Jennifer Aniston - A Homewrecker

[rox_yr_sox]

^ Just because she's trying changing her image, doesn't mean her actual character changes. At heart, I reckon she'll probably always be the friendly, good girl next door.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

married ppl don't just walk away without looking back

Hmmmm...The divorce rate is pretty high! 1 in 3 marriages end in divorce? Or even higher? 1 in 2? Not sure if it matters that it takes 2 or 3 months for the legalities. The relationship still ends. Further, divorces are often cruel, as people fight over property, wages, even children. Most relationships ending are complicated and painful. People who split up who lived together would have things to sort out too, just like a married couple. Only they may not have to hire lawyers.

 

[Not Plain Jane]

^ Just because she's trying changing her image, doesn't mean her actual character changes. At heart, I reckon she'll probably always be the friendly, good girl next door.

Oh for sure. But I don't know her personally, so I don't know what her actual character is at heart. I know her only through her roles, and they have mainly been good girls. I have read some interviews with her, and she seems more complex than her roles imply. She has had some difficult family issues, for e.g. Jen may be quite different in real life for all I know!

 

[mrsjamesdean]

the title of this thread is TOO>DAMN>MUCH!!!

The title of thread should be Jennifer Aniston - A Homewrecker ?
A question mark, ironically reminds me of a Sex and The City episode which Justin once guest-starred on the show but that's beside the point, haha.

 

[dreamss]

So, you more or less contradicted yourself. You start by saying marriages aren't traps, and then you end on saying because Heidi didn't have it sign-sealed-delivered in a legal commitment he could easily just leave her. So, basically, because she hadn't 'trapped' him in marriage, it was easy to break the relationship. Regarding the above post on divorcing people getting back together: you could equally say the divorce process further drives people apart, with the fighting, lawyers, division of property, making people hate each other even more from arguing. Of course, division of common goods goes on in other relationships, but so too could spilt up non-married couples just as easily get back together (and they wouldn't have all the legal worries about stopping the divorce process and wasted lawyers fees).

I do think some people may use marriage to 'trap' a person, so that their partner would feel more guilty about cheating/leaving. If two people love and trust each other, they may feel that its completely unnecessary to formalise their relationship. Or, they may not be able to if they're gay, because so many countries see those relationships as being 'unworthy' of marriage and 'unequal' with heterosexual relationships. This is one of the things that bothers me about people arguing that people who are married are in 'true' committed relationships. Gay couples aren't even offered this opportunity and I suppose some of you may see them as being some how less in love, less emotionally and morally committed (or maybe as evil sinners). (Marriage equality! Rah, rah, rah, etc...)

------

I don't particularly hate Justin or Jen because of their actions though and rush towards coupledom, leaving Heidi in their dust. From all the interviews I've read and seen with Justin, he comes across as a sensitive, genuine guy, so I doubt he deliberately meant to hurt anyone or deliver a crushing blow to Heidi. And hey, people do meet other people, whether they're married, in 30 year committed relationships or single, and sometimes fall in love or lust. It's better to be open and honest and break off a relationship, than stay in a relationship when you want someone else.

Regarding the living together thing, it does seem sudden, but maybe both felt ready, and Justin's previous relationship seems to suggest that he loves to co-hab! Also probably convenient for him if he wants to work in LA mostly and doesn't want to spring for a place (Jen is vastly more wealthy than him for sure). At least Justin seems like a change from the commitment-aphobe boyfriends she's had over the past 5 years, who were all mostly womanisers or eternal bachelors. A lowkey, relationship-friendly person like Justin could be just what Jen needs.

you're putting words in my mouth. And i never contradicted myself. It's no secret that walking out on a relationship is a lot easier than walking not on a marriage. No matter how long you've been together, you can wake up one day and leave. You mean having it signed-sealed-delivered is a trap to you? It's called a marriage. It's called settling down. It's called growing up and do what responsible adults do. So what if those two love birds who didn't marry decide to break up and divide there stuff, what lawyer in his right mind would waste his time on them? What happens if they don't decide to get back together but divide there stuff and move on? That can be messy because 1 of them might be greedy and decide to take all or most of it. How is that gonna work out? You see, there a reason for everything. And yeah in a marriage, the person leaving the relationship should feel guilt, because when they were getting together she/he didn't tell the other i'm gonna dump you when i'm tired of you. There's a reason they call it boyfriend/girlfriend, it's for teenagers and ppl in there 20s.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[kokobombon]

Seems like a lot of you are worked up about the legal implications of being or not being married but by definition a "homewrecker" is a person who breaks a family not necessarily a marriage. Feelings are not bound by law, if he was having an affair with Jen while he was still with his long term girlfriend how is that not as awful as if he was married?

 

[Not Plain Jane]

So what if those two love birds who didn't marry decide to break up and divide there stuff, what lawyer in his right mind would waste his time on them?

Okay, but if the relationship is common law, a lawyer would get paid the same amount as if it were a marriage breaking up, so it wouldn't be wasting a lawyer's time in that case. Lawyers do what they do to get paid.

What happens if they don't decide to get back together but divide there stuff and move on? That can be messy because 1 of them might be greedy and decide to take all or most of it.

