ladyexxa

I was just watching an informational advert about a birth control pill that shortens your period (by cycle 6) to under three days, because its a 24-day deal. It made me think about other treatments that surpress the menstrual cycle and thusly a woman has but 3 or 4 periods a year. What is better in the long run, environmentally. it's a short, light, but monthly routine for me right now, i worry because sanitary products are overpriced, overpackaged, and contribute hugely to our landfills. I know there are reusable products out there, but they don't fit in my lifestyle.
If one cuts back on the amount of product used by opting for the three-periods a year pill, will the increased amount of hormones (would there be an increase?)released into the water systems have a lesser, equal or worse impact on the enviroment?
GodDAMMIT the Fox13 American news is so awful. TORNADOES! KIIDNAPPERS! DEAD FATHERS! BLAH! it's on in the background because I was watching a Trading Spouses episode featuring The World's Biggest Bigot placed into a lesbian couple's household. Sometimes that show makes me sad, and especially this one because the bigot kept shooting her mouth off and the really nice lesbian lady didn't even stand up for herself or even try and provide the ignorant person with an alternate way of viewing things. Or maybe just a plain and simple "your rude way of stating your opinions will not be tolerated."

posted earlier this week--->>EEEEE!! I met a boy with Rin!! I am so giddy at new prospects....and really stoked I got to chaperone her shoot because I am happy to have met him...WAIT A MINUTE WHAT KIND OF CHAPERONE AM I? If I'm making eyes at the photographer? I am hoping he calls.
*glares at phone* CALL NOW. CALL NOW. NOW. NOW.

HE PHONED! and we've chatted a bit online and I am going to try not to be too impatient.