Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous1234567891011...LastNext
Current Page: 2 of 13
Re: Anita
Posted by: duke richardson ()
Date: April 15, 2015 18:02

i'm wondering about Bliss's comment that Tara was born 'addicted to heroin'..

Re: Anita
Posted by: runaway ()
Date: April 15, 2015 18:15

Quote
straycatuk
Quote
runaway
I find it very disrespectful to humiliate older people and I hate gossip!

Why are you here then ? >grinning smiley<

sc uk

I'm looking for the Holy Grailgrinning smiley

Re: Anita
Posted by: Bliss ()
Date: April 15, 2015 22:35

Quote
duke richardson
i'm wondering about Bliss's comment that Tara was born 'addicted to heroin'..

Meaning that Anita was using heroin throughout her pregnancy.

Re: Anita
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: April 16, 2015 05:43

Quote
Bliss
And please, do get to know some adult women, who do not fit your view of every woman having a little girl inside. Some of us are mature, high-functioning human beings.

The concept of the inner child is alive and well among many mature, high functioning and very intelligent and creative people. It is a metaphor for the part of us which is truly alive, energetic, creative and fulfilled. Maybe you are all of these things and unlike Anita have not had any problems with addiction, creative expression, personal relationships and other such things.. If so, you are one of the few. Congratulations. The concept is often used to help heal problems of people who come from dysfunctional families or just to help people understand themselves better and live more healthy fulfilling lives.

Having, knowing, accepting and healing the "inner child" is perfectly compatible with being a mature, functioning human being and many would say is even necessary for us to be our best selves. I hope you can understand the concept of this metaphor even if you don't agree with it, but thanks for the recommendation on my choice of female friends...eye rolling smiley, if you only knew..

peace

Re: Anita
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: April 16, 2015 05:54

Naturalust....Is there any chance your real name is Ruth Westheimer ??



ROCKMAN

Re: Anita
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: April 16, 2015 05:58

Quote
Rockman
Naturalust....Is there any chance your real name is Ruth Westheimer ??

Lol. No, but we probably both have the same preoccupation with sex. smoking smiley

peace

Re: Anita
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: April 16, 2015 06:51

OH!!! .. in that case then do you know how to say I want Bang-Bang in Indonesian?



ROCKMAN

Re: Anita
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: April 16, 2015 07:09

The language of love is universal mate, but you can always use hand signals....love charades so to speak. If that doesn't work try a few bars of Magadlena .smoking smiley

peace



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-16 08:01 by Naturalust.

Re: Anita
Posted by: whitem8 ()
Date: April 16, 2015 08:29

It is fair to disparage the "gossip". I admit that I don't know Anita and only know here from what I have read. So I shouldn't judge. Lord knows I have no right to judge anyone. She seems to have "recovered" and done well for herself. So good on her.

Re: Anita
Posted by: TheGreek ()
Date: April 16, 2015 13:29

Quote
Naturalust
Quote
Bliss
And please, do get to know some adult women, who do not fit your view of every woman having a little girl inside. Some of us are mature, high-functioning human beings.

The concept of the inner child is alive and well among many mature, high functioning and very intelligent and creative people. It is a metaphor for the part of us which is truly alive, energetic, creative and fulfilled. Maybe you are all of these things and unlike Anita have not had any problems with addiction, creative expression, personal relationships and other such things.. If so, you are one of the few. Congratulations. The concept is often used to help heal problems of people who come from dysfunctional families or just to help people understand themselves better and live more healthy fulfilling lives.

Having, knowing, accepting and healing the "inner child" is perfectly compatible with being a mature, functioning human being and many would say is even necessary for us to be our best selves. I hope you can understand the concept of this metaphor even if you don't agree with it, but thanks for the recommendation on my choice of female friends...eye rolling smiley, if you only knew..

peace
Bravo, very well said , i really respect your view . Anita is truly a survivor of this juggarnut that is the stones . the highways are littered with poor lost souls that thought they could keep up with the glimmers.

Re: Anita
Posted by: latebloomer ()
Date: April 16, 2015 13:49

Quote
whitem8
It is fair to disparage the "gossip". I admit that I don't know Anita and only know here from what I have read. So I shouldn't judge. Lord knows I have no right to judge anyone. She seems to have "recovered" and done well for herself. So good on her.

You and me both, whitem8. But, let's all admit it...who doesn't like a bit of juicy gossip now and then? Okay, time to stifle my inner child and go to work.grinning smiley

Re: Anita
Posted by: Bliss ()
Date: April 16, 2015 15:10

For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

Re: Anita
Date: April 16, 2015 15:16

Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

No better or worse than our boys were, right?

Re: Anita
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: April 16, 2015 15:20

And here's Bianca


Re: Anita
Posted by: TheGreek ()
Date: April 16, 2015 15:33

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

No better or worse than our boys were, right?
so true

Re: Anita
Posted by: Come On ()
Date: April 16, 2015 15:55

Jo, Shirley...



2 1 2 0

Re: Anita
Posted by: duke richardson ()
Date: April 16, 2015 15:59

Quote
Come On
Jo, Shirley...


don't know who the second pic is..it doesn't look like Shirley Watts..

Re: Anita
Posted by: duke richardson ()
Date: April 16, 2015 16:03

Charlie and Shirley..


Re: Anita
Posted by: Bliss ()
Date: April 16, 2015 16:09

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

No better or worse than our boys were, right?

There's one big difference - Anita had no other responsibilities apart from looking after her children, whereas Keith also had his musical career, the band, and financial responsibility for his family. Her neglect of them and the reported squalor in which they lived is less excusable than Keith's part, especially given that there was no shortage of money.

Re: Anita
Date: April 16, 2015 16:22

Quote
Bliss
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

No better or worse than our boys were, right?

