Tuesday, August 31, 2004
Tampons in the West Wing
When, if ever, will the Oval Office bathroom need to be equipped with a supply of tampons? Surely someday we'll have a woman president. However, the youngest president so far was 43. Could a woman that young ever be a truly viable candidate?
At the earliest, a woman could be inaugurated in January, 2009. At that point, Hillary Clinton, Carol Moseley Braun, Christine Todd Whitman, and Olympia Snowe will all be 61. Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi will be 68. Madeleine Albright will be 71, and not eligible anyway. Elizabeth Dole will be 72. Dianne Feinstein and Ann Richards will be 75.
If average age of menopause is 51.4 years, our best bet may be Condoleezza Rice, who will be 54.
Did you notice how many of the prominent female politicians were born in 1947? Also born that year: Kim Campbell, the first woman Prime Minister of Canada. I guess that's the baby boom!
At the earliest, a woman could be inaugurated in January, 2009. At that point, Hillary Clinton, Carol Moseley Braun, Christine Todd Whitman, and Olympia Snowe will all be 61. Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi will be 68. Madeleine Albright will be 71, and not eligible anyway. Elizabeth Dole will be 72. Dianne Feinstein and Ann Richards will be 75.
If average age of menopause is 51.4 years, our best bet may be Condoleezza Rice, who will be 54.
Did you notice how many of the prominent female politicians were born in 1947? Also born that year: Kim Campbell, the first woman Prime Minister of Canada. I guess that's the baby boom!
Thursday, August 26, 2004
Keeping Up Correspondences
I always feel as though I am not in as close contact with most of my friends as I would wish. Months can go by, even years, without a word on either side. For the past few years, I have attributed this to my inconstant lifestyle; the fact that it's been years since I've felt confident that I would be in the same town or in the same job for longer than a few months. I'll get in touch with them when I get a job, I think to myself. That way, I'll have good news to relate. Well, tomorrow never comes, and correspondence falls by the wayside.
Of course, losing touch is a two-way street. I am no more to blame than they. And after a few years, that sank in, and lately, I've felt a lot less guilt about my inconsistent communications. It really is true that if we've been friends since seventh grade, a little thing like not seeing each other for 4 years isn't going to make lunch awkward when we do meet again. Or just because we were roommates in college, that doesn't mean that years later, we have to be in touch every week. In fact, it's especially nice to catch up after a while and to see how the other has changed and stayed the same; I find it's usually a mixture of both.
I have one particular friend who I haven't heard from in over a year; last summer when I called her number, it was disconnected because she had moved. Two months ago, she called and left me a message with her new number. She wasn't embarrassed that it had been so long, and I'm not upset. On the contrary: I'm excited to be back in touch. I look forward to when we finally are able to catch each other on the line, and set up a dinner date. But I'm patient, too: I think we're going to be friends for a long time, so there's no rush.
Of course, losing touch is a two-way street. I am no more to blame than they. And after a few years, that sank in, and lately, I've felt a lot less guilt about my inconsistent communications. It really is true that if we've been friends since seventh grade, a little thing like not seeing each other for 4 years isn't going to make lunch awkward when we do meet again. Or just because we were roommates in college, that doesn't mean that years later, we have to be in touch every week. In fact, it's especially nice to catch up after a while and to see how the other has changed and stayed the same; I find it's usually a mixture of both.
I have one particular friend who I haven't heard from in over a year; last summer when I called her number, it was disconnected because she had moved. Two months ago, she called and left me a message with her new number. She wasn't embarrassed that it had been so long, and I'm not upset. On the contrary: I'm excited to be back in touch. I look forward to when we finally are able to catch each other on the line, and set up a dinner date. But I'm patient, too: I think we're going to be friends for a long time, so there's no rush.
Wednesday, August 25, 2004
Er. Thanks. Um. I think.
When someone pays a compliment, the typical response is "Thank you." But what if the comment may not be a compliment? Is the potential complimented simply making an observation?
