Can only agree about the tediously lazy journalism in these two articles. And even worse, I was stupid enough to buy the paper, thinking that there might be a serious consideration as to why being a mother (note, not a parent) has become so fetishised, and feted, in certain parts of our society.
Did I get an analysis of post-feminist, consumerist society interacting with the changing social demographic of later childbearing interrupting established career pathways? Did they touch on the ever expanding roles of women at home and work, and the inequitous uptake of traditionally female roles by men? Did I hear any comment about the translocation of the American model of family - the "soccer moms" phenomenon (due in turn to complex interactions of social conservatism, very few maternity rights, and a strongly christian culture)?
No, I got an ear bashing about how boring I was, how my choices weren't fashionable, and how my brain was only fit to examine the colour choices of my childs buggy.
And despite accusations of being even more materialistic and selfish post-children, most of the twenty reasons for not having children were about money.
Never again will I be buying the observer.
Not even for Sport Monthly. Sorry DH.