Angelina Jolie covers the new issue of Time Mag, Brad Pitt steps out in LA

I’ve been full of praise for the way Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have publicly handled Angelina’s double-mastectomy, even allowing my Brangeloonie Freak Flag to fly proudly in a way I haven’t in a while. But I do need to have a word with Brad Pitt about this ensemble – Brad was photographed yesterday in LA, leaving a business meeting. At first I thought he was wearing Justin Beiber-esque hammer pants, but I actually think these are slouchy linen sweatpants or something. And they’re too big for him, so they just LOOK like Bieber Pants, and it’s a bad look in total. I’m fine with black sweater – everything from the waist up is fine. But Brad needs to stop trying to make the linen casual-wear happen.

So, we’ve got an assortment of Brangelina news today. Let’s do it with bullet points!

*Angelina’s doctor has begun to blog about Angelina’s process – you can read the first blog post here. The doctor notes that Brad really was there every step of the way and Brad was the first person Angelina saw after she got out of surgery.

*Angelina’s friend Nicholas Kristof, who is an advocate-columnist for the NYT, wrote on his Facebook page: “Angelina Jolie also asked me to convey her thanks. She is just so, so grateful for the overwhelming outpouring of public support that’s she’s getting. And she’s grateful to all for taking this and running with it to start serious conversations about women’s health.” Angelina came out to support Kristof’s book Half the Sky: Turning Oppression Into Opportunity for Women Worldwide several years ago.

*Kristof also tweeted that Angelina is “the gold standard for celebrity activism… [this is] a conversation that’ll save lives. I’ve spoken to Angelina Jolie several times in [the] last few days, and she has been so strong, so brave, so determined. She wants to use her medical issues to nurture a nat’l conversation on health options. No self pity; she just wants to help.”

*Jon Voight found out about his daughter’s double mastectomy on Tuesday, like the rest of the world, despite the fact that he just seen her days before. Voight said: “My love and admiration for my daughter can’t be explained in words. I saw her two days ago with my son Jamie. We all got together for his birthday, with her and Brad [Pitt]. But I didn’t know. It wasn’t obvious at all. I found out [Tuesday] morning. I was as surprised as anyone and deeply moved by the way she’s handled this. She’s a very extraordinary person, the way she examined it and what she shared.”

*Dr. Oz issued a statement that was extremely complimentary of what Angelina is doing and has done already. His statement reads like a love letter from a fan-boy. It’s really sweet.

Update: OMG, Angelina scored the cover of Time Mag!! You can read an excerpt of the cover story here, and here’s the (absolutely gorgeous) cover.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

226 Responses to “Angelina Jolie covers the new issue of Time Mag, Brad Pitt steps out in LA”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. JenD says:

    Two things:
    1- of course Brad would be the first person she saw when she woke up from surgery. When I had surgery last year, my husband was the first person I saw (beside the medical professionals). Shouldn’t that be the case?

    2-That’s weird she wouldn’t tell her dad about this major surgery, knowing she was about to make it public. That really says something about how their relationship.

    • Ari says:

      I think they stated that the only people who knew were like 1 doc and brad to keep it extra tight. EDIT Oh my bad I see you stated about it just about to make it public – yes thats odd

    • Toot says:

      I think Angelina doesn’t trust John.

      In her 60 minute interview last year something she said gave me the impression she has a relationship with him for her kids.

    • watchingyoubitch says:

      I dont even think it s because of their lack of relationship ,it is because jon voight has A BIG MOUTH..he would totally skype foxnews.

    • Tahoe says:

      With Voight’s history of blabbing, whether innocent or not, of course they wouldn’t tell him. I seriously doubt many people knew at all. As for what it says about their relationship isn’t it their business?

      • Sabrine says:

        That is it exactly. Jon cannot be trusted not to blab although I’m sure he’d say that’s not the case at all.

        She is an advocate with people hanging on every word she says and has brought this to the forefront. She said the testing should be free. Amazing woman.

      • Drea says:

        ” As for what it says about their relationship isn’t it their business?”

        I’m pretty sure you could say this about 90% of celebrity gossip stories.

        Judging by our behavior – hanging out on a gossip site where we speculate about celebrities & their relationships – I guess the answer to your question is no.

    • TOPgirl says:

      Angelina is a grown adult and her decisions do not have to be shared with her father. The person you turn to first is normally your significant other and then the rest is second (even parents and siblings).

    • BeesKnees says:

      I think it comes down to that she just cannot trust her father. Remember all those years ago when he went on E News to plead to her to change her lifestyle? I wouldn’t trust my dad after that. I know there are also unsubstantiated blind gossip rumors that he has shown some signs of dementia. Like I said though, all speculation.

      • truthSF says:

        What I found weird about all of his “pleading for her to change her life”, was that it came after she started changing her lifestyle.

        1. She had already adopted Maddox

        2. She had already filed to divorce her husband, who she felt wasn’t bringing the right influence for her son.(And the kissing and fondling on the red carpet has long since stopped before the divorce came around).

        3. She had already became a member UNICEF and was doing goodwill mission.

        Wouldn’t you say that she changed her life.

        So what exactly was Mr. Voight pleading for his daughter to do?!

      • Emma - the JP Lover says:

        @BeesKnees, who wrote: “I think it comes down to that she just cannot trust her father. Remember all those years ago when he went on E News to plead to her to change her lifestyle?”

        More than that, it was his blabbing about her adoption of Maddox that caused her to do a ‘final’ severing of ties from him. Angelina really ‘did’ want to keep her adoption quiet so she could have a small amount of time with Maddox without media scrutiny.

        So what did Jon Voight do (even after she asked him ‘not’ to say anything about it)? He called a press conference and announced that his daughter had just adopted and was on her way back to the U.S. with his grandchild. She and Maddox were met at the airport by the press. She was not a happy camper.

        He simply cannot be trusted with confidential information.

        @TruthSf, who wrote: “So what exactly was Mr. Voight pleading for his daughter to do?”

        She had cut him out of her life. He wanted back in (or probably felt he was ‘entitled’ to be in her life), so he publicly humiliated her to try and force her hand.

        All it did was add fuel to the bond fire the haters had primed and after 2005 all they could say was “There’s something wrong with her to keep him away from his grandchildren!” But it was perfectly okay for ‘She who will remain Nameless’ to ignore her mother.

      • StaCat1 says:

        Just for the record. Angelina is a goodwill ambassador for UNHCR (UN arm for refugees) not UNICEF. She initially reached out to be an ambassador for UNICEF (this was pre-image makeover) and she was shot down as her “image” at that time was not conducive with UNICEF’s image.

      • truthSF says:

        Thank you for the clarification StaCat1.

    • Lulu.T.O. says:

      At this point in my life, I would not tell my father either, simply because I know he would make himself sick with worry. He’s 73 years old and doesn’t need that kind of stress.

      OTOH, I remember all too well his publicly pleading with her to ‘get help’ (for what, we will never know) while she was in the process of adopting Maddox. So I can only too well imagine him doing the same in this instance.

    • Masque says:

      Jon has loose lips. I doubt he’s privy to secrets of the Jolie-Pitt family.

  2. aims says:

    No doubt in my mind that Brad wouldn’t be with her every step of the way. This ordeal could really make or break a lot of couples. Brad’s statement when everything was coming out was so supportive, and I have really been moved by the love and commitment they share. At the end of the day, they are a normal couple who were faced with a health crisis. They faced it together, and are stronger for it.

  3. smee says:

    I hope she is able to use this as a way to be an activist for women’s healthcare in the U.S., because until EVERY woman who needs this type of surgery – masectomy AND reconstructive surgery – we are failing as a country.

    I’m so sick of healthcare being treated as a COMMODITY that is sold only to those who can afford it.

    All I can think about is the women here in the U.S. who will die bc this type of preventative surgery is not available to them thru insurance AND all the women who will be psychologically damaged by having their feminine identity removed and having no way to replace it.

    • mel says:

      +1….I’m just a little uncomfortable with this whole topic. I admire Angelina going public and bringing awareness to women’s health issues (and its nice to see her do something to promote an issue in the U.S.)..but at the same time she could afford to do this and so many women will not have this “luxury”. To call her a hero is just a little much for my taste.

      • Mich says:

        Of FFS. Honestly? This again?

        I’m putting this in caps not to yell at you but to make sure the point stands out: WOMEN IN COUNTRIES WITH NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE ARE OFTEN COVERED FOR THIS – FROM TESTING THROUGH RECONSTRUCTION.

        Yesterday, people from countries around the world – from Australia to Canada – chimed in to say exactly that. In the South Africa, where I live, not only do we have nationalized health but insurance companies can only exclude preexisting conditions for one year.

        The problem is that the US system sucks and puts dollars first. Angelina has become an advocate to try to change that.

      • Hubbahun says:

        I’m with you – there’s just something a little OTT – BUT I hasten to add before I get lynched by the Brangeloonies – I have nothing but respect for any woman who furthers the cause for other women.

      • Lulu.T.O. says:

        +1 you guys. But I see the lynchings have already begun. So I’ll post my support and go to another topic!

      • NicolaGossips says:

        Sorry but I live in Toronto, Canada. At my last job my co-workers best friend has been battling cancer for 10 years. 4 years ago she went through gene testing. Neither my coworker or I understood what was going on. She just knew that her doctor had referred her to this new process available.

        I’m amazed that so many Americans have been conned into thinking National Health Care is some sort of communist threat against democracy (and their tax dollars). Health care like Education should and MUST be a universal right.

      • emmav1 says:

        The reason I “lynch” people is because they seem not to have read her article at the new york times website (seriously go to the NYTimes and read the article) but instead read snippets off of some other website, like yahoo, CNN, etc. which didn’t post her article in full.

        She admits that this gene testing costs a lot of money as well as the overall procedures and that we need to make it available to women of all economic classes, whereever in the world they may be.

        She also mentions that the % of breast cancer is different for everyone and that your options for treating these things should be consulted with a doctor and geneticist.

        In no way is she advocating for EVERYONE to get a double mastectomy nor does she think everyone has the financial means to get them.

        She makes these points quite clear.

        Also there’s not a hint of self-pity within her piece. She doesn’t try to get your sympathy, but rather present the cold hard facts and open this up for discussion, which is what it has been doing.

        She wants to educate, inform, advocate…..

        It’s a wonderful thing.

        As for the heroic comments, that’s from Brad Pitt’s mouth and I agree that for him and their children she’s a hero for putting them first over her vanity.

        Also, I’m pretty sure that at least 1 woman in the world might get tested early because of Jolie and get saved as a result.

        We don’t seem to have a problem calling someone a hero when they help someone out of a burning car….it’s just different means.

