OutFront live Mon. – Fri. 7p ET

The captain of the sunken ferry in South Korea was formally charged and is in custody, state-run media reported early Saturday, citing prosecutors and police. Erin Burnett has more.
March 9th, 2012
12:17 PM ET

Jessica Simpson nude on Elle

By Erin Burnett

Jessica Simpson is on the cover of Elle magazine this month.

In the shot she is very naked and very pregnant.

Back in October – during our first week of shows – we noticed this strange trend:

Naked and pregnant women occupy the cover of magazines a lot.

Back then it was New York magazine and Ebony releasing covers featuring very pregnant and very nude women within weeks of each other.

At the time, we acknowledged it was a tribute to the 1991 Demi Moore Vanity Fair cover.

But it's a "tribute" that is getting seriously old.

The Demi cover was more than 20 years ago.

And since then, literally dozens and dozens of magazines have done the exact same cover.

I know that the magazines are *expecting* us to be shocked and appalled when a naked woman is on a magazine cover.

But at this point, we're not.

So what do you say – when it comes to magazine covers like this – let's all just take a pregnant pause.

What do you think about pregnant women on magazines? Does the cover of a magazine make you want to buy it? What other magazine trends have you noticed?


Filed under: Erin's Essay
soundoff (149 Responses)
  1. Tim

    I don't think Jessica Simpson is anything special anyway. Erin Burnett? Absolutely!

    April 3, 2012 at 11:17 pm | Reply
  2. Heidi

    any controvery aside...Elle is a fashion mag, I expect to see clothes, 'cos I'm not about to head out of the house nude!!!

    March 29, 2012 at 3:38 pm | Reply
  3. William Wilson

    I think it is a good thing that she has done this. I don't really like Jessica Simpson but we should all have the right in America to do something like this as long as it does hurt anyone else. If someone doesn't like it, they should not buy the magazine. This is another example of some people trying to impose thier beliefs and values on all of us against our will and that is not freedom. I am suprised that Rick Santorum and all the Republicans haven't taken her out and burned her at the stake.

    March 22, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Reply
  4. FatBOiChubbyChaser

    I bet Kim Kardassean (not from star Trek) looks even grosser with her big butt and floppy boobies when she is pregnant with whatever it is inside of her genital reproductors.....yucky really gross

    March 12, 2012 at 8:22 pm | Reply
  5. Michael Lynch

    Ms. Burnett worries the photographs have published to the point of not even causing us to become "shocked and appalled." Perhaps that is the point.

    March 12, 2012 at 11:16 am | Reply
  6. mb2010a

    Grossest picture I have ever seen...preggy women are not beautiful.

    March 12, 2012 at 10:39 am | Reply
    • RBree

      I'm sure your mother would love to hear that she was hideous when she spawned you.

      March 12, 2012 at 11:06 am | Reply
      • Lisa

        LMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

        March 13, 2012 at 4:37 am | Reply
  7. J0nx

    Some women look truly wonderful when pregnant, my girlfriend included, but Jessica is NOT one of them. Pregnancy is not becoming on her. She looks like she will be delivering a nose tackle for the Raiders.

    March 12, 2012 at 10:24 am | Reply
  8. cain-lyons

    #1 I don't consider nude, pregnant women to be news. I'm more offended by CNN running this story.
    #2 Nudity isn't bad. Pregnancy isn't bad. Together, both are not bad
    #3 Complaining about nude women, pregnant or otherwise, is shallow. If Ms Burnett chooses to express shallow opinions, she has the right to do so, just as she has the right to direct her vision and purchases to buy magazines that do not promote the sacred joy of womanhood.

    March 12, 2012 at 9:41 am | Reply
    • Lisa

      Agreed. She doesn't seem to complain when the women are nude but not pregnant. Double standard, much?

      March 13, 2012 at 4:38 am | Reply
  9. Legup

    Satanists will do anything to get a laugh!

    March 12, 2012 at 7:45 am | Reply
  10. Izzie Nutz

    I saw a lot of pregnant women, but i didn't see any nude ones. They were all cleverly covered as much or more than women on any given beach in America.

    March 12, 2012 at 7:17 am | Reply
  11. Joe Chan

    I like the covers. What in the world is this goofy Erin women talking about. Beautiful is beautiful, how can you say. "Ga', you know, this pregnancy thing is so played."

    March 12, 2012 at 2:57 am | Reply
  12. FizikWithSence

    I'm sorry "boring:( " If I want to see a pregnant woman, I can always impregnate my wife and behold her beauty in our private home not on a MAG.... stop promoting nude pictures...

    March 12, 2012 at 1:46 am | Reply
  13. really

    Being a man I'd rather eat a booger than see this.

    March 12, 2012 at 1:00 am | Reply
    • RBree

      Well, you are what you eat.

      March 12, 2012 at 12:06 pm | Reply
      • Lisa

        LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I'm dyin', here!

        March 13, 2012 at 4:38 am | Reply
  14. really

    The emperor is wearing no clothes. This picture is unbecoming. Even if she loses the weight most will never see her the same. This will be etched upon the mind.

    March 12, 2012 at 12:46 am | Reply
  15. Lisa1742

    A naked pregnant woman is not a beautiful thing, and anyone who says otherwise is either too full of sympathy or PC bullcrap to admit it or even realize it. I've been pregnant twice and I tell the same white lies people told me " you look grreeeaaat! You're just glowing!" it's pity, who are we trying to kid here. Pregnancy and children may be a beautiful thing but seriously. If I wanted to see a big ol' naked whale splashed across anything I'd be hitting Seaworld.

    March 12, 2012 at 12:40 am | Reply
  16. yukko

    Is that a yak or a guppie?

    March 12, 2012 at 12:39 am | Reply
  17. Chris

    Someone previously wrote: "find something newsworthy to report on", hit the nail right on the head.

    With regard to Elle – Demi Moore's cover when pregnant has been "copied" over and over again by other wannabe actresses. Publicity for Simpson – we'll be hearing soon enough of the problems she faced during pregnancy, the issues of losing the baby fat and the amazing recovery to get back to "normal" – so what!

    Millions of women around the world are pregnant – millions do not make the cover of fashion magazines – guess there's nothing more worthwhile or of interest to the readers of these magazines – guess this is what keeps "these" people in the news and sales up ...................

    March 11, 2012 at 10:59 pm | Reply
  18. Doctor

    Air brushing is a gift to jealous women. For the excuse.

    March 11, 2012 at 10:23 pm | Reply
  19. MikeG

    Once was edgy. Showoffs need to showoff to feel relevant I guess.

    March 11, 2012 at 10:18 pm | Reply
  20. fronco123

    Lady GAGA is not going to like this. just saying.

    March 11, 2012 at 10:00 pm | Reply
  21. fronco123

    Mom and Dad must be proud of their little girl.

    March 11, 2012 at 9:47 pm | Reply
  22. Slobs

    Disgusting slob.

    March 11, 2012 at 8:25 pm | Reply
  23. nytw

    President Santorum will ensure filth like this is outlawed. It will be a great day when President Santorum makes America a Christian Nation again.

    March 11, 2012 at 7:46 pm | Reply
  24. Beth

    So 20 years ago. Same pose, so unoriginal and boring. What's so great about being a copy cat!

    March 11, 2012 at 5:20 pm | Reply
  25. Ann west

    🔴 Wow yet another Proud Republican doing why they do best. Most people wish she would keep her mouth shut and her clothes on. Gross!

    March 11, 2012 at 2:48 pm | Reply
  26. NYNY2233

    HOT!!!

    March 11, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Reply
  27. Bob Littleton

    Let it be. If she wnats the world to see thigs, so be it.
    Personally I rather see Robin Meade. :)
    Or some other super brain!

    March 11, 2012 at 2:14 pm | Reply
  28. Mel

    My only problem with these covers is the fact that that their airbrush them SO much that its hard to really say that their baring it all, and 'confident' in their bodies. I'd be confident too if I knew all my stretchmarks, odd shadows, etc. would be airbrushed out.
    Otherwise, being 9 months pregnant myself, I'm tired of co-workers asking when I'm bringing my nudie pics to work...

    March 11, 2012 at 1:01 pm | Reply
    • fronco123

      Just wonderful, and a great idea to show nude photos of yourself when your with child. makes a mom and dad proud of their daughter showing photos in the nude while having a baby. very,very intelligent thought.

      March 11, 2012 at 10:15 pm | Reply
  29. bptsj

    Doesn't make me buy the magazine but I do admire the photo while waiting in the check-out line. Pregnant women are beautiful. Until you have a famility of your own you probably won't feel that way.

