Question:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> : Sounds like some of those from alt.support.childfree are jealous of people > : who have children. Why would someone feel the need to criticize with > : different preferences otherwise? > I did try and reply with email but I couldn’t get through > to the person… But I wanted then to be clear on this. > I am sorry you think that we are jealous because the truth is very > far from that. On the childfree newsgroup the people do not want to > have kids, unlike some people in other newsgroups that can not have > kids. To say we are jealous of kids is like going into to pro-gay > newsgroup and saying that they are jealous of you because you have > sex with your opposite sex. It is laughable and more than a bit > nauseating. > We, for the most part, criticize mindless people who think that > the only way they can be happy is to have kids. We also do not > spend all of our time criticizing anyone or anything but just talking > and having fun. > Also some of us truly dislike children, some love children but > don’t want them for themselves. The truth is we, more often than > not, dislike parents who think that all anyone can think about > or talk about is their kids and kids in general. > Most of us do not go into other newsgroups, or up to parents > in rl and criticize them for having kids or thinking or talking > about kids. But this particular article, about the people in > Iowa was posted to us, and we only responded to it with what > we feel and think about such an act. And in responding to it > our thoughts and feelings were posted to the other newsgroups > that were also in the posting. > -Mara > I am trying to take a look at alt.support.childfree just to see what > everyone is talking about. I can’t seem to access it and get the > following message: "News host responded: No such group". Does anyone > know why?
We use stealth computers. We don’t show up on radar.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Um … are we reading the same thread? The McCaugheys *didn’t* birth > "healthy happy children." They produced seven premature babies, the > *largest* of which weighs less than half the normal weight for a term > baby. > — > You obviously don’t know much about premature babies. 31 weekers isn’t > that extreme and I will bet they don’t have too many "preemie" related > problems that those babies born at less than say 28 weeks have! > Christine > Mommy to a 33 weeker!!!!
Please — if you’re going to continue posting in this thread, take alt.support.childfree out of the address. We really don’t care.
Response:
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Congratulations to the Septuplets born and the parents! The babies: Brandon James 3lbs, 3oz. Joel Steven 2lbs, 15oz. Nathhanial Roy 2lbs, 14oz. Kenneth Robert 3lbs, 4oz. Natalie Sue 2lbs, 10oz. Alexie May 2lbs, 11oz. Kelsey Ann 2lbs, 5oz. The Proud Parents: Bobbi McCaughey Mom Kenny McCaughey Dad The Deliveries occured between 12:48 and 12:54 p.m. on Wed 11/19/97. Again, Congratulations! Content-Type: image/gif; name="DMRegisterCombination.gif" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline; filename="DMRegisterCombination.gif" <encoded_portion_removed> ADs=
Response:
> Congratulations to the Septuplets born and the parents!
get!!!
Response:
>get!!!
Elise
Response:
Might I make a suggestion that everyone edit there newsgroups list before sending on their opinions on this subject. According to my newsreader, these messages are being cross posted to the following newsgroups: alt.x.y,alt.support.childfree,alt.parenting.twins-triplets,misc.kids.pregna ncy,alt.parenting.solutions. Though I am not familiar with all of these newsgroups, it is obvious that there are some differences in opinion out there. I don’t know if the originator of the first message was trying to annoy someone or simply made a mistake. However, from what I have read, there is a response out there to annoy everyone. Thanks in advance…
Response:
If you can’t express your opinions without swearing, don’t express them at all. If I wanted to listen to language like yours I’d go stand on a street corner. So if you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all. Lynn. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> Congratulations to the Septuplets born and the parents! >get!!! > Did any of you clueless fucks notice the newsgroup line? Why would readers > of alt.support.childfree give a rat’s ass about this overhyped media > event? > Peggy > [note followups] > — > "Granola pisses me off." — Eric Cartman
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > > Congratulations to the Septuplets born and the parents! > > get!!! > This whole episode makes me want to puke. Fertility drugs should be made > illegal. Starting today…pete > — > Surely you"re *smart* enough to remove the spam control… > How insensitive. I’m sure this family will manage just fine and get all > the support they need. As long as they birth healthy happy children, > who cares how they got into this world. Because of fertility drugs, > there are countless people that couldnot have children that have been > blessed, for that reason, they should be legal! > I’m in shock over how they will manage but they will. > Christine
