Michelle Williams Takes Time Out for Matilda

INF

In a year that brought a most unexpected heartbreak — the death by accidental overdose of Heath Ledger — Michelle Williams says it’s predictability that she’s craving for the couple’s 3-year-old daughter Matilda Rose. She’s taken a hiatus from acting to focus all her attention on her only child, telling Newsweek, "I don’t want to work while she’s in school." Michelle adds,

"I want her to have a routine. I want the plainest, simplest, most ordinary, habituated routine possible. I just want to know what’s coming next."

In furtherance of that goal, mother and daughter recently relocated to a farm in upstate New York and it is there that Michelle says she’s been able to achieve some semblance of normalcy. Although she has succeeded in putting distance between herself and the paparazzi, her feelings on the shutterbugs remain strong. "It burns a fire inside of me, the s––t that I’ve seen people do to get at me or my daughter," the 28-year-old actress explains. "I won’t forget it, and I won’t support it. I don’t want my daughter growing up feeling spied on or threatened."

Michelle’s new movie Wendy and Lucy opens in limited release December 10th.

Source: Newsweek

Comments

I so admire Michelle. She truly embodies all the best qualities of a mom. Heath would be so proud of her, and so pleased with Matilda.

- mp on November 22nd, 2008

Little Matilda is so lucky to have such a wonderful and devoted mother. Michelle obviously has her daughter’s best interests at hand. I hope that by moving away from the city, Matilda is able to have the normal life that Michelle so desperately wants for her.

- Lily on November 22nd, 2008

It’s strange, eh, that we spend so much time loving michelle and matilda, loving to look at pictures of them together, when it is a site very much like this one, and the magazines, that create the need and money for the photographs that drive the photographers to take pictures of of thses photos of them together! It is one thing to be an actress and a person in the public, another thing entirely to have people hounding her and her daughter day in and day out.

- sally on November 22nd, 2008

Go Michelle! lol She’s a firecracker.

- brandi on November 22nd, 2008

i don’t want to see their pics on this site anymore. this site has always seemed to be quite moral and therefore you should do the right thing and not post anymore pics.

be part of the solution not part of the problem.

- emma on November 22nd, 2008

I have a feeling that, no matter what Michelle does, this is a duo that will be hounded for photos wherever they are. I feel for her entirely, especially since we all know why there is suddenly so much press attention directed at Matilda. I just hope we do get to see some photos every now and then, and that Michelle does make some movies, as I love her and she’s such an incredible actress.

Sadly, Michelle did choose celebrity herself and it’s a shame that it’s not been a totally pleasant experience for her. I think there are a lot of celebs out there who maybe take a slightly romantic view of the life and then are shocked when they realise that there is a side of it that is a bit darker.

This is not a criticism of Michelle at all, because I’m certain she’s had it harder than most, it can’t be easy to suddenly become a lone parent and then have to grieve for both yourself and on your child’s behalf in the public eye, but I do find it difficult to understand how celebrities can blanket criticise all attention. If it goes too far, or the paps get too close to a child, I think that’s fair enough, complain away, but celebrities have to accept some attention, that’s just the nature of the business they have chosen I’m afraid, and it’s a bit naive to think otherwise and complain about it. I hope that Michelle doesn’t become hardened because of the way she feels about this, I’ve always thought she was such a lovely lady and a wonderful mother.

I think Michelle will find that the general public will never treat her badly, or Matilda. From things I’ve read in the past, 99% of people adore the Williams-Ledger two-some, I’m certainly one of them!

- phoebe on November 22nd, 2008

I agree Sally. But at the same time, the attention is what moved Michelle from “the other Dawson’s Creek girl” to someone who can probably be in whatever movie they choose.

She’s not under a constant watch like someone who is a household name (like Angelina or Tom & Katie), even with the attention put on her after she and Heath got together, and after he died. This probably has to do with the fact that she goes to extreme lengths to maintain her privacy.

The people who look at her pictures are people on this site and girls interested in her fashion, none of whom would want her getting harassed for pictures. Without these photos being published, she’d lose most of that fan base.

I think it’s ridiculous that paparazzi follow someone so normal around, but if someone takes one picture every once in a while and then leaves, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.

