meant to be seen by as many people as possible. Because there's nothing normal about that. Not the money, not the privilege, not the lifestyle.
Normal is anonymity. Yet stars live from the attention they generate, so they cannot expect to be treated like normal people.
The standards for normality get distorted when you yourself are not living a normal life. The stars earn their millions by posing for normal people, basically. They put their face on the biggest canvas possible for all to see. If they feel trapped, they shouldn't step on to that stage.
It's also important to remember: You have a choice, you brought this down on yourself, you took the decision to engage in films and to be in the realm of the public eye.
I'm not saying the stars deserve to be hunted down by paps (it must be painfully stressful at times) far from it, but if it's not worth it, you have the means to withdraw from the spotlight. The press won't hunt you down forever. More often than not you are exactly as interesting as you let yourself be.
If you do The Hunger Games, you will have paps waiting for you, if you do a Winter's Bone-type of movie they will leave you alone. I would say that the latter is the more artistically and personally fulfilling to do, but, hey, money rules the world. I just don't think you should expect the rest of us to sulk along with you when you tire of the trappings of fame.
So if my ex-boyfriend starts so stalk me I guess I have to just deal with since I agreed to date him in the first place and it just shows how much he still 'loves' me? I don't honestly understand how some people can justify paparazzi harassment by saying it's part of the job. People stopping you on streets asking autographs and having to do press before movie releases is part of the job but having to deal with strange men trying to take crotch shots under your skirt, shouting obscenities and sexual suggestions in an attempt to get a reaction is not. There are very few leading roles for women in blockbusters available in Hollywood and wanting to have good ass-kicking roles should not require becoming a public property against their will.
I don't honestly understand how Sasha can justify paparazzi hitting Lawrence in the face and shoving her, calling her fat and ugly and telling her she has no talent and she should go back to States when she's attending Bafta ceremony where she's nominated for an award -an honor from her British peers -and saying she has no right to complain since some teenage people online 'love' her? There are plenty of successful book series being adapted on screen and some of them become hits while others flop and you never know what will happen. I know some of the Narnia stars and while the movies made lots of money around the world the first surpassing Hunger Games, they live very normal lives and don't have to put up with paparazzi or harassment and I don't see why American stars like Kristen and Jennifer don't have the same right.
I like watching celebrity photos as much as the next person but me liking like doesn't override the right of famous people to not get harassed, bullied and stalked. It's pretty sickening when groups of adult men harass young women whose breakdown then becomes some sort of public sport and entertainment. I live in a country without paparazzi and we survive very well so I don't get how American and British residents supposedly have some overriding right or need to harass their residents. Celebrities' kids' faces get blurred on magazines unless they have a permission to print them from the parents but while that helps their privacy, it still doesn't take away the adverse effects swarming paparazzi have on small kids going to school, park and minding their own business. Even if some celeb parents willingly put their kids out there, laws should still be in place and enforced to protect the kids from the press and even the parents if necessary.
I know Sasha hates Jennifer Lawrence for winning an oscar over her favourites likes she hates Tom Hooper but this article is very petty and pathetic even from her.
Jpns Viewer
Thank UFO Gods for Julian and his relatively insightful comment: merci beaucoup for not taking things simply in terms of black and white. . . .
While I don't fully understand [not really: I am sort of be able to read between the line; just a figure of speech] Sasha's motives and her outward appearance on this thread that seems more to take side with Bella while to an extent, despite the pap context being the same more-or-less, neglecting the poor Tiffany, I however refuse to take her as a hater, for this thread alone.
Again, great choice of words, Julian.
Jade Fox
I do have nothing but sympathy for the Jennifer Lawrences and Kristen Stewarts of this industry who would rather just do the work and live their life privately. They speaking out against the paparazzi will always get my support.
The problem for them is that there ARE celebs who call them up and use them to further their careers. Interestingly enough these people are often D list celebs and reality stars who need that kind of exposure because well, what casting director will hire them for a film role?
And because of these reality stars working with the paps it's made everyone else more vulnerable. People tend to think that celebs are a monolith so if one of them does it, then they all must do it which is clearly not the case.
So fight the good fight to all those who speak out against the paps. They will never get my sympathy after one of them called a 7 year old girl a bitch.
Bob Burns
do not understand interest in the personal lives of actors.
Really unnecessary and unclassy response, Koles. You're capable of better debating techniques.
Cate Blanchett has done her fair share of Blockbusters too. She doesn't just stick to indies. Meryl Streep has done done big movies like Mamma Mia, Devil Wears Prada, and is about to do Into the Woods.
Being an actor and being a celeb are two different things. Just because an actress isn't being limited by what she is being offered doesn't mean that she should not be able to accept without fear of being mentally harassed.
When Cate says it, or Meryl streeps says the same thing, nobody says anything. All actors complain about this. but when Jen, a girl wh is just getting used to this says something, oh well , "she asked for it?" What if she really wanted the role and the opportunity? She was a huge fan of the books, she won the role, any actress would have taken it. X-men she had a minor role and it didn't do anythign for her stock. Other than those two movies, her other roles have been small indies.
This article is ridiculous.
Let me get this straight, Koleś. You want me to understand that people who face the public as part of their job deserve to be treated with respect — and you drive home your point by telling me you're happy to see that I enjoy being a shit-eating whore?
Sasha, surely you have better things to do in your life than continue your petty vendetta towards Jennifer Lawrence. At least, I would hope.
Ryan…I apologize for my comment. It was unwarranted because you were staying out of this and minding your own business.
Sasha, I also apologize for the "get help" crack because that was immature of me. Perhaps you could explain to your readers exactly what your problem is regarding Jennifer Lawrence…because it's very difficult to understand. I didn't see anything wrong with Lawrence's comments /feelings about the paparazzi/fame…she understands that it's the price of fame but she's having a hard time getting used to it. Perhaps you should read the entire interview and not just snippets to get a better idea of what Lawrence is talking about.
That comment is really nasty, Koleś.
That's ok, Charlotte. No big thing.
As I tried to let Koleś know, I can let things like that roll off my back. In the context of brittle spirited discussion, I felt more surprised than wounded.
Really appreciate your followup. Thanks.
[Alex Wagner: That was way over the line. Had to delete your lousy remarks. Try to think about how you look lashing out with a crude personal assault on a movie writer while you're trying to speak out against personal assaults on a movie star.]
I largely stayed out of this because many people already voiced how I felt and I hate redundancy. I will say I'm very surprised by this article and it seemed to have been written more on the spot and with cynicism in the heart. Yes, celebrities should expect to be followed by photogs. But their kids? Come on. Photogs are crossing the line more and more everyday. I bet that film Paparazzi looked pretty silly 10 years ago but it seems timely now, not the revenge part but everything else. I hate to say that rich people have problems too but they do. They are allowed to complain. If they just took it up the ass from photogs day in and day out people would be saying, "A normal person would probably get annoyed." Well they are. Jennifer Garner seems like a wonderful person, free of scandal and has a great career. When somebody that straight forward asks for more privacy, or just more respect, why not let them say it and leave it at that?
