Mick Jagger To Be A Dad Again at 72!!

13»

Comments

  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    Unless you are 72yrs old I really don't think that we can appreciate what they're thinking in their brain.
    This train dissects too much.
  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

    Unless you are 72yrs old I really don't think that we can appreciate what they're thinking in their brain.
    This train dissects too much.

    I'd rather think (it happening in my brain is a given!) - or "dissect" - than just go along, mind and mouth taped shut.

    I can imagine, I can even appreciate, but I know that I can't KNOW. Still will put my thoughts out there like any other issues discussed here. Don't see a reason not to...do you?
  • InHiding80
    InHiding80 Upland,CA Posts: 7,623
    edited July 2016
    PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

    The greatest gift that can be given is life.

    edit - which is why abortion is wrong.

    The constitution says you're wrong. You're so cold. You're so cold, cold, cold.

    But keep dreaming, Mike Pence.
    Post edited by InHiding80 on
  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    Curious - if Mick were a woman, having a baby at 72.

    Would it change anyone's mind?
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    Good question, hedo, though the situation of a 72 year old woman having a baby isn't comparable physiologically and medically. There would be such massive potential for serious or fatal medical complications for both mother and baby. Also, you can't deny that such a scenario would be a very intentional one, whereas the one the OP posted may well be accidental. Apparently the announcement said they were "surprised but pleased", which might mean an unplanned pregnancy. Hard to believe they wouldn't be cognizant of the possibility, but it's there. Of course, some will accuse her of creating the situation as a cash grab.

    Older fathers do create a higher risk of genetic abnormalities, just like older mothers, so that's an additional risk beyond the basic risk of dying while the child is still young.

    It also appears that they aren't planning on setting up a cozy home together with Mick changing diapers and getting up at 2:00 wen the baby cries. No plans to live together, or even on the same continent. Does that change anyone's opiniob, if he's not going to be involved beyond an occasional visit?
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Free
    Free Posts: 3,562
    chadwick said:

    mick is so physically fit it is ridiculous. another physically fit rolling stone is that charlie watts at 75 yrs of age. mick literally runs around dancing & carrying on like a young man while singing. nothing at all is wrong with mick & this gal having a baby together.

Categories