    March 11, 2012 at 12:45 pm | Reply
    • really

      Just because it sounds good doesn't make it true.

      March 12, 2012 at 12:43 am | Reply
  30. shan

    shameless...stoops to any level for money?

    March 11, 2012 at 12:45 pm | Reply
  31. esamps

    Well, they do it because they get air time from outlets like CNN!

    March 11, 2012 at 12:42 pm | Reply
  32. Lolly

    OK, EVERYONE – here's the question: what is the purpose of showing your pregnant body like this? Who cares what Demi or Jessica look like naked, showing their large bellies and boobs? What's the point? I just don't get it. I can see some men enjoying eyeing these naked women, and I'm all for supporting the whole "creation" beauty thing – but what's the end game of showing off one's large pregnant body like this? (Hopefully this commentary won't elicit a lot of stupid cracks – please, I'm raising this to open a discussion to help me understand). Thanks to those who want to help another grasp the rationale behind doing this.

    March 11, 2012 at 12:04 pm | Reply
    • bptsj

      I posted earlier about admiring the photo's and having to be married to understand. To answer your question it brings up feelings of wanting to care for and protect that person. I can't expain it; it must be in the male genes. I wouldn't be surprised if it caused a rush of endorphins ;)

      March 11, 2012 at 2:19 pm | Reply
      • Chris

        You've got to be joking! You've "got to be married to understand"????? You don't have to be married to bring a baby in to the world! In case you are still in the dark ages – Simpson is not married! You think or feel it's okay for those in the public eye to sell themselves, regardless of whether some may find it insulting, uncomfortable to have it shoved in our faces in supermarket lines, offensive, "beautiful"?, why not submit your photo next time you become a mother – being married of course, well, we'll all understand the rationale when you make a front cover.

        By the way, if you are the female partner in the relationship, how would your counterpart feel with that type of exposure – being married of course?

        March 11, 2012 at 11:07 pm | Reply
      • really

        what a putz.

        March 12, 2012 at 12:44 am | Reply
    • mark

      The end game for the photographer is art. The end game for the magazine is a profit. Sometimes they are at odds. Sometimes they are symbiotic. In this case, it appears to me to be just an artistic shot. There may be some people who buy the magazine just because of the picture, but I don't know the numbers.

      And for people who don't think this is art, I'd point you to a an art gallery, where many nudes are displayed. Just because it's Jessica Simpson (with pros and cons due to her personality and persona) doesn't detract or add to the artistry of the actual photograph.

      March 11, 2012 at 5:57 pm | Reply
  33. Yancy James

    Promises another season of, "Teen Mom." Jessica's a pretty woman, but she's pregnant out of wedlock. C'mom folks. This just "ain't" right.

    March 11, 2012 at 9:03 am | Reply
    • mark

      Unwed teen mothers is not a new phenomenon. There have been unwed teen mothers throughout history. The most famous that pops into my mind is Mary, mother of Jesus. She was an unwed (probably) teen mother.

      March 11, 2012 at 5:59 pm | Reply
    • eloise

      c'mom? no pun intended?

      March 11, 2012 at 6:36 pm | Reply
  34. Lisa

    This chick is complaining about seeing too many naked and pregnant women on the covers of magazines, yet not complaining about the naked (or almost naked) women who have been appearing on the covers of magazines since way before Demi Moore got pregnant and naked for Vanity Fair. Why is it getting "boring" when the naked woman is pregnant, but not "boring" when she is not pregnant? Really, Erin Burnett?

    March 11, 2012 at 5:12 am | Reply
  35. glib

    Boring, been done and done better

    March 10, 2012 at 11:37 pm | Reply
  36. Daniel J. Russ

    Erin,

    I say, they are placing naked pregnant women on the magazine covers because they are twice as beautiful BECAUSE they are pregnant and I agree whole hardily!

    March 10, 2012 at 10:08 pm | Reply
  37. dwade

    The fact of the matter is that this photo on a magazine is a non-issue. Who cares? If this bothers you and you feel the need to get on your soapbox and preach, it really means that you are narrow minded and a prude. We as the american society tend to make the whole idea of a nude woman on a picture a big deal when it is not. If you find it beautiful, buy the magazine... if you don't, move on to something that matters.

