Children are not Accessories

Why the hell would Madonna fly to Malawi to adopt a child when her own fallopian tubes seem to be working fine? Why doesn't she just do the natural thing and actually have another child of her own? I've been theorising, and basically I think it's due to one of a few possibilities.

1. She thinks adopting a child from a third world country is the new black, and has upped the stakes in the hideous game between her and Angelina Jolie to decide who really is the most detached from reality by completing the entire set of ethnic children, like a football sticker collection. Babies are not accessories. Dressing them up in little burberry jackets and back-facing caps makes you look like an irresponsible dimwit who treats their totally dependant child like a Barbie doll. By the way Britney, I recommend sterilization. Drinking and smoking the amount you are already should do the trick anyway by around 2010.
2. In her own tiny little head, she actually thinks that ripping a child away from their entire culture, heritage, and groups of friends and ancestors constitutes saving the world. If she really wanted to do something helpful, she'd get off her fat fake-Brit arse, go down to the bank, and use the interest she accrued on her fortune in the last millisecond to build a new orphanage and furbish it with staff, beds, food and clean water, so that she could prospectively save thousands of kids. But, like the spoilt child she really is, she stands against the shop window, staring at all the poor faces of starving children and proclaims obstinately that she only wants one. The cute one. Well guess what, that's not how it works.
3. She thinks that black people are genetically gifted with better rhythm, so when the kid grows up he'll be able to write her a few albums, distancing her nose from the grindstone by a further million miles.
4. All of the above.