Or...It Might Be A Sign That You Had Unprotected Sex
Does having children mean that you are more mature? Not necessarily. But, that's often the assumption when they're compared with the childless. Katie Roiphe writes on Slate of some of the men who choose not to have children:
Thinking of men I know who have decided not to have children, there is often a belief that they are immature, Peter Pan-ish, and somehow clinging unnaturally to a freer state, an unseemly perpetual adolescence. The criticism of them is not that they are failures, as is the implicit judgment of women, or somehow unfulfilled or empty, but that they are not growing up.A man in his 40s who decided against having children emailed me:
"The immaturity verdict--I got that a lot in my 30s. The theory behind it is that every man wants a kid but some won't admit this to themselves on schedule, and so need to have their narcissism exploded by all these terrific new Moms and Dads. Forget the question of whether men are qualified to make their own decisions at age 35--I'd say most are. And forget that you have to be mature at least in some ways to withstand so much social pressure. The most unattractive thing about my friends at this time was that they seemed indifferent not only to my happiness, but to the happiness of my children. These kid-pushers had none of my reluctance to sentence a child to life with an ambivalent, disengaged and possibly unloving Dad."
The semi-moral imperative to grow up does seem sort of arbitrary and unfair. After all, why should you have to grow up if you don't want to? Why do we feel the need to impose or foist this very particular variety of grown up life on other people? It seems likely that there is an element of envy in those who have taken on responsible, burdened, parenting lives.
To me, what's "grown up" is recognizing that I find children loud, sticky and expensive and have no desire to have any.
I don't know how women feel about women who don't want children, but out here in Manlyville, the thinly-disguised resentment for men who don't want kids can deliver some truly deranged social encounters.
Being called immature is price we pay for not taking part in the fatherhood market, even within that sadly-diminished sector of womanhood that recognizes eager, satisfied fatherhood as essential for a loving family. A man who doesn't feel the need is just immature, or broken, or cowardly in some terribly obvious way (which can't quite be put into words.)
The superfreaky part of this –in our generations– is that gay men get an automatic pass. But if you're straight, you have no excuse for not adding yourself to the pool of men who want to live their lives supporting Moms and children, allowing the ladies to choose from a more competitive field of contenders.
I've seen this naivete in women in every economic and intellectual level. In a pathetic complement to the horndog men who think every waitress who says "Good Morning" is looking to get quickly and casually laid, many women just can't believe that their most personal and mundane desires aren't the meaning of life for the whole civilization.
Prager calls the desire for motherhood to be "erotically" powerful in most women, and I think it's true. It often makes them stupid.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 1:17 AM
See also.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 1:21 AM
I haven't run into this personally. We had kids fairly late, but I do not remember any pressure from anyone. It must depend on the social circles you are in.
That said, now that we are even older, we can look around at people who did not have children, and see what sort of difference this decision has made in their lives.
Warning: the following contains stereotypes. If you are allergic to stereotypes, seek medical advice before reading further.
Childless people tend to become fusspots. This seems to be worse with women than with men. They are so used to having complete control over their lives that they sink into ruts. Get up at 7:26, go to yoga class at 09:15, have lunch at one of 3 favorite restaurants at 12:07; if the day doesn't run according to plan, life is a disaster.
This flows into all aspects of their lives. Need someone to take on an unexpected business project? Is a project running late, and you need someone to put in a few extra hours? You'd think the people with kids would have the most difficulties, but you'd be wrong. People with kids are used to having to adjust their plans; they can deal with the unexpected. The childless have their holy rituals set up, and woe betide the anyone who disturbs them.
Obviously, people vary a lot, but the above stereotype represents what I see in my friends and colleagues in their 50s. The ones with kids tend to be more flexible; they are still "young at heart". The childless ones are set in their ways; they already act "old".
YMMV
a_random_guy at May 4, 2012 2:22 AM
I remember reading somewhere:
"Insanity is hereditary. You get it from your children"
Having 3 (long since grown up), I can relate. As for "wanting" children, what I "wanted" was sex. I (we) was too young and stupid for any other consideration. Children were a side-effect, albeit a nice one.
davnel at May 4, 2012 2:56 AM
I don't think it is the HAVING children which makes people think (rightly or wrongly) you're grown up, it's the WANTING to settle down and have children.
NicoleK at May 4, 2012 5:13 AM
When I was in my twenties I was in the military and planned on being a "lifer", so didn't really want to bounce a family around the world. If I had found a base I wanted to stay on, I would have pulled my "dream sheet" and then considered it.
After I got out, I hooked up with a woman that was 13 years older and had a hysterectomy. Her daughter was grown and out of the house. That was 13 years with a very sweet lady.
So now I'm in my 40's single and childless. I have dated some ladies with kids. I can deal with that. If they try to introduce me to the non-adult kids early on (3-5 dates), I'm out of it. I won't call it child abuse -- but my mother did that to guys she was dating. I didn't need to see that as a kid. I don't need to do that from the other side.
But I have seen the looks and had similar comments made until they know my history. If they don't know my history, I very rarely fill in the blanks unless they are close enough to me that I want to hold conversations with them. That isn't very many people. Otherwise they can go someplace else and think what they want.
Jim P. at May 4, 2012 5:44 AM
I think some of the reasons people think the childless are immature, is sometimes the reasons for being childless are immature, like, "I want to be able to go clubbing till 3 am!" "I want to eat at a fancy restaurant!" "My friends who have kids have to go home early!"
NicoleK at May 4, 2012 6:01 AM
We're biologically programmed to reproduce and to parent for the survival of our genes and our tribe. So it's understandable that not sharing that urge gets one labeled; "immature" seems as reasonable a tag as any for something that is surely incomprehensible to many whose lives are dominated by the drive to procreate..
But the species would benefit from more people choosing to remain childless. Maybe we're seeing some sort of memetic evolution at work: fewer reproducing members (down to some lower limit that we haven't yet discovered) make a culture more likely to survive and thrive in a world of scarcening resources; those who shouldn't reproduce and know it are more evolved than the many who shouldn't reproduce and do anyway.
