Strollerderby

The difference in treatment may have something to do with the background images.  At the time of her first adoption, Jolie was seen as one part of a couple, adopting a child.  At the time of her first5 adoption, my memory tells me that Madonna was a single, and then her professional life came across as a little bit too risque for the general public.  

Maybe??

Adorable, way cooler than Paris Hilton's scrawny pooch Tinkerbell.  Ah! They're so cute! I want one! I want one!

Do they come with nanny included or do you have to purchase those somewhere else in Africa Mall?

Madonna has been seen as using her wealth to avoid going through the 18-24 month assessment period that Malawian Law requires before adoption. Also this girls 61 year old grandmother is still alive and wants the right to go to court to win custody. Jolie followed the correct procedure when it came to her adoptions. Modonna did not.

Maybe it is just that we are a society of nitpickers. The media loves a good hook and Madonna has always been one. People need to realize that a celebrity's persona and character are far different than who they actually are.

I think I do remember some badmouthing when Jolie first adopted. I think Brad Pitt helped get her off the hook as now she appeared to have the family unit that naysayers look for. Even if her husband-to-be was married at the time.

No one is perfect. I am a fan of Madonna (yep, 80's kid!) and I think Angelina Jolie is good at putting her money where her mouth is and remembers America in her good deeds. If they want to adopt, by all means, they have my support.

Good thought-provoking post, Shannon.

I don't think that it's true that Angelina has gotten a free pass at all, but clearly the uproar has been much greater in Madonna's case. I don't know why, and think it's an interesting question. It seems that both have fairly similar reputations, but maybe Angelina has been more successful in transforming her image after becoming a mother?

As for the issues with the orphanage where Maddox was adopted, I don't think that's Angelina's fault. I agree that she should have done a bit more research first, but she did already have strong connections with Cambodia at the time, so I can see why she thought of adopting there first. She was naive, obviously, but hopefully she has learned from her mistakes. I have heard her criticized all over the place for adopting children from different countries, but in fact she had no choice. The US stopped issuing visas for children adopted from Cambodia shortly after Maddox was adopted. I imagine that's why they chose to adopt their next son from Vietnam, so at least their sons would share southeast Asian origins. I don't blame them at all for not discussing that issue in public. Criticizing her son's country of origin in public could be very hurtful to him, and given that the adoption has already happened, I think her first responsibility is to him.

It's great that Madonna is trying to help out in Malawi. I also feel very uncomfortable about children being dragged into a celebrity lifestyle (whether through adoption or birth), but having seen lots of orphanages in poor countries (as well as children who aren't lucky enough to be in an orphanage, but are homeless street kids instead), I totally agree that given those two options, I'd take the mansion and the paparazzi any day.

I wish all of their children well, and hope that some day, children born into poverty and tragedy have better options in their own home countries.

Many upper middle class and rich kids are transnational.  All this "stay in the jungle" stuff is stupid.   Kids are kids.  They'd all rather have the good life and shop at the classy stores at the mall.  A kid knows where every dime goes.   If you can hook up with Madonna Mommie, why not?

I wonder if it is because Madonna is living in the UK and we have far, far fewer international adoptions?  I get the feeling that international adoption is viewed in a generally more negative light here than in the US.  I'm probably over-generalising but that's the impression I have.

Could it be because Madonna is going through a rather messy public divorce? That doesn't seem like the best circumstances in which to introduce a new child to the family. I don't care that she's single or divorced, but this all seems to be happening at once. Can she just tend to the ones she's got during all of this?

I can see that it might be important to keep a child in a country where there is potential family support or the child has a connection there.  But I'm not a big supporter of "cultural connections" for newborns who haven't had the chance to experience anything else.

Maybe I'm just speaking from a biased p.o.v. - I'm an adoptee, as are my siblings, and none of us know anything about our biological families or ethnic backgrounds.  We've all had different responses to, and differing degrees of interest in, our family's background (our adoptive family).  Which happens with biological children too. I'm not sure that, in all cases, I think it's better for children to stay in one place rather than another if the main difference is biological roots.