There's one big difference - Anita had no other responsibilities apart from looking after her children, whereas Keith also had his musical career, the band, and financial responsibility for his family. Her neglect of them and the reported squalor in which they lived is less excusable than Keith's part, especially given that there was no shortage of money.

As far as I know, she was an actress up till 1976. She didn't have the same safety net as Keith had, when she was by herself.

Re: Anita
Posted by: Bliss ()
Date: April 16, 2015 16:38

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

No better or worse than our boys were, right?

There's one big difference - Anita had no other responsibilities apart from looking after her children, whereas Keith also had his musical career, the band, and financial responsibility for his family. Her neglect of them and the reported squalor in which they lived is less excusable than Keith's part, especially given that there was no shortage of money.

As far as I know, she was an actress up till 1976. She didn't have the same safety net as Keith had, when she was by herself.

No. After Performance (1970), she had one small part in 1976 and after that, nothing til 1998, all small parts. Anita's film roles

Re: Anita
Date: April 16, 2015 16:44

Performance (1970)
Umano non umano (1972)
Le berceau de cristal (1976)

Re: Anita
Posted by: latebloomer ()
Date: April 16, 2015 16:45

Quote
Bliss
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

No better or worse than our boys were, right?

There's one big difference - Anita had no other responsibilities apart from looking after her children, whereas Keith also had his musical career, the band, and financial responsibility for his family. Her neglect of them and the reported squalor in which they lived is less excusable than Keith's part, especially given that there was no shortage of money.

As far as I know, she was an actress up till 1976. She didn't have the same safety net as Keith had, when she was by herself.

No. After Performance (1970), she had one small part in 1976 and after that, nothing til 1998, all small parts. Anita's film roles

I get what you are saying Bliss, there is really no excuse for her neglect of her children. But, it was a different time and the idea of women having their own careers was still a novelty. Anita has been quoted as saying that Keith did not want her to work and it was very difficult for her when she did because of his disapproval, so eventually she just stopped fighting it.

Re: Anita
Posted by: EJM ()
Date: April 16, 2015 17:28

I wonder if the not wanting her to work was a bit tied up with her film work on Performance ...

Re: Anita
Posted by: Bliss ()
Date: April 16, 2015 19:36

Quote
latebloomer
Quote
Bliss
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

No better or worse than our boys were, right?

There's one big difference - Anita had no other responsibilities apart from looking after her children, whereas Keith also had his musical career, the band, and financial responsibility for his family. Her neglect of them and the reported squalor in which they lived is less excusable than Keith's part, especially given that there was no shortage of money.

As far as I know, she was an actress up till 1976. She didn't have the same safety net as Keith had, when she was by herself.

No. After Performance (1970), she had one small part in 1976 and after that, nothing til 1998, all small parts. Anita's film roles

I get what you are saying Bliss, there is really no excuse for her neglect of her children. But, it was a different time and the idea of women having their own careers was still a novelty. Anita has been quoted as saying that Keith did not want her to work and it was very difficult for her when she did because of his disapproval, so eventually she just stopped fighting it.

I am not criticising Anita for not working or saying (as others have) that she should be villified for sponging off others. My point is that, given that her only job was to raise her children, her neglect of them, the condition in which they lived, and the things to which they were exposed, are deplorable. AFAIK, the other RS children were well looked-after and properly bought up, including Keith's other two.

Re: Anita
Posted by: duke richardson ()
Date: April 16, 2015 19:53

didn't Keith have Marlon with him on tour, when Marlon was a child..

Re: Anita
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: April 16, 2015 20:03

Quote
Bliss
For heaven's sake, there is a big difference between the outmoded 1960's concept of the 'inner child' and saying 'every woman has a little girl inside her'.

Nice attempt at back-pedaling however.

Whatever Anita Palleneberg may be now, there is a lot of evidence to support the idea that in the past she was a destructive, toxic force to those around her. Kudos to her for surviving, but I see no reason to idealise her.

Actually Bliss there is no difference, I was referring to the inner child concept when I suggested every woman has a little girl inside her. Instead of back-pedaling I was trying to move forward and explain the metaphor. The concept was popularized in the late 1980's and continues to be an important tool for people in the healing profession. Far from being outmoded it continues to be used and developed in 2015, very specifically to heal things like destructive behavior and evil deeds, the very things you believe Anita was at one time so capable of.

And I'm not idealizing her by any means, just maybe trying to humanize her a bit. Although I do believe she deserves a lot more respect for overcoming her addictions and other issues, surviving the Rolling Stones helping to raise what has become a a pretty nice nice family from my perspective.

Here is a link to a short, fairly recent article which talks about the inner child, explained better than I could. If you are a parent Bliss, it wouldn't hurt to give it a quick read for your kids sake and if not it's still pretty interesting.

[www.psychologytoday.com]

I suspect most of us will be thoroughly exercising our inner children at the Stones shows, at least in terms of wonder, awe, joy, and playfulness, but thankfully we can also drink some beer! smoking smiley

peace

Re: Anita
Posted by: Bliss ()
Date: April 16, 2015 21:29

Thanks NL, but truly, pop psychology holds zero interest for me.

Re: Anita
Posted by: BILLPERKS ()
Date: April 16, 2015 22:19

This may be the dumbest discussion ever..and that's quite an accomplishment.

Re: Anita
Posted by: duke richardson ()
Date: April 16, 2015 22:46

Quote
BILLPERKS
This may be the dumbest discussion ever..and that's quite an accomplishment.

can't top the todger discussions...

btw why did you QUIT USING ALL CAPS? cool smiley

Goto Page: Previous1234567891011...LastNext
Current Page: 2 of 13


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 2072
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home