Jennifer Garner describes how the paparazzi taunt her 3 year-old daughter

fp_2182181_garner_jennifer_fp_051109

Jennifer Garner and her 3-year-old daughter Violet Affleck must be two of the most photographed people in Hollywood. I’d bet that after Brangelina’s crew and Suri Cruise, Violet must be the most photographed celebrity kid. She always looks adorable and Jen is often seen taking her on fun outings. But we forget when we’re looking at these idyllic pictures that there are loud, screaming people behind them. Paparazzi yelling, harassing, flashing a thousand bright bulbs on them. Jennifer signed on for all this – something she readily admits. But Violet didn’t. She lives in a fishbowl, and Jen thinks there needs to be more laws protecting celebrity children.

They are waiting — cameras and camcorders in their hands — every morning in front of the kindergarten gates. Some days, there are enough of them to block easy access to the school. They can be aggressive and frightening to a young child. And in the evening, when parents return to pick the youngsters up, they are back in full force again.

Little wonder that Jennifer Garner finds herself tensing up whenever she takes her three-year-old daughter to preschool. Little wonder that she experiences mounting frustration and rage over the failure of the system to protect the children of celebrities from the harassment of the paparazzi.

“Now, it’s worse because of the entire world of tabloid journalism,” she says bluntly. “Now, there are almost as many video cameras as there are film cameras and the situation has shifted so that a huge amount of their focus is put on the children of celebrities.” Which is why getting daughter Violet Anne to school each morning has turned into a nightmare for Garner and husband Ben Affleck.

“To call it a ‘problem’ is the hugest understatement in the world,” she says passionately. “There are no laws protecting children. They have no right to privacy. Because my husband and I are public figures, it is assumed that our daughters are public figures, and there’s nothing to protect them.”

… It’s that fierce love for her children that has sparked her outburst against the paparazzi this morning. “There are cars chasing us outside our home day and night — through red lights. There is absolutely nothing — nothing, nothing — on the side of care.” But preschool is the biggest ordeal. “When we go to preschool, there are so many paparazzi there that they are knocking kids on the heads with cameras and knocking them down.”

She recalls one day when an elderly woman was knocked to the ground. “They’re there every single day, when I drop Violet Anne off and pick her up outside the gates. There are huge numbers of them — and they’re aggressive. They talk to her. They yell at her. They try to get her attention. They try to get her to react. It is a shame, shame, shame.”

Garner admits there are some protective laws on the books in California, but they are difficult to enforce “unless there’s a police officer with you at all times.” She believes some kind of tough licensing legislation is needed to prevent the paparazzi from “making money off people who don’t want their picture to be taken.” She also suggests that celebrities, simply by reason of being celebrities, often don’t get a sympathetic hearing.

[From Vancouver Sun via Celebrity Baby Blog]

I used to get annoyed when celebrities complained about photographers, but once you actually see videos of the whole scene – not just the final cute photo of someone famous – it’s hard not to feel badly for them. Yes they have privileged lives, but I cannot imagine being able to cope with that level of intrusion. Paparazzi often get right up in people’s faces – I would be swatting cameras right and left. I can only imagine what I’d do if I had kids. And no matter what, the children of celebrities don’t deserve to be harassed, or even interrupted in slight ways. Their parent(s) chose a certain career and the resulting lifestyle. The kids had no say in it. And it’s just an unfair way to have a childhood. I think back on all the things I was scared of when I was little – and they were all baseless fears. Imagine how frightening it would be to have these goons yelling at you, hovering over you en masse when you’re a small, possibly timid child.

Here’s a link to video of a then-pregnant Jennifer Garner and Ben Affleck picking up Violet from preschool in December and here is Garner alone with Violet outside her school in February. It really seems barbaric for them to go through all that.

Here are Jennifer, Violet, and Seraphina on their way to the park in Boston yesterday. She really does deal with it all graciously. Seraphina is also shown with her nanny earlier that morning. Images thanks to Fame Pictures .

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

68 Responses to “Jennifer Garner describes how the paparazzi taunt her 3 year-old daughter”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Annie says:

    I agree.

    The parents signed on, but the children did not.

  2. ferdis says:

    I understand Jen frustration. I have the same frustration when i see her daughter goint to school. What is interesting about that?

    My advice? Move to France. We dont see Depp’s children. And their father is so much more interesting than Afflecks.

