Book Review: Reconceiving Women: Separating Motherhood from Female Identity by Mardy S. Ireland

Reconceiving Women: Separating Motherhood from Female Identity

Ireland, Mardy S.

This book was very heavy on theories but I found it to be quite satisfying. The author categorized women as 'traditional' (wanted to be mothers but infertile), 'transitional' (women who delayed children by life circumstance) or 'transformative' (women who actively chose to not have children).

I obviously fall into the last category, but this book was a great chance for me to understand other women. The book also focused a LOT on theories and different psychologist and the formation of the conscious and unconscious lives of humans. It touched on Freud and other theorists. This bit got to be quite heavy, but was still informative and interesting.

This book was published in 1993 which is nearly 20 years ago. The author looks at women who were born after World War II as part of our culture's duty to thrive. So there have been changes in the demographic makeup since then, but this doesn't make the book/research irrelevant by any means. It basically reminded that many of these women experienced life during the wave of feminism and it helped to formulate them.

There were many interesting parts to this book having to with gender and personal identification. I appreciated that the book/author focused on the creativity that women are allowed to pursue in their lives that is a valid lifestyle. I view myself as a creative person, so I know that my creativity is my 'child'.

There were SO many good parts to this book, that I find it hard to wrap up without a looooong reivew as previous entries. (The purpose of these reviews should be to give you an opinion on the work, not give you a novel to read before the book!)

Basically, the author posits that by limiting humans to gender roles, we prevent men and women from tapping into their strengths whether a woman be more aggressive and a man more nurturing or what have you. And that the childfree woman is often seen as a threat to both mothers and males, but needs to be welcomed as a valid life choice.

The theory part of the book was sometimes hard to read (and some hard to stomach, especially when Freud and Lacan talk 'lack') but the interesting point mentioned in some of it was 'language' and creating the language necessary for females to be seen outside the realms of motherhood only. That was part of the reason for creating this blog... to give us another method of describing our lives, without referring to something our life does not involve. I am Independent of Dependents, I am Childfree, I am a Creative Person with Purpose.

I do really recommend this book and want to know if anyone else has read it or plans to read it. It's different from many of the other Childfree/Childless books because it is more intellectual and theoretical than any I've read before.

Book Review Time!!! "Two is Enough" and "Complete Without Kids"

Last month I finished reading:

Two Is Enough: A Couple's Guide to Living Childless by Choice

by Laura S. Scott  


I didn't take many notes on it but I do remember is that it was statistically driven off of surveys and essays and interviews. As a single woman, I thought it lacked information about the Childfree Single. One thing I definitely took away was someone's comment about how being CF (or as we like to call it: IOD...Independent of Dependents) allows a person to travel NOW instead of waiting until retirement. That person recalls visiting Greek ruins and being saddened to see elderly people unable to make the climb to the top to see the grandiose ruins they had traveled to see. To me, an ardent traveler, that is really sad! Life is meant to be enjoyed NOW, not put off.

I also remember that the book was more positively driven than not. Often times chosing to be CF/IOD seems like a struggle, constantly having to prove to people that we aren't crazy and that we are making a VALID CHOICE. So it's no wonder sometimes a CF/IOD person can get defensive or angry... if someone is telling you that you don't know what you're doing with your life, just because he or she chose something different. I've gone through the stages and will continue to, depending with whom I'm speaking. Of course, we need to be able to vent our frustrations with ignorant people or bad parents, but at the end of the day, you get more flies with honey.

So, the above book was a good read. It was geared towards CF/IOD (IOD is the agreed-upon, created term my friends and I developed) and also those who are considering the CF choice. I think it's very important that children are seen as a CHOICE. If we continue to promote it as a CHOICE and not 'just what you do', we are encouraging people to be more responsible for their own decisions. (Of course, religion does often get in the way of proactively preventing pregnancies... but that's not the theme of this topic).

________________________________

And tonight was a CRAZY Friday night. I just finished reading: 

Complete Without Kids: An Insider's Guide to Childfree Living by Choice or by Chance

by Ellen L. Walker

 

I did actually take notes on this book (as I will for the other 5 or 6 CF books I have checked out!!! I have a lot of reading to do!)

 

This book didn't sit as favorably with me. The author drew too many conclusions and made assumptions that I found unnecessary. She postulated that so-and-so would have been a good mother had she met someone. She postulated that a Japanese exchange student probably went on to have kids because she probably felt awkward being one of 2 childless females in a room of 50 at a Church retreat. I found these assumptions detracted from my enjoyment of the story. 

