I can’t even tell y’all how many times I’ve filled up my CF Bingo card with all the questions I’ve gotten over the years. It’s like religion - great for other people, but it’s not for me.
14 Likes
Why do people ask the question? I’d say it’s because people are interested in finding clues to themselves.
e.g., Would they be able to do such a thing? How come this woman is famous and they’re not? If not-having-babies made that woman happy, would it have made them happy/happier?…And on and on…
I’d say it’s about the questioners themselves, not about Solnit or Woolf or Snowden.
1 Like
You are technically correct, but forgive me if I don’t lose a lot of sleep over the plight of the tragically misunderstood upper class.
As for parenting, anyone who doesn’t want kids should probably not have them. The species is not in danger from underpopulation. My sister and brother in law chose not to, and it’s a good thing - she really doesn’t seem to like my kids much.
Having kids is about 80% exhausting, infuriating and frustrating and about 20% amazing, with a 20% variation on any given day or week.
4 Likes
I think this sort of thing goes both ways - plenty of people without kids sneer at people who do have kids. It’s the lording of moral superiority over others that pisses me off. Why can’t we all stop judging others for their choice in life! We’re making Cillian Murphy cry, damn it!!!
10 Likes
Perhaps I shouldn’t mention how I spent my summer then. (Spoiler alert: I can now say that my daughter broke my arm!)
Parenting is not for the faint-hearted.
6 Likes
It’s funny that if you have one, then you have this protective badge from the implication that you’re some humanity-loathing, selfish monster.
I have no qualms telling people there is no way in hell I’m going back on grueling sleep shifts, constant worry and biohazard messes now that it is down to humane levels and under control, whenever they ask ‘when the next one is coming’. That said, if I don’t feel like putting up with the nasty looks, I can just coo about how ideal our one girl is and she’s all we wanted (which is earnest; she’s an awesome little nut). It’s like I’ve proven I’m not an evil robot so I get to reclaim some creature comfort for myself without being totally blasted for it.
People really ought to just mind their own beeswax though.
7 Likes
I’d be inclined to agree if the answer to the question wasn’t so obvious. Plus, the question itself seems to presume a lack of selflessness, and even if the inquirer doesn’t mean to take that tack, I totally understand why it could feel like that.
Or: parents are already expected to put the needs of their kids ahead of their own needs (and rightly so, for the most part). At the same time, it can seem like non-parents are being held to the same standard vis-a-vis ghosts of children that never existed.
1 Like
You know, this thread is concentrating on the specific detail of women being asked about having kids, but it’s really part of a larger pattern. And it’s not just public interviews: it’s the same in business meetings, where everyone feels like the first thing they say to women as part of the greeting must be a compliment about how nice we look or what we’re wearing (but never to the men). I’m here to discuss a potential acquisition, so why are you asking me if I changed my hairstyle recently?
And trust me, there’s no right way to counter such things. The socialization is so strong that people are offended if you don’t play along.
14 Likes
Yes, all that you’ve said, too.
My comment simply came out of the topic reminding me that there can be wisdom in not taking things—anything—too personally.
That is part of the problem.
2 Likes
One difficulty is that if you’re male and don’t do this, you may be perceived as one of those techies with no social skills. So it can work both ways. If you’re a male feminist, you have to work extra hard to ensure you get taken the right way.
But it can be rewarding. I once got introduced to a new female colleague as “This is Kupfernigk - the only man in the company who knows what Spare Rib was.” (Yes, yes, I boast.)
4 Likes
I think that’s actually part of the reason for the pressure. One natalist position is that the current culture exists only because those holding a similar view to your own chose to sacrifice 20 years of their life and some of their own happiness in order to perpetuate a culture they believed valuable enough that it was worth that sacrifice.
Likewise, we expect the next generation to honor our claims to their time and money (i.e. not seize the assets of those too old to defend them). Why should they feel obliged to honor the claims from a culture that thought so little of itself that it refused to make the sacrifices necessary to perpetuate it.
