GNR Women's Discussion - Part 2

[Rocketqueen76]

2 minutes ago, Padme said:

Yes, but that doesn't mean those reporters are liars. They can't report Axl's side of the story if he doesn't speak to them

I was speaking in general terms in regards to the press.

[killuridols]

11 minutes ago, Padme said:

First time in my life I heard her ex husband was friend of her and Brant. I didn't have the foggiest idea about this  So I guess that means despite her divorce from Andrews. They always were in good terms. And he was close with his son. In other words he never needed a step father.

Yes. That's why I posted it. It shed light over something that sounded unfair to Dylan's father... the way the story was told made it look like Dylan was an orphan and desperately needed Axl to save him. That's why I think Axl oversizes some aspects of his relationship with Stephanie and the child.

14 minutes ago, Padme said:

In the People's magazine interview we got the information from Erin and Stephanie. It wasn't something some reporter came up with. For the RS article they quoted some sources and others spoke in condition of annonymity. In both cases Axl was asked for coment. In the case of People Magazine a spokesperson only said Erin wanted money. In the case of RS, they claimed Axl was going to send them a statment but he never did. In other words we never got his side of the story. He was given the chance to do it. The lawsuits got settle.That's all we know

I guess that if there is a legal case, the reporters cannot be blamed. The violence DID happen and the case was taken to court. Not only that, it was backed up with Erin's case too. How much do we need to believe these woman? Do we need pictures of them with a black eye or a broken arm?

Fans can choose to remain blind to the dark aspects of Axl Rose and that's their right, but trying to convince others that a woman deserves to be beaten up because she's a cheater....?? That will never work with me, Im sorry, not sorry at all.

[Axl`s BFF]

I read peter grant adopted him so not that much in his life

[Rocketqueen76]

13 minutes ago, killuridols said:

29 minutes ago, Padme said:

 

I guess that if there is a legal case, the reporters cannot be blamed. The violence DID happen and the case was taken to court. Not only that, it was backed up with Erin's case too. How much do we need to believe these woman? Do we need pictures of them with a black eye or a broken arm?

Fans can choose to remain blind to the dark aspects of Axl Rose and that's their right, but trying to convince others that a woman deserves to be beaten up because she's a cheater....?? That will never work with me, Im sorry, not sorry at all.

OMG WOMAN....no one is saying any of that, does everything have to be so dramatic with you? Listen I’m not attacking you, but i just don’t understand why you get so excitable so often.

[Lio]

10 minutes ago, Rocketqueen76 said:

OMG WOMAN....no one is saying any of that, does everything have to be so dramatic with you? Listen I’m not attacking you, but i just don’t understand why you get so excitable so often.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

Regarding Dylan, it seems like he grew up with two fathers, if I can call it that. He was adopted by Peter Brant, who he calls his father, but he still is in contact with his biological father and his family too, so he seems to have always been in his life too.

I've always found it really odd when kids are adopted by a new husband and get that person's name, not only, but especially when their dad is still alive and in their life. Then again, I find it really odd to adopt the name of your husband too, so it's probably just a difference in cultures. Either way, Stephanie seemed to be looking for someone who could be her young son's 'father' too. Once she got together with Brant, he quickly took the role of father to Dylan, so it might not be so farfetched that Axl was briefly in that role too, to some degree.

[Alja]

Judging by style of Axl`s style of communication, little children must love being around him (works on dogs, cats and other animals, too) and he visibly enjoys their company usually much more than adults`. 

[killuridols]

35 minutes ago, Rocketqueen76 said:

OMG WOMAN....no one is saying any of that, does everything have to be so dramatic with you? Listen I’m not attacking you, but i just don’t understand why you get so excitable so often.

I get excitable? You are the one typing in caps and adding disclaimers to your opinions

It is not very clear the message you're sending. What is your position then? Why can't you be clear like water?

All you did was blaming the journalists and dismissing the evidence presented, without any proof that the journalists lied. Your arguments are weak but they seem to support Axl, because you are clearly not supporting Stephanie.

[Padme]

16 minutes ago, Lio said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

Regarding Dylan, it seems like he grew up with two fathers, if I can call it that. He was adopted by Peter Brant, who he calls his father, but he still is in contact with his biological father and his family too, so he seems to have always been in his life too.

I've always found it really odd when kids are adopted by a new husband and get that person's name, not only, but especially when their dad is still alive and in their life. Then again, I find it really odd to adopt the name of your husband too, so it's probably just a difference in cultures. Either way, Stephanie seemed to be looking for someone who could be her young son's 'father' too. Once she got together with Brant, he quickly took the role of father to Dylan, so it might not be so farfetched that Axl was briefly in that role too, to some degree.

Well legal adoption also means rights. For example when it comes to a will, properties, stock, etc. Adopting the name of the husband, in the U.S. is an old tradition. It could make your life easy if you have one of those impossible to spell and promounce last names.  

