|
|
Vil
ip: 4.252.37.156 |
|
| I don't know if anyone reading this board is familiar with Anna Nicole Smith. But you don't really have to be to understand this post. In short, she was scapegoated by her family as was her best friend, Howard Stern, because her family and she were estranged at Anna's initiative. Anna died recently, and the family is after her estate when Anna wanted nothing to do with them and would roll over in her grave (if her mom ever stops filing court papers to keep her in the morgue rotting while she tries to get what she wants from Anna's estate). Anyway, the title of this thread is A Good Family...and the reason for that is that people who do have good families can't seem to understand that Anna hated her family! So they are jumping on the family's bandwagon and supporting them! This is pertinent to us on here because...well....people probably don't understand that sometimes we have reason to disown our family members and want nothing to do with them, but who gets the tag of Bad Guy....well, we do of course since there is belief in the power of numbers. It was Anna's whole family against her and Anna against her whole family, and people want to believe that the masses are more correct than the one odd man out. Something must be wrong with the one person since so many can't be wrong. Even without talking to the odd man out to find out his point of view and even if they do, odd man is wrong, period, because the masses are in the majority. This is the problem we face with our families. For whatever reason, we have been singled out and are not part of the group. Perhaps, like with Anna (and myself), we don't want to be part of the group and singled ourselves out. But still, the group looks like they are the good guys just because they are the group and groups are always favored over one small voice of dissention. I no longer see myself as a scapegoat. I see myself as the one strong individual who does not abide shallow judgemental ways in anyone, hence I have rejected them as not just family, but as decent and honest individuals. I think one of the things that hurts us is that it seems we have been made odd man out by our families for valid reasons, when in fact, we have removed ourselves because we don't like the dynamic of our family. Society needs to realize that we can't help what family we are born into, but we can choose our own associations after that. We do not have to be family if we don't want to. Now we just need laws in place to disown our family so we can prove we really aren't part of them anymore at our own discretion, not theirs. Ha Ha. |
| Date: 24 Feb, 2007 on 02:52 p.m. |
|
vil
ip: 4.252.37.156 |
|
| I'm replying to my own post because I thought I'd run out of space if I tried to put the whole thing in one post. It is important that we don't try to superimpose our own needs and desires onto others when we choose reason to reject them. What I mean is, we shouldn't reject them just because we don't like the things they do or don't do. Rejection should be the last resort after someone abuses our rights to be an individual spirit that is not harming anyone but maybe ourselves and continues to do so without remorse...and that should not be confused with not giving to us what we want or approving of our life choices. Maybe I'll write more later if there is any interest in this topic. |
| Date: 24 Feb, 2007 on 03:35 p.m. |
|
Dee Ann
ip: 207.200.116.72 |
|
Vil -
Very interesting subject and not just for the gossipy aspect but some real family dynamics and lifestyles and the results etc etc.
Anna Nicole Smith is familiar to me now especially after her son died and she's all over the news. Anna did call her Mother when her son died and again when she gave birth to her daughter. That behavior doesn't sound like extrangement with her family to me. I'm not sure about that Howard. Did you see his profile in the court room? If you did, what did it remind you of?
Maybe Anna's Mother said something to Anna Nicole about taking drugs while pregnant and that's why she hated her mother? (Just something to consider)
I agree with your concept about Good Families not having a clue about how bad families operate. I also agree with how people love to jump on bandwagon's and blame the scapegoat, group mentality.
My perception about Anna is that she lived for her beauty and it's so sad cause she looked almost ugly when imitating Marilyn Monroe with her smile so unattractive nothing like Marilyn Monroe's. When she does ANNA NICOLE with her hair pulled back in a pony tail with very little make-up on, riding a horse in her jeans she looks demurely gorgeous.
I agree with most of what you say about groups and one lone person being blamed but I'm still not sure that Anna was the scapegoat of her family. One thing that is leaning in Anna's favor though is her Mother acting like she was at PEACE with Howard Stern coming out of the courtroom and then almost immediately filing a court document(can't think of name at this moment) thus leaving her daughter still unburied. That doesn't make Mommy look too good to me. (Quote from Vil) "I no longer see myself as a scapegoat. I see myself as the one strong individual who does not abide shallow judgemental ways in anyone, hence I have rejected them as not just family, but as decent and honest individuals." (Resonse to quote from Vil above) "I also don't consider myself a scapegoat anymore. The pain in gone! 
