5 ms·

I was intrigued by the opening paragraphs up until she got to: "Because no matter how many different kinds of public images women see of themselves, they're st

by rohern 14y ago

I was intrigued by the opening paragraphs up until she got to: "Because no matter how many different kinds of public images women see of themselves, they're still limited. They're still largely white, straight upper-middle-class depictions, and they all still identify women as mothers or non-mothers. American culture can't accept the reality of a woman who does not want to be a mother. It goes against everything we've been taught to think about women and how desperately they want babies. If we're to believe the media and pop culture, women -- even teen girls -- are forever desperate for a baby. It's our greatest desire. " You cannot assert things like and not provide evidence. This is a gargantuan statement about society that is left totally unsupported. I think this is a very bad habit of people in the humanities and it needs to go away before I take this kind of criticism seriously.

paganel 14y ago
This is a magazine article (quite well-written, IMHO), it's not a scientific paper. So in that respect of course it has to make some generalizations, which in this case I think they're mostly correct.
- rohern 14y ago
  I do not think you understand what science is. Scientific papers do not present data and models and analysis because they are scientific papers. They do these things because they lead to testable claims of knowledge. It is not done for the style of it. If you are reading all your magazines under the presumption that they make no claims about the world and are simply a kind of ironic entertainment, okay, but that is not at all how this article portrays itself.
king_jester 14y ago
I can see how you would say this, but Jessica Valenti is a well known feminist author who was written several works on this very subject, so she takes this position based on her previous knowledge and study. She is most known for Full Frontal Feminism: http://www.amazon.com/Full-Frontal-Feminism-Womans-Matters/dp/1580052010/ http://www.amazon.com/Full-Frontal-Feminism-Womans-Matters/d...
Tichy 14y ago
Classifying women as mothers or non-mothers seems correct. What other possible categories are there? Either you are a mother, or you are not (in fact the same classification system could be applied to men, too). Just saying. Also, really, do non-white women also think of white, straight upper-middle-class women when they think of "the model woman"? That seems very unlikely to me.
- rohern 14y ago
  I agree with you that it is tautologically true, though I do not think that is a point in favor of the author. It is also true that we can classify women as penguins and non-penguins.
mnicole 14y ago
I can't even count on one hand conversations in the past 6 months I've had with co-workers and friends in which I've had to explain why I don't want kids and "Well.. wait, what are you going to DO with your life then?!" One of these co-workers sits near me and goes off almost every day about how wonderful his are and how everyone should have them. The other day, he even tried convincing another colleague of having her own even though she was averse. The whole thing was awkward. I had a high school science teacher that told me "we all feel that way when we're young, but just wait until you're older." This can totally be the case, but for me it's a lot more than that. I've heard countless arguments that children are the only thing that bring meaning to one's life. I've been told that I just won't understand until I have one. Those sentiments are echoed throughout this thread and every other thread about children. Look at the one about 60% of startup founders having children and wives - can't we take away that the reason most people have children is simply because we grow up being told that's what you're supposed to do? This may seem trivial on the outset, but hearing it day after day is defeating - particularly when there's general societal pressure on top of it. When people ask me why I made this decision, I try to keep it brief and just tell them I'm devoted to my career. Quite frankly, I shouldn't need an excuse; I'm of the mindset that too many unqualified people are having children and those children are being tossed by the wayside as they grow up in crummy neighborhoods or bloated classrooms. In my [somewhat extremist] view, I wish we had better indicators of potential health concerns and weren't afraid of telling people with financial issues that they need to get on track before they're allowed to reproduce; if you couldn't get approved for a loan that would cover the first year or two (or more) of childcare, how do you think you actually will? I know that's not a popular opinion, but having grown up in a home where everything was put onto credit cards that were deliberately timed to line up with bankruptcy claims, and knowing what kind of life that is, that's my take on it. Worse, there are a lot of women that don't realize until it is too late that they probably weren't cut out for it and the implications it has on their aspirations and careers. Some women feel so detached from their newborns that they become dissociative. Some resort to Facebook, while others resort to much more unfortunate (and long-term) solutions. Anyhow, those of us in the childfree mindset absolutely exist (and in higher numbers more recently), but for the sake of our sanities we don't talk about it unless we want an onslaught of people telling us how we should actually feel and live our lives.

by rohern 14y ago

paganel 14y ago

This is a magazine article (quite well-written, IMHO), it's not a scientific paper. So in that respect of course it has to make some generalizations, which in this case I think they're mostly correct.

rohern 14y ago
I do not think you understand what science is. Scientific papers do not present data and models and analysis because they are scientific papers. They do these things because they lead to testable claims of knowledge. It is not done for the style of it. If you are reading all your magazines under the presumption that they make no claims about the world and are simply a kind of ironic entertainment, okay, but that is not at all how this article portrays itself.

king_jester 14y ago

I can see how you would say this, but Jessica Valenti is a well known feminist author who was written several works on this very subject, so she takes this position based on her previous knowledge and study. She is most known for Full Frontal Feminism: http://www.amazon.com/Full-Frontal-Feminism-Womans-Matters/dp/1580052010/ http://www.amazon.com/Full-Frontal-Feminism-Womans-Matters/d...

Tichy 14y ago

Classifying women as mothers or non-mothers seems correct. What other possible categories are there? Either you are a mother, or you are not (in fact the same classification system could be applied to men, too). Just saying. Also, really, do non-white women also think of white, straight upper-middle-class women when they think of "the model woman"? That seems very unlikely to me.

rohern 14y ago
I agree with you that it is tautologically true, though I do not think that is a point in favor of the author. It is also true that we can classify women as penguins and non-penguins.

mnicole 14y ago

I can't even count on one hand conversations in the past 6 months I've had with co-workers and friends in which I've had to explain why I don't want kids and "Well.. wait, what are you going to DO with your life then?!" One of these co-workers sits near me and goes off almost every day about how wonderful his are and how everyone should have them. The other day, he even tried convincing another colleague of having her own even though she was averse. The whole thing was awkward. I had a high school science teacher that told me "we all feel that way when we're young, but just wait until you're older." This can totally be the case, but for me it's a lot more than that. I've heard countless arguments that children are the only thing that bring meaning to one's life. I've been told that I just won't understand until I have one. Those sentiments are echoed throughout this thread and every other thread about children. Look at the one about 60% of startup founders having children and wives - can't we take away that the reason most people have children is simply because we grow up being told that's what you're supposed to do? This may seem trivial on the outset, but hearing it day after day is defeating - particularly when there's general societal pressure on top of it. When people ask me why I made this decision, I try to keep it brief and just tell them I'm devoted to my career. Quite frankly, I shouldn't need an excuse; I'm of the mindset that too many unqualified people are having children and those children are being tossed by the wayside as they grow up in crummy neighborhoods or bloated classrooms. In my [somewhat extremist] view, I wish we had better indicators of potential health concerns and weren't afraid of telling people with financial issues that they need to get on track before they're allowed to reproduce; if you couldn't get approved for a loan that would cover the first year or two (or more) of childcare, how do you think you actually will? I know that's not a popular opinion, but having grown up in a home where everything was put onto credit cards that were deliberately timed to line up with bankruptcy claims, and knowing what kind of life that is, that's my take on it. Worse, there are a lot of women that don't realize until it is too late that they probably weren't cut out for it and the implications it has on their aspirations and careers. Some women feel so detached from their newborns that they become dissociative. Some resort to Facebook, while others resort to much more unfortunate (and long-term) solutions. Anyhow, those of us in the childfree mindset absolutely exist (and in higher numbers more recently), but for the sake of our sanities we don't talk about it unless we want an onslaught of people telling us how we should actually feel and live our lives.