In any case, as a practical matter those with children should deliberately encourage the childless to remain childless. Even if my theory is wrong and it's not better for the species, the diminished competition is better for our genes.
Mark W. Bennett at May 4, 2012 6:39 AM
I can't get very elaborate because I am only on break from a class, but I would like to offer up that I cannot explain why, but my life would not feel complete without my daughters. I WOULD feel immature and Peter-Pan-ish. I'm divorced and they live with their mom, but they are still an integral part of my life. I do agree that some people should not reproduce for the benefit of the species as a whole. We have exams for relatively trivial matters such as driving a car, but an act with potentially monumental repercussions can be undertaken with no checks and balances whatsoever.
Joe at May 4, 2012 7:28 AM
Final thought from me, and I say this mildly tongue-in-cheek: for me to have not contributed to the gene pool would have been unfortunate. My girls are gorgeous, intelligent, funny, sociable, talented and well-dressed. I have not met enough women who meet such criteria, so the more will be around in the future, the better.
Joe at May 4, 2012 7:35 AM
"The semi-moral imperative to grow up does seem sort of arbitrary and unfair. After all, why should you have to grow up if you don't want to? Why do we feel the need to impose or foist this very particular variety of grown up life on other people? It seems likely that there is an element of envy in those who have taken on responsible, burdened, parenting lives."
The arbitrariness of the imperative extends to the idea mentioned by the author here that growing up and being responsible in themselves are contingent upon becoming a parent.
In some cases, parenthood itself is the embodiment of irresponsibility. Exercising the capacity to breed does not indicate nor cultivate a responsible nature. It is often a by-product, but not a default result.
"I haven't run into this personally. We had kids fairly late, but I do not remember any pressure from anyone. It must depend on the social circles you are in."
Perhaps you didn't get much flack at the time before you had kids because you told folks who asked that you planned to have children in the future? The childfree who have made a concrete decision to stay that way, and answer questions accordingly when asked, usually experience the arguments. The folks who meet the self-proclaimed childfree with everything from skepticism to volatile repugnance are generally appeased with some form of "Oh, sure I want to have kids SOMEDAY (read: I'm normal, really!) - just not right now!"
"I think some of the reasons people think the childless are immature, is sometimes the reasons for being childless are immature, like, "I want to be able to go clubbing till 3 am!" "I want to eat at a fancy restaurant!" "My friends who have kids have to go home early!" "
You're probably exactly right, Nicole. That being said, if someone really does want to do those things and would resent a child getting in their way of doing them, I don't want them to have a baby to shake instead of a martini.
ValiantBlue at May 4, 2012 7:44 AM
"Even if my theory is wrong and it's not better for the species, the diminished competition is better for our genes."
Are you sure?
http://youtu.be/icmRCixQrx8
ValiantBlue at May 4, 2012 7:51 AM
Groups of people get judged one way or the other for tons of reasons, some legit others fancifal. It happens it's part of life especially when you go "against the grain".
Oh well..
Joe J at May 4, 2012 8:07 AM
I wouldn't be here but for my ambivalent, disengaged and not demonstratively affectionate dad. However, we all ate, got medical and dental care, and grew up to make something of ourselves, or not. That makes him far from the worst dad in the world.
I sometimes wonder if he felt trapped, because he never had many of the material advantages I do. But I get a lot of satisfaction out of my kids' accomplishments. I helped some, but it was mostly them. I hope, and suspect, he felt the same way.
I don't think vacations or more new cars or a bigger house are the same thing, but I wouldn't make that choice for anyone but me.
The glass is always half full.
MarkD at May 4, 2012 8:34 AM
When I was about seven years old, I had a best friend with 2 little brothers who were three and maybe one. My mom picked me up after playing at their house one afternoon, and I was very annoyed. Apparently I told her that I didn't like Sammy's little brothers, in fact, I didn't like any babies at all. And if I ever had any I was giving them to her. My mom was a little shocked and just told me that I might change my mind one day, and besides, by that time she would be too old to take care of any more babies. 30 years later I still have no kids and no intention of having any. I'm not selfish or immature, I just really never wanted kids and even if I did it would be a real struggle with where I'm at in my life. I work a full time and a part time job, own a house, a big goofy dog, and have a boyfriend of over five years who doesn't want kids either. We're happy.
Jill at May 4, 2012 8:58 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/05/04/orit_might_be_a.html#comment-3174626">comment from JillI never felt a desire to have kids.
As an adult, I've developed some close friendships with friends' kids -- I was just in New York to tape Anderson Cooper, and was completely touched that one of my friend C's kids, the one I feel particularly close to, came home from college that weekend because I was staying over Saturday night.
Amy Alkon at May 4, 2012 9:15 AM
I have a wonderful daughter from my first marriage. I adore her, and had custody of her from age eight on. She's 19 now, in college (without any student loans!), and a charming, exceedingly intelligent and reasonably attractive young lady.
My current wife is ten years younger than I, at 31, and the product of a child-centric Mormon upbringing. She no longer practicies any religion, but we had several VERY long talks before I proposed to her. These talks boiled down to, "If you want kids, I'm not your guy." She accepted this eagerly, since she also has no desire for children. (I realize she could get baby fever at 34, of course, and if she absolutely demands a kid I'll remind her of these talks and possibly cease being her guy.)
Her Mormon family is severely disappointed in our choice, and occasionally makes crappy comments to her about being "selfish" for not wanting seven kids. When I mentioned to my sister that I am getting a vasectomy later this month, I was met with dead and disapproving silence.
We really enjoy our lives as they are. We go to games and the symphony when we feel like it, sometimes on the spur of the moment. We like hanging out with friends in the bar. We take weekend road trips whenever we want to. We want to buy a condo in a downtown high-rise. Children simply don't fit into this life. Call it "immature" if you like, but I don't think doing the things we enjoy (within reason) when we want is necessarily immature.
