Anyone else feel aggrieved by the Child-free movement?

[beatie]

Mostly my feelings have surfaced in response to this article

in The Observer and the responses of support it provoked the following week. (Can't find them online but they are the usual)

I?m pretty sick of smug journalists writing articles about being child-free and how they feel so hard done by because the rest of society is having children. I?m as sick of their articles vilifying parents as I am sick of reading articles about parenting.

Must there be such a polarisation of child-free Vs parents within society? Can the two camps not co-exist and appreciate what all have to offer society?

And what about some of the terminology that is used by the Child-free, by men and women?. Some of it smacks of misogyny. Child-rearers? Breeders? What vile phrases for women to use against their fellow womankind.

I don?t give two hoots if women make a choice not to have children but I mind very much that they have a problem with those who do. Whilst their act of not having children is no more selfish than my desire to have children, they do show themselves up to being selfish people when they start complaining about their taxes being spent on things which benefit children - like education, nursery places maternity benefits etc? Are they that small-minded not to realise that we ALL pay taxes into a pot from which we do not take out an even amount? I don?t begrudge paying for day centres for the mentally ill, drug rehabilitation units, incapacity benefit, unemployment benefits, new roads, regeneration projects (the list could go on) or many things which I rarely use or hope never to use. Why are parents being singled out?

Have they forgotten that sometime in the past, someone?s taxes paid for their maternity ward, their children?s library, their education?

One the one hand they complain that they come last in the queue to be allowed to take holidays during school holiday time whilst on the other hand gloat that they can take several long-haul (term-time) holidays per year (in fact cite this as a huge plus reason not to have children)

I wholeheartedly agree that ALL employees (not just parents) should be entitled to flexible working and should be able to establish a good work/life balance but often it is non-parents who set the precedence for working excessive hours over and above what is contracted. Also, why moan to us? Parents and parenting groups have spent decades fighting for flexible working rights (it?s not like we even really have it - only the right to request it). If other groups want it, then they can fight for it too.

Pre-children I worked in two different places of work which offered flexi-time to all. My BIL has no children and is allowed to take a 3 month sabbatical every two years (he uses it to travel). Another friend of mine is child-free and she has been allowed to compact her hours into 4 days. Such flexible jobs do exist for non-parents. And there are plenty of part-time jobs out there? many, many part time jobs. They are typically low paid and lowly rewarded but nothing is stopping non-parents from applying for these jobs.

Do child-free women really want a return to the 1960s attitude towards women of childbearing age? How would it benefit them if ALL women had to leave their careers and work-places as soon as they have a baby? It would most probably send the feminism backwards, leaving these child-free women working in an even more male-dominated workplace, perhaps having to put up with sexist comments from the men wondering when the said child-free woman was going to leave and have babies.

Grrrr - can you tell I get a bit hot under the collar about this?!

I wasn't, BK, and I apologise if my tone implied that.

I suppose I've not come across that. The assumption is always that parenthood must be incredibly tough and wearing and I haven't read a book in ages, instead. Which is annoying, granted.

Whoops!! Just back from working all afternoon. My comment about families being more environmentally aware was purely a joke!!!! (Shown by the wink, I thought!!!)
Of course they're not. You should see the number of 4X4s round here. The family opposite have 3 huge wheelie bins of rubbish overflowing every week and never leave anything out for the recycling collection. I am smug enough to be proud that we leave MORE out for recycling than for rubbish, although I have to say I don't think recycling schemes are the answer - we need less packaging and more reusing to start with.....
Haven't read all the posts since mine, but sorry if anyone took me seriously! I think the 'what's in your bin' article is an excellent idea, and have to say that I think it's right up the Guardian's street. My dh is more involved with the ad revenue though.....

oooh I love this thread. MI makes a good point - there is a massive difference between saying "I didn't understand tiredness/happiness/love/why parents with baby car seats need wider parking spaces until I had a baby" and "You don't understand blah blah because you haven't had a baby". It's a subtle difference but an important one. And it's one that I try to apply to everything. If I hear someone talking and I think to myself "you wait until you experience x, you'll soon (unless I was talking about favourite chocolate) - it's very patronising and annoying.

that was meant to be "you'll soon change your mind"

I rarely mention my children when I'm at work and people are often surprised to find I have any. I've been very surprised to find out that a huge number of my colleagues (30s and 40s) don't have any children.