    March 10, 2012 at 9:55 pm | Reply
    • Murray

      Much agreed. Everyone likes seeing a beautiful naked woman...so why not a pregnant woman, its certainly more exciting because its something normally so closeted away. It's bizarre cause she's holding a life in there, a person in a person! Crazy! Let it stay an exciting wonder for all times...beautiful and engaging. Who cares if it was a good idea 20 years, ago it still is. And people will still be prudish, awkward and concerned about it 20 years from now.

      March 12, 2012 at 12:28 am | Reply
  38. 1225

    Who cares?????????

    March 10, 2012 at 8:20 pm | Reply
  39. 1225

    Who Cares? Who really cares??

    March 10, 2012 at 8:18 pm | Reply
  40. tim

    oooh , someone just sent it to me

    March 10, 2012 at 7:36 pm | Reply
  41. tim

    may be this is just a guy thing , but....Id rather see a pic of how she got that way } : )

    March 10, 2012 at 7:33 pm | Reply
  42. siesta1000

    Erin-
    I understand your support for women's equality and I support that too. I would like to know why you don't have that same zeal when asking questions of politicians. When one of these dodos says something like "I want to repeal Obamacare", why can't you just ask why? Don't accept the talking points as an answer; ask more probative questions, and wait for an answer. Be a reporter, journalist spokesperson for the readers. Ask real probing questions and have them reveal why they are against this or that. It would be much more interesting than the milk toast blather we hear now.

    March 10, 2012 at 5:45 pm | Reply
  43. FatBOiChubbyChaser

    Skinny hot chicks rule. Please lose some weight all you other fatties. Some dude say she looks like man belly and man boobs...she needs a little more hair on her chest and back/arms and I can see it...

    March 10, 2012 at 4:40 pm | Reply
  44. FatBOiChubbyChaser

    To quote Eric Cartman, "......Ew, Yuck! Gross!!!!!"

    March 10, 2012 at 4:31 pm | Reply
  45. StoopidSociety

    I saw my wife naked when she was pregnant. Never thought of contacting ELLE Magazine.

    March 10, 2012 at 3:00 pm | Reply
  46. treprice

    ho-hum

    March 10, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Reply
  47. InGA

    Elle...put a naked Betty White on your cover and THAT would be a story.

    March 10, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Reply
  48. theone87

    so THIS is what Erin Burnett is reporting when shes not warmongering against Iran. sublime journalist she is..

    March 10, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Reply
  49. Simon Alvarado

    I see natures beauty and the awe of Motherhood . I see two people in the picture and then think of the fragile life we have . I think of my mom ,my wife ,my children and smile .

    March 10, 2012 at 12:07 pm | Reply
  50. Rose

    LOL Everytime an actor or actress is a has been, they decide to "bare all". What a desperate attempt for attention.

    March 10, 2012 at 11:33 am | Reply
  51. Jason Tweed

    I disagree completely. Yes, Demi Moore's photo was more for shock value than anything else. However, today, many women feel unattractive while pregnant. I think these photos are more about celebrating the beauty of a pregnant woman. Honestly, is there any more optimistic photo in the world. Jessica Simpson, and all the others here have shared their bodies, demonstrate the absolute beauty that is the essence of a woman, capable of bringing new life into the world. I think your comments are shortsighted. I don't think these photos are any more or less designed to sell magazines. Yes, the cover photo of every magazine is selected to be engaging, but I don't feel the motive of duty during pregnancy is old, tired or stale. I think we need more displays of positive optimism, which on a woman's magazine, there is no greater optimism.

    March 10, 2012 at 11:25 am | Reply
    • Alaskan Amber

      I share your perspective! Thank you for your comments!

      March 11, 2012 at 10:44 pm | Reply
  52. Obstetrician

    If they want shocked and appalled then show her giving birth from the doctor's point of view.

    March 10, 2012 at 11:21 am | Reply
  53. Jt_flyer

    Appearently women like looking at naked pregnant women because I don't know a single who does. Problem is she hard to miss as your skimming actual news stories. Could we be sharing a little too much?

    March 10, 2012 at 10:27 am | Reply
    • CNN

      Does anyone else have the SI swimsuit add at the top of this article, I LOVE IT!!!!

      March 10, 2012 at 11:40 am | Reply
  54. nyc girl

    Erin... I miss watching you on CNBC.

