Last week Nick Cannon expressed his regret for some nude pregnancy portraits he and his wife, Mariah Carey, had taken. Those were just hanging about their house, which was problematic enough, but now new nude pics of the couple are splashed all over the British version of OK! magazine.
Look at that cover, and tell me that's okay. Maybe I'm a prude, but his hands on her breasts -- pregnant or not -- that's just not grocery store checkout-line appropriate. If you want to do Playboy like that, fine, but this is too much and just so ... tacky. I'm not the biggest Mariah fan, but I would expect more from her than this.
We all know how you made the baby, so there's no need to show us. Mariah looks gorgeous, but the butterfly belly would have been plenty, really. But she had to go and give us even more with her nude picture on the cover of Life & Style. And now this. Seems like pregnancy is turning her and Nick into a couple of exhibitionists.
And why? WHY? It's not like she needs the money or any more publicity, since she can sneeze and get a headline. If they really just wanted to document this magical time, fine, but why over-share it with the world like this? You know those twins are going to die of embarrassment because of these pictures someday.
The real worry here, though, is the one I stated when I heard about the couple's first set of nude pictures -- people everywhere are going to hop on this trend. Be warned, because you're likely going to start seeing baby shower announcements with tacky porno-like pictures such as these coming to your mailbox soon.
Let's just hope the next pictures we see of Carey and Cannon are of them holding their new, beautiful twin babies (due any day!), and that they're all fully clothed!
What do you think of the latest nude pictures of Nick Cannon and Mariah Carey?
Image via OK!
Ashley Is a Widow Who Stays Strong...
This Hot Dad Wants to Vacuum Your Rug
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
KStew Refuses to Shower
Comments 70
I saw this at the grocery store but it was a different cover. It was her naked covering her parts. I shook my head, not appropriate!
Really? I think some people need to grow up. There's nothing wrong with the pictures and comparing them to "soft porn" is immature. If you don't like it, don't buy the magazine.
I don't know what would be going on in someone's head to think that putting a picture on a magazine cover of your husband feeling up your naked breasts would be an okay thing to do. Whatever you do in your own home is your business, but you don't have to plaster it all over the place for all the world to see.
I am so sick and tired of the "if you don't like it, don't look/buy/participate" argument. Why can nothing be left to remain private anymore?
This picture IS "soft porn". Her husband is squeezing her naked breasts, and it's plastered all over the cover of a magazine that is displayed right next to the gardening and housekeeping magazines at the checkout aisle. It's inappropriate, and it is potentially setting up a conversation that many parents are simply not ready to have with their kids just yet.
A far more tasteful photo would have had her clothed and both with hands clasped over her belly. And you'd still get the idea that she's very pregnant, and they're very happy. Why does it always have to be naked?
i think they are beautiful pictures, but should be private.
I'm not a prude in any way, or at least I don't consider myself one. And while I don't see this as "soft porn" I do think it is something that is meant to be in their own home and not on a magazine. I find these photos to be an intimate thing, and intimate things should be kept just that, intimate. Personally I would have no problem doing a naked pregnancy photo shoot with my husband, but the last thing I would want is to have those pictures put up on the front cover of a magazine. Those pictures would be for us, and only us.