Why do so many posters hate mothers/children

[Sundayschool]

Inspired a bit by the current thread on SMP!

Why does Mumsnet, predominately/historically a forum for parents, attract so many posters who seem to hate children and mothers? It surprises me how fast posters are to tear down any women who want better conditions for themselves or their children or indeed anything to make life a bit easier (parent/child spaces, better SMP).

Why do such people choose to post on this site in particular? Surely if you really feel so strongly this is the last place you would think to come and post?

Love this post!!

You know what MN actually hates? TAATs.

Well, having read the first page it’s certainly taught me that there is a huge amount of intolerance of mothers and children and that no accommodation should be made for them as it’s a valueless lifestyle choice.
I trust these posters all live in America or dream of moving there. You’d love the hyper individualism.

Can’t say I see that? There’s an awful lot of hate against men and men pretending to be women though.

100% made up but probably quite accurate example.

“My husband ate the last ice cream, he knew it was mine”

Kill him
LTB
LTB then kill him
strangle his cat

I read the SMP thread, and I was more horrified at the attitude towards pensions/pensioners. People going on about how it's 'loads more' than SMP. It's a little bit more, yes, but only if you have been paying into it for 35 years. And then there was, 'but pensioners aren't having to pay crippling mortgages'. Well, some are still paying rent, but many worked their arses off to pay off those mortgages, have brought up their own children with a damn sight less state assistance than is available now.

The attitude towards the elderly on this site is pretty vile. And guess what, most of the elderly in this country are? Parents. So I'd be asking why there's so much dislike for other parents who worked their arses off, same as you are now, but don't deserve nice houses or a decent return on something they contributed to for 35 years.

"Hate" mothers and children?
I don't like kids and never had any.
Just mind my own business and get out of their way if present, since it has always been overwhelming.
But I don't hate them or their mums, it's the adult's choice in life, so they ought to get on with it.

Nobody hates children as much as their own mothers! They always seem to be desperate to get rid of them (to school) or ignoring them or shouting at them. And they decided to bring them into this world despite a global population crisis and supposed climate crisis which they claim to be worried about. 🤦🏼‍♀️

Parents create their own problems and expect everyone to reward them for it. Some of us have hard enough lives already, and we didn't choose them.

I don’t hate people with children. I just don’t think they’re any more special or deserving than people who don’t have children, and in the world of Mumsnet that tends to be interpreted as hating children.

I do think statutory maternity pay should be better. But I also think statutory sick pay should be better, pensions should be better, PIP should be better… I could go on. In general I’m in favour of everyone being better off. I just roll my eyes when people elevate mothers above everyone else.

As a parent, I found other parents to be a PITA generally, their kids were fine for the most part. Hate and disagree are two different things.

Some parents display an entitlement that really gets on people’s wicks. I had a child at an activity refuse to clean up after the event and demanded to take materials home. Instead of the parent supporting the rules, she expected special treatment because she didn’t want to deal with the fall out of saying no to the little prince, urgh!

I'm not a big fan of increased SMP or other maternity benefits, but this has nothing to do with hating women, quite the opposite in fact.

Having a child is a joint venture, which both parents should plan and prepare for. A man has no business having a child with a woman if he doesn't have a (joint) plan for supporting them through her maternity leave, I don't understand why he or they would think the state should do it.

The more costly and difficult you make it for employers to employ or promote women of child bearing age/mothers, the less they'll do it, which doesn't help women.

Making the point o f many of the posts on the first page perfectly.

Not one person has said that no accommodation should be made as having kids is a valueless lifestyle choice. Nobody on the other thread is screaming that mat leave should be abolished, child benefit axed, no subsidised childcare on their watch.

Some have said that they disagree with mothers getting more state provision than they already are, or with P&C parking spaces. That isn't intolerance. It doesn't mean that people think mothers and children are valueless.

I honestly do think that some people on here expect mothers to be held up on a pedestal and agreed with at all times.

We have a puritanical streak in the UK - lots of people seem to see suffering as a virtue.

‘my life was shit so yours should be too’.

I’ve long been confused by the expectation by many that if you have children you should expect to work incredibly hard and live in poverty.

IMO the objective of paying into a welfare state is to provide you with support when you need it.

When you have had a baby, you need support to allow you to care for that child, and the idea you get something ‘back’ from the state for that short period seems fair to me.

A lot of people are paying a lot of tax for a comprehensive welfare state that they personally are not allowed to access unless they are more or less destitute.

This can come as a surprise after never having claimed anything from the state but having paid a lot of tax for many years. ‘Now it’s my time to need help’ - and you are given a few crumbs from the table.

I agree OP to an extent. Obviously all are welcome but this is a site aimed primarily at mums in the throws of parenting, the clue is in the name and the graphic.

What I have certainly seen a lot of is (presumably) women from an older generation coming on here to berate young mums struggling with phrases like “but we had 15% interest rates” “we had no central heating in my day” “I only got 3 weeks maternity!”, which is not helpful or particularly relevant given the conversation is about modern day parenting and it’s not a race to the bottom.

No doubt I’ll be slammed for being “ageist”, but I have to seriously question the motivations of people who are no longer actively parenting coming onto a parenting forum to sanctimoniously harp on about how much harder they had it. The pensions one is a classic example, the conversation was about SMP NOT pensions, surely that can be discussed on a separate thread or on gransnet?

Again, I expect cries of “ageism” but it doesn’t really wash with me when it’s the same people pulling down mums that need support.

Why do you need support to pay for that child?

I do wonder why anybody would be on Mumsnet when they’re apparently ‘child free’ though. I put child free in inverted commas because child free to me means no children by choice.

It seems to be quite a recent and rather childish thing to regard disagreement as hatred. Being a woman or a mother doesn't mean immunity to having your views challenged. Presumably most of the posters you think 'hate' women and mothers are women and mothers themselves.

Because you’re not able to work because you have had a baby, and it is too young to use any formal childcare.

No bad children guys, only shitty parents - you know the drill.

Very very few people are net contributors to the state. Only something like the top 5% pay in more than they take out over a lifetime. Unless you're a very high earner it's highly unlikely that you've "paid" for the support, especially if you're having children.

I absolutely support a welfare state that supports those in need to get through hard times following illness, disability, job loss, and am grateful for it, happy to contribute, but maternity leave is entirely predicatbale and should be covered by parents IMO. The state can't afford to do everything.

MN may have started as a parenting forum but now it's much bigger than that, and there's no competitor in terms of a female-dominated discussion space. It also has a large and very active infertility Board, which attracts women without kids who then stay for the rows about parking and debates about pythons called Mr Hissy.

We have our own Board now here as well.

Women obviously need time off to recover from birth and adjust to the new reality. Women who've had C sections have had major abdominal surgery and after no other surgery would you be expected to look after a newborn as soon as the anaesthetic wears off!
Again, it should be obvious that an employer needs to keep your job available for a reasonable amount of time.
Women might need support with breastfeeding or learning how to care for a baby.
Women definitely need support. I'm just not convinced that it's reasonable for support to come in the form of repeated long term leave at full pay every time a woman gives birth.

There's a finite amount of money and ultimately I think it's for parents to meet the costs of their own families, but employers or the state,

@Sleephound the top 20% of earners are net contributors not the top 5%.

I pay astronomical amounts of tax, I’m confident I’m paying far above what I ‘take’ - particularly given I’m not eligible for child benefits, childcare benefits etc.

Materntiy leave isn’t entirely predictable. And - what is the rationale behind supporting people who have lost their job and so have no income, but not someone who can’t work because they’ve recently given birth?

Given the UK has a rapidly declining birth rate, I would argue the state cannot only afford this but it’s actually critical investment for the future ie having enough future tax payers.

For many women SMP is paid from six weeks.

I had to stop work at 40 weeks, but my baby wasn’t born until over 42 weeks.

This meant at the six week cut-off, my baby was <4 weeks old (and I was way off recovery from the birth).

Would you support high SMP for the early months, if not for the full 39 weeks?

Having children is a choice the government is not a charity and should not be paying parents to have children