Insensitive? Someone posts this crap to alt.support.childFREE and you expect us to be sensitive? These inconsiderate litter-breeders should take a flying leap …
Response:
I think the best thing for the true majority of normal people to do is disassociate ourselves with the pathetic creatures that have been writing this nonsense. I’ve never read anything from the alt.support.childfree newsgroup, but if this string is any indication, they are a group that enjoys inflicting pain and mental cruelty upon the those who would find happiness. I pity a person who who find it necessary to harbour such ill will towards a family who, though we may disagree with their methods, have nevertheless found the joy and blessings of birth. So, without belaboring the point, we can really do no more than allow these sad and lonely people to wallow in their own loathing hatred. To those who support that particular newsgroup, my apologies for whoever sent the "announcement" of a joyous birth to your mean-spirited hate group. I would hope that neither of our paths would cross again. Tell ya if you’ll try to steer clear of the rest of us…….and our children. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Where were the McCaugheys for *these* kids? Where were they for >foster-care babies, being fed three at a time out of a single jar of baby >food? For kids who spend their days waiting in corridors at Child >Protective Services, with their possessions in plastic garbage bags? For >kids who *sleep* at CPS, stretched out on desks, because no one could come >up with one more "overnight" placement? For kids assigned to fifteen or >twenty different foster homes in less than two months? >I’ll tell you where the McCaugheys were. At the fertility clinic, >struggling to produce a perfect flawless Gerber baby with *their* precious >genetic pattern. >Think globally, act locally. > Susan >– >"Gadfly is what they call you when you are no longer | Remove SPAMWALL >dangerous. I much prefer troublemaker, malcontent, | from my address >desperado." – Harlan Ellison | to reply.
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > I think the best thing for the true majority of normal people to do is > disassociate ourselves with the pathetic creatures that have been writing > this nonsense. I’ve never read anything from the alt.support.childfree > newsgroup, but if this string is any indication, they are a group that > enjoys inflicting pain and mental cruelty upon the those who would find > happiness. I pity a person who who find it necessary to harbour such ill > will towards a family who, though we may disagree with their methods, have > nevertheless found the joy and blessings of birth. So, without belaboring > the point, we can really do no more than allow these sad and lonely people > to wallow in their own loathing hatred. > To those who support that particular newsgroup, my apologies for whoever > sent the "announcement" of a joyous birth to your mean-spirited hate group. > I would hope that neither of our paths would cross again. Tell ya > if you’ll try to steer clear of the rest of us…….and our children. >Where were the McCaugheys for *these* kids? Where were they for >foster-care babies, being fed three at a time out of a single jar of baby >food? For kids who spend their days waiting in corridors at Child >Protective Services, with their possessions in plastic garbage bags? For >kids who *sleep* at CPS, stretched out on desks, because no one could come >up with one more "overnight" placement? For kids assigned to fifteen or >twenty different foster homes in less than two months? >I’ll tell you where the McCaugheys were. At the fertility clinic, >struggling to produce a perfect flawless Gerber baby with *their* precious >genetic pattern. >Think globally, act locally. > Susan >– >"Gadfly is what they call you when you are no longer | Remove SPAMWALL >dangerous. I much prefer troublemaker, malcontent, | from my address >desperado." – Harlan Ellison | to reply.
I also had never seen the childfree newsgroup until today and was amazed at what I read there. I didn’t know there were so many mean spirted people out there. I can understand people not agreeing with the methods used in conceiving these babies, but to say such hateful and hurtful things is not right. If people don’t agree with the parents that’s fine, but they can at least be nice to the babies. Just my opinion. Diane (mother of a 3 month old son) — Mike, Diane, Cory, Lucy, and Ethel O’Neill http://home.earthlink.net/~mcdeo/
Response:
>To those who support that particular newsgroup, my apologies for whoever >sent the "announcement" of a joyous birth to your mean-spirited hate group. >I would hope that neither of our paths would cross again. Tell ya >if you’ll try to steer clear of the rest of us…….and our children.
