This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"Miss Rosenberg. How lovely to see you again. Have you done something with your hair?"
11945 members | you are not logged in | 25 October 2014




Tweet







May 24 2009

Buffy and her bump. "Sarah Michelle Gellar shows off her burgeoning belly on shopping trip"

And she looks beautiful & happy!! She does look a little big for four months - maybe she's having twins!! Could also be just that the dress is loose.

She looks stunning!
Aw, that cute little healthy Season 1 double-chin is back. I miss Season 1 SMG.... have more babies!
Aw she's gorgeous!
She does look great :)

And I think if I had a jacuzzi I'd want to sit in it all night drinking wine too.
That's going to be one very attractive baby.
The bump looks a little "wind-aided" but still cute :)
Awwwww. Cute.
Not so big for four months, methinks - she has a tiny frame, so that bump has nowhere to go but out. No room to hide. What a pretty dress.
I think she looks lovely. Congratulations to Sarah and Fred. :)
Why is this entry here .This is a Pap picture and according to Simon from last week we don't use them .
I must have missed what you are referring to Garda39. What is a "Pap" picture? And could you refer me to where Simon says this so I can read it? I apologize if I broke the rules - it wasn't my intent. Just saw a beautiful picture of Sarah and thought I'd share.
Can't recall the exact post - could have been one of the ones the moderators took down for content issues - but basically what garda39 is trying to say is that a recent ruling here has put the kibosh on posting articles about Whedonverse actors where it's really just paparazzi - the 'pap' you asked about - taking pictures of them out and about, with no corresponding information about projects or current employment.

Technically, this article is a paparazzi piece...BUT I imagine that it's lasted to this point is because it relates to SMG's upcoming motherhood. Could be other reasons, but I don't think it necessary to speculate ;)
I would say this article refers to her current production. :)

Besides, it's so darned cute.
Thanks BlueEyedBrigadier for filling me in. It does mention she is shooting a pilot for "The Wonderful Maladys" so I don't know if that makes it more legit even though there isn't much detail. Of course, I had no idea it might be against the rules and only posted it because of the baby bump!!
with no corresponding information about projects or current employment.


That doesn't seem to give clearance either since it was Pap pictures of the start of shooting of "The Wonderful Malady's" from , I think , the 13th of this month .
Sarah Michelle always brings the adorability, but paparazzi bring the unhappiness to actrons, so I'd rather not encourage them.

Yesterday, one paparazz...us(?) bothered Eliza Dushku, who called the cops.
Paparazzo. It's Italian.
You know people could email us if they're not sure about anything. As for this feature, it's borderline acceptable. If you want to know about why it's acceptable please do take the time to send me an email about it.
As mentioned about, SMG is very petite, so her baby-belliness will be more noticeable.

My math might be a bit off, but...is she due in October? How ironic would it be if she has a Halloween baby? (I think this year would've been the "Buffy" Halloween episode.)

Also: Paparrazi are agents of The First - just ask Princess Diana's family. Or anyone else who has been stalked while trying to lead a normal life. I really wish fans & paparrazi would realize that actors are regular people, too - they just happen to have a job that lets millions of other people see them a lot. But it's their job, not their life. It's like thinking it's ok for you to show up unannounced on your boss's doorstep one morning because you want to have breakfast with him. No. You see each other at work, but his personal life is just that - personal.

Grr.
What! Has WHEDONesque suddenly become the "googoo gaga" site! Please, enought of this "celebrity spawn" watch.
Simon , never entered my mind there was an ambiguity about Pap pictures after last week since that seemed to close any room for manoeuvre otherwise I would have emailed about this on Friday .
Little Green Kid - If it bothers you so much, why don't you ignore the topics instead of reading the comments? No one's holding a gun to your head. I don't, for the life of me, get why people just post to complain about something they could easily avoid.
Yeesh. I agree with Kyotoyoshi way to suck the fun out of a nice pleasant thread some of you folks! Is it so wrong some people would want to gush over baby pictures? It is the norm for people to do that.

[ edited by vampmogs on 2009-05-25 03:53 ]
How ironic would it be if she has a Halloween baby?

As a Halloween baby myself, I'm pushing for this. We need more of my ilk!
The first time I posted to Whedonesque I posted what I thought was a cute picture of Eliza (admittedly taken by the papparazzi) and got torn to shreds in the comments before it was taken down by admin. So I was surprised to see this post too!

I researched before posting and never found any official rules anywhere that it wasn't allowed. I'm sure if it was stated somewhere on the site FAQ whats allowed and whats "borderline allowed" regarding pap pictures then nobody would complain :)
There are many, many fun things about pregnancy, but I've got to say that having total strangers treat my growing body as an appropriate subject for public conversation was pretty obnoxious.

It was announced last month, Sarah and husband Freddie Prinze Jnr, 33, were expecting their first child together - said to be a girl - but the notoriously-private couple declined to confirm it.

Since there are obviously a number of people here who are confused about what kinds of papparazi photos are OK to post here (myself included), it might be helpful to post some guidelines in the public FAQ about what constitutes an "borderline" acceptable invasion of a celeb's privacy here at Whedonesque.
There's plenty of guidance from this site under "About" with regard to content and I don't mean to speak for the Mods. I have complained about paparazzi photos or uncomfortable subject matter, but mostly through email, their preferred form of contact, re for example photos of upper-body naked Whedonfolk men out jogging with no story supporting such, Whedonfolk ladies being savaged by the Fug Girls, a blog calling one of our Whedonfolk men bangable in a whole list of bangable actors...

These Sarah pregnancy photos I thought were sweet, but not so great they're the work of paparazzi, however didn't seem all that intrusive. It's this site's call. I particularly like this section from "About":

What makes a good WHEDONesque post?

* Think quality over quantity.
* Think of yourself as a filter. Only let the best stuff through.
* Think about your audience. Have they seen or read this before? Is the information useful? Will it lead to great discussion?
* When in doubt, e-mail a moderator and ask.
Tonya, The "About" page does have a long list of things that are unacceptable here, but not one word of guidance about the posting of papparazi photos and tabloid stories. Since quite a few people here have unwittingly tripped up over an unspoken rule, it might be helpful for the admins to include a few words of guidance as to what kinds of pap photos are OK. I remember posting a story with pics of SMG having fun surfing on a public beach in a non-revealing wetsuit and having that post summarily deleted on the grounds of invading SMG's privacy. So frankly I'm at a loss to understand why these photos and story about her pregnancy and her pregnant body are OK, particularly when SMG has been pretty private about the subject. I can get the admins not wanting to debate site policy in public, but it would be helpful for them to at least articulate just what that policy is so that the public knows what exactly they're supposed to keep in line with. Hell, I'm happy to submit a draft:

"Red carpet and other public event photos are OK (as long as it's not the umpteenth story about whatever pretty dress Michelle Trachtenberg is wearing this week, because, let's face it, the girl wears LOTS of pretty dresses); FugGirls posts are never OK, even when they're complimentary, because they have the tendency to serve as a jumpoff for nasty comments from those who disagree with the compliments; coffee shop/gas station/grocery store run photos never OK (just because they're so flipping boring to look at); and drunken late-night pub/club crawl photos never OK --- unless it's a video of Nathan and Alan acting out Joss's lost Wonder Woman script with a bunch of Playboy bunnies they just liberated from Hef's mansion, in which case we'll make an exception."

Basically I think this is supposed to be a nerw site, ummm make that a news site, not "just" a fan site, so a pic of them with no news value (like that surfing pic) is out of place-ish. This is really our first look at the Little Prinze or Prinzess "in the chute" as rodeo people say, and there's an article of sorts accompanying it.

As to very appropriately channelling Tammy Wynette and saying they "just have a different job," that's true, celebs have the same human needs we all do, includign privacy needs, such as the right not to be chased when moving someplace. However, they are celebrities, so they can expect to draw some interest when in public. A certain older-brother-of-some-lesser celebrities' attidue of "Even on a public street, I don't exist for you, only at staged events and on screen" was unrealistic.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home