Dare we deem any of this 'discussion' of the octuplet mother...?

...not sure, but this could possibly be one of DU's finer moments--regarding a media 'diss'cussed woman.
:puke:

Anyone watching Octomom on NBC?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5027431


Is it possible the mother of 10 got paid under the table?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5034933


'Breeding disorder.'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5028274



Where are all the fundies thrilled with octo-mom's decision to give birth
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5035339



Chicage Sun Times: Octuplets' mom 'creepy' -- irritates Angelina Jolie
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5039912


OctoMom -- It Was a Very "Goodyear" *GRAPHIC PHOTO!*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5039926


Threats send California octuplets mom into hiding
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5032866



You people talking about taking away Octomom's kids are overreacting
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5041545


Comments, thoughts?
There are other threads on the issue, I've bookmarked. I'm waiting for them to hit the archives before linking them here.
Anyone w/a desire to link a currently active thread on this issue to this thread, I request to please until it's arhived.
(Doing so, cuts down on disruptive elements visiting with a need to "share." ;))

:hi:

on the one hand, the media's vilification of her is inexcusable, on the other, I really believe that actively (and I mean actively, as in, she actively went out to get pregnant, using a method that has is known to cause multiples) bringing children into a world where you can't support them makes you an irresponsible person.

I dislike much of the language that is being used about her and many of the reactions, both here and elsewhere, but I also hate the idea that these children will most likely grow up at a disadvantage. I truly feel so bad for these kids.

What makes it more complicated for me is that (of course) I support a woman's right to choice - and that necessarily means the choice to have the baby, not just not have the baby. So I guess I'm conflicted.

When I take a step back, I still don't understand the fascination with this situation, other than getting to trash a woman in what is practically a free fall. Last time I saw that was with the Duke case. (I wonder how that woman is doing now? I hope her life is going well, the young men from what I understand, are doing quite well)

Getting to feel that sense of of justified and righteous indignation against a woman who in the Finest Ronald Reagan tradition could possible dare to be a welfare queen. And then yell "What about the BABIES" Like they actually give a shit. Equate parenting with a monetary bottom line and justify it.

My problem with the whole welfare thing, I think, is that I work in one of two hospitals in my area that between them 80% of so-called "charity" cases. And then there is medicare/medicaid. Or extended stays when a condition becomes difficult to heal and insurance runs out. The hospital so often eat the cost. Shall I start a thread criticizing lifestyle or addictive behaviors that lead to the conditions that are extremely costly?

A part of me, the instinctive part perhaps, not the logical part, wonders if more than a bit of this righteous indignation comes from the fact this women didn't have to have a penis directly involved. I wonder if her ethnicity makes it easier for some folks rip her apart. If she was blond and blued eyed I mean, how would the reaction have differed? Every time I think I've seen the ultimate Other, another one is created.

She's that media blood sacrifice on the alter of public opinion (I forget who said that)

I started knowing very little IVF, and I've spoken to a couple of people. It's now my understanding that most states limit how many embryos are implanted. One nurse told me in our state you have to agree to selective abortion in a multiple birth that becomes dangerous. I haven't verified that.

What I know In this case the woman had 7 implants, right? with one split egg. She had 6 other children. She lives with her mother. Somehow, she carried all eight fetuses to term. They are relatively healthy all things considered. She may need some public assistance, or has already done so.

Another thing that bugs me is that it's over. The kids are here. It's done. She's all over the news for a while, perhaps she seeks it out I have no idea. My point is all this vitriol, is a waste of time.

It's a red herring, and I've seen more than one thread that was blatantly anti-choice and anti-poverty or anti-POOR rather, and what was frightening is that it appeared to be a knee jerk reaction to a single situation.

14 is a big number for children. In this country most women do it one or two or three children at a time, but it's not unheard of. Other countries baby after baby is born and 14 is much more common. I think she's going to be a busy woman. I think she's going to experience a lot of pain. I think she'll do her best with what she's got. I think we'll hear about her from time to time. In a few years, 20/20 will do an expose on her "right now" Same old shit.

I don't see the value of trashing her and this constant judgment although I don't agree with having a bunch of babies


My final impression that is both instinctive AND logical is that there are a lot of people with mommy issues out there. Give it up kids, get over it. You grown.

I am still struggling to understand the justifications for the outrage.

A lot of people claim that their outrage is because of her economic class. How irresponsible to have a lot of kids if you can't support them in a certain lifestyle. I'd like to know what the limit is - poor women can raise one child in poverty? Five? None? They can have kids - as long as they were unwanted?

Then there is another (with crossover) set who just get irate at women who have above a certain number of kids regardless of their ability to support them. This would include the people who focus on the duggar woman's vagina specifically, as if that dang vagina-organ is making the decisions for the entire family rather than the husband and wife together. I see the same (anti-woman) mindset there as the ones who are calling this woman nicknames derived from derogatory slurs for women's genitals.

I definitely don't understand the level of Concern over 14 children living in poverty. I find it a little disingenuous that people care so much about that one family's economic security, while the prevailing attitude lately on DU about other kids in poverty (a current thread about immigrant children in public schools comes to mind) is to let them rot - we don't want them in our back yards. "Not my problem."

totally rings true for me.

Quote:
I definitely don't understand the level of Concern over 14 children living in poverty. I find it a little disingenuous that people care so much about that one family's economic security, while the prevailing attitude lately on DU about other kids in poverty (a current thread about immigrant children in public schools comes to mind) is to let them rot - we don't want them in our back yards. "Not my problem."

I recall comments during the immigration discussion where members were equally outraged, that 'children' remain in the US (technically citizens, as they were born here)--when their parents may be deported for not being citizens.

The consensus then, as in now seemed to be "why should we foot the bill" for the offspring of their illegal activity.

As hard working citizens with all mental faculties intact, why should we pay for the mistakes of these lazy brown people--just trying to get over on the system?

:eyes:

A part of me, the instinctive part perhaps, not the logical part, wonders if more than a bit of this righteous indignation comes from the fact this women didn't have to have a penis directly involved.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=5028274#5029001
(responses 9 & 30)

;)

Isn't this what Margaret Sanger worked all those years to save us from?


The woman's behaviour is abhorrent to me.

So is the behaviour of anyone, man or woman, in an advanced industrial society, who produces children in numbers like that, or in fact in much lower numbers than that. And there are thousands upon thousands of families in the US with children in such numbers. Many of whom have two parents, and many of whom receive public assistance. (Hell, even public assistance in the form of schooling. Whose taxes pay? Not to mention all the other costs to a society of this kind of explosive procreation.)

I have no doubt that much of the righteous indignation directed at her is because she is a woman. Just like Andrea Yates, when men kill their children weekly.

It's the old madonna/whore, damned if you do/damned if you don't, healthy person/crazy woman / healthy woman/crazy person thing.

A real woman wants babies. A bad woman doesn't want babies / wants too many babies.

A real woman is nurturing and polite; a real person is autonomous and assertive; an other-focused passive woman has late luteal phase dysphoric disorder. Or self-defeating personality-disorder. I forget.

It's a fine tightrope to walk, and some people fall off.

Basically, *nothing* that a woman does is "normal". We can't be normal, because normal is male. If we do what men do, we're not normal women. If we do what normal women do, we're not normal human beings. If we do too much or too little of what normal women do, we're weird squared.

This woman is weird squared, all right. But if she weren't a woman, she'd just be weird, and there wouldn't be quite so much need to light the bonfires.