The Cellar

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Current Events (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Anonymous Mom, No Dads, + 14 (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=19415)

HungLikeJesus 02-10-2009 12:20 AM

Yes, you're right, Ali. China is running into all kinds of unanticipated issues, like an unbalanced male/female ratio (my wife thinks China will go to war just to balance this out).

I think the only answer is to let the human race just fade away and the koalas can run things for the next few thousand years.

Aliantha 02-10-2009 12:22 AM

Hmmm...koalas are pretty stupid animals you know. Almost as stupid as humans.

I think the mice will be happy to take over. ;)

sugarpop 02-10-2009 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliantha (Post 532711)
So how many kids should people have then HLJ? Do you think we should stop breeding all together? Or just have one? China tried that out of course, and look at the human rights issues that resulted from that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungLikeJesus
Yes, you're right, Ali. China is running into all kinds of unanticipated issues, like an unbalanced male/female ratio (my wife thinks China will go to war just to balance this out).

Well, I think part of that stems from the fact that China is such a patriarchal society. Women are not valued, and so girl babies are not wanted. That resulted in all kinds of human rights issues.

sugarpop 02-10-2009 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aliantha (Post 532726)
Hmmm...koalas are pretty stupid animals you know. Almost as stupid as humans.

I think the mice will be happy to take over. ;)

Or the cockroaches...

binky 02-10-2009 08:06 AM

Okay now I'm pissed. I read this morning that our latest California whackjob gets social security for some of her 14 kids, and foodstamps. This in a state so broke, that I can't get the tax refund, that I am fairly owed, for a month, and may get an IOU from the state even then

sugarpop 02-10-2009 09:02 AM

Yes. I heard this morning she was getting over $400 in food stamps, and a few thousand for something else. THAT is why she shouldn't have been able to make that choice. Man, I am fucking PISSED OFF about this. grrrrrr. California apparently does have a much more generous program for people like her, even if they are illegal immigrants. I thought after a certain number of kids, your benefits actually went DOWN. And they should. We should not be encouraging people to have loads of kids when they have no way to take care of them. And those babies are going to need some serious care. And apparently, some of her other kids are mentally ill. Is that not a reason to stop her from having more? sheesh.

classicman 02-10-2009 01:37 PM

Gee really? And I thought she was getting by on her looks - NOT!
Maybe they should pass a law that if you are on welfare or state funding you cannot have any more kids or something. This doesn't seem feasible, but damn this shit is getting ridiculous.

TheMercenary 02-10-2009 01:40 PM

I saw her on the tube last night. She is oblivious.

xoxoxoBruce 02-10-2009 01:43 PM

Yes, it's infuriating. I try to keep in mind that this idiot, and a few others I hear of, are anomalies and don't represent the millions of people that are doing the best they can but losing ground. I don't mine giving a helping hand to the majority.
There will always be scammers but we shouldn't throw out the baby with the bath water.

TheMercenary 02-10-2009 01:46 PM

Well stated. In this day and age I am not thinking much past this one person at this point. The problem is there is a whole bunch of other people out there like her. Not with multipul births but scamming the system where now thousands of others could be using it as designed.

DanaC 02-10-2009 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 532880)
There will always be scammers but we shouldn't throw out the babies with the bath water.

Fixed!

piercehawkeye45 02-10-2009 03:11 PM

I'm not against the idea of population control, it has been used well into prehistoric times, but the issue becomes extremely tricky. In order to have a good population control system, we first need to find a saturation population based on an average standard of living. This works similar to designing a water treatment plant. If we do not know how much water is used per capita, no design will be successful unless by pure chance. Then resource regulation has to come into play. If we are going to start focusing on population control, regulating resources must go hand in hand or else the saturation population will drop and we will resource droughts for some people.

I strongly believe that without regulating both factors, population and resources, we can never produce an effective population control method. Obviously regulation control does not mean that each person can only have so many gallons of gas per day, but a national goal has to be set and met.

After getting our resource use goal, we can then determine how many people can live under that resource goal and make actions accordingly. If the population is not threatening the stability of the community, influential campaigns will be more effective. If the population is threatening the stability of the community, harsher methods should be used. It will be completely dynamic based on the situation on hand.

I greatly prefer this because it should not go against individual rights unless we are in great crisis because we will be looking at birth rates from a national level. If one person has 14 kids and 14 other families have one less kid then the average goal, we do not have a problem on a national level.