For example, "You are so tall!" How to respond? "Thank you" doesn't seem right. "Yeah, I am" sounds odd. Or "What a big baby!" If it were "what a big butt!" it would definitely not warrant a "thank you!"
I frequently hear "What thick hair!" Sometimes this is quickly followed by an observation about how it must be very difficult to keep it in check. Does that mean that my hair is currently running wild, or that it is sufficiently styled at that moment? (I think "Yes, it can be hard to manage." is a sufficient reply in that case, but without a follow-up statement, I can't tell the intent.)
Since some of these comments are delivered with sympathy, I can sometimes figure out that it isn't a compliment, that it is just an observation. But sometimes I don't know. I don't want to ignore the comment because that would be rude. But to say "thank you" when it wasn't a compliment isn't a good idea. And agreeing with the commenter should it be a compliment is rude, too! (For example: "You have such beautiful eyes" met with "Yes, I do." would be rude! But "Your eyes are so brown" is ambiguous - because maybe the speaker likes brown eyes, maybe they do not.)
So what to do?
I would like to give the observer the benefit of the doubt, in that maybe they wouldn't comment unless it were meant to be a compliment. But I find it hard to say "thank you" in an ambiguous case, especially when the comment is about something I dislike (such as my extremely thick hair) Plus, people these days aren't necessarily of the "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all" camp. And in the case where the comment is outright rude, I guess just silence is appropriate, though if the commenter didn't intend it to be rude, then I end up being the rude one.
There is much over-thinking to do in just a second after the comment is made!
For example, "You are so tall!" How to respond? "Thank you" doesn't seem right. "Yeah, I am" sounds odd. Or "What a big baby!" If it were "what a big butt!" it would definitely not warrant a "thank you!"
I frequently hear "What thick hair!" Sometimes this is quickly followed by an observation about how it must be very difficult to keep it in check. Does that mean that my hair is currently running wild, or that it is sufficiently styled at that moment? (I think "Yes, it can be hard to manage." is a sufficient reply in that case, but without a follow-up statement, I can't tell the intent.)
Since some of these comments are delivered with sympathy, I can sometimes figure out that it isn't a compliment, that it is just an observation. But sometimes I don't know. I don't want to ignore the comment because that would be rude. But to say "thank you" when it wasn't a compliment isn't a good idea. And agreeing with the commenter should it be a compliment is rude, too! (For example: "You have such beautiful eyes" met with "Yes, I do." would be rude! But "Your eyes are so brown" is ambiguous - because maybe the speaker likes brown eyes, maybe they do not.)
So what to do?
I would like to give the observer the benefit of the doubt, in that maybe they wouldn't comment unless it were meant to be a compliment. But I find it hard to say "thank you" in an ambiguous case, especially when the comment is about something I dislike (such as my extremely thick hair) Plus, people these days aren't necessarily of the "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say it at all" camp. And in the case where the comment is outright rude, I guess just silence is appropriate, though if the commenter didn't intend it to be rude, then I end up being the rude one.
There is much over-thinking to do in just a second after the comment is made!
Monday, August 23, 2004
Holiday Card List Shuffle
No, I am not sending out my holiday cards just yet! Rather, I just finished addressing the last batch of "new baby" cards. While deciding to whom to send the announcements, I realized I have several different categories of people on my list:
1) Family. Whether they send me annoucements/cards themselves, I have to keep them on "The List." The exceptions are more distant family members for whom I don't have current addresses, but am actively seeking.
2) People who send my family cards. This is easy because each year, if we receive a holiday card from someone to whom we haven't sent one, we quickly send one back to them, and add them to "The List."
3) People who have sent my family cards in the past, but who haven't recently. I have started a two-year grace period. I send these people cards for two years without having a reciprocal card, then I scratch them from "The List."
