Saturday, September 04, 2010

Yet another way to evade reality

There are some conflicted young women out there.

The reality is that a woman's best time to marry and start a family is in her twenties. But women are being brought up to believe that they should focus instead on an independent girl lifestyle of careers, travel and casual relationships.

So reality is stubbornly resisted. Which leads to the kind of attitude reported by journalist Lisa Pryor:

Don't leave it too late to have babies, girls. There must hardly be a young women out there who has missed out on this warning. It is a lesson pressed on them 100 times over, in the media and over the dinner table.

This generation of young women will not make the mistake some older women made, of believing fertility was simply a matter of mind over ovaries, that if you were smart about it you could give birth to healthy babies well into your forties, just like the celebrities in the magazines, with their dark glasses and boisterous twins and giant cups of takeaway coffee.

This myth has been put to rest only to be replaced by another one I keep hearing from women in their twenties. It goes like this: "If I leave it too late to have babies of my own it is OK because I'll just adopt, which is better anyway because there are so many babies in the Third World who need a home."

 Hollywood actresses have a lot to answer for.

I couldn't help but think of the mindset of the young women saying such things. They are so resistant to the idea that they might marry in a timely way, that they are willing to contemplate the option of raising a child from another country and culture when they are middle-aged.

As Lisa Pryor points out, even this is not an easy thing to achieve. Most countries won't allow adoptions of babies to older women or to single women and international law requires that babies first be offered for adoption in their own countries. Therefore adoptions are rare in Australia:

Additionally, and for good reason, the Hague Convention seeks to have children adopted in the country of origin before overseas adoption is considered. So it is not surprising that in 2008-09 there were just 93 inter-country adoptions across the whole of NSW, with an additional 20 babies adopted locally.

Marrying and starting a family in your 20s ought to be considered normal. There are women in our society who now have to find their way back to normal. I can only hope they get there in time.

22 comments:

  1. *Sigh* You know I feel like saying this to women is kinda shitty. Not because I disagree with you, but because for some women it is difficult to find the right man...especially nowadays when you actually DO have values.

    I think instead of saying "Women get married in your 20s forget the career" For your own daughters, I would focus on having the right morals and values....

    - Don't date anyone you wouldn't consider marrying--Date to marry
    - No pre-marital sex
    - Pride in one's heritage
    - The realization that biological children are a blessing and a benefit to yourself and society
    - Working in a cubicle as a secretary versus having a large family....a large family actually is probably the bigger benefit to society

    If you have these types of traditional outlooks....then most likely a girl will find the right guy sooner. The values take care of the timing so to speak. And if a few women get married a bit older cuz of some unforeseen circumstance (a church girl I knew got hit by her fiance weeks before the wedding with the hand that had a ring on it..and now she's 30 and single...but I'm sure will be married to some lucky man before you can blink) then it's just fate and nothing to be ashamed of.

    The values take care of the timing!

    Much better message for a young girl instead of turning her into a college husband hunter.

    Besides, every single one of my friends are married or engaged right now. I'm the last dinosaur! BUT BUT BUT here's the catch....

    How many children have been born out my highschool friends of say 75 to white couples (we have an interracial baby)?

    3 to the annoying housewife
    1 to a sweet girl

    I think there's a few out of wedlock but they aren't white so they don't count...

    So yeah 70 married/engaged people and 4 babies. That's a whole nother problem!!!

    The values!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really can't stress to you enough Mark that ALL of my friends are married (before the age of 28) and have been married for over 2 years and they have no children and no plan of children (from the conversations i've had with them).

    I think it's time to start beating up on these people to make me feel better :) Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. they have no children and no plan of children

    Maybe that's a modified version of the single girl ethos. You go as far as making a commitment to marriage, but you don't interrupt careers, travel, social life etc with children.

    I wonder what will happen when some of these women do finally hear the biological clock ticking. How easily will they be able to swing their husbands around to the idea of children?

    You know I feel like saying this to women is kinda shitty

    Well, I was saying it to a particular group of women - those who don't want reality to get in the way of deferred family commitments.

    I agree with you when you write:

    If you have these types of traditional outlooks....then most likely a girl will find the right guy sooner.

    In my observation, young women who come from closely knit families and who look up to and love their fathers are much more likely to make family formation a priority.

    And it certainly makes sense that if you are brought up to value your heritage, your family tradition, the value of motherhood and fatherhood and an ideal of love expressed within marriage that you are more likely to follow the traditional life patterns.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think instead of saying "Women get married in your 20s forget the career"

    I don't see why the two are exclusive. You can have kids in your 20s AND have a career. And no, not as a secretary, either.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't see why the two are exclusive. You can have kids in your 20s AND have a career. And no, not as a secretary, either.

    Yes, you can, that's true. But, it is not common, both because young women who are career-oriented today generally have a strong preference to use their 20s to (1) finish education, (2) get first 5+ years of career experience down and (3) have fun while they are young and hot (not necessarily in that order). It's very uncommon for a career-oriented woman to try to slip marriage in before she's, say, at least 27-28, and it's more common that it happens around 30 or later. That naturally cuts down on family size pretty substantially, really.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think what Anon might be getting at is that those of us who were raised without traditional values and are only now, sometime in our mid to late 20's, stumbling upon them feel kind of "sh***y" when we read columns like this. They remind us of how much we've done wrong (without knowing better) and how difficult/maybe impossible it will be to fix it.

    Yeah, it doesn't feel good to read things like that. I know I feel bad about my own life when I read columns like this, and I'm a man.

    But don't fault Mr. Richardson for writing it, Anon. Just because the truth makes us feel "shitty" as you put it, doesn't make it "sh***y" to tell the truth. The truth is good, always, even if its light hurts our eyes now and then.