That brings me to my opinion on this issue. An increase of 10 children is not large on a global or even national level but the questions are whether she is the norm, we have the resources to handle that increase if it is the norm, and whether she as an individual can support her children.

On the national level, our population (USA) is increasing. For every woman having 5+ children, we do not seem to have 3 families having only one or even no children. But that is a different issue.

If she can not pay for more children, then I am against handing it money to her within our current system. If you are under welfare and show no signs of coming off, no extra money should be given for having an excessive number of children (5+ being excessive). If you are financially stable with 14 kids and then hit a roadblock and need to go to welfare, that is a different story.

All in all, I don't really care. Most people don't have 14 children and the extra money given to her won't effect me but I can see how this can be a problem if this happens to often.

Trilby 02-10-2009 03:14 PM

I guess people are mad b/c they feel she's being rewarded for mental illnesss and nutty behavior. That's my guess.

Aliantha 02-10-2009 03:20 PM

If that's why they're mad they should probably get over it. The world is full of nutjobs.

Trilby 02-10-2009 03:22 PM

"Get Over It" - the Eagles

I turn on the tube and what do I see
A whole lotta people cryin' "Don't blame me"
They point their crooked little fingers ar everybody else
Spend all their time feelin' sorry for themselves
Victim of this, victim of that
Your momma's too thin; your daddy's too fat

Get over it
Get over it
All this whinin' and cryin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it

You say you haven't been the same since you had your little crash
But you might feel better if I gave you some cash
The more I think about it, Old Billy was right
Let's kill all the lawyers, kill 'em tonight
You don't want to work, you want to live like a king
But the big, bad world doesn't owe you a thing

Get over it
Get over it
If you don't want to play, then you might as well split
Get over it, Get over it

It's like going to confession every time I hear you speak
You're makin' the most of your losin' streak
Some call it sick, but I call it weak

You drag it around like a ball and chain
You wallow in the guilt; you wallow in the pain
You wave it like a flag, you wear it like a crown
Got your mind in the gutter, bringin' everybody down
Complain about the present and blame it on the past
I'd like to find your inner child and kick its little ass

Get over it
Get over it
All this bitchin' and moanin' and pitchin' a fit
Get over it, get over it

Get over it
Get over it
It's gotta stop sometime, so why don't you quit
Get over it, get over it

sweetwater 02-10-2009 03:44 PM

Q: how could she afford to pay for the medical workups and implantations that led to this fiasco? Was it lawsuit income or the 'generosity' of the doctor? I haven't seen the answer anywhere, though I perhaps have missed it. Seeing red makes it hard to read, ya know. And will California build her an enormous shoe in which she and her brood may live? Just askin'! :)

Trilby 02-10-2009 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sweetwater (Post 532931)
Q: how could she afford to pay for the medical workups and implantations that led to this fiasco? Was it lawsuit income or the 'generosity' of the doctor? I haven't seen the answer anywhere, though I perhaps have missed it. Seeing red makes it hard to read, ya know. And will California build her an enormous shoe in which she and her brood may live? Just askin'! :)

Did you read the song lyrics, missy? :)

sugarpop 02-11-2009 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 532912)
I'm not against the idea of population control, it has been used well into prehistoric times, but the issue becomes extremely tricky. In order to have a good population control system, we first need to find a saturation population based on an average standard of living. This works similar to designing a water treatment plant. If we do not know how much water is used per capita, no design will be successful unless by pure chance. Then resource regulation has to come into play. If we are going to start focusing on population control, regulating resources must go hand in hand or else the saturation population will drop and we will resource droughts for some people.

I strongly believe that without regulating both factors, population and resources, we can never produce an effective population control method. Obviously regulation control does not mean that each person can only have so many gallons of gas per day, but a national goal has to be set and met.

After getting our resource use goal, we can then determine how many people can live under that resource goal and make actions accordingly. If the population is not threatening the stability of the community, influential campaigns will be more effective. If the population is threatening the stability of the community, harsher methods should be used. It will be completely dynamic based on the situation on hand.

I greatly prefer this because it should not go against individual rights unless we are in great crisis because we will be looking at birth rates from a national level. If one person has 14 kids and 14 other families have one less kid then the average goal, we do not have a problem on a national level.


That brings me to my opinion on this issue. An increase of 10 children is not large on a global or even national level but the questions are whether she is the norm, we have the resources to handle that increase if it is the norm, and whether she as an individual can support her children.

