My egg donor is pregnant

[Anonymous]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=facebook%20stalking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=facebook%20stalking

Yes. And as this makes clear, the phrase is short for stalking someone on Facebook. And as I said, it is a loose application of the term stalking. It is not illegal. And if someone has a public page, they invite this to happen, and they are not a "victim" unless the "stalker" uses the information gathered in an illicit way.

[Anonymous]

Not that Urban Dictionary is Websters (it's not, so take their definition with a grain of salt):

Facebook Stalking, like regular stalking, allows the stalker to secretly gather information about the person they are interested in; the stalkee if you will. Unlike regular stalking, Facebook Stalking is less likely to have an illegal component and is generally accepted by it's voyeuristic victims. The argument being, that if you didn't want others to know about your life, you wouldn't post it all over the internet.

So the whole point of using their definition is moot to the pp who thought is was so awful.

[Anonymous]

NP here and I think it's pretty awful regardless of what you call it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not that Urban Dictionary is Websters (it's not, so take their definition with a grain of salt):

Facebook Stalking, like regular stalking, allows the stalker to secretly gather information about the person they are interested in; the stalkee if you will. Unlike regular stalking, Facebook Stalking is less likely to have an illegal component and is generally accepted by it's voyeuristic victims. The argument being, that if you didn't want others to know about your life, you wouldn't post it all over the internet.

So the whole point of using their definition is moot to the pp who thought is was so awful.

Exactly. The definition also speaks of the "stalkee" being the person, not the page. Which was my point at the beginning of this exchange.

[Anonymous]

This reads like some creepy sci-fi story come true. Creative writing class OP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This reads like some creepy sci-fi story come true. Creative writing class OP?

The only sci-fi part about this is using an egg donor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This reads like some creepy sci-fi story come true. Creative writing class OP?

The only sci-fi part about this is using an egg donor.

My point exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This reads like some creepy sci-fi story come true. Creative writing class OP?

The only sci-fi part about this is using an egg donor.

My point exactly.

Yet nobody chastises you for being product of a sperm donation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here, and no this is not a troll post. But I am sitting here laughing at all the judgemental BS some of you are spewing. I was reaching out for some helpful feedback, but my mistake was thinking some of you DCUMs would have an EQ high enough to provide that.

For those of you who who manage to respond without taking your bad day out on me, I really appreciate it. I'm not some crazy woman, just someone who happens to let her curiosity get the best of her. I know plenty of people via forums who did an open egg donation (they know their donors), so I don't consider what I'm doing some heinous crime. The fact is she's a lovely young lady who is smart, gorgeous, and by her FB posts - very sweet. If anything, I'm extremely proud of her.

I was off the Infertility board for a while and am now back. My first impression on being back was that it was a lot nicer than it used to be, but the past few days I've seen a lot of judgmental crap - people telling one woman not to have a baby until her divorce is final (really? You want a 40 year old woman to put her life on hold while she gets a court date and gets jacked around by her soon to be ex???) and now to include the posters on this thread.

OP I'd do the same thing if I were you. Let's go see a shrink together. LOL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here, and no this is not a troll post. But I am sitting here laughing at all the judgemental BS some of you are spewing. I was reaching out for some helpful feedback, but my mistake was thinking some of you DCUMs would have an EQ high enough to provide that.

For those of you who who manage to respond without taking your bad day out on me, I really appreciate it. I'm not some crazy woman, just someone who happens to let her curiosity get the best of her. I know plenty of people via forums who did an open egg donation (they know their donors), so I don't consider what I'm doing some heinous crime. The fact is she's a lovely young lady who is smart, gorgeous, and by her FB posts - very sweet. If anything, I'm extremely proud of her.

If you feel like you can't stop looking (your curiosity was sated, great) please get help from a professional to talk through your obsessions.

Oh, you judgmental bitches. Obsessions, really? You guys are right, she didn't do an open donation, so this is not what she should be doing, but the fact is, the anonymity was meant to protect HER as much as the donor. Just because she now finds it hard to look away does not mean that she has anything pathological going on. She'll get over it, probably without professional help.

Thank you, pp. For the record, I'm going to make a clean break. But seriously people, get a grip. Being anonymous online doesn't mean you use it as some outlet for your neuroses - lash out much? If this is how some of you act to every question put to you, then you definitely have bigger problems than I do. Jeez.

OP, we'll see them on the parenting board in a few years being the same judgmental bitches. Ha ha. Or maybe we won't.....parenthood isn't for everyone.

[Anonymous]

I don't think its pathological at all! Just natural human curiosity. I know I would be curious about the biological mother of my child if I had used an egg donor.

[Anonymous]

I agree that it is understandable that the OP is curious about the donor. Even though the donor's FB page is not fully privacy-protected, I doubt she would welcome a peeker who was just interested because she was her donor, just as I doubt anyone would be pleased that their ex is peeking.

Anonymity in these circumstances is to protect everyone - donor, OP, OP's child, donor's child. Would it be OK if the positions were reversed? If the donor had accidentally found out OP's name and was now following her on FB to see how OP's child was doing? Understandable curiosity, yes. But how would OP like it? The OP agreed to anonymity and now she is betraying her promise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it is understandable that the OP is curious about the donor. Even though the donor's FB page is not fully privacy-protected, I doubt she would welcome a peeker who was just interested because she was her donor, just as I doubt anyone would be pleased that their ex is peeking.

Anonymity in these circumstances is to protect everyone - donor, OP, OP's child, donor's child. Would it be OK if the positions were reversed? If the donor had accidentally found out OP's name and was now following her on FB to see how OP's child was doing? Understandable curiosity, yes. But how would OP like it? The OP agreed to anonymity and now she is betraying her promise.

This is a really good way to think about it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it is understandable that the OP is curious about the donor. Even though the donor's FB page is not fully privacy-protected, I doubt she would welcome a peeker who was just interested because she was her donor, just as I doubt anyone would be pleased that their ex is peeking.

Anonymity in these circumstances is to protect everyone - donor, OP, OP's child, donor's child. Would it be OK if the positions were reversed? If the donor had accidentally found out OP's name and was now following her on FB to see how OP's child was doing? Understandable curiosity, yes. But how would OP like it? The OP agreed to anonymity and now she is betraying her promise.

OP never promised she would be able to look away if the name was revealed to her. That was not part of the deal, and looking away when you know would be *really* hard for most people. I think the breach of anonymity is very unfortunate for OP, while the donor isn't really affected by this as long as OP is only looking at her *public* Facebook page. That is page is not "not fully privacy protected". If OP, as a complete stranger, can look at it, it is public. That means that unless the donor is really dumb, she doesn't care who the fuck looks at it.

I think OP should now look away, for her own sake, but she isn't betraying anybody. She was betrayed by having had to find out the donor's name. She did not sign up for this situation.