Sunday, March 20, 2011

Why would someone like Sami Lukis need a sperm donor?

Sami Lukis is an exceptionally beautiful Australian TV personality. She is now 41. But how might she have made use of her abundant feminine charms as a younger women?

One option would have been to take advantage of her beauty to attract a high quality husband - a man who would have loved her, been loyal to her and who would have had the character to be a good husband and father. The type of man she could have successfully formed a family with.

This option would have allowed her to have children and to have devoted her youthful beauty and fertility to her husband, so that he would have bonded strongly with her and wanted to be with her even when her beauty faded and her fertility was lost. It would also have allowed her to pass on a culture of family life to her own children, so that she might have later on enjoyed being a grandmother whilst still at an active age.

But Sami Lukis did not take this option. She did the modern girl thing instead. She by no means rejected marriage and motherhood, but she decided to defer it to the last moment:

I always knew I wanted a baby. It just wasn't a priority until my late 30s.

So what did she do in the meantime? She had a string of relationships with unsuitable men:

She said, however, that given her time again she would not have wasted so many years on relationships that she didn't think were leading to children.

And what is her plan now? She is going to attempt to do IVF as a single woman, make a TV show about it ("Sami's baby") and try to find a husband afterward:

I have the rest of my life to meet Mr Right, but I only have limited time to have a baby.

So if she does manage to have a baby (not guaranteed at age 41 even with IVF), the child won't know its biological father. And her future husband (if there is one), won't get much at all of what men used to get out of marriage - no children, no youthful feminine beauty and passion - he will have been put last on the modern girl list of things to do and he will end up working to bring up a sperm donor's baby.

I can understand Sami Lukis's overwhelming desire to have a child:

Lukis...is worried she might have left her attempt to have a baby too late. "As a woman you have this amazing opportunity to have children, to have that mother/child bond our bodies are created this way," she said. "I don't want to miss out on being a mum, it's a basic instinct."

But we somehow have to get through to women like Sami Lukis that the modern girl option is no way to go about securing her future.

It also raises the moral question of whether single women should be accessing IVF to deliberately create fatherless families. Doesn't this send the message that the government doesn't think fathers are necessary to family life, but are at best some sort of optional enhancement?

Herald Sun columnist Susie O'Brien took on this moral issue. In response to reports that 500 single women have used IVF treatments in Victoria in the past year alone, she asked the question:

Do we really need biological fathers?

Her initial answer seems straightforward and clear:

Yes, absolutely.

But she just can't follow through consistently with this answer. She's in an impossible position. She doesn't want to give up on the idea of men being necessary to family life. But she also wants to give her blessing to lesbian couples and single women having children without men. So she refuses to admit that there is any contradiction in her position:

It is possible to passionately support the right of dads in our society, and still support the right of single women and same-sex couples to have kids.

And how does Susie uphold the "right of dads"? She claims that a "father figure" such as a family friend can "do the job just as well" as a biological father. And she writes:

You just have to accept that these days there are lots of different kinds of fathers.

And she then goes on to declare:

The exact permutations of who lives with who, who's married to whom and what their biological origins might be don't really matter to me.

Well, there you have it. She's gone from her initial position of fathers mattering "absolutely" to the idea that whether there's a father around or not doesn't "really matter".

And to underline this point she then finishes her column by quoting Sami Lukis to the effect that her child will be loved, father or not. Susie O'Brien thinks this is the key thing:

And in the end isn't that the only thing that really matters?

So why then did she say at the start that fathers matter absolutely? Perhaps because she doesn't want to put her own husband in the unnecessary category. Perhaps because she recognises at some level the implications of what she is arguing and is reluctant to spell them out too clearly.

Let me say here that Susie O'Brien couldn't be more wrong. If men were to believe the kinds of things she is arguing, then it would be all over for Western society. A society can only exist at a high level if men believe that their role within a family is a distinct and necessary one.

The answer to the Sami Lukis problem is not to declare fathers optional within family life. It's to give priority to family formation at the right time in life.

50 comments:

  1. She claims that a "father figure" such as a family friend can "do the job just as well" as a biological father.

    As the product of divorce, and a father myself, I say this is absolute nonsense. The "father figures" my mum recruited were totally unable to do the job just as well as a biological father, and no other man could do my job as a father as well as I do (and I pray to God my son never finds this out).

    And in the end isn't that the only thing that really matters?

