Pipe Down, Moms - You're Already on the Payroll

Every once in awhile it rises to the surface again - the idea that moms should be paid, or at the minimum that were they paid, they would earn in the six figures, based on everything they do and all the hours they put in.  These types of assessments are uplifting and empowering to moms, who feel overworked and undervalued and who, I suspect, are coming to grips with the harsh reality that the cost/benefit analysis of being a mom is slanted severely against their favor.

The most recent exhaltation of maternal worth comes from Wendy Luhabe, an influential South African business woman, who has taken it upon herself to publicly declare that mothers should be paid a salary equal to 10% of their husbands' income, to stay at home with their kids.  You can read the article here (thank you to Cameron for sending me the link), but in summary, these are her arguments:

1.  Paying moms a salary makes them feel valued, and therefore makes the choice to have children one which is free of resentment.

2.  Motherhood is the most important contribution to the world and should therefore be valued.  Since money is the currency used to demonstrate value, mothers should be paid 10% of their husband's earnings.

3.  Women who choose to have children need support so that they can do so joyfully and not dump their children on nannies.

4.  Creating a society where children are brought up properly by their mothers will create a much more stable and healthy society.

I cannot speak specifically to the value of motherhood in South Africa, but let me address Ms. Luhabe's arguments from an American perspective.

1.  In America, as in most cultures, motherhood is not only valued, it is seen as as woman's ultimate achievement and the pinacle of her existence.  In fact, in most cases, womanhood is equated with motherhood, so that women who cannot (or choose not to be) mothers are pitied, judged and made to feel that they are deficient, unwhole and unfeminine.  If anyone has cause for feelings of resentment, it is the childless and childfree women, who are seen as much less than their maternal counterparts.

How is motherhood valued?  Let us count the ways.  Women are encouraged to have children.  The moment a woman announces her pregnancy, lavish praise and celebration is heaped upon her.  She instantly becomes the center of attention wherever she goes.  She is repeatedly told how beautiful, glowing and radiant she is.  Parties and thrown and gifts are showered upon her. 

Once the child is born, she enters into the Mommy Club in which she has a ready circle of supportive friends who all validate her very existence.   Adding a child to her family also bestows a number of financial benefits on the mom, not available to those without kids.  She gets a substantial tax break on her income tax bill.  She gets to fully utilize her local property taxes by using the public school system.  She gets special treatment and discounts from businesses who go out of their way to be "family-friendly".  If she lives in suburbia, her family can take advantage of any number of activities and events that are geared toward families with kids, while those without kids are unlikely to find many (if any) activities geared toward them.

And let's not forget the most important "pay" a mom receives - the joy of having a child.  After all, women do not have children to selflessly contribute to the world.  They have them for all the joy, love and personal satisfaction they believe they will get from the experience.   Women who argue that they should be paid a salary to have kids are unknowingly admitting that the joy and satisfaction they enjoy from having children isn't enough to make the drudgery worth it - which, by the way, is the same argument I have been advancing in this blog from day one.

2.  Being that the world is overpopulated, and there are already far more people on earth than the planet can sustain, I would have to disagree with the persistent message that motherhood is the most important contribution to the world.  In fact, I would argue that what we need is a reduction in the number of women breeding.  We need to encourage people to take care of the people already populating our world, instead of adding more destructive, polluting consumers to a planet teetering on the verge of extinction.  Instead of paying women to be stay-at-home mothers, let's pay people to make meaningful, worthwhile contributions to the world that actually benefit everybody and the planet itself - for example, adoption, working to end poverty and homelessness, environmental activism...and the list goes on.  Breeding is not a positive contribution to the world.  It is a destructive detriment and it should most certainly not be rewarded with monetary compensation.  In fact, I will go farther and argue that those who breed should be heavily fined, with the money raised by said fines going to people and organizations which better the world.

3.  See my reply in #1 above.  Women already receive an abundance of validation, support and financial incentives to have children. 

4.  While I agree that it is important for children to be brought up properly in stable households, there are many stay-at-home moms who have no parenting skills and no business raising children.  It is not a given that all mothers are saintly, benevolent beings and that the best environment for a child is at home with his mother.  Almost every day, in my travels to and from work, during my visits to the bank and supermarkets, I witness first-hand mothers who treat their children with an intensity of seething hostility that I would not wish heaped upon a convicted felon.  Many of these women are stay-at-home moms who are boiling over with resentment, exhaustion and frustration (and I am sure regret) from the spawn they are saddled with.

