JESSICA SIMPSON IS GIVING WEIGHT WATCHERS A BAD NAME

What the heck is going on with Jessica Simpson? Everything she does seems motivated by that four million dollar contract she has with Weight Watchers. After she claimed to gain 70 pounds in baby weight, she gave birth to Maxwell in May, and started desperately trying to lose weight so she could fulfill her Weight Watchers deal. Following a highly visible struggle, she seemed to start making progress when she surprised everyone by getting pregnant again. She still refuses to acknowledge the fact. Recently, she did a photo shoot for WW – while loudly CLAIMING to have lost 50 pounds. In the photos she’s wearing “fat clothes” – the kind of layered stuff women wear when they feel bloated, and she’s far from slim. Has she admitted to Weight Watchers that she is pregnant again? Will it alter her payday with them? She’s being very secretive and not very honest. We’re starting not to trust Weight Watchers, either!

17 Comments so far

1. By Cal
   On December 20, 2012 at

   Janet you ommitted to give her some credit to her failure to loose weight, due to her fathers recent coming out, that could stress her and drive her to food.

   Other than that, she should have lost the weight, she is being paid well to do so.

2. By Kitty
   On December 20, 2012 at

   She and the whole family are a hot mess.

3. By yoyo
   On December 20, 2012 at

   @Cal, good point.

   Wish the media would stop with the size zero nonsense & focus more on a person’s inner well being. True, she signed a contract & has to live up to her end of the bargain but she should have been more forthcoming by admitting she may need more time.

4. By baja
   On December 21, 2012 at

   don’t you get it: THIS COULD BE A Punk ‘d-EPISODE!!

5. By Patrick
   On December 21, 2012 at

   Yum!

6. By Denise
   On December 21, 2012 at

   Wow, it’s criticisms like that that perpetuate the eating disorders in this country. She looks like a real woman and she looks grat. Congratulations to her for her unexpected second pregnancy.

7. By Elisabeth
   On December 21, 2012 at

   I agree with Denise. Leave her alone. Those are hardly ‘fat’ clothes. She’s drop dead gorgeous, regardless of her weight. I’m started to believe Janet is against all people that aren’t size zero as she always has something snarky to say about them. Who care about her Weight Watchers deal. She’s happy, beautiful and in love.

8. By Noblecascade
   On December 21, 2012 at

   I don’t see this as a reflection on WW. Jessica is going through some trying times as we all do. She still looks beautiful. Those are not my idea of fat clothes.

9. By dark sided
   On December 21, 2012 at

   Jessica is soo dumb and looks like a frog with that mouth of hers open all the time.

10. By palermo
    On December 21, 2012 at

    First of all, we saw the “diet plan” her trainer had her on, it was not a Weight Watcher’s diet, just shakes. Second of all I’m sure I read she had tons of lipo to get rid of the weight cause she wasn’t losing. Thirdly, I believe she gained around 100 lbs, not whatever she claimed. If she’s really pregnant she will never lose it afterwards cause each pregnancy will leave her with more weight. We have already seen her stuffing her gob at her friend’s wedding.

11. By Diane
    On December 22, 2012 at

    A real woman is not a dried up old scrawny scab !! men like curves – give me a break!!!

12. By Denise
    On December 22, 2012 at

    First of all, the above Denise isn’t me. I can spell.

    Jessica looks fine and WW has been in the business of paying celebrities for so long now that I’m sure that if she doesn’t lose weight according to their plan, they don’t pay her anything.

13. By Hello
    On December 23, 2012 at

    Wouldn’t 360 mean she is right back where she started, pregnancy fat. She would have to do a 180.

14. By Daydream
    On December 24, 2012 at

    First of all JS is FAR from dumb. She runs a billion dollar business. If she wants to gain a thousand pounds she can do it and still be rich but second of all – they should just PhotoShop the picture. Why not? Everthing else in advertisement is.

15. By Glen B
    On December 24, 2012 at

    talentless, bloated, irrelevant, and thankfully, entirely disposable.

16. By Joe Romano
    On December 26, 2012 at

    Why do we pay her any attention….Trash breeds reash!!

17. By Joe Romano
    On December 26, 2012 at

    Why do we pay her any attention….Trash breeds trash!!

17 Responses to “JESSICA SIMPSON IS GIVING WEIGHT WATCHERS A BAD NAME”