    No, it bloody well isn't! My mum loved me, but it really, really mattered that I didn't have a father.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "One option would have been to take advantage of her beauty to attract a high quality husband - a man who would have loved her, been loyal to her"

    Beauty is no guarantee a husband will always love you or be loyal…look at actresses, for just one example.

    "devoted her youthful beauty and fertility to her husband, so that he would have bonded strongly with her and wanted to be with her even when her beauty faded and her fertility was lost."

    Nice theme that gets repeated over and over on the manosphere but not entirely accurate. Fading beauties are quite often turned in for a newer model and if they married young, their resume will look a bit skimpy on the job market. Better that a woman can provide for herself and has resources before she has children.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You just have to accept that these days there are lots of different kinds of fathers.

    This sort of garbage is spouted a lot these days, I can only assume by people who don't have kids.

    I agree with the first comment. Kids are frustrating and a lot of work. The payoff a father gets is an internally generated feeling of self satisfaction. Like the sex drive there is nothing so powerful. And like the sex drive it can't really be manufactured or faked.

    And of course there are exceptions - some adoptive fathers I believe can act in the same way as 'real' fathers. But this is not going to work for step-dads, sperm donors etc.

    I shouldn't need to say this, it's blindingly obvious, the sort of thing we all know from childhood.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It might be possible to change the men supporting Sami in her life, however this won't be so easy for the child. Presumably Sami was raised by a stable biological family so how would she know whether this plan is really good for the kids or not? What we do know is that its convenient for her. Its very hard to have sympathy for a woman who was so busy working and holidaying that she neglected to find time for a stable relationship or family. Sami is now a cautionary tale for the next generation of women. It would also be nice if she showed as much commitment to kid’s futures as she does to supporting lesbian’s rights.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well at least you can live with the solace the child will most likely be autistic.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And how does Susie uphold the "right of dads"? She claims that a "father figure" such as a family friend can "do the job just as well" as a biological father.

    She means the non-biological men in kids lives who molest, abuse and kill them at a far higher rate than bio-dads.

    Here in the US, we have FBI statistics that back up that statement, but I don't know how useful that will be to you Aussies.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "The answer to the Sami Lukis problem is not to declare fathers optional within family life. It's to give priority to family formation at the right time in life."

    This advice should be given to every woman everywhere right now. At least I already have a plan to have a husband and some children between 18 and 30 plus a part-time job.

    "Fading beauties are quite often turned in for a newer model and if they married young, their resume will look a bit skimpy on the job market. Better that a woman can provide for herself and has resources before she has children."

    Women can go to another job market, find someone who will accept them for this or create their own part-time jobs. Why waste beauty on something short-term and an excellent career when you can have a family and a satisfactory job?

    "It would also be nice if she showed as much commitment to kid’s futures as she does to supporting lesbian’s rights."

    She wouldn't anyways. She would seek autonomy, rights and equality at any cost and that's precisely what she did.

    "She doesn't want to give up on the idea of men being necessary to family life. But she also wants to give her blessing to lesbian couples and single women having children without men. So she refuses to admit that there is any contradiction in her position"

    She's either exercising the unprincipled exception or double think. I think it's double think. This is a pattern I'm noticing with liberals in generals. They want to have their cake and eat it too. Major advice I would give to traditional conservatives and reactionaries is DON'T help them out unless they are rejecting liberalism in total or else they would never see the failure and flaws in the worldview of liberalism. A neutered right (right-liberals) is far worse than an all powerful left with complete domain because there would be no princinpled objection to liberalism and not only that but they are keeping liberalism from collapsing on its own contradictions and experiment.

    "So why then did she say at the start that fathers matter absolutely? Perhaps because she doesn't want to put her own husband in the unnecessary category. Perhaps because she recognises at some level the implications of what she is arguing and is reluctant to spell them out too clearly."

    You know this is one of the things I hate about "moderates" (aka moderate liberals). At least the far-left has the guts and the courtesy to tell us how their plans would work out if they were followed throughly, the causes of their beliefs and what would be the consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  8. On the other hand perhaps this is a good thing. Not a lot of liberal women reproducing and indoctrinating the next generation of youth into liberalism don't you think? But then again the schools and universities naturally steer left. But also we now have homeschooling and private traditional conservative universities and schools to choose from. Youth just have to be careful with what the media says these days. And who knows with fiscal collapse arriving slowly on Western shores perhaps things will change little by little. We just need to prepare, start and run our own non-liberal communities firstly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "princinpled objection"

    Sorry I meant "principled objection".