I am a bit disappointed in some of the comments I've read here. A lot of you are better than what you're posting. Yes, I disagree with things Sasha will post but if I have to voice my opinion I do it with dignity. If you lay out an insult then that opens the door to scrutiny and, guess what? Your point is shadowed by your ignorance. With that being said I'm happy to see others feel the same way I do and have voiced their opinions in a nice way and have actually asked questions that require good answers.
And Sasha continues to attack JLaw every chance she gets. She also goes after her on the Awards Daily podcast. How pathetic. 🙁
I'm sorry. For real. I was out of line on that last comment and I apologise Ryan. But just to explain myself, I don't believe that people should be condemned for being famous and not wanting the ugly side of fame. Sure, they are famous, because that's how you earn a living in this profession, but I see nothing wrong in speaking out that you actually want to have a private life, that you don't want people invaiding you private space. Doesn't matter if you have a child, a dog or you simply want to be left alone on you morning walk to store. You crave the attention cause you wanna get paid, and that, to a certain extent is ok. But I feel that most of us here know where the line is drawn. That's why I got so upset reading that earning 40 mil might just push that line a little further. It does not.
But still I'm sorry for the comment. Ryan, I was out of line. Judging by your comments I've read through the years I know you have a strong bark arround you and none of this shit I've wrote can even slightly hurt. I guess these are the informal "comments' section laws". But still consider this, not all people have this bark arround them, commenters, movie stars or whoever. Consider that.
I love reading the impassioned defense of ms Stewart at the expense of ms Lawrence. I suppose it sucks to be in the awards watching game and know that for at least the next 18 years (until Lawrence hit the dreaded 40 yo mark), you will have to include her years after years as one of the contenders. Meanwhile, the queen of the contrived publicity-driven "relationship" for twilight has not turned her acting with just one facial expression method into Oscars yet.
I just came to this article and don't have the literal time to read all these comments so I apologize if this is redundant.
My contention for Ms. Lawrence is that she is/was not in it to pursue fame. Sure she's done some big blockbuster stuff, but what person from our generation doesn't have at least a little bit of superhero inside them? It is a child's dream to be in movies like that! I would jump heads first if offered to do something like that, not even considering the potential fame. I think its wrong to say she's in pursuit of fame, I think it happened to her. Heaven forbid an actor is well known enough that they can pick projects they want to do! That's the goal right? To be able to the work you want to do?
Additionally, just because she is famous then automatically negates her opinions? Since when is that a relevant argument? Sasha is allowed to express her opinions too (its her site for sakes), but this time it feels like some bias emotion got in the way of a valid argument.
I used to come here to read the state of the race articles and to read and listen to others talk about movies (I'm a lurker). But more recently it has felt like a celeb blog–the kind of content I try to avoid. I'll keep reading because
Alas, I suppose it is what the "people" want…why not feed them. It sure feeds the ad revenue.
you're doing the same but backwards, elevating Jen by putting Kristen down…-_-
Kristen's relationship is explored by the tabloid industry, she's constantly harassed by it. And this commentary section corroborates the author's words, as the majority are praising JenLaw and flipping about Kristen. Had it been Kristen's interview to Vogue, you'd all be calling her an ungrateful bitch…so, you just proved Sasha is right.
Oh, man Ryan. Both you and Sasha do a fantastic job on this site and on your podcast. But there's something a bit too insensitive about your comments here.
Comparing the comments from a few people on your website to the extraordinary stress and disruption of every aspect of your life by paparazzi and stalkers is off target.
You are off the hook when you turn off your computer. Jennifer Lawrence isn't. She isn't off the hook when she leaves her home. Hell, she probably isn't even off the hook at home, because she has to watch out how she acts, is dressed, sneezes, eats, farts around her own home to avoid someone (pool man, housekeeper, mailman, carpenter, neighbour, any body) leaking it to the press or posting it online. It's not just on the red carpet. It is every living and breathing moment of your life. Just take a look at your own day and imagine absolutely no privacy. Not just no privacy from your friends, family and loved ones. But potentially from everybody.
Then imagine people trying to provoke reactions out of you or your kids. Or someone you went to class with. Or just said "hi" to once. Imagine you giving a hug to an old friend and seeing photos of that on the cover of a magazine as "Ryan's secret affair" and your lover, while trusting you, gradually starting to get that nagging feeling of doubt.
Remember Philip Seymour Hoffman's speech about gossip in "Doubt"? Multiply that by a factor of a thousand and make it a 24 hour a day constant bombardement on every aspect of your life.
That life will break anybody, and is responsible for ending too many careers and lives.
You guys strike me as very intelligent and empathetic people. It would be a nice colour on you, if you would just consider that side of the argument and maybe admit, that you might have been a bit too onesided in your comments.
Now for all those on this site leaving comments that attack Sasha and Ryan in words way harder than they used about Jennifer Lawrence or anyone else: Pull yourself together. You can do better than being such assholes (anonymous paparazzi like assholes at that…). How come so many of you write something and then apologize shortly afterwards? It says a lot of good about you that you apologize, but don't you people ever stop and think about your words before you post them?
julian the emperor
You have to be pretty, pretty famous if you are afraid that your sneeze or fart will be broadcast news… my advice: go buy a pacific island and just chill. The monkeys and the cicadas won't gossip…
Nik, your reply is well-intentioned and measured, but I cannot understand this urge to stand up for people who earn 40 million bucks a year and live off of the attention they get. You don't get into this business completely clueless about where it might take you. There are incredible privileges that comes with the lifestyle, and therefore some sacrifices.
What is really so rude about questioning the motives of the celebrities. What is so unsound about expecting of them to be aware that they cannot just pull back from the circus of their lifestyle whenever it suits them? They cannot expect the media to be a useful tool to generate buzz for their movies or their new mansion or their new baby on the one hand, and expect to be left alone the rest of the time.
I don't feel particularly sorry for Jennifer Garner or Kristen Stewart or whomever.
I feel sorry for the countless millions of Americans who work full-time, yet are unable to lead a worthy life from the lousy salaries they are being paid. Try and do something about THAT. Now, there's your worthy cause.
If you are a celebrity, you have a choice: Do I want the kind of fame that is associated with gossip stuff and pandering to the media to achieve the level of attention that sustains my career? Or do I want to step back, do interesting stuff and settle for a lesser paycheck, yet keep some privacy?
As several commenters have pointed out, you don't see paparazzi hunting down Cate Blanchett. Why is that? Because she has made the sound decision of not letting all the star machinery of Hollywood and the media get in the way of her personal life. She seems to be making a pretty good balancing act of it.
It IS harder and more merciless when you are young and attractive, sure, but nobody's forcing you to play anybody's game. No one forced J-Law to do Hunger Games. No one forced Kristen Stewart to sleep with someone else's husband. I'm not saying they deserve what they get, I'm just saying I don't care too much about it. They have the means and the privilege to pull the plug if they feel like it. Unlike the worker at McDonald's, for whom alternative is a luxury he can't afford…
I hear you, Julian. But what does the comparison you make have to do with anything? Then I shouldn't feel sorry for people in the US who are out of work, because people living in war zones have a much harder time?
