The times, they are a changin'

[fpb]

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don't criticize
What you can't understand.
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command,
Your old road is rapidly agin';
Please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand,
For the times they are a changin'.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g798CHaazwkE1E0TMQv8AZ60Bj1wD91DKPI00

Like all really inevitable and natural development, this one surprised everybody, including me. Well, what the Hell did we all expect? People like babies. Women particularly like babies. Girls - with a few exceptions in whose personal history it is all too easy to read the emotional reasons - intensely love babies. You cannot introduce a baby among a group of schoolgirls without being practically drowned by cooings and bursts of wonder at the cuteness of them. Nobody should have expected that this natural instinct could be for ever silenced by an artificial image of a brilliant career woman, something which, for nine women out of ten, has no reality at all. Women look at Sex and the City with its childless, unmarried, rich, elegant forty-years-old, as they read Hello magazine: as a kind of fable. I do not understand the appeal myself, but I very much doubt whether it has anything to do with daily or real life. Women read their glossy magazines in ordinary, sometimes drab homes, and do not seem to make much of an effort to imitate them. It all seems to me to live in a special space of the mind dedicated to unreality. If any woman identifies with the Sex and the City characters, it cannot be because of their surroundings or careers; it is more a matter of the common complaint about weak, shiftless, commitment-phobic men - which, whether or not it is true, is at least a commonplace female whine. The idea that millions of schoolgirls go out into the great wide world in the hope of becoming top corporate lawyers, marketing VPs, or even fashion designers or Hollywood actresses, seems to me naive in the extreme. Some of them may dream of such things; most of them know that they never will happen. And the universal cultural pressure on girls to regard babies as obstacles in the way of their careers is increasingly nullified by the fact that, across the advanced world, the vast majority of women know that they will have no careers. The idea of spending one's life moving forwards in a job until one achieves a high and permanent rank is outdated, not only for the majority of women, but of men too. The same people who tried to scare us with the fear of being hobbled to babies for life also informed us, in the same breath, that the notion of jobs for life is an outdated superstition.

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide;
The chance won't come again.
And don't speak too soon
For the world's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who that it's namin';
For the loser now will be later to win,
For the times, they are a changin'.

It is a case study in the power and limit of cultural consensus. They removed the stigma from illegitimacy; these days, most people who call someone a "bastard" (and weirdly enough, it is a popular insult) do not know what is meant to be insulting about the term. But they could not remove the attraction from babies, or the magnetism from sex. Every attempt to make maternity unattractive or dreaded must founder on the reality of human nature. A number of people will no doubt absorb these attitudes: they are the kind who, for one reason or another, deviate from the human average. The majority may well learn to repeat them by rote, but will never internalize them; their emptiness will become manifest - they will vanish like mist in the sun - at the sight of a single real baby. You have made it easier, not harder, for your children to have babies. The result, as I said, should have been expected; it is only the result of our universal attachment to statistics - which are, after all, always yesterday's news - that kept us from seeing the obvious.

I am not saying that there will ever be a fad for having babies as such among sixteen-year-olds. One good (or rather bad) experience of childbirth would knock that sort of nonsense on the head, and at any rate even sixteen-year-olds are not that silly. The point is rather that the coming generation is beginning to instinctively see its future, not in terms of career - they learned at the cradle how difficult and fickle a thing it is - but in terms of children, of family, of heirs. These girls know that in nine times out of ten, what will give their lives continuity and content will not be the ever-changing, mostly frustrating, sometimes dangerous and unwelcoming, reality of work, but their families; that their real life is apt to be at home, with a husband or partner if they are lucky, but with a baby anyway. And like young people across the world, they are impatient to start.

The line, it is drawn.
The curse, it is cast.
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin'.
AND THE FIRST ONES NOW WILL LATER BE LAST -
For the times, they are a changin'.

Comments

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Yes. "A lot of people" do suffer from anger issues - and most do not, luckily for mankind at large. That is what I am trying to say. I think that the perception of normalcy is intuitive, and the fact that you intuitively stress the exceptions, the "many people", your own experience - anything, that is, that is sectional, minority, or personal - strongly suggests to me that you understand, on some level, what this intuitive idea of human normality is about. You just prefer to stress the opposite poles - the exceptions, the deviation, the sectionality. And I am far from condemning you for it. Variation is both necessary and largely positive, and we should never argue as if it did not exist. I certainly did not (check my answer to elskuligr, if you have not already done so. But I think the notion of proving everything rationally is unsustainable; it leads to an eternal regress.

