Going Childless

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Krista - posted on 09/10/2010

12,562

16

842

Actually, Mary, you'd be surprised:



Canadian federal marginal tax rates of taxable income

2010 (est.)

$0 – $10,382 0%

$10,383 - $40,970 15%

$40,971 - $81,941 22%

$81,942 - $127,021 26%

over $127,021 29%



In the U.S.



10% $0 – $8,375

15% $8,376 – $34,000

25% $34,001 – $82,400

28% $82,401 – $171,850

33% $171,851 – $373,650

35% $373,651+





Obviously, there will be variances from province to province and from state to state when you factor in stuff like sales taxes and whatnot. But just comparing apples to apples, with regards to federal income tax, the U.S. tax rates are actually higher than ours. Mind you, a lot less of our tax revenue goes towards military spending, which is probably why we can afford to put it towards social programming like maternity leave.



The way it works with ours is that you get 15 weeks of maternity benefits, and are then allowed to claim parental benefits (which is paid by our Employment Insurance system, which we all pay into separately from our income taxes) for an additional 37 weeks, for a total of one year. Either parent can take the parental benefits -- so if I had wanted to go back to work after 30 weeks, my husband could have taken the additional 22 weeks and stayed home with Sam. And normally, when someone goes on mat leave for a year, her employer will hire someone to cover that position for a year-long term. This keeps her coworkers from being unduly burdened, and also provides someone else with some valuable work experience. It works out really well, actually.



And frankly, 12 weeks sounds like a pittance -- you'd really just be starting to get your feet under you and would be getting into a good rhythm and routine with your baby, and bang -- back to work, lady! And I think that is what Carol was getting at: it's not fair to ask women without kids to pick up the slack. But if employers/the government had more family-friendly policies (flexible hours, work-sharing, better mat leave), it would actually benefit all of society as a whole.

Mary - posted on 09/10/2010

3,348

31

119

I completely agree with Krista E. I found nothing even remotely offensive in this article. As someone who was childless until the age of 38 (not by choice) I actually AGREED with a lot of what she was saying.

Many, many women do feel that motherhood entitles them to a certain amount of concessions or considerations from society just because of their CHOICE to procreate. We've had countless threads on CoM about such things as Stork parking spots, maternity leave, reduced work loads/altered work assignments during pregnancy that actually support her theory that ".... parenthood does not make one selfless. It tends to make people prioritize their children over themselves, yes, but it also gives them a sense of entitlement that can lead to some profoundly uncivilized behavior .....".

I'm sorry, because I know that many of you are going to take offense to this, but the bottom line is, she is right. Women often do expect different/special treatment from others in some situations just because they are either pregnant or are mothers. I guess because I was childless for longer than many of you, I was the victim of this mindset more often...I know what it's like to be expected to give a little more, or work a little harder to make things "easier" for someone soley because she had chosen to get pregnant, or had small kids at home.

A perfect example of this jobs that need to be done 24/7, 365 days a year. As a nurse, a downside to my job is that I have to work weekends and holidays. I knew this going in...it's not exactly a secret that hospitals don't close just because it is CHrsitmas or Halloween and everyone wants to be home with their families. From the age of 21, when I first became a nurse, and for the 16 years until my daughter was born, I was constantly being berated and guilted by coworkers to work many of the more family-centered holidays because some of them did not want to be apart from their children on these special days. I didn't mind being asked to switch, but I did resent that if I declined, some women would go on and on about how it was so mauch harder for them to work Christmas Eve because they had small kids.

In the beginning, I always did it, because - hey - it would mean I got New Years's Eve off, and I wanted to go out drinking. But after a few years, not only did I start to miss Christmas, but MY family missed me. I might not have been a mother, but I was someone's child...and my mom wanted her "baby" at home on Christmas just as much as my co-worker wanted to be home with her babies. My perspective shifted, and I realized that the holidays are not necessarily more important or meaningful just because someone is a parent. I didn't owe it to my co-workers to work every Xmas, Halloween or Easter simply because they had kids and I did not....but I work with a lot of women who do think that having a child entitled them to that concession from me.

Krista - posted on 09/09/2010

12,562

16

842

I don't find her article offensive, actually.

I can understand why Vernon is frustrated -- I really can. It's got to be a MAJOR piss-off to know that you don't want children, and to have all these assholes condescendingly say to you, "Oh, you'll change your mind" or "Oh, you just haven't met the right person" or "Oh, wait and see when you hit 35!" I find it offensive as hell, because it presumes that oh, that silly woman doesn't know her own mind. I have friends who do not want kids, and they hear that kind of bullshit all the time, and I don't blame them for being annoyed.

And yes, women DO get a lot of pressure to have kids, and are looked upon as something unnatural if they just don't want to be a mother. Men don't really get this same pressure.

I don't really see in the article where she's attacking moms. I see it more as an attack on the societal expectation that all women want to be mothers.

Johnny - posted on 09/08/2010

8,686

26

318

I am completely in support of women who choose not to become mothers. Or men who choose not to become fathers, for that matter. Why take on something as important as raising a child if you don't really want to. It makes no sense. My niece (who is nearly 30) is clear on her absolutely commitment never to be a mother. I frequently find myself having to back up her choice with judgmental family and friends and I really don't get their perspective at all. Why is it such a big deal if she doesn't want kids. It is really just as normal as wanting them. Argh!

However, in her case she has nothing against kids, or parents, or paying taxes for schools. She gets that those of us with kids are producing the future tax payers that will be supporting her when she's old and on CPP and needing more healthcare.

What gets me irritated, is women like the author of this article (I actually find more childless men to have this irritating perspective) that think that they shouldn't "have to pay" for other people's kids. I find this all the time in comment sections from online news stories about things like education & child protection. That pisses me off. My kids will be paying taxes for your nursing home care you miserly twit, be nice to them.

But I have no doubts or questions or criticisms of people choosing not to have kids. Don't want them? Great, enjoy yourself. If we hadn't been able to conceive, we would not have adopted or done IVF, we would have just enjoyed the free-wheeling childless lifestyle. I don't regret having my daughter for one moment, but that would have been a happy and satisfying life too.

Lindsay - posted on 09/08/2010

3,532

26

266

I agree...I didn't read it that she had any nastiness to moms, more so to anyone who felt they should try to judge her for not wanting to be a mother. As far as the stroller comment, I find it valid. There are many mothers out there that believe that because they are mothers they are owed something or the world should cater to them. We see it everywhere from not budging on a sidewalk to bitching about the person alone that took the closer parking spot. Being a mother does not give anyone an excuse for superiority but it seems that many people forget that.

This conversation has been closed to further comments

70 Comments

View replies by

Jess - posted on 09/12/2010

1,806

3

96

Not everyone is destined to be a mother.This women, clearly isn't the mothering type and I think she if she did go forth and multiple she would be miserable, her child would ultimately be the one to pay the price. Good for her to be strong enough to publicly say "No thanks", but I'm a little sad for her that she feels she is "leaving her friends behind" because her career is so much better off being childless. Life isn't all about work ! My daughter makes me happier than any career ever could ! She is missing out, but you can't miss something you have never wanted.

Mary - posted on 09/11/2010

3,348

31

119

Carol, I think you misinterpreted my last post...it was merely a response and clarification to Krista about my personal situation...and really nothing to do with my views about Canada's EI program. Since I knew nothing about it prior to this thread, I have very little opinion of it. It sounds lovely...sort of like the country-wide, colllective equivalent to my 'company' disability plan (albeit a bit longer). I was really trying to clarify that I did initially have to return to work fulltime not because of a lack of government benefits, but because of my husband's job loss. I'm pretty sure that even if I had access to a program similar to yours, I still would have been back at work at the same time, because anything less than my full salary would not have paid our bills while he was out of work, or underemployed as he was for almost a year (and with out the cushion of a hefty personal savings account, it was still rather tight for a while).

Johnny - posted on 09/11/2010

8,686

26

318

Just one thing in regards to the EI mat leave 'entitlement'. Most women have been working all their adult lives and contributing to their EI account. EI is available to anyone who has a long-term illness disability that prevents them from working or to people who have been laid off from their job (not fired). I have been contributing to EI since I started my first job at 14. I have always worked. Part-time during school and full-time any other time. I have contributed on each and every pay check. So it is not as if mothers are expecting other people to foot our bill. We have contributed to the pot from which we are receiving. You make it sound as though we decide to have a baby and expect others to foot the bill, which is simply not the case. I don't get upset when someone chooses to work as a fisherman and gets EI payments during the off-season. It's really the same thing. We all pay in and many people will need it at some point. Men and women, those with children and those without.

Mary - posted on 09/10/2010

3,348

31

119

Krista, I realize that I was fortunate in a lot of ways. I actually had to go back full time the first 10 months (3 12 hour nights, plus some on-call shifts) because John was laid off 3 weeks before I delivered. We were okay, because I was a frugal, build-up-my-savings-account girl for all of my professional life. He got another job after she was born, but wasn't making enough for me to cut my hours until about 9 months ago. We are ALL happier that I am now part time.



The way we got away with not doing day care was with some help from my parents watching her, but I also went without much sleep as well. Instead of staying up all night at work, and then sleeping until, say 2pm, like I did pre-baby, I would get maybe 2- 4 hours of sleep (interrupted while I was still nursing) and then go and get her from my parents, and hopefully nap when she did. It wasn't easy, but for us, it was worthwhile, and the right thing to do.



I do often wish that life was easier for all of us, but I guess I was raised to accept that some things in life are hard, and you need to do what's necessary for you and your family, and not expect others to necessarily have to sacrifice for the choices that you make. It's not that I either refuse or don't appreciate help...I just don't feel I'm more entitled to it simply because I have a child. That was MY choice, and I'm just not the kind of person who is okay with burdening others to support my choices.

Krista - posted on 09/10/2010

12,562

16

842

And to add: "What Carol said." : )

Something to note as well is that year-long mat leave is relatively new. It was 6 months up until just a few years ago, I believe. When my mom had me, it was 6 weeks.

And there ARE plenty of women who don't take their mat leave. Some of them just want to get back to work, and others can't afford to live off of a reduced income (you don't get paid 100% of your salary when on mat leave).

But damn, it's REALLY nice to have that choice, and to be able to do what I feel works best for my situation and my family.

Krista - posted on 09/10/2010

12,562

16

842

Yeah, I think it's different where you were able to leave Molly with her dad, and only part-time. When I went back to work, it had to be full-time, and it just hit when Keith's work is at its busiest period, so he just didn't feel right asking to take pat leave. I suppose that's why I feel like 12 weeks would have been way too early -- because in my circumstances, it would have meant Sam being in full-time daycare at 3 months old.



With regards to covering a mat leave, it's understood up-front that the job is only a year-long term. In larger companies, they can sometimes find an alternate position for that individual once the mother gets back from her mat leave. In other cases, yes, that person is out of a job. But at least they've a) gained some work experience that could lead to them finding a good job elsewhere, and b) they've worked enough hours to qualify to go on EI for another year, if needs be.



And yes, Laura's right -- when you factor in the sales tax, we do wind up paying more. I consider year-long mat leave and comprehensive health care to be worth it, however. I think most Canadians feel similarly, although some don't. And it certainly doesn't stop us from grumbling about taxes, but hey -- that's our right as citizens! LOL!

Johnny - posted on 09/10/2010

8,686

26

318

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Since I started at my company, every single person that has been hired for a mat leave position (which is always noted in the job listings - that it is a non-permanent mat-leave replacement position) has ended up being hired full-time. That is obviously not always the case, but when you are applying for a mat leave position, you already know there is no guarantee of permanent work. But in my company, it has worked out that between attrition & growth there has always been room for those workers to continue with the company. The woman who took my position when I was on mat still has it, and I got a new position. And I got into my position originally when the woman who had it went on mat leave. She did not return, but even if she had, I would not have lost my job, although I may have ended up in another position. My employer actually likes mat leave because it allows him to hire new workers who get comprehensive training by the person currently in that position (it is a smaller company, so most jobs are task specific) instead of trying to train a new person without the guidance of the person in that position. It leads to a quicker learning curve.