I'll now refer to my notes and provide page numbers where possible. Excerpts or ideas from the book will be in italics and my notes will be in plain text.


p. 48 'Suzanne' expresses sadness when she sees families portrayed in movies as being happy and having intimate connections. The idea of missing out eats at her.  - Of course the movies are going to portray things as perfection! Movies set unrealistic expectations for the audience. That's why you have to take everything with a grain of salt. And I'm saying this as someone who is involved in the film industry! Unless the story has to do with a dysfunctional family, you won't see that as part of the storyline. Or, the film shows happy happy happy to set up the meltdown and the return to happy happy. It's just like when I watch a romantic comedy, I know it's outside the realm of normal. 


p. 52-53 Having it all: career and mothering leaves a woman stressed and not present -  This I agree with and find important to mention. We lost our own war with feminism. We felt the need to prove we CAN do it all, work AND be mothers. But to what end? Mothers who have guilt and aren't able to be everywhere at once? Spreading themselves so thin between career and parenting that they lose themselves? TANGENT: On a photo of an Italian female government representative Licia Ronzulli who brought her baby to the voting session... I saw SO many mothers responding to it with pride about how women can do it all. One woman wrote "I'm a mother before I'm a woman". I was flabbergasted. You couldn't be a mother without being a woman first, biologically speaking alone. And you shouldn't be losing your identity into your children's lives. Luckily I saw a commenter write that it (bringing one's infant to work) was feminism fail. For more info on this situation....go here. Basically, as a mother, you are held to the impossible standard of having to prove that you are superwoman. And if you don't happen to measure up, you are in for a world of guilt.


p 66-67 "Having Fun and the Fear of Losing Youthfulness" - I don't like this section of the book. It's too short and I feel it misses the point and misconstrues the issue. It seems like the author is saying that CF people avoid maturing and are just all about fun AND that they have a fear of growing older. I don't know if this was meant to be implied, but that's how I read it. TO ME, I find that many parents have children because of the (subconscious) FEAR of how to fill the next 60+ years ahead of them. It can be daunting to think of all the open roads before me, but I'm grateful and excited, especially because I have several Childfree/Independent of Dependent friends to join me. The author seemed to imply that CF/IOD people are free from responsibility or care and don't need to grow up. This is a falsehood. Having children doesn't make someone mature or responsible. It can be a motivator for someone to become that way, but not everyone NEEDS to pop out a kid to realize they should get their life in order. I'm sure the author did not mean to imply that we shirk responsibility, but that it might appear we do.


Three Categories as developed by the author: Childfree by Happenstance, Childfree by Choice or Childfree by Circumstance - I'm a little fuzzy on the difference between Happenstance and Circumstance. To me, they represent the same thing, but the author seems to imply that Happenstance means a person just never ended up with a partner during their fertile years and that Circumstance is for people that wanted to have kids but were infertile. I don't know if the distinction is as I've surmised or that it's clear enough. In Laura Scott's Two Is Enough there was a category for those who ended up CF because of their partner's strong choice and their ability to be okay with not having kids. I just found Walker's categorization to be a bit fuzzy.


p 68 Selfishness - Some childfree people are happy to admit they are selfish, but I have a hard time doing so. I think all humans are selfish and it is a survival instinct. Parents are not selfless for having children... it's just the group they protect is bigger, so they are selfish for a larger group of their DNA. It's the same as if I'm out with friends and there is an open table at a bar... I'm looking out for the good of my group and will try to get that table for us and let others fend for themselves. My group is where my loyalties lie. And we all know that people have selfish reasons for procreating: wanting someone to care for them in old age (RIGHT!), wanting to have the experience of being a parent, etc. I think less focus needs to be put on selfishness/selflessness because it doesn't seem relevant to me. Just because I don't have a small family group to care for doesn't mean that I don't extend good will by other means, such as volunteering or caring for my nephews. I don't like the idea of selfishness even though some people are happy to lay claim to it.
       Ah, now I see my notes more clearly... I wrote that the author didn't cover the selfishness topic well enough because she didn't mention how it can be selfish to have children for the wrong reasons and that the section basically only said CF people didn't feel guilty for having so much free time. 


p 71 Sometimes the differences become isolating and we can be left out by mothers/parents because we seem to be dis-trustworthy and we have to makes steps to show we "accept kids" - This makes me bristle. I understand the author is saying we need to have a little give and be ambassadors for the Childfree community. I selectively do this with people I care for that have children so that they know I'm not hateful of their kids. I'm very vocal about my choice to be IOD and it can be offputting to mothers. But, yes I make it a point through my actions to show them I can be around their child and not shrivel into a pile of ash. But I won't go too much out of my way. I did go to a friend's party for her 1 year old boy and it was at a Children's Museum. My mom and I even took the birthday boy around for a bit but he was hungry and I couldn't help him. He just wanted his mama! So I relinquished the crying birthday boy. But he was cute in his little vest and hiking boots! See?! I went to the party and spent time with the little one because I WANTED to, not because I felt it was my duty. I care for the little guy and his parents are wonderful, so of course I want to be there for them and celebrate. My choice to stay an aunt doesn't mean I don't want to celebrate and spend time with kids! In fact, I really like having kids around because I like to teach them it's okay to be goofy and just enjoy life! I do this with my nephews and I've done this with all the kids I've nannied or as a camp counselor. It's my way of spreading silliness and joy. Letting kids be kids and take their joyful attitude into adulthood with them. Life is meant to be enjoyed and that's something I like to promote. Something I'm ABLE to promote because I'm not focused on my own children, but can be there for others. So, I guess, the author has a point, but it still threw me off. It made it seem like 'we' have to make the parents feel comfortable and they don't have to make us feel okay. But it is give and take. Each CF/IOD person feels differently about how much they want to be included with parents and kids, and it's up to them to indicate it. Okay... moving on... ;O)

