Author: has written 5272 posts for this blog.

Jill has been blogging for Feministe since 2005.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

46 Responses

  1. Tracy Morris
    Tracy Morris September 2, 2011 at 12:07 pm |

    You might be surprised at what desperately hopeful people can believe…

  2. Jadey
    Jadey September 2, 2011 at 12:09 pm |

    Mmmm, bacon bits.

    Sorry, was I supposed to be impregnating myself? I got distracted.

  3. wasabi
    wasabi September 2, 2011 at 12:12 pm |

    “I have patients who say: ‘I’m 48 but everyone thinks I’m 38. Shouldn’t I be as fertile as a 38-year-old?’ ”

    Seriously?! Who can possibly think this?! In 2011 who can possibly really not know that your fertility starts to decline at 30 and hits a nose-dive around 36? I get that they may not realize quite how dire it is (like that there’s only a 5% of conceiving naturally after 40), but no idea? I’m 36 and I can’t even count how many articles I have read that were a variant on the “Don’t Wait too Long Ladies/Turns out it’s Hard to get Pregnant at 50″ since I turned 30. How can people still not know?!

  4. EG
    EG September 2, 2011 at 12:12 pm |

    Oh, for fuck’s sake. Was the NYT offering to supplement my income back when I was 27, the age at which I had wanted to have my first baby? Are they offering to supplement my income now, 8 years later, when I still can’t afford to support both myself and a child? Are they out there advocating for universal daycare so that it might be feasible for me to have a baby now without an income supplement? Are they even interested in fixing me up on dates on the off-chance they could introduce me to another adult with an income and/or able to do childcare with whom I would want to have a baby?

    No? They’re not doing any of those things? They’re just going to sit there and print stories stressing me out?

    They they can go fuck themselves.

  5. Angelia Sparrow
    Angelia Sparrow September 2, 2011 at 12:15 pm |

    Thank Hecate for small mercies! I’ve done the kids thing. Let ‘em crumble!

  6. Sanoe
    Sanoe September 2, 2011 at 12:24 pm |

    After reading the title, I immediately glanced down at my womb-area and thought about how good bacon sounded right now. I blame feminism for any auto-anthropophological impulses I have in the future.

  7. Jadey
    Jadey September 2, 2011 at 12:32 pm |

    I’ve pulled myself away from crying into my bacon-flavoured Hagen-Daaz and knitting shawls out of cat hair long enough to actually read the article in question, and I’m confused – you mean dipping my tampons in Oil of Olay, replacing my skin with Elastoplast, and masturbating with a Venus of Willendorf replica made out of a petrified placenta that I bought off Etsy isn’t going to keep me so fecund that just thinking about Liam Neeson will spontaneously impregnate me? Thank god I just got my hands on a fake ID that lists my age as 21 and my name as “Doreen Gray”, or else I’d be screwed.

  8. Kristen J.
    Kristen J. September 2, 2011 at 12:39 pm |

    Jadey:
    I’ve pulled myself away from crying into my bacon-flavoured Hagen-Daaz and knitting shawls out of cat hair long enough to actually read the article in question, and I’m confused – you mean dipping my tampons in Oil of Olay, replacing my skin with Elastoplast, and masturbating with a Venus of Willendorf replica made out of a petrified placenta that I bought off Etsy isn’t going to keep me so fecund that just thinking about Liam Neeson will spontaneously impregnate me? Thank god I just got my hands on a fake ID that lists my age as 21 and my name as “Doreen Gray”, or else I’d be screwed.

    lulz

  9. Elena
    Elena September 2, 2011 at 12:41 pm |

    Wasabi- 5% sounds really low. I just googled and found that IVF has 40% with a woman’s own eggs at 40, and it goes down from there. I couldn’t find anything for non iVF. I have read before that fertility rates for older women is unclear, because the estimates come from fertility doctors, who see mostly older women with low fertility. Younger non fertile and older fertile women are underrepresented because they aren’t trying. In my family and my husband’s all our grandmothers and his mother had babies in their forties, before widespread birthcontrol.

  10. Computer Soldier Porygon
    Computer Soldier Porygon September 2, 2011 at 12:42 pm |

    Jadey:
    I’ve pulled myself away from crying into my bacon-flavoured Hagen-Daaz

    this needs to exist

  11. Annabelle
    Annabelle September 2, 2011 at 1:17 pm |

    Kristen J.: …isn’t going to keep me so fecund that just thinking about Liam Neeson will spontaneously impregnate me?