    ReplyDelete
  10. If biological paternity is not important, why is biological maternity? She could just adopt. This looks like yet another double standard: women's issues are important, men's don't count at all.

    ReplyDelete
  11. If biological paternity is not important, why is biological maternity?

    Good point.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Exactly so, why doesn't she just adopt? Because having a baby is a natural urge. Then maybe she shouldn't deny this to men.

    Elizabeth Smith said,

    "Not a lot of liberal women reproducing and indoctrinating the next generation of youth into liberalism don't you think?"

    I think a lot of people will see them as losers and so that will undermine their influence. What people need is an achievable alternative to that kind of life.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Presumably Sami was raised by a stable biological family so how would she know whether this plan is really good for the kids or not?"

    She should know this is not good for the kids because there is abundant evidence to this effect -- but looking for that evidence and believing it would be inconvenient and would interfere with her "autonomy".

    ReplyDelete
  14. )))((((((
    (-)...(-)
    ....U....
    ..[___]..---{Pull your pud everyday
    it helps to keep prostrate cancer away}

    ReplyDelete
  15. The chickens have come home to roost for this selfish woman.

    Every child needs a father.

    Take off the blinkers hun.

    You rode the carousel and now, arrogantly assert at the ripe old age of 41 that YOU want to have a child..

    Spare me!

    This isn't like having a puppy.


    It's about the poor child that she may have, and the lack of a fatherly influence in the childs' life.

    I have no sympathy whatsoever for this woman..

    She could easily have married a decent man.. She chose otherwise..


    You reap what you sow.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Elizabeth Smith - ”This advice should be given to every woman everywhere right now. At least I already have a plan to have a husband and some children”

    Really? I thought your plan was to find some lesser-beta schumck, so completely lacking in his own personal autonomy that he wouldn’t dare challenge your personal hyper-autonomy in wishing to cuckold him (albeit via a high-tech route) . Remember this:

    ”My plan is to find a good Christian man of the same heritage as my mother between 18 and 30, marry him somewhere in mid 20's, have 2-4 children by him, conceive a child through a fertility clinic with a sperm donor from the same heritage as my father”

    So you are so wrapped up in your personal plan, your (very liberal) autonomy, that you actually believe that this is a good idea? You really believe that any man, other than the most pathetic of beta’s would even considering agreeing to your bearing of another man’s child, and also commit themselves to provide for and raise that other man’s child as their own? Do actually believe men would willing opt to spend thousands of dollars so that you could be inseminated with another man’s sperm, when their already making plenty of it themselves?

    You’ve boasted of your plan on at least a couple of occasions, and no one else has bothered to call you on your BS. And, it’s really no of my business, but I don’t mind playing the role of truth-telling jerk here.

    Seriously, Elizabeth, a more practical approach to achieving your “end-game” would be to lie to the man you’d like to marry, and tell him there would never be any others, then just plan on cheating on him with another man of the other race so that you can become pregnant by that other man. Let’s face it, if a man were to be okay with your desire to high-tech cuckold him, he’d probably be okay with your cuckolding him the old-fashion way. Plus, think of the savings over artificial insemination.

    And, hey, if he isn’t “man enough” to accept your cheating and another man’s child, then he obviously isn’t worthy of you. He obviously is to concerned with his own autonomy to be willing to yield to yours. Just divorce him and get court-ordered support from him for the child that is his.

    Yep. Why care about what a man might want in a wife, and why subject your plans to him? And, why would you ever bother to consider that Gods plan might be better than Elizabeth Smith’s?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Slwerner said,

    "You’ve boasted of your plan on at least a couple of occasions, and no one else has bothered to call you on your BS."

    That's not quite true. It is none of our business but also its a real issue that many people face when they're of a mixed heritage.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Being a mother would interfere with Sami's trim taunt and terrific body. I guess that would suck.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Jesse_7 - ”That's not quite true. It is none of our business but also its a real issue that many people face when they're of a mixed heritage.”

    Jesse,

    Which part is “not quite true”? The part about no one else questioning the wisdom, practicality and morality of her grand plan? Or, that it is, in simple terms, BS?

    While she can make it seem as though there’s some admirable intention, it fails to consider that poor schmuck who’s marry into her plan.