      • Chicagogurl says:

        I was prescribed this test by my obgyn due to family history and my insurance won’t cover. I think that’s the whole point of her talking about this so publicly. Law makers and insurance companies are not being held accountable for denying women who cannot afford what should be a standard test to those who have a proven medical history or genetic history. I’m 33 and have been getting mammograms annually for 3 years and paps 2 times a year and fought insurance for 2 yrs just for that luxury even with recommendations from 2 specialists and still have to pay a large fee out of pocket with insurance. I even submitted medical records from my moms cancer treatment and my paternal grandmothers along with my case. With so many women in my family who have had mastectomy’s, breast cancer or ovarian cancer a test like this would help my female cousins, sister and myself yet we have all been denied. There’s something really wrong with patents on genetic testing and insurance not covering preventative care but rather wanting the long term cost and fees associated with treatment. Angie is getting the conversation we should have had years ago started and I applaud her efforts. It was always going to take someone who could afford it to kick up sand so that everyone else could say – why can’t I or all women with a genetic history have this too? So many have died from cancers that could have been prevented with a test and action like this.

      • Cait says:


        As women, we attach a great deal of our feminine identity to our girly parts. She chopped ‘em off and is still a gorgeous woman. And she OWNS it, That’s significant in and of itself.

        To bring additional awareness – and to spark conversation, even – to the preexisting condition/healthcare debate is always to be lauded.

        In 2011, before I was pregnant with my first child, my OB had me take a genetic test for a genetic mutation called MTHFR (I refer to it sarcastically as the mothereffer gene). The reason for this was because both my father and his mother had died from strokes. This gene is linked to hereditary stroke risk, and also greatly impacts prenatal health. Getting pregnant if you have a homozygous mutation is a terriyfing proprosition, because the risk of miscarriage is high, and even worse, the risk of stroke while pregnant is high.

        I tested heterozygous positive, which is sort of good news. I am still at great risk for a stroke at some point, and honestly, beyond making healthy lifestyle choices (like not smoking or keeping my weight down), there’s not a whole hell of a lot I can do to manage my risk. I can take folic acid (which I already do, having an 18 month-old and one on the way), which helps to lower the presence of a specific amino acid that spikes the risk. But that’s really it.

        This test, that helps me be more aware of my life choices – so that I can hopefully be around for my husband and kids – was under $100.

        To me, the costing of the test is really a moot issue. The bigger debate revolves around the existing system of denying coverage to those with “preexisting” conditions (which is a moving target). Sure, you can get genetic testing for most things now at a relatively low cost – but will you then be penalized by your insurance? Furthermore, why aren’t insurance companies, who are inherently for-profit, looking at the cost benefit analysis of preventative care versus the cost of treatment after the fact?

        That’s a debate we need to have. And thank you, Angelina Jolie, for demonstrating that it’s not so much about privilege as it is about forcing a discourse on having options for more.

      • Elle Kaye says:

        Ok, let’s just hold up a minute!! Before people keep spreading nonsense, please do some research. You all assume that Canada just pays, regardless, but they don’t. You must meet the criteria. That criteria is the same as the US.

      • Lucrezia says:

        @ Cait: thank you for sharing your story. It certainly wasn’t overshare :)

        RE cost: The MTHFR-test looks for one specific mutation. $3k BRCA testing looks for over 100 different mutations. You can get a cheaper ($300-$400) BRCA test if you know exactly which mutation you’re looking for. (I felt the need to point that out, just in case anyone read Cait’s story and thought the BRCA battery should be available for $100. It’s certainly overpriced, but realistically $1k is about as low as it’s going to get.)

        RE: “Sure, you can get genetic testing for most things now at a relatively low cost – but will you then be penalized by your insurance?”

        See the GINA act:

        It is still an issue for life insurance, and for long-term care insurance, but (since 2008) your health insurance can’t use the results of genetic testing to deny you coverage (or charge you more).

        It’s a relatively recent law, and it seems a LOT of people haven’t heard about the change. Which is it’s own issue … it’s not enough to quietly remove the impediments to testing, you have to make people aware that you’ve fixed the problem.

      • Lucrezia says:

        @ Elle Kay: Are people really assuming Canada (and the rest of the socialised medicine countries) just cover it for everyone? I assumed certain criteria. Just like you can’t randomly walk into a hospital and expect a free x-ray, you can’t randomly expect a free BRCA test. But if the doctors think you need it, then you can get one.

        But the level at which the criteria is set is something that needs to be discussed. Seems like in most places (US, Canada, Oz), you have to be rated as having a 10% chance of carrying the gene before doctors will send you for the test. In the UK, you need to hit the 20% mark. Some UK poster (sorry can’t remember who!) was complaining that they’d been rated 19.8% … and so the NHS wouldn’t cover it.

        It’s a really arbitrary line. If you have a small family, it can be really hard to show enough evidence. If a woman and 4 out of her 8 daughters have breast cancer it’s a clear trend. If a woman and 1 out of her 2 daughters have breast cancer, it could be genetic or it could just be dumb luck.

        Or, in my case, I know absolutely nothing about my father’s side of the family. They could’ve all had breast cancer and I’d have no idea.

        Should everyone who doesn’t have an obvious cancer-free family history get a BRCA test? I lean towards “no” … but perhaps I’m biased. For starters, I can afford to go and pay for one if I felt the need. But I don’t feel the need. That’s probably because I’ve never had a close acquaintance suffer from breast-cancer. If I’d seen by best-friend go through it, then I wouldn’t be so unconcerned.

    • Hipocricy says:

      +2 !

      It’s really a shame for a country that flatter itself as being rich and send young people into unecessary wars with money that could benefit patients to have in that sad state of affair in terms of universal affordable healthcare for the majority of its people.

      Not only for cancer but AIDS that is rampant and the highest of any western country as well as all illnesses related to obesity and high blood pressure.

      It’s time to get a reality check and save life that could easily be saved if part of the public finance for expenditures like military was just shifted to education, prevention and affordable healthcare for the majority !

  4. serena says:

    She is an amazing woman. Her friend was right ‘she is the gold standard for celebrity activism…’.

    Watch and burn Chelsea and Jen.

  5. doofus says:

    “everything from the waist up is fine”

    I disagree…those mirror-shades are SUPER CHEESE.

    ETA: Huff Post had an article about the negative comments and tweets that her editorial prompted.

    Some people are really horrible, hateful folks.

    • Mich says:

      I read the last word of your post altogether differently. My version also started with an ‘f’ and ended with a ‘ks’ and it fit the context amazingly well ;-)

    • LadyMTL says:

      Yeah, I had to click away from HuffPo because the comments were making me angry. I don’t care how people feel about Angelina as an actress or whatever, but what she did took a butt-load of courage. Bah…stupid people are stupid.

      *Takes deep breath* On a better note, that Time cover photo is GORGEOUS. She really is a stunningly beautiful woman.

    • gogoGorilla says:

      I’ve stopped reading comments about this when they get ugly like that. People can be ugly, hateful little trolls. I bet the people who are spewing about the luxury of genetic testing are also the people buying into the idea that nationalized health care would turn us into a socialized nation one step away from Marxism.

      Not that they know what any of those things actually mean, but you know. It makes for a good sound bite.

      I hope Angelina sharing her story makes a difference for someone, somewhere. I hope that it raises public consciousness and shames Congress into getting OUT OF BED with lobbyists.

      ETA: Brad is definitely a sexy fellow. But that outfit? GAH!

  6. me says:

    Love the time cover, gorgeous!!! But as far as the “news” that Brad was the first person to see her my response is: I hope he was! If my significant other wasn’t there as soon as I opened my eyes I think we’d have a few words lol

  7. Toot says:

    Love that Time cover. Brad looks like he’s put on some weight, but he looks good.

    I love the support they have for each other.

  8. Lucy says:

    God I love them more than ever now

  9. The Original G says:

    I dunno. Can we give it till next week to attack Brad for his pants? Can there be just a moment here that isn’t cheap?

    • V4Real says:

      I was thinking the same thing and said not today, no attack on how Brad looks in those photos.

      Then after giving it more thought I considered just because you’re a celeb do you have to be on all the time? Do you have to make yourself camera ready just to run to the corner store for milk?

    • Yes! says:

      Agree- SO MUCH. Of course, there is always a double standard when it comes to Brad or Angie- hence blogs saying that Angie found a way to give herself the faulty gene just so she could get attention and/or take away attention from Aniston or for career promo. I hope karma bites these haters on the butt, but, at the very least, they live have to live with the brains that concoct these thoughts- great punishment.

    • Jess says:

      Given no one knew Angelina was having surgery, and no one would have ever known if she didn’t make it public, surely this just shows that you never know what going on behind closed doors. Every single celebrity that get mentioned on this site could be dealing with something traumatic at any given time. The actress who’s being mocked mercilessly for having a bad boob job might have just had a miscarriage, the actor who’s sobriety is being speculated about may have just found out a family member is dying… at a certain point your either ok with snarking about celebrities, or you just don’t do it under any circumstances.

      • BeesKnees says:

        I so agree. I think with the advent of certain gossip blogs, we have become so jaded to think that all celebrities are so calculated. At the end of the day, they are just human beings. There is so much that goes on that we don’t know about; paparazzi, the internet, cell phone cameras or not, we don’t know everything. I give Angelina props for what she did and I truly think she is a genuinely caring woman, but those pants Brad is wearing are pretty awful!

    • cs says:

      Thanks Original G couldn’t have said it better. Are we back to being superficial so soon? I see some haters of Brad and Angie are now feeling stupid. Dr. Drew tweeting now about how strong Angie is but last year was telling the world she will always be a heroin addict. Bonnie Fuller was called out on her site for her stupid remarks ” Angie is trying to sabotage JA’s wedding plans” and now she produces a video talking how strong and brave Angie is. Someone said GMAFB Bonnie..It just shows people think they know so much about strangers and know nothing. We all know the JP’s always kept it tight. There’s no inside source in their household.
      It just reminded me of a co-worker that everyone in the office talked about being “slow”. And then felt stupid when they found out he was suffering from Parkinson disease.

    • madashell says:

      Sorry, those pants need immediate attention: you get back in the house and change them right now young man.

    • littlestar says:

      When I looked Brad in those pants after reading the article I thought, ‘He’s looking pretty fine to me, so I don’t know what the fuss is about’ LOL.

  10. Jess says:

    OK, I have to say it, it annoys the hell out of me when totally normal, frankly boring details become romanticized because the overall story is huge.

    Of course Brad was the first person Angelina saw when she got out of surgery. Almost everyone will first see their partner or family or close friends by their side after major surgery. Doctors and nurses (nurses especially) try not to be disruptful so that patients wake up to their loved ones. There’s no story in this, but I can totally see trash mags getting a whole 3 pages out of this ‘news’.

    • lisa2 says:

      well I’m glad about it. The rags would have been.. All Brad deserts Angie..leaves care to hospital. This way it takes the wind out of their sail.

      they don’t know squat and this whole story proves they are lying 99% of the time.

