So the manosphere blogger who calls himself The Red Pill Theorist has managed to work himself into a tizzy over a Wall Street Journal piece by a woman who — gasp! — froze some of her eggs in her 30s in order to give her more time in which to find the right guy with whom to have kids.
In her op-ed, titled “Why I Froze My Eggs (And You Should, Too),” Sarah Elizabeth Richards wrote:
Between the ages of 36 and 38, I spent nearly $50,000 to freeze 70 eggs in the hope that they would help me have a family in my mid-40s, when my natural fertility is gone. For this baby insurance, I obliterated my savings and used up the money my parents had set aside for a wedding. It was the best investment I ever made.
Egg freezing stopped the sadness that I was feeling at losing my chance to have the child I had dreamed about my entire life. It soothed my pangs of regret for frittering away my 20s with a man I didn’t want to have children with, and for wasting more years in my 30s with a man who wasn’t sure he even wanted children. It took away the punishing pressure to seek a new mate and helped me find love again at age 42.
I have a lot of reactions to this op-ed, ranging from “damn that’s a lot of money” to “that’s kind of a sad way to look at your past relationships” to “congratulations to you, I guess, but I don’t think this is really a solution to the work-life dilemma faced by most working would-be-moms.” (See here and here for discussions of this latter issue that are a lot more informed than my gut reaction.)
The Red Pill Theorist had, well, a different reaction, worrying that egg freezing could become a “grrlpower-enabling” technology, much like the birth control pill before it, and predicting that evil Democrats will soon demand that it be covered by Medicaid.
His real worry? That egg freezing will allow women to have sex with a variety of men into their 30s and even — gasp! — their 40s without “settling down” with the hardworking betas who’ve been waiting patiently on the sidelines for a chance to score a little nookie with the ladies before these ladies get completely old and ugly.
If women begin freezing their eggs en-masse at thirty, and embark upon fifteen more years of debauchery, watch out. The current trend of beta misery, female misery, and alpha ecstasy is only going to get worse. Now 30-35 year olds with a lick of sense leap off the carousel with all the alacrity they can muster. But what if they don’t have to? They’ve got frozen eggs, and early-thirties women can be decent looking. There’s going to be a massive increase in the supply of female sexuality in the dating market. We all saw how well that worked out for women in the sixties.
The Red Pill Theorist imagines that somehow these gals will manage to stick those poor, pitiful, endlessly used and abused beta schlubs with the bill:
In the future, there won’t just be divorce-rape. There will be pre-divorce rape. Crafty college gals will extract financial resources from their beta boyfriends to freeze their eggs, and then unhaapyness will set in, and the beta will be stuck with the bill.
His grand conclusion:
Egg freezing is one more brick in the wall of total sexual marketplace deregulation. Bit by bit, the chains that once encircled the hypergamic beast are falling away. There’s never been a better time for men with options, never been a worse time for men without them. … It’s the next sexual revolution, except this time, women 30-40 will get to have some ill-advised fun.
Imagine that. Women in their 30s and 40s. Having fun. The horror!
And yeah, either abortion is moral, or it isn’t. Provide a coherent argument if you want some moderate view to be taken seriously.
Also, Catholic morals? SIR PECUNIUM!!!
The moderate position on abortion is “it’s none of my business what other people do with their bodies”.
I did this a while ago on my calves when I was shaving off all of my body hair. Not fun! X_X Two bloody gashes. It’s better than that Nair shit, though…chemical burns are way less fun.
@Aaliyah
You wrote,
——————————————————————————————————————-
Also off-topic BUT I JUST FOUND TWO FUCKING SPIDERS IN A BOWL OF CEREAL I WAS ABOUT TO EAT
I hate everything.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Yuck just through it away, and wash the bowl. Than make sure there are no arachnids in the cereal box. Worse case scenario, call an exterminator.
“The moderate position on abortion is “it’s none of my business what other people do with their bodies”.
Yes. This.
Also, all hail Man Boobz regulars.
P.S.
I really hate spiders.
Nair is crap. I haven’t had burns from it (ow!) but I tried the version that’s supposed to be for facial hair. One, it didn’t work, and two, it stinks.
Blunt razors are all douchecanoes who want to force us to give birth or be men’s slaves in any other way deserve.
Speaking of cereal, it might be an idea to get sealable plastic containers to keep it in, if you get spiders in the cupboards. ::shudder::
Spiders don’t eat cereal, so if they went in there it was because there were already bugs in the cereal. Sweet dreams!
AAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
Whew. Good night, everyone.
Oh dear.
Yeah, I was thinking weevils. Haven’t seen those since my days in Libya and ew, so much more ew than spiders.
Most horrible thing I’ve found in food in the last few years was the unopened bag of rice that had some sort of freaky looking moths hatch in it. I could see them flapping around inside trying to get out as I threw it away. Ew…never buying from the store where I got that again.
I haven’t used Nair myself; I’ve just heard some horror stories from a fellow trans* woman who used to use it. Speaking of her, I wish she would hang out here some day. One of the nicest people I know.
The earliest contraceptives I know of are Egyptian (so… IIRC, about 1,500 BC, maybe 2,000). The recommend a pessary (that is a lumpen suppository) of dried crocodile dung in a small linen sack.
Sort of like a sponge. As might be imagined, this is more effective than a modern would think, as it 1: blocks semen, and 2: change the ph of the upper vagina to one which isn’t good for sperm.
It’s also got the bonus of being something any woman who can find crocodile dung (personally, or in the market) could make/use herself.
And either Rome or Greece (maybe both) drove a plant to extinction for this reason (might’ve been abortion, not birth control but either way, 2k+ years of natural family planning)
Argenti: The extinction of sylphium was caused by Rome, but the most plausible reason is gourmandise. The volume of writing about it’s savory qualities dwarfs the references to it’s abortifacient properties.
