Sunday, April 10, 2011

Suddenly 50

One of the faults of the liberal life script is that it leaves out motherhood. According to this script, women are to spend their 20s as single girls, with motherhood being left to the last moment in their 30s or even 40s.

That's why otherwise intelligent women can seem to have very unrealistic expectations about family life. Take, for instance, Michelle Bridges, who is a fitness guru on Australian TV. This is how her life is described in a recent edition of Who:

Now, after finishing her home and turning 40 in October, she is ready for her next chapter – enjoying her happy balance of work and domestic life. She is also contemplating motherhood, which has "just been one of those things that you think you'll get around to at some point," says Bridges.

Amazing. She is turning 40 and only now "contemplating" motherhood. She apparently has little idea of the biological realities of life, let alone the social consequences of treating family formation in such a cavalier manner.

She is not alone. A 50-year-old Melbourne woman, Meagan Callaghan, wants to use IVF to have a child. Why do this at age 50? She told the Herald Sun:

Life passes by so quickly, one minute you are 20 and the next you are 50.

Having babies did not occur to her, in her busy life, until she hit 50. So now she is going to deliberately create a fatherless family as a very old mother and raise a child to whom she is not biologically related. Hardly ideal.

You would think that liberals would recognise the flaw in their life script. But listen to the reaction of columnist Alan Howe. He believes that it is a sign of liberal progress for women to leave motherhood so late:

Like so many women her age, Ms Callaghan has either been too busy, or has never met the right partner, to start a family.

We can hardly encourage women to complete their educations, enter the workforce, smash through all but the most reinforced glass ceilings, and expect otherwise.

That's not our Western way. In less tolerant lands - Afghanistan springs to mind - women are often seen as chattels and baby factories...

Mrs Smug from suburbia may well say that leaving things late is Ms Callaghan's fault and she should have been aware of her fertility.

That's nonsense; until very recently, most women have commonly been unaware of the vertiginous decline, from around their mid-30s, in their ability to have children.

Alan Howe associates motherhood with the oppression of women and careerism with their liberation. No wonder he is such a defender of the liberal life script in which motherhood is left till last. As for his claim that women have only recently been aware that fertility declines from the mid-30s, that just shows how little interest liberals have in such matters.

29 comments:

  1. The article begins -

    LET'S not allow the nanny state to stick its nose in to our fertility - or lack of it.

    and ends -

    Meagan Callaghan has as much right to a baby as any of us, and by whatever means are legal.

    And she has as much right to claim rebates from Medicare as any of us do for any treatment.


    Sorry but the nanny state is using my cash to subsidise this woman's idiotic life choices. And with no man around - this whole experiment will be taxpayer funded until the kid turns 18.

    For a lefty like Alan to criticise the 'nanny state' is pure comedy. Apprently the 'nanny state' like 'political correctness' has no friends.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Amazing. I am speechless.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Alan Howe's antics on this matter are doubtless connected with his endless championship (well attested in the Melbourne Herald Sun's online archives) of invading Arab countries in the sacred name of "women's rights". He really does appear to find it outrageous that any females are still allowed to exist in the entire world except those who are careerists, whores, or both.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is really bad. Careerism, autonomy, equality and liberal sexual standards isn't liberation. This freedom is actually true slavery. My mother and me were just talking today about me being a part-time worker and making God and family the focus of my life instead of making career my focus in life. Interestly enough she started talking about female business women, female politicians, female teachers and women in the military. A lot of negatives she said. Unfortunately Mark Richardson the only way this can be broken is through breaking the liberal grip on media and academia (the way we think). A lot of these old feminist or liberal hags in their 40's, 50's and 60's are trying to teach female teenagers and young women about the most important values in life. Don't even get me started on liberal men indoctrinating young women and cheering for slutiness, unfertility and the like. The only other hope is that somehow men and women around the world check out of these forms of thought and start looking at blogs such as yours Mark Richardson.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "We can hardly encourage women to complete their educations"

    Miss Alan (it would be an insult to call him Mr. since he believes in equality of the sexes) college education is a scam. In fact the university bubble is going to burst in the USA for example.