I'm in the public sector and the same rules apply to everyone with regard to leave and hours. Anyone can work part time, or full time hours over less days, or can take 6 months off unpaid. We have a number of childless colleagues who have had to leave early/come in late because of problems with elderly relatives, or boilers breaking down, or taking dogs to the vet.

Holidays seem to be pretty much sorted, and we find that it's the childless who expect to have the whole 2 weeks off over Xmas, and are always off every half-term. The most bizarre one is the October half term when most of the office want to be off, particularly those with no children- I've never worked that one out!

Interestingly the people most often off sick are the childless....

..and of course I missed the vital point to my ramble which was that where I work no-one automatically takes priority over anyone else, and that everyone has the same options open to them, whatever their domestic set up. (which is as it should be).

Sounds like a great place to work Tallulah.

And of course, this isn't only about parental rights, this is also about children's rights. Children's rights to have a parent with them while sick, to spend time with them during the week, the rights to good quality childcare, to those parent car-parking spaces so they can be liften safely out in their little seats or not having to cross the whole car park to get to the shop etc etc.....

Ooh another excellent point Fairymum - you are on a roll! Been thinking about this alot today. I have read several articles by people who have had, say, cancer, and say that in many ways it has changed them for the better. Eg more patient, less aggressive etc. Are they smug too?

I'm not surprised parents take less sick-leave. Let's face it, looking after your children when you're ill is a nightmare - I'd far rather drag myself to work, much easier.

There is crucial difference, though, in that their change is the result of something which is acknowledged to be painful, difficult, terrifying, debilitating and so on. Parenthood is not usually compared to a life-threatening illness.

I seriously am beginning to think I've missed something in this parenthood lark, I have to say.

But it is the same in that it is life-changing, and propels you quite suddenly and without warning into an entirely different sort of life with totally different priorities and demands.
And it IS bloody painful - at least the very start of it! And also a HUGE emotional experience. I would find it very odd if anyone became a mother without experiencing totally new and often overwhelming emotions.
I think it would also be quite peculiar to experience motherhood and not be changed by it in many ways. I'm not entirely sure why it is OK to say this if one has been ill, or bereaved or even fallen in love, but not when you have a child. Clearly it is absurd and offensive to say that every parent is better than every non-parent, equally it would be ridiculous to say that everyone who has had cancer is a better person than anyone who has not, but is it smug for someone who has experienced cancer to say it has made them a different, and in some ways, a better person?

You mean it hasn't changed you for the better MI? It hasn't made you see far horizons that you never saw before, transformed your attitudes, values, priorities blah di blah di blah?

Sorry posts crossed. I agree with quite a lot of what Aloha is saying. I don't think my attitudes, values, priorities etc. have been changed by motherhood (except that my children are of course, now my biggest priority) but I think I have changed. Can't think exactly how though, I'll have to think about that. (Wanders off to cogitate...)

aloha - I think the problem you point to is partly a language thing. We have words like "grief" which are very specific to loosing someone close to you. So it's perfectly legitimate and acceptable to talk about experiencing "grief" as an experience that is uniquely tied to death. But - for me anyway - there are no words that adequately portray the experience of having children, so we all end up using words (like "love") that are frequently used in other contexts. We all fail miserably to truly portray it and so it becomes patronising, repetitive and dull if you seem to be implying that someone who doesn't have children doesn't know what love is. I think the lack of a unique language is also one of the reasons why we - as a society, parents and non-parents alike, spend so much time talking about it.

"Wanders off to cogitate..."

Caligula, I read that as "wanders off to copulate..."

Sorry, carry on.

Personally, I find it sometimes frustrating that it is considered so very naff to say that /act as if parenthood is life changing. Kate Moss is absolutely idolised in many quarters (OK, mostly by single, childless female journalists ) for 'not letting motherhood cramp her style'.

Message withdrawn

I've been thinking about this as well, and what (for me, and I think for others) comes across as smugness. We live in a society which tells us repeatedly that we will only be Fulfilled As Women when we Reproduce. Any comment/reaction to the actual experience of motherhood has that context.

I do feel, very strongly, that we need to live in a society which mixes people who do and who don't have children; and where work patterns do give you the option for other things - whether those are 'hobbies' or childcare. (Personally I think people should be able to go home to write a novel or veg in front of the telly, whichever they feel like.)

