SEX: YES !
BREEDING: NO !
CHOOSING NON-PARENTHOOD
By D.M. Dismore AFeminist@aol.com
Anyone who's an "unrepentantly independent individualist" chooses non-parenthood
the same way a skydiver makes a choice to pull the ripcord: enthusiastically,
and without hesitation, debate, or second thoughts !
Of course, in a way, non-parenthood was less something I "decided on"
than a natural, inevitable, and thoroughly healthy expression of who and
what I am as an "Independent." (I avoid judgmental terms like "single"
since they only define what I'm not - married - rather than what I am:
Independent.) "Singleness" can be a temporary, easily changeable status,
and one that's often compatible with parenthood. But "independence" is
a powerful and lifelong core personality characteristic that when recognized,
happily accepted, and encouraged, bestows many advantages. Among them,
a reassuring confidence and freedom about making unconventional, but "right
for me" choices in regard to philosophy, career, or lifestyle in general.
But the one option few "Independents" can realistically consider is the
one that represents the opposite of independence, freedom and autonomy:
parenting !
As right, and natural, as non-parenthood has always felt, learning to
become just as open and proud of my choice as parents are about theirs
was anything but an easy process in an earlier society where even minor
non- conformities could provoke major hostility. Add to this the fact
that parenting truly is a very hard and crucial job, deserving generous
amounts of praise by society, and it's obvious that anyone who says "No!"
to parenthood is going to get a lot more criticism than pats on the back.
While growing up, I don't ever recall anyone saying "if" you have children,
only "when." And there certainly were no role models in the media, or
my family, of adults who made non- traditional choices. (I do remember
an aunt who never married, but this was due to "religious differences"
between her and her partner over how their children would have been raised,
rather than a revolutionary experiment in the kind of non-parental, uncohabitational,
non-possessive relationship that two "independents" might eventually come
up with.)
But after years of assuming that I was the "only person in the world"
who didn't look forward to parenting, I was overwhelmed with support and
role models at age 24, when I tuned into the middle of a Phil Donahue
Show one day. I didn't even know what the subject was at first, but I
knew I'd never seen this kind of hostility on a talk show before. (Jerry
Springer & Geraldo were decades in the future back in 1970).
I discovered that what the attractive, articulate, and very friendly
couples were guilty of was "premeditated non-parenthood," and the audience
of "traditionalists on steroids" saw this as some sort of threat to humanity's
survival, or an attack on their own choice to be parents.
Though no one enjoys seeing people like themselves publicly attacked
or vilified, I wasn't that concerned with the studio audience's views.
But I was delighted to learn that there were others who felt their lives
were quite happy and complete without children ! Apparently I wasn't the
only home viewer applauding them because as a result of fan mail from
the Donahue Show, as well as readers of "The Baby Trap" by Ellen Peck,
the National Organization for Non-Parents was (pardon the expression .....
) " born ! " Though it existed for only a decade, being an active member
of N.O.N. was a fantastic experience, offering living proof that for some
people it's not only possible, but necessary to opt against parenting
in order to have a fulfilling life.
NO EXCUSES, PLEASE !
There's nothing we humans ought to be prouder of than our potential
to be incredibly diverse. That diversity has created a vast and joyous
spectrum of possible lifestyles, and enables people at opposite ends of
that spectrum to be equally happy with their choices. There are lots of
good reasons why someone might make a responsible choice for - or against
- parenthood, and people should be happy to openly and honestly discuss
the reasons for their decision. But one thing non-parents should never
do is "justify" our choice with "excuses," even if some of them are quite
good.
For instance, no one feels more strongly than I that population growth
is arguably the world's greatest problem, and I respect those whose concern
for the future causes them to reluctantly limit their own fertility. But
hypocrisy may be the world's second biggest problem. So as someone who
was a confirmed non-parent long before I learned about the devastating
effects of overpopulation, if I gave the impression that this was a part
of my decision to opt out of the gene pool, I'd not only be lying, but
doing a disservice to my fellow non-parents by implying that we all have
a universal obligation to reproduce which can only be "temporarily excused"
by a present or future demographic crisis.
