Even as the Brangelina pair divides, it's giving a lot of meat for public and media speculation. There are a number of debates and split hairs on the whys, why nots and wherefores of the pair.
However, there seems to be more public support for the male actor than for Jolie. She has been loosely branded as a number of things that do not seem to be supported by any of her actions.
When she filed for divorce, Angelina accused Brad Pitt of having lost his temper and got physical with Maddox, his eldest son. He has also been alleged to have indulged in and become addicted to alcohol and drug abuse. Not able to cope with his behaviour, she is the one who filed the divorce papers.
Hence, the facts clearly show that Pitt is the person who could be insufferable. His drug abuse, wild temper and tendency to lash out at his son are accusations that have been used against him, and have caused the rift. He has not completely denied the charges, though the seriousness of the accusations has been toned down.
However, what are the allegations that he has hurled against Angelina? None so far, at least. which definitely seem to reflect that she is not the villain of the story. Yet the branding and labelling of the poor rich actress is distressing, revealing a sexist tolerance of the male point of view, while the female is hauled over the coals for not being "sensitive, tolerant and understanding" of the husband.
Here are a few labels that have been pinned on her.
Maleficent:
It is said that Angelina has played the evil witch to the hilt, and damaged her spouse's reputation. "With all of her Brad Pitt divorce drama, it will surely cause trouble for her career too, as no one would want to work with someone as vindictive and spiteful as she apparently is," accused celebdirtylaundry.
What is it about Jolie that the site found vindictive and spiteful? If she had been trying to get her own back about something, then she would not have stuck by Pitt for 12 years. Damaging her spouse's reputation is also not her aim - otherwise she could have done a magnificent job of it.
Self-pitying:
Angelina is getting skinnier and paler by the day, and is also looking peaked and ready to collapse any time. Instead of empathising with her situation, she is branded by the public as deliberately pretending to be ill and losing weight rapidly in order to win his sympathy.
That kind of allegation makes no sense at all. Losing weight and looking sickly seems to be a very elaborate and unnecessary way of winning sympathy or attention. If Angelina really wanted to be the heroine of a "pity party", then she could still have acted being depressed and down, without stopping to eat in the process.
Control freak:
It is said that Angelina distanced her husband from his close family and friends. In the past 12 years, Pitt didn't make too much effort to reach out to his Midwestern family or even his other close friends like George Clooney. Though Pitt is reported to have had a grand party life with Jennifer Aniston, his social life ground to a zero with Jolie.
That is a completely laughable charge to be hurled against Jolie. Would a grown man hand over his social life to his wife? Unless he is a moron or is totally bewitched by her, he wouldn't miss going to stag parties or meeting his family. To blame the wife for something that Pitt did not want to do would be completely asinine.
And if it is true, he deserves to be robbed of his social life. If he has the IQ of a 10-year-old, then it certainly isn't Angelina Jolie's responsibility to look after his needs as if he were her seventh child.
Insensitive:
Being perhaps disorganised in her parenting, Angelina Jolie did not want to stick to one place. It is reported that it affected her husband so much that he began to turn to drink increasingly. She did not seem to "notice" that her husband was resorting to drinking and addictive drugging in order to escape from his deteriorating lifestyle.
Again, it isn't Jolie's responsibility to "console" Pitt or keep him away from alcohol abuse. That is his own lookout. With her hands full, she cannot be blamed for not acting as his nanny.
Isn't it remarkable, then, that this stupendous woman, struggling to do her best to look after six children, three of whom are adopted, has never bad-mouthed or dissed her husband in any way except citing the reasons she wants to divorce him?
