17 Jun 2009

'Womankind defies nature', says Daily Male

Praise be! The Daily Male has once again shared with us their little perils of wisdom! This time they're warning all us broody females not to have children too late, because we might not be able to have children.

My cat Emmeline Pankhurst sent me an email with a link to this awful article:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1193296/Have-baby-35-Meet-deadline-risk-missing-motherhood-say-doctors.html

It preaches that women should definitely have babies between the ages of 20 and 35 or risk having a successful career. Thanks to the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists for drawing our attention to the 'optimum age' for childbearing and the 'epidemic of pregnancy' taking place among 40-somethings. Even if this is scientific stuff (which I doubt it is, see below) there is no need to phrase it so crassly.

I personally can't stand children, but maintain it should be a woman' s right to chose when, where and how she should open herself up to the world, almost bleed to death and give birth. On the other hand birth can also be a beautiful experience- I remember when my old college friend Natalie gave birth to triplets in a water tank. She had eight epidurals and said it was better than the summer solstice.


But do you know what this really reminded me of lady readers? Nazi Germany? 1935? Persecution? The Fascists started making up medical facts to prevent Jews reproducing, whilst constructing despicable laws to prevent Aryan and Jewish weddings. Well I say to you, same sex marriage- no one's too happy about that are they? And what do we really know about the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists anyway..?


Mine Fuhrer is that a copy of The Daily Male or are you just pleased to see me?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Post a Comment