MikeInRealLife at May 4, 2012 9:21 AM
a_random_guy nailed it..single childless folk are always telling people what they ate that day, how far they ran/biked/kayaked, how much money they paid for their fine handmade furniture or BMW. It embarrasses me because I am childless also, and stayed single a long time. There is something stunted about the personality.
I was defensive about it in my 40s, like this guy. Actually started to get angry - why are all these supposedly liberated women foaling again?? I think that's because I was dimly aware of the biological destiny I was denying.
It wasn't until I was about 55, way too old, that I started to get it.
carol at May 4, 2012 10:29 AM
Her Mormon family is severely disappointed in our choice, and occasionally makes crappy comments to her about being "selfish" for not wanting seven kids.
See, in my mind YOU are not the immature one for being childless. Her family members are the immature ones. Making accusations, being insulting, expecting OTHERS to make them happy, expecting everyone to make the same choices that they have made, and whining when they don't get what they want. That's toddler-level immaturity right there.
I often ask myself: Who is more immature? Me, for recognizing that a child is a BAAAAAD idea at this point in my life? Or my boyfriend's mother who cries when she talks about not having grandbabies?
sofar at May 4, 2012 10:30 AM
You'd think the people with kids would have the most difficulties, but you'd be wrong. People with kids are used to having to adjust their plans; they can deal with the unexpected.
As a childless person myself, I...kind of agree with this! Yes, it's just my personal observations, and purely anecdotal evidence. But I don't get where the whole "parents slack off at work and stick their childless coworkers with the work they don't finish" stereotype comes from. The parents I work with tend to have some the best work ethics -- maybe because they have kids depending on them and their income. And they can sure as hell deal with lack of sleep way better than I can.
sofar at May 4, 2012 10:36 AM
I'm a strong believer that the world would be an infinitely better place, if the only people who had kids were the ones who adored children and could provide for their financial and emotional well-being.
Parenting seems really hard and most people don't seem too great at it.
If you know you don't want kids and you don't have any, then good for you. You made a truly adult decision.
flighty at May 4, 2012 10:49 AM
I don't care if people think I'm immature, wise, selfish, weird or anything else for not wanting to have children. Personally, I'll stack up my maturity level against that of a Levi Johnston or a Maury Povich creature any day, but I don't give a flip if someone else finds me "immature."
People without kids sometimes twist themselves into pretzels trying to explain their choice. "Because I don't want kids" is a perfectly good explanation.
Kevin at May 4, 2012 10:57 AM
I…have a boyfriend of over five years who doesn't want kids either.
He should probably wait till he's at least twelve to make that decision.
Mark W. Bennett at May 4, 2012 11:55 AM
> YMMV
It does.
> I don't think it is the HAVING children which makes
> people think (rightly or wrongly) you're grown up,
> it's the WANTING to settle down and have children.
That's weirdly didactic and formal, especially with the absent contraction and cap letters.
> sometimes the reasons for being childless are
> immature, like, "I want to be able to go clubbing
> till 3 am!" "I want to eat at a fancy restaurant!"
> "My friends who have kids have to go home early!"
Those aren't the reasons, those are the reasons given when asked. It's one of the most personal expressions of liberty a human being will experience. The inquisitor's usually a dim, clucking, unattractive woman who's very pointedly taken the floor to ask you about it during a cocktail party or similar breezy context. Her defensive posture is evident in her interest, so she chirps as if she were inquiring about the color of the leather package in your car interior.
But the question is so cloying and inappropriate that one's mind usually turns to trivial, impersonal things, as if to politely restore the table to a comfortable tone of exchange. (How 'bout those Cubbies? Anybuddy catch Leno last night? Jerry did a great job on this rear deck, amirite?, look at that railing. Can't say enough about this bean dip....)
Or, you can look the questioner straight in the eye and ask what kind of sex she likes. That can be a good way to go, because it will usually embarrass her husband, too. (Don't worry, he's been embarrassed before, and those couples have often found routines by which to process these moments.) (And when other women in the circle snort into their cocktails when they hear you ask, you'll know they're really grateful to you.)
> "immature" seems as reasonable a tag as any for
> something that is surely incomprehensible to many
> whose lives are dominated by the drive to procreate..
WTF? What the flying fuck?
It's "reasonable" to insult other people when an oblivious servility to your own "drives" makes the courage and dignity of their lives "incomprehensible"?
Preposterous. Also, I want to introduce you to some gays. And some Muslims and Jews and Scientologists. Mean ones. Sketchy ones.
> I WOULD feel immature and Peter-Pan-ish. I'm divorced and
> they live with their mom, but they are still an integral
> part of my life.
That comment really, really sucks.
> for me to have not contributed to the gene pool would
> have been unfortunate. My girls are gorgeous, intelligent,
> funny, sociable, talented and well-dressed.
Others will be the judge of that.
> single childless folk are always telling people what
> they ate that day, how far they ran/biked/kayaked,
> how much money they paid for their fine handmade
> furniture or BMW.
Or is that what you chose to hear during those conversations? Seriously, how is it you selected those moments from your memory of those people and times for recall in this context? What exactly was the setting for those conversations? Taxicab chatter? Flatware-clattering lunches? Hours-long, late-night conversations with mutually-dear couples draped across stuffed furniture in the glow of candles and empty wine bottles?
> There is something stunted about the personality.
"Stunted" is profoundly condemnatory. It's not just that it's snotty and obnoxious (though certainly it is), it's that it's so certain and so superior.
So what, specifically, where these people supposed to have been talking about in those moments? Molecular biology? High-energy physics? Linguistics?
Or children? (Children whom, as they've explained to you, do not exist and are not of interest?)
> Apparently I told her that I didn't like Sammy's little
> brothers, in fact, I didn't like any babies at all.
I too remember the moment I found out I didn't have to be a father. A broad horizon of warmth and and enlightenment dawned across my heart, and I knew my life and my soul would be more than machinery.
> "Because I don't want kids" is a perfectly good explanation.
You're a brother.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 1:02 PM
First, the other Joe is an imposter, since I'm the one with the gorgeous girls.