    "enter the workforce"

    By entering the workforce women have stolen jobs from men and the workforce has become more feminized. Many women don't even do essential work or work in a proper manner. It's also because of women in politics that we have the endless cheering for libertarianism, 'progress' and democracy.

    "smash through all but the most reinforced glass ceilings, and expect otherwise."

    Here are the business goddesses who achieved their way to the top through affirmative action and active discrimination for women --- www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2011/04/a-gathering-of-cegs-chief-executive-goddesses/

    What a pack of unrefined and narcissistic women. Only one of the many fruits of the philosophy of the Enlightement.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "In less tolerant lands - Afghanistan springs to mind"

    The wars in the Middle East for the spread of Western iberal democracy are flawed. Neoconservatives need to snap out of this project.

    ReplyDelete
  7. There is a bright side to this, we just have not thought about it...by leaving motherhood to their thirties and later, the indoctrinated mindless females who cannot think outside of the box of feminism will take themselves out of the gene pool, and eliminate their genetic inheritance from humanity.

    "smash through all but the most reinforced glass ceilings, and expect otherwise."

    But we WILL leave the glass floors in place, though! We can't have those evil, oppressive men manage to advance now, can we?

    ReplyDelete
  8. So, instead of old single mothers, there will be young single mothers.
    Someone has to pay it, right?

    ReplyDelete
  9. If Callaghan is having IVF with another woman's eggs, doesn't this mean that her own genes will not be passed down?
    If that is the case, isn't the more rational option for Callaghan to adopt rather than have IVF?

    So Callaghan will have a baby
    (a) regardless of the possibility of birth defects
    (b) with zero concern for the absence of a father and
    (c) with some other woman's genetics.

    All this simply shows how horrible Callaghan is as a person.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "So, instead of old single mothers, there will be young single mothers.
    Someone has to pay it, right?"

    A lot of these women have the money to pay for it themselves. They are career women after all.

    "the indoctrinated mindless females who cannot think outside of the box of feminism will take themselves out of the gene pool, and eliminate their genetic inheritance from humanity."

    Good point but we still need to break the indoctrination inherent in academia and media towards liberalism. They will try to brainwash the remaining opposing women after all and are currently doing it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "All this simply shows how horrible Callaghan is as a person."

    I don't think that is the case. The true horror is the face that this cancer is so pervasive in the West that people think acting like this is the norm.

    Most people are sheep. You don't get to this level of horror without something all-encompassing guiding your way of thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  12. In many or some respects having children at 40 might be convenient or rational. It isn't however natural and our bodies aren't set up that way. At the end of the day its not want you want, or would desire, that must be considered primarily but what you can do, and this requires a focus on reality that is greater than many liberals have.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "In many or some respects having children at 40 might be convenient or rational. It isn't however natural and our bodies aren't set up that way."

    Meh. My wife and her sister and my sister had their second kid at age 40 and their bodies did just fine.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Meh. My wife and her sister and my sister had their second kid at age 40 and their bodies did just fine.

    It becomes a game of chance. My wife also had a baby at age 40, but it was a fraught process, not to be recommended.

    And you have to remember the other disadvantages. There will be women who will find that they love motherhood and are good at it, but who won't get the chance to have more babies. So they won't be able to compensate for those women not having children. You therefore get locked into a below replacement fertility level.

    Also, if the next generation has a child at age 40 then they will only know their grandparents as 80-year-olds sitting in armchairs. The relationship with an active grandparent will be lost.

    And what is the effect on men and women in their 20s? If women want to avoid family commitments in their 20s, then men with the qualities to make good fathers and husbands won't get much attention or respect from women. Women will instead favour less suitable men, the players, the thugs etc.

    The players will be seen to be the winners and men will start to adapt to such a lifestyle. And women will be expected to date within a hook up culture.

    And that is all expected to suddenly change when you get to your mid-30s. Men are suddenly expected to change back into family guys. Women are suddenly expected to be able to emotionally pair bond again.

    It's a particularly bad deal for the average man. He is supposed to accept the lifelong responsibilities and burdens of being a husband and father, when his wife has given away her youthful beauty, passion and fertility to other men, and when middle age is looming.

