Skip Nav
Women
Read 'Em and Weep! 49 Tattoos Inspired by Famous Books
Women
17 Typewriter-Font Tattoos For the Girl Who Has a Way With Words
Relationships
Spice Up Your Relationship With This 30-Day Challenge

Dear Poll: Would Put Your Baby on Display?

There's always been some sort of weird fascination with celebrity babies. Since we most likely won't be receiving their baby announcement, the paparazzi will do almost anything to fulfill the public's curiosity surrounding what they look like. But could you imagine having to deal with all that hoopla right after giving birth? In my opinion, it makes much more sense to grant photo ops on your own terms — Remember Sarah Jessica Parker and Mathew Broderick being calmly photographed on the steps of their New York hospital after she gave birth to James Wilke?

Ladies, if you were a pregnant celebrity or a new mom like Halle, Jennifer, Christina, or Nicole, would you put your baby on display and let the paparazzi get their million-dollar shot ala SJP or would you try to keep your baby away from the spotlight for as long as possible?

Source

Around The Web
Join The Conversation
lms lms 8 years
I would pose for the picture. I would schedule it for when I was comfortable having the baby around a bunch of people. Also, I could arrange for a stylist and makeup artist. LOL Who knows what the pictures would look like if they were chasing us around town.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
Also, I am making a conscious decision to not voice my objections on this site any longer about privacy issues because so many, including the staff, find no issue with publishing pictures and stories about celebrity children, their schedule, names, etc., so i'll take that as a clue that I am in the minority and respect everyone's right to view what they like w/o my point or seeming judgment mixed in with the post. I definitely respect everyone's choices and views.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
Pop, you are correct they are stalked and pics taken by almost any means, legal, ethical, or other issues be damned, that makes privacy difficult to secure, but not impossible. I mean, there are some who have accomplished it. What do Warren Beatty's kids look like? Or Steven Spielberg's? Before Schwarzenegger was governor, how many times were his children photographed? Michelle Pfeiffer's? Even Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise protect their children to an amazing extent. I lived in the same community, they were out and about a lot as a family, yet few pics. Later, he accomplished the same with Holmes and even Britney Spears managed it for a time , both met with great speculation abous to the reason why they "hid" the child. There are those who manage to protect their children's privacy. How they do it, I don't know. But, I would do my best to make sure their privacy was protected and not allow access even for a good cause. The moment you do, someone will use it as an excuse to continue the loss of privacy. I think the key word is voluntarily. Do you assuage the irrational need for strangers to see your kids because you sing, act on a TV show, or movies? Or do you put up a good fight to protect your child?
sweetnshy5282 sweetnshy5282 8 years
unless the profits were donated a la Brad and Angie
k-squared k-squared 8 years
what other way to get lots of publicity than a baby? having babies is a big trend right now; it seems like there's a celeb baby born/adopted/predicted every other week. plus, most of these women are well established in their careers, and they obviously have enough time and money to, well, have babies.
sweetnshy5282 sweetnshy5282 8 years
I think it must be so hard running from the paprazzi all the time. I would probably just get the picture out there. their fans just want to know what the baby looks like and how the couple is doing. if you grant them that w/ the least amount of drama possible, it would most likely make for a more peaceful postpartum. besides...these celebs have enough money as it is. they really don't need to sell the pictures to the highest bidder. that, to me is tacky.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 8 years
chakra, I appreciate your position, but how would you not allow them to be photographed? I mean, it seems like in order for that to work you'd have to keep them indoors all the time. These people are literally stalked. They follow the celebs to the hospitals sometimes. I think they'll do this no matter what, so you might as well sell the photos and do some good with the money. Seems like it takes a bizarre fascination and turns it into good for someone else. Personally, I don't care what celeb babies look like but there is obviously a market for them.
chakra_healer chakra_healer 8 years
I would not allow my child to be photographed. Nor would I voluntarily release information about their names or dates of birth. That destroys any privacy the child has and endangers their welfare. *Soapbox* There are too many crazy and insane people in the world to put a child on display publicly; child stars deal with stalkers all the time, why invite or allow that sort of attention because a parent acts on a TV show or sings? I will never understand why anyone feels a right to see, often by any means, or know about a famous person's children. This wasn't the case in the past, right? Where there more ethics in journalism, not reporting about kids or blurring faces, or is it just the access is so easy online that it is nearly impossible to moderate a child's privacy? *end soapbox* It was not an attack on anyone's chosen form of entertainment. I guess, I'm just trying to understand.
dreamlover823 dreamlover823 8 years
I would do like brad & angie... pose and donate... they are going to try to get the shot anyway...
cheersdarlin916 cheersdarlin916 8 years
Even if you pose for a picture they would not stay out of your hair. I mean look at Shilo and Olive.
almost-famous almost-famous 8 years
Well I was gonna say that I would pose for a professional photographer, but the paps know how to get those photos. I don't know if I would broadcast it, but you can't be cooped up in a house everyday right?
kitkatherine kitkatherine 8 years
why not? and if they give it to charities - great. i mean, you photo op, people see the baby, they are satiated. then you don't get crazu people running down your door. also, i bet i'd have a cute kid. everyone loves their kid. who wouldn't want to show them off? babies are pretty cute. nearly everyone loves baby pictures.
erratic-assassin erratic-assassin 8 years
oops, *guilty
erratic-assassin erratic-assassin 8 years
did Xtina cut a deal with a magazine? I haven't even SEEN her kid! why is she guitly of this? i didnt vote. sure. I'd want the whole world to see my kids. they'll be precious!
hotstuff hotstuff 8 years
I think some of the parents do it because they are going to be hunted anyways, so they may as well do it. These parents tend to give the money to charity. Others I think are wannabes who just try to live up to the hype and say oh lets see if our kid can get as much as Shiloh or Suri. These parents tend to keep the money for themselves.
popgoestheworld popgoestheworld 8 years
I know it's controversial, but I kinda like what Angelina does. Holding out for a lot of money and then donating it charity. It's kind of weird but think of all the money donated to good causes. Just for a photo of your kid!
Shopaholichunny Shopaholichunny 8 years
Yeah either way. They would eventually see my baby anywayz..
Lovely_1 Lovely_1 8 years
I dunno...I would just be a bitch and tell them to polietly FUCK OFF!
Dwayne Johnson's Cutest Family Pictures
Jensen Ackles Talking About His Daughter July 2016
Is Mila Kunis Ready For Another Baby?
Harry Potter Author's Son Granted Privacy
Dear Poll: Do Celebs Have a Right to Fight Back?
Pictures of John Legend and Chrissy Teigen's Daughter Luna
Britney Spears on the Cover of The Atlantic?

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

From Our Partners
Latest Love
X