Now in the case of Stephanie, she became famous with her own last name. And she keeps using it

[Rocketqueen76]

9 minutes ago, killuridols said:

I get excitable? You are the one typing in caps and adding disclaimers to your opinions

It is not very clear the message you're sending. What is your position then? Why can't you be clear like water?

All you did was blaming the journalists and dismissing the evidence presented, without any proof that the journalists lied. Your arguments are weak but they seem to support Axl, because you are clearly not supporting Stephanie.

As far as the journalists are concerned, I was speaking in general terms and I think I made my position more than clear. And yes you get excitable my friend in the way you react to others opinions. And Tbh I am not fond of Stephanie, her borderline incestuous relationship with her kids is more than I can stand.

Edited May 15, 2018 by Rocketqueen76

[Tori72]

Can everybody calm down please? Listen to me, young ladies! lol

I haven’t read any personal attacks here unless the last few posts. Don’t let old anger take over or we’ll never be able to discuss anything anymore in here. Stick to the things we have got now and don’t take anything that’s been posted here as personal attacks. Always bear in mind that maybe it wasn’t meant as offensive as you might feel it is.

Thanks. Now, rock on.

 

Edited May 15, 2018 by Tori72

[Lio]

2 minutes ago, Padme said:

Well legal adoption also means rights. For example when it comes to a will, properties, stock, etc. Adopting the name of the husband, in the U.S. is an old tradition. It could make your life easy if you have one of those impossible to spell and promounce last names.  

Now in the case of Stephanie, she became famous with her own last name. And she keeps using it

LOL, I hadn't even thought of inheritance I wouldn't dream of ever doing that (changing my own last name or having a kid adopted). And I wonder how Mr Andrews (or other dads in his situation) felt about that. Crazy Americans

[killuridols]

3 minutes ago, Rocketqueen76 said:

As far as the journalists are concerned, I was speaking in general terms and I think I made my position more than clear. And yes you get excitable my friend in the way you react to others opinions.

Saying that, in general, journalists don't do their jobs well and build up stories is really disrespectful to the work of those people. Speaking in general terms of the bad job a group of people do is unfair to a big portion of that group, would you like to have someone talking like that about the militars or soldiers?

Please refrain from commenting about the way you perceive me. It is not relevant to the discussion.

[Rocketqueen76]

Just now, killuridols said:

Saying that, in general, journalists don't do their jobs well and build up stories is really disrespectful to the work of those people. Speaking in general terms of the bad job a group of people do is unfair to a big portion of that group, would you like to have someone talking like that about the militars or soldiers?

Please refrain from commenting about the way you perceive me. It is not relevant to the discussion.

Like I said, I was speaking in general terms about the press, and news flash, people talk ill about the military everyday and a good majority of the time it’s to my face and I respect what they have to say even if I don’t agree.

[Axl`s BFF]

You must have a different view of journalists than most people I never buy a news paper these days because of the rubbish they write 😕

[killuridols]

12 minutes ago, Rocketqueen76 said:

Like I said, I was speaking in general terms about the press, and news flash, people talk ill about the military everyday and a good majority of the time it’s to my face and I respect what they have to say even if I don’t agree.

That's what I meant. Talking in general of groups of people will always be unfair to the ones who do their jobs well. There are great journalists out there, people who have given their lives to uncover unjustice, corruption, illegal activites that hurt children, women and people in general.

Well, if you suffer in your own skin how unfair it is to have people talking ill about your job or the institution you belong to, then I don't know why you think it is ok to do the same to others.

 

Edited May 15, 2018 by killuridols

[Padme]

14 minutes ago, Lio said:

LOL, I hadn't even thought of inheritance I wouldn't dream of ever doing that (changing my own last name or having a kid adopted). And I wonder how Mr Andrews (or other dads in his situation) felt about that. Crazy Americans

Well adoption is a good thing for couples who can't have children. And also there are people who like to adopt chindren living in poverty. So those kids have a chance of a better life. I believe it's a very private matter. I don't really want to go deeper into who is adopting who and why.

[Rocketqueen76]

2 minutes ago, killuridols said:

That's what I meant. Talking in general of groups of people will always be unfair to the ones who do their jobs well. There are great journalists out there, people who have given their lives to uncover unjustice, corruption, illegal activites that hurt children, women and people in general.

Well, if you suffer in your own skin how unfair it is to have people talking ill about your job or the institution you belong to, then I don't know why you think it is ok to do the same to others.

 

Truth is truth, no matter how harsh.  We can wallow and get pissed, or we can accept it and try to change for the better and move on.

[Lio]

1 minute ago, Padme said:

Well adoption is a good thing for couples who can't have children. And also there are people who like to adopt chindren living in poverty. So those kids have a chance of a better life. I believe it's a very private matter. I don't really want to go deeper into who is adopting who and why.