  3. Wench. says:

    Ferdis – LOL!!!

    I really hope that held some form of sarcasm, as that is the worst advice I’ve ever heard. YOU move!

  4. ferdis says:

    Wench.: it was sarcastic, except the part than Depp is so much more interesting than the Afflecs. This is SO true.

    Actually, Jen cant do noting about that. I get surprise why people buy their pictures at school. Its invasive and boring. They are boring.

  5. Emily says:

    The Depps live in France because Vanessa Paradis is French. It wouldn’t make much sense for Ben and Jen to move there.

    Should all celebs have to move to remote locations in order to raise their kids? It doesn’t seem fair, but it’s really the only alternative.

  6. hatsumomo says:

    well, really, these ppl are incredibly rich and privileged. they can afford to live anywhere in the world. and saying they live in LA for work purposes is irrelevant. Depp lives in france and he still gets plenty of work….

  7. Sakota says:

    Third verse same as the first. All these celebs complain all the time.

    As for Depp, outside of his work he’s usually off the radar until his next project comes along. Personal anecdotes are cute, but it’s a bad idea if you don’t want the press to be invasive when you don’t have something to promote.

  8. n says:

    guess there’s always home schooling.

  9. happymom says:

    I agree that it’s awful-but there are so many more “famous” celebrity parents whose kids you NEVER see-so how does that happen?

  10. boo says:

    “It really seems barbaric for them to go through all that.”

    So then you go and post a picture of the Nanny and baby. Doesn’t make sense to me after your comments.

  11. Annie says:

    Wait wait, are you guys trying to say that this is the parents’ fault??

    Seriously?

    That born and raised Americans with great taste in baseball teams…(LOL jk) should have to uproot themselves from their homes because people have no common courtesy for CHILDREN?

    Really????

    How about I send people to stalk you outside your house and let’s see if you’ll move or instead have tons of sympathizers citing violations of privacy….

  12. mel says:

    I think that’s why Halle Berry hates the papps cause they probably do the same to her daughter too just to get a freakin photo. I think there should be a law that prevents photos of children under 10.

  13. anastasiabeaverhausen says:

    So, is Celebitchy going to stop posting pics of celebrities’ kids?

  14. Wench. says:

    Ferdis – ma’bad. My sarcasm chip is missing due to crazy amounts of revision about nothing interesting.

    Vanessa interests me moreso than Jennifer Garner, though. Although, I do like a celebrity to have an air of mystery about them – which is ironic concerning my love of gossip blogs.

  15. gg says:

    JayBird thank you for spelling “en masse” correctly. Every day I am incredulous of writers mangling every cliche’ out there and spelling phonetically.

  16. lisa says:

    Well, she knew this going into the pregnancies, so I don’t feel sorry for them. Your kids may not have signed on for this, but your lifestyle became their reality.

  17. Valensi says:

    I really often wonder how low you’d have to stoop to be a paparazzo. It must be awful to introduce yourself at cocktail parties.

  18. OXA says:

    As much as I like to read about celebs, I do think that their children should be off limits. The pappers are endangering the lives of others and need to be restrained.

  19. geronimo says:

    Good point, happymom. Does make you wonder. Personally, these two bore me rigid so it really surprises me that they get so much pap attention.

  20. czarina says:

    To me, saying their children deserve equal harassment because their parents are celebrities would be the same as saying celebs deserve to be stalked by some unbalanced psycho because they put themselves out there in the public!
    There have to be lines.
    The entire papparazzi thing has gotten out of control.
    It’s not even so much about privacy, but that they have as much right as you and I to raise their children in a relatively normal environment.
    Someone suggested home schooling–how unfair is that to Violet? She is not able to play with other kids her age or attend school (which at that age kids love doing) NOT because her parents are actors, but because we as a society have no compassion for children.
    Remember, this is all about money.
    All about how much can be made by these photographers and tabloids.
    I would totally support Celebitchy if they refused to buy pictures of celebrity children knowing how they are obtained.
    I definately agree that there should be much, much stricter laws in place regarding the sale and exposure of pictures of children. (France has strong laws regarding that, I believe, so it certainly CAN be done if people care enough).

  21. lalalala! says:

    i see very few photos of Julia Roberts children or Christian Bale daughter or Johnny Depp children but i often (even every day)see photos of Tom Cruise or Madonna or Brangelina ! why? i believe several famous peoples use theirs children to be more popular!
    but i dislike to see pictures of children ! i agree to Celebitchy (and another gossip sites) stop to post pictures of celebrities kids!