Parenting classes

[fpb.livejournal.com]

It may interest you that some Catholic dioceses insist on people taking marriage and parenting classes before they are married. And it has happened that, as a result of open discussion in these classes, some people have actually decided that they were not ready or suited. "Some", of course - the majority did. After all, most people realize that when you make a decision, you take the bad as well as the good. Even if you only decide to send an aunt a thank-you card, you have to go through the nuisance of choosing and buying one and writing an appropriate message. There is no decision without nuisance.

Re: Patronizing

[fpb.livejournal.com]

More than being honest or dishonest, it is a matter of knowing when to speak, when to listen, and when - most important of all - to keep your trap shut. I think you would probably be better at it than you think, but if competition is so thick on the ground, maybe you are better off not trying.

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

Hmm, that is an interesting point. I think I might stress the exceptions because I don't believe there is a norm. I believe there can be an 'average' as in 'most' humans do this, but I don't believe things should be considered 'normal' or 'not normal'. I guess I could always argue that I think everybody is special in their own. :p But that sounds too much like a self-help book.

I probably do have a intuitive belief of what normal is, but I don't like the idea so I sort of suppress that intuition.

If I really think about it, then yeah, most women will probably start off wanting both a career and kids but they will most likely sacrifice the career to have children. This sounds quite similar to what you believe (or least my interpretation of what you believe), however I do not believe this is a good thing. I might be stressing the exceptions because I don't believe our current norm should continue to be the norm.

Or, y'know, I could be overthinking this. I think I used far too many 'in my opinion' and 'my belief' statements in my comments. Gah. This is what happens when I'm in essay-writing mode. I would never state my opinions as fact in an essay. Actually, I have difficulty stating anything as fact in an essay.

Re: Parenting classes

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

That's a really good idea actually. Hey, this is about the only time when I'd applaud a decision by the Catholic church.

After all, most people realize that when you make a decision, you take the bad as well as the good.

Of course. But this way they're making an informed decision. And that's what matters, in my book. As long as you know what the bad is, you won't be surprised or horrified when things don't turn out to be perfect.

Re: Patronizing

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

The funny thing is that telling me that I shouldn't try because there's too much competition, tends to make me more eager to prove you wrong. But that's a bit silly when I don't want to be a diplomat. It was a pipe dream when I was a child, but I honestly don't think I'd make a good one. I'm not very good at social niceties. All these 'pleases' and 'thank yous' and holding the door open for people, these things puzzle me at times. As does the whole idea of saying 'hi, how are you?' as a reflex rather than actually wanting to know what the other person feels.

I like competition. I've always done the best when the competition has been fierce. I guess I just enjoy doing better than other people, which is both a good and bad thing.

The actual job I will be trying for next year is far more suited for me. It's more of an analyst role.

Re: women and babies

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

And bear in mind that this is the experience of work for the vast majority of women in the world.


I daresay it's the experience of work for most people in the world! One thing that has often frustrated me about my fellow students is that they don't seem to have a goal in life. They don't seem to have ambition. They don't have that 'dream job'. They want a job because they want something that can buy them a reasonable house and a nice car and all the necessities of life.

More people ought to have a vocation.

l that there is so great a pressure on women to have babies, is that because everyone in the world is telling you to have them - or because you are trying not to hear?

That's an interesting point. Hmm. I haven't personally felt this pressure yet, but I suspect this is because my parents believe I'm far too young. When I'm thirty, I'll have to see which is actually the case. :) Then again, I've told people since I was about ten that I never wanted children. It might actually sink in by the time I'm thirty so maybe nobody will actually say anything!

Re: women and babies

[fpb.livejournal.com]

More people ought to have a vocation

Heck no. Not everyone can be a doctor, a priest, a teacher, a scholar, or even a policeman or a soldier. Society lives and thrives on the work of people who are just trying to pay the bills. And ultimately, it is not even necessarily the case that a vocation will make you happier or better than anyone else.

Re: Patronizing

[privatemaladict.livejournal.com]

Like I said, it's not that it can't be done - it's just not the best time to do it, that's all. Most sixteen-year-old really haven't done enough living yet.

When did you make the decision to be a doctor?