    • Anon says:

      It is often posted that they were not/are not together, by a few persons who post here. That they haven’t been seen together. I guess its mentioned (that she woke up to see Brad)because of statements like that.

      • Kim1 says:

        I agree some person just posted yesterday that Brad was in France selling,wine and screewing a PA while Angie was going through this.I was very moved by Cathy Newman account of noone lnowing she had surgery when she went to Congo with Hague to meet rape survivors.Imagine hours traveling on rural roads to get to refugee camps. several years ago Angie spoke about people in refugee camps not only dealing with hunger but with AIDS and cancer while displaced in refugee camps.I guess she felt if those people can deal with having cancer she could tolerate a few days of dealing with pain after surgery to meet with them.

      • Jess says:

        I really doubt her doctor included that detail to ward of tabloid speculation. My issue isn’t with that being in the run-down of the procedures she had, it’s with it being treated by the gossip websites, and most likely the mags next week, like it’s something amazing, when it’s quite possibly the most boring and useless nugget of info you could take from that whole piece.

      • lisa2 says:


        I don’t think anyone is saying that it was put out for the tabloids. I know that is not what I meant. I think for anyone going through surgery your loved ones are there. It gives you a sense of safety when you wake up. I’ve experienced that myself.

        I was making the point that yes that detail just hopefully puts some of the future negative off the table. And for the none fans that will find anything to try and post a negative. They take minor details just like this and turn them into something gross. Just as one of the people here just noted, yesterday someone was quick to say that Brad was MIA during this time.

  11. Talie says:

    Man, she is powerful. When she speaks, people really do listen.

  12. RHONYC says:

    i’ve always loved how Angie is ‘Queen of Living on My Own Terms’.

    she fuggin’ rocks at that. ;-)

  13. watchingyoubitch says:

    gorgeous cover,
    This story makes me really sad,cancer is a evil fucker.
    Brad looks a bloated mess but i would still do him!

  14. lisa2 says:

    I don’t think the pants are too big. I think they are suppose to fit that way. Hell they look comfortable. I like his swagger. I know many here don’t but to each his own. There are several men that people here swoon over and I don’t find them attractive at all. but I stay off their thread making negative comments.

    anyway I agree. It is so important for any woman going through this to have someone in their life to support them. So many woman as many have commented on don’t have that.

    I think they are an awesome couple who by the accounts of people that actually KNOW them love and respect each other very much.

  15. Anna says:

    Perfect timing! Today the declaration, tomorrow Times. Let’s face it: Times is not something that they (the editors) do on their knees ..
    And I even thought that she was really sincere. I do think that she had a dramatic thing going on but now that passed .. why don’t make something out of it. She is indeed a very smart woman. And I doubt that Brad can match her in the game. He only supports her.

    • emmav1 says:

      Disgusting comment. You do know that the TIME photo was taken from long before her surgery and that it’s NOT AN INTERVIEW with her.

      It’s just some journalists writing about gene testing using Angelina Jolie as a lens to view this topic.

      Also, TIME has an interesting article that came out yesterday about her public image turn around, which kind of feeds the trolls that she’s being insincere….so it seems unlikely Jolie has somehow manipulated and worked out a deal with TIME otherwise they wouldn’t have printed that article.

    • MavenTheFirst says:


      I’m with you. I find the ‘coincidence’ not so coincidental.

      This is all so over the top. You’d think she was Mother Teresa. I don’t really care for her one way of another (but do adore her in action films). I get the feeling she keeps sharp and complete control of her image.

    • Emma - the JP Lover says:

      Geez, I think every card-carrying member of Ian Undercover or Female First has dropped by to spread their ‘cheery’ comments with us about how ‘non-heroic,’ elitist, and calculating Angelina Jolie is.

      So what’s the talking points memo, ladies?

      “Pretend you didn’t read the entire Op-Ed or complete quote by Brad Pitt where he talks about ‘all’ women who have gone through the surgeries being heroic (as if we’d actually read that crap … I mean come on, it’s about HER!) and just focus in on the price of the test and that ‘heroic’ thing Pitt said. Just pretend to be impressed by that homewrecking famewhore and sucker them into reading your comment, but make sure to shit all over the positive comments. This brother kisser doesn’t deserve positive press. She’s pulling attention away from ‘sweet, innocent, all-natural beauty’ Jen’s shopping trip in NYC!

      And when they respond to our posts with quotes pulled from that damn Op-Ed and Pitt-boy’s quote, we’ll just ignore those and post our stuff in the replies, like we didn’t ‘see’ what they posted. Yeah, yeah … that’s what we’ll do! Pass it on.”

      • cs says:


        I also believe it’s the same trolls from those sites that come over here to tell us about the negative comments in their normal passive-aggressive way. I don’t know why they come here. Why don’t they all just congregate on those sites and talk among themselves how this all PR. Oh I know why.. No one goes on those sites anymore.

  16. swack says:

    I get it that she has brought genetic testing to the forefront. But she is no more heroic than those women who fight breast cancer every day or have the same surgery that she had.

    • The Original G says:

      If you read Brad’s comment, he says just that.

    • Rhea says:

      I don’t think she herself think that she’s a hero more than them.

    • truthSF says:

      I don’t think them fighting cancer is what makes them heroic. I mean, if you want to live, you have to fight whatever it is that’s doing the opposite to you.

      I think her sharing a story about herself that makes her look less then perfect (in a perfect looks driving industry) and bringing a much needed discussing to the forefront that can (in the long run) help many others, is what makes her a hero(TO THEM).

    • ctkat1 says:

      No, she isn’t any more of a hero than any other woman dealing with this issue. What is brave about what she did is making it public. Angelina Jolie is a sex symbol. She’s widely considered one of the most famous and most beautiful women on the planet (whatever your personal feelings about her).

      It was a big decision to go public with this, to say that her breasts are not there to titillate the (mostly) male gaze, but are in fact a part of a woman who is complex and more than the sum of her body parts. For most women, having a double mastectomy is an emotionally difficult decision, one that makes them wonder if they are now “less” of a woman or if they are still attractive. For Angelina freaking Jolie to come out publicly and say, “I had a preventive double mastectomy, my breasts have been reconstructed” is powerful, probably more powerful than any other woman in Hollywood.
      I would venture that the only other woman in America who could create this type of response and conversation would be Michelle Obama.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      Yeah I agree with the original comment and I also agree with all the comments above^.

      What really stood out for me was how much DETAIL Jolie gave on the actual process involved. I mean, that is some very personal information there–I think it takes guts to be so open and transparent about it. Also, after reading how involved the mastectomy process is, I realized how ignorant I was about it.

      I agree that there are MANY brave women out there battling cancer and sharing their journey but none as high-profile as Jolie. She didn’t have to talk about this but she did and she did it not for press or for accolades, but to open up a dialogue about a very sensitive issue.

    • FLORC says:

      You’re just trying to stir the pot. There is a good message here and because you don’t care for her you want to put the good message aside and attack her any petty way you can. That’s not a good way to go through life.

      • swack says:

        Sorry Florc, not trying to stir the pot. Not trying to put her down in any way. Yes, it was brave of her to put it out there. But I truly wish they would also go out and get the story of some others that have gone through the same thing.

      • emmav1 says:

        While I understand what you’re saying swack but these stories are posted on the internet everywhere, maybe not on main news sites like CNN or yahoo, but they’re there.

        The problem is not many people want to read about some random person beating cancer unless there’s a twist/unique aspect to the story.

        When Jolie spear heads it, it gets attention.

        The media will NEVER start printing stories of random people, so the only way to bring this stuff to the forefront is through someone famous that the media will listen to.

      • lower-case deb says:

        i know this is not the same thing, but as i trawl through and put jolie in the search, i can find some news about other women who are less famous (in my country anyway) other than AJ, or even non-celebrities.

        many news site, i guess, in a hope for coverage (or site hits) are running stories of many people who shares the same plight or has witnessed the same plight–either as a news piece, or in the opinion/letters section.

        the following are just a selection of what i found in the first few pages (i “sort by date”).

        there is also a long letter from the anti-gene testing monopoly group who is trying to win their SC court case against Myriad (which is, by the way, cashing in on AJ’s op-ed piece).

        Some known names include Marisa Marchelleto (writer of Cancer Vixen, who is going to be portrayed by Cate Blanchett?! when is this showing), the Komen Foundation founder, Nancy Brinker, CNN news anchor who shares her own story about struggle with cancer…

        some readers letters, sharing their experience:

        an english language teacher, Cathy Howard, and her story amongst tohers
        (teacher, and cancer survivor? i think i’m a fan already)

        The Hardy sisters:

        Barbara May:

        Sarah Brown:

        and many many others. pages and pages about stories of “laypersons” being shared on the heels of AJ’s op-ed. and what’s fascinating is that after hours of reading through the stories, i get a fuller picture of the different struggles, and that each has a very unique set of story to tell.

        there’s a story about three sisters, two waited until its too late, one who “got away”. there’s a story about someone who’s afraid to go out because of mastectomy for the longest time, there’s a story about divorces, or reconciliation, etc.

        even in my country, it opens a lot of discussions, and some of the women interviewed, or wrote in, said that they have a hard time admitting to cancer or mastectomy because of taboo, but even though AJ’s op-ed is NOT the only motivator (they admitted to have friends supporting them against a deluge of cultural taboo), but AJ’s op-ed helps encourage them.

        and let’s not forget that we have been celebrating the brave and heroic ladies (and gents) of Celebitchy these past few days as they come out to share their own stories.

        also, i hope that the news people will continue to highlight the plight of women and survivors, the laypeople, the “quiet” heroes. and not stop their coverage after the storm has died down (so to speak). we need to raise awareness (continually), and erase the taboo of speaking about this. and many other issues, like affordable healthcare, etc.

      • Hipocricy says:


        The story of others are out there and have been out there every single day, every weeks on blogs, sites, support groups, publications dedicated to the subject…you just CHOSE to ignore it, to research about it like any other person who suddenly remember they exist and use them as a pretense in a lame attempt to belittle and discredit Jolie even in those circumstances.

        Even yesterday, that news has triggerd in here and in other sites, personal stories of women who have dealt with the same or even worse.

        The false pretense some of you use is just to discredit Jolie, as usual for having any attention at all even when it comes to something that relates to death or illness…bet some of you would still find a way to whine for her breaking the news of her passing.

        It would have been Sandra Bollocks there would have been NONE of the ‘i wish the attention should be given to other women’ excuse or the : oh well she can afford it so who cares. Instead, it would have been the ‘how courrageous and heroic she is…

        The thing is deep down inside, it all goes down to Jolie’s increasing sphere of power and international attention that rub some of you the wrong way…

        That’s all it is and that was always the case.

  17. TheOriginalKitten says:

    Such a beautiful shot of her on the cover. She does not have a bad angle, that woman.

    Brad looks like he’s put on weight from all the stress.

    • Erinn says:

      I can’t even get over how stunning that cover is. She is absolutely gorgeous.

      And it does look like he put on some weight. Maybe he’s a bit of a comfort food guy.

      • TheOriginalKitten says:

        I’ve mentioned this many times before but I have a male friend who doesn’t think she’s beautiful and it makes me so mad. Ha ha..
        Logically, I know that beauty is subjective but I think Jolie’s looks transcend personal opinion somehow. She is just perfection.

        Yeah I can’t imagine how stressed out BP must have been. He seems like such a doting and supportive husband though–glad she had him to lean on.

      • emmav1 says:


        Haha I agree, though I can understand people not finding Angelina beautiful (she has very weird features) but I cannot understand them finding her unattractive.

        I can only understand them thinking she’s average/okay looking.

        Also Brad’s reached that age where he works out but doesn’t control what he eats. I remember a few months ago I saw a picture and though he had some very nice arms (biceps + triceps)….but also in a picture of him at the beach like 1-2 years ago, still nice pecs, but stomach is bulging out somewhat.

      • Erinn says:

        Aww haha, my fiancee isn’t a fan of her looks either. When I get home I’m sending him this cover and being like “LOOK. LOOK AT THIS”. I think at the end of the day it’s just a case of Jolie being a very thin woman, and it’s not his general taste.

        I can’t even imagine what a mess I’d be if my significant other was going through all of this. I’d be a wreck.

      • Janet says:

        Brad’s at the age now where he has to watch what he eats. Even if he was eating in moderation before, he’s going to pile on the pounds if he doesn’t eat less. In your late 40s you start wondering why you’re gaining weight because you aren’t eating any more than you did before. It’s because your metabolism went south and you don’t burn the calories as efficiently as you used to. You have to eat a lot less just to stay at the same weight. Believe me, I know from experience. In five years in my middle 50s, I went from 128 to 141 lbs. Now I’m back at 128 (I’m 5’5″ so it’s a good weight) but I have to be careful of how much I eat to stay there.

      • Bird says:

        All I see is that she is chin and Michael Jackson nose. If they carve any more out of it, it’s going to collapse on her skeleton face. Beauty is certainly in the eye of the beholder.

    • Ruffian9 says:

      The best profile in the business.

  18. anonincali says:

    Am I the only person wondering what pity card Jennifer anniston is planning?

    • The Original G says:

      I’m not an Anniston fan, but honestly, I can’t see that Anniston has done anything wrong here?

    • FLORC says:

      New tabloid cover: Angelina has double mastectomy and hysterectomy to keep Brad from leaving her/stopping Jen’s wedding!

      You know it’s in the works.

    • Maggie says:

      What does Jennifer Aniston got to do with this? Honestly from reading these threads it’s the Loons that keep this triangle crap going. Sooo defensive of AJ but you’ll go over to a JA thread and bash away saying far worse. Leave it alone. For all we know they could be on friendly terms.

    • Lauren says:

      @anonincali I think that is a pretty assuming and disgusting comment to make. Think whatever you must about AJ and JA feelings towards one another but I think you have to have some deep seeded hatred towards a person and think so low of them to assume that Jen is somehow fuming and wishing to spin her own story to take the attention off of Jolie.

      It is funny how people always say that Jen must not be ignored and only does stuff to spin an angle. She said it herself in a documentary ‘$elebrity’ that the media does a pretty job of creating this false narrative in order to sell the stories.

      They have to perpetuate some plot and keep a dialogue going in the non-existent drama. Doesn’t make any of it true. There are slots to be filled and it isn’t entirely Jen/ Angie’s/ Brad’s faults that the media chose to brand them into whichever category. People need to stop accusing Jen of not being ‘over it’ when on every damn article I read about any one of them has someone bringing up all. It’s seems like it’s some readers on gossip blogs that can’t let go more than Jen.

      This is an article about what Jolie has been suffering through. She is a brave woman and you didn’t need to bring up what you did by making those assumptions. It doesn’t help the overall purpose that this is about Jolie’s message. It is assumption about another persons character that is in such poor taste giving the subject matter.

      • Emma - the JP Lover says:

        @Luaren, who wrote: “@anonincali I think that is a pretty assuming and disgusting comment to make. Think whatever you must about AJ and JA feelings towards one another but I think you have to have some deep seeded hatred towards a person and think so low of them to assume that Jen is somehow fuming and wishing to spin her own story to take the attention off of Jolie.”

        (Blinks) Surely you jest. I’m outraged by ‘your’ outrage. I mean … come on, this is the same woman who appeared nude on a “GQ” magazine cover to divert attention away from the release of “Changling” and “Benjamin Button,” then bribed someone to let her present at the Academy Awards after Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt were nominated for Oscars. ‘Then’ she pretended to be so flustered by being in such close proximately to the Villainess Angelina Jolie that she flubbed her joke, giving her the opportunity to go all Rachelesque and shoot Brad her ‘I’m so sweet and lovable in a kooky way, how could you put me in this situation?’ Hoping the tabloids would hold her banner higher.

        This is the same woman who appears on Chelsea Handler’s show ‘right’ after every stand up routine she does about that ‘C$NT’ Angelina Jolie in a good mood and with a huge smile, thereby endorsing every nasty, vile thing Handler said about Angie and her kids.

        This is the same woman who commandeered the Academy Awards issue of “People” magazine so she could announce her wedding plans ‘after’ she’d used the magazine to upstage Brad and Angie by announcing her engagement the weekend everyone thought the Jolie-Pitts were getting married.

        Yes, I for one ‘do’ think her capable of being holed up in a confab with her PR guru right now, trying to think of a way to upstage Angie and steal the attention.

    • Janet says:

      I don’t know about Aniston but I’d bet a dollar to a donut hole that somewhere in some dark corner, Chelsea Handler is cackling and gloating.

    • Lulu.T.O. says:

      Oh ffs. Don’t MAKE me type in all caps to you…

  19. Mich says:

    What the hell is wrong with people? I can’t tell if it is bitterness or ignorance about what advocacy means.

    • Lucrezia says:

      Most of the negative reactions seem to be from American women complaining that Angelina is too privileged … her story isn’t that of the average US woman, so she’s not being an advocate for them.

      Pretend you are an American woman with no insurance, and you thought Angelina was talking to/for you. From that perspective it would read like Angelina was blind to her privilege. One short mention of the cost of the test … nothing about the cost of the treatment being far beyond that of the test itself. As a piece advocating the reform of US healthcare, it sucked.

      Problem with that is the op-ed wasn’t addressed to American women … it was to/for women in general. (As a piece advocating genetic testing and prophylactic mastectomy, it was brilliant.)

      So I think they’re simply reading it wrong: judging it for not doing something it wasn’t designed to do. But given the incorrect reading, I can understand the negative reaction.

  20. Joanna says:

    i like brad with loose drawstring pants. it will make it easier to get into his pants when angelina’s not looking. ;P

  21. evyn says:

    I think Angelina’s relationship with her dad only extends to allowing him to be in her children’s lives. They have made peace with each other, but there are still issues. She must feel that her kids need a grandfather, but she doesn’t need a father.

    Yep, I’m speaking from experience.

    • Jayna says:

      Plus, he blabs. He’s older and set in his ways. So even if he didn’t and kept a lid on it and a leak came from somewhere else, she would probably think it was him, maybe wrongly. So, smartly, I think just didn’t tell him until she released the news in an abundance of caution.

  22. Elly says:

    OMG Brad looks like Val Kilmer!

  23. Leen says:

    I love the fact Angelina Jolie is friends with Nicholas kristof!

  24. Brittney says:

    Kaiser, can I just say that you’re single-handedly responsible for saving me countless hours of scouring lesser blogs (and ignoring the comments) and setting Google alerts and wasting time on Twitter?

    I’m the biggest Angeloonie I know (in real life) and this one post feels like it was made especially for me. These are all INCREDIBLE links and I’m so thankful for your research and compiling skills. You even kept me on track with my magazine cover collection… must go add Time to the eleven-year-old archives. Gone are the years of checking multiple blogs every morning and hitting every newsstand in Manhattan (though that was fun too, especially during her Cradle of Life promotional tour, when she was literally blocks away at times). Now I’ve said too much.

    ANYWAY, she is one amazing woman, and all this feedback from her colleagues and doctors really confirms that. I hope this health care conversation continues until some real results are reached; once again, her fame is infinitely more productive than the usual, vapid cycle of negative energy and body-shaming.

  25. Shannon says:

    Brad is so hot. He looks like a bum in those pics but I would totally bang him out.

    Angie looks beautiful in profile.

  26. skuddles says:

    She looks simply stunning on the Time cover. And my respect for her just continues to grow. Brave, strong, smart, real, committed, and involved – this woman is THE gold standard, period.

  27. aang says:

    What I dislike about this whole thing is the idea that we are such sheople that we need a *movie star* to teach us how to care for ourselves. Has nothing to do with AJ but with the fact that the media can’t cover a worth while topic unless celebrity is involved.

    • Brittney says:

      Well, this is precisely why she does what she does… whether it’s publicizing her double mastectomy or visiting refugee camps. She realizes that, for better or worse, we live in a celebrity culture where disasters and wars and health care issues that affect millions are overlooked while the dress that a reality star wore makes the front page. It’s a brilliant compromise to meet in the middle and force some intelligent, worthy, important causes into an otherwise vapid and pointless conversation.

  28. Anna says:

    I saw this on other forum:

    I aways like Angelina…..And remember old interviews where Angelina said she would probably die young, because of her family’s history with cancer.
    Her family made ​​a blog to remember and honor her mother. And in some posts we see that the family of her mother suffered with so many early deaths …. must be anguishing to wait and live with the feeling that the same will probably happen to you, especially when you have kids

    Here some post about her mother’s family history:

    “She lived a tragic and yet joyous life. Her mother
    passed away at the tender age of 45 and she lost her
    father at the age of 62.”
    HER cousin, Norma Parent Poucher Ocala, Florida

    “The whole family was a joy to be with and I’m sorry for all the sadness Marcia had to endure. I’m glad to know that Debbie and Raleigh are still around.”
    Patti Miles Smith, Jacksonville, Florida

    Of all the deaths I’ve gone through within my Family I thought I would be better at embracing loss. Not being with my Sister 4 years now, and my Brother nearly 2 years, life doesn’t become easier. It never

    You are my secret admirer, my Flash Gordon and my comforter through all our family losses since 10 years old and on, and on.
    Debbie Martin – Escondido, California

    Marcheline Bertrand Remembered

  29. AY says:

    The Time mag cover is so gorgeous, and Angelina looks so elegant, calm and beautiful! What a woman!

  30. binturong says:

    I continue to be disturbed at the idea that such a procedure is necessary, that cancer can ever have only genetic causes, and that more women, following AJ’s example, will have it done (if they can afford it, a big if).

    Here’s another article about it:

    THIS quote from the article: “While I do not begrudge her personal decision, I begrudge a society that chooses to tolerate its women undergoing amputation and excision as routine procedures. As anthropogenic alterations to our world render it more and more inhospitable to life, will we continue to abide increasingly insane actions to maintain our existence, or will we ever relinquish our short-term superficial conveniences for long-term genuine life?”

    Will we continue to let environmental poisoners–that’s corporations and the military–get away with slow murder?

    • Mich says:

      Meh. I would happily sacrifice my breasts to be able to have the opportunity to meet my grandchildren. I don’t consider it mutilation any more than having a diseased kidney removed. You gotta do what you gotta do.

      I totally agree with you about the bigger issues beyond this one faulty mutation, however. My immune system turned on me last year and I now sit with a host of ‘diseases’ that I’m positive all start with the commercial food industry and the genetically engineered garbage now being sold as ‘real food’. Once I realized I had to monitor every single bite I took, I also started to look into my ‘green’ household cleaners, cosmetics, etc. Modern living is filled with poison.

      • binturong says:

        @ mich: I hear you about your struggle w/immune system issues. I also have problems, though it sounds like they’re much less serious than yours. Good luck with it–I know EXACTLY how hard it is to monitor our food and surroundings!

        I’m not arguing at all with the idea of mastectomy when a cancer is found; what I do have problems with is the idea of “preventative” mastectomy. The idea that this will ensure that you’ll live to see grandchildren is false. It seems like it’s a procedure that cruelly gives and then takes away hope, when cancer gets you from environmental causes, as it normally does.

    • cat1 says:

      It’s a very drastic decision. As I posted a bit further down…

      Dr. Christiane Northrup wrote about this (she is a women’s doctor, wrote a best seller, Women’s Bodies, Women’s Wisdom, and writes about women issues and health):

      “My quick take on the news of Angelina Jolie’s bilateral mastectomies: The vast majority of women who get breast cancer have NO genetic risk factors. Optimal levels of vitamin D decrease breast cancer risk by 50%. Far too many women are already getting prophylactic mastectomies for DCIS– which they will die with but not from. The combination of Jolie’s celebrity and the current fear of breast cancer is a most unfortunate situation for most women. And yes– there are instances in which prophylactic surgery is indeed a sound choice. But they are very very rare.”

      Thanks for this link. I will check it out.

      • binturong says:

        ^^^THIS: “The combination of Jolie’s celebrity and the current fear of breast cancer is a most unfortunate situation for most women.”

      • Mich says:

        Wait. Are you saying that you think there is now going to be a mad rush of panicked women begging their doctors to remove their breasts?

      • Lulu.T.O. says:

        Thanks for this link. There is also the fact that early detection lead to many procedures that women don’t really need, including total mascectomies. Most breast cancers are quite slow growing and are not life threatening. But right now we have no way of discerning which is which, so they treat all cancer aggressively with surgery, chemotherapy (poison) and radiation (mutagenic in and of itself). It’s really a bit of a mess.

      • Suze says:

        Most women are not going to be running to their doctors and begging to have their breasts removed because of Angelina Jolie. Give people more credit than that. And doctors are not going to be recommending preventive mastectomies when they aren’t needed. This is fear-mongering at its worst.

        The issue with early diagnosis and the problem of discerning which tumors are fast or slow growing (and how to treat them) is definitely worth discussion, but that isn’t what Jolie was facing. She had a genetic abnormality that gave her a high probability of dying.

        That linked article was written by someone who is very angry at the role of environmental toxins in public health and the current state of breast cancer treatment – which are also worthy of discussion – but, again, not that relative to Jolie’s situation. She didn’t have cancer and her genetic mutation was not the result of environmental issues.

        Jolie genetic situation is rare, but it would most likely not have a good outcome if she did not take action – and her situation would not be improved by increased vitamin D consumption or exercise – worthy as those things are.

        As for Dr. Northrups “quick take” – I’ll rely on Jolie’s measured response to what was probably a far more detailed review of her situation by her own doctors.

  31. NYC_girl says:

    She really is stunningly beautiful; I saw her in person and she looks like that.

    Separately, I think a bigger issue is healthcare in this country and women having access to it, and being able to monitor their health, especially if cancer runs in their family and hits at an earlier age. What should a woman do if their mother had breast or ovarian cancer? What are the options, especially if you don’t have insurance?

  32. Runs with Scissors says:

    Stupid argument #1:

    “Whaaaa! She’s not really being ‘heroic’!!!! All she’s doing is trying to save her own life, really she’s just selfish!!! What about all the other women fighting cancer???!!! She’s not so special!”

    Look, trying desperately to diminish Jolie does NOT raise anyone else UP. Squawking endlessly about how she isn’t really a hero only diminishes all the OTHER women who are going through it. Did it ever occur to you that they might see THEMSELVES in Jolie and share positively in the attention she’s getting for the brave way she faced this situation? You are only sh!tting on other women fighting cancer when you sh!t on Jolie.

    Stupid argument #2:

    Whaaa! Jolie is rich and she can afford stuff the rest of us can’t! Whaaa! She HERSELF points this out. Get off your ass and take it up with the government by researching and voting these principles. Don’t scream at Jolie for it.

    Stupid argument #3:

    “She mutilated her body!”

    People screeching that she chose to “mutilate her body” to hugely mitigate her risk of DEATH, yet don’t bat an eye when millions of women a year pay tons of money to have themselves carved up for breast implants for no other reason than VANITY, should just sit the hell down about what constitutes “mutilation of the female body.”

  33. cat1 says:

    I am not a doctor but I find this decision a little confusing.

    Dr. Christiane Northrup wrote about this (she is a women’s doctor, wrote a best seller, Women’s Bodies, Women’s Wisdom, and writes about women issues and health):

    “My quick take on the news of Angelina Jolie’s bilateral mastectomies: The vast majority of women who get breast cancer have NO genetic risk factors. Optimal levels of vitamin D decrease breast cancer risk by 50%. Far too many women are already getting prophylactic mastectomies for DCIS– which they will die with but not from. The combination of Jolie’s celebrity and the current fear of breast cancer is a most unfortunate situation for most women. And yes– there are instances in which prophylactic surgery is indeed a sound choice. But they are very very rare.”

  34. Janet says:

    That cover photo on Time blew me away. Look at some photos of her now and compare them with photos of her when she was 21. It seems like the older she gets, the more beautiful she gets.

  35. lisa2 says:

    Every woman has a right to make the choice that is RIGHT for her. she made the choice that was right for her and her family. I don’t understand anyone can fault that. I’m sure she and Brad discussed this and reached the decision that was right for them She is 37 and has 6 children. I think they could have made a different choice is they didn’t have kids yet. But they have the big family they both wanted. If they don’t have anymore children it won’t be a sad thing. So I think she was thinking more of the future.

    Her choice. It is about options and choices. She is not telling other women to make the same choice. But for women to know that there are choices. I applaud that.

    • Lulu.T.O. says:

      Of course, you are right! And the fact that she made it public, means we get to discuss it and debate.

      It sounds like she made the right decision, if this was indeed hanging over her head. I know how I feel, with my risks hanging over my head. But I am encouraged by some doctor’s responses to her op-ed, pointing out that her risks may not have been as high as she feared, and why.

      It’s been a good think all around, as it has brought about a number of good talking points.

  36. tabasco says:

    this is kind of a big deal insofar as it should be covered to a reasonable level by insurance. and another angle – recognition that mammography is not always enough. women with dense breast tissue can have a clear mammogram and still have cancer. like my aunt, who didn’t know she had cancer until it was advanced, b/c the folks doing her mammograms did not recognize the density of her tissue or properly escalate her testing. i am not of mammogram age yet, but i have already been told i have very dense breast tissue – - i will be insisting on MRI rather mammography, even if i have to pay for it. it’s also a potential factor in having breast reduction surgery. it’s a back issue and general annoyance, but it can also pose challenges for cancer detection.

  37. lower-case deb says:

    today, i hear alarming news on television.
    actually on radio and elsewhere too! people with poor reading comprehension shouldn’t be writing news scripts, imho.
    they’ve misquoted jolie by saying “women should consider cutting up their breasts to minimize cancer”.

    am i reading the same op-ed?

    This is what she said:
    “I want to encourage every woman, especially if you have a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, to seek out the information and medical experts who can help you through this aspect of your life, and to make your own informed choices.”

    what i read is:
    go see your physician, go see doctors, get their opinion, and get informed. DEMAND to get informed. and if you really think that–AFTER ALL THE INFO and consideration–you need to have your breasts cut off, then don’t be ashamed about it.

    plus, she is giving a tip to the medical profession: if they are good doctors, and they see you coming and asking “Please chop my breasts off because Jolie said so”, they will say “wait. hang on a minute. let’s sit down and talk and do tests and whatnot”. doctors are not robots that say yes immediately to orders of a patient.

    she’s not advocating chopping breasts off willy-nilly. she’s advocating INFORMED choices, and that women should NOT BE AFRAID of going to the doctors and discussing this. and for doctors to SPEAK honestly about what it entails.

    i’m only speaking from what i know in my country:
    Caveat: this is sweeping generalization. not everyone are like this
    - some women don’t even feel comfortable going to the doctor for pap or breast check, because they’re too “ashamed”
    - some doctors don’t feel comfortable to give information. they just instruct, tell, order. they don’t want you to go to them for “opinion”, they want you to buy expensive treatments from them, etc.
    - insurance barely covers basic needs, let alone something “science-y”.

    in addition, to underline that AJ is not advocating unnecessary mastectomy: she wrote in the next paragraph: “there are many wonderful holistic doctors working on alternatives to surgery”

    and finally, she is not flaunting her wealth. she is actually poking at the healthcare condition in her country:
    “It has got to be a priority to ensure that more women can access gene testing and lifesaving preventive treatment, whatever their means and background, wherever they live. The cost of testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2, at more than $3,000 in the United States, remains an obstacle for many women.”

    she is not “supposed to speak out for the less fortunate”. she IS ALREADY doing so!

    • pwal says:

      Yeah… I’m seeing the pushback already. On my local morning news, they showed a package advocating alternatives like exercising, reducing alcohol intake, doing mammograms/MRI screenings. And they prefaced Angelina’s actions as ‘drastic’. Yet, I haven’t heard anyone talking about how prevalent cancer is on Angelina’s maternal side. Again, quite a few of Angelina’s relatives have died of cancer, never reaching the age of 60.

      If I had that kind of family history and I got those results from the screening, I would likely do what Angelina did and I don’t have children or a significant other to think about.

  38. mkyarwood says:

    I’m very late to this thread! I feel like yes, this is great for Angelina to be so candid. I understand that using her starpower to raise awareness is great. However, I feel like she may have been a little lied to by her doctors. The thing is, we don’t need a mutated version of BRCA-1 to give us cancer. We all have cancer. It’s the steps we take to keep it from multiplying/spreading that makes a difference. Now, if she was going to go ahead and ‘fix’ her boobs anyway, and she carried the gene, this option makes a lot of sense! However, I fully believe it takes a lifestyle rehaul upon receiving news like she did, and an attempt at staying healthy,monitoring your progress every year, rather than jumping all over breast removal (for most women). The thing is, I wouldn’t get more boobs if I had to go this route. I’d get a commemorative tattoo and soldier forward. Still, the way she and her family are releasing the news is brilliant, and not in a conspiracy sort of way.

    • Emma - the JP Lover says:

      Did you read the news, or even the posts here, that stress how prevalent cancer is on Angelina Jolie’s maternal side of the family? She lost her mother and two uncles to cancer before any of them reached the age of 60. Her mother was diagnosed with cancer at 46. It was her family history, and her kids asking about mommy’s mommy, that drove her to get the BRCA1 gene test.

    • Lulu.T.O. says:

      Our body’s immune system targets and attacks cancer cells when it is working in optimal condition. Optimal is the key word of course. Throw in some aging, stress, and genetic mutations, and it begins to falter.

  39. tabasco says:

    my experience with BRCA testing, after my aunt was diagnosed and given the dense breast tissue issue, was that i went for “genetic counseling” first, where they did a family tree of sorts, taking down all manner of family health history and then calculated that the odds of my having the “faulty” gene were extremely low – i was still given the option of having the testing done, but decided not to, not b/c of cost, i actually never got so far as considering the cost, but b/c it was already pretty clear i did not have the “bad gene”.

  40. tabasco says:

    p.s. if i had the percentages AJ was looking at, you better believe i’d have everything removed, no question.

  41. pwal says:

    And on another note, thanks for swapping Brad’s pic for Angelina’s Time cover. While I love Brad and am hopeful that he is doing right by her, I think that Angelina, her decision, and the implications for other women with the same gene mutation, and any other woman grappling with the actual disease should remain the forefront. {{Hugs to Brad}}

    {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Hugs and good vibes}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}} to Angelina.

  42. Nymeria says:

    Okay, we get it, she’s a hero for having a double mastectomy which most of us cannot even afford. I think the real reason for the media circus around this bit of news is pure shock that such a beautiful woman had her breasts lopped off in a bid to prevent cancer. The thought of a beautiful woman being mutilated, no matter the nobility of the reasons behind the mutilation, makes us feel disquieted. I wish that were being talked about along with genetic testing (which is in its infancy) and the affordability – or lack of it – of health care in this country.

    In a way, I think she’s badass for coming forward with this – for precisely the reason I outlined above: beautiful women are meant to serve as eye candy for society at large, and as such, aren’t thought of as full persons; they’re pretty objects for us to ogle. But Angelina’s revelation that she had a double mastectomy effectively tells us, “F-ck your fascist beauty standards, I’m a human being and I don’t want to get cancer!” She, perhaps the epitome of beautiful womanhood, had her breasts – her breasts, the visible symbols of femininity – removed, violating society’s belief that beautiful women should be seen and not carved upon. Or heard. But she’s been cut open and she has definitely been heard about it. I think that’s pretty cool.

    On the other hand, I can’t help but wonder if the timing of her revelation is related to Brad’s train-wreck of a movie coming out soon.

    Just my two cents.

    • storyteller says:

      I will never understand people who think that something this personal, this serious, this life changing, would be used as a pr exercise for a godforsaken MOVIE!!!! Never. “Oh Angelina, tell the world about your risk of cancer and the multiple surgeries you went through, maybe it’ll make people go and see my zombie movie”! C’mon people, let’s be sensible human beings here.

      • LoL says:

        No matter how you look at it, this has been stellar Pr for Brad Pitt. “The doting partner that stood by and supported the mother of his children.” Um, the other choice would have ruined his image for life. It’s just a coincidence that the news hit at the exact time he starts interviews for his movie. :-)

      • pwal says:

        Thank you!

        In fact, I would go a step further and say that it is obvious that people can handle the idea of watching CGI zombies eating human brains and guts more than they can handle the idea of a young, beautiful actress writing about her double mastectomy in clear, clinical terms.

    • mslewis says:

      I think your two cents aren’t really worth that much. To say a woman would have her breasts removed in order to get publicity for a movie is just DUMB!! The decision to have this procedure was not made in just a day. Angelina probably talked to her doctors and had tests done and talked to Brad and had tests done and talked to specialists and had tests done over a long, long period of time. And then the procedures took three entire months. I seriously doubt she “timed” it for Brad’s movie. If she had waited until next year you would have said she “timed” it for her own movie.

      And I’m sick of people saying that “no one else” can afford this procedure. Everyone with insurance, and a lot of people without insurance in American can get this done. They just have to talk to their medical professional.

      You are a cynical, nasty, mean person and your life must be horrible.

    • Emma - the JP Lover says:

      @Nymeria, who wrote: “On the other hand, I can’t help but wonder if the timing of her revelation is related to Brad’s train-wreck of a movie coming out soon.”

      Is the end of next month (June) considered soon?? Wouldn’t your assumption carry more weight if “World War Z” was due for release next weekend or on Memorial Day?

    • Janet says:

      You think she did this for PR?

      You must be a real drag at parties.

    • pwal says:

      Well… I guess that Angelina’s reveal does have something to do with it. And maybe Marcheline’s ex-boyfriend revealing that Angelina’s aunt Debbie has stage four breast cancer plays into WWZ’s promotion too.

      It was just on Inside Edition.

    • Sal says:

      The problem with the movie assumption is that both Angelina and Brad are actors and are always going to have a movie coming out, so no time would be a good non-coincidental time.

  43. Jessie says:

    Running with scissors, ms lewis, and emma comments all straightforward and truthful. Love every word

  44. Kim1 says:

    @LOL Im sorry you don’ t have a loving partner,not surprised though.

  45. Maggie says:

    I think we all should have a right to our opinion without being attacked. I volunteer in a cancer centre and believe me I see some horrific shit. That being said I would not have my healthy breasts removed. Medicine has made huge leaps in the treatment of breast cancer. It’s funny that a lot of people would rather give up a body part than lose their hair. Men included! On another note….Brad looks like he could use a cleanup.

    • tabasco says:

      Yes, but why chance it at all when you have enormously high chances of getting cancer – - I think AJ’s probability for breast cancer was in the high 80s? I know catching it early helps and all, but you really can’t guarantee anything. Also, I think of my aunt. We previously had NO cancer anywhere in my family history. She got her annual mammogram – clean – found a lump a few months later – she had breast cancer that had been there a while, spread to the bones, liver. She has high density breast tissue and the people doing the mammograms did not pick up on it and tag her for escalated testing procedures, which would have picked up the cancer earlier. I don’t have the faulty gene, but I do have very dense breast tissue and expect my insurance company to give me a hard time when I’m of mammogram age and demand more thorough testing – - I’ve considered having breast reduction surgery for that reason alone – you can still have smaller breasts and dense tissue, but right now I’m a very busty girl with very dense tissue and I don’t think those mammogram machines can do a thing with this rack!

      • Maggie says:

        Well if she’s that fearful I’m wondering why she didnt get her ovaries removed first. That’s the scary cancer! You dont really know it’s there…’s easy for me to say what I would do sitting behind a keyboard but if those were my odds the ovaries would be gone. Forget the breasts. It’s just seems like such a drastic move to me.

    • Josephina says:

      @ Maggie-

      Your opinion will never have the same weight as the person actually going through the decision making to reduce the risk or prevent cancer from happening.

      And no one is attacking you. Opposing your opinion? Absolutely. And we should.

      Why? Because you opposed the opinion of the person who has lived with the knowledge of cancer running three generations in her family. Who are you to minimize the impact of multiple death experiences and the pain of watching not just her mother, but her grandfather, grandmother, uncles and aunts (in fact, she currently has an aunt struggling with Phase IV breast cancer as we speak) die FROM THE SAME DISEASE?

      You came off as insensitive and incapable of understanding her decision. And rightfully so, we are opposing your point of view.

  46. KellyinSeattle says:

    The thing that always strikes me is how EFFORTLESSLY gorgeous/sophisticated she carries herself. She even looks great when she’s visiting other countries and in her dress-downs. I think Brad looks great, if a bit unkept. I am buying that issue of Time, for sure! An artist couldn’t have created a better portrait.

  47. Jen Aniston says:

    Hell– how will i be able to top that?

  48. Original Me says:

    I’m glad that AJ is bringing awareness and sharing her story, but all of these quotes about her are ridic. She’s not Mother Teresa. It’s just the Hollywoodized back patting they all love to do.

  49. tabasco says:

    Also, I’m not sure the “no normal person could afford these options” thing is true? Maybe I’ve been lucky to have decent insurance, but my experience has been that Reasonably Professional Person Insurance does cover genetic counseling, testing, mastectomy (not sure about preventative) and reconstructive surgery. Having said that, clearly not everyone has Reasonably Professional Person Insurance (middle class to upper middle class i guess?) and these options obviously should not be limited by socioeconomic factors. I give her props for handling it in a serious way – she knew it would go public, so I’m glad she took it public in a take-this-seriously outlet like the NYT rather than some celeb gossip outlet. Has she already said they are done having biological children? If not, I wonder if they’ll make a priority of getting pregnant again if that’s what they want, if she wants to have her ovaries removed as well.

    • Sapphire says:

      Actually mid-level insurance does cover the test in part, preventative surgery and some of reconstruction.-the nipple salvage is new and probably not. Most reconstruction means big scars and expanders or TRAM flap. That’s where AJ’s finances gave her more options.

      I’m no fan, but the fact we are discussing this shows how effective her announcement was.

  50. Ravensdaughter says:

    Brad’s lookin’ rough-understandably so….

  51. Love's Bitch says:

    She’s gonna find it hard to top this week.

  52. lisa2 says:

    I think I saw a report that her aunt. Her mother’s sister has Stage 4 cancer. Angie has a lot of relatives on her Mother’s side that have cancer. So if this is true how can anyone not understand that she would be very proactive.

    as many have already it is Her choice. She never said every woman should make the same choice as she, but that they should be educated to make the choice best for them.

    And she has not given any interviews. She did her statement. Others are reacting on their own. How she at fault for that.

    And yes I’m buying that Time mag too. I wish there was and actual interview, but it looks very informative.

    and she has been on the cover before. I loved that last one. If I remember correctly that cover or photo-shoot won that photographer some award.