  22. hmm says:

    I don’t think the kids deserve the attention but explain to me why this couple and their children are photographed every single day. They are not hardly the most famous couple yet we see every single move. Why?

  23. Because I Say So says:

    Something in the milk ain’t clean. I agree that there are far more interesting celebs and their resultant offspring than the Aflacs (misspelled on purpose). It is possible to live a relatively private life in the US even when a celebrity. Dave Letterman and his protection of his son readily springs to mind….

    I just find this excuse so tiresome and mostly untrue.

  24. Ana says:

    I think it’s amazing that they take pictures of them. Violet is cute sure but the family is so boring.
    I like that they’re boring though and giving their children a good life. But I don’t want to see pictures of them all the time.
    It is sad. But if I were her I would try to quit picking her up from school and having someone else bring her home.
    Happymom does a have a good point. I wonder that often.

  25. Shannon says:

    There need to be more laws on the books protecting citizens from stalking and intrusion. Celebrities are citizens who pay taxes and they should be protected like any other law-abiding citizen.

    My personal thoughts on this is that during “work hours” actors can and should be photographed, but after “work hours” then they should have a level of privacy that all normal people assume. That means you can’t follow them to the grocery store while they pick up a presciption. You can’t follow them and take photos of them while they are dropping their kids off at school. Plueeze! If someone did this me I would would call the police and have them arrested! The police would probably arrest them too!

    I don’t understand why these actors and actresses don’t call the police more often! Besides, how many of these so-called photojournalist are actually journalist with valid credentials? These days anyone with a damn camera can be a paparazzi!

  26. Katharine Jaynes says:

    My favorite photos of celebrities are the ones that show them with their families. They seem so normal, relateable, less fabulous and perfect. Plus their kids are really cute. That said, I think that certain photo agencies are terribly invasive and photographers use poor judgment shouting at children.

    But with celebrity kids, I think the attention is partially the parents fault. Jen Garner’s interviews are almost exclusively about Violet and her family life. People are naturally going to be interested in pictures of your children if you talk about them all the time and draw attention to them. We want to know what Violet looks like because we want to see what this vivacious little person (with SOO much more personality than her mom) looks like. Does she resemble dad? or mom? Babies are exciting and of course the parents will want to talk about them. It’s not like Jen doesn’t get anything out of it. She gets the added bonus of publicity for her film projects. Violet is just a more fascinating interview topic than her mother.

  27. Miranda says:

    We are the guilty ones because we’re consuming this stuff. Celebitchy promotes paparazzi and we consume it.

    I agree there should be laws against it, however. But I also think that big celebs who have children should seriously consider living somewhere other than Los Angeles. It’s not fair to the children to have to live in that fishbowl. And people as famous as Jen and Ben do not need to be in L.A. for auditions. They could live anywhere.

    While I agree that the paparazzi is vicious and the whole celebrity culture is sick, the celebs themselves are equally (ir)responsible for what happens to their children.

  28. HashBrowns says:

    It is absolute nonsense to say that a public figure has zero privacy. They should be allowed to walk down the street and go to the store or go to a park without having 30-50 people with cameras following them around, screaming things at them and taking flash pictures (which is extremely dangerous when they are attempting to drive at night).

    I have never understood why people think that because someone wants to be an actor, their right to privacy is dissolved. Everyone has certain rights and paparazzi violate a person’s personal safety and their children’s safety.

    Talking about your kids does NOT give someone else the right to photograph them or talk to them or yell at them on the street. Some people might be curious about a celebrity’s child but it’s sick the way people feel entitled to see someone else’ child.

    Like with the whole Suri Cruise thing. People were actually angry that they didn’t show her in public for awhile; they tried to say she didn’t exist. Every time a celebrity is pregnant, people get offended if there isn’t some official announcement. Come on.

    They have a right to privacy and a right to having a private life. We are NOT entitled to know every single detail about a celebrity.

  29. Dingles says:

    Leave LA. Problem solved. If you don’t like the monkeys, don’t live in a zoo.