The same can happen when a marriage breaks up. In fact, people often hire divorce lawyers specifically due to their GREED! And some people get married for money! In addition, we know there are such things as "pre-nup" contracts, which are about protecting wealth/assests. It has nothing to do with love or romance, or even settling down.

There are too many nuances and complictions in each different situation. To me, it is impossible to idealize or vilify marriage OR co-habitating. Both have their own drawbacks and benefits, and they vary from relationship to relationship.

Also, let's keep in mind that Jen herself seems to be living with someone now, if the rumours are true.

 

[dreamss]

^pre-nups and stuff like that aren't marriages, i think we can all agree on that no? And like i said, don't count on those legal relationships, they probably exist in only 25% of the countries in the world, and that's me being generous
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Not Plain Jane]

But dreamss, while I respect your opinions, don't you agree that relationships, regardless of whether the two involved are married, can be meaningful or not meaningful depending on the two people involved? Some people are serial marriers, for e.g. They hop from one marriage to the next not taking any of it seriously, and maybe even doing it for money. Whereas some people find real love and never choose to have a legal ceremony. In Hollywood, look at Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell; they have been together, seemingly happily, for 28 years and have never married, whereas Goldie's first two marriages both lasted less than 10 years and ended in divorce. So which relationship could we say is the most love-filled and committed? To me, it's the latter one, which doesn't involve marriage.

These things called relationships, in other words, are never black and white.

 

[dreamss]

^i have to say, your thoughts are always organised. I agree with most of them. What i can't agree on is ppl lessening the value of marriage. Heck, i'm not even married yet (still young). If you've posted this all along, I'd have been out of words lol.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Not Plain Jane]

I understand: I think marriage has been devalued in the minds of some because of the rising divorce rate in the 80s-00s. At one point I think the figure was close to 50% of marriages ending in divorce. But you never know: it may be making a comeback?

The bottom lines are these: love, happiness, honesty and committment.

 

[dreamss]

Exactly
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[rox_yr_sox]

you're putting words in my mouth. And i never contradicted myself. It's no secret that walking out on a relationship is a lot easier than walking not on a marriage. No matter how long you've been together, you can wake up one day and leave. You mean having it signed-sealed-delivered is a trap to you? It's called a marriage. It's called settling down. It's called growing up and do what responsible adults do. So what if those two love birds who didn't marry decide to break up and divide there stuff, what lawyer in his right mind would waste his time on them? What happens if they don't decide to get back together but divide there stuff and move on? That can be messy because 1 of them might be greedy and decide to take all or most of it. How is that gonna work out? You see, there a reason for everything. And yeah in a marriage, the person leaving the relationship should feel guilt, because when they were getting together she/he didn't tell the other i'm gonna dump you when i'm tired of you. There's a reason they call it boyfriend/girlfriend, it's for teenagers and ppl in there 20s.
Posted via Mobile Device

You can just as easily leave a marriage as another relationship. I think you'll find if you actually read what I wrote, that I said some people use marriage as a way to trap people. And to say that marriage is about "growing up and do what responsible adults do" is ridiculous. To use Not Plan Jane's example, I guess Goldie Hawn & Kurt Russell aren't responsible adults, because they're not married, even though they've been together for 28 years.

But dreamss, while I respect your opinions, don't you agree that relationships, regardless of whether the two involved are married, can be meaningful or not meaningful depending on the two people involved? Some people are serial marriers, for e.g. They hop from one marriage to the next not taking any of it seriously, and maybe even doing it for money. Whereas some people find real love and never choose to have a legal ceremony. In Hollywood, look at Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell; they have been together, seemingly happily, for 28 years and have never married, whereas Goldie's first two marriages both lasted less than 10 years and ended in divorce. So which relationship could we say is the most love-filled and committed? To me, it's the latter one, which doesn't involve marriage.

These things called relationships, in other words, are never black and white.

I understand: I think marriage has been devalued in the minds of some because of the rising divorce rate in the 80s-00s. At one point I think the figure was close to 50% of marriages ending in divorce. But you never know: it may be making a comeback?

The bottom lines are these: love, happiness, honesty and committment.

Well said Not Plain Jane. A relationship is serious and meaningful because of emotional and moral commitment and love between two people, not because they may or may not hold a marriage certificate.

 

[Lela London]

A 2nd well said to Not Plain Jane, as well! I was super frivolous in relationships before my current boyfriend - the only person I would seriously consider marriage with. Marriage can't create commitment. I think thats where a lot of people go wrong.

 

[dreamss]

^^My dearest, if a marriage certificate is just a piece of paper, why didn't they get it over with? If you ask me, because some ppl get divorced, they fear that they might end up getting divorced too so why bother getting married? And after 28 years of living together they call themselves boyfriend/girlfriend? I call that refusing to grow up . If ppl want to stay with each other for years without marriage it's there cup of tea but lessening the value of marriage is the ridiculous thing here.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[saann]

So this thread isn't working out despite my mod note so I'm closing it for now. Please take your discussions regarding homewrecking or the validity of marriage elsewhere or to PMs.