What are your unpopular opinions

[HoneyIgrewthekids]

Was discussing this with DD and her friends and thought it would make a great mumsnet thread.

Here are mine,
I cant stand Eastenders
I find Love Island boring
I dont like Ed Sheeran

all gay men are at least slightly misogynistic in nature - your gay best friend does not give a shit about your existence, only about what they can get from you.

Ffs

I think the view that tattoos look shit isn’t really very unpopular, based on this thread 😂

On the other hand, I think they can look beautiful on people of any age (and in some cases, the more the better), particularly combined with a pretty dress.

amibeingdaft81

I didn’t say I was adverse to medical intervention. I said I don’t agree with IVF. If you are not meant to reproduce naturally then it isn’t to be. It’s a completely different thing. We are overriding natural selection, as someone else rightly said “what happens when we have lots of IVF babies later reproducing?”. Only the fittest survive in evolution, and if nature dictates you don’t conceive naturally then it is for a reason.

From a societal point of view, fertility treatment of any kind is totally unnecessary. 7 billion people on this planet...the traditional way of procreating seems to work pretty well considering we are over populated. There is no need to find artificial ways of reproducing.

From an individual point of view, I completely understand why people would want fertility treatment.

Only the fittest survive in evolution, and if nature dictates you don’t conceive naturally then it is for a reason.

So again.

Apply this logic. You have a caesarean. Presumably for a very real medical need that you and or your baby may have died without a result of which.

So according to medical evolution - you weren’t in the band of the fittest and should have been let to struggle on and likely die during labour.

But it would have been ok. Because it would have been natural.

I don’t believe that IVF should be available on the NHS either. And procedures have already changed to take account of the fact that IVF is not a natural process and meant that there were additional risks to having an IVF baby. E.g. it used to be that three embrio’s were put back, leading to a high number of triplets/twins who were invariably born prematurely and then often had life-changing disabilities not to mention the fact that IVF babies were responsible for bed shortages on SCBU wards. Then only two embrio’s were put back and now it’s only one.

Let’s not pretend that IVF doesn’t come with greater long term risks because it absolutely does.

I do think as well that everyone has some kind of controversial view on something but that far too many people are virtue signallers who like to put out the right-on view that they never judge anyone ever.

And there is a vast difference between medical intervention which is going to save lives and IVF which creates more lives thus taking money away from the already existing population whose lives may need saving.

*I dislike..

Gender reveal party's.

Baby showers.

And how hen and stag do's have now seemed to turn into a 3/4 day holiday abroad with each day being some sort of celebration.

Children with their ears pierced.

People giving there kids multiple names such as ( first name - middle name, middle name, middle name, last name)*

I hate terrible spag. PARTIES, DOS, THEIR

@tenthstreet

^^ I also hate people who correct other peoples grammar on a internet forum (you must be fun at PARTIES)

Over riding natural selection means my son would have died at birth. And then again at 6 months old from an anaphylactic response to egg. You either have medicine, or you don't have medicine.

I can understand an argument against NHS funded IVF, when we're desperately short of cash already. Although I can't quite agree with it having seen the pain of people struggle to conceive.

But framing it as an argument as survival of the fittest, is fundamentally flawed.

surely this thread has played itself now.

"if nature dictates you don’t conceive naturally then it is for a reason."

Like your partner is female or infertile perhaps. You could just go out and shag some random bloke but most people prefer not to and people often choose ivf over methods because it is more effective.
Or you have blocked tubes but perfectly healthy eggs and sperm are available.

@Martiniwitholives
I also hate people who correct other peoples grammar on a internet forum (you must be fun at PARTIES) This is not an unpopular opinion!

The ‘natural selection’ argument makes no sense as it can’t be brought to its logical conclusion. My friend had cancer in her 20s, had chemotherapy which saved her life and went on to have children. While luckily she didn’t need any fertility treatment, by the natural selection argument, she should have never survived to give birth in the first place. Are her children ‘flawed’ because they’re the children of a woman who was sick?

Or what about an otherwise healthy 20 year old male playing sports who collapses of an undiagnosed heart condition who’s defibrillated and survives ( as is an unfortunate regular-ish occurrence). Should he not be allowed to have children? ‘Nature’ dictated that he should die- modern medicine saved him.

You either believe in natural selection or you don’t. It’s illogical to pick and choose which parts of it you agree with.( Presumably anyone who believes this also doesn’t wear glasses, have hearing aids, don’t go for health scans etc. )

I hate paper straws, even the thick expensive ones.
Obesity is far more complex than just eat less, move more.
Coronation Street is a pile of rubbish.
Brad Pitt is not attractive.
I like Meghan Markle, and dislike Kate.
It's time to abolish the monarchy.

No that's natural selection in action. Natural selection is the survival of the fittest to the environment. The environment of the cancer survivor and the heart attack survivor is one in which those two conditions have not been lethal or prevented the passing on of those individuals genes. The environment has life saving resources, therefore they are fit to survive.

In a different environment they would not survive and pass on their genes Eg in an isolated indigenous population with no modern medicine.

Humans are somewhat unique in their ability to change their environment to make it easier to survive in (Eg making clothes and shelter to survive in otherwise lethaly cold weather) .

@BillywigSting. Gosh...I’m really not following your argument. Surely, per your logic, IVF is also the very definition of natural selection? In an isolated indigenous population people would die of heart attacks and cancer ( among other things) and people would not have IVF. Agreed.

Our environment has life saving resources ( as you quite rightly point out) . Our environment also has resources to aid and facilitate fertility. Therefore those babies are ‘fit’ to be born as their environment has dictated that they can be. The same way ( per your argument) our environment has dictated that someone can receive chemotherapy.

In addition, embryos are routinely screened for chromosomal abnormalities during IVF with only the healthy embryos being implanted. How is this not the very definition of environmental natural selection??

Yes, ivf is natural selection. We have the ability (fitness) to use advanced tools to procreate.

Natural selection applies to us just as much as any other organism. We just have different selection pressures to other animals because of how we adapt to /have adapted our environment.

Yes, ivf is natural selection. We have the ability (fitness) to use advanced tools to procreate

No it isn’t 😫 we are artificially breeding.

Also “we” don’t hand the advanced tools, a select group of scientists looking to make a profit are able to do this.

amibeingdaft81

There is a great deal of difference between saving life and creating a new one which isn’t meant to be.

Do you think anyone who has life saving treatment should be sterilised because obviously they had been meant to die so any future children weren't meant to be?

People going on about life saving treatment vs IVF are being deliberately obtuse.

Well this thread is suddenly dying...

Maybe it can still be resurrected.

But only naturally of course.