I am no less sad, when I lose a friend, just beacause I know someone else has lost two.
There's just a faint tint of jealousy to the argument that they make so and so much money, and they have such a privileged lifestyle, so they should just shut up and take whatever else hits them.
The thing is, I'm not even defending "stars who whine". I am however absolutely coming down on people who devote their life (or even just a part of it) to stalk and intentionally hurt others (famous or not) for their own benefit. It is a conscious decision to be a paparazzi, to be a stalker or to financially support them through hiring them or bying their product. Why should that act be excused just beacuse the injured party is wealthy and famous?
Is it ok to steal their car then? After all, they can just buy a new one.
And when we defend the paparazzi or even when we excuse them by objectifying the celebrities, and not regarding them as human beings, who had an opportunity many others didn't and took it, when we let jealousy overtake empathy, then we only add fuel to the already strong fire of the foul leeches that are the paparazzi.
So I am not particularly trying to defend people, that others might find overly priviliged. I am raging against the above mentioned scum, and just peacefully noting that not distancing oneself from them, but lashing out against the people who are wronged by them, is intentionally or not, supporting them.
I am not asking anybody to feel sorry for Jennifer Lawrence or anyone else. That's up to people's own conscience. But how can there be any doubt about wether or not the stalking by paparazzi is wrong?
julian the emperor
I fully agree with your assessment of the paparazzi as, basically, scum and the media that hire them to do their dirty work. So if we talk paparazzi, I fully agree with you. And you make a compelling case against them.
The thing is, though, the article Sasha did was premised on Garner's and Berry's testimony to the pressures of living under paparazzi scrutiny, not the work ethics (or lack thereof) of the paparazzi.
Of course, it is relevant to hear what stars have to say about how the paparazzi methods affect them: They are humans, after all. Everyone has the right to be protected from others' wrong-doing, be it physical or emotional.
But the inherent hypocrisy of the stars trouble me. They want to use the media AS they wish and WHEN they see fit, but they don't want it to affect them the other way around. When you put on a show for everyone to see, you cannot expect to have full control over what the public wants from you. You can pull the plug and escape the whole charade or you can at least admit that if you have ever used the media for your own ends, they might try to use you also to achieve something (better ratings or whatever).
There has to be that level of reflection among the stars – the recognition of the push and pull of fame, so to speak – and, frankly, I think a lot of them are too preoccupied with their own needs and too oblivious of their own privileges to gain a realistic perspective.
They don't see the hypocrisies of their own lifestyle, only whatever troubles them (paparazzi and what more?) as a menace they have a RIGHT to be rid of.
Nik, please go back and see if you can locate any sentence where I compare my life or stress to how Jennifer Lawrence lives.
You could also consider the possibility that I and billions of other people might face problems that Jennifer Lawrence cannot even conceive of.
Koleś, don't even worry about it. Just took me surprise because a flare-up like that isn't like you at all.
My remark about the $40 million wasn't too clear. I didn't mean that anyone's soul should be for sale if the price is right. I was only trying to playfully lay the bank balance of most normal people up against $40 million to show that it's such a fraction of a fraction of a fraction that it's nearly nothing. And yet the poorest people on earth cope with hardships a movie star will never face.
We don't often see homeless people crying to the media about their lack of privacy.
I didn't want to state so bluntly, but hoped it might help if people stop and remember that NOBODY has an easy life. I guess I meant to suggest that anyone who thinks money might not help balance some of the pressure of fame should talk to a single mom who works at McDonald's for minimum wage.
One way to measure the stress of stardom Jennifer Lawrence deals with against the daily grinding humiliations that a minimum wage mom has to face would be to ask them both how they'd like to swap lifestyles for a year. Or even a week.
A few days ago, Alec Baldwin got mad because he was being misrepresented on Twitter. He's fed up with Twitter and quit in a huff.
Baldwin says: "I have one dream in my life and that is that this daughter I'm having—she comes to me about seven or eight years from now, she has a friend, and she's at her house and she says, 'Daddy, Susie's mom says you used to be on TV. Daddy, is that true?' She has no knowledge of me as a public person. That would be heaven for me."
When asked if this meant he was quitting acting, Baldwin replied, "That would be the greatest thing in the world."
But while he would "love to" say goodbye to show business, he added, "if I could find something else to do."
Good lord, Baldwin. Your net worth is $65 million. Nobody is going to miss your ass if your quit acting. Just do it. You can't find anything else to do? Bullshit. You can't flip burgers? No, what you mean is you can't find anything to do that pays you a million dollars a week. But why do you need that? Can't you get by on the vast fortune you've already amassed? If being a public person is so horrible then you should quit right now. And trust me, you'd be fine. You already have enough money to live like royalty for the next 200 years.
I agree with you absolutely, Koleś. Some people just don't have the tough bark to cope with public pressures. So they should try working at WalMart and see if that eases their stress. Because life's a stress-free breeze for WalMart workers.
That's all I meant. I don't mean anybody needs to be happy about the crap they have to deal with. But everyone makes his or her own choices. If Alec Baldwin hates his life, nobody is stopping him from doing something different.
Michael Collins
As much as I like Sashas writing I am horrified by this article. Jennifer Lawrence is not public domain. Just because she acts in a blockbuster doesn't make it okay to be a victim of paparazzi. Every person has the right for a private life. It's not as if Lawrence acts like Lindsay Lohan or Charlie Sheen and loves to bath in the publicity.
The Yellow Press is a digusting thing and everyone who thinks they have a right to invade anybodys life should be ashamed of themselves. I would bet my life that Jennifer Lawrence and most others would gladly give up most of their paychecks to have a more private life
"I would bet my life that Jennifer Lawrence and most others would gladly give up most of their paychecks to have a more private life."
ouch, you just lost that bet.
If stars wanted to trade enormous paychecks for anonymity, why don't they then? It's quite simple. Quit. Go away. I can think of only 3 or 4 actors in history who have made that choice — They quit. And to show how effectively it ensured their privacy, I can't even remember their names offhand.
Want to know who's forced to be in the public eye every single day for hours and hours while a steady stream strangers look at them? 20 million underpaid grocery-store clerks and fast food workers.
julian the emperor
Ha, Michael.
What is "most of their paychecks"? Do you think it would kill them to get by with 5 million bucks instead of 35?
You know what? I think stars suffer from inflated egos: If their rich neighbor or their rich colleague on a current project they're doing get more money than they do, they want a raise in their already over-inflated salary. That's how vanity works.
