This is why there is no Feminist leadership

In an upcoming Harper's Bazaar issue, so-called 'feminist' Naomi Wolf decided to tackle the question of why Angelina Jolie is so powerful. The thoroughly uninspired, tabloidy take on Jolie reeked of superficiality, which is why this article could be her ticket to a View panel discussion.

Several issues that I have with this article deals with Wolf's inaccurate assessments of several key issues. First, her assessment that certain women of America's Golden Age weren't allowed to realize various aspects of their personalities, specifically Marlene Dietrich being sexual but not loved. Apparently, Wolf was unaware of the intense love that soldiers and veterans of the Allied Forces during WWII felt for her. In addition, Dietrich was a mother - whether she was a good one is an answer that only her daughter can answer. She also referenced Jacqueline Susann and Marilyn Monroe as women with money, fame, and dazzling careers, who suffered from depression, drug addiction, loneliness, and self-destructive; however, she failed to address that their mental vulnerabilities existed before their careers caught fire and that money and codependent relationships with men with their own issues exacerbated their issues.

My next issue with Wolf's assessment is her reference to Angelina's 'off-key notes' during her early years in the media. Wolf citing incidents that occurred with the men of her life (Billy Bob Thornton, James Haven), but completely omitted the real moments that set the stage for the Angelina Jolie many love today. Her candid explanation about her bisexuality while she was still a relative unknown piqued many people's interests. And if Wolf insisted on pointing out a significant on-camera moment involving a man, why not bring up Randolf Duke? Or rather, the moment when Angelina fulfilled her promise to the press that, after winning an award, she would jump into a pool, while wearing a Randolph Duke dress. Moments like these weren't 'off-key'; they were high notes during a time in a starlet's career when they hide, reconfigure and reshape themselves just to guarantee a place in Hollywood which is never a guarantee.

Wolf would've benefited from Judge Judy's advice: KISS (Keep it simple, stupid!!) Wolf was right it one area; Angelina's appeal has everything to do with possibilities. Angelina could've easily coasted on her looks, which aren't 'conventional', by the way. 'Conventional' looks aren't greeted with a great, big daaaaaaayyyyyyyyyuuuuuuuuummmmmmmmmm by straight women. Or gay women. Or gay men. And to say the least, her candor isn't 'conventional', especially because she's White. Because if Wolf and other White women were honest with themselves, they would freely admit that they are capable of getting more from the world if they tow the line and play by men's rules, whereas women of color can never have access to such riches because they already violated the rules by not being White.

Angelina has demonstrated that she doesn't require the protective embrace of 'men' when she continues to keep her father, Jon Voight, at arms' length, despite many women campaigning for a reconciliation for an estrangement that was initially initiated by Jon Voight himself. Actually, if you look at all of the men of Angelina's past, you will notice that all of them need her, or the mere mention of her, to bolster their careers or deflect from non Angelina-related controversies that these men brought on themselves. Meanwhile, Brad Pitt, the man that princesses continue to insist is a passive participant of Angelina's current relationship, has an ironclad reputation for not using his past relationships as fuel for his career, which should indicate that his male beauty and virility wasn't the beginning, middle or end to why Angelina is with him.

The fact that so many women love Angelina and many other women make such efforts to derail her career or compromise her reputation can be summed up with one word: promise. Not the 'promise' that is associated with possibilities. It's the 'promise' that Angelina has clearly made to herself long before she was the megastar that she is today. Women picked up on the 'promise' because it is infused in the way she walks, talks, and conducts herself. And Angelina is obviously keeping that promise to herself. Whether the promise is vague or specific; long-term or short-term; career-based or personal; or made in crisis or while daydreaming, this woman's focus is unwavering, which is why so many women hate her for it. These women either broke fundamental promises to themselves or their promises were so shallow that they belong in copy for Special K ads, therefore when they sense someone, a woman, not doing this, they spend all of their energy trying to destroy the reminder that making and keeping promises to oneself is possible. And since Brad Pitt was their 'safe man' or 'honorary woman', they decide to perpetrate a rewriting of his history too.

Like Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt made a promise to himself and kept it, as demonstrated by his leaving college when he was one term paper away from graduation; driving out to California; living in apartments with out of work actors; wearing chicken suits; driving strippers around for extra cash; and essentially clawing his way to the top of the Hollywood heap. For women to believe that his reward for his grit and tenacity should be Jennifer Aniston is flat out retarded. This not a passive man, and for Wolf to try to depict him as, essentially, a trophy, diminishes her argument about Angelina's power. Wolf would've done better if she asserted that Angelina finally attracted a man that 'got it'. A man who understands the 'promise' and is not threatened by how her promise to herself would affect him.

For me, this article was a colossal FAIL, because Wolf was not well-versed in any aspect of her subject. But then again, these so-called professionals (doctors, journalists, feminists) have put anything resembling professionalism and expertise on the back burner for the instant gratification of benign, anti-Angelina punditry.