-I agree with the author's section about how our time is OUR time. The evenings and weekends are our leisure time, not filled with the children's activities or catering to what the kids need. That's one of the benefits to my IOD Choice... I can fill up my time in ways that make me feel like a happy and fulfilled person, without being distracted by the needs of children. That can be a BIG struggle for parents, but as a CF/IOD person, I'm very happy with this benefit. This doesn't make me feel selfish, but motivated. I have many projects that I chose to do with my time. Writing this blog is one of them. IT WORKS FOR ME. Everyone should be free to make this choice.


- I like the inclusion of the section on Singles, since the previous book didn't touch well enough on it for me. IF I ever choose to look for a partner (my projects are my loves right now), I would only date another CF/IOD-minded person. I don't have a desire to be a stepmother. As much as I realize that there are children out there that need love and fostering, my decision to be childfree includes children biological or not. The idea is that my life isn't leading towards mothering, no matter where the kid comes from. So, I have to be content to contribute by volunteering. It's much easier on the wallet and less time-consuming ;)


p. 119 - Healthy lifestyles and kids as a motivator to stay healthy - I find that to be a bit misleading. I'm sure there are unhealthy people who don't have kids. The author even mentions one. But she also mentions that because of more free time, Childfree adults are able to use that time to do activities such as healthy cooking and fun exercises like skiing or running. The author also mentioned a study that showed parents consume more fats, saturated fats and sweets and salty snacks that Childfree people. The idea of providing a healthful diet for children is a big scary thing for me. I have a hard enough time making sure I eat enough of the right foods during the day. I'm not up for the task. I can understand how parents can go for the easiest route... when I have my nephews for the weekend.... well, it's not all healthy food. I DO always have fruits and veggies for them. Their parents live on an organic farm, so I know a concerted effort is being made to raise these kids on real food. And that's a big deal!
     I agree with the person on page 121 who says that personality is the driving factor to a person's healthy or unhealthy lifestyle, rather than whether or not they have children. I think kids can act as a motivator sometimes, but I also agree with the fact that parents are more susceptible to disease, not only from contact with their children, but because being a parent can be stressful, leaving parents with less time to sleep and recharge their body. I enjoy the fact that I can respond to my body's needs and get extra sleep when I need it. (I sleep a LOT... it's just how my body is!) Actually yesterday I was able to stay home from work and I thought about the fact that I wouldn't necessarily have been able to recuperate (including my 3 hour nap) if I had a child to care for. Being a parent is a 24/7 job and I'm happy I work in a different field! ;)


p 126-7 - EXPENSIVE! - "Families that make $70,000 a year or more will spend $260,520 to raise a child from birth through age 17, and this doesn't include college tuition, which can add up to $150,000 more for a four-year education. - OUCH! Well, I know I'm not in that tax bracket AT ALL. I work three jobs and would be lucky if it totaled to 30K. So, no, having a child is not financially an option for me. BUT, what IS an option for me, is to save money for my retirement and save money for my travels. In fact, $5 is going into my travel savings fund for writing this blog post. Because I have my goals and my priorities, I'm able to attain what I want. Some people DO want to spend obs and gobs of money on rearing children. Good for them and best of luck to them. But I hope they'd be just as willing to wish me well on MY goals. Often times, people try to place importance on the idea of raising a family and any other use of one's time is seen as frivolous. I disagree. I think it's more important to identify what makes YOU happiest and how you can attain it. Living up to someone else's standards will NOT make you happy. 


p 130 - The author mentions one interviewee said parents are often reluctant to travel for business while Childfree people are able to do so and might look forward to it. - I saw this in action. I happened to have taken off a month from work so I could travel for a GREAT flight deal, visit friends and family in six cities (not something parents can do!) and while I was sitting in an airport, biding my time, I couldn't but hear a frustrated mother on the phone berating her kids or husband for not remembering a dentist appointment and calling the dentist to reschedule. From the airport. A mother's work is never done. Mothers are important people. But sometimes I feel they LIKE it! How many of you have mothers that can be described as 'martyrs'? I know my mother gripes about how much she has to do for us, even now. But sometimes, if they relinquished a bit more control and ASKED for things to be done... well, maybe their children and husband might step up to the plate! I know that's a bit utopian, but if a woman never asks for help and only gripes about not getting any help... it's not really a healthy environment for anyone.