They would not accept 5 million bucks if it secured them anonymity (from what? Stars thrive with attention, not anonymity, and you cannot get both at the same time!), but I bet you that most would deny a cut in their paycheck because that would make them look bad compared to their peers…
We are talking about people here with the mindset of a Johnny Depp (who won't star in anything worthwhile, because people who do worthwhile projects can't afford to pay "his" kind of money) or a Bruce Willis (well, good call, Bruce, turning down that Expendables-thing, btw…)
For god's sake, people: Find some worthier cause to engage with. Celebrities are not it.
"Jennifer Lawrence and most others would gladly give up most of their paychecks to have a more private life."?
If only they could spend part of their paychecks on 20,000 sq ft mansions in exclusive enclaves surrounded by acres of gated landscape protected by 24-hour security. If only they would spend part of their paychecks on deluxe hotel suites with private elevators and Rodeo Drive shops and travel in Learjets or limos with black-tinted windows, then maybe they could get a few moments of serenity once in a while instead of riding the bus and eating at KFC and standing in line at K-Mart where ordinary people can "look at them."
Because, stars, you know, they can't stand to be looked at. That's why they never go on TV to tell funny stories about their private lives all the time.
The way we know Jennifer Lawrence zealously guards her privacy is by how she never told the whole world more than 6 or 7 stories about the times she peed in public.
James Ho
Wow, I used to read this site for insightful news and reviews. Now, I see it's become the written equivalent of papparazzi, thanks to this column and others. Disgusting. I'm out of here.
The way we know Jennifer Lawrence is zealously uninterested in her own private life is by how she never said that she hopes working within a normalized toxic environment will not result in internalizing the normality of the toxins.
@Ryan-So actors should never complain about the dehumanizing behavior of the paparazzi because in the grand scheme of things other people have it worse off? Not a very compelling argument. Just because they are harassing celebrities doesn't magically give the paparazzi license to do anything they please. Fact is there isn't a person in any walk of life that would want to be treated the way major celebrities are routinely treated by the paparazzi. Saying "shut up, you're a celebrity", doesn't quite cut it.
And would you drop the snide act. Jennifer has accomplished more at 22 by her own drive and talent than you will ever accomplish in your entire life. It just comes off as petty jealousy. Which it clearly is.
Anyway most people have a clearer sense of the issue. Just because they are targeting celebrities doesn't make normal paparazzi behavior any less despicable.
@Ryan-Reading through your comments, I'm ashamed for you. .
@Ryan-Yes because being humorous and having a compelling personality immediately negates any complaints about being stalked by photographers 24/7. That is truly like someone saying that a rape victim asked for it. She should not have dressed so attractively, etc
Are you drunk?
It just comes off as petty jealousy. Which it clearly is.
Busted! That's why I never have anything nice to say about anybody who's smarter than me or more talented than I am. Because clearly if I'm jealous of Jennifer Lawrence then I must be jealous of every filmmaker and artist and scientist and Olympic gymnast who ever lived. Is that what you think, Winston?
Saying "shut up, you're a celebrity", doesn't quite cut it.
You'd really have me pinned down if that's what I said.
She can say whatever she wants. I don't care if she shuts up or cries like a baby. I'm only saying I don't have a huge amount of concern for the torment of un-solicited publicity Jennifer Lawrence says she suffers. Is that alright with you?
"That is truly like someone saying that a rape victim asked for it. Are you drunk?"
That's right, Winston. Having an un-sanctioned photo taken is truly like rape. That doesn't sound too sober.
For the record, Winston, I don't want Alec Baldwin to shut up. I want him to keep saying he wishes could quit show business. I wish he would keep repeating it so more people would start to see how ridiculous he sounds. I wish he would say it over and over until his wish comes true.
Baldwin acts as if he's trapped in this show biz nightmare against his will. His act isn't very convincing.
Somebody might remind Balwin that he can still make tons of money if he wanted to QUIT acting altogether to become a TV commercial clown parody of himself — but I think he already figured that out.
"And so did Stewart… So, why does Jen get the 5th degree here? Please, someone explain, other than what can only be described as jealousy at this point."
I have to contradict this. You see, if you watch the earliest Twilight interviews, you'll realize that they kept saying that they didn't know Twilight will blow up. They kept repeating that the support was unexpected and it changed their lives. If my memory served me right, Twilight was supposedly an indie film. They didn't even know if they are going to make a 2nd film after Twilight but if they would, Kristen and Rob were signed already.
Also, I'd like to offer a theory over why Sasha said Jennifer knew what she was getting into when she signed up for THG. We are living in an era where internet is used to stalk celebrities, to sell paparazzi pictures, where people read tabloid bullsh*t online, where the media makes or break an actor/actress. Twilight came before THG. Therefore, the evidence of what overnight success did for the Trio of Twilight is seen all over the internet; every incriminating pictures can be googled. If I am going to star in a huge book-turned-into-film series with a huge fan base, and I want to know how it might possibly change me, I can just google the Twilight trio and learn from them. I mean, they are everywhere, especially the past years. They attend award shows; paparazzi and some fans stalk them; every day, tabloids update stories about them (sometimes it doesn't even matter if it's news-worthy or not) – and it's all in the internet. Sometimes you don't even have to search it!
When Sasha said Jennifer knew what she was getting herself into, she might have meant that: that everyone knew what it did to Twilight. How it changed their lives. Even Lily Collins of TMI kind of prepared herself lest TMI hits it big too. And no, I am not hating Jennifer. I am merely formulating a possible explanation. If that is not what Sasha meant, then some of the comments here about Jennifer saying it took her long to decide whether she'll do THG because she knows it might change her life may be the reason. Thank you.
My guess for the question why Sasha feels sympathy with Kristen over Jennifer:
1) Jennifer is practically a saint in the eyes of the media. Simply put, if this was Kristen's interview with Vogue, people would be calling her ungrateful right now. But since it's Jennifer, paparazzi are suddenly 10 times more vicious than normal (even if these people still check pap pictures of both Kristen and Jennifer). Sure, Jennifer gets some BS, but not as much as Kristen does. Kristen, from the start of Twilight (even before those incriminating pictures w/ the director) has been portrayed by the media as sullen and moody. And she was kind of awkward during early Twilight days so I guess that's where it came from. But it's haunted her and until now, tabloids would rather choose a picture of Kristen not smiling to go along with their stories.
2) Twilight kids didn't know Twilight will be big. Therefore, they are caught in the middle of overnight success. And it came before THG. Which means Jennifer Lawrence and other might-be-successful series, can take lessons on how badly fame can affect actors/actresses based on Twilight stars' experience. They were unprepared and Kristen wasn't able to deal with the sudden fame smoothly. Sasha might feel a little bad about the girl and thinks Lawrence should know better based on what happened to Twilight.
3) Kristen was almost 18 when she became famous. Hence, she had to mature in front of the camera. Teenage years + fame isn't such a good combo. Just check pop stars, i.e. Justin Bieber. I have nothing against him but check his antics in front of the camera and how tabloids portrayed it as reference. Meanwhile, Jennifer was in her early 20s when fame hit her. Therefore, she's a little bit more mature and aware already about the consequences of fame.
