Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the impulse to assume that most surrogates are poor women in desperate situations being exploited into making money. I certainly assumed that at one point. But I met two surrogates in my social circles who were college-educated, married moms who loved being pregnant and wanted to help a family. Obviously they wanted to be paid for their work, but they didn't come from the demographic background I assumed. They both said being surrogates felt completely different from being pregnant with their own children.

Research studies of U.S. surrogates also don't bear out the poor, desperate woman stereotype.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324004917

Half of surrogates half at least a bachelor's degree. Nearly all were employed. The vast majority lived in two-income households and had a household income above median. Only 10% of surrogates reported money being the primary motivation for becoming a surrogate.

I have a lot more concerns about the exploitation of parents placing infants for adoption than I do about the exploitation of surrogates.

I still hate surrogates because it takes away the ONE thing that levels us all as equals- the ability to have babies and turns it into a money making scheme. You can say that it is NEVER a level playing field for kids as clearly higher SES kids have more options given to them, but it isn’t quite the same. There is a difference between being able to MAKE a human in your body and molding/hot housing that baby during childhood. I don’t think the ability to MAKE a human should be commodified. I am totally pro-choice as far as abortions are concerned, but not with this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the impulse to assume that most surrogates are poor women in desperate situations being exploited into making money. I certainly assumed that at one point. But I met two surrogates in my social circles who were college-educated, married moms who loved being pregnant and wanted to help a family. Obviously they wanted to be paid for their work, but they didn't come from the demographic background I assumed. They both said being surrogates felt completely different from being pregnant with their own children.

Research studies of U.S. surrogates also don't bear out the poor, desperate woman stereotype.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324004917

Half of surrogates half at least a bachelor's degree. Nearly all were employed. The vast majority lived in two-income households and had a household income above median. Only 10% of surrogates reported money being the primary motivation for becoming a surrogate.

I have a lot more concerns about the exploitation of parents placing infants for adoption than I do about the exploitation of surrogates.

I still hate surrogates because it takes away the ONE thing that levels us all as equals- the ability to have babies and turns it into a money making scheme. You can say that it is NEVER a level playing field for kids as clearly higher SES kids have more options given to them, but it isn’t quite the same. There is a difference between being able to MAKE a human in your body and molding/hot housing that baby during childhood. I don’t think the ability to MAKE a human should be commodified. I am totally pro-choice as far as abortions are concerned, but not with this.

Anonymous wrote:I guess Meghan didn’t want to ruin her new plastic body (implants plus Ozempic). Congratulations! What a phony.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand the impulse to assume that most surrogates are poor women in desperate situations being exploited into making money. I certainly assumed that at one point. But I met two surrogates in my social circles who were college-educated, married moms who loved being pregnant and wanted to help a family. Obviously they wanted to be paid for their work, but they didn't come from the demographic background I assumed. They both said being surrogates felt completely different from being pregnant with their own children.

Research studies of U.S. surrogates also don't bear out the poor, desperate woman stereotype.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324004917

Half of surrogates half at least a bachelor's degree. Nearly all were employed. The vast majority lived in two-income households and had a household income above median. Only 10% of surrogates reported money being the primary motivation for becoming a surrogate.

I have a lot more concerns about the exploitation of parents placing infants for adoption than I do about the exploitation of surrogates.

I still hate surrogates because it takes away the ONE thing that levels us all as equals- the ability to have babies and turns it into a money making scheme. You can say that it is NEVER a level playing field for kids as clearly higher SES kids have more options given to them, but it isn’t quite the same. There is a difference between being able to MAKE a human in your body and molding/hot housing that baby during childhood. I don’t think the ability to MAKE a human should be commodified. I am totally pro-choice as far as abortions are concerned, but not with this.

Anonymous wrote:I understand the impulse to assume that most surrogates are poor women in desperate situations being exploited into making money. I certainly assumed that at one point. But I met two surrogates in my social circles who were college-educated, married moms who loved being pregnant and wanted to help a family. Obviously they wanted to be paid for their work, but they didn't come from the demographic background I assumed. They both said being surrogates felt completely different from being pregnant with their own children.

Research studies of U.S. surrogates also don't bear out the poor, desperate woman stereotype.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648324004917

Half of surrogates half at least a bachelor's degree. Nearly all were employed. The vast majority lived in two-income households and had a household income above median. Only 10% of surrogates reported money being the primary motivation for becoming a surrogate.

I have a lot more concerns about the exploitation of parents placing infants for adoption than I do about the exploitation of surrogates.

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to support surrogacy for a couple who already have two children.

Anonymous wrote:Why hasn't she fixed that awful nose of hers?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who the F cares? She never pretended or denied that she used a surrogate. She said it was a decision made with her doctor. People are so weird.

NP. Commercial surrogacy should be disallowed, like nearly all other civilized nations have done. We stand alone in the world in permitting this atrocity.

Agree with this. Altruistic surrogacy is one thing but rent-a-womb is entirely another.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mikey Moon? What kind of horrid name is that?

Awful!!!!