There are a series of milestones Western society views as steps a female takes toward full-fledged womanhood. The first stage starts with the beginning of menstruation around age 12 ½, then goes on to the wearing of a bra, (the next items are in no particular order) then makeup, a driver's license, losing virginity, getting a degree, finding a job... and then the real clinchers, marriage and children.
The first event is unavoidable. The next several, while not compulsory, are not unusual. The latter two, marriage and children, can be one's choice to avoid, one's choice to do, or one's choice to hope for. But marriage, and particularly motherhood, weigh the heaviest in our definition of womanhood.
In 'Unnatural', 'Unwomanly', 'Uncreditable' and 'Undervalued': The Significance of Being a Childless Woman in Australian Society, a new study published last month in the journal Gender Issues, authors Stephanie Rich, Ann Taket, Melissa Graham, Julia Shelley looked at the experiences of childless women in contemporary Australia. They wrote that their research "revealed five key themes as significant facets of the experiences of childless women: notions of 'natural' and 'unnatural'; woman = mother; childlessness as a discrediting attribute; feeling undervalued; and the significance of being childless."
With no American similar study done lately, I was curious to learn what Australian women are experiencing, whether they choose to be childless, cannot conceive, or, like me, are waiting to find a mate with whom to have children. Like in Australia, more American woman are childless than ever before. Over forty-seven percent of U.S. women are not mothers by age 45. And when we do have children, it's later in life than ever before. The White House's 2011 Women in America report stated, "There has been a steep rise in the share of women age 25-29 who have not had a child, rising from 31 percent in 1976 to about 46 percent in 2008." Furthermore, the "likelihood of a woman having her first child at age 30 or older increased roughly six-fold from about 4 percent of all first-time mothers in the 1970s to 24 percent in 2007." About one fifth of American women are childless between ages 40 and 44.
And yet, as the Australian study sets out to show, childlessness is not quite understood or seen as a norm. Western society is pronatalist. People are expected to get married and have children. Those who are not married and/or do not have children are considered anomalous. Having babies is perceived as natural; it's what women do. The study states:
"....womanhood and motherhood come to be seen as synonymous identities and facets of experience. Thus for women, parenting and the act of mothering are not only presented as desirable, but are in fact seen as the natural expression of their 'femininity'. While motherhood has been recognized as mostly undervalued in society through holding little material or social status, non-motherhood is often granted even lower prestige. As such, the lives of Australian childless women are further influenced by prevailing motherhood discourses, in which women without the desire (voluntary), ability (involuntary) or opportunity (circumstantial) to have children, may be seen as abnormal and unfeminine."
The study shares how childless women are made to feel 'unnatural' when they reach a certain age. Until we are in our later fertility years, being childless is natural. Most would not say it's natural for a young woman to be a mother at 14. Childlessness is the state into which a girl is born. But once she reaches her mid thirties, that natural state is suddenly deemed unnatural. "It's not natural!" is the popular refrain.
The women in the study also felt discredited for their childlessness. Childlessness is an "attribute they felt was associated with being selfish, and having lesser care or compassion." As the founder of Savvy Auntie, the media company designed for the nearly 50 percent of American women who love the children in their lives but are not mothers themselves, I know for a fact that most women are generous, giving and full of compassion for children they did not give birth to. But yet, they are discredited for this simply because they are generous with other people's kids, not their own.
Which is why the fourth theme resonates so much with me: "feeling undervalued." First, in this pronatalist society, mothers are lifted to a higher status in the eyes of others, with popular refrains like "There's no more important job than motherhood!" In fact, the study states that "childless women have often been stereotyped as having either no time for, or spending no time with, children; consequently, they are perceived as having no understanding of children." Again, I can tell you from my research for my book, SAVVY AUNTIE, that this is blatantly untrue. In fact, I've even given a name to the valuable time an aunt spends with a child because it's that influential. I've dubbed it "QualAuntie Time."
Finally, the significance of being labeled "childless" weighed on how the women in the study felt perceived by society. There is little positivity in the word; no one wants to be made to feel less than anything. (I have gone on to use the term "childfull" since Savvy Aunties choose to love the children in their lives. I realize it's not a perfect solution, but it feels like a much more proactive state than being 'less than' anything.)
When I share the data about childlessness in America, many, even those focused on marketing to women, are surprised. The perception is that most women are mothers. Truth is, we're only half way there.
