Kate Hudson on the Late Show part 1. She comes on at 2:30. Part 2 is below

Kate Hudson was on the Late Show last night and I found her so funny and likable. I’ve seen Kate interviewed before and she’s usually very comfortable and just rolls with the punches. On Letterman she mostly talked about her six year-old son, Ryder, and you could tell that she adores him and finds the things he does so funny. I have a son right around that age and I could really relate to a lot of the stories she was telling.

On how Ryder goes to a French school
Kate explained that Ryder goes to a French school, and that he has a week left in Kindergarten there. She said that he’s there because the school is flexible about their schedule. “What happened was is due to travel schedules, it was sort of a school that would accommodate the traveling circus family. He had a hard time, but now he’s sort of loving it. He’s into this thing where if the ladies like it, it’s cool… He’ll show off his accent, he’s getting into it now… he’s really learning how to communicate in French.”

On how she wants more kids
When Letterman joked about how his kid was entering first grade this year and is so old he’s started smoking, she said “It makes you want more. For me, as a woman… I can’t wait to have more kids.”

On how Ryder fakes an injury to talk to people
“He wears this splint around his hand and there’s nothing wrong with him. He just likes it because people ask him what happened. So I literally watch him make up stories every time somebody asks him about his splint…

There’s nothing more fun to me than watching your kids come up with stuff like that.”

On her diet
Letterman made waffles on the air using a waffle iron right on his desk. He gave one to Kate with butter and syrup and she said she initially didn’t want to eat it, but then gave in and had a couple of bites.

“I’ve been doing this calorie counting thing.”

“Yeah, because you’ve really let yourself go,” Dave quipped.

“But I actually do let myself go, but I’ve been calorie counting and it works. Right now if I have three bites it’s like 100 calories.”

On her movie The Killer Inside Me
Kate is promoting The Killer Inside Me with Casey Affleck, which Letterman called “just about as creepy as a movie can get.”

She talked about a scene in which Casey’s character is spanking her. “There’s a scene where Casey’s actually spanking me… All of a sudden it hits you that you’ve been spanked like 20 times, and you can’t help but start to laugh even though it’s such a horrible subject. Then there’s the other side… it’s actually quite a gruesome movie, and it was tough at times.”

Kate was a lot of fun and I’m reminded how bubbly her personality is. It won’t get me to see this movie, but she sure is doing a great job promoting it. I love my kid too and think he’s the funniest little guy. I’ll give Kate a pass for her frenetic dating history. No matter what she’s up to, you can tell she’s really enjoying life and that she just cherishes this time in her son’s life.

Kate Hudson on The Late Show Part 2:

Header photo is from 6/5/10. Credit: DAVID KRIEGER/ bauergriffinonline.com. Photos of Kate outside the Late Show from Fame Pictures

Star Magazine reports this week that Alex Rodriguez’s ex wife has forbidden him from bringing Cameron Diaz or any other girlfriends around their two children, Natasha, 5, and Ella, 2. That makes sense considering that she’s had to deal with her kids getting attached to their daddy’s last two girlfriends, Madonna and Kate Hudson, along with any other random professionals and actresses he happened to be banging.

Alex Rodriguez’s ex-wife, Cynthia Scurtis, is laying down the law when it comes to his new girlfriend, Cameron Diaz! She’s insisting that the actress, 37, stay away from… her daughters with the New York Yankees slugger, 34… “Cynthia is sick of having all these women hanging around the girls. She doesn’t think it’s healthy,” says a source. “She says she’s sure Cameron is a decent person, but enough is enough.” The insider admits that Cynthia, who filed for divorce in 2008, doesn’t like that he has so quickly gained a reputation as a Hollywood playboy. “She has her reasons for being mad at him, but the ‘no girlfriend’ rule is really to protect the girls… If he gets married again, that’s one thing. Otherwise, no way.”