    March 10, 2012 at 9:23 am | Reply
  55. andrea

    This type of picture is so tired.

    March 10, 2012 at 9:12 am | Reply
  56. Logical Positivist

    Looking at naked Jessica Simpson's at the checkout line of the grocery store sure beats looking at good and plenty's and cough drops. Of course my six year old son asks me why the lady on the cover of the magazine is naked. I say, "because it helps them sell more magazines". He then asks me if I'm going to buy it and I say no. Then he says, "I guess it doesn't work then".

    March 10, 2012 at 6:45 am | Reply
  57. Nick

    Erin Burnett, you were much better at CNBC. Please go back, you will do CNBC and CNN good.

    March 10, 2012 at 6:37 am | Reply
  58. Dave

    It's hardly a naked photo when her hand is covering up more of her breast than a bikini would.

    March 9, 2012 at 10:46 pm | Reply
  59. theobc

    my only issue with this picture, if you can call it an issue, is that that a picture of jessica simpson with clothes showing her pregnant makes it very clear that this picture of her has been retouched. ms. simpson has gained a lot of weight with this pregnancy (her business, i only mention it to make a point). from ms. simpson's picture with clothes on, you can see that her face is a bit bloated, her nose has spread (as happens with some pregnant women) and she has developed a double chin. she is also bigger in the body area as her legs and arms have fattened and she has a few visible rolls with her clothes on that is not some with her clothes off. my point is that, if you are going show a pregnant woman with her clothes off, show one that actually resembles what most pregnant women actually look like at that stage of pregnancy. other than that, i have no issue with grown people taking their close off as long as i have an option of looking or not looking. now, when is daniel craig going to poise au naturel for a magazine.

    March 9, 2012 at 9:50 pm | Reply
  60. dudley0415

    It more greatly defines and illustrates the slender market that Elle possesses; young, upscale, child-bearing age women with a feminist side.

    They're struggling.

    March 9, 2012 at 9:03 pm | Reply
    • monify

      Another knocked-up, not married, white trash female to add to the American landscape. Lovely.

      March 10, 2012 at 7:49 am | Reply
  61. CNN what

    Is this hard hitting news?
    You pose in FRONT of helicopters and on war scenes trying to be Lara Logan... And then you blog this?
    Please hurry your descent and let Amanpour take your place

    March 9, 2012 at 8:16 pm | Reply
  62. yawn, pls

    erin burnett you are worthless

    March 9, 2012 at 7:51 pm | Reply
    • Grim Reaper

      Erin Burnett and Bill Maher should hook up. Two biased no talent journalists. Her 1 minute of worth looking at ended and now she's just tired to listen to.

      March 9, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Reply
    • Irish

      Your comment , which was basically without content is what is worthless. You are making yourself looking like the typical parking trailler trash nutjob..

      March 10, 2012 at 6:23 am | Reply
    • Adam

      I concur.

      March 10, 2012 at 8:28 pm | Reply
    • Orso

      Would you care to elaborate?
      Or are you just angry at life itself?

      March 11, 2012 at 11:40 am | Reply
  63. Dan Bednarik, PhD

    To be followed by stretch marks and no more love.

    March 9, 2012 at 7:47 pm | Reply
    • Dawn J

      First of, not all women who bear children will get stretch marks- I am proof of that but even if I had gotten them- it is part of bringing new life to this planet. A small price to give the gift of life. You seem to have overlooked the joy that is bundled within. And Jessica is about to experience a kind of love she has never had.

      March 9, 2012 at 8:17 pm | Reply
      • alexandra stratan

        she is gross and the whole thing is ridiculous all about publicity always and, never mind the mesege it sends to young women and how loweley...so what if Demi Moore did it, as who is she? and what is she to dictate right or wrong? her life is not all that great , is she an example? it is sad when as a society we feed and crave on things that are immoral and we shape our lives on the examples of women like these! It would be a good thing for girls and women to know that these so called stars do not represent an example and find women who are true and positive role models and heroes, wish we could stop feeding these types and women like the Kardashians and the rest of the trash out there, find real meaning to what a good example is

        March 12, 2012 at 8:58 am | Reply
    • StanCalif

      Yes, those swelled up breasts will become deflated and sagging balloons after birth! Better make money now!

