Archives for May 2009

Bristol Palin, who’s going to be the answer to a lot of trivia questions a decade from now, is on the front cover of People magazine. In it, she talks about how unglamorous life with a tiny baby is:

Girls need to imagine and picture their life with a screaming newborn baby and then think before they have sex,” she says of being a teenage mom. “Think about the consequences … If girls realized the consequences of sex, nobody would be having sex. Trust me. Nobody.”

I’m not sure she’s quite got the point here. If the message is that life with a screaming newborn baby can be stressful, well yes, that’s true. It’s equally unpleasant to be sleep-deprived and subject to nursing woes and diaper changes when not a teenager. And while having other adults around to share in the baby-care makes life easier, the basic hassle involved in the tending of small children is pretty standard, whether you’re a teenager, an adult, married, single, a stay at home mom, work outside the home, you name it.

Bristol Palin’s problem isn’t that she has a screaming newborn baby per se; it’s that she has this baby with whose father she’s already broken up, a not uncommon result of a high school romance; that she’s still totally dependent upon her parents and thus pretty much by definition not prepared to parent herself; and that she has none of the supports in place to help her cope and adjust that are more likely to be available when you are married and at least semi-autonomous before having children.

Don’t get me wrong, if “sex=screaming baby=no social life” stops kids in high school from having sex, more power to them. The thing is, to a certain extent, that equation holds true for adults too, not just teens. The issue isn’t how much work babies are, it’s how much more bearable the work is when you’ve got a husband and supportive family and a bit more maturity to fall back on.

And it’s a wee bit irresponsible for People to run a cover of a beautifully made up, slim and rested-looking Bristol in cap and gown, toting Tripp as an accessory. The text may read “don’t do this” but the sub-text is telling a different story.

Well, I’m pretty sure I know the answer.

Ever since Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire? I’ve had a morbid fascination with dating shows. It’s kind of like the sick compulsion to eavesdrop on a couple having a fight at the next table in a restaurant, or the glee small children have when they can watch a sibling getting in trouble, except there are no innocent victims because everyone involved actually consented to going on a reality show, for crying out loud.

Anyway, the latest round got off to a rousing start last night. (I do laundry in front of pulp TV. When I’m not solving differential equations and stuff.) What’s peculiar about the show is that the “Bachelorette” in question was, a few short months ago, proclaiming her undying love for The Bachelor Jason (himself a reject from an earlier session of The B’ette, DeAnna, who was kicked to the curb by Brad … it’s like a daisy chain of moronic exhibitionists) and yet now proclaims herself ready for true love (plausible enough) and expecting to find it on TV.

The 30 men competing, for their part, signed up without even knowing who the lady in question would be. So they’re coming on this show, purporting to want to marry at the end of it, when they don’t even know who their prospective bride is.

I’ve long thought that the Harlequin-ization of our culture of relationships, in which The One will send electricity sizzling through you and provide you with emotional, sexual, intellectual, social and psychological satisfaction forever and ever, or else he’s not The One, is really harmful. Arranged marriages don’t strike me as that great either, but given the two extremes, I’d say a considered attempt to match yourself with someone of a compatible background, with shared values and goals and beliefs who wants a similar lifestyle, is more likely to lead to happiness than letting your hormones decide for you in a matter of days. Certainly you’re more likely to find lasting happiness with a kind and good person who shares the above, whom you grow to love profoundly, than with someone who has all the right pheromones but has a divergent outlook on life.

So is it kind of nice, that there are people out there willing to say “I want a long-term relationship, and finding someone who wants what I do is my goal” when they don’t even know what the other guy/girl will look like? Or are these just a bunch of fame-hounds looking for booze-fuelled hot tub action?

On second thought, don’t answer that.

___________________

Andrea adds: Glad you added that last line, Rebecca. No answer from me then.

___________________

Brigitte wonders: You fuel your hot tub with booze?

Apparently this ad is creating a bit of a kerfuffle. Wonder why, eh? Think it’s likely to discourage teenage sex? [warning: graphic]

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frHOZn3tpdQ]

The controversial video is the latest weapon used by a local primary care trust in the fight to reduce teen pregnancies, it said.

