Natalie Portman is pregnant with baby #3!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you guys are so weirdly invested in this. Why do you even care about when other women have babies? Mind your own business and worry about your own life.

Because fertility clinics playing God is immoral and God-LESS. All this donor eggs, donor sperm, surrogacy, endocrinologist, killing embryos, IVF, literally buying babies crap is unnatural and demonic. And I mean that very sincerely. It's sick.

oh so the crazy posts are because of religion - SHOCKED!

Crazy is being a washed up divorced menopausal celeb and buying a child because you’re lonely and broken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michelle Williams welcomed a baby via surrogate last April at 44. This was her 4th. She has 3 children with her new husband (born in 2020, 2022, 2025). She had them at 39 and 42 and used a surrogate at 44.

Her first was with Heath Ledger.

An older mom's surrogate baby from someone else's womb and possibly someone else's eggs is not at all the same thing as a woman having a baby in her 40s.

It is akin to adopting a baby. She did not have a baby in her 40s. She didn't have a baby. Someone else had that baby.

What part of “she had a baby at 42” did you not understand? That was #3 and wasn’t a surrogate. She most definitely birthed a baby in her 40s. lol.

And why did you have my post removed that previously exposed this? Very odd.

This comment was in response to the person tgat posted "Michelle Williams had a baby via surrogate at 44" not Natalie Portman.

Michelle Williams paying another younger woman for her womb and her baby at age 44 is not at all the same as Natalie Portman or any other mom having a baby in their 40s.

Surrogacy in your 40s is more similar to adopting a baby, and not at all the same to having your own baby in your own womb

DP. Michelle Williams had a baby "in her own womb" at 42. So she had a baby in her 40s.

The person wrote

"Michelle Williams welcomed a baby via surrogate last April at 44. This was her 4th. She has 3 children with her new husband (born in 2020, 2022, 2025). She had them at 39 and 42 and used a surrogate at 44."

If you scoll up you can see the entire conversation.

I'm not that PP but since when is 42 not "in her 40s?"

The post was in response to the surrogacy at 44, which was the lead and the conclusion of the comment.

So you didn’t read the middle of my comment?! I’m very aware that a surrogate is not the same as birthing own baby, but Michelle Williams still birthed her own baby at 42. That counts as having your own baby in your 40s.

Why would you only respond to my factoid that she used a surrogate at 44?

The opening and concluding statements were about surrogacy.

Just so I’m clear, you now do understand that Michelle Williams actually had a baby in her 40s? She was 42 and didn’t use a surrogate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you guys are so weirdly invested in this. Why do you even care about when other women have babies? Mind your own business and worry about your own life.

Because fertility clinics playing God is immoral and God-LESS. All this donor eggs, donor sperm, surrogacy, endocrinologist, killing embryos, IVF, literally buying babies crap is unnatural and demonic. And I mean that very sincerely. It's sick.

oh so the crazy posts are because of religion - SHOCKED!

Crazy is being a washed up divorced menopausal celeb and buying a child because you’re lonely and broken.

Calling Natalie Portman "washed up" is something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michelle Williams welcomed a baby via surrogate last April at 44. This was her 4th. She has 3 children with her new husband (born in 2020, 2022, 2025). She had them at 39 and 42 and used a surrogate at 44.

Her first was with Heath Ledger.

An older mom's surrogate baby from someone else's womb and possibly someone else's eggs is not at all the same thing as a woman having a baby in her 40s.

It is akin to adopting a baby. She did not have a baby in her 40s. She didn't have a baby. Someone else had that baby.

What part of “she had a baby at 42” did you not understand? That was #3 and wasn’t a surrogate. She most definitely birthed a baby in her 40s. lol.

And why did you have my post removed that previously exposed this? Very odd.

This comment was in response to the person tgat posted "Michelle Williams had a baby via surrogate at 44" not Natalie Portman.

Michelle Williams paying another younger woman for her womb and her baby at age 44 is not at all the same as Natalie Portman or any other mom having a baby in their 40s.

Surrogacy in your 40s is more similar to adopting a baby, and not at all the same to having your own baby in your own womb

DP. Michelle Williams had a baby "in her own womb" at 42. So she had a baby in her 40s.

The person wrote

"Michelle Williams welcomed a baby via surrogate last April at 44. This was her 4th. She has 3 children with her new husband (born in 2020, 2022, 2025). She had them at 39 and 42 and used a surrogate at 44."

If you scoll up you can see the entire conversation.

I'm not that PP but since when is 42 not "in her 40s?"

The post was in response to the surrogacy at 44, which was the lead and the conclusion of the comment.

So you didn’t read the middle of my comment?! I’m very aware that a surrogate is not the same as birthing own baby, but Michelle Williams still birthed her own baby at 42. That counts as having your own baby in your 40s.

Why would you only respond to my factoid that she used a surrogate at 44?

The opening and concluding statements were about surrogacy.

