‘With science I can have a baby whenever I want’’

[Laughingstock91]

Naomi Campbell had had a baby at 50 - not sure if she’s given birth or it’s a surrogate but her comments really irritated me. She said ‘with science I can have a baby whenever I want’ - do people actually think about the baby? I am sure she’ll be a lovely mum but it makes having a baby just sound like something to tick off on a list when you have decided you have had enough of everything else no matter what age you are. Maybe I am being harsh but if it’s that easy with science, why wait until you are 50?

Aibu?

Feminism doesn't mean 'I'm on Team Women! I'll support any woman no matter what she does'.

Why don't you vilify men who have all the fun and have kids when there's nothing better to do? Hugh Grant? Mick Jagger? Rod Stewart. I think it's great she enjoyed her life and then got a baby despite being 'old'. That brings more balance between men and women.

I don't think the age is so important, assuming that there was a surrogate and/or egg and sperm donation. If it's 'natural' it's a bit worrying because of the increased risk of health problems in the child.

In an ideal world, I would suggest that it might be preferable to adopt a child who would otherwise grow up in an orphanage. However, this would mean international adoption, which is almost impossible nowadays.

As regards the fact that she might have less energy, might need care when the child is a young adult, etc. - there have always been children who were adopted by their grandparents. No living arrangement is ideal in every way: at least this child is not unplanned. And, crass though it may be to mention it, Naomi Campbell would always be able to afford paid help if she needs it.

Urgh ,it does all come across as "I'm rich and famous and I can do what the fuck I want and when the fuck I want"

It's capitalism that's at the route of this. People can be obscenely rich and then do what they like and us poor folk acquiesce and sell our selves at every level. Campbell got rich because she's incredibly attractive and willing to be a clothes horse to sell clothes to very very wealthy people who can only afford designer goods because they've exploited and suppressed the working population.

It’s not feminist to judge another woman for her life choices
Since when did feminism mean congratulating any action done by a woman?

When the celebs and affluent women are renting their wombs at the same rate as poorer or vulnerable women, then I'll change my mind. Until then, I'll continue to challenge the idea that women with money should be given a free pass to exploit other women is a just another valid choice.

Not ironic as I didn’t imply anyone was not a feminist at all. I don’t know or care if you’re a feminist. I simply pointed out that feminism as I’ve been told is supposedly about choices, yet I see women getting slammed on here for being working mothers, or stay at home mothers. Point was that if it’s about choices then why slam another woman for her choices?

Carry on. I’m a stranger on the internet. So my opinion doesn’t matter or shouldn’t matter to anyone. I’m just pointing out a vein of hypocrisy that seems rampant with women these days. We just can’t seem to stop criticizing one another. No matter what a woman doesn’t.. it’s always another woman there to slam her choices. 🙄

There's a certain branch of feminism who preach the "but feminism is about choice", which sounds nice and friendly. Dig below the surface and what it often becomes is women being foot soldiers for the patriarchy, supporting things that continue continue oppress women. That branch of feminism is all very individualist and me me me, my choice, I want, and pays very little attention to systemic issues that oppress women.

I'm younger than her and it wouldn't be fair on the child if I had another baby. I would be worried I would get sick/die before they reach 25 and I do not have the energy I once had. The flip side is you can afford a nanny often if you are older but still not fair on the child

@LolaSmiles

There's a certain branch of feminism who preach the "but feminism is about choice", which sounds nice and friendly. Dig below the surface and what it often becomes is women being foot soldiers for the patriarchy, supporting things that continue continue oppress women. That branch of feminism is all very individualist and me me me, my choice, I want, and pays very little attention to systemic issues that oppress women.

Add in the choice to exploit other women with less money, in the case of commercial surrogacy or watching porn.

It’s not really anyone’s business what anyone else does
and

The technology is there and its not illegal , so why shouldn't she use it

I don't know where to start with some of these opinions - they are so vacuous. Are you really saying that you can do anything as long as it is not illegal and no one else should be bothered?

Feminism definitely hasn’t helped if women are damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

You don't know what feminism is. Feminism is not about supporting everything women do just because they are women. Plenty of women make choices which are anti-feminist.

HecatesCatsInFancyHats
I agree.
Those so called feminists seem to really struggle comprehending the difference between individual actions and systemic oppression.

What I find difficult is how often the "but choices" individualistic feminists seem to conveniently promote much of the same norms and values as the patriarchy, just rebranding it as 'empowerment' and 'freedom', with a healthy dose of telling other women off for challenging oppressive structures.

I simply pointed out that feminism as I’ve been told is supposedly about choices

Choices in terms of equality of opportunity yes, in terms of choosing to sell a kidney on the black market or making and selling babies/baby trafficking, no.

I think what you have been told would differ from what others understand to be 'feminism'.

'Choice feminism' or 'liberal feminism' is, from what I have read and understood, supportive and encouraging of surrogacy and prostitution ("sex work is work", though no one has said that surrogacy is work which is odd, I guess money changing hands for babies is a bit 'icky' even for the fun kind of feminists), and women having the choice to participate in either is presented as progress, and both overwhelmingly benefit men.

Women having choice is fine when it benefits men.

It's "get your tits out for the lads" feminism or what was it that woman photographed with Owen Jones had on her t shirt "blow jobs for socialism"....something like that.

Yea, I'm not that kind of feminist and if that is feminism I'm not a feminist at all.

nowadays some 50 year olds are much healthier than 30/40 year olds and would therefore have longer life expectancies. I think you cant put everyone in same boat based on just age!