I'm not going to say people should have kids, it's their choice, but I will say that having children changes you in ways you can't anticipate. I'll also say that anyone who hasn't had children or spent significant time raising them (even if as an older sibling) has no business lecturing those who have on how to properly raise children. (A sister-in-law used to do this and kept doing it through the first two kids until she had her hell-spawn as the third and the she stopped the lecturing.)
I should also add that raising infants is not the same thing as raising teenagers. The former was easy as hell for me, the latter was hell.
Joe at May 4, 2012 1:02 PM
> He should probably wait till he's at least twelve
But that was funny.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 1:02 PM
See, this doesn't sound grown up:
"To me, what's "grown up" is recognizing that I find children loud, sticky and expensive"
It may be true, but it doesn't sound grown-up. I'm sure you can come up with better phrasing.
NicoleK at May 4, 2012 1:29 PM
Aw man, Joe, don't bum me out, I've got a toddler!
NicoleK at May 4, 2012 1:29 PM
> I'm sure you can come up with better phrasing.
Yes, Amy! Goddamit, if you MUST make personal choices that other people wouldn't make, you have no excuse for not describing them with the best phrasing!!! The best!!!!!!
We're sure you can do better! Now step to it, young lady!
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 1:35 PM
Gee....I sure wish I could be grown up like NicoleK.
Niki at May 4, 2012 1:40 PM
Now, Little Niki, don't let your aspirations carry you away! We're not ALL going to have that kind of righteousness, composure, and grace... Even if we DO use the best "phrasing" to describe our decisions to others. Some of us are just damned to be immature.
I'm sure it's nothing personal.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 1:49 PM
Boo Hoo
The wife and me were derided for having kids in our early 20's as being stupid and immature. Especially my wife because she stayed at home to raise them. "Oh, she doesn't work!??" "Don't you want to be fulfilled by a real career??"
For women, isn't there some link to a lack of kids and breast cancer? Women evolved by missing a ton of curse cycles being preggers and all. Something to consider, I guess.
For me, I wanted little people around because it is so much fun to take advantage of their naivete. Then, they get to have the same kind of fun at my expense during the inevitable decay and ruin.
Superficially, I can see the logic in hanging the immature title on the childless. That is probably true in some cases and not in most. Selfishness, laziness and fear of change are probably more common reasons. And I agree that it is mature to recognize personal preference and don't do something you don't want too. However, in the end, they are missing out on the best possible life experience. Deeper love is just not possible with life partners, friends or acquaintances.
Having grand kids starting in the late 40's is great. Our late bloomer (yet more normal) friends with kids still at home are worn out and stressed. Also, we got the kids through University before it got enormously expensive. Our childless friends seem to enjoy sharing their experiences at trendy vacation spots, fancy restaurants and fine wines on Facebook.
To each his own.
Howard at May 4, 2012 2:35 PM
I don't think people without kids are immature. Selfish, maybe, but that's an important thing to recognize about yourself. Selfishness isn't bad if it doens't hurt others-like a kid you had but didn't want.
I can't imagine I'd trust a 31 year old spouse not to change her mind. I'm not saying women don't know their minds-of course they do. But the people we are at 24 or 30 isn't who we stay and a 31 year old has a lot of changing to do. Then again, being around a lot of kids when young can make you feel like you've already done the kid thing, and have no need to do it again.
In the end, I'm really tired of people trying to justify their choice in life as the truly best one, painting those who make the opposite one with an oh so subtle tint of stupidity.
I grew up wanting 7 kids. In college, I didn't want any. Now, I am settled at 4. Probably couldn't handle more, certainly not well. Some women can. +
momof4 at May 4, 2012 2:48 PM
> For me, I wanted little people around because it
> is so much fun to take advantage of their
> naivete. Then, they get to have the same kind of
> fun at my expense during the inevitable decay
> and ruin.
I like you...
> Selfishness, laziness and fear of change are
> probably more common reasons.
...Even though you're a prick.
I've never understood the accusation of being "selfish" with respect to people who do not exist.
This logic is so fundamental... If you took a freshman-level philosophy class and made an error like that, your prof would send you back to kindergarten. "Woh-kay, let's take this one from the top. Alphabet E-through-G in the morning, then milk and cookies, then a nap, then the colors of the rainbow...."
Personally, I think anyone who doesn't learn to do the Jimi Hendrix dive bomb (consider 2:20 precisely) on a Strat is a just a lazy coward.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 2:55 PM
I am prepared for the wrath of hell, but here is my opinion.
The most immature people are those who have kids and keep them who don't make changes in their life or sacrifice for their children's well being.
Next are those that choose not to have children. I applaud them for withstanding peer pressure and doing what is best for their potential children and being good about birth control.
I think that when you have children and put their needs ahead of your own day after day, year after year, it does mature a person. The tend to think more long term and they think more of about others.
Having a baby doesn't automatically do it. I have seen parents who have no business with children and I have seen childless people who embody maturity and self-sacrifice. Hello Mother Teresa.
PS. For me, having toddlers was hell. It was as though they were intent on killing themselves (and humiliating me) I have a 16 year old boy as well as a grown son and I could not ask for young men with more character. I guess we all pay our dues at some time.
Jen at May 4, 2012 3:28 PM
> I am prepared for the wrath of hell
Good
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 3:37 PM
the horndog men who think every waitress who says "Good Morning" is looking to get quickly and casually laid
Wait...they're not? there goes that theory.
Any way, here's one reason for a man to not have kids: he hasn't found a woman worthy of the honor.
Further, there is little in the institution of marriage as currently constituted that makes it an attractive proposition to men. Especially marriage that results in fatherhood.
All kinds of downsides, and not much in terms of upside.
As Socrates is supposed to have said by all means, get married. If you find a good wife, you will be happy. If not, you'll become a philosopher. I've wondered what Mrs. Socrates thought about that.
Maybe she's the one who poured him the cup of hemlock...
I R A Darth Aggie at May 4, 2012 4:19 PM
Crid:
You are fantastic.
That is all.
ValiantBlue at May 4, 2012 4:26 PM
*****That being said, if someone really does want to do those things and would resent a child getting in their way of doing them, I don't want them to have a baby to shake instead of a martini.*****
Well said. I'll be back as soon as I find my olives.
And this whole "childfree people are selfish" thing - um, isn't it the height of selfishness to bring a person into the world simply because you want to? Most parents phrase their reasons for having kids with "I want". If that's not selfish, I don't know what is. I'll wager you that the people who consciously chose not to have kids put a WHOLE lot more thought into it than at least half the people who had them.
Daghain at May 4, 2012 4:55 PM
> That is all.
Without you, I'm nothing.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 5:00 PM
"I'll wager you that the people who consciously chose not to have kids put a WHOLE lot more thought into it than at least half the people who had them."
Absolutely - this is a large part of why so many childfree-by-choice folks become defensive when others badger them to "do the sensible thing" and have kids. The argument is usually based on the assumption that people who know they don't want kids couldn't have possibly reflected on everything they're "missing." That's the point: most of them have considered very carefully all the aspects of parenthood that they can't wait to miss. This is converse to the phenomenon purported by many parents that "kids just happen."
"Without you, I'm nothing."
*grin*
ValiantBlue at May 4, 2012 5:27 PM
> most of them have considered very carefully
> all the aspects of parenthood that they can't
> wait to miss.
Again, boldface:
> most of them have considered very carefully
> all the aspects of parenthood that they can't
> wait to miss.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 5:29 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/05/04/orit_might_be_a.html#comment-3175091">comment from Crid [CridComment at gmail]I can "have kids" pretty easily -- for about two minutes, until I give them back. I go visit my neighbors' kids, watch them play ball, look at their drawings, look at their shells they collected, give them some little prezzie I picked up for them (a tiny Tabasco bottle for each -- have to give them those tomorrow), and then I go home and let their parents deal with whining, obligations, and expenses. It's glorious.
Amy Alkon at May 4, 2012 5:35 PM
Flattery doesn't work with me. Kids try that move all day long trying to work an angle. They still get their mashed lentil sandwich on 97-grain bread and an apple for lunch.
What's for desert, you ask? Why chocolate cake and ice cream. Really!! Na, just foolin'. How 'bout a second helping of sweet potato.
People who don't have kids train the best dogs. You know what I mean, they are INTO it. Zen and shit.
Little do they know that raising kids are exactly the same with a longer "house training" period. They eat the dry food if that's all there is. They don't whine long if you ignore their bleats (it's easier to take if your nipples don't weep milk when they cry).
Unlike dogs, they actually learn how to get shit done and eventually fix things and put food on the table. I'm a selfish prick and those stupid kids love me more for it.
You sound like you think it's a bad thing. I don't know what planet you're from, but here on Earth, everyone is pretty much selfish all the time. Screw philosophy, if you want to learn logic, take a math class. If you are interested in human behavior, study Darwin. If you learn this lesson well, I might divulge my moron theory of life.
Cheers
Howard at May 4, 2012 5:35 PM
Selfishness, laziness and fear of change are probably more common reasons.
and
However, in the end, they are missing out on the best possible life experience. Deeper love is just not possible with life partners, friends or acquaintances.
Self-Justifying Piffle 101
Crid, why don't you and Amy and ValiantBlue come over, and we'll spend our loads of discretionary childfree income on some good wine, sit on my immaculate white furniture, and give thanks for living in the age of birth control.
Pirate Jo at May 4, 2012 5:40 PM
> I might divulge my moron theory of life.
That's OK.
Offtopic: Don't call. Don't make it weird.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 5:42 PM
"I can "have kids" pretty easily -- for about two minutes, until I give them back. "
Masturbation to porn is never ever a substitute to making love to your one and only.
If your satisfied, who am I to say otherwise.
"we'll spend our loads of discretionary childfree income on some good wine, sit on my immaculate white furniture..."
Yeah, but you are still stuck in LA, the APCD. I love my home town that is the greatest place to be from. It's a good thing for you that you can't actually hear what you are saying.
"That's OK." Too funny. I need to put those up in my 'hood. It'll drive the blue-hairs crazy.
Howard at May 4, 2012 5:56 PM
> good wine, sit on my immaculate white
> furniture, and give thanks for living
> in the age of birth control.
I've cited this passage from Paul Rudnick in Spy before, but Google makes it irresistable.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 6:07 PM
What is the APCD?
Pirate Jo at May 4, 2012 6:11 PM
Crid, shhh, don't tell anyone, but the reason I got white furniture is so that the cat hair from my 26 white cats wouldn't show up as much.
Pirate Jo at May 4, 2012 6:19 PM
Arrrrrggghh!
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 6:24 PM
I think the charge of selfishness occurs when parents confuse cause and effect. My husband and I decided against children, mainly because neither of us had ever really particularly wanted them. Because we didn't have kids, we are DINKS. Yes, we take vacations to great locations and have more free time but that isn't why we chose not to have children, it's the result of that choice.
Astra at May 4, 2012 6:50 PM
@Joe
My girls are gorgeous, intelligent, funny, sociable, talented and well-dressed
Are they also fair minded?
Redrajesh at May 4, 2012 7:06 PM
Question for the peeps that call people without kids selfish...
Nobody calls me selfish for not, say, going to Disneyland 3 times a year, not living in a treehouse, or not having a firemans pole in my home to slide down to get downstairs.
So, if having kids is so wonderful, why are you calling me *selfish* for not participating?
I'm looking for a serious answer to this. When I ask people this in person they change the subject, because they know I'm right.
deathbysnoosnoo at May 4, 2012 8:24 PM
The odd thing is most of the people I know who are childless/childfree are either career hounds, paranoid that they will become their horrible parents, or are very self focused.
That is much better than the idiots I knew in my teen years who couldn't figure out how to navigate a condom. What I couldn't figure out is how someone could have an accidental pregnancy then have another accident a year later.
ZombieApocalypseKitten at May 4, 2012 8:59 PM
I like children very much. I have several nieces / nephews / kids of friends who I get along with very well. My job (as I see it) is to wind them up and give them back to their parents. I do that pretty well.
I don't have any of my own, and barring some kind of toddler apocalypse, never will.
Fortunately, my friends and family accept that, and don't give me the kind of crap others seem to get.
But ...
The whole selfishness monicker makes me wonder.
People are selfish if they've made a well considered decision not to have children (apparently, by definition).
We're told of all of the wonderful things that happen to you when you have children. This implies that they're having children because they get those wonderful things.
A lot of those with that argument don't seem to be saying that they're having children because of what they're doing for the children, they seem to be saying it because of what having children does for them.
How is that not a textbook definition of selfishness?
That said, there's nothing wrong with being selfish. It's not the evil motivation so many people seem to believe it is.
there are some who call me 'Tim?' at May 4, 2012 9:05 PM
"I can "have kids" pretty easily -- for about two minutes, until I give them back."
Some of the bikers in my club have patches which say, "We Ride For Kids".
So I tell people, "You'd be surprised how cheap they are secondhand!"
Radwaste at May 4, 2012 9:06 PM
> that isn't why we chose not to have children,
> it's the result of that choice.
That's a great, great point. And it's not even "the" result, it's just one result. No one argues that there are opportunities for fulfilling connection available to parents (if not always seized) that the childless might not experience.
Most of us have had the experience of dinner at a wealthier friend's house where everyone is talking about things beyond our own budget... And it's not that they're assholes, and it's not that they don't care about the little people, they're just talking about the things they know.
So we smile and nod and double down on the vegetables, maybe a short second glass of Cab.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 10:21 PM
What we don't do is say is "You don't really enjoy that Ferrari...."
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 10:22 PM
(An experience from the other side of that dinner table happened to me on the way home from a dive trip. Here's where I realized there was no way I'd have been able to enjoy the trip or the company of the successful people around me if I'd been worrying about paying for Cody's braces.)
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 10:39 PM
Frinkin' HTML. It was here.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 4, 2012 10:53 PM
Jen said:
I am prepared for the wrath of hell, but here is my opinion.
The most immature people are those who have kids and keep them who don't make changes in their life or sacrifice for their children's well being.
***
I think it's safe to say there's unanimous agreement with that statement.
NicoleK at May 5, 2012 12:04 AM
But not on our topic.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 5, 2012 12:15 AM
Selfishness is not bad , it's normal. Many are showing unfounded guilt about it. Some of the greatest accomplishments in history were from childless people who were selfish about their work.
Everything is a trade-off and you miss a lot going without raising kids and grand kids.
APCB = air pollution control district. That's the old-school name. It's now the air quality management district or some such warm and fuzzy euphemism for a place with terrible air.
Say it ain't so Jo. I don't picture you a cat lady.
Howard at May 5, 2012 6:56 AM
I think the public's perspective of your maturity depends mostly on what you LOOK like from a distance - that is, are you a disk jockey? Or are you a firefighter, social worker, civil rights lawyer, teacher, etc?
Hobbies can matter too.
Quote from the Bratfree website:
smug moo: myrna minkoff, don't you think not having kids is kind of immature? i mean, everyone has to grow up sometime.
myrna minkoff: one of us sits home watching "spongebob squarepants," wears t-shirts and sweat pants everywhere and vacations in disneyland; the other wears big-girl clothes, attends the opera and vacations in paris. you're right; one of us does need to grow up.
Me: Ironically, this reminds me of comedian Bill Maher's hypocrisy.
That is, I (used to) admire him quite a bit in general. Yes, he's clearly CF (childfree). Yes, he complains about our child-centered, teen-centered culture, especially when it comes to all the dumbing-down in schools and entertainment. BUT......he makes it pretty clear that he very much prefers the juvenile, rootless, anti-intellectual culture of, say, Los Angeles and not New York. Quote from "New Rules": "If I want to be really bored, I'll read." Not to mention his constant disparagement of marriage and glorification of porn, adultery and instant gratification in general - something George Carlin would never have done, if only because that last one is anti-intellectual.
(For all I know, this is all an act and maybe he really does prefer to read challenging newspapers and books rather than watch TV - but I doubt it.)
And while I'm at it, check this out:
http://forums.ivillage.com/t5/Pornography-Debate/Interesting-rant-one-of-the-reasons-some-guys-prefer-porn-to/td-p/116187737
(it's not about porn)
The original article: "Marriage, Fatherhood And Why I Have Avoided Both" is by Robert O'Hara and can be found at Men's News Daily - but there's a certain pronunciation problem there, as you'll see.
He DOES make some good points, but doesn't want to talk about how better male birth control would help prevent a lot of unhappiness in men's lives (he's talked about that in other columns, granted).
In a nutshell, he tells of meeting a truly cold-blooded, amoral woman who's planning on making some man a father without his consent - and he builds on that memory.
Excerpt:
"It is just too risky to get married with an overall divorce rate of 50%, with women initiating between 70% and 90% of them depending on whether or not you live in a state that has no fault divorce laws, in which case it is the later statistic of 90%. Children? Would you really have a kid if you knew there was this kind of likelihood they would be ripped out of your life and used as a proboscis to suck your wallet dry? I don’t think so, but incredibly men get married all the time."
(But, as NicoleK(?) pointed out here, just because women initiate most divorces doesn't necessarily mean that the women were to blame for the failure of the marriages.)
Anyway, it's worth reading.
lenona at May 5, 2012 7:49 AM
And, as someone else pointed out, the reasons for having children these days (in First World countries, that is) are pretty much all sentimental reasons that include the words "I want" (how unselfish is that?) whereas reasons for not having them tend to be quite rational.
Besides, as many have said, if children are supposed to be so REWARDING (a belief that didn't really exist quite so much in the days when kids were still economically mandatory) how is it selfish or immature NOT to have them? Especially when your career is one of the unselfish ones I described above?
But ultimately, as my father once said (on some other subject): "You can never brag about what you AREN'T doing; you can only brag about what you ARE doing."
lenona at May 5, 2012 7:56 AM
> Selfishness is not bad, it's normal.
