Jenny Hardt wants a fourth child

The star of the series "Beverly Hills 90210" is in great shape after the show "Dancing with the Stars", but the other day the actress admitted that it is not for long

Jenny and her husband Pete
Jenny and her husband Pete

Jenny continues her brilliant participation in the Dancing with the Stars show (she and her partner made it to the final part of the competition). During the preparation for the show and the performances themselves, the 35-year-old actress gained a fantastic figure, returning to the forms with which she, still very young, shone in the TV series "Beverly Hills 90210".

Surrounding people do not get tired of making Jenny compliments about her dancing abilities and wonderful metamorphoses with her body, but the actress herself assures those around her that thin waist and chiseled hips are not forever.

The fact is that in the very near future, Jenny plans to become pregnant with her fourth child! The actress and her husband Pete (they were married in 2001) already have three daughters - Bella, Lola and Fiona, and the couple dreams of a boy.

"I like to participate in the show, but I understand that this is a game, and at any moment I can go home,therefore, I make plans for the near future, ”Jenny shared with journalists,“ I dream of having a son as soon as possible, but because of the show, I have no time to do this, so to speak! ”

With her, Jennie agrees completely and her husband Pete: "I wait, I can not wait for my wife at home" !!! - he joked.

November 12, 2007

Hollywood is so fashionable now: the more children, the better? Or they have a competition there - who comes out of actresses more? .. No, I, of course, do not mind - just wondering ...

Everything is natural, it seems to me: there is a popular statement among the middle class “we cannot afford many children, it’s irresponsible, because it’s so expensive”. And once life is successful, we give birth to our pleasure. Children - a sign of prosperity. Though so :).

And it seems to me, somehow it looks like a primitive system, when there were no contraceptives ...)))


and what's wrong is that people want more children? and here contraceptives, if this child is planned? some strange conclusions you have, Chess word

Apparently, it was meant that it resembles patriarchal societies, where children gave birth to everything as long as possible. And most of all it was possible to give birth and survived more for those who ate well and could feed well.So it turned out: who has more children - that fellow.

You are absolutely right. That is what I hinted at. And for some reason, I perceive this Hollywood baby boom as a tribute to fashion ... I do not believe it!)))))))))))

But real children are born, and thank God.

In each hut their rattles, I think.

You are not from the child-free community for an hour?

Is there such a community? ))

Alas, there is. Shame all lj.

If it was just a hobby group “I don’t want children,” it’s okay. But they have long become a society "I hate all children and stupid females who give birth to these red monsters."

I did not know about this society either. Thanks for telling me))). I can not say that I agree with them, but such a theory has the right to exist))

I am not against the theory if there were no aggressive hatred and insults with a touch of glamor.

True, otherwise where to push yourself all this money?

In the nostrils of the powder as usual? Better in children to invest.

And it is fashionable not only to give birth to their own in huge quantities, but also to adopt orphans - this is already the highest class!

Four is a huge amount?


And you have how much, confess! :) Or your friends on average, how many in the family?

(I honestly consider the average of detny friends): two by two, and they are not against the third, some have five, others have four.