[From Star Magazine, print edition, June 14, 2010]

Alex didn’t just (allegedly) cheat on Cynthia with Madonna, a relationship her lawyer called “an affair of the heart” in a statement around the time of their divorce, he also (allegedly) cheated on her with hookers. She has plenty of reasons to be mad at the guy and not to trust him. It’s not vindictive not to want other women around her kids, though, it’s just protective and realistic. After all, how long are these relationships going to last? I’m surprised Cameron Diaz and A-Rod are still even together.

While I was looking up some old stories to get background for this, I came upon this gem that Cynthia Rodriguez blew $100k on a shopping spree in Paris right before filing for divorce. She had just had his second daughter 11 weeks prior and flew herself and two friends first class to the French capital where they had spa treatments and ate at the best restaurants. Now that’s a little vindictive, but can you blame her? It’s not like her ex husband doesn’t have the money.

Earlier last week, a video came out of what were allegedly seven year old girls bumping and grinding in tiny costumes to Beyonce’s Single Ladies. It took place at a dance competition and while the moves were impressive, the fact that little girls were wearing lingerie-type outfits and gyrating their hips was disturbing. A lot of people wondered what the hell their parents were thinking and how they could allow this.

It turns out that the girls were eight and nine, slightly older than we heard, and that at least two of their parents think it’s our fault for watching the video in the first place, and that the outfits and dance moves are fine. Two parents were interviewed on Good Morning America and they said that they never meant for the video to go viral and that it was never supposed to be viewed by large audiences. The girls were doing what they needed to do to win the competition, and the costumes were designed for “maximum movement,” one mother explained:

Decked out in red midriff-baring tops and hot pants, dancers at a recent competition earned whoops and praise for their skilled moves and obvious talent.

Parents say video was taken out of context and wasn’t intended to go viral.

But what was an exhilarating performance has turned into an Internet firestorm — the dancers gyrating on a Los Angeles stage to Beyonce’s “All the Single Ladies” were as young as 8.

The girls’ parents defended their daughters’ performance at the World of Dance, billed as the largest U.S. urban dance competition, saying their daughters’ moves and outfits were appropriate for competition.

“This is taken completely out of context,” Cory Miller, father of one of the girls, told “Good Morning America” today. “The girls weren’t meant to be viewed by millions of people.”

Miller said they have tried to slow the spread of the video, but viewers need to understand that the girls’ performance was “completely normal for dancing.”

“On behalf of the parents, our best interest is for the kids,” he said. “Just know that the kids are doing something that they completely love to do. They compete in dance competitions … in front of family and friends.”

Melissa Presch, a mother of one of the 8-year-old dancers, said, “We’re very proud of our daughters and their accomplishments…”

Presch said her daughter has never seen Beyonce’s video, only the cartoon performance in the recently released children’s movie “Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel.”

“It’s one of the most popular songs probably of the decade, said Presch . “The costumes are designed for movement, unrestricted movement and to show body lines.”

Presch also defended the girl’s costumes, saying that judges need to be able to see the girl’s movement and technical skills.

[From ABCNews.com]

These parents have no clue that there’s anything wrong with the way their daughters were dancing. They weren’t even defensive about it and were just kind of matter of fact, like “you just don’t understand.” Maybe the international attention this video has received will be a wakeup call to them, and to a lot of other parents who are putting their children in sexualized costumes and situations. As many of you pointed out, this is all too common in child competitions like dancing and pageants. It’s not that outsiders don’t understand, it’s that insiders have created a situation that is unacceptable and exploitive. They need some oversight that has obviously been sorely lacking.

There are several videos on YouTube featuring two of Michael Jackson’s children: his youngest son, Blanket, 8, and his daughter Paris, 12. Blanket is in most of the videos. He jokes around with his cousin, Donte, while re-enacting movie scenes from Star Wars and Monsters, Inc. In other videos, he talks about a comic book villain and painter Von Gogh. It’s all kind of random and just looks like kids messing around with a new video editing program. (You can see some of the videos in this post, through the links above, and on this account for “King of Pop Kids” on the right side.)

