Gwen Stefani uses a Gucci, leather-trimmed baby carrier
Filed under: Newborns, Celeb Kids, Life & Style, Media, Mommy Musts, Decor, Expert Advice: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Nutrition: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Day Care & Education, Research Reveals: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Gear Guides: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Gear Guides: Babies, Activities: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Behavior: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Development: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Health & Safety: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Expert Advice: Babies, Research Reveals: Babies, Baby-sitting, Toddlers Preschoolers, Health & Safety: Babies, Development/Milestones: Babies, Feeding & Sleeping
What am I talking about? I am talking about Gwen Stefani's baby carrier. It is very fashionable, and has a brown leather trim. That's right. I hope Kingston doesn't spit up on it or have a diaper leak on it. But, maybe Gwen has one to match every outfit! Could be! The Gucci slings only cost $760.
Unfortunately, nobody sent me one to test, so I cannot write a product review, but as accessories go, this makes Gwen's baby look smashing. And Gwen doesn't look too bad either.
Let me ask you something that I have been thinking about recently: If you had a chance to live how the other half live (I know there are fewer than half of the population out there with that kind of disposable income, by the way), would you be tempted by this baby sling? Or is it just outside the realm of your imagination?
I think I fall into the category of, "I simply cannot imagine." I also can't look at this without thinking of the multiples of homeless people I passed daily in Ottawa, Ontario, last week and how much food that sling would have bought.
p.s,, Confidential to Gwen: Stacey and Clinton would tell you to lose the tunic already.
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
- Is it legal to claim relation to a person ? ( OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE FOR MONATERY GAIN) TO BE ILLEGAL ?
- Are all items consumable or a product and ingredients ...public record or are you literature restricted
- A motion to dismiss filed; is also using a motion to avoid perjury(having to testify under oath) correct?