Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been dating Chris Martin for years now and is in her mid thirties while he is pushing 50. He already has 2 kids is divorced. Why is she wasting her fertility on this old guy who already has kids?

I also find it strange how many beautiful wealthy actresses there are wasting what’s left of their fertility away. Dakota is rich, dating an even richer man, plenty old enough, and both have a lot of leisure time — why would she not be trying to have kids? It makes no sense. But she’s hardly alone in Hollywood. Childless actresses off the top of my head whose fertility window is closing or closed:

Brie Larson, Sofia Vergara, Margot Robbie (lies about her age), Aubrey Plaza, Emma Watson, all of the Olson sisters… on and on.

Makes perfect sense to me why the Olsen sisters don’t have kids. They seem deeply impacted by the way they grew up. I get the feeling they’ve never been in a place where they didn’t feel ambiguous about the stability of their lives and how they could raise a child whose childhood wasn’t messed up like theirs.

There is one relentless poster on this thread and others who gets angry when people speculate why mid-late thirties female actresses don’t seem to be pursuing parenthood. The answer is because celebrity or not, women don’t have forever to make the decision like a man does, which said poster does not seem to understand. It’s fine if someone doesn’t want to have kids, but it’s a fair question to ask about women of a certain age who need to at least preserve their fertility - ideally with a partner- even if they do want kids down the road. Said poster also makes it seem like it’s impossible for an established, thirty something woman to maintain her Hollywood career while having kids, which is just so inaccurate- see Reese Witherspoon, cate blanchett, Kate winslet, Nicole Kidman, and countless others.

Why is it any of your concern? They might not want kids and you just said that it’s fine if they don’t.

Why is anything about celebrities lives of others concern? It’s because they live public lives.

No, they don’t. They are public *performers* and you falsely believe that gives you some right to their personal lives.

Lol, okay. Fame is entirely what keeps them relevant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been dating Chris Martin for years now and is in her mid thirties while he is pushing 50. He already has 2 kids is divorced. Why is she wasting her fertility on this old guy who already has kids?

I also find it strange how many beautiful wealthy actresses there are wasting what’s left of their fertility away. Dakota is rich, dating an even richer man, plenty old enough, and both have a lot of leisure time — why would she not be trying to have kids? It makes no sense. But she’s hardly alone in Hollywood. Childless actresses off the top of my head whose fertility window is closing or closed:

Brie Larson, Sofia Vergara, Margot Robbie (lies about her age), Aubrey Plaza, Emma Watson, all of the Olson sisters… on and on.

Makes perfect sense to me why the Olsen sisters don’t have kids. They seem deeply impacted by the way they grew up. I get the feeling they’ve never been in a place where they didn’t feel ambiguous about the stability of their lives and how they could raise a child whose childhood wasn’t messed up like theirs.

There is one relentless poster on this thread and others who gets angry when people speculate why mid-late thirties female actresses don’t seem to be pursuing parenthood. The answer is because celebrity or not, women don’t have forever to make the decision like a man does, which said poster does not seem to understand. It’s fine if someone doesn’t want to have kids, but it’s a fair question to ask about women of a certain age who need to at least preserve their fertility - ideally with a partner- even if they do want kids down the road. Said poster also makes it seem like it’s impossible for an established, thirty something woman to maintain her Hollywood career while having kids, which is just so inaccurate- see Reese Witherspoon, cate blanchett, Kate winslet, Nicole Kidman, and countless others.

Why is it any of your concern? They might not want kids and you just said that it’s fine if they don’t.

Why is anything about celebrities lives of others concern? It’s because they live public lives.

No, they don’t. They are public *performers* and you falsely believe that gives you some right to their personal lives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He split with her when she wouldn't marry him and have kids. then they got back together

not everyone has dreams of being a suburban housewife

He actually wanted more kids?

He has an Apple, he wants an Orange.

Or maybe he wants a Peach.

And maybe she just wants the Banana.

Anonymous wrote:She has been dating Chris Martin for years now and is in her mid thirties while he is pushing 50. He already has 2 kids is divorced. Why is she wasting her fertility on this old guy who already has kids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He split with her when she wouldn't marry him and have kids. then they got back together

not everyone has dreams of being a suburban housewife

He actually wanted more kids?

He has an Apple, he wants an Orange.

Or maybe he wants a Peach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been dating Chris Martin for years now and is in her mid thirties while he is pushing 50. He already has 2 kids is divorced. Why is she wasting her fertility on this old guy who already has kids?

I also find it strange how many beautiful wealthy actresses there are wasting what’s left of their fertility away. Dakota is rich, dating an even richer man, plenty old enough, and both have a lot of leisure time — why would she not be trying to have kids? It makes no sense. But she’s hardly alone in Hollywood. Childless actresses off the top of my head whose fertility window is closing or closed:

Brie Larson, Sofia Vergara, Margot Robbie (lies about her age), Aubrey Plaza, Emma Watson, all of the Olson sisters… on and on.