  30. L says:

    different people make different sacrafices for the good of their children. some people have to work extra jobs to afford and allow one parent to stay home and raise the kids. some people have to work extra jobs to be able to put their child in daycare and make a living. what do jen and ben have to sacrafice? maybe they should consider that, if they are so concerned for the good of their children. maybe they should consider that maybe they can’t have it all. she seems to want to have the “normal” lifestyle, like every other parent who is not a celebrity, who can drop their kid off and pick them up. if she wants that then maybe she should consider moving somewhere random like rhode island. or if she wants to stay in hollywood then maybe she should home school them. there has to be a sacrifice, either give up the hollywood persona, or give up the “normal” stuff. everyone with children needs to make sacrifices on behalf of the child, not just the underprivileged, everyone.

  31. L says:

    different people make different sacrafices for the good of their children. some people have to work extra jobs to afford and allow one parent to stay home and raise the kids. some people have to work extra jobs to be able to put their child in daycare and make a living. what do jen and ben have to sacrafice? maybe they should consider that, if they are so concerned for the good of their children. maybe they should consider that maybe they can’t have it all. she seems to want to have the “normal” lifestyle, like every other parent who is not a celebrity, who can drop their kid off and pick them up. if she wants that then maybe she should consider moving somewhere random like rhode island. or if she wants to stay in hollywood then maybe she should home school them. there has to be a sacrifice, either give up the hollywood persona, or give up the “normal” stuff. everyone with children needs to make sacrifices on behalf of the child, not just the underprivileged, everyone.

  32. Annie says:

    Agreed Hashbrowns.

    I am more than happy to critique the body size of a celeb (ie: Kim “I’m a size 2” Ass-ian or Jessica “I’m not Fat” Simpson) because frankly, if you don’t want people to obsess about your weight, stop talking about it yourself.

    But kids? The line should be drawn at children. And it sickens me how many people have justified this so far on this thread.

    We’ll see what tune you’re singing when these kids end up seriously injured because 30-50 paps are shoving things in their faces. Those cameras aren’t light, could you imagine that accidentally dropping on a fragile child? God Forbid.

  33. Amy says:

    Off topic but the Jolie-Pitt kids are some of the least photographed kids. It could be weeks sometimes months without new photos of the kids while Violet, Suri, and others are photographed everyday. I thought photographers weren’t allowed on school grounds? I would think school officials would believe it’s pervy for a bunch of men to photograph and film little kids. I know Jennifer, celebrities in general, should do and go anywhere they want but considering the chaos Jennifer causes she should change her routine. There is no need for Jennifer to go to the school twice a day. There are so many paparazzi at the school because they know she or Ben will be there. The nanny can go to the school a few times a week.

  34. Tess says:

    seems to me that it’s the parents’ responsibility to create a life that they want their kids to live, especially parents who have the financials means to do so.

    they’re making the choice to live as they do…they have to accept the responsibility for the consequences of their lifestyle, including how it affects their children.

    They can’t just take the benefits of celebrity, they are choosing the whole damn package.

    It’s on them.

  35. mE says:

    I truely feel bad for them. When kids are involved and the paps have little to know decency, all hell is bound to break loose at one point. I can only imagine it wouldn’t take long for me to loose my shit with someone like that over my children. Then, the people who egged me on will have documentary evidence that I am a raging bitch when in actuality, any mother would do the same.

    I would highly recommend that they use baby carriers like Moby Wraps and mei tais, etc. Frequently, if I have my little one (even my 33# 4yo) on my back, people don’t automatically see them. Plus babies who are worn tend to be happy kiddos. I would imagine it would be easier to get out of a dodgy situation quickly with babe on our back or in a front carry.

  36. Lisa says:

    Dingles says: “Leave LA. Problem solved. If you don’t like the monkeys, don’t live in a zoo. ” They HAVE left LA, at least temporarily. they are in Boston and guess what? Pap agencies have followed them there. So your advice “just leave LA” doesnt hold for them. There is tons of interest in this couple and their children, whether YOU think its deserved or not, and that’s why paps follow them, Jen and Ben DO NOT promote it in the least, in fact they have said they hate it.

    Katharine Jaynes:For someone who continually says she doesn’t care or like Jennifer Garner, you sure comment and think about her a lot, dont you? Get yourself a life.You are one of the tons of people who follow this couple religiously and that’s what the bloggers see and that’s why they buy their pictures.

  37. anna says:

    “And no matter what, the children of celebrities don’t deserve to be harassed, or even interrupted in slight ways. Their parent(s) chose a certain career and the resulting lifestyle. The kids had no say in it. And it’s just an unfair way to have a childhood.”