Another idea mentioned by the author is having kids means you may likely have to work a job you don't like because the children have financial needs that can only be met by a steady income. - This is a frightening reality. We don't know which way the river flows. Look at the economic downturn of the past recent years. How many parents lost jobs? You can bet most of them had to take jobs beneath their pay level just to keep food on the table. I can't imagine how stressful that must be. See above, where having kids is EXPENSIVE! As a single person, if I hit bad times, I can move into a home with others. You can't really do that if you have a large family. Well, many immigrants do it, but that's a different story. But working an unpleasant job is one of those 'sacrifices' parents make for their kids. It's something for people to consider when looking at their options. You don't HAVE to choose to sacrifice things you want because society tells you it's how you mature and it's the next step. You can look at your life and what you want to do with it. So if you choose children or no children, you know you are being true to yourself. 


p 130-131 The workplace oftentimes punishes those who don't have children with more chances to leave work (sick kids), more money (single moms), no discounts on health insurance as compared to those with kids, etc.) - There are a number of reasons that parents seems to have advantages over people like myself. The main difference is that in my department, most are salaried people, while 5 of us are hourly. So right there, there are a number of differences that aren't quite fair. I won't go into it because it's specific to my situation. I do know that it generally isn't balanced treatment and changes need to be made. Just because I don't have to run off to pick up a kid from school doesn't mean I wouldn't like to leave early as often as the others who still get paid. 


p 132 Tax breaks. - Grrrr. I don't understand why tax breaks occur. Why are people being rewarded for having kids when it's because of the increase of the population that more services are needed? Why don't I get a tax break for NOT having kids? My taxes pay for public education, but I don't have any kids that benefit from it. (My nephews are homeschooled.) I think there should either be more options across the board (I volunteer a LOT) or there shouldn't be any tax breaks. It just seems like a lop-sided, goofy, unfair system.


p. 137 The author wondered at the idea that since many childfree people will end up in retirement homes, we'll still be surrounded by the elderly who will talk about their children and grandchildren and will NEVER escape. The author hoped that by the time she retired, there would be a childfree retirement home! - HA! Yes!


p. 142 - The author talked about the need for growth in terminology. 'Childless' is used by some people who wanted but couldn't have children and they, and parents with children, may take offense to 'Childfree' while those who like that term are proud of their choice. - This situation was part of the inspiration for the title of this blog. I wanted to be able to refer to my lifestyle that doesn't contain children without referring to children. I'm not a 'non-BMW owner'. Independent of Dependents or IOD seems to be a tax term to refer to our chosen lifestyle. I like it and I hope it catches on. For three reasons, 1)CF also stands for Cystic Fibrosis 2) IOD sounds like IUD which is a method of birth control. 3) My friends and I can lay claim to it! ;)


p. 146 - I REALLY liked the paragraphs on 'purpose'. To me, that's a very important theme. My life is IOD because that's how I feel I will best attain my purpose in life. To me, it's all about encouraging people to research this decision, the most impacting decision on their life, and to make a well-informed, heartfelt decision that is true to that particular person. 


p. 149 - Having children doesn't make for a happier marriage. In fact studies show that happiness in marriage goes down with the arrival of the first child and increases when the children are gone. - I know it sounds like we are making that up to promote a baby-free agenda, but get the book and check it out for yourself! To me, it makes sense. Having kids isn't easy and adds A LOT of stress into a couple's life. It changes everything for them. Sometimes it works out well and sometimes not so much. You can't depend on an outside thing to make you happy. 


p 151. - The author suggested nation-wide people abstain from sex for a week and see how it affects the population. - I really hope this was said in jest. Even I, as a non-parent, am well aware that many parents often go for more than a week without sex. So there goes that idea!

So... in conclusion to this very long book review on "Complete Without Kids", even though I took issue with the way the information was presented (based on a few interviews with unnecessary conclusions/assumptions), and even though I disagreed with things that were presented, I can tell from my own report that it does actually present the Childfree Life as something to be considered. The author would present her life and show how it would be different if children were involved. And for some people that would be welcome. It's just a matter of REALLY examining the choices thoroughly. 
         As presented in this book, half of all pregnancies (in the U.S.?) are accidental. We as a society need to give our youth more information on how to stay safe and be well-informed and MAKE A DECISION. As technology and life options continue to progress and expand, so too do the messages we send to our youth, the emphasis our society puts on life choices and how to make them.

     As always, I want to send out a reminder those parents that may read this (if you have, your kids must be busy ;) ).... Those of use who are Childless, Childfree, or Independent of Dependents, just want you to know, we are living our lives the way we want to. We chose what's best for us in our individual lives. It makes us happy. And we wish the same happiness and fulfillment for you in your lives. So please, don't freak out the next time we say "No, I don't have kids". I'm sure we can still find something to talk about! ;)

PEACE

TV Review: How I Met Your Mother "Symphony of Illumination"

All the things you get to do when you're not pregnant.

Tonight, "How I Met Your Mother," a sitcom that has spent six seasons building up the identity of the mother of Ted Mosby's children finally stepped away from focusing on Ted and got into the mind of one of the female characters for a change. And for once, the show that is so focused on settling down and having kids as the aim of life showed the child-free side in a realistic and even a little touching way.

If you haven't seen the show, the woman pictured above is Robin Scherbatsky, a TV journalist, who has always been vocal about the fact that she doesn't want kids. As Mosby's first serious love-interest in the show, the kids or no-kids issue was a deal breaker. Robin wanted to continue chasing her dream of being a journalist, traveling, and remaining free and independent.

