Women without men who want children: Must they find a man first? Must they behave so indirectly in the pursuit of what they want?
The short answer is "yes". Her article talks about an internet "kaffee klatsch" where poor downtrodden women who want to take a turkey baster rather than invest the time in finding a life's mate for themselves find support.
First off, let me say that I have little sympathy for these selfish women "pursuing what they want" at the expense of a little human being who deserves both a mother and a father.
I guess on the island of Lesbos where the noble radical feminists reside, dads are not important in the raising of their children, but in the real world they are. How is a woman who cannot maintain a relationship with a man model it for either a daughter or a son. This doesn't even take into account the fact that in prisons, 80% of the inmates come from fatherless homes.
There is a reason for this which Ms. Althouse, in her testosterone-deficient state can't comprehend: boys have testosterone, this causes them to be active which in many cases prompts lazy teachers to prescribe them Ritalin. As they approach the teen years, and are on the way to becoming young men, they need a decent role model (preferably an involved dad) to teach them how to channel that aggression and become decent men themselves.
The more interesting statements happened in the comments section.
For the kids we're talking about, the alternative is nonexistence. Are you saying that 38-year-old women who can't find suitable matches should not have children? Or that they should make dads out of unsuitable men? Talk about the real world, not just your ideal.
Yes, Ann, that is precisely what I'm talking about. We should not use the tools with which the creator creates willy nilly. If that means we have to go childless for the benefit of the future children, so be it. This is the selflessness that is required to be a parent.
By traditional means of constraint, I did not mean husbands, I meant the chiding and disapproval and pressure put on women who are thinking of going it alone. These women today find support on the web. Telling a woman she's "neurotic" to want a child is a typical example of the traditional pressure put on women. If she finds a husband, she doesn't have the problem under discussion.
But I can see that people will find it disturbing that the normal desire for a child doesn't stay part of the pressure on women to make matches with men. This is hard on men, but maybe it will put a good pressure on them to become better husband material.
As for the children, I'll say it again. Those who are born to these women would simply not have been born otherwise. Are you telling me that it's better not to be born than to be born into this situation?
Yes. It is better not to be born than to be born into this situation intentionally. Sure, sometimes things happen. Sometimes women make bad choices of mates. Sometimes the father dies. Sometimes the parents get divorced. They don't, however, set that situation up intentionally. It's unfortunate, and it sometimes happens.
And honey, let me tell you, this is not hard on men. At least this man. I just made sure to hang out with women who value the necessity of a father in the lives of their children and a husband in their life. I have made sure to marry the woman that God gifted me with, and to gratefully feel his hand on us as we helped Him in His creative work.
Children are not some sort of "right" to us. They are a gift and a huge responsibility. One we both take seriously.
Do you think that maybe... just maybe the attitude that men are unnecessary in children's lives (and obviously their lives) is telegraphed to the men they meet? Could it be maybe men, coarse, unintuitive creatures that we are pick up on this attitude. Nahhhh... Couldn't be.
the answer to the question in my title really is, for a lot of people: yes. Why get so upset about what these women are doing? They are at the end of their fertility and have not been able to find a mate. They want to love and care for a child, as much as or maybe more than a married couple. They will have to be altruistic and unselfish to take care of a child, so it's not fair to label this selfish. And the assumption that they can easily adopt, as the article points out, is wrong.
Ms. Althouse assumes altruism when in hef very first paragraph she talks about "what these women want". So this is something for them. Nowhere does she say what is best for them except expect the children who are left fatherless because without "altruistic" mom, they would never exist. Thanks a lot, "mom".
Oh, and as to the idea that being able to find a mate is the appropriate test of when you will be a good enough parent? Have you taken a look at some of the people who pair up? Women can find men by lowering their standards enough. Why do you think women who do that are more deserving than women who see that they haven't been able to find a match, assess their real situation and see that unless they go it alone they will remain childless?
Of course, how dare I even try to suggest that finding "an appropriate mate" might make it easier to raise a child and supply him or her with a much more stable loving home. But the "new mommies" can simply "shoot up" the "best part of the man" with a turkey baster and then go to their power office, do their power lunches, give their child to a child care warehouse, or some nanny to raise for them.
As far as "standards" go, the only "man" who would meet their standards is another woman.
I agree that there is a real problem with males becoming unproductive and unstable if women do not bond with them. Pre-feminism, women had to pair with men and the problem of unpaired men was minimized. That's actually the most frightening thing about female autonomy. Accusing me of being a man-hater, however, if just dredging up the oldest anti-feminist argument in the book. I am not impressed, and I am not cowed. (Or bull-ied.)
Wow, Ms. Althouse is woman, hear her roar. Don't flatter yourself, Ms. Althouse. Many men are shying away from ball-busting radical feminists and waiting for a woman who will love them, nurture them, civilize them, have their children, partner in the raising of the children, and be their life's companion until one of them goes to meet their Maker.
Why do you think ball-busting radical feminists are having problems finding and/or keeping a decent man. It's not that there are no decent men around. But decent men are not buying what they are selling.
Women who marry unsuitable men are also being unrealistic. That's not to say women going for single motherhood may not also be unrealistic. Actually, everyone goes into pregnancy with some lack of realism.
Umm, no. My wife and I went into pregnancy with our eyes open. We realized that we would need to subsume our desires to the needs of our children and we would have lots of self sacrifice, both in time and in money.
I am a talented computer programmer. I could have gotten a high pressure job making lots of money in one of the big markets, but I chose to stick where I am working less hours in a place with a lower cost of living to have a great place for our children to grow up.
A single mom, no matter what she does (unless she's independently wealthy) cannot give that level of time and attention to her child or children. Not to belittle single moms, but a loving mom and dad is more ideal for children than a single mom or dad.
It's not incoherent. I'm saying there should be more men who want to be in families and who are developing themselves into the kind of people who would have matched these women who find themselves without partners. Look at how many young men behave in our culture. A lot of them are in prison, for one thing. Others do not look for women to be faithfully devoted to. They seek selfish pleasures, not more responsibilities. Many have substance abuse problems. They are not pursuing higher education at the same rate as women. There is a disparity that leaves a lot of women without partners. I'm sure some of the women are too picky or too conceited or whatever your stereotype is, but a lot of them are good women who haven't got reasonable marriage prospects. Show some sympathy for their plight!
Many young men are in prison because... Ta Da!!! They grew up in a home without a dad. I submit that many of these women don't have "reasonable marriage prospects because"
1. They are too busy to date.
2. They are looking for all the wrong qualities in a man.
3. They bust the balls of every man they meet.
I'm not afraid of female autonomy, but autonomy is a funny word to use when you are using it in the same sentence as parenthood. And I find it interesting that women who aren't able to inflict themselves on a man, find it necessary and have the ability to inflict themselves on innocent children who have no choice. And isn't that what radical feminists are about? The right to choose? But I guess that doesn't apply to their children.