    That said…

    “Here’s a link to video of a then-pregnant Jennifer Garner and Ben Affleck picking up Violet from preschool in December and here is Garner alone with Violet outside her school in February.”

    Either way, I don’t care. Kids adapt, and Violet, as sweet as she seems, will grow up and – like the rest of her nepotistic peers – probably end up in front of the camera. Like Kate Hudson, Liv Tyler, Gwyneth Paltrow, Tori Spelling, Peter Fonda, Kiefer Sutherland, Maritska Hartigay (sp?), and other Hollywood-bred children.

    part and parcel… in for penny, in for pound. Celebs can’t expect that the popularity and success they seek (fame) doesn’t come with a price. I hope no physical harm ever comes to them though, and I feel terrible for the little old lady who was knocked by a paprazzo.

  38. Darya says:

    I don’t know if moving out of California would be of much help. They are Americans and they are entitled to live in their own country but it means no privacy. Jen and the two girls were followed by paps in Boston this week when they went to a park so no matter where they go in the US they are likely to be papped. Julia Roberts and her family live on a ranch – but that style of living isn’t for everyone. They are just going to have to deal with it looks like.

  39. anon says:

    Those videos really bring it home. This is wrong and needs to stop! Take a minute to watch those videos if you aren’t sure or think it is okay to do this to a child. This breaks my heart. All it might take is one gossip rag or gossip blog to refuse to publish photos of celebrity’s kids and I believe others will follow suit. Be the first celebitchy! I for one will not click on these stories anymore.

  40. whatever says:

    Call me nasty, but I have ZERO sympathy for her. Celebs are THE most overpaid, over-indulged people on this planet. WHO else in this world gets paid millions for JUST 3 months of work? Even overpaid athletes work 10 months out of the year and risk personal injuries. Celebs have the money to do whatever they want. Demi Moore moved to Idaho and had no problems. Other celebs have hired bodyguards, or put their kids in private schools. They have OPTIONS–tons of options that us little people who are dead broke don’t have. Every time I hear a celeb complain about the consequences from a career they CHOSE to pursue, I remind myself to NEVER support anything they do thereafter. So add Jen Garner to the list of idiotic, whiny brat complainers which includes: Jen Aniston, Brad Pitt, Angelina, Reese, and the rest. On the other hand, I respect Julia Roberts who said “complaining about the paparazzi publically is like the fastest runner in the world complaining about a blister on their foot.” Probably the best thing I’ve ever heard a celeb say.

  41. sage says:

    Easy solution, this website should only publish photos and gossip about adults.

  42. Joe says:

    That’s what happens when you put money and cameras in the hands of Eastern European convicts, mafia and hoodlums and let them loose on the streets of L.A.

    Scum. All of them.

  43. pipsqueak says:

    I agree Sage. I would totally support this or any gossip site that refused to show pictures of celebrity children. If there’s no market, there’s no money to be made and it’s all about money for the photographers…. and I use the term lightly. Stalkers is more like it.

  44. Marianne says:

    Celebrities have the right of this, and that…bla…bla…bla. Bullshit. Hypocrisy.. The paps only exist for one reason: there are people interested in what they sell, otherwise zillions of tabloids and celebity sites wouldn’t exist. So, taking those pics is a dirty job, but someone has got to do it.
    The most chased celebrities usually are attention whores, who love the publicity and just pretend to be annoyed. We know who are the favorites of the paparazzi are. The Lindsays Lohans, Britneys Spears, Tomkats, Beckhams and Brangelinas of the world.
    So, it obviously means that, the interest that paparazzi and tabloids will take on you depends exclusively on the way you portray yourself. Because there are dozens of huge celebrities who manage to do their stuff and keep their privacy. Julia Roberts, Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Nicole Kidman, Halle Berry, Daniel Day Lewis, Jodie Foster (she’s so private that she managed to stay for almost 20 years in the closet), Charlize Theron, Tom Hanks (notice how many critically praised professionals we have in this list.) and many others. Even Russell Crowe, the notorious bad boy who threw telephones on people gets few lines in the tabloids these days. Same with Jennifer Lopez. So, when it comes to the grown ups, I struggle to feel sorry for them, but I simply can’t, especially knowing how many people act and are not chased around.
    I feel sorry for the kids, because I think it’s creepy to obsess over a three year old, like Shiloh or Suri. I mean, from what I know, apart from their money, they’re just babies, with no particular reason to be famous. They don’t glow in the dark, they don’t fly or float on air.
    I feel sorry for Violet because her parents, unlike Brangelina and Tomkat, didn’t sell her pictures or some shit like that.