On the national level, our population (USA) is increasing. For every woman having 5+ children, we do not seem to have 3 families having only one or even no children. But that is a different issue.

If she can not pay for more children, then I am against handing it money to her within our current system. If you are under welfare and show no signs of coming off, no extra money should be given for having an excessive number of children (5+ being excessive). If you are financially stable with 14 kids and then hit a roadblock and need to go to welfare, that is a different story.

All in all, I don't really care. Most people don't have 14 children and the extra money given to her won't effect me but I can see how this can be a problem if this happens to often.

In looking at population and population control, we also have to look at how much longer people are living nowadays. We keep extending life. Since people are living so much longer, that is another stress on the environoment. You can't have people living longer, and also have the population growing, especially when some people are choosing to have so many damn kids. And while it may be an anomaly to pop out 8 babies at once, there are a lot of people having more than 3 or 4 kids as well. And with fertility treatments, there are a LOT more people having 4 or 5 babies at once.

I think there is a big ethics issue here. I believe people have to look at the long term effects of their choices on the world at large, and not just think about what THEY want. There is a bigger picture here. And if people aren't willing to look at this on their own, then we have an obligation to the world community to force them to look at it.

sugarpop 02-11-2009 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sweetwater (Post 532931)
Q: how could she afford to pay for the medical workups and implantations that led to this fiasco? Was it lawsuit income or the 'generosity' of the doctor? I haven't seen the answer anywhere, though I perhaps have missed it. Seeing red makes it hard to read, ya know. And will California build her an enormous shoe in which she and her brood may live? Just askin'! :)

Apparently, before she became disabled, she saved all her money while working as a nurse or something. She is obviously educated, but she also obviously has mental issues.

One of her other 6 kids is autistic, another one is a "little" autistic and has disabilities, and another one has some other kind of disability. She receives disability from the state for those 3 kids. So why would a responsible doctor implant her with more embryos, knowing she already had three kids that were disabled in some way? He should be investigated for that.

piercehawkeye45 02-11-2009 05:20 PM

Quote:

I think there is a big ethics issue here. I believe people have to look at the long term effects of their choices on the world at large, and not just think about what THEY want. There is a bigger picture here. And if people aren't willing to look at this on their own, then we have an obligation to the world community to force them to look at it.
Do you really think the world community is going to take this seriously? This issue is just so much about resources as it is population. Yes, the US and European countries might be doing well in keeping a slow or nonexistent population growth rate but we are completely unsustainable when it comes to resources. If more efficient methods and lifestyles were set up, it would be much easier to support our world population.

TheMercenary 02-12-2009 06:49 AM

Imagine that....

Taxpayers may have to cover octuplet mom's costs

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

classicman 02-12-2009 08:16 AM

I heard mention of plastic surgery to look more like Angelina Jolie last night during a tv interview. She flatly denied it, but there were before and after pics by the station and she also caved on her "exaggeration" of not receiving assistance, welfare.
Its really too bad that there are children involved because this woman deserves ZERO from the taxpayers.

Trilby 02-12-2009 08:54 AM

This woman's real obsession is Jolie. She wants to look like her and have a bunch of children like jolie - only problem is she certainly doesn't have jolie's income.

Man. check the before and after photos of her on the web. I hope the doc that did this gets his license yanked.

TheMercenary 02-12-2009 08:13 PM

Nice. {not for weak stomachs, sfw}

http://www.tmz.com/2009/02/12/octomo...very-goodyear/

sugarpop 02-13-2009 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 533437)
Do you really think the world community is going to take this seriously? This issue is just so much about resources as it is population. Yes, the US and European countries might be doing well in keeping a slow or nonexistent population growth rate but we are completely unsustainable when it comes to resources. If more efficient methods and lifestyles were set up, it would be much easier to support our world population.

I think a lot of people are sufficiently upset about it to evoke some kind of change in policy for fertilization techniques. Fertility is supposed to be for people who have trouble conceiving, not for people who already have a bunch of kids.

And hey, I agree about the sustainability issue. That is my whole beef. Well, that and the fact that she can't afford the kids in the first place. Personally, the rate the world population has increased over the past 100 years, I don't believe we could sustain it no matter what we did.

sugarpop 02-13-2009 12:11 AM

oh, and apparently she now has a websight asking people for donations to support her kids.

