Notes Around
Clusteringflux said:
In one post you undermine your own argument. Chidren don't need money, they need love.
Yes, love feeds a child. It also cures cancer. But we'll get back to that in a minute. In fact, I'll ask our friend Madanthonywayne about it.
If you can afford a computer, internet service and a place to set it, you can make at least one childs life better than the one they're living.
Well, let's think about that for a minute. The computer on which I type these words is the second in a relevant sequence. My first iMac was purchased two years before my daughter was born. It's sitting nearby on the floor. If I'm so inclined, I can put a couple of memory sticks in it (they're around here somewhere), and it will run again.
The present machine, its replacement, isn't that much newer. A friend of mine worked for a software company that was about to trash it when he said, "Yes, but does it work?" The bosses nodded. So my friend asked, "Does it matter where it goes? I mean, as long as it's not to me?" His bosses shrugged and said, "Go for it." So I got a slightly-faster iMac for free.
The internet connection is paid by my brother.
Cost of computer and internet services that could otherwise be diverted to another child in the household: $0.00.
So the question goes back to you..Are children (or how they are provided for)a status symbol?
Children are human beings. My daughter only becomes a status symbol if some act of mine grossly harms her. Of course, that's not what most people think about when they think of status symbols.
Or is it? Again, we'll come back to that in a moment. See my subsequent remarks to Madanthonywayne.
• • •
Madanthonywayne said:
No. To me, children are the fulfillment of our natural urge for immortality.
So the reason for having kids is still self-centered? I accept that, argumentatively.
You want a status symbol, buy an expensive car, pick up a hot chick, buy a boat or a big house.
Ah, yes, the trophy wife. Since Max brought up homosexuals and politics, I'll merely chuckle at the "sanctity" of marriage heterosupremacists are always clucking about.
Children, if anything, make the aquisition of these things much more difficult because they take a lot of our time and money. I find, for that reason, that people concerned with status symbols don't have children.
Rhetorically, at least, I would wonder at your opinion of "Generation X". After all, there is a generation that has been widely reviled for being self-obsessed, unrealistic, demanding, and generally screwed in its collective and individual heads.
Two phrases very familiar to Generation Xers:
• "What will the neighbors think?"
• "If you keep acting like this, people will think I'm a bad parent."
It's a curiously subtle difference, in a way. Instead of tangible symbols of status and success, many seek the virtue of public acceptance, or even praise.
Consider a simple ritual: two fathers becoming acquainted with one another, say at work. So they show each other pictures of their kids. In and of itself, this is not only harmless, but also beneficial in the context of social bonding. Yet there is also a dark side to this. Surely you cannot be unaware of a certain comedy bit, in which two fathers try to one-up each other. You know, "My kid is nine, but she reads at a twelfth-grade level." "That's great. Mine is ten, and he already speaks Latin." "Well, you should see the twins race to finish their calculus problems. We're thinking of skipping high school and sending them straight to college."
I know for a fact this phenomenon is not limited to parents of GenX children. It was a punch line when most of us were still in diapers. Some would even suggest that GenX got lucky insofar as we didn't have as many such pressures on us as the generations that preceded us.
One way to look at it is a conversation I had with my daughter's teacher the other day. It started because I wanted to know about a toy Emma brought out of the classroom with her. The teacher explained that it was hers to keep, that she had earned it through exemplary behavior at the Veterans' Day assembly.
My confusion at that sort of reward system—not the principle, but the fact that it is in place—notwithstanding, she went on to explain that my daughter is doing very well on all fronts. Her cognitive, social, and motor skills are apparently notable to some degree. I confess I'm pleased by this on a number of levels. After all, there was a time just over a year ago when we were worried about her development. So I talked with the teacher about that, explaining a couple of things about our parental theories, and the concerns that had raised. "Keep doing what you're doing," the teacher advised.
Now, I would be lying if I said that didn't warm my sense of pride, but at the same time, I'm well aware that self-love is about the last thing about the situation that is important. Even though my parents used to talk about achievement for
my sake, it is not simple coincidence that, among the many transformations of our relationships, a major one occurred when their philosophy shifted from "happiness through material success" to "happiness". The point being that while I can certainly pat myself on the back for doing alright so far, the reality is that I should keep doing what I'm doing for
my daughter's sake. We have, somehow, produced a sociable, inquisitive, ambitious, and nearly fearless child who seems to understand boundaries not for the sake of authority, but rather for the purpose of function. No, she does not read as my brother and I did when we were her age, but hopefully she won't spend the next ten years terrified of transgressing abstractions. She demonstrates an inherent understanding of rules and obedience that it took me until my twenties to recognize as an abstract concept.