In one video, Paris lipsyncs to a rap by Omer Bhatti, the 26 year-old Norwegian rapper known as Michael Jackson’s “secret son.” The song is actually pretty good and my first impression was that it was Bhatti who leaked these videos in an attempt for publicity. Popeater spoke to one of the YouTube account holders who posted most of the videos, and that guy claims that the videos were leaked by fans who had access to private accounts owned by the Jacksons. There’s an inevitable debate as to whether this is good for the kids or not. Their dad would have surely been against it. The late King of Pop wanted to make sure his children weren’t recognizable to the public or paparazzi and routinely used masks and scarves to cover them while they were out.

With his cousin, Donte Jackson, in the room, Blanket is shown acting out movie scenes and telling imaginative tales, while showing off his animated side. The bulk of the videos star Blanket, but two feature his sister Paris. One is of her simply saying, “Monkey, please help,” while the other shows Paris lip synching over an Omer Bhatti rap song.

Many message board users suggest the two children released the videos themselves, but according to the account owner of the KingOfPopKids YouTube channel, which posted many of the clips of Paris and Blanket, Jackson fans were responsible for the video leak.

“Some ‘fans’ got into one family member account (Facebook and Photobucket) and posted them on the Web,” the user told PopEater in an email interview. “I have been told the account was public and then made private.”

After living their life in seclusion, Paris and Blanket have suddenly interacted with tens of thousands of people through their personal videos. Could this virtual connection be beneficial to the isolated tweens? The owner of KingOfPopKids’ YouTube channel is unsure.

“No, it is not a good exposure because we do not know if they are aware of this,” the user says. “But at the same time, as a fan, I like to see that they are happy, smiling and having fun with their family. That’s a good feeling for us fans, because we feel so empty since Michael’s death. I just think some people need to be careful with the Internet.”

[From Popeater]

It seems like family members could just as easily have “leaked” these videos on purpose. Joe Jackson has said that Paris and Blanket have a future in showbusiness, not that he would have the wherewithal to upload videos to YouTube in order to make that happen.

The last we heard from the Jackson family they were under investigation by Child Protective Services when it came out that 13 year-old Jaafar Jackson, Jermaine’s son, had purchased a stun gun online and was teasing his cousins with it. Thankfully, no one was hurt. We did hear at that time that no less than 14 people lived in the Jackson mansion, including Omer Bhatti, Donte (whose “parentage is unknown”), four cousins, their mother Alejandra Oaziaza, grandmother Katherine, late Michael’s three children, nanny Grace Rwamba, and various help. TMZ reports that the stun gun was to be “part of a movie plot” for these home movies that Blanket and his cousin were making. At 3,000 volts, it’s a good thing they never used the gun on each other and that having their privacy compromised was the worst thing that’s happened so far.

Full disclosure: I love comic book movies. “Iron Man” is my all time favorite, closely followed by “Spiderman 2″ and of course the original “Superman” and “The Dark Knight.” So when I heard that the underground legend “Kick-Ass” was being made into a movie, I nearly peed my pants. Now, “Kick-Ass,” much like “Watchmen,” isn’t for everyone. It’s an unlikely but darkly humorous story about regular people who decide to wear costumes and become superheroes, even though they don’t have any super powers. It’s violent, it’s bloody, it uses foul language. That’s why the movie is rated R. But revered movie critic Roger Ebert has a big problem with the film: he hates the fact that an 11-year-old girl is both killing and nearly killed in the film and has no remorse or emotions about it.

Shall I have feelings, or should I pretend to be cool? Will I seem hopelessly square if I find “Kick-Ass” morally reprehensible and will I appear to have missed the point? Let’s say you’re a big fan of the original comic book, and you think the movie does it justice. You know what? You inhabit a world I am so very not interested in. A movie camera makes a record of whatever is placed in front of it, and in this case, it shows deadly carnage dished out by an 11-year-old girl, after which an adult man brutally hammers her to within an inch of her life. Blood everywhere. Now tell me all about the context.

The movie’s premise is that ordinary people, including a high school kid, the 11-year-old and her father, try to become superheroes in order to punish evil men. The flaw in this premise is that the little girl does become a superhero. In one scene, she faces a hallway jammed with heavily armed gangsters and shoots, stabs and kicks them all to death, while flying through the air with such power, it’s enough to make Jackie Chan take out an AARP membership.

This isn’t comic violence. These men, and many others in the film, are really stone-cold dead. And the 11-year-old apparently experiences no emotions about this. Many children that age would be, I dunno, affected somehow, don’t you think, after killing eight or 12 men who were trying to kill her?

I know, I know. This is a satire. But a satire of what? The movie’s rated R, which means in this case that it’s doubly attractive to anyone under 17. I’m not too worried about 16-year-olds here. I’m thinking of 6-year-olds. There are characters here with walls covered in carefully mounted firearms, ranging from handguns through automatic weapons to bazookas. At the end, when the villain deliciously anticipates blowing a bullet hole in the child’s head, he is prevented only because her friend, in the nick of time, shoots him with bazooka shell at 10-foot range and blows him through a skyscraper window and across several city blocks of sky in a projectile of blood, flame and smoke. As I often read on the Internet: Hahahahaha.

[From The Chicago Sun Times]

I definitely see where Ebert is coming from. I have a lot of respect for the guy. But I also think that if he is going to single out this movie for its lack of emotion or remorse about gratuitious violence and killing, he’s leaving out an awful lot of other movies that did it first. How about “The Matrix” or “Wanted” or “Sin City” or “300″ or even “Inglorious Basterds?” All of those films were blood baths. I think the only movie in recent memory where a character showed remorse about killing people was one of the “Bourne Identity” sequels. Other than that, I don’t see any characters, superhero or otherwise, have any problems with taking the badguys out. So to single out this one movie because there’s a kid in it doesn’t make much sense to me.

As for his concern about 6 year olds seeing the film, I do agree that this is NOT made for young children. I haven’t even let my kids read the comic book yet, and I certainly won’t be taking my 10 year old to see it and maybe not my 15 year old either. But there are plenty of parents out there who do take their little kids to R-rated movies. I don’t get it, but they do. I remember toddlers in the theater when we saw “Sin City,” and I just wanted to walk up to those parents and say, “What the hell is wrong with you?” Still, I don’t think it’s fair to censor or ban a movie because there are stupid parents out there who don’t care what their kids see. I guess that’s where Roger and I will disagree. Personally, I haven’t seen “Kick-Ass” yet but I can’t wait to go. I’ll probably check it out this weekend.

photos via AllMoviePhoto

*We don’t have access to the photos of Suri with the bottle. To these photos, go to Us Weekly.*

This is one of those topics that can be absolutely explosive, but let’s talk about it anyway. Should a four-year-old child be drinking from a bottle, and is it anyone else’s business if a parent thinks this is ok? Case in point: little Suri Cruise, daughter of Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise, who was recently photographed drinking a bottle on an outing with mom. Suri turns 4 soon, and doesn’t seem to be giving up the bottle any time in the near future. What are some of the risks of letting an older toddler like Suri continue to bottle feed – or is it really no big deal?

Suri Cruise — who turns 4 Apr. 18 — just can’t put down the bottle.

She was spotted drinking out of one Friday in New York City, where mom Katie Holmes is shooting the crime-thriller Son of No One.

Last fall, experts told UsMagazine.com it was imperative for Holmes, 31, and husband Tom Cruise, 47, to wean their daughter off the bottle.

