«
»

The Case Against Motherhood

03.21.09 | motherhood | 37 Comments

In many religious and socioeconomic circles, purposeful motherhood has emerged as a holy calling, a vocation of supposed significance to the well-being of our children, the structure of society, and the future of civilization. But the benefits of purposeful motherhood aren’t well-documented in the literature. And motherhood itself is perhaps a selfish luxury whose perpetuation will lay waste our resources, pollute the environment, devastate our planet, and cruelly prolong the human condition.

Worst of all, motherhood condemns women to an endless existence as . . . women.

Several months ago Dick asked me if I hate being a mother so much, and I have considered it often since then, using that episode as a litmus test for new friends. If they empathize, we will get along, and if they confess that they are “natural” mothers who delight in all things nurturing and domestic and bucolic, we probably won’t.

Motherhood is stifling and restrictive. You have to keep your house clean, because there are magazines with beautiful pictures of well-kept houses. You have to read the same (gentle) discipline books and belong to the same groups and encourage the same activities that all the other mothers do. You have to craft and grow organic vegetables and scrapbook and wait to shower until everyone else’s needs are met in full.

You can’t shape and change motherhood to fit you and your likes, wants, needs, and desires, because there is only one way to mother, and that’s the way that is in vogue right now, with a very narrow segment of the population, of the United States, in the 21st century.

If you want to be a good mother, and for a post-feminist woman, Madonna-like motherhood is imperative: you must live up to Angelina Jolie, a perfect paragon of effortless, elegant parenthood, only dismissing that past-history nonsense about her brother and the blood, and poor Jennifer Aniston and the whole Billy Bob thing.

Oh, I once threw myself whole-heartedly into the motherhood nirvana. I grew my babies under my heart, birthed them, nursed them, loved them, but then I remembered all the other things I should be doing. All the things my children were forcing me to deny myself. My husband walked out the door each morning to work, and I raged that this was my life.

Then one day I read in Freakonomics that the legalization of abortion was significantly correlated with a drop in crime. I researched further and realized that our earth is irrevocably endangered by the hordes of children we’re bringing into it. My orthopedic surgeon told me that pregnancy hormones aggravate my shoulder’s connective tissue problems.

In short: Motherhood is clearly wrong for everyone. Anyone who would contemplate (or worse, promote or support) motherhood is an embarrassment to humankind, a betrayer of the ideals of freedom and liberty, and a disgrace to feminists everywhere.

Because motherhood is a biological shackle. Many women (myself included) have children because our hormones whisper (like clashing cymbals) that a warm, soft bundle of humanity to snuggle is the most desirable of all things on earth. A woman who listens to her body and marries her intellect to her instinct and emotion is an abomination. Intellect (however fallible) alone should rule.

Motherhood precludes any meaningful work on the part of the mother. Instead of striving towards the greater good of all humankind in an office with desks and computers and conference calls and Very Important People, the woman who is ensnared by motherhood might choose to be that most extreme and shameful of all things — a woman who stays home with her children.

Even if she does return to work full-time, part of her attention and caring and energy will always be reserved for those parasitic weaklings at home who sap her drive and meddle with her priorities.

But the stay-at-home mother is the worst. Instead of leading or defending or promoting the free world, she is selfishly ensconsed in her diaper-lined harem, with no thought for anything beyond her small sphere. What cares she for the economy or the Middle East or great books? Clearly none of these things will ever affect her or the children in her care, so they couldn’t be of less interest.

And what of her barren day-to-day life? She earns no paycheck, so she has no concept of independence or self-reliance or the confidence borne of hard work. No staid accountant can sit behind a desk and finger her W-2 form at tax time, so the labor she engages in is worthless, ephemeral, and totally without meaning or significance.

She has no opportunity for growth or sacrifice or any need to confront her own flaws and shortcomings. While men and women serve our country in the armed forces, the stay-at-home mother merely teaches Please and Thank You, marginal bits of manners that will never shape a character or have any practical application in the Real World.

Unlike the lucky architect or the plucky project manager, there is no scope for exploration or delight in seeing a project come to fruition.

And there’s no humor or insight to be had. People under the age of five say the dullest, most unimaginative things. Why, a three year old who’s not in full-time daycare has not yet been taught to sit still and color in the lines and respond as expected. Is it any wonder that the poor woman trapped at home turns to crystal meth and daytime soaps when the vague, staring, piglet-like creatures around her endlessly root for the nourishment she provides and drain her of all potential?

Still, I continue to mother. Continue, even, to stay at home. Despite the lack of evidence establishing any hint of validation, I am a stay-at-home mother. Naturally I long for the day when I can ship them all to boarding school or hire two or three nannies, but in the meantime, I suffer in silence, knowing that the best years of my life are slipping through my fingers like sands through an hourglass.

Because, perhaps, this is my last opportunity to hold them to my heart, and even though I hate almost every aspect of it, I may miss it when they’re gone.

—-

This post inspired by Hanna Rosin’s The Case Against Breast-Feeding and almost everything Judith Warner has ever written.

totally unrelated, but fun to read

37 Comments

have your say

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. Subscribe to these comments.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam. By the way, if you post a comment but it doesn't appear immediately on the site, let me know. My spam filter is a little sensitive and I may not even see it.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

:

:


«
»