Things you secretly oppose, but don't want other people to know:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with all the hate for IVF? Because I can't get pregnant naturally I should just accept that? By that line of reasoning I should decline treatment for a cancer dx.

I personally don't understand the desire to have a child that's biologically yours. I have seen too many marriages break up over the wife's overwhelming desire to have a biological child. It's not the end all be all and there are other ways to create a family.

Men just follow along because they are trying to do what's going to make their wives happy.

Do you have a biological child? I'm guessing no and that's for the best, I'm sure. The desire to have a child that is "biologically" yours is just that - BIOLOGY. It is perfectly normal and all of the snarky, rotten to black on the inside hateful people like you can rail against BIOLOGY all you want, but it won't change it. You are not fucking God and you're not going to change human nature, so get over it already.

[Anonymous]

Cyclists who ride in the street. Most want/expect the same rights and privileges as cars, but don't want to follow the same rules: they pass on the right, blow through stop signs and red lights and don't yield to pedestrians in crosswalks. Perfect example: It annoys me to no end that I have yet to EVER see a cyclist stop at the stop sign on the crescent trail at Little Falls Parkway. There is a clear sign that cars must yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk. Bicyclists, however, do NOT have the right of way in the crosswalk. THEY have a stop sign and should yield to the car traffic on Little Falls Parkway. AAARRRGGHHH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I oppose Gay Marriage.

I LOVE that marriage equality has become so accepted that you don't want others to know how you truly feel!

Me too, as a lesbian I love to hear that I'm finally going to maybe possibly be treated as a human.

Oh, stop with the pity party. It's annoying.

I don't care what it is? Are you gay? Do you know what it's like walking around knowing half the people want you dead or to just disappear?

I oppose gay marriage also, but I have never, once, treated a gay person any differently than someone who was straight. Not everyone who opposes gay marriage is an ahole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

ART involving egg-donation or sperm donation
single motherhood by choice by ART
same-sex parenthood by ART

Just curious: are you against all ART or just these aspects? Are you cool with single motherhood or same-sex parenthood if they don't involve ART?

yes, that is why I phrased it that way

You DO realize that save-sex parenthood cannot happen without ART, right? So, you are basically against any same-sex parenhood.

adoption

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I oppose Gay Marriage.

I LOVE that marriage equality has become so accepted that you don't want others to know how you truly feel!

Me too, as a lesbian I love to hear that I'm finally going to maybe possibly be treated as a human.

Oh, stop with the pity party. It's annoying.

I don't care what it is? Are you gay? Do you know what it's like walking around knowing half the people want you dead or to just disappear?

I oppose gay marriage also, but I have never, once, treated a gay person any differently than someone who was straight. Not everyone who opposes gay marriage is an ahole.

Actually yes you are an asshole. If you oppose gay marriage you are an ASSHOLE. You can pat yourself on the back all you want for not treating gay people differently, but the fact remains you view them as people who are not worthy IN THE EYES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA as equal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cyclists who ride in the street. Most want/expect the same rights and privileges as cars, but don't want to follow the same rules: they pass on the right, blow through stop signs and red lights and don't yield to pedestrians in crosswalks. Perfect example: It annoys me to no end that I have yet to EVER see a cyclist stop at the stop sign on the crescent trail at Little Falls Parkway. There is a clear sign that cars must yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk. Bicyclists, however, do NOT have the right of way in the crosswalk. THEY have a stop sign and should yield to the car traffic on Little Falls Parkway. AAARRRGGHHH.

Cyclists aren't allowed to ride on sidewalks. But totally agree regarding not obeying the same traffic rules as cars - stopping at lights and yielding in crosswalks. Lots of cyclists have lost their lives due to their own carelessness at intersections. Very sad!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm anti IVF because I think it's wasteful to spend tens of thousands of dollars on getting pregnant when there are already children here who need homes. But if you have the money, it's your body, your family, your life. Do what you want.

Most of the time, the parents DON'T have the money which is why health insurance premiums are through the roof. Either foot the bill yourself or find another avenue to have a child. The whole system is a racket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cyclists who ride in the street. Most want/expect the same rights and privileges as cars, but don't want to follow the same rules: they pass on the right, blow through stop signs and red lights and don't yield to pedestrians in crosswalks. Perfect example: It annoys me to no end that I have yet to EVER see a cyclist stop at the stop sign on the crescent trail at Little Falls Parkway. There is a clear sign that cars must yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk. Bicyclists, however, do NOT have the right of way in the crosswalk. THEY have a stop sign and should yield to the car traffic on Little Falls Parkway. AAARRRGGHHH.