      March 10, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Reply
  64. RIley

    Wow, what indepth investigative reporting by Erin Burnett. Yeah, this is really outfront material that I couldn't get anywhere else.

    A few article writers have eviscerated Burnett for simplicity and naivete – glad to see she's more than happy to prove them right.

    I just lost 2 minutes of my life writing this – who is the bigger fool :|

    March 9, 2012 at 5:09 pm | Reply
    • Moe

      It took you TWO MINUTES to get through this? YOU are definitely the bigger fool.

      Lighten up, idiot.

      March 9, 2012 at 6:00 pm | Reply
      • RIley

        Ahh, revert to the ol' name calling. So bright and educated. Give yourself a pat. But seriously – leave the boards to the adults. Now back to your video games.

        March 9, 2012 at 10:31 pm | Reply
        • its sad

          Ironic that you tell someone to go back to your video games since you are obviously watching the board to respond to any response – talk about a loser.

          March 11, 2012 at 10:06 am | Reply
    • John

      Right on Riley. Erin is the bigger fool, don't fear. Why does Erin think we should be "shocked and appaled?" Actually I like it and think Jessica looks hot!

      March 9, 2012 at 6:35 pm | Reply
      • Moe

        Erin specifically said we're NOT shocked and appalled. Both of you, if you're not actually the same person, are morons.

        March 10, 2012 at 12:39 am | Reply
      • jim

        Obviously, you have very low standards of beauty.

        March 11, 2012 at 10:34 am | Reply
  65. Buck

    She looks like a pot bellied fat dude with man boobs.

    March 9, 2012 at 5:04 pm | Reply
    • jim

      Yeah, this is gross.

      March 10, 2012 at 11:38 pm | Reply
      • RBree

        Buck & Jim. A couple of rednecks. I can see why the sheep never turn their backs when they see you two.

        March 12, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Reply
  66. CCD08

    A pregnant woman is beautiful, both her and the joy within her.

    March 9, 2012 at 4:40 pm | Reply
    • peckbag

      You're kidding, right?

      March 10, 2012 at 10:55 pm | Reply
    • Janie

      That's a classic female response geared to defending a misshapen and deformed body. I'm also a woman and the truth is there's nothing remotely attractive about pregnant body. A distended belly, swollen ankles and chubby face are not pretty. Thank God it's only a temporary condition.

      March 11, 2012 at 11:48 am | Reply
  67. Bob the Janitor

    Thank you for pointing out the obvious, Ms. Burnett...now, go find something newsworthy to report on!

    March 9, 2012 at 4:32 pm | Reply
  68. byndpst

    The problem with this picture is that it was taken when she was only 5 MONTHS PREGNANT!! Good God, girl!!! Gaining all that weight is not good for you or the baby!!!!! She's not having twins.

    March 9, 2012 at 4:32 pm | Reply
    • byndpst

      *all

      March 9, 2012 at 4:33 pm | Reply
    • Keona

      She's having a big baby.
      Her fiance was 10lbs and the doctors say her baby is already 10lbs. If you look at pictures of her, it's all only pretty much belly.
      She isn't grossly fat.

      Nobody cares about Demi's cover anymore. Just because she may have been the fisrt to do it doesn't mean every naked and preggo cover is a tribute for her. And this cover looks better than the other naked and pregnant covers I've seen.
      I like i

      March 11, 2012 at 8:30 am | Reply
  69. Lane

    Women and men who don't have children think this is "gross" or inappropriate. Women and men who love having kids and think that women and creation are beautiful things, regardless of the packaging, think this is a beautiful photo. Jessica Simpson is a gorgeous woman and looks radiant pregnant. People should open their minds to what is beautiful beyond what marketing and retailers try to shove down our throats as to what is beautiful – essentially skinny anorexic little girls who are air-brushed.

    March 9, 2012 at 4:23 pm | Reply
    • Kevin

      Did you read the article or did you just read the headline and look at the pictures? If you had read the article you'd have noticed how Erin pointed out that there has been a flood of pictures and magazine covers identical to this one since Demi Moore in 1990's. Obviously marketing exec's have something to "shove down our throats" than skinny is pretty. I'd even go as far as to say that they agree with you when you say pregnant women are beautiful.

      March 11, 2012 at 7:01 am | Reply
    • jim

      You must have just "washed" your brain.

