I think Christina's story checks out. And there is proof.
-
claudja777 — 12 years ago(December 28, 2013 02:50 AM)
I can see your point,still as I said, christina had plenty,more than plenty of time to fled that relationship.
it s true,some parents favours a kid, and that s not enough for them, they favour one and use another to throw all of their anger on
She was an indipendent working actress by the age of 21, she married, but,eh, joan is well present in all those occasions.why?
plus:I mean, ok, tell about all your private shenanigans with your mum as long as you want,really,then people will decide,but HOW BAD TASTE IN THIS UNIVERSE is to go full-details on her private sexual excapedes?Im sorry but that was gossipy at his best.What was this kid,a little louella? -
backus1611-1 — 10 years ago(June 11, 2015 05:23 PM)
"I can see your point,still as I said, christina had plenty,more than plenty of time to fled that relationship.
it s true,some parents favours a kid, and that s not enough for them, they favour one and use another to throw all of their anger on
She was an indipendent working actress by the age of 21, she married, but,eh, joan is well present in all those occasions.why? "
Easily explained. Do you really think a child growing up in abuse acts sanely? It took me having kids for me to finally cut ties with my parents. Long after I left home, went to college, work, etc etc. People don't act logically, especially when it comes to family members. I know a young man who went through terrible abuse, he was the eldest, the other 2 kids know nothing about this abuse, yet he's still seeking a relationship with his father. Explain that. -
claudja777 — 10 years ago(June 17, 2015 04:43 AM)
But also people around her didn't act sanely? noone at school, in the nieghborhood, in the streets, in the gym, in her close circle of friends ever noticed nothing?
NEVER?
plus: u talk about act sanely. in you opinion she was not acting sanely because of this growing u way, well she didn't act sanely enough in yout opinion to say "enough is enough" to this supposedly bad to the limite of sadic relationship but was sane enough to find a job a man, friends etc etc -
toastygoodness — 11 years ago(February 06, 2015 03:31 PM)
Exactly, NPD is like that. Triangulation between the children is a ploy of the Narcissistic parent, often the mother. She plays them off against each other. In my own family she would tell me the other sibling didn't like me, or vice versa. Always stirring the pot and looking for attention, good or bad.
I have absolutely no doubt of Christina's story. You can even see a bit on youtube where Joan grabs Christina's hand on live TV (the TV host had surprized Joan with her daughter's presence onstage and Joan is actually livid, you can see the body language). Joan practically pulls the girl off her feet trying to get her off the stage. I think there was a competitive aspect with Joan and Christina too, another often scenario with NPD. An envy of the power of youth and beauty, when her own is fading. -
shemp56 — 11 years ago(July 24, 2014 02:16 AM)
In the 1950's Confidential magazine was going to do an article exposing Joan's abuse of her children but the story was suppressed. Since then many eyewitnesses, friends, neighbors have confirmed the abuse. I don't think there's much doubt now.
-
EverythingInItsRightPlace — 10 years ago(April 09, 2015 08:35 PM)
I totally believe Christina's story, maybe not every detail, but the abuse in general. If I'm not mistaken, most people do too.
J.D. Salinger's kids greatly disagree about an abusive/neglectful household created by their father, too. His eldest child, daughter Margaret is the one who alleges the abuse as well. It's not hard for me to imagine that there's something to this pattern in general. And it's totally possible that each of these children did have different experiences entirely. -
deem_bastille — 10 years ago(April 10, 2015 11:11 AM)
yeah, that's true. I was the oldest child and I was the guinnea pig for discipline. the middle sister was given a free pass because my mother was the middle child and neither of my parents wanted her to suffer from 'middle child syndrome' like our mother did. and the youngest one was so out of control: ultimatum was: you don't get the ROTC scholarship, you don't go to college!
me I was hit so hard once I still had the handprint on my ass a month later.
OH THANK YOU GOD! THANK YOU SO
BLOODY
MUCH!!! Basil Fawlty -
oknar1977 — 10 years ago(September 09, 2015 09:10 AM)
there is a you tube video from 60s with joan and christina,
joan is grabbing her like a puppet, there you can see taped how she molested her.
Joan & Christina Crawford - Jerry Lewis Telethon (1968)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS7YIC8F2Ec -
lupitag-11852 — 10 years ago(January 18, 2016 06:39 PM)
I, too, have always believed Christina.
It's very telling to go and read biographies of Joan's life AFTER one reads Mommie Dearest. Certain things just jump off the page that didn't before, even in biographies written by authors who worship Joan and discount any abuse.
Examples: In interviews, Joan admits her children call her "Mommie, dearest" and that she is elated with joy when she hears it, but the problem is she makes it sound like this was something Christina came up with spontaneously on her own, not something she was forced to say. I find it hard to believe a child growing up in the 1940s would adopt such antiquated speaking mannerisms for their mother, which sound like something out of a 19th century novel.
Speaking of old fashioned, other people in the film industry found Joan's insistence that Christina curtsy while Christopher bowed for every guest ridiculously antiquated and not something children in that era did. One of her directors was actually embarrassed for her that she made her children do this, but the point is, it backs up Christina's story about Joan's obsessiveness with appearances. If the woman made her children address her as "Mommie, dearest" and actually curtsy and bow in the 1940s, it already paints a picture of an out-of-touch mother, and there's no denying her children were forced to adopt these behaviors, as well as call Joan's lovers "uncle", as one of Joan's directors (who actually speaks very highly of her) attests to, since they were asked to call him that at her house when Joan basically had him over for sex. He is even quoted as saying he wonders how many "uncles" the children knew. It sheds light on the passages in Christina's book where she mentions having to make cocktails for her "uncles."