4) Friends-of-family (which usually means friends of my parents or past neighbors)who are important enough that they may have become part of group #3 and therefore scratched from "The List for Holiday Cards" but who should be informed of "big deal" things like marriage and new babies. Therefore, these people are temporarily reinstated on "The List." (Perhaps they will then go into category #2 if they realize they've lost contact with us and send us a note.)
5) People who are important to me but who actually haven't sent holiday (or other) cards in the past. These are people who would ordinarily be "cut" after the two-year grace period, but I know that there are other reasons that they may not send cards. First, they may not be the holiday card sort. If they send cards to nobody, then I shouldn't feel entitled to a card myself. Second, they may be very busy and forget (or be unable) to send cards for a few years. I still want to keep them abreast of my events and wish to let them know I care about them, so I don't mind whether they send cards or not.
I wonder how many people in category #3 who have been "cut" should actually still be on "The List" because they fall into the "not-sending-cards" subset of my category #5. Some of these people may still want to know what is going on in my life, but just aren't the card-sending sort. But, my hope is that if that were the case, that these people would at least email / call me to touch base. So I hope I haven't offended anyone!
Juggling people from these lists can be difficult! I certainly don't want to "cut" anyone too early (like my maid-of-honor who I gave a four-year grace period in the desperate hope that she would contact me in any manner whether to say "hi" or to say that I had offended her in some manner. She should be in category #5, but since nobody has heard from her, I wonder if she doesn't want to be contacted.)
The tricky thing about sending annoucements is that some may view these as solicitation for gifts. This is a particular concern about people who I haven't been in contact with recently. I hope that they will view my annoucement as a happy form of contact rather than "gimme a gift."
(Wait, this post isn't about menstruation! Well, I figured that since we've discussed etiquette issues in the past, this was safe territory.)
1) Family. Whether they send me annoucements/cards themselves, I have to keep them on "The List." The exceptions are more distant family members for whom I don't have current addresses, but am actively seeking.
2) People who send my family cards. This is easy because each year, if we receive a holiday card from someone to whom we haven't sent one, we quickly send one back to them, and add them to "The List."
3) People who have sent my family cards in the past, but who haven't recently. I have started a two-year grace period. I send these people cards for two years without having a reciprocal card, then I scratch them from "The List."
4) Friends-of-family (which usually means friends of my parents or past neighbors)who are important enough that they may have become part of group #3 and therefore scratched from "The List for Holiday Cards" but who should be informed of "big deal" things like marriage and new babies. Therefore, these people are temporarily reinstated on "The List." (Perhaps they will then go into category #2 if they realize they've lost contact with us and send us a note.)
5) People who are important to me but who actually haven't sent holiday (or other) cards in the past. These are people who would ordinarily be "cut" after the two-year grace period, but I know that there are other reasons that they may not send cards. First, they may not be the holiday card sort. If they send cards to nobody, then I shouldn't feel entitled to a card myself. Second, they may be very busy and forget (or be unable) to send cards for a few years. I still want to keep them abreast of my events and wish to let them know I care about them, so I don't mind whether they send cards or not.
I wonder how many people in category #3 who have been "cut" should actually still be on "The List" because they fall into the "not-sending-cards" subset of my category #5. Some of these people may still want to know what is going on in my life, but just aren't the card-sending sort. But, my hope is that if that were the case, that these people would at least email / call me to touch base. So I hope I haven't offended anyone!
Juggling people from these lists can be difficult! I certainly don't want to "cut" anyone too early (like my maid-of-honor who I gave a four-year grace period in the desperate hope that she would contact me in any manner whether to say "hi" or to say that I had offended her in some manner. She should be in category #5, but since nobody has heard from her, I wonder if she doesn't want to be contacted.)
The tricky thing about sending annoucements is that some may view these as solicitation for gifts. This is a particular concern about people who I haven't been in contact with recently. I hope that they will view my annoucement as a happy form of contact rather than "gimme a gift."
