The Oracle said...
Why don't you put your money and love towards adopting a child, ferret, instead of a cat? ...I might have more respect for you and your lame opinions. Which, in the grand scheme of things, are meaningless.
February 25, 2009 9:14 AM
Oracle, I thought I would address your comment in a special post. This is not about politics, and it will be a little personal, but it's something about which I feel driven to write. The thing about writing a blog that is read by about 10 people, 2 or 3 who know me, is that you are expecting people to take you at face value. All that most of you know about me is what I share here, or on SFGate if you have encountered me there. My motivations, ambitions, dreams, flaws, failures are only known to you if I choose to expose them to you. It is a power we all have, which makes this a pretty democratic forum. In writing about politics (mostly), I have been able to retain certain items for just myself. If you'll forgive me, I'm going to pull back the curtain a bit...
I believe that I have mentioned that I was adopted at birth. The people who adopted me were, I suspect, attempting to save their marriage with a baby. Like most of those attempts, it failed. They divorced, and each took new spouses. When I was four, my adopted mother committed suicide. While I didn't actually see her body, I did discover her...a moment that is still crystal clear in my mind.
Since my adopted father still had custody of me, I went to live with him and his new family. It was incredibly disfunctional, and I suffered all sorts of abuse. My step-mother was especially fond of using a switch cut from the peach tree in our yard to discipline us.
When I was 9, I was removed from that home and placed in foster care. That is when I met the people that I consider to be my family - which they officially became when they adopted me two years later. My mother was unable to have children - having had cancer in her early 20's - and fostering was her only way to fulfill what I believe to be her purpose here on earth. If anyone was meant to be a parent, she was that person - generosity of spirit, unconditional in her love, supportive and empowering, those are the gifts with which she was blessed. And I was blessed to know her.
Unfortunately, I knew her for a painfully short amount of time. Twenty-seven years ago today, eight years and one week after I moved in with her, my mother was killed by a drunk driver. She was already gone when I found out, so I didn't have a real chance to say good-bye. Her loss was devastating, and I believe that my inability to properly grieve for her marked the beginning of a long, slow descent into a crippling depression. With a lot of hard work, therapy and support from my wonderful family (a gift from my mother), I found my way back to become the (reasonably) well-adjusted person you see before you.
So, Oracle, I have had four different women fill the role of mother - if you count the girl/woman that gave birth to me. My experiences have been 'difficult', for lack of a better word. Obviously, when I was nine I finally found my real mother - meaning the woman who was intended to be my mother. However, given the examples of the first nine years of my life, and the short time I was given with my mother - well, you'll forgive me if I'm just not sure I'm up to the job of being a mother myself. I have no doubt that I have love to spare, and a nurturing spirit - but it's a serious task, and it's so crucial to not fuck it up.
I've thought of fostering, as there are so many children who need a loving home. But, thus far, I am taking this journey alone, and most foster children have special emotional and/or physical needs that I'm not sure that I could do it all myself. So, while you may think that I'm selfish, I will confess to a greater defect - fear. Fear of failing a child. I know what that feels like, and I couldn't stand it if I did it to someone else.
Margie - I know you are watching over me, and I miss you every day. Thank you for all that you gave me, and the world, in your short time with us.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
119 comments:
FH -- fortunately for my kids, I didn't become a father until I was old enough to be as good a father as I'm capable of being. I'm watching Jeopardy right now with my 11 year old. He's nailing a bunch of the answers. Tomorrow, orchestra rehearsal and baseball (and, of course, homework). Your beautiful piece means a great deal to me right now. Thanks.
So is this "comment moderation' going to end anytime soon?
Wow, sweetheart. That was probably more than you wanted to share. I'm not trying to be facetious, but did that take a couple glasses of wine? I know it would with me because between the ages of 11 and 14, I was in a foster home as well. But I had my real moms to visit every weekend at least until she could...well. I just realized. Let's not get into it. My lovely hostess, YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!
But you know? It's weird. But I know something. Today. Today in your life. You are filled with wonderful people and love. And because we're in the 21st century, you started this ridiculous blog to share with your cyber friends as well.
Now, obviously when you have to type in your own blog:
ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well...there's always some bugs to work out.
Look.
I don't really know you. I only know you from here, The Splash (where Michael rules!) and LaSalle's blog.
And you're an admittantly(sic) "bleeding heart liberal") which I am not.
But my fondness for you is beyond all these things.
I think you're wonderful. Smart. Funny. Sexy, when you want to be. And just overall.
A good Catholic
;)
Just trying to get you to laugh.
Sweetheart, thanks for sharing.
I think you're great.
Thnaks for Brushfires.
FH - your story is so touching. Really. Just a wow. I'm sorry to hear of your troubles, but you have to know how lucky you were to finally find a "real" mom. Some people are stuck with the woman they grew up with who wasn't all that interested in it to begin with. I know that Mr. Suza's mom is really interesting (although she's tamed considerably and I find her charming). I hear she wasn't the most interested in fulfilling mommy duties by the time she got to him - her 7th child and his father passed away when he was young.
I know that your Margie is looking out for you - some people are just born to it. It is incredibly easy to f*ck up, but as YOU know, kids are very forgiving.
Out of curiosity, did you ever look for/find your biological mother? I think if it were me I would have an interest in knowing who she was at least, although I don't know how productive it might or might not be to meet her.
ps - are you going to turn off the comment moderation or are you just no longer offering instant gratification?