As well, mat leave is covered through our EI system, not through taxes. We pay into EI all of our working lives, and that is how it covers maternity leave. Our EI system is self-sustaining now (it wasn't always the case) and tax dollars are not used to supplement it. In fact, there has been controversy about EI excesses being used to supplement external programs. So our tax rate is not impacted by the program.

The higher tax rates cover our medial care. However, if you compare a Canadian and an American making $50,000/year, Canadians pay in taxes what Americans pay in taxes + insurance premiums & co-pays.

I honestly believe that 12 weeks maximum off is completely insufficient. It's just dandy if you want to go back to work and your situation allows for good child care options or for the child to stay with family, but for very many people it is a heavy burden on the family.

Katherine - posted on 09/10/2010

65,420

232

4956

@ Mary, when I went on mat leave they flled my position. How could they do it? Under FMLA they had under 50 employees supposedly. I never fought it.
You guys are GREAT. When I worked in an AFC home people were ALWAYS getting off early because of their kids. Or they would have to leave and I would have to work a double (this was pre-kids for me). I always used to say, "I should start popping out some kids so that I can leave early and slack off." It happened at least once a week. I understood if the kids were sck, but seriously it was something every week and I was basically the only one without kids.
So thank you for NOT being those moms!

Mary - posted on 09/10/2010

3,348

31

119

13% sales tax??? Holy Fuck!



I don't know, Krista...I stayed home 14 weeks after Molly was born, and quite frankly, I was ready to go back. It was hard to leave her, but once I got there, it was the best thing in the world for me. Of course, it was made easier by the fact that I was leaving her at home, in her crib, with her father, and I was only doing that 3 nights a week. But god, it was good to get back amongst my friends, and feel competent at what I was doing. I didn't realize how much I missed the social aspect of my job. I think if I had stayed home any longer, and I would have driven my husband insane!



I have to be honest, I wouldn't have wanted to stay home for year. I wouldn't have worked enough hours to get my nursing license renewed, and would have needed to fork out a thousand bucks for a refresher course, not to mention a re-orientation at work...clinically, and policy-wise, a lot changes in a year...I couldn't have just walked back into my job and been fully competent without it.



I'm curious as to how that does work for an employer if someone takes a year off, and they re-hire to cover the work load. What happens when you return? Is that unfortunate soul than out of a job?

Isobel - posted on 09/10/2010

9,849

0

282

in Ontario though, we pay 13% harmonized tax on ALL goods and services...and there's a 17 or 18% tax on booze, our gas is taxed through the roof, so yeah, she's right we do pay more taxes.

anyhoodle.

I had to go back to work after 8 days because I had my kids too close together...because I hadn't worked for 6 months before his birth, I didn't qualify for maternity leave...boooooo :(...but at least their dad qualified so he stayed home (he mostly played video games and let them CIO, wouldn't it be nice if they let us trade?)

Mary - posted on 09/10/2010

3,348

31

119

Carol, I have to admit, I'm a bit perplexed about your comments related to the "maternity leave" policy in the US. While most companies no longer have a specific leave for maternity, ALL companies are required, by federal government, to grant 12 weeks of FMLA (Family/Medical Leave of Absence). What that means is that your employer must hold your job for 12 weeks. For most of us, the first 6-8 weeks is paid as disability, the rest is unpaid. In my case, I could have carried additional disability insurance that would have covered those remaining 6 weeks. I understand that Canada has a more generous, government funded policy, but then again, I'm guessing you pay a higher percentage of your income towards taxes than I do. No one is forced to "go back to work in a couple of days after giving birth".
Perhaps one of the biggest differences is that here in the US, there isn't a distinct paid absence for childbirth...that leave is equally available to people caring for a terminally ill family member (parent/child/spouse) as well as for say, a broken leg. It can also be used intermittently; when I was undergoing IVF, and had to make frequent visits for cycle-specific labs and ultrasounds, I could utilize when I needed to be 2 hours late for work, or needed a whole day for an invasive procedure. This way, my job was protected, and my absences we "excused". It is equally available to ALL citizens who have a legitimate need. (BTW, my disability insurance covered those absences as well).