Do you understand? My only view of the quality of my parenting is that I'm an inadequate father, and I have it from my own parents that this is natural. No matter what I do, I'll never feel it's enough. Those that would assert otherwise—especially in practice—are merely exercising ego defense mechanisms against their own internal criticisms. Shit, it's not like people haven't criticized my parenting here, especially the amount of drugs I've done in the past, and would do if I had the money. But proving assholes wrong should be the last of my list of parental priorities if I should even allow that point onto the list at all.
People who can't have the big houses, the fast cars, trophy wives, yachts, buildings named after them, private islands, professional sports teams, or whatever, will often seek other assertions of status. And many of them will find that assertion in their children.
Perhaps it is a "middle America" thing, or an urban-cosmopolitan thing. Maybe it's only in New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle, Los Angeles, and other such cities, that you hear parents talking about the connection between a "reputable" pre-school and whether their kid gets into Harvard. Maybe in ... where is it, Indiana? ... parents don't have their kids enrolled in so many extracurricular activities at once that a nine year-old starts to sound like a professional, pausing to consult a PDA before telling you what she's doing after school tomorrow.
Some other phrases you may have heard over time.
"No kid of mine ...."
• ... is going to marry a Mexican.
• ... is going to be in a union.
• ... is going to be a fag.
• ... is going to turn his back on God.
• ad nauseam, ad infinitum
Or, more simply, I think you're wrongly limiting the ways in which people assess and assert status.
Oh, hey, one last thing—Our friend Clusteringflux has suggested that I should adopt another child. Now, the thing is that at present, I don't receive public money. But if I had another child, I would inevitably require food stamps and other public assistance in order to fulfill their needs. So what do you think, sir? Should I adopt another kid and go on welfare?
You feel like paying in for that? (Pretending, of course, that anyone in their right mind would hand another kid to someone of my financial standing.)
• • •
Dsdsds said:
Right. It's not your biological kid. You can grow to love that kid as much as if it were "yours" but you will always wonder about its geneology when it gets sick or acts in a way that surprises you.
I admit, every time I read that, I keep hanging on the phrase, "grow to love".
There are NO limits of a mother's (or parent's) love. It's non conditional and self rewarding. Nothing wrong if all parties involve approve.
Oh, come now. I've gotten more from my mother in these last few years than I can reasonably count. And it
must necessarily come to an end soon. The current phase is out of hand, and it is this recognition that is spurring the movement toward changing the state of things. We already recognize something's amiss, and we keep trying to figure out what to do about it. Most likely, though, we'll never actually answer the question. At some point, I'll up and do something stupid for the sake of doing
something, and we'll deal with the consequences of
that.
There's only so much one can reasonably ask or accept.
You've got to be kidding, right? Or have you gone off the deep end Tiassa?
Not in the slightest. Madanthonywayne alluded to one of the things I find absurd about the international economic arrangement when he asked, "is this couple from Africa?" The most comfortable leadership I can conceive of is a situation in which everyone else is told to do what is too much to ask of the leaders.
If the American fertility rate was below the replacement rate, his point would carry more weight in the abstract. At present, though, the fertility rate is 2.1 bpw (
U.S. Census Bureau), which is right on target when accounting for childhood mortality, and only slightly below the global TFR of 2.33 (
Wikipedia). Additionally, however, I recognize the entirety of the human species, and am not simply satisfied that conditions are relatively good within my own abstract boundaries—e.g. the United States. Our worldwide resource-distribution system is presently inadequate to accommodate all the people in the world, but if what happens in Africa is only a problem for Africans (at least until someone using African resources bombs something in the United States), it should be enough to point out that over 35 million people live in households classified as "food insecure" (including 12.6 million children, approximately 17.2% of all children in the nation), and food insecurity is on the rise (
Food Research and Action Center).
Reproductive responsibility isn't tyranny. After all, this isn't China. To the other, though, if the point of having children invested in some perverse sense of self-gratification, I can see how the suggestion of responsibility—especially among those who ought, by education, to know better—might seem intrusive.
____________________
Notes:
Day, Jennifer Cheeseman. "Population Profile of the United States: National Population Projections". U.S. Census Bureau. Updated July 8, 2008. http://www.census.gov/population/www/pop-profile/natproj.html
"Total fertility rate". Wikipedia. Updated October 29, 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate
Food Research and Action Center. "Hunger and Food Insecurity in the United States". FRAC.org. Updated January 17, 2007. http://www.frac.org/html/hunger_in_the_us/hunger_index.html