NOT the Mama!

Dorothea Salo wonders about how it works that one is perceived differently by different people. She has enthusiastic admirers, and there are also people from the far end of the lunch table who dislike her writing or her forthrightness and opinions. And there are some who criticize her not for what she writes, but for what she is: childfree.

One blogger considers me anathema (is there a word stronger than anathema? if there is, this blogger would use it of me) because I don’t make any particular secret of not liking ill-behaved children and not wanting children of my own (ill-behaved or not).

Remember, Dorothy, you’re not anathema, you’re a notthemama.

I’ve never understood the hostility and scorn that is reserved for anyone that professes they don’t like children. I also don’t like Brussels sprouts, but I don’t get criticized for my avoidance of them.

I’m with British TV and film producer Verity Lambert, who once cheerfully claimed, “But I can’t stand babies–no, I love babies as long as their parents take them away.”

Sixteen And Not Done Yet

Personally, this horrifies me on so many levels: Arkansas Family Expecting 16th Child

How can someone justify this large a family as a moral imperative? Our country consumes the bulk of the world’s resources in fossil fuels and yet are behind other nations in the percentage of our gross national product that we donate to poor countries. We don’t donate 0.7% like some of our peers.

“Extreme poverty can be reduced, and indeed eliminated, in our generation,” Sachs told journalists last week in a national conference call. “What it will take is increased investment.”

How much? To the American who would mutter, “Uh-oh, more handouts,” Sachs offered background and perspective.

In lending support to British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s recent call for a doubling of aid to Africa to $50 billion a year, he pointed out that the well-off countries are nowhere near their goal of 0.7 percent of gross domestic product in foreign aid.

And whereas the European Union has agreed to hit 0.5 percent by 2010 and 0.7 percent by 2015, the United States — second to last in foreign aid as a percentage of wealth — stands at 0.16 percent and has refused so far to set a numerical goal even though it signed off on the 0.7 declaration in 2002. While AIDS funding has been hiked by the Bush administration, total U.S. aid to Africa is $3 billion a year.

“The image Americans have that we push huge amounts at Africa and it all goes bad or goes away is simply wrong,” Sachs said. “It is one of the great American myths.”

I thought about this for a couple of days. People don’t like criticism of parents, no matter how irresponsible the parents are, no matter how screwed up their motives. Even so – sixteen and not done yet is just too disturbing to let pass without comment.

Can I Get A Childfree “Amen?”

What I chose to do with my life and my body is my business, as long as I’m not infringing on other people’s rights and privileges or expecting them to pay for my choices. Maybe the real question to be asked is not “Why am I CF” but “Why are you so worried that I am?”

Chances are I know this website’s author from the old days – it’s a nice WordPress site, too. I got there via one of the blogs at the *beep* blog listing of the local newspaper The Daily Herald.

I Give Up

The Good Wife Strikes Back

The Good Wife Strikes Back
By: Elizabeth Buchan
Okay, uncle uncle already. Or auntie, auntie, same deal. I give up on this book. I bought it based on the cute, charming cover art and assumed that it would turn out to be a cute, charming tale of a lady of a certain age who Finds Herself just in time. It had some sort of British/Tuscan storyline hinted at in the jacket, and that seemed like a good start. Currently there are a number of books and movies in circulation featuring charm, villas, good food, good wine, ladies who live large and well, and Romance for people not in the first flush of youth.

Instead, what I got was a story of a political wife who’d just sent her daughter off on her first backpacking trip with friends to Australia and was still trying to come to grips with the social and behavioral demands of being married to a rising political star and member of Parliament. Her every action, word and gesture is scrutinized by the ever-present political aide. It sounds like she’d love to escape from this prison and somehow get back to Italy and take over the family business growing wine grapes, a career that she gave up “temporarily” soon after marrying and finding herself quickly pregnant.

Well, this book may appeal to many women for exactly that reason. But not to this woman. Remember? I’m childfree, though not as crabbily militant about it as I used to be in the days when I hung out with the hardliners online. And I just completely lack the “awwwww, it’s a sweet little baby” gene. And the “tell me all about your 18 hours in labor, with every gory detail” gene. I am just not into mommy-lit.

I figured if the book was clever and charming enough, it would turn out to be a completely diffrent kind of women’s novel. But every time the plot line in the present day would inch slowly forward, the action would shift to the protagonist’s past (Fanny? Was that her name? Can’t be bothered to go look it up). And everything in her past revolved around her increasingly unfulfilling relationship with her husband, and her increasingly more and more dewily fulfilling relationship with her baby. Entire chapters are devoted to the pregnancy, the birth, the rapturous breast-feeding, the tempestuous toddler years, and so on. Frankly, I wasn’t that interested in the kid in the past, but I did want to know what hijinks she was getting up to off in Oz with her girlfriends. She was slightly more interesting when she became a sullen teenager. I have a lot more in common with her than with her mum. And even the discovery of her husband’s infidelity paled in importance in the scheme of her life, because he swore it wouldn’t happen again, and anyway she had her precious child to care for and love. There was no explanation as to why there was just the one kid, though. That must have been in one of the bits I skipped. There’s a nephew and a dipsomaniac sister-in-law to add a bit of hectic upheaval now and then, but that’s about it for lively action in the past.

I started skipping a lot. There was a lot about her father, with plenty of foreshadowing of his inevitable demise before she’s able to realize her dream of growing grapes at his side on the family estate. There was even quite a lot about her first lover, a French wine grower of some standing who pops up in her life again and evidently adds the obligatory “problematic 2nd love interest” that tempts Fanny-whatsername to abandon her husband for good and all. Or something.

It was singularly lacking in charm, this book, even though the writer worked hard to inject some. I have absolutely nothing in common with the protagonist and never found her whingeing the least bit interesting. At about the point when Fanny takes a trip to Montana to visit with her mother and American step-father on their idyllic sounding ranch, I lost all interest, put the book down, and never picked it up again. It’s after this point that she apparently runs off to Italy for a sabbatical from her family and political responsibilities (it seems that in Britain, political wives have to swot up the issues, act as a sort of auxiliary secretary, and yet still look smashing in a little cocktail dress at diplomatic functions).

Gah. This one’s going in the Remaindered pile to be given away via Bookcrossings. Maybe someone else will adore and devour this book. I found it completely unloveable and indigestible.

Shoshika

It means “a society without children.” Supposedly it means economic disaster.

A former prime minister who is in charge of the governing party’s committee on population famously told women to stay at home and breed.

Fightin’ words, dude. Your economy would be better served by more working-age adults in the workplace, not by sending half of them home to make babies and letting the other half stay out til all hours “working” (actually, drinking with their cow-orkers).

The Heterosexual Agenda

But when straight people feel the need to flaunt their lifestyle choice in front of God and everybody, I simply have to draw the line! Heterosexuality tends to lead to excessive breeding and higher rates of divorce, neither of which I think ought to be encouraged. Why can’t they just be happy comprising roughly 96% of the population, and leave the rest of us to live our simple lives, unencumbered by the burden of birth control?? Is that so wrong??

(That last line ought to be read in the voice of Harvey Fierstein.)

Song: Judy Garland: “You’ll Never Walk Alone”

Damn my allergies! That was so good it calls for a post-blogital cigarette.

Thank God that my spouse and I were saved in time from a slavish devotion to the agenda; we are no longer encumbered or burdened by birth control thanks to the wonders of modern surgical medicine.

Seriously, though, I worry for friends, acquaintances, and complete strangers on the other side of the sexual fence. The other night I was discussing a possible church blog with my priest, and he’s worried that it’s not safe “in the current climate.” I keep seeing articles referencing more and more sly little attacks on gay rights, more and more blatantly anti-gay statements by politicians, and more pleas for tolerance falling on deaf ears. The recent refusal by CBS and NBC to run a mainline Protestant church’s ad, which shows gays and other minorities being refused entrance to a worship service by “church bouncers,” has been bothering me for a while. Why is it okay to accept statements from evangelical/fundamentalist ministers that espouse implicit intolerance in their public support of anti-gay legislation, while it’s not okay to accept an ad from a moderate church in support of tolerance and inclusivity?