Just so I’m clear, you now do understand that Michelle Williams actually had a baby in her 40s? She was 42 and didn’t use a surrogate.

Yes, of course.

But the main point of that post, most of the sentances and the opening and closing statements, were clearly about surrogacy at 44.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Her dad's a fertility doctor.

Was just going to post this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t she get cheated on and left her husband. Who knocked her up?

Yeah, the husband who cheated on her cheated on his previous girlfriend to be with Portman. How you get them is how you lose them. New guy is another French artsy type.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is one troll who seems sure women are being fed some message that they can get pregnant forever and like, what? I got pregnant by accident in my early 30s. I heard my whole life how fertility declines especially after 30 and I stopped being so careful.

Yeah. Most women I know got pregnant once they were partnered/married - it wasn’t like they had an earlier opportunity. I also know a fair number of women who’d like to have kids, but aren’t partnered. I don’t know any women who are partnered, want kids and are waiting a gratuitously long time to have them based on some idea that you can delay it indefinitely.

This is something that drives me crazy about the "hurry up and have babies, ladies!" crowd. Unless you are a single mom by choice (which I'm sure these same people will howl about as being terrible), your timelines is not just up to you. And the pressure to find a good partner is often much more on women because men are not encouraged to plan ahead or think about family composition and parenting ability in their partner (men who are taught to do this tend to marry well!). So as a 20-somethign woman who wants kids, you are out there dating, trying to find a good partner and father, but also trying not to put too much pressure on it and drive anyone away, and also working on yourself to be the best partner and future mom you can be. It's a lot. And then you have people like the PP on this thread running around saying "hurry up! hurry up! don't you know your eggs are shriveling up as you speak! do you think everyone has babies in their 40s like Natalie Portman?????"

Go yell at men. Go tell men that if they think they want to be fathers "someday" they need to become the sort of men who can be fathers *right now*. Tell them to stop waiting for a woman to come and fix them and remind them to go to the doctor and the dentist and develop empathy and be responsible -- they need to figure all that out on their own so that when they meet a woman they want to marry, they are already ready to go. Go tell men to stop dicking around on these apps getting distracted by ever new set of tits they see, and actually get to know women and find someone they connect with.

Stop yelling at women. We've been yelled at enough. We KNOW. We're working on it. Go work on men and tell them to stop "looksmaxxing" and grow up.

The 20 something year old women don't want marriage and definitely don't want children.

There are so many wonderful marriage minded young men full of opportunity and promise, but very few women who want anything resembling a family with a strong, kind, nurturing, productive husband and kids.

LOL no, what most women don't want is a traditional man to "protect" and "lead" them. If a man in his 20s can't find a girl to settle down with,he's the problem.

And to the first post above YEP. And then if DO find a guy in your 20s and have babies "on schedule" and somehow the guy ends up not great "you should have picked better." lol

So you are against young men not willing to be fathers, but hate young men who are responsible, nurturing, respectful, hard working and willing to be responsible husbands and supportive loving partners.

Got it.

No one is falling for your manosphere coded bs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is one troll who seems sure women are being fed some message that they can get pregnant forever and like, what? I got pregnant by accident in my early 30s. I heard my whole life how fertility declines especially after 30 and I stopped being so careful.

Yeah. Most women I know got pregnant once they were partnered/married - it wasn’t like they had an earlier opportunity. I also know a fair number of women who’d like to have kids, but aren’t partnered. I don’t know any women who are partnered, want kids and are waiting a gratuitously long time to have them based on some idea that you can delay it indefinitely.

This is something that drives me crazy about the "hurry up and have babies, ladies!" crowd. Unless you are a single mom by choice (which I'm sure these same people will howl about as being terrible), your timelines is not just up to you. And the pressure to find a good partner is often much more on women because men are not encouraged to plan ahead or think about family composition and parenting ability in their partner (men who are taught to do this tend to marry well!). So as a 20-somethign woman who wants kids, you are out there dating, trying to find a good partner and father, but also trying not to put too much pressure on it and drive anyone away, and also working on yourself to be the best partner and future mom you can be. It's a lot. And then you have people like the PP on this thread running around saying "hurry up! hurry up! don't you know your eggs are shriveling up as you speak! do you think everyone has babies in their 40s like Natalie Portman?????"

Go yell at men. Go tell men that if they think they want to be fathers "someday" they need to become the sort of men who can be fathers *right now*. Tell them to stop waiting for a woman to come and fix them and remind them to go to the doctor and the dentist and develop empathy and be responsible -- they need to figure all that out on their own so that when they meet a woman they want to marry, they are already ready to go. Go tell men to stop dicking around on these apps getting distracted by ever new set of tits they see, and actually get to know women and find someone they connect with.

Stop yelling at women. We've been yelled at enough. We KNOW. We're working on it. Go work on men and tell them to stop "looksmaxxing" and grow up.

The 20 something year old women don't want marriage and definitely don't want children.

There are so many wonderful marriage minded young men full of opportunity and promise, but very few women who want anything resembling a family with a strong, kind, nurturing, productive husband and kids.

