Why do celebrities use surrogates so much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No One seems to care about the impact on the life of the surrogates

But have we seen anything where surrogates are publicly talking about this being a bad thing? It might be out there but I haven’t seen it.

I did read an article about surrogates in India a few years back and how they often don’t get paid what they were promised and that was pretty upsetting.

But celebrities aren’t hiring surrogates in India.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know that it’s vanity, necessarily - they have enough $$$ and help to lose any baby weight quickly, and the media loves a good “baby bounce back” story. My guess is a lot simply can’t get pregnant due to current or former eating disorders and/or drug use. They could go through rounds of IVF hoping to get pregnant or just skip right to surrogacy, and the surrogacy seems a safer bet and will take less time and be a lot less invasive.

It’s common sense. The health, aesthetic, financial, and career incentives all overwhelmingly favor NOT going through a pregnancy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No One seems to care about the impact on the life of the surrogates

But have we seen anything where surrogates are publicly talking about this being a bad thing? It might be out there but I haven’t seen it.

I did read an article about surrogates in India a few years back and how they often don’t get paid what they were promised and that was pretty upsetting.

But celebrities aren’t hiring surrogates in India.

You really think the only reason surrogates aren’t open about the negatives of surrogacy is because there are no negatives? How about the reality that this is their CAREER and, for virtually all of them, their primary source of income. Most surrogates are repeat surrogates. If they publicly badmouth their career and upset the families and agencies who are effectively their employers, then they will not be selected for surrogacy again and there goes their income. Duh.

[Anonymous]

I saw a coworker with hyperemesis gravidarum and she was genuinely SUFFERING for months. Like it was awful to see. She was grey and gaunt and would literally rock herself back and forth slowly in meetings. She went from being this fun, positive, upbeat person (kind of like a kindergarten teacher) to a shell of her former self and it lasted the entire 9 months.

If she has another baby, I will gladly contribute to a fund for her to hire a surrogate. I feel traumatized just thinking about how it felt to watch her be pregnant with HG.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No One seems to care about the impact on the life of the surrogates

But have we seen anything where surrogates are publicly talking about this being a bad thing? It might be out there but I haven’t seen it.

I did read an article about surrogates in India a few years back and how they often don’t get paid what they were promised and that was pretty upsetting.

But celebrities aren’t hiring surrogates in India.

You really think the only reason surrogates aren’t open about the negatives of surrogacy is because there are no negatives? How about the reality that this is their CAREER and, for virtually all of them, their primary source of income. Most surrogates are repeat surrogates. If they publicly badmouth their career and upset the families and agencies who are effectively their employers, then they will not be selected for surrogacy again and there goes their income. Duh.

If they keep doing it though, doesn’t that suggest it’s working out for them?

I can’t imagine it’s truly a panacea-surely there’d be some who feel comfortable speaking out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A friend, single mom struggling actor with teen, is becoming a gestational carrier for a gay male couple (one is an undisclosed celebrity). She loved being pregnant and says she’s excited to help the guys start a family. Of course, she’s thrilled to earn enough to pay off her debt and put a down payment on a house!

Would she have rented out her uterus if she wasn’t struggling financially or wasn’t getting paid? Don’t gloss over what this really is: Women monetizing our reproductive capabilities in a society that values us for little else and narrows our options.

So because you don't need the money, you're going to deny other women the opportunity to earn a living how they see fit.

I believe sex work should be legal, too. Legal and regulated.

And I would be fine if we could sell our kidneys. Imagine how many people could live better lives, if that were an available option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No One seems to care about the impact on the life of the surrogates

But have we seen anything where surrogates are publicly talking about this being a bad thing? It might be out there but I haven’t seen it.

I did read an article about surrogates in India a few years back and how they often don’t get paid what they were promised and that was pretty upsetting.

But celebrities aren’t hiring surrogates in India.

You really think the only reason surrogates aren’t open about the negatives of surrogacy is because there are no negatives? How about the reality that this is their CAREER and, for virtually all of them, their primary source of income. Most surrogates are repeat surrogates. If they publicly badmouth their career and upset the families and agencies who are effectively their employers, then they will not be selected for surrogacy again and there goes their income. Duh.

If they keep doing it though, doesn’t that suggest it’s working out for them?

I can’t imagine it’s truly a panacea-surely there’d be some who feel comfortable speaking out.

You clearly don’t care enough to think this through, so stop speaking authoritatively. First of all, a good deal has been written on how many Indian and even American surrogates who suffer pregnancy and childbirth complications are left with lifelong injuries and no help after the surrogacy. You just don’t care enough to seek out those narratives. Second, it shouldn’t be so hard for you to understand that people who need money will do what they can to keep the checks coming even if there are serious consequence. How old are you and have you never worked to pay bills? Once again, I say to you: DUH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A friend, single mom struggling actor with teen, is becoming a gestational carrier for a gay male couple (one is an undisclosed celebrity). She loved being pregnant and says she’s excited to help the guys start a family. Of course, she’s thrilled to earn enough to pay off her debt and put a down payment on a house!

Would she have rented out her uterus if she wasn’t struggling financially or wasn’t getting paid? Don’t gloss over what this really is: Women monetizing our reproductive capabilities in a society that values us for little else and narrows our options.

So because you don't need the money, you're going to deny other women the opportunity to earn a living how they see fit.

I believe sex work should be legal, too. Legal and regulated.

And I would be fine if we could sell our kidneys. Imagine how many people could live better lives, if that were an available option.

Where did you read that I seek to deny other women the opportunity to earn a living as they see fit?

