Casting stones at Jamie Lynn

jamie lynnWhen “good girl” celebrity Jamie Lynn Spears announced she was pregnant, reporters cast their rhetorical stones at the fallen teen role model. As Monica Hesse of The Washington Post wrote:

We thought she was the good Spears. Sure, Jamie Lynn looked like her big sis in an uncanny Mini-Me sort of way. But tabloids had released nary an underage boozing photo, and “Zoey 101,” her Nickelodeon show, was downright wholesome — especially compared with the jailbait “Baby One More Time” video that Britney was touting at 16. Jamie Lynn was, yes, a role model …

The public can accept a lot from Hollywood. But a rotund teenager on the red carpet, displaying the gestating results of that early sexualization of girls you’ve heard too much about? Let’s just call it the boundary test between societal acceptance and condemnation.

Actually, let’s just call it condemnation. Like others covering this story, Hesse cast verbal stones at Spears, not least because of her hypocrisy. Besides starring in a wholesome TV show, Spears met her baby papa in … church. Oh, the double standard!

Hesse also cast stones at Spears for giving scandal to the faithful — her faithful fans, that is:

But questions of career rebounds aside, the larger issue at hand is how the pregnancy will resound with teen girls around the country.

“It’s interesting to note that Jamie Lynn has a good-girl image,” says Jessica Sheets of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. “It’s a message that girls should be getting.” Message received: Good girls get baby bumps, too.

As you might have guessed, my problem with Hesse’s condemnation story is that it’s a secular morality tale and little else. Hypocrisy, sin, giving scandal to the faithful, casting stones — where have we heard of those before?

To be sure, teenage pregnancy is a major secular concern. But Hesse and other reporters should have examined the religious angle to this story, especially considering that Spears and her boyfriend met in church. What does their pastor have to say about Spears’ pregnancy? What does Spears’ Baptist faith have to say about premarital sex?

I don’t mind the Narrative of the Fallen Teen Role Model. But don’t ignore the Parable of the Woman Caught in Adultery.

Meanwhile, there is one other little issue to clear up in many of the mainstream reports. It appears that the oh-my-gosh-isn’t-that-ironic “parenting book” that evangelical mega-publisher Thomas Nelson was about to publish by Lynn Spears wasn’t going to be a parenting advice book. Editor & Publisher notes:

Now the house is clarifying one point it claims the press missed from the beginning: the book in question is not a parenting title, as it has often been cited by in the media.

“From the onset, the media have inaccurately reported that Lynne Spears’ book is a parenting book. I’m sure this helps fuel tabloid readership, but it is simply not true,” explained Nelson president and CEO Michael Hyatt in a statement.

The book, which a rep at the house confirmed has not been canceled but “delayed indefinitely,” will not, as the publisher notes, offer advice on child-rearing from the mom of fallen pop princess Britney Spears, but, rather, stand as a memoir about raising kids thrust into the spotlight. It will, as the publisher describes, “provide a window into the real-life world of fame and worldly success, including the toll it extracts from some who aspire to it.”

Duly noted. We can assume that it will now feature a new chapter or two.

Print Friendly

  • http://rub-a-dub.blogspot.com Mattk

    Hmmm. Ive never heard of either of these people. From ooking at their picture, the seem to be adults. Maybe the problem is that our society expects peole who are physically mature to behave as though they aren’t. Evidently, one of them is making enough money to support a family. Why is this s big deal? Get married and raise the baby. This shouldn’t even be in the press.

  • Stephen A.

    The girl is just 16. This baby-faced boy is over 18, so this is probably a question of statutory rape, so it’s actually news, and newsworthy.

    Of course, it’s also news because she’s starring in a kids TV show on the Nikelodeon network, and getting knocked up is not the best example to be setting for the kiddies.

  • Audrey

    There is debate as to how old the father really is. The sad fact of the matter is that Jamie Lynne Spears is not the first 16 year old to get pregnant nor will she be the last. If parents would talk to their children about the risks (it appears Lynne assumed Jamie Lynne already knew) and if schools would stop teaching abstinence only education and prepare these kids for the real world, maybe we wouldn’t be having this problem. I’ve learned that whether you preach abstinence or not, kids are still going to have sex. So why not teach them how to do it safely? And if you’re intent on your child not having sex before marriage, then don’t be surprised when your little baby ends up with a baby of her own.

  • Ann

    The alternative to a visibly pregnant Jamie Lynn is for Jamie Lynn to have an abortion. I have no doubt that’s what a LOT of girls in her position would do/have done. That she didn’t do so is probably a decision formed by her faith. Hypocrisy? Hardly.

  • http://storkstork.blogspot.com/ Mrs_Y

    Abstinence education would make a lot more sense if it took promoting abstinence as its primary goal instead of giving children an incomplete understanding of the mechanics of human reproduction. I’m just saying. To my mind, the biggest part of promoting chastity is beginning sex education from early childhood in the home and not waiting to have one big talk when your kid hits puberty – or just handing the task over to the schools.

  • Stephen A.

    It’s almost impossible to quantify the effectiveness of abstinence only education, which to me sounds like a good start, anyway, in my opinion. Who knows whether this girl was taught abstinence only, and if it “worked” for a few months or a year to postpone sexual activity. Regardless, considering this girl was in a “Hollywood” family, any and all analogies or so-called lessons to be learned about sex ed or abstinance only programs is pretty much invalid, since these are pretty unique circumstances.

    It’s also, of course, not in the mission of GR to discuss the merits of sex ed programs, only the newsworthiness of the results in this case, and how the media are handling it.