Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Poor unfortunate soul

It took me a while to choose a photo for this post, but I went with this one from the JaDine In Love concert. I think there's a lot of strength radiating from Nadine Lustre in this photo, so it seemed perfect given the current situation.
Twitter’s 140-character limit on our tweets really sucks. It forces you to compress your thoughts into such a tiny space and sometimes, that doesn’t go over well at all. Especially when you have so much to say on a certain topic, like I did with the article published by lifestyle web site Preen last night about Nadine Lustre.

Everyone knows that Nadine is one of my favorite girls. We hit it off well at Julia Barretto’s debut last year—I spent most of the night hanging out with her and some of our common friends—and we’ve been tight ever since. So yes, I have to admit the piece in question didn’t sit well with me when I read it last night.

If it had been published before I was diagnosed with and entered treatment for my mental health disorder, my first reaction would have been to fire off a series of angry tweets directed at Preen and writer Jacqueline Arias. My disorder makes me unable to manage my emotions properly. I get angry really easily, and when I do, you better watch out. A volcanic eruption ain’t got nothing on me.

However, I was diagnosed in May 2015, I’ve learned that I should try not to give in to my impulses, especially when reacting to something upsetting. So I just held myself in check and, when I calmed down, decided that tweeting either Jacqueline or Preen would be a waste of time.

I’ve learned that there are some things you just shouldn’t dignify with a response—and in my opinion, that article about Nadine is one of them. It's so not well-written at all. It’s a supremely poor attempt at snark. Why waste 140 characters on something that's not worth even a single one? Yes, what Jacqueline Arias wrote is upsetting, but the better reaction, IMO, would’ve been to turn the other cheek and focus on other things instead. The opposite of love isn’t hate, it’s indifference.

If you absolutely must react, say something once and then move on, which I think is what James himself did. That's what I meant to say in my tweets and all I tried to get the fans to do last night, when I tweeted about calming down and reading StarStudio instead. I realize now that my attempt to divert the fans’ attention was clumsy at best, and for that I apologize.

I also don’t have anything against the JaDines who got mad at me last night. They’re perfectly entitled to feel however they want to, and I know they were upset over the article so they said some things they probably didn’t mean.

I’m just surprised that Preen took the article down and issued an apology. I was sure they would stand by their content and their writer. That’s normally what any publication would do. But I guess the reaction to what Jacqueline Arias wrote was just overwhelmingly negative—and personally, I can’t blame the fans for reacting the way they did. They felt compelled to speak up in defense of Nadine because they love her, that’s all.

I just have to wonder how Jacqueline Arias is feeling atm. I’m not too worried about Nadine, to be honest. She’s a strong woman and she has James to lean on besides. It’s just that as a writer myself, it’s kind of easy for me to put myself in that poor unfortunate soul’s shoes. Others may say she had it coming and part of me agrees, but something people need to understand is that for a writer, if your editors don’t stand by you or your story and yet saw fit to publish it, that’s very sad.

Anyway, since Preen took the article down and issued an apology, the point is moot and academic now. I think the best thing to do at this juncture is to accept their apology for what it is and move forward.

Did you like this post? Sound off in the comments!

Main photo by Nimfa and Sany Chua for Jules Explains it All.


  1. I kinda dig what you're trying to say. Yes, that article infuriated JaDine fans such as myself, But we already had our piece to say and somehow lecture that careless and immature writer, so it's time to move on. I guess by now, she already understands the consequences of poor writing, and next time be more careful with her write up, I hope! And if she still has a career after this.... What I don't understand though, is Inquirer, being one of the biggest publication, would allow such unwitty and crappy article, if they would even consider that as a Satire, to be out for the nth time. And funny thing is, as soon as it gets the attention it needed, they readily delete it from their page... This is not responsible journalism, not even owning their write ups. Tsk3x! Too bad! Anyway, Nadine is at the top of her game now, with a blooming career and a lovelife. Who said, you can't have both? So amidst all the negative write ups, Nadine still has the last laugh, bcoz she gets to be talked. And the more she gets criticized, the more she gets support and love from her fans, family and ofcourse her man, James.

  2. You also pointed out what has been on my mind all along .. that despite the fact I found the article distasteful, I was not expecting Inquirer to retract the article and issue an apology. Does this mean the editor didn't have enough foresight to anticipate what was coming or was it pure negligence on their part allowing a piece of obvious mockery to get published? I get that some writers thrive on satirical pieces (Jessica Zafra is an excellent example who has several books published under this very theme) but the author of this journalistic faux pas failed so miserably in her attempt to be tongue in cheek. For one, she forgot or perhaps misunderstood the very definition of satire - "a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn". On top of a satirical piece done wrong, the author made another mistake of choosing her subject; because Nadine is a hardworking, reputable, multi-faceted and most of all, loved by many. You cannot use an exemplary individual with exceptional standing simply because doing so would defeat the purpose of a satirical piece. Meaning, the article lambasted her fierce determination to succeed, her physical appearance, her dignity as a person. And this was why it rankled when I read the published mockery. Yes, Jadine fans can be quite overzealous at times but, I have to give it to them this time because the author failed miserably at using artistic pass to hurl insults towards not only an exemplary young star, but to the very gender their column was built for - women. But, that's just me.

  3. Thankyou Juls because u gave a good point and thankyou for understanding JADINE to be honest i actually cried when i saw the article because for me that article is too much and yes ur right NADINE is a very strong independent woman an article will not put her down thanks juls for giving a good point looking forward to see in person that would be an honor

  4. She became the pansy that got thrown under the bus. It's not really about what she wrote but that it actually got published by a supposedly respectable media outlet. What should astound is the disregard for journalistic integrity. Maybe the editors thought it's JUST a celebrity/lifestyle piece. Let's feed this one to the wolves.

  5. It seems that the writer also wrote similar articles abt Liza and Maine. So I guess her editor deemed it fit to publish but unfortunately for this article vigilant Jadines caught and read the article abt Nadine and found it offensive. I get what you said abt turning the other cheek but I think if Jadines did that another poor unfortunate actress would have been another victim if Jadines didn't complain. Plus as a woman those articles were demeaning and for the article to be written by another woman and published in a site said to be for women it was just unacceptable. But now they took down those articles and I honestly hope the writer apologize too. But I guess that might not happen.

  6. *I did not think that I would ever be fangirling over... (oops! typo.)

  7. I'm a jadine fan but I'm more offended as a woman and how it was portrayed in that stupid article. Why can't women be successful and beautiful for her own sake??? Why is she insinuating that these attributes are goals you need to get a james reid??? Don't women deserve success in their own right without being dependent from men??? And to think branded themselves as a lifestyle site to empower women. They feed this to the young generation and that is not okay!!! I'm so sick and tired of these pasosyal sites who are pretending to be for women empowerment but all they preach are for young generation to be materialistic, narcissistic, shallow, and stupid.

  8. Why does my comment keep getting deleted? Strange...

  9. Haven't read the article though. 😑

  10. Haven't read the article though. 😑


© Jules Explains it All
Maira Gall