Guess crow didn’t read the part about the unadoptable kids, below, or it might have come to the conclusion that not all of us hate kids. Just excess, celebrity-worship and media fawning. But hey, The Parent has spoken. Let us all now commence to quake in our boots. Elise
Response:
> I think the best thing for the true majority of normal people to do is > disassociate ourselves with the pathetic creatures that have been writing > this nonsense. I’ve never read anything from the alt.support.childfree > newsgroup, but if this string is any indication, they are a group that > enjoys inflicting pain and mental cruelty upon the those who would find > happiness. I pity a person who who find it necessary to harbour such ill > will towards a family who, though we may disagree with their methods, have > nevertheless found the joy and blessings of birth. So, without belaboring > the point, we can really do no more than allow these sad and lonely people > to wallow in their own loathing hatred.
And we appreciate that. I’m going back to our cocktail party in alt.support.childfree now. We shall darken your door no more.
Response:
Can someone please explain to me why this couple was taking fertility drugs? From what I have read, they have been married 5 years and have a 22 month old daughter in addition to the new seven. They also are relatively young, and not in danger of becoming too old to conceive. This doesn’t sound like an infertile couple to me. Does anyone have any insight on why a doctor would perscribe fertility drugs under these circumstances?
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > : Sounds like some of those from alt.support.childfree are jealous of people > : who have children. Why would someone feel the need to criticize with > : different preferences otherwise? > I did try and reply with email but I couldn’t get through > to the person… But I wanted then to be clear on this. > I am sorry you think that we are jealous because the truth is very > far from that. On the childfree newsgroup the people do not want to > have kids, unlike some people in other newsgroups that can not have > kids. To say we are jealous of kids is like going into to pro-gay > newsgroup and saying that they are jealous of you because you have > sex with your opposite sex. It is laughable and more than a bit > nauseating. > We, for the most part, criticize mindless people who think that > the only way they can be happy is to have kids. We also do not > spend all of our time criticizing anyone or anything but just talking > and having fun. > Also some of us truly dislike children, some love children but > don’t want them for themselves. The truth is we, more often than > not, dislike parents who think that all anyone can think about > or talk about is their kids and kids in general. > Most of us do not go into other newsgroups, or up to parents > in rl and criticize them for having kids or thinking or talking > about kids. But this particular article, about the people in > Iowa was posted to us, and we only responded to it with what > we feel and think about such an act. And in responding to it > our thoughts and feelings were posted to the other newsgroups > that were also in the posting. > -Mara
I am trying to take a look at alt.support.childfree just to see what everyone is talking about. I can’t seem to access it and get the following message: "News host responded: No such group". Does anyone know why?
Response:
> > Um … are we reading the same thread? The McCaugheys *didn’t* birth > "healthy happy children." They produced seven premature babies, the > *largest* of which weighs less than half the normal weight for a term > baby. > — > You obviously don’t know much about premature babies. 31 weekers isn’t > that extreme and I will bet they don’t have too many "preemie" related > problems that those babies born at less than say 28 weeks have!
31 weeks might not be that extreme for ONE child who was able to take all the possible nutrients, etc. in the womb. But with seven kids vying for one mother’s resources, 31 weeks takes on a whole new meaning. CF
Response:
> Sounds like some of those from alt.support.childfree are jealous of people > who have children. Why would someone feel the need to criticize with > different preferences otherwise?