Cloud 02-13-2009 12:54 AM

I can't bring myself to get too excited over this woman. People do weird and stupid things.

glatt 02-13-2009 07:27 AM

She's getting death threats now and the police are getting involved.

I think she has poor judgment, but she hasn't broken any laws. People need to leave her alone. It's one thing to discuss the idea of this woman on a forum, but sending her nasty e-mails and threatening phone calls is worse than what she has done.

xoxoxoBruce 02-13-2009 11:12 AM

If she makes a public appeal, she's asking for flack.
I'm ok with nasty emails, as long as they are signed and not anonymous, in response to the website seeking donations.

classicman 02-13-2009 02:12 PM

There are extremists in the world and they will make death threats or whatever else, but she asked for it by "begging" for donations. I can't wait to see when some *&^% celebrity gives her a lot of money. A little more fame, the daytime talk show circuit, perhaps a series about the kids and their trials.... :vomit

This type of behavior is what gives humans a bad reputation.

No she hasn't broken any laws, we cannot legislate morality or ethics. What she has done is a travesty.

Shawnee123 02-13-2009 02:17 PM

I think those were the kinds of things she envisioned, classic, but what she got is quite different. Now that the backlash has really come out, I think publicity will only come in the form of ET or TMZ. She won't be getting any shows; I doubt celebs will endorse her actions. Angelina Jolie herself is probably going WTF?

Quote:

This type of behavior is what gives humans a bad reputation
lol...among whom?

DanaC 02-14-2009 04:43 AM

Dogs...

Sundae 02-14-2009 07:09 AM

Dogs! Don't get me started!
High class bitches only giving it out for studs with classy parentage, having 2-8 at a time, selling them - SELLING THEM! - to the highest bidder, having tails and ears docked - completely unnecessary surgery, not bothering to work.

Dogs, pah.
Never catch a human doing that.

Shawnee123 02-14-2009 08:16 AM

Damn dogs!

lol

TheMercenary 02-14-2009 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 534366)
Dogs...

Pussys...

Trilby 02-19-2009 09:50 AM

Looks like grandma is in danger of losing her home (where Nadya and all the kiddies live, too). She's approx. 24,000 behind on her mortgage...oh my.

classicman 02-19-2009 01:10 PM

I was waiting for something like this. I believe she may have had these kids, in part, as a solution to her/their financial problems. Fuckin' entitlement mentality.

Trilby 02-19-2009 01:22 PM

I can think of a lot of easier ways to make money than to have 14 kids...

classicman 02-19-2009 02:24 PM

That only makes you smarter than her. No one is claiming that she is smart

HungLikeJesus 02-19-2009 09:07 PM

I just got this in an e-mail:

Quote:

In honor of the mother of the octuplets, Denny's is offering a new breakfast meal: you get fourteen eggs, no sausage, and the guy next to you has to pay the bill.

TheMercenary 02-19-2009 11:27 PM

That was funny.

Shawnee123 02-19-2009 11:30 PM

:lol2:

Sundae 02-20-2009 05:52 AM

What about the bacon?
Oh I get it - none. Because no-one's bringing it home.

classicman 02-20-2009 08:23 AM

Well she is apparently getting a tv deal, selling the rights to pics of the kids and looking at a house in LA reportedly for about 2 MILLION. Isn't that special?

Shawnee123 02-20-2009 08:27 AM

She's the worst kind of ho. :headshake

xoxoxoBruce 02-20-2009 10:26 AM

We forsake you
Gonna rape you
Let's forget you better still.

Sundae 02-20-2009 10:33 AM

Right now, in Britain, we have a reality TV star who is trying to earn money to make sure her sons are okay.

Why?

She has terminal cancer.

She got the news when she was on Indian Big Brother (the reasons for which are too long to go into). She signed up for a series as soon as she got back to the UK, and they have followed her every step of the way. She, the tabloids, and I believed she would weather this storm as she has every other - she's a born survivor.

But no. She has months to live.
And journalists are finally coming round to treating her with respect.

Because when it's one of their own (John Diamond's cancer diaries in the Times) it's "brave". When it's someone from Big Brother it's "desperate" and "is there nothing she won't share?"

Jade Goody has admitted she is trying to bank enough to secure the future for her two sons. But also to show the process for other people in the same situation, who don't have the same media coverage. And to die as she lived - in the public eye.

Sorry, this ended up being off topic.
I have no support for the amazing clown vagina woman.
I just wanted to point out that a decent person who loves their children can have an acceptable reason for letting the media in.

Shawnee123 02-20-2009 10:34 AM

Absolutely, that is a good point.

Trilby 02-20-2009 10:37 AM

Amazing Clown Vagina Woman is a good name for a rock band.

xoxoxoBruce 02-20-2009 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl (Post 536730)
I just wanted to point out that a decent person who loves their children can have an acceptable reason for letting the media in.

I firmly believe the ACVW's plan from the outset was to become rich and famous.

classicman 02-20-2009 11:13 AM

I am skeptical and agree with Bruce.

Pie 02-26-2009 07:45 AM

Quote:

Report: Octuplets May Not Be Allowed Home
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that officials at a California hospital where octuplets were born late last month may not let the mother take the babies home unless she proves she can care for them. The information comes from talk show host "Dr. Phil" McGraw; hospital officials at Kaiser Permanente Southern California have refused to comment directly but said that, "In general, mothers with multiple births who have babies in the neonatal intensive care unit are given advice and counsel about what they need to have in place to care for the children when they are discharged."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/health/25rounds.html

toranokaze 02-26-2009 08:07 AM

A grain of sanity in an ocean of insanity.

sugarpop 02-28-2009 10:27 PM

Here's a thought, just like people shouldn't use abortion as a form of birth control, people who can't conceive shouldn't use fertility treatments to have litters.

Clodfobble 02-28-2009 10:44 PM

Here's a thought, people who never wanted children should shut the fuck up about fertility treatments, lest they accidentally offend some of the millions of great parents out there who happened to need them. Oh, and they should consider dropping all metaphors that equate babies to dogs, while they're at it.

sugarpop 03-01-2009 12:21 AM

I wasn't talking about people who used fertility treatments to have a kid, or even two kids, I was talking about cases like this woman, who already had six kids, 3 of which are disabled, before popping out 8 more, even when she couldn't afford the ones she already had. It isn't natural, and it isn't right. That's why I used the derogatory term equating it to dogs.

It is still a valid point. And the fact that I have CHOSEN not to have kids does not invalidate my opinion or the point I was making. I know a LOT of people with kids who feel the same way.

DanaC 03-01-2009 05:30 AM

I must agree with Clod on the dog thing. I really dislike all these comparisons to dogs and litters. It's utterly dehumanising. It doesn't just speak to the case in point, it speaks to femininity and womanhood more generally.

I occasionally frequent a gaming board and it has an off-topic section. Debates about abortion routinely involve comments like "if the bitches are too stupid to keep their legs closed" or others referring to 'bitches' 'squeezing out another fucking brat'

The attitude of the young lads on that board actually shocked me. Very misogynistic, very aggressively anti-female. The most common similes and metaphors for women and childbirth relate to dogs. They almost always refer to women in those debates in animalistic terms and almost always negatively.

Griff 03-01-2009 07:13 AM

I think its a socialization issue, as much as people defend gaming there is a de-humanizing aspect to it. Combine that with the attitude that develops on boards where folks say anything to get a rise and you get a pretty toxic environment. I'm wondering if some these boys who may be outcasts in the real world develop a really unhealthy support system on-line. Thinking of the teens around my girls, I'm drawing some pretty unscientific conclusions but it is enough to warn them about.

DanaC 03-01-2009 08:24 AM

It surprised me. And bear in mind, I've been bopping about the gaming boards for pretty much as long as gaming boards have existed. No word of a lie, there was a 'debate' on that board in which various young men posited their belief that females were naturally less capable of rational thought than males.

Along with other gems like "the problem with young women is they don't know how to entertain themselves" in a wider point about how to 'manage' one's relationship with a girl. That same poster was suggesting things like: "let her win the argument now and then, it'll make her feel good. There's nothing wrong with pretending she's as clever as you sometimes."

Clodfobble 03-01-2009 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sugarpop
I wasn't talking about people who used fertility treatments to have a kid, or even two kids,

What about people who used fertility treatments and ended up with triplets? Or people who used fertility treatments to become pregnant with their third, or fourth consecutive child? The only relevant point is whether the parent can care for the children, not how they got them. You've made it very clear in other posts that you think having even one child is grotesquely irresponsible from a societal standpoint, so when you focus on the fact that she "can't conceive," rather than the fact that she has no money and is obviously not acting in her children's best interests, you come very close to implying that she was infertile 'for a reason' and should take the hint.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:32 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.