To those who have anything in common with the women in this Australian study, let me assure you of this: Babies are born from the womb, but maternity is born from the soul. There are many ways to mother. And when our society begins to view us as valuable and significant contributors to society and the American Family Village, we all win. Especially the children.
Follow Melanie Notkin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/savvyauntie
Along with not having/not wanting children of my own, I also don't dote on other people's children. I don't dislike children and I do have compassion for them, but they just don't interest me nor do I find them appealing enough that I want to fawn over them, spend time with them, or nurture them. I do feel very nuturing towards animals. I am tired of being viewed as somehow defective for feeling as I do.
"Over forty-seven percent of U.S. women are not mothers by age 45."
AND:
"About one fifth of American women are childless between ages 40 and 44."
If 80 percent are mothers by age 44, how can more than 47 percent NOT be mothers the following year? Am I confused?
I think the 47 percent number has to be wrong.
Regarding the essay as a whole: I think people should stop stereotyping those without children. Everyone has a different reason. Some don't want them. Some are tearing their heart out trying to have them but can't have them. Some saw their spouse die young or haven't found the right person yet, but are always looking and just haven't had the good luck. Me, I would have had at least one kid as a single woman if I had to. (Some would rather not be a single parent.) Luckily I found my mate at 36, and even more luckily, I was able to have two healthy babies at 38 and 40. Some go through their life savings and have their heart grieve in an effort to do this. Please don't judge.
"Over forty-seven percent of U.S. women are not mothers by age 45." versus
"About one fifth of American women are childless between ages 40 and 44." ? what?
First, I seriously doubt over 46% of women in the US are not mothers by age 45, that is a Profound shift and would have enormous consequences to the workforce/economy for the following generation and in terms of supporting these women once they are older in terms of the wider economic impact it would have on the US now. If 46% - so roughly HALF of all US women were not bearing children the impact on schools, healthcare- - indeed the entire structure of society (there need to be people to work!) would be immense - it would be national news.
If, in fact 46% of US women were childless by 45 (and even given IVF and donor eggs etc that number could not lessen much given a woman enters menopause around 45+), that would mean Far more than one fifth of American women would be childless between the ages of 40 and 44. Indeed, given that the younger one is, the Higher the chance of giving birth to a child, that number would, if anything be higher not lower than those who are 45.
Dubious stats make for dubious claims.
"I know for a fact that most women are generous, giving and full of compassion for children they did not give birth to."
and
"There are many ways to mother. And when our society begins to view us as valuable and significant contributors to society and the American Family Village, we all win. Especially the children."
This sentiment seems to indicate the title is a judgment of women who aren't, and have no desire to be, maternal: it's saying we ARE unnatural. The thing is, many women who don't have children have no desire to be mothers, nor do they have a desire to be aunties.
Why is it necessary that we be "generous, giving and full of compassion for children [we] did not give birth to," or that we be "valuable and significant contributors to society and the American Family Village," in order to be deemed "natural"?
Maybe those of us who don't want kids are the new 10%. I'd actually like to see more research into men who feel comfortable leaving their children/forfeiting custody, what it is that creates in our society such low expectations of men as fathers. Why is no one looking into that? It seems that kind of thing has far greater impact on the family village than do women who choose not to create children for the village.
And yes, I have pets. No, they're not my kids. As I am childfree, I simply don't need a substitute for children. Just sayin'.
And where do you get that childless women need to "come to terms" with the fact that we don't want children and move on? Women who don't want children are best friends with those terms. Perhaps you need to come to terms with the fact that some women don't want children. We already know we would be bad mothers BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT CHILDREN. There are many women who have children because they think it's what they're supposed to do, and when they do they're miserable. So what are your thoughts on those women? They probably aren't stellar mothers...
Society at large are prejudiced towards women who are not mothers in the same way towards men who are primary care giver-stay at home dads and on a certain level, most likely always will be. Both may be more accepted and common place but there will always be a certain level but in the face of those who trully expereince discrimination and unjust treatment, the difficulties experience by childless women and men who care for their children, well, it is pretty insignificant.
Yes, some women have children they don't want because of social/cultural/religious preasures and that is sad for the children. I hope that one day Melanie meets her man, they have children, and all is well in her universe. A good day that will be.
Our value as human beings (both women and men) extends beyond a myopic self-imposed standard or purported ideal.