It's almost too easy to write a Grrr! column about Madonna.
From her S&M wardrobe to nailing herself on a crucifix to proselytizing about Kabbalah, the Material Girl living in a material world has certainly made the most of her fame, and she's also Grrr'd many along the way.
But the thing that Grrrs me the most about Madonna is that she neglects any responsibility that comes with her act.
Not so many years ago, when she was already a mommy writing children's books, Madonna decided it would be a good idea to French kiss Britney Spears at the MTV Video Music Awards.
"No harm, no foul," her supporters said.
But ask any of those same supporters how they would feel if they were flipping through the channels late one night and one of their precious daughters was featured on a "Girls Gone Wild" infomercial, sucking face with their college roommate from spring break.
But of course, the demise of morality among the younger set is not all Madonna's fault.
After all, she is writing children's books, which must account for something, right? That must also be the thinking of "I love me some me" football-distraction-turned children's book author Terrell Owens, with his "Little T.O." series.
T.O.'s next book should be a collaboration with Madonna. It could even be a series of three books: "Little T.O. Learns How to French Kiss," "Little T.O. Learns How to Circumvent Adoption Laws" and "Little T.O. Learns Money Can Buy Anything."
"Twenty-five million reasons to be alive." But I digress.
Madonna has been all over the news recently after adopting 1-year-old David Banda from the African nation of Malawi.
What is so troubling about this latest publicity stunt — and let's face it, folks, that's what this is, sadly for the child — is not that Madonna and husband Guy Ritchie will be bad parents. They are reportedly very good parents — with the best nannies, tutors, toys, horses, homes and protection money can buy.
What's really troubling about this is Madonna did not adopt a child who was an actual orphan. This little boy was effectively legally kidnapped (Malawi officials are looking into this) because he has a father and a loving grandmother.
The fact that the boy's father, Yohame Banda, said he is happy for his son because he will now have money and presumably a better life and education does not make it any easier for the parents who have waited years to be able to adopt real orphans from Malawi, while Madonna did so (seemingly) in a flash.
A $3 million donation by Madonna and Ritchie to build an orphanage for some 4,000 children helped speed up the adoption process, no doubt, and I'm not about to Grrr that.
However, I do question Madonna's motives. Is she so selfish that she would be willing to adopt a child who is technically not an orphan, rather than, say, writing a check to his poor family so that they could raise him properly?
I mean, seriously, if she cares enough about the child to take him into her home, where she already has two children, she could spare a few bucks to help out the kid's family, no?
It's all very confusing, isn't it?
In the end, David will have a better life with Madonna. In the end, some 4,000 orphans will benefit from a $3 million donation from Madonna. In the end, Malawi may speed up adoption processes for the other law-abiding and loving parents-to-be who have been waiting years for their turn.
On the flip side, there will be some unfit parents who benefit from all of this, and when an innocent child is adopted hastily, by the wrong types of people, it is that child who will be the victim in all of this.
And that is a crying shame. Madonna won't care about that.