Tah - posted on 09/10/2010

7,412

22

357

@Emma..you should have said no...let's practice..."Emma..please...we have noone to come in...can you pleasseeeeeeee come in?"..."Nope...cause i think i just heard santa and i have been a really good girl...better call the on-call"...

Stifler's - posted on 09/10/2010

15,141

154

597

We finally got paid maternity leave in Australia for everyone. Do you baby bonuses in America??

Johnny - posted on 09/10/2010

8,686

26

318

Should people without kids pick up the slack because someone is using their kids as reason not to fulfill their job duties? No. But KIDS are entitled to have their parents around and frankly it saddens me that more emphasis is not put on supporting families in American society. The lack of maternity leave and such is shocking. I fail to see how a society as a whole (not just parents) is harmed by providing good care to children. There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that it is good for all to have healthy, happy families. It seems that people who can afford to have options that allow them to look after their children are awfully cavalier in suggesting that parents who are not so fortunate should just go right back to work a couple days after birthing. That's what I hear when I read this lack of support for maternity leave and such. I guess that's the socialist in me talking.

And just to clarify, so no one gets upset again, I am not attacking the author or her choice not to have children but the social policy issues that are being discusses as a result of the article.

Stifler's - posted on 09/10/2010

15,141

154

597

Ah Mary I did that when I used to look after the oldies, I worked Christmas AND New Years 3 years in a row because people with kids who thought they were entitled to Christmas with the kids would call in sick and they'd call me at 4AM begging me to go in. What about if I wanted to spend Christmas with MY family or go out with friends on NYE??!!! Apparently that doesn't count.

Dana - posted on 09/10/2010

11,264

35

489

I should say that part of it is the employer's fault for allowing mothers to get special treatment.

Tah - posted on 09/10/2010

7,412

22

357

I actually dont think there is anything wrong with what she says..if she doesn't want to have children then that is her right. I will say that i don't and never have felt i was entitled to something more so than anyone else just because im a mother. Also maternity leave is 6-12 weeks, does she complain when someone takes a 2-3 week vacation or has to go out on fmla. I know it's hard for me to pick up extra patients when someone is out no matter what the reason. If she wants to not have children, more power to her but she should accept that because so many other people do, so that we can have a future and all, that concessions are made for them. like isn't it easier to for you to move over since you are only carrying a purse and the stampede of bugaboo pushing moms have more to move. I mean that's just common courtesy, i move for elderly, people with strollers, people with alot of shoppinng bags for goodness sake.
I have also never guilted anyone into working for me, i as a nurse have worked every holiday, at one time or another, holiday pay is great, and if i had to be in at 7am, we opened some gifts early before i left and the rest later. if it was an overnight shift then did it when i got home. People will try to guilt you over anything, not just because they have kids. It's my b-day, you can't work for me. I wanted to go out of town..to be honest i have never picked up a holiday for anyone because they have kids, it's always been for other reasons and if i have said no, i let them go on the guilt trip alone...

Dana - posted on 09/10/2010

11,264

35

489

Oy, I totally get your point, Mary. Before Ethan I was the person, without any kids, who was expected to pick up the slack at work from women who had kids. They could always fall back on the excuse that they couldn't be called into work or work certain days because they had this or that going on with the kids. And I understand that but, it's really not fair to expect women without kids to pick up YOUR slack.

Jenni - posted on 09/10/2010

5,928

34

373

Don't have much to add... I didn't find her article offensive at all. She's just explaining why she has chosen to go childless and she's happy with her decision. Nothing wrong with that. She isn't attacking mothers who choose to have children. On the contrary, i think she was respectful in explaining her reasons to go childless.

Mary - posted on 09/10/2010

3,348

31

119

Oh - and in case anyone was wondering....Last year, when my daughter was one, I DID work 7p-7a on Christmas Eve. It was hard, and I was sad, but it was my turn (I was on maternity leave for the entire holiday season the year before!). I did ask a couple of people to switch with me, but when they declined, I graciously said "That's okay, I understand, nobody wants to work that night."....and left it at that. I did not try to guilt them into doing it for me because it was Molly's first real Christmas. It was just as much a holiday for them as it was me, regardless of their parental status.

[deleted account]

Its sad because many who feel the never want kids ever like that lady,are probably the ones who would make fantastic moms..but then to many women today are wanting children and having them, some have made horrible mothers.Many who felt like the never liked kids or wanted them really came into there own once the gave birth.Its every body's choice at the end of the day, she has the right to her opinion but with everything you have to put your opinion across in a good respectful way.As to not offend woman who are mothers,who want to be and who will one day be.Again as i said in my last comment i personally didnt take any offence to what she said or feel it was in anyway offence in how she gave her opinion.

[deleted account]

If the woman doesn't want children because of these reasons then thats up to her. Some of her opinions might be misguided, but if that's the way she feels about it then I'm glad she doesn't have kids. I'm not offended.

Katherine - posted on 09/09/2010

65,420

232

4956

Oh she is definitely not mother material. Th thing is, is that she is trying to defend her point that no one should tell her what to do. What she is inadverdently doing is attacking moms, for attacking her.

Lyndsay - posted on 09/09/2010

2,008

19

175

I'd rather somebody who is adamantly against having kids not have any, than the alternative of somebody who doesn't want kids having an "accident" and ending up with a resented and neglected child. But thats just me.

Stifler's - posted on 09/09/2010

15,141

154

597

i think it's funny abut the organic baby food and four figure strollers and work. one of my friends has a kid and went back to work recently at woolworths and i'm pretty sure her work and everyone else is getting sick of hearing about how they should give her all the hours she wants because she has a kid and needs to be home at a certain time and blah blah blah and everyone else should accept whatever they are given. also every time you go on facebook there are single people whingeing about work and people with kids come on and disregard the fact that anyone besides people with kids has problems and tells them to get over it and then craps on about how their little man is sick or someone discriminated against them. it's really pathetic and i can understand why people hate people with kids. endrant.

[deleted account]

I can definitely see how Vernon feels the way she does and I feel for her! I did NOT take ANY offense to the comments and claims she makes in her article. I did NOT think she was attacking mothers as a whole. I have also ran in to MANY of the people she refers and would have been one of those "oh, just wait" ppl before I myself had kids! Funny that I would have a change of heart AFTER having my own children...how we grow ;)

[deleted account]

I couldn't care less..if you dont want kids thats cool..i wouldnt have known true love or what life truly was all about if i didnt have kids.Each to there own.I dont take offence to any of it..quite happy in my role as mom to the two best girls in Ireland lol.I love being a mom and respect others who dont want to be mothers.I can understand fully why some women dont want to be mothers too.:-)you have woman who by having a child there whole world just falls perfectly into place and many woman dont have to have children for that to happen,there very happy and fulfilled in there life as childless women. ♥

Fair play to her for knowing what she wants and being able to stand up for her self and not back down on what she wants for herself ,its her life,its her feelings and her personal view on it.

Rosie - posted on 09/09/2010

8,657

30

315

i agree with her except her unwillingness to understand that women DO procreate in this world, and yes time off will always be an outcome of that. i don't understand bitching about that, without someone taking time off-she wouldn't of existed. or you would hear someone else bitching about how mothers aren't allowed in the workforce-which wouldn't be right either.

my best friend doesn't want to be a mother, i don't get it, and have over the years tried to convince her otherwise. i mean she's soooo wonderful with my boys, she would make an excellent mother. it took me about a year after she had an abortion to realize that she was serious about not having kids. they had tried to get her husband a vasectomy but they wouldn't until he was 25, so they relied on their birth control like they always had. afterwards i was kinda mad at her, i just didn't understand how someone as fabulous as her wouldn't want to be a mother. it finally clicked, and i felt like an ass for pressuring her all these years. i get what this lady is saying, but the attitude of hers needs to be put in check a bit IMO.

Isobel - posted on 09/09/2010

9,849

0

282

I skipped a bunch of posts but it says that she was quoting just how shitty being a mother was in her teenage years...it's entirely possible that women who have been "attacking" her, have indeed being defensive for a reason.

I know two types of women who don't want kids...one type just doesn't and wants to be left alone about it, and the other wants to tell every mother they see exactly how much motherhood sucks and their life is better.

I don't know which came first the chicken or the egg, but it seems to me like it would end up being a never-ending cycle.

Johnny - posted on 09/09/2010

8,686

26

318

I totally agree with you Krista. There are some very exacting societal expectations out there about getting married, having kids, how many kids, etc. It is quite absurd. I remember how the baby questions suddenly hit when I turned 30. It was annoying. And going on for years like that would really lead me to patent some sort of very snappy come back for someone rude enough to ask. Now I'm working on one for people rude enough to suggest that I have to have another child. But god forbid I go past 3, because then they'd wonder if "I don't know what is causing it." The societal norms are still pretty darn narrow. And people do not think before they speak. The pressure on people to reproduce is very strong, and I actually think rather damaging to our planet.

Elisabeth - posted on 09/09/2010

37

0

0

"Ubiquitous mommy blogs host heated debates on the relative merits of organic baby food, four-figure strollers, and the latest inventions of "momtrepreneurs."". Hmmm wonder who that could be...hehe anyway each to their own and if all shes interested in is her own selfish wants then it's probably a good thing that she's not a mother because she would make a fucking shit one.

Jaime - posted on 09/09/2010

4,427

24

196

My best friend is childless and wishes to be so for the rest of her life. When she was 23 she had her tubes tied. Back then, I didn't understand her views and I encouraged her to think about her decision much more, rather than just accepting her choice. Fast forward 7 years and I totally get it! She doesn't speak badly of children, she just doesn't want to have any. She will gladly be the resident babysitter for a mom's-night-out, but she doesn't want to undertake the routine, permanent care of her own offspring.



I found this article to be extremely understanding of women that want to be mothers. The author further analyzed the hyper craze of motherhood that seems to have become a fad in every facet of popular society. Celebrity babies, tabloid moms that are popular just because they are moms, etc. And she makes an awesome point about the fact that the push to achieve this 'fad' has sent some women into a tailspin of fertility treatments ad nauseum and likely an ensuing feeling of defeat or inadequacy if they are unable to produce a viable, biological offspring. I think children are incredible, I think parenthood is amazing and I think motherhood is truly an endearing privilege...but it's not for everyone and I'm okay with that.

Darlena - posted on 09/09/2010

60

4

0

I wrote that blog response. I think it's absurd that childfree people be forced to defend their position all the time, and I can understand exactly where Vernon is coming from. But she's completely off base in attacking women trying to conceive, and what is meant to be a tell-off to one misogynistic man really does, in my opinion end up as an attack on mothers. Mothers who blog, mothers who she's 'left behind', mothers who are famous, mothers who are not.

IMO, attack the right people, lady. I am not your enemy. I'd hold your sign right there with you. You have every right to live your life without justification. But so do I.

http://parentwin.blogspot.com/2010/09/ch...

In case you needed the link. I said it more eloquently there.

Tracey - posted on 09/09/2010

1,094

2

58

If I were in this lady's position I would find it very offensive to be asked to clarify if I couldn't have kids or didn't want them. Why is this anyone's business? Does she deserve sympathy if she has a fertility problem but not if she made her own decision. Would you ask a man in the same position if he couldn't have kids because he was impotent?

Stifler's - posted on 09/08/2010

15,141

154

597

I'm defending childless people. That's their right. Mothers aren't better than people who have children nor should they have more rights as people as some tend to think they do.

Amie - posted on 09/08/2010

6,596

20

408

You were the one who used the words personal attack, so I replied to it. =/



No one's defending all childless people, we were debating this article in particular. Obviously there are differing perceptions on it.

Johnny - posted on 09/08/2010

8,686

26

318

A personal attack on the author? Okay. I think we're taking this a tad seriously. But I apologize if that is how it was perceived. Geez, I had not expected people on Circle of Moms to be so overly defensive of those who choose not to have children and then complain about those that do. It's rather odd. But for those of you who misunderstood, I do apologize.

Amie - posted on 09/08/2010

6,596

20

408

No I didn't think you were (offended) Carol. I did read your first post, which is where I found the rant. It's why my post said people and did not specify any certain person.



On the taxes issue, I can agree we are fortunate for the way our system is set up. But I will disagree it wasn't an attack on her.



"What gets me irritated, is women like the author of this article (I actually find more childless men to have this irritating perspective) that think that they shouldn't "have to pay" for other people's kids."



You may not have meant it to be but that was the end result.

Johnny - posted on 09/08/2010

8,686

26

318

And then read my following posts, Amie. I clearly state that I never have been suggesting that the author said that. I'm just sick of what hearing what I think is a bullshit line from people who refuse to acknowledge that not only do they pay taxes but they also benefit from them. It's as if they are being forced to pay into a system from which they reap no benefits and it couldn't be further from the truth. I dislike paying taxes too, but I feel fortunate to do so, frankly.

I also might add that I'm not offended by her opinion and wishing to blame her for stuff. Like I said, I have absolutely no problem at all with people who don't want kids. I think it is normal, healthy, and probably a damn good thing for the planet. I actually even find some of the same crap about parents irritating as she does. I was just adding my complaint about the minority of childless people who don't understand the basics of how taxation and government funding works. It was NOT a personal attack on her or even on those without kids in general.

Amie - posted on 09/08/2010

6,596

20

408

I think you misunderstood me Carol.

My grandmothers paid for their own nursing home stays. They still paid taxes. They were still paying their way, in your eyes as I've read from your post.

People are still allowed to complain about the amount of taxes they pay and where it goes. I sure do. It does not mean I want a refund. There is a difference.

It's just one more notch that is unfairly pushed upon women like this one (in the article) because people choose to be offended by her opinion.

Unless I missed something too, I didn't read her complaining about paying taxes?

Johnny - posted on 09/08/2010

8,686

26

318

No, your comprehension skills are excellent as ever. I, however, am just going off on a tangent.

Johnny - posted on 09/08/2010

8,686

26

318

You are correct Lindsay, the writer of this article never said that. I was referring to childless people I hear all the time alluding to the fact that they shouldn't have to pay school taxes because they don't have kids, and crap like that.

Lindsay - posted on 09/08/2010

3,532

26

266

Unless I missed it, and if I did please point it out to me, she never said anything about paying school taxes. So if she does end up using medicare later in life, she's supported all of these kids going to school. Just as her taxes went towards them, thiers will also go to her.

Johnny - posted on 09/08/2010

8,686

26

318

Amie, there are a great plenty of things that people need in old age, aside from nursing homes, that is covered by the taxpayer. Right now, their taxes are going to cover the elderly, and our future taxes will be doing the same. If someone decides to opt out of covering someone else, they lose their right to claim future services IMO. Here in Canada, we live in a more socialist state. We do for one another. If someone does not want to pay for my kids to attend public school, as part of their taxes, then why should my kid help pay for their healthcare? What about all those poor saps who had to pay for that selfish prat's schooling when they were a kid? Do they get a tax refund for it?

Lindsay - posted on 09/08/2010

3,532

26

266

The lady that wrote that response has a major stick up her ass!

Amie - posted on 09/08/2010

6,596

20

408

Carol, Why do you assume that these people would need assistance paying for a nursing home in their old age?

They probably save for their retirement just like the rest of us and will not be a burden on the taxpayers of tomorrow.

Amie - posted on 09/08/2010

6,596

20

408

It's still one person's opinion of another person's opinion. It's in how you read it, if people choose to take a negative spin and read it as an attack on all mother's, that's on them.

There's a few of us already who obviously don't agree with that sentiment.

Stifler's - posted on 09/08/2010

15,141

154

597

What she is saying is pretty true. Some women go nuts and have a sense of entitlement when they have children and think they are more of a woman than everyone else who isn't obsessed with all things children. It annoys me greatly. I'm a huge fan of 'STFU, Parents".

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms