The one where her head explodes

I'm a masochist. I enjoy extended periods of self-loathing, and will often put myself in a position that encourages further self-hatred. For instance, I have put off starting to exercise again (for "again" read "for the first time in 8 years") because if I lost the weight that PCOS and subsequent depression added to my frame, what would I beat myself up about daily? If I'm truthful to myself, I'd realise that even if I did lose the weight, I'd only find something else to detest.

This masochistic streak also manifests itself in my persistent desire to always be pissed off about something. Usually that something is infertility, and when others' opinions on infertility and its treatment are involved, be careful. I seek this shit out just so I can sit at my PC at work, fuming and bubbling with rage. I am the type of person that, if bored, would google religion and infertility treatment with the sole intent of angering myself so that The Dude can be subjected to hour long rants on self-righteous, close-minded twats. He's a lucky guy, to be sure.

This said, imagine my joy when this just fell into my lap. I didn't even have to go searching for it! Brief summary--MPs in Britain have proposed that couples undergoing IVF should be able to choose the sex of their babies. The BBC website has a section entitled "Have Your Say", where the brains of Britain crawl out from underneath their rocks and pass down their very valued judgments on subjects they are not fit to comment on. Apparently, asking the public if choosing the sex of a child should be allowed translates to, "Attention: all religious right fuckwads and ignorant simpletons--do not address the actual issue at hand, but rather do please tell us your stance on all reproductive technology. Fear not about offending people about a subject you know nothing about, because you are probably right because...well, because you hold an opinion and dammit if that doesn't count for something!"

Obviously you can read these comments yourselves, but I decided to select a few of my very favourites:

• "Totally agree with Chris of Telford! WAY too much money is being wasted on these selfish women who want to satisfy their own needs with the almighty BABY of their own. Plenty of kids out there are looking for homes, instead of all this rubbish maybe some relaxing of the adoption policies is needed!"

-First of all, hardly any money is spent on these "selfish" women that want a child. To my knowledge, most local health authorities do not fund IVF. Mine was to start as of today, but GLCP suggested that it will probably take ages to take effect. Secondly, I will never understand how pursuing fertility treatment because you want a biological child is selfish. Once again, a subject I do not think people should comment on until they have to go through it. This person should SHUT up and go ADOPT some of these KIDS if she's so DESPERATE to make things RIGHT.

• "Boy or girl - who cares? Far too much taxpayer's money is wasted on IVF as it is - I thought the NHS was there to treat sick people. Women who cannot have a baby are not sick - they just want something they were not destined to have. Spend the money on the people who are already living and often in severe pain, and let the women use their energies making the world a better place, I am of the opinion that the world's population should be falling anyway - the present one is unsustainable."

-The issue of what the NHS (National Health Service) should and should not spend its money on is always hotly debated. Funny how so many people think IVF should not be funded, yet insist that obesity and smoking-related diseases should have unlimited funding. Infertility, for the most part, is not self-imposed.

• "I agree with those here that say that this is ridiculous. IVF is interfering with nature and that's suspect enough. There are all kinds of reasons why people find it hard to conceive and many of them are because nature knows best. Spending NHS money on IVF treatment is hard to justify. Then allowing people to choose the sex of their baby is just plain wrong."

-Oh goodness...if we are going to quote interference with nature, how about this? Medicine in all of its forms interferes with nature! Medicine by definition is interference with nature!! Medicine exists to keep people alive longer, and in as little pain as possible. Isn't this classified as interfering with nature?

• "My reasons and the justification for my arguments stem from a very sound Biblical perspective. This shows that the Creator of all forms of creation Jehovah Elohim is the only Supreme God who has a right to not only determine a baby's sex but also determine the constituent elements of its spirit as well."

-Well, there is always one.

• "IVF treatment has no place in the NHS, with limited funds such self indulgent treatments should be returned to private sector."

-Ah, a valid point. IVF is tremendously self-indulgent, isn't it? After my last IUI failed I thought to myself, "Self, it would be nice to have a spa day. A nice hot rock massage, pedicure, facial...Unless...yes, yes! What about IVF instead? Getting constant injections, painful, invasive procedures, endless cooter pokings, emotional hell sounds fun, and a brilliant way to spoil myself!" Oh, the life of an infertile is so decadent! Excuse me, boy, fetch those grapes and feed them to me whilst I lounge.

• "If you can't cope with kids, don't have sex - or at least use protection! If you do, don't wait until you're 40 and need IVF."

-Or, don't inherit a disease that renders you infertile so that at 26, IVF is the only option. Or, don't wait until you find the right person to actually attempt to procreate with, just make sure you do it before you're 40. Or, time travel to 35 years ago when a woman's first priority was the home, so that you can have all your kids by age 30. Wow, thanks. It's suddenly so clear to me now.

• "We have an over populated planet, so nature ups the rate of infertile couples. So we give IVF. What will nature do if we create an imbalance in the sexes? I have one child - I only wanted one, a boy. I did have a boy. Would I have considered IVF to chose the sex if it had been available - no. What next - choose to rid our children of genetic conditions? My son is dyslexic and I still would never have tampered with genetics. Consider the list of influential people with genetic conditions - Albert Einstein (dyslexic), Stephen Hawkins, etc. Think about our world if these people had not been allowed to exist."

-I didn't think people this stupid could type. We have an overpopulated planet for which nature redresses the balance by making certain people infertile. The writer must be ever so concerned about the overpopulated planet, which is why she had a child to contribute to the overpopulation. Oh, and nature has a lot to answer for. That bitch made me infertile to ensure the numerical harmony of the population? She's toast. Oh, and luv...It's Stephen H-A-W-K-I-N-G.

Luckily there were plenty of pro-IVF ers that bothered to write, most of which either went through IVF or were planning on it. Those writers didn't piss me off though, hence their omission.

Right...so what is next? Oh, Molly's link today had me mighty pissed off, so maybe I'll hunt down further information on that topic so I can spend my Saturday seething and angry with the state of the world. Again.