(Wait, this post isn't about menstruation! Well, I figured that since we've discussed etiquette issues in the past, this was safe territory.)
A real job for a stay-at-home-mom
This weekend, I was discussing cars with some folks. I indicated a preference for a particular expensive car, to which one man said "Well, when you get a job, you can get whatever car you want!"
My first thought was that I do have a part-time paying job, and then a full-time job maintaining the household, and the health and happiness of my sons. In my opinion, I have many jobs and I work just as hard at them as someone who receives money for their efforts. Truth be told, I had heard this argument from stay-at-home moms and full-time homemakers before, and didn't really understand the validity of the statement. I thought it was just crazy feminist whining. But now I understand.
Or, I could take the man's statment to mean "When you are earning more money, you can get whatever car you want!" but even that has insulting undertones. If it meant that I have to contribute to the household financially in order to choose how to spend that money, that is insulting. If it means that the breadwinner of the household (my husband) doesn't earn enough for that particular expensive car, then that isn't insulting my stay-at-home status; however, I cannot see someone making that same comment to a man.
Something else in the same realm that gets under my skin is that a father is "watching" or "babysitting" his own children if the mom isn't present. That implies that it is the default responsibility for the mother to take care of the children, yet when the father does it, his task is considered a job - babysitting. If it is a "job" for the man, then it is certainly a "job" for the mother.
Similarly, it is frustrating to hear what a wonderful father my husband is because he takes care of the kids, such as chasing one around the park while I hold the other or vice versa. Yes, he is a caring father. But nobody goes out of their way to say what a fantastic mom I am for taking our kids to the park!
My first thought was that I do have a part-time paying job, and then a full-time job maintaining the household, and the health and happiness of my sons. In my opinion, I have many jobs and I work just as hard at them as someone who receives money for their efforts. Truth be told, I had heard this argument from stay-at-home moms and full-time homemakers before, and didn't really understand the validity of the statement. I thought it was just crazy feminist whining. But now I understand.
Or, I could take the man's statment to mean "When you are earning more money, you can get whatever car you want!" but even that has insulting undertones. If it meant that I have to contribute to the household financially in order to choose how to spend that money, that is insulting. If it means that the breadwinner of the household (my husband) doesn't earn enough for that particular expensive car, then that isn't insulting my stay-at-home status; however, I cannot see someone making that same comment to a man.
Something else in the same realm that gets under my skin is that a father is "watching" or "babysitting" his own children if the mom isn't present. That implies that it is the default responsibility for the mother to take care of the children, yet when the father does it, his task is considered a job - babysitting. If it is a "job" for the man, then it is certainly a "job" for the mother.
Similarly, it is frustrating to hear what a wonderful father my husband is because he takes care of the kids, such as chasing one around the park while I hold the other or vice versa. Yes, he is a caring father. But nobody goes out of their way to say what a fantastic mom I am for taking our kids to the park!
Wednesday, August 18, 2004
Is it time for Blaire to get married?
Check out this website first, then come back here, and consider these questions:
Is, perhaps, her work history a bit intimidating to would-be suitors?
What do you think she thinks of the J.Lo vehicle The Wedding Planner?
Is this website actually just a clever marketing ploy for her self-run business?
Discuss.
Full Disclosure: When I first saw the link (via MeFi), I thought it was some weird Facts of Life followup.
Is, perhaps, her work history a bit intimidating to would-be suitors?
What do you think she thinks of the J.Lo vehicle The Wedding Planner?
Is this website actually just a clever marketing ploy for her self-run business?
Discuss.
Full Disclosure: When I first saw the link (via MeFi), I thought it was some weird Facts of Life followup.
Monday, August 16, 2004
Recipro-linkage
If you have a link to our blog on your site, and want us to return the favor, please leave a comment to that effect on the most recent post on this site. Remember to include your website's url in the request.