“By the time kids are nine-months old, they have the physical development and mouth coordination necessary to be able to drink out of a sippy cup or a cup with straw,” said Dr. Jennifer Shu, a pediatrician and co-author of Food Fights. “That development comes pretty early.”

Shu told Us she didn’t “know why” Cruise and Holmes still allowed their daughter to drink from one. “You don’t force kids to crawl when they can walk,” Shu told Us.

But Dr. Harvey Karp — a pediatrician, child development specialist and creator of the DVD and book, The Happiest Toddler on the Block — said it isn’t a huge deal.

“Sucking is normal for kids when they are tired or bored,” he told Us, “as long as kids aren’t keeping the bottle in their mouths for hours.”

[From Us Magazine]

I’m a mom who has breast and bottle-fed two babies. I did a lot of research about weaning when my daughters were infants. The consensus between the experts and my own pediatrician was that bottle feeding once a child has a full set of teeth is detrimental and not necessary, since a child with teeth doesn’t need to get their nutrients from formula or breast milk anymore. There’s also the risk of cavities associated with bottles. Of course, that medical advice doesn’t take into consideration the emotional attachments often associated with the bottle: many kids view their “ba-ba” as a source of comfort just like a blanket or a pacifier. This may be what’s going on with Suri, who despite her “mature” appearance, still carries a blanket around as well.

As for my opinion, it’s simple: bottles are for babies, and a four year old is not even close to being a baby. Ideally, as a parent, you wouldn’t let a situation like this happen in the first place. I don’t think Katie and Tom are doing their child or themselves any favors by indulging her on the bottle- they should ask their good friend and fellow Scientologist Leah Remini how that fared for her.

These photos are from 3/11 before the scandal. Credit: Fame Pictures

There’s not much that’s new in the tabloids this week about the Sandra Bullock/Jesse James scandal. The Enquirer says that Jesse is a violent racist, and quotes author Ian Halperin’s probably speculative claim that Sandra has hired bodyguards to protect her from Jesse. According to Halperin, “sources close to Sandra expect her to accuse Jesse of both physical and mental abuse in her divorce suit.” I think Jesse is of course capable of violence, and there were claims of domestic abuse in his divorce with Lindemulder, but it looks like they’re just piling on the accusations now that we know what a scumbag the guy is. The whole “dog fighting” claim by the Enquirer last week was pretty lame, in my opinion. (Yes the dogs fought to the death, which is despicable. It was more negligence than willfully pitting them against each other though. It’s still disgusting, just not as bad as they made it out to be.)

The Enquirer also has quotes from a guy who worked with Jesse at a bar and says that he regularly used racial epithets and told racist jokes. Jesse worked as a bouncer and had “numerous bloody fights.” He’s a shady character, but whether he’d hurt Sandra physically it’s hard to tell. Star has a similar story on Jesse’s temper, and claims he has an anger management problem. They say Sandra is going to file a restraining order against him.

US Weekly takes a softer look at the fallout from Sandra’s divorce, and focuses on her relationship with Jesse’s children, particularly Sunny, six. Sandra has said through her lawyer that she has no plans to adopt any of Jesse’s three children, Sunny, Jesse Jr., 12, and Chandler, 15. Us reports that Sandra is of course worried about them, particularly Sunny, with whom she was close.

Sunny has been seen out with her grandmother, James’ mom, while her dad Jesse is in rehab in a lame attempt to save his marriage. Now TMZ is reporting that Sunny, Chandler, and Jesse Jr. are all staying with Sandra. It’s a good sign that Sandra still has access to the kids but whether it will last through a messy divorce is anyone’s guess.

Sources directly connected with Sandra Bullock and Jesse James tell TMZ Jesse’s kids are living with Sandra.

We’re told all three kids — Sunny, Chandler and Jesse, Jr. — are all with Sandra.

Our sources say Sandra is not living at her Hollywood Hills home, which has become paparazzi central for more than a week.

