Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Let's stop glamorising pregnancy out of wedlock

Pregnant and unmarried

Call me old-fashioned, but I'm getting tired of the endless parade of celebrities getting pregnant out of wedlock. Beauty Addict has run a series of posts showing magazine covers of pregnant celebrities:
  • Jessica Alba (unmarried)
  • Lily Allen (unmarried)
  • Halle Berry (unmarried)
  • Jennifer Lopez (married!)
No, I am not suggesting that we go back to the days when Ingrid Bergmann left the U.S. because of the relentlessly hostile press she had for conceiving out of wedlock. Media has simply gone too far on the other side of the pendulum, and it's time to go back to the center. One can't escape these magazines - these magazines are point of purchase items when one checks out at the cashier.

What sort of example is this giving to young women that pregnancy out of wedlock is desirable? OK, I take marriage seriously - I've held to my heart what my father-in-law wrote to me prior to my marriage - that marriage is a sacrament, not merely a contract.

I received negative replies when I posted my opinions on Beauty Addict. Kristen herself said my comments about Halle Berry were "insensitive." I know Halle Berry's story: her family abandoned by her father and two wrenching divorces (the first from baseball star David Justice, the second from singer Eric Benet). No wonder that she's bummed on marriage. Still, this is not reason to emblazon her picture on magazine covers such as InStyle and People (does her publicist have an "in" with Time Warner, which owns both magazines?). Is Halle Berry seeking validation from the magazines's audiences for her choices?


retainer girl said...

Right now, I'm more disturbed by the fact that Jamie Lynn Spears' pregnancy has increased viewership of her Nickelodeon show. What kind of message is that?!

The Style Page said...

It just goes to show that it is ultimately the audience that feeds this madness.

Did Lynne Spears really sell Jamie-Lynn's pregnancy story for $1 million to OK! magazine? With morals like this, it's no wonder that Britney is so messed up!

Anonymous said...

Talk about ignorance. Just because you're an aging conservative doesn't mean that pregnancy out of wedlock is wrong. Would you rather them get an abortion? From what you've articulated in this post, I'm pretty sure that would drive you barking mad.

Just chill out and stick to make up, k?

Ondo Lady said...

I don't see anything wrong with mature women having babies out of wedlock. As long as they are financially and emotionally able to look after the child then good for them. I think it is better and far more healthier for the child to be raised by a single parent who is happy than one in a relationship that does not work. I do agree with you about Jamie Lynn Spears - now that is f***ed up!!

Anonymous said...

So are you saying that these women should not be happy to be having children, and that the rest of the world should not be happy for them? That's just ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

Having a child out of wedlock is wrong!It has become very fashionable for celebrities to go sleeping around and having bastard children.The madness of it all is that society condones and actually applauds these fools.The unfortunate kids are called 'love children'.It is as if,once you are a celebrity or a socialite you a new set of rules applies to you.You have men and women these days with 4 kids from 4 partners and everybody applauds the circus.In the old days what they are doing would be called plain fornication and now we all accept it and everyone looks the other way!