There's way too much 2/10 WNB in this thread.
Scarlett Johansson to divorce, again
![[Image: scarlett-johansson-womens-march-speech.jpg]](http://cdn03.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/headlines/2017/01/scarlett-johansson-womens-march-speech.jpg)
![[Image: rickys791309.JPG.jpeg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_taG_diZSsqA/S82DRtS_wWI/AAAAAAAABTA/Mj7DNThYvfM/s1600/rickys791309.JPG.jpeg)
She still has a couple of Marvel films up her sleeve (contract).
Yet if recent photos are anything to go by.
How long until this one also sings the tiresome song of - "why do all the sexy roles go to the young girls...?".
Yet if recent photos are anything to go by.
How long until this one also sings the tiresome song of - "why do all the sexy roles go to the young girls...?".
Post: #42RE: Scarlett Johansson to divorce, again
(Yesterday 01:33 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:
She was hot as fuck in 2001.
Was she? Here is a picture of her in Ghost World, which was released in September 2001.
She was hot as fuck in that movie and in Lost In Translation (2001)-Look at that sexy bitch, she still has some innocence left, so young and tender. I would fuck the shit out of her young sexy ass in 2001 and go balls deep in that ass-I like young , sexy, white girls with very little world experiance. That is a hot bitch in 2001 , I want at that shit in 2001.
(Yesterday 01:33 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:
She was hot as fuck in 2001.
Was she? Here is a picture of her in Ghost World, which was released in September 2001.
She was hot as fuck in that movie and in Lost In Translation (2001)-Look at that sexy bitch, she still has some innocence left, so young and tender. I would fuck the shit out of her young sexy ass in 2001 and go balls deep in that ass-I like young , sexy, white girls with very little world experiance. That is a hot bitch in 2001 , I want at that shit in 2001.
Delicious Tacos is the voice of my generation....
Quote: (01-27-2017 07:01 AM)CynicalContrarian Wrote:
She still has a couple of Marvel films up her sleeve (contract).
Yet if recent photos are anything to go by.
How long until this one also sings the tiresome song of - "why do all the sexy roles go to the young girls...?".
She's 33. If she does go there, she'll be adhering perfectly to the starlet timeline.
Quote:Alsos Wrote:
- 33-35: dry spell; now speaks out on the ageism of Hollwood, shown by the lack of roles for actresses in their peak, prime, perfected, matured, grown-up, or other euphemism for "middle age"
Call me chivalrous and old fashioned, but I don't blame her any more than I blame a child for wanting to eat candy all day.
She's worth a gazillion dollars, she's hot, she's exposed daily to very high value men, and society tells her to be independent and that kids aren't the only thing that will ultimately make her happy.
Perhaps she should consult wisdom from the late "feminist" (she wasn't) Mary Tyler Moore:
“I want to mention my Gloria Steinem experience. She thought that I was 100% on Betty Friedan’s train. And I really wasn’t. I believed that women—and I still do—have a very major role to play as mothers. It’s very necessary for mothers to be involved with their children. And that’s not what Gloria Steinem was saying. Gloria was saying oh, you can have everything, and you owe it to yourself to have a career. And I didn’t really believe in that, so that was a little difficult for me. Well, I just had to say no.”
I heard somewhere she wished she had had more children so she could have had grandkids.
She's worth a gazillion dollars, she's hot, she's exposed daily to very high value men, and society tells her to be independent and that kids aren't the only thing that will ultimately make her happy.
Perhaps she should consult wisdom from the late "feminist" (she wasn't) Mary Tyler Moore:
“I want to mention my Gloria Steinem experience. She thought that I was 100% on Betty Friedan’s train. And I really wasn’t. I believed that women—and I still do—have a very major role to play as mothers. It’s very necessary for mothers to be involved with their children. And that’s not what Gloria Steinem was saying. Gloria was saying oh, you can have everything, and you owe it to yourself to have a career. And I didn’t really believe in that, so that was a little difficult for me. Well, I just had to say no.”
I heard somewhere she wished she had had more children so she could have had grandkids.
“Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.”
Quote: (01-26-2017 11:27 PM)TooFineAPoint Wrote:
She got a breast reduction not too long ago, I thought.
So that seals it for me. That is the worst desecration a woman can visit upon herself.
Then she cut the hair short. Scarlett, you're dead to me.
Breast reductions should be illegal.
I am a boob man and I die a little inside when I hear some girl has reduced her beautiful assets.