So tonight's episode threw her a loop. Robin learned that she might be pregnant, and pregnant by none other than the show's lovable lothario Barney (Neil Patrick Harris- seriously, I am trying to make sure any non-HIMYM viewers follow me here!)

Barney takes this in a very uncharacteristically positive way, and goes from "commitment is something you tell girls you want so you can sleep with them" to "yay, we're going to have a baby" in a span of 10 seconds. And he tries to take Robin with him, dragging her to baby stores to convince her that having offspring would be fun.

Thankfully, the show brought Robin back to her principles. While baby-shopping with their pregnant friend Lily, Robin and Barney are confronted by all the terrors of pregnancy and child-rearing- tired parents, out-of-control kids, nipples cracking from breast-feeding- you get the idea. And when a doctor confirms that Robin is not pregnant, she and Barney do a happy dance of relief and joy.

But then the doctor brings on some more news: Robin isn't pregnant because Robin can't get pregnant. This suddenly puts a down note on what was otherwise a great episode on how not every accidental pregnancy is a joy. Instead of taking this news with relief that she won't have to worry about scares like this in the future, Robin becomes disheartened. She talks about how she wanted to be able to have the option later if she chose; suddenly she is stricken with regret over something she never wanted to begin with.

I know many CF people who would identify with Robin in this episode. They don't want children for many reasons, but they've never wanted to take away the option. It's an argument many child-free people run into in their lives. "Won't you change your mind?"

And truthfully, some CFers do. But they've thought very seriously about the challenges of having children and have taken the time to decide that is was right for them. The infertility news doesn't spur Robin to have IVF and get pregnant at any cost, but she mourns the loss of being able to change her mind.

But ultimately, she remembers why she chose not to have children- because it was not what she wanted out of life.

In the end, the episode wraps with Ted telling his future children about all the wonderful things their "Aunt Robin" accomplished- traveling, famous TV journalist, even a bullfighter- but most importantly "kids, there was one thing Aunt Robin never was: lonely."

The Child-free Family: Yes, We Have Families.

That time of year is upon us. Collectively known as "the holiday season" in the next six weeks we will be bombarded by Christmas ads, turkey dinners, travel, decorations, etc. that of course all come back to the family as the central part of the celebration.

(Sorry, Hanukkah, I know you're a big family-centric holiday too. Unfortunately, you don't get nearly the ad revenue that Christmas does.)

Every commercial, every film, every billboard shows big family gatherings, putting particular emphasis on toys for the kids, the kids' table at Thanksgiving- in other words the presence of children seem to be the definition of family. Don't have them? That means you won't have a true Thanksgiving or Christmas this year.

That's the argument that many of my more reproductive-minded acquaintances make. The common definition of a "normal family" is that of the nuclear family unit- two parents and children. The holidays and their advertised tradition of such a family makes the reproductive-minded turn to the child-free and say so pityingly, "You must be so lonely over the holidays- no family and all."

Newsflash: the child-free have families! We have large families!

I, for example, come from a large family. I have multiple siblings, some of whom have married, and a multitude of aunts, uncles, cousins, cousins' spouses, cousins' kids, second cousins, cousins-once-removed, great-aunts, grandparents, godparents and a few more friends of the family that are included in every family holiday and special occasion. I used to note how many new relatives I met at every one of my father's Thanksgivings. There was always a new second cousin, third cousin, father's cousin's second wife's father. As I write my family is currently planning how to get 15 to 17 of us into a cabin for Christmas, ages ranging from 2 to 96.

The assumption that family means having children is harmful not just to the child-free community but to an entire extended family. By not having children we actually have more time to spend with the family unit we were born into. We have our parents, our aunts, uncles, grandparents (for those lucky enough to still have their grandparents), and our siblings whom we spend the holidays with.

"But don't you want kids of your own to play Santa with? Don't you want to see them open Christmas presents, play tug-o-war with the wishbone at Thanksgiving?"

NO. You know how much stress parents have to deal with over the holidays? Cook a fantastic Thanksgiving feast with picky-eating children, or with children underfoot in the kitchen. Buying all the toys and gifts they want? EXPENSIVE.

And, despite popular belief, we do have children in our families. We have nieces, nephews, godchildren, and cousins' offspring aplenty to get the kid festivities of Christmas if we choose. (Note: we don't have to try and put them to bed on New Year's Eve so we can ring in the new year! Happy New Year to us! hahahaha!)

And that's just family that's blood. Our families also include our friends, neighbors- people whom we bring into our lives who are not our blood but who still become our family.

Being child-free (and for some of us unmarried, but more on that topic another time) we don't have to split holidays with spouses' families if we don't choose, just so people can see our children. Feel like saying "screw Christmas, we're going skiing in Switzerland this year"? We can, because we don't have kids whom are relying upon us to provide all the trimmings of the traditional holiday.

The child-free person's holidays are far from lonely, but in fact are free to devote as much time to a wider family than those who see the nuclear family as the only true family.