And the onus is on both sides to enable that.

And it's also awful in ways you can't imagine.

Mi, possibly you'll find it more character-testing when your babes go to school, in the sense that until then you more or less have absolute control over their lives (barring the occasional difficult experience at nursery or with childminders,etc). It seems to me that when children go to school they are, almost overnight, thrust into a world where so many others have such a big influence on them and the repercussions of this are enormous.

Oh god, it tests my character and my patience and my self control to the limit as it is!

MI I totally agree with you. But the tone of articles like this one, ensures the polarisation of the childless and the childed (!?) is encouraged. All of us were childless once, and some of the childless now will be parents in future. What I see in these articles, is yet another angle to attack women as mothers, which is one of my major objections to them. What these articles don't do, is work towards the society which you envisage. It seems to me that we've gone from being a society which pities and denigrates women who don't reproduce, to one where a small minority of very noisy people want to pity and denigrate those women who do (IE most of us). The polarisation of mothers and others isn't a progressive blow for women imo; and it just seems to me that while the article may hit on some interesting issues, the approach and tone of it has put it in the BAD camp, for me, rather than the GOOD. (Sorry I'm in a rush to go out, so am abandoning sophisticated vocabulary! )

Hmmm, I'm not at all sure that it is the job of people with children to ensure that people without children have time off work for hobbies. Isn't that their job? It was hard enough to get even the bare minimum of maternity pay and time off (and how crap it is even now) let alone the right to 'request' flexible working. While I think that flexible working is the way forward for all companies I don't actually think it's necessarily my job to campaign for it for other people who may very well not want it! I simply don't see childless people bashing down the doors of HR to demand shorter days to spend more time in front of the telly and - the big issue here - thus earn much less money.
And anyway, why do we assume that only people without children have interests/want to write novels etc?
I think we primarily live in a society where women are not considered to be fulfilled unless they are thin, beautiful and in a couple. I think motherhood actually comes some way down the list these days. Hence the adulation of Kate Moss for having a baby without showing any signs of changing her life/behaviour etc etc.
Caveat: This does mean I think it is acceptable for mothers to turn to their single friends, shake their heads pityingly and talk about biological clocks!

Hmmm. I found myself pondering this a whole thing in the shower this a.m, having taken a rather '4' stance until now (4 being the 'who cares' option on possible reactions to an issue!). I found it in turns patronising, ludicrous and insulting to be told that you couldn't understand a world tragedy until you had kids - and now I've got one I would consider it patronising/ludicrous /insulting to say that to anyone else. I have drifted away from some friends without kids, made other excellent friends who have. I just didn't get very worked up about it, and I do wonder why it has become he subject of huge expanses of newsprint that I do find quite exasperatingly boring.

I think what bothers me is that yet again it is women who are both victims and villified on both sides of the debate. Not men. Men just don't seem to get themselves in these knots - and I don't think it's because it's some responsibility that they are evading, I think it is because they don't feel the need to build power around their status as a parent or not. And I honestly think that this is something women are imposing on ourselves. Yes, in a context of trying to stand firm on what someties feels like a shaky ledge on the foothold of equality, but sometimes I think it is worth 'acting as if' we can just get on with our lives, in our own way, irregardless of what other people think. that's what men do. Men are NOT writing tortured articles about their lives and identities, nor, I suspect, are they reading them. Yes, I know it is women's lives that ten to be more radically affected by changes in the family, but SAHD's and men who are now far better partners/fathers rather than breadwinners are a really fast growing phenomenum and are just getting on with it.

I don't think this q is at the heart of the political pressure for more family-freindly working policies - or indeed people-freindly policies - and men can be seen to be even-handedly obstructive or helpful in these movements regardless of their family circumstances. The unsympthtic male bastards in the office are as likely to be parents as child-free politicians introduciing paternity leave are to be child-free/less.

I am hypothesisng, and maybe hopelessly naive, but I think I see this debate as another arena in which women beat each other up, and we should cease to take it personally, stop reacting, stop doing it and get on with the lives we have had the courage, confidence and resources to achieve - whatever that life may be.

LOL at Aloha and I both sitting down and beginning 'Hmmmm' simultaneously!