Pot, kettle, black. Miche Miche Campbell <*> Captain of the Starship Yentaprise These are not necessarily the opinions of the University of Otago You say Chaos like it’s a *bad* thing! "Beer is furrowed." – Nigel Barley, _The Innocent Anthropologist_ Unsolicited commercial email is deleted unread
Response:
I noticed that somehow the announcement about the uber-birth was posted to alt.support.childfree, and some semi-blistering responses appeared in pregnancy/parenting groups, so would like to add this statement (and will not post to parent groups again, as I think it’s not quite polite of me). I’ve been reading some other newsgroups about the septuplet birth (and Naomi, although we rarely agree, is sterling on those groups!) It seems that the difference in attitudes goes beyond us CFs (childfrees) and some parents. Many of us CFs do, I think, go beyond simply "wanting acceptance" for our CFness. Speaking for myself, I think there should be fewer people, period, therefore am against much reproduction by ANYONE. That goes beyond simply wanting to be accepted. I want to help create an environment where having kids is completely a conscious choice (dream on) and not an assumption/accident/given script to play out. Part of the reason I feel that way is, of course, environmental. It’s not just that I want more CF company, although that would be nice! I really want a less-populated world in ALL parts of the world, and think that a lot of childhaving in this culture, where birth control/women’s rights exist is just automatic "That’s what you do.." rather than a real desire to do it. The parent-types I refer to don’t seem to have any environmental sense whatsoever- "as long as they’re loved/cared for it’s no one’s business" attitude about family size. Plus, there’s the religious aspect- those who believe that children are sent by god or are a blessing or whatever (as opposed to the byproduct of people’s favorite indoor sport..) There’s a discussion on CNN online about the blessed Iowa event. One woman actually wrote something like "If there’s a big disaster, we’ll need fertility drugs to replenish the population, so our civilization can continue." I’m reminded of what Gandhi supposedly said: Q: "What do you think of Western civilization?" A: "I think it’s a very good idea!" Read ‘em and weep.. Ilene B
Response:
: Can someone please explain to me why this couple was taking fertility : drugs? From what I have read, they have been married 5 years and have a : 22 month old daughter in addition to the new seven. They also are : relatively young, and not in danger of becoming too old to conceive. : This doesn’t sound like an infertile couple to me. Does anyone have any : insight on why a doctor would perscribe fertility drugs under these : circumstances? From what I’ve read, the older child was also conceived using fertility drugs. The mother most likely has an ovulatory disorder which makes it difficult or impossible to conceive without assistance. And all the time in the world won’t help a woman get pregnant if she’s not ovulating. This is an extremely common use of fertility drugs and the overwhelming majority of women who conceive using these drugs have singletons–though obviously the chance of a multiple births is much higher than normal. However, there are ways to reduce the chances of a ’super-twin’ conception without selective reduction. Unless IVF is being done, the doctor usually tries to prescribe the minimum dose of the drug to develop just a few mature eggs. Since women taking these drugs are closely monitored, the doctor and patient should know if too many eggs are developing. In that situation, the doctor will often recommend that the cycle be cancelled. Not that the patient has to listen; there was that woman in the U.K. who had and lost 8 or 9 fetuses–she had intercourse during ovulation very much against the advice of her doctor. As a matter of fact, I’m currently pregnant with my second child using the same type of drugs that the Iowa mom used. And I personally think it was very irresponsible to have gone through with the cycle under the circumstances–the risks to mom and babies were *enormous* and they were incredibly lucky that the babies are as healthy as they apparently are. I’m glad it had a happy outcome, but I still think someone made a very bad decision. I just hope this doesn’t encourage others to take similiar risks. — Laura Uerling
Response:
> Sounds like some of those from alt.support.childfree are jealous of people > who have children. Why would someone feel the need to criticize with > different preferences otherwise?
Gah!!!!! Didnt we just get over 1 flame/post/war with the childfree NG? Do we have to start another.. they have their reasons for how they live their lives as do we.. PPL dont have to have children or even like children.. The ppl from the childfree NG wouldn’t get their nose out of joint if the ppl here on the child NGS didnt keep telling them they were guilty/jealous/unfulfilled/etc etcetc for not having kids in their lives
Response:
Sounds like some of those from alt.support.childfree are jealous of people who have children. Why would someone feel the need to criticize with different preferences otherwise?
Response:
> Um … are we reading the same thread? The McCaugheys *didn’t* birth > "healthy happy children." They produced seven premature babies, the > *largest* of which weighs less than half the normal weight for a term > baby. > —
You obviously don’t know much about premature babies. 31 weekers isn’t that extreme and I will bet they don’t have too many "preemie" related problems that those babies born at less than say 28 weeks have! Christine Mommy to a 33 weeker!!!!