Makes perfect sense to me why the Olsen sisters don’t have kids. They seem deeply impacted by the way they grew up. I get the feeling they’ve never been in a place where they didn’t feel ambiguous about the stability of their lives and how they could raise a child whose childhood wasn’t messed up like theirs.

There is one relentless poster on this thread and others who gets angry when people speculate why mid-late thirties female actresses don’t seem to be pursuing parenthood. The answer is because celebrity or not, women don’t have forever to make the decision like a man does, which said poster does not seem to understand. It’s fine if someone doesn’t want to have kids, but it’s a fair question to ask about women of a certain age who need to at least preserve their fertility - ideally with a partner- even if they do want kids down the road. Said poster also makes it seem like it’s impossible for an established, thirty something woman to maintain her Hollywood career while having kids, which is just so inaccurate- see Reese Witherspoon, cate blanchett, Kate winslet, Nicole Kidman, and countless others.

Why is it any of your concern? They might not want kids and you just said that it’s fine if they don’t.

Why is anything about celebrities lives of others concern? It’s because they live public lives.

Anonymous wrote:Oh geez, college. I had to address that before the Harpies came after me.

Anonymous wrote:She grew up with Melanie Griffith’s extreme neediness, constant drama and instability. That would do a number on any kid, and affect their view of relationships.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He split with her when she wouldn't marry him and have kids. then they got back together

not everyone has dreams of being a suburban housewife

He actually wanted more kids?

He has an Apple, he wants an Orange.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been dating Chris Martin for years now and is in her mid thirties while he is pushing 50. He already has 2 kids is divorced. Why is she wasting her fertility on this old guy who already has kids?

I also find it strange how many beautiful wealthy actresses there are wasting what’s left of their fertility away. Dakota is rich, dating an even richer man, plenty old enough, and both have a lot of leisure time — why would she not be trying to have kids? It makes no sense. But she’s hardly alone in Hollywood. Childless actresses off the top of my head whose fertility window is closing or closed:

Brie Larson, Sofia Vergara, Margot Robbie (lies about her age), Aubrey Plaza, Emma Watson, all of the Olson sisters… on and on.

Makes perfect sense to me why the Olsen sisters don’t have kids. They seem deeply impacted by the way they grew up. I get the feeling they’ve never been in a place where they didn’t feel ambiguous about the stability of their lives and how they could raise a child whose childhood wasn’t messed up like theirs.

There is one relentless poster on this thread and others who gets angry when people speculate why mid-late thirties female actresses don’t seem to be pursuing parenthood. The answer is because celebrity or not, women don’t have forever to make the decision like a man does, which said poster does not seem to understand. It’s fine if someone doesn’t want to have kids, but it’s a fair question to ask about women of a certain age who need to at least preserve their fertility - ideally with a partner- even if they do want kids down the road. Said poster also makes it seem like it’s impossible for an established, thirty something woman to maintain her Hollywood career while having kids, which is just so inaccurate- see Reese Witherspoon, cate blanchett, Kate winslet, Nicole Kidman, and countless others.

Why is it any of your concern? They might not want kids and you just said that it’s fine if they don’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She has been dating Chris Martin for years now and is in her mid thirties while he is pushing 50. He already has 2 kids is divorced. Why is she wasting her fertility on this old guy who already has kids?

I also find it strange how many beautiful wealthy actresses there are wasting what’s left of their fertility away. Dakota is rich, dating an even richer man, plenty old enough, and both have a lot of leisure time — why would she not be trying to have kids? It makes no sense. But she’s hardly alone in Hollywood. Childless actresses off the top of my head whose fertility window is closing or closed:

Brie Larson, Sofia Vergara, Margot Robbie (lies about her age), Aubrey Plaza, Emma Watson, all of the Olson sisters… on and on.

Makes perfect sense to me why the Olsen sisters don’t have kids. They seem deeply impacted by the way they grew up. I get the feeling they’ve never been in a place where they didn’t feel ambiguous about the stability of their lives and how they could raise a child whose childhood wasn’t messed up like theirs.

There is one relentless poster on this thread and others who gets angry when people speculate why mid-late thirties female actresses don’t seem to be pursuing parenthood. The answer is because celebrity or not, women don’t have forever to make the decision like a man does, which said poster does not seem to understand. It’s fine if someone doesn’t want to have kids, but it’s a fair question to ask about women of a certain age who need to at least preserve their fertility - ideally with a partner- even if they do want kids down the road. Said poster also makes it seem like it’s impossible for an established, thirty something woman to maintain her Hollywood career while having kids, which is just so inaccurate- see Reese Witherspoon, cate blanchett, Kate winslet, Nicole Kidman, and countless others.