No one has a personal obligation to become a parent any more than they
must become a teacher, physician, farmer, or any other job that's absolutely
essential to societal survival. Sure, I'll admit that if everyone did
as I did, humanity would be extinct in about a hundred years. But it's
also undeniably true that if everyone lived in a city, and produced no
food, humanity's extinction would be mere months away. Yet no one attacks
"non- farmers" as some sort of threat to survival. Nor have I ever heard
of anyone being told that in addition to contributing to the world through
their profession or volunteer work, they must also devote several decades
to full-time agriculture. Regardless of whether we're dealing with a "population
bomb" or a "birth dearth", decisions about parenting are intensely personal
and individualistic, and a decision against parenthood deserves to be
a bold statement, not an "I'd like to be a parent, but...." apology.
Of course, if I wanted to make excuses, I'd have plenty to choose from.
As a full-time feminist, who loves my nearly triple digit workweek, I
could easily pretend that I was altruistically "giving up parenthood"
in order to "fully dedicate myself to the cause of equality." But although
feminism is a cause that I've been happily and freely committed to for
over a quarter of a century, I could never make a statement like that
with a straight face. If I woke up one day, and found that the world had
somehow rid itself of every trace of sexism, racism, patriarchal religious
extremism, poverty and injustice, I still would have no intention of redirecting
my energy toward parenting. But I'd sure be interested in investigating
such bizarre concepts as a "forty hour week" and "vacations."
Though the psychological rewards of being an activist for any cause
are great, few would choose that path for monetary reasons. So, if I wanted
to go for the gold medal in the Hypocrisy Olympics I could insist that
I was foregoing parenthood (or at least postponing it for many years)
due to the very real and substantial costs involved. But in all the years
I've been figuring out what I'll do with the state lottery jackpot when
I win it, the one and only thing that's never crossed my mind is (you
guessed it !) parenting.
I'm a "no excuses, no apologies" non- parent for the same reason I would
have been an equally proud and outspoken parent had my basic nature been
totally different, and made parenthood a logical, responsible choice.
What's important isn't the specific choice itself, it's taking the decision-making
process seriously. Certainly, there are varying degrees of suitability
to parenthood. The "perfect parent" doesn't exist, and there is plenty
of room for debate about what makes someone a "good" or even "adequate"
parent. But a passionate interest is essential to being successful at
any hard task. If you were about to undergo an operation, I'm sure you'd
prefer a surgeon who loved studying medicine all their life, and not want
one who chose this field because it was "expected" of them as a kind of
"family tradition", and who makes the minimum effort required. So, by
the same principle, there's no question of what makes me unsuited to parenthood
regardless of any other factor. Though I openly admit that the two most
delightful people I've ever known were under the age of three, and it
always makes my day when a baby in a grocery line smiles back at me, I've
never had the slightest inkling that I'd like to be a "full-time parent."
I'm sure I'd also like spending an hour or two driving a well-tuned sports
car down a quiet country road on a warm summer day. But to conclude that
"I love driving" and then sign an 18 year, unbreakable contract to be
a long-haul truck driver would be an obvious mistake.
I know parenting is a fascinating and satisfying experience for a lot
of people, and I've never argued otherwise. But "a lot " isn't "all",
What's a wonderful experience for one person is a potential disaster for
another. I've known people who felt their lives would be unfulfilled and
incomplete without spending 30 years in the military. But I've also known
devout pacifists for whom ANY military service would be life's worst ordeal.
Neither attitude is inherently "right" or "wrong." What IS wrong is when
someone makes a choice based on what they think they're "supposed" to
want. Or, far worse, doesn't really make decisions at all, and just "lets
things happen."
As long as what adults want to do doesn't involve force, deception,
self-destruction, or an unwillingness to take responsibility for their
actions, a well thought out decision on any of life's important choices
ought to be enthusiastically applauded. If you're suited to parenthood,
then be proud of the fact that you either waited until you were prepared
for all its responsibilities before embarking upon the adventure, or did
your best to fulfill your duties as a parent even if you became one by
accident. If you're a non-parent by choice, take pride in having managed
to overcome intense biological and social programming to unthinkingly
reproduce, and in being successful at avoiding reproductive mistakes that
would have made you an unwilling and unhappy parent.
CUTTING THE GORDIAN KNOT
On one of youth's least enjoyable days, I finally figured out three
important things: (a) There could be some sort of connection between sex
and pregnancy; (b) Nature has a sadistic sense of humor; and (c) I'd have
an unsolvable dilemma to deal with one day if what I looked forward to
most (being an ex-virgin !) couldn't be totally separated from what I
wanted to avoid most (parenthood !).
