The demonisation of single mothers.

[SantaIsAnAnagramOfSatan]

Hi,

I've ended up talking about this in various threads but have never dedicated a thread to it.

So, i'm looking for your thoughts. How do we see this in action? What are the views of single mothers? How are they propagated? Why are they propagated and why do they attract such demonisation?

I'd also like to hear about where you think the feminist vision saw single mothers, did it predict their would be more given the increased freedom women would have in their lives and their ability to leave male partners or choose to not have one without being financially or socially (though that hasn't held true entirely compared to 1960's it's at least possible to live this way) ruined?

Is women being able to have children alone a part of the feminist outcome - if women have more control over their bodies and reproduction surely it was an inevitable outcome? And is it in your mind a positive or negative thing in terms of feminism?

I'm actually going away for a few days now but hope this will attract lots of thoughts for me to read when i get back.

As for me, to put this in context, i am a single mother of a pre school boy. When i found out i was pregnant (unplanned) at 30 i decided that i was happy to be and wanted to keep the baby but that i didn't want to stay in the problematic relationship with the father. Therefore i've been a single parent from the outset.

I have framed this as about single mothers rather than single parents as it is my experience that single fathers are seen very differently, imo as heroes and glorified whereas single mothers get the demonisation treatment in popular culture.

Look forward to reading your thoughts.

I'd never thought of that, Lenin- about the over-importance our current culture places on biological heritage. It's money-driven of course, the fertility industry is huge, as well as other industries that cash in on maternity and babies.
The Japanese are bad for this preoccupation with biological heritage. Adoption is very rare here. Couples prefer to go childless. Although I think it's healthier to not mind being childless than to get caught up in this manic pursuit for a child at any cost that some women go on.

What do people mean when they say it's a human right to have a child? I can imagine lots of circs where it wouldn't be a human right IMO eg a convicted sex offender adopting one.

Why is having a child a human right?

There was a scientist bloke on the radio ages ago and I didn't hear him but my dad told me about it - he was saying that it's ridiculous to vilify young mothers, they are simply following their biological programming ie they are in their most fertile years and all of their hormones are telling them to breed. sounds a bit crass put like that but YKWIM. People have powerful urges to procreate, it's a bit silly to pretend we're all robots. Or to pretend that having children when you're physically at the best point to cope with it and the demands that follow is in some way wrong.

I wonder (getting random now) whether rates of postnatal psychological problems have increased as women have had their children later? I had terrible problems and I think a lot of it was to do with having been free and single for so many years that the change when it happened was really hard. Maybe younger people who are still growing and changing and less set in their ways are better at adapting to the changes a new baby brings?

It's a written right. The right to procreate or not to procreate regardless of marital status.

I've read it before as the right to enjoy a family life, but carn't remember where.

I feel I should clarify about my "Manic pursuit to have a child" comment. I meant, specifically, women who think that surrogacy is a reasonable option, or women who have tried and failed again and again at IVF to the point where the stress is wrecking their relationship, or a woman past menopause, that type of thing. I think that biological heritage is over-emphasized. Adopting a child would bring just as much happiness, although I understand why biological heritage is desirable under the current system.

ISNT- oh absolutely not a sex offender!(although noone can stop him from procreating ) I'll be honest with you, I think it's the right of every female to give birth (within reason -see above!). ANd I think that person who claims that a particular female (or group of females) has no right to give birth should be regarded with deep deep suspicion.

FFS all those people who say it's a child's right to have their father present, have nothing to say when asked how they would ensure that a father who choses to have sweet FA to do with his child, should be dealt with.

All these reactionary ideas, are so driven by the patriarchal media aren't they - so everyone thinks that the major probelm of the day, is bitch-harpy women who either have babies without fathers or deny loving fathers proper contact with their children, when in fact a much bigger problem, is disconnected fathers who simply choose not to be involved.