All in all, my guess is that it has something to do with Kristen being an underdog. She wasn't able to deal with fame graciously because it came at such a young age and people kicked her for it. In turn, Sasha might have felt bad and wanted to stick up to her. This just my theory though.
I really like Sasha and I like this article too. I'm laughing at all the people that felt the need to come defend the honour of Jennifer Lawrence. Didn't she in a recent interview with Vogue say that she always knew she would be famous? Well if she grew up knowing she'd be famous then she had plenty of time preparing herself for how to deal with fame. The press hardly ever say anything negative about Jennifer they just kiss her ass so she's getting treated better than a lot of other celebrities. Kristen Stewart on the other hand get bullied by the paparazzi and the press on a daily basis so I'm more inclined to feel more sympathy for actors like her rather than Jennifer. The Twilight actors had no idea that Twilight would be this huge, they've mentioned that in interviews so they weren't prepared for the fame that came along with it. Also the people commenting on Stewart's personal life are just pathetic, don't know why people care about the personal lives of people they don't even know, and some comments just show the complete misogyny the press and some people have. Whereas Jennifer saw and knew what would happen if The Hunger Games became big like Twilight. So Sasha and co keep doing what you're doing I really enjoy reading your articles. Ignore the trolls.
Thanks, Nadia.
It feels surreal to me that I'm not allowed to say out loud that Jennifer Lawrence didn't hang the moon.
I can't understand how it's so horrible of me to observe that there's a disconnect when an actress says, "Look at me! Look at me! Look at my bikini photo shoots! Listen to the half-a-dozen different stories I love to tell about how I pee in public and have a habit of pissing my pants!" and then her fans cry, "Her privacy! Her privacy! Go away! Respect her privacy!"
In fact, Lawrence herself is not even complaining. She just seems baffled by the curiosity — or (I believe) feigning bewilderment. All some of us are saying is, "Really, Jen? You didn't invite the attention?"
But then when another actress (like Kristen Stewart or Rooney Mara) tries to be more reserved and circumspect, it's that actress who's browbeaten online for being more demur and closed off in an effort to maintain her personal life.
Am I the only one who unsubscribed from his podcast because of the awkward editing? Taking out gaps of silence is one thing, but the program sounds like Baldwin is JUMPING with the next question like he's been waiting all his life. Not exactly at NPR standard if ya know what I mean..
In a whimsical twist on Ryan Adams' internet comment, J-Law transformed into her IMAX-sized form and hanged the goddamn moon.
"Even i wouldnt pull some bullshit like that, damn, and I'm [evil]" a source says K-Stew says.
Look for more updates online and tweet us @Attention
I have seen these parasites at work with my own two eyes and it is nothing short of harassment. A law needs to be implemented. Actors are people too.
What Jennifer needs to realize is that she is not a normal 23-year old girl. What woman wins an oscar, is the lead of a huge franchise and on Forbes highest paid list at that age. I find it hypocritical that before when HG first came out she said she understood that it was a job and the paparazzi was the downside of fame, everyone applauded her maturity. Now shes complaining about it and everyone is defending her saying the papz have no right. Sure they have no right but lets all be honest she doesn't have it half as bad as other actors her age. Kristen Stewart has her way of dealing with them whether its the right way or not. Even before her scandal last year she was harassed by them (Cannes) yet she has never commented on it in interviews. Never once do you hear her complaining about grown men harassing her to a magazine, she prefers cussing and flipping them off in there faces. These two are often compared because if you were to pay close attention they act fairly the same, both stutter, give sincere answers in interviews, been caught smoking marijuana, cuss and flip the bird-yet we treated them differently for it. Kristen gets criticized and called ungrateful while Jennifer is congratulated and called refreshing. Bottom line is Jennifer knew what she was getting herself into when signing on to a franchise, as does Lily Collins and Shailene Woodley. The HP & Twilight kids did not.
Ryan, come on. I respect your work and I don't know you as a person, so I assume I'd respect you privately as well. Why that kind of answer?
Of course you have problems that Garner and Lawrence don't comprehend or can't conceive of. As do many others. And they have problems you can't comprehend unless you've lived their exposed lives.
Does that make them lesser people or you better? Or the other way around?
You wrote that people on this site bitchin' about your comments is a price you were aware of and ready to pay. And that $40 mio. would make that price all the more sweet. I take that as a comparison to Garner/Lawrence and that they should take the shit that hits them, because they are so well paid. If that was not your intent, then I don't understand your comment, and so be it.
I just don't think others have a right to stalk them or shit on them just because they are succesful, and to call them whining bitches just because they speak out against the paparazzi-culture.
No, I'm not saying you, Ryan, called them whining bitches. No, I'm not saying you've stalked them
But I do not understand the reasoning on this site in this instance. I am not attributing this quote to anyone, but this is how I've understood the prevailing argument from you, Sasha and a few others here:
They are succesful. They have shitloads of money. They have used the media to further their career. So they should shut up when they are attacked by the media, have their privacy invaded or feel unjustly treated in any way.
I may have misunderstood that this was your point of view. And I may not have.
I just wholeheartedly disagree with that point of view. In every way.
I guess we agree to a certain extent 🙂
And we absolutely don't have to agree on everything 🙂
Again, you have good points, well argued.
I just have one comment:
It is not quite right that the stars (and their agents, producers, distributors etc.) exploit the media when promoting their product, and the media gets nothing out of the deal until they can stalk them later and invade their privacy, and that is the point where the media makes money off the celebrities.
First of all, I don't want to generalize as hard as I do, when I just label them "the media". They are as varied as any other professional field. And I love the existence of the media!!!!
But make no mistake. "The media" makes serious money on just having the celebrities appear at openings, giving interviews, promoting productions. That's why they cover them so heavily. That's why they tell that story every time.
So no one is in the red on that part of the deal. That's a completely fair tradeoff. And if the stars want the press to cover their film, yes, they have to appear at the openings, do the press junkets, do a billion interviews. Absolutely.
So no one looses out there.
And the media is not doing the celebrities any favors there. And they are not being exploited by the stars. That's a naive thought.
Then, for some reason, parts of "the media" (and parts of the public) then feel they are entitled to more. More pictures, more personal stories, more, more, more.
That is the part I find disgusting.
If Lawrence or Garner had complained about taxes, the prices of hospitals, food, tuition or anything else financially. Then I would totally agree: "Shut up. You are well off and have nothing to complain about".
But they are not. They are complaining about an invasion of privacy that is not fair and does not, in any way have to be a natural part of the deal. And they are not courting and exploiting the media with the privacy of the families.
Hey, if they are, then there's a saying where I live: If you invite the press to the wedding, then they'll be there for the funeral. And in that case it's their own fault.
But it is not their own fault just because they are famous, because they work their asses of to make the films they do or because they work even harder to promote them. That parts a fair give-and-take with the press.
So if you sell photos of your newborn to the press, then you open the door.
If you do blockbusters, openings and a billion press conferences about your work, how the fuck does that give anyone the right to invade your home, and how can anyone be so jealous as to think they've asked for it themselves.
