User:	childfree (posted by karebu72)
	Date:	2009-11-09 18:47
	Subject:	Another Good Reason to Avoid Pregnancy
	Security:	Public

Warning: content contains gross female stuff that makes you go Ewww and wish for brain bleach

Allison Henry: My first pregnancy was totally normal and healthy and fine. When my daughter was 11-and-a-half months old, I got pregnant with my second child.

About ten weeks into my pregnancy, I was doing prenatal yoga and it felt like someone had rammed a pitchfork up my butt, so I stopped. It was an intense, sharp pain, but it passed. As I was feeding my daughter lunch a short time later, it felt like I had peed my pants, and when I ran to the bathroom, I saw I was gushing blood everywhere. It was the biggest scare of my life.

I rushed to the OB/GYN, and they said I hadn't lost the baby, thank God. But they couldn't figure out what was wrong, and I kept bleeding for 15 weeks straight.

	User:	marysues (posted by beachy_sun)
	Date:	2009-11-09 18:15
	Subject:	'Nuther Yugioh Sue. Oh joy.
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	blah

( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

	User:	childfree (posted by peehorser)
	Date:	2009-11-09 16:15
	Subject:	Another reason I hate kids.
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	cranky

Yesterday was one of my wifes nephew's birthday party. Basically to make a long story short. One of my other wifes nephews, that some of you may remember, the one that's 4 and doesn't talk, likes to beat people up for fun, ect. He was throwing a ball at people's feet and legs for giggles, he though it was hilarious to throw it at people as hard as he could. No one corrected him and it was making me furious. Then I did the child free no-no. I made eye contact with him. He threw the ball as hard as he could right at my face. I didn't think about it I just stuck my arm up and the ball bounced off of my arm and right back into his face. It knocked him on his butt and he started bawling. Inside I thought it was hilarious but I didn't let it out until later. Everyone of course was "AWWW POORRR BBAABBIEIEEEEZ DID THE MEAN MAN HURT YOOOOUUUU"?!?! and all kinds of crap, I'm just like wtf? Its perfectly ok when hes hurting people but when he intentionally tries to hurt someone else and it back fires then its the worst thing EVAR! I hate children and children loving people like my wifes family. /rage.

	User:	childfree (posted by law1204)
	Date:	2009-11-09 14:00
	Subject:	My new boyfriend rocks so so much.
	Security:	Public

He slipped this in his bookstore purchases when I wasn't looking and surprised me with it later.

http://www.amazon.com/Oh-Crap-Im-Having-Baby/dp/1601672187/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257803944&sr=8-1

	User:	childfree (posted by electricenigma)
	Date:	2009-11-09 11:55
	Subject:	this made my blood boil
	Security:	Public

This is a backdated entry from customers_suck. It made me so angry I'm squirming in my seat. I seriously want to hit something.

I feel so bad for this poor girl! This story is my new epitome of bad parenting.

Remember this is not my story, it's someone else's!

Here to read original entry.


( Copy pasta for linkophobes like myself. )

tl;dr: evil lady's hellspawn breaks cashier's nose, lady thinks hellspawn did nothing wrong.

	User:	childfree (posted by shunhuggedme)
	Date:	2009-11-09 10:14
	Subject:	My family, it is full of fail.
	Security:	Public

My mom called me this weekend. She never, ever calls me 'to chat', just to gossip to me when someone in the family does something completely retarded. This call was no exception.

( RAGE back here. Also some swearing, so I cut it for you guyses just in case. )

	User:	childfree (posted by theatrenocturne)
	Date:	2009-11-08 13:26
	Subject:
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	angry

The "abortion debate" has been part of politics in the United States for the better part of 30 years now, a constant background noise of which people are good, righteous people, and which ones are terrible, evil baby-hating people. It's not really a debate. The opposition doesn't really care about women or babies or fetuses, they're not going to stop until the law is "no abortion ever for anyone under an circumstance." The next best thing for them is for abortion to be legal but all but impossible to obtain. There are waiting periods, restrictions on time and age, they want the consent of the genetic progenitor, other medical procedures must be performed first that the patient has to pay for themselves out of pocket, they list goes on and on. And too, this "debate" is heavily linked to the refusal to proscribe or dispense birth control, the refusal to perform basic medical exams, the very idea that a doctor can go into the field of gynecology and then "opt out" of performing a pap smear.

For those in the United States, the Stupack Amendment has been making the rounds. If you're not in the know, a simple breakdown (not in my own words):

"...an amendment that would impose tight restrictions on abortions that could be offered through a new government-run insurance plan and through private insurance that is bought using government subsidies."