    Now, there are some rather hard-left, progressive liberal men who might be open to such an alternative style marriage/parental arrangement. But Elizabeth has shown only contempt for such a mind-set.

    As a marriage-minded young man, would you feel if you met a beautiful young women, who seemed like a good prospect for becoming a wife and mother, who informed you that, if you married her, not only would she have a child with you, but she fully intended to also have a child by another man, of another race?

    How would you feel knowing that you (your genes, and your heritage) just weren’t enough for her (and her children to be)?

    How would you feel with the stares of everyone who you’d meet, given that it would appear that your wife had (obviously) cheated on/cuckolded you?

    You comfortable spending thousands indulging her desire for another man’s sperm and the IVF so as to bear his child?

    How would you feel if the cost of raising that other man’s child would mean that you could not afford to have any more children of your own?

    I guess I’m just having trouble imagining the sort of guy who’s go for that. I keep picturing that wimpy mangina who married self-slut worshipping Jessica Valenti.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Look at the past posts where several people expressed objections. I wish you MRA's would get all your facts straight before you sound off.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Jesse -

    It's just that it comes up again and again and there is no commentary about it.

    It's a crap gameplan, has nothing at all to do with traditionalism (as it craps on traditional conceptions of monogamy and paternity in marriage) and so on.

    It's complete and utter crap. And on a traditionalist website you all should be all over her every time it is raised, but you are not. I suspect the reason is that she agrees with much of the *rest* of the "programme", but having children by another man's sperm just because hubby is of a "wrong" race has nothing at all to do with tradition of any kind, and it should be called out as such every single time it is raised.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Elizabeth, we're all aware of your plan so you don't have to keep telling us. ;).
    Jesse_7 - "Look at the past posts where several people expressed objections. I wish you MRA's would get all your facts straight before you sound off."
    Sorry if I missed some discussion in which someone finally spoke up about her oft-stated intentions? It seemed she posted the plan often, (usually) to no objections.
    From the thread with the comment I quote her from, your reaction seemed more to be of annoyance at her repeatedly posting her plan, rather than any discernable objection to the nature of her plan. Sorry that you seem to have taken such offense that I missed any comments that did take her to task (I looked back through, and did finally find where you and Kathy did denounce her plans. I hadn’t followed that thread on “immigration”, and had only seen her “grand plan” in other discussions.
    If my failure to notice that she had actually (finally) gotten a negative reaction is my only "fact fax paux”, I have to say I’m still doing better than some of your Traditionalist allies who’ve blathered-on (repeatedly) about their mis-impressions of MRA’s – most notably, Elizabeth herself (second only to (former?) village idiot ThorDaddy).

    ReplyDelete
  24. I don't pay much heed to Elizabeth's misguided notions about husbands and sperm donors.
    (Sorry Elizabeth nothing personal as you know- I think that you are a good and decent girl)

    As I said before, when I disagreed with her stance previously, she will have to find a man to marry her first.

    Good luck with that task!

    It's a moot point I think.

    What quality man would go for the arrangement that Liz is seeking?

    Liz is only eighteen.. As I said to Jesse, Brendan, think back to when you were eighteen.. :)

    In a few years from now (through neccesity if nothing else.. Yes, I know that you are stubborn , Liz)Liz will abandon such unrealist and selfish notions, particularly if she meets and falls in love with a man. .

    ReplyDelete
  25. Kathy - "I don't pay much heed to Elizabeth's misguided notions about husbands and sperm donors."

    Knowing that she is young, I would not have bothered with her "plan" except that she was clearly comparing her "sperm donor plan to Sami Lukis's - and implying that her's was better.

    I suppose I was struck by the hypocrisy, especially since Elizabeth has been so vociferous about the (supposedly) liberal autonomy she ascribes to MRA’s (especially those who question the value of marriage to young men, given the short-comings of young women).

    I hadn’t noticed that you had taken her to task previously. I’m sort of surprised that she would have brought it back up after the rather stern rebuke that you and Jesse_7 did give her.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I laughed so hard at this pathetic woman when i saw her ad-like article on the news.com website.

    I hope she fails.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Slwerner is right about elizabeth. Cuckoldism or suggests of cuckoldism (and rearing other races children forcibly) for western males is a nauseating thing it makes me physically sick the whole notion of it.
    It also happens to be the underground farlefts most disturbing form of sexual-race propaganda directed at young European straight men.
    In a sane world it would be outlawed as the hate crime it is because if it was any other people there would be outrage.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I can't wait for the end of feminism. If it happens tomorrow it will have been way too long.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Greenlander,

    It might be sooner than you think. If they can't reproduce they're in real trouble, and if they can't run a functional society who would want to join up?