LOL no, what most women don't want is a traditional man to "protect" and "lead" them. If a man in his 20s can't find a girl to settle down with,he's the problem.

And to the first post above YEP. And then if DO find a guy in your 20s and have babies "on schedule" and somehow the guy ends up not great "you should have picked better." lol

So you are against young men not willing to be fathers, but hate young men who are responsible, nurturing, respectful, hard working and willing to be responsible husbands and supportive loving partners.

Got it.

No one is falling for your manosphere coded bs.

Yeah, this is so obviously a troll. It’s not even fun anymore. Women are evil, men are good. We got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michelle Williams welcomed a baby via surrogate last April at 44. This was her 4th. She has 3 children with her new husband (born in 2020, 2022, 2025). She had them at 39 and 42 and used a surrogate at 44.

Her first was with Heath Ledger.

An older mom's surrogate baby from someone else's womb and possibly someone else's eggs is not at all the same thing as a woman having a baby in her 40s.

It is akin to adopting a baby. She did not have a baby in her 40s. She didn't have a baby. Someone else had that baby.

What part of “she had a baby at 42” did you not understand? That was #3 and wasn’t a surrogate. She most definitely birthed a baby in her 40s. lol.

And why did you have my post removed that previously exposed this? Very odd.

This comment was in response to the person tgat posted "Michelle Williams had a baby via surrogate at 44" not Natalie Portman.

Michelle Williams paying another younger woman for her womb and her baby at age 44 is not at all the same as Natalie Portman or any other mom having a baby in their 40s.

Surrogacy in your 40s is more similar to adopting a baby, and not at all the same to having your own baby in your own womb

DP. Michelle Williams had a baby "in her own womb" at 42. So she had a baby in her 40s.

The person wrote

"Michelle Williams welcomed a baby via surrogate last April at 44. This was her 4th. She has 3 children with her new husband (born in 2020, 2022, 2025). She had them at 39 and 42 and used a surrogate at 44."

If you scoll up you can see the entire conversation.

I'm not that PP but since when is 42 not "in her 40s?"

The post was in response to the surrogacy at 44, which was the lead and the conclusion of the comment.

So you didn’t read the middle of my comment?! I’m very aware that a surrogate is not the same as birthing own baby, but Michelle Williams still birthed her own baby at 42. That counts as having your own baby in your 40s.

Why would you only respond to my factoid that she used a surrogate at 44?

The opening and concluding statements were about surrogacy.

Just so I’m clear, you now do understand that Michelle Williams actually had a baby in her 40s? She was 42 and didn’t use a surrogate.

Yes, of course.

But the main point of that post, most of the sentances and the opening and closing statements, were clearly about surrogacy at 44.

I wrote that post and no, my main point was to show that other women, particular Michelle Williams, had a baby in her 40s. I wanted to make sure you understood that I wasn’t referring to the surrogate baby as that one which is why I highlighted it as separate.

You are really weird doubling down here.

[Anonymous]

My sister had kids at 41 and 43. I had a kid at 42. Au natural. It does happen. Is it ideal? In some ways yes because children of older and more educated mothers are more successful academically, financially more able to spend on enrichment activities, etc. In same ways, potentially have less time to spend with them throughout life or could have health concerns for parents. But younger parents may also have these issues and more acute mental health issues. Hard to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Didn’t she get cheated on and left her husband. Who knocked her up?

Yeah, the husband who cheated on her cheated on his previous girlfriend to be with Portman. How you get them is how you lose them. New guy is another French artsy type.

He looks like a terrorist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:its sad that she chose to bring a new child into the world in a single parent unmarried household, very unresponsible

Irresponsible? Unresponsive? How are YOUR kids doing?

[Anonymous]

Kourtney Kardashian had her 4th at age 44.

[Anonymous]

She does have a thing for French artistes.

Hopefully this guy isn't like the previous one but she did get the husband by taking him from his fiancee.

She doesn't seem to need marriage from this guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women who actually CARE about other women's reproductive health and their choices need to care about the narrative of celebrity geriatric pregnancies.

You may think only "mouth breathers" think a woman can easily get pregnant at 44, but many women do, especially impressionable young women who were raised in the "you can have it all" generation that witnessed many, many celebrities having children in their 40s without sharing all the details of how they got that pregnancy.

No one needs to share how their babies were conceived

I agree that privacy should be honored, but also, there is a degree of harm when celebrities share the pregnancy but not the years of fertility treatments, purchased eggs, and other medical intervention needed to get pregnant. Statistically speaking, the vast majority of women who wait to have children until their 40s will be unable to do so without a tremendous amount of expensive and invasive medical intervention. We are creating a generation of women who think they are going to win the lottery.

Most women who have kids in their 40s are not having their FIRST kid in their 40s. They aren't "waiting" until they're 40s to have children. They have a track record of good fertility, which makes it more likely that they can get pregnant in their 40s naturally without intervention.