"Once you've gotten the lay you have won."- Mufasa
"You Miss 100% of the shots you don't take"- Wayne Gretzky
She was fine as hell in The Island (underrated movie)
Quote: (01-27-2017 12:14 PM)graffix13 Wrote:If she's popped out a kid or two and her tits look like someone dropped a baseball in a sock, then there's nothing wrong with a reduction.
Quote: (01-26-2017 11:27 PM)TooFineAPoint Wrote:
She got a breast reduction not too long ago, I thought.
So that seals it for me. That is the worst desecration a woman can visit upon herself.
Then she cut the hair short. Scarlett, you're dead to me.
Breast reductions should be illegal.
I am a boob man and I die a little inside when I hear some girl has reduced her beautiful assets.
She was excellent in Her. Of course, that role was voice work only.
I never understood her sex appeal, I always found her to be overtly masculine. With that butch hair cut she isn't even hiding it anymore.
Quote: (01-27-2017 01:25 PM)porscheguy Wrote:
Quote: (01-27-2017 12:14 PM)graffix13 Wrote:If she's popped out a kid or two and her tits look like someone dropped a baseball in a sock, then there's nothing wrong with a reduction.
Quote: (01-26-2017 11:27 PM)TooFineAPoint Wrote:
She got a breast reduction not too long ago, I thought.
So that seals it for me. That is the worst desecration a woman can visit upon herself.
Then she cut the hair short. Scarlett, you're dead to me.
Breast reductions should be illegal.
I am a boob man and I die a little inside when I hear some girl has reduced her beautiful assets.
Wrong. Make them bigger is the answer you were looking for.
Quote: (01-27-2017 06:31 PM)Gambler Wrote:
Quote: (01-26-2017 02:32 PM)BladeRunner Wrote:
Quote: (01-26-2017 09:34 AM)Roosh Wrote:
I thought this thread is about Scar Jo. Whos' the kid in the Little Drummer Boy outfit?
She looks 10 years older with that haircut. WNB
She looks like that one security guard that got the job because "affirmative action".
Sure enough. After the next two Avengers movies (which they'll film at the same time), according to IMDB.
She's got nothing.
Plus the one upcoming role is only voice work :
2018 Avengers: Infinity War (filming)
2018 Isle of Dogs (filming) (voice)
2017 Rock That Body (post-production)
2017 Ghost in the Shell (post-production)
She's got nothing.
Plus the one upcoming role is only voice work :
2018 Avengers: Infinity War (filming)
2018 Isle of Dogs (filming) (voice)
2017 Rock That Body (post-production)
2017 Ghost in the Shell (post-production)
I'd still fuck her until the screws in my bed frame came loose, hair cut and all... ![[Image: hump.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/new/hump.gif)
![[Image: EF42oPI.jpg]](https://i.imgur.com/EF42oPI.jpg)
I don't think she ever had natural breasts.
I think early on she got them enhanced and probably went a bit too big for her frame that they didn't look natural. However ,I'm fairly sure she got them done by a very good surgeon. In all likely hood they went through the armpit and underneath the muscle instead of under a cut underneath the breast or through the nipple.
Her being an actress meant she can't have any noticeable scars on her body because even though most Hollywood stars go under the knife we aren't actually supposed to see evidence of it on the movie screen.
When she turned feminist she probably got them removed for something related to implants being oppressive towards women.
I think early on she got them enhanced and probably went a bit too big for her frame that they didn't look natural. However ,I'm fairly sure she got them done by a very good surgeon. In all likely hood they went through the armpit and underneath the muscle instead of under a cut underneath the breast or through the nipple.
Her being an actress meant she can't have any noticeable scars on her body because even though most Hollywood stars go under the knife we aren't actually supposed to see evidence of it on the movie screen.
When she turned feminist she probably got them removed for something related to implants being oppressive towards women.
^^^
So you're saying she was Scarless Johansson, but now she's ScarJo.
So you're saying she was Scarless Johansson, but now she's ScarJo.
Reporter: What keeps you awake at night?
General James "Mad Dog" Mattis: Nothing, I keep other people awake at night.
OKC Data Sheet
Scarlett Johansson Has Revealed Why She Divorced Her Husband
http://www.theladbible.com/more/celebrit...d-20170215
http://www.theladbible.com/more/celebrit...d-20170215
Quote:Quote:
she doesn't believe in choosing to get down with with just one person for the rest of your living life.
she doesn't believe in choosing to get down with with just one person for the rest of your living life.
