Reality Bites

But playing fast and loose with biological and medical facts has consequences. We need to face reality or we will inevitably deal with significant negative impacts.

We seem to have a problem with reality of late. In fact, we seem to be able to convince ourselves collectively that “reality” is sexist or ageist or something-ist if we don’t like it. These shrieks of all manner of “-isms” serve one goal: to censor anyone who disagrees. It doesn’t matter if the dissenter is grounding their view in data.

Today we seem to primarily live in a world that is about feelings not facts.

But reality is not something that can be ignored or overcome through sheer force of will, by calling it bigoted, or saying it hurts my feelings, or through medical intervention.

To label anyone as bigoted for pointing out true things is not a game. It is very dangerous.

This sort of silencing through name-calling doesn’t make what is real any less true. But it does ensure that reality will not be faced and that harmful consequences are likely to occur.

We seem to believe, collectively, that through medical interventions we can play God. Pharmaceutical companies and Public Health appear all too willing to further this delusion. Reality always comes back to bite us.

A few examples:

Women’s Fertility

It is not sexist to point out that women’s fertility declines after the age of 30. It’s just a fact.

In her 20s, a sexually active woman has about a 25-30% chance of getting pregnant each month. Fertility starts declining dramatically in a woman’s 30s and by age 40, her chances are less than 5% of getting pregnant each month.

I’ll cite a personal story to illustrate this point. I had my two oldest children in my early 30s. I got pregnant easy peasy, no problem.

Then I got divorced, paired up again, and my new partner didn’t have kids and wanted them. I was 42 and wasn’t planning on having more, but I love kids, and him, so I was happy to try and see where it went.

He was 42 as well. He simply hadn’t been ready up until that point to have kids, and he didn’t have to be. His sperm were just fine.

We went through many rounds of in vitro fertilization (IVF), a huge emotional, physical and financial drain. No luck. Eventually we concluded, along with my doctor, that my eggs were just too old, and we decided to use an egg donor. Then I got pregnant right away. And now I have two young children, ages 5 and 7.

You should not think, when you meet me, and I am 53 with a second grader and a kindergartener, that I have magical eggs. I do not. No one does.

But somehow, in today’s reality-resistant world, it’s sexist to point out that women’s fertility declines with age. It’s somehow saying we as women have no value after our childbearing years. Which is just a silly interpretation, to put it nicely.

This piece in The Guardian is a case in point:

It’s filed under: “The Week in Patriarchy”. It is not the patriarchy oppressing women that dictates that we will have difficulty having kids after 35. It’s reality.

The article goes on:

Good news, ladies! We’ve officially been granted two more years of useful life… For a long time, the age of 35 has been treated like it’s some kind of fertility cliff. Hit that magic number and you’re officially described as being of “advanced maternal age” or a “geriatric mother”. You’re given dire warnings about how hard it will be to get pregnant and all the problems you and your baby might face if you do. Your pregnancy is immediately labelled “high-risk” and subject to extra monitoring. Trying to get pregnant after 35 is a process that is often shrouded in stress and judgment.

Trying to get pregnant after 35 is filled with stress, though perhaps not judgement, at least not in my experience. It’s just a fact that women’s fertility declines whereas men’s does not, at least not to the same extent. It is a reality that we all need to wrestle with so that we can plan our lives accordingly, if we want to have children without spending gazillions of dollars in painful, stressful fertility treatments that might not even work.

Is it fair that men can have children into their 70s? Maybe not. But they can. They can go through their 20s, 30s and even 40s and just not think about it, and then decide one day at 50 that they want kids, if they find a younger woman willing to do so. That’s the reality.

Fertility clinics are selling IVF and all manner of other fertility treatments. Celebrities are sharing their stories of having children at 43 or 45 or 50 (Janet Jackson) yet many of them are not sharing how – not that they have to. Why don’t they tell us? I don’t know.

But it seems as if it is somehow shameful to admit that a thing called biology exists. And I’d be willing to bet that Janet Jackson used an egg donor. And when this fact, if it’s true, is left out, women are misled into thinking they can just deal with the whole thing later.

Ladies – it sucks but you have to face reality. Have kids by your mid-30s or freeze your eggs so you can do it later. Otherwise, chances are, you will face either disappointment, significant outlays of money, or most likely, both.

That is not sexist to say out loud.

Aging

It is not ageist to say that people get old, and that their cognitive abilities decline. The brain’s capacity for memory, reasoning and comprehension can start to decline in the mid-40s. And usually starts by the 50s. By the 70s almost everyone experiences it.

It does not mean that older folks don’t have value in the world. But it also means they shouldn’t fly planes. Or possibly drive. Or perhaps be President. Though according to Time Magazine, mentioning cognitive decline is an ageist stereotype.

Levi’s, my former employer, has a rule that board members cannot serve after the age of 71. The corporate governance guidelines read: “A director is deemed to have resigned automatically upon the director’s 72nd birthday.”

Levi’s presumably has this rule in place because they recognize that a person’s mental faculties are likely compromised after 71 to the degree that serving on the board is a business risk.

It is not ageist to have this rule in place. It’s an acknowledgement of reality.

If you wouldn’t let an 80-year-old babysit your 5-year-old, then that same octogenarian probably shouldn’t hold a post with significant responsibilities.

No amount of medication or healthy living will prevent this cognitive decline from happening to all of us one day. That doesn’t make me anti-old to say it. It means I live in reality, and again, can plan accordingly, as to how to help care for the older folks in my life. And for my own care as my own age advances.

Weight

It isn’t fat-phobic to say that being overweight comes, in most instances, with adverse health impacts. Being overweight often leads to heart disease, Type 2 diabetes and joint degeneration and, all too often, premature death.

Currently, the body positivity movement dictates that saying this out loud makes you a bigot. In fact, losing weight makes you a fat-phobe. TikTok star Mark Gaetano shared his 120-pound weight loss journey with his fans and was called fat-phobic.

This criticism of Gaetano discourages people from losing weight and getting healthier due to fear of being labeled bigots and traitors to the body positivity cause. Supporting him in his journey does not mean demonizing those who have not yet undertaken a similar one.

But when we collectively pretend that there are not harmful consequences to widespread obesity, people’s health, and sometimes, lives are unnecessarily put at risk.

Believing that through the “science” of medical interventions (things like high blood pressure medication for instance), we can overcome reality, is, once again, a dangerous endeavor. And again, living with the truth that there are adverse health consequences to being overweight does not make someone who is overweight of any less value as a human. But it does suggest that losing weight would very likely lead to a longer life.

It isn’t fat-phobic to say that there is such a thing as a healthy weight and lifestyle.

Playing fast and loose with the biological and medical facts has consequences. Relying on quick fixes like IVF and other medical interventions is expensive, can have other negative health impacts and doesn’t reliably work.

We need to face reality or we will inevitably deal with the impacts. And it won’t be pretty.

C’mon everyone. It’s time to get real.