"This amendment...prohibits [women] from access to an abortion even if they pay for it with their own money"

"The Stupak-Pitts amendment forbids any plan offering abortion coverage in the new system from accepting even one subsidized customer. Since more than 80 percent of the participants in the exchange will be subsidized, it seems certain that all health plans will seek and accept these individuals. In other words, the Stupak-Pitts amendment forces plans in the exchange to make a difficult choice: either offer their product to 80 percent of consumers in the marketplace or offer abortion services in their benefits package. It seems clear which choice they will make."

"There will be no abortion, not just with public funds, but with private funds under the public option, and that's not acceptable," said Rep. Diana DeGette

"Studies have shown that somewhere between 45 and 80 percent of the women who have health care coverage through their companies currently get abortion coverage. And so, the argument then is that if the government plan were to disallow that, you would essentially be stripping that coverage from people who already - who currently get that."

the amendment in question

Further reading (quotes can be located in below articles):

Democrats to resolve abortion impasse on the House floor
Who sold us out
Abortion Was at Heart of Wrangling
The Hyde Amendment
House votes Yes
Surgery for Seniors vs Abortions
Abortion and Healthcare Reform
NPR spot

The Hyde Amendment is mentioned above, and it's the foundation block of this bit of dogma. It "is a limitation amendment barring the use of federal funds to pay for abortions through funds allocated by the annual appropriations bill for Health and Human Services." Which means:

"Women who are poor enough to qualify for Medicaid have been denied access to abortion except in non-federally-funded clinics, which have become so few-and-far-between that these women often have to travel to another state to get an abortion. The same goes for disabled women on Medicare, and for Native women who rely on the Indian Health Service. When the SCHIP was established, adolescent females joined the ranks of poor, disabled and Native women. - inaru [Daily Kos]"

The Hyde Amendment has been for years the root of the problem and should have been repealed long ago. Now we're got a fresh problem caused by this previous problem. i would urge you, especially if you see one of you congresspeople on the above list, to start calling up/emailing/harassing politicians. If your congressperson is not on the lest and voted against the amendment, call them or email them and thank them for their vote. It's not enough that people know when we don't support them, they must also know when we do.
Now, if you're in Minnesota, we have another course of action. For Michele Bachmann, it's more advisable we find out what sort of voodoo curse caused this woman to be inflicted upon us and sacrifice a pigeon under the pale light of the fullest moon, chanting in the darkness. Only then will this blight be lifted from our state.

	User:	childfree (posted by nesmith)
	Date:	2009-11-08 13:40
	Subject:	Mod Post - Addition to the rules
	Security:	Public

Thanks in part to over-posting, the rules have been updated; we no longer want to see any survey/research/school project posts. It's always the same questions over and over and over, and reading back even just a little bit will get you all the answers you need. This community is not a homework/research resource.

And I would also like to add that if there's a post that is against the rules or that you feel isn't kosher, the correct response is to email the mods, NOT to post "Mods, you need to ban this person" in the comments. That's our call to make, and demanding we take action or telling us what needs to be done is rude and irritates us, and I would also like to point out that Playing Mod is specifically against the rules and is a bannable offense, one which we maybe give more of a benefit of the doubt than we should.

That's all.

	User:	childfree (posted by eidolonamorata)
	Date:	2009-11-08 13:31
	Subject:	That's not funny!
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	gross

Last night I saw a picture which was supposedly humorous. It was a baby wearing a onesie that said, I shit you not, "I tore my mommy a new one!"

o_0

I can't believe that anyone would find that cute or funny, especially someone who had given birth and been through that kind of pain and mutilation. *shudder* Also, come on... like everyone who sees your kid wants to imagine your scarred, gaping vagina. TMI!

	User:	childfree (posted by bttfbabe)
	Date:	2009-11-08 13:11
	Subject:	Just because Disney put their name on it, doesn't mean Bratleigh should see it.
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	indifferent

I took my mother to the movies last night to see the latest adaptation of A Christmas Carol.  This is her all-time favorite Christmas story and she wanted to see if this version measured up, so that she might add it to her collection when it's available on DVD.  I was so reminded of the reason why I have branded my uterus a child-free zone.

I knew there would be trouble when I saw a Moo and Duh bring in their little girl who looked, maybe, 3 or 4 years old.  I had my doubts that she would be able to sit hrough the movie without getting antsy.  Plus, there is the movie's content to consider.  Anyone who's ever seen one of these adaptations knows that there are some versions that just aren't little kid friendly. 

This one, after Bob Zemeckis got ahold of it, was one of those not-so-friendly versions.  For one thing, he kept most of the traditional aspects of the story (and I swear there was a Back to The Future reference in there).  And you are talking about the guy that executive produced The Frighteners (of which there was also a subtle reference). 

So, I was not surprised that the little sprog totally freaked out when she saw the latest incarnation of the Ghost of Christmas Future shoot up out of a set of stone steps withe the one of the most hideous faces I have ever seen (totally kicked ass, btw).  I was annoyed, however, when she proceeded to scream, "DADDDYYYY!!!!"  I turned around and gave them all a loud, "SHHHHHH!"  I don't care if it didn't win me popularity points, but it shut the brat up.