One source very familiar with the situation tells TMZ, “It’s a positive sign about Sandra’s relationship with Jesse.” The source would not elaborate.

[From TMZ via D-Listed]

Good for Sandra for moving to where she has some privacy. I really hated to read that last quote about how Sandra caring for the children is a positive sign for her relationship. I want to see her divorce this guy quickly, but I totally understand why she, and Elin Woods, are taking their time despite all the reams of evidence that their husbands are lying, cheating douchebags. It’s more complicated when there are kids involved. I once received advice to never make permanent decisions base on temporary feelings. Some STDs are forever, though.

Both Star and Us Weekly have variations on the “celebrity kids are insane” stories. Star actually takes the nicer slant, calling celebrity kids Shiloh, Suri, Harlow, and others “Billion Dollar Babies”. Do you think these kids really have “shrinks on call 24/7”? Well, we know Suri doesn’t. Xenu wouldn’t stand for it. Maybe Tori and Dean’s Stella does? How about “butlers in tuxedos”? If we’re talking tuxedo t-shirts, maybe that one is Matthew and Camila’s little Levi. Meanwhile, Us Weekly condemns the celebrity kids with “Growing Up Too Fast: Over-the-top parties, private jets, personal stylists, inside the world of Tinseltown’s cutest A-Listers”. Like any day now Suri is going to doing lines with Lindsay Lohan at the bathroom of Bungalow 8. But it is weird that both tabloids chose the same photo of Suri, isn’t it? Hm..

Anyway, very few details have been released from the cover stories, but I can take a wild guess that both are just filler pieces about the “extravagant” lives these kids lead. Some of which is probably true, some not so much. But there is this little piece from Us Weekly about Suri:

There’s a reason why you never see Suri Cruise in denim: She “hates jeans and favors dresses,” a source tells the latest Us Weekly (on newsstands now), which reveals surprising new details on the lavish lifestyles of Hollywood kids.

At the tender age of 3, Suri, daughter of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, also has a penchant for heels — and pricey designer bags. Us Weekly reports that she even carries around an $850 Ferragamo purse!

For more on Hollywood kids – including how Cruise had a “private playground” built for Suri; which star once dropped a staggering $25,000 on her sons’ birthday; the secret way Brad Pitt calms down a “flustered” Shiloh and which Tinseltown tots have personal stylists – grab the new Us Weekly today!

[From Us Weekly]

Is this breaking news? Does this deserve a cover story? No and no. Anyone who has read anything about Tom Cruise, Katie or Suri over the past few years knows that Suri is a little princess who wears expensive doll clothes. And there are many celebrity kids who also have nice things too. I remember seeing Angelina and Empress Zahara with matching $800 purses at one point too. Yes, celebrity parents splurge on their beloved children. As do non-celebrity parents. Shocking!

US Weekly & Star covers courtesy of CoverAwards.

CB hasn’t said it to me directly, but I think she thinks I hate children. I don’t really hate them, I just have a very low tolerance for the annoyances many children bring. I’m not a mother, and I like the idea of kids – but in reality, when I’m seated behind a kid in a restaurant or movie theatre, I’m the bitch who says something. All of you know someone like me. I’m the one who gripes loudly “Why would you bring a four year old to a rated R movie?” I’m the one who asks the waitress if there are any other tables available, while shooting a look at some kid who is in the midst of a full-blown ketchup-related tantrum. Don’t even say it. I know I’m a bitch.

I bring up my alleged child-hatred (which is really just mild child-annoyance) because of this story involving Ivana Trump, some rowdy children, a plane, and what was probably a team of burly TSA men. Just so you know, this is the first time I think Ivana Trump and I might be kindred spirits:

Donald Trump’s ex-wife, Ivana, was forcefully removed from a New York City-bound Delta Airlines flight Saturday after causing a scene and screaming at crew members.

