Anonymous wrote:Brunch granny needs to go to Disney to really get her panties in a twist. Lots of arrested development going on there. Childless 20-35 years olds prancing around in Disney costumes or Disney bounding. Most of the day is spent taking pictures for Instagram.

Anonymous wrote:Brunch granny needs to go to Disney to really get her panties in a twist. Lots of arrested development going on there. Childless 20-35 years olds prancing around in Disney costumes or Disney bounding. Most of the day is spent taking pictures for Instagram.

Anonymous wrote:I had one child at 35 and then took my remaining eggs and slathered them in hollandaise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Basically every mother I know who gave birth after age 36 had complications; either with the pregnancy, delivery and/or the child is on the spectrum or has food allergies that could kill them. You folks live in delusional la la land if you think every woman can be on birth control for decades and booze through their 20s and early 30s, maybe even an abortion along the way, and then pop out healthy babies. Trust the science.

“Trust the science, which I am declining to provide, because it doesn’t exist.”

Unless, of course, “science” = “basically every mother this loonie poster knows”.

Oh my God, is this the same poster who went off on Cecily Strong for being a useless spinster who had an abortion? I bet it is. Excuse me, I’m getting stupid chills.

Probably also the same person who tears apart older female celebrities in Entertainment for either not having kids or having them after 30. Like the poster who was practically cackling with glee that Priyanka Chopra’s infant was born prematurely because apparently she should have had her child at age 23.

Anonymous wrote:It's shocking how many allegedly grown and college-educated parents don't comprehend what a mortality table is. Do you think you and your husband have a 100% chance of living to the age 78 average life expectancy? Or even 58 or 68? Do you think you both have a 100% of being of sound mind and body at 78? Or even 58 or 68?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ha! Now brunch granny is wishing an early death upon the mimosa slurping sluts!
This thread doesn’t disappoint!

If you have ivf babies at 40, you're going to be at least 62 when they graduate from college, and around 70 before your husband can walk them down the aisle, and at least 71 before they have their first child (your grandchild). Nobody is wishing death on anyone, just fascinating to see the anti-science delusions being trafficked in these threads. In addition to having low-energy and being the "old" parents, I hope all of the bellinis were worth the very high likelihood you or your husband pass away or are in a diminished state for all of those milestones. Nobody I know who waited to have children admits they are glad they waited; it's unanimous that they wish they had them earlier, and wish they had the fertility for another one or two, which is why I suspect these threads are full of spinsters in denial.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Basically every mother I know who gave birth after age 36 had complications; either with the pregnancy, delivery and/or the child is on the spectrum or has food allergies that could kill them. You folks live in delusional la la land if you think every woman can be on birth control for decades and booze through their 20s and early 30s, maybe even an abortion along the way, and then pop out healthy babies. Trust the science.

“Trust the science, which I am declining to provide, because it doesn’t exist.”

Unless, of course, “science” = “basically every mother this loonie poster knows”.

Oh my God, is this the same poster who went off on Cecily Strong for being a useless spinster who had an abortion? I bet it is. Excuse me, I’m getting stupid chills.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the ticking biological clock thing is so overstated. I got accidentally pregnant from one time unprotected sex at 38. And I know sooooooo many other women that have similar stories from their late 30s and 40s. I only know two women who had fertiility issues—one had issues starting at age 25 because it turned out an ovulation problem she never knew about. The other didn’t start trying until late 30s—so very well may have had the same issues if she had started earlier.

Also, I’ve done a lot of geneological research reviewing census records from the 19th and early 20th century. A certain percentage of women were just infertile or had low birth rates regardless of the early marriages and lack of birth control. For women that were gererallt fertile, if they didn’t die or have catastrophic gyn problems from chldbirth, they were generally having kids into their 40s. Elizabeth cady Stanton had her last at 44 (feminism not having dried up her ovaries).

Basically every mother I know who gave birth after age 36 had complications; either with the pregnancy, delivery and/or the child is on the spectrum or has food allergies that could kill them. You folks live in delusional la la land if you think every woman can be on birth control for decades and booze through their 20s and early 30s, maybe even an abortion along the way, and then pop out healthy babies. Trust the science.

Anonymous wrote:Brunch granny has definitely struck a nerve. The only other (non-Politics) threads that display such rampant defensiveness involve the exhausting SAHM v. WOHM debate.

Anonymous wrote:It's shocking how many allegedly grown and college-educated parents don't comprehend what a mortality table is. Do you think you and your husband have a 100% chance of living to the age 78 average life expectancy? Or even 58 or 68? Do you think you both have a 100% of being of sound mind and body at 78? Or even 58 or 68?