When I was about 20. Even then it was up in the air until I actually got in. And being a doctor, unlike having a child, is a decision that can still be undone. I could drop out tomorrow and pusue my science career, or do something else entirely. You can't drop out of raising a child.

Re: women and babies

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

Gah, I think I'm a bit tired. I think I meant that everybody should have some sort of life goal. Whether this be a job, or to make babies, or whatever. However, there'll always be directionless people out there.

[privatemaladict.livejournal.com]

I'm 24. I hope I will manage to have a child by the time I'm 30. Yes, biologically it's better to do it... pretty much at the age I am now. But clearly that's not an option for me.

And mother nature isn't exactly having the first say these days. 100 years ago, it was typical for a girl to get her first menstrual period at the age of 16 or 17. Of course many became pregnant earlier than that, but a lot weren't actually fertile until they were 18 or so. Nowadays, mainly for nutritional reasons, the average age for a first menstrual period is 12. I got mine when I was 10, meaning I was theoretically fertile around age 11. Even if your mother had you at 16 and did a great job raising you, you can't possibly argue that I would've made a good mother at 11. Just because something is biologically possible, doesn't mean it's a good idea.

And I made some terrible decisions in my teenage years. If I'd got it into my head to have a baby when I was 16, its dad would've been a drug-addicted Year 11 dropout who thought he was the next Marylin Manson. And I was one of the more stable girls among my friends.

Re: women and babies

[elskuligr.livejournal.com]

yeah, there is pressure, though more for some people than others depending how broad-minded your family and social environment is.
I think in general there is pressure for people to marry and have children, but the pressure is slightly different and stronger for women, because women are expected to want children more than anything else almost, and to devote themselves to their education.
In my experience, if you say you don't like babies, people look at you like you're not a real woman somehow, which I think is weird. Similarly, if you say you'd like to keep a job when you have babies, people make snide remarks like you're not a good mother, not the real thing, or selfish, which they wouldn't say about men. And this I think is totally unjustified because often women who have other interests in life than their children are less likely to put a lot of pressure on their kids and more likely to encourage their kids' socialisation for example by taking them to kindergarten.
It's not too bad in France, but it's really bad in Germany in that respect: there if you're a working mother, you're a bad mother for a lot of people.

I definitely second your remark about having an unambitious / uninteresting job being the reality of life for most people, not just for women.
But even a job which is not a dream job is important: it means a social circle of colleagues, a role in society that goes beyond the family circle and quite importantly financial independence. Who doesn't recall the joy of, for the first time, buying something with your own money, that you earned yourself rather than with your parents' allowance, without needing to justify your decision to anybody, no matter how useless or unreasonable that purchase might be? It may seem trivial, but I think that's important for most people, including women.

I also agree that having a goal in life is a good thing: it doesn't have to be very definite, but it's important to have some desires, a curiosity, a will to do better, etc because that makes you more alive I think.
Similarly, and there I admit this is more questionable, I think it's important for people to have a job. It's ok to take a break when your kids are little. It's ok to have a job which is not very ambitious, but I think people should all take part actively in society. If it's not a paid job, then at least you should be part of an association or be active in politics or something but you know, you should care for things outside your own house.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

And maybe you would have got out of that nonsense. Parenthood is a great knocker-out of nonsense. I know one person who got rid of a drinking habit by her own unaided effort because she felt she was not being fair to her little child.

Re: Patronizing

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I never had the impression that you were anything but single-minded in your career. I also had the impression that it would have broken your heart if you had not made it through the course.

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

Your last paragraph made me laugh. My bad.

[privatemaladict.livejournal.com]

We're all sharing personal opinions here. You're no less guilty of generalizing based on personal experience than curia_regis. Your own mother had you at a young age, so naturally you're defending these young mothers and their ability to make a responsible decisions. I'm drawing on what I remember of high school, and what I've seen of teenage girls since then to suggest that a high school girl isn't the best candidate for motherhood. And curia_regis is telling you that in her experience, plenty of non-screwed-up women aren't very interested in having children - something I also agree with. None of us are drawing on statistics or hard data here. We're just talking.

Re: women and babies

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

I think in general there is pressure for people to marry and have children, but the pressure is slightly different and stronger for women, because women are expected to want children more than anything else almost, and to devote themselves to their education.

Unfortunately yes.

I'm all for parents devoting themselves to their children's education though. I've read studies on how children do better if they are looked after full-time by a parent for their formative years. But I don't think this job should automatically fall back on the woman. What if she's has a better job?

