Lex Jurgen - June 24, 2014
I have pretty much every Dax Shepard and Kristen Bell high minded missive tattooed on my sleeve of awesome celebrity insights. I remember at the beginning of this year when the two headed vegan Bell-Shepard hydra bitch announced a boycott of all magazines that show pictures of celebrity kids. Jennifer Garner and Halle Berry and I think that woman who became a man but still had a baby on Oprah joined the protest, asking the celebrity magazines to refrain from taking candid photos of their kids. Outlets like People magazine felt obliged to pen tortured explanations about how they're parents too and work really hard to make sure kids are never exploited within their pages. Obviously, there are rare exceptions of newsworthy events or when print subscriptions are plummeting and you need a cover story on Suri Cruise looking fucking adorable as ever. Also, if you pay the parents a shit ton of money for their kids' pictures, it's cool. It's noted as the Kardashian Exception under law.
I used to feel sorry for the children of celebrities for being visually exploited in this manner. Now I realize that large middle aged women need porn too. If perusing photos of Suri and North and Nahla and all the other kitschy commercially named rugrats keep these same women from overdrawing their checking accounts to buy cute owl-ornaments on QVC, so be it. These children are doomed with or without the long distance exploitation. Why not let Betty from Ames ventilate her privates as she reviews what famous preschoolers are wearing to the summer parties. If Dax and Kristen weren't so inherently more right than other people, this might just be open to debate.
Photo Credit: INFphoto.com
Please log in again. The login page will open in a new tab. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.