Friday, September 09, 2011

Elisabetta Canalis Calls Herself A Doormat


I don't think I have ever read a celebrity interview where I felt more sorry for someone. Elisabetta Canalis gave an interview to Chi Magazine and she called herself a doormat and that she has no choice but to be with cold and controlling men because there are no Prince Charmings in the world. Wow. That is a cold hard smack of reality.

"I have always seen cold and controlled men as the right ones for me. You have to accept that Prince Charming who is coming to save you is not going to happen - it works against you. I'm a bit of a tomboy, but when it comes to love I am a doormat. I'm looking for men who can give me security."

Have you ever read an interview like that from a quasi celebrity? I wish that she would not give up so easily. She is 32 years old and made a very good living in Italy and will make a few hundred thousand dollars from DWTS, so why should she have to be anything she does not want to be. I understand wanting security in your life, but you don't have to be a doormat to have security. She makes more money than most people in the world. Is it really security she wants or does she want to be rich? So, does this mean George is cold and controlling?

50 comments:

brendalove@gmail.com said...

Well, it is kind of a fact. If you are going to depend on a man for your financial security.
The flip side of that is to be self-supporting.
And even then, Prince Charming ain't showing up.

Rita said...

I think she worked this one perfectly: Sympathy for your votes.

Clearly, she'll be getting Enty's vote!

RocketQueen said...

Oh boo hoo.

I have definitely read a celebrity interview where I have felt more sorry for someone. Gawd.

Sue Ellen Mishkey said...

You'd think by now that she would realise someone else can't save you, that you have to save yourself.

I don't feel too bad for her at all.

Ida Blankenship said...

What Rocket Queen said.

Sounds like a classic golddigger to me: happy to settle down with a rich, aloof man who doesn't treat her well, but gives her a big allowance to make up for his dickheadedness.

Pathetic.

Lauren said...

Oh Waaaaaaaa. I found a price charming, and our relationship is a two way street. I am guessing her attitude dictates her relationships quite a bit.

califblondy said...

Wow, I'm surprised the contract (if there is one) would allow her to say something like that.

Cali Girl said...

Didn't she get a $10 million settlement from Clooney? Or sth close to that?

Cindy said...

Rita hit the nail right on the head. She did this for sympathy and certainly men fall for it quicker than women (at least the women of CDAN!)

Miranda said...

All I heard was "I want money money money money and I don't care what kind of shit I have to put up with as long as a dude gives me lots of cash."

Yawn.

Rita said...

Glad someone else sees it too Cindy. This girl, she knows her men inside out.
However, from the response on this site, I don't think she'll be able to manipulate the women quite as well. And if I'm not mistaken, women vote more on DWTS then men do.

MISCH said...

Yup, that's what I read somewhere, she came out of the relationship 10 million dollars richer....not bad..

Maja. With a J. said...

Well...at least she's honest about it...*L*

linnea said...

Ladies, we are so on the same page here it is scary! So the next time a huge fight breaks out over politics or anything else, we can just mention
Elisabetta Canalis and everybody can agree on how manipulative she is!

Mooshki said...

None of my friends look for a Prince Charming to give them "security" - they look for a man they can be friends with. I don't know about Prince Charmings, but there are plenty of good guys out there.

nancer said...

yeeh yeah, life's a bitch when you're young and beautiful, isn't it? poor baby. i think the 'cold, controlling' part was a total dig at george. don't these women know ANYTHING about this guy before they sign on to be his GF (for 2 years)?

they must all think 'he'll change for me.' uh....NO.

i don't feel sorry for her. sounds to me like a lazy woman who likes rich men, but her neediness drives them away.

also, 'i'm a bit of a tomboy but when it comes to love i'm a doormat' is a total non sequitur. i have NO idea what she's trying to say.

Layna Day said...

George didn't try to control her. He has two golden rules: don't look to get married and don't talk about me to the press. That's it. In exchange, you live the life that would make Kate Middleton jealous. Money, cars, clothes, vacations, and a handsome boyfriend that won't badmouth you when the relationship ends. Hell, what else does she want? A tiara? Ask Charlene how THAT is working out for her.

As the saying goes: Elisabetta, SIT YO A** DOWN AND SHUT YO A** UP!

ChasingHeaven said...

$$$ = Freedom

If you want security, go out and earn your own $$$. It's dangerous to put your security in the hands of another, you never know what curve ball life may throw at you.

msgirl said...

What a manipulative slut. Oh boohoo, poor me, - she wants attention, but is a complete waste of time.

Snakeoiler said...

Maybe she can be a roomie with Rachel Uchitel (sp?).

ardleigh said...

Oh look I found her picture...next to the definition of gold digger.

Honey you want security? Get off your back and earn it on your own.