The clip, dubbed Teenage Kicks, was created by NHS Leicester City and features a girl giving birth on a school playing field surrounded by her peers.

It was created as part of a campaign to warn youngsters about teenage pregnancies.

The video is currently posted on video sharing sites popular with young people, including YouTube and Kontraband, and the primary care trust said it has now been viewed around 72,000 times.

Filmed in the style of a “happy-slapping” on a mobile phone, the video is designed to appeal to young people in a bid to spread the message.

It shows a gang of teens running towards a crowd of other schoolchildren.

In the middle of the jeering crowd is a girl giving labour, while another helps her.

The clip ends with the slogan: “Not what you expected?” followed by, “Being a teenage parent might not be either”.

It then refers young people to the campaign’s website, hey-babe.co.uk

So President Obama wants dialogue and compromise on abortion? This lawyer in Washington DC suggests he start “by curbing fetal pain.”

He writes:

But about 10% of all abortions – approximately 150,000 per year – occur in the second or third trimesters, when scientists are uncertain exactly when the ability to feel pain begins. Methods of abortion after the first trimester can be particularly gruesome, such as the procedure opponents call “partial-birth abortion,” which is now illegal in some circumstances under federal law. But even other, less controversial methods of abortion have been described – by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an abortion supporter – as “brutal,” involving “tearing [a fetus] apart,” and “ripping off its limbs.” Any fetus capable of feeling pain would surely suffer greatly during such dismemberment. …is it too much to ask that they not be tortured to death in a manner we would not permit to be used on a terrorist, a murderer or a dog?

A couple of problems I foresee with this. 1) President Obama had not a bit of problem with letting born babies die alone, voting against Infants Born Alive legislation more than once, I believe. If he’s unconcerned about the pain of born babies, what are the chances the pain of the unborn will be a problem? 2) Pro-abortion types go apoplectic when you draw attention to any factor that allows the public to understand that the fetus in the womb might be sentient. 3) Obama might say he wants dialogue, but in reality, there has been a dialogue going on here for decades–and any time he’s ventured into the fray it’s been to inflame the proceedings by choosing an extreme position.

In short, I’m not as charitable as this Washington lawyer. (I’m sure there’s a joke in there somewhere, one that doesn’t make me look very good.)

If such an act were introduced to protect the fetus from the pain of dismemberment, sure, I’d support it. But I’m guessing I know already who wouldn’t. (His name starts with “O” and ends with “ama”.)

I’d love to be proven wrong. But I fear that the whole topic really is above Obama’s paygrade.

A spectacularly moving piece about a woman whose son lived less than a day. This woman is amazingly brave and courageous and I can only wish that, were I to find myself in a similar situation, I would be as brave and courageous as she was. Thank you for writing, Ms. Phenix.

About that poll, which Andrea highlighted earlier, that says most Americans now call themselves pro-life, here. Personally, I find the piece irritatingly wishy-washy. I also tend to be highly suspicious of opinion polls – it’s too easy to say anything on the phone just to make the caller go away and get back to the dinner table. Maybe I’m just grumpy…

Hey, remember this story about the British 13-year-old boy and his 15-year-old girlfriend having a baby? Here’s an update:

DNA tests have revealed that a 13-year-old British boy who claimed to have fathered a child with his 15-year-old girlfriend was not the dad, according to a court judgement made public Monday.Claims that baby-faced schoolboy Alfie Patten made Chantelle Steadman pregnant when he was aged just 12 triggered national soul-searching about Britain’s high level of teenage pregnancies.

But the story, reported in February just days after the birth, sparked claims from other boys who lived nearby that they could also be the father and social workers organised a DNA test.

The results, revealed in a high court judgement last month which was only made public Monday, showed the father was 15-year-old Tyler Barker, who lived on the same housing estate as Steadman in Eastbourne in southern England.

_______________________
Véronique adds: Phew! So the dad was really 15. What a relief…