Fit Pregnancy recently released their list of the best cities to have a baby, and U.S. Crunchy Central Portland, Oregon was at the top. The magazine looked at the 50 largest cities and their quality of health care, breastfeeding rates, availability of doulas and midwives, stroller friendly parks, etc. Results were tabulated by the “Fit Pregnancy Advisory Board”, whoever they are — probably a bunch of interns throwing darts at a map. Maybe I’m just bitter because my hometown, Chicago, ranked number 28th. What? Who wouldn’t want to have a baby in a Cook County hospital? And the Windy City gets an “F” for stroller-friendliness? The whole place is covered with concrete, what’s not stroller-friendly about that? Have you ever tried to push a stroller on a wooded trail or through a lush meadow? Not fun. Hmmph. Here’s a run down of the top 10:

1. Portland - perfect for socialists who don’t like to shave their armpits.
2. Minneapolis - great if you’re having a baby popsicle.
3. San Francisco - every commercial that uses a runaway ball, car, piano, etc. films on San Francisco’s hills — that’s stroller-friendly?
4. Seattle - like Portland, but with more caffeine and software moguls.
5. Denver - good luck with those high altitude breathing exercises.
6. Boston - if you’re carrying a wicked pissa, Boston is freakin’ awesome.
7. Omaha - so boring I don’t even have anything to say about it.
8. Virginia Beach - best thing Virginia has going for it? It’s not West Virginia.
9. Austin - just hope your due date isn’t during South by Southwest.
10. Albuquerque - actually, Albuquerque is kinda nice.

Bottom of the list? Detroit. So at least we’re better than the Motor City. Which is like being a better parent than Britney Spears.

Bookmark to:
   

I will admit that I cringe whenever I hear someone say, “Guess what? We’re pregnant!” The phrase really rubs me the wrong way. I think it’s because I never romanticized the whole pregnancy process, so to me “we’re pregnant” just feels so corny and cloying. Couple that with my bit of anal insistence on proper language use and disdain of malapropisms, and the eyes tend to roll back into my skull — not exactly following the rules for politeness on hearing such joyous news from a friend (perhaps that’s why I don’t have many of them).

So imagine my reaction reading this piece from the L.A. Times about a Christian group — quelle surprise — that’s trying to “change abortion’s pronoun”:

These days, he channels the grief into activism in a burgeoning movement of “post-abortive men.” Abortion is usually portrayed as a woman’s issue: her body, her choice, her relief or her regret. This new movement — both political and deeply personal in nature — contends that the pronoun is all wrong.

“We had abortions,” said Mark B. Morrow, a Christian counselor. “I’ve had abortions.”

I don’t doubt that some men may feel a sense of loss, but slapping a label on it and treating it like some sort of syndrome is a bit much, is it not? He goes on:

Morrow, the counselor, described his regret as sneaking up on him in midlife — more than a decade after he impregnated three girlfriends (one of them twice) in quick succession in the late 1980s. All four pregnancies ended in abortion.

Years later, when his wife told him she was pregnant, “I suddenly realized that I had four dead children,” said Morrow, 47, who lives near Erie, Pa. “I hadn’t given it a thought. Now it all came crashing down on me — look what you’ve done.”

What have you done? You prevented yourself from lining up “baby mamas” like you were P. Diddy, that’s what. I was prepared to write it off as a guy a bit too much in touch with his feelings until I read that this melodrama was part of a bigger plot — to use the passionate stories to try and influence the Supreme Court:

Therapist Vincent M. Rue, who helped develop the concept of post-abortion trauma, runs an online study that asks men to check off symptoms (such as irritability, insomnia and impotence) that they feel they have suffered as a result of an abortion. When men are widely recognized as victims, Rue said, “that will change society.”

Abortion rights supporters watch this latest mobilization warily: If anecdotes from grieving women can move the Supreme Court, what will testimony about men’s pain accomplish?

“They can potentially shift the entire debate,” said Marjorie Signer of the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, an interfaith group that supports abortion rights.

I say not to worry — we all know that when a large group of privileged white men feel they are suffering an injustice, nothing is ever done about it, right?

Oh, shit.

Bookmark to:
   

A former coworker of mine, who came and went within a span of 4 months, announced during her 2nd week of employment that she was expecting a baby. Congratulations were offered to the glowing, petite mother who could not have been more than a few days pregnant, given her size 0 figure.

Surprise, surprise. She tells us, she’s not 2 weeks pregnant, she expecting in 2 weeks! Apparently, her and her husband hired a surrogate to carry their biological child and being the intrusive, nosy-nelly I am, I said to her, “Isn’t that wonderful that there are options for loving people to have children when they aren’t able to?”

Okay, so pretty presumptuous of me, I know. Then she says that getting pregnant wasn’t their problem, but that she has a pinched nerve in her neck that sometimes requires pain killers and she didn’t think it was safe to carry a baby. “Plus,” she said, “I have a weight restriction of 15 pounds, because of my pinched nerve, so I couldn’t carry a baby to term, unless I wanted to be bed ridden and who wants that?” (I dunno know, someone who wants a baby perhaps?)

