Sunday, March 4, 2012

Single Mum - by choice

I really cannot believe I am revisiting this topic. Because the logical thing to do would be to avoid issues that enrage me.
But alas, I claim not to be a logical creature.
Maybe I am wearing 'red' today, Grasshopper.
In any case I am definitely seeing red.
The gloves are off.

Let the rant begin.

In the post on intimacy I hinted that my personality type is often characterised by passivity, so much so that we are often mistaken for the dead. In my case this is no exaggeration.

But even I come alive when a principle is at stake.

In the post 'The sins of the Mother', I was in a subdued mood describing a phenomenon which is sad, with the full recognition on my part that some of the perpetrators of these 'sins' are largely unaware of the consequences of their actions.

In the case in hand, my reaction is very different. Because the intent here is all too clear.
Here is a woman choosing to be a bad mother even before she becomes a mother.

Single motherhood is tough. Men who abandon their children willingly are cowardly and unjust. Women who prevent ex-partners from seeing their children (for no good reason) are unfair to their children, not to talk of the ex-partner.
The point of this post is not single motherhood per se.
I daresay, given the right conditions, no woman would choose to become a single mother.
Given the right conditions.
What are these right conditions?

1. She is right in the head. Even an idiot like me knows it is very hard work being a parent. Nobody should be looking to do the whole single parent thing. It's not normal.

2. It is socially stigmatising to want to be a single parent. Note I did not say, to be a single parent. I do not believe it is right to point fingers at a general group when individual circumstances are not known.
There are many reasons why people (men or women) end up raising a child alone.

3. The state is not encouraging this phenomenon.

In Britain, it has become quite the fashion for a 16 year old girl, bored of school and living with the parents, to decide to become a 'baby mama' to get herself a new apartment and all the mod cons, paid for by you and me. I am sure that phenomenon is not unheard of in other countries too.

The scary thing is, material gain is sometimes the sole reason for her pregnancy. That, and the fact that she is looking for someone who will 'love her' unconditionally when it becomes clear that the randy 16 year old boy she is consorting with is not really in the 'love' business, despite what he says. The irony is, she herself may not know what real love is, either. She may really be as immature as she acts.

When I think of this issue, I always remember a former female boss of mine, not known for her tact or subtlety. She would read in one of those tabloids about yet another 12 year old expecting twins, and she would say something like, 'No ponies to go riding on?'
Particularly hilarious as it would appear she was completely oblivious to the fact that these urban kids did not quite live in the same world as her. Or perhaps she was being ironic, and I am the one who is missing her point...

Anyway, it came as quite the surprise to see this article referenced in one of Dalrock's posts.
An educated woman who is financially independent and who was herself raised by a single mother wants to become a single mother.

This woman's mother became a single mother not by choice, as she states early on in the article. Which makes her decision to become a single mother all the more hard to digest.
This woman is not the daughter of some narcissistic mother who wanted a 'mini-me'.
Her mother never said negative things to her about her father growing up. Even though it is clear that her father was not an ideal father.
The problem was not his large beard, as she claims. The problem goes far deeper than she lets on.
Society dies another little death each time a young woman adopts her kind of attitude.

Each to his or her own. Life is full of choices.
But hopefully, one is allowed an opinion.
Here's mine.

Do we not yet have enough evidence to suggest that it is better for children to have two loving parents rather than one, in general?
Not to say of course that children of single parents are necessarily worse off.
Everyone would agree that on the whole an abusive parent is worse than no parent. Children who have had to grow up without one parent make do, and overcome, but often not without a lot of hardship first.
The point is, given the choice, why would anyone want to deny a child something that is good for them? Deliberately.

The whole 'single by choice' thing by women and men is cool. Everyone is free to make a choice that affects them.
'Single motherhood by choice' is not cool. Because a bad decision is being made for another human being even before they have begun life.

