Christina Crawford LIED website goes live

Oh my. Could she have lied about everything?

I should have drowned the little bitch at birth!

She was abused, period. It kills me this is still up for debate. That she also grew up with indulgences that other abused kids didn’t have doesn’t change the truth.

LOL at the statement signed by "webmaster" on that ghetto-ass website straight out of 1998.

Well, she did for reason that are well known to her!

The original snowflake.

Is this run by that psycho queen who runs the Concluding Chapter of Crawford site?

The truth always lies somewhere in the middle.

There was a lot of what she did in the movie for which I would have smacked the shit out of her. Harder than Joan.

For fucks sake, let it go already.

Who the fuck is invested enough to create an entire website???

And fuck "two sides of the story" idiots like r8. That kind of thinking allows abusers to get away with it.

You just know some ancient, cigarette sucking, kaftan wearing, Joan Crawford fan-queen paid some rent boy to throw this website up so she could finally "avenge Joan"

Wait, so Joan didn’t tear down that bitch of a bearing wall and put a window where it ought to be??

She was probably unfavored by Joan compared to the others and did experience some of the behavior described, like the periodic rages that are common from mentally ill parents, but I’ve read the book and it just does not line up with a lot of the outside testimony. She went too extreme, and Joan was dead before she could refute anything, like Bette did when her own daughter made her spoiled brat manifesto.

Tatum O’Neal is someone you can contrast Christina to because her stories about Ryan are totally believable without sounding like she wanted to ruin his reputation, which is how Christina came off. And so many outside stories confirm Ryan’s behavior towards Tatum. Tatum has publicly tried reconciling with Ryan so many times, it’s just sad.

And yes, there are many sides to every story. The world isn’t split to victims and abusers, people are complex.

The "Webmaster" screams for the TRUTH TO BE EXPOSED, with righteous indignation. You can't ignore the irony that the "Webmaster" insists on being anonymous and hiding behind a cheesy website. Love how she invites Christina Crawford to

[quote]..participate in a video-recorded public meeting regarding the evidence countering your allegations against Joan Crawford. Despite your refusal to allow Joan Crawford the rightful opportunity to respond to your false allegations,

LOL!

R14, believe it or not real abusers do exist, so enough with the "people are complex" as if that makes abuse okay

Lana Turner's daughter Cheryl backed CC up on it on some talk show in the early 90's, maybe late 80's. She was a guest with Christina and said she had asked her mother about it, and Lana Turner told her everyone knew about the abuse. Cheryl asked why nobody did anything, and LT said because you just didn't do that back then. Sad thing is, a lot of people wouldn't do anything about it now.

The book "Mommie Dearest" came out when I was in high school, and I remember that there was much back-and-forth debate about whether her allegations were true or it was simply a case of "sour grapes" for having been left out of the will.

One thing I noticed is that my friends who came from stable, loving homes found it incomprehensible that anyone could abuse a child in the manner described by Christina and thought she was lying. On the other hand, those of us who were living in troubled, abusive homes knew EXACTLY what Christina was talking about and didn't doubt her allegations for a second. Instead, we mentally compared what we were going through to Christina's experiences and found both comfort ("Thank God my parents never did THAT to us") and dismay ("She's lucky Crawford didn't do THAT to her like our parents do") from the narrative.

No doubt in my mind that Christina was telling the truth. Joan was a complete self-absorbed narcissist, and no child *EVER* wants to believe/admit that their parents would intentionally do anything to harm them (hence the long-time silence).

Marry me r12

Did the twins really sue her successfully for defamation of character? Interesting.

r18 nails it

R19 - Deal! As long as you come sit by me and let me viciously snark the world as they go by. Preferably while having wine and hot wings. ;)

She kept the doll

AND

the bracelet.

[quote] Is this run by that psycho queen who runs the Concluding Chapter of Crawford site?

I thought maybe it was Joan's fat nelly queen nephew.

R16 I never implied that makes abuse okay, but I think the ease in which people love to stamp someone with the mark of "ABUSER!" like it's the Scarlet Letter, especially today, shows a lack of maturity. Everyone has the capacity to redeem themselves, and most people have done things to others that fall under the now-broad category for abuse. Zoomers label their ex-boyfriends as abusers because they didn't listen to them.

Lana Turner's daughter is just one testimony. Why didn't Lana herself come out and say everyone knew about the violent abuse if it was such common knowledge? Why did so many people defend Joan, even people who weren't friends with her, like Bette? Plenty of people outright said it wasn't true, or Joan was strict and unloving, but didn't beat her or any of the more insane shit described. It is a complex situation.

Cathy Crawford, one of twins, sued Christina. Christina publicly stated that the twins were not biologically related. This was untrue. Cathy settled the case for $10K. Joan’s children, Cathy, Cynthia, and Christopher died. Christina survives.

And Christina being successfully sued for defamation by the twins means she is a confirmed liar. I don't doubt Joan was a bad mother, but Christina likely painted her as this abusive monster to get an outcry of public sympathy (from people like R18 especially - she paints the common picture of an abuser to garner abuse victims to her side) and as revenge for being cut out of the will. Why do it when Joan doesn't have the opportunity to defend herself? Christina was a grown woman, not some child under her mother's thumb at that point. If Joan was alive, she surely would have sued Christina and probably won.

[quote]I’ve read the book and it just does not line up with a lot of the outside testimony

This is absolutely true, and on top of that, some of the things she lists as abusive aren't. Joan having a fit that the school knew the stablehand was sleeping with some of the girls, Christina included, wasn't abuse.

[quote]On the other hand, those of us who were living in troubled, abusive homes knew EXACTLY what Christina was talking about and didn't doubt her allegations for a second

Don't generalize like that. I had parents who were volatile (dad was an alcoholic, mom was mentally ill) and I went through tons of situations similar to what Christina described.

Here's one of my stories: I have a huge scar on my forehead from when my parents thought it would be funny to make me try to balance on a three-legged stool when I was about 2, and I fell into a coffee table with a really sharp corner. They didn't take me to a doctor or anything, just laughed at my head injury. I don't remember the incident, but I remember when I was about 7 or so asking what this scar was, and my parents laughing and telling me the story. As an adult, I keep thinking about how that was their version of events, and it was still psychotic. Sometimes I wonder if there is an even worse real story behind the incident.

I think that's why I really bristle at a lot of Christina's stories, because she contradicts herself in official paperwork, in her stories, people who were there contradict her, and she was obviously not always telling the truth. It makes me a little angry that someone would lie about the kind of abuse I went through, and also it reminds me of my own parents who would tell lies.

In Christina's case I feel that she was probably dealing with a mental or personality disorder and I'm not sure her lies were meant to be malicious, so I'm not hugely personally invested in this, but I do really dislike the person who is always saying "if you were abused you know she's telling 100% the truth," because that in itself is not true.

Next let's discuss whether or not Fatty Arbuckle was wrongly accused of raping Virginia Rappe and rupturing her bladder from his dead weight on top of her!

How *both sides* of you, r8.

[quote]Joan having a fit that the school knew the stablehand was sleeping with some of the girls, Christina included, wasn't abuse.

More like jealousy.

Allegedly, Christina wrote the book before Joan Crawford died. I think a Crawford biographer, Charlotte Chandler, wrote this. Anyway, supposedly Joan discovered this.

Why now? Who cares?

Christina always did know where to find the boys AND the booze.

You do, apparently, since you saw the thread, opened it, scrolled all the way down and typed "who cares?" Most people don't expend any energy on things they don't care about.

[quote]Don't generalize like that. I had parents who were volatile (dad was an alcoholic, mom was mentally ill) and I went through tons of situations similar to what Christina described.

R29 - You are in DEEP denial. That’s why I was sure to point out:

[quote]”no child *EVER* wants to believe/admit that their parents would intentionally do anything to harm them (hence the long-time silence).”

BTW - When your father put you in a rowboat, paddled out to the middle of the lake, and threw you overboard, he WASN’T trying to teach you how to swim . . .

Whether or not Christina's claims about Joan's abuse of her are completely true, largely true, partly true, or completely untrue, the fact that Christina has done things like making personal appearances at campy screenings of the movie with drag queens in attendance is disgusting -- because if her allegations about her mother are factual, then it's disgusting to make light of them in this way, and if they're NOT factual, then it's disgusting and despicable that she lied.

[quote]I think that's why I really bristle at a lot of Christina's stories, because she contradicts herself in official paperwork, in her stories, people who were there contradict her, and she was obviously not always telling the truth.

Link, r29?