No, I didn't report them for not removing their sprog.  I chalked it up to karma.  And I bet Moo and Duh received plenty of it last night when they were up with their toddler who no doubt had nightmares.  I know I shouldn't laugh, but karma can be such a bitch.

There are plenty of innocent versions of this story to wean a child out on.  Mickey's Christmas Carol might have been a better choice.  Remember people, just because Disney slapped their name on it, that doesn't mean the movie is little kid friendly.  (Even the older boy sitting next to me was freaked out by some of the shit in thsi movie.  Yeah, I laughed at him, because he had been talking to his little friend until Marley "appeared" in Scrooge's door.  It freaked him out so bad that he almost fell out of his seat.  At least, he was quiet for the rest of the film.)

	User:	childfree (posted by spikethekitten)
	Date:	2009-11-08 12:13
	Subject:	Another movie experience, ruined.
	Security:	Public

My boyfriend's mom and stepdad are up visiting this weekend, and we went to the Rangos Omnimax Theater at the Carnegie Science Center.  They show IMAX movies on a huge screen, so it's like you're really there, etc.  It's also $8 a ticket.

Long story short, we went to see Under the Sea and this kid in the back kept shouting out every. single. thing. that came up on the screen.  For forty minutes, all we heard was this tinny voice going, "FISHIEEE!  LOOK MOMMY LOOK AT THE BIG FISHIEEEE!  OHH!  SEA LIONS!  SHAAAAAARKS!  LOOK MOM A JELLY FISH!  TURRRTLES!  LOOK DAD IT'S NEMO!"  Every time.  And yeah, okay, it would be okay a few times, cause he WAS little and it was cool.  I myself kind of wanted to go "Oooh, shaaaarks!" when the sharks came up, but you know, I'm 22 and I don't do that. 

The part that bugged me was that the parents did absolutely nothing to quiet this child down.  Not even a half-assed "shhh honey" or "don't yell" or anything.  They simply replied to him "Oh yes honey, sharks!  Doesn't that fishie look like Nemo?"  This is not your living room, you fucking bitch.  Finally the guy in front of them turned around and said (rather politely), "Hey, can you at least try to keep him quiet?  We can't hear the narration."  And the fucking moo cow just snaps, "He's EXCITED, okay?  He's just a KID."

Well fuck you.  I know he got into the movie for free, but the rest of us didn't and your "excited" little shit is ruining it for everything.  UGH.  SO RUDE.

	User:	childfree (posted by everwatcher)
	Date:	2009-11-08 00:37
	Subject:	IN the NEWS: "The Enemy of the Good" Edition
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	bittersweet

Just a short while ago today, the US House of Reps. took a critical and major step toward assuring health insurance and related forms of support to nearly every legal resident of America.

This awesome success merely comes at the expense of including abortion coverage in all that federal support.

The political concept of the "big tent" seems tolerant and admirable at first glance. However, it is indirectly responsible for the loathsome stick-up job that Public Enemy #1 Bart Stupak has just foisted on the American people. Those of you familiar with the more conservative US Democrats can see the grimly amusing side of this: denying federal payments for abortion was so ridiculously essential that the rest of the bill was tolerable enough to a few dozen of them.

	User:	childfree (posted by aphrodita7)
	Date:	2009-11-07 17:37
	Subject:	Survey for childfree college students
	Security:	Public

Hi guys,
I am 20, childfree since I've been like 6. I am currently writing a sociological paper for school on childfree women. I need your help. I need 5 to 10 women, college students, to complete a small, quick survey about their motivations. Basically, I have 17 statements, and you have to rate them from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), based on whether these statements correspond to you. I would really, really appreciate your help since writing this paper is pretty challenging and I am really lacking data for college students.

1.     I do not want to spend money on children.

2.     I do not want to spend time on children.

3.     I am concerned about what pregnancy and childbirth will do to my body.

4.     I do not want children because my partner doesn’t want children.

5.     I do not believe that my children, if I had them, would be grateful for my raising them.

6.     I am concerned about what having children might do to my relationship with my partner.

7.     I simply don’t like children.

8.     I feel that having children contributes to overpopulation and environmental issues.

9.     I feel that my parents raised me poorly and therefore don’t deserve a grandchild.

10.   I have enough contact with children (nephews, godchildren…)  that I do not feel the need to have children on my own.

