Top Stories

Natalie Portman Speaks Out on 'Eating Animals'

Natalie Portman Speaks Out on 'Eating Animals'

Natalie Portman takes to the Huffington Post to write about how author Jonathan Safran Foer (Everything Is Illuminated) and his book Eating Animals changed her already strict vegetarian habits to go even more extreme.

Now, the 28-year-old actress writes, she’s a vegan activist: “[T]his book reminded me that some things are just wrong. Perhaps others disagree with me that animals have personalities, but the highly documented torture of animals is unacceptable, and the human cost Foer describes in his book, of which I was previously unaware, is universally compelling.”

Natalie, who has been voted the World’s Sexiest Vegetarian by PETA, refuses to wear leather or fur and is a huge animal rights advocate.

Read more from Natalie at the HuffingtonPost.com.

Like Just Jared on Facebook
Photos: L. Gallo/WENN
Posted to: Natalie Portman

JJ Links Around The Web

Frazer Harrison/Getty

108 Comments

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 » Show All

I still do not understand why is Natalie Portman responsible for this.

I love that dress and she looks great in it, she stands out as always, as at the Oscars and Love and other impossible pursuits premiere.

I blame her stylist.

well, the nipple did not make a break so there is nothing to criticize.

I don’t even like Natalie, but I completely agree with her on this.

Ultimately, it is the actor who makes the final decision as to what to wear and Natalie always makes great choices. She has implacable taste. Her dress at the Oscars was one of the best if not the best. She looks wonderful every time I see her pictures and she definitely stands out, she is never lost in the crowed of other actors. That takes taste.

I am glad you agree with NP.

British Latin American @ 10/28/2009 at 9:53 am

@christine: God, you’re a dumb s**t.

natural observer @ 10/28/2009 at 10:05 am

It is a known fact that vegetarians are healthier than meat eaters, it is just a matter of discipline that most of us do not have. I respect Natalie for being able to stick to it for so long. Who knows, may be when she wants to start a family she will drop it.

Um okay. People are starving to death in our country, dying in an unjust war, and struggling with HMOS and her biggest concern of the day is whether or not to eat a hamburger? Gawd, I wish I were a celebrity.

Eating a hamburger is not her biggest concern, she has many concerns as FINCA and animal rights and politics/elections and many many other issues. Being a vegetarian/vegan is just her stand against cruelty to animals. She is a very intelligent and deep thinker and she inspires thought and ideals.

No longer a fan. @ 10/28/2009 at 11:38 am

@ #44

Drugging someone and forcing ones self on them while saying repeatedly “No, stop.” is not consensual (go read the court transcripts).

It don’t matter what age, sex, sexual history, race, color, or religion. No means NO!

-No longer a fan.

You will see her movies just as much as you will see Harrison Ford’s movies and Scorsese and others. You will be a fan as soon as all the facts are know and the reasons why many celebs signed the petition.

Natalie did a review from a book she read and she made a really interesting subject of discussion that makes me think more about the animal, the food, veganism, etc whether I agree or disagree with her.
I salute her.

So Judgemental @ 10/28/2009 at 12:37 pm

Wow.. all this vitriol over her signing the petition.

Polanski’s victim has also been trying for years to get the charges dropped against him. Are you as hateful towards her as well?

Polanski’s victim says she believes he has been punished enough. That she doesn’t believe he is a threat to society and that in actuality people like you and the media demanding his return are victimizing her and now her family all over again.

On top of that California is bankrupt. Schwarzenegger is considering letting 30,000 inmates out of prison and back on the streets to save money… will even more criminals who are dangerous to society NOW be released to cover the cost of returning an old man to the United States 30+ years after the crime to argue that he plead guilty specifically for a plea deal that was time served in a mental ward but the judge was backing out of due to outside pressure even though the psych evaluation stated he WAS NOT a pedophile or a threat to society, even though no one else has come forward, even though he has been a law abiding citizen since and is married with children of his own, and even though the prosecutor at the time admitted to lying in regards to the case, with a unwilling victim who at the time the prosecution didn’t even want to have testify because of her admitted previous multiple sex acts and experimentation with drugs and alcohol before the incident with Polanski and no physical evidence (no bruising or tearing from her rape examination) , no trace evidence on her underwear or clothes and a cooperating witness obtained only in exchange for getting her cocaine possession charges dropped (Angelica Houston).

This case was a mess. And now.. how many more dangerous criminals who recently raped, assaulted, car jacked, burglarized a holes are going to be put back on the streets to re offend so that we can cover the cost of expedition and sentencing, possibly re-trying and then incarcerating Polanski?

Just keep the ***** banned from the states. And keep the real threats to our safety behind bars until their sentence is over.

So Judgemental @ 10/28/2009 at 12:54 pm

Seriously.. what Polanski did was 100% wrong. No matter if she did say no one thousand times or even if (which I do not believe) she seduced him and even though she was not a virgin and had experimented wih Quaaludes and alcohol several times before (great mother by the way.. way to watch your 13 year old daughter lady!!).. the girl was 13. Against the law no matter what happened.. no matter which explanation or excuse or theory you use.

The defense wanted the victim to list the other men she had sex with and who gave her drugs and alcohol and wanted them prosecuted as well. It was literally her word against his.. they wanted a mental evaluation done on her as well.

This would have been a horrible trial so they let him plead to the lowest possible act.. just unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. Ambiguously meaning she could have given consent but still illegal due to age. They were going to give him time served.. but then the public went nuts and the judge folded and purposely told the defense and prosecution what he was going to do and coached them what to say in court and Polanski got scared and ran.. you would probably have run to if your parents had died in concentration camps and you had hid in various homes to survive.. he no longer trusted the system.

Of course I think he should voluntarily return and serve a reduced sentence.. for the original charges no time due to the original plea deal and give him one year for running. And then kick him out of the country again forever.

Take into consideration the victims wishes, how incredibly corrupted the trial was, and the fact that California cannot even afford to bring him back and process and incarcerate him.. not without releasing more inmates to do so.

What is more important to you.. Polanksi serving time? Or 200 to 500 recent offenders serving time? California may not be able to afford both.

No longer a fan. @ 10/28/2009 at 1:11 pm

This person said everything I wanted to say.
Please, listen to the whole.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqSkZKKPfk8

The idiot in the video is only doing it for personal publicity. There are truly serious crimes being committed daily and he chose which one – Roman Polanski. Disgusting.

The system did not work, the prosecution made mistakes, the judge made mistakes, the victim wants no part of it, in any other case it would have been a mistrial or the case would have been dropped, but due to the famous name of RP now every one is on the band wagon.

I don’t hear this loser talking about OJ Simpson.

OJ Simpson killed 2 people and waked away unpunished. Where is the outrage. RP had sex with a little ***** and did not know her age. He has been out of the country for 30 years, enough is enough. Sometimes the system fails, but this crime is not as serious as others it is just more public.

No longer a fan. @ 10/28/2009 at 3:38 pm

@94 Before taking pictures you need a standard consent form.
Leagally you have to show age and/ proof of age (birth cirtificate, or drivers licence, ect..).

(transcript):

MR. GUNSON: On March 10, 1977, the day you had sexual intercourse with the complaining witness, how old did you believe her to be?

(Pause in the proceedings while a discussion off the record ensued at the counsel table between the defendant and his counsel.)

THE DEFENDANT: She was 13.

MR. GUNSON: Did you understand that she was 13 on March 10, 1977, when you had sexual intercourse with her?

(Pause in the proceedings while a discussion off the record ensued at the counsel table between the defendant and his counsel.)

THE DEFENDANT: Yes.

Obviously, based on the text of the proceedings you posted there was advise of the counsel, this advise of the counsel was based on the deal made with the prosecution and the judge. Had there been no deal, there would have been no such statement form the defendant. After the authorities broke the deal, the defendant had no choice but to run, he had no one left to trust, basically, he was framed. You would run too.
To this day we don’t know if her knew her age at the time of intercourse. He agreed to the deal, this does not mean he knew she was 13.

as to the consent form, so he did not fill one out, big deal, may be his secretary did and he did not see it

he is a director and a good judge of character, he could see that this girl had a promiscuous history and saw this was nothing knew to her

if this girl was goody too shoes, he would not do anything

why don’t you focus your outrage on horrible cases dismissed on technicalities and criminals go free and our cities are full or recidivists

Polanski lead a good life after this unfortunate incident for 30 years.

o plz stfu
i hate u animal activists who say i shouldnt eat meat or drink milk
i do however agree that animals shouldnt be tortured when being killed for food, it’s cruel but i really hate it when activists go 2 the extreme and say no milk or meat

Pages: « 1 2 3 [4] 5 » Show All

Comment and Share!








You have of 5,000 characters left.

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here