'Single motherhood by choice' is bad motherhood. Because any woman who does not know by now that denying a child their God-given right to a father (if that father is a good enough fellow who is not abusive or dangerous) is at risk of one day becoming a bad mother. It cannot be stressed enough the importance of Father in the lives of both boys and girls. Why must people always be left to discover this the hard way?
Not enough feral kids on the streets already? Not enough damaged people to make us all sit up?

Adults who were adopted as children go through this yearning to find out their roots practically their whole lives until they get the information they need. It has been likened to the need to scratch something that is not there, ala the 'phantom limb syndrome' of amputees.

Is this what we want for our children?

This woman doesn't want to be bothered by the stresses of a relationship with a man. But she wants a child.
Is this woman even mature enough to be a mother?
What if said child becomes too difficult to live with? Will he or she be chucked out too?

She doesn't give a sensible reason to choose what she has. Her father was not the best, agreed. But should this not be the impetus for her to improve things for the next generation?
Most people who are born poor strive to do better for their children one day. Most people who grew up without a father either want to be a good father or ensure they couple up with a good father for their future children.
This woman seems to have had a great mother. This exemplary mother did the best she could so that her daughter had a great upbringing and life. Mother did so well in this task that daughter now believes that single motherhood is easy.
Unfortunately, Mother's heroic efforts are about to be nullified by a daughter who doesn't get it, who doesn't understand the sacrifices Mother made.

She just doesn't want the 'hassle' of being with a man, the possible father of her desired child.
She is proving the point that a woman essentially brought up exclusively in a matriarchy ala Kim K is at high risk of becoming a narcissist. Unless she gains insight into the problem and self-corrects. Such women are unfit for marriage because they are way too selfish, so they will try to find alternative family-building strategies, like this woman is trying to do. She sees it as her 'right' to have a child, by any means necessary. Who gives a monkeys about the needs of the child? As long as she gets what she wants, stuff the rest.
It is not her fault. We are all products of our environment afterall. But Mother cannot be held responsible for this selfish woman's decisions. If what she says about her mother is true, Mother did a great job, along with her grandmother.
But I fear daughter is showing exactly why she needed a father growing up. Pity she cannot see it herself. Let's hope she does not succeed in propagating this problem.
And this should be a lesson to voluntarily absentee fathers, and mothers who deliberately separate their kids from their fathers. This situation creates little Frankensteins.

Which conditions have gone awry in this woman's situation allowing her to unashamedly declare her abhorent intentions to the world?
All three.

Quite rightly, what incensed a lot of men in the comments section was her noble promise that she would somehow provide a 'male role model' for her future fatherless child.

Yes. Some poor man who may or may not have ties to her will be roped in to play part-time 'daddy' to her kid from a distance, at occasions and in a manner of her choosing. Just like in the movies.

In all humility, might I appeal to her better nature here, fully acknowledging the possibility that this young woman, like the rest of us may have been 'misguided' in her thinking?
That she simply needs to wake up soon and say to herself: 'Something's wrong with our modern life. Things are not supposed to be this way'  like many women are doing now.

Because those who do not, ever in their lives, are the ones on the non-stop express train to Crashville. Some are in the first-class compartment paid for by feminism.

Can and will this woman get off the poisoned train?

She has a chance to prevent this 'part-time daddy' nonsense she wants so badly from becoming a reality now.

Doesn't she know that it is a last resort option that people (including her lovely, commendable mother) have to take when all other attempts to prevent this have failed? Does she really believe it is fun for a kid to have a 'part-time' father-substitute? To watch as Uncle X leaves to go home to his own children? To always feel that no-one is his/her own to keep, that every adult man he/she comes into contact with is 'borrowed'?
From what she says in her article, she should know!

You are not supposed to be choosing this option for your future children from the get-go, Dear Friend.
You go, girl.

I really must stop here before I implode.

Too late!


Anonymous said...

Wow, just wow!
ST hits the jackpot again!
You're on a roll, dear.

