Thursday, 23 August 2012

Why the menopause?

Yet another "scientific study" has come up with the this ridiculous exlanation for the menopause: (in summary) it's there so that there are plenty of grannies to look after the new generation, rather than carry on breeding themselves.

No no NO! It's perfectly obvious to me why women reach a manopuase; if fertility continued into old age, who would look after all those babies? Given that it takes about 18 years to see them to maturity, we need those extra post-menopause years to see them out of the nest. Also, as any grandmother will tell you, we are TOO TIRED to go on producing babies for ever. Some of us want to travel, write books, paint picture, climb Everest. This is OUR TURN. The kids will have theirs. OK?

This argument presupposes that men, whose fertility persists interminably, are incapable of seeing those same babies out of the nest. Well, let's face it; in some cases (not all, but some) it could just be right.

I do wish these scientists would stop wasting years of "research" on these silly projects, and just ask us. It would save so much time.

20 comments:

  1. Scientific studies are a waste of time, common sense is better Frances.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have designer menopause. Mine started at 35 when it was chemo induced due to breast cancer. I didn't heed what should have happened to me medically and created my future sans hormones. The fun secret is that the libido starts in your brain. Now I am on HRT but more for heart health.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope you are now fully fit, and enjoying your libido!

      Delete
  3. I quite agree - why on earth don't scientists do something useful with their time instead of coming up with these daft things that help no one? x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. .....and no doubt cost a lot of money, too.

      Delete
  4. My daily newspaper is always publishing some scientific fact or other. I keep meaning to cut them out and refer to them again when they contradict themselves with another such 'fact'. It would probably make an article in itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right, Maggie. One minute something's good for you, the next, it isn't. I just ignore that all now, and carry on doing what I want to do.

      Delete
  5. Magazines and papers seem to be full of 'research' where the results are so obvious the average five-year-old could have told them the answer. I'd like to quote some but I can't remember any - which just goes to show how memorable they weren't.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm a great believer in Mother Nature and if she says women shouldn't be bearining children when they are older then that is fine by me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, but there has to be a REASON for everything (say the scientists). And that means research, and rdiculous conclusions...and...and...

      Delete
  7. In total agreement with you, Frances.
    Scientists had better spend their time researching about the origin of stupidity.
    Nature's proved much more intelligent than them.
    (I have also being a life-long opponent of the death penalty)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Dulcina. And it's good to meet another anti-death penalty person!

      Delete
  8. Presumably these scientists are mostly men? As you say, Frances, just ask the women the answer to most common sense questions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ask women? You must be joking, Rosemary. That would be much too simple!

      Delete
  9. Reminds me of the expensive research doctors did some years back to prove that (DUH!) women really DO have menstrual cramps!

    ReplyDelete