Oh hell R38, perhaps it was all part of her trying to heal....you know, making lemonade out of lemons? If I suffered abuse to that extent, I'd love to be able to reach a point where I could make light of it, because I fucking survived.

r37, I said my parents were abusive, alcoholic and mentally ill, that's abundantly clear. I guess your "denial" thing is just you trying to start a fight.

R41 - You ARE in denial. You are making excuses for the fact that your parents abused you - "It's not *really* their fault; Dad was a drunk and Mom was crazy, so it's OK."

Meanwhile, with the following statement, you play "Blame the Victim" (Christina was the crazy one), ascertain that Christina was definitely lying, and are being dismissive of everyone who has ever suffered cruelly at the hands of the people who should be protecting them (you're just GENERALIZING or worse MAKING THAT UP).

[quote]"In Christina's case I feel that she was probably dealing with a mental or personality disorder and I'm not sure her lies were meant to be malicious, so I'm not hugely personally invested in this, but I do really dislike the person who is always saying "if you were abused you know she's telling 100% the truth," because that in itself is not true."

[quote] She was probably unfavored by Joan compared to the others and did experience some of the behavior described, like the periodic rages that are common from mentally ill parents, but I’ve read the book and it just does not line up with a lot of the outside testimony. She went too extreme, and Joan was dead before she could refute anything, like Bette did when her own daughter made her spoiled brat manifesto.

Crawford's close friend Helen Hayes confirmed the abuse. June Allyson and Vincent Sherman also said that Crawford was abusive. Being raised by a toxic drunk is probably never really pleasant.

The twins were adopted 7 yrs after Christina and Christina was sent off to boarding school a few yrs after their adoption.

Natalie "Mrs. Howell Schafer" gave an interview about the time Christopher visited Joan on the set of the movie "Female on the Beach."

There was a box of chocolates and Christopher asked if he could have one. Joan said he could have one, but then she caught him sneaking another one. So she made him eat the entire box in front of her, and he got sick afterward.

Yeah, that's child abuse.

Include Lana and Cheryl in knowing about the abuse. And the grande dames who came to Joan's defense when the book came out were either blind to the abuse or protecting one of their own.

Joan was a cunt. Deal with it.

This isn't normal...

[quote]Joan was a cunt.

That's why we love her!!!

People will say or not say things to keep the access they have to someone - whether that someone has fame, a name, a fortune or a reputation.

The waters are muddy on this one and the Occam's razor of it all is that Joan WAS an abusive drunken cunt, and Christina WAS/IS a master manipulator - one that certainly did some of this on her own accord, but as they say, monsters aren't born, they're made.

Holy fuck R47. If you pause the video and read that task list you can see how fucking insane this woman was!! She actually has an instruction to tie Phillip (Christopher's original name) to his chair while the floor is being mopped.

This also reminded me that she changed the names of Christina and Christopher. Christina was originally named Joan and Christoper was Phillip (she changed his name after she divorced Phillip Terry). Freak show! It's incredible how anyone could doubt her abusive nature.

And you know there would be hell to pay if that schedule wasn't strictly adhered to, r50.

June Allyson backed up Christina's story. Joan was a disturbed woman.

R43 - Helen Hayes said she was a strict parent. June Allyson said she saw Joan put Christina in a time-out and not let her go to a friend's birthday party, but neither of them said they witnessed violent physical abuse as described in the book.

R53 And that's because child abusers do their physical abusing when others aren't looking.

What "access" to Joan would people like Katharine Hepburn or Bette Davis need? Bette especially despised Joan and the fact she defended her says a lot. Being a strict or unloving parent does not always equal violent abuse.

[quote] [R43] - Helen Hayes said she was a strict parent. June Allyson said she saw Joan put Christina in a time-out and not let her go to a friend's birthday party, but neither of them said they witnessed violent physical abuse as described in the book.

[quote] What "access" to Joan would people like Katharine Hepburn or Bette Davis need? Bette especially despised Joan and the fact she defended her says a lot. Being a strict or unloving parent does not always equal violent abuse.

Emotional abuse is still abuse. You're arguing that unless Crawford physically beat the children in front of her friends. She was not abusive. Which is ridiculous.

Davis and Crawford were not friends. They didn't socialize. Davis denied the feud rumors and spoke kindly about Crawford. Meanwhile her close friend Helen Hayes (with whom she did socialize) confirmed the abuse.

R38 Her book brought a lot of attention to the then rare discussion of child abuse, and there are many people to back up her claims. Christina hated the film because it generalized her story and combined many scenes/night raids into one, making it over the top. Along with Faye's overacting and the director just letting her go on and on. The film is, ironically, the "Hollywood" version of her story. She has stated she would have much preferred Anne Bancroft, to Faye. And she only appeared at a screening of Mommie Dearest in 1997 at the Castro Theater after she finally acknowledged that it had become a cult film with (mostly) gay audiences. It was to appease US! I was there and she had a great attitude about it. Team Christina. All the way.

[quote]Christina hated the film because it generalized her story and combined many scenes/night raids into one, making it over the top.

Christina hated the film because it changed the entire perspective of the book, which was from the POV of the abused child, to a film that focused on the life and career of a crazy woman.

R57 I was there, too. She was very charming and gave in to all the camp, even giving away a wire hanger that she decorated with a Christmas theme.

And Lana Turner knew but didn’t say anything. Her own husband was raping her daughter.

R60 But Lana DID kick Lex out of the house and ended the marriage the minute she found out about it.

Ryan Murphy should do a miniseries of Mommie Dearest. He CAN do a good job (Feud, Versace). A longer run time and more subtle approach would make for a fascinating watch. Not sure if he could pull it off, but it would be worth a try.

Who woul play Joan?

I'm available.

R62 I was the one who had a recent thread with that question: would it have been better as a miniseries or limited series? I got shot down for that.

But I feel that way about this story, as I do about Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, which I hope is remade after Clint bites the dust.

Both were compelling books that suffered from the ways in which the scripts were seriously compacted, combined and shrunk to fit into a 2 hour film. (Midnight's script had other issues, but let's leave it at that.)

Not sure if Murphy is exactly the right choice, but I wouldn't rule him out, though he did already explore much of this ground in Feud.

Cate Blanchett

I never doubted Christina's book when it came out. It made a lot of sense to me, based on what I knew of Joan's own childhood. Many who are abused become abusers. I think Christina was very brave to write it, knowing what was coming her way. That said, Christina is, in many ways, her mother, and is not a very nice person.

R67 "That said, Christina is, in many ways, her mother, and is not a very nice person"

How do you know that?

This 1960 article from Redbook is the thing that has always fascinated me. It's really the first 2/3rds of Mommie Dearest. And, contrary to what Joan defenders say, Joan DID have a chance to respond to her daughter's allegations. She does so here.

What I find fascinating is I don't recall any mention of this article in Mommie Dearest, or if it is mentioned, it's downplayed. This article, in a MAJOR, legit, national woman's magazine must have mortified Joan, who had carefully cultivated and micromanaged her public image for well over 30 years at that point.

If Christina didn't realize she'd burned a bridge with her mother by doing that article, she must not have been very smart or self aware. "For reasons which are well known to them." IT WAS THIS ARTICLE, TINA! After this came out, you were never going to be in the will.

That whole Redbook thing went over pretty well, I'd say.

And once this is all settled, we need an academic investigation into the allegations that W.C. Fields took a shit in Edgar Bergen's dressing room. Or could it have been Mae West?! This is a timely hot topic and I demand we render justice!

Is the real Christina Crawford going to sue the LIED website?

[quote]June Allyson said she saw Joan put Christina in a time-out and not let her go to a friend's birthday party

My goodness, r53, how you minimize June's story (at 10:20). You really think humiliation should be a part of a "time-out"?

^

It's a really good thing that r53 isn't a parent.

The FB page of the loon that runs this site is giving off very Trumpian vibes.

"Proof is coming soon!"

I'm not acting...

Is this website run by the Concluding Chapter of Crawford guy? He has an excellent site. Tons of great information, Joan's personal correspondence with other celebs chief among them. You could spend an afternoon reading them.

But I've never agreed with him about Christina. I think the truth of the matter lies somewhere in the middle. It's not a black or white situation.

The truth lies between my fist and your face!

I'm not saying she didn't experience emotional abuse, or that Joan was a good parent. I'm saying Christina exaggerated the abuse (which is lying and defamation) to paint Joan as an irredeemable child beating monster. Christina isn't dumb, she knew how to write a textbook abuser (as so many here even are saying, a textbook abuser, Joan in MD reads like she's ripped from a PSA pamphlet regarding child abuse) and how to paint herself a helpless victim. The truth lies in the middle.