    No, no, thinking of Liam Neeson always works.

  12. Bagelsan
    Bagelsan September 2, 2011 at 1:33 pm |

    Huh, so much for my plan to just eventually steal the face of a younger woman and glue it to my own if/when I want to get preggers. I really thought that would work.

  13. Tori
    Tori September 2, 2011 at 1:48 pm |

    So… is it possible to harvest these internal bacon bits? I mean, I’m on the fence about (various) hysterectomy (options) anyway, and I sure do like bacon. But I just turned 30, so it’s probably not all crumbly yet, right?

  14. Mezosub
    Mezosub September 2, 2011 at 2:40 pm |

    Yawn. What do these people at the NYT think that women do all day long if not but sit around pining for a baby?

    Here’s a thought: Some of us are doing other things with our lives, like getting advanced degrees, or professional licenses, or practicing our profession, which stimulates the economy because we’re working and paying our taxes like good little drones.

    Jeebus Foofoo, you’d think these journalists really think that we all believe that motherhood is a woman’s highest calling, and that there is absolutely positively nothing better that we could possibly be doing with our time.

    Here’s a tip: NYT, some of us have work to do. For some of us, that work is critical to the functioning of society, like saving lives or writing legislation, or educating other people’s children. Now, please get out of our way, and go clutch your pearls somewhere else.

  15. Maribel
    Maribel September 2, 2011 at 3:25 pm |

    Elena:
    Wasabi- 5% sounds really low. I just googled and found that IVF has 40% with a woman’s own eggs at 40, and it goes down from there. I couldn’t find anything for non iVF. I have read before that fertility rates for older women is unclear, because the estimates come from fertility doctors, who see mostly older women with low fertility. Younger non fertile and older fertile womenare underrepresented because they aren’t trying. In my family and my husband’s all our grandmothers and his mother had babies in their forties, before widespread birthcontrol.

    I have a beautiful 8 month old brother. My mother is 49. No iVF. With all the crap that she read on the news papers and magazines or heard on the tv she stopped using birth control thinking that because of her age pregnancy was impossible. Well she got pregnant. Healthy mom, healthy pregnancy, healthy baby. Now I am a fucking babysitter. FML

  16. Ali
    Ali September 2, 2011 at 3:55 pm |

    EG:
    Oh, for fuck’s sake.Was the NYT offering to supplement my income back when I was 27, the age at which I had wanted to have my first baby?Are they offering to supplement my income now, 8 years later, when I still can’t afford to support both myself and a child?Are they out there advocating for universal daycare so that it might be feasible for me to have a baby now without an income supplement?Are they even interested in fixing me up on dates on the off-chance they could introduce me to another adult with an income and/or able to do childcare with whom I would want to have a baby?

    No?They’re not doing any of those things?They’re just going to sit there and print stories stressing me out?

    They they can go fuck themselves.

    I’m sorry about your situation, but the NYT’s fashion and style section is around to report on clothes, shoes, trends and yes, puff pieces on the delusions of the wealthy and fit. The NYT is a newspaper, not a federal or state aid agency, a political advocate (well…), or a dating service. They exist to be annoying and print things that stress you/me/everyone out–whether those things are fluff about a few delusional ladies, the collapse of our economy, or some truly distressful social trend. That’s the news.

  17. Echo Zen
    Echo Zen September 2, 2011 at 4:15 pm |

    Yes, this is a terrible analogy. Many of us love bacon bits. :-p

  18. zuzu
    zuzu September 2, 2011 at 4:48 pm |

    Computer Soldier Porygon: this needs to exist

    I don’t think Haagen-Dasz makes it, but bacon-flavored ice cream does, in fact, exist.

    Tori: So… is it possible to harvest these internal bacon bits?

    Yes, but make sure you hardboil the eggs. Otherwise, how are you going to make a Cobb salad when you’re done?

  19. FashionablyEvil
    FashionablyEvil September 2, 2011 at 5:41 pm |

    I’m sorry about your situation, but the NYT’s fashion and style section is around to report on clothes, shoes, trends and yes, puff pieces on the delusions of the wealthy and fit.

    That seems unduly harsh.

  20. Ali
    Ali September 2, 2011 at 6:23 pm |

    FashionablyEvil: That seems unduly harsh.

