--- In [email protected], "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "hugheshugo" 
> > <richardhughes103@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > > Not impossible that's what happened. The media
> > > > > > would certainly have been looking for negative
> > > > > > things to report, even if they had to largely
> > > > > > manufacture them.
> > > > > 
> > > > > He said that before he found out the truth
> > > > 
> > > > And we know this how?
> > > 
> > > http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1550201,00.html
> > 
> > Did you notice that all the questions the interviewer
> > asked were attempting to get him to say something
> > negative about Madonna, but he would not do so?
> > 
> > He seems to have been misled by the media to think
> > that the adoption is a done deal.  In fact, Madonna
> > won't even be able to apply for adoption for 18 months,
> > during which time she will be visited regularly to
> > make sure the boy is being taken care of properly.
> > 
> > He says he had been told his son would come back
> > once he had finished his schooling, meaning he
> > *did* understand that he wouldn't see his son for
> > many years.  In other words, as far as he was
> > concerned, the difference between that and "having
> > his son taken away from him," as the interviewer
> > kept phrasing it to make him sound like a victim,
> > is just about nil.
> > 
> > In any case, if he was told his son would come
> > back when he finished his schooling, that has to
> > be because it's what *Madonna* expects to happen.
> > And "the truth" is that there's no reason that it
> > cannot still happen.
> > 
> > From that interview, it looks to me as though
> > Madonna's perception that the stories in the
> > media have twisted the whole thing to make it
> > appear that the man had been cruelly exploited
> > is right on target.  He may not have understood
> > what the potential adoption of his son would
> > involve legally, but as far as I can see, the
> > effects would be no different--and it appears,
> > in fact, that *he* recognizes this and is OK
> > with the situation.
> > 
> > He gives zero indication that he wouldn't have
> > done exactly the same thing had he known about
> > the legal nature of adoption.  At this point he
> > has no desire to contest the arrangement.  One
> > can only hope the media doesn't try to exploit
> > *him* any further in the hope of making Madonna
> > look bad.
> >
> 
> Here's something for you to ponder: Let's assume the reporter asked 
> all the questions that he did BUT ten minutes before he started 
> asking the questions he showed the father Madonna's book "Sex" (and 
> let's assume the text was in a language he would understand, so 
that 
> he doesn't miss the anal-sex-is-great! chapter), tell me: do you 
> think his answers would be the same?

If he understood how completely irrelevant the book
was to the issue of his son and Madonna, sure.





To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to