Duggars: Clown Car vs. Ruckers: Fostering Heroes

By now, we have all heard that the Duggars are expecting Child #20. Personally, this sickens me. I will admit I am not a fan of organized religion, especially when it includes mistakenly justifying the overpopulation of the Earth. (We are over 7 billion people for anyone who's counting.) I've tried to ignore this family and their show and what they stand for (using religion as an excuse to shirk 'family planning' based on technology... or at least using a freaking condom once in a while) but if you are interested in this frighteningly abnormal family, check out the link above. Also check out this article that claims that Michelle Duggar is technically a feminist because she made a life choice that makes her happy. Oh and this book that supposedly tells you that you are mistaken if you think having kids is expensive, cuz it's not and having kids is LOADS of fun. For those of you not following the link, the book is called "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think" by Bryan Caplan. The 'great' thing about this book (that I have NOT read) is that it openly lists the reasons as being SELFISH. At least, they admit it. But unfortunately they act as if it's a good thing to be 'selfish' and disregard your perceptions about using finances as a valid reason to abstain from (more) children.

Here's the thing. I don't personally want children but my wish is that more people educate themselves about this CHOICE that will have THE biggest effect on their lives more so than anything else they will ever do. Having kids is the one thing that you cannot 'undo'. You can get a divorce, you can change jobs, you can move cities but you cannot un-have children. 

Maybe the Duggars are good people. Even though I don't agree with their religion and their reasoning for having children, they are providing a safe, loving home for their oodles of kids. (Although the kids can't possibly get the amount of parental attention they would like... especially since child-rearing duties are passed on to the other kids.) The kids are growing up with a set of morals (the religious background scares me - I can almost guarantee that an atheist never uses 'natural family planning') and they seem to be happy, positive people. Even though I don't agree with their religion or lifestyle, I can't help thinking what if the Duggars would have adopted 20 children? Now, it's possible that no adoption agency would place more kids in their crowded home but if the Duggars really have so much love to give, why couldn't they have cared for some of the other children on this Earth? They believe that children are a gift from God but their actions seem to say that it's only your genetic children. And this seems to be the mainstream attitude. And this really, really makes me sad. 

Even though I don't want to spend my life in a caretaker role to children, I applaud those that open their hearts and homes to children who really need parents. I'm talking about those people who foster or adopt children that are not biologically their own. People like the Ruckers who have fostered over 45 children within 7 years. <----- Video available at the link. Another, shorter video available below.

I know the fostering system isn't perfect and there are abusive people who take advantage of the fostering system because of the stipend BUT people like this couple make my heart swell. People who are able to do this make me feel so much better about the world and so thankful for these loving, wonderful people.

But then I remember how much people are drawn to starting their 'own' family. When we don't stop and question the norms, we don't always reach our highest potential. Many times people do the 'marriage and kids' thing because it is just what people do. I always encourage people to really get in tune with what makes them happy, whether it's children or not, to really understand and explore what it is they want.

In my life, I understand the responsibilities and lifestyle changes that accompany having children. When I listen to myself and understand my calling and where my life is leading me, I can tell that having children isn't for me. And I can't change that, as much as I can't change the fact that I'm not called to be a doctor. Were my life's motivation to change drastically (not likely), I hope that I would have the strength to foster children. I don't have the urge to birth children and I honestly don't like the baby years. I like kids who are more dependent (i.e. potty trained!) so the leap to being a foster parent would make sense, were it to be what I want. But, it's not. And I can't change that. But it doesn't stop me from wanting so badly for children in foster care to find the loving homes they deserve.

Wanting a childfree life for myself does not mean I want children to suffer. It helps me see the world from a different viewpoint. I see thousands of children in every nation that suffer from lack of a loving home environment in which to grow into strong, happy people who can do great things. I can't imagine what it must be like to grow up feeling inadequate because their biological parents were unable to care for them (hence needing to promote more options and education on contraception!). I can't imagine what these children must feel and it breaks my heart. I was born into a two parent home and had all of my needs met so I can easily follow my dreams and make something of myself. But these children in foster care, despite any of the problems they may carry around with them, are no 'worse' than any children a couple may biologically have. There are no guarantees in life. People are inclined to have their own children because a) it happens b) they want to see what their kids would look like c) they want a fairy tale family. So do these kids.

If anyone happens to be reading this blog, anyone who actually isn't childfree, PLEASE ask yourself if you have room in your heart and in your home to reconsider fostering children. Wait, watch the videos below. THEN ask yourself.

The following video is from March 2010, but I'm sure the numbers are still as unsettling.

This next video is from Jan 2010 about a family who did adopt and foster and you can hear the journalist tearing up as he finishes the story.

You might tear up as you watch these kids talk about getting adopted when you see the smiles on their faces.....

Okay, last tearjerker video. From the same series as the one above.

SO... If you live a life in which you want to be a parent, PLEASE open your mind and your heart to the idea of fostering and/or adopting. How much different would our world be if we encouraged people to not only be more responsible for their own reproductive power but to see their own possible power when it comes to the impact on one's community?

If it takes a village to raise a child, why aren't the villagers more concerned? I'm an Auntie for life but I still do my part in the village! What are you being called to do?


