Jennifer Aniston has definitely been under a microscope for the past couple weeks after her recent comments about her thoughts on motherhood. Aniston, 41, stars in the new movie, The Switch, and plays a woman who undergoes artificial insemination to become pregnant.
Jennifer is supportive of women who choose this route of conceiving a child, and basically said that all that a child really needs is love, and that women don’t necessarily need men to raise a family.
Traditionalists have attacked her point of view, saying that she is downplaying the importance of the role of fathers in their childrens’ lives. Bill O’Reilly even went so far as to say that Jennifer’s comments were “destructive to our society.”
I understand that people are sensitive about the roles of fathers being undermined, but do you really think that’s what Jen was trying to do?
In my opinion, I think it is merely a case of a 41-year old woman who still wants to have a child, but doesn’t want to settle down with a man just for the sake of getting pregnant. Should a woman really be denied the chance to have a baby simply because she hasn’t found Mr. Right?
On the heels of the whole Jennifer Aniston controversy, Neil-Patrick Harris announced over the weekend that he and his partner, David Burtka, are expecting twins this fall via a surrogate, and they are both thrilled about becoming dads.
I can’t help but wonder if Neil and David are going to be the next couple to fall under scrutiny from people who think that a child should have a mother and a father, period.
If Aniston is downplaying the role of fathers, does this mean that Neil Patrick-Harris is downplaying the role of mothers?
Honestly, if a child has a loving and stable home, does anything else really matter?