Finally, a message to would-be moms.  I have said this before, and I will say it again:  If you don't like the idea of a job with endless work, sleepless nights, non-stop crying and screaming, financial strain, endless hours of overtime and no pay, it's very simple:  don't have kids.  Nobody is putting a gun to your head.  You can choose to do something different.  And ladies, if you do decide to have kids, do us all a favor and don't come back later complaining that you are saddled with endless work, sleepless nights, non-stop crying and screaming, financial strain, endless hours of overtime and no pay.  You knew what the job entailed when you accepted it, so if you are resentful about the choice you made, suck it up and accept that you'll be living with that resentment for a long time. 

And please, don't ask for a salary.

More Bitching and (a little) Backpedaling

Wow - the parents are really coming out of the woodwork to bitch and complain about the downsides of parenting. Love it. Here's another mom-authorized bitchfest entitled 10 things no one told you about work-life balance with kids. As is the usual custom with parental bitchfests, while she spends the bulk of her article dishing the shit, she is careful to end her bitchfest with the requisite pro-parenting propaganda (The Backpedal) - lest you be left with the idea that she is promoting the message that having kids is not worth it (which would make her a terrible, terrible person, a bad mom, and a traitor to all the other long-suffering moms who need constant reminders that having kids wasn't the biggest mistake of their lives).

I must say I find the title of her article curious. No one told her about work-life balance with kids? Do we really need someone to tell us about this? How is it possible to live in our society and observe other people (with kids) and not notice that being a parent royally screws up a person's life and turns it into a major stress-fest? I don't need anyone to write a list out for me to give me the heads up. All I have to do is look around me at the people I know who have kids and I can see that having kids = sleep deprivation, exhaustion, stress, constant upset, negative impact on career and job performance, financial strain, weight gain, and the list goes on and on. How is it that this author was surprised to encounter all these negative changes in her life once she had kids? What planet does she live on?

Oh, that's right. She probably bought into all the pro-parenting propaganda that was spoonfed to her during her entire pre-kid life like, "it's so worth it", "it's the most important and most rewarding job in the world", "it's the best thing you can do", "you can do it all", "you just make it work" (you know - the same propaganda we childfree people were smart enough to recognize as a BS brainwashing scam), while turning a blind eye to the conflicting evidence before her very eyes. It's interesting how the human mind works, isn't it - how people believe what they want to believe and then are shocked when reality smacks them in the face.

P.S. After you read the article, be sure to scroll down and read the comments by more stressed out parents. Lots of bitching, and minimal backpedaling.

_____________________________________________________

If you'd like to read more from regretful parents, click here.

World's Oldest Mom Dies

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

The world's oldest new mother - a single woman who gave birth at age 66 - has died at age 69, leaving her 2 year old twins orphaned.

This situation is a vivid example of pronatalism gone awry and illustrates the need for controls to be put on the relentless, unreasonable pursuit of parenthood at all costs. In this case, the cost is being incurred by two innocent children who are left orphaned, all because this woman had a selfish desire to become a mom long after it was reasonable for her to do so.

Moms on the Dole

Since motherhood is not already valued enough in our culture, Salary.com added a "Mom Salary Wizard" to their web site, so that moms can boost their self-esteem even further and get even more positive reinforcement by seeing how much they would be paid if they received a salary. The site will even print out a paycheck for them (presumably to give to their husbands to make them appreciate them more). Thanks to my friend Matt for forwarding this to me. Give it a whirl and let me know what you think.

Hm, if moms actually got paid this much money, I might decide to change careers. (just kidding)

In all seriousness, this is ridiculous. As Matt said in his e-mail to me, "This really irritates me. Have you done a blog post about this? I'm sure you must have. It's just so ridiculous. People CHOOSE to have children, so how is this conversation even justified? It's like getting paid to mow your own lawn or pursue a hobby."

Good point, Matt. In fact, I'd like to have a salary calculator too to figure out what all my unpaid contributions to the world are worth. This blog alone must be worth big bucks, right?

Oooh, and I just noticed something interesting on this calculator. If you look closely, under the calculator, there is a little link that says "What about Dads?", so you can click that link and calculate what a dad is worth in salary. Bad news, ladies. Gender inequality in the workplace reigns supreme even in the the domestic sphere. The basic salary range for a Mom without changing any of the defaults is $68,027 - $181,273. The basic range for a Dad is $71,090 - $186,375.

Surely a man invented this calculator.

A Smart Young Woman

Found this video on YouTube and thought it was worth sharing with you all. This is a very articulate and intelligent young childfree woman who at such a young age, is already wise to the bull.