Addendum: (11/11/11 at 7:45 am) To clarify, I'm not saying that I look down upon those that have their own birth children but I highly encourage those who wish to add more children to their family really consider adoption and/or fostering as options in their lives.

Going Against the Grain

When you stop and consider how socially revolutionary it is to say 'I don't want kids,' it tends to follow that other societal 'norms' are easier to eschew. On a whole, I guess I've questioned a lot of things.... I don't follow religion, I don't want to buy into real estate and be tied down, I don't see the lure of marriage in my future and I've recently come to terms with not wanting a 'real' job. And at age 26, I'm learning (or at least telling myself) that this is okay. It's slightly scary but also liberating. And I'm quite glad that I've taken the time and been able to make these important choices on what is best for ME rather than cave into the pressures and go down a road (job, house, spouse and kids) that might not be right for me.

In society, across all cultural barriers, humans put pressure on their offspring and their peers to follow the most popular and accepted path but this fails to allow people to customize their lives. You can customize your car, your home, your phone, your computer, even your lawn but we aren't really encouraged to customize our life choices. Sure, you can choose a career but that is one of the identifiers humans put on ourselves. 'I'm a doctor' or 'he's a lawyer' or 'she's a human resources manager'. Many unemployed people feel worthless because they built their identity around a job that they no longer have.

Go to a bar, meet a stranger and they'll ask 'What do you do?'. This question is one of my pet peeves. I'm not at a bar to talk about work. (I'm usually at a bar to forget about work!) My work doesn't define me and frankly, explaining the 2.5 jobs I do to make ends meet will bore you AND me, so please don't ask!

I was recently thinking of creating a 'State of the Union Address' for my girlfriends so they could see where I stand on big issues right now (since we don't talk as often as we used to) but I might as well share it here. After all, for those child-minded, they may like to see the thoughts of one childfree mind. (I speak only for myself.)

• Religion: I find religion to be disconcerting, not because it challenges you to hold your behavior to a higher standard but because it is run by fallible humans who claim to have divinely inspired knowledge about events or phenomena outside of our comprehension (or era) while simultaneously trying to fit humans into little boxes that restrict activities for sometimes very bizarre reasons. I do believe in a spiritual connection and power but it seems a waste of time to worry on the details.
• Politics: Ugh. A dirty system meant to benefit the people in office and those that bribe them. I have little faith in the political system. It and religion are more linked than they should be.
• Romance: After going on a couple dates with compatible Childfree males, I had to listen to myself and realize, I may actually be a 'single-minded' person. I'm more inclined to stay home and work on my projects that make me happy than to foster a relationship with just one other person. I've spent the majority of my life single and happy and I'll be fine if I stay that way. Finding another person is such a pressure on most people that they lose focus on just exploring their own personality and being happy in their own skin. I'm also not sure I understand the concept of 'forever'. Since I don't have kids and won't have any in my future, I would be able to cut myself off from exes a heck of a lot easier than those who procreate. Thank goodness! Again, relationships are just one of those things that people are pressured into sometimes without thinking about it. Once I actually considered it and realized what I was leaning towards, I discovered I may be a lone agent but it still makes me happy. (But I'll add the cliché: 'Who knows what the future holds?')
• Career: No career path and okay with that. This is one of the most recent revelations I've had. I had an opportunity at my workplace to double my money and quadruple my workload. Luckily, it took them three weeks to post that position and in that ample time, I was my usual 'pendulum' self, going back and forth on my decision-making process, polling people and picking out nice apartments I could afford without going over the 'no more than 30% of your income goes toward housing' rule. After really mulling over what I want in my life, really searching deep inside my true self, I decided that the more intense job would give me undesired stress in something I really had no interest in doing. It would also drain me of energy needed for my more important projects I do at home. These projects are what I eventually want to receive money for doing so it makes no sense to put money at the forefront if it pushes my desires to the backburner. THIS is a huge step for me. I'm able to make enough money at an unchallenging job in order to do the things I want to do and THAT is fine. 

It's difficult because society tells me that I should want more money and a better job. But that is so overwhelming! And silly! Look at it this way.... if I have 80 years of life, these 80 years are full of unknown events and people that affect the course my life will take. So to sit here and say, 'By this age, I'm going to do this and this age, I'll have done this' is so very futile. I have very little control over the world and just as I don't want to waste time on religious details, I don't want to waste time plotting out supposed events in my unpredictable future.

This doesn't mean that I have no aspirations in life and that I'm just floating around. On the contrary! My life, when not working for money or sleeping, is spent pursuing many activities that give me fulfillment: volunteering, writing, making music, watching movies, dancing, spending time with family and friends, traveling, taking photos, learning languages, making art, performing, etc. (Yeah, I'm pretty sure I can find something to occupy the time that won't be spent raising children!) I work on these things in hopes that I am preparing myself for future opportunities that will allow me to leave my humdrum jobs and use these talents to make money. At this point in my life, I just need to make money. Besides being creative and entertaining, there isn't a certain 'career' that calls out to me. I just had to come to terms with that because that is how I am wired and that is where I am in life at this point. (No quarter-life crisis necessary. PASS!)