    Do you mean unduly harsh to the person I am replying to or to the NYT’s style section or to the “delusional wealthy/fit people”? If you mean the poster I was replying to, that was not my intent, my intent was to ridicule the NYT while at the same time defending some of the things it does. Because–the fashion and trends style does indeed focus mostly on the wealthy and fit, and that is bullshit. But it is also is a news organization, not an organization that does good deeds or directly helps people. Whatever good influence it has is indirect and comes from what people choose to do about the things it reports.

    If you mean unduly harsh to the style section, which I doubt, then oops.

    If you mean unduly harsh to the women in the article, well, maybe. My initial reactions after reading were 1.) Ugh, too much fluff, not enough substance and 2.) Are there really people delusional enough to believe that money dropped on looking young and outward/presumed fitness? But maybe the people in the article were never received proper education about fertility.

    So the intention of my post was to counter what I thought was a lot of anger over the role of news in general. The post I was responding to sounded a bit like, “Argh, why does the news exist it just makes us all feel like crap?” Clearly the article hit a sensitive place for EG–but it wasn’t about women like her who have been trying for years to have a child but don’t have the means, which is a horrible situation. It was a really crappy and patronizing trend piece about a couple of women who didn’t seem to realize to that outward appearance does not correlate to reproductive abilities.

  21. Jadey
    Jadey September 2, 2011 at 7:20 pm |

    zuzu: I don’t think Haagen-Dasz makes it, but bacon-flavored ice cream does, in fact, exist.

    Clearly my misspelled version is actually some kind of Canadian rip-off brand with much better flavours.

  22. Dausuul
    Dausuul September 2, 2011 at 7:36 pm |

    Jadey:
    I’ve pulled myself away from crying into my bacon-flavoured Hagen-Daaz and knitting shawls out of cat hair long enough to actually read the article in question, and I’m confused – you mean dipping my tampons in Oil of Olay, replacing my skin with Elastoplast, and masturbating with a Venus of Willendorf replica made out of a petrified placenta that I bought off Etsy isn’t going to keep me so fecund that just thinking about Liam Neeson will spontaneously impregnate me? Thank god I just got my hands on a fake ID that lists my age as 21 and my name as “Doreen Gray”, or else I’d be screwed.

    There is so much awesome in this post, the mind boggles.

  23. Alientea
    Alientea September 2, 2011 at 7:51 pm |

    My partner’s sisters both had babies this month, and naturally everyone looked at us as if to say “when’s your turn?”
    I joked about it saying “I’ve still got a few years before my best-before date”
    When no one laughed I realised, apparently it’s not a joke.
    Ugh.

  24. April
    April September 2, 2011 at 7:53 pm |

    Mmm, bacon bits…

  25. annalouise
    annalouise September 2, 2011 at 8:05 pm |

    Oh, for fuck’s sake. Was the NYT offering to supplement my income back when I was 27, the age at which I had wanted to have my first baby? Are they offering to supplement my income now, 8 years later, when I still can’t afford to support both myself and a child? Are they out there advocating for universal daycare so that it might be feasible for me to have a baby now without an income supplement? Are they even interested in fixing me up on dates on the off-chance they could introduce me to another adult with an income and/or able to do childcare with whom I would want to have a baby?

    Yeah, seriously. I get stressed as fuck about fertility and baby-having. But contrary to the standard NYT style section worldview, I’m not neglecting my baby-having opportunities because in conflicts with my luxury vacations. I’d knock myself up today if I had even the slightest confidence that I could have paid maternity leave and cheap/free daycare. But as it stands, as a single woman, even though I’m awfully financially comfortable compared to some people and have a steady, salaried, middle-income job, every time the I crunch the numbers it looks just financially catastrophic for me to have a baby.

    And fuck the NYT seriously, but I’m more than a little crabby at the gleefully childfree women (most of whome are younger than me) lol’ing it up like how stupid it is for anyone to be attached to the idea of having a child.

  26. Tori
    Tori September 2, 2011 at 8:16 pm |

    zuzu: I don’t think Haagen-Dasz makes it, but bacon-flavored ice cream does, in fact, exist.

    Yes, but make sure you hardboil the eggs.Otherwise, how are you going to make a Cobb salad when you’re done?

    Hrm. You don’t think bacon bits and scrambled eggs would be suitable for a makeshift breakfast burrito?

  27. zuzu
    zuzu September 2, 2011 at 9:52 pm |

    Ali: Because–the fashion and trends style does indeed focus mostly on the wealthy and fit, and that is bullshit.