Yes it is bad, and yes, it's normal. Diverting which righteously belong to others (or others as well) is by definition a bad things to do. It's normal because human nature is as often shitty as decent.
Other people can help us resist bad conduct.
Crid at May 5, 2012 5:50 PM
"Crid, why don't you and Amy and ValiantBlue come over, and we'll spend our loads of discretionary childfree income on some good wine, sit on my immaculate white furniture, and give thanks for living in the age of birth control."
I'll bring hors d'oeurves!
"Yes, we take vacations to great locations and have more free time but that isn't why we chose not to have children, it's the result of that choice."
Yes! Cause and effect tends to be well-overlooked by the baby bazooka brigade.
Cause:
Responsible decision to avoid having children based on knowing oneself and daring to have thought processes differing from the wavelengths of peer pressure and societal norms.
Effect:
http://babyoffboard.com/pitythechildlesscouple/
"What we don't do is say is "You don't really enjoy that Ferrari...." "
Indeed. They surely are trying to fill their existential void with material things. Hehe.
"Besides, as many have said, if children are supposed to be so REWARDING (a belief that didn't really exist quite so much in the days when kids were still economically mandatory) how is it selfish or immature NOT to have them? Especially when your career is one of the unselfish ones I described above? "
I've wondered. I think it's mostly a compulsory ad hominem argument that stems from a desire to shame the person into sharing a sentiment. Logic tends to have little role in "How could you NOT want for YOU what I wanted for ME?" discussions.
ValiantBlue at May 5, 2012 6:20 PM
Oh, and you can help me feed the cats, Crid.
ValiantBlue at May 5, 2012 8:58 PM
The weirdest passage of the Ann Landers thing goes like this:
And I'm all, like, if they're too comfortable to know they're terrified, they probably aren't that empty.You wanna have babies? Go ahead. I got the Big V years ago, when the elder Boosh was president, so it's got nothin' to do with me. I pay my taxes, am nice to families, etc. etc. etc.
But until the day I die I will marvel at the stunning array of idiocies that reproduction robots present on behalf of babymaking. Tim offered a good one above:
> those with that argument don't seem to be
> saying that they're having children because
> of what they're doing for the children, they
> seem to be saying it because of what having
> children does for them. How is that not a
> textbook definition of selfishness?
I have an example of this from my own life that was just jaw-dropping. I think it was a 9/11 baby. The woman (presumably) was spooked and said "now or never," but "now" was a time in which she was wholly unprepared to do it well. Months later she called and left a message on my machine, saying very specifically "It's the best thing that ever happened to me." We haven't been in touch.
And then there was this classic from this very blog. The undefended, curt smugness of that rhetoric will always make my flesh crawl.
Many women, including several I like and admire a great deal, will always pretend that motherhood was the willful, chosen expression of their own individuality, no matter how obvious it is that they're on the autopilot of their biology.
Men can't get away with that shit. When they do it badly, they're dogs, and civilization isn't afraid to say so.
> Oh, and you can help me feed the cats
The woman described above had five.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 5, 2012 9:12 PM
"I got the Big V years ago, when the elder Boosh was president, so it's got nothin' to do with me."
Good for you! (I mean that.)
"Many women, including several I like and admire a great deal, will always pretend that motherhood was the willful, chosen expression of their own individuality, no matter how obvious it is that they're on the autopilot of their biology.
Men can't get away with that shit. When they do it badly, they're dogs, and civilization isn't afraid to say so."
Agreed - modern men tend to be in a lose-lose situation from all angles: traditionalists consider men with generally respectable conduct to be gender-traitors, while extreme "it should be called a people-hole cover" feminists label them as reprobates seeking invariably to gain power over wymmyn through any means necessary, including and especially through childbearing. I guess informed consent (read: biology) doesn't factor in.
Well summed:
"Groups of people get judged one way or the other for tons of reasons, some legit others fancifal. It happens it's part of life especially when you go "against the grain".
Oh well.."
by Joe J
"Months later she called and left a message on my machine, saying very specifically "It's the best thing that ever happened to me." We haven't been in touch."
Now that's creepy. Which brings us back to Tim's (agreeably excellent) point and a pro-breeding-default bingo I've often encountered myself:
"...but there's no unconditional love like that from your very own child!"
I find it blackly comical that most people who've sprung this specific argument on me were so emotionally stunted that their main motivation for having children was for the express purpose of feeling wanted, needed and loved. What's disturbing to me is that these self-admittedly loneliness-motivated parents are responsible for transferring their more remarkable dysfunctions to their children. Loneliness is the human condition. I don't feel the need to incur a lifetime of obligation and worry in order to compensate for my insecurities.
Commence rant on these folks in particular:
Really, in my arrogant opinion, if you're that badly in need of validation and purpose, adopt. If you can't love a child that you're not biologically linked to, you're probably not the selfless altruist you consider gifted for parenting anyway.
End rant.
"The woman described above had five."
Well, to be fair, you linked to Cat Lady - not Crazy Cat Lady. There's sometimes a fine line, though.
ValiantBlue at May 6, 2012 12:09 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/05/04/orit_might_be_a.html#comment-3177147">comment from ValiantBlueSometimes, I get lonely. When I do, I either suck it up or I call a friend or go to a bar or a coffee shop.
Amy Alkon at May 6, 2012 12:22 AM
But that's not good enough, Amy! Your friend won't look to you at every moment of their formative years to shape them and love them back!
You're a lot of things, Amy. Histrionically needy has never struck me as any of them.
Hm... coffee sounds good. I will unearth my decidedly crayon-free cappuccino maker.
ValiantBlue at May 6, 2012 12:32 AM
> modern men tend to be in a lose-lose situation
> from all angles
Well, that wasn't meant as a complaint. Being asked to behave in civilized manner is not to 'lose.'
But I think we're at a weird spot in history where most everyone in the world –at least, everyone with whom you'd ever want to spend time and quite a few with whom you'd not– recognizes that masculine nature has very specific and predictable downsides, things that a man is going to have to deal with because he's a man before you'll call him a good person. Every 14-year-old boy knows what we're talking about.