Oh, I agree. I just meant in the case of when mum remarries and has her new husband adopt her kid(s), when the kid(s) dad is still alive. I wasn't talking about adoption in general, but in this specific situation.

[killuridols]

3 minutes ago, Rocketqueen76 said:

Truth is truth, no matter how harsh.  We can wallow and get pissed, or we can accept it and try to change for the better and move on.

I don't even know what "truth" you are talking about anymore..... hope it is not the truth of that crazy Mojo dude/tte

[Rocketqueen76]

6 minutes ago, killuridols said:

I don't even know what "truth" you are talking about anymore..... hope it is not the truth of that crazy Mojo dude/tte

Wow....ummm okay 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[MyPrettyTiedUpMichelle]

21 minutes ago, Lio said:

Oh, I agree. I just meant in the case of when mum remarries and has her new husband adopt her kid(s), when the kid(s) dad is still alive. I wasn't talking about adoption in general, but in this specific situation.

Just want to pop in and clarify in case anyone is interested: in the case of the mother re-marrying (in some countries) it is necessary for the step-father to adopt the child (who usually takes his name), for legal purposes pertaining to such things as passports and proof of identity including driver's licence, utility bills and bank accounts.  

If the step-father wants to include the step-child in his will, that child must be adopted or else is not entitled to the step-father's inheritance.  All sorts of legal problems arise when the step-father doesn't adopt the child, especially if the child takes on the step-father's name.  It can be difficult for the child to prove their identity and in some cases, can be traumatic for the child to have to rely on the legal documents bearing the biological father's name.  Usually, these problems don't come to light until the child has grown up and is of course, applying for things like driver's licence and passports etc.  

Edited May 15, 2018 by MyPrettyTiedUpMichelle

[killuridols]

15 minutes ago, MyPrettyTiedUpMichelle said:

Just want to pop in and clarify in case anyone is interested: in the case of the mother re-marrying (in some countries) it is necessary for the step-father to adopt the child (who usually takes his name), for legal purposes pertaining to such things as passports and proof of identity including driver's licence, utility bills and bank accounts. 

That's weird

I mean, if the kid already has a father who has given the child his last name and is providing for the child, why would he have to be adopted by the mom's new husband?

Here, when a child is born, they take the name of the father but if the mom is alone, she can give her last name to the child. You can't have the child without a last name going around for too long. You need to register the child and do all legal paperwork as soon as they are born.

A new man can give their last name to kids that are not his if he wants, but it does not happen frequently, as the law here insists on making biological parents be responsible for their children, whether they are married to the mother or not.

[Padme]

1 hour ago, Axl`s BFF said:

You must have a different view of journalists than most people I never buy a news paper these days because of the rubbish they write 😕

Well The Washington Post is not The National Inquirer. I hope you can see the difference. 

[MyPrettyTiedUpMichelle]

20 minutes ago, killuridols said:

That's weird

I mean, if the kid already has a father who has given the child his last name and is providing for the child, why would he have to be adopted by the mom's new husband?

Here, when a child is born, they take the name of the father but if the mom is alone, she can give her last name to the child. You can't have the child without a last name going around for too long. You need to register the child and do all legal paperwork as soon as they are born.

A new man can give their last name to kids that are not his if he wants, but it does not happen frequently, as the law here insists on making biological parents be responsible for their children, whether they are married to the mother or not.

The step-father doesn't have to adopt, but it's advisable due to the reasons I mentioned above.  Once the mother remarries the biological father is not obliged to provide for the child. Or the biological father is no longer in the child's life.  This is very common.  Or the mother does not want the biological father in their lives (think domestic violence cases).  And, as I mentioned, the child must be adopted to inherit from the step-father's will - so there's that.

It is culturally the norm in some countries that a woman takes on the surname of her husband.  There are exceptions of course as it's not a legal requirement, just a cultural norm.  So yes, the woman then changes her name for a second time upon re-marrying.  In such cases, it is common for the child to then take on the name of the step-father so that everyone within the family unit shares the same surname.   Otherwise, it can become a legal minefield later on, when the child is say, 18, to prove that they are who they say they are.  

If the child has a different name from the mother sometimes that causes problems, travelling abroad, for example.  The mother has to take a copy of the child's birth certificate with her to prove she is the mother of the child and not smuggling someone else's child out of the country.  

It's all very confusing! 

Edited May 15, 2018 by MyPrettyTiedUpMichelle

[Axl`s BFF]

10 minutes ago, Padme said:

Well The Washington Post is not The National Inquirer. I hope you can see the difference. 

I know the difference thank you I live in the uk

didn't people quote from people magazine is that in the same group as w/post or n/inquirer 🤔  I do watch the news I just don't  buy papers thank