Most people are "victims" of emotional abuse, life is emotional abuse! Some of us aren't lucky enough to experience it in the lap of luxury........

Yes, it is, r78. She was either abusive or she wasn't. The degrees of abusiveness may be debated, but she *was* abusive to a degree that any reasonable person would consider...abusive.

R79 to be clear, I didn't mean to make excuses of any kind for Miss Crawford. SHE was the adult, and is ultimately responsible for how their relationship was up until Tina turned 16 or so.

Spoiled children need to be put in their place.

I will say things were done so much differently back then.

My mom has complained repeatedly about stuff from her childhood. Then one of her brothers will remind her, of their neighbors/friends who didn't live any differently.

My dad talks about my great-grandmother living with them after her husband's death. There were 6 boys. If someone got in trouble, they all got the switch. She didn't play after having 9 kids.

It is hard to know who is telling the truth here. I am sure it lies somewhere in the middle.

Strapping children in bed all night with leather restraints (a hideous "sleep-safe" device) for YEARS seems pretty extreme.

R84

Yes, taking behavior out of the context of the era is always something people do in situations like this. I've also seen it done when discussing Henry Fonda's parenting. He was by all accounts cold towards his children, especially Jane, but men of that time (he was born close to the turn of the century, which is crazy to think about) often behaved like that within the family dynamic. That's partially why Jane annoys me, when she talks about her father as if he was in any way uniquely awful, especially with how he gave her everything she needed for her career and lifestyle.

Never blame the parents.

To be fair, Jane Fonda has been pretty critical of her own parenting methods too. I think she and Peter saw their relationship with their cold, distant father as typical of the generation gap that widened into a gulf in many families--I don't think they saw him as an abuser, just a stuffed shirt who couldn't let it all hang out, as they loved to do.

True about Henry Fonda, r86. Men of his generation were commonly cold toward their children, it was the mother's job to take care of the kids. Fathers did their own thing, they weren't terribly involved in raising the children. Fonda was very much a man of his time.

[quote]It is hard to know who is telling the truth here. I am sure it lies somewhere in the middle.

Oh well, r84, it's just middle-of-the-road abuse, so it's fine.

[quote]Yes, taking behavior out of the context of the era is always something people do in situations like this.

Being a cold, aloof parent is one thing, r86, strapping your kids in bed (or highchair), exposing them to night rages, and being hyper-controlling is another.

Joan Crawford was an emotionally unstable alcoholic who never should've been allowed anywhere near children.

[quote] Bette especially despised Joan and the fact she defended her says a lot.

When did Bette defend her? The only time I ever heard her mention it was in an interview after BD wrote her own book. Bette said “I guess it’s possible it (referring to Christina’s book) shouldn’t have been done.” That’s hardly a defense of Joan.

While goalposts have moved, certain mistreatment of children has always been seen as beyond the pale. I haven't read it in a long time, but isn't there a passage in The Brothers Karamazov in which Ivan argues against the existence of God by pointing to egregious cases of child abuse, including one in which a young girl was made to eat her own feces?

Joan would get blackout drunk on vodka, barge into the kids' bedrooms and beat the shit out of them in the middle of the night. How was that not abuse?

[quote] Miss Patsy Ramsey, formerly of Boulder Co

to quote a line from the movie, "If you can't do something right, then don't do it AT ALL."

I also think it's a socioeconomic issue to some degree -- what's viewed as abusive or non-abusive. (Just stating this generally, not as it pertains to Christina Crawford's situation.)

I've written in other threads about working with a number of lower-to-middle class women in physically abusive relationships.

One was a young girl around 20. She said that when she talked about leaving her boyfriend, he would threaten to kill himself. So she stayed, because "he really would do it." She seemed to have no sense that this behavior was manipulative and abusive.

Bitch was cut out of the will and wrote a book with falsehoods to make money. It got us a quotable movie that functionally destroyed the career of a mega bitch actress irl. It doesn't require a deep dive into investigative journalism on a cheap Wix site. Jeez.

[quote] functionally destroyed the career of a mega bitch actress

Well, I think DEATH ended her career. But it destroyed her reputation.

I used to have a friend who wad a child abuse apologist like R84 and R86 who would try to “comfort” me by saying: “Times were different when we were growing up - EVERYONE beat their children.”

Thing is, I grew up, got away from my abusers, talked with people from normal families, and found out: NO; everyone DID NOT senselessly beat their children “back then”. In fact, most parents did not inflict abuse on their kids.

To these same excuse-makers/enablers like R84 and R86, I ask: If child abuse was a generational/era “thing” that is a behavior of past times, why does child abuse still run rampant today? It didn’t just magically disappear in the 80s or 90s.

The problem is all of you are falling hook, line, and sinker for Christina's MO - paint Joan as a vicious abuser, herself as a poor, innocent victim. All the stuff about strapping kids to the beds and beating the shit out of them every night probably did not happen. She probably was cruel to Christina and didn't like her, but I don't believe the crazy shit she wrote, sorry.

Abuse has varying degrees, you wouldn't say someone whose parents spanked them occasionally (a practice, by the way, which was seen as totally normal until recently but would now be considered child abuse) suffered the same kind of abuse as someone who got beaten nightly.

R100 "Everyone you've talked to" maybe comprises .1% of people in the United States. And I have never said abuse was okay, it's just that the goalposts for what is considered abuse have radically changed over the years. It was never considered normal to be constantly beaten, yes, but other forms of physical discipline were considered normal - spanking, slaps upside the head - and to say they weren't is dishonest. There were always parents who never laid hands on their children and there were always parents who used physical discipline, as wrong as we know it is now.

R100's post made me think of this (a bit of a tangent from that post) -

What is the definition of child abuse? I mean, we know what it is, generally speaking, right? The obvious cases.

But I think some of the "I never ever ever ever ever EVER spanked my kid" crowds of today would think my parents were child abusers. They never paddled me often, nor very hard as a little kid (more a NO! and a swat or two on the bum that didn't really hurt) and I can remember maybe a few transgressions that were harsh enough for a paddling as I was older. I wouldn't think of my parents as abusive but I think the perceptions of child abuse and acceptable ways of child rearing has changed a LOT in the last 50 years.

....and as soon as I posted, my DL screen updated and showed me R101 which said many of the same things I just repeated. Sorry! Oopsie! (It wasn't showing for me before.)

R98 may have meant Faye, but I’ll leave that to the other thread.

Yeah, it's pretty clear he was talking about Faye, not Joan.

On another topic:

[quote] Next let's discuss whether or not Fatty Arbuckle was wrongly accused of raping Virginia Rappe and rupturing her bladder from his dead weight on top of her!

Roscoe Arbuckle was cleared of all charges and no expert on the topic thinks he did anything wrong.

R100, I am not defending anything.

I wasn't there, so I don't know. All, I know is what my parents and relatives have said. What was considered normal in that era according to them.

I don't know if you are getting your own past and experiences in the mix here, but don't twist my fucking words.

I have never condoned child abuse in my life. I do have a real problem with history revisionism and applying current standards to the past in ANY situation. I look at things through the lens of what was the norm then and what is the norm now.

The comments about "several of the most outrageous allegations within Christina's memoir have been countered by those who lived in the home, and firsthand eyewitnesses who were present during exact events " makes me suspicious that this website is being run by Joan's nutcase grandson Casey LaLonde.

[quote]”All, I know is what my parents and relatives have said. What was considered normal in that era according to them.”

Translation: R106 comes from an extended family where child abuse was an accepted norm until someone had to make them understand, on some level, that what they were accustomed to doing was wrong. Now they their left trying to explain it away under the premise: “But everybody was doing it” and trying get others to co-sign their BS.

r98 here. I did mean Faye, should've made it more obvious. Sorry.

Whether she lied or not isn't important. What's important is that she had a hand in making one of the most important gay movies of the 1980s.

I definitely believe Joan flying into rages. That is scary to a child. I believe the battle of wills with Christina. Did Christopher ever comment on the sleep restraints, etc?

Yes.

Chris was strapped into bed until the age of 12. Once caught playing with matches, his mother made him hold his hand in the fireplace. "I had blisters all over my hand; that day I ran away for the first time. I was 7."

Thank you, R112.

Bette Davis's daughter saw all the money Mommie Dearest made and wrote her own book, but Davis was hardly abusive like Crawford was.

Damn! That article at R112 makes my blood boil.

Joan was a

CUNT!

I have to separate the actress from her private life. I do this with Barbara Stanwyck too. She was a horrible mother, aloof and neglectful. Like Joan, she adopted a child for all of the wrong reasons. But I admire some of the films that both Joan Crawford and Barbara Stanwyck have made. I’m just glad that neither of them were my mother.