I'm agreeing with leahsmom.  It is almost as though all adoptees are expected to feel left out or need that "cultural connection"....And we all want to find out who we are and will immediately fall in love with our birthparents.  Nope.  I was adopted at just a couple of weeks old.  I would have come home straight from the hospital, but the "who gets this baby committee" had a member who was sick, so they had to wait until she got back...Anywhoo, I really didn't feel like I had lost out or didn't know who I was.  I didn't even know I was supposed to have these feelings until I watched Oprah and was told that since I was an adoptee, I needed to know where I came from etc.

My mom told me when I was 4 that "anyone can have a baby...not anyone can be a mommy and daddy."  And I believe that.

madonna is seen as a "whore"

whereas jolie is not.

it's as simple as that.

I think there are a couple of factors at stake.

(1) The British Tabloid Press -- which didn't like Madonna even before you factor in UK attitudes toward adoption.  If you look at the bylines on these stories, most of them are AP-generated or out of the British press.  The US coverage hasn't been that vitriolic.

(2) It's true that Cambodia closed to US adoptions soon after Jolie's adoption, but at each point, she's adopted from a country that was then open to US adoptions.  Madonna went out and circumvented another country's laws, so the appearance of celebrity special treatment is much greater.  I take your point about her NGO, but that reinforces the appearance that Madonna is buying a child.  For the general public, there's probably a lot less awareness of how money affects ALL intl adoption, so they just don't think about this the way you do.

(3) The families of Madonna's Malawian child(ren) are more available to the media.  Although in point of fact, so were the Ethiopian family of Jolie's eldest daughter and the Vietnamese family of Jolie's second son, after the fact.  Both of those families were featured in sensationalistic tabloid stories (although the Ethiopian adoption was a little lost in the whole Pitt-Aniston-Jolie brouhaha).  Still, it's much clearer as Madonna's adoptions are being processed that both of these children have birth families who are conflicted about their child's adoption status.

(4) All of Jolie's adoptions have happened in countries with established (albeit corrupt/suspect) intl-adoption procedures.  The Malawian officials just don't seem to know how to behave with all this press attention, and they don't have established protocols to guide their behavior.  I think this is a HUGE factor in feeding the media monster.

(5) Brad Pitt.

Madonna is much more annoying than Angelina.  Don't get me wrong, Angelina has her issues too.  But Madonna comes across as holier than though and her Enlish accent affectation is annoying.  Madonna is also seen as less maternal.  She is significantly older, has more muscle mass than many male body builders, and exhudes an image of being extremely controlling.  Blame it on public image.  Angelina is constantly being photographed with her clan of children (I know, the nannies are deliberately left out of pictures), while Madonna is seen cavorting with Gwyneth Paltrow and other celebrities who like to don a red string around their wrist.  Madonna is just not seen as a very likeable mother figure.

You are totally right on about Brad Pitt, Shannon.

Re: Brad Pitt.

No idea.

The difference is that Jolie has a better publicist than Madonna does.  Jolie has been painted by her people as a "good mother" who loves children.  Madonnas' people are more focused on her performances than her image as a mother.  For Jolie her image as a sexy mother is crucial to her livelihood.  Madonna does not need that image to succeed.  It is all smoke and mirrors.  I dont really care for Madonna but I applaud her efforts in Malawi, a country of thousands of children orphaned by AIDS and all but forgotten by the West.  I have a friend adopting from Ethipoia.  She sent formula to her waiting special needs baby and they have to lock it up in the safe.  Formula, food and medicine is so scarce they are often robbed.  To heck with culture when you are starving to death or dying from diarrhea.