I'm so comforted that at least one woman gets this to such a degree.
I know you said in that "MGTOW" article that you're a slow burner.
Trust me, your recent pieces show that you GET it.

Grasshopper said...

I have long suspected that more than a few parents see their children as lifestyle accessories rather than little human beings with whom they have been entrusted to care and raise. This however is that kind of selfishness taken to the extreme.

I hear what she is saying about her father – but I would really like to hear her father’s version of the story. Her version of her upbringing seems a little too convenient shall we say.

B asked in another thread recently if there was something a man could provide a woman that she could not get from someone else. I could not come up with a good answer at the time. After reading this article I can now.

He can be a father to their children (in every sense of the term – not just biologically speaking).


Spacetraveller said...

@ Anonymous,

Thank you.
Might I say that I hope this woman is not representative of the young women of childbearing age of today. I really hope she is very much in the minority.

Because if she represents the majority, then shoot me now, because life would literally be unlivable in the future.
Already, fatherlessness is a big issue in today's world.
The London riots 2011, anyone?
More of that coming our way if we don't all correct the problem soon.

@ Grasshopper,

Yes there might be the remote possibility that her father was actually a good guy and that the reason Mother could not tell daughter any negative things about him was that there was in fact nothing bad to tell.
But somehow I feel that would be a stretch of the imagination somewhat. In any case there are women in this position who would still take the opportunity to badmouth Dad to daughter so she grows up believing all men are bastards.

This Mother very generously refrained from doing that. I have no doubt that she had complaints about Dad, but she didn't confide them to daughter. Admirable.
Mothers should know that their children are not supposed to be little therapists for their emotional issues. They should have girlfriends or actual therapists for that. This sort of thing causes 2 immediate problems for child: It automatically pips child against Dad (not fair to Dad or child) and it burdens a child before they are emotionally ready, hence this problem is listed as one of the 'sins' in 'The sins of the Mother'.

Jony Gibson said...

As a single mom, finding love isn’t very high on the list of priorities. There’s homework to assist with, meals to prepare, etc.But at the same time, finding a meaningful relationship can be essential for your well being.
Dating as A Single Parent

Spacetraveller said...

Welcome to The Sanctuary, Jony!

I am unsure what to make of your comment, because it seems wildly off-topic...

My internal 'spam alert' went off especially with the plug for the dating site.
But...I shall give you the benefit of the doubt and accept your comment as a genuine contribution to this post.

There is nothing wrong in what you say of course. I can (at least intuitively) agree.
My problem is, I don't see how it relates to this post. I stated quite clearly that the issue was not about being a single parent. The issue I am addressing is that a young woman seems to think that being a single mother is a wonderful thing when most single mothers (maybe including you?) and certainly her own mother would probably disagree, and would prefer not to be in that situation because it ain't fun for Mother nor child. But life being what it is, it happens, a lot. People make do.

But it annoys me a tad that this woman is advertising single motherhood as the next best thing.
Because a less-than-bright younger woman reading her article might say to herself...'Wow, this sounds soooo cool. Maybe I shall try this'.
And then she finds out the hard way...

OK, I exaggerate for effect a little, but you get the picture...

The point is, she is doing some 'false advertising'.

Maybe you can do me a favour, Jony. Go talk to this woman and set her straight. You could do it better than I can.

Anonymous said...


In the bible there is a passage about how in the last days the "earth will be filled with violence". I think the hign incidence of these single mom households, either by divorce, seperation or single mum by choice is setting the stage/conditions for this.

Also if these feral youths end up conscripted in the military for overseas wars they'll be a big increase in atrocities commited when the officers backs are turned; rape and killing of civilians etc.

Spacetraveller said...

@ Anonymous,

Thank you for your comment.

What you say is sadly backed up by social research, even though I daresay 'single mother' is a very diverse group and some of said research attempts to distinguish between the many sub-categories. Is a widow with children in the same category as the 16 year old girl I refer to in the post?
The sensible answer is no.

