Seeing Red
Penny Red is doing some empire-building for her own particular variety of Feminism at Liberal Conspiracy. I usually don’t get into this, but this one is completely off the wall … sorry … “provocative”.
I was raised by a single mother who was also a part-time lawyer; it did me no harm whatsoever, and I fully intend to be one myself one day.
OK. Without getting into “did me no harm”, it seems to have caused a certain lack of objectivity.
Sorry about your balls, guys, but these babies are “ours”, and they will remain ours whilst they are born from our bodies.
Ahem.
Surely you mean “mine”? Any evidence of another 30 million women agreeing with you?
And there was me thinking that women had a right to speak for themselves and not be turned into a compliant walk-on support group standing silently in the background lending weight to somebody else’s opinions. That, I think, is one of the problems I have with some “feminists” - a towering sense of “I am right” that would fit better in a Maoist re-education camp.
And that’s leaving aside the idea that anybody “owns” children; they don’t.
Why is it unarguable that a man should support his offspring?
Because they are his offspring. It’s not difficult.
I’m fervently pro-choice, pro-choice to the wire, and part of that passionate belief that women deserve no less than absolute control over their reproductive capacity entails a certainty that with full reproductive control should come full reproductive responsibility.
Pro-choice for me - fuck the rest of you: you live with the consequences of my choice.
Sorry - don’t buy it. And I don’t think many others do either.
I know I’m not the only feminist and progressive who finds…
“Progressive”? Are you joking? Fortunately - to me - more people believe in equality.
The view Penny is putting over reads to me like the values of a cardboard-cutout caricature of Thatcherism taken to an extreme:
- children are a possession,
- society is atomised,
- and all the rights are “mine”.
No.
I think the real problem with is that the argument is grounded in a thoroughly utilitarian and materialist philosophy, which I would call - literally - inhuman.
I’m also tempted to think that Penny’s view which will change after some experience of children - practice of childcare has a habit of changing neat theories.
Categories: All WW, Comment, Human Rights / Freedom, Politics
Matt,
What this comes down to is rights versus responsibilities. I’m working from a fundamental basis of absolute reproductive rights for women: women get to decide what happens to their bodies, full stop.
Given those primary terms, I find it unfair to suggest that men, who may have had no say in the matter up until the time of a child’s birth, should be forced to pay child support or give financial care.
For me, parental rights are predicated on a duty of care. Most mothers, willing or unwilling, don’t have much of a choice about that duty of care, but if they forfeit that duty they may also forfeit the contingent rights. For non-birth-parents - fathers, grandparents, partners of mothers, adoptive parents, other legal guardians - parental obligatin has to come first. Parental rights come second.
It might be helpful to consider the case of adoptive parents. Someone who has voluntarily taken on legal guardianship of a child is expected to provide a certain standard of care. If they forfeit that duty for any reason, is it reasonable for a former adoptive parent to demand access to his or her ‘offspring’? Clearly, not unless the child and current caregiveers are okay with it! I think talking about fathers in the same way as we currently talk about adoptive parents is much healthier than clinging to an outdated notion of ‘husband and breadwinner.’
The point is that fathers have much more of a choice over how much parental support to put in. And that’s fine. Fathers who genuinely make that choice to be involved in their child’s life in a positive way should be commended - but that’s the starting point. That has to be the starting point, and it can’t be any other way.
Pennyred
Thanks for your reply.
I disagree with you on a couple points, and agree more on others.
I’ve also got a couple of thoughts re: abortion rights that I’ve been planning to write about.
I’ll find time to do a proper response this evening - this is a subject that one either goes into properly or stays out of, and I still owe a response to a conversation at Feminist Philosophers after the Lib Con do.
Matt