- lily on November 22nd, 2008

Michelle surely sounds like a wonderful & devoted mother! I’m so happy to hear she wants to stay out of the limelight, whereas some celebrities thrive on it! Keep up the good work with Matilda, Michelle!

- Lori on November 22nd, 2008

Phoebe, you hit the nail on the head. There has to be a balance. I love Michelle too, but she must find a compromise between her need for privacy and the fact that she did invite the paps into her life by choosing the career she did. I also think Lily is right, Michelle has gathered huge amounts of press this year, but she doesn’t have the level of celebrity that wouldn’t allow her to almost entirely leave the business if that’s what she wanted to do, so it’s nice that she has the choice to do that at this point, if it’s something she feels she wants to do with and for Matilda. Michelle needs to ride out the next few months, get through the first anniversary of Heath’s passing (I still feel sad about it TBH) and I think the focus on her will probably fade out a little, and will just be something near the normal attention given to a celebrity and her child. I love Michelle and Matilda though, and I think the mama’s comments are coming from a well intentioned place. I suspect she might rub some people up the wrong way with exactly what was reported, but I don’t think she’s hating on all the attention, it’s probably just the stuff that’s focused on Matilda. It’s likely a fact now though, that Michelle will have to accept that people will photograph her child. While there is a demand, there will be someone eager to fill the supply, it’s just the way it goes. I hope they stop ambushing her if that’s what’s really been going on. Matilda’s going to have some tough times growing up, she doesn’t need to be scared by strange people all the time. Keep it respectful, use long lenses, think of the child. If all paps had morals and treated people fairly, I doubt Michelle would have had any grounds to say anything like this. Beautiful mama and bubba.

- kaya on November 22nd, 2008

i think it is ridiculous that people here can advise michelle how to find a balance in her life. who here has any idea what she goes through? media has changed and what many paparazzi do to get pictures (stalking, yelling, screaming) should never be considered an acceptable consequence of being an actress. believe to say she does not have it as bad as brad pitt and angelina, how do you know? i live in new york city and believe me after heath ledger died the paparazzi was swarming her home every day.

i find the content on this site to be great but it is important to note, like some of you did, how the photos are taken

- heather on November 22nd, 2008

I guess that’s why we haven’t seen any photos of them recently. Wonder if they still own the brownstone in Brooklyn, or they’re gone for good. I love them both either way!

- Mimi on November 22nd, 2008

I’m sorry, but Michelle’s issues with the paps do not warrant any sympathy.

How many mothers you know would like to say, “Y’know, I’m not gonna work while my daughter’s in school. I’d shall relocate to a farmhouse in upstate New York…”

Are y’all kidding me? Actors and actresses get paid millions – MILLIONS – of dollars for a couple months work precisely because you have to then be a public figure.

Demi Moore stopped working and moved to a cabin in Utah to raise her kids and no paparazzi followed her there. This isn’t rocket science.

I have all the sympathy in the world – endless, endless sympathy – for losing her child’s father. But the paparazzi tantrums get on my last nerve. How ’bout you go be a teacher, stick your kids in daycare, worry about health insurance premiums, clip your coupons, never go out to eat or take a vacation, and see how you like that.

You can, y’know. If you had a college degree, which you don’t (not even a high school degree actually) so maybe try raising your daughter pulling double shifts waiting tables. See how that goes. When do all the women who do that get to retire to their farmhouse on a wave of public sympathy…

- Ashley Doughty on November 22nd, 2008

How sad that Michelle and Matilda have to move just to have some sense of privacy and normalcy.
And about them moving out of the city,maybe it was too sad for them to continue living in Heath’s old apartment?

- Allison on November 22nd, 2008

Lily says:

“I agree Sally. But at the same time, the attention is what moved Michelle from “the other Dawson’s Creek girl” to someone who can probably be in whatever movie they choose.”

I think actually the oscar nomination and performance in Brokeback Mountain is what changed Michelle Williams’s career.

The point of my post really was how interesting and sad it is that one’s career means that their children can’t attend school without being hounded by photographers. And how much we all love looking at pictures of matilda skipping down the street with michelle, that those actual pictures and the photographer’s who take them, create a world in which the very person we lovingly admire or whatever we are doing while looking at these pictures, means that the poor girl (and yes, i do feel so badly for her for all of this unwanted attention, she doesn’t court the press like Tom, Kate, & Angenlina do)… has to leave her home because her lover died and she is left taking care of the child and is constantly followed because of all of this. If you think for one minute that she is asking for it by being an actress i think you are being untruthful with yourself. Sadly, we, with all of our good intentions, are in part to blame for the hardship she faces now.