Response:
: Sounds like some of those from alt.support.childfree are jealous of people : who have children. Why would someone feel the need to criticize with : different preferences otherwise? I did try and reply with email but I couldn’t get through to the person… But I wanted then to be clear on this. I am sorry you think that we are jealous because the truth is very far from that. On the childfree newsgroup the people do not want to have kids, unlike some people in other newsgroups that can not have kids. To say we are jealous of kids is like going into to pro-gay newsgroup and saying that they are jealous of you because you have sex with your opposite sex. It is laughable and more than a bit nauseating. We, for the most part, criticize mindless people who think that the only way they can be happy is to have kids. We also do not spend all of our time criticizing anyone or anything but just talking and having fun. Also some of us truly dislike children, some love children but don’t want them for themselves. The truth is we, more often than not, dislike parents who think that all anyone can think about or talk about is their kids and kids in general. Most of us do not go into other newsgroups, or up to parents in rl and criticize them for having kids or thinking or talking about kids. But this particular article, about the people in Iowa was posted to us, and we only responded to it with what we feel and think about such an act. And in responding to it our thoughts and feelings were posted to the other newsgroups that were also in the posting. -Mara
Response:
Are you saying that people able to get pregnant w/o drugs are welcome to do so.. but those who need help should just adopt?? Ridiculous! Personally I believe it is irresponsible for a doctor to allow such a large pregnancy to continue, but I don’t think I would have aborted any of them either. Hopefully they all do well. B. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Where were the McCaugheys for *these* kids? Where were they for >foster-care babies, being fed three at a time out of a single jar of baby >food? For kids who spend their days waiting in corridors at Child >Protective Services, with their possessions in plastic garbage bags? For >kids who *sleep* at CPS, stretched out on desks, because no one could come >up with one more "overnight" placement? For kids assigned to fifteen or >twenty different foster homes in less than two months? >I’ll tell you where the McCaugheys were. At the fertility clinic, >struggling to produce a perfect flawless Gerber baby with *their* precious >genetic pattern. >Think globally, act locally. > Susan
Response:
>I also had never seen the childfree newsgroup until today and was amazed >at what I read there. I didn’t know there were so many mean spirted >people out there.
"They don’t want to be like us! They find that children, especially spoiled brats, can be annoying! WAAAAH!!!" What do you mean by "mean spirited"? >I can understand people not agreeing with the methods used in conceiving >these babies, but to say such hateful and hurtful things is not right.
Why is it that saying what we believe to be true has to be "hateful and hurtful"? Wanting offspring so badly that you go to a clinic and take fertility drugs, I can see, even if I can’t really understand it. But when you find out that you have *seven* viable embryos, and you decide "hey, I want all of them", you’re being selfish and putting the babies themselves at real risk. I find it oddly strange that someone could go to such a clinic, and, when faced with a large number of embryos, decline selective abortion because it would be "unnatural and immoral". Twins, triplets, and the occasional quads do happen naturally, but humans are simply not designed to give birth to large litters. If you have a problem with a particular point that someone’s making, feel free to address that, but crying about us mean, nasty childfree people doesn’t solve anything. Nothing makes me happier than seeing thinking parents who are willing to provide an intelligent, non-dogmatic view of us childfree heathens, but "WAH!!!" just doesn’t count as scathing commentary. >If people don’t agree with the parents that’s fine, but they can at >least be nice to the babies.
I haven’t had such a good laugh in a while. The babies probably won’t be reading Usenet for at least five years. And if the Frustaci septuplets are any indication, maybe quite a bit longer. (me)
Response:
>Sounds like some of those from alt.support.childfree are jealous of people >who have children. Why would someone feel the need to criticize with >different preferences otherwise?
Stunning display of logic there: "I’m burning down forests, and these jerks are criticizing me! They must be jealous." It’s the easiest thing in the world for most people to have kids. It’s the default setting for any heterosexually active couple. Few of us are naturally infertile, although we can (and do) take steps to achieve infertility. So far I’ve seen the following objections: 1) Taking extraordinary steps to have your own children when you could adopt is selfish. 2) The world is full enough of people as it is, and, especially in America, every new mouth consumes a *lot* of resources, unless you’re conscientious about such things (and I don’t just mean buying lots of crap and then recycling it). Having children is one of the key links in this recursive and destructive cycle. 3) Having seven children means having seven premature babies, all at serious risk for health problems. And it also consumes a lot of resources that could be used by people who *aren’t* actively creating their own health crises. 4) Having children is one thing. *Raising* children is another. Read alt.support.childfree, and you’ll see exactly how bad "parents" and their children can be. I’m sure I’m missing other points people have brought up. But which of these translates to "we’re just jealous"? (me)
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.