"Come on, you know there are those women who ruin it for all of us. Who'll just go crazy with it."

Well, then, it is their problem. They are given all of the information when the Plan B is given to them. Why should people irresponsibly using the thing be a reason to keep everyone else from responsibly using that thing?

This is an example of why everyone who cares about making their own decisions should be a libertarian. Why should someone else's personal beliefs dictate what you can do with your body OR paycheck? As long as it's not inflicting on anyone's rights they shouldn't care.

Ok, I'll admit to ruining this for all women. Can I help it if I like to go crazy with an awesome Plan B-centered orgy every Friday night? Sheesh.

Even though Plan B is a pharmaceutical, it's emergency contraception, NOT an abotion pill, so it should be dispensed to women just like condoms. Can you think of anyone who would argue that only responsible women should get to use condoms?!?

I think women got the idea that we can't be trusted with Plan B *because* it has been so tightly regulated. Making women ask for permission has just been another way of infantilizing us and I think that has really fed into the notion that only *responsible* women should even be allowed to purchase the pill (read: "mature" women who are have proven that they're grown up and don't need to ask daddy's permission anymore).

No way can we make contraceptives available over the counter. People might start using them and then the anti-abortion groups would have nothing to do. And who wants a bunch of rabid oppressive jerks running around free?

Right?

Since you asked what am I judgemental about, I'll share. I grit my teeth a little bit when I'm out with a very professional and progressive woman and let her know that I'm a feminist and the response is (with a wierd confused thumb up your ass look) "oh well I'm not at all a feminist but...".

I posted on this same story at my blog, too.

To kick off the discussion of "what are you judgmental about?", I'll be brave enough to jump in first:

I'm judgmental of women who change their last names when they get married.

Yes, I know it's wrong. Yes, I know many women-- including many women whom I respect-- who have done it. Yes, I know that NOT changing my name didn't make me a better feminist and women choosing to change their names aren't "bad" feminists. But it's upsetting to me, and I cringe and feel sad whenever I hear of it.

So feel free to judge me on that! . . . As long as you confess to something you're judgmental about, too.

*sigh* Exactly. Who cares if some women use it repeatedly? Sure we want women to use more reliable methods of birth control, but there aren't any medical reasons why women can't be serial users.

And what's more, studies show women aren't more promiscuous and don't have more unprotected sexual encounters with more access to Plan B.

I'm rather judgmental as well!

I have never subscribed to the "some will ruin it for everyone" theory when it comes to very important life choices like EC and abortion. As the first poster said, just because some will use something irresponsibly doesn't make it right for that something to be unavailable for everyone. At some point people need to be held accountable for their own actions, be they responsible or irresponsible, and the rest of us should not be punished for it along with them. Basically, we are not in 5th grade anymore.

Not to mention that the women I know who've used EC say it's SERIOUSLY unpleasant (as in: makes you violently, though temporarily, ill). I'm not seeing masses of women repeatedly popping it like Advil. (And of course, so the fuck what if they do...)

I am judgemental about a lot of things as a feminist. I am judgemental of other feminists who tell me I am not a feminist because I stay at home with my children. Never mind the fact that I work with three non-profit organizations, and in the middle of starting a fourth non-profit in conjunction with one I already work with. Never mind that I am a farmers market manager and a seamstress and a homeschool teacher and that I WANT to be home with my children...isn't that what our movement was about in the gfirst place? choosing what you want to do, not just doing it for the sake of the norm?

I am judgemental of women's birth choices, mostly because I had Zoe at home after having my first daughter, Grace-who is 5- at a hospital and very traumatically. I am very judgemental of women who do not take the time to actually educate themselves about their bodies, their birth choices and the prenatal care choices.

I breastfeed and I am VERY judgemental of women who dont because they chose not to, not because they simply couldn't.

In this case...if a woman decides she want to have casual sex without protecting herself-which I am also very judgemental and angry about-and she feels the need to use this time and again, who am I to judge that aspect of her decision making? who is anyone to judge that aspect?

Fortunately Plan B (a newer generation brand of EC) is actually very gentle, most women who take it have very little or no side effects. This is unlike Preven (at least in the U.S.) or using certain brands of daily birth control pills, which are usually connected with more unpleasant side effects, like nausea. So, it is indeed quite safe!

Actually, I don't think this just applies to women judging other women (although it's unusually sad and annoying when it does). I've read that the majority of people believe that other people should always obey the law, but believe that they, themselves, can be trusted to decide which laws should be obeyed and which are okay to break. The belief that you can be trusted to do the right thing but all those strangers can't is pretty common.

As to what I'm judgmental about... gosh, how many years have you got? Let's limit it to the one that's most in my face lately: religion. I'm an atheist, a fairly passionate and outspoken one, and while I try very hard not to be, I'm often judgmental of people who believe in a literal, interventionist, all-powerful all-knowing all-good God. (Or indeed, anyone who ends a debate about religion with, "Well, I can't prove it and it's probably not rational, but that's just my faith." I just want to scream, "If you think faith always trumps reason and evidence, then why did you waste my time arguing with me?")

Ooooh, I'm judgmental about that, too, Greta!

Seems to me that this is an offshoot of the "The only moral abortion is MY abortion" phenomenon.

I used EC. Felt like a normal day for me other than that whole, FUCK AM I PREGNANT thought going through my head. But fortunately for me, I came out baby free. I'd buy it for any under aged girl that asked me for it, even if it were a stranger. And I'd probably help her pay for it, too.

Greta, I completely know what you are talking about. It's gotten really hard for me not to think evil thoughts about people that wear gold crosses and put Jesus fishes on their stupid SUVs. If I see someone wearing anything that associates them with Christianity I find it hard not to dislike them. I know it's wrong to just judge someone that way but I'm trying to fix it.

Oh, and people that drive Hummers. They piss me off.

I posted my thoughts on this at my blog.

Thanks Jen, excellent post. I really appreciated the confession--I can be judgmental too, but I work on it because "my" experiences and choices aren't right for everyone and its really important to remember that.

It amazes me to read those accounts of anti-reproductive rights protesters on the picket line one week, getting an abortion the next week, and then back out on the sidewalk with their gruesome pictures and false science. Only their abortions are justified. I think that much of it breaks down to "othering", well "the other"--women, minorities, indigenous people, the homeless, etc. If we fail to give other women the full complexity of our own humanity, we fail to be fully human.

I judge people who drive Hummers, too!!! Wow, I'm even more judgmental than I realized. And I already realized that I was pretty judgmental.

Also, I would buy EC for any under-age girl, too. Even if she was a stranger. Without a second thought.