Yep. +1. And then they ride on the sidewalk and want to be treated as a pedestrian. Arg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people commenting on the thread to criticize? Either add your own or shut up. I'm black, an immigrant AND I believe in interracial marriage. However, the OP is not going to be persuaded otherwise in this thread so anyone posting to do so is just being a sanctimonious twat.

On my end, I disagree with
adoption
international adoption
people who say they can't cook

I also really dislike SN parents and adoptive parents! I feel like adoption/SN turns them into the kind of morons add pink inspirational email signatures and they are entitled and self absorbed.

OH this is awesome. Too good to be true. I am an internationally adoptive mom of a SN child! AND going back for #2, who will also have SNs! We must drive you crazy!

Not as long as you can pay for all their problems and don't force taxpayers to fund your stupid choices.

Nope. Of course our child is on our medical insurance and we do not need to accept public financial support for anything. Why ever would you assume otherwise? You cannot even adopt if you cannot prove that you can financially support an addition to your family. Do you not know that, in order to adopt, potential adoptive parents' financial lives (not to mention every other detail of their lives) have already been scrutinized six ways to Sunday in order to ensure that they would be fit parents?

(We are not even using the public school system, for heaven's sakes. So with one less child in there, our taxes are paying for your or other children. You are welcome!)

[Anonymous]

I oppose runners who run in the streets in the dark wearing all dark gear, save the tiny reflective stripe on their shoes. WHY don't they wear at least a white shirt/jacket so cars can see them???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the PP you quoted. I haven't previously been bashing IVF and I don't have any weird ideas that women who can't get pregnant shouldn't because of evolution. I agree with you that adoption comes with its own issues and that it is not for everyone. What about people who buy a donor egg, donor sperm, and hire a surrogate? At that point, wouldn't it be better to just adopt a kid?

I haven't been contributing to this conversation, but re: what you said about donor egg/sperm/uterus, yes, at that point, I think ART is going too far. At that point, it becomes manufacturing a specific child - why did you choose THOSE eggs and sperm? To get a baby that looked a particular way? (Obvious rhetorical question)

You chose your spouse because, presumably, he or she looked a certan way and had certain characteristics.

But more importantly, it's obvsious you're totally ignorant about how IVF / ART works (not surprising, since most of the anti IVF people seem ignorant on many levels). Most people choose sperm and/or eggs that most closely resemble THEM so that they won't have to face the contant judgment from people like you when their child looks totally different than either their mom and/or dad.

I'm actually not totally ignorant of how it works, and am perfectly aware that people choose characteristics that look like them/that they find desirable. I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with that. I also think it's totally fine if you need a little bit of help from science at some point during the process, in the same way I think it's totally fine if you need a little help from science to give birth to a baby or feed a baby or whatever else. The part where I become judgy is when you need a lot of help from science with the whole process. If you're not using your or your partner's eggs, your or your partner's sperm or your or your partner's body to grow the child in question, why not just adopt? I'm happy for anyone who gets to raise a child they want, but I would imagine the "but sometimes ART is much cheaper than adoption" argument falls a bit flat when you're talking about donor eggs/sperm/uterus.

I'm genuinely curious why you think that it's a good idea to use donor sperm AND eggs AND a surrogate.

How many people do donor eggs and donor sperm and use a surrogate? I don't know of a single example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm anti IVF because I think it's wasteful to spend tens of thousands of dollars on getting pregnant when there are already children here who need homes. But if you have the money, it's your body, your family, your life. Do what you want.

Alright, I have to stick up for the IVF crowd (and I didn't even do IVF, so I have no dog in this fight). For many fortunate people, their insurance pays for IVF or other fertility treatments, therefore they have very few costs to bear. Of course, there are some people who must pay out of pocket, and yes, that can cost a lot. Both domestic and international adoption is changing...the standard for a domestic one is open adoption (in whatever degree of openess) and the expectant mom picks the adoptive parents. Of course, because the baby isn't born and relinquished yet, making her an expectant mom and not a birth mom at that point, she has the right to change her mind and decide to parent. So btwn having an expectant mom pick you AND then have her actually decide to place...well, that can take a long time. People can wait years. With international adoption, many countries are closed or timelines, like Korea and China, are pretty slow. Again, it could take years. With either kind of adoption, it could take years or it could be quick. It's not as straightforward and reliable as it used to be.

We adopted internationally and it was the right choice for us- no doubt about it. However, I can completely understand why some people choose to pursue fertility treatments that could take less time and money than adoption. I also understand that some people want a bio connection to their kids- I bet the great majority of people do even fertile people. Otherwise, you as a fertile person would've adopted and not had bio children, no?? Also, depending on mental health or physical health (or income), some people don't qualify for an international adoption.

I do wish that more people would consider adoption, but all you can ask is that they genuinely consider it, and if they decide for whatever reason it's not right for them, then that's good they considered and decided against it. Personally, we did not pursue IVF for many reasons, but as long as people who do don't make derogatory remarks about adoption and adoptees, then I have no beef with IVF.

Signed, an adoptee and adoptive parent

I'm the PP you quoted. I haven't previously been bashing IVF and I don't have any weird ideas that women who can't get pregnant shouldn't because of evolution. I agree with you that adoption comes with its own issues and that it is not for everyone. What about people who buy a donor egg, donor sperm, and hire a surrogate? At that point, wouldn't it be better to just adopt a kid?

DH and I paid over $35K and two years trying to adopt an older special needs child and had NO luck - the country we were working with closed foreign adoptions shortly after our application was approved. You don't get a refund - all that money was lost not to mention the terrible sorrow of "losing" a child that we had grown deeply connected to. We then went the domestic adoption route, only to have the heartbreak of the birth mother deciding after the baby was born that she wanted to keep her child (a decision we understood, but deeply disappointing for us, nonetheless). We eventually went the IVF route because it was FREE (my insurance covered the procedure and the meds) and less than four months after starting the process I was pregnant with my daughter.

When I hear people bashing IVF and/or holding up adoption as a piece of cake I instantly recognize them as being ignorant as to what adoption really entails and/or really sheltered from the heatbreak that many of us face as part of the adoption process. I can't imagine why anyone would resent or judge another person for trying to build their family in whatever way they can and choose to follow. It's nothing short of twisted.

It's interesting that you were deeply disappointed that the birth mother chose to keep her child rather than give it to you. I find your take on this to be selfish. You aren't guaranteed someone else's baby until the papers are signed, so it's best to not raise your hopes too high in the event they decide to parent their child. And when they choose to do this, be happy for the child.

And IVF wasn't free. Other members of your health care plan helped foot the bill for your pregnancy. Rather than pay to increase our population, I'd rather have *my* portion of the money go towards finding homes for the many children in foster care. But, of course, you didn't want a child *that* bad, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I oppose runners who run in the streets in the dark wearing all dark gear, save the tiny reflective stripe on their shoes. WHY don't they wear at least a white shirt/jacket so cars can see them???

I believe this is referred to as Natural Selection

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm anti IVF because I think it's wasteful to spend tens of thousands of dollars on getting pregnant when there are already children here who need homes. But if you have the money, it's your body, your family, your life. Do what you want.

Alright, I have to stick up for the IVF crowd (and I didn't even do IVF, so I have no dog in this fight). For many fortunate people, their insurance pays for IVF or other fertility treatments, therefore they have very few costs to bear. Of course, there are some people who must pay out of pocket, and yes, that can cost a lot. Both domestic and international adoption is changing...the standard for a domestic one is open adoption (in whatever degree of openess) and the expectant mom picks the adoptive parents. Of course, because the baby isn't born and relinquished yet, making her an expectant mom and not a birth mom at that point, she has the right to change her mind and decide to parent. So btwn having an expectant mom pick you AND then have her actually decide to place...well, that can take a long time. People can wait years. With international adoption, many countries are closed or timelines, like Korea and China, are pretty slow. Again, it could take years. With either kind of adoption, it could take years or it could be quick. It's not as straightforward and reliable as it used to be.

We adopted internationally and it was the right choice for us- no doubt about it. However, I can completely understand why some people choose to pursue fertility treatments that could take less time and money than adoption. I also understand that some people want a bio connection to their kids- I bet the great majority of people do even fertile people. Otherwise, you as a fertile person would've adopted and not had bio children, no?? Also, depending on mental health or physical health (or income), some people don't qualify for an international adoption.

I do wish that more people would consider adoption, but all you can ask is that they genuinely consider it, and if they decide for whatever reason it's not right for them, then that's good they considered and decided against it. Personally, we did not pursue IVF for many reasons, but as long as people who do don't make derogatory remarks about adoption and adoptees, then I have no beef with IVF.

Signed, an adoptee and adoptive parent

I'm the PP you quoted. I haven't previously been bashing IVF and I don't have any weird ideas that women who can't get pregnant shouldn't because of evolution. I agree with you that adoption comes with its own issues and that it is not for everyone. What about people who buy a donor egg, donor sperm, and hire a surrogate? At that point, wouldn't it be better to just adopt a kid?

