Of Basters And Bias

As I read Louise Sloan's new book Knock Yourself Up, I couldn't help thinking about Bette Davis' famous line from All About Eve: "Buckle up. It's going to be a bumpy night."

Sure enough, her funny and personal argument that single women who want to have children should take things into their own hands drew quick fire from predictable quarters.

Although the media gravitated quickly and inevitably to images of turkey basters, critics from the right seized on the socially blasphemous cover line ... "No Man? No Problem."

While a few, of course, condemned the do-it-yourself aspect of the process, more were concerned with the result. She has been accused of "screeching about women's rights while violating the human rights of her own child" and "pursuing her pregnancy fantasies by making consummately selfish choices."

Such response doesn't really surprise me. I've been there myself.

When I wrote a book called Raising Boys Without Men - How Maverick Moms are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men my assault on two parent hetero-normalcy was to publish research findings that argued the sons of single mothers and lesbian couples turned out better than fine. My long-term study of these boys (compared to boys raised in traditional nuclear families) found young men who were not only masculine and well-adjusted, but tended to be kinder and more in touch with their feelings.

Balancing praise for the book from many quarters were invitations to "Go back to Russia where you belong, you commie bitch," and other responses that had me for a time considering hiring security.

I don't know whether anthropologist Margaret Mead drew that kind of heat when she said, "Fathers are a biological necessity, but a social accident. But the fact is, suggesting that fathers aren't necessary just seems to get people riled up.

The problem is simple enough. When you apply stringent limitations to the notion of family, then anything outside of those limitations quickly becomes an either-or proposition. To argue that fathers aren't compulsory in raising happy, healthy and productive children quickly translates to a statement that fathers are irrelevant.

A dependable masculine presence is a wonderful part of a family. I know that on a very personal level because a heart attack took mine away when I was three. Louise Sloan lost her father the same way at age two. But to assign any family a lesser value because a father - by circumstance or choice - isn't there is not only ludicrous, it's small and mean. It's an arbitrary and arrogant denial of all that families are and can be.

While the deniers of a broader definition of family cling to cherished stereotypes of the family unit, the world has a way of moving on. Nearly a third of American households are headed by women alone. The National Center for Human Statistics reports that, between 1999 and 2003, the number of children born to unmarried women between 15 and 24 declined 6 percent. For unmarried women between ages of 30 and 44, the figure increased 17 percent. Clearly choice is a big part of those figures.

If Mr. Right comes into the life of a woman via a sperm bank and an appliance, so be it. Like the results of a married hetero union, not every result of that conception will be a happy and successful child. But most of them will. Instead of labeling those families, instead of giving short odds on their success - why can't we simply wish them well?

Comments

[adryenn]

One of my best friends faces the situation where she hasn't found Mr. Right, really has never dated successfully, and is a warm, bright, wonderful woman who can easily support herself and a child. And she would make a fantastic mother. She's 34. Does she wait, or worse, go on the marathon dating spree, maxing out her calendar with dates from match.com, eharmoney, and even chemistry.com?
I say no. Long ago I had decided that if I hadn't found Mr. Right by 35, my gay friend and I would have a baby. I did find Mr. Right and we had our own baby, but I had a back up plan.
What people fail to recognize when criticizing single mothers by choice, is that these are not the women who are luring unsuspecting men into fatherhood, they aren't having unprotected sex with a rich guy to get a kid and a paycheck, or having another kid to stay on welfare. These women are well rounded, often far better educated and financially secure. And they want a child. As a society, we should applaud the women who take on the responsibility on their own, without the horrific consequences of family court. In a perfect world would a dad be great? Of course! But the world isn't perfect. We always forget that part.
And while I doubt that her study took into account the socio-economic status and matched it to in tact families of the same level, what you have here is simply a good parent raising a quality kid. With that kind of attention and effort, the kids are going to come out just fine.

[jdoiter]

The Joseph Mankiewicz screenplay "All About Eve" from which you quote reads:

KAREN: (to Margo) We know you, we've seen you before like this. Is it over -- or just the beginning?

Margo surveys them all.

MARGO: Fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy night.

She downs the drink, hands the empty glass to Bill, and leaves them, CAMERA with her.

[OtayPanky]

Peggy Drexler: To argue that fathers aren't compulsory in raising happy, healthy and productive children quickly translates to a statement that fathers are irrelevant.

===

Agreed.

But the exact same logic can be applied to MOTHERS.

Mothers aren't necessary for raising happy healthy children, any more than fathers are.

But that doesn't mean mothers are irrelevant, either.

Here's what this is REALLY all about: Children need committed, competent caretakers - whether they are male or female, natural parents or adoptive ones.

That's the beginning and end of this discussion. Rabid feministas, or rabid fundie wingnuts can all go off into a separate room in some circle of hell where they can beat each other verbally for as long as they like without annoying the rest of us.

And happy new year, everyone!

OTAY!

[WorkingClass]

How Maverick Moms are Creating the Next Generation of Exceptional Men.

Exceptional by whose standard? Women are capable of raising "good boys". Actual manhood has to be modeled. Not necessarily by a father, but at least by one or more men who have negotiated the passage.

Baby boys get into this world any way they can. There are much greater disadvantages than being raised by women. But the luckiest boys will have a real man in their life so that they might develop into "exceptional men" by male standards.

[mbjesq]

My sister "knocked-herself up" and is raising an amazing little man in my nephew -- generous, considerate, deeply compassionate. He will be the third-generation to be raised in a single-mothered family. Based on my own experience, I support your thesis without reservation: the absence of a male figure within the household is, on balance, a net plus for the development of the kid.

Sure, social stigmas and notions of "completeness" can make the kid long for a father at home -- right up until they grow up and realize that they were exposed to (and shielded from) a set of parental attitudes toward the world, toward power, and toward other human beings that they could not have had in a traditional nuclear family. Perhaps this is why, "traditionally" our kids grow up to be, on average, average.

MBJ
memestreamblog.wordpress.coms.com