I am judgemental about a lot of things as a feminist. I am judgemental of other feminists who tell me I am not a feminist because I stay at home with my children.

I would never consider you not a feminist because you stay at home with your kids, I myself am a SAHM. However I find it very difficult to consider you a feminist when the vast majority of your post has to do with judging other women based on what they do or don't do with their bodies. That seems a little counter-intuitive there.

Oh, gets me going big time. So share. What are you judgmental about?

Wow, where to start? :)

1. I'm not judgmental about religion. I am judgmental about people who DON'T THINK about their religion. Unless their religion requires them to believe that reason is from the Devil, they ought to use their minds. I know people who have chased me away from religion (which is really why I'm an atheist) because they think that everything is God's will. Something good happened? God is watching out for you. Bad happened? God is testing you.

Um, generally, your theories ought to be disprovable. Not seeing that with that system.

2. People who absolutely refuse to help themselves. Ladies, I know we are trained to be kind, caring, and compassionate, but that does NOT mean acting in such a way as to be make yourself a burden on others. Take care of yourself - your health, your mental health, and your career - before taking care of others.

3. My big one: women who want men to take care of them. Admit that you're a prostitute - exchanging sex for money.

A woman who stays at home with her children out of the desire to be a better mother is one deeply invested in a career, albeit one that does not pay. That is a far cry from women who see men as a meal ticket - those who use children as the excuse to not work, not as a job in of themselves.

rant over. :)

Okay a few things:

1) I also totally judge people in Hummers. I find that I judge those in a) Hummer limos and b) Hummers with personalized plates more than your average one though.

2) If any girl asked me to buy EC for her, I would do it in a heartbeat, without a second thought. However, since I don't look like I am definitely over 18 (I'm only 20; and I look it but I get carded all the damn time), I doubt it would be a few years before I would actually get asked to do that. And I am kind of hoping that by then Plan B will be available over the counter to EVERYONE.

3) I guess I kind of judge people who surround themselves with Jesus paraphenalia as well, but I try to allow my opinions of them to remain fluid unless they actually start discussing how wrong my life is without the presence of "the big J.C." Gag me.

And finally, I don't believe that in order to say to yourself, "I want to be able to do what I want with MY BODY," you should need to be a libertarian. Pretty sure I can have any political identity I want and still think that, and its not like libertarians are getting a whole lot done about the things they believe in anyway.

P.S. Wouldn't it be awesome to someday go to the doctor and have a basket full of free EC right next to the free condom basket?

Yes, I agree about the religion issue too. My grandparents are Muslim and I find their intractability with regards to their faith more than a little irritating. As you say Greta, it all comes down to, "well, that's what the [insert religious text here] says, and that's the word of God." And the problem with that is there's no flexibility of opinion about certain issues, particularly to do with women's and queer rights. For example, most religious people believe homosexuality is always unnatural/wrong - sure different people respond to it differently, some even with "compassion" and a view to "helping you find the right path" (blech) - but either way, their religious belief becomes an excuse for their bigotry, and a reason why they don't bother to investigate the matter further or try and see another perspective. So in essence, I'm judgmental about people who are judgmental, which is kind of ironic.

I do need to be more open-minded about religious people though, because at the sight of any indication that someone is a member of a religious institution, I baulk - I mean, I immediately assume they're a patronising narrow-minded bigot who I won't have anything in common with, even though I know that's not always true. Spirituality is really important to some people and I know that religion is often an inspiration for people to do some really amazing charitable work - plus there are many religious people who constantly question their own faith and really try to take a moderate stance. Something for me to work on.

And Tasha-Rose, it sounds like perhaps you've had some bad experiences with people judging you as not being a feminist because of the choices you've made to do with motherhood - and that sucks. But have you ever thought that being educated about breast-feeding, birth, and unprotected sex is often linked to privilege? And that perhaps poorer women and those who struggle with English as a second or third language might not be in as empowered a position as you are? Not to mention the fact that even women who are aware of the risks of unprotected sex may be incredibly disempowered to insist on the use of contraception for various psychological/sociological reasons? Feminism is about educating and empowering women to make choices that are right for them, not judging them for not living up to a rigid set of standards.

Good comment, Ledlight.

As for breast-feeding: there is evidence that breast-feeding leads to better outcomes (higher IQ, lower risk of disease, etc).

HOWEVER, there is a big difference between correlation and causation, and the latter has NEVER been established. More importantly, it is undermined because breast-feeding correlates so strongly with genetic and environmental factors that improve outcomes: those who breast-feed are wealthier, smarter, and more educated to begin with.

There's simply no evidence that breast-feeding improves things for the kid. I was never breast-fed and would like to believe that I turned out okay. ;) There are some substantial negatives associated with breast-feeding: breast milk is digested in two hours, requiring a new mother to feed her infant every few hours and getting no good sleep; it makes it difficult for new fathers to interact with their babies (which is bad for the kid, esp. if a daughter, for the marriage, and for the dad and the mother who must shoulder more of the burden); and it could place more stress on older siblings.

Not trying to convert you - just trying to point out that women who don't breast-feed aren't uncaring Mommy Dearests.

Me too, Cara! That's another one - the whole changing name thing... It's not that I think women who change their names can't be feminist, but I am kind of judgmental because I think all-in-all it's a bit of an 'unfeminist' decision. One of my feminist friends just got married - her new husband is a bit traditional and she didn't even bring up the name thing with him, she just changed it. I don't get why she's with such a 'traditional' man in the first place, but I'm worried it's a sign of things to come. Actually that's another thing I judge women about - choosing a moronic partner, especially one who's anti-feminist! I just don't get it...

On being judgmental.. I am judgmental about a lot of things. Religion, breastfeeding, Hummer drivers all being examples for me as well. But what it boils down to is that I am bloody fucking judgmental of people who JUST DON'T THINK.

i tend to be judmental of women who unthinkingly buy into all of the goofy trappings of modern weddings.
the diamond ring (i always want to say, you know someone in sierra leone is walking around without limbs so you can wear that bauble), the stupid confectionery dress, the horribly-attaired bridesmaids tripping over themselves for the bouquet- all of the money spent for such artifice.

I seriously judge people who follow the, "it happened to me and I'm alright" line of thinking. Sorry, oenophile, but I highly doubt the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists would tout breast milk as the superior form of nutrition, if there were "simply no evidence that breast-feeding improves things for the kid." Check out AAP's Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;100/6/1035) and ACOG's Clinical Review on Breastfeeding and I think you will see otherwise.

Breast milk is best milk, period.

Was just at the gym, and realized that I forgot an important one: People who don't exercise, and then complain because they're always tired and stressed and can't sleep. (And more generally, people who complain about their lives but don't take action to improve them.)