    I dunno. The NYT is a business, and part of its business is selling ads. Advertisers want to reach a certain audience, and the NYT reaches the wealthy. And a lot of wealthy people have enough leisure time to be fit, or at least treat fitness aspirationally (where they’ll buy the associated products and services, even if they don’t actually achieve fitness).

    The part that makes the NYT maddening is that it’s The Paper of Record, so all these style trend articles reach beyond the intended audience and become part of the national conversation and part of the cultural backdrop. Though since the NYT is infamous for spotting “trends” only when they’re over, they could be said to be reflecting, rather than influencing the cultural backdrop.

  28. zuzu
    zuzu September 2, 2011 at 9:55 pm |

    Jadey: Clearly my misspelled version is actually some kind of Canadian rip-off brand with much better flavours.

    I had a cone from one of those artisanal ice cream trucks that have popped up in NYC that was brown butter and bacon-flavored. MMmm, bacon.

  29. EG
    EG September 2, 2011 at 10:41 pm |

    I’m sorry about your situation, but the NYT’s fashion and style section is around to report on clothes, shoes, trends and yes, puff pieces on the delusions of the wealthy and fit. The NYT is a newspaper, not a federal or state aid agency, a political advocate (well…), or a dating service.

    You don’t…seriously think that I expected the NYT to give me money, do you? Or to set me up on dates? Honestly? You thought…I expected that? You really, seriously, honest-to-god thought I was dead serious, not at all using hyperbole to make a point about what the paper of record thought worthy of reporting or focusing on in an article about fertility issues?

    That’s bizarre.

    They exist to be annoying and print things that stress you/me/everyone out–whether those things are fluff about a few delusional ladies, the collapse of our economy, or some truly distressful social trend. That’s the news.

    I think that’s letting the NYT off far too lightly. It is the major US paper of record. It doesn’t have to passively go along with prevailing trends; in fact, it helps to create those trends. It can do major muck-raking stories, such as that multi-part piece it did on the abuse of the mentally disabled in state-run facilities in upstate NY some weeks ago, which seems to have resulted in quite the stink and Cuomo having to take some action. It publishes editorials and op-ed pieces, including Warren Buffet’s piece on why we should tax the rich more than we do. If the editors wanted to responsibly report on fertility concerns and why and how more women are delaying childbearing, they have the ability and power to choose a variety of angles to go with. They consistently choose the “those silly ladies think they can have it all, but ha ha, the clock is ticking, they should know better” angle. So, as I said, they can go fuck themselves.

  30. Ali
    Ali September 3, 2011 at 12:37 am |

    @ EG–Actually, I had to read your post twice before I responded to it. Partly because I can be slow to catch to tone on the Internet and partly because people seriously, honestly, honest-to-god actually believe and say things like this both in the “real world” and online and it puzzles/annoys me to no end. They blame the government for their kid’s cold, the media for everything else and expect impossible solutions for their problems. It is so commonplace that when I started writing, I seriously, bizarrely wasn’t sure if you were using hyperbole or not. But I was hyped up on that train of thought, so while I assumed you were using hyperbole, I wanted to make a point to defend the news as something that does more than print things that stress people out and as something that isn’t usually directly involved in change.

    Looking back on my comment to you I realize I could have said that way better than I did, ugh. But I’m new to commenting online so I have to learn not make connections that aren’t apparent to other people especially in a place where I’m not around to explain my mishaps, haha. Also, good point on the NYT’s attitude toward women and their choices about fertility.

  31. Jadey
    Jadey September 3, 2011 at 1:09 am |

    zuzu: I had a cone from one of those artisanal ice cream trucks that have popped up in NYC that was brown butter and bacon-flavored.MMmm, bacon.

    I resent you talking about delicious food that I am in the wrong postal code to enjoy, dammit! That’s it, Feministe – I’ve had it with zuzu flaunting her culinary access – I’m out of here FOREVER.

  32. Bagelsan
    Bagelsan September 3, 2011 at 1:14 am |

    And fuck the NYT seriously, but I’m more than a little crabby at the gleefully childfree women (most of whome are younger than me) lol’ing it up like how stupid it is for anyone to be attached to the idea of having a child.

    I don’t see anyone doing that on here.