Imo, having children is a huge decision and people should be ready to make sacrifices. But they should be sensible sacrifices that are logical.

It's not too bad in France, but it's really bad in Germany in that respect: there if you're a working mother, you're a bad mother for a lot of people.

Eeek. That sounds awful! My mother basically went back to work a month or so after she had me. Then again, we were in China at the time, so she just left me with my grandparents as goes the custom.

If it's not a paid job, then at least you should be part of an association or be active in politics or something but you know, you should care for things outside your own house.

I agree completely. Only then can you actually care about the world as a whole (the 'bigger picture' as it may). I mean, we might not be able to affect the world as a whole, but it's good to try! And most women can damn well contribute more than our wombs.

[privatemaladict.livejournal.com]

Maybe I would have. But that doesn't change the fact that I'm much better equipped to have a child now than I was then - and I hope to be even better equipped (e.g. with a stable partner and an income) before I undertake the great challenge that is parenthood.

[curia-regis.livejournal.com]

I think I did try to draw on statistics somewhere up there, but I haven't really researched the area so it probably doesn't have a huge amount of validity.

This is always a really interesting topic to talk about. :)

Re: Patronizing

[privatemaladict.livejournal.com]

No. Losing Mike broke my heart. I don't think a career change could ever compare to the pain of losing somebody you love.

Re: women and babies

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's nice to be able to pay for something with money that is your own rather than your parents'. But frankly, what is important at 16 does not quite have the same glow of triumph at 46. Life should be about more than being financially independent. And if you have no place besides work to find friends and a social life, I have to wonder about how impoverished a life you lead. Do you have no church, reading interests, women's groups or clubs or institutes, political parties, associations, charities, voluntary groups, evening classes, etc., in your area? Is "wage slavery" really your main way to develop a social life? The very idea scares me half to death.

Re: Patronizing

[privatemaladict.livejournal.com]

Ahh, but you see, you've known me since I was about 20 - right around the time I decided to attempt to get into medicine. And I must admit, that while it's not exactly true to say that I drifted into it, I certainly didn't have my heart completely set on it. At the time, I felt that the path I was on didn't really suit me, and I thought medicine might be a better choice. I decided to sit the necessary exams and see what happened. I didn't expect to get in straight away, and thought I'd do honours and have another year to think it through.

As time went by, I became more and more excited about the prospect of doing medicine - and contrary to my expectations, I got in straight away. The life-changing part was comitting myself to another 4 years of uni without a break. In retrospect, I should've taken a year off between my degrees, and not done honours, but worked and then travelled. The decision not to do that was a poor one, and sadly, only experience could've taught me that.

I'm glad my life hasn't been shaped by decisions I made at the age of 16.

Re: women and babies

[fpb.livejournal.com]

The question should rather be: what if she is better at her job? What if society loses more if she quits than if her husband does? Even so, I think that, in spite of your and elskuligr's views, most women simply do feel closer to what they have borne in their womb, than even their husbands do. To sacrifice something for their children comes natural for them; just watch who it is, at dinner, who takes the bad part of the chicken, and lets the child have the thigh or the breast. This instinctive fact often drives the choices of wife and husband.

And why do you refer to "your wombs" as if it was something second-rate? Whatever else anyone can contribute to society, there is only one thing that can give it life. It ought to be a token of special honour; whereas you speak of it as if it was less important and significant than the choice to be swindled by Politician A instead of being defrauded by Politician B.

[privatemaladict.livejournal.com]

It's okay, it really is funny in retrospect. But imagine if I really had done something I couldn't undo at that age - imagine if my life now was shaped by my decisions then. In some ways it is, of course - the decision not to have sex with that boy, for instance. But seriously - I did so many stupid things. I had such a warped view of the world. How could I not? I'd never seen any of the world beyond my home and my school. I didn't even have literature as a source of knowledge, since all I read at that age was fantasy.

Re: Patronizing

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I know about that. But you are using the one and fresh grief not to answer about the other and merely hypothetical one. As it happens, you have honourably sailed through all the exams and jumped through all the hoops; but I do remember your intense nervousness before each exam, your fear that you might bollix up your career. That is no less a serious matter because love is more serious. Would I not have given up everything up, and gladly, for Debbie? Or even just so that she should not actually hate me? But believe me when I say that what little I have been able to do in history dominates my life nevertheless.