And I know what you mean about weddings, 13lesslee. Especially having worked my butt off throwing a very non-traditional wedding. It's not that I have a problem with any given traditional consumerist trapping (except the evil diamond); it's the unthinking acceptance of every traditional consumerist trapping without questioning what it means and whether it's relevant to your relationship.

Oh, and on that topic: People -- okay, women -- who plan the trappings of their wedding down to the last ridiculously petty detail, but then just use the boilerplate vows. I mean, these are the promises you're making to each other about your marriage -- you don't want to spend an evening figuring out what exactly it is that you want to promise?

Boy, I really am a judgmental bitch tonight, aren't I? Damn. This topic is scary.

I'm really judgmental of self-professed "fag hags". They could be really decent people for all I know, but you have to do a lot to convince me that your "totally awesome gay best friend" is more than just an accessory to you.It might just be the nervous lesbian in me who's worried about people's perception, though.

I also judge the Hummer drivers. I live in rural/suburban New York. You do not need a Hummer out here no matter how much money you make.

I'm extremely judgmental of people who won't recycle. There's no reason for it, really--get a bin, rinse out the goddamn can, and take an interest in your fucking planet, for god's sake.

What I'm most judgmental about, though, is people who won't read. I don't mean people who can't read or for whatever reason have little/no access to books. But if you're surrounded by opportunity to pick up a book and you just can't be buggered, it annoys me. I hate when people tell me they "don't read". In a similar vein, I judge college students who refuse to take their education seriously. This is costing you or your parents money, people. TAKE AN INTEREST.

Concerning EC, I've never really had a problem with "those sluts are gonna ruin it for all of us!" because as far as I'm concerned, those "sluts" can shag as many guys as they want and it will have absolutely *zero* impact on the rich white guys in Washington who think we shouldn't have control over our own reproduction. And those "sluts" are capable of making the decision that's best for them. Fucking doesn't rot your brain; they can still think.

There was a girl I went to elementry school with, who, when we were in highschool, allgidly had 3 abortions before we graduated. I don't know how true that was, but I'd have rather she used EC three times, or ten times or fifty times, than had 3 abortions before the age of 18. We had the same sex education in middle school, which was very thorough, but for whatever reasons she just didn't get the same out of it as I did. It was the late ninties though, and while we live in Canada, EC was a lot less publicized and heavily discouraged even in our health classes. Of course I would prefer her to go on the pill or make her boyfriend wrap it up, but when people are (for reasons I will never understand) incapable of simply saying "wrap it up", there should always be an affordable, accessable alternative to abortion after an accident or just careless sex. Abortions are going to be more risky for women than pills, and I would rather she take the risk with a pill (a pill which isn't cheap up here, even over the counter) than with an operation.

My list of annoyances

1) Women who have an abortion (or multiple abortions) and insist on calling themselves "pro-life" despite the fact that they don't regret having an abortion (or two or three). I just feel like grabbing them by the shirt collar and yelling "Stop trying to have it both ways!"

2) I support the right of the next woman to do whatever she wants to do with her body but I don't feel that I should be held responsible for her choice, meaning I don't support federal funding of abortion or the so-called right of a woman to have her children supported by the tax-payers. If you can't pay for your own abortion or support you kid then you shouldn't be having sex.

I'm very judgemental, but it's something that I'm working on.

i don't like it when women attack other women for not breastfeeding. i breast fed, and i recommend trying it if you can even though if can be an extremely difficult process despite the fact that it is natural. though in the end, along with all other things involving a women's body, it is her choice.

hummers. yeah, everyone has already covered how ridiculous those are.

people who refuse to read the facts about EC really push me over the edge. if they just take the time to do a little research they'd realize that it isn't an abortion pill.

i'm judgmental of people who use religion to oppress others, but not of religion in general.

if i hear anyone make a joke about rape then i automatically want nothing to do with them. i've heard a lot of date rape jokes, and i think anyone who thinks they're funny is sick. however, if i express my dislike for their humor then everyone labels me as uptight because of course they weren't being a sick fuck, but just "edgy".

i'm seriously annoyed by women who say they aren't a feminist, but have totally feminist views. then when you get down to why they have an aversion to the title it usually has to do with how they think men will then view them. same thing goes with why they might feel the need to act like a rape joke is acceptable so they're not viewed as an angry uptight feminist. yesterday was rough!

i could probably go on, but i think i've done enough damage. i know i'm being judgmental, and a little rude, but i'd rather think of it as that i'm wishing that people would stop these harmful behaviors.

I'm judgmental of anyone who thinks that a woman's "sluttish" behavior ought to be "punished" by making her give birth to a child she doesn't want. Sorry, who does that punish again?

And add my name to the "I'm not a feminist" peeve list. I generally interrupt them with, "Yes you are," prove it to them, and get on with the conversation.

I'm judgmental as all hell of people who adopt from overseas solely because they "don't want to deal with all that birth parent stuff."

I'm also judgmental of anyone who think s/he has a right to decide who screws and who doesn't--particularly when that decision is grounded in economics. WTH, Jamila--sex is for the rich?

I try not to judge people on the basis of their religion, but I do judge the ones who advertise their Christianity all over their cars in a society that is majority Christian as righteous jerks. (I don't like neoPagans who can't be bothered to study history either--the ones who swallow the "Olde Religion" stuff whole hog.)

I don't have kids, so I find it very easy to judge their parents by their behavior. I'm getting better about this, but when your kid is actively annoying others and you do nothing to stop it, I don't think much of you. Conversely, I've told some poeple what great parents I think they are--which is pretty damned patronizing of me.

I teach college, and I've had enough students who went above and beyond the call to not be incredibly judgmental of the ones who have the nerve to tell me that they paid their tuition and that means they get an A.

Finally, I'm not proud of it, but every time I see a red convertible peel out, I think "needledick!"

Thank you for such an honest post, Jen. I tend to think I'm non-judgmental, but when I thought about reciprocating your honesty, I was inundated with a list of my judgmental ways, echoing almost all of the confessions posted here: changing names, hummers, not breastfeeding when you could, not re-cycling, 'othering' anyone about any thing, weird white weddings that unthinkingly buy into (pun intended) consumerism, and as mara jade posted-PEOPLE WHO DON'T THINK. In the people who don't think category, I'm especially judgmental about a) people who think they exist in a vacuum, think whatever they want is a free choice totally uninfluenced by the social forces surrounding them and b) people who can only see issues through a single lens and are unable to modify their perspective.

Yes, as it turns out, I'm a very judgmental person. I'm sure I could expand my list!

Not to be too meta, but I tend to be be judgmental of people to are self-absorbedly judgmental.

Before you judge someone wearing a diamond engagement ring, do ask if it was an heirloom or a hand me down? Maybe a particularly god fake? Before you judge someone's decision not to breastfeed do you take a minute to think there might have been medical problems involved that the individual doesn't feel comfortable discussing with you?

I admit there are specific things I'm judgmental about. I think less of people that don't believe in evolution. I am wary of self-professed Republicans because of who they choose to associate themselves with. But in general, I'm judgmental about people have no interest in the actual circumstances of a decision. They just want to judge it in a yes/no, black/white context so they know whether to put someone in the good box or the bad bad box.

Oh--trolls and airheads, too.

Grrr...This really bugs me. There are plenty of drugs that are available over the counter that actually are addictive and actually can be abused and no one is suggesting that we ban them. Just the other day I was at the pharmacy waiting for my perscription when a man came in to buy needles. After he left the pharmacist told me that it bothered her to sell them to people like him because he never buys any medication to inject so she knows that he's using them for illegal drugs.

This is just a case of other people trying to impose their morals on women. I'm suprised that anyone who considers themself a feminist would have an issue with this.

I'm judgmental of the fact that male birth control isn't developed and embraced more vigorously. We're always hearing about how their reproductive bodies are invincible and they can sire children until their 80's or whatever, so shouldn't the doctors be fucking with their hormones a bit instead? When it comes time to chemically alter the male body there's a big dial tone.

I'm judgemental of holier-than-thou religious people. Of Hummers (someone in my boyfriend's parents' neighborhood actually seems to own a yellow stretch Hummer - or else he's rented it every time I've been down there).

I'm also judgemental about women who have several children by several different fathers. I probably should't be - I don't know what their lives are like, or what brought them to that point, or anything else. But my first thought in response is still generally "You know, you'd think she'd have figured out what causes those kids by now." Which, I admit, is terribly uncharitable.

I reread that and saw I was actually more judgmental about the issue than I thought! For the record, I don't consider all of women's hormonal contraception "fucking with hormones." I realize the best ones are often developed by feminist doctors, and some people actually feel better on the pill. What I RESENT is the way a woman's body is expendable, we can change it here, there, and everywhere (think about how the first pills, IUD's etc. had side effects; it seems like we've been bleeding and cramping and getting infections for decades...) and yet there is no funding to even conceive (pun intended) of doing this for men. The social vibe I resent is that my body can be perfected (I've actually had gyn's suggest the pill for PMS) but his is perfect the way it is.

And don't get me started about how the fact that birth control is her responsiblity translates into judgments about the ability or inability of women, their effectiveness as a human being, etc. when birth control "fails." I would love to see a world where men carried some of the stigma for unplanned pregnancy. I wouldn't be surprised if the stigma magically evaporated altogether before that happened, though.

And in no way would I want men's hormones to be "fucked with" blithely. However, it HAS felt like my hormones were fucked with in the past, and I resent that only half the population has to deal with this dilemma in order to plan families. And anyhow, I'm pretty confident that unless it was proven to be completely and totally harmless to the physical and psychological welfare of men, it would never be released.

So, sorry about that. :) "I'm judgemental of society for not supporting male birth control pills." That's what I meant to say.

on EC:
i work for a planned parenthood and we sell it otc. from my experience with the sales that i've done, i can say that there aren't a rash of women who seem to be taking advantage. for one, it's pricey! but when i talk to them about if they're on a regular form of bc, etc, they often have reasons why they're not and most often the reason they are there is because, from what they say, the condom broke. so it's not as though it's a majority of women who are just being plain irresponsible and saying "it's okay - i can get ec!!" i find that they tend to not be so happy they are there in the first place and do listen when i talk about bc options or correct condom usage to prevent future breakage...

as for being judgmental, i agree with Roni. i definitely have some pet peeves but i try to have an open mind about most things/people. most times, if you talk to someone that you would have otherwise just judged, you'll find that there is a story there to which you can relate. maybe they are not knowledgable about some of the things you are or maybe there are other things going on. regardless, i don't really feel it's my place to "judge" anyone...

On the whole breast-feeding thing, I think a friend's doctor said it best--"Breast is best, but only if it's actually in the baby." It drives me a little crazy when people judge other women for not breastfeeding when they have no idea why she made that decision. Can't we trust that women will do what is best for their kids?

I'm not just judgmental about Hummers, but really about all SUVs. There are very few people in this country who actually need one. In fact, I'm very judgmental of anyone who puts "style" in front of gas mileage when it comes to buying a car.

I don't comprehend this at all. I mean, EC is not like Sudafed, where the fucking meth-heads really *did* ruin it for everyone, getting it damn close to taken off the market (and no, PE is not an adequate substitute) because they abused it to make drugs. You can't do anything with EC except not get pregnant. So how *can* you even abuse it? If you took EC every weekend, how would that affect my life in any way?

As for judgementalism, I was raised in a judgemental family and struggle very hard to overcome my judgementalism. One area I have not overcome -- which is probably a natural part of the process -- is judging the overly judgemental. In particular, music snobs. I'm sorry, but you are not a better, more moral or even smarter person because you listen to indie music no one else ever heard of. I am going to listen to Nickelback if I damn well want to and I am not going to give a shit about your opinion, because the fact that you must form opinions about the value of other humans based on what music they like is pathetic.

I am judgemental of people who don't want to pay any money into the social safety net, but are happy to use the roads and the Internet. The unwanted child you help a woman not to bear today, the wanted child you help a dirt-poor woman to raise and feed tomorrow, is the child who *won't* break into your house and steal your credit cards to feed his drug habit the day after tomorrow. I am tired of paying waaaaay more tax money than I should have to because idiot libertarians and tough-on-crime Republicans think it is a better idea to lock up criminals *after* they've committed several crimes than to make a fair society where fewer people feel driven to crime in the first place, which tends to be a much cheaper solution to the problem.

I am judgemental of people who judge other people for what they do with their bodies. Yeah, breast is best, but formula doesn't kill kids in developed countries where the water is safe, unless the parents are actively neglectful. You don't know what stresses exist in another woman's life, so get off her case unless her kids are *actually harmed*, rather than bitching her out because they are not maximally benefited. Likewise, if a person is too tired and stressed and they don't exercise, MAYBE THEY DON'T HAVE TIME. Exercise takes time, effort, often takes special equipment or training (or at least safe roads to take walks or jogs on), and specifically it takes "me time", time not spent watching children or working at your job or helping others, and women are chronically short of me time. I personally find that when I'm tired and stressed, I get depressed, and when I'm depressed it's an uphill struggle to make myself do *anything* for my own benefit.

That being said, I am hypocritical. Because yes, I do judge women who change their names. It's such a damn hassle to do, I can't see why anyone would do it unless she holds some sort of fallacious opinion like "my name isn't mine, it's my dad's, and I don't like my dad" and I'm tired of women being trained from birth to think of their own names as something disposable. But I need to overcome this reaction. It's none of my business what other people do with their own names, and the fact is that society *is* training women to consider their names disposable, so should I hold it against other people that they couldn't overcome their training? And what about women who genuinely hate their names -- isn't the problem there that men who genuinely hate their names face enormous institutional sexism and pressure *not* to change theirs? I kept my own name and I'm teaching my daughters that they should keep theirs, I teach my sons that their dad actually did change his name when he was a child (he was adopted by his stepfather... and the new name was much cooler) in order to reinforce that name-changing *is* an option for men if they choose... there is nothing more I need do. Judging other women's choices that don't harm me is wrong, though I can judge the impersonal societal forces that pressure them into it. So I need to work on this.

For me part of what bugs here is that there's such a fuss over regular, non-emergency birth control and how we ALL need to keep it away from those crazy harpies because then the'll just be able to have sex all the time without producing eighty seven babies and then society would CRUMBLE I TELL YOU. While I think Plan B is great and should be an OTC option, I would much rather see more emphasis placed on birth control education than focusing on Plan B....which of course is inevitable because people hear the oh-so-basic "well, the end result is that you don't get pregnant" and everyone goes to get their pitchforks. After all, why worry about how it works before unleashing a stream of vitriol across the public discourse??

My view on abortion, beyond the whole It's My Body, Nuff Said concept, is that either you're mature enough to consider and weigh the risks and benefits of an abortion and ditto the risk/benefit of keeping the baby or adopting, or you're immature enough to consider abortion a casual solution and thus probably don't need a miniature human being relying on you. I think a similar concept can be applied to Plan B - either you have the sense to do what you've gotta do and are using Plan B as a last resort, or you're using it casually as a form of birth control, which I personally think is foolish and odd, but is your own choice. And even so...who does it hurt, in the end? The potential for abuse here isn't some kind of Sudafed/meth issue, it's limited to the mother's body, which is the jurisdiction of her own damn self.

I really do think more BC education is the best way to keep it un-abused, although I don't think the risk of abuse is huge to begin with.

Ok- on breastfeeding...I gave birth two weeks ago to a baby girl, whom (of course) I absolutely adore. I spent the last eight months taking care of a body that was no longer my own, albeit temporarily. Vomiting for months, swelling, getting almost no sleep, crankiness, quitting smoking, eating healthy, etc. were not easy, but it was completely and totally worth it. At this point, I am not breastfeeding due to certain medications I take. If this were not the case, however, I think I still may have chosen not to breastfeed. I enjoy having my body back to myself, so to speak, and I'd prefer that it not serve the function of meeting another's needs. I do not think this would make me a bad mother, but rather a mother who has not forgotten herself. (Please do not construe this post as passing judgement on those who breastfeed- I'm merely pointing out that there are many reasons women choose not to do so, even if there are no medical reasons).

Hypocrisy is human nature. It's easy to justify holding others to a different standard than we hold ourselves. It isn't at all surprising to find that there are women who use EC who are against it being OTC. The number, however, does seem depressingly high.

There's no real question that OTC EC would increase the total number of sexual encounters. But, the idea that it would encourage a significant number of women to engage in a significant number of extra encounters is ridiculous. And if it did, so what? I don't see why an inflated fear of pregnancy should have to play a part in a woman's choice when/if to have sex.

There's also no real question that it could prevent unnecessary abortions. I believe abortions are a bad thing and am for any measure that would reduce the number needed. The fact that so many Right-To-Lifers are against it pretty much makes it clear that their real agenda is anti-sex.

Oh, and on the issue raised about male birth control. I'm a male and wouldn't really have a problem with it; I couldn't actually speak to how much opposition there would be to it. Obviously you could count on the Religous Right ro raise Hell. The trouble is that, except as an option for committed partners, there wouldn't be much call for it. I mean would you really just take a guys word for it if he claimed he was on birth control?

A lot of the things I see listed are things it's OKAY to be "judgemental" about. For example, I don't think it's "judgemental" (in a negative sense) to dislike someone who tells rape jokes. IMO, it's IMPORTANT to judge people who hurt, demean or abuse others. It's

That being said,
I judge people who drive Hummers.
I judge people who don't like dogs.
I judge women who change their last names when they marry.
I judge people who do IVF.
I judge people who don't recycle.

Wow, I like this comment thread, and I could write on forever, but I'll try to keep it brief:

Breast-feeding: all good if you can, but no one has mentioned how EXTREMELY PAINFUL it can be for the mother!!! And I'm sure there's just a TON of reasons why women don't/can't. If I have children, and it is very painful, i am not going to cause semi-hourly pain on a daily basis for ensuing months to myself!! Sorry!

I'd appreciate comments back on my Number ONE thing I am judgmental about: People who say they are Republicans!! I honestly can't say that I agree with anything on their platform this day in age (maybe over half a century ago when they were Pro-Choice, but not now!), and I honestly can't understand any one who isn't money hungry or crazy who would be...particularly feminist sisters. Are there any of you that are Republican, or agree with a Republican issue and can explain to me why? The only situation I can understand is my mother: she used to be Republican when they were Pro-Choice and hasn't changed her registration because she feels that Democrats aren't promoting womens' issue like they should because they think they have women 'in the bag' so to speak when it comes to voting. So she's hoping that they will cater and talk more about women's issues if they think they have to pull women over FROM the republican side to vote for them (which my Mom does anyway, but it's a very good insight into the campaigning system).

Also this reminds me of my stupid best friend - oxymoron, right? But she's been my BF since 6th grade but I am increasingly more and more fed up with her bull as we get older. At the pool yesterday, she was shocked when I told her I don't agree w/ anything on the Republican platform that I am aware of (and I am pretty up on the politics). She said she is apathetic about politics because she thinks everyone lies. I started explaining to her why she should care (e.g. no Bush's in office please!) and touched on many issues Bush has made harder on us including the partial-birth abortion ban. She said, 'why wouldn't you want that to be banned? Women should be getting abortions way before that!' This is a woman who just got her MBA in sociology *scoff* and she is advocating the "I don't trust other women to get an abortion in the first trimester so we should just ban them from doing it later" So obviously she thought the ONLY women getting partial-birth abortions were those that had no problems except that they simply decided, 'eh, i don't really wanna have a kid anymore. Just thought of this yesterday and didn't think about it months before'. Dear gawd. It's amazing how much educating I have to do for her because she refuses to do it herself and she refuses to care - because I'm just a CRAZY LIBERAL and she doesn't want to be like me! Look out!

Whew, ok, had to vent. It's very difficult being her friend any more - she's your typical female chauvinistic pig, and didn't used to be this bad. Don't know what happened to her.

Chell_belle just touched on yet another thing I'm judgemental about:

People who are apathetic about politics. Now, of course I'm MORE judgemental of people who aren't apathetic but are Republican. But I want to scream when people say, "I don't really care about politics" and admit that they don't vote, don't pay attention to the news, and generally don't believe politics affects them. It MATTERS who gets elected. It DOES affect REAL PEOPLE in myriad ways. Obviously I don't have to tell you that, I know.

I'm judgmental about....

Fundamental/evangelical christians, women who change their name after marriage, people without post-secondary educations, people who drive ANY SUV, soccer moms, women who begin having children past 40, people who have been married more than once, people who send their children to public schools, people who send their children to private schools, parents who don't or won't pay child support, and parents whose children misbehave in public. And that's just off the top of my head.

I don't think it is possible not to be judgmental but it is possible to realize that your judgments about people's lives have little to do with their right to live it as they see fit. I am a firm believer in you leave me alone and I will leave you alone.

ooh, Chell_belle! Ouch! Ouch!

first ouch is on breastfeeding (I was careful to be judgmental only with those who could--which covers those who can't because of medical, physical, economical, emotional, whatever reason. But about the pain--yes it hurts like hell, but only at first for a few days or a couple of weeks at most, not for months. Then it's quite pleasurable; it causes the uterus to contract back to its normal size and can even stimulate orgasms. With my second child, I was shocked that it hurt like hell all over again, but at least I knew it wouldn't last too long.

Second ouch: old friends. i tend to keep up with friends forever even when I find that i'm censoring myself or giving fem 101 lessons to the unappreciative. Some people just dump friends when they figure they're past their expiration date, but I'll torn about that. I guess I'd keep at it, don't censor yourself, and feel free to be judgmental about her!

Thank you, Roni: "But in general, I'm judgmental about people have no interest in the actual circumstances of a decision. They just want to judge it in a yes/no, black/white context so they know whether to put someone in the good box or the bad bad box."

For me, I get frustrated when a woman changes her name at her marriage, but often the situation is so much more complicated than what appears on the surface. I know what I would do and the reasons why, but before I judge, why don't I ask her why she decided to do what she did? Often, I've found that hearing a woman's story about her decision helps me get know her context and relax my judgments. This usually works for any person and any decision I start to feel judgmental about.

With that said, once I know a person's context and story, I can still be angry or frustrated or joyous around their decision. But at least my emotions feel more grounded and less icky than when I judge.

Pockysmama, does that mean you only approve of people who homeschool their children, or people who don't have children at all?

Like Roni, I'm judgmental of anyone who doesn't believe in evolution. That's a statement against their critical thinking skills right there.

Likewise, I'm judgmental of anyone who describes themselves as "evangelical" or "fundamentalist".

I'm judgmental of anyone who believes in astrology, homeopathy, etc. Again, that critical-thinking thing.

I'm judgmental about tobacco smokers, especially young ones. Okay, it used to be that the effects of smoking weren't well-publicized, but now that they are, just how stupid do you have to be to start such a habit? I try not to badger them, though, because I know how hard it is to break a bad habit even when addiction's not involved.

I'm judgmental of atheists who set up a false dichotomy of "willfully ignorant religious nutbars vs. calm, logical, intelligent atheists". (I'm looking at you, Richard Dawkins.)

I'm judgmental of anyone who uses "everyone's entitled to their own opinion" as an excuse to put forward an uninformed opinion.

Speaking of uninformed opinions, I am judgmental about virgins who make judgments about other people's sex lives. (Wendy Shalit is a good example.) Sure, making judgments about other people's sex lives is generally not a great thing anyway, but it particularly irritates me when someone who hasn't had that experience starts talking about what sex should be.

I'm judgmental about people who have poor writing skills. I try not to be, since they might have a learning disability, and English may not be their first language. It's especially hard if the only way I know them is over the internet.

I seriously judge people who follow the, "it happened to me and I'm alright" line of thinking. Sorry, oenophile, but I highly doubt the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists would tout breast milk as the superior form of nutrition, if there were "simply no evidence that breast-feeding improves things for the kid." Check out AAP's Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;100/6/1035) and ACOG's Clinical Review on Breastfeeding and I think you will see otherwise.

Breast milk is best milk, period.

1. Get a working link if you want to prove something.

2. I threw that in as a joking aside, not as data. Calm the fuck down and get a clue.

At this point, I am not breastfeeding due to certain medications I take. If this were not the case, however, I think I still may have chosen not to breastfeed. I enjoy having my body back to myself, so to speak, and I'd prefer that it not serve the function of meeting another's needs. I do not think this would make me a bad mother, but rather a mother who has not forgotten herself.

Bingo.

While this site says that breast-feeding is good for women (although that shouldn't translate into a requirement to do it...) it also has a long, long list of diet restrictions:
http://kidshealth.org/parent/food/infants/breastfeed_eating.html

Hey, at least pregnant women can eat peanuts and Mexican food. Heaven forbid your kid have a food allergy.

oenophile:

I've obviously offended you, and I apologize. I am also sorry that I took your comment (that you weren't breastfed, but you turned out ok) the wrong way; all too often I see that very same argument used in many different situations and, well, as I admitted, I seriously judge people who use it.

I checked out the AAP link again, and it works for me. I'd just Google "Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk" if you are still unable to copy and paste. It has tons of info on breastfeeding and the benefits for both mothers and their infants. I just don't understand why you wouldn't want to give your kid the best start possible to life. Sure, breastfeeding is difficult for some women to the point where they aren't able to do it for long or at all, but I get really irked when people actually discourage women from breastfeeding as if formula is equivalent, because it is not.

ACOG does not have a "long, long list" of foods to avoid, only those that you've noticed cause a bad reaction in your baby (http://www.acog.org/publications/patient_education/bp029.cfm). Hopefully, this link works for you.

I agree that it's entirely plausible that breast milk is the most nutritious way to feed you baby, in a perfect world. However there are a lot of caveats. If you work full time and can't afford 1)the pump, 2)the time to pump then breastfeeding may not be best. If you subsist on cheetos and Red Bull, breastfeeding may not be best. If you are on several medications breastfeeding may not be best. Breastfeeding is only as good as a mother makes it to be. It's my opinion that a mentally sound, less stressed, more rested, and healthy mom makes for a better infancy experience. If you can do that while breastfeeding that is, of course, optimal. A lot of us can't. I breast fed for about two months until my daughter just couldn't stand it any more. She hated being cradled and tolerated being "footballed" only occasionally. She would stretch completely out across my legs and tilt her head at a 45 degree angle and that's the only way she would nurse, with me bent completely over (I'm double jointed in my hips, that's the only way I could pull it off, no shit). After about two months of that I let her sprawl with a bottle so her head could rest at a normal angle, and I could sit up straight. My daughter's healthy as a horse and just fine in all other areas.

What I don't understand about the arguments is that no one can really point to severe deleterious affects to formula besides some kids who have allergic reactions (which happens also with breastmilk, depending on what you're eating). Look at it this way--we'd all probably be in agreement that sending each of our kids to private schools would increase their potential for learning and doing better in the world, but obviously not everyone can. But we still don't castigate those who send their kids to public school even though in doing so the public school parents aren't giving their kids every single best opportunity. But even though there's really nothing wrong, most of the time with formula, and formula fed children are virtually indistinguishable from breast fed children (go to a playground sometime and see if you can pick out all the ones who were breastfed and all the ones who weren't just by observation--bet you can't) we treat formula feeding moms like they're sitting their kids down with a package of Marlboros. It's not the same. Not doing what is absolutely the best, for whatever reason--you can't afford the private school, you can't purchase the expensive organic cotton clothes, you don't have the time or desire to breastfeed--does not make you a bad parent. It just makes you a human who makes choices based on particular personal situations. Breastfeeding is more nutritious, done properly. It is not, however always best.

Here's a decent link to that affect, too (hope it works):

http://www.slate.com/id/2138629/

There are some substantial negatives associated with breast-feeding: breast milk is digested in two hours, requiring a new mother to feed her infant every few hours and getting no good sleep;

That's not a negative at all, actually. It's thought to be one reason breastfed babies have a lower risk of SIDS. Google "breastfeeding" and "sids" sometime.

it makes it difficult for new fathers to interact with their babies (which is bad for the kid, esp. if a daughter,

Ridiculous. Babies bond with all kinds of people when they're older. Infancy is not the only time to bond. In the meantime, there are other things fathers can do to bond besides hold a bottle. Among them, rocking/dancing to sleep, bathing, reading books/playing and diapering.

for the marriage, and for the dad and the mother who must shoulder more of the burden)

See above. Being the milkmaid is much easier when a husband is doing the housework and the above infant tasks. If he has time to sit and bottle feed, he has time to vaccum. Give me a cuddly baby and a movie while my husband cooks dinner or washes dishes any day.

and it could place more stress on older siblings.

Learning to share a mother teaches older children compassion and empathy. Most toddlers and younger children I know make the transition amazingly, and often delight in fond memories of when they were nursed, watching. And again, that Dad who wanted to be so involved with the feeding? It's story time.

It's not a breasteeding debate, but these were just too silly.

I suppose I am most judgemental of people who try to tell people what they should be doing with THEIR OWN BODIES. This includes abortion, breastfeeding, EC, etc.

My body belongs to me alone. If I wished to have a child, and then chose not to breastfeed, I would have absolutely no tolerance for people telling me that I am harming my child with my decision. My reaction to this would be equal to my reaction to those people that try to tell me that if I have an abortion, I am risking future infertility, etc., even though that is a complete falsehood.

My point is this: I think that any person who tries to convince a person to follow their way of thinking by attempting to scare them into it is supremely annoying. It does not matter what information they are using to do so. I believe that it is important to make informed decisions, but if you are not the one actually making the decision, then it is not your place to butt into it. You should instead assume that the person you are talking to was intelligent enough to do a Google search on their own and find the same information as you are about to give them, and yet has still decided to make the decision they have made. Give them a little credit.

I really don't understand the judgmentality on not breasfeeding, either. It's a special relationship, and no one can inflict a relationship on you. If you're not having fun, it won't be wonderful. I don't think you can pressure someone into it.

However, you can provide a supportive environment so that our VERY breastfeeding unfriendly culture is offset. And this culture is often manifest by people saying that it's going to interfere with your relationship, you've decided to give up your "life" to be a "milk cow" or your other children will suffer. It says you won't have any freedom and you're not taking care of yourself by waking up at night, and by the way, can't you do that in the washroom? This stuff is as old as the hills, and all part of the same shiny postwar culture of intimidation who would just rather not see it at all.

" There are some substantial negatives associated with breast-feeding: breast milk is digested in two hours, requiring a new mother to feed her infant every few hours and getting no good sleep;

That's not a negative at all, actually. It's thought to be one reason breastfed babies have a lower risk of SIDS. Google "breastfeeding" and "sids" sometime."

Riiight. There's a what, one in a few thousand chance of dying of SIDS and a very real chance of harming your body from not sleeping?

" There are some substantial negatives associated with breast-feeding: breast milk is digested in two hours, requiring a new mother to feed her infant every few hours and getting no good sleep;

That's not a negative at all, actually. It's thought to be one reason breastfed babies have a lower risk of SIDS. Google "breastfeeding" and "sids" sometime."

Which is fabulous, unless you are the mom in question.

Fabulous for older kids to learn how to share, except what to do if Mom is too tired from not sleeping in six months to care for them properly?

Are you assuming a nice upper-class family where the father works and the mother can afford to stay at home? Pray tell, how does one not sleep at night and not lose one's job from underperformance?

It's not like you are poisoning the kid with formula. Chill.

Oenophile, don't obscure the issue. I said very clearly that I harbor no judgements either way, and you can't defend yourself by trying to hand me the "breastfeeding police" baton. It simply isn't mine.

*You* are the one who described the above as "substantial negatives with breastfeeding ." That means working moms, stay at home moms and everything in-between. You described it as "negative" of "breastfeeding."

Every family must appraise its own situation. But to describe it as a "drawback" this way implies that it is a necessary part of breastfeeding, and the only way to get out of it is NOT to breastfeed. Which, as I said, would be mighty convenient for lots of people not interested in women's issues at all. Why do women need paid maternity leave if they can just formula feed and have a lovely night's sleep each night and keep working? And if she's willing to stop breastfeeding, then why do you need those breaks to pump, and ohmigod what happend to my choice TO breastfeed?

This is why the more supportive culture regarding breastfeeding is better for women's choices in general. People may start the guilt trip, but no one is going to rig the game so that the CHOICE to bottle feed isn't possible. Breastfeeding rights are what needs to be preserved and expanded, regardless of whether or not you personally want to breastfeed. And advertising particular negatives as general ones works for the other side.

And by the way, what is the rate of death, hospitilization, car accidents or job firings resulting in family starvation due to maternal lack of sleep? Is it higher than SIDS? You can't compare a "death" rate to a "temporarily tired" rate. You've got to do apples to apples, I'm afraid. Most people wouldn't set those consequences as equal.

great man." I know one. When I discovered that's who she is, I lost all respect for her. In its place grew disdain. I am not proud of this.

I find manipulators dishonest and unappealing.

I am also an intellectual snob. This seems both morally reprehensible and completely ineluctable, based on my worldview.

And just to clarify, I don't think fear of SIDS should ever factor into the choice of how to feed one's baby. There is no causal relation, just a statistical one. However, Oenophile brought up night waking babies as a negative, and since it can potentially be saving their lives in some cases, as the research indicates, I simply recast that as a positive.

Ack, it cut off. That should read "The great woman behind the great man..."

The last names thing like some people said....also anyone who goes tanning or smokes...especially when they smoke in front of me when they're WELL AWARE that I don't and that I think it's a disgusting habit and...if I wanted lung cancer, I would smoke myself...

Wow, there really is a lot here about what other women do with their bodies.

I judge

1. People who voted for Bush twice.

2. People who refer to the "scientific debate" about evolution vs. creationism.

3. People, often the same as under nos. 1 and 2, who say evolution is "just a theory" (learn what words mean before you use them).

4. People who say "stipulate" when they mean "provide" (this is one of the few things that really annoys me when I edit).

5. People who make shit up when citing to the record and add insult to injury by citing to actual page numbers.

6. People who think that religion somehow gives them a licence to be assholes.

7. People who think that a refusal to let them impose their religion on others constitutes "bias" against their religion.

8. People who actually brag about taking mythology literally and think it makes them a better person.

9. People who think sexism is somehow not as bad as racism or any other form of bigotry or discrimination.

10. Atheists who can't be bothered to develop a considered basis for being atheists (totally undercuts the fact that atheism at least has a rational basis)

11. People who give their kids stupid names because they think it's cool (you try walking around school with a name like Percy and get back to me on that).

12. People who attack feminists for not "coming to a compromise" with people who believe that the State should be the ultimate authority over a woman's uterus.

13. People who think that religion and morality are the same thing.

14. People who preface racist/sexist/homophobic remarks with "I'm not a racist/sexist/homophobe, but,"

15. People who call themselves libertarians while supporting unfettered , unaccountable corporate power.

16. People who think that voting for Democrats, rather than their often indistinguishable opponents, somehow makes everything better.

17. People who attack non-voters without saving at least some vitriol for a political system that offers no real options.

18. People who sloganise (aren't there enough things stifling actual thought in this society already?)

19. People who say "reverse racism"/"reverse discrimination", as if there's a right direction in which to discriminate.

20. Guys who refer to women as "ladies".

21. Guys who call women "females".

22. People who play golf.

23. People who think that they can insulate a false statement of fact by saying "I have a right to my opinion".

24. People who refuse to look at legislative history at all, even when the statute was enacted last week, but are willing to base their entire construction of the Constitution on what they think someone who died close to two centuries ago would have thought about e-mail.

25. People who oppose the Equal Rights Amendment.

26. People who treat homelessness as an aesthetic issue.

27. People who call Democrats "left wingers".

28. People who call statist reactionaries "conservatives".

29. People who refer to Leninism-Stalinism as "Communism".

For fuck's sake, Sage, get a clue.

Let's recap:
1. A poster said that she's judgmental about women who don't breast-feed.
2. I pointed out negatives of breast-feeding, for the obvious to everyone but you reason that breast feeding isn't all sunshine and rainbows and women who don't aren't necessarily being selfish, uncaring Mommy Dearests.
3. You got on my case because I said "negative" and "breast feeding."

My head hurts. Your utter inability to see how horrible you are being is astonishing. Want an excuse to jump all over me? Take it. Have at it. Just don't pretend that I said that I'm against breast-feeding - because, babycakes, I was the first one there defending a woman's choice on the matter.

So let me take that "choice" baton back from you - because you're patently against anyone who might ever want to stick up for women who don't breast-feed.

I was getting a little annoyed with all these breast is best fanatics and then oenophile came in and was far more eloquent then i could ever be about why its a personal choice and why its not always "best" for not only both mother and child, but the rest of the family as well. as someone who is adopted and therefore obviously not breasfed, i often find the militant "breast is best" crowd very offensive, esp considering the fact that i am far more healthy then most people i know who received all this miracle milk from their mothers breasts (and that is not even addressing the ridiculous amount of allergies that are rampant these days-which by the way they attribute to an increase in breastfeeding bc guess what, people dont follow the guidelines!). i know you cant use your own special case as data, but i thought i would throw it in there.

anyway, thanks oenophile (also since i agree with your list above-but would ad guys who call women "broads" to that list). feminism IS about a womens choice, and not judging women when they make one different from your own.

i say this but indeed i am judgemental. i would agree that i often thought that some people ruin it for the majority. i say this bc people always use the minority case when arguing against a social policy. for instance, people who are against welfare bc "some people just keep having children" , or "women lie about rape" bc of the maybe .5% times that is true, or, in this instance, women who will go buck wild bc of Plan B. sure, there are always those people. but like Amanda said "trusting" people is not necessarily a good reason to give freedoms bc there will ALWAYS be those you cannot trust, and their decisions should not mean you cant be trusted either.

"And Tasha-Rose, it sounds like perhaps you've had some bad experiences with people judging you as not being a feminist because of the choices you've made to do with motherhood - and that sucks. But have you ever thought that being educated about breast-feeding, birth, and unprotected sex is often linked to privilege? And that perhaps poorer women and those who struggle with English as a second or third language might not be in as empowered a position as you are? Not to mention the fact that even women who are aware of the risks of unprotected sex may be incredibly disempowered to insist on the use of contraception for various psychological/sociological reasons? Feminism is about educating and empowering women to make choices that are right for them, not judging them for not living up to a rigid set of standards."

I do take that into consideration and I am actually involved in educating women about their birth choices and about breastfeeding. I work with the WIC program as a breastfeeding mentor. I work with Trust Birth in encouraging women to seek out the truth behind their birth options and to question their midwives and doctors as they are PAID CONSULTANTS, not he be all end all of information.

So I understand what you are getting at and perhaps I should have expanded on it in terms of what I do to change the status quo....

Oh and I speak Spanish. ;)