In the popular mind, there's not even a whispered suggestion than being a woman has any such (complementary) downside.
'Something dangerous about me because I'm a woman? How dare you! Femininity is always loving and nuturing and oppressed by the evil Man....'
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 6, 2012 5:29 AM
*****Really, in my arrogant opinion, if you're that badly in need of validation and purpose, adopt. If you can't love a child that you're not biologically linked to, you're probably not the selfless altruist you consider gifted for parenting anyway.*****
THIS.
Daghain at May 6, 2012 10:12 AM
>> If you can't love a child that you're not
>> biologically linked to, you're probably not
>> the selfless altruist you consider gifted
>> for parenting anyway.
> THIS.
Well...
I see where you're going with this, but at some point we have to stop howling into the wind. Whether we think it's ideal or not, human nature dictates that most parents would prefer to have their own genes in their children. That's the essence of a whole lot of biology which fell into place long before we became human. The model of loving fatherhood which gives us strength today couldn't have happened any other way.
This is a truth which makes successful adoption all the more admirable.
It's fun (and for some people, profitable) to pretend that children belong to the whole village, but the fact is that having favorites works out best for everyone.
Crid at May 6, 2012 10:55 AM
I remeber that idiot, crid.
Did he (The Newborn Ultimatum) ever write in to you again Amy after that blogpost?
lujlp at May 6, 2012 12:45 PM
"> modern men tend to be in a lose-lose situation
> from all angles
Well, that wasn't meant as a complaint. Being asked to behave in civilized manner is not to 'lose.' "
I hadn't got the impression that it was meant that way so much as was an observation. Women have much of the same experience, naturally, being humans and given our proclivity to pressure each other into doing what we want. It's certainly not a bad thing when we use it to convince each other to behave in a civilized manner. It's a little less encouraging when we use it for blanket judgements such as, for example, the notion in the popular mind that you reminded us of as follows:
"In the popular mind, there's not even a whispered suggestion than being a woman has any such (complementary) downside.
'Something dangerous about me because I'm a woman? How dare you! Femininity is always loving and nuturing and oppressed by the evil Man....' "
Indeed, this is the very pedestal of "the fairer sex" fragility and superiority that some feminists recoil against yet unwittingly perpetuate. Traditional patriarchy often lauds the fallacy that women are infallible in matters of childbearing in order to designate them the default parental unit. While we now know better than to indulge such sexism, folks still tend to hold onto the ridiculous notion directly related to it that women are incapable of the same shortcomings and evils that men are capable of.
"Whether we think it's ideal or not, human nature dictates that most parents would prefer to have their own genes in their children. That's the essence of a whole lot of biology which fell into place long before we became human. The model of loving fatherhood which gives us strength today couldn't have happened any other way.
This is a truth which makes successful adoption all the more admirable."
Of course it's to be expected that humans would prefer to raise their bilogical own; it makes evolutionary sense and it's not about to change (I don't expect it to). I just think it's goofy and damaging when (specifically) the self-coddlers I referred to will simply not be consoled without having a little mini-me to serve as a genetic monument to themselves. Of course, it's also part of human nature to shape our offspring in ways following our own, but it doesn't serve any of us well when the shaping is done by bludgeoning the kid's own identity. That happens often when the parent's primary inclination to procreate is to have a very malleable interactive doll.
Of course, as you mentioned, the mutual benefit of an adoption is by no means guaranteed any more than a healthy biological family relationship. I just think that we have more children who need nurturing than we have a need to further swell the population.
ValiantBlue at May 7, 2012 6:31 AM
"It's fun (and for some people, profitable) to pretend that children belong to the whole village, but the fact is that having favorites works out best for everyone."
Many of the adopted I know (and surely, many of the adopted whom I know and of which I am unaware) aspire, should they have children of any sort, to be half the parents that their adopted folks didn't have to be. I think I understand that you're not quite stating the contrary, but adopted kids can be favorites, too. The village parenting concept hearkens to me in a manner that is more reminiscent of mentoring, coaching, schoolteaching, nurturing the playmates of one's own children, and so on in the fashion of caring for children that are not directly part of the family unit.
ValiantBlue at May 7, 2012 7:25 AM
@Redrajesh....of course they are. As am I.
@Crid....thanks for the wonderful insight. Now that I know I am being formally evaluated, I will endeavor to make un-sucky comments from here on out.
Joe at May 7, 2012 9:19 AM
Our planet would be better off with fewer people reproducing.
JD at May 7, 2012 10:35 AM
> Our planet would be better off with fewer
> people reproducing.
Yeah?
Yew Shur?
So let's start with yourself, and everyone you ever loved.
Gosh... Golly... It turns out that your file's missing from our records... Exactly how many minds do you control, again?
(It's nuthin' personal, we just need to keep track of who wants to be here and who doesn't... I'm sure you understand....)
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 7, 2012 5:39 PM
Cocksucking HTML. Motherfucking HTML.
A perfectly good slamdown, shot to Hell.
Yeah, I'm angry. Why does linking gotta be so smelly, Nelly?
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at May 7, 2012 5:42 PM
Not to pick nits, but I'm not sure that failing to reproduce is quite the same thing as genocide.
ValiantBlue at May 8, 2012 4:36 AM
Pshaw... We see that everyone complains about overpopulation, but no one ever wants to do anything about it.
Not as regard their own popula-tude, anyway.
Crid at May 8, 2012 6:28 AM
Many people don't contribute to the population; hence the whole "childfree" and "childless" things (there is a difference.) They're doing something about the overabundance of people by not producing more. They probably encourage others to do likewise, but that whole darn independent will thing means they can't make them. What more are they supposed to do, actively murder a few? That's so ridiculous as to need no further serious thought.
This really doesn't seem that hard to fathom.
Reginald Van der Snoot III at May 8, 2012 2:18 PM
I told you to stay out of my head between 2 and 3.
ValiantBlue at May 9, 2012 5:20 AM
Leave a comment