      March 11, 2012 at 10:36 am | Reply
  70. Barb

    It doesn't make me want to buy them more, or even less than I did before. I don't mind the pictures, though. I think if they showed everything instead of covering bits up it might be different, though. Also, I don't think we need to see every celebrity nude and naked. It does get old. If they're doing it for the bucks, I don't think it helps. If they're doing it to show that pregnancy can still be beautiful, it does work.. to an extent.

    March 9, 2012 at 4:16 pm | Reply
    • Barb

      Pregnant and naked, I meant..

      March 9, 2012 at 4:18 pm | Reply
  71. MJP

    Tasteless! Especially these knocked up broads like Jessica. Bad messages from these low class people

    March 9, 2012 at 4:00 pm | Reply
    • CCD08

      "Knocked up". Now that's a classy statement.

      March 9, 2012 at 4:38 pm | Reply
  72. Doug

    I think pregnancy is beautiful. And don't mind at all these types of views of it.

    March 9, 2012 at 3:35 pm | Reply
    • jim

      You are totally whipped!

      March 11, 2012 at 10:38 am | Reply
  73. DocCutty

    Well, like Ron White said, speaking for most men: "Once you've seen one woman naked...you wanna see 'em all naked." :-)

    March 9, 2012 at 3:35 pm | Reply
  74. michael H

    Now a nude picture of a pregnant celebrity smoking crack, now that would be interesting.

    March 9, 2012 at 3:32 pm | Reply
  75. Sanjoy Moulik

    It is just bad taste; looks like the magazines have run out of ideas.

    March 9, 2012 at 3:16 pm | Reply
  76. ray

    gross

    March 9, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Reply
    • RBree

      I'm sure you'd cry like a two year old if you had to give birth. And the rest of the world would probably puke if they had to see you naked.

      March 9, 2012 at 3:44 pm | Reply
  77. anthropologist

    Human Beings have been fascinated by these representations since 35,000 years:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_figurines

    No reason for this to fade in the next 20 years...

    March 9, 2012 at 2:52 pm | Reply
    • Mel

      Not to get technical, but the Venus statues are mostly celebrating the fertility of women, but none of them actually represent a pregnant woman herself. :)

      March 11, 2012 at 12:58 pm | Reply
  78. Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

    I'd still hit it.

    March 9, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Reply
  79. PJC

    Another pregnant celeb, whoop-de-do. I tend to think that women who do this are so enamored with their own 'specialness' that they believe their pregnancy is something that everyone should want to see... so special and unique that it's worthy of a nude front page spread. It's a bit ridiculous really, and insanely egotistical. Dear Ms. Simpson (and every other immature, self-absorbed pregnant celeb with a princess complex who aspires to a nude cover): yes, we see that you're able to reproduce. We're happy for you, but please get a clue ladies: thousands of us non-celebrity women have babies every year. We don't go about demanding special recognition for our ability to reproduce, or delude ourselves into thinking that our pregnant bodies are so glorious that everyone who visits the pharmacy or supermarket wants to see it unclothed. Yes you're a celebrity... but as far as being a woman goes, you're nothing special. So do us all a favor – keep your pregnant bellies under wraps and reproduce without fanfare like everyone else. We really don't care, and it's disrespectful to your baby to turn your pregnancy and delivery into a nude spread and media circus for profit.

    March 9, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Reply
    • TKH1957

      Well said PJC!! I couldn't agree with you more.

      March 9, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Reply
    • tricia

      well said just what i was thinking

      March 9, 2012 at 3:55 pm | Reply
    • Jen

      Well said PJC! Exactly on point. THE best thing stated on this page ;)

      March 10, 2012 at 10:03 am | Reply
    • Yancy James

      Well put.

      March 11, 2012 at 9:06 am | Reply
    • raa

      Perfectly said!!!!

      March 11, 2012 at 10:38 am | Reply
    • jim

      Thank you! Most eloquent!

      March 11, 2012 at 10:40 am | Reply
    • maribeth

      maybe since she hasnt done anything to have an income, she needed the money???? lol

      March 11, 2012 at 10:58 am | Reply
    • Bob Lieberman

      I agree wholeheartedly PJC. Well-written, too!

      March 11, 2012 at 6:19 pm | Reply
    • FizikWithSence

      Well said PJC.