[Anonymous]

Because they have the funds to rent wombs and lack the moral compass to care that they are exploiting women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No One seems to care about the impact on the life of the surrogates

But have we seen anything where surrogates are publicly talking about this being a bad thing? It might be out there but I haven’t seen it.

I did read an article about surrogates in India a few years back and how they often don’t get paid what they were promised and that was pretty upsetting.

But celebrities aren’t hiring surrogates in India.

You really think the only reason surrogates aren’t open about the negatives of surrogacy is because there are no negatives? How about the reality that this is their CAREER and, for virtually all of them, their primary source of income. Most surrogates are repeat surrogates. If they publicly badmouth their career and upset the families and agencies who are effectively their employers, then they will not be selected for surrogacy again and there goes their income. Duh.

If they keep doing it though, doesn’t that suggest it’s working out for them?

I can’t imagine it’s truly a panacea-surely there’d be some who feel comfortable speaking out.

You clearly don’t care enough to think this through, so stop speaking authoritatively. First of all, a good deal has been written on how many Indian and even American surrogates who suffer pregnancy and childbirth complications are left with lifelong injuries and no help after the surrogacy. You just don’t care enough to seek out those narratives. Second, it shouldn’t be so hard for you to understand that people who need money will do what they can to keep the checks coming even if there are serious consequence. How old are you and have you never worked to pay bills? Once again, I say to you: DUH.

So you’re saying it shouldn’t be an option then?

I hate that surrogates have to do this if it’s not what they want, but I’m not sure if removing it as an option is really making it any better for them. If they’ve decided being a surrogate makes more sense than working a minimum wage job, who am I to decide what they should choose?

Also, I’m guessing the celebrity surrogate gig is much better than your average surrogate job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A friend, single mom struggling actor with teen, is becoming a gestational carrier for a gay male couple (one is an undisclosed celebrity). She loved being pregnant and says she’s excited to help the guys start a family. Of course, she’s thrilled to earn enough to pay off her debt and put a down payment on a house!

Would she have rented out her uterus if she wasn’t struggling financially or wasn’t getting paid? Don’t gloss over what this really is: Women monetizing our reproductive capabilities in a society that values us for little else and narrows our options.

So because you don't need the money, you're going to deny other women the opportunity to earn a living how they see fit.

I believe sex work should be legal, too. Legal and regulated.

And I would be fine if we could sell our kidneys. Imagine how many people could live better lives, if that were an available option.

Where did you read that I seek to deny other women the opportunity to earn a living as they see fit?

By opposing surrogacy. I assume your opposition includes wanting to prohibit it. But maybe not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is Regarding women potentially struggling to conceive. So many celebrities have been shamed for adopting (whether internationally or transracially) so I can see why celebrities are turning away from it and doing surrogacy if they still can.

I can’t think of a major celebrity that has adopted in the last 5 years or so. Sandra Bullock was the last one in 2015. Can’t think of anyone past that.

Gestational surrogacy is controversial but at least the child is biologically related to the parents.

Hoda Kotb

Getting a white baby through adoption is nearly impossible. Honda's kids are not white.

Childbirth is torture. Why not pay someone who likes it and wants to earn money do it?

I’m a PP who has defended surrogacy, but let’s not lie or be glib about what it is. Women overwhelmingly become surrogates for one of two reasons: because they need money or because they are pressured into it. It’s not because they’re barely sentient broodmares who don’t have nerve endings and “like” going through what you have described as torture so someone else to have a baby. You can defend surrogacy without tacitly dehumanizing the women involved.

A lot of surrogates in the US are super Christian and view surrogacy as a way to build families and fulfill what they believe to be a higher calling for God. They often have a bunch of their own kids they had young, have easy pregnancies, and don't blink at the idea of giving birth many, many times. The money doesn't hurt and helps their own brood, but they're also not worrying about putting food on the table, they're middle class. I don't really get it personally, because I am nothing like this, but this seems common enough here. India or elsewhere is a whole different ball of wax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know they want to look good all the time and don't want to destroy their figure (either natural or plastic surgeon made) but it's getting ridiculous. All of them use surrogates even when they are still of age of conceiving (30's to 40's). Even Elon musk's girlfriends used surrogates to conceive, amber heard, kim k, paris hilton, etc. Possibly even Janet jackson who conceived at 50 though everyone saw her with a bump.

Does Grimes have shared custody of Techno? That was a weird post she made about begging Musk to let her see her son and respond to her lawyer. Surrogacy sounds dangerous when you are dealing with billionaires and break ups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A friend, single mom struggling actor with teen, is becoming a gestational carrier for a gay male couple (one is an undisclosed celebrity). She loved being pregnant and says she’s excited to help the guys start a family. Of course, she’s thrilled to earn enough to pay off her debt and put a down payment on a house!

Would she have rented out her uterus if she wasn’t struggling financially or wasn’t getting paid? Don’t gloss over what this really is: Women monetizing our reproductive capabilities in a society that values us for little else and narrows our options.

So because you don't need the money, you're going to deny other women the opportunity to earn a living how they see fit.

I believe sex work should be legal, too. Legal and regulated.

And I would be fine if we could sell our kidneys. Imagine how many people could live better lives, if that were an available option.

Where did you read that I seek to deny other women the opportunity to earn a living as they see fit?

By opposing surrogacy. I assume your opposition includes wanting to prohibit it. But maybe not?

Your assumption is unfounded. One can face the realities of surrogacy without seeking to ban it and just because you support surrogacy doesn’t mean you should lie to yourself about its realities.

[Anonymous]

It is Godless. It is modern slavery. It should be illegal.