Gold stars all around if you can tell me what's missing from these magazine covers:
Aw, how sweet. The Jolie-Pitts have become a beautiful family of five.
What's that you say? They actually have other three other children? Don't be silly. Everyone knows adopted kids aren't really family, especially those embarrassingly obvious transracial adoptees.
I'm not surprised, but I am royally annoyed. Especially since their eldest child is old enough to read and understand this slight.
Bonus gold star if you can answer this head-scratcher: if one of their adopted children was white, would he/she have been acknowledged on the cover? My guess is still no.
13 comments:
The FIRST thing I noticed when I saw the cover was that none of the other children were shown other than the other bio kid. I wish Pitt & Jolie had negotiated that either none of their other children would be shown on the cover or ALL of the other children would be shown as part of the deal. It's so disappointing.
the whole thing is rather disgusting. while I don't really want to think about it, it does makes you wonder if this is solely media slight or whether they allowed it if only their bio kid sat for the pix. either way, very troubling. not surprising how societal bias is reinforced at every turn, is it?
Like Megan that was the FIRST thing I noticed. It just pissed me off!
As I don't have the mag, does anyone know if the rest of the family is featured in the "19 Page Family Album" that People boasts? Not that it excuses the slight if they are in the "family album" - it doesn't - I'm more just curious at this point.
I suppose I'm not surprised that the mag did this, but to be honest I am a little surprised that B.Pitt and A.Jolie were okay with it (you better believe they okay'd everything that went into that article, especially the cover!)
@thanksgivingmom--There are pics of the other kids on the inside pages of People. And they don't really distinguish between their bio and adopted kids in the article text, at least on the website.
I'd be interested in knowing how much control they had over the People cover, too. The two of them are typically really good about reinforcing the unity of their family in the media.
I actually thought briefly about why they only put Shiloh on the cover, but I kind of looked at it in a different light--she's the only bio kid they have, so SHE'S actually the odd ball of the family with all the other kids being adopted! Now I guess she's not so different...Who knows what they're thinking!!
Gad- I saw the same thing. What's with that??! Are they just trying to piss people off?
O. M. G. That is disgusting. Thing is, I'm sure most people will look at those pictures and it won't even cross their mind. I also wonder how much Brangelina had a say in that, and if they would make a statement about it if it was done without their OK.
I noticed that right away... Shiloh is gorgeous, but they do have 3 other lovely children, too.
Sigh.
I thought the same thing. Gross.
Thanks for the info Heather. I just am still shocked at them more than anything...I too thought that they usually were so good about not distinguishing between adopted kids or bio kids, or the color of their kids' skin...if they okay'd this it's just such a step backward for them.
It's the Star cover that is the worse of the two...as if Shiloh is the only one meeting her siblings. I've found that the media consistently leaves out or adds, as second mention, children of "the stars" that were adopted. I mean, what have you ever heard about Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise's two adopted children? Yet their new babies in their new relationships are big news.
Interesting analysis of the inside People spread here.
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.