The same is true of the nature of the complaints about it’s becoming rare.
It’s also not clear it was actually able to effect an abortion; though the evidence is that it was thought to be so (being referred to as, “the best method”, but not the only one.
This may be an artifact of who was writing, but given the odds ways in which the Romans were supportive of personal/bodily autonomy, it’s not that women were being kept from it, nor from writing about it. But the writings we have of it as an abortifacient are more in the nature of treatises, and the laments of its loss/paeans to it’s tastiness are in letters.
So I suspect it was a more generic consumption which put paid to it.
Also, I’m very sorry if I’ve triggered anyone’s arachnophobia. I can get triggered really badly myself.
*giggle*
*snort*
Newsflash, follower of a “kinder, gentler” despot…there is no such thing as a “true nature” of any human relations, because how humans relate to each other is learned.
Did I already tell the story of the (very large, still alive) moth I found in one of those pre-washed bags of lettuce?
[shudders]
Moths freak me out. One of them once flew into my face in the middle of the night when I went to the bathroom and I screamed so loud Mr C came running in thinking I’d hurt myself. And then I made him find it and kill it, because misandry (and also he’s scared of rats and mice, not moths).
CassandraSays, Did you see David’s question to you about using your “lightbulb moment” comment as a post? I’m sleepy, so I might have missed it, but I bet you’re okay with it so if you haven’t already said so… here’s your chance. 😀
I usually love moths. Ever since I was 6 I’ve been able to catch them with my own hands and then release them (without crushing their wings!). They’re just as soft as they look. And they’re cute, too.
Moths that scare me, though, can fuck off forever.
@ cloudiah
What post was that on? And hmm, actually I’d rather not have David do that, since I’ve seen what happens when the MRM is pointed at any specific woman online.
Pecunium — guessing you aren’t caught up yet, as if it works like wild carrot, I explained how wild carrot works. Of course, wild carrot is also, duh, tasty, so it being driven out more by general food use makes sense.
I can’t even remember what thread but the comment was very recent… And fair enough! (It was a cool lightbulb moment though. Maybe you’d be willing to let him paraphrase?)
Aaliyah – I just ate a bowl of cereal. It was ever so slightly stale but still good. I don’t think (I HOPE I HOPE I HOPE) there were any spiders in it. *shudder*
ProPatria – a patriarchy run by women is an oxymoron. For…obvious reasons. Don’t make me spell it out, FFS.
Also, “the true nature of gender relations”?! LOL. The problem is the word “true”. Gender relations are not a one-size-fits-all phenomenon. There never has been and never will be a “true nature of gender relations” because everyone is different, everyone relates to each other in different ways, gender relations in the past were different from gender relations today, and gender relations in the future will be different from gender relations today.
You use words like “moderate” and “marginalize” like a politician – i.e., like someone with no real understanding of the words or the context you’re attempting to use them in.
Aaaaaaand…it’s time for bed, kids.
Pro Patria Truthiness: Pop Quiz:
Which does the church condemn most stringently.
Birth Control
Capital Punishment
How about this pair:
Abortion
Unjust War
How does the Encyclical Humanum vitae address those issues (and to what degree)?
Does the Official Position of the Church on Capital Punishment relate to its attitude on Abortion, if so how?
Should John Kerry be refused communion, based on the official policies of The Church?
How about Antonin Scalia?
(both of them are confirmed Catholics, in case you didn’t know).
When did the present position of the Church get codified? What was the previous opinion of the Church?
What caused the change? How does that affect the moral status of the opinion of the church?
What is the nature of sin when a person takes part in an abortion? What about the use of Birth Control?
Why does the Catholic position differ from that of Judaism? In what ways does that difference reflect the difference between the two Covenants? And why is the more liberal covenant (i.e. that of the Sacrifice of the Cross, “the new covenant, for you and for all men”) the one interpreted as that which is more limited?
How does that reflect on the relative moral strictures of the two faiths? Which is the one which is (absent the presence of Divine Punishment) more “moral”.
Why do you say so?
If the Sacrifice of the Cross was enough to wash away all sins, and God is omniscient, and motive is material to the question venal/mortal sin; and God is all loving, and Heaven awaits for all who die without sin (and the Blood of the Lamb can wash away the taint of original sin; and baptism of those who are born with fatal birth defects) why can’t a moral decision be made about the quality of life for the living, while avoiding the pain of limbo for the child?
Since the present position of The Church is that unbaptised infants no longer go to Limbo, what is the moral problem of abortion? The fetal child isn’t being condemned to eternal separation from God (which is implausible; see, The Sacrifice of the Cross, the New Covenant, and the Omni-Benevolent, All-Forgiving God), so that aspect of the equation can’t be used to say it’s a greater harm, in the afterlife, and so the living must suffer, lest a soul be damned.
Does the doctrine of Just War, which says that when one is under an existential threat one can act in corporate defense, even when innocents are going to suffer; because war is impossible to limit to just the hostile parties, allow for the idea that an, “innocent” child may need to aborted, if the result of it’s birth would be so detrimental to the living that it might be better if it were never born?
These are all questions moral Catholics are asking. They are questions Catholic Theologians are debating.
What makes you so certain you are more educated in theology then they? Are you “touched by the Holy Spirit, and so become a prophet”?
Or are you courting the Deadly Sin of Pride, which goeth before The Fall?
*I am a Catholic. I considered taking Holy Orders. This is a serious set of questions, not meant to mock you, but rather to challenge your assumptions, because they seem to be somewhat less than clearly framed, and lacking in the perspective required to come to the certainty you are presenting.