Real nice parenting Cindy!
-
swordoftheshogun — 21 years ago(August 26, 2004 03:40 PM)
Yes shame on them for flipping off cameras who have NO business following people around, constantly snapping pictures of ANYTHING you do all day long. I don't know about you, but i'd do more than flip someone off if they followed me around all day.
-
Sparkle197646 — 21 years ago(September 06, 2004 12:21 PM)
I have no sympathy for celebs.They know that if they are famous there is a 99.9% chance the Paparazzi will follow them.How do you think People Magazine,US Weekly,and In Touch get half of their photos??? The pictures are used for many purposes not just to tick of the celebrity.And while Presley didn`t choose a famous lifestyle his mom did and she can keep him away from the public eye if she pleases.
-
swordoftheshogun — 21 years ago(September 07, 2004 10:00 AM)
No actually she can't. Tabloids pay millions just to get pictures of stars kids.
Why can't they have a private life? It's jerks like you who read that crap, that allows the tabloids to pay photographers the money to hunt them down like animals. It's sick and disgusting to see what they do just to get a picture of a celebrity at their worst. And it's YOUR fault because you pick up the magazine to see that picture.
The pictures are used for garbage. The star, enquirer, globe etc etc are all trash and 99.9% bs. There are some legit star papers, and those are the ones who sit down with the stars and get the right story, not stand outside their house and take pictures.
How would you like it? -
filmfanatic101 — 21 years ago(September 11, 2004 07:57 AM)
In response to Swordoftheshogun,
I AM NOT a jerk for reading Us Weekly.In fact I could care less about seeing celebs kids.I skim right through those pages so dont make me sound like some kind of weirdo for reading magazines.Why do I care if I see her kids or anyone elses for that matter??? So maybe you should keep your under the breath on liners to yourself. -
aspoonfuloflester — 21 years ago(April 09, 2005 01:05 AM)
Obviously none of you are parents. A lot of kids go through a stage where they flip off anybody and everybody, and there's nothing you can do to stop them aside from beat111cing them. As a teacher, I see this all the time. They eventually grow out of it, and while it bothers you and you do your best to discipline them and stop them, they're still kids, and they still have a mind of their own. Remember, you probably did some stuff as a child that, when taken out of context, would make your parents look like less than stellar parents yourselves.
-
Dunklezahn — 20 years ago(April 27, 2005 06:51 AM)
See its this kind of 'there's nothing we can do, they'll grow out of it' parenting that really gets my goat. Congratulations if your kids respond to you doing nothing about their behaviour and still turning out right, your a minority.
There are a lot of things you can do to discipline a kid without violence, and frankly if more parents realised this we wouldnt have so many kids out there who thing anti-social/violent and otherwise destructive behaviour is acceptable.
If you accept the responsibility of being a parent you have to accept the responsibility of disciplining your kids -
ragreen259 — 19 years ago(June 06, 2006 12:36 PM)
Well, in one sense you're right their life is public now and those casual trips to the liquor store for a pack of smokes, or just going out for a pair of tennis shoes is pretty much over.
However, high-speed chases, lunatics hiding in your bushes, or taking pictures of you naked inside your house from over a mile away with a telescopic lens is not on the list of "well that's OK" unless you're a beep idiot, and any buttwipe caught doi5b4ng that crap deserves having his ass kicked by a bodyguard ans sued out of existance, not to mention put in jail for voyeurism and stalking. If you think otherwise, you're a fool. -
lornamd-1 — 19 years ago(November 24, 2006 06:54 AM)
How can Cindy Crawford keep her children out of the public eye when the press follow her family around when they're walking down the street in their own time? The only way to stop that would be to keep them locked in their house all day. Now that would be real nice parenting.
-
robken0174 — 13 years ago(October 23, 2012 09:51 PM)
YES, shame on them (and no sarcasm here). When you become a celebrity, you trade in a great deal of your privacy, especially when you're out and about. It wasn't like Cindy and her little sht son were in their home. As for you doing more than flipping someone off, if you would try assaulting a photographer, be prepared to be sued. Celebs should know what they're getting into before working to be famous. That little sht needs better parenting.
-
fryer — 19 years ago(June 28, 2006 08:31 PM)
http://www.quemedices.wanadoo.es/carticulos/14818.html
This is one of them! It's in spanish though!