    ReplyDelete
  30. greenlander liberal rule will end sometime. It never lasts forever as societies usually go in cycles I think.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I've just finished watching Sami Lukis's documentary. It turns out that she spent her 20s dating black guys, then her 30s dating white guys - one of whom wanted to marry her and have kids, but she wanted instead to focus on career. She was picky about men, rejecting them on matters such as length of hair, height etc. She bought a dog as a child substitute.

    Anyway, at age 40 she decided that family is what counts and that she wasn't so interested in career anymore. She went to see an IVF specialist intending to become a single mother. However, she did instead what I've seen other women do - which is to suddenly settle. She met a very ordinary looking bloke at a pub and decided he'd do. So they're going to try to have a baby the normal way.

    The documentary served a useful purpose, raising all the problems about excessive delay in family formation.

    ReplyDelete
  32. slwerner please go away.

    I won't try to deceive the man and I will tell him before hand about this plan.

    In case you haven't noticed I DO care what God thinks. If God tells me in my prayers that he doesn't agree with this plan then I will stop.

    I do listen to what Jesse and Novaseeker had told me about my ideas. People have criticized me on this website and I ponder on their criticisms.

    Anonymous it's a bit of stretch to call it a "hate crime". Immoral? Yes. Wrong? Yes. "Hate crime"? Sounds too much like sexist, racist and homophobic to me (liberal speech code concerning political correctness).

    slwerner you have this idea of my taking advantage of a good "beta". I will not take advantage of any man. He WILL know and has the choice to leave and disagree with this BEFORE we get engaged and married.

    Concerning marriage my criticism of "MRA's" has to do with their negativity sometimes. They think that marriage is repressive and slavery. I have never gone and said "All young women are perfect". If anything "MRA's" are saying "Marriage is useless, patriarchy is dead, let's just either see society as completely hopeless or have all the sex we want with game!". There are a few good women and it's better to seek them out. Disdain the current version of marriage yes but try to create a version of marriage contrary to the ruling atmosphere and have hope. Learn to distinguish between good and bad women.

    Novaseeker I believe in monogamy and legitimacy. I am still a virgin and chaste and most likely marry that way as well. I will have his (my husband's) children BEFORE the 3rd, 4th or 5th child which will be from a fertility clinic.

    Sometimes I do get dramatic and for that I am sorry. My brother and sister (we are three children in total) are not going to marry people of either my father's or mother's heritage from what they have told me. I feel like I have the burden of carrying my father's and my mother's lineage at the same time and obviously I can't reconcile that in my future marriage which will be monogamous. I can't think of divorce either because my parents have been together for 25-30 years and it has had a good effect on me. I think what will happen if I don't continue the race they are and if the child will be akined to a divorce child or a fatherless child (which is not what I want either).

    Thank you Kathy Farell for the advice.

    slwerner don't ever speak to me again you rat. It's hard to be a mixed race child and like you I know how hard it is where most women are under liberal influence. Sometimes we don't know what to do.

    Nevertheless slwerner don't go around with baseless accusations where I will take advantage of a "beta" husband and seeking to "maximize" my 'autonomy'. I am doing this for my family and for God. Not for myself.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "Anyway, at age 40 she decided that family is what counts and that she wasn't so interested in career anymore. She went to see an IVF specialist intending to become a single mother. However, she did instead what I've seen other women do - which is to suddenly settle. She met a very ordinary looking bloke at a pub and decided he'd do. So they're going to try to have a baby the normal way."

    That's good.

    ReplyDelete
  34. On Mark's point,

    She seems the kind of woman who would be happy with a knock about bloke. Why she had to wait till 40 though... If she does manage to conceive she'll be very lucky and even then that's only one baby and not replacement rate. Career women if they're going to have babies are going to have to come up with a better plan than this. I do really think that this matter is being brought home to women of the next generation though.

    Elizabeth,

    Whatever our opinions all the best.

    ReplyDelete
  35. How do children conceived by anonymous sperm donor feel when they know the truth? I imagine they would be a little grossed out and wonder what was wrong with their mom that she couldn't find a stable marriage and that she thought this was a good idea.