Anyhow, I am starting to get the sinking feeling that the point of the post is misunderstood somewhat.

This post should not represent an opportunity to 'bash' single mothers.
Like I had to explain to Jony Gibson above, the point of this post is the 'pre-meditated' nature of the subject's decision to become a single mother when she is supposed to be educated, and all the research on single parenthood points to evidence of negative issues being more likely in the children of single parents compared to 'double' parents.

More likely. Not certainty, but an increased chance, yes.

I had to mention all this bad stuff in order to make the point about this woman making a potentially bad decision.

Please, please, let's not hit on single mothers here!
Some of them like this woman's mother do a fantastic job in very hard circumstances.
And some already know that the absence of Father in their child's life is manifesting itself in a bad way and are despairing.
Let's not add to their pain.

But let's discuss THIS woman's pre-meditated choice of lifestyle for herself and her future children.

BeijaFlor said...

Growing up the only son of a single mother taught me - by its absence - the importance of a father.

Mom was my one-and-only ally, in a sense that Helen Reddy sang in "You And Me Against The World," from my childhood to her death. And when I grew to adulthood, Mom needed me - financially, emotionally, etc. - whereas the "eligible women" of my acquaintance showed they'd rather not be bothered with me. So I put my loyalty where I was needed.

I give witness to the idea that this was a failed experiment.

Anonymous said...

Warning, the above link is data from the USA only, and some of it is obviously cherry-picked to show fatherlessness in the worst possible light.

As a matter of fact, I only include it so as to show how some view the present societal situation. Don't get me wrong, I believe children benefit greatly when there are two parents involved, regardless of genders of the parents or the children. I would not even want to think how possibly bad it would be for a child to be raised without an involved mother. But, that's probably a function of my own close relationship with my grandmother.

But, we must also be careful not to judge too harshly, this woman may turn out to be a great mom. I do not applaud her choice to have a child alone, but that's more due to the child being bereft of something that this putative mother values very little. Judging by her commentary on her father, he doesn't sound like much of a man to me, at all, but that is a very poor reason to decide to have a child alone, regardless of her ability to raise a child alone. Yet, at the same time, I've known some kids that turned out great, from single parent homes, which goes against the link I posted here.

Ok, so her father was a 'wanker' as you Brits say. Certainly met more than a few of those in my time on this Earth, but instead of merely making her more cautious in her selection of possible partners, it seems to have turned her against a committed relationship. Assuming she is heterosexual, she is ignoring a LOT of history, which shows that traditional two parent families do work, and rather well. Yes, sometimes parents stay together for the sake of the kids, but I'm not about to condemn or condone that... thinking of the kids first shows that the parents are good parents, even if not a good husband or good wife.

What does bother me, is the apparent notion that we must accept anyone's personal decisions without regard to any harm or potential harm done to another human being. This isn't a conservative backlash at political correctness, but a genuine call for society to remember that such decisions DO affect the children.

Quoting the article:

"Despite this, I feel apprehensive at the idea of sharing parenthood with another person. Having never experienced the traditional family unit, raising a kid in tandem with someone is as difficult for me to imagine as having another set of limbs. I can’t help but think that having a partner there with an equal stake in the matter would complicate the process."

Complicate the process? Forgive the emotional outburst here, but this is a CHILD, not a fecking process! Not an obligation, not an accessory, and most certainly, not a validation. It's another human being, and if raising a child has been reduced to a process, then I would not recommend the woman in question have a child, regardless of whether she is in a permanent, committed relationship or not.

Ok, so calming down, let me close by saying, two unfortunate events do not make one fortunate future. It's sad that her father was not around, but don't compound his stupid mistake by making another mistake. Children are the most precious gift, and to take your own child for granted, that amazing love will turn into something far less than what she thought she was getting.

The Navy Corpsman

Spacetraveller said...

@ NC,

Thanks for your comment on this issue.
I am with you on this. Completely.