That strand of natalism has a lot in common with war-time ethics of avoiding the draft and seems most common among those who were least happy with parenthood and at least console themselves with having “done their part” for their culture, while resenting those who expect all the rewards of being a member of their culture but aren’t willing to do their part to protect and perpetuate it.
To me it looks a bit like the right-wing case of typically left-wing resentment of those who escape paying their taxes. Both are seen (by their respective constituents) as people escaping their responsibilities to society.
2 Likes
I don’t think it’s weird we focus on women’s fertility, hairstyles, dress, &etc. What I think is weird is that we DON’T focus on men the same way. These attributes aren’t restricted to one gender, so why do women have to put up with this but men don’t?
You compliment a woman on her hairstyle or shoes during a business meeting and at worst somebody thinks you’re a chauvinist, but more likely everybody thinks you’re charming. You compliment a man in the same words, and it’ll probably be assumed you’re coming on to him - or that you’re insane.
2 Likes
It’s a tricky balance. Years ago, I was criticized by my superiors for being all business and not asking about irrelevant personal details that just slowed the meeting down. They were probably right, in that people are more cooperative if they believe you have a personal interesting in their lives.
However, as you point out, however, if you know nothing about the person, the comments being made are going to be among the most facile and stereotype-ridden simply because they’re most likely to be relevant to the audience (while annoying the minority who don’t conform to the stereotype).
To put it into a male context, it is probably long term productivity-enhancing to “bond” briefly about sports before the meeting even though a significant minority (including myself) have no interest in them.
I think it’s supposed to be related to how the different sexes bond. Watching women interact with women and men interact with men leads one to observe that such surface-level bonding occurs with both sexes, it’s simply that the subject is different. (And at least personal appearance has some minor relevance to the office as opposed to which team won/lost last night.)
3 Likes
Yeah, seen that a million times. So I take the easy route.
“It’s so great to see you again!”, if I know them.
“It is a pleasure to meet face to face after all this!”, if I don’t.
And if the atmosphere is relaxed, I pull out my ace card, “doing anything fun or exciting this weekend?”.
I give compliments on work, and if the counterparty wants to talk about their new tweed jacket or an awesome stylist they are seeing, I’ll engage. But I need to know someone at least a year (usually muuch longer) before I say, " have you done something different with your hair?"
That whole idea creeps me out.
15 Likes
I don’t want to blow my own trumpet, but I don’t think I’ve ever expressed an opinion of the appearance of any women I’ve worked with. I think that would just be fucking creepy.
A large part of that is probably because I’m a complete misanthrope and really don’t care, though. I barely take any interest in anything about anyone I work with.
6 Likes
And don’t forget that women are just as socialized into doing this to each other too.
2 Likes
I finally got around to reading Ms. Solnit’s “mansplaining” essay that Cory linked. This sprung out at me immediately:
My own experience does not mirror this. In a way I am jealous; I wish I had only met half so many egregiously, aggressively ignorant people as I have. Encountering those exemplars of the Dunning-Kruger effect who drive their ignorance over other people like a steamroller annoys me intensely.
I carry a pocket edition of Marcus Aurelius to highfalutin’ social events in case there isn’t enough beer available to make such people amusing. Totally not kidding.
2 Likes
Straw man.
I was simply pointing out that we shouldn’t judge people by accent, only content. The hyperbolic “tragically misunderstood” is an artefact of your fevered imagination.
(A lot of Americans failed to appreciate that a major reason that Gorbachev was pushed out was that he speaks rather uneducated Russian, and the nomenklatura looked down on him - just as the nomenklatura of the English Labour Party look down on Corbyn, who didn’t go to Oxford. Sadly, these things are important when they should not be.)
I agree partly. Stupidity has no limits; no matter if you think you have reached the end of it there is always more to find. But in my experience it exists regardless of race, creed, colour, gender or type of sex organs.
However, I think the operative phrase was “out-and-out confrontation” rather than “totally ignorant”, and when it comes to confrontation I would suggest men outnumber women in the ratio of around 9:1. However, from what I see Fox News is trying to improve the ratio.
1 Like
