babies = accessories?

according to glamour magazine anyways.  looking through the april issue, i'm way behind, and they have the top 10 glamour dos & don't.

#1 ~ "It's Glamour's Accessories Issue - so why not salute the most-carried accessory since the dawn of time?  Here, a bevy of celebs with their ultimate piece of arm candy.  Too cute."

seriously?  arm candy?  most-carried accessory?  it's a baby for cryin' out loud!  for a magazine as forward thinking as glamour, this do seems a bit childish, so to speak.  i have nothing against babies but to think of them as arm candy or accessories is just ridiculous.  i mean when celebs were toting around mini dogs as accessories, people were complaining saying that a dog is a pet, not an accessory.  which i agree so why is it okay to call a baby an accessory?

i'm all for celebs being w/ their babies instead of them being w/ a nanny but i'm sure there's a better word to describe them than an accessory.  bad move glamour, bad move!