Letters to the Editor
Laurel962
Published Letters: 486 Editor's Choice: 37
-
Just for the record...
[Read the article: No more periods, period.]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The idea that women in the past rarely menstruated (because they were pregnant all the time) has largely been refuted, so I wish it would stop being repeated as fact.
While married women, or women actively having sex, would have gotten pregnant much more frequently than modern people would, not every woman was married or sexually active. There were spinsters, and nuns, and widows, and women in loveless arranged marriages who were largely ignored by their husbands. For every girl married at (or before) puberty, there were probably some who married much later -- or not at all.
Since there was no medical birth control, the only kind was of the sort that the Christian Right Wing would LOVE to see return -- abstinence. Some couples undoubtedly practiced this, when the prospec of having 10-15 mouths to feed became daunting, or if the wife's health was compromised.
Another disproved theory was that a woman who was pregnant most of her life would not have the lifetime exposure to estrogen that a menstruating woman did -- duh, wrong again. Pregnancy floods the body with more estrogen than any menstrual cycle.
So women SHOULD be healthier now with fewer pregnancies -- and guess what, duh again -- yes we are. The average woman used to have a life expectancy (in say, the Medieval times) of around 47. Now we live to around 82! That's real progress, periods or not.
*****
BTW: the poster just before me, ranting about the stink of dead squirrels, and how men talk privately amongst themselves about the revolting stench of menstruation, represent exactly the kind of female hatred and menstruation hatred that I addressed in my earlier post! With these kind of disgusting messages aimed at women, why would be be surprised anyone would want to stop menstruating? Just to avoid the insults and the accusations of being "dirty" and "smelly". This is despicable, untrue and the worst kind of woman-bashing imaginable.
-
Cary: wrong as per usual
[Read the article: Do I have to be a mommy to "opt out"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't know where Cary finds all these letters from dysfunctional, affluent, spoiled young white people who don't seem to have a lick of common sense -- but appear to have all the time in the world to brood and examine their navel lint...oh and who all have traveled the globe (presumably on their rich parent's dime).
The LW is practically screaming at the top of her lungs that her biological clock is ticking, as well it should be at 35. At the same time, she is making every excuse known to womankind ("I have hormonal issues" -- what the hell does that mean? -- "I don't have a boyfriend, I'm not ready, whatever") about why she doesn't want to settle down and make a real family.
I have often commented that the real issue behind many of Cary's letter writers (and a lot of US society, especially at the upper income ranges) is AMBIVALENCE. To choose anything in life means letting something else go -- for spoiled yuppie brats, this is unendurable. Give up traveling, at the drop of a hat, to five continents? Settle for any ONE partner, when the supply of interesting potential partners is almost unlimited? Pick a career, when there are so many tantalizing options? So for some people -- people with money, that is -- the unlimited options are paralyzing, like a Baskin Robbins ice cream store with not 31, but thirty one MILLION flavors.
I am all for extended families, and for loving, involved "Aunties" -- heck, I am one. But you can't live your life as a "shadow" to someone else's life. This is recipe, long term, for pain and disappointment.
The LW's neices and nephews are very young, and at a very cute stage -- like puppies. They will not always be this cute or small....someday, they will be bratty, obnoxious teenagers and they may not want to spend time with an older relative at all. The LW's sisters may move away, or divorce, or remarry. Their husbands (unquoted here) may not be thrilled with a "shadow parent" who wants to be invited to every birthday party and every family dinner, and who inserts herself, whether needed or not.
You can certainly maintain a loving involvement, whether you live in another city or the same city -- that's immateral. What IS critical to the LW is that she be involved and committed to HER OWN LIFE, not the lives of others. She needs her own husband (or significant other), her OWN children (whether biological or adopted) and HER OWN LIFE. Nobody in the history of the world was ever satisfied by living on the edges of other people's lives, peering in.
Personally, I think she's intrigued by her sister's successful family life's, and is sort of "testing the waters" by wanting to join (but not join), to be there (but not really) and exist on this sort of shadow plain. But time is against her -- she can't give these neices and nephews 15 years of her life, and then go back and say, hey, I think I really want MY OWN KIDS and MY OWN FAMILY -- because by then she will be 50, and her chances close to nil.
Time is not infinite and expandable. You only go around ONCE. It's WONDERFUL being an involved "Auntie" or Uncle or even family friend -- it's a really treasured, special thing. But it is not a substitute for your own life. And you are not doing your sisters or their husbands that big a favor (except for some free babysitting) -- eventually they will find you creepy and intrusive.
LW, listen to your inner voice. Your inner voice is telling you that you want your own family and your own life, but you are too scared and too AMBIVALENT to make a decision. Grow up. Be an adult. Choose to live your own life....and be an auntie too. The two things are not mutually exclusive.