I don't condemn people that truly want a family or really enjoy a certain career path. My focus is on promoting choices. If you choose employment or a career, children or childfree, a planted home or an RV, a religion or reason, make sure it is something you feel deep inside your bones, your flesh, your very being. There is no one way to live, no one route to happiness.

I may not know what the next 60+(?) years of my life hold in store but I will do my best every day to be glad for each passing moment, month, and year that I'm allowed to learn and grow as a person in the adventure that only I can live! Best wishes to you on your adventure!

*Remember you either get older or you die, so quit your complaining!*

"Never Say Never"

Recently, via social media, I asked a drag queen (one of my favorite entertainers) if he thought he would ever have kids and he said "probably not but you can never say never". Maybe he meant he couldn't say 'never' and that is his right. Some people may not see children as a part of their lives but could be open to it 'should the stars align'. More power to 'em on their life adventures! (And may they be prepared!)

But for those of us who have thought long and hard about the decision to procreate/raise children, we can say 'never'.  For me:
I will never be President of the USA.
I will never be a marine biologist.
I will never be a doctor.
I will never climb Mount Everest in the buff.
I will never procreate/have children.

Of course, there is ALWAYS the possibility that I may be put in a mother role, due to unforeseen circumstances that I don't want to imagine. (For me, this does not include dating a man with kids, b/c I feel so strongly about it, that if a man has kids, the dating will not even commence. We all have our standards and if you wouldn't bend your 'no drugs' rule for a drug addict that could be 'the one'.... then don't be surprised if I stick with my guns on the child thing.)

As a female at age 26 (some would say: too young to decide to be CF but not too young to be a mother?!?!), with my experiences of being a child, being a babysitter, being a camp counselor and being an aunt for the past 12 years, I think I have the right to say the word 'never' when it comes to the child decision. 

Yet there is a stigma that follows this declaration. There is something about humans that when they hear the word 'never' they want to point out to that 'it's possible!!!' Sure, many things are possible. Notice that I didn't say "I will never kill another human being"? Because, technically, it is possible. Of course, I do my best to avoid it but a situation calling for the death of another person could arise, i.e. self-defense. Or someone just really pissing me off. JUST KIDDING!

But humans just want to be right and sometimes that means saying: "You never know".

1) There is no benefit to the person saying this except supposed 'bragging rights' were I to 'change my mind.' Therefore this statement is self-serving and egotistical. It will NOT make me change my mind as it is NOT persuasive and has no bearing on the reality of birthing and raising children.
2) With the amount of technology and knowledge we have, it is very possible to avoid pregnancy altogether, so I'm quite sure I 'know' I won't be having children.
3) Whatever possibilities that may occur in life, it will never change the amount of responsibility that children bring.

This last one is very important. Saying "I'm not having children" is not the same as saying "I'll never move to Texas". Someday, I may move to Texas but it is not an occurrence that comes with a lifetime of responsibility or change.

Sometimes, I think 'I could possibly be persuaded to adopt years into the future' but then I remember... in most cases, where the kids come from doesn't affect the amount of work that children bring. Adoption, though less physically demanding than birthing and diapering, (I don't like the baby years) does not prevent me from having to deal with all of the other things that I am trying to avoid by not having children in the first place. In this case, adopting would actually be selfish of me because I would be doing it to feel better about myself, to feel as if I'm helping children out. But I'm not helping them out if I don't actually want to have kids around me 24/7 for the next couple decades.

I counteract this 'impulse' to help other people by volunteering with special needs kids. It leaves me both exhausted (after 3 hours) yet very fulfilled. I can then tackle all of the other life goals I have for myself that factor into my decision to remain Independent of Dependents.

It's similar to a situation I faced recently at work. I could stay at my regular job that had all the perks I enjoyed or I could apply for a job that doubled my pay but would stress me out with quadruple the work-load and many job elements that I am happy to not currently have. I had to fight the impulse of 'but I feel like I should' to really identify what is best for me. And I really am all the happier for it, despite not having the extra money that I wasn't missing anyway.

So, while saying "I never want kids" sounds flippant and therefore deserving of a flippant "Never say never" response, saying 'never' is not flippant when it is actually the end result of a well-thought out decision.

And it is a very important decision that should be respected whether a person chooses something you would or not. I choose to remain Childfree/Independent of Dependents/The Fun Aunt because it is what I truly desire and I know that will give me the space/time/energy to be happy/free/me. But I also need to respect those who have chosen the Children Choice. If I'm not supposed to ask 'Are you sure?' to a woman who says she wants children, I deserve the same respect when stating my desires for my future.

So, if you could 'never' imagine your life without your children, know that I feel just as strongly about 'never' having children. Yeah? So if I say 'never', you better believe it! ;)

Peace.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that employing the concept of 'never' can have a negative connotation, implying that a person isn't open to the marvelous possibilities of life. But the list of things I'll never do are realities I'm okay with and would rather not do anyway. It's possible to employ the concept of 'never' and keep a positive and realistic view on life and what an individual desires in his or her own unique life. Capiche?