    Elizabeth,
    I think your plan is worse than Lukis's because it involves a worse stigma to the child and potential humiliation to your hypothetical husband. I don't see it as different from adultery or covetousness. The Lord created you mixed race and gave you a standard for bringing children into the world via marriage. He did not provide alternative arrangements for our convenience.

    Your idea is so bizarre and anti-traditional that I wonder if it isn't a farce?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Sorry forgot to add...

    Elizabeth
    Why not just find a man of the same mixed ethnicity as you? That is far more likely anyhow Besides, what type of screwed up guy would acquiesce to this set up?

    Your plan just makes me question that you aren't just trying to mock traditionalism.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "I think your plan is worse than Lukis's because it involves a worse stigma to the child and potential humiliation to your hypothetical husband. I don't see it as different from adultery or covetousness. The Lord created you mixed race and gave you a standard for bringing children into the world via marriage. He did not provide alternative arrangements for our convenience."

    Thank you for the advice Liesel. I'm thinking about this. I know that this type of thing is horrible and I really don't want to do it because of it's effects on the family and God and I was hoping my sister would turn around (hopefully she will marry somebody like my father or my mother). I know for sure my brother won't marry either my father's or mother's heritage (he fancies another race).

    Obviously I shouldn't and can't get advantage of a man. I have to take responsibility and tell him about this plan. And I have to pray to God for this too. But at the same time being mixed heritage is kind of difficult if your siblings don't want to help and will just dilute the blood even further.

    Thank you Jesse for you advice as well. All the best.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "Why not just find a man of the same mixed ethnicity as you?"

    I'll try that.

    "That is far more likely anyhow Besides, what type of screwed up guy would acquiesce to this set up?"

    Not many.

    "Your plan just makes me question that you aren't just trying to mock traditionalism."

    I'm not trying to mock traditionalism. I'm trying to follow traditional conservatism in a sticky situation.

    ReplyDelete
  39. "But at the same time being mixed heritage is kind of difficult if your siblings don't want to help and will just dilute the blood even further."

    I guess I'm just confused by this. How can mixed ethnicity be "diluted?" Is it jsut that you identify with one more than the other?

    ReplyDelete
  40. "I guess I'm just confused by this. How can mixed ethnicity be "diluted?" Is it jsut that you identify with one more than the other?"

    When I mean diluted I mean that my brother and my sister are going to mix with other races until there is no majority blood race such as 75% Caucasian or 90% African or 80% Asian or 70% Middle Eastern.

    Instead the offspring will all be quarters or pieces of many races (12% Asian, 12% African, 25% Caucasian and so forth for example). My father and my mother each would be considered majority blood (+70%) or near 'pure blooded' (+80%). Each have one major fixed identity and I'm two of these (50/50). If I marry somebody like my father then it would be 75/25 majority blood and the same for my mother. When I mean diluted I mean that my descendants would have so many ethnicities that a racial identity would become non-existent and meaningless because they have none (no 'stable' one). This is a destruction of nationality or a heritage and not in good way. There has been race mixing but usually it's controlled and restricted.

    Interracial is normal and sometimes occurs but never has there been a systematic worldview or advocating of deliberate race mixing to the destruction of say British identity for example (multiculturalism and diversity is strength).

    I don't believe in what the Jew hating white nationalists believe and I don't believe in a 1000% pure race or in laws where we have to marry our cousings but obviously that IQ racial differences exist for example.

    And yes plenty of mixed people may identify with one race more than another. This is usually the case with those of part African descent or part Asian descent.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Elizabeth,

    Your thinking suggests that your parents made a mistake in marrying outside their ethnicity and you're trying to correct it. If your heritage gives you a confused situation it also gives you certain advantages of being able to see things from more than one perspective. As you say you don't support 100% racial backgrounds and your parents would also be mixed to a certain extent, whether it be a mix within the white side eg Irish and German, or within the black. The important thing is that you find peace and also pass this peace onto your children.

    ReplyDelete
  42. This is a standalone comment.

    Completely agree (accept about giving the 'youth and beauty part' to your husband *vomit vomit*...I hope that isn't why a man would marry me of course! Mark, we woman are very sensitive to 'youth and beauty' remarks :)). Anyways, The television show this woman should have made is a show at age 36, or 38 saying "I have 2 years to find THE ONE and then get down to biz-ness" I would have much rather watched that show as a single woman! I love seeing people find their soulmates!!