Unfortunately, the studies on fatherlessness are kinda biased in my view, because they pit fatherless children against GOOD fathers. No-one is comparing fatherless children against bad, abusive fathers...but then again, would that even be an ethical trial to conduct? Would that even be possible? How would they choose these case controls anyhow?

So I admit there is plenty wrong with the data, for sure.

But it is the general picture which is more important. No-one needs a study to confirm what we see around us everyday...

There are many things that upset me about this woman's article, but I guess what makes me boil over the most is her belief that just because she is financially independent, she is enough for her future child. No thought given to the emotional, psychological or even spiritual needs of the child. She has it 'all figured out'.
So, yes, in that sense she is treating a child as a 'commodity'.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.

I also agree her Father was indeed a 'Swiss banker', as we would say in Cockney rhyme down in East London, but you are right - two wrongs don't make a right.
She should be striving to 'find a better man than Dad'.
Difficult, given that some women are attracted to men just like Daddy :-)

But the point is, you don't know till you try. Why give up even before the task has begun?
Why declare yourself a loser even before the race has begun?

That's just got to be the worst kind of self-sabotage, no?

Anonymous said...

Yes, self defeating attitude is bad. But, with most things, you're the only one affected, put a child in the mix, and suddenly you've moved the question to an entirely new level of concern, one that society has at least a right to comment upon.

Americans are famous (infamous?) for our fanatical devotion to individual rights. Every one of us is supposed to take responsibility for ourselves and if we're raising a child, for that child as well. Along with that responsibility, we expect that we have the right of self-determination and authority over one's own actions and beliefs. We're deeply suspicious of governmental interference in our lives. Yet, at the same time, we expect a certain level of compassionate charity from those who have clearly more money, more financial success... and this has not been the case for at least 15 years. We don't want the government to tax us to spend on welfare, precisely because we see people with 15 children all under the age of 18, on the television demanding that someone pays them for all the kids. This sort of thing has been going on since I was born, probably before, too. Like I said, I'm not going to condemn or condone, but I sure don't like the attitude that a self-supporting woman believes that she has the ability to raise a child alone, ONLY because she is self-supporting. It takes vastly more than just money, to raise a child well. Of all the things one could name, money is pretty far down on the list, but because it is hard to come by, it gets more importance than it deserves. Time is the most precious thing a parent can give to a child, especially since the child gives so much back with their time to a parent.

But getting back to your point about sabotage, yes of course, thinking you cannot raise a child alone, pretty much guarantees you never will. There are also classes that one could take, learning about the various needs of a child, learning how the child will affect your job, and your own social life. Nothing is going to teach you as much as actually raising a kid, but a lot of people could benefit from a bit of education, because they simply never have done it themselves.

One thing I will say, she has a right to have a child by herself, if she so desires. I don't want to bash her for that wish, it's perfectly natural and human for an adult. It's just so clear from her essay that she has not thought things through, that she needs to consider the child far more than she has, currently. I, for one, hope that she not only has a child, but raises that child very very well. For my wife and myself, raising two boys was by far our greatest accomplishment in life, both individually and together. I also hope she can find someone, assuming she is heterosexual, who can give her what she needs, as well as what a child needs. I hope she can come to realize that there are Swiss bankers out there, and there are some pretty decent human beings, also, who would see child rearing as a special privilege for both parents, and that it is a cooperative venture, not a competition.

The Navy Corpsman

Anonymous said...

What she's talking about is kind of a common female fantasy... Although, the other character is usually depicted as a fully grown man. She talks about having a child as if it were a lover! :s

Spacetraveller said...

@ Anonymous @ 7.26PM,

"She talks about having a child as if it were a lover!"
I think I know what you mean. I think it is exceedingly dangerous however. A child is not a grown up. To treat them as such is to rob them of their right to be a child. That poor child would always be Mum's emotional cushion and not have the capacity to relate normally to his or her peers.
Wrong, wrong, wrong!