Barbara Stanwyck was a cold mother who lost interest in her adopted son, Dion. She dumped him into military schools. Once he became an adult, she cut all ties with him.

I found this hilarious video clip of Barbara. It’s hysterical!

[quote]Helen Hayes said she was a strict parent.

In her autobiography, she said Joan was "cruel" and that she and her friends were "worried to death" about Christina and Christopher. And around the time that the book came out, she said, "Joan tried to be all things to all people. I just wish she hadn't tried to be a mother."

Joan and Barbara had horrific childhoods. Neither of them were loved by their parents for various reasons. Their maternal instincts were warped, if they had any at all.

I have no problem separating Joan's professional accomplishments from her flawed personal life, r116. And, yes, glad she wasn't my mom.

Hayes adopted son son James Macarthur remembered staying with Christopher Crawford:

James MacArthur came to Hollywood in 1950 when his mother, Helen Hayes, returned to the screen in My Son John. James was invited to spend a weekend with Christopher Crawford, who was three years younger.

The two boys were preparing for sleep in Christopher's room when the maid entered and began strapping Christopher to his bed. Young MacArthur was astonished. "Is this the way they treat children in Hollywood?" he mused. "And will I be next?" The maid left the room without applying the same treatment to the guest.

R121 - According to R84 and R 86, that’s just the way they did things “back then”. Just accept it and move on; nothing to see there . . .

"The whole story," she says, "is a product of the girl's imagination. My relationship with the Chadwicks was always warm and friendly. Christina's behavior at school was not always what it should have been. She often dated and went away for weekends without my permission or that of the Chadwicks. I don't enjoy telling you this, but the real reason Christina left Chadwick was that she had been expelled, and I will not say why. I sent her to the convent because it was the only school that would accept her."

[quote]Oh hell [R38], perhaps it was all part of her trying to heal....you know, making lemonade out of lemons? If I suffered abuse to that extent, I'd love to be able to reach a point where I could make light of it, because I fucking survived.

Yeah, that must be it! "She was trying to heal." Yes, of course! How insensitive of me not to realize that!!!!!

P.S. I'm being sarcastic, which I wouldn't need to underline if you weren't obviously an idiot. The fact that Christina Crawford long ago began to treat the movie of her book as a camp classic to be ridiculed caused her to lose whatever credibility she had.....except in the eyes of fools like you.

BOBRA PLEEZE

I want to discuss the supreme jankiness of that site!

It must be the Concluding Chapter of Crawford queen, because both sites don't let you right-click and give you a pissy little dialogue box:

FUNCTION DISABLED!

[quote] I want to discuss the supreme jankiness of that site! It must be the Concluding Chapter of Crawford queen, because both sites don't let you right-click and give you a pissy little dialogue box: FUNCTION DISABLED! —Is FUNCTION DISABLED! the new THREAD CLOSED! ?

Sounds like it too is run by Muriel.

Joan was damaged goods long before she made it to Hollywood. She, and a lot of women of her time should have never been mothers.

Well. maybe true, false, outright lies or something in between all of these. One thing for sure. Christine never made it as an actress.Joan did. Daughters of beautiful & famous women who are less successful struggle sometimes. I see this in my own family, with my sister now dead was a dish, successful & a man magnet. My niece, her daughter is none of these.. She still resents my sister & trashes her every chance she gets

Christine was excluded from the will, so no dough, no career, then came the book & film deal & loads of dough. Plus the extra payoff of trashing the woman who adopted you & was prettier, more successful & a man eater. Christopher was excluded from the will as well, so not sure how pure his stuff is either. Did Christine divert a few bucks his way? I'm cynical for sure. I take after death vitriol with lots of salt

Joan was diabolical

Joan had a horrific childhood, one filled with poverty and abuse. She was raped by her stepfather at 11 and her mother blamed Joan. She became a star through a combination of aggressive sexuality and sheer force of will. Strange that she fell prey to the same domestic bliss bullshit as most other women of the period: She knew from an early age that home was no refuge and the traditional family unit could easily be shattered. She should have stayed happily single like Kate Hepburn.

She probably was a terrible parent. The fact that Christina didn't publish Mommie Dearest until after being cut out of Joan's will does make you wonder how much was exaggerated, though.

Debbie Reynolds confirmed Christina's story once on Larry King. He asked her if she knew Crawford. She said that Crawford drank a lot and would go home and take out her anger on the kids, the oldest one (Christina) in particular.)

I believe Christina

I don't blame her for waiting, r131

“[My mom] was trying to kill me,” she said. “I was 13 or 14. And it was then that I realized the world had gone insane.”

A cop showed up but did nothing, she recalled. “The officer was very kind. He told me that there was nothing he could do because there were no laws to protect me. He told me: ‘You have to try to live [here] until you are 18 and can go free. But, otherwise, if anyone calls me again on you, you’ll have to go to juvenile detention,” she said.

Christina had already begun telling tales on Joan in 1960, when she was 21. There was an interview with her in REDBOOK that essentially became the template for "Mommie Dearest"

She clearly had it in for Joan from early on.

R136 Yeah, we already knew. It's been discussed elsewhere in this thread. The website we are talking about it has that article as a prominent post.

oops, sorry for the redundant info....

Team Christina siempre. Joan was batshit crazy. Good movies though. This weekend I will watch Humoresque, Daisy Kenyon, Possessed and The Story of Esther Costello. And be grateful for not being adopted by her or anyone like her.

It's official, and we have a consensus! Joan was a raging alcoholic and a psychotic abusive mother. Christina told the truth. Anyone who doesn't believe her or attempts to diminish the severity of all the things Joan did are nothing more than enabling cunts. The end.

What kind of monster would you have to be to hold a 7 year old's hand over the fireplace? And long enough that he got blisters from it? J.C. was a disturbed and damaged individual.

R131 But, a huge part of what's in Mommie Dearest had already been published in that Redbook article. Joan had a chance to respond. And frankly, her denials aren't very convincing at all.

Mrs. Howell (Natalie Shafer) had stories of Crawford's abuse that were as bad as anything in the book.

Please. All of Hollywood witnessed Joan’s questionable parenting. It was an open secret.

This site reveals more about the people obsessed with Christina Crawford than what Christina wrote.

WHY are you idiots so consumed by this? Have you no life at ALL?

WHY are you in a thread you have no interest in, R145? Have you NO life at ALL?

I was in some Joan Crawford FB groups for a while. The people who run some of the big ones are really unhinged. They infiltrated several other groups that mocked Joan and reported posts for any possible violation until FB shut the groups were shut down. It was really orchestrated and they shut down 4 or 5 groups in succession. The Joan Crawford mafia. Do not cross them! Jesting aside, it was all to much like religious fervour for me. I like her films but to quote Christina in Mommie Dearest ‘Jesus Christ’…the other JC.

R147, there is a Joan Crawford Facebook group. You cannot post anything negative about Joan, particularly “Mommie Dearest” references.

I think there are far more Joan Crawford posts than Bette Davis ones.

Wow. I guess crazy really does attract crazy.

See also: Michael Jackson fans

R146 = Crawford freak with no life!

The thing about Joan was she didn’t have a reputation for being an asshole in Hollywood.

Christina did. And that’s what probably killed her acting career.

I think Joan was strict and probably abusive but not to the “Mommie Dearest” extent.

As Faye Dunaway said, their relationship was a child of want vs. a child of plenty.

Just because Tina might be prone to embellishment as far as her abuse in MD, doesn’t make it any less horrible. If she made certain scenarios up, she did have a book to sell. She would have to be totally psychotic to make up everything, and Tina has never struck me as this.

I don’t think that she was abusive…gimme some Orange Juice bitch!

Did someone say they had a book to sell?

R153 We’re talking about a woman who threw a drink in Elvis’ face in his own house because he wasn’t paying enough attention to her.

Joan wasn’t the only famous person to whoop her ass.

People have forgotten her documented behavior as an adult.

I didn't know about the adult Christina's behavior. Was she a raging bitch?

Gee, I can’t imagine why she behaved like that 🤔🤔🙄🙄

Crawford was a mess, and she should never have been allowed to adopt children. She may have had the best intentions (and she did not adopt them for publicity, as Christina claimed) but she was so warped by life (her childhood, her awful relatives, starting in films when she was still a teen, and all the things she had to do with disgusting men in Hollywood just to be given a chance to show what she could do).

What worked for her (her insane OCD attention to detail and awareness of herself onscreen) also worked against her IRL. Because she was so driven about being a star, she could work the crazy hours that were demanded back then, without complaint and with total dedication. Unfortunately she demanded the same kind of work ethic from her children, regarding their grades in school, their comportment, or the cleanliness of their rooms. She couldn't realize that her way wasn't the only way. And to her, the results probably seemed to prove her right; she was making hit movies in the mid 50s (Johnny Guitar, Female On The Beach, Queen Bee) when Bette couldn't get arrested in Hollywood.

Add to that her slide into alcoholism, which would have been terrifying to any child. It probably terrified Crawford as well (she could control every aspect of her career and life, but not that...) And as always she powered through, but it took a toll on everyone around her, and on herself.

Christina's a whole different kettle of fish. She was definitely abused, and she had the right to speak out about it, but Mommie Dearest was so self-serving, and uncomprehending . She also lied quite a bit in it (about her uncle Hal starting out first in Hollywood, and Joan following him out to CA, and then destroying his career and ruining his life). Hal ruined his own life (he was more of an alcoholic than she was, and also a drug addict, apparently) and the way she wrote about Crawford's mother was so slanted. Joan supported her (and Hall) for decades, and they wanted for nothing, but it was never enough for them, and her mother especially knew how to use the whole "withholding approval" tactic to her advantage.

But in MD, Christina never mentions that, saying finally "Grandma Anna, uncle Hal, I've often thought they paid a terrible price for sharing Mommie's early years." Bitch, WHAT? They were both adults and could have gone anywhere they wanted, but they followed her to California, and sponged off of her for the rest of their lives. As did Christina, and as she still does. How must it be to be 80+ years old, and to have never accomplished anything, outside of talking about how horrible her mother was?

Crawford was a fucking disaster and a mythic figure (as an actress and as a person). Christina...was not.

Good post r159. Especially about Joan's awful mother and brother. They were total leeches and really unpleasant people.

The same thing happened with Bette Davis, except it was her daughter BD Hyman who was the leech and an awful person.

Christina Crawford wasn't adopted, she was purchased from a baby broker. At 90 years of age, Christina Crawford doesn't have to prove anything and she does not have to get over it either. Mommy Dearest is available to watch on youtube at no cost right now, you ought to read the hundreds of comments people are leaving in response about being mentally, physically and sexually abused by their own parents.

[quote]she was making hit movies in the mid 50s (Johnny Guitar, Female On The Beach, Queen Bee) when Bette couldn't get arrested in Hollywood.

Davis aged hard in the 50s. She gained weight and all the cigarettes and booze really showed on her face, more so than other actresses. If she'd kept herself in better shape, perhaps she would've done better films in that decade.

R14= abuser

The "there's two sides to every story, what about some nuance?" ethos definitely benefits abusers. In fact, it's a line of thinking that abusive people are very fond of.

The fact is, abusers always feel their abuse is justified, especially in the moment. They are also masters at convincing others that the abuse is justified. I have never known an abusive man who didn't try to convince people his partner was crazy.

Joan bought the twins from that awful woman in Tennessee who literally stole babies from their parents to keep a supply chain going for her state run adoption agency. Child trafficking in the most literal sense.

Has Christina ever found her birth family? With the burgeoning of sites like 23 & Me, this has become a lot easier. (An adopted friend found his birth family this way.)

[quote]If she made certain scenarios up, she did have a book to sell.

It just doesn't sit well with me that someone would lie about their abuse and turn it into a campy joke. Like I said earlier in the thread a couple of days ago, I was abused as a kid, too, in some similar situations to what Christina described, but people don't believe her because of her inconsistencies and the idea that she lied because "she had a book to sell," and they wouldn't believe me, either. I mean, my experience was so similar my mother actually used the "for reasons well known to them" to cut out her three eldest kids from the will, just to start shit between all her kids after she died. I've told that part on DL before and no one believes me. Why? Because of fucking Christina Crawford, that's why.

My dislike for Christina doesn't mean I don't think Joan wasn't abusive. Of course she was. That doesn't mean Christina has been a real piece of work herself, because she most certainly has been.

Georgia Tann, r165. Notorious.

I have little doubt she may have exaggerated some details of how she treated those two kids, but there were too many eye witness reports from others in the movie industry that showed Crawford was a lunatic.

R161 She's only 83, not 90.

[quote]The "Webmaster" screams for the TRUTH TO BE EXPOSED

Bitch better not be coming after MY job!

Actually, BD was a pretty good daughter for a long time, but slowly went batshit crazy when she discovered religion. She did sponge off Bette, but still was supportive of her. What was interesting about her book was, Bette really didn't come off as badly as BD tried to make her, and that all in all, she really wan't that bad a mother.

Bette Davis was never an abusive mother like Crawford. Bette drank too much and could be overwrought and overly involved in her children's lives, but that was hardly abuse. She was pretty much your standard drama queen overbearing mother, like millions of other mothers have been.

[quote]It just doesn't sit well with me that someone would lie about their abuse and turn it into a campy joke.

And of course, it doesn't sit well -- to put it mildly -- that someone would turn their abuse into a campy joke even if they weren't lying about it. That's my main point here, regardless of how true the stories of abuse are or aren't.

Bette had her first child when she was almost 40. Supposedly it ages a woman. It did back then at least. Same with Lucy.

[quote]Supposedly it ages a woman. It did back then at least. Same with Lucy.

I thought Chesterfields and booze aged Lucy.

Yeah, I kinda think booze and cigarettes age someone a LOT more than childbirth.

Re: R156's post:

"Christina Crawford, the adopted daughter of Joan Crawford, paid Elvis a visit. The group was scattered, and I found myself in the TV room seated across a large coffee table from Elvis and Christina watching "Bonanza," one of the few shows in color then. Elvis had been puffing on a cigar making small talk with me as Christina tickled him and kidded around, apparently seeking more direct attention. Suddenly, she slung the contents of her cocktail glass right into Elvis's face. We're talking close range here, folks. The cigar went "phhhtttt" and he jumped up. I leapt up in surprise. He grabbed her by the hair; "Get this bitch out of here!" he screamed." Dragging her across the marble coffee table, kicking her in the butt and led her toward the front door as she struggled to keep up with the rather quick pace as he was pulling her locks. In just a few moments, a disheveled Elvis returned to the TV lounge, telling me apologetically, "Man, I'm sorry, I wasn't raised to treat a woman like that. She's crazy...I don't know what's wrong with her." - From Buzz Carson's autobiography: "Living the Rock 'n Roll Dream: The Adventures of Buzz Cason"

Bette overindulged an only child who hooked up early in life (aged 15) with a grifter.

I didn’t edit the book but I was at the publishing house when it came out and spent time with the editor and with Christina. She seemed eminently believable and the lawyers, who gave her a hard time at first, eventually believed what she said as well.

B.D. wasn't an only child.

Bette adopted her other two children r181.

When did this alleged incident take place, R178? After the book Mommie Dearest came out when Elvis was dead?

BD was in the opening scene of Whatever Happened to Baby Jane, lest you forget. I get a kick out the there way she talks exactly like her mother.

R184, but with literally NO acting talent WHATSOEVER. Every time I watch those scenes, I get so embarrassed for B.D. and for Bette that I cringe. Also for the wonderful Anna Lee, who plays B.D.'s mother.

Bette supported BD and her useless husband for two decades in an upper-middle class lifestyle, even though she couldn't stand BD's husband. When Bette had her strokes it was feared that she would either die soon or never work again so that's why BD wrote the book, because she was afraid her mother could no longer financially support her.

Duh, R185. I'm only talking about her VOICE and VOCAL INFLECTIONS. It's comical.

[quote] It just doesn't sit well with me that someone would lie about their abuse and turn it into a campy joke.

[quote] And of course, it doesn't sit well -- to put it mildly -- that someone would turn their abuse into a campy joke even if they weren't lying about it. That's my main point here, regardless of how true the stories of abuse are or aren't.

Hollywood and Faye Dunaway (unintentionally) turned Christina’s story into a “campy joke”, not Christina. You continue to attempt to use that to discredit Christina.

Datalounge, please!

I recall Christina saying somewhere that she had made contact with her birth family as an adult, and made just a brief comment to the effect that things didn't work out with them.

[quote]Hollywood and Faye Dunaway (unintentionally) turned Christina’s story into a “campy joke”, not Christina. You continue to attempt to use that to discredit Christina.

She didn't turn the story into a campy joke, but when that happened with the release of the movie, Christine embraced it by doing vile things like hosting screenings of the movie with drag queens participating, making jokes about wire hangers and axes, and so on. That's what I'm objecting to. Understand now?

Birth family??? Her parents were two teenagers.