I think one of the things that hurts us is that it seems we have been made odd man out by our families for valid reasons, when in fact, we have removed ourselves because we don't like the dynamic of our family. Society needs to realize that we can't help what family we are born into, but we can choose our own associations after that. We do not have to be family if we don't want to. Now we just need laws in place to disown our family so we can prove we really aren't part of them anymore at our own discretion, not theirs. Ha Ha.[/quote]
|
| Date: 24 Feb, 2007 on 08:24 p.m. |
|
Dee Ann
ip: 207.200.116.72 |
|
Vil -
I was just reading from the message "Why do people SCAPEGOAT?" and you wrote some very open, interesting, informative posts. They made me wonder why, in the past, you have had such a strong reaction to what I've said in posts? Did I bring up a sensitive subject matter? Did I say some words you don't care for? What was it because I saw your reaction as much stronger than I would have expected. I didn't consider it fighting, but others on the Discussion Forum thought we were fighting. I know we can't make everyone happy but I believe everyone should be considered. |
| Date: 24 Feb, 2007 on 09:30 p.m. |
|
vil
ip: 4.252.33.201 |
|
Dee Ann (24 Feb, 2007 09:30 p.m.):
Vil -
I was just reading from the message "Why do people SCAPEGOAT?" and you wrote some very open, interesting, informative posts. They made me wonder why, in the past, you have had such a strong reaction to what I've said in posts? Did I bring up a sensitive subject matter? Did I say some words you don't care for? What was it because I saw your reaction as much stronger than I would have expected. I didn't consider it fighting, but others on the Discussion Forum thought we were fighting. I know we can't make everyone happy but I believe everyone should be considered.
Dee...here's my answer to the above...if I have a problem with words or anything with a particular person I will say so. If I do not say so, then I do not have a problem. I do not backstab or get caddy...well, I might get caddy if I'm in a playful mood. LOL Now about the AnnaNS deal....I didn't mean to suggest that Anna was scapegoated by her family. She was not. My point was intended to be more along the lines of why in some families one person will shut members out and that sometimes it is justified, yet...even if justified the lone man out gets seen as the bad guy because he is alone. It's like in the jungle, man.....even a lion will wait until one prey is alone even if he has to chase the entire herd to make it so. I just think Anna's family should shut the hell up! Anna said she didn't like them and didn't want anything to do with them, so they need to believe her and let her have what she wanted. You're right...she did call home when Daniel died and when the baby was born. She made an effort like so many of us had done from time to time...but to no avail! Her mom did not answer the phone, nor did she return the calls. She did however, go on national TV and say how awful it was that Anna and Howard caused Daniel's death and then with the baby...well, she didn't care about seeing it until Anna died and the possibility of getting money via the baby became interesting. I guess Anna's story is interesting to me because her family seems a lot like mine...dysfunctional and acting perfect.... Digging for dirt on anyone but themselves....getting mad or acting hurt if anyone objects to their lies or their abuses....but ready to ride your coattails if you have anything good going that they can benefit from. |
| Date: 25 Feb, 2007 on 12:25 a.m. |
|
Dee Ann
ip: 207.200.116.72 |
|
Vil -
Only when the person singled out is innocent(being blamed for other people's sins), is it wrong to single them out. Anna was not innocent. She was on drugs(even while pregnant). When a person on drugs is singled out, that's called intervention. Maybe the media was Mom's way of intervening? What is caddy?
vil (25 Feb, 2007 12:25 a.m.):
Dee Ann (24 Feb, 2007 09:30 p.m.):
Vil -
I was just reading from the message "Why do people SCAPEGOAT?" and you wrote some very open, interesting, informative posts. They made me wonder why, in the past, you have had such a strong reaction to what I've said in posts? Did I bring up a sensitive subject matter? Did I say some words you don't care for? What was it because I saw your reaction as much stronger than I would have expected. I didn't consider it fighting, but others on the Discussion Forum thought we were fighting. I know we can't make everyone happy but I believe everyone should be considered.
Dee...here's my answer to the above...if I have a problem with words or anything with a particular person I will say so. If I do not say so, then I do not have a problem. I do not backstab or get caddy...well, I might get caddy if I'm in a playful mood. LOL Now about the AnnaNS deal....I didn't mean to suggest that Anna was scapegoated by her family. She was not. My point was intended to be more along the lines of why in some families one person will shut members out and that sometimes it is justified, yet...even if justified the lone man out gets seen as the bad guy because he is alone. It's like in the jungle, man.....even a lion will wait until one prey is alone even if he has to chase the entire herd to make it so. I just think Anna's family should shut the hell up! Anna said she didn't like them and didn't want anything to do with them, so they need to believe her and let her have what she wanted. You're right...she did call home when Daniel died and when the baby was born. She made an effort like so many of us had done from time to time...but to no avail! Her mom did not answer the phone, nor did she return the calls. She did however, go on national TV and say how awful it was that Anna and Howard caused Daniel's death and then with the baby...well, she didn't care about seeing it until Anna died and the possibility of getting money via the baby became interesting. I guess Anna's story is interesting to me because her family seems a lot like mine...dysfunctional and acting perfect.... Digging for dirt on anyone but themselves....getting mad or acting hurt if anyone objects to their lies or their abuses....but ready to ride your coattails if you have anything good going that they can benefit from.
