Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Congratulations! You're pre-pregnant!

This may very well be old news to many of you, as I've personally seen it on my friends page SEVEN times today (and counting), but apparently, according to new Federal guidelines, doctors are now supposed to treat all females, from their first period to the onset of menopause, as though they are "pre-pregnant."

Coffee? Bad. Alcohol? Bad. Cigarettes? Bad. Cleaning out the cat box? Bad. Gotta take your folic acid and watch that weight.

Now, let's not forget that I got my first period at the tender age of ten. And that, according to all the "abstinence-only" bullshit programs that pass themselves off as sex ed these days, I'm not supposed to have sex outside of marriage.

So if I was "pre-pregnant" at ten, was I supposed to get married then as well?

I would write something much more persuasive and coherent if my head weren't too busy exploding. Y'all should go to misia's entry -- she includes a helpful list of people to write to and complain.


( 19 comments — Leave a comment )
May. 17th, 2006 12:14 am (UTC)
gee, and here I was thinking that my self-worth and concept of womanness wasn't totally reliant upon me popping out a crotch spawn. how silly of me.
May. 17th, 2006 12:28 am (UTC)
My favorite quote has to be "Experts acknowledge that women with no plans to get pregnant in the near future may resist preconception care."

Gee, ya think?
May. 17th, 2006 12:37 am (UTC)
Yeah.. I love how they use the term "preconception" care.. geesh.. talking about framing..


Here are some other ideas..

The average woman presents about 400 living eggs for fertilization in her lifetime. Unless it is fertilized, a living egg is lost during each menstrual period throughout a woman's life. Each female is born with the capability of creating 400 precious lives, but each of the unfertilized eggs are, in turn, unceremoniously ejected from the female body.


AND this Poem my stepfather wrote on behalf of the unconcieved...

Let's add to irrationality
To nonsense unbelieved,
And urge, against free human choice,
The rights of the unconceived.

May. 17th, 2006 12:15 am (UTC)
I guess I'll go ahead and schedule that abortion now then--just in case.
May. 17th, 2006 12:16 am (UTC)
Well, you are pre-pregnant, after all.
May. 17th, 2006 12:20 am (UTC)
Isn't that kind of sexist?
What I mean is, doesn't that in effect, treat women from the onset of puberty until menaoause as nothing more than "brood mares"?
May. 17th, 2006 12:21 am (UTC)
Re: Isn't that kind of sexist?
erm menopause. IK can neither type nor spell tonite
May. 17th, 2006 12:56 am (UTC)
Re: Isn't that kind of sexist?
I think this was a great reply as far as that goes.

And "kind of sexist" doesn't even begin to decribe it!
May. 17th, 2006 01:21 am (UTC)
Re: Isn't that kind of sexist?
I should have never conceived then:

I smoked 1+ packs a day back then
I smoked pot
I love hot baths and showers
I used to wear tight undies
Sexual restraint? What's that???

I was never a heavy drinker, and I wasn;t into excercise, but everything else stacked the odds against me.

May. 17th, 2006 01:22 am (UTC)
Re: Isn't that kind of sexist?
not that this is an issue with me anymore
May. 17th, 2006 01:27 am (UTC)
Re: Isn't that kind of sexist?
Melody and I were discussing this, and imho: if this had been released under another administration - a pro-choice administration - this would have been received differently.

Truth be told, we all need to take better care of ourselves - reproductive health should be secondary
May. 17th, 2006 12:28 am (UTC)
THis is absolutely DISGUSTING! I read what one woman wrote.. that this changes the model from one where women should do it for themselves.. but rather only because they MIGHT get pregnant... and it is for the BABY that might be pushed out of their body some day!


I just turned 38 and I had the typical contemplation about the fact that I may never have a child and how do I feel about that?... I have no partner.. so it obviously isn't an optino and my financial situation isn't where I could raise a child alone...

Fuck .. I may never have a partner either..

I swear.. I am SOOO glad I live in a society where I am totally marginalized as a woman.. that I am only here to breed...

I smell the Religious Right all over this one! UGh!

I swear...

WHile I don't advocate it.. my mum drank and smoked while she was pregnant with me in the late 1960's..... they didn't know.. and I didn't turn out too bad.. a little depression. and ADD but no major birth defects or abnormalities....

However, I got crap from the Feminists when I said that I thought that women who were drug addicts and already had children and could get pregnant again should have norplant.. BOY they didn't like that one.. but that to me is about really protecting potential children. I work in a Mental HEalth agency and I see every day the effects of what drugs and abuse have on children.. it is sad.. but I am getting into dangerous territory here..

But I am not going to stop drinking just because there may be SOME REMOTE possiblity I may get pregnant.. by immaculate conception mind you! Give me a damn break!

UGH!@.. Yeah.. the human race has managed to survive millenia without these guidelines.. I think we will continue to..

If this forces the INsurance industry to cover more.. then I guess It is a good thing but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Single Payer is the direction we need to take!
May. 17th, 2006 12:49 am (UTC)
My birth mother smoked when pregnant with me as well. It was the last 60s/early 70s -- there wasn't the widespread knowledge about the dangers of smoking that exists today.

Now, pretty much everyone knows that I'm trying to quit smoking. And most people know that my main motivator is now and has always been my desire to get pregnant. But these new guidelines feel dangerously close to legislation ... it's a very small step from "you should act as though you're pre-pregnant" to "if you don't act as though you're pre-pregnant, then you're going to jail."

Do I think smoking was a stupid idea and a horrible habit? Hell yea. Do I think it was anyone's business but my own? Fuck no.
May. 17th, 2006 12:56 am (UTC)
I think that they should extend this then to the Corporations that pollute our environment then too!

DOW MONSANTO etc... They pollute the environment.. You would think all these pro-lifers would worry more about environmental pollution and it's potential effects ont eh preconcieved...
May. 17th, 2006 12:38 am (UTC)
Or how bout this one!!

Sunday, May 9, 2004
Don't just protect the unconceived: protect the inanimate!

Fafnir of Fafblog has written a good think-piece explaining the logical next step in the Bush administration's campaign to protect the rights of the unconceived: protecting the rights of the inanimate.
May. 17th, 2006 01:50 am (UTC)
I cannot believe they did this, it's so obviously bizarre and absurd -- it reframes pregnancy as an inevitability, not a choice. That's just so fucked up I don't even know where to begin.
May. 17th, 2006 02:28 am (UTC)
I was once told that all men, if they live to a certain age, will definitely develop some form of prostate cancer. So shouldn't we treat all men as pre-cancerous then?
(Deleted comment)
May. 17th, 2006 02:30 am (UTC)
Yes. Interesting that the article links the rate of infant mortality in the U.S. to women not taking "proper" care of themselves (as opposed to, say, women being uninsured and not having access to prenatal care when they're actually pregnant).
May. 17th, 2006 04:09 am (UTC)
okay, so I actually do want to have (a) kid(s) some day, but I definitely do not consider myself pre-pregnant. I have a fucking IUD. it is the single most effective form of birth control available. it is more effective than sterilization. PLUS I'm not having sex. so WTF?

let me bleed, bitches!
( 19 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

March 2015


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by yoksel