[quote]Bette supported BD and her useless husband for two decades in an upper-middle class lifestyle, even though she couldn't stand BD's husband. When Bette had her strokes it was feared that she would either die soon or never work again so that's why BD wrote the book, because she was afraid her mother could no longer financially support her.

Wouldn't BD have wanted to be extra nice to her mother after the stroke, if only to insure a nice inheritance? I guess you're saying BD did it for the money she got for the book, and I guess that's possible. I don't know what kind of an advance she received, and I'm not interested enough to research it.

BD Hyman received a $100,000 advance for her book. This was per a Washington Post article, in May, 1985.

[quote] She didn't turn the story into a campy joke, but when that happened with the release of the movie, Christine embraced it by doing vile things like hosting screenings of the movie with drag queens participating, making jokes about wire hangers and axes, and so on. That's what I'm objecting to. Understand now?

You posted that earlier. Someone pointed out that Christina hated the movie and your comments were not accurate.

R283, it happened in 1967 - Tina darling had a bit role in an Elvis picture. The incident was documented in several books and recounted by more than one of Elvis's bodyguards who witnessed it.

[quote]BD Hyman received a $100,000 advance for her book.

That's unlikely at that time unless the book was sold for a movie.

Bette had some scandal surrounding her as well. The mysterious death of her one husband. There was gossip surrounding the one daughter's handicap.

Other people have attested that her marriage to Gary was a dysfunctional trainwreck fueled by booze and blowouts. While it may not have been physically abusive, I would hardly call it Norman Rockwell either.

Gary Merrill would be in jail today. He was drunk and physically abusive. It was amazing what people got away with back in those days.

Enough people have corroborated Christina's assessment of her awful upbringing, for the general thrust of it to be credible. Did she embellish any parts? Maybe, we'll never know. Did she let spite towards her mother and greed for money shape aspects of her account? In my opinion, probably. It's clear that Crawford was a massive diva who came from a highly traumatised childhood herself. She may have been mentally ill. She seemed bipolar. Her twins insist they did not have the same awful experience as Christina and they loved their mother very much. I believe them too. Children will have different experiences with the same parent.

Everyone knows Joan did it to those kids. Her fans are just as insane as she is.

[quote]Gary Merrill would be in jail today. He was drunk and physically abusive. It was amazing what people got away with back in those days.

You'd be amazed at how much men CONTINUE to get away with in this regard

r202 if you read the Davis bios it was BAD. Merrill regularly beat the shit out of Davis in a drunken rage and the cops showed up to their house multiple times but never did anything.

Is Christina Crawford still alive?Might she sue the owners of this website?

She's alive.

This is a good interview Christina did several years ago. She's smart and very reasonable.

Christina is homely AF.

Adopted Hollywood children look like normal people you'd see at the mall. Not ugly - normal. Look at the Cruise kids. Of course that's often rough on them.

Well isn't that what plastic surgery is for r208? Isn't there, like, a program or something for these poor unfortunates?

This is one of the wildest and most surreal interviews I've ever seen. Christina and Christian Brando interviewed together, along with Christian's gigolo friend, who was sleeping with both Christian and his father Marlon at the same time. Bill Cable used to be married to Elvira, Mistress of the Dark who's now a lesbian.

[quote]Someone pointed out that Christina hated the movie and your comments were not accurate.

Sorry, but you do not know what you are talking about. Apparently, Christina has in fact consistently maintained that she hates the movie, BUT she has also somehow managed to get on board the bandwagon that treats it as a camp classic, even though it deals with the deadly serious subject of child abuse. Here's some background on all of this, if you care to educate yourself rather than remain in a state of ignorance.

Seems like Ellen Corby and Joan may have done some " clam digging " in her dressing room ....

Bill Cable was straight but he was one of Colt's earliest models. Colt, aka Jim French, said in a much later interview that Bill Cable was the most beautiful man he had ever photographed.

Bill Cable was a gigolo and sexually free who slept with both women and men. He was gay for pay.

"sexually free" and "gay for pay" are not the same thing.

Tina does hate the movie. But, starting with the 20th anniversary of the book, she started to attend q and a sessions at screenings that played up the camp aspect in order to help promote the new edition of the book.

She still dislikes the movie, but has learned to have so fun with the more campy aspects of it.

Both Joan Crawford and Gary Merrill had BDF. Anyone know if emit was true for either of them?

I agree with the notion that Joan's grandson Casey is running the site.

And you know who else was allowed to adopt several children despite being mentally ill, physically abusive and with a violent obsession for cleanliness? Lois Jurgens.

Funny Fact: Joan was FAR MORE horrified that her bisexuality would be publicly revealed. Abusing the children was a lesser crime.

The guy who runs the "Lied" website (which does look like it's from 1998, as someone stated previously) is indeed the one who runs the "Concluding Chapter of Crawford" FB group. Bryan someone; he's not a bad-looking guy. I was in the group for a bit, but talk about some loons. It made DL look downright sane by comparison.

If she lied, it means Christina’s an exceedingly camp gay man trapped in a woman’s body.

[quote]Tina does hate the movie. But, starting with the 20th anniversary of the book, she started to attend q and a sessions at screenings that played up the camp aspect in order to help promote the new edition of the book. She still dislikes the movie, but has learned to have fun with the more campy aspects of it.

Correct, and I for one think it's disgusting to play up the "campy" and "funny" aspects of the movie -- including the wire hanger scene, the scene with the axe, and so on and so on -- for whatever reason. You are free to disagree.

WE played up the camp aspects you fucking moron. Christina only came around to accepting that after 17 years of THE FILM being a gay camp classic.

[quote]WE played up the camp aspects you fucking moron. Christina only came around to accepting that after 17 years of THE FILM being a gay camp classic.

She didn't HAVE to accept it, join the party, and feed into it. Either child abuse is a tragic thing, or it's something to be laughed at because some people made a bad, over-the-top film about it with a ridiculous, high-camp performance in the role of the abuser. That's the way I look at it. To repeat: In my opinion, Christina having embraced the "camp" value of the movie has only served to damage her credibility and whatever integrity anyone previously thought she had.

^One or the other. What a wide range of shit you have for brains.

[quote]...has only served to damage her credibility and whatever integrity anyone previously thought she had.

In *your* mind, r224. What's the deal anyway? You obviously never thought she had any.

I’ve also found websites that show Chuck Colson and Alger Hiss lied. I will post as soon as I recover the links.

R204 "Is Christina Crawford still alive?"

Barely.

I'll be seeing you VERY soon, Tina darling.

Will Lucille aka Joan be behind St. Pete @the Pearly Gates wire hanger in hand??

R226, it's incredibly nervy of you to think you can read my mind. FWIW, I had no reason to disbelieve Christina or question her integrity UNTIL she started to participate in events like the one I linked to above and am linking to again here. If you don't think stuff like this reflects very badly on her integrity and/or her credibility, we'll just have to disagree on that.

R224 = lots of personal problems besides no sense of humor

We literally had a thread with the newspaper article that interviewed Joan where she proudly admitted to abusing her children. She thought it was sound to punish her so for eating chocolate by making him eat the entire box until he vomited to teach him a lesson.

That has to be made by the Concluding Chapter of Joan Crawford guy. He’s mentally unsound.

Just don't think you can read his mind, r231!

This guy r233?

Yes, and OJ didn’t kill Nicole. Please. Christina couldn’t be anymore believable, not to mention all the people who backed up her claims. Joan was a fucking nutcase. Hollywood at that time was even worse than the Weinstein era. Why people need to believe that this semi-talented actress was a saint is beyond me. It’s like Michael Jackson’s brain dead cult following.

Yes, r253. Both web sites look exactly the same. He’s now all over Instagram spamming posts with a link to his web site. Guy needs to be placed in a straight jacket already. He even said that he was surprised by how nice Christina was, not to mention helpful to people on some show he took part in (they were both being interviewed separately). He really needs professional help.

My mom was about as phony and terrible as Joan but I didn’t write a nasty book so you all love her.

Please don't summon the "OJ is innocent, and what about Robert Blake??" troll r236!!

A milestone - at age 55, I finally watched "Mommie Dearest" for the first time last night. I feel like it was a version of crossing the Equator, I can finally claim my gay badge. I can now understand what all the quotes are about. But, when she was walking on the beach, I could swear she said, "I had seven pregnancies by Groucho". Obviously that's not correct, what did she actually say?

Franchot. Her husband Franchot Tone upon whom Bette Davis also had a crush.

He was her second husband.

Loved Tone's look & style. Very elegant. Just that alone would make dog face Tina pea green.

Franchot Tone was a very nice-looking guy.