  33. Laurie
    Laurie September 3, 2011 at 8:04 am |

    I’m a 40-year-old woman going through the IUI process (so far unsuccessful after 2 tries) due to my husband’s infertility. This is the first time I have ever tried to conceive. We didn’t try sooner due to financial, career and psychological considerations. We chose to wait until the ideal time professionally and financially, although we certainly could have supported a child 10 years ago.

    I read a lot of anti-feminist sites and I realize that I could be their poster-child for career-bitch-who-selfishly-waited-too-long-and-now-it’s-too-late-to-have-a-baby. The two anti-feminist narratives regarding infertile older women are selfish-bitch and dumb-bitch. These generally merge into selfish-dumb-bitch.

    The reality is my husband and I chose to risk having no baby than have a baby at at the wrong time. Having a child is a ginormous emotional, financial, and time commitment. We knew that having a baby while feeling ambivalence about it or still trying to prove ourselves professionally would have been the worst thing we could possibly do. So now I’m older, which means it might not happen. Them’s the breaks.

    While I understand that some couples are genuinely heartbroken about infertility, I dislike the implication that an infertile woman is necessarily sobbing into her pillow every night. My basic take is that if it doesn’t work out, we look into adoption (though the expense of adoption looks scary to me) and, if that doesn’t turn out, we turn our time and creativity and sweat equity to building something else — maybe a new business venture or writing a book or volunteering with younger people. It seems to me that if my whole reason for being were hinged on producing a biological child, I would have hopped to much sooner but there are good reasons why I didn’t.

    Being a parent seems like a wonderful, rewarding, happy-making albeit difficult endeavor. But I hate this narrative of, “OMGGGG Women’s lives are being ruined!!!!!!!”

  34. GumbyAnne
    GumbyAnne September 3, 2011 at 10:39 am |

    I would like to have a child sooner rather than later if I could afford one, and I also think that the “gleefully child-free women” can “lol it up” at whatever they like.

  35. zuzu
    zuzu September 3, 2011 at 10:54 am |

    Jadey: That’s it, Feministe – I’ve had it with zuzu flaunting her culinary access – I’m out of here FOREVER.

    Aaaannnnnd… flounce!

    Wait, Jadey! Come back! I’m now 3000 miles away from that zip code!

  36. groggette
    groggette September 3, 2011 at 12:17 pm |

    Jadey: I resent you talking about delicious food that I am in the wrong postal code to enjoy, dammit! That’s it, Feministe – I’ve had it with zuzu flaunting her culinary access – I’m out of here FOREVER.

    I had bacon ice cream (and lonestar beer cupcakes with cheddar and bacon frosting) in a dive bar in Houston, TX. I don’t know if that makes it better or worse for you though.

  37. TheRiverJordan
    TheRiverJordan September 3, 2011 at 1:45 pm |

    GumbyAnne:
    I would like to have a child sooner rather than later if I could afford one, and I also think that the “gleefully child-free women” can “lol it up” at whatever they like.

    FTW!!

  38. Interrobang
    Interrobang September 3, 2011 at 2:59 pm |

    I’m one of those gleefully childfree women, and probably older than you (at a decrepit and thankfully fertility-nose-diving 36 years ancient, thank you!), and I’d never laugh it up at someone who was attached to the idea of having a baby. I just don’t *get* it.

    I mean, babies, yuck. I understand that some people do, but it’s a very intellectual understanding, if you get my drift.

    Articles shrieking at me about how my Fertility Is Vanishing Dammit just make me laugh, but the joke’s not on women who want to get pregnant, it’s on idiots who try to fearmonger women.

  39. Jennifer
    Jennifer September 3, 2011 at 5:48 pm |

    I know a lot of young women (early 30s) who’ve needed fertility treatments. I come from a line of women who were fertile into their 40s, and I got pregnant my first month trying at 38, and I certainly know a lot of other older moms. I realize that the plural of anecdote isn’t data, but I wonder how good the data on fertility really is, and how much variability there is among women. If there’s a lot of variability, you’d need a lot of data to get good estimates, and then averages wouldn’t describe any individual very well. There always seems to be an assumption that women having trouble getting pregnant later in life would have been successful if they tried earlier, and I wonder about the extent to which that’s true. I don’t care enough to look into it.

  40. Ashley
    Ashley September 3, 2011 at 8:19 pm |

    “There always seems to be an assumption that women having trouble getting pregnant later in life would have been successful if they tried earlier, and I wonder about the extent to which that’s true.”