  45. Miranda says:

    This is weird – why would celebitchy post this and talk about agreeing with kids having privacy when they regularly post photos of kids anyway? AND include photos of a child taken by paps?

  46. anon says:

    agree with Miranda. STOP POSTING THE PICS AND WE CAN DO OUR PART AND STOP CLICKING ON ARTICLES THAT INCLUDE CHILDREN.

  47. Ned says:

    “I feel sorry for Violet because her parents, unlike Brangelina and Tomkat, didn’t sell her pictures or some shit like that.”

    Marriane, I can’t believe you made me (almost) defend Brangelina, but I think you got one thing wrong.

    Selling pictures is a very petty thing when you compare it to daily subjecting your children to these photo ops.

    The problem is not if you sell the one picture of your baby and be done with it.

    The problem is that Garner and Angelina use their children as part of their props to brand themselves in a certain way, and notify the paps when they will go and where.

    It seems that Garner is doing it much more than Angelina.
    Now she dares to complain about it?

  48. Ro says:

    I’m sorry, but anyone who is more familiar with the paparazzi can correct me if I am wrong but aren’t they followed because they want to be?
    I’m not saying that they want to be annoyed but don’t certain celebrities start out by calling the paparazzi and playing these cat and mouse games and then when it gets out of control they complain.
    There are celebrity children that we don’t see posted accept maybe once or twice a year so I find it very hard to believe that these people are not courting any of this attention.
    I know a lot of people seem to like Ms. Garner but I just have a very hard time believing that she and/or her publicist have nothing to do with this type of frenzy. She is not on a hit show anymore and her and her husband’s movies just don’t do that well.

  49. Sarah says:

    Some celebrities get followed by the paps more than others. It all depends on the public’s interest at the time.

    And honestly celebs do deserve some level of privacy. I’m not saying the paparazzi should stay away from them at all times but there should be some kind of law protecting them, especially if they have kids. Seriously, put yourself in any celeb parent’s shoes. You may say they are overpaid and don’t deserve any privacy but think about the kids. Celebrities want to protect their kids just like any normal parent and it seems a lot of people forget that. It really isn’t fair to expect kids to get used to it. Suri Cruise has been photographed all her life and we still see pictures of her hiding her face or putting her hands over her ears. It’s scary having a bunch of cameras thrust into your face with strangers calling your name.

    I’m just really disgusted here at the lack of sympathy for the kids. I get that a lot of you don’t feel sorry for celebs getting photographed in general. But honestly it’s so easy to judge until you’ve been there.

  50. gem15 says:

    I think the kids should be off limits. If paps are stalking them, hiding in bushes by their schools, etc they should be brought up on pedophilia charges. Most of the pictures show the children looking frightened or angry. If you could see an aerial view of the paps surrounding them you would see why. LA is losing more and more celebrity parents, and my guess, a lot of tax income. No licensing is required to be a pap. they could be convicted child abusers with cameras. Something needs to change and quickly.

  51. Jazz says:

    It’s the publicity w***es like Paris & Lindsay that make it worse for everyone else.

  52. Anna says:

    Good piece and I feel sorry for Jennifer (and all those other celeb kids).

    But JayBird, how does it then make sense to post yesterday’s outing pictures and link to two videos? You made your point quite well without that and a header photo would have sufficed.
    I’m also on board with those who commented saying: ok, but is CB now dedicated to stop bringing pics of celeb kids? It’s pretty two-faced to write such a strong piece on the subject, with as clear an opinion as “barbaric” but continue buying into it.
    Maybe you’re worried about readers. I just want to say, I know I definitely won’t stop reading CB if you decided to cut celeb kids from your stories. I would applaud it.

  53. Noname says:

    The picture of her sure shows how irritaded she is. Probably talking now as truthfully as when she says she doesn’t have a upperlip-filler. Truth is more likely that the Affleck’s need the exposure of their children to stay relevant, surely they ain’t surviving in the business by counting on their acting skills.