Men's Mag Jumps on the Pronatalist Bandwagon

Okay, I know I am hyper-focused on the relentless pronatalism in our culture, but I just have to say this. You know things are out of control when MEN'S magazines are pushing baby-making!

Browsing on the internet, I came across this article in Men's Health: "Eight Monumental Sexual Experiences You Must Have". Now remember, this is geared toward men. Let's see, we have:

Wedding Night Sex

Honey-I'm-Home Sex

Makeup Sex

Breakup Sex

Birthday Sex

First-Time-With-Her-Sex

Vacation Sex

and last but not least:

Let's-Have-a-Baby-Sex

Now, let me ask you. Do you really think men are sitting around worrying about whether the sex they are getting is of the let's-have-a-baby variety? Does Men's Health Magazine really think men worry about making sure they have this monumental form of sex? From what I know of men, I think they are happy to be getting sex of any variety, whatever day of the week, no matter what occasion or what circumstances surround the sex. I assure you, they are not sitting around all misty eyed over having baby-making sex.

Secondly, from what I understand about let's-have-a-baby-sex, it's not great sex. For most couples, it's scheduled and calculated like a science experiment. There's no romance or spontaneity. The man is basically a stud horse and certain protocols must be followed precisely for the best chance at success. Crack the whip!

And then, putting pronatalism aside, there's a whole 'nother problem with this article. Not only does it assume all men will make babies, it also assumes all men are heterosexual AND will be married.

So maybe Men's Health Magazine should change it's name to Married Straight Men Who Aim to be Fathers Magazine. That would be a more fitting title.

How Valuable are You? (Not a child? Not Very.)

You may have heard that on Sunday, a small plane crashed in Montana and 17 people perished. If you heard this news story, you probably also heard that several children were on the plane because that appears to be the aspect of this story that every news organization and paper is focusing on. Children. were. on. the. plane.

As if the adults who perished aren't as significant.

As if the fact that children were killed makes the accident far more tragic.

As if the loved ones of the adults who died won't suffer and mourn their loss just as much as the families of the children.

As if the adults who died aren't somebody's wife, husband, mother, father, sister, brother, or friend.

Perhaps I am looking for a fight, but since this is a blog focused (in large part) on the rampant pronatalism that permeates every aspect of our existence, I think it's important to highlight clear examples when they arise. We are so immune to this kind of thing because it is so pervasive, but we need to stop for a moment and think. What makes a child's life more valuable than an adult's? Why is it more horrible that a child's life was cut short, than a grown-up's? In a purely technical sense, it could be argued that the adult is the bigger loss, since the adult is an actual contributor to society, whereas the child is a parasite on it. An adult has also had much more time to establish meaningful, long-standing relationships and has (hopefully) had much more time to make a positive, lasting impact on the lives of others. His loss will create a ripple effect that will extend far beyond the parameters of his immediate family.

The fact is, if my husband had died on that Montana plane crash, I probably would have been too devastated to even think about the fact that all anyone cared about was the loss of the children. I would be too focused on the value of the person I had lost - a person who by nature of his age may be undervalued by our child-obsessed society, but means the entire world to me.

Inquiring Minds Need to Know...

In the interest of keeping you all informed about what's going on in the celebrity world...

Train Keeps a Rollin'

In the ongoing train wreck saga that is Nadya Suleman, there is certainly no shortage of material to write about. Where do I start?

In this interview with Ann Curry of the Today Show, Suleman defends herself against her many critics. Apparently (and not surprisingly), the primary thrust of anger directed at Suleman concerns the fact that despite having no job and 6 children already to support, she deliberately set out to have an entire brood of additional children with no means to support them, leaving the expense to the taxpayers. Interestingly, in her first interview with Ann Curry, Suleman had stated she and her children do not receive welfare, however it has since come to light that she receives food stamps as well as a total of $1,800 per month in SSI payments for her autistic son and 2 other children with disabilities (said disabilities, by the way, are more likely in multiple births - another reason it is selfish to be implanted with multiple embryos).

Suleman's explanation? "I am not living off of any taxpayer money. If I am - if it is food stamps - it's a temporary resource. We receive no cash and it's every month - about $190 - and it's going for food."

Excuse me? So in one sentence she states she is not living off taxpayer money, yet she states she receives food stamps. Who does she think pays for said food stamps?

She then goes on to defend herself against statements made by her own mother who claimed that Nadya is incapable of of caring for 14 children. Nadya's response? "What human in this planet is capable to take care of 14 independently without support from family, from friends, from church!?"