Joan also backs up Christina's tale about her 5th birthday party and how pretentiously fake it all was. Joan said she never had birthday parties growing up, so she wanted her daughter to have the finest ones "like all the other children" of actors and actresses. She goes into detail about how expensive the gifts were and, so as not to seem ungrateful, she made Christina carefully unwrap each gift and fold up the paper before parading the gift around the room for all to see before moving on to another. The problem is Joan herself admits there were literally dozens of gifts and, at some point, Christina, being five, become cranky and sullen during the gifting process and Joan admits she had to assist her in getting the rest open. Okay, what five year old girl wants to sit there the center of attention for dozens of people and be expected to have the patience to carefully unwrap every gift, fold up the paper, and then present the gift to the room? Most children simply want to tear into them, and we all know the patience of a five year oldexpecting them to go through all of that is a bit much, but the point is it speaks volumes about how Joan required Christina to behave, already at such a young age. If this is how Joan had her behaving at five, it lends tremendous credence to how strict she was on her two oldest children and all of Christina's other incidences of exaggerated "proper" behavior instantly become more believable. I also highly doubt Christina was "friends" with anyone at that party, which is exactly what she claims in Mommie Dearest (that she didn't know any of the children). The party was obviously more for Joan's benefit than Christina's, and this is yet another account where the two narratives match up, the only difference being Joan vs. Christina's interpretation of it.
It's also notable that Joan, who prides herself on her compliments, spares no mercy for her children in her own talks with the press. You think Christina bad-mouthed Joan, as if the whole situation is one-sided? One should be directed to the quotes Joan herself made about her own children during her lifetime, printed in her biographies. If anything, Christina was just giving back to her what she had been dishing out for decadesI can't even begin to type all of the back-stabbing, bitchy quotes Joan herself had to share about her two oldest children for the entire world. She was particularly good at portraying the two as little conniving devils who conspired against Joan to make her life miserable for apparently no reason. She mentions Christina and Christopher whispering together as children and how it was something malicious about her, as if the two were somehow spawns of Satan who got it into their heads to make their mother's life hell. It does wonders to paint Joan as paranoid and somewhat out of her mind, as she seemed convinced her children had, for no apparent reason, made a pact to mentally torture her. She's prone to making public statements about how misbehaved and horrible the two were, and how they seemed to "live for trouble", all the while painting herself as the put-out mother trying to handle two demon children constantly thwarting her every move. She made one quote saying the ONLY atte -
shopguyperry — 9 years ago(June 08, 2016 10:29 AM)
May 9 1977: While helping Joan to the toilet, the woman looking after her (Darinka Papich) says to Joan "I think I said something like, 'I want to pray for you', and Joan said 'Oh, Darinka, don't do that."
According to Carleton Varney (a friend of Joan's) not only was he told this information but Christina was as well yet she claims in her book (and the 2002 TCM Joan documentary) that her mother's last words were "Dammit, don't you dare ask God to help me." -
dan-h868 — 9 years ago(September 14, 2016 10:47 PM)
Christopher Crawford was interviewed in 1978 and he seems to corroborate his sister Christina's account that Joan was a stone cold monster to them.
The quote from Christina sounds more like the real Joan Crawford and not the glossed over one that personal friends will tell to the press as to not speak ill of the dead.
Other people who knew Joan throughout the years have also come forward and stated Joan was an abusive, troubled person.
Don't base everything on the movie as even Christina has said it went overboard at times and Faye played Joan like a complete psycho. -
mcdaniels-84888 — 9 years ago(September 21, 2016 04:05 PM)
Christina Crawford is the only person to ever come forward to cite abuse by Joan. No one else has ever publicly corroborated Christina's allegations (in her book). Even nearly 40 years since the publication of "Mommie Dearest" that remains to be seen.
Why was Christopher not better taken care of financially from the proceeds from the "Mommie Dearest" book, if according to Christina, he received the same "abuse" as she did - and Christina has said several times that he had a harder time than she. It would seem fitting that she would have shared the proceeds with Christopher 50/50, and why was this not done, and/or why did she not feel the need to do this?
Also, consider Christina's allegation that she remained close to Christopher during his adulthood. According to Christopher's family, Christina wasn't close to Christopher, and didn't even attend his funeral when he passed away. -
XxXThePhantomsRoseXxX — 9 years ago(September 25, 2016 11:24 AM)
I have never seen the movies remade about the little girl who was tortured by her caretaker and the caretakers children in the 70s, but I have read up on the case. This woman beat, burned, and raped this little girl and encouraged other neighborhood kids to join in. None of the adults in the neighborhood reported any sort of abuse. The girl was seen with black eyes and bruises all over her body. One woman even asked how she got so badly hurt, and one of the girls proceeded to beat the girl to show her how.
No one reported anything bc the caretaker told everyone that this little girl was bad and deserved to be punished. Neighborhood kids later said after the girl ended up dying from her injuries that whenever they tried to tell their parents about the abuse, their parents would say "that's what happens to bad children."
Back in the day, child abuse didn't exist. If a child was beaten, the parent was in the right and the child must have done something deserving of said beating. No one questioned the parents or any one in authority over the children. So its not surprising to me that some people insist that if something was wrong, people would speak out as a claim to support Joan NOT being abusive. Just because no one said anything, just because no adults came forward, doesn't mean that the abuse didn't take place.
"Chaos is what killed the dinosaurs, darling."