    And sometimes--and I know this is also going to be hard to hear, but hey I'm saying it to myself too--it isn't about us anyway. We might well just be screwed. But I don't see why Mr. Richardson should quit warning others against late marriage just to spare us from some pain.

    And that doesn't mean that you or I are really screwed: We aren't, necessarily. It kind of depends upon our attitude toward God and His Way going forward, but that's a different post.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I suppose if you value autonomy adoption has a lot going for it,
    "Hmmm, I think I'll have that one".

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks Barthelomew and Mark. I hate it when people take things personal too.

    I have my issues and Mark's posts give me panic attacks.

    Hey Mark don't take anything I post as comments personal. I have to vent my issues in a healthy manner to keep me sane :) There's a reason why I read this blog all the time :) If I didn't completely agree with you 100% I wouldn't.

    And yes it is the single girl lifestyle that carries on into marriage...

    If you've got young parents you should totally take advantage of them while you can when it comes to child rearing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Jesse wrote,

    "I suppose if you value autonomy adoption has a lot going for it,
    "Hmmm, I think I'll have that one"."


    Haha, you nailed it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Its all fun and games now but the law of unintended consequences says somebody's got to pay down the line.

    Interracial adoption is child abuse, so is IVF if the child is denied the right to a father.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hehe thanks Bartholmew, remember a child isn't just for Christmas ;).

    Off topic (Australian politics) I'm having chills because I just read that the three independents are demanding (asking for whatever) an "acknowledgment of country" before prayers in Parliament.

    This is totally unacceptable. For those who don't know an acknowledgement of country is a statement of which aboriginal tribal land you're currently on. This bullshit ceremonial passing under the yoke has swept trendy circles. That it should take place in Parliament is completely unacceptable.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Tony Abbott should tell the Independents:

    "We don’t want you. Go and form government with Labor and the Greens. You will have that legacy hanging over your head for the rest of your career. You will be an integral part of a red-green coalition, devastate this country, we will run Liberal and National candidates in all of your seats and cross-preference each other. Your names will be mud. Have a nice day."

    Then just sit in opposition and watch the circus unfold. If this is what the Australian electorate wants, that's what it deserves.

    Of course, e-traditionalists will spend their time writing about it, instead of doing anything about it... because... well... "we're still figuring out our position on policy" as if traditionalism hasn't already been defined, elaborated on and "figured out" already by much wiser minds: Kirk and Scruton et al.

    Like I said - if you're not in the game, your complaints are not worthy of serious attention.

    ReplyDelete
  13. ""So yeah 70 married/engaged people and 4 babies. That's a whole nother problem!!!""

    Easy fix.

    Cut government waste as much as possible with a razor gang [nah stuff that, Samurai sword gang], then pass all those savings into natalist tax cuts. The more kids you have the lower your rate of tax.

    This would ensure:

    1. The people most tempted to have kids would be those best able to look after them, unlike the baby bonus which is responsible for all the prams I see at my local public housing units.

    2. Having kids would become an economic decision rather than something you do just for emotional or personal gratification. today there is no financial benefit to having children, make it a breaking even affair and watch the maternity wards fill to overflowing.

    3. Raising our natural birthrate by about 80,000 a year would make Australia self sustaining. We would no longer need immigration as an economic driver and could pay for the baby boomers pensions.

    In one stroke we could solve quite a few problems. And the best part is the amount of money needed p.a would be very roughly what could be gained from selling SBS and the ABC.

    I await your applause...

    ReplyDelete
  14. Kilroy said,

    "Tony Abbott should tell the Independents:

    "We don’t want you. Go and form government with Labor and the Greens. You will have that legacy hanging over your head for the rest of your career. ""

    Yeah totally.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm having chills because I just read that the three independents are demanding (asking for whatever) an "acknowledgment of country" before prayers in Parliament.

    It shows the calibre of the "conservative" independents, doesn't it?

    At my workplace we play a recording of an Aboriginal elder welcoming us as guests to her country before every meeting.

    It's a very effective way of de-countrifying the rest of us. I suppose the rest of us are supposed to be individualistic, self-seeking liberal subjects rather than members of a country of our own.

    I'm not surprised by Oakeshott and Windsor pushing for this, but I thought Katter might have been a bit better.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Yes I just briefly glanced at the article so I'm not sure if Katter supported it too. I think this "country" thing has gone quite far enough and that its not a harmless thing to be ignored. We're all familiar with how the Left operate. They start out with a "harmless" concession which moves into a necessary inevitability and then into a claim made with outrage damanding more. That we should introduce this travesty into our soverign body is not acceptable. I would remind the Aboriginals that active possession is the chief element of our property law and that they have no valid claim to our "country".

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yes there's going to be an acknowledgement of country and both parties have agreed to it. This is such bullshit.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I am betting labor has got it.

    Windsor and Oakeshott are closet lefties, that is why they are no longer in the Nationals.

    Katter will go lib probably, or will do something typically crazy.

    That puts Julia in charge with a hostile senate for her first year or so and a compliant senate running up to the elections as long as she swings hard to the left.

    I should look back on this in 4 hours or so to see how right or wrong I am...

    ReplyDelete
  19. You'd have to put your money on Labor but its impossible to know.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Boo-ya..

    I nailed it in one, even the Bob crazy part.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Lol he wasn't that crazy. Those shit independents will definetly be in the vice in their home electorates. Here comes Greens Government and weak Labor.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Its funny I just saw a piece about Katty Perry saying that she wants to own a farm and be a farmer's wife. She would expect her future husband Russell Brand to be in on it too. Assuming this isn't a passing idea (apparently she's a fairly devout Christian if you can believe it although that might be a sliding scale) the idea that her bulimic drug addict husband would be a good farmer is slightly ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.