If you want to support independent women's media, become a Mamamia subscriber . Get an all-access pass to everything we make, including exclusive podcasts, articles, videos and our exercise app, MOVE.

Another day, another woman attacked on social media for being *checks notes* pregnant.

Well, this is a new low, isn't it? Please tell me it is! Tell me it doesn't get worse than this?

Yes, I understand this is no ordinary woman, this is Anne Hathaway, a very famous celebrity who has enough money and privilege not to be too harmed by obscure corners of the internet insulting her.

Watch: The hosts of Mamamia Out Loud discuss Anne Hathaway's 2026 Met Gala look. Post continues below.

The star of The Devil Wears Prada 2 announced on her Instagram on June 20 that she was pregnant by revealing her tummy in a short video accompanied by the caption, "Baby I'm yours. x".

This will be the third child for Anne and her husband, Adam Shulman. The couple already have two boys, Jonathan, 11 and Jack, 6.

But apparently being 43 and famous means that you're not allowed to announce your pregnancy?

Eve Simmons, whose Substack, Why Am I Bleeding, just went slightly viral for her condemnation. Her piece "Dear middle age celebrities: stop bragging about your baby bumps" heavily criticised Hathaway because, "most of us mere mortals will struggle to get pregnant at 43, in other words, we're not mega rich."

Simmons outlined how difficult it is to get pregnant after 40, (true) and how prohibitively expensive it is to undergo IVF (also true). But then lays the blame on Anne for "offering false hope to millions of vulnerable women with Instagram 'reveals' [without telling] the stinkingly obvious truth: you are pregnant because you are rich. Or maybe exceptionally lucky."

We know exactly nothing about how Anne got pregnant. It could be IVF, it could be planned, it could be one of those surprise perimenopause babies.

Anne had to announce the pregnancy because pap shots of her were everywhere and she wanted to confirm it on her own terms. But I don't think, when Anne posted the announcement to her 43.1 million followers, she was trying to rub your nose in it.

I'm sure a wealthy actress doesn't need me to defend her, but here's the thing. Our views about celebrities are essentially projections of what we really feel about ourselves and our own worldview. Which means that what we think or say about them is kinda what we think and say about people close to us, friends, co-workers, relatives, enemies.

Celebrities are, in many ways, the canaries in the coal mine of culture; what they choose to do with their bodies does eventually trickle down to become normalised within wider society. So yes, a woman with an emaciated body is worth talking about because there are dangerous ramifications for other, vulnerable women. But pregnancy? Why do we get so weird about it? Especially given that less women than ever before are interested in having kids.

Remember when Kourtney Kardashian was pregnant in 2023 at 44? People were not having it, calling her too old. Kardashian then had to clarify that she conceived a year after she stopped IVF. As if a 'natural' baby is somehow superior?

Remember Sienna Miller had to defend herself against comments that she was too old for both her partner and motherhood. Once again, she had to let everyone know it wasn't an IVF baby, telling Vogue "I was very fortunate. I wasn't necessarily trying to get pregnant. This happened as a total surprise and biologically, was something that my body was able to do."

Sorry, what? So now we have a class system of pregnancy, do we? So, if a woman conceives naturally, that's fine, but if she has IVF, we have permission to be outraged and even jealous?

As Sienna said, we don't get nearly as mad at men. People seemed bemused that Al Pacino, had a baby at 83 and Alec Baldwin, who had his youngest at 64. George Clooney was 56 when his twins were born.

Listen to this episode of Mamamia Out Loud, what women are actually talking about. Post continues below.

It's true, IVF is horribly expensive, with one cycle costing $10,000 minimum in Australia. But is that really the fault of famous women?

Maybe instead of condemning women in their 40s for daring to bring a child into the world, we might redirect our anger at a system that seeks to profit so substantially from women (and men's) infertility. And then, get on with our lives.

Feature image: Getty.