Worst comment you've had as a child free woman

[derekdied]

I'll start. Someone I had literally met about fifteen minutes previously. One of her first questions "do you have kids?" Me "no.." her "oh could you just not be bothered with the responsibility?" 😮

I fucking hate that first comment, that you’ll get comments just as bad if so have kids. Duh, we know that. Women get a raw deal with plenty on things in life. Men don’t even get asked.

Actually one of the big reasons I left it so long to have my child (was child-free until 44, had a surprise kid) was that I didn’t fancy identifying as a “mum” & all of the shite that comes with it.

However, much as I hate it (I don’t hate being a mum) it’s nowhere near as bad as the treatment / comments I had as a child-free woman. Nothing changed for DH when DS was born.

One friend suggested (after I’d had a miscarriage in my 40s, which she knew about) that me & DH must have a “nice nest egg” put by, not having a mortgage or children to pay for…

One friend suggested (after I’d had a miscarriage in my 40s, which she knew about) that me & DH must have a “nice nest egg” put by, not having a mortgage or children to pay for…

See also thread about 'the childfree are rich.' I wish I'd known about these mortgage companies that don't charge CF people when they buy a property.

I wish I'd known about jobs that magically paid more for the childfree and landlords that charged less during my working years!

Is anybody else reading the higher earner/low earner relationship thread,

I’m trying to actively avoid any threads which I think are bait to bring out all the smug parents who think they’re superior to those of us CF people and want an opportunity to show how worthless they think we are.

Despite the fact that we work more than them, contribute more in tax and NI and take less out of the system on average to them, we’re still deemed worthless because we didn’t participate in the “miracle” of creating life.

The miracle that billions of people have done and will continue to do but apparently still a miracle.

As for the dog hate threads of which many pop up on the daily, I’m sure some of these posters are livid that people prefer dogs to their kids. No one, bar them, thinks their kids are as cute or loveable as a dog and they know it and hate it.

There was a poster once who got absolutely slaughtered by all the mums (despite being pregnant herself) for admitting that beyond the baby stage no one really cares about their kids or finds them cute. Which is, largely, true but these women couldn’t take it. Like there are literally tons of people who have multiple kids just so they can relive the baby stage again. This is a thing.

Its honestly hilarious to watch and wish I remembered which thread it was in.

I’ve realised that MN is a place full of self important people who think they’re always right and their lives are the only lives worth living and if you’ve chosen different or your life has worked out differently it’s lesser.

Oh god yes the people who expect others to worship their kids. Even other parents don’t care about other people’s kids (and many admit as much on here). I don’t like the baby stage either, I really don’t get what people find cute or appealing about babies. Wrinkled little potato creatures that make annoying noises and shit themselves. I’m always baffled at the people who say they’re fighting off in laws and friends who want to hold their babies, like who’d voluntarily spend time around one? I prefer kids when they can hold a conversation and wipe their own bum, personally.

Same (apart from liking them as older children - I don't). I find babies unappealing, all too likely to puke or crap everywhere. This picture from the SIL thread sums it up:

I have a colleague who has seven children. Other half doesn't work so only one set of NI etc being paid where they are taking vastly more out than they put in. I feel hugely sorry for the kids because whilst the one income coming in is above average it's certainly nowhere near millions. They've never been to the cinema, they can't have hobbies outside school and only the older children have new clothes. Everybody else gets hand-me-downs. Of course there are couples out there with only one or two children in the same boat but for this couple its purely selfishness - the glow of being pregnant and the centre of attention. Even to the extent where the mother's life has been at serious risk with the last three pregnancies due to complications that she has been told will be complications every time. So risking your existing children being left without a parent because you just have to be pregnant.

But we're the selfish ones right.

I admit I really don’t understand why people prefer dogs and cats to babies and children - but that’s fine, we are all different!

I really enjoy spending time with kids, I just have never had the desire to have my own.

For me it's probably because I never liked children much when I was one, and never had anything to do with babies (I was the youngest of three, my sister and brother are much older). I don't find babies or children remotely interesting.

Cats I grew up with, though, and have never been without, and hope I never have to!