Precisely! This is exactly why a jobless, broke, single mother with 6 kids has no business having 8 more!

Let me ask you a question, Nadya. Did you consult with your family, friends and church members before you voluntarily got implanted with a multitude of embryos to ascertain whether they were willing or interested in "helping" you with a new litter of 8 children? Did it ever occur to you that perhaps people have their own lives to live, their own spouses and/or children to care for? Maybe they would like to focus on them. Maybe they would like to attend to their own families, instead of sacrificing their time, money and effort to accommodate your selfish desire for a boatload of kids that you have no means to support or care for.

Suleman says (with a chuckle) that we've all heard the saying "it takes a village to raise a child. Well, this will take a lot of villages!"

Thanks, Nadya, for volunteering us all to take care of the problems you've created.

Despite her desire for the villagers to rally together to tend to her family, she simultaneously holds the view that people should not "dissect" her life or make judgements about it. "It's really kind of sick because I think people really need to focus on their own lives...and stop trying to fixate on other people. I think that's unfortunate for them."

Good point, Nadya. Actually, we'd like to focus on our own lives, but since you recruited us villagers to raise your children, our focus has understandably shifted to you.

On a separate, but related issue, I pose a question to you today. How is it that someone who has no job, lives at home with her parents, has a boatload of children to support and is living off of food stamps, disability payments and student loans, can afford to have substantial plastic surgery costing (according to one plastic surgeon) in the area of $20,000? Don't know what I am talking about? Check out these 2 photos of Suleman - one from a few years ago and a recent photo - and tell me if anything looks suspicious to you:

Let's connect the dots here. Could it be that her obsession with having children has been fueled (or exacerbated) by the rampant pronatalist glorification and worship of breeding and motherhood in the media? Could it be that Suleman craves the adoration heaped upon the Queen-of-all-prolific-Mothers, Angelina Jolie?

I have written quite a bit about the danger of media pronatalism and this is the ultimate example of what can happen to people who get whisked away on the pronatalist train as it careens down the tracks.

(I don't blame Angelina, by the way. She is apparently just as creeped out by Suleman as the rest of us.)

Seeing Red

If you watched the video in my previous post, you heard Dr. Jamie Grifo state that "you cannot legislate the practice of medicine", i.e. you cannot force doctors to limit the number of embryos they implant in a woman. Although most doctors follow the guidelines recommended - limiting the embroys implanted to one or two - he states that there are no laws limiting them if they choose to implant more. In other words, these doctors who implant 8 embryos in one woman are free to run wild and do as they wish, because "we do not want to infringe on a woman's reproductive rights".

And yet at the same time, many women and men who do not wish to have children are turned away by doctors who refuse to sterilize them because they have not already had children. What about these individuals' reproductive rights? Why is nobody concerned about their reproductive wishes being granted? Why is it that when a person chooses not to have children, her wishes are ignored because it is assumed she must not know her mind, yet the wishes of a woman who is clearly an insane, selfish narcissist - who has 6 children already and wants to add 8 more to the brood when she is single and lives alone with her parents who are going bankrupt - are granted with no questions asked?!! Nobody is questioning her wishes or doubting whether she knows her mind. This is what truly burns me up and makes me see red!

As if this is not all enough, one of the doctors interviewed on the video stated that the health care for these 8 babies will run into the MILLIONS of dollars and guess who will have to pay for it? Us! These women and doctors can do whatever they please with impunity and we just have to deal with it and foot the bill! Nobody questions a woman who wants to be implanted with 8 embryos about the fact that she has 6 kids already. Nobody questions her about whether she has the financial means to pay for their medical care. Nobody questions the negative impact on the health of the woman or the children. Nobody questions her about how she will possibly be able to care for and financially support 14 children. None of this is a concern to anyone because "we cannot legislate medicine". Are you fucking kidding me?

This case illustrates more clearly than anything, the rampant pronatalism that is has our society in a death grip. It is disgraceful and beyond all reason and comprehension. Breeding is encouraged for everyone, under all circumstances and without question because babies are "miracles" and the more miracles we can create, the better off we all are, even if this flies in the face of reality, as in this situation. It is as though our entire society is a culture of catatonic, unthinking Stepford Wives.

The doctors who implanted those 8 embryos should be thrown in prison, as should the mom. In fact, put them all in the same jail cell together and make it a really small jail cell so they can experience the same overcrowding that those 14 children will feel when they are jammed into that tiny bungalow like a bunch of sardines. And turn the 14 children over to adoptive parents who are responsible and have the financial and psychological means to raise them properly.