  54. nene says:

    time to move to Montana.

    oh — no big H-wood paychecks to be had there?

    i don’t have much sympathy for people who go into a business like show business.
    they wanted the fame, they’ve got to come to terms with the good and the bad parts of the bargain. anyone with a brain can see the bad parts. why oh why didn’t these 2 see it before they stepped into the deal? it’s like trying to bargain with the devil. they got what they wanted, now they have to pay for it.

  55. caribassett says:

    No child should ever be treated this way, and I do agree the law needs to be changed to protect them. I can not imagine how terrified these children must be. It is vile, and disgusting.

  56. karen says:

    I agree nene. People who go into show business should know what they are getting themselves (and their future progeny) into. The problem is that they are so used to the whole world catering to their needs that they become shocked when the tabloids/paparazzi refuse to do so. After all, life should be absolutely perfect if you are a big time STAR, right? Of course.

  57. HashBrowns says:

    @karen: it is absolutely sick that you think that because someone wants to be an actor and wants to perform in films, they deserve to have their, and their children’s, privacy taken away from them.

    Being famous does not equal zero privacy.

  58. Maritza says:

    Seraphina looks just like Violet, adorable!

  59. Marianne says:

    Ned, what I meant is, when the initiative to expose your child comes from you, it awakes the interest of other people much more easily. I mean, you can’t complain that people want to see your child, when you were the one to show him/her in the first place. And, I know there’s a lot of money and publicity involved but, I think it’s shameful to sell pictures of your baby, no matter if it goes to charity or to someone’s pocket. These celebrities are treating the image of their own kids as some product. I wouldn’t mind if they did this to themselves, but to babies? Not nice at all. And c’mon, of all goddamn things, millions for a silly picture of a newborn, who probably looks like every newborn in the world (we know that young babies are not much distintictive)? This is all too crazy.

  60. Katharine Jaynes says:

    Lisa:

    I don’t know what I have done to warrant personal attacks from you. We are each entitled to our own opinions. There is absolutely no reason for you to make unnecessary ad hominem attacks on me, my character, & my life. For your information, I am an attorney by profession, but currently in my 3rd trimester of a very difficult pregnancy and my doctor has put me on bed rest. Celebrity gossip is a hobby I can enjoy while in bed. I chose to post on celebitchy because most of the other posters are very intelligent and respectful, and I like to read what people are saying. This was the #1 story today, so why wouldn’t I read the story and express my opinion? For the record I have posted on two Jen Garner stories. Back off.

  61. Weeble says:

    I call BS. This woman is notorious in paparazzi circles for notifying them when and where she will be. If you’re wondering why some celebs get photoed more than others, you have only as far as their publicists to look.

    All that being said, I don’t think it’s cool to taunt celebrity kids, but in the case of Jen if she’s that upset, then all she has to do is put down the phone.

  62. aleach says:

    i am just not understanding the obsession with celeb’s kids in the first place.
    i really, really dont give a shit about seeing violet, suri, shiloh, or any of the other ones. i dont need to see their first baby pictures, or what they are wearing, or what funny thing they are doing at the playground.
    not. interested. at. all.
    the hysteria (by the paps & fans) is just a little creepy.

  63. K McFarlane says:

    The reason that Ferdis suggested France (albeit tongue in cheek) is that in France the paparazzi laws are much stricter than in the US and it would be illegal to take these photos.

  64. JUSTINE says:

    Jennifer is a really great actress and i think the paparazzi should leave her and her kid alone cause she has done nothing wrong for the paparazzi to want to do something like that she is kind sweet pleasent person to be around and true to her self so the paparazzi has no right to spy on her like that she deserves the privercey as everyone else has shes a true person and should never be treated in anyway disrespectfully or not in a quiet right manor she deserves every bit of respect as regular ppl have. GO JENNIFER!!!!! #1 fan

  65. Moogles says:

    How about Celebitchy stops feeding this by showing pictures of these poor kids?

  66. Aleksa says:

    In my country,Spain, it´s illegal to show a child´s photo in the media, with or without their parent´s consent. There is a law to protect kids here, and I like it, I have no morbid curiosity to see what any of our celebs´ kids look like…

  67. Tess says:

    @aleach:

    agree, the attention is creepy.

    and if I’m not mistaken, I think it’s connected to the sexualization of young girls in the popular culture.

    nasty, dangerous trend.

  68. filthy cute says:

    Why is anyone taking pics of Violet in the first place? She’s so ugly.