Understand the difference here: that's not a belief she actually held prior to marrying. If she did she wouldn't have got married to start with, and if her ex-husband had suspected she held that view he would never have put a ring on it: he was French for Christ's sake and owned his own advertising business, if anyone was more into the model of a wife at home and a mistress next door, it would have been him.
This belief is a rationalisation, a psychological defence mechanism. It's a perfect way to protect your ego from the fact that the common element in all your failed relationships is you.
Look at the pattern of her past relationships: throughout all of her twenties she dates and in one case marries fellow actors, from her acting class classmate to John Hartnett, Ryan Reynolds, and then Sean Penn. Each relationship/marriage lasts between 18 months and two years, when you count by the separations and not by the dates of the divorces. Her last marriage happened when she was 29 years old. It, and having the kid, are biological clocks ringing, not actual maturity.
What identifies it as a rationalisation is because she doesn't particularise it to herself. It also identifies her as a narcissist, but we'll get to that. The quote from the Playboy interview says:
Notice how she makes it a general rule for all of humanity, instead of saying that for her monogamy doesn't work? If she did admit it was her, and not nature itself that makes her want multicock, she would have to confront the fact that either she is damaged or that she is different from most other people around her. She cannot allow this blow to her psyche; her narcissism won't allow it.
Also note the bootstrap levitation on proof, not that you really expect Bertrand Russell logic from someone whose main assets are quite literally out in front of her: "it's a lot of work to maintain a marriage, and because it's a lot of work, it therefore isn't natural."
If you want to know what's a lot of work because it's hard as fuck, try childrearing sometime, married or otherwise. Your husband's grumpiness over his T-shirts not getting washed correctly pale into insignificance against the temper and naked disrespect that can be thrown at you by a six year old. By ScarJo's criteria, raising your own kids is not natural.
On the other hand, most likely she hasn't tried child-raising much. It will have been a series of nannies raising her toddler since it was born.
"I might be skewered for that" - by whom? Her professional peers are poking every orifice in each other's bodies on a nightly basis, I doubt anyone in her professional or social circles are going to get riled up about someone daring to state they don't think they're cut out for one dick at a time. That fear's coming from fear of the MSM ... or fear of the media. Or - and I think this is probably the correct guess - from fear of her mother.
According to Wikipedia's whitewashed story, supposedly her family grew up poor and her mother was a film buff and a producer (though she wasn't a producer until 2004 or so). She's the child of a second marriage, so she's already fucked up in that her father had a family before her. Her grandfather was a screenwriter and she was put into acting at an early age. Supposedly she would audition for commercials but take rejection so hard her mother began limiting her to film tryouts.
To me this collection of factors points to someone who is trained from an early age to be a narcissist. Taking rejection hard as a tiny kid is to be expected. But I have a mental picture of a household where the mother pushes the kid too fucking hard to be an actress; no suggestion is made that the kid will be anything other than in the film industry; rather than leave her to take the rejections, she is steered away from situations where rejection is likely and she's still told to work harder, faster, stronger. The kid taking rejection too hard says a lot more about the mother, at that early age, than the kid.
This response - "It's not me that's unable to be monogamous, it's nature" - allows her to avoid asking the more germane questions. Such as: what kind of a woman am I, that I keep attracting men who will only stay for about two years?
Or: what kind of a woman am I, that I cannot stay interested in a man more than two years?
Or: what kind of a woman am I who sees a relationship of less than two years as wonderful but a relationship any more committed as unbearable work?
Or: what kind of a woman am I that even in a committed relationship, I have a need always to "look beyond"?
Narcissists will do anything to avoid the identity they allow the world to see from being exposed as fake, even to and especially to themselves. That identity so exposed is shame: and in a narcissist, shame replaces guilt as the prime motivating factor for all protective behaviour.
That drive to avoid shame is so pervasive it can even lead people to make assertions about the unnaturalness of monogamy. Proclaiming monogamy as unnatural is to take the initiative against that exposure: suddenly people are talking about whether you are a freethinker or a realist or a behaviourist; they're not talking about whether your relationships and marriages failed because you're a shrew or a spendthrift or emotionally cold.
Understand the difference here: that's not a belief she actually held prior to marrying. If she did she wouldn't have got married to start with, and if her ex-husband had suspected she held that view he would never have put a ring on it: he was French for Christ's sake and owned his own advertising business, if anyone was more into the model of a wife at home and a mistress next door, it would have been him.