This country is like one gigantic schoolyard, and the bullies have taken over the principal’s office, the nurse’s office, the janitor’s closet, the physical plant, the groundskeeper’s hut, and the ROTC club. Anybody who is so uncool as to be un-conventional and un-saved (and thus un-American) will get picked on like all the other weirdos.

It looks like the rest of us “uncool” and “weird” and “bent” and “differently abled” and “ethnic” kids had better barricade ourselves in the library…because if the bullies come after one bunch of weird kids, they’ll come after us all.

What’s Next, Rhythm?

Via Clack: Don’t think for one minute that it’ll stop with just abortion. Some pharmacists refuse to dispense birth-control pills on moral grounds. There are legal protections for pharmacists who refuse to dispense birth control, too. They’re supposed to make arrangements for another pharmacist to fill the scrip, but some even refuse to do that. Which makes me wonder if the RTL movement has been quietly working to get a lot of pharmacists into their tent… if you object to birth control on moral grounds, one way to stop it is to cut off the supply at a convenient choke point, right?

Right.

Good thing I got the ol’ shnipperoo.

Acts of Extremely Civil Disobedience

I don’t happen to think our leaders’ ideal republic has a lot of room for overeducated lefty feminist childfree gay-friendly non-religious Spanish-speaking ex-Jewish librarians, either.

I’m with you, Dorothea – right up to the Spanish-speaking part, and I’m quite friendly with the final two constituencies, too. And I’m definitely in the “It’s a womb, not a clown car” club. I saw a Discovery/Health show on the Duggars brood the other night – the combination of fundamentalism with fecundity gave me the heebie geebies just before the election, so it was just great timing.

Oddly enough, I have some rooibos tea at home. I’ll have some of that tonight in solidarity. I’m sure it’ll help.

In any case, I’ll be doing a lot of thinking, pondering, and reflecting for a while. For one thing, I think very soon somebody will be re-writing the familiar quotation of Pastor Martin Niemoller.

‘First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.’

I’ll wager they re-order the lines, trash the Communists altogether, and have it start “First they came for the Democrats…”

I’m taking a lot of calls today – the lines are busy, and I’ve noticed the oddest thing: callers from Red States are extreeeeemely cordial and syrupy and nice on the phone. And very understanding and patient. And it’s setting my teeth on edge, and I suspect my blood pressure may be spiking and I may need insulin later (I’m not a diabetic so far as I know). And I find myself looking forward to hearing a nice grating Noo Yawk or braahd Bahstin accent next.

I’m trying to give up conspiracy theories for the rest of the year, but can’t help but wonder if They aren’t all just being a little too nice. I read something earlier in USA Today:

Many Republicans said conciliation wasn’t necessary.

Angela Lutz, 33, a Bush voter from Waterville, Wash., said she understands the divisions the campaign opened. Kerry signs in her town were torn down several times. She said “it would be nice if everyone could just get along.”

But how to do that? “It would be nice if some people could just change their minds,” she said.

AAAAAH! You know she’s not changing her mind. Of course, it would be lovely if we were all singing out of the same choirbook (shudder). This is why it will be hard for me to give up on the “hairy-eyeballed wing-nuts are taking over” theories, too.

One act of extremely civil disobedience that I will try to commit in the coming years is to make donations to NPR stations in Red states, such as Nebraska, Wyoming, and Colorado (KUNC is heard in southern WY and western NE, too). National Public Radio offers cultural and news programming that can seem like a lifeline to lonely progressive thinkers out in the heartlands. It can reach moderates whose only other news is local TV and commercial radio… and religious/talk radio.

When David and I went on our long road trip, we had a CD player along, but wanted to listen to various weekend shows on NPR to pass the time. Sure enough, no matter how far out there you are, you can usually find a station, even if it’s only a repeater from a college NPR station far away. As the Abu Ghraib news was literally breaking open that first weekend (Sy Hersh was on Sunday Edition) we were glued to the radio, and frequently had to twiddle the dial to get a better signal, or pick up another repeater. It was comforting to be in touch with national events, and later when the music shows came on, it was the only alternative to our small CD rotation.

