Brigitte Macron's playful push to Emmanuel goes viral: About their romance, 25-year age gap, net worth
When French First Lady Brigitte Macron playfully nudged President Emmanuel Macron just as he stepped off his presidential plane for his South Asia tour, she likely didn't expect their love story to grab global attention once again – but that's exactly what happened.
The couple grabbed headlines after a video surfaced showing Brigitte Macron playfully shoving Emmanuel Macron's face.
While some speculated it was a domestic spat, the French President dismissed the buzz, saying they were simply 'horsing around.' France's President Emmanuel Macron was pushed in the face by his wife Brigitte Macron
'My wife and I were squabbling, we were rather joking, and I was taken by surprise,' he said, probably thinking this would bury the hatchet.
With the couple back in the spotlight, here's a closer look at their rather unique love story.
Brigitte Trogneux was born on April 13, 1953, in Amiens in northern France.
Brigitte Macron is French President Emmanuel Macron's wife and thus, French first lady. She is 72 years old.
The 25-year age difference and the extraordinary way they met – he pursued her when he was her pupil – makes her the most talked-about French president's partner.
A drama teacher at a French school, Brigitte Macron was known to his students as Madame Auziere.
She was married to banker André-Louis Auzière and also had three children with him – Tiphaine Auzière, Sébastien Auzière, Laurence Auzière-Jourdan.
She divorced in 2006 and married Emmanuel Macron a year afterward, despite their 25-year age gap.
Brigitte Macron met Emmanuel Macron at Lycee La Providence in Amiens when he was just 15 and she was 40.
'She wasn't really my teacher. She was my drama teacher,' he once said.
In school as teacher and student, the two had been collaborating on a play 'The Art Of Comedy' by writer Eduardo De Filippo.
'Every Friday I went to write a play with her for several hours. We spoke about everything. And I discovered we had always known one another,' he said.
And Brigitte thought Emmanuel had 'exceptional intelligence' and working with him felt like she was 'working with Mozart'.
The affair came to the fore when, at the end of the play, Emmanuel bent to kiss his drama teacher on the cheek. Later, at a local restaurant, the two were seen sharing a 'tender moment'. This was 1993.
But as their romance became apparent, Emmanuel Macron's parents sent him to Paris to attend another school. But he kept pursuing her and gradually she was won over.
'At the age of 17, Emmanuel said to me 'whatever you do, I will marry you',' she told Paris Match.
She moved to Paris where he continued his studies and she worked as a teacher.
Speaking about their 25-year age gap and the criticism she endured, Brigitte Macron once told Elle France, 'There are times in your life where you need to make vital choices. And for me, that was it. So, what has been said over the 20 years, it's insignificant.'
'If I did not make that choice, I would have missed out on my life. I had a lot of happiness with my children and, at the same time, felt I had to live this love as Prevert used to say, to be fully happy,' she said.
According to the French media, Brigitte Macron's net worth could reach around $10 million by 2025. She inherited Villa Monéjan, a four-story house in Le Touquet, from his parents and the property is valued between €2.7 and €2.8 million.
Emmanuel Macron's estimated net worth is around $2 million.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump's ambition collides with law on sending migrants to dangerous countries
As the Trump administration ships migrants to countries around the world, it is abandoning a long-standing US policy of not sending people to places where they would be at risk of torture and other persecution. The principle emerged in international human rights law after World War II and is also embedded in US domestic law. It is called "non-refoulement," derived from a French word for return. The issue came into sharp relief in the past month as the Trump administration has tried to deport migrants with criminal records to Libya and South Sudan, countries considered so dangerous that they are on the State Department 's "do not travel" list. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Birla Evara 3 and 4 BHK from ₹ 1.68 Crore* Birla Estates Learn More Undo "What the US is doing runs afoul of the bedrock prohibition in US and international law of non-refoulement," said Robert K. Goldman, faculty director of the War Crimes Research Office at American University's law school. (Join our ETNRI WhatsApp channel for all the latest updates) In a recent affidavit, Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the Trump administration's efforts to send migrants to those two countries as part of a diplomatic push to improve relations. He acknowledged that the Libyan capital, Tripoli, was wracked by violence and instability. Live Events You Might Also Like: Trump administration proposes $1,000 fast-track fee for US tourist visas: memo To critics of the administration, the sworn statement shows that the United States is no longer considering whether a deportee is more likely than not to be at risk of abuse through repatriation or transfer to a third country. State Department employees were also recently told to stop noting in annual human rights reports whether a nation had violated its obligations not to send anyone "to a country where they would face torture or persecution." The State Department said in a statement that it dropped that requirement to focus the reports on "human rights issues themselves rather than a laundry list of politically biased demands and assertions." "Enforcing US immigration law, including removing those without a legal basis to remain in the United States, is critical to upholding the rule of law and protecting Americans," the statement said. You Might Also Like: Trump's ban on Harvard international students blocked by US judge A judge blocked the transfer of migrants to South Sudan, which is teetering on the brink of civil war, and the men were being held at a US military outpost in Djibouti pending more court action. The Trump administration is also in a showdown in another court over its transfer of Venezuelan deportees described as dangerous gang members to a notorious prison in El Salvador without due process. "If they were sending them to Sweden, that would be a different thing than sending them to South Sudan, which is one of the most dangerous places on the