Opinion

Forget Octomom, Michelle Duggar is having her 19th kid. Yes, that’s right, 19th kid. I remember a few years back I heard the Duggar family had 15 kids and I thought to myself insane thoughts I won’t repeat here. Now, Michelle Duggar is pregnant with her 19th child.

But unlike Octomom, Michelle Duggar is married, and the Duggar family is debt free and lives in a big, approx 7000 sq ft home. My first instinct was that it’s a big house, but for 20 people, I don’t know how they make the bedrooms work. Anyway, like Octomom probably will soon, the Duggar family has a TV show on TLC.

I’m all for having kids if you can afford it, but 19 kids? Damn. The only thing I do have a problem is with … their ways? Taken from my favorite source Wikipedia,

“In addition, the Duggar parents have ultra-conservative and very traditional parenting ideas. None of the family’s daughters are permitted to do typically ‘male’ activities, such having short hair, wearing pants or attending college. The Duggars follow the teachings of Bill Gothard, which include that children not go to college, children should not leave the home until they are married, families do not use birth control and refuse many forms of pre-natal care, stringent social conservatism (including ideas such as young-earth creationism) is strictly enforced and taught at a young age, and gender roles are adhered to.”

The whole birth control ideology, whatever, but females can’t have short hair or wear pants (hello, practicality?) and no one goes to college? Then again, sending that many kids to college probably would take them out of their envious debt-free-ness. Oh, and I read more, and everyone is homeschooled. But I guess it’s not in the traditional sense, because with that many kids it’s more or less a classroom with many ages of students.

I won’t lie, I’ve always found ultra traditional and conservative Christians very fascinating. Like Indendent Fundamental Baptists, who don’t allow modern music and dancing among other things. I’m not trashing on anyone else’s religion, because if someone believes something and it doesn’t hurt anyone, I don’t really care. If someone believes something only because it’s the only thing they’ve ever known, I feel sorry for them. If someone is forced by their family to follow something they don’t want to follow, I hope they either change their familiy’s minds or find a way to run away.

They say that you shouldn’t feel “guilty” for eating junk food. They say that if you feel that kind of guilt after eating certain foods, then the media has really gotten to your head or something and you’re far too obsessed with trying to be a size zero.

“They” is a a few of my friends, guidance councilors, teachers.

And you know what, I’m sick of it.

The reason for this rant (which may be a overreaction, but I’ve been thinking about it for a while) is that many times, a conversation like the following will occur, and I will actually feel guilty for it.

Friend: You want to go get some bubble tea after school?
Me: No thanks, I had a muffin this morning.
Friend: So?
Me:  So I don’t want to overload on too much sugar in one day.
Friend: Sure, if that’s your story. You need to stop with the lose weight, dieting thing. It’s not like you need to weight or anything.
Me: I’m not trying to.
Friend:  Okay, health freak.

And immediately I feel bad because they temporarily (aka for a few seconds) convince me that I’ve been sucked in by the media to be weight obsessed. But then I realize I haven’t.

I am not a health freak. I don’t get enough exercise or sleep or vegetables. But I try. I think I was in sixth grade when I saw the nutrition information for some of those muffins from Timmy’s, and I was thinking that they were just like donuts, and … it made me try to avoid muffins after that. Except the ones that I make myself, because I put in about 1/4 the amount of sugar the recipes tell me to and they turn out fine.

I am tired of “feeling guilty” for not wanting to eat too much junk food in one day. By junk food I mean empty calories. That’s what they are. I do not count calories, count carbs, or count any of that stuff. I count how many empty calorie ridden items I eat in one day, and try to limit that. That does not mean I am obsessed with losing weight or dieting. If you really want to know how often I check my weight, it’s about once a month.

Why do I hate taking in empty calories if I’m not diet obsessed? I don’t know, perhaps because I’m more health obsessed (do not read that as health freak, haha). And I’ll admit, I’d like to maintain my weight, seeing as I’m not exactly going through a growth spurt or anything right now. Actually, right now, I don’t have the money nor time to go buy a bunch of new jeans and slacks a size bigger or smaller.

As well, I know that too much sugar (or sodium!) isn’t healthy.

I’m not saying here that I wouldn’t want to lose five pounds. I’d still be able to fit in my old jeans, and maybe  I could have more toned arms and less belly fat. I’m short, so my size one/three doesn’t mean anything. I’m still nowhere as  thin as my 5′8 and size 5 friend. But there’s a difference between not minding something and being obsessed. If I was obsessed, I would exercise like crazy and eat 10 servings of fruits and vegetables and drink 8 glasses of water every day. Do I do that? Hell no.

It’s just that I like to keep a balanced diet. I feel bad if I eat more than one significant ‘junk food item’ in one day. And I don’t want to feel bad about feeling that. I want people to stop telling me that I’m “diet obsessed” or “sucked in by the media.” Thank you.

I usually like to watch at least one Oscar-nominated film before the Oscars. This year I’ve chosen Clint Eastwood’s “Changeling,” with Angelina Jolie, which I watched yesterday.

I originally wanted to watch it in theatres, but I never really got around it, being the procrastination freak I am. The movie is shot in a muted palette, or in other words, it’s very gray, I guess for the depressing effect. It looked appealing in the trailer.

It’s 1928, and Angelina Jolie plays Christine Collins, a mother who left her son at home while she went to work, only to come back with her son gone. The corrupted Los Angeles Police Department isn’t much help - they give her the wrong boy. And the story continues about how she keeps trying to find her (real) son, and the LAPD keeps trying to tell her that the boy they gave her is her son… and I won’t spoil the ending.

At first it may not seem like much… a mother loses her son? Hardly exciting. Even the back story is more horrid and more graphic. But Changeling’s poignance lies behind its story of a woman who never gives up and never loses hope. Despite all the misogynistic threats, the tricks, and the torture the LAPD puts her through, Christine Collins keeps on trying to stand up to the system, corrupted as it is, to find her son.

Changeling is without doubt an inspirational movie, and inspirational movies usually leave me happy and uplifted when I’m finished watching. Changeling was different. Some of the parts are truly hard to watch, and mostly consist of various victims screaming and the various authorities in emotionless silence. These disgusting scenes replay in your head even once the movie is done. The creepy music throughout the film and in the ending credits do not help.

The most amazing part is that this shocking movie is a true story. According to the writer, he found this in the LA City Hall records, and he researched through newspapers. I’m sure they tweaked things up a bit, but the general plot and the original names are all preserved. The fact that this movie is, or is based on, a true story makes it that much more compelling.

Now is when I think I will mention that Angelina Jolie does an amazing job in this movie. I’ve only watched two of her movies before this, Mr and Mrs Smith and Tomb Raider, both commercial, box-office movies that I hardly warmed up to. In Changeling, her true acting talents show.  As an anecdote, she also wears an ostentatious red lipstick and these little round hats.

I know Changeling wasn’t one of the big Oscar movies of the year, but Angelina did get nominated for Best Actress and I wanted to see her in a good performance. I wasn’t let down.

The scenes in Changeling are still replaying in my head. And the great thing about movie rentals is that you can watch them again. I always take advantage of Blockbuster’s no late fees policy.

“California woman” is a seemingly vague term, but enter it into Google and the results all refer to the same California woman, Nadya Suleman.

This 33-year-old California woman recently gave birth to octuplets. That means eight. That’s a miracle. My first reaction to this was, “Wow, congratulations!” It’s not every day that someone has eight children.

Then more information started rolling in. This California woman conceived these babies through in vitro fertilization through a sperm donor. This California woman already has six kids, also conceived through IVF. This California woman has no husband or boyfriend, only her mother, to help her raise these children. This California woman is unemployed, and supported her first six children through money from the state. Three of her first six children receive Social Security disability payments - one is autistic, one has ADHD, and another has mild speech delay.

It’s not a single one of these factors that causes me to think that she shouldn’t have had these eight more children, it’s the combination of all of them. If it was a single woman who wanted to have children, sure. I have nothing against single mothers. But she already has six children. I have no experience with this, but something tells me it can’t be easy for one woman to raise six children.

Now she has fourteen.

She didn’t have eight embroyos implanted, she had six. Two split apart, I suppose. But still, to implant six embryos? First of all, she can’t afford to have another six kids. Second of all, how safe is that?

Multiple births are risky. Babies from mulitple births have more risk for health problems. But I won’t get into that, because I don’t know a thing about health.

How is she going to take care of fourteen children? No doubt she is going to need increased assistance from the government. This is not just a little money a month. This is a lot of money a month until this woman can find some means of fully financially supporting herself and her family, or until all her kids turn 18, which will be in 18 years. If we’re waiting for the former, I think we’ll be waiting for a while. How many employed, two-parent families do you know that can support fourteen kids? Didn’t think so.

Money that comes from the government comes from the tax payers, and considering the economic situation the United States and specifically California is in, I think that says enough in itself.