NPR: it’s national, and rational, and we need it more than ever. I still love AAR, but I doubt a Bush believer will listen for long without getting turned off and turning it off (as funny as Al Franken is, he’s not making any new friends in the “Dumb States.” Heh.)

I see by my readings at Salon.com and the echo chamber that is my personal Bloglines list that the bloodletting and recriminations have already begun. I have a solution: we’re simply going to have to start up a Democratic Party version of the Grange movement, or perhaps Chatauqua, with speakers of interest, social services, and so on. Maybe the Democratic Party could spend some of those vast sums of money on more grassroots groups that work for positive change.

The “mild Protestantism” of Chatauqua shouldn’t be a deterrent to the secular (I’ve been to a concert at the Boulder Chatauqua complex, it’s like an old fashioned summer retreat). The movement was nearly killed off by the rise of fundamentalism in the 20’s, so it would be satisfying to breathe a little life on the ashes and revive it.

I feel like the people who voted against gay marriage in all those states just weren’t stopping to think of their friends and family who are gay. If they don’t have any friends and family who are gay, they certainly need some. The irony is, they probably already do. So maybe nice gay people in fleets of tastefully decorated Winnebagoes ought to ply the rural byways of this land, offering cultural exchange, makeover tips, and banana bread. And we ALL, gay and straight, need to travel the world and reassure them that we’re not all religious zealots.

And maybe we should all drink more rooibos tea. We latte-sipping liberrrls could sure stand to cut back on the caffeine a little to reduce the stress.

My Marriage Is NOT Irrelevant

Keyes was also asked about another comment he made last week critical of gay marriage in which he declared: “Where procreation is in principle impossible, marriage is irrelevant.” Keyes said the logic of that statement would not preclude elderly people past child-bearing age from getting married.

Overshare Alert!

Well, in my case “procreation in principle is impossible,” because reproduction has been permanently circumvented. However, this doesn’t stop us from fooling around anyway. Yay!

Therefore, I’m childfree, and Alan Keyes would think I’m a monster, with an irrelevant marriage. Apparently, he would have people who are unable or unwilling to have children remain unmarried and celibate.

Here’s a cluestick for you, Mr. Keyes: My marriage is NOT irrelevant. This is not “logic and philosophy,” it is the rantings of a mentally unbalanced religious kook.

And what’s more, my marriage is NOT threatened if gay people are extended the same right to marry that benefits me and my husband.

IN fact, I happen to think that the institution of marriage is strengthened when more people are legally allowed to marry. I actually think my marriage is threatened if some people are legally prevented from marrying the person of their choice. Just my personal “logic and philosophy;” your mileage may vary.

Otherwise, if we’re going to continue to enforce some hoary old Biblical restrictions on our lives, we’ve got to enforce them ALL. Meaning, we’ve some ‘splaining to do about wearing Godless heathenish cotton-wool blends. Not to mention Lycra and stretch denim jeans (for which I personally thank God). We Christians are woefully slack (except in the matter of our too-tight jeans).

And another thing: Keyes is so not a member of the Reality-Based Community. Eric Zorn had this to say in his column in the Trib, which he titled “Full Metal Alan” and subtitled “Obtusion Confusion:”

In the post-debate news conference at WTTW, a reporter asked Keyes, “Do you think you have a chance of winning this election?”

Keyes responded: “I think I am winning this election, and I think it’s going to be proven on Nov. 2. But, as I say, this is for God to know and for the obtuse media in Illinois to find out.”

He thinks he’s going to win, and we’re obtuse?

See, in his reality he’s winning the election, because God is right and he’s a God-fearing man, and so as he’s right with God, he’s also right about winning the election. God would not let him fail. Right? Riiiiiiight.

Either that, or Republican monkeys will fly out of his butt next Tuesday, armed with provisional voters’ registrations. And they will all look like Karl Rove and Nathan Sproul, and sport natty little 3-decker capes and pillbox hats, just like they wore in the Wizard of Oz.

And golly, won’t we all be embarassed to find out that like the media, we’re obtuse, too. Shucks.