Bonnie blue risky sexual behaviour whilst pregnant

[Jellysweets13]

If you’re not interested in discussing this then feel free to scroll on by.

A lot of us will know who Bonnie Blue is. The porn star who slept with 1000 men and various other stunts. Loves to rage bait especially to women.

She’s now pregnant, probably around 4-6 months.

If she’s to be believed she’s still working and filming and her latest stunt was to hold a baby shower in which she invited strangers to urinate over her and then have sex with her.

Obviously this has created a lot of outrage and disgust and there are comments everywhere online saying that she is not only sexualising her baby but that social services should be involved.

I’m not completely convinced that she actually doing these things for real. She has an X page showing clips, but it could all be fake or AI.

But let’s say for a moment that she really is having sex with strangers and letting them urinate on her. Where is the line drawn between her body her choice and saying that she’s putting the baby at risk and social services should be involved?

I’m very much usually of the opinion of women having autonomy and choice, but it seems like very risky behaviour and the child is going to have to endure a lot of negative comments and attention because of the choices the mother is making. She doesn’t need to do these things whilst pregnant she is a millionaire.

Yabu - her body her choice
Yanbu - it’s a social services case

The men are worse. I would disown my DS if he queued up for sex. No joke.
Just shows how fucking low they are, no wonder men get away with drugging their wives and offering their unconscious body to other men, who turn up. Vile.

It would instigate safeguarding, how that would pan out depends on BB.

I’m an adoptive mum. SS were heavily involved with all my children before they were born. They were removed at birth and went straight into care. For the second, we knew it was likely they’d come to us several months before they were born (we had already adopted the sibling).

It's not unheard of for women to sleep with several different men while pregnant. Given that many men are cheats, there are also women who have sex with men who engage in risky behaviours while pregnant and they are completely unaware of it. It really wouldn't be good if that became a ground for removing a child.

Yes I know, I was just replying to someone who was trying to make out that her behaviour is the same as women simply having a sex life during pregnancy…

Are you alleging that I consume 'pregnancy porn'?

I thought she was 6 months pregnant. You cant abort then can you ? So it must be recognised as a person.

No, I’m not keen to be smug. I’m keen to understand why you want to be sure something- something that might be nothing- has happened and why you think that action goes any way towards solving the problem of Bonnie blue being pregnant.

Would it make you feel better if you knew that her baby shower prompted a phone call From SS to BB? Why? It’s basically a nothing action!

I agree the men are worse. It doesn’t make what she is doing any more morally acceptable to me personally.

Oh the radar doesn't mean anything. It's something people say when they don't understand how social services work. A child can have a thousand referrals but if they don't meet threshold for intervention nothing will happen.

It's not.

It would be interesting to know their reasons.it is quite odd behaviour.

Yes I know, I was quoting back the language of the poster I quoted

I think it's unlikely that SS will be involved before the birth. I honestly doubt it will be the case after either unless something major happens.

What she is doing is obviously questionable from a moral point of view but having lots of casual sex when pregnant isn't child abuse, especially when a foetus doesn't have the same rights as a child until birth and having lots of casual sex when you have a small child isn't child abuse unless she actively involves the child and obviously that would be very, very different.

She isn't the only influencer type that will have her baby all over social media. Again, not child abuse.

Yes but they will not have had any powers over the birth mum until she actually gave birth. They would have been involved with her and tried to support etc but they couldn't do anything until the child was born. With many birth parents who have had kids removed before, they know it's inevitable that the next one will be removed too so a plan is made early on as to what will happen.

The baby is at risk of her catching an STD. Herpes can be devastating to a baby.

But in cases where a woman has been killed while pregnant i think the homicide of a child is also recognised isnt it. The " unborn child" is the term i think. Im sure ive seen that before now.

The fetus has no legal rights until born. Do you want the state to control pregnant women as that is what you and many posters are implying.

Yes I'm sorry but that's just not enough for social services to get involved during a pregnancy.

Anyone having unprotected sex is at potential risk of herpes. Including married women whose husbands might have cheated on them.

She's not pregnant.

Not in this country. Maybe in America.

God that analogy has just made my head hurt.

Of course, but it's not devastating to an adult like it is to a foetus.

So the child has no rights at all. But I'm sure there are precedents in law that contradict that.