The responsibility for this does not lie solely in Nadya Suleman. Perhaps she is not the most mentally stable woman. The clinic, in particular the doctor she dealt with, must be held responsible. The current guideline for IVF for women under 35, such as Nadya Suleman, is one to two embryos. I understand that she wanted all of them implanted because they were frozen embryos from previous treatments. But that frozen embryo eventually becomes a live baby, and that baby needs care and attention from a mother. The doctor, who also treated Suleman before, knew that she has six kids already, and now he is hearing that she wants six more. The woman is single and she is unemployed - she cannot take care of twelve kids. Any doctor should be able to realize that, and upon hearing such desires from the woman, should recommend her to a psychiatrist/psychologist. Maybe she’s obsessed with having children. Maybe she has some desire to have a super huge family. I don’t know. But what she wants is not feasible, and a responsible doctor should not only have denied her the treatment, but also get her some help.

This is a country where you are legally free to have children, as many as you want. Unlike China, we have no one-child policy. Thanks to technology, you don’t even need a spouse. This is one of the great things about America. That being said, if you’re going to have children, you have to make sure you are able to take care of them. It costs money to raise a child, to afford basic necessities such as food and clothing. You can have as many kids as you want, but you have to be sure you can pay for them, minus their free public education.  Suleman is unemployed, and thus collecting money from the state, in the form of food stamps and whatnot to support her family. You should only have as many children as you can afford. How many children a woman has stops being her own business when others’ taxes go towards that decision.

Some have proposed legislation limiting how many children a woman should be able to have. I disagree, because that is far too subjective. But people should use their own heads. Nadya Suleman had several IVF treatments, so clearly, these fourteen kids were no accident.

I honestly don’t know what the mother or the doctor was thinking. I wish those fourteen children the best.

Alright, here is the magnificent story of me trying to get to the mall on time. Quite an adventure.

Yesterday I had plans to go shopping at the mall with my friend, at 1. My plans were to take the 12:30 bus, get to the terminal by 12:50, and wait around for a bit. But I forgot that I have a knack for missing buses by less than 10 seconds. I saw the bus (which came early) whiz by me as I was waiting to cross the street. In non-peak times, buses come every half hour. AKA, I would not only be late, but I would be waiting half an hour in the cold.

I did not want to do this. So I hopped on the VIVA express bus that came 10 minutes later, headed towards York University, in which I figured I’d just transfer there to VIVA express bus towards the mall. VIVA express buses come every 10 minutes. This plan, however, did not follow through as planned.

York U is still on strike, even after 11 weeks, and the buses only pass it - they don’t stop at the terminal. I found myself headed towards, and later stranded at, Downsview Station. And so I continue on my journey to get to the mall as soon as possible - it was 1:06 already! From the bus terminal there, I got on a bus that could take me to Keele and Finch, where my dad works, and he could drive me…? (He’s got job hour flexibility, that’s an upside)

This bus was waiting for an abnormally long time to leave the terminal. I asked the driver real nicely when we were leaving, and he just told me, “When the time comes, you’ll know.” Ahh… helpful. Then he continued reading the paper. After a long time, he started driving. This is where I’ll add in that this was the squeakiest bus ever. It just kept on going SQUEAK SQUEAK SQUEAK. I couldn’t even hear my iPod over it.

I ring the bell to get off at Keele and Finch, but then I hear the woman in the automated-bus-stop-announcement-system say, “Next Stop: Keele and Finch. Passenger Pickup only.” Now what the hell is this? So I ask the driver if I can get off at Keele and Finch and he says, “It depends.” Helpful. “Excuse me?” I say. “Pick up only. If someone gets on, you can get off. If no one wants to get on, you can’t get off. The next stop will be York University.” York U is quite a bit down the sidewalk-less road.

Passenger pick-up only? Whose genius idea was that? So if I’m traveling from Point A to Point B, and Point B happens to be this stop, I might not be able to get off? In other words, there is no reliability in taking this route. What kind of idea is that? It’s not like this is a little pit stop in the middle of nowhere. This is Keele St. and Finch St., the major intersection, adjacent to Toronto’s infamous Jane and Finch neighborhood.

I’m sure that the transit system would love to get more regular riders, the ones that commute to and from work/school in the morning and afternoon. Daily commuters get on and off at the same stop in the morning and afternoon. It’d sure be unlucky if for someone, that stop is one of these “passenger pick-up only” stops. You’ll be able to get on in the morning for sure, but you might not be able to get off at the same intersection when you’re coming home from work/school. Cross your fingers and hope someone will be getting on.

(I did, and it worked! Someone got on. I went to my dad’s and he drove me. I was only forty minutes late.)

Transit is usually great, but this “Passenger Pick-up Only” thing should be eliminated, at least for stops at major intersections. The idea doesn’t make much sense. Just my two cents.