More Franchot

Robert Young and Franchot look like they're about to spit-roast Joan....

There's something small and girly about Franchot Tone, Crawford had a bigger head. It could be the rhinoplasty gives him a feminine look.

Here's Frankie and Joan out with their favorite 1930s couple:

Another interesting tidbit is Christina is also an alcoholic, though she barely even mentions her recovery.

She certainly has made a career out of recycling her stories, but the made-up additions have gotten crazy (like Joan murdered Alfred Steele).

Joan took care of Franchot at the end of his life.

Joan was, without question, an alcoholic until a fall in 1974--combined with her Christian Science faith--made her quit drinking in January 1975.

She also came from a childhood of poverty, neglect, and abuse, very likely sexual abuse. She had no model of good parenting but grew up in an era when women weren't complete until they had children (and that's only a little better these days--it's still a widely held belief). And an era that believed in strict parenting and corporal punishment.

It doesn't excuse what she did, but it does explain it, and makes it exceptionally likely that what Christina says has truth to it, even if some of it is embellished or provably inaccurate in the fine details. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...it's probably a duck.

Joan herself was questioned at Town Hall (and in other interviews) about being a strict parent, and she always admitted that she was, usually spinning discipline as a form of showing caring/love and that she was raising her children to be normal and mannerly/well-brought-up. She talks about the sleep safes (to strap the kids in bed) in her final book, My Way of Life.

Giving her the benefit of the doubt on some of her actions, I think she probably knew on some level that she ultimately wasn't a great parent, especially to Christina and Christopher. Those two children were just bad matches for her personality, which isn't the child's fault. Thus the boarding schools. She outsourced their parenting to the best places she could.

The twins were much more docile and compliant, plus Joan had mellowed a bit and her career wasn't in as dire a place. In 1940 when Christina was adopted, she was 35 or so and really winding down at MGM, with Strange Cargo. The second Christopher was adopted in 1943, the year she left MGM.

The twins were from 1947, the year after she won the Oscar (in March on 1946). She was on her Warner Brothers success streak, having had back to back hits with Mildred Pierce ('45) and Humoresque ('46). Possessed and Daisy Kenyon were her 1947 films, and she was nominated for Possessed.

She really wasn't anywhere near broke when she died, as Judy Garland was. Joan was more Hollywood "broke" (net worth of few million instead of much, much more, and a little cash-poor) and with the retreat from her public life seems to have become frugal and minimalist about acquiring new things, but still held on to as much of her old life as she cared to.

The first apartment downsizing from the Steele apartment to Imperial House happened in 1967, then the final apartment downsizing in the same building happened in 1973. Though her last public appearance was in 1974, she was still seeing people in person who were close friends in 1976.

Isn't it crazy we're still talking about her and hashing all this out, and that she's still (reasonably) mainstream, what with Feud and all?

What's the best biography of Joan?

[quote] What's the best biography of Joan?

Trog

[quote]Joan took care of Franchot at the end of his life.

Um, I don't think so. She helped but didn't "take care of him" until the end.

She REALLY quit drinking? I don't believe it for a second, faith or not.

[quote]Joan had mellowed a bit ...

Yeah, from melomaniac to partially less OCD, okay.

[quote]the final apartment downsizing in the same building happened in 1973

Yeah, to a smaller apt on the Upper East Side of NYC on the 20-something floor. I weep for her.

Joan took care of Franchot when he was dying of cancer. When Franchot died, Joan was doing the Mike Douglas Show in Philadelphia. After the taping Christina told Joan the news and accompanied her back to the hotel. Joan was inconsolable.

Joan quit drinking in late '74 or early '75 when she had a bad drunken fall in her apartment. Her face hit an end table or a coffee table and she got knocked out. When she regained consciousness on the floor, she had two black eyes and a cut on her forehead. She was so scared by that she never touched booze again. Her friends were absolutely amazed that she could just stop drinking like that, after decades of alcoholism.

This has all been well-documented r252

So is she the only surviving child of La Crawford?

Yes, R254, by Joan and her fans.

r256 it's been documented in numerous sources.

Here's another fun fact you may not know: Bette Davis smoked a lot

[quote]You just know some ancient, cigarette sucking, kaftan wearing, Joan Crawford fan-queen paid some rent boy to throw this website up so she could finally "avenge Joan"

And for that you gotta love him!

This is a telling photo.

Perhaps the animosity was because Joan (tanned and gorgeous in this photo) realized that little Christina actually looked like a Mini Me version of Joan's original MGM nemesis Norma Shearer! She does!

I didn't know Christian Crawford was a singer, lied is particularly difficult.

And typing is hard too. Apparently.

Where does Joanie go to get back her reputation?!

I think Franchot was her true love. It was obvious she married Alfred for the money and Pepsi stock.

[quote] Franchot Tone was a very nice-looking guy.

He was average at best.

Franchot was never the same after getting involved with that hellcat Barbara Payton. She was two-timing him with a low-life z-list actor and the man beat him so badly that Franchot nearly died and was left disfigured. He divorced Payton after that, but his career was basically over.

In Joan's defense, she tried to warn Franchot about Barbara.

[quote] Franchot was never the same after getting involved with that hellcat Barbara Payton. She was two-timing him with a low-life z-list actor and the man beat him so badly that Franchot nearly died and was left disfigured. He divorced Payton after that, but his career was basically over. In Joan's defense, she tried to warn Franchot about Barbara.

He was always an average looking guy.

R263, Clark Gable was Joan’s love of her life. Joan loved Alfred Steele, too, and missed him for the rest of her life.

She had four marriages of no more than four years each and innumerable flings and lovers throughout her life. Joan wasn't capable of a "love of her life." That's not an insult, just a fact. Not everyone is built for that kind of thing.

Joan loved getting dicked down by a variety of men. She got some of the best cock in Hollywood.

R268, Alfred Steele died; Joan was a widow. They were married four years. Actress Judy Geeson said that Joan deeply missed him. (Joan and Judy were in the film “Berserk.”)

Being a widow was a new career for Joan, she loved it. (Which included what she said to Judy Gleeson)

Joan dated Hollywood lawyer and studly man about town Greg Bautzer in the late 40s, and his reminiscences of that period make Joan sound totally deranged.

Four four year marriages. Joan 4X4.

In the book, Christina said Cesar Romero was one of Joan’s many lovers. I couldn’t take that bitch seriously after that.

How was Cesar able to survive in Hollywood in those days without a beard marriage?

[quote] How was Cesar able to survive in Hollywood in those days without a beard marriage?

Because he is a Latino. He was never a leading man. Therefore, he didn’t face the same type of pressure.

The reality is that no one here will ever know the truth. People talk about eye witnesses, but there are no eyewitnesses to the physical abuse that Christina claims - only to acts that some outsiders felt amounted to psychological abuse. That is what people like June Allyson and Helen Hayes witnessed. I'm in the camp that says that Joan was cold and cruel to her daughter and son, especially by today's standards, and that Christina probably fabricated a lot of stuff too. As some of the anecdotes above prove, she was far from stable in her professional life, so why would we take her written reminiscences as gospel truth?

[quote]Joan loved getting dicked down by a variety of men. She got some of the best cock in Hollywood.

I like to imagine that her pink, fleshy vulva got a healthy dose of long, hard cocks. And that those cocks thrust mercilessly against her sugar walls , disgorging rivulets of warm semen in Joan's uterine canal.

That would explain all the abortions.

Maria Riva corroborated Crawford tales of physical abuse in the memoir she wrote about her mother. She wrote Dietrich saw the bruises on the kids who may have deserved the beatings because they were adopted and may have something wrong with them.

Marlene was a twisted cunt. Her reaction to her daughter being molested by Mercedes deAcosta should have gotten her parental rights revoked.

R278 Aw aw! No. Dear god. No! 😱🤮

[quote] I'm in the camp that says that Joan was cold and cruel to her daughter and son, especially by today's standards, and that Christina probably fabricated a lot of stuff too. As some of the anecdotes above prove, she was far from stable in her professional life, so why would we take her written reminiscences as gospel truth?

Christina did the magazine interview when she was 20.

Abusive unstable childhoods often create unstable adults. Christina did however succeed academically and she did have a career.

For multiple people to take notice and confirm the abuse. Joan was obviously “cold and cruel” (emotional abuse) by any decade’s standards. You’re attempting to minimize the emotional abuse so that you cast doubt on the physical abuse.

[quote]I like to imagine that her pink, fleshy vulva got a healthy dose of long, hard cocks.

Vulva?

It’s a Swedish automobile, Rose @ r284!