After years of worrying about how I and the T.C.P. (Truly Compatible
Partner) I hoped to meet one day would deal with our future dilemma, I
was delighted to find a "loophole" in the laws of nature while volunteering
at the local office of Zero Population Growth. One of our phone referrals
was a surgeon who treated adults as adults, and would gladly give a sterilization
to an unpartnered 26 year old, as long as I understood exactly what it
was, and that it should be considered permanent.
Sure, "Sexual Freedom Day" was an exercise in long-range planning. I'd
already begun to suspect that as someone whose views, goals, and priorities
in life were well out of the mainstream, it might be awhile before I met
someone with the unique compatibility that transforms a warm friendship
into a passionate, romantic relationship. But once the doctor was done,
I didn't have to wait even an hour to be hit by a wave of relief and euphoria
as I realized the threat of fertility had been totally banished, and I
immediately returned to looking forward to having a future relationship
with a "T.C.P." with the same unrestrained enthusiasm I'd had before learning
about the "facts of life."
I certainly don't look back on my pre- sterilization days with any fondness
or nostalgia. And I still smile a bit more than usual every January 27th,
as I realize my early affliction with fertility has receded one year farther
into ancient history. But I'll grudgingly admit that the time spent worrying
about life's first big dilemma was not all bad. If nothing else, it gave
me the luxury (which I didn't consider a luxury way back them) of having
LOTS of time to think about what I wanted sexuality to be, rather than
just rushing into the kind of "too early and for the wrong reasons" experiences
many people have. By the time I was old enough to get sterilized, and
be eligible for "ex-virginhood," I'd had time to figure out that attitudes
are greatly influenced by experiences. If I wanted sex to be as special,
meaningful and enjoyable as it has the potential to be, it must only be
associated with a genuinely loving, and well-established, long-term relationship
with a very special partner, even if all that rarely comes along conveniently
early in life for anyone. But however long it might take, or how difficult
it might be for two extremely individualistic people to invent and improvise
our unique relationship, I knew one thing for sure on that winter day
in 1973. At least in regard to that delightfully complicated portion of
the relationship in which couples gradually figure out what's mutually
pleasurable, there was no longer ONE option that contained such totally
catastrophic potential. Now, our only affectional limits would be those
of our own ingenuity and imagination.
BUT WHAT IF A FUTURE PARTNER WANTS ME TO BECOME A PARENT
(OR A 19 YEAR OLD COLLEGE BASKETBALL STAR ?)
If I had to make a list of "10,000 Things To Worry About" falling in
love with someone who wants to have children would rank just below "Abduction
By Space Aliens" (Worry #9997) and just above "Making A Good Speech When
I Accept The Nobel Prize For Literature For My Book About Alien Abduction"
(Worry #9999).
There are lots of things people with good relationships can disagree
on and compromise, but parenthood isn't one of them. Decisions on childbearing
involve such basic feelings, and major personality characteristics that
people who disagree on this issue would be mismatched on lots of other
levels as well. No doubt couples exist in which one partner leans slightly
in favor of parenthood, and the other slightly against, and they must
spend years in agonized debate over what to do. But because of my intense
need for autonomy, and gleeful love of freedom and privacy, I could never
be just "slightly" opposed to becoming a parent. To imagine a serious
conflict on this issue means imagining a relationship of two "opposites,"
one of whom wants the other to be something totally different from who,
and what, they obviously are. Expecting any "independent" to change into
"parent material" is about as realistic as expecting me to grow a foot
or more in height, drop 35 years off my age, and somehow become a college
basketball star simply to suit a partner's wants or needs.
Sure, I've heard that "opposites attract," but few say they have happy,
and lifelong relationships. I know some people have such an intense need
for a relationship that they will compromise almost anything for it. But
"independents" are by definition happy, busy, complete individuals, who
don't see themselves as "half a couple" in need of the "other half" to
"make life fulfilling." Any two "independents" are certainly capable of
inventing and improvising a wonderful - if unconventional - relationship.
Be we recognize those potential relationships as one of life's greatest
luxuries, not basic necessities.