Some of the comments about being CF are unbelievably cruel! I didn’t have my first until 34 (not that old I know) and I felt like people were always careful around asking me about having children at family events etc.

I have a few child free friends. I don’t know if through choice or circumstances for a couple but the others are open about it - one doesn’t want, one never met the right person etc etc.
I think for a lot of women, having children defines them. I live in a fairly affluent area and a lot of mum pals don’t work. Invariably when we catch up the chat revolves around talking about children and I find it mind numbing tbh. On the other hand I love catching up with CF for the chat, I do love my kids I just don’t want to spend an evening talking about their habits/grades/sleep patterns.

I have 2 dogs who I love like furry children and probably talk about them too much so swings and roundabouts! The love you can have for pets is different because you know you’ll outlive them and have to say goodbye but it is no less intense than the love for your children (for me anyway!).

I don’t mind babies and small children, but I work quite hard to avoid them most of the time because of the “watch and judge double jeopardy”. You know the way if people see you’re good with kids it’s all “oh, such a shame, you would have been a good mum and you missed out”, and if you do something wrong you’re an unnatural bitch who should probably be disposed of.

I wouldn't say I like older children but if I really, really must spend time around kids I prefer it if they're at least 7 or older. I wouldn't choose to spend time around any kids if I didn't have to, though!

For a couple where one earns high and one earns low its ok apparently for one to have a sausage roll lifestyle and the other to have a champagne lifestyle because you are just boyfriend and girlfriend who share a flat unless you are married or have kids!!

The only message I took from a swift scan of that thread was 'thank God I'm hardcore single because coupledom sounds like FAR too much hard work.' 😄

Sorry but that's not what I took from that thread at all. OP sounds like a CF (and it doesn't stand for childfree in this case!). OP's bf paying for lots of luxuries for her, not living different lifestyles at all, but she's moaning because she has to contribute to living costs basically.

Lots of people saying if they were genuinely committed (and listed long-term partnerships, marriage or kids) then yes resources should be pooled, but honestly yes it sounds like OP is just living with her boyfriend. Why should he fund her lifestyle when he's in the higher earning role which possibly (but of course not necessarily) comes with longer hours, more qualifications and more responsibility? If it was the other way round you'd think it was quite right that the woman protect their assets.

@Possimpible there are posters on that thread who are saying its not a partnership unless you are married or have children. I get what you are saying, but what if one of them were to become ill. Or have an accident Tough shit Im not helping you.

DH and i were living together for six years before we got married. DWP certainly saw us a couple not flatmates!!!!

@JenniferBooth Again not really what I took from the thread, more that as a boyfriend he doesn't have an obligation to contribute to her living expenses unless they're married or have children, which legally is true isn't it? Regarding accident and illness, as is always the advice on here, if you're not married (and actually if you are), you should have your own income protection/insurance to cover. That thread was specific to OP's circumstances, which are bonkers (and maybe her boyfriend just doesn't see them as partners), so I can't get het up about it the way I did about the family = mum, dad and 2.4 kids thread 🙄

Mind you give me a Greggs sausage roll over champagne any day Cant stand the stuff

I think I agree with @Possimpible on this. I’m not in favour of extending the responsibilities and protections you get with marriage to cover all cohabitation arrangements. Both people should contribute to rent and essential bills at a level they can afford, so the higher earner has to choose whether they’re going to pay more than half, or live somewhere smaller/cheaper than they could afford. But I don’t think they’re under any obligation to share the disposable income they have left over, and I don’t think it makes them arseholes if they don’t.

You can't claim means-tested benefits if your partner earns over the threshold whether you are married or not, so there's at least one circumstance in which the higher earner is expected by the Govt to support the lower earner.

Anyone see the baby at a wedding thread? Apparently unless you have given birth you are too stupid to work out that a small baby might need to be with its mum

Aye, didn't take too long for us to get a bashing!

See also "childless people don't know the difference between a baby and a child".

Both Cambridge and Merriam-Webster define child as 'from birth to puberty' and United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child as 'everyone under 18 unless "under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier".'

So ain't us not knowing the difference because there isn't one.