According to the Associated Press, Trump’s 60-year-old former wife became angered by a group of children running in the aisle of her first class cabin while the flight was waiting to depart Palm Beach International Airport en route to New York.

Flight attendants were unable to calm the socialite down and the pilot taxied the plane back to the gate where law enforcement tried to convince Trump to voluntarily exit the aircraft.

When she refused and continued to hurl obscenities at crew members and fellow passengers, deputies “physically escorted her off the aircraft,” a department spokesman told RadarOnline.com.

Trump filed for divorce from her fourth husband, Rossano Rubicondi, earlier this month.

[From Us Weekly]

For me, the story hinges on something we don’t know – were the rowdy kids first-class passengers or economy-class? If they were economy class, I don’t blame Ivana in the least. She paid the exorbitant price for first-class, she should be able to enjoy her white wine in peace and quiet. If the kids were first-class passengers too, well, tough sh-t for Ivana. The kids’ parents paid for their seats, and the kids can act however they want. Oh, and I can totally see myself “pulling an Ivana” especially if I was the one being escorted out while the parents of the rowdy kids, and the kids themselves, were allowed to stay on the plane. That’s not fair.

Do I sound too Team Ivana? This is new for me. I’ve never identified with her before. Even though I totally understand how and why this happened, I do think Ivana should invest in some sleeping pills or Valium or something to make her more chilled out for flying. That’s as harsh as I’ll go.

Ivana Trump at the International Horse Fair (SICAB) in Spain on November 28, 2009. Credit: Target/FAME Pictures.

Suri Cruise was just named as the “most stylish celebrity child” by a poll conducted in the United Kingdom. I’m grossed out for a couple of reasons – first, I really do hate the way the media is trying to pit children in competition with one another, whether or not the children are aware of it or not. Second point – Zahara Jolie-Pitt got robbed! Third point – Violet Affleck, Maddox Jolie-Pitt, Sunday Rose Kidman-Urban and Honor Alba-Warren got robbed too! Although, I think the fact that this poll was conducted in the UK might have had something to do with it – Princess Tiaamii Andre (Katie Price’s daughter) made the list, after all.

She faced some pretty tough competition, but in a recent poll conducted by UK clothier Adams Childrenwear 3-year-old Suri Cruise was named the most stylish celebrity child.

Mom Katie Holmes recently revealed that her daughter already has an eye for fashion, saying, “She loves clothes and picks out her own.”

Joining Tom and Katie’s little fashionista on the list were all three Beckham boys and of course L.A.M.B. designer Gwen Stefani’s preschooler Kingston. Here’s a list of all of the very stylish tots who made the top 10:

1. Suri Cruise
2. Cruz Beckham
3. Brooklyn Beckham
4. Lourdes
5. Romeo Beckham
6. Junior Andre
7. Shiloh Jolie-Pitt
8. Kingston Rossdale
9. Poppy Oliver
10. Princess Tiaamii Andre

[From Celebrity Baby Scoop]

I would have been all for Lourdes getting top honors, but I thought the list was for little kids, not 13-year-olds. Lola is totally one of the most fashionable kids or young women out there today. But Shiloh? Shiloh is too busy dressing up like a hellrasing tomboy, or Peter Pan. Which is cute, but is it stylish? If Suri is the top of the list, it makes me suspect that people like little girls dresses as little dolls, especially if the dolls don’t wear coats. Kingston Rossdale deserves his place on the list though – that is one stylish little boy. Sigh… they’re all cuties. Why make them compete?

Suri Cruise in Spain on December 11, 2009. Credit: Target/FAME Pictures. Brooklyn and Cruz Beckham on September 1, 2009 in LA. Credit: Fame. Shiloh, Zahara and Angelina on February 18, 2009; Kingston Rossdale in London on December 20, 2009; Lourdes on December 15 in New York; and Princess Tiaamii Andre on November 22, with Peter Andre, credit for all: WENN.