planet," said Michael H. Posner, director of the Center for Business and Human Rights at New York University's Stern School of Business. Posner, who was the assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor from 2009 to 2013, said the United States could send someone from Cuba or Venezuela to another country if it had been determined at a hearing that the place was safe. "We should not be deporting people to third countries where they have no connections and where their lives will be in serious jeopardy," he said. You Might Also Like: Trump travel ban: Why is Trump banning millions from entering the US again? The White House likens its crackdown on illegal migration to combating a national security threat from a hostile enemy. It has pressed military troops into service at the southwestern border and at a small detention operation for migrants at Guantánamo Bay. But even after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the United States abided by its non-refoulement obligation for prisoners it was holding at Guantánamo Bay, during a period when it flouted international law by torturing other detainees in secret overseas prisons called black sites. In 2004, Secretary of State Colin Powell concluded that the United States would not repatriate Chinese citizens from the Uyghur Muslim minority who had been rounded up in the war against terrorism in 2001 and held at the military base at Guantánamo. The United States believed that the men would be at risk if they were sent to China. Eventually, in 2013, the State Department found other countries to take in all of the Uyghurs. In the past, State Department officials have essentially asked two questions to determine where a detainee could be sent: Would the destination be safe for the individual? Would the United States and its allies be safe if the person was sent there? US officials had to assess whether the receiving country could monitor the activities of the detainees to prevent them from endangering the United States or an ally. Officials were also required to assess whether a deportee would be subjected to torture or other inhumane treatment. The United States adopted the same approach to its efforts to send home Islamic State group members or their relatives who were being housed in camps in northern Syria. "Consistent with both long-standing policy and its legal obligations, the US government cannot send people to a country where there are substantial grounds to believe that they will be mistreated," said Ian Moss, a lawyer and a former senior counterterrorism official at the State Department. In his affidavit, Rubio accused the courts that were reviewing deportation challenges of undermining US foreign policy. He also said that plans to announce "expanded activities of a US energy company in Libya" had been postponed. Rubio did not mention whether any diplomatic agreements surrounding the proposed resettlement included guarantees about how the migrants would be treated. "If these individuals are as dangerous as the administration represents them to be," Moss said, "sending them to a conflict area or country where there is a lack of capacity to manage them undermines the national security justification," Moss said. The State Department statement referred questions about "the removals process, including screening for credible or reasonable fear," to the Department of Homeland Security . The eight men who were to be sent to South Sudan were at a holding site in Texas when they were informed of their destination. An immigration division official, Garrett J. Ripa, said in a sworn statement May 23 that none of the men declared himself afraid to go. Court records showed that an immigration officer gave the men a form that listed their intended place of deportation. None signed the document. "By not signing, people are protesting being sent to a third country in the only way they know how," said Trina Realmuto, a lawyer for the migrants in the case. Administration officials had previously planned to deport one of the men to Libya, which has been so unstable that Congress has since 2015 not allowed detainees who are cleared for release from Guantánamo Bay to be sent there.
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Lebanon Threatens To Exit Ceasefire Talks After Israel Strikes Beirut On Eid Eve
/ Jun 07, 2025, 10:48AM IST Lebanon's army has threatened to withdraw from the ceasefire monitoring body following Israeli airstrikes on Hezbollah targets in Beirut's southern suburbs. The army said the strikes, which occurred just before the Islamic holiday of Eid al-Adha, have undermined its role in maintaining the fragile truce. Although Israel issued evacuation warnings, the timing of the attacks provoked strong local outrage. Lebanese officials warned that future strikes could end their cooperation in monitoring and search efforts. They accused Israel of violating the ceasefire and bypassing official communication channels. France condemned the attacks, calling them a threat to regional stability. In a statement, French authorities urged Israel to withdraw from Lebanese territory and called on all parties to honour the ceasefire signed in November.#lebanon #israel #hezbollah #MiddleEastTensions #CeasefireViolation #BeirutStrikes #EidAlAdha #LebaneseArmy #IsraelAirstrike #FranceCondemns #BlueLineCrisis #unpeacekeepers #middleeastconflict #CeasefireCrisis #RegionalSecurity
United News of India
2 hours ago
- United News of India
Center group of forces destroyed over 455 Ukrainian servicemen: Russian Defence Ministry
Moscow, June 7 (UNI) The Russian Defence Ministry's Center group of forces continued to advance deep into the enemy's defences, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces lost more than 455 servicemen in its area of responsibility, the group's spokesman, Alexander Savchuk, said. "The Center group of forces continues to carry out combat missions in the area of the special military operation. The group's units continued to advance deep into the enemy's defences, inflicted losses on units of three mechanized, motorized infantry, jaeger, two airborne assault brigades, two brigades of the Ukrainian Armed Forces' marines and a brigade of the National Guard of Ukraine," Savchuk said. He said the defeat was inflicted in the areas of Koptevo, Dimitrov, Krasnoarmeisk, Sergeyevka, Udachny and Alekseyevka. "The enemy's losses were over 455 servicemen, eight combat armored vehicles, including a French-made VAB armored personnel carrier, seven pickups and three field artillery guns," Savchuk said. UNI SPUTNIK ARN
