Some people who are parents like to try to convince others (including the childfree) to have children.
I think this is a strategic error on their part.
First, if I don't have children, I'm not creating competition for your child. My child would be after the same daycare spaces and university spaces and scholarships and jobs as your child. Why would you want that?
Second, if I don't have children, the resources that would be dedicated to my children have the potential of going to your children.
Example: several months ago, the manufacturer of My Favourite Little Person's favourite cereal changed the recipe so it contained something she was allergic to. Her parents (who, by the way, are not the kind of parents who try to convince CF people to have kids) were trying to hoard as much of the old version as possible, so I promptly went to the supermarket, bought up every box, and brought it all to them. But if I had a baby of my own, especially if my baby had the same allergy, I would have responded to this news by buying up every box for my own baby, and MFLP would be out a few months' worth of cereal.
Another example: I was recently at a professional gathering where some of the people in attendance were new parents. One person, who was on maternity leave, brought her baby with her. She wanted to have an uninterrupted cup of coffee, so several people, including me, held the baby for a period of time. I was holding him when he started fussing, and even managed to get him to stop fussing so his mother didn't have to drop everything. But if I had a baby of my own, I wouldn't have found holding a baby to be an interesting and amusing diversion and would have instead been more interested in having my own uninterrupted cup of coffee, and that baby would have had a more stressed mommy that day.
Obviously, a few boxes of cereal and a round of fussy baby bouncing aren't life-changing. Most of the time, my life has no impact on the children around me - positive or negative. But when I do come in contact with the children around me, the fact that I have no children of my own allows me to be a slight positive influence in a way that wouldn't be as possible if I had kids.
2 comments:
In sombunall cases, the child-free interests and the queer interests overlap:
"Heterosexual couples and larger society, on the other hand, do not need homosexuality to produce children."
No, but they very well need us to raise those children. As has been pointed out by more than one person, in evolutionary terms, for a non-reproducing trait like homosexuality to exist, it must be important to the larger species. We've been described as the "worker bees" of humanity (at least I think that's what Harvey Fierstein said at the end of a "In the Life" episode), and there is preliminary research that women with gay brothers are more fertile than those who have only straight siblings. Given the high rate of death from both childbirth and disease/accident in early humanity, and the enormous amount of time we spend raising our children, it sure as heck makes sense to breed a few spinster aunts and bachelor uncles who won't themselves have children, and will be perfect for adopting the orphaned, and helping feed those who still have parents.
But to think that, one would need to have reason and logic on their side. I'm afraid Ms. LaBarbera is a little short of both.
Also, having caring adults in their lives who are not their parents is great for kids, really important. IME, childfree adults are more likely to be these people than adults with kids.
However, why ANYONE would try to talk someone into having children is beyond me. Why would you want someone who doesn't want children to have children???
Post a Comment