The issue is, darling R285, vulva doesn't "get cock."

R12, you only EVER refer to [italic]Miss[/italic] Crawford, cunt!

[quote]I like to imagine that her pink, fleshy vulva got a healthy dose of long, hard cocks. And that those cocks thrust mercilessly against her sugar walls , disgorging rivulets of warm semen in Joan's uterine canal.

Stars in the Canal, coming soon from author Barbara Tartland.

My vulva has been pulsing just reading about all this and I'm gay and male.

I find Christina's accusations credible. So much so that I wonder if she intentionally left some details OUT of her book because they were too traumatizing.

One Halloween afternoon in the early 80s I walking down Christopher Street and saw this perfect queen in entire Crawford drag cuddling a big doll in her arms. Every few hundred feet she would start slamming the doll down repeatedly headfirst onto the sidewalk shouting "No, Christina, no! I said no!" Then she'd pick the doll up and continue walking it down the street, cuddling it, before screaming and crushing its head on the sidewalk again. Ah, New York.

So if Joan had seven pregnancies by Franchot, did they end up as miscarriages or abortions?

Miscarriages. Because she had so many abortions she couldn’t carry her babies to term.

Casey LaLoser, is that you?

Go eat your feelings, Mary.

Joan may have had a chance at her own baby today, but those abortions back in the day damaged her uterus.

Tell me about it r295

The one who runs The Concluding Chapter Of...is fine, capable and intelligent. The truly psychotic Joan Crawford stan is the one who runs The Best Of Everything website, Stephanie Jones. People have taken out restraining orders against her. She is absolutely nuts, a drunk middle-aged psycho.

Barbara Stanwyck, Jane Russell, Myrna Loy and Polly Bergen were only a few Hollywood actresses made infertile from back-alley abortions.

We have a whole new normal coming for back alley abortions!

Welcome to 1935!

Typical queens defending some dead woman who wouldn't give a fuck about you if you were on fire. Let the hurt go.

Typical fraus cruising Datalounge. Let it go.

I don't know who's crazier ... the queen at r235 or the lesbian at r297

Who used to run the Legendary Joan Crawford site?

The queen looks like that queen that got herself surgically changed into a Ken doll.

Joan attracts the crazies.

R298, Stanwyck, Jane Russell and Polly Bergen weren't able to get pregnant because they were too busy eating pussy.

Ate every pussy

Between Carlsbad and the Pier

And I'm here!

Polly wasn’t a lesbian, was she? Jane Russell too? Barbara? I can believe that.

[quote]Polly wasn’t a lesbian, was she?

I've always heard that she was, and that it was pretty much common knowledge in showbiz circles.

Jane Russell really did have a dykey vibe despite the glamor girl treatment in films like Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Not a diesel dyke, but not quite a lipstick lez either.

Polly Bergen was most definitely a lesbian, despite her marriages to men.

Axe, bring me the Christina!

I was just reading the "What's your favorite jazz standard?" thread when I looked at r203. I didn't realize I was in a different thread and thought immediately, "What?? Helen Merrill and Miles Davis recorded together AND she beat the shit out of him?!!"

So did Joan leave most of her estate to the twins?

R314 Yes. And Christina and Christopher took them to court to get their shares after Joan omitted them both from the will.

Joan didn't leave much to the twin, less than 80K each I believe. Most of it went to charity.

r316 that's worth around $380,000 in 2022.

Joan was oddly philanthropic for someone so narcissistic. Apparently she was fairly generous in that regard.

I just think she expected her kids to viciously whore their way up the success ladder like she did, which is why she gave almost all of it away to charity.

Didn't the twins live down the street from Alfred and her in their own apartment growing up? I remember reading that somewhere and thinking it was odd.

R297 A deranged lesbian with multiple restraining orders is nothing new. But that woman does take the cake. She's more fucking nuts than the Sussex Squad, Brenda Dickson and Madonna combined.

I've been to that Crawford site and liked it, I had no idea the webmistresses was a crazy drunk dyke.

[quote]I've been to that Crawford site and liked it, I had no idea the webmistresses was a crazy drunk dyke.

Remember that famous New Yorker cartoon of a dog at a keyboard saying to a another dog "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog."

Franchot Tone was so boring I can’t believe he became a star. As boring as Fred MacMurray. I have never understood the appeal they evidently held for audiences in the 1930s and 40s. So many potential great movies ruined by their wet blanket-ness.

R317, $380,000 out of a few million isn't generous. She was still punishing her children from the grave.

I didn't make any judgements one way or another r325. I just put it in context.

I wonder if it bugged Joan that Christina was a homely child for a long time.

R324 they were usually paired up with A-list leading ladies so as not to overpower them. Guys like George Brent were like that too. Attractive, affable and about as bland as porridge. Honorable mention to Joel McCrea. But he moved over to the Western genre, where his wooden acting could pass as stoicism. He was also kind of hot.

Nah, I actually love George Brent and Joel McCrea. A lot. McCrea was stunningly sexy and Brent had a warmth about him, and great hair. I think Joel McCrea’s acting is very underrated.

FAT George Brent? Ewwww

Also, Tone was always playing second-fiddle to A-listers like Clark Gable. In his movies with Joan, he was either the schlub who got rejected for Gable OR he was the schlub she settled for when Gable's character died/became a villain. He deeply resented this and it contributed to the breakdown of his marriage to Joan.

r328=Maureen Stapleton

r329 is also Maureen Stapleton

Franchot was the one I think she really loved. She cared for him when he was dying.

She loved Gable, but they both realized that the appeal of their decades-long affair was that it WAS an affair. Sometimes, it's better to stay fuckbuddies.

I wish Joan and DF Jr had had a son - I bet he would have been beautiful.

Did I read on here that the twins are both dead now? Why did they die so young? Christopher, too?

And yet here I AM bitches!

Too evil to die!

Yes, Christina we know, because ONLY the good die young!

Fred MacMurray, Robert Montgomery and Melvyn Douglas were all legitimately very popular and talented (enough) actors in their film prime and all played opposite the big leading ladies of the day, including Joan, without overpowering her. I guess Franchot Tone , Robert Young and George Brent come in the next tier down but their windows of popularity were shorter in films.

Of the lot, I think Melvyn Douglas was the best actor and he just got better and better working right up until his death. I'd say Montgomery, while handsome enough and not without charm was the luckiest. He starred in A-list film after film, especially as Joan Crawford's leading man (five times). I guess his ability to do the role while reflecting her greatness made him very popular with Joan. She seemed to like him a lot.

You forgot another bland 'serviceable' ancient movie actor, Robert Young.

[quote]She cared for him when he was dying.

Yes. When he was DYING

[quote]You forgot another bland 'serviceable' ancient movie actor, Robert Young.

Read my post again, especially the part that said...

[quote]I guess Franchot Tone , [bold]Robert Young[/bold] and George Brent come in the next tier down...

Tone was definitely a step down in looks from Fairbanks. Oddly, Fairbanks always spoke kindly of Crawford, but I suppose he was not a person to say anything unkind in public.

Well, r343, his affair with Gertie showed he had a taste for high strung actresses.

So weird that she is now older than her mother was when she died.

At the time of her death, Polly Bergen was living with her manager Jan McCormack, and most remembrances by people who knew her personally include Jan. Bergen never acknowledged that they were anything more than friends in the press.

The pregnancy that got Polly out of First Impressions was tubal. She was married to Freddie Fields at the time, so it may have been an agent's ploy. They adopted three children and she converted to Judaism for Freddie.

Polly tells the story of her abortion at age 17 in that book The Choices We Made. She was a good Democrat and campaigned for Hillary. She directed memorials in her name be made to Planned Parenthood.

Polly and Jane Seymour were the best things about that bloated [italic]War and Remembrance[/italic] miniseries. Polly played Rhoda so daffy.

I wonder who the fathers were of Joan's aborted babies?

[quote]Bergen never acknowledged that they were anything more than friends in the press.

YEAH

R348, they were unborn FETUSES, not "babies," dickhead.

ABORT ABORT ABORT!

CHUCK IT DOWN THE PAN!

Was Polly Bergen a lesbian?

R350 - funny, when my female coworkers get pregnant, they always refer to them as "babies", not "fetuses" (if they're planning on having it).

Where do you live, Alabama?

Noel Coward liked Douglas…maybe…

Poor Christina.

When are going to get a Chace Crawford Lied website?

As others have noted, the design similarities give away who is behind Christina Crawford Lied. But you can also look up the domain registration. The webmaster's info is private but Concluding Chapter and Christina Crawford Lied are registered and maintained through the same Canadian company, unlike The Best of Everything.