My humble point of view, and I totally respect those of you here that obvoiusly disagree.
Do you really think so? I honestly haven't felt that way.
Isn't she just making an argument as to why she feels Lawrence wasn't the right winner?
Personally I think Chastain should have won, but I'm ok with Lawrence's win. I also think Lawrence was great in Winter's Bone, is a huge talent and I hope she won't turn out to be a flash-in-the-pan, forgotten in 5-10 years. I have great sympathy for Jennifer Lawrence. And I have actually only gotten the impression that Sasha and others on the site and the podcast have great respect for her and her work. Sasha has just made some pretty well put arguments as to why she thinks Lawrence won the Oscar instead of Chastain, Riva or anyone else from that year.
I might be wrong, but I can't recall Sasha personally bashing Lawrence for winning the award. I only remember her every time saying that she likes Jennifer Lawrence. And then makes the case why Sasha thinks "JLaw" won and why she feels someone else should have in her stead.
Hell, I disagree with a lot of the stuff they say on the podcast, and I think to myself "what idiots, they know nothing and I'll never listen to their show again". Then moments later I find myself totally agreeing with them on something else and think "they are geniuses and I love this podcast!"
Maybe you're using the word "pathetic", but actually wanting to say "passionate"?
And I give Sasha enough credit that her thoughts on the outcome of the Oscars have nothing to do with her thoughts on the stalkerazzi stuff in this article (I agree with her on one and totally disagree on the other).
Ryan, I think you're spot on regarding Alec Baldwin's comments, if that is indeed what he said and how he said it.
If he seriously dreams of quitting, then go ahead.
He could have said that he sometimes toys with the idea, but he loves the work and he likes the pay, so he propbably won't. That'd be fair enough.
I just don't see how you can compare the stress of a McDonald's worker to that of Alec Baldwin.
There are, as you say, millions or billions of hard working people, who struggle to make ends meet and maybe you're right that many would love to trade places with ie. Baldwin.
Low wages, unemployment, starvation and many other issues are extremely important to increase awareness of. Absolutely!
Are some celebreties overpaid? Maybe. Could they survive on less? I'm sure you're right.
When it comes to financial security, wealth could (and maybe should?) be distributed way more evenly.
What does that have to do with the invasion of privacy?
No, the workers you talk about are not under the same public scrutiny as the celebrities mentioned. They do not have people stalking them at home, taking spy photos of their bedrooms, harassing their kids, selling naked pictures of them, spreading lies about them on the cover of papers, magazines and headers on websites.
They are judged for their work, while they're doing it, and then they go home to their privacy. As should be the right of everyone. No matter what your income is.
At what level of income is it anybody elses business what your sexuality is? What your religion is? Who you desire? What you eat? When you shit? When you make love (or don't)? What your kids play? Who your friends are? What they eat and who they fuck?
Should there be a scale where you give up freedom and rights gradually as your paycheck increases?
Yes, everybody has stressful lives. People trying to make ends meet. People in war zones. People with debilitating diseases.
People are under stress because of sexuality, race, gender, religious views (or lack thereoff).
I won't compare the levels of stress and I won't even begin to grade them. Life's hard, you're right.
And yes, it rings completely hollow if someone says that they would give up everything just to be rid of the paparazzi. Then go ahead, give up everything. They have the choice, and I agree with you, people with low income jobs, victims of war or disease and many others don't have a choice.
I will give you all those points.
But I still can't find one single good argument that makes sense why anybody has the right to harass celebrities, invade their homes, stalk their kids, spread lies about them or why the injured party is not allowed to speak up against this.
Why is this a war between the "I love Kristen Stewart" and "I love Jennifer Lawrence" camps?
Regardless of wether or not anyone loves or hates either girl. Regardless of wether or not there are other, more important issues in the world. Regardless of wether or not anyone feels any sympathy for any actor or actress mentioned in the above comments or if anyone laughs at them and think they had a backlash coming.
Isn't there really only one question:
Should there be stricter laws against stalkers and paparazzi?
I absolutely think there should be, and I haven't heard any reasonable arguments against.
julian the emperor
Nik, I appreciate having this discussion with you because of your very constructive approach.
Just one thing: I don't argue that the stars exploit the media and not the other way around. It's a give and take, for sure.
I'm not as naive as to think that the media are somehow unaware that the stars take advantage of them or vice versa. Both parties, of course, are painfully aware that they both benefit from this cycle of mutual benefit. There's nothing mysterious about this, nothing dubious if you accept that this is how it is, but as a consumer of the media (and of the stars), it would be nice if we – the audience – are treated to a higher quality of whatever comes out of the stars/media-relation other than, as Ryan points out, stories about how J-Law peed in her pants etc.
Oh well, anyway: I don't think the fact that the media get something out of the stars when they put them on air (higher ratings), takes away the stars' own responsibility of how they choose to appear in the media and how much and what exposure they try to attract.
If you play the game, then you should expect certain strands of the media to try and exploit you, because you live the lifestyle of a celebrity. You cannot just pull the plug, whenever you feel like it. Or, rather, actually; you can: You can stay away from the limelight, you can go away and enjoy life with all your millions intact. The privileges that your money provide you, give you opportunities that normal people don't have.
There is therefore a distortion of reality, when stars complain about their situation with paparazzi, because by and large they have the means to avoid being hassled. Either by staying out of the limelight, dealing with the media in a "serious" way that will effectively ensure that they are being treated as "working artists" rather than as mere celebrities.
Ultimately, you can hide away at your spacious mansion or try to accept that photographers take your picture once in awhile (and not only on the red carpet when it suits YOU). It's not akin to being raped, you know, it's a by-product of playing the game that you also benefit hugely from.
Again, I don't find it too disconcerting that people who earn 40 million bucks or whatever, have to deal with some sacrifices (when it comes to being a private person in public) when you consider the privileges and possibilities they have at hand.
I hate to break it to you, but Harry Potter and Twilight were very popular before the films were made. Harry Potter had the tougher task of living up to the fantasy world but Twilight had it made. All they had to do was find attractive actors and stick them in the northwest, modern day society. They had more of a guarantee for a sequel than HP did due to the budgets.
Agreed. The biases showing are becoming so transparent…not picking a side here but I'm really shocked at all of Lawrence's backlash. It's all becoming more than transparent though, it's getting petty.
You're right again, regardless of who says what and what they're getting paid (like it really fucking matters) the paparazzi should be on tighter leashes.
Lots of good points you make, Nik.
I don't like paparazzi. I don't like sites like gawker and perez hilton and I never go visit them, never go to those sleazy pages in search of "news" items to post. I despise that crap. I don't like tabloid photos and I don't like that it's almost impossible to avoid seeing them.
There are already laws against paparazzi "doing anything they want" (as another reader describes it). Those laws should be strengthened. More stars should pursue lawsuits — because it's all about money and it's not going to stop until the business of of candid photos is less financially attractive.