    I can't see men accepting such an arrangement in perpetuity. There will be men who will look for something else, and who will pioneer some other arrangement.

    That's why it's so important that family formation is pushed back into our 20s where it belongs.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jonathan Wolfe,

    "Most people are sheep. You don't get to this level of horror without something all-encompassing guiding your way of thinking."

    The herd mentality does not excuse making a conscious choice to subject a child to a substandard life.

    ReplyDelete
  16. ""That's nonsense; until very recently, most women have commonly been unaware of the vertiginous decline, from around their mid-30s, in their ability to have children.""

    Women have traditionally paid a HELL of a lot of attention to fertility for at least as long as the first cities.

    Sure men never paid that much attention to women when writing the histories but to assume that women have had no cultural knowlege of fertility is insane.

    I always had a soft spot for Howe despite his idiocies but this is too far.

    ReplyDelete
  17. OT but...

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/pauline-hanson-looking-good-to-winner-upper-house-seat-in-nsw-parliament/story-fn7q4q9f-1226037100037

    "She" might very well be back...

    ReplyDelete
  18. "I can't see men accepting such an arrangement in perpetuity. There will be men who will look for something else, and who will pioneer some other arrangement."

    That's what they are doing and why so many women whine that there are no "good men" after all of the loose sex and careerdom. These men are probably avoiding them and snatching up with women who are similar in their views (in "game" language this is the phenomenon of "beta" men seeking "beta" women, mating with them and forming a family with them).

    "Also, if the next generation has a child at age 40 then they will only know their grandparents as 80-year-olds sitting in armchairs. The relationship with an active grandparent will be lost."

    That's why it is essential to get rid and oppose the current indoctrination by liberals in the media and academia.

    "The players will be seen to be the winners and men will start to adapt to such a lifestyle. And women will be expected to date within a hook up culture."

    These women are crazy. It's better not to bother with them and find an alternative dating market. "Gamers" seem to have the goal of becoming these players.

    ReplyDelete
  19. ""That's nonsense; until very recently, most women have commonly been unaware of the vertiginous decline, from around their mid-30s, in their ability to have children.""

    Women have traditionally paid a HELL of a lot of attention to fertility for at least as long as the first cities.


    The decline of fertility in the 30s has been largely a moot point, since many women had kids in their teens.

    It becomes a game of chance. My wife also had a baby at age 40, but it was a fraught process, not to be recommended.

    Didn't say I recommended it - and I don't, I acknowledge all the disadvantages you mention - just that a woman's body at 40 can do it if that's how it works out.

    I am certainly going to push my kids to have kids in their 20s, but whether or not they do so is not totally under my control, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "That's nonsense; until very recently, most women have commonly been unaware of the vertiginous decline, from around their mid-30s, in their ability to have children"

    No, He is full of nonsense. It is modern women that are unaware of how their fertility works. We have examples going back to the Bible of women being well aware that female fertility does not age well.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Whoppie we're getting women in combat roles in the military.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/combat-roles-offered-to-women/story-fn59niix-1226037485919

    That's another thing for them to do before they don't have children.

    ReplyDelete
  22. We're encouraged these days to live for the moment. As ridiculous as it sounds when you live for the moment you can look up and find yourself "suddenly 50".

    ReplyDelete
  23. @Elizabeth: A lot of these women have the money to pay for it themselves. They are career women after all.

    Not really. Even these "career women" are supported by men though (a) Big Government programs (b) affirmative action (c) childimony (d) employment laws favoring women (e) a shift in jobs from the productive sector to government jobs.

    In a truly even playing field, the plight of single mothers would be much, much harsher.

    ReplyDelete
  24. How does one deal with married women with children who sympathise with their 'Suddenly 50' counterparts and even encourage them in their narcissistic plans to have children at any cost (and I'm not referring here to the personal expense of assisted reproduction techniques)?

    Last week I found myself in a perfect position to defend many of the traditional values you write about at this blog and, so help me, I couldn't find the right words. I'm still kicking myself.