Could I be strongly attracted to someone I have nothing in common with?
Instantly and often, ever since grade school, and probably until the coroner
ties the tag on my toe at the age of 115. But while we're programmed by
genetics and environment to be attracted to some unique combination of
physical characteristics, there's a big difference between "attraction"
and "compatibility." Your "programming" makes you notice one stranger
in a crowded room. And while this instinct probably serves a good evolutionary
and reproductive goal in nature, it's a totally unreliable way of determining
compatibility, because the shared values, goals, interests and priorities
which create that nice, warm feeling of "us-ness" in any good relationship
aren't outwardly evident. Nothing wrong with briefly imagining what it
would be like if someone's personality characteristics were just as suited
to what you're looking for as what you see on the outside. (I was a member
of the "Crush of the Week Club" from 6th grade until about age 30. Then
I started to recognize, and devalue my "programming.") But the real compatibility
it would take to establish a relationship in which decisions about childbearing
would even have to be made would also make it inevitable that our feelings
on the subject would be just one more thing that we would have in common,
and like about each other.
Of course, one of the many benefits of aging is that couples of "our
age" would no longer be dealing with this as an issue anyway, but having
been asked the question so many times, I thought it ought to be dealt
with one last time before being formally retired.
OLD AGE:
WHY I'LL STILL BE COUNTING FRACTIONS AT 104 1/2
If forty years ago someone had asked me my age, I would have said "fourteen
and a half" rather than just "fourteen." If asked that same question today,
I'd proudly say "fifty four and a half." That's because now, as then,
I still see the aging process as overwhelmingly positive and beneficial
in regard to all the really important things: knowledge, experience, and
maturity. But, apparently, most people don't see it that way.
I know there's a more stereotypical, ageist, and insulting question
than "If you don't have kids, who'll take care of you when you're old?",
but I can't quite imagine what it might be. The only time someone needs
to be "taken care of" is if they're incapacitated by injury or disease.
And though we may all be just one second and one accident away from being
unable to care for ourselves, old age is neither an unfortunate accident
or some uniformly debilitating disease. It's mostly what you make it,
and there are lots of ways to prepare for an enjoyable old age that don't
require parenthood.
For example, as a non-smoker, a non- driving bicyclist who puts in about
100 miles a week, and who eats a "Vegan" (the strictest form of vegetarian)
diet, I'm doing things that will maximize my odds of being among the majority
of the elderly who don't suffer the lingering illnesses and lengthy nursing
home stays we all have nightmares about. Most of the problems we assume
are the inevitable effects of aging are actually due to (or made much
worse by) inactivity, smoking, and a low fiber, high saturated fat diet
during middle-age. We all get older, but we needn't get "elderly" in the
negative sense. Most of my family members were the dictionary definition
of "spry and feisty" right up to the end, so apparently, my first decision
in life (choosing good ancestors !) was a right one, and should pay many
dividends in future decades.
Financially speaking, by NOT spending a not-so-small fortune on raising
children, I should be in a much less vulnerable position than someone
who did, and hopes to get some support from their kids later on. (Right
about the time they're struggling to raise their own kids, unfortunately.)
Non-parents realize that they'll be on their own later in life, and plan
for it not just financially, but by making sure they develop interests
and friendships that will last.
Of course, even having good health and a little extra money isn't enough
to assure a happy old age unless you're also busy with fulfilling activities.
As an activist, "keeping busy," and finding ideologically compatible people
to be busy with won't be a problem at any age. Humans have been around
for a very long time, and since we haven't managed to achieve a world
of peace, equal rights, justice, and environmental balance by now, it's
unlikely we'll do so in the next few decades. How do "Independents" (and
activists) spend their old age, and what will I be doing fifty years from
now, at the age of one hundred and four and a half? Since there's no way
of predicting what the world will be like then, or what "hot issues" will
be inspiring people to take action, there's no way to know.
But based on my past and present, I will make one prediction. If sometime
around 2051 someone is doing a research project on the lives of centenarians
who chose not to have children, I'll be delighted to be a part of it.
But they'll have to be patient, because I'll need time to rearrange my
calendar so we can have a long talk. I'll still be promoting, opposing,
writing, or researching something, and as usual, running about three days
behind schedule!
****************************************
D.M. Dismore AFeminist@aol.com
*****************************************
|