My DC's father simply doesn't engage. He pays no maintenane (and if he did, the CSA decrees that the level of financial responsibilty for his children is £2.50 per week per child) he never visits them, he never phones them and he has only recently made himself available for SKYPE calls. How the hell are all those arseholes saying my kids have the right to have their father's presence, proposing to enforce that right? The mysogynist media is so good at framing the debate as if it is reasonable - talking about children's rights in order to attack women, while refusing to talk about them when we're discussing men's behaviour. Pah.

As long as I have a womb I know that it's my right to procreate. The reason why humans are here is make more little humans. It's more of a biological impulse tahn anything else. The rest is just cultural and formed over eons of religion etc.

Sorry- the reason why humans are here is to make more little humans. Nature dosn't give a crap if you are married, single, monogamous or polygamous. All nature gives a toss about is replicating it's genes in the most evolutionary advantageous way possible.

But if you are unable to conceive is it a human right to have a child? Is it a human right to be able to adopt or foster? What if no-one will have sex with you? I don't think it is a human right to have a child is it?

I think people are talking about something else maybe.

I don't see how you can say it is a persons human right to have a child as conception is dependent on another person as well as yourself.

No it isn't huddspur - well unless you consider the donor another person (which he is of course but just not involved).

I felt very much like I was being doubly penalised for not being in a relationship so I wasn't allowed to be a parent either.

I expect to it means that if you can conceive no-one can force you to have an abortion regardless of marital status/mental health etc.

But if you're a man and no-one will have sex with you and you're not eligible to adopt, then you can't have children, can you. Or if you're a woman and you can't conceive and you're not eligible to adopt. I mean, it's not a human right for everybody who wants a child to have a child full stop. I don't understand

If noone will have sex with you, you can buy sperm from the internet nowadays and use a turkey baster. i'm not recommending it, but it is an option.

It's more of a biological imperative imo. Genetics usually takes care of it.

ladybiscuit- I think you are only looking at it from a female perspective, how can a man have a child if there isn't a woman willing to be impregnated by him and to carry his baby.
Of course a woman can use sperm donors if no man is willing but human rights have to be universal as far as is possible

Not all women can conceive, whether they have sperm on tap or not. I don't understand this at all TBH.

It is not a human right to have a child. it just isn't, sorry. There are loads of people who can't have children for one reason or another and their human rights are not being violated

It's a horrible thought that a man might not be able to find a woman willing to get pregnant by him, isn't it?

No of course they can't ISNT. I don't think it's a human right but I do think a lot of men have kept women hanging on throughout their 30s while they were waiting to be ready and the fact is that they never were (often with that particular woman). There's a time limit on women that men don't have.

Sounds like this thread's gone off topic a bit. Just wanted to put my oar in and repeat something that a headteacher at a school I worked in said: 'I see a lot of responsible mothers every day, but the irresponsible fathers are noticeable by their absence.' And he was a man.. I was a SAHM on benefits for quite a while. These days there is no one 'type'. It could happen to any of us at any time.. and my life was quite happy. I had a couple of chances to leap on the marriage bandwagon but didn't take the first one that came along (guess I was lucky that my self esteem was strong enough to wait for the right partner). I do think unemployed single mums are vilified by some press, but until coming off benefits is financially safer and childcare is affordable and decent, things will largely stay as they are. (Incidentally, was good at getting job interviews, but continually told I was too bright for the jobs I went for, as they fitted in with DD's school hours. Some want to be enployed but employers don't want the more ambitious ones, it would seem.) I always wanted to go out to work, it looked pretty cushy to me after taking full time care of a baby/toddler.

BillHicks - single mother here. Office drone too and for a while I worked for a construction company.
At one point my job description changed and I spent a large part of my day on site wandering amongst the scaffolding dealing with some fairly irate tenants.
Hard hat, high vis, steel toecap boots.

Wanna guess how much extra I got on my payslip as danger money?

Go on, have stab?

Really interesting thread by the way, I have been lurking.