- Sally on November 22nd, 2008

I agree with Heather. And I don’t think Michelle could ever have anticipated the turn of events her life would take, merely that she wanted to pursue an acting profession. And when she was doing so, the paparazzi were nowhere NEAR as invasive as they have become now. If she were just starting out now, I would agree that yes, she should have been aware of what she was getting herself and her daughter into. In fact, I feel this way about much of young Hollywood that complains about their lack of privacy, as they’ve grown up in an exceptionally media-crazed, digital age. But this isn’t the case with her so I think a little more sympathy and less condemnation is due here.

- Jaycee on November 22nd, 2008

Michelle has never enjoyed paparazzi attention, and I think she found her soulmate in Mr Heath Ledger because he was exactly the same from the moment he stepped onto the scene, but I believe just before he died he accepted it was just part of his job. He was an incredibly shy person and I believe she’s the same. Any woman would feel vulnerable in that state, and to have her daughter feel the same for no other reason than being her daughter, there is possibly a bit of guilt involved.

The paparazzi has followed Michelle since she became involved with Heath Ledger and even more so when she gave birth to Matilda. There’s so many candid pictures of Matilda out with her parents since she was newborn.

I do wonder if one day she’ll understand that Matilda may be able to find comfort in these candid shots with her out and about spending time with her beloved Daddy, to see how much he really adored her and not just in posed family photographs. Not many children whose parents have died can have access to something like that.

- Belle on November 23rd, 2008

Sally-

I meant the attention she got from her oscar nomination. Obviously I don’t think she’s getting roles because of the attention put on her after Heath’s death or because of her personal life. If that were true, any reality star or tabloid commodity would be directed by Scorsese.

But there are other great actresses who don’t get that much work because they are overlooked for someone who is more media friendly.

I’m not saying just because less photographers are surrounding her than Angelina Jolie it is any less unnerving. I’m saying she has the power right now to walk away from acting if she wants (which would be sad because she is my favorite actress under 30). She has the power to live in Brooklyn without bodyguards. The only way people hear about her is if they go looking for information about her. (With the exception of the month after Heath died). You don’t turn on the tv and see her on the news, like Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan.

And Heather, people aren’t giving Michelle advice. I’d hope no one thinks that they know more about Michelle’s life than Michelle herself. We’re merely discussing our opinions based on what we see, and what Michelle has just said in the interview.

I don’t think, just because she chose this career, that she should be harassed or followed. But there is a difference between someone taking one picture for blogs such as this one and fans such as ourselves and people literally following her around and yelling things and trying to get at her daughter.

- lily on November 23rd, 2008

Sally- Since when does Angelina court the press? She and Brad do interviews when they need to promote their movies, just like virtually all celebs do, but other than that you don’t hear much from them (now ABOUT them is another story! The tabs are always printing stuff about them, even when they are out of the public eye!).

Angie is definently not Paris or Lindsey!

- CelebBabyLover on November 23rd, 2008

Okay, let me explain what I meant, in case I am being accused of being harsh. ANY celebrity who complains about ALL the attention is whining, because being photographed and watched is a part of their world, that can’t possibly come as a surprise to them so it’s not as if the paps as a rule is something they are not aware of before they start out. But I do have full sympathy for what Michelle is saying and I do understand why she said it. A lot of the attention she has now is because of Heath’s death, and that to me is tragic in itself. If she and Matilda are being harrassed because of that, my feelings for the people that are putting them through that are beyond contempt. Although I believe that they shouldn’t have been forced out of their home, if it got as bad as it seems, she’s undoubtedly done the right thing. She had to be proactive about it, I think Kaya had a point in saying that eventually the focus will not be as strong on her, but for the time being, it’s probably a good thing that she got out when she did. Matilda will likely not remember specific encounters with the paps at this point (which is another sad thing, because it obviously means she won’t remember her dad either) so Michelle has a chance to make things normal for her.

