Stand in line for a few minutes at the grocery store and you'll catch up on who's pregnant, who's just snapped back into shape a month after giving birth, and which celebrity kids --gasp!-- look like their parents.
For some reason, while the rest of us are gratified (or in some cases relieved) to see our kids resemble us, the tabloid world cannot seem to stop being AMAZED by the miracle of basic inheritance. And the public agrees!
Perhaps it's the same reason we have to sneak a glance at those beach photos or those no makeup selfies: we don't quite buy celebrities are that good looking. And perhaps there's the tiniest hope they'll have awkward or ugly kids because part of the voyeurism of celebrity life is a secret desire to confirm their lives aren't perfect. Kind of awful of us, isn't it?
But there is something beyond curiosity in the public's fascination with celebrity offspring. Look at how many horrible comments were posted about Kim Kardashian's baby or Beyoncé's little girl
, Blue Ivy, for not being a "caramel princess."
For every negative comment, however, there are those that feel included in celebrating when celebs manage to reproduce children who resemble them. The online chatter about "twins" like Reese Witherspoon and her daughter or Cindy Crawford and her daughter have the same intensity as royal watching in the UK.
But is any of this good for the kids? And should they be better protected from online trolls and fans? In the digital age these children will be able to access these comments years from now. Should there be tighter protections on paparazzi photos of celebrity kids?