Friday, August 13, 2004
Guilty Pleasures
I cannot wait to see The Princess Diaries 2: The Royal Engagement. It came out on Wednesday, and I've been desperate to get to the movie theater. Evidently, I have the film tastes of a 14-year old girl.
So, I've been musing a lot recently about guilty pleasures. Chick Flicks. Chick Lit. Pop music. Reality TV. Anything on the WB. The stuff that you know isn't art, that you're not proud of enjoying, but that is pure, simple pleasure. Admit it, if you're in the car alone, and Air Supply comes on the radio, don't you roll up the windows and sing along? I have a really impressive chick lit collection, and I'm generous about lending novels to friends. However, it's all stored upstairs. The living room bookshelf is stocked with books I'm proud of having read, like Nickel and Dimed and The Botany of Desire. Boys have their fluffy movies, too, but they're called "Summer Blockbusters." There's no shame in saying that you saw Spiderman 2. But are you going to announce around the water cooler on Monday morning that you saw—and loved—Little Black Book?
I think it's unfortunate that chick lit and flicks are so scorned, because they're never really reviewed for what they are. That leaves the consumer on her own, with no useful advice other than word of mouth, to sort out the excellent (Diary of a Manhattan Call Girl) from the enjoyable (13 Going on 30) from the total and utter waste of $10 (Jemima J).
What we need is a reputable source of chick lit/flick reviews. One that takes them seriously for what they are. What would be the criteria? Certainly its usefulness as escapism. A heroine you can identify with. A fun soundtrack. A makeover, shopping, or other fun transition scene that will never get old. I'd prefer to have the humor not come from cringe-inducing embarrassment for the characters. And, frankly, if the point of the movie is fun, I'd rather that the crisis of the plot be as gentle and short as possible. By this criteria, an ideal movie was Clueless. The majority of the movie is fun that you can watch over and over again. The lowest emotional point is still enjoyable, because she simply wanders around a mall with a great song playing. You're never really embarrassed for the main character. There are probably those who would argue that the plot is too shallow to be enjoyable, that without depressing lows you can't really appreciate the happy ending. Pshaw.
So, I've been musing a lot recently about guilty pleasures. Chick Flicks. Chick Lit. Pop music. Reality TV. Anything on the WB. The stuff that you know isn't art, that you're not proud of enjoying, but that is pure, simple pleasure. Admit it, if you're in the car alone, and Air Supply comes on the radio, don't you roll up the windows and sing along? I have a really impressive chick lit collection, and I'm generous about lending novels to friends. However, it's all stored upstairs. The living room bookshelf is stocked with books I'm proud of having read, like Nickel and Dimed and The Botany of Desire. Boys have their fluffy movies, too, but they're called "Summer Blockbusters." There's no shame in saying that you saw Spiderman 2. But are you going to announce around the water cooler on Monday morning that you saw—and loved—Little Black Book?
I think it's unfortunate that chick lit and flicks are so scorned, because they're never really reviewed for what they are. That leaves the consumer on her own, with no useful advice other than word of mouth, to sort out the excellent (Diary of a Manhattan Call Girl) from the enjoyable (13 Going on 30) from the total and utter waste of $10 (Jemima J).
What we need is a reputable source of chick lit/flick reviews. One that takes them seriously for what they are. What would be the criteria? Certainly its usefulness as escapism. A heroine you can identify with. A fun soundtrack. A makeover, shopping, or other fun transition scene that will never get old. I'd prefer to have the humor not come from cringe-inducing embarrassment for the characters. And, frankly, if the point of the movie is fun, I'd rather that the crisis of the plot be as gentle and short as possible. By this criteria, an ideal movie was Clueless. The majority of the movie is fun that you can watch over and over again. The lowest emotional point is still enjoyable, because she simply wanders around a mall with a great song playing. You're never really embarrassed for the main character. There are probably those who would argue that the plot is too shallow to be enjoyable, that without depressing lows you can't really appreciate the happy ending. Pshaw.
Tuesday, August 10, 2004
More on Embarrassing Questions
Since moving to the suburbs, I've gotten pretty sick of the question "Are you going to have kids?" I don't think that there is a good answer to that question. "Someday" gets you lectures about not putting it off too long and horror stories about women who waited until it was too late. Any variation on "no" gets you labeled a selfish freak in many social circles. Jokes about how you can't even take care of a houseplant, let alone another human, get you lectures about how parenthood is different. Any variation on "we're trying," especially detailed answers, is way too much information for most people, even the nosy ones. "As a matter of fact, we're pregnant now, but we didn't want to go public yet" should embarrass the questioner, but probably wouldn't. There's always the possibility that the answer to that question is a tragic story about miscarriages, infertility, or a disagreement between partners over whether or not to have kids.
Miss Manners would probably approve of a breezy "When the time is right, I suppose," or, for the appallingly rude, a stone-faced "I beg your pardon?" I often fall back on my favorite, "I'm still trying to figure out how to skip straight to being a grandparent!" If the nosy person happens to be a grandparent themselves, this comes off as charming. And then you can segue into a conversation about how great it is to be a grandparent/aunt/friend of a parent, because you can play with someone's baby, and when it cries or poops, hand it right back!
What I'd really like to do is learn how to cry on command. When you ask the parenthood question, you run the risk that your question could cause the person a lot of pain or embarrassment. So, I like to think that it would be exactly what these people deserve if my response to their question was to burst into tears and run away. Let them be embarrassed. Perhaps it would backfire on me. Maybe it's more cruel than they deserve. I can't cry on command, so it's a moot point (or perhaps it's a "moo point"), but a girl can dream.
Miss Manners would probably approve of a breezy "When the time is right, I suppose," or, for the appallingly rude, a stone-faced "I beg your pardon?" I often fall back on my favorite, "I'm still trying to figure out how to skip straight to being a grandparent!" If the nosy person happens to be a grandparent themselves, this comes off as charming. And then you can segue into a conversation about how great it is to be a grandparent/aunt/friend of a parent, because you can play with someone's baby, and when it cries or poops, hand it right back!
What I'd really like to do is learn how to cry on command. When you ask the parenthood question, you run the risk that your question could cause the person a lot of pain or embarrassment. So, I like to think that it would be exactly what these people deserve if my response to their question was to burst into tears and run away. Let them be embarrassed. Perhaps it would backfire on me. Maybe it's more cruel than they deserve. I can't cry on command, so it's a moot point (or perhaps it's a "moo point"), but a girl can dream.
The Better Part of Valor
I have learned a lesson about sharing personal information with friends and acquaintances. I assumed that anything told to other women, in hushed tones, in private, about private matters, would be understood to be personal and sensitive information. But, once you share information with someone, it belongs to both of you. And naturally, people want to ask for updates. If only I thought about how casually those updates might be asked for!
Over the weekend, I bumped into my real estate agent, who asked me a very personal question in a crowd waiting outside a restaurant! (I think that the stress and amount of time involved in real estate transactions creates these relationships of artificial, instant intimacy, and I foolishly confided something in my real estate agent as though she were a friend.)
Recently, a girlfriend ask me for an update, in front of her significant other. Now, she probably tells him everything I say when I'm not there, but knowing that he might know, and discussing it with him myself are two different things. I tried to make a joke out of changing the subject, saying that I didn't want to embarrass the S.O. She persisted, so I joked that "Gosh, if we cover that, the only topic left to scare S.O. away would be talking about our periods!" The friend then launched into a discussion about her flow! That wasn't the topic change I had in mind, but it worked!
I'm probably a prude, but if I don't want to risk being caught off guard by topics of conversation, I need to be more discreet with how I share! And realize that just because something embarrasses me doesn't mean that my friends will be embarrassed for me.
Over the weekend, I bumped into my real estate agent, who asked me a very personal question in a crowd waiting outside a restaurant! (I think that the stress and amount of time involved in real estate transactions creates these relationships of artificial, instant intimacy, and I foolishly confided something in my real estate agent as though she were a friend.)