    As someone who’s met many many older mothers and many young infertile women, it’s my belief that it’s not so much that fertility nosedives at 35, but that a woman who hasn’t had a first pregnancy by 35 is more likely to have problems in general. I started TTC when I was 22 and it took 2 years and 3 miscarriages before I got a PCOS diagnosis and ultimately my daughter . I have several friends who have been trying since their early 20s but due to endometriosis or PCOS or other issues have seriously struggled. I’ve had friends who had an easy time getting pregnant in their early to mid 20s with #1 and then struggle for years for #2 (and in some cases get surprised by #3 shortly after). Or, alternatively, really struggle for #1 but later pregnancies happen very easily (I’m in that boat as well).

    Infertility is a really complicated issue and these grand assumptions about it just really frustrate me.

  41. MH
    MH September 4, 2011 at 4:07 pm |

    “I just don’t *get* it. I mean, babies, yuck. I understand that some people do, but it’s a very intellectual understanding, if you get my drift.”

    My feelings exactly. I have a very visceral dislike of babies, and can’t fathom why a person would want to try to make one inside herself and then squeeze it out of her body, and then still be stuck caring for it for 18+ years. It seems like a horror-movie plot to me.

    “[I]t’s my belief that it’s not so much that fertility nosedives at 35, but that a woman who hasn’t had a first pregnancy by 35 is more likely to have problems in general.”

    That makes sense. Obviously, women with fertility issues are less likely than other women to have a baby at a younger age too, and most who aren’t successful will probably simply give up trying at some point, and live with it, foster/adopt a baby, or get some nice kittehz instead. So women still trying to conceive after age 35 will disproportionately be those who both (1) are insufficiently fertile to conceive and (2) are desperate enough to make a baby that they would consider seeking IVF. So the ‘statistics’ on older-women’s fertility are really misleading, as a lot of them are simply women who have always been infertile and have an above-average drive to have a child.

  42. dustbury.com » Quote of the week
    dustbury.com » Quote of the week September 4, 2011 at 10:23 pm |

    [...] Jill Filipovic at Feministe, on what seems to be a popular, um, misconception these days: It turns out that whitening your teeth, dying your hair and using really good anti-wrinkle cream will not in fact extend your fertility. I KNOW. My biology class taught me that if you’re pretty you can have babies forever, so this really blew my mind. Super glad the Times regularly covers the “you think you’re young, ambitious, happy and responsible because you’re waiting until you’re ready to have kids, but you actually have the ovaries of a shriveled old hag so better get to procreating yesterday” beat. Without it, women who are under the impression that they can get pregnant at 86 as long as they look like they might still menstruate would probably never have the chance to be quoted in a reputable news publication. [...]

  43. Matt
    Matt September 5, 2011 at 1:05 am |

    My mom was like, 36 when I was born, and I have a twin. Maybe she just has good genes?

  44. Mztress
    Mztress September 6, 2011 at 3:28 pm |

    Well, that was one of the most ridiculous and worthless things I’ve ever read. And from a “reputable” publication; tsk, tsk.

    Having children is like having little terrorists who commandeer your internal organs, income, home, and freedom. Thus, I want no part of the motherhood situation. Of course, you’re not a REAL woman til you’ve popped out some babies (or so I’ve been told implicitly and explicitly my whole life).

    However, I make it a point to be nice to other peoples’ kids. Also, I’m willing to pay a lot of my tax dollars into making sure kids are happy, educated, healthy, well cared for, well-adjusted, and mentally stable, because they’ll be running the world and making decisions for me when I’m too old, feeble, and senile to do it myself. I certainly don’t want the people who change my Depends and write my pension checks to have a chip on their shoulder.

  45. llama
    llama September 9, 2011 at 10:03 am |

    MH: My feelings exactly. I have a very visceral dislike of babies, and can’t fathom why a person would want to try to make one inside herself and then squeeze it out of her body, and then still be stuck caring for it for 18+ years. It seems like a horror-movie plot to me.

    You want to try to be the man that supports this process.

  46. Politicalguineapig
    Politicalguineapig September 9, 2011 at 10:32 am |

    Go away troll. Men don’t have as much of a stake in pregnancy, don’t need to be as involved in child rearing, and they always have the option of walking away from their families. Women put their health and lives at risk, have to do the heavy lifting in regard to child-rearing, sacrifice their careers for their children, and are considered pariahs if they do abandon their families.

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.