Was having kids worth the risk it took on your looks?

[Anonymous]

I had to use a gestational carrier for medication reasons. I look good but I do look my age, keeping up with my twins. I don’t have celebrity-level money to hire multiple nannies, chefs, personal trainers and beauty services.
And frankly, I would have had kids even if the trade off was turning into a crone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was always going to be old and wrinkly at 70. Now ill be old and wrinkly with kids and grandkids.

Yep, this. I hate this nonsense so much. When I look around at women in my age group I don’t see much difference between the moms and non moms. In fact often the moms look much better!

+1 Kids keep you young.

I can't imagine a husband agreeing to use a surrogate instead of his spouse. Couples tend to want to pass on their own and their partner's genetics. The celebs who use surrogates are likely using them because they can't have kids (safely) themselves anymore.

You will be passing on both partners genetics, unless you’re using donor egg or sperm.

[Anonymous]

Yes it was. I have pancake boobs now but other than that no issues. I got Melasma from antibiotics (and it comes with age anyway— I had mine at 36 and 40).

[Anonymous]

Yes. I can't even begin to comprehend this question. And I look fine (yes I do, before the harpies come in and tell me I am wrong).

[Anonymous]

A million times yes.

[Anonymous]

Of course it is worth it! But not everyone looks like a train wreck after.

I had no trouble losing the weight and getting back in shape. My only motherhood scars are a couple lower abdomen stretch marks and a small varicose vein in my leg. Otherwise, I think I look great for 40 and am aging just as I would otherwise

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's absolutely worth it, and people are absolutely kidding themselves when they say they've aged the same way as childless women. The sleep factor alone is huge.

In the little kid years that’s true but it all catches up in your 50s.

No way. There was a childfree woman at my gym that I thought was 32 yrs old max. Someone told her she would lose her physique after she had kids and to “wait until you also hit menopause.” She responded saying she is 55 and post menopause. Mic drop. I would not have believed it in a million years but is true. Totally shut down that conversation. 😁

How do you know it’s true?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's absolutely worth it, and people are absolutely kidding themselves when they say they've aged the same way as childless women. The sleep factor alone is huge.

In the little kid years that’s true but it all catches up in your 50s.

No way. There was a childfree woman at my gym that I thought was 32 yrs old max. Someone told her she would lose her physique after she had kids and to “wait until you also hit menopause.” She responded saying she is 55 and post menopause. Mic drop. I would not have believed it in a million years but is true. Totally shut down that conversation. 😁

It's called the genetic lottery. That woman would probably look fantastic with kids too.

[Anonymous]

Sophie Turner has two kids and a killer body.

I don’t think stars are using surrogates unless they truly can’t get pregnant. I do t think Prianka Chopra would have used a surrogate if she could conceive naturally. In that way it’s similar to regular people. The only reason it looks more common because celebrities don’t face the same financial limitations that regular people do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sophie Turner has two kids and a killer body.

I don’t think stars are using surrogates unless they truly can’t get pregnant. I do t think Prianka Chopra would have used a surrogate if she could conceive naturally. In that way it’s similar to regular people. The only reason it looks more common because celebrities don’t face the same financial limitations that regular people do.

Explain Amber Heard then

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I lost the weight very quickly after each pregnancy. I have a few childless by choice friends and we are all 50 and I have, by far, aged the best out if the group.

It seems like this is the case in my circle too. Maybe having kids keeps you young? Or unlock certain hormones that are helpful? I don't know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, there was no question. I always wanted kids and am happy to have them. I also got lucky and got two awesome kids.

But, seriously, if you are even asking this question, just don't have kids. Your priorities are screwed up. If you were asking about risks to your -health- and the changes that can happen with pregnancy to your health, that would be one thing. But your looks? Nope. Don't have kids. Just do what you do best and focus on yourself.

+1 to all of this. If you are even asking this question, do not have children.

Disagree. It’s okay to be vain and prioritize looks and still have kids.

Assuming you are one of these vain people, did worries about your looks even factor into your *decision-making* about having kids? No one is saying a person who places value on their own appearance cannot be a good parent. But that is not what OP was asking.

OP here. Nowhere did I say it factored into MY decision making process. I asked if it factored into other women's decision making process because I have seen women look aged as much as 10 or 15 yrs older than their ages. I looked like a kid next to them and I'm probably older than them.

[Anonymous]

I think it’s more just not having time for the same level of grooming.

I’ve had two and it wasn’t too rough on my looks. Main differences are that my boobs are smaller and flatter, and I have a small lower belly pooch that won’t budge. If I got really mad about these, a small size breast implant and lipo would resolve it, but I’ll probably just stick with push-up bras and high-waisted pants.

I definitely look a bit tired, but Botox and a little lip filler help tremendously. For most people I know, if they do their hair and makeup and wear a decent outfit, they’re not looking much different than pre-kids. I think because many moms (myself included) are too busy most days to do the same level of personal upkeep, it’s easy to mistake that for looking way different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sophie Turner has two kids and a killer body.

I don’t think stars are using surrogates unless they truly can’t get pregnant. I do t think Prianka Chopra would have used a surrogate if she could conceive naturally. In that way it’s similar to regular people. The only reason it looks more common because celebrities don’t face the same financial limitations that regular people do.

Explain Amber Heard then

Amber Heard has not confirmed (she should not have to, btw) but the media reported that she could not carry a child

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's absolutely worth it, and people are absolutely kidding themselves when they say they've aged the same way as childless women. The sleep factor alone is huge.

In the little kid years that’s true but it all catches up in your 50s.

Mothers experience so much more stress and have less time and money to spend on themselves, no matter how old their kids are.
And plenty of women still have kids at home in their fifties, some of them quite a way away from leaving home.

It's not about pregnancy and baby weight. It's the sum total of years of less sleep, more things to worry about, and less time for themselves.