desperately chilled
if you read her words on the matter, they salvaged the nipple and used implants to recreate the size/shape, so i'm sure she'll look more or less the same. her kids haven't noticed a difference, etc. so i'm sure you won't either unless you're holding them.
Active Member
You probably see women walking around who have had double mastectomies every day. They're not that conspicuous.
tempus est umbra in mente
You need a colon to live.Originally Posted by Deepvoid
Active Member
I guess what I was trying to say is if you are stuck with the gene in question, couldn't you just have like monthly visit to the doctor to make sure that everything is ok instead of chopping everything right off the bat?
Administrator
Why go through all that physical and mental stress?
It was a decision she made about her body.
Active Member
Extremely expensive and worrisome. Honestly, in her shoes I'd make basically the same decision and may do the same thing one day if I can afford it. Why wouldn't you take a test that can save your life? She was basically told she had a 9/10 chance of getting breast cancer. So, time bomb on your chest, but why don't you just check it every month to make sure it doesn't go off?
I think she set a really important example by doing this and then talking about it. She didn't have to share it.
The Enhancer
Yeah, because if she doesn't have tits then her career is fucking OVER, right?
Active Member
Sharon Osbourne, Christina Applegate, Wanda Sykes, Kathy Bates. Still working, still successful, still look the same.
Bite me
Giuliana Rancic, too!
And Lori from "Say Yes to the Dress Atlanta." (Her decision to undergo a double mastectomy was on the show, very gut-wrenching.)
Last edited by allegro; 05-15-2013 at 03:10 AM.
Active Member
Zoe Saldana: "[I might] end up with a woman raising my children. That's how androgynous I am,"
That's not how androgyny works, Zoe.
Too Privileged to Get It
no, but considering some of the movies that she's most famous for, she tends to be chosen for her sex appeal. i'm sure at this point she's done enough movies that she can pick and choose the roles she wants to play a bit more freely, but studio execs tend to see things in dollars and cents and they don't often consider the impact some of their decisions have on who plays in their movies. CGI breasts would be ridiculous, sure, but can you really say that some studio might not suggest it? I don't know. i'm really just musing.Yeah, because if she doesn't have tits then her career is fucking OVER, right?
desperately chilled
i thought we covered this already. if you read the article like i suggested above, she mentions that the nipple was saved and implants were put in place to create the same shape/size of her breasts. she obviously hasn't made a public appearance yet, but i'm guessing that she won't look much different on the red carpet or in films that she doesn't take her top off.
correct me if i'm wrong (i'm no expert on her film roles), but since she's become more hollywood royalty, has she even done a nude scene? those movies you claim she's famous for came out in the 90s/early 2000s. beowulf doesn't count as that was CGI heavy to begin with.
i can't believe there's a debate about someone's personal health choices vs. what their tits look like.
Last edited by frankie teardrop; 05-15-2013 at 10:49 AM.
Too Privileged to Get It
it's fine, dude. it was just musing. I did read the article, I know what happened, I was just expanding on the thought i'd had as a theoretical situation. i'm not even a fan of hers, I don't watch her movies, it was all a thought exercise. so let's move on.
Bite me
@Demogorgon Look at this and see her hectic humanitarian schedule while she was undergoing the surgery process. The only thing that would affect her humanitarian work and career is death.
Too Privileged to Get It
that's interesting, Allegro. I do think she made a good decision, regardless of her film career, and I honestly don't think it will hurt said career much. but I thought it was an interesting thought to consider, seeing as how most of Hollywood is a lot more shallow than she is.
Active Member
You see her ass (which thankfully cancer can't take away) in Wanted.
desperately chilled
it just seems like a non-issue that you keep bringing up. she can live a longer, happier life with her kids and her partner and continue with her humanitarian work, which i'm sure is the priority for her. she's earned her stripes, so i don't think this will have much impact on her career should she want to get back into acting, especially since she should look about the same, according to her words on the matter.
honestly, @icklekitty and @allegro nailed it on applegate, bates, rancic, etc. if you want to play the sex appeal card, applegate still looks amazing. i agree that hollywood is shallow atimes (moreso based on what us as consumers expect of our leading ladies). honestly, i'd be fine if this pushed jolie back into doing grittier, more interesting roles like like girl interrupted, etc. not that i love that flick per se, but that premise to me is more interesting than typecasting her as the sultry action star.
Last edited by frankie teardrop; 05-15-2013 at 11:24 AM.
Bored
I can't find the article now, just because I'm looking for it (story of my life that) but I've read somewhere yesterday that as far as her career is concerned, the only impact this could have had is that she may had become uninsurable when signing up for a movie after learning she could develop a life-threatening condition.
From what I understand about the procedure she has had, it was like emptying an egg through a little hole (like you do when you paint them for Easter). The doctors removed the tissues that were problematic, leaving the breast as an empty sac and them they filled it up again with an implant. We won't be able to tell the difference.
This is why her decision to speak up about this is so remarkable: she went through all the procedures without anyone finding out about it so she could have kept silent about it. Instead, she chose to share her experience in order to raise awareness and in the hope to help other women.
Kudos to her and I wish her a long and happy life with her family.
tempus est umbra in mente
to be honest, Demogorgon is touching (perhaps inadvertently) on why this is such a big deal. Regardless of whether we want to accept it or not, part of what makes the surgery such an issue here is that her tabloid relevance and status as a sex symbol are hallmarks of modern American culture. If Brad Pitt burnt Angelina's toast while cooking her breakfast, it was on the cover of all those newspapers you see while checking out at the grocery store. And yeah, she is commonly thought of as a sex symbol. She was listed off in that stupid "We Saw Your Boobs" song Seth MacFarlane sang at the Oscars.
But that's why it's a big deal for her to come out and be so open and frank about the surgery. A lot of people (like Demogorgon) were previously unaware that a woman could have a mastectomy and not have it be a startling disfigurement. Now, because of this news story, he knows differently. Maybe this will have the same effect on public awareness that Magic Johnson had with regards to AIDS/HIV awareness. Before he contracted the HIV virus, the popular contention was "well, I'm not gay, so I'm not at risk." Maybe if people can see Angelina Jolie openly discuss her mastectomy, along with her reason for it, it might not only raise breast cancer awareness, but alert the popular opinion that a woman who has had a mastectomy can still be sexy and no less of a woman.
desperately chilled
well said. i merely felt that Demogorgon was unnecessarily pushing the hypothetical issue about this procedure costing her film roles, given that she likely won't look much different when all is said and done so it really shouldn't make a difference. perhaps i misinterpreted that a bit, but overall everything about this, outside of having the cancer-giving gene in the first place, is positive and quite possibly a tremendous step forward in awareness and public perception of sexuality.
Last edited by frankie teardrop; 05-15-2013 at 01:23 PM.
Bite me
I didn't think - even for a FRACTION OF A SECOND - "gee, I wonder what this will do to her career."
The ONLY thing I thought - as a female, with breasts - is "Jesus Christ, that sounds horrible and painful. "
I watched Lori on SYTTD Atlanta go through this on TV and I was CRYING -- like, 300 tissues crying -- thinking "OMG WHAT A FUCKED UP DECISION THAT MUST BE, PRE OR DURING CANCER!!"
One of my childhood friends had breast cancer twice by the time she was in her 40s so she HAD to have a double radical reconstructive mastectomy, which is what ^^ Lori had, and is more typical than what Jolie did: First, they remove lots of muscles from your back, then - during the same surgery - they flip you over and remove the contents of your breasts and some lymph nodes, and then they use fat and muscle tissue from your own body to reconstruct your breasts ... all in one surgery! The recovery is HORRENDOUS. But, your life expectancy is WAY better and my friend said she ended up with BETTER boobs. One of the worst parts was that they removed her nipples and then put them back ON, later (I think it was tattoos). Ow ow ow ow ow. Which Jolie's surgery avoided.
Last edited by allegro; 05-15-2013 at 09:10 PM.
Throbbing Member
I just imagined boobs with no nipples...that'd be crazy.
She should have done that!!!
Administrator
My god, can we stop fetishizing over her breasts?
Active Member
NO. Breasts is awesome.
BACKROLLS?!
No, because a woman is only worth something if she has breasts. OBVIOUSLY.
Active Member
Haha, you funny.
FATUM NOS IUNGET
Behold the morning star
So sad.
Bored
Very very sad indeed.
RIP Ray.
Active Member
He was one of the few rock keyboardists to make it look cool (it probably helped he was in a "dangerous band"), and maybe one of the best at it. I thought he had a better touch for piano than the Gibson/Vox organ sound he was famous for. My ex-girlfriend described the Fender Rhodes on "Riders On The Storm" like raindrops.
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Faceplams: 
Reply With Quote