DH and I paid over $35K and two years trying to adopt an older special needs child and had NO luck - the country we were working with closed foreign adoptions shortly after our application was approved. You don't get a refund - all that money was lost not to mention the terrible sorrow of "losing" a child that we had grown deeply connected to. We then went the domestic adoption route, only to have the heartbreak of the birth mother deciding after the baby was born that she wanted to keep her child (a decision we understood, but deeply disappointing for us, nonetheless). We eventually went the IVF route because it was FREE (my insurance covered the procedure and the meds) and less than four months after starting the process I was pregnant with my daughter.

When I hear people bashing IVF and/or holding up adoption as a piece of cake I instantly recognize them as being ignorant as to what adoption really entails and/or really sheltered from the heatbreak that many of us face as part of the adoption process. I can't imagine why anyone would resent or judge another person for trying to build their family in whatever way they can and choose to follow. It's nothing short of twisted.

It's interesting that you were deeply disappointed that the birth mother chose to keep her child rather than give it to you. I find your take on this to be selfish. You aren't guaranteed someone else's baby until the papers are signed, so it's best to not raise your hopes too high in the event they decide to parent their child. And when they choose to do this, be happy for the child.

And IVF wasn't free. Other members of your health care plan helped foot the bill for your pregnancy. Rather than pay to increase our population, I'd rather have *my* portion of the money go towards finding homes for the many children in foster care. But, of course, you didn't want a child *that* bad, right?



You are an idiot. Nothing in what PP said suggest that she thought she was "guaranteed a child". It is completely understandable that she would be disappointed given that she was told the child would be hers. People get disappointed for much less and no-one judges.

As for IVF being free, of course it was not free, but PP pays for her insurance and therefore covers all kinds of stuff that troubles others. So over her lifetime, she will likely pay for it (and all the other things she uses).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the PP you quoted. I haven't previously been bashing IVF and I don't have any weird ideas that women who can't get pregnant shouldn't because of evolution. I agree with you that adoption comes with its own issues and that it is not for everyone. What about people who buy a donor egg, donor sperm, and hire a surrogate? At that point, wouldn't it be better to just adopt a kid?

I haven't been contributing to this conversation, but re: what you said about donor egg/sperm/uterus, yes, at that point, I think ART is going too far. At that point, it becomes manufacturing a specific child - why did you choose THOSE eggs and sperm? To get a baby that looked a particular way? (Obvious rhetorical question)

You chose your spouse because, presumably, he or she looked a certan way and had certain characteristics.

But more importantly, it's obvsious you're totally ignorant about how IVF / ART works (not surprising, since most of the anti IVF people seem ignorant on many levels). Most people choose sperm and/or eggs that most closely resemble THEM so that they won't have to face the contant judgment from people like you when their child looks totally different than either their mom and/or dad.

I'm actually not totally ignorant of how it works, and am perfectly aware that people choose characteristics that look like them/that they find desirable. I'm not suggesting that there's anything wrong with that. I also think it's totally fine if you need a little bit of help from science at some point during the process, in the same way I think it's totally fine if you need a little help from science to give birth to a baby or feed a baby or whatever else. The part where I become judgy is when you need a lot of help from science with the whole process. If you're not using your or your partner's eggs, your or your partner's sperm or your or your partner's body to grow the child in question, why not just adopt? I'm happy for anyone who gets to raise a child they want, but I would imagine the "but sometimes ART is much cheaper than adoption" argument falls a bit flat when you're talking about donor eggs/sperm/uterus.

I'm genuinely curious why you think that it's a good idea to use donor sperm AND eggs AND a surrogate.

How many people do donor eggs and donor sperm and use a surrogate? I don't know of a single example.

We used donor egg because I had a very poor response to meds (I was only 31 at the time) and literally didn't get a single egg through retrieval. We used donor sperm (and knew we would have to) because DH has very poor sperm count / quality due to an accident. We did not use a surrogate. We paid for the entire process ourselves and it came to $32k as part of a shared donor egg program. We looked at adoption but it was more expensive and we were told there was a minimum wait time of two years. I met many couples going through this process and not one of them was using a surrogate. The only person I know who used a surrogate (a co worker) had a hysterectomy as a result of severe fibroids. When people talk about IVF and ART so viciously and attack couples for using these methods it makes me think they are painfully ignorant of what real people encounter through these processes and how difficult it is. And adoption isn't the easy solution that many on this forum make it out to be, either. When you are in my shoes, then you can judge.