14 November 2007

Infuriated

So, I'm reading along on one of my new-fave blogs (The Brit Girl) and I come across her posts on an article entitled "That Was No 'Accident'."

A few things came to mind while reading this article. 1. Holy fuck. Women need to get over themselves. 2. One of my favorite shows, Coupling, deals with a woman trying for a baby without letting her long-term boyfriend know. (Granted, he doesn't seem upset by the idea, he just didn't know they were trying.)

But this passage really ticked me off.

"A lot of us feel like it's not even really fair that men should get to vote, considering they could be 72 and, with a little Viagra, have another baby," says Vicki Iovine, author of The Girlfriends' Guide to Pregnancy. "For us women, it's really a limited window. We know that boys who grow up to become men don't necessarily want to be men. They like to be boys. And so women say, 'You know what? He's gonna just have to snap out of it—and my pregnancy will be the thing to do it.'" The end, says Iovine, sometimes justifies the means. "Any guy with a heart and soul, and preferably with a job, once he sees the baby on the sonogram or hears the heartbeat, will melt," she says.


Say WHAT?

While it's not rape, in many ways, it's got a lot of the same power-play and manipulation aspects. (Oh, I'm gonna be flamed for that statement!) It's the woman saying, "It's all about what *I* want, what *you* want doesn't matter."

How many women would flip their shit if their SO had that attitude? Actually, let me rewind and address that passage piece by piece.

"A lot of us feel like it's not even really fair that men should get to vote, considering they could be 72 and, with a little Viagra, have another baby," says Vicki Iovine, author of The Girlfriends' Guide to Pregnancy.
Where to start with what's wrong with that statement. Okay, if you're going to "oops" a guy, or more directly, trick and manipulate him into a pregnancy, you are (according to most US laws) requiring him to conribute to the financial upkeep of the child (that he may or may not have wanted, but you didn't bother talking to the man) for 18 to 21 to 25 years.

As for the "72 and with a little Viagra..." statement, then go find a man who's 72 and has some Viagra. If that's the age that the man wants to become a father. Or, better yet, go to a sperm bank.

For us women, it's really a limited window. We know that boys who grow
up to become men don't necessarily want to be men. They like to be
boys. And so women say, 'You know what? He's gonna just have to snap
out of it—and my pregnancy will be the thing to do it.'"
Okay, yes. Women are biologically fertile for a shorter time than men are. While this must be frustrating to some women, perhaps the reality is not the duration of fertility, but the maturity of men. Blame the previous generation for raising males who are not fully-formed emotionally by adulthood. "Forcing" a man to grow up is dumb, cruel, and, to be quite honest, damaging. How many men that have been oopsed are hesitant to ever fully trust a woman again? You women that are complaining how there are no good men? Blame the permissive "sisterhood" that some of you seem to rally around. Good men are out there, but apparently there's a trick to finding them prior to another woman doing a number on them. (Okay, perhaps I'm single-bitter, but honestly? I'm tired of hearing how decent guys are screwed over by needy women.)

If you want a man, date a man. Don't date a boy.

The end, says Iovine, sometimes justifies the means. "Any guy with a
heart and soul, and preferably with a job, once he sees the baby on the
sonogram or hears the heartbeat, will melt," she says.

Really? So, a guy who absolutely does not want children is heartless and soulless? Or it's okay if the guy is on the fence and gets "nudged" (their words, sure as hell not mine) if he has a job, because then it's great that he falls in love with the little tadpole? What happens if the guy doesn't change his mind? Well, that's okay, because he's still on the hook as far as financial support goes. I mean, that's all that really matters, isn't it?


In the interest of full disclosure, I'm on the fence leaning toward no on the kids front. I cannot see myself being pregnant or ever having kids. I'm not getting sterilized yet because I'm not 100% against having kids, I just can't see it at this point in my life. The one thing I'm fully aware of is that the only constant in life is change. I am, however, looking into an IUD. 10 years of birth control without having to worry about taking it at the same time every day or whatnot is nice. Add into that the double-duty aspect of IUD + Condom = no unintended visitors.

I guess what I really don't understand is two things.

1. Why don't these women communicate with their partners? Of course, the idea of the answer being "no" sucks, but better to realize that your partner isn't the right person for you than to trap them (and yourself) into a relationship that they didn't want.
2. Why don't these women find men that want what they want? Life is so much easier with someone that's walking down the same path as you. And honestly? It's easier still to walk alone than it is to walk with someone that's not on the same path as you.


Powered by ScribeFire.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I think I love you! You echo my thoughts.

I shall be eternally glad that my partner (who is the epitome of all that is good and right in the human species) does not want to be a father. I would no more consider tricking him into it than I would cut off my own head.

I have nothing else to add...other than to say well done, and I wish more women had your (and my) attitude towards men, babies and parenthood. Women that use such underhand tricks are, in my opinion, a disgrace to their gender.

Regards,
Nicole (Gok on Ravelry!)