Angelina Jolie's young pics found

**AliceInWonderland** · April 3rd, 2008, 01:37 PM

shocking jock! ^

**Belt Up** · April 3rd, 2008, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by Mel1973

I believe I recall that... of course, can you call it "a live in boyfriend" if it doubles as your brother??

Ouch!

Young girls play around with their new found sexuality, they test it out, that's normal, not that these pics strike me as particularly inappropriate...

It's the reactions that older guys have to these young Lolitas that really turn my stomach....but that's another story.

**sweetness** · April 3rd, 2008, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Mel1973

It's totally the same - except Angelina PAID someone to do this. And considering how POOR they were, maybe she just let the photog cornhole her (love that phrase) as opposed to Miley who got her pics for free....

Cornhole!!

I dunno..... the fact that these pics were done for a portfolio (I'm assuming) and also that she was a little older make them different from Miley's imo. Veinge was covered up, Miley was letting it all hang out. And the Hello Kitty made it seem a bit disturbing to me.

Heck, maybe I'm just biased since Miley gets on my nerves a bit more than Mangie does.

**buttmunch** · April 3rd, 2008, 02:49 PM

Great pics and completely un-scandolous.

DitaPage* · April 3rd, 2008, 04:02 PM

She's a natural beauty, no denying that. (Although not everyone's cup of tea)

**GaPeach** · April 3rd, 2008, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by buttmunch

Great pics and completely un-scandolous.

thank you

she's done a lot of crap in the past but these pictures aren't worthy of being called a scandal, they don't even get a raised eye brow from me.

is there a 16 year old here that didn't wear a bikini?

**viggofan** · April 3rd, 2008, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by WhateverLolaWants

I have mixed feelings about this. I lived a fairly wholesome existance but I was a VERY sexual person at 16. While I don't think these would be appropriate for a men's magazine, trying to cram our teenagers' sexuality in their closets has worked SO well for the past 50 years. These photos are undeniably sexual, but I don't see them as trashy or exploitational.

On the other hand, I see 12 year olds with thongs showing over their midriff riding jeans and I want to throw up, so yeah...I'm divided.

I have to agree with you on this opinion. I too had a wholesome family life at 16 but I also remember what I was doing at 16 too. I am not sure I would want my 16 yr old to be in a men's magazine( if I had a daughter) but I too did not find the pictures to be scandalous.

**sparkly** · April 3rd, 2008, 10:11 PM

As long as the photos weren't taken to be used to turn on grown men, I don't see a problem.

**Voodoo Child** · April 3rd, 2008, 10:15 PM

Originally Posted by Mel1973

*tunes up violin*
because she was sooooo poor and put upon & downtrodden. why, at that point, her father had "abandoned" her family, her mother was supporting her & her brother, she was screwing her brother for his allowance money... *busts violin against the wall*

luv it!

**baked_tater** · April 3rd, 2008, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by Sweetie

How dare she wear a bathing suit at 16, and get photographed; I swear, the world can't handle stuff like this.

I KNOW! Where the heck is her Scarlet letter for GAWD's sake??

**Voodoo Child** · April 3rd, 2008, 10:24 PM

Btw she looks ridiculous.

**bellini** · April 3rd, 2008, 10:58 PM

Nothings scandalous of course. But Jolie has such a knowing sensuality that's apparent there. It makes me curious about her. She's pretty self-possessed for a sixteen year old. Maybe that's just coming from my own gawky, dorky sixteen year old experience though.