What this trick wants is easy money and a free ride...preferably in a new Bugatti Veyron.

Me said...

his ex's always cry the blues. remember that chick from dsperate housewives? the one you al hate (skinny, played lois lane). anyway, she said "george broke my heart" after something like 2 weeks of dating. thinking its to make him sound "manly".

Snowbunny said...

@arleigh, I agree. She states she has no choice but a cold and controlling man, when you equate security=money what do she expect. Doesn't she realize they know what she is after? If she doesn't want to be a doormat, perhaps she needs to change her priorities.

Mooshki said...

"a free ride...preferably in a new Bugatti Veyron."

Um, whenever Enty asks how much money it would take for you to sleep with some rich guy, I always answer "no way in hell, no matter how much," but I guess my morals aren't as strong as I thought, because reading that sentence my first reaction was "I'd do just about any guy for a Veyron!" LOL! Speaking of which, Flo Rida desecrated his Veyron by painting it all white. I was almost sick watching the story on TMZ. WHY?!!! And for the record, I fell in love with the Veyron the first time I saw a picture, before I had any idea how much they cost.

Jasmine said...

Enty, I cant help but see that you are making a distinction that money should bring her security. I think that is your automatic response because (no offense) you are a white male in America where the only thing you really need to bring you ultimate prestige and security is a higher socioeconomic bracket.

Im reading a book right now called the Kaleidoscope of Gender and really there is a matrix involving race, gender, and class and how they all intertwine to create was in which we survive and thrive in the Western world. Yes money will provide her more than someone without money but as a woman she has far more to negotiate in this life as far as finding security to make it as simple as money.
I feel for her, as a person and as a fellow woman.

And truly, this is why I am losing any liking for George. Everyone always totes out that rethoric when he tosses another gf aside that they knew what they were getting into but jesus- its gotta fucking suck to be with someone for years and perhaps only for telling the media that you see yourself marrying this person, you are tossed aside abruptly.
What the fuck is wrong with expressing happiness if you are engaged emotionally with someone? What I see is someone being open and available and another man shooting this down with no emotions and people defending that. Well thats not okay in my book and it never will be.

Jasmine said...

*ways in which, oops

Lelaina Pierce said...

Yeah, agree w/ most of the other posters on this one. Hard for me to have sympathy for her. She had a nice little ride with Georgie. And if she got $10 mil out of it? :-/

Ida Blankenship said...

"What the fuck is wrong with expressing happiness if you are engaged emotionally with someone? What I see is someone being open and available and another man shooting this down with no emotions and people defending that."

I DO see what you mean, though I just CAN'T feel bad for Elizabetta. George seems to pick out a particular type of woman to date -- vapid, pneumatic, and immature, with very little intellectual ambition -- so it's easy for me to feel scorn towards those women because I can't imagine being friends with them, or even *tolerating* them. But there IS something misogynistic about the way George seems to use women until he tires of them, and then he finds some random replacement with appropriately perky funbags.

Okay. Sidenote. Seriously: WTF is wrong with Sandra Bullock?! Why not her? She's GORGEOUS, and they seem to get along! Why did she have to settle for Vanilla Gorilla in the FIRST place? I want her to get back with Gosling again!!! OMG. FUCK Eva Mendes. Just sayin.' Okay, I'm done.

I used to have SUCH a crush on George, but his taste in girlfriends has just ruined it. Jon Hamm is the new Cary Grant. IMO, *he's* the new Suave and Ultra-Masculine Hollywood Charmer. George is just far too much of a manwhore. I think he's an enormously handsome man and a great actor, but ewwwwwwwwww.

Henriette said...

I don't like George because he picks out this type of woman. He picks out women he can use and discard. I don't see him with women who would be intellectually or emotionally stimulating.

Simone said...

Do not RSVP to Elisabetta's pity party. Early on, before Clooney did his whitewashing, I read that for several years in Italy she made big bucks on her topless calendars. Her income was in the millions between that and her TV appearances.

She was a Velina which is a girl who dances on Italian TV programs. Velina translates literally to tissue. (Use once and throw away.)

She is trying to gain your sympathy as GC goes public with the new wrestler chick.

Jasmine said...

@Simone- what, so because she has earned her money dancing on tv and used her body and looks to try to get somewhere in the patriarchal society she lives in that reduces her to becoming synomous with a freaking tissue?!

You're a woman (im assuming) and it pains me when women reinforce that binary category of women of the madonna and the whore.

Think about what you said and see how I am picking out misogynistic slings left and right from your words, like shards of glass.

L said...

@simone - impara l'italiano sul serio prima di scrivere stupidaggini: Velina e' il termine che viene usato dai giornalisti per definire il foglio su cui vengono passate le notizie dell'ultimo minuto. Ignorante e misogino!

L said...

sorry for the little italian rant aimed at Simone.
@Jasmine - Simone in Italian is a name for guys...

for the record Velina in Italian is the name used in the newsworld for paper notes of breaking news handed over to newsmen during live news.

anyway, as an Italian woman now living abroad, i wish to shed a little light on the way women are used in the media in Italy.
For years the private networks, mostly owned by the individual who is currently the Italian prime minister, have used women as nothing more than meat to grab the attention of the male public. The objectification of women has now reached all networks and printed media - if it works, if it sells, why stop using it? All the most popular TV female faces have had one or more naked calendars made - and in Italy this is pretty much considered a boost of popularity.
my impression is that the Italian people are not even aware of what they are watching on TV, growing more and more jaded to the extent that their majority does not even grow indignant after what has been revealed about the behavior of the prime minister and most of the Italian politicians.
Sorry for the rant. i do not intend to defend Elisabetta Canalis. But i wish to provide the bigger picture of a sad and jaded country which produces tons of girls who think their looks and attractiveness are the only thing going for them

Jasmine said...

L-
THANK YOU for clarifying that to us. There is a phrase in sociology called 'Blaming the Victim' and I think that applies here, for these Italian women.

My professor said the other day that she could interview 100 people who are deemed privileged in our Western world, i.e. they are able to move around the social groups more freely and have thus, more opportunity to florish. These people include, white, thin, young, athletic, affluent, often male, etc. And the kicker was if you asked THEM if they were priviledged 70% would say NO.

That is the problem with so many societies where so many groups are forced to compete for resources in whatever capacity those may be and often forced into a type of marganilization that takes a herculean effort to extract oneself from. And yet- the ignorance (and even disdain) FROM the privileged is similiar to what Blogger Simone threw out.

Thanks for trying to create a more well-rounded picture of WHY women might have to objectify their sexuality in order to suceed in their chosen field. Simone- look up Blaming the Victim, and you'll find your name right underneath buddy.

L said...

thank you, Jasmine.
I am glad to hear that this phenomenon is being studied and hopefully we'll all become more aware and we'll help reverse the blame cycle..

take care and best of luck with your studies :)

Jasmine said...

Thanks L
:)))

Simone said...

Jasmine - What are you talking about? Your argument makes no sense. Hell, Jasmine, Elisabetta is 32 years old. She is no victim. She is an opportunist. She comes from a well off Sardinian family and had options. She is not furthering the cause, she is setting us back.

Elisabetta had CHOICES. She wanted to be famous and she has done whatever it takes to get herself noticed.

And I am not making this Velina stuff up.

Read it and weep.

The actual title of these girls is Velina. (Use google translate. Velina = Tissue.) I understand that there is a competition and, sadly, many young Italian girls dream of becoming a Velina. Ask L.

So she has made a few million by shaking her ass on TV and showing her boobs in calendars in her native country. Now she is using her one achievement here, dating George Clooney, to try to create 15 minutes of fame in the US.

Why are you wasting your tears on her? Are you crying for Pamela Anderson, too? "Boo hoo, that poor 'victim' Snooki." You must be a mess.

Oh, wait here is a TISSUE.

And I am no misogynist. That would be that old fool Clooney.

linnea said...

I tend to agree with that. By calling these women victims, you are doing them and us a disservice. You are taking away their agency and ability to make choices on their own.

Jasmine said...

Look, whether or not you choose to believe it- Western societies are built upon a patriarchical, capitalistic system where,by definition, certain people/groups ARE set up to be disserviced, devalued, marganilized and so forth by comparison. THis is why we have a two-and-only-two gender system that places male/female in a dichatomy that favors men at the top. (70c for every 1$ a man makes remember). THis is why affluent people (btw whites make up a disporpotioned number in just about every head of company and govt) seting up a binary opposite with people of color, poor whites, etc. These are facts! Hell, entire fields base decades and millions of research in studying this phenomenon. So when I use the say women who sell their sexualities and people who castigate them for that without looking at the ways society sets this up for women to do, I use the phrase Blaming the Victim (a sociological term) to describe the very reaction our patriarchical society has put into place to keep people down and not questioning the shitty system at hand- that belief that when a poor black man commits theft and goes to jail and cannot vote with his felony (a highly RACIST law btw) and a woman in Italy to get ahead in her field plays the game of havign to sell her looks to maintain her lifstyle, when people 'blame' them by saying well he's just a no good dude or she is just a slut with money signs in her eyes, well, what is really happening is a justification for the racism and social injustice and sexism that keeps people from fully succeeding. The word 'Victim' is then apropos because even if you dont WANT to be a victim, sometimes our society sets your ass up to be one.

Its not desrespectful to call a woman a victim when it applies. Your very reaction to my doing so simply calls attention away from my point that there IS a big fucking problem with the way our gender system opperates and again focuses it erroneously on the individual. The reality is that our social injustices work on an individual as well as interactional and institutional level.
I've digressed but I will say that the woman CEO is also a 'victim'. She is a victim of the patriarchical system. How? Well, despite her hard work she still, on average, makes 30% less than her male counterpart. See?
The solution is really opening your eyes that in the matrix of social interaction, we are all touched by social injustice- from the female CEO to the 'slutty' Elisabetta Canalis- whether you want to admit it or not. And things SHOULD and need to change to allow for a less dileneated system of gender and racial control.

Jasmine said...

btw- NO ONE can make complete choices on their own- when everyone is working in a three part system of individual, interactional, and institiutional.

linnea said...

I have read that theory, too. Way, way too much of it. And I understand what you mean, but I still do not entirely agree with you. I would like to believe that we have more agency than that.

Jasmine said...

Linnea- you are being stubborn.
We DO have agency, but like I believe I have established, it IS limited, because we are not navigating alone along this path of life- things influence how we are treated and thus, force our reactions based upon that treatment. Sometimes those reactions are selling drugs and stealing cars if you are in a certain socioeconomic level and/or a person of color, and sometimes those reactions are selling naked calenders of yourself to stay relevant in the career of your choice in Italy.

Its frustrating to me that you cant see this.

Here is one last example of how little agency we really have:

Say you are a female and we dress you up in a ball cap that hides your hair and features, slouchy clothes that hide your breasts, etc. And we have you walk down a crowded street. Now you identify as a striaght female BUT because of what you are wearing, which is rigidly assigned to masculine categories, i.e. the loose clothes and lack of make up or long hair, people thus categorize you as male. Even if you dont want this title People bestow this role onto you, and thus, treat you accordingly. This is a small example of how women who wear/ don the traditional feminine characteristics, tight clothes, makeup, long hair, etc. are reinforcing the rigidness of how our society has set up who is a female and who is a male and how we will treat them.

Realize that much like social injustice is set up in ways you take for granted as self will and self control and individual when the reality (whether you like or know it or not) is that shit is set up before you're even born, to put you in categories and make assumptions about you that you have to live with.

linnea said...

I think it is rather unfair of you to call me stubborn because I disagree with you. It is clear that we view this differently. As I said earlier, I see what you mean but I do not agree.

Jasmine said...

I guess its just frustrating to me because you and i normally agree on a lot of things and I am literally learning this in a class that is devoted practically the whole semester on it. So understand that I say the adjective 'stubborn' because I view this not as different viewpoints but rather as facts and not facts.
I am learning these things from professors with doctorates in the field of social interactions as well as case studies that go back decades and for you to simply say that you think individuals have that much free will/agency is countered from every single thing I am learning FROM EXPERTS on the subject.
So yeah, though you know I think you're rad, on this topic I do think you are being stubborn.

linnea said...

Well, coming from someone who has ALSO taken a lot of classes on this topic I think this matter is way too complex for one person to be either "right" or "wrong." Rather, there are many different theories and interpretations. For a period I felt the same way you do now, but now, I have more doubts.

Of course individuals are influenced by the culture around them. But in this instance, women have the power to decide what they want to do with their lives, and they do not have to get naked in order to gain power and respect. There are other ways, even though those might be harder.

So believe me - I have read what you have said, I have (also) studied this and I simply think it is not black-and-white.

linnea said...

But I respect your compliment and will continue to consider myself "rad".

Jasmine said...

Linnea- I too dont consider it so black and white.
Listen, I grew up and had to fight for getting where I am right now- no one is helping me with school and although I have a trade I could do and support myself in life adequately, I am choosing to struggle now so that I can really make something of myself.
I totally get that if an individual wants to succeed and they have the drive, this goes a long way in them creating their own agency in life.
But I still think my example of the woman CEO who gets paid less than her counterpart and the women in Italy that have to sell naked calenders of themselves to get ahead, both those things point to real problems in the shitty patriarchical society we have set up for ourselves.

linnea said...

Of course, I agree with you on that.

It is horrible, it is a world created and designed by men (have you, btw, seen the excellent documentary Videocrazy?) but that doesn’t mean that women have no choice but to participate in it on someone else's terms.

But when we claim that these women are mere "victims" we are also participating in taking away their agency. With the same logic, we are not responsible for any of the choices we make. Women who chose to participate in this are also, to some extent, legitimizing it.

linnea said...

*videocracy

__-__=__ said...

I also think she should hook up with Rachel Uchitel. Evidently she comes from money so there is no excuse for her not having an education and doing something worth while in this world. I'm not into her pity party. I vote for some kind of personality disorder on her part, having nothing to do with anything but her gaming the system. Maybe Clooney should talk about it all one day.