    Not only is she committing a sin of not having a father for her child, but she is making a sin to try to turn it into Profit and Media Fame. I may have defended her a bit(or at least felt sorry for her) if she just quietly did it without anyone knowing and didn't make it public.

    But let's face it....this is why she's single. Why would a man want to marry a woman who would profit from an immoral show that encourages women to do bad things?

    ReplyDelete
  43. One more thing....

    Ok Honestly Mark, we do have to have sympathy for SOME childless women. The woman in the article is a dork.

    But for example, Renee Zellweger...she gave Bradley Cooper a child ultimatum and they broke up :(

    And now on HuffingtonPost, Kate Walsh talks about how she 'feels like a loser' for not having children and how she wanted 3 or 4 children.

    I'm actually dismayed by the Mean Spirited comments of the posters on such a liberal site.

    I feel bad for some 'high-powered' women, most notably the actresses. I feel like they get used and abused in Hollywood.

    It is very sad when good women do go childless.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "Your thinking suggests that your parents made a mistake in marrying outside their ethnicity and you're trying to correct it."

    No, I'm happy for them and I love them for what they have given me. The problem is that my descendants are not going to have 'majority' blood and the burden is on me, not on my parents.

    "If your heritage gives you a confused situation it also gives you certain advantages of being able to see things from more than one perspective."

    I know. Thank you for your help Jesse.

    ReplyDelete
  45. "I have the rest of my life to meet Mr Right, but I only have limited time to have a baby."

    hahaha! yeah, good luck with that! some guy is gonna marry a woman that old and her kid and have 1-2 years of her good looks before taking care of an old bag. ha! that kid will grow up to resent her and it will be funny.

    what a dumbass!

    ReplyDelete
  46. Wow Elizabeth you are totally weird!!! Who bloody cares about carrying on the race! Get a life

    ReplyDelete
  47. Anon,

    It's not "weird" to want to carry on your race - it's normal. Modern life has deracinated some people - they have lost an important form of identity and connection - but that loss is not something to be proud of or to seek to normalise.

    ReplyDelete
  48. OMG! whoever wrote this blog obviously has no idea what it is like for an attractive woman to find a 'husband that is loyal to her and loves her etc etc' I spent over a decade doing just that. It is not easy. Women are not having children with sperm donors because they aren't concentrating on finding a suitable partner, they are doing it because there is a lack of suitable partners. To marry and have children with someone you have to
    - meet someone that you are attracted to and they you, you need 'spark'
    - have the same views about having children at all (want them versus not wanting them)
    - have similar lifestyles and personalities to be able to live together in harmony
    - be able to resolve conflict effectively
    - connect on a mental level to be able to communicate and engage in conversation
    - have similar views on parenting/diet/work ethic/finances and spending
    - be able to live with one anothers flaws which could be huge such as gambling, drug or alcohol addiction, mental illness
    - want to live in the same town/city/country/place
    the list is endless. Getting a 'match' on all these things, before the biological clock ticks out is not easy. Settling when these things dont match up, often results in divoce and a child being raised in a broken home which has been proven through research to be more damaging that being raised soley by a single parent. Women who choose this option are wise, educated, strong and wonderful mothers

    ReplyDelete
  49. Alison, Sami Lukis admits that she didn't make family formation a priority until her late 30s. She admits that she dated men who weren't husband material.

    Men want a relationship with a woman. So the issue then becomes what women select for, as men will try to fulfil the criteria that women are selecting for.

    The problem for women of your generation is that too many of your peers were selecting for all the wrong qualities in men when in their 20s.

    Men who had family man type qualities were shunned. So men were discouraged from cultivating these qualities, leading to a much smaller pool of available, eligible men for those women who were looking more seriously for a husband.

    You know, when I was in my 20s I found it really hard to meet a suitable woman - but that's because the women in my peer group weren't trying to be suitable wives.

    But when they finally did try to put themselves forward as suitable wives I had a wealth of choice. I had a range of women to choose from. It didn't seem that hard at all.

    And it shouldn't have been hard for you, not if the men in your peer group were really trying to present themselves as suitable husbands.

    ReplyDelete
  50. "But Sami Lukis did not take this option. " Seriously??!! She didn't HAVE the option.. What was she supposed to do ? Marry any guy around just because that was the right 'baby-making' time?! I'm sure that would have been a happy, long-lasting marriage.. What world do you people live in.!?

    ReplyDelete