Posted on 12/28/2014 12:18:17 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Hollywood recently unveiled yet another of many feature films for the holiday season, this one the ambitious World War II era character study, Unbroken. It was directed by Angelina Jolie, and while I haven’t seen it yet, the topic looks fascinating. When it came time for the red carpet activities, though, Jolie’s family had to step in for her and do a quick turn for the cameras. Here’s one photo from the event, featuring husband Brad Pitt and several of their children.
That’s a handsome group of fellows, isn’t it? But if you look a bit closer there’s a bit of a mystery here. The blond haired child in the center isn’t actually a boy at all. It’s Jolie’s eight year old daughter by birth, Shiloh. Susan Goldberg at PJ Media caught this story recently, in which we discover that Shiloh “identifies as a male” and chooses to go by the name John. This tale was oh so politically correctly highlighted by Refinery 29.
Angelina Jolie’s entire family recently stepped out on the red carpet to support their mother’s new movie, Unbroken. The couple’s oldest biological child, who was assigned female at birth, joined brothers Maddox and Pax wearing sharp suits and short haircuts.
Pitt and Jolie have been fairly open over the years about Shiloh’s interest in all things considered masculine. In an interview with Oprah in 2008, Brad Pitt discussed how Shiloh wanted to be called John.
The eight-year-old’s family fully supports their decision to self-identify — from an affinity for suits and ties to shorter hair to the name change.
While you pick your jaws up off the floor, I’ll offer up this example of the great lengths the reporter went to in order to ensure that nobody’s gender sensibilities were offended.
Editor’s Note: We have followed the Advocate’s lead, and referred to John Jolie-Pitt as “they” as a gender-neutral pronoun to respect John’s decision, whatever gender they may end up being.
While I generally try to avoid all things Hollywood in my own writing, this story has to make one wonder precisely how things went so far off track as to come to this turn of events. Goldberg has a theory:
Probably about as dumb as the Advocate grasping at straws via the stale tale of Shiloh Pitt, who apparently has been dressed in boyswear and given boyishly short haircuts by her parents since she was a toddler. Four years later, why wouldn’t an 8-year-old girl think she ought to be called “John”? If anything she’s aiming for a more defined gender identity than her parents have yet to give her, either through her name, her hair, or her clothing, let alone the gender-neutral pronouns being used to identify her in the media.
What is to become of this little girl in the future? And given the massive media attention paid to her parents and all things related to them, how can a new generation of children – most of whom have smart phones and tablets by the age of 8 these days – avoid thinking that there is something normal about this?
Young girls who grow up in a household with brothers can frequently take on tomboy characteristics. I observed that myself while growing up, visiting two male cousins at my Uncle’s farm. Their younger sister would traipse along with us (generally to our annoyance) and was frequently dressed in jeans and tee shirts since we were out playing on the farm. But she kept her birth name, and after puberty struck she was quickly wearing dresses and “girly” clothes, obsessing over boys and doing all the things that teenage girls do. There’s really nothing unusual about that at all.
But when media exposure changes the child’s perspective from wanting to go search for turtles and snakes with her brother to a reevaluation of her gender and switching to a masculine name, the car of that family is heading for the ditch. An eight year old knows nothing of sexuality and “gender identification” and, frankly, doesn’t need to know anything about it. She needs to have time to be a kid and do all the silly, fun things that kids do without worrying about such adult notions.
Shiloh may still turn around in a few years and become “Shiloh” again. But in the meantime, children around the world are looking at her and thinking, “I wonder if that’s who I am too?” This is not a solution. It’s a problem.
A couple years later I was putting on lip-gloss and sighing over boys just like all the other girls.
And Conservatives are supposed to be the party of anti-science??? Let them produce one study that shows gender can be randomly ‘assigned.’
She’s an angel
I got lucky
But kids can’t choose their folk I guess
I think I like Angie’s alleged black rubber sheets and restraints fantasies more than her gender assignment gobbledegook
Is Pitt afraid of her I reckon
Take it from me - a woman who actually had cancer and then tested positive for a genetic mutation: Angelina Jolie made a WISE choice to reduce her risk for cancer by taking preventive action.
When you wait (as I did) to be diagnosed with cancer first, then you run a greater risk of dying; you have to undergo harmful treatments such as chemo and radiation; and cosmetic options are limited.
Jolie wasn't the first woman to take preventive action; she simply was the most famous woman to do so. Many other young women (including sisters and wives of FReepers) have been making that very difficult decision long before Jolie did. That decision might not be the right one for any of you, but it's not "stupid" or "weird."
I identify as a suboscine.
Jean Pitt Jolie!!
What a stage name!
Good luck, Kid.
BROKEN = ‘Diverse’ ?!?
You have to wonder..
Very astute observation. It's a modern variation of Munchausen-by-proxy. Parents get lauded for being brave heroes for letting their children be true to themselves.
There's nothing abnormal about a girl who likes to play rough or cut her hair short and there is nothing wrong with a boy who likes art and quiet games. But those are actions that do not define one's sex.
Sex is immutable. Gender, which used to refer to language, is not sex. I wish conservatives would stop using the term gender altogether as it distorts reality and plays right into the progressive game plan.
I thought she left Billy
One of the evils of the Obama administration is adding biases toward it in government contracts. If two service providers or defense contractors are close on price, then having policies considered “pro-LBGTA” (same sex partners eligible for spousal benefits for health insurance, gender change covered by health insurance) or affirmative action in the form of biased training to make protected minorities fit for promotion, then the more Politically Correct firm gets the contract.
The end result is that all the major defense contractors like Lockheed Martin and Raytheon and Boeing have far left corporate policies and enforce it, because it is essential to the financial bottom line.
I see Navy SEAL in that gayze..
Chaz..
When Cher ran with the Allman Bros..
Well. Greg anyway..
Did us no favors.
We’re approaching the point where they say you have a beautiful, healthy baby but you can’t say it is a boy or girl until age 18.
these parents are FREAKS...
I support the mother’s decision to have a mastectomy. Just lost another relative and live with a survivor.
Don’t support Shiloh/John thing
Yes Mr. Huxley.
I believe the young lady will turn it on, in a number of years, and Jolie will know exactly how to help her then.
She’s a bit out there, but I am all for Angelina. Let the girl be herself for a few years. She’s still a kid.
Just saying.
IMO, it’s absolute child abuse. Human children progress through a series of experiences which culminate with them determining for themselves exactly where they come down on sexuality and (being repetitive here) “self-determined” gender.
Nobody at any age should assess where the individual sees themselves.
If someone has chosen a lifestyle which later troubles them and they seek help, only then should a mutual assessment be made.
Recognize the stupidity of this for what it is folks.
If you approach an adult and explain they might be able to function very well as a heterosexual exclusively, the Left thinks it’s wrong.
If you approach a child of eight, it’s perfectly ok for them to explain that a child is a homosexual, male, female, or a mix.
I would go so far as to say that anyone trying to pull this stunt on a child, should be barred from every holding a position of authority involving children ever again.
I think you hit it on the head.
there is an Anti-Christ spirit of confusion in the world today
Anything goes and no contradictions are questioned by the “wise”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.