Post: #1

Quote:Child-free: why women who choose not to have kids are given such a hard time
May 25, 2016 6.09am AEST

Author

Zoë Krupka
PhD Student, Faculty of Health Sciences, La Trobe University

More than 7% of Western women choose not to have children.

Our politicians talk a lot about “families”, but what do they really mean when they use this term? What does a modern Australian family look like and how does it compare with ten, 20 or even 30 years ago?

In this ten-part series, we examine some major changes in family and relationships, and how that might in turn reshape law, policy and our idea of ourselves.

Selfish, damaged, cold-hearted, shallow, overeducated and greedy. Women who choose not to have children are often labelled in these ways by everyone from the Pope to their co-workers.

Australian women experience marked social exclusion if they choose to remain childless – and it’s the choice part of the equation that leads to their deviant status. While all childless women experience some exclusion, women who have rejected the traditional ideal of motherhood are at the greatest risk of social disconnection. It is the very act of making a conscious and public choice to reject the role of mother that is overtly or tacitly criticised.

The so-called lifestyle pages are full of articles by women trying to redress and reclaim the dialogue around the choice not to have children. These narratives and other contemporary writings on the choice to remain child-free parallel the research and challenge the dominant story that women who choose not to have children hate little people, want to save money and can’t give up their holidays.

The research evidence tells a different tale. It’s not children childless women hate, or even the terrible cost of having children, the lack of available childcare, parental leave or the loss of superannuation that’s taking up the lion’s share of their decision. Instead, it’s the degraded state and overinflated expectations of motherhood most are not keen on. And, of course, some women simply want a different kind of life.

Several recent studies point to an increased social acceptance of women who choose to remain child-free in societies with greater gender parity. In other words, the larger the space women can occupy, the more opportunity there is for a variety of life choices for women. In places where women have greater power, there is less policing of the role of mother and room for a more inclusive view of how to be a woman.

Women who are childless by choice often mother in other ways, ways that can go unrecognised by all but those who benefit from them. They step mother, allomother (where women other than the mother help take care of the child), actively aunt or foster. Anyone who has ever shared the burdensome role of parent or been mothered by such a voluntary mother will understand how desperately necessary this kind of mothering is.

The fascinating story of voluntary childlessness is really no different from the story of all women who have fought to gain a measure of control over their fertility. While the reasons women choose not to have children are in some ways complex, more than 7% of Western women are making this choice. This proportion has increased significantly over the past 30 years. And more women are making this decision as their ability to do so with less censure increases.

But not all women are able to choose. Just over 40% of pregnancies worldwide are unplanned and many of those are also unwanted. There are a myriad of reasons for this staggering number, including access and adequacy of contraception, domestic violence, social pressure and misinformation. The choice to limit fertility is very much still an ideal rather than a reality for many women.

If you step back from the picture painted by the research and personal dialogue about women’s voluntary childlessness, what stands out is how hard it still is for women to be truly free to make choices about whether or not to have children. The rhetoric around childlessness, like the often degraded conversations about abortion, older mothers, young mothers, lesbian mothers, single mothers (the list goes on), continues to pit woman against woman in a effort to keep the definition of woman as narrow as possible.

The experiences of women who choose not to have children play a key part in understanding how our choices as women have the power to define who we are. And our degree of freedom to make those choices tells us something about who we are allowed to be. Women who use their freedom of choice to not have children are among those who stretch the idea of womanhood to its furthest edges, challenging the age-old assumption that woman and mother are synonymous and spotlighting the current high cost of mothering.

Author Q&A: Zoë Krupka will be answering your questions today (24 May) from 3pm to 4pm AEST.

http://theconversation.com/child-free-wh...time-58068

Is anyone seeing this sort of stigma against empowered womyn daring to contribute to society in other highfalutin ways such as pursuing multiple higher degrees, running for public office, performing in the arts and sports, curing diseases, climbing the corporate ladder?

Krupka appears to give the impression that to do so carries the sort of taboo of being a witch in mediaeval times, it echoes the sorts of sentiments I've heard from a few of my professors on how hard they have it interviewing for roles in engineering, architecture and finance — whereas I hardly see it happening in real life.

Post: #2

In 10 years time we will be talking about the birthrate crisis.

Post: #3

I dunno. Maybe we'd be better off if these basket cases don't raise children.

Also, great alliteration in thread title.

Post: #4

This is why Australia imports a quarter of a million alien cultured people into the nation each year, clearly the old incumbent culture needs elimination and flushing.

Post: #5

Because you know why:



High T manjaw.

Her Twitter:

Quote:Ethics and Etiquette. Writer, Feminist Therapist, Cairnmillar Institute Lecturer. Currently writes for theconversation, past newmatilda news therapist.

Majority of pics from her twitter are like this:





Yeah, I think we're done here boys.

Post: #6

(06-01-2016 12:39 AM)JWLZG Wrote:  Is anyone seeing this sort of stigma against empowered womyn daring to contribute to society in other highfalutin ways such as pursuing multiple higher degrees, running for public office, performing in the arts and sports, curing diseases, climbing the corporate ladder?

Sure. From all the women who define themselves by their motherhood & have little else to show for their time on this planet.

My mother is a classic example & I suspect this kind of thinking also lurks in the hidden recess' (see: would not have the balls to post on FB) of my sister-in-law.

Both of them are rubbish at holding down jobs & love to sanctimoniously lord their own self-worth to others. The only thing they have succeeded in is shitting out kids & beta-fying their husbands. They would be completely at sea without them though. Mum certainly is now that Dad's in a better place.

As George Carlin said... "Women understand women. And they hate each other". One small-minded bitch to the next, if there is something missing in their lives they find a way to rationalise it & then passive-aggressively condemn those who they don't believe share their perspective. It's a form tall poppy syndrome.


Edit: ^^^ We've seen this bitch before around these parts. I recall an AB or TLOZ breakdown of that mug in the recent past.

Post: #7

^^ agreed, how do people not see through this shit? The whole article is written to make herself feel better, trying to justify her stupidity. She has written all of this with an alterior motive.Its a feel good propaganda piece for feminists.

She really was smacked by the ugly stick though.

Post: #8

(06-01-2016 12:45 AM)Surreyman Wrote:  In 10 years time we will be talking about the birthrate crisis.

Nah. It'll be the latest variant of "YOLO" and "you go girl."

Post: #9

(06-01-2016 02:12 AM)kazz Wrote:  She really was smacked by the ugly stick though.

I am pretty sure the ugly stick got the worse end of the deal after touching her.

Post: #10

(06-01-2016 01:43 AM)Conscious Pirate Wrote:  

(06-01-2016 12:39 AM)JWLZG Wrote:  Is anyone seeing this sort of stigma against empowered womyn daring to contribute to society in other highfalutin ways such as pursuing multiple higher degrees, running for public office, performing in the arts and sports, curing diseases, climbing the corporate ladder?

Sure. From all the women who define themselves by their motherhood & have little else to show for their time on this planet.

My mother is a classic example & I suspect this kind of thinking also lurks in the hidden recess' (see: would not have the balls to post on FB) of my sister-in-law.

Both of them are rubbish at holding down jobs & love to sanctimoniously lord their own self-worth to others. The only thing they have succeeded in is shitting out kids & beta-fying their husbands. They would be completely at sea without them though. Mum certainly is now that Dad's in a better place.

As George Carlin said... "Women understand women. And they hate each other". One small-minded bitch to the next, if there is something missing in their lives they find a way to rationalise it & then passive-aggressively condemn those who they don't believe share their perspective. It's a form tall poppy syndrome.


Edit: ^^^ We've seen this bitch before around these parts. I recall an AB or TLOZ breakdown of that mug in the recent past.

I don't know the individual women you're talking about, but I see no issue whatsoever with women defining themselves by motherhood. That's their biological imperative.

What should they define themselves by, if not that?

Post: #11

No one ever gives childless unmarried men shit ever, by contrast.

No one ever insinuates that we're gay or calls us "immature man babies" with "Peter Pan syndrome".

Also, being unmarried doesn't affect our careers in the corporate world one bit.

/s

Post: #12

Sounds like the equality they don't want: Man not married, no kids = nobody gives a shit about him, he doesn't care to hang around peoples kids; Woman not married, no kids = nobody gives a shit about her, she wants to be around other peoples kids and they don't want her getting her fix off their children. feline surrogacy enabled.

Post: #13

(06-01-2016 01:35 AM)Speculation Wrote:  Because you know why:


High T manjaw.

------ | | | | | | | | |
------ V V V V V V V

Post: #14

In fairness a lot of people who have kids probably aren't fit to be parents, probably because having a child is considered a fundamental right, yet people have to demonstrate more competence to get a driver's license or a part-time job at a retail store than they do to make a human life.

The fewer chest-haired feminazis having kids the better in my book; they're just signing their own extinction warrant. Same with the virgin-for-life male feminists.

Post: #15

(06-01-2016 10:10 AM)Surreyman Wrote:  I don't know the individual women you're talking about, but I see no issue whatsoever with women defining themselves by motherhood. That's their biological imperative.

What should they define themselves by, if not that?

Well, maybe as a human being first of all, and ALL that that encompasses.

Don't get me wrong. I have all the respect in the world for a woman who sets out to be a wife & mother for the right reasons. Just the same as I would for any man who takes his role as provider, protector, husband & father seriously in the world we live in today. It is no easy feat to raise balanced, healthy, mentally-sound human beings given all the degenerate ideologies being pushed onto vulnerable, forming minds from early age these days.

But think about this. Do you define yourself strictly by your manhood or masculinity? I would put it to you that you are much more than that.

As individuals we all wear many hats & are fortunate enough to live in a time where we can invest in & strengthen ourselves in a huge amount of avenues of human endeavour, skill sets and facets to our personalities & understanding of the world around us.

What happens to a woman who defines herself solely as a mother? Well, from personal experience I can tell you that things start out pretty well. Early childhood is catered for extremely well by these women. But as the child grows & needs to explore their own inner & outer existence, things can get hairy for the parent who defines themselves solely as a parent.

As pair bonding between mother & child becomes less beneficial to that childs growth & their innate desire to individuate becomes stronger, a mother who defines herself solely as a mother starts to lose her identity.

I have seen first hand how this can be devastating to both mother & child, causing an arrested development in both as individuals, and in their relationship to each other. When you rely on the existence & availability of another human (your child, for example) for your own self worth, you are effectively giving up control of your own destiny (& theirs). You are denying yourself & them the growth that is intrinsic to a human life & development. Fathers seem to handle the relational transition from parent to friend much more easily due to not ever having the intense emotional/physical bond that mothers develop from day one with their offspring.

It creates a schism that can be extremely damaging to all parties involved.

For me personally, I not only want to love & lust after my partner - I want to respect them greatly - in fact, above all others. I have realised that this is actually the most important component to a monogamous relationship as feelings of love will rise & fall multiple times throughout the course of a lifetime of commitment to another human being. And lust is going to drop off at some point.

What never goes away however, is respect. The moment I see behaviours in my partner that cause a loss or drop in respect, love & lust go out the window. And that is the death knell for any relationship.

I want my woman to understand me as completely as she can, for all of the facets to my personality, the lengths I will go to to support & provide for her & the kids, and the achievements and experiences that help define & shape me into the man I am always becoming. And in return, I want the opportunity to do the same for my partner.

Am I making sense here?