I think everyone has sympathy for Michelle, who in their right mind wouldn’t? After what she’s been through, it’s abominable to think otherwise. But Michelle must, and I’m sure she gets this, understand that people are curious about her life and that they will want to see photos of her and her little girl. Does this entitle the paps to be aggressive? Hell no. But the base reason for the attention is that Michelle chose to be an actress and be famous. I think that’s why people may take issue with what has been said. She will always get more sympathy from people than anyone else who criticises the paps because of the reason for the increase in the attention, but she’s famous anyway and she has a supercute child, I just find it a bit unrealistic to hope that she will be able to hide away completely, or that she will always be able to have the good side of fame and not some of the bad (not that I’m condoning the bad, because I certainly am not). As much as I wish for her that it was different, it never will be, for anyone, that’s just what happens. So I still think she must find a balance, for her own sake. Celebrities do find ways of handling it, keep the paps from controlling their life by giving them enough to keep them happy. It’s not the most ideal thing if you’re that private a person, but it’s a compromise.

Let me just say that I am a total Michelle and Matilda fan, I think the way Michelle has handled herself is absolutely admirable, and I just hope with her move she will be tonnes happier and able to deal with stuff more.

- phoebe on November 23rd, 2008

I agree with Sally that we are in part to blame for the intrusion on Michelle’s life. if you look back 5 or so years ago there wasn’t this demand to see celebrites with their children. the paparazzi have changed in their intesity and we are in part to blame because of our curiosity. i mean years ago there was only People mag and maybe US weekly. Now you have the other magazines and all these celebrity websites. Which i guess the internet can take part of the blame too for this intrusion. i don’t know what the answer is because i do like looking at pictures of Michelle/Matilda but i don’t like how it is done. no easy answer here folks

- Laura on November 23rd, 2008

If she wanted to keep her privacy she shouldn’t have said the farm is in upstate new york. i can only imagine how many paparazzi are headed up there now trying to get a picture.

- Laura on November 23rd, 2008

Pheobe, My point is that OUR interest, our coming to this site, our buying magazines, all of this creates a monetary prize for photographers who are aggressive. who get that shot of them, that candid shot that no-one else has.
So we sit here and say how much sympathy we have for her but it’s our very curiosity that causes it. I live in NYC, you could not believe the INTENSE, ridiculous and scary news attention on Michelle and Matilda after Heath’s death and now people just camp out in front of their house.

As far as Angelina NOT courting the press, read this article in the New York Times. She is smart and crafty but don’t for a moment think she is not in control of how the press views her and her family. The article is GREAT. Her and Michelle have really nothing in common in terms of their relationship with the press.

New York Times, Angelina Joie’s Carefully Orchestrated Image, 11/21/08
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/business/media/21angelina.html?scp=2&sq=angelina%20jolie&st=cse

- Sally on November 23rd, 2008

Sally, I never said anything about us not being partly to blame, I believe we are in a liberal sense, but with that in mind, I think if you gave the majority of people who like looking at photos of Michelle and Matilda the choice of either seeing photos that were the result of harrassment or not seeing photos at all, any reasonable person would say none at all, myself included. Paps (and let’s be fair here, not all of them are awful) mustn’t hide behind the demand for photos as a justification for some of the tactics they use, and we mustn’t allow them to use us as a reason for it. With that in mind, the extremes they go to are ultimately their own responsibility. They should be controlled more by law and possibly, agencies shouldn’t deal with photos that are obtained in a manner likely to cause distress to celebrities (and more so their children). But this is a very difficult thing to regulate.

The bottom line is that this is an industry with all too many contributing factors, and unless there is an outright ban on pap photos of celebrities (something that will never happen universally), I don’t believe such a lucrative inductry could ever be restricted to a certain set of rules that would be deemed acceptable to all concerned.

So of course we are partially responsible for the interest, but I don’t believe that responsibility stretches to such a point that a celeb can point a finger and say ‘hey you there, fan person, you’re the reason my kid cried and was scared’.

I completely see where you’re coming from Sally, but I think if you’re suggesting that we are entirely to blame, that’s a bit much. I hope I made sense!

- phoebe on November 23rd, 2008

When I hear most celebrities complaining, it’s usually in relation to their children. We see a nice picture that we like… mama or dad holding the child. What we don’t see are the swarms of paparazzi surrounding them, screaming their names and practically knocking them down to get a shot.
I know Brad Pitt, among others, has begged photographers to use long range lenses so they aren’t right in the kids’ faces.
It’s not too much to ask, as a star, that your kids aren’t terrified.