|
| Date: 25 Feb, 2007 on 03:59 p.m. |
|
Dee Ann
ip: 207.200.116.72 |
|
Vil -
I've heard a different story than what you heard on the news. I heard Anna called Mom and someone hung up the phone on Anna's side, right in the middle of the conversation. I've never once heard that Anna called her Mom and her Mom didn't return her calls. As far as the money is concerned, Mom doesn't seem to need any extra money. She has lawyers and money to go back and forth to the Bahamas as many times as needed. |
| Date: 25 Feb, 2007 on 04:09 p.m. |
|
vil
ip: 4.152.192.89 |
|
Dee Ann (25 Feb, 2007 04:09 p.m.):
Vil -
I've heard a different story than what you heard on the news. I heard Anna called Mom and someone hung up the phone on Anna's side, right in the middle of the conversation. I've never once heard that Anna called her Mom and her Mom didn't return her calls. As far as the money is concerned, Mom doesn't seem to need any extra money. She has lawyers and money to go back and forth to the Bahamas as many times as needed.
Yeah, well you know this Anna thing is so much 'he said she said'....I saw footage of Anna's mom saying someone (Howard) hung up on her while she was talkin to Anna...I also saw footage of Anna herself saying no one called her back and the first she knew her mom even got the message was when she saw her mom on TV talking smak. I'm sorry...but I've been watching too much of this mess about Anna....so here's what I know....her mom doesn't have money to pay those lawyers and for her trips. A bill is being tabulated and that bill will be paid by Anna's estate as part of the costs of cleaning up things after her death. Well...I say she doesn't have money....not right now she doesn't, but she has signed contracts with journalists for stories and will have some in short order. She got paid by a journalist to go to the Bahamas and lay down on Daniel's grave already...Daniel is Anna's 20 year old son that died 3 days after her baby girl was born last September....and let them take video of her 'grieving'. While there in the Bahamas, where Anna was living at the time, the mother did not try to get up with Anna (by mother's own admission). She just wanted to make that video and high tail it out of there before Anna found out she was filming Daniel's grave for money....Anna had gone to great lengths to not disclose the actual gravesite....she didn't want the media all over him....so she didn't even put up a marker! She wanted to wait until the media lost interest so they'd not mess around his grave. The mom found it by going to the groundskeeper at the cemetary and crying and swearing she was not going to tell anyone where it was. (of course, then she video taped it and the journalist dude showed it on TV) She had Danny's baby shoes and baby clothes in her arms acting like how sad it was and all that and did this on his birthday for greater sympathy from the groudskeeper. And get this....Anna's mom had refused over all years to let Anna have any of Daniel's baby things. She had them because she used to babysit him when Anna was just starting out. These clothes (according the mother) Anna bought...but the mother laid claim to them (according to the mother) because they were in her possession. Then she takes these very clothes that Anna wanted so badly and her mom wouldn't let her have and goes down there and makes a spectacle on his grave with them!...filming!...and disclosing to the public what Anna did not want disclosed! ...and then running away real fast without trying to see Anna while she was there. Anna's mother is rotten to the core. |
| Date: 25 Feb, 2007 on 10:30 p.m. |
|
vil
ip: 4.152.192.89 |
|
Dee Ann (25 Feb, 2007 03:59 p.m.):
Vil -
Only when the person singled out is innocent(being blamed for other people's sins), is it wrong to single them out. Anna was not innocent. She was on drugs(even while pregnant). When a person on drugs is singled out, that's called intervention. Maybe the media was Mom's way of intervening?
For money? She got paid.
Dee Ann (25 Feb, 2007 03:59 p.m.):
What is caddy?
I think it's that person who carries around golf clubs for some golfer. |
| Date: 25 Feb, 2007 on 10:34 p.m. |
|
Dee Ann
ip: 207.200.116.72 |
|
Vil -
Anna isn't innocent is what I am saying mostly. She filmed her child's short life too for what reason? I thought she went to the Bahamas to be private.
If my daughter said what Anna said about me on TV, I'd be hesitant about visiting her too. Maybe Anna's Mom just wanted to visit her Grandson's grave and used the money they gave her to make that trip? I don't think there's proof YET that Anna's Mom is only after money, doesn't care at all about her daughter, Grandson, and the new baby Granddaughter. I'm not in any way speaking of your family. You have every right to speak whatever you feel about them. What I'm saying is that I don't think there's 100% proof who the bad guys are YET. So when you are being "caddy" like you said you do sometimes when you're in a playful mood in another post, what actually are you doing? The word alone doesn't explain much to me when comparing it to a caddy on the golf course. |
| Date: 25 Feb, 2007 on 11:21 p.m. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