I simply pointed out that feminism as I’ve been told is supposedly about choices

You've been told wrong. If your choice is to exploit women for your personal gain, how do you think that is feminist?

I see a lot of adverts on Facebook for U.K. based businesses because the algorithms see my comments here I suppose

Damn! I thought that was only in the wild west of the U.S. Sounds like there is a creep into UK media. That's a shame.

The U.S. is currently fighting to keep abortion rights for women...I can't help to think limiting reproductive choice for some women, while widening distorting it for others is linked - women's bodies are up for use/restriction/exploitation depending on who is in power and who can pay for it.

So you really think Naomi Campbell, a black woman, doesn’t understand systemic oppression?

These jokes write themselves!

I don’t identify as a feminist anyway. Definitely do not identify with 3rd wave feminism. I’m educated and have a career and believe women should be able to be paid the same.I’m anti porn, pro marriage, anti prostitution etc. But the feminist movement as it exists today.. I don’t relate.

Again ladies. Clam down.. I’m a stranger on the internet. A foreigner (which makes my opinion worth less in here apparently) and I think we are allowed to have different opinions without a collective meltdown. Or not.. carry on.

But the reactions to what I have said is exactly why so many women don’t identify with “feminism” because we aren’t allowed to have nuance, debate anything or have other opinions.

Also anyone saying Naomi Campbell is systematically oppressing anyone is ridiculous. She’s a black woman who has been discriminated against a lot in her career, so I’m sure she understands systems of oppression.

And again.. we don’t even know if she used a surrogate. It’s speculation. Should we call Naomi and tell her we don’t agree if she used a surrogate and ask her to do what? Give the baby back? 🙃

Also anyone saying Naomi Campbell is systematically oppressing anyone is ridiculous. She’s a black woman who has been discriminated against a lot in her career, so I’m sure she understands systems of oppression.

Can I ask if she's used a Black woman from a lower income background as a surrogate mother for her child how that sits with you? Can you see how there might be a power dynamic there - a rich woman renting a poorer woman's womb.

@MarshmallowSwede

So you really think Naomi Campbell, a black woman, doesn’t understand systemic oppression?

These jokes write themselves!

She's black, so she gets a pass on exploiting other women?

She's incredibly rich and privileged and has bought a human baby. Her colour doesn't make that ok.

But the reactions to what I have said is exactly why so many women don’t identify with “feminism” because we aren’t allowed to have nuance, debate anything or have other opinions

That was YOU, ffs with your "feminism is about choices, you;re not allowed to judge any women ever".
Stop lecturing others when you are so damn confused!

I agree.

I have several friends whose parents had them in their 40s and they are now looking at care homes and care providers whilst also navigating being first time parents themselves (we are mid 30s). One friends mum even said she was sad she wouldn't be able to be a "proper grandma" because she was too frail, and WHY DIDN'T MY FRIEND HAVE A BABY EARLIER (she was 32!) not laying the blame at her own door, having my friend at 44! Another friend had lost both parents to old age by the time he finished uni, another couple by the time they were 30.

So whilst I see how for women it can be liberating to not be tied to baby making years of 20s and 30s, but for the kids, I think it's really hard.

PaperbackRider
I agree. The problem with liberal choice based feminism is that it frequently goes hand in hand with a slightly self-righteous and naive I care about women's choices and those other feminists are so awful. How can you support women if you are judgey about their choices?.
I say that having been a liberal feminist who was all about choices and empowerment. It was with time and reading, reflection and critical thinking that I realised that there is a huge difference between an individual woman's actions and the systemic patriarchy. Now I can look at an individual woman's actions in different ways such as:
This action is actively challenging the patriarchy
This action might not be challenging the patriarchy, but it isn't selling other women out or exploiting other women, so live and let live.
This action actively promotes patriarchy, and harms other women.

Obviously it's more nuanced than that, but it was a learning curve.

Bluntness100

They are not selling babies. That makes it sound like they are selling their own biological children. They are selling or providing gestation only. And it should be tightly controlled to avoid exploitation. But past that if a woman wishes to gestate another’s woman’s baby for her, becayse she herself cannot, I take no issue with it.

So, you argue that the baby belongs to the woman he or she has the biological link to, not the woman who gave birth to him or her?

Do you argue the same, that the baby belongs to the woman whose eggs were used, when a woman has a successful pregnancy after IVF using donor eggs?

It seems to have got to the point where anyone with enough money can acquire a new born baby. They may not have carried the child, may not be genetically related, may be years past menopause, but anyone with enough money can take delivery of a new born baby. I'm not sure whether that is a good thing.

Ulrika Josson in the Sun, though I am not a fan if either, and she spectacularly misses the point.

"If Ms Campbell has chosen the surrogacy route, which is another wonderful option for singles or couples, then she’s not asking her body to go through the arduous task of pregnancy for nine months, which makes things considerably less risky at 50.
But does that mean that women in their 60s or 70s should opt for surrogacy, just because they can?"

www.thesun.co.uk/news/15031132/naomi-campbell-baby-50-selfish-ulrika-jonsson/

It's very much about her age and how old a mother can be, and to be fair there are no age restrictions for commissioning parents, you could buy a baby at 79 if you have the money, the lawyers and a willing woman and her healthy womb.

Like every other media outlet or newspaper ignores that the "arduous task for pregnancy" has been outsourced and it's risks transferred to the birth mother.