Recently, a girlfriend ask me for an update, in front of her significant other. Now, she probably tells him everything I say when I'm not there, but knowing that he might know, and discussing it with him myself are two different things. I tried to make a joke out of changing the subject, saying that I didn't want to embarrass the S.O. She persisted, so I joked that "Gosh, if we cover that, the only topic left to scare S.O. away would be talking about our periods!" The friend then launched into a discussion about her flow! That wasn't the topic change I had in mind, but it worked!
I'm probably a prude, but if I don't want to risk being caught off guard by topics of conversation, I need to be more discreet with how I share! And realize that just because something embarrasses me doesn't mean that my friends will be embarrassed for me.
Tuesday, August 03, 2004
Pee is for Period, and That's Good Enough for Me!
I pee a lot. My nickname should be The Urinator. And in the first day or two of my period, it's much worse. I don't know if the uterine spasms are triggering my bladder to spasm, or if it's the PMS water retention being released.
I did some web searching to try to find an explanation, and came up with nothing.
I'm having a hard time getting work done, because I'm getting up every 10-20 minutes to pee. I wonder what I'd be like pregnant? Maybe I'd need to take a laptop into the bathroom and just camp out all day!
I did some web searching to try to find an explanation, and came up with nothing.
I'm having a hard time getting work done, because I'm getting up every 10-20 minutes to pee. I wonder what I'd be like pregnant? Maybe I'd need to take a laptop into the bathroom and just camp out all day!
Monday, August 02, 2004
Low-Carb, Low-Flow
When I was eating low-carb, I didn't experience any great (or lasting) weight loss, but I did notice a that my period got significantly lighter. Now that I'm back to a moderate intake of carbs, I can't believe how heavy my period is. I'm honestly not sure if it's heavier than ever, or if I got spoiled and now "normal" feels excessive.
With all the trips I've been making to the bathroom to cope with this, I've been fantasizing about a period that you could get over and done with (including emotional turbulence) in an hour. It would have to be something that you could control the timing of a bit, because you wouldn't want a bursting Hoover Dam scenario while out and about. I imagine that it wouldn't be a pleasant experience, but it would be over with quickly and normal life could resume. I'd be willing to sit on the toilet with a book for an unpleasant hour and have it be over. That said, I would not be willing to go even farther and have a hellish 15 minutes, or an excruciating 2 minutes. But an unpleasant hour that gets it over with, assuming I could control the timing, I'd go for. It's like how one good vomit is better than a day of queasiness.
I'd also consider going the other direction and having a 10-day period that was so light that I'd never, ever have to worry about leakage.
Better yet, what about a period that you could start and stop at will? Wouldn't it be great if you could void your uterus periodically the way you void your bladder? Think of the money and landfill space we'd save on feminine products! Having your period would hardly effect your daily life!
With all the trips I've been making to the bathroom to cope with this, I've been fantasizing about a period that you could get over and done with (including emotional turbulence) in an hour. It would have to be something that you could control the timing of a bit, because you wouldn't want a bursting Hoover Dam scenario while out and about. I imagine that it wouldn't be a pleasant experience, but it would be over with quickly and normal life could resume. I'd be willing to sit on the toilet with a book for an unpleasant hour and have it be over. That said, I would not be willing to go even farther and have a hellish 15 minutes, or an excruciating 2 minutes. But an unpleasant hour that gets it over with, assuming I could control the timing, I'd go for. It's like how one good vomit is better than a day of queasiness.
I'd also consider going the other direction and having a 10-day period that was so light that I'd never, ever have to worry about leakage.
Better yet, what about a period that you could start and stop at will? Wouldn't it be great if you could void your uterus periodically the way you void your bladder? Think of the money and landfill space we'd save on feminine products! Having your period would hardly effect your daily life!