Anyone who thinks stars are under 24/7 pressure from privacy intruders trying to watch them take a shit isn't considering the kind of seclusion, comfort, security and impenetrable layers of sheltered protection 5 million dollars can buy 23-and-a-half hours a day.
"I just don't see how you can compare the stress of a McDonald's worker to that of Alec Baldwin."
You're right. I suspect Alec Baldwin would melt down into a panic-attack puddle of huffy mush if he had to live the life of a McDonald's worker for a single week. The spoiled twat flipped out like a lunatic when he got badmouthed on Twitter — the same badmouthing hundreds of millions of Twitter users deal with every day without pitching a fit, crying, bitching, and closing their accounts.
Stars are sheltered, pampered and protected inside fantastically lavish cocoons of luxury nearly every single minute of their lives. I don't lose a lot of sleep worrying about the few minutes when they have to travel amidst the commoners en route between all their palatial pads.
I'll say again, if Jennifer Lawrence doesn't want people to know about her private toilet habits then she should stfu with her charming tales of weird urination behavior on talk shows broadcast to millions of people.
So 2 or 3 times in her entire life Jennifer Lawrence has been embarrassed by awkward photos taken of her instead of the high-gloss look she gets to project in 5000 photos she'd rather have us see. Gee, wow, I don't much care and I don't feel sorry for her in the least.
If she wants to see some embarrassing photos she should take a look at the high school yearbooks of every regular person in America.
Ryan, I think you're spot on regarding Alec Baldwin's comments, if that is indeed what he said and how he said it.
You can google "Alec Baldwin quit showbiz" to verify more details and context.
Here's how much Alec Baldwin is a helpless victim of harrassment. Check out how much Baldwin respects other private citizen on Twitter (George Stark, a UK journalist who made a stupid error and misread the public tweets of Baldwin's wife).
– How much of this shit are people supposed to take? With these fucking blatant lies EVERY DAY.
– I'm gonna find you, George Stark, you toxic little queen, and I'm gonna fuck…you…up.
– If put my foot up your fucking ass, George Stark, but I'm sure you'd dig it too much
– I want all of my followers and beyond to straighten out this fucking little bitch, George Stark.
– Someone wrote that my wife was tweeting at a funeral. Hey. That's not true. But I'm gonna tweet at your funeral.
– George Stark, you lying little bitch. I am gonna f%#@ you up.
That's how Alec Baldwin respected a gay journalist's privacy before he finally quit Twitter in a climatic meltdown because he was feeling abused. Right after that Baldwin threatened to quit his clown act altogether. So all his fans of who made him a multimillionaire will be deprived of his glamorous charm.
Hate to break it to you but Twilight started out as an indie. Most of the cast were unknowns. The sequel wasn't green lit until the day after it was released in theaters. They had know idea that it was going to blow up. Had a low budget of about $37 million unlike all these new franchise coming out.
Thank god I'm not the only one annoyed by all her peeing stories. I try to watch her interviews to learn about the movie shes promoting, yet it seems like all she does is promote herself.
julian the emperor
That Alec Baldwin twitter rant… oh boy…
I literally had a hard time "enjoying" his scenes in Blue Jasmine thinking about what a jerk the guy is.
Thanks, Julian. Same goes. Constructive debate is my favorite. Nonsensical mud throwing? Not so much 🙂
You know what. It's really hard for me to disagree with your latest comment.
Personally I really don't care if Lawrence pees in public or not. And I do find it a bit strange that she chose to share that story herself. I'd guess that she tried to keep up an image of being a happy-go-lucky "fresh" young woman, so she (and/or) her publicist chose to use that story more than once.
It's what happens from then on in the media, that bothers me. I totally think the press is in their good right to print that angle and only that if they so chose. If they decide to write about her public urination adventures and not write a word about the film she was trying to promote, so be it. That's her fault, and she and her people should know better. Or just accept that that could turn out to be the story of Lawrence and her permanent nickname (PeePee Lawrence?).
I still don't, in any way, understand how that can justify the next level of paparazzi hounding. I really am trying to see the point of view of people defending that aspect. But I can't. I don't see why there's a connection. The connection is only there because the paparazzi is trying to make people see the connection, so they can go on doing their dirty deeds.
And don't get me wrong. I'm not lying awake thinking about the "wronged" superstars and "however are they going to be allright?". I'm sure they'll make it through life despite people looking at them, when they go to the local 7-11.
I'm just saying that there is a completely unethical intrusion of a person's privacy. It's icing on an extremely psychologically stressful cake. Icing that should be illegal and actively fought against.
Some people (not you, I'm quite sure) just seem to mix things up. Complaining about the paparazzi is not the same as complaining about people recognizing you on the streets. It's totally different.
But because you're ALWAYS recognized 24/7 it just hits all the harder that someone goes to the extreme, and absolutely offensive, measures that paparazzi and stalkers use.
So I'm definetely nok asking or expecting anyone to cry for the poor celebs or loose sleep on their behalf. Hell no. They'll be fine.
But that doesn't mean I think it's ok when crimes are committed against them (or anyone else).
And I do consider it a crime, the way the paparazzi acts. Not at all equivalent to rape (it's quite shocking that some would make that comparison). But a crime none the less.
julian the emperor
I get your point. You argue that there is a difference between using the media for promotion and being the victim of unlawful intrusions on your privacy. You feel that it is tantamount to uphold that distinction.
I do agree with you about that, sure.
So what the discussion comes down to, really, is whether you feel compelled to feel sorry for the stars in question or feel compelled to voice an outcry on their behalf. Since they have a choice to stay out of the limelight and enjoy life in any conceivable way, I don't personally feel compelled to feel sorry for them, but at the same time I do accept your arguments that all unlawful behavior against any individual should be fought against.
It's just the tone of some of the commenters here that chose to attack Sasha's stance that troubled me some. I think some of them ought to see things in a larger perspective, to see injustice where it really counts for something.
We've already been through this. I introduced the example of the McDonalds worker on a minimum wage (in Denmark where I come from, the minimum wage is something like 30 dollars per hour, which put the appalling conditions in the US in perspective) and Ryan took that example and used it with his mix of acidic wit and rightful indignation.
But, we could also talk about Guantanamo detainees, the single biggest offense against international law perpetrated by a Western government. When you consider the glaring difference in what constitutes a choice in shaping your own destiny, that kind of put the stars' "problems" with the paparazzi thoroughly in the shade.
I know that trying to come up with other examples doesn't take away the essence of the principled stance you advocate, but it kind of feels like a necessary rebuttal to the outrage of some of the commenters who feel that J-Law is an innocent victim of a heinous crime or that Sasha or Ryan are being irresponsible for voicing the obvious hypocrisies that lie behind most Hollywood stars' way of dealing with the public.
Hahaha 🙂
Damn. I think I like your writing quite a bit, Ryan!
And I totally agree: stfu with those stories about public urination. Bad advise from her publicists or the mistake of a girl too young to handle the exposure. If she's eventually remembered as the pee-in-public-girl instead of as an Oscar winner, that's her own fault.
