Angelina Jolie Undergoes Double Mastectomy.

Johnny Scumm

InZayn In The Membrane
Today, Angelina Jolie publicly told everyone that she underwent a Double Mastectomy, to reduce the risk of her getting Breast Cancer. It's been all over the news and to be honest, I have the utmost respect for Jolie. She's had both of her breasts removed and well, she's brave to come out and tell us. This is what she had to say;

“

I wanted to write this to tell other women that the decision to have a mastectomy was not easy. But it is one I am very happy that I made. My chances of developing breast cancer have dropped from 87 percent to under 5 percent. I can tell my children that they don’t need to fear they will lose me to breast cancer.

It is reassuring that they see nothing that makes them uncomfortable. They can see my small scars and that’s it. Everything else is just Mommy, the same as she always was. And they know that I love them and will do anything to be with them as long as I can. On a personal note, I do not feel any less of a woman. I feel empowered that I made a strong choice that in no way diminishes my femininity.
”

Now, I've seen people today on social sites complaining about the choice Jolie has made, because she's had her breasts removed and it's really sick, to think that's all that people care about. She took a step to protect her health & if you can't respect her decision, then you're not right.

So, what are your thoughts on the decision Jolie made?

Note: This is NOT a thread to make tasteless jokes about the situation that Jolie is in, so please refrain.
 
I'm sure the main reason she went public is so sites like TMZ don't do a "Has she had a breast reduction" story.
 
If I were a woman and had an 87% chance of developing breast cancer, I'd want to do the same. The problem is that most women don't have that kind of money.

One of the biggest problems with breast cancer (apart from the obvious cancer...) is the symbolic loss of womanhood. If a hottie like Jolie is willing to do it, maybe some of the stigma will fade over time.
 
I think this has to be one if the craziest things I've read in some time, unless there's more to the story than meets the eye. As I understand it, she hadn't been diagnosed with breast cancer. If she had, I'd say yes to a double mastectomy in the blink of an eye. But if I'm understanding the OP correctly, she had both breasts removed because there was a chance she might get cancer, and she decided to remove her breasts as a preventive mechanism.

This seems like a gross overreaction and insane over treatment. What was the basis if determining an 87% chance of being diagnosed with breast cancer? Says who? And would you drastically and permanently change your body because you might become ill?

I guess there's a chance I could be diagnosed with testicular cancer at some point in the future. Hopefully not but I guess it's possible, but I can guarantee you, no one is heading in that vicinity with a scalpel unless a definitive diagnosis has been made. No one will be messing with my junk just because of something that could possibly happen in the future.

I really hope no physician ever tells her there's a chance she could be diagnosed with brain cancer.
 
I think this has to be one if the craziest things I've read in some time, unless there's more to the story than meets the eye. As I understand it, she hadn't been diagnosed with breast cancer. If she had, I'd say yes to a double mastectomy in the blink of an eye. But if I'm understanding the OP correctly, she had both breasts removed because there was a chance she might get cancer, and she decided to remove her breasts as a preventive mechanism.

This seems like a gross overreaction and insane over treatment. What was the basis if determining an 87% chance of being diagnosed with breast cancer? Says who? And would you drastically and permanently change your body because you might become ill?

I guess there's a chance I could be diagnosed with testicular cancer at some point in the future. Hopefully not but I guess it's possible, but I can guarantee you, no one is heading in that vicinity with a scalpel unless a definitive diagnosis has been made. No one will be messing with my junk just because of something that could possibly happen in the future.

I really hope no physician ever tells her there's a chance she could be diagnosed with brain cancer.
:disappointed: I guess you never heard of the faulty BRCA1 gene she carries. What PHD do you have?
 
I think this has to be one if the craziest things I've read in some time, unless there's more to the story than meets the eye. As I understand it, she hadn't been diagnosed with breast cancer. If she had, I'd say yes to a double mastectomy in the blink of an eye. But if I'm understanding the OP correctly, she had both breasts removed because there was a chance she might get cancer, and she decided to remove her breasts as a preventive mechanism.

This seems like a gross overreaction and insane over treatment. What was the basis if determining an 87% chance of being diagnosed with breast cancer? Says who? And would you drastically and permanently change your body because you might become ill?

I guess there's a chance I could be diagnosed with testicular cancer at some point in the future. Hopefully not but I guess it's possible, but I can guarantee you, no one is heading in that vicinity with a scalpel unless a definitive diagnosis has been made. No one will be messing with my junk just because of something that could possibly happen in the future.

I really hope no physician ever tells her there's a chance she could be diagnosed with brain cancer.

I'm glad someone else feels the way I do about this. Unless there's some evidence of breast cancer, wtf? Seriously? I do preventative maintenance as part of my job, and just because our equipment can fail, doesn't mean we remove it ahead of time. I'm curious to know where this 87% comes from.

I mean, it's her choice so more power to her for whatever she wants to do to herself, but I feel like there's some piece of information missing here.

:disappointed: I guess you never heard of the faulty BRCA1 gene she carries. What PHD do you have?

EDIT: Maybe this is that piece of information we were missing...
 
:disappointed: I guess you never heard of the faulty BRCA1 gene she carries. What PHD do you have?

As I said in my post, my opinion would be based upon knowledge of the full story. I said "unless there's more to the story than meets the eye". I had not read anything of any "faulty BRCA1 gene she's carrying". Although frankly I'm still not sure that carrying a "faulty gene" would be motivation enough to take such drastic measures, but that's just me.
 
I think, and bear with me here, she would exercise all alternatives, before having her goddamn breasts removed.
 
I've been a huge fan of Jolie's for a long time and will remain so since I sincerely doubt this will affect her as an actress/director or as a person. Wish her nothing but the best.
 
Huge credit to her. It'd take some serious balls for an ordinary person to go ahead with pre-emptive surgery, for someone in her profession it's remarkable.
 
And she had such looooverly boobies :(

Seriously, if she was told that there was a 87% of her getting the disease and she has made this decision for her family and children then fair enough. It's more important you are around to see your kids grow up than have a cracking pair of tits.

Hard times for Brad though
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,837
Messages
3,300,747
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top