Since she’s being so free with the info, I say, “Huh. Your surrogate must be a really good person.”

“No, she’s not,” she replies. “We had to pay her and we paid her really well.”

I couldn’t resist. “Tell me if this question is too personal, but what does something like that cost?”

“Enough to send her 3 boys to college.”

So, two weeks later she is out on maternity leave. Apparently, she likes the number two, since she also took two weeks off for her maternity leave. (Yep, two whole weeks.)

Then, she comes back, hair perfect, clothes ironed but emotionally distraught and she proceeds to lose it. Every day, she comes in crying. She complains incessantly about how much her nanny costs and that she is paying her nanny more than she makes. I suggest that perhaps she quit? She says she can’t, her husband’s company is laying people off. It starts to annoy me. She cries all day. She claims she’s going through post-partum depression. (Is that possible, if you haven’t actually given birth?)

And then she ups and quits.

Weird.

Bookmark to:
   

Wow, given the giant stick up her ass I figured the bitch hadn’t gotten laid in years.

Word on the street is that Nancy Grace, of bug-eyed, mega-attitude, Tammy Faye makeup fame, is expecting twins. Ms. Grace has already deemed herself to be the exploiter, er, protector of child victims everywhere, so she’s sure to be a good mother. Doesn’t seem like she’s the type that would become unhinged over the presence of a certain undesirable method of hanging ones clothes at all…

From Access Hollywood (home of credible news, of course!):

NEW YORK, NY (June 26, 2007) — TV’s legal eagle, Nancy Grace, has revealed that she is four months pregnant with twins. But that’s not her only headliner: she also snuck off and got married!

“I always said I wanted a family,” Grace told Access Hollywood. “I grew up in happy, loving family [and] I wanted it too. But until now I just thought it wasn’t meant to be for me. And as part of God’s mysterious plan, I’m given this wonderful blessing late in life — and I could not be happier.”

47-years-old, and happier than ever! The CNN “Headline News” host married Atlanta-based banker David Linch in April. The couple reportedly met when they attended Mercer College together in the late 1970s.

Huh, just curious, does “God’s mysterious plan” include Clomid?

It seems more moms are bringing babies into this world with a much larger war chest than in previous years. First and foremost, the independence and checkbook of the more mature and sophisticated mother have allowed to her be a demographic worth fighting for. While older female generations laugh and roll their eyes at the calculated planning of 20- and 30-somethings in deciding when to start a family, it is not uncommon to hear women, both married and single, announce that they will have children when they can afford it. I remember a college professor ridiculing such silly and well-intentioned plans asking, “When can you ever really afford a child?”

But today’s moms aren’t investing in basics, they’re investing for hardcore label collateral. Items such as Bugaboo strollers, triangle-shaped-gold-leaf cribs, Tiffany spoons, bilingual V-tech toys, laptops, children’s life coaches and tutoring. It’s all a part of bringing children into this world to truly appreciate the most important part of life — stuff.

From The Hamilton Spectator, Deirdre Healey observes corporations circling around pregnant women like sharks:

Retailers are scrambling to get a piece of the billions spent by older, more educated and affluent moms. The kind who wants her child to wear the latest fashion trends, play with educational toys that encourage brain development and have as many hair and skin care products as she does.

Toys that will make you smarter. Something tells me we’re not talking paper, pencils and books, oh, no. That’s for chumps!

Retailers are scrambling to get a piece of the billions spent by older, more educated and affluent moms. The kind who wants her child to wear the latest fashion trends, pThis generation of moms are competitive when it comes to raising their children, said Maureen Hupfer, marketing professor at McMaster University’s DeGroote School of Business. They are always trying to out do their peers with products that promise a better experience for their child or will make life easier for mom.

Fiona Petit, co-owner of Baby World in Stoney Creek, is constantly going to baby shows with the hope of finding the latest product from all-terrain strollers to baby carriers with special back support.

I love this part: “products that promise a better experience for the child”. I’m sure an infant riding around in a Bugaboo stroller is just so much more enlightened that those whose parents have to “settle” for Graco. Surely the difference will be monumental and significant. One will talk with his/her teeth clenched while the other will hurl obscenities at the bus driver.

In the wake of criticizing Madonna for her latest African purchase, I wonder if I might have been too harsh on her when everybody’s doin’ it. The only difference is they’re doin’ it with their biological children. So, what’s the difference? Could it be that babies in general becoming mere accessories? Something by which to compare and accessorize the accessory? And what happens when one grows tired of the accessory?

Of course, there are always better to be had. Better educations, better cars, better clothes, better haircuts but that does not make a better child or a child better.

If only it were that easy.

The children who are nothing more than victims of their parents material issues seem to pay the ultimate price; the love and affection they seek is only given back with stuff, but it is not stuff that they need or want. The price they pay is often times a trade off for what they truly desire. While their parents are out accumulating more stuff, they wind up with things that don’t mean much. I see it quite often. Vile and mean spirited children with a whole lotta stuff and the stuff becomes worthless with nobody to share it with.

Bookmark to: