Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Oops, she did it again! Sort of anyway...

So here's what I want to know. Is stupidity genetic? Are we inherently destined to make poor decisions in life based upon our DNA? Or, can it be obtained through osmosis? Just by being in close proximity to others who aren't that bright? Or rather, is it an acquired, learned behaviour. Tolerated and nurtured because one is a "celebrity" of some sort.



How disturbing is it to find out that Jamie Lynn Spears is 16 years old, and about to become a mother. What I find rather comical, is that instead of having pictures of her floating around with these articles, you're more inclined to find photos of her sister, Ms. Britney. Birds of a feather clearly flock together. One would think that Jamie would see the disarray that her sister is in and think to herself "hmm. That's so not the direction I want to end up in".



Here's the thing. Teenage pregnancies have been going on for years, and it is not - or rather should not -- be a reflection on parenting, upbringing or perceived as anything other than what it is - and that is an age old issue of children growing up too quickly and being involved with relationships when they are too young to be responsible about it. So, I'm here to say that I am not passing judgement on anyone else. I know plenty of wonderful people who were born when they're mothers were probably too young to have had them in retrospect. I'm talking only about the family at hand -- the Spears family in particular. I'm thinking that there may be a little bit more of a judgemental perspective here. Is it that everyone was so wrapped around Britney that they figured they could let Jamie Lynn do whatever she wanted? I'm sorry, but isn't there this issue floating around now with regards to professional athletes as well -- being thrust into money and fame so quickly and so young, with little or no mentorship?? Doesn't the same thing apply to actors/actresses and the like? I mean, don't 16 year olds still require adult supervision? I know that kids have ample time to do things and fool around and all that, but truthfully - I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I'm sure Jamie Lynn Spears didn't have curfews and other rules to follow that a 16 year old probably should have.



Let's look at another celebrity family. We can all laugh and poke jokes at Jessica Simpson's father -- but truth be told, it seems to me that he and his wife kept their family together despite the fame and fortune that his daughters found at young ages. Maybe that's why he was so involved in Jessica's life. Sure, we can say that he was too involved and what not, and that she's spoiled and not the brightest bulb in the box sometimes -- but maybe the joke is on everyone else instead. Because while he was and is so involved, despite the normal dating type issues that Jessica's going through under the scrutiny of a microscope -- his kids are actually doing okay and seem relatively normal and grounded.



So now, what do all of these teen magazines do now? Do they not feature her anymore? I would tend to think that pregnant at 16 is not something that should be perceived as glamourized, and should not be condoned merely because she's a quasi-celebrity. At the same time, to drop her might be considered discrimination to some. So what's the media to do? Will they lead the confused little flock of young teenage girls into thinking that it's okay to be pregnant at 16 by showing the latest in maternity fashions on one who is clearly still a baby herself?



The scary thing is, I think they will. What is the alternative? Is there a happy medium for the portrayal of this situation?


1 comment:

AdamAnt Eve said...

Teens already wear the teen-maternity style as it is...the fitted bodice area with the full skirted bottom-frightening!