    • Rena says:

      Yes Angie’s aunt Debbie, her Mom’s sister has Stage 4 breast cancer. Angie’s uncle, her Mom’s brother, died of cancer 2 years after Angie’s mother died. Angie’s maternal grandmother died of ovarian cancer at age 45. Angie’s mother died at age 56 with both breast and ovarian cancer.

      Now with a family history like Angie’s, a loving mom of 6 small kids, who wouldn’t do what they thought was the best choice they could possible make to be proactive and try to eliminate as much as possible the genetic threat hanging over her head? A choice she is not attempting to force on anyone.

      And those who have a problem with Angie’s choice, well that is very likely the expression of a genetic mutation of the gene that controls logical and rational brain function.

  53. Anna says:

    Angelina Jolie Is Her Mom’s Hero

    Angelina Jolie’s decision to have a double mastectomy to reduce her risk of breast cancer shocked the world, even those closest to her.

    No one knows her family’s struggle with the devastating disease more than the man who helped raise Jolie and lived with her mom Marcheline Bertrand for over a decade.

    “She’s known for making movies and being one of the most beautiful actresses and that is her stock and trade for everything,” Bill Day told Celebuzz. “For a woman in that position to do what she did is very surprising. It’s undeniably brave.”

    Day says Bertrand, who passed away at 56 from ovarian cancer in 2007, would have echoed Brad Pitt’s “heroic” sentiments.

    “She would look at Angelina now as her hero. She’d be frightened for her, but at the same time, proud,” he said.

    Day, who watched Jolie grow up from a precocious four-year-old to a rebellious 17-year-old as her mother’s longtime live-in partner, remembers vividly how cancer has “decimated” the family: Jolie’s great-grandmother, grandparents and uncle all passed away from the disease, while her aunt has been battling it for years.

    Day, a documentary filmmaker, says when he met Bertrand she was already going to incredible lengths to ward off the disease, including radically changing her diet and even turning to her own “New Age” advisors.

    “She freaked out,” he said. “She knew she had to change because her grandmother and mother all died at 45 or below. That will change you.”

    And she wanted to make sure her children, Jolie and James Haven, learned to live the same healthy lifestyle.

    In her emotional New York Times essay Jolie reveals that after discovering she carries a “faulty” BRCA1 gene, which sharply increases the risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer, she underwent the preventative surgery for the sake of her six young children and announced her private struggle to be an example for women to better understand their options.

    For Day, why she chose such a public forum is the one thing that didn’t come as a surprise.

    “She was always the mother hen-type. She was always a bright star. She was always an independent thinker,” he said. “And a lot of thinking went into this. She’s making all the right moves, she’s a sincere person and she continues to surprise us with the decisions she makes.”

    • pwal says:

      Kinda makes me mad that Marcheline’s ex had to come forward and ‘clarify’ why Angelina opted for this solution. Of course, a lot of her fans were aware of what happened to her maternal side of the family. I hate that, seemingly, a man has to smooth over the path for a woman to make a personal choice about her own health. That is absolutely unnecessary, IMO.

  54. Anna says:

    After reading this statement the former boyfriend of her mother, explains a lot of how cancer has been a constant presence.
    “remembers vividly how cancer has” Decimated “the family: Jolie’s great-grandmother, grandparents and uncle all passed away from the disease, while her aunt has been battling it for years.”

    And I think that this information explains much to Angelina’s relationship with food:

    “Day, a documentary filmmaker, says he met Bertrand When she was already going to incredible lengths to ward off the disease, including radically changing her diet and even turning to her own” New Age “advisors.

    “She freaked Out,” he said. “She Knew she had to change because her grandmother and mother all died at 45 or below. That will change you.”

    The choice of Angelina was for a longer life and perhaps with less suffering.

    • Lucrezia says:

      I knew AJ’s mum died from breast cancer, but not she’d been so conscious of her risk and tried so hard to be pro-active.

      I think it makes AJ’s radical approach more understandable. She saw her mother try the healthy-living approach, and it didn’t work.

  55. jes_sayin says:

    Listen, I think it’s great that she shared this w- everyone too. Obviously.


    I can’t help but feel a little conned into this really well parlayed PR move. I mean the cover of TIME with “The Angelina effect” in all CAPS?? And “Brad Pitt was the first person she saw out of surgery”…

    Sorry, but Christina Applegate already did this… and she actually had cancer (among several other female celebs).

    It’s just the hyperbole: the perfection on top of more compliments, etc. Too much.

    • Yi says:

      THIS. I don’t think she’s lying about her situation, her family history speaks for itself. In her case, I’d say she made a smart choice. But she’s a public figure with a lot of discrepancies in her speech/verses lifestyle, etc. I don’t think that ANY public figure doesn’t think about how they’re perceived, and that they don’t try to control it. It’s a given. Public figures in media, politics, you name it. They’ve done things most of us wouldn’t consider in order to obtain their current image. They care about public opinion more than people seem to understand. Honestly, I think this is a real thing for her. But I don’t think it’s far-fetched to say that she may have waited until the opportune moment, or that she may have only come forward once someone else got the scoop, and she wanted to have things her way. It’s understandable and rational, not any other way around. To say so isn’t to suggest that she didn’t deal with obvious risks. She did, but the timing…who knows?

      • Josephina says:

        @ Yi-

        What TIMING are you referring to? Of what exactly are you suspicious?

        She just had the surgery on April 27th. Her Op-Ed was printed May 14th. Let’s assume she took some time to recover from the surgery.

        The TIME article is NOT an interview that she provided. It is THEIR summary of the impact of her decision.

      • Natalia says:

        @Josephina: you don’t think she had time to think all of this through BEFORE the surgery? You don’t think it’s at all possible that her people worked to secure her the cover of the mag? Even if they didn’t interview her? I assume you understand that Time magazine isn’t a tabloid. They have their cover story ready long before 2 days of news might dictate it. What exactly are you saying/asking? It’s obvious to some of us, even if you can’t see those points clearly written above. I felt sorry for her when I heard, but then I learned that she didn’t actually have cancer, and she didn’t actually have to lose her breasts like most women would have to. She essentially got an extra boob job and a great opportunity to talk more about herself, as her and Brad have always done. We know all about their children, their sex lives, their politics, and random other thoughts on the universe. People can’t be blamed for questioning this to be any different. Don’t be naive enough to believe that most women in hollywood, including her, have already had implants at one point or another. I don’t really see this as heroic. Smart? Yes. Preventive? Yes. Heroic, impassioned, sacrificial, holy and divine? No. Sorry.

      • Josephina says:

        @ Yi and Natalia:

        She refused NYT an interview and INSTEAD wrote an OP-ED herself so that she can tell the HER story HER way with no one twisting her words. She cuts the middle man out– she does not have a PR guru or team. She reperesents herself. And she’s smart and knows how to write. You don’t need a PR team when you are as articulate and intelligent as she is.

        ” she didn’t actually have to lose her breasts like most women would have to. She essentially got an extra boob job and a great opportunity to talk more about herself, as her and Brad have always done. ” —-?!?! What.the. hell…?

        Soooooos, if you had 6 kids, aunt is fighting Phase 4 breast cancer, lost your mom and gradndma to cancer, and THEN found out that you have an 87% chance of getting breast cancer before age 50 and a 50% chance of getting ovarian cancer, you would “wait” until you tested positive for cancer to try and stop it then? You would actually ignore the advance notice confirmation and gamble on your life?

        No one can help you when you do not value your life enough to protect yourself. By the way, that was the point of her speaking up about her experience- to consider options early, and to not be afraid,

        But no, you geniuses missed the message about ADDRESSING women’s health issues. The point is to consider your options and consider them EARLY. Don’t just accept the roadblocks presented before you, push and get educated and/or involved.

        The good news is that MOST women, globally speaking, got the message.

    • Sal says:

      Where this argument collapses is that Angelina did not give Time an interview. Nor did she authorize them putting her on the cover. Time did this all themselves. Angelina had nothing to do with it. Just because some tabloid puts a celeb on their cover, does NOT mean the celeb themself authorized it or knew about it.

      • Natalia says:

        OH.EM.GEE. Learn to read. As stated above, Time magazine is NOT a tabloid. If you honestly believe she had no idea she was to be featured on the cover of a magazine like that…I honestly feel sorry for you. And @Josephina: it was stated over and over again that her decision was smart considering her history. We just don’t agree that getting a preventive boob job is heroic, or even much of a sacrifice for someone who seems to have already had a boob job at one time or another in her past. Reading comp. is your friend. *eyeroll*

      • San says:

        I know very well that Time is not a tabloid, I said tabloid to explain that celebs are on the covers of such things all the time without their knowledge so why would Time be different. She did not give an interview to time. If she authorized being on the cover, she would have given them an interview. She instead gave her *exclusive* to NYT. If you don’t see the difference and can’t work out Angelina didn’t have anything to do with Time, well, theres no point discussing it as you don’t understand the news/tabloid industry.

  56. Morgane says:

    I don’t think she did it for PR but I hate the way people are dealing with her op-ed, almost idolizing and worshiping her for doing the mastectomy and talking about it afterwards. She went through that but 545454118 other women went through the same thing.

    It’s ok that she wanted to write the op-ed but I think it’s unnecessary to have Brad Pitt, James Haven, Jane Pitt, John Voight…. talking to the press about how ‘heroic, amazing…’ she is for doing the operation.

    It’s a smart choice in any woman’s life with high chance of getting cancer to do it and even though it’s a major operation it will only cause benefits to them.

  57. Anna says:

    Looking At Medical History Of Angelina Jolie’s Family
    Airdate: 05/16/2013

    It’s a dark cloud that has hung over Angelina Jolie her entire life. Jolie’s mother succombed to ovarian cancer at the age of 56.

    Bill Day was the boyfriend of Jolie’s mother for 12 years. He actually helped raise Jolie.

    Day told INSIDE EDITION’s Diane McInerney, “Angie was acutely aware that cancer was killing her mother’s side of the family. People she grew up with were all dying. Her mother died. Her uncle died. Her grandfather, her grandmother. Everybody on that side of the family all died of cancer.”

    Bill shared some home movies he made of Jolie’s gorgeous mom, Marcheline. He says she lived in constant fear of cancer because of her family history and was obsessed with healthy living.

    “She had a very strict regime because as she believed, if she drank lemon and water every day, it would help her immune system. Angelina would see this every day and know what it was for,” said Day.

    But Marcheline could not escape the family curse.

    And now, INSIDE EDITION has learned that another close relative in Angelina Jolie’s family is fighting for her life.

    Jolie’s aunt Debbie, her beloved mom’s sister, is battling Stage 4 breast cancer. Day looked through photos that show the family resemblance, even though she is clearly very ill.

    “That’s Debbie. She’s lost a lot of weight. She’s been in chemotherapy,” said Day. “Debbie is really struggling. She’s in a desperate situation right now.?

    He says he was shocked when he heard of Jolie’s double mastectomy, but given the loss her family has suffered going back at least three generations, he’s not at all surprised.

    McInerney asked, ” You reached out to Angelina. What did you tell her?”

    “I let her know that I was proud of her. It takes a lot of courage to do what she did, but it comes from a fear of cancer that was already instilled by what’s happened to the rest of her mother’s family,” said Day.

  58. Asdfg says:

    I’m happy for her for making the decision and also looking out for herself and family. What I don’t understand is why everyone is praising her? I think it’s cool she opened up about it, coming out and letting the public/fans know but how exactly does that help you or me? It doesn’t.

    She can afford these preventive tests and surgeries yet some of us can’t. I provide for my family first then I worry about myself. Totally different situation with Angelina. She and Brad both have enough money for their kids to live content without them unlike the majority of us. Losing a loved one is devastating but such is life. Her comment,

    “I can tell my children that they don’t need to fear they will lose me to breast cancer.”

    *side eye*

    Most of her children are young, very young. I doubt the even know the extent of breast cancer or how serious it really is and if they do know I feel sorry for them.

    I don’t know, for some reason I feel like this is about Angelina and solely Angelina. My opinion could be offensive to some and if it is I apologize I just don’t understand why her coming out about her preventive mastectomy is so important. Millions of other women have had the same surgery yet they aren’t in the news being worshiped and praised. Again, i’m glad she’s made a recovery and there for her family.

    • Asdfg says:

      Honestly if I had the money to get tested plus afford a mastectomy I would take that money and spend it on my kids or family. They come first in my life not me.

      • Loira says:

        Trust me, as a daughter of a mom who died of cancer, I know that she would have tried to leave us without debt. At least we were already adults.
        Many of the women getting cancer or on risk of it have young children. It would be more selfish to not care for your health. If you do not care for them having you longer, who would care for them as much as you?
        Maybe if you feel like it is pretentious to have breasts reconstructed then do not,
        I would have liked to have my mom longer, if we had found the way before it was too late. Can you imagine if cancer awaited a mom of 6 young children. She would probably try to raise her children, be there.

      • KB says:

        I’d rather have my mom than anything else money could buy.

      • Hipocricy says:

        lol, as if children would chose millions over the life of their mum at their side…

        i would relenquish all my belongings, lose my home, my car, my job and my credit card if it could spare the life of my own mum.

        I am sure for a lot of people, the life of a loved one weigh much more in the balance that any belongings they possess including money.

      • pwal says:

        And this mentality is why some women took their dirt naps well before their time. I will never understand why some people this this attitude is selfless while what Angelina did is selfish.

        And again, there are resources available for lower income women to find out if they have a gene mutation like this. For example, the facility Angelina went to cater to lower income women as well as people who can afford it.

    • emmav1 says:

      Someone above wrote a nice response about your concerns/issues with Jolie (not directly towards you but to people in general who share your sentiment), but Jolie’s point about coming out about this is to raise awareness, to bring this platform back into the national spotlight, and to make other women feel comfortable about their struggles with breast/ovarian cancer.

      If you actually read her article in full on NYTimes rather than snippets on websites (even revered ones like CNN) you’ll see she acknowledges most women don’t have her financial means and she is urging for that to change. She also mentions this is different for all women.

      Also, if you have an 86% chance of getting breat cancer by age 70 ish and usually with her type of mutation it’s before age 50, are you seriously going to say “screw my mastectomy, I’m going to send my kids to Disneyland?”

      I mean maybe you meant spend the money on the kid’s college fund, etc. but still….I think her kids (even if she wasn’t a millionaire) would rather she save her life.

      Also her young kids should be well aware of cancer because Jolie’s mom died in 2007. Maddox certainly met Marcheline multiple times and probably wonders why she’s no longer around. Also, both Pitts (Jane and Bill) and Voight are all alive, so it makes Marchelines absence more notable.

      • Yi says:

        Yes, but doesn’t she say everything she does in the public eye is to raise awareness? Is it not what anyone would say in her position? I don’t fault her for sharing this. I truly don’t. But I’m not blind to what she usually does to gain and garter attention for herself and her family. I think this was real for her, but it was also something she could use to gain public empathy and get back in the headlines. I’m not an evil, spiteful, satanic person for saying this. I’m a person who isn’t easily won over by people in media. We only see what they want us to see. I’m sorry she had to go through this, but people aren’t out of line to question the timing or the motive. People are well aware of the devastating wake of cancer, and to suggest that we need her input to know what options are available? Really? You don’t think a doctor will let you know about your options, regardless of whether you can afford all of them? Really? Could the same not be said of you having a pessimistic sense of reality in thinking that only a celeb will help you realize your options? Don’t you see how ridic it is to not question things that are handed to you on a silver platter? Excuse me. I like to look at things from more than one angle.

      • Yi says:

        *garner. Damn auto correct! carry on…

    • Hipocricy says:

      I knew, well mainly my parents knew a family with 8 daughters. Their mum, aunts and grandmother all died from cancer.

      From the 8 daughters, 5 already have died of cancer, the 3 left are battling with it.

      I never thought before that, that a whole family could systematically die of cancer.

      I knew families that have been wiped out because of aids because they all had a risky sex life but cancer, wiping out aunts, mothers, 8 sisters, cousins, grandmother, ect…it’s just shoking.

      It’s like they come to life with a ticking bomb inside and they cannot do anything about it or stop the march to premature death by stopping to reproduce to spare future generations from having it.

      It’s really sad, depressing and shocking.

    • Asdfg says:

      This isn’t about “money” it’s about survival! Of course i’m not talking about “screw my mastectomy my kids are going to Disneyland”!

      40 million people in the United States are living in poverty! Parent’s don’t have shelter/food for their kids! What about those people? Should they work to shelter/feed their kids or say fuck the kids i’m getting a mastectomy?

      In a kids mind he/she would rather have their parents then money but do you really think kids get a choice? In a life or death situation i’m pretty sure a parent would save their kids life before their own!

      • Yi says:

        I don’t think she meant to say that the choice to have the surgery was a negative one. What she’s saying is that it’s not a problem for someone with such wealth. Most of us would not be able to afford the surgery whilst providing for a family. That’s all. She has a different sense of reality than most women. That’s all that was implied. Most people WOULD have to make a choice between having the surgery or taking care of their kids. Angelina is not burdened with that choice. That’s all I read from the comment.

      • Josephina says:

        @AFSDG AND YI-

        “40 million people in the United States are living in poverty! Parent’s don’t have shelter/food for their kids! What about those people? Should they work to shelter/feed their kids or say fuck the kids i’m getting a mastectomy?”

        You seem passionate about this. Jolie is not to blame for the extreme unfairness in the division of wealth in the U.S. She has done more than her fair share, to the tune of over 5 millions dollars, of giving back monies in aid or funding. And still, you have not noticed a thing or felt an improvement in the economy. Your fight should be aimed at the politicians blindly selected into office, those whom are NOT HELD ACCOUNTABLE for the economic decisions made to adversely affect the lives of everyday people. They are the ones that are hurting you.

        How about selfish business owners who would rather layoff workers to protect profits or avoid taxes or insurance coverage rather than keep employees who are raising families?

        ” Most people WOULD have to make a choice between having the surgery or taking care of their kids. Angelina is not burdened with that choice. ”

        YOU are not burdened with her burdens either. There is no doubt that a mother of six and a US Special Envoy who advocates for rape and war torn refugess has LOT MORE on her plate than you do.

        Both of you need to stop whining about the lack of impact you obviously have in your daily lives and rethink how you CAN be relevant. Shooting down someone else who is already EFFECTIVE at awareness, resource gathering and information, and productive dialog and action is silly.

        Angelina’s global influence on women’s issues is nothing to sneeze at.

        Christina Applegate does not have Angelina’s wing span of influence. This does not diminish her experience or any other cancer victim or survivor.

        We are talking about the ability to influence people across gender, race, age, nationality, status, socio-economic status and privileged circles. There are not that many that can reach many hearts, but Angelina has and can.

      • Asdfg says:

        @Yi- Yes, thank you! That’s exactly what I was trying to say even if it didn’t come out the way I intended for it to!

        I know Angelina can afford the surgery and I don’t judge her because of it! I feel for the parents who can’t afford it! The parents who’d rather provide for their family rather than themselves!

        Most people have never had to experience that so they don’t know what it’s like to sacrifice life to provide for their kids or family!

        Both of my Grandmothers had breast cancer! I’m no stranger to cancer! In facti’m at risk myself!

        I know Angelina’s intentions were good but her opening up about doesn’t do much for those living in poverty diagnosed with cancer!

  59. Yi says:

    @Josephina: *blinks* Dude. I literally have no words. For you to assume what online posters have on their plate, for you to make assumptions about their challenges or their reach…wow. Your post sounded like a sermon from the Church of Jolie. I can’t really argue with that or take the time to try. Good luck, man.

  60. zut alors! says:

    Lama, you seem quite invested in your hatred for Ms. Jolie. Care to share why you’re so dedicated to highlighting the negative in everything she does?

    By the way, I read the DM article. The responses were overwhelmingly in favor of and supportive of Ms. Jolie and rather disdainful towards the author. Did you happen to read those before gleefully sharing that link?

  61. Lillyfee says:

    What a promotion tour!!! Wtf, it is all about money!!!

    • lisa2 says:


      genius huh.. Angie’s mother got cancer and her grandmother both dying. Her aunt has stage 4 cancer and her uncle also died of cancer. Now I don’t know how they did it but I guess they knew that sometime in the future Brad would be about to promote a Zombie movie that despite the negative from people that have not seen it, the people that have say it is very good.

      but they all died or are dying from cancer. Angie decided to help with the promoting by getting a test that showed she had 87% chance of getting the cancer that killed her mother/uncle/grandmother and is killing her aunt so that people would talk about her and not Brad’s movie. But she is such the genius.. she convinced Doctors to not worry about future lawsuits and had them remove her breast tissue. Now that was a painful thing and she was oK with it.. even being ok that her 6 children who are very young would see her in pain and recovering from the surgery.. Well hell Brad has a movie coming out in 2 months.. what the F is pain.

      Now to the good part. She had her breast removed and here is the kicker.. she doesn’t know yet if the movie will make money. I guess she will have to wait and see.. but now she has a 50% chance of getting ovarian cancer that her mother also fought or a decade.. Damn.. but you know we have to get the money in for that movie..So I guess in the next few months we will have to see what Angie is willing to cut off..

      I wonder what the thousands upon thousands of women that have gone through similar struggles were helping promote..

      I need to check into that. Maybe while I’m doing that you will take your head out of your butt and think before you post something so insensitive; not just to Angie but every woman/man that is going through this too.