This belief is a rationalisation, a psychological defence mechanism. It's a perfect way to protect your ego from the fact that the common element in all your failed relationships is you.
Look at the pattern of her past relationships: throughout all of her twenties she dates and in one case marries fellow actors, from her acting class classmate to John Hartnett, Ryan Reynolds, and then Sean Penn. Each relationship/marriage lasts between 18 months and two years, when you count by the separations and not by the dates of the divorces. Her last marriage happened when she was 29 years old. It, and having the kid, are biological clocks ringing, not actual maturity.
What identifies it as a rationalisation is because she doesn't particularise it to herself. It also identifies her as a narcissist, but we'll get to that. The quote from the Playboy interview says:
Quote:Quote:
“I think the idea of marriage is very romantic; it’s a beautiful idea, and the practice of it can be a very beautiful thing,” said the actress. “I don’t think it’s natural to be a monogamous person. I might be skewered for that, but I think it’s work. It’s a lot of work.”
“And the fact that it is such work for so many people — for everyone — the fact of that proves that it is not a natural thing. It’s something I have a lot of respect for and have participated in, but I think it definitely goes against some instinct to look beyond.”
Notice how she makes it a general rule for all of humanity, instead of saying that for her monogamy doesn't work? If she did admit it was her, and not nature itself that makes her want multicock, she would have to confront the fact that either she is damaged or that she is different from most other people around her. She cannot allow this blow to her psyche; her narcissism won't allow it.
Also note the bootstrap levitation on proof, not that you really expect Bertrand Russell logic from someone whose main assets are quite literally out in front of her: "it's a lot of work to maintain a marriage, and because it's a lot of work, it therefore isn't natural."
If you want to know what's a lot of work because it's hard as fuck, try childrearing sometime, married or otherwise. Your husband's grumpiness over his T-shirts not getting washed correctly pale into insignificance against the temper and naked disrespect that can be thrown at you by a six year old. By ScarJo's criteria, raising your own kids is not natural.
On the other hand, most likely she hasn't tried child-raising much. It will have been a series of nannies raising her toddler since it was born.
"I might be skewered for that" - by whom? Her professional peers are poking every orifice in each other's bodies on a nightly basis, I doubt anyone in her professional or social circles are going to get riled up about someone daring to state they don't think they're cut out for one dick at a time. That fear's coming from fear of the MSM ... or fear of the media. Or - and I think this is probably the correct guess - from fear of her mother.
According to Wikipedia's whitewashed story, supposedly her family grew up poor and her mother was a film buff and a producer (though she wasn't a producer until 2004 or so). She's the child of a second marriage, so she's already fucked up in that her father had a family before her. Her grandfather was a screenwriter and she was put into acting at an early age. Supposedly she would audition for commercials but take rejection so hard her mother began limiting her to film tryouts.
To me this collection of factors points to someone who is trained from an early age to be a narcissist. Taking rejection hard as a tiny kid is to be expected. But I have a mental picture of a household where the mother pushes the kid too fucking hard to be an actress; no suggestion is made that the kid will be anything other than in the film industry; rather than leave her to take the rejections, she is steered away from situations where rejection is likely and she's still told to work harder, faster, stronger. The kid taking rejection too hard says a lot more about the mother, at that early age, than the kid.
This response - "It's not me that's unable to be monogamous, it's nature" - allows her to avoid asking the more germane questions. Such as: what kind of a woman am I, that I keep attracting men who will only stay for about two years?
Or: what kind of a woman am I, that I cannot stay interested in a man more than two years?
Or: what kind of a woman am I who sees a relationship of less than two years as wonderful but a relationship any more committed as unbearable work?
Or: what kind of a woman am I that even in a committed relationship, I have a need always to "look beyond"?
Narcissists will do anything to avoid the identity they allow the world to see from being exposed as fake, even to and especially to themselves. That identity so exposed is shame: and in a narcissist, shame replaces guilt as the prime motivating factor for all protective behaviour.
That drive to avoid shame is so pervasive it can even lead people to make assertions about the unnaturalness of monogamy. Proclaiming monogamy as unnatural is to take the initiative against that exposure: suddenly people are talking about whether you are a freethinker or a realist or a behaviourist; they're not talking about whether your relationships and marriages failed because you're a shrew or a spendthrift or emotionally cold.
Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm
Damn what a write up.... great insight @Paracelsus
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)