      March 12, 2012 at 1:33 am | Reply
  80. xmxm

    We have been watching pictures of naked women for ages. Why should we get bored of pictures of naked pregnant women in 20 years? Keep em' coming!

    March 9, 2012 at 2:36 pm | Reply
  81. ieat

    In oppose to not pregnant woman on the cover of the magazine in newest fashion? I've seen the same post of non-pregnant women over and over again, and I don't see anyone complaining about it. Besides it's only a cover, why make such a big deal out of it? Jessica Simpson looks good on the cover.

    March 9, 2012 at 2:01 pm | Reply
  82. Jeanne

    Will I buy this magazine? No. Does the picture interest me? Not in the least. A very tired trend and frankly I observed myself this way 3 times and I am not impressed.

    March 9, 2012 at 2:00 pm | Reply
  83. humtake

    It is so annoying to read articles like this saying how a celebrity bares all but in reality they bare no more than a bikini would. And they keep coming out with these every time a celebrity shows some skin on the front cover. Get a clue!!! They are not baring all. They are not showing any more than any Maxim or anything does. Stop trying to make this sort of thing interesting when it is not. Oh, and pregnant girls are fat. Yeah, I said it. They aren't "glowing", or "beautiful", they are fat. And in our society, fat is not glamorous. I should know, I'm fat.

    March 9, 2012 at 1:56 pm | Reply
    • PJC

      You're an insensitive jerk.
      Please don't breed.

      March 9, 2012 at 2:03 pm | Reply
  84. thetruckinglife

    are you saying you want kids?
    personally i do not think these pictures should be shown.

    March 9, 2012 at 1:44 pm | Reply
  85. Bryan S

    No, I don't believe the magazines are trying to make people, "shocked and appalled." I think they are trying to show something that most people do not appreciate. By putting a familiar face (Demi, Jessica, etc) on the cover, it causes people to re-evaluate pregnancy and women's bodies. I think she looks beautiful there and hopefully Ms. Burnett will see that and not dismiss it as a trend.

    March 9, 2012 at 1:38 pm | Reply
    • ieat

      nailed it!

      March 9, 2012 at 2:02 pm | Reply
    • Marcus Moore

      I think Peyton Manning would be a great QB for Miami.

      March 9, 2012 at 4:51 pm | Reply
  86. real chic

    It's a beautiful thing & mainly women living the experince of carry a child & embracing womanhood would understand it. NOthing durty about it it was done classy as many of these shots have been done in the past. Many consider it a form of art & we know art is a controversial thing & taste too. Many women will continue to do it long after Jessica.. It is a beautiful warm classy shoot of a woman embracing her body with child.

    March 9, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Reply
  87. butchyon

    There's certainly nothing wrong with a pregnant beauty on the cove of a magazine. IMHO, a woman may not ever be any more beautiful than when she is with child. Yes, I think we all realize that Demi started the trend over two decades ago. But that certainly doesn't diminish the beauty of the covers that other celebrities have posed for since then. I think Jessica's Elle cover is magnificent, and she has never been more gorgeous. Any woman who doesn't take the opportunity to have a beautiful, professional photo portfolio taken while she is pregnant is missing a chance she may never get again. Kudos to the ladies that choose to do so, and our gracious thanks to those who have chosen to share that beauty with the rest of the world!

    March 9, 2012 at 1:18 pm | Reply
    • mike collins

      beauty is in the eye of the beholder...I don't think I'm alone here by saying that picture is anything but "beautiful".

      March 9, 2012 at 2:09 pm | Reply
  88. Bob

    Can you write more than one sentence at a time?

    If you get just just make it rhyme.

    Go count your cash – it's no sin...

    But next time don't just phone it in.

    March 9, 2012 at 12:47 pm | Reply
  89. David. J.W.

    Pregnant women are valuable and they deserve all people's blessing, but I will not buy it. Instead, I will buy "Maxim"

    March 9, 2012 at 12:34 pm | Reply
    • Ronnie12345

      lol Im with ya buddy.

      March 9, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Reply
  90. Ed Tice

    It doesn't matter what I think. I don't buy these magazines. What matters is whether or not, regardless of how 'tired' it may be, this continues to sell magazines. We're not talking about the Economist here, this is Elle, pretty much the female equivalent of Maxim.

    March 9, 2012 at 12:27 pm | Reply
    • mike collins

      ...then it would have a picture of a dude...

      March 9, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.