Guess we also agree that laws against the paparazzi should be tougher.
I just think she (and others) are in their full right to speak out publicly against the paparazzi.
Unfortunately I still think that some people are not aware that they hurt another human being when they cough up money for the vomit that the paparazzi throw up in magazines or when people visit their websites.
I'm not losing sleep because I worry so much about poor Jennifer Lawrence. But I really do believe she is in her good rights to speak out against the rotten apples of the media.
As for Alec Baldwin. Don't know the guy personally, but from what you're saying he's painting quite the picture of himself as an asshole.
Targeting a person the way he does makes him no better than the paparazzi.
I understand the frustration that led to his comments, but the comments themselves. Hell no. Bad call Baldwin.
Reminds me of Axl Rose who named and slammed a couple of his harshest critics in the song "Get in the Ring" in the early 90's. He may have been right, but it was a bad color on him and it was the best possible promo for the works of the people he named.
And Baldwin as a McD worker… I'd love to see that. I think you might right about his chances of succes there 😀
"Mr. Baldwin, I'm sorry, but I said "no onions"…"
McDonald's Trainee, Alec B:
"You F@€K! You toxic little queen! I'd stick my foot up your ass, but I'm afraid I might find out I like it too much and have to admit something about myself, that I'm not yet ready to talk about! So F@€K off or I'm gonna tweet all over your onions!"
But who knows? He could surprise us and be the uncrowned Burger King…
Dude…What are you smoking?
I totally agree with you Julian!
The tone of the comments made by some people here, raging against Sasha and Ryan, is ridiculous and embarrassing. Shameful!
If this had been my site, I would have deleted most of those comments right away. I'm very impressed that they've only removed the absolute worst. That shows a level of self-control I might not have if I was in their place.
Agree with all of this.
This site has had a full on hatefest for Jennifer Lawrence ever since she beat Emmanuelle Riva for the Oscar. So take Sasha's bashing of Lawrence with a grain of salt.
As for what Lawrence was saying, Sasha conveniently takes snippets of the quote. Lawrence was talking about how she has woken up in the morning and found paparazzi sleeping on her lawn and loitering/trespassing on her personal property and when she called the cops she was told there was nothing she could do about it, yet if she was a non-celebrity 23-year-old, the men would have been arrested.
I do think celebrity kids should not be photographed, but what about the parents that use their kids as props for the paps?That's a question that needs to be discussed. I have no idea what Matt Damon's or Mark Wahlberg's kids look like (nor do I care to know), because they don't pimp them out or pre-call the paps.
Agreed. I am not a big Kristin Stewart fan, but the harassment she has had to endure is utter garbage. People act as though she's the only woman to have ever cheated on her boyfriend (forgetting the fact that Pattinson cheated on her multiple times yet he gets none of the grief).
JLaw and Kristin are good friends, why their fans have to get into wars with each other is absurd.
She had the audacity to beat out Emmanuelle Riva and Jessica Chastain for the Oscar. This site – Sasha specifically – has been foaming at the mouth at her ever since. It says more about Sasha Stone's bitterness and unprofessionalism than it does about anything Jennifer Lawrence has said or done.
Exactly. The pap who called Suri Cruise a "bitch" should have been called on the carpet by his fellow paps, but sadly not. Imagine calling a 7 year old a "bitch" or screaming in their faces. It's disgusting.
The problem is there is little regulation of the paparazzi. Many of the paps are ex-cons, illegal immigrants, have criminal backgrounds, and are just unsavory people overall. If the paps and their agencies won't reign themselves in, they can't be surprised that others will do it for them.
But part of it is us. If we didn't buy the magazines or click on the website galleries, these pics wouldn't be worth as much. Those who buy the products and glossies/tabloids are just as much to blame as the paps. If there is no demand there will be no supply. People Magazine's Celebrity Baby website is more popular than their mothership site.
Exactly. I love Cate Blanchett and the fact that I know very little about her family doesn't bother me at all. Yet she still gets harassed by paps while not even coming close to courting fame.
A lot of actresses have complained about the paps and their loss of privacy, yet Lawrence is the only one singled out here (and we all know the reason why).
It's bordering on sad and pathetic how much time Sasha wastes on hating Jennifer Lawrence. It's getting to the point where therapy or medication is probably in order.
As Manda said above, this entire article is ridiculous.
These two attributes that complement one another are interdependent,
and you will find probably essentially the most rare and valuable with a videochat model.
Males appear across beautiful females every last day.
It will be a shame to not use your organic give significantly enhance your income.
This is very interesting, You're a very skilled blogger.
I've joined your feed and look forward to seeking more of your wonderful post.
Also, I have shared your site in my social networks!
Pingback: x78bn5t37bc45rtb3x45ctbwxds()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت هشتم شهرزاد دوم()
Pingback: دانلود شهرزاد قسمت نهم فصل دوم()
Pingback: دانلود شهرزاد قسمت دوازدهم فصل دوم()
Pingback: دانلود شهرزاد قسمت هشتم فصل دوم()
Pingback: dildos()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت هفدهم عاشقانه()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت ششم فصل دوم شهرزاد()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت 10 شهرزاد دوم()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت سیزده عاشقانه()
Pingback: Brittney White()
Pingback: August Ames()
Pingback: Alexa Tomas()
Pingback: دانلود فصل دوم شهرزاد()
Pingback: terörist sosyalmarketim()
Pingback: movies()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت اول شهرزاد دوم()
Pingback: سریال عاشقانه()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت اول شهرزاد دوم()
Pingback: Loyola College for Sale by CollegeDunia()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت دوازدهم عاشقانه()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت 13 عاشقانه()
Pingback: under armour sydney()
Pingback: porno()
Pingback: porno()
Pingback: porno gratis()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت هفدهم عاشقانه()
Pingback: پنجره دوجداره وین تک()
Pingback: Acne Facial Treatments Hollywood()
Pingback: دانلود موزیک()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت پنجم شهرزاد دوم()
Pingback: clash royale hack tool()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت هفتم شهرزاد()
Pingback: پنجره دو سه جداره()
Pingback: Agen Judi()
Pingback: magazin de pescuit()
Pingback: coin-banks trading()
Pingback: Tenzi TAN CAR()
Pingback: coin-banks()
Pingback: coin-banks exchange()
Pingback: anime()
Pingback: دانلود شهرزاد قسمت 15()
Pingback: دانلود شهرزاد 13()
Pingback: 16 دانلود سریال شهرزاد()
Pingback: دانلود قسمت دوم سریال عالیجناب()
Pingback: دانلود فیلم()
Pingback: دانلودسریال عالیجناب قسمت دوم()
Pingback: Gazebos for hire in London()
Pingback: شرکت تولیدی پنجره دوجداره ترک()
Pingback: پنجره دوجداره وین تک()
Pingback: online golf store()
Pingback: پنجره دوجداره()
Pingback: دانلود()
Pingback: پنجره()
Pingback: پنجره()