I don't know about all of you, but my opinion of Lance Armstrong changed after reading this article:
http://tiny.cc/4fgkH
Printable View
I don't know about all of you, but my opinion of Lance Armstrong changed after reading this article:
http://tiny.cc/4fgkH
Am a bit lost here.
Though I don't care much for a guy like Lance personally, he probably made the right decision to be honest with Crowe that he no longer wanted children when he had several himself. Then of course, the relationship had to end. (But presumably they could have gotten together again, if she already cross the biological line..But she needs time to work this through herself whatever the end result is.)
I personally don't think it's right that a guy should just make a woman happy to have a child, if HE is not 100% committed himself to the idea. And especially he already has children himself. Yes a love must end, if the woman insists on having children, her child, etc. But that's life. That's reality.
So Lance did do the most honorable thing, he was honest to Crowe. (Of course, we really don't know what else caused the end of their relationship. But who cares.)
For once, I'm not faulting Lance. She wanted kids - just then. He wasn't ready to commit to them again. I think it was the right decision for them based on the article.
CA
I don't know if I can hold this against Lance. My husband is 15 years older than me and already had two pre-teen kids from his first marriage when we met. He didn't want to have more kids, and I accepted that before we got engaged. It was better for Lance to call off the engagement, than to enter a marriage where you don't agree on whether or not to have children. Someone will be disappointed. I've often said that just because you love someone, doesn't mean you should marry them.
Cunninghair, my partner had it easier. :) I didn't want any children but I accepted that he had 2 teens (at the time when we first met). To my amazement, he has said to me, that if I wanted to have a child, he would go along --just to please me/fill my wishes. :confused:
We joke about this now...he honestly wouldn't want the responsibility right now. He's 65 (he's 16 years older than I). Already the things that he has done in the past few years wouldn't have been possible with a baby to care for, while I went to work.
We wouldn't want any other way. And he has time to spend with adult children now plus his grandchild.
I don't fault Lance for saying 'no' to more kids. But I do think it's in bad taste to blab to the media and to help sell books (even though it seemed pretty obvious kids was the reason they broke up).
Still, he should have kept his mouth shut.
who the heck is Anna Hansen? last I knew he was dating Goldie Hawn's daughter, what's her name...
Kate Hudson, nope that's finished too...Quote:
Originally Posted by elk
I think he was right to say no to kids... but still I think he should have kept it private.
I don't see anything wrong with telling the truth about the reason for the break up. It would have been worse for them to get married when they felt so differently about this issue.
As far as him talking about it, well, he is writing a book, so this is publicity. I don't really get the celebrity thing, writing about yourself, etc., but this doesn't change my opinion of him.
I didn't have a great opinion of him to begin with, so this just makes me roll my eyes further.
It'd have been appropriate to just say we broke up because we both wanted different things out of life without going into details, but I guess details sell better.
It's of course ironic that he does have a baby on the way now...
This doesn't seem like news to me. During the time, this was the rumor going around in the media--especially after she adopted. It seems like Cheryl Crow even commented on it at one point. I could be wrong.
I agree that Lance did the right thing. He's a strong-willed, stubborn, driven guy and I imagine Cheryl is too--you'd have to be to be so successful. If he's made up his mind he doesn't want any more kids, than it's best they went their separate ways. Marriage and relationships are full of compromises--but we all have our deal-breakers. Can't fault 'em for that.
This quote sums it up for me:
"Because if somebody wants a child -- man, that's the greatest gift you can give to a woman -- so who are you to stand there and say I don't want one. So we were at different points in our lives. We were not compatible on that issue."
They did the right thing IMHO.
Absolutely. He isn't bashing her or talking smack. He's being honest about the reasons for their break up. I don't see the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by arielmoon
I agree that he was right to break it off under those circumstances, but I don't know why he feels the need to bring it up three years later and make it public.
I'm assuming this new book is a biography, so I think that it makes sense in that context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brina
I'm sure it's a very small part of the book, but one that would catch attention and headlines, which is probably why the New York Post chose that passage to excerpt.Quote:
The Tour de France superstar is sharing details in advance of the July release of the book "Lance" (Da Capo) by author John Wilcockson. The New York Post excerpted some key passages on Friday.
But then, he got Anna Hansen pregnant, and her baby is due next month... so he IS having another one. :rolleyes: But I do agree that at the time, he was correct in telling Sheryl that he didn't want kids. ...must have changed his mind since then!!!
Three. Freaking. Years. Later. God, you women are ruthless. Oh...and maybe the baby with Anna was a surprise...I'm not sure he realized his junk was actually functioning. Sometimes surprises happen and you make the best of it...that is way different than planning for a baby and being under pressure since your fiance's bio clock is tickin' away.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnieBikes
I'm sure the baby with Anna was a surprise...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandy
But you don't think that Sheryl Crow probably finds this a bit of a slap in the face? It must be hard enough that he's now having a kid with someone else, but then to have all of this become public at the same time?
I completely respect his (their?) decision to split at that time. How could he know that three years later he would accidentally impregnate his girlfriend? He did the right thing back then, and he did the right thing by staying with in this current situation. Accidents happen.
who says it's an accident? Maybe he was ready for it now. Maybe he felt that he wouldn't be a good parent with Sheryl. You know... bringing up a child is teamwork and some teams are better than others. :)
"Doctors had thought that Armstrong's bout with testicular cancer in 1996 had rendered him sterile. "Quote:
Originally Posted by papaver
In that case, I'm surprised there aren't a whole bunch of little Lance's running around...:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedal Wench
There very well could be!:DQuote:
Originally Posted by tulip