11.   I am afraid of losing my job and not being able to support my children if I had them.

12.   I do not think I would make a good mother.

13.   There are genetic diseases in my family that I would not want my children to get.

14.   I do not think I am attractive enough to have children.

15.   I do not think that my friends who have children are happy.

16.   I would rather focus on my career than on children.

	User:	childfree (posted by velvetmornings)
	Date:	2009-11-07 12:22
	Subject:	the dreaded baby shower
	Security:	Public

I have to go to a baby shower today. I was having an otherwise good day, and now this. I find baby showers to be the ultimate tedium. The guests are subjected to stupid games and then the whole watch the mom-to-be open gifts for an hour. Why do I have to give you a gift because you're breeding? How about you give ME a gift for NOT breeding. Not to mention this is the second party my friend has thrown for herself in one week! She had a birthday party on Monday! So I get to buy her two gifts in one week! And I've bought her a bridal gift and wedding gift this year too. And she got me nothing for my birthday and I've bought her 4 gifts this year. Apparently unless if you're getting married or popping out babies you don't deserve a gift!

	User:	childfree (posted by barsanddrums)
	Date:	2009-11-07 09:19
	Subject:	For crying out loud!
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	annoyed

So I was rewatching the "Pregnant Women are Smug" by Garfunkel and Oates video on youtube. You know how they sold out so now video's on the internet have to be treated like tv shows on television with annoying as Hell commercials and advertisments popping up, ruining the enjoyment of the experience? Yeah... so naturally one of those annoying pop ups appeared as I was watching this (which makes no sense, because the whole ad thing is for copywrited material; like by a company that owns the rights to a movie trailer for example; which I don't think someone putting a video of themselves up would fall under that catagory -- unless we're all some companies personal property now), and I'll just let the picture under the cut explain the story.

( Read more... )

	User:	childfree (posted by azfiregirl)
	Date:	2009-11-07 05:10
	Subject:	Public service annoucement
	Security:	Public

So I don't know if someone has posted this before, but I've been meaning to for a while (since I learned it in nursing school) and just keep forgetting. I was reminded of it while reading a book, so here I am.

For those who are unaware, many antibiotics can counter the effects of most birth-control pills. Pharmacists SHOULD tell you this when you pick up an antibiotic but I was never informed though, thankfully, I haven't had to be on antibiotics very often.

At any rate, if you get sick and the doc puts you on an antibiotic, be sure and use an additional form of protection other than the Pill. I'd hate for my CF friends to wind up pregnant due to a medication interaction!

(x-posted to cf-harcore)

	User:	childfree (posted by konora)
	Date:	2009-11-07 00:25
	Subject:
	Security:	Public

I just want to watch Cake Boss season 2 online. Why must I be shown, at every commercial break, the same absolutely hideous baby? Yeah, I know, my fault for watching anything on TLC. But pretty cakes have nothing to do with diapers or babies! Especially not really ugly newborn ones who smack their lips creepily.

	User:	childfree (posted by ihasstopwatch)
	Date:	2009-11-06 18:37
	Subject:
	Security:	Public
	Mood:	curious

Remember that case a while back about the Florida girl who was found dead with her parents' Burmese Python in bed with her? Well, that case has come back to bite all python owners in the ass thanks to HR 2811. If you belong to one of the reptile comms on LiveJournal, I apologize for making you see yet another post about this.

( Cut for length )

	User:	marysues (posted by genkigami)
	Date:	2009-11-06 21:29
	Subject:	Sues? In my Balto?
	Security:	Public
	Music:	Mononoke Hime - DANCEMANIA ANIME SPEED

( You are about to view content that may not be appropriate for minors. )

	User:	childfree (posted by _chrome_)
	Date:	2009-11-07 03:26
	Subject:	More kitty posts: this is me gloating!
	Security:	Public

I think I've mentioned before I own a restaurant. There are four people working on my restaurant: my husband and I and our two employees (whom I call "the kids" though they are older than me and feel strongly responsible over, but that's another matter). Our two employees are a boy-girl couple, they live together, they are happily childfree and they just adopted a new kitten and, what did we do?

...

Bring your kittens to work day!!!!

They brought their kitty and the kitty's sister to the restaurant before bussiness hours and we all watched them play and run around :):):):):) So much better than watching children play!!!

ETA: Guys, I'm not a complete moron, ok? The kitties were inside the carrier most of the time and even when they went outside they didn't leave the canopy bed that is located on the drinking area (separated from the eating area and the kitchen). They were 5 weeks old kitties, mightily tiny, so they didn't voluntarily leave the carrier until the very very end, and when they left it they went to my employee's lap.
It's not like I had cats rubbing themselves on the dishes and produce!

Anyway it is allowed in most drinking places in my city to come in with dogs or cats. I even know of a restaurant near my house that has their own resident dog, that can be seen and petted by the customers, (meaning, people clearly knows there's a dog there!) and the place's always full.

If you think about it, it's no worse (strictly speaking of health-hygiene) than other countries where you can take *any* service animal *anywhere* without showing proof that they really are service animals.