- sam on November 23rd, 2008

People are very unrealistic when they expect celebs not to have gripes about their jobs. I have never met ONE person who can’t find fault with at least one aspect of their profession, no matter how minor or major. As I have stated previously in regards to this topic, my husband has been employed in the same job for more than 16 years now. He loves it, and wouldn’t change it for the world. However, there are things about that he doesn’t like, aspects of it that he wishes were not so and that he wishes he could change. However, he is not quitting. He wouldn’t dream of it because for him the pleasure far outweigh the displeasures but he still has his gripes for sure. Nevertheless, never once has anyone suggested that my husband “quit” or “Just stop whining,” because his sentiments are normal are normal and very real. You just accept the good with the bad, but that doesn’t mean you have to like it. Celebs are no different. Just like the rest of us, there are going to be things about their jobs and profession that bugs the hell out of them (the paps and lack of privacy for starters.) Doesn’t mean they should quit what they obviously love to do. I am sure that each and every one of them are aware at this point of the sacrifices that they have to make to be a part of the Hollywood world, and just because they perks in most cases far outweigh the downside it doesn’t mean they are going to be any less annoyed with a bunch of photographers in their faces every where they turn. Like Michelle said, “How many pics of me with my child and a cup of coffee in my hand walking down the street do you need?” And it’s not just the pics, but the lengths that these guys go to in order to get these pics. And it’s also not just in Hollywood. I was in Toronto earlier this fall and you should have seen the paps (over 20 guys at least) and how they surrounded this coffee shop because Halle Berry was inside with Nahla. It was quite frightening to say the least, a bunch of guys screaming both Halle and Nahla’s name and flashing pics left and right. IN TORONTO!! One of the managers of the shop came out and tried to get some of the guys to leave because they were causing such a ruckus, to no avail. I couldn’t imagine having people follow me around like that or having people say, “Oh just suck it up” simply because I expressed my displeasure with the paps boorish behavior.

- lizzielui on November 23rd, 2008

Probably the thing that strikes me most about this is the fact broad brush strokes applied to those, like Michelle Williams, who are in the public eye.

There are actors, there are singers, there are celebrities. Because each of these jobs involves playing to the public does not mean that all of the individuals who inhabit them want to be famous.

I have a friend, in London, who wants to be an actor. She’s been to drama school, she’s done some plays in fringe theatre and on the West End and a small film because acting is what feeds her soul. Just as writing is what feeds mine. She’s not an attention seeker, I’ve never had a conversation with her about fame or any of that nonesense, it’s an irrelevance in terms of her ambition, and I know that she just wants to step into the shoes of different characters, act her guts off, and work with interesting artists. It’s what she’s wanted all her life.

There is a possibility that if she became very well known at some point within the industry (which is all she’s hoping for) that that might translate to being publically well known but who knows? That’s something she can’t predict or control at this stage, because she doesn’t care about it and if it happens it’s only going to come from her work, not from her doing a Paris Hilton.

I can say that my friend is the actor’s actor, which is what you can sense Heath Ledger was and what Michelle Williams is: private people, perhaps also shy, who happen to love something that puts them in the public eye whereas most people end up in offices or schools or hospitals, the latter two especially with their own audiences but localised. A teacher of one school isn’t going to be known in the next, or at least probably not, anyway.

And for those who claim that acting means you can’t be shy…you’re not being yourself, you’re being somebody else.

The advent of ‘celebrity’ – a horrible, horrible misused word I think – during the 1990s and now in the 21st Century has changed things considerably. We no longer seem to be able to distinguish between ‘artist’ and ‘celebrity’ – sometimes, they can be one and the same, people who are artists but court celebrity in that they live their lives publically (not necessarily a negative thing, just the reality, like Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith and their family who aren’t the retiring types). Then there are celebrities like Paris Hilton who clearly, and admittedly, always wanted to be famous.

And then, there are artists who are just that.

Sometimes, their work or, in the case of Michelle Williams it was both, events surrounding them that are outside of their control, captures peoples’ attention. But just because the term celebrity might now include them does not mean that they wanted it or expected it or are comfortable with it. Most will be realistic enough to know that it’s a possibility, but as only a tiny minority of actors succeed in acting for a living, the vast majority will choose (if they are given the opportunity) to be actors and, like my friend, never even think of the rest because how can you? Michelle Williams obviously did not choose to be a celebrity. She chose to be an actor and recent American films are all the better for it.

I know ‘celebrity’ is a hazard of the job sometimes, but I think we need to be honest with ourselves and recogise that there is a difference between Paris Hilton and Michelle Williams. It is a very sad situation if Michelle feels that things have gotten so out of hand that the only way to gain some normalcy for her child (her child!) is to step away from acting.

And that brings me to a further point which is that children are children and while some, again like the Smiths, are photographed with their parents consent and some (parents) don’t appear to mind much, but others are not and that should always always always be the prerogative of their parents. Just because you may be famous does not mean that you surrender your child as public property, or that if you give a few magazine photos, as the Jolie-Pitts have done, that it’s okay for someone to then spy on your children in the bath. Child protection, anyone?! Parental rights and consent?! In England, a school can’t even photograph its students at school events, for example, without written consent from parents.

No. There has to be a line that you do not ever cross. CBB does a fairly okay job in staying appropriate in what it writes, certainly, with quotes from interviews and blogs and interviews on the site, which I think is nice.

But back to the line you don’t cross… the paparazzi have clearly crossed it with Michelle Williams and her young daughter.

- Marie on November 23rd, 2008

marie, beautifully written!

- sally on November 23rd, 2008

Marie- ITA!

Sally- I know exactly which article you’re referring to, and I highly recommend that you hop on over to pittwatch (if I’m allowed to do this, the link is: http://www.pittwatch.com). We’re having a very good discussion about that article over there (scroll down until you see “Discussion Topic: Angelina’s ‘Carefully Orchestrated Image’,), and some of the commentors there who share my views (which is quite a few of them!), can probably explain what I’ve been trying to say about Angie NOT courting the press better than I can!

All I’ll say here is that most of us readers/commentors over at pittwatch are upset by the article, disagree with it, and think it’s mostly a bunch of lies.

- CelebBabyLover on November 24th, 2008

Marie – you do make some good points about the differences, but the choices Michelle (and if you want to go even further, Heath) has made have been ones that she has known will make her famous. It doesn’t matter whether this was her intention, she took on things she knew would come with fame (and personally, as a now-adult who grew up with Dawson’s Creek as the soundtrack to my teenage years, I’m really grateful she did!). Whether or not she is the so-called ‘actor’s actor’, doesn’t change her choices. This is no way justifies some of the things that she has been through because of the paps, but there’s no point in romanticising. If you read back over my posts on this thread, you will see how I feel so there’s no point in me going through it again (!), but having said that, I think if the paps and the fans and the industry and the media are to blame, it’s a bit of a dubious and somewhat glaring omission to leave out the celebrity at the centre of it all. Again, this doesn’t excuse the abuse (and yes, it is abuse) by some of the paps, but if the fans and blog readers are going to be accused of sourcing the interest, it’s not much of a stretch to acknowledge that the celebrity generates portions of the interest as well.

- phoebe on November 24th, 2008

i agree w/ a lot of the comments here. the paparazzi need to get a grip – it’s just gotten way too out of hand the last few years and unfortunately, will probably only continue to get worse.

i think the biggest interest with michelle williams, and why the paps follow her around so much is because of matilda. i think people in general just want to know that she’s going to be okay. the world has sort of invested their feelings in the little precious girl ever since her daddy passed. but i think we’re all seen (by all the past paps pics) that she has a terrific mother in michelle and there should be no doubt, that that little girl is going to live as normal as a life as possible. i always say it because it’s so true, but hollywood moms out there need to take notes from michelle williams. THIS IS HOW YOU DO IT! truly and class act and so obvious, a doting, loving mother that is not concerned with buying her $100 dresses so she looks cute in people magazine photos, not going out there to all these celebrity events – just wants to do right by her daughter and does not ever lose focus of that.

i think this article says it all right here – speaks volumes about what a great mother she is – matilda is so lucky …

http://www.newsweek.com/id/170184

- dawn on November 24th, 2008

She’s such a cutie but I must say I love the paparazzi if only so I can come to CBB and check out daily photos of my favorite celeb babies! <3
Where & how would we get our fix?

- Emaline on December 3rd, 2008