Baby Mama: A Miscarriage of Modern Fertility

Posted by : | February 2, 2015

Oh ‘twer better had this film never even been conceived! Hot off loving the Fey/Poehler Golden Globes with all their femme-iliar, femme-tastic feminist-perspective punchlines, I thought hell yeah I’ll watch Baby Mama! How have I not seen this 2008 comedy starring my ladies? Tina Fey plays a successful career woman who feels the ticking of her biological clock, and Amy Poehler is her cray-cray surrogate. Fun premise, and what better way to showcase the brave new world of modern fertility than placing the afterbirth safely in the hands of progressive, cool comediennes, right? WRONG.



Not only did this stillborn movie not explore the topic with any real insight, but it actually runs screaming from its subject matter and abandons its premise at the nearest fire station safe haven. LAME. Oh it was written and directed by a man. Surprise surprise. What a miscarriage of modern fertility!

Here’s where Baby Mama epic fails. In 2008, the topic of alternative fertility treatments wasn’t explored a ton in pop culture. This was 6 years before Facebook and Apple started paying for their female employees to freeze their eggs. This was three years before the guy who owns the pizza shop in my neighborhood hired a surrogate so he could have a child. But celebrities were already on the surrogate bandwagon. In other words, hey assholes who made this film, Angela Bassett already had a child via surrogate, as had Katey Segal, Dennis Quaid, and Ricky Martin.

Here’s how this bastard film wraps up a complex subject in tidy 1950s bunting: It turns out that surrogate Amy Poehler is actually impregnated not by Tina’s sperm-donor fertilized eggs but got preggers by her male life partner. Like in the “normal” way. What a relief! And then voila, Tina Fey also gets pregnant the old fashioned way by the guy she really likes! Presto changeo, a movie that even McCarthy era censors would approve! Nothing to see here: Human mating stays the same as it’s been since cave woman days. Someone call the midwife!

Don't worry! It's my sperm and her egg!

Don’t worry! It’s my sperm and her egg!

And can we discuss Sigourney Weaver? Her character is the head of the surrogacy agency that Tina Fey hires. So she has to be vilified for enabling humans a wide option of fertility treatments! Tina meets Sigourney’s baby and assumes it’s the result of a surrogate, too. But Sigourney’s just fertile as hell. Well Tina is appalled that a woman of Sigourney’s age has a baby. Now in real life, Sigourney was 59. Given a little movie magic, maybe she’s playing a woman in her 40s? Is that really so horrific? Later in the film, as Tina and Amy are at the hospital delivering Amy’s baby (don’t worry they made it in the lord’s way!), they see Sigourney coddling the twins she’s just had. The women are all like omg HOW OLD IS SHE? So GROSS! They actually use the word gross.



OH HELL NO. How outrageous to vilify mothers in their 40s! Screw you male writer and director. It’s appalling how a foray into a really interesting and relevant subject to so many singles and couples can not only veer cowardly but fully vilify the whole reason these treatments exist — extending women’s fertility and giving family life where before none was possible. And how has Sigourney said yes to this role? She was 41 when she had her own daughter!!

Ready for more ridiculous EUW-ing? The following celebrity women all gave birth in their 40s, including Halle Berry, Gwen Stefani, and that perfect spawn of Eva Mendes with Ryan Gosling. And if you’re gonna EUW gross the women, why not EUW gross THE MEN, too? Because these guys became fathers in their 60s and 70s! Including DeNiro and Picasso at 68, and Clint Eastwood and Larry King at 66. And Charlie Chaplin was 73!!!!

Today, lost of celebs use surrogates. This article lists a bunch, like Elton, Elizabeth Banks, Giuliana Rancic, SJP, Matt Bomer, Neil Patrick Harris and more. And this article lists Jimmy Fallon and Nicole Kidman.

Baby Mama slips the needle of judgement into the amniotic fluid of hope, stabbing at the very processes that fulfill the deepest wishes of families. Would the writer prefer that Elton John and other loving gay couples not have children? Or that cancer survivor Giuliana Rancic give up the dream of motherhood?


My “normal” baby beats your weird one!

Well guess what, naive biological parents of this horrid movie? The world changed despite your propaganda. And guess what else? Your great grandchildren will probably come out of test tubes or a factory or a splicer or might even be clones. So fuck you and your judgey script and your stupid movie. We women are beating all the odds, doing it for ourselves, and bringing home the bacon and the babies by whatever means necessary. And so are gay couples and single pizza parlor owners and cancer survivors and men in their twilight years.

Say hi to 1957 for me, dickwad Baby Mama.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  1. Stephanie
    Posted February 17, 2015 at 9:53 pm | Permalink

    ah okay Porky, that’s a fair point. The women should be ashamed, particularly Sigourney whose life imitates and glorifies the very life that was so ‘gross’ in the movie — yes a failure from all genders!

  2. Patrick
    Posted February 7, 2015 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

    Sounds like the sterling Fey/Poehler comedy duo is showing some tarnish… How come Mr. Writer-Director gets all the blame and not the ladies? I’m assuming they read the script before signing up!

Leave a Reply