    I was walking through a shopping centre with two girlfriends, both of whom are married with young children, when the conversation turned to Jennifer Aniston and how good she looks for her age. (By way of context, we had just walked out of the cinema after seeing Aniston in an appalling film called 'Just Go For It.')
    Of course I should have seen it coming, but I didn't. Right on cue girlfriend #1 uttered the almost inevitable line - "You know, she (Anitson) really should hurry up and have kids and just forget about finding Mr. Right. She could get a sperm donor or even get herself knocked up while there's still time. I wonder what's holding her back?"

    Friend #2 made the kind of approving sounds and gestures that you'd expect from someone who hasn't thought the issue through, and I was left speechless, as is so often the case when I'm in polite company. The only responses that ever pop into my head, both in the heat of the moment and afterwards, are harsh and insulting on one level or another.

    Here's what I wanted to say, but couldn't:
    "Is being a sperm donor all that men are good for? Is that all YOUR HUSBANDS are good for? And what about the children - yours and Aniston's hypothetical children - do they not deserve to know who their biological father is and to have a relationship with him as well as with you, just as you do with your beloved mothers AND fathers? Are the needs of our children completely irrelevant? I didn't realise that selfishness had suddenly become a virtue.

    The problem is that, for better or worse (probably worse), my desire to avoid confrontation usually wins out over my desire to defend traditional family values in face-to-face situations. Any advice on how to handle situations like this without sounding confronational would be much appreciated! As things stand, I feel like I'm ceding too much ground to the other side and giving unwitting assent through my silence.
    Simone G

    ReplyDelete
  25. Today many successful women have a child after 40, many of them want to have a career and postpone the idea of having a child, but the biological clock doesn't take in consideration this fact and sometimes it's not so easy to have a baby in a natural way, so that is why many celebrities resort to new medical methods of getting pregnant, cause their clock doesn't works like it was at 20 years.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Simone,

    I think patience is the key when it comes to arguing with friends or colleagues.

    It's often best to wait for the right moment, perhaps when you yourself are in a calm and collected mood, or when the right opportunity presents itself.

    I remember doing this once when a couple of younger female colleagues began to talk about when to marry and have children. I didn't push a lot of politics onto them, I simply chimed in with my own experiences of having married a bit late and the drawbacks I'd encountered.

    They listened with some interest and ended up agreeing. It was a relaxed, unforced conversation which worked better, I think, than if I had launched into a political rant.

    I think we have to expect that our friends and family members are going to spout certain modernist ideas at times that we roll our eyes at. I wouldn't set myself the aim of trying to take them on every time this happens.

    If you do want to intervene, sometimes it's enough just to counter with something simple. For instance, you could have said to your friend, "Well, if she (Aniston) went ahead and did that, the poor child would never know its father."

    That would probably be enough to either put your friend on the back foot, or to draw out the doubts of your other friend, or to engage your friends more gently in a conversation on the issue.

    Simone, I'd encourage you to pick the right person at the right time to have these conversations with. Some people are so dyed-in-the-wool in their beliefs that it's not worthwhile. Nor do you want to alienate friends and family unnecessarily. At the same time, it's a positive thing to try to influence our social circles in the right direction. In my experience, it often only takes a gentle prod to bring out the inner traditionalist in people.

    ReplyDelete
  27. http://www.starobserver.com.au/news/australia-news/new-south-wales-news/2011/04/13/wentworth-supports-marriage-equality/49461

    Typical - a homosexual website approvingly quoting Kerryn Phelps saying "we need to separate marriage from procreation" - the sad thing is that this stuff goes unresponded to in even mainstream media too.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "Typical - a homosexual website approvingly quoting Kerryn Phelps saying "we need to separate marriage from procreation" - the sad thing is that this stuff goes unresponded to in even mainstream media too."

    We need to separate marriage from the liberal state and stop the influence of liberalism on academia and media. I sometimes wished that the LGBTQ community would take a hike and stop it's never ending role in the destruction of civil society. These same people that believe in "marriage equality" or "marriage progress" without a doubt believe that marriage is for erotic love or any of the views of love put forward by the Enlightment. In reality marriage is a sacrifice for society and the community, sometimes even arranged and many times for the purpose of following God or some other deity. In marriage we shouldn't have unrealistic expectations or principles such as marrying the perfect hunky sexy man or possessing fuzzy superficial feelings forevermore.

    ReplyDelete

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