I think what Madonna is doing in Malawi is amazing and she should not be criticised at all. She does not have to help but she wants to help and she is helping. I saw the movie I am because we are lately and apart from being an admirer of her art, i see what a beautiful woman with a beautiful heart she is and she is strong and fights for what she believes is good and at the end, you have to admit that your heart feels as well, that IT IS good. A lot of people just talk, talk, talk, talk is cheap and action speaks louder than words and if you can do it better then do it yourself. Thank you Madonna for what you are doing and I know that sometimes it hurts you how some people react but i also know that you focus on what is real and what matters, continue to shine your light and the light shines back at you

I think along lines with Allie.  The U.S. press and American attitudes towards adoption, especially international adoption, are coated sweets.  Delicious.  The British press and social workers may feel differently...apparently.  Perhaps it is simply a matter of national attitudes?  Madonna is British and criticized by British press (and social workers); Jolie is American and adulated accordingly.  What has the British press said about Jolie's adoptions?

Madonna isn't British...

Brad Pitt..... grrr! Take it from the straight girl living in redneck country, that boy is smokin' hot. Although, I must admit I have a bit of a crush on Jennifer Aniston and that might be what initially made him hot to me.

I think (after reading some of the comments here) that despite all the years since she appeared, Madonna is still a conflicting image in the eyes of society. Obviously none of us know her real self, just the persona she portrays in the media, and that's Madonna's biggest enemy in these whole adoption thing, because people still see the 80's Like a Virgin girl, and not just a normal 50 y.o. woman.

Madonna has left the UK - Remember the divorce story? It was not so long ago... I am absolutely shocked by the media coverage of her trying to save a kid's life. Yes the girl would be better raised by her familly - And?? They left her to the orphanage... Mind you own business - and let her give a child a decent life -

And please the UK based politically-labourish-correctness association stay where you are and work on what happens in your miserable country, she'out of the UK now and I doubt she will come back

According to a statement from Madonna's publicist, she met with David's father "for the first time since the adoption" today. So I don't think you are totally correct with respect to her efforts re international adoption.

I am particularly turned off by the fact that both she and Angelina picked her children out of the orphanage. Whatever international adoption is, I strongly feel that it should not be about shopping around for the child that appeals to you most, unless that child is in the most danger and thus in most need of placement. Personally, the only difference I see between Madonna and Angelina's adoption image is that Madonna made the statement when she adopted David that she was "saving his life" by adopting him whereas I have only heard statements from Angelina that she wants to build a big family.

I am a huge Madonna fan, and was linked to this article from an M-community on LiveJournal.

There are things about Madonna's adoption of David (and pending adoption of Mercy) that make me uncomfortable. I share some of the other commenter's concerns about her swanning into orphanages and plucking out a child who appeals to her the most. The papers are now saying that Mercy's grandmother has "relented" and her uncle has given his consent for the adoption to proceed; but it bothers me that M chose two children who weren't really "orphans". Some of the things that M has said about Malawi are misleading. The more I read stories of children who need care, the more I cotton on that broken families are the reason they are being left behind. Why aren't grannies and uncles and aunts and fathers standing up and taking in children when their mothers are dead? I am assuming it is poverty, being unable to afford even one more mouth to feed. I know that Raising Malawi is helping in this respect by teaching optimal agricultural practices, but over-simplifying the problem as "passels of orphans" is disingenuous. It is clear that Malawi has social problems beyond AIDS and orphaned children.

Lastly, I wanted to address Elise's concern about Madonna's reason for choosing David. She did LITERALLY save his life. She had met him on one of her first visits to Malawi, and left him in the orphanage. When she returned three months later, he was dying of pneumonia and malaria. They could not afford medicine or any medical care for him at the orphanage (see Alice's formula story; that's situation normal for them), so Madonna was given to understand that all they could do was keep him dry and fed until he succumbed to his illnesses. She had him immediately taken by ambulance to a hospital, where he recovered. The crisis created a bond between them and that is why she said that she saved his life. She told this story to Paris Match, on Oprah and in her documentary, "I Am Because We Are".