;)
Sorry gang! I don't know why I thought it would just turn itself off when I 'approved' the comments. I wanted a time out, not to keep you out.
Here's how silly I can be - I thought maybe nobody was posting because you wanted to give me a taste of my own medicine! After two hours, though, I got a clue...
You guys ROCK!!!
TedSpe - no wine for this ferret. Part of the come back from the abyss...nothing stronger than caffeine or chocolate, which is just fine with me!
I hope you will all forgive the self-indulgent post. It was just that what The Oracle wrote, so close to the anniversary - I wanted to explain a little bit of who I am, and the bar that my mom set so high...
*hug* Thank you for sharing, it couldn't have been too easy.
Jean: that was a lovely post.
A difficult and emotional reflection. If and when you decide to raise a child, may I recommend a book that has had a great influence on us...
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0914/p11s01-bogn.html
Everything is political.
Nonetheless, this is personal. My parents were working class (my father quit high school to go to work to help support his family). I could go on forever about deprivation and bourgeios slights. But I always had the benefit of a solid family. Indeed, I always had the sense that if something went wrong, my extended family would care for me. (The working class tended to have big extended families back then.) What a luxury.
Ms. F., much of your intelligence and drive probably stem from genetics, but your generosity of spirit is another matter. Thank you for telling your story.
Mr. Spe, sounds like you're a pretty good guy too. Work on those politics, ok?
well, I guess I could have spelled bourgeois properly. I apologize.
The world is not "one size fits all." This is the main thing that irritates me about Gina's posts on children. Everyone has the right to choose the path they want to take, as long as they're not hurting others by what they do. Jean, thank you for sharing your difficult memories with us. I would not presume to tell you the best way for you to share your obvious gifts with the world; I just feel confident that you will make the right choice for you, and that your choice will be a positive one for others as well. We don't get a choice of who will birth us, and very little choice of who will raise us, so whatever advantages we receive as a result of those facts are purely a matter of luck/fortune. I think I agree with Gina on one point, namely, that life is a blessing; where we disagree is the basis on which we exercise our free will to choose. Regardless, each of us is fortunate to be alive, even more fortunate to have been born in this country. We all should be thankful for those gifts and should also be prepared to use those gifts for more than just our own benefit. If it's your children, that's great, but as long as it's something besides yourself is the most important thing, IMO.
Well, life is very mysterious. I have crossed paths with people for the most seemingly unexplainable reasons...always have. Maybe someone is trying to tell you something.
Don't be afraid...I think you'd make a great mom.
I feel like I stepped into a very private world here and am not sure if it's OK for me to comment. I'll choose to do so and wait to see if there is any objection.
Ferret, that was an unbelievably honest story you told. I think your concern about being able to take care of a child is one more people should consider before having them. It's a huge responsibility and lots of people screw it up really bad.
Oracle or Gina or whatever, I'm bewildered by your attitude. You seem to be implying that Ferret SHOULD have a child or adopt one; the implication being that she is a bad person for not doing so. That is a truly weird thing to say.
Ferret has a good heart. That much I do know about her. Being a good parent is not that difficult.I know. Even my ex says I'm an excellent mother. Mothering only requires some common sense and compassion for others. Children are wonderful little creatures and just want to be loved and nurtured. Give them that and the rest is a piece of cake. Of course it helps to have their father around who is devoted to the idea that the children needs are important. I was fortunate to have a husband that agreed with me that I should stay home take care of the kids while he worked. After they reach school age, it's not that important. Ferret could probably swing it on her own if the child was over five.
And, ya, it would be a little criminal if a loving heart couldn't open itself up to a child that was probably very much like her at one point, wouldn't it?
Life is a chain, it shouldn't be broken.
Are you listening, msg?
Yes emotional interaction is the foundation of it all, but children love a stimulating environment and a lot is getting connected in the first three years. Blocks, toys, physical challenges and obstacles, paints and colors, music and a lot of music. There was an interesting piece a while back in SF Gate about a place called Studio Grow, which is in Berkeley and Concord. Look at the pictures of those kids--so cute....
We have our greatest plasticity in our early years where our minds are shaped by the environments in which we are reared. Much of our adult life is the opposite: we try to project our internal world on to the outer world, and some are even willing to use silencing mechanisms, abuse and even violence to avoid having to confront contending subjective perceptions of the external world.
Yes, Hartal, dear, all that is true. But being an adult also means letting hurts go--real or imagined.
Look at my responses here. A lot of hate from a lot of different people, yet my responses are calm (and for you over-argued) and that's because I have a pretty bemused reaction to all this.
It's funny that people like dsgonzale6 and twinfan don't seem to see that they like a good intellectual fight as much as I do. They can try to finish their arguments against me; they can both try to do it at the same time. And they can have TedSpe hurling insults. And I just laugh. Especially when they criticize me for an inability to admit that I am wrong? I mean how damn hilarious is that.
Now look at twinfan's picture--he does look deranged or as he would put it totally insane. He's been married five times (he's like that one guy who can make half of all marriages end in divorce, as I tried to show); do you think I should take my problems with him personally?
Should I feel hurt that twinfan and TedSpe despise me? Well I don't.
Off to the park in the double stroller, and there are indeed many ways to connect with the next generation. Parenting is not required--working to protect life on the planet would be one way-- and many ugly things have been done in the name of providing a secure home for one's kids. So having kids does not make you morally worthy. That was one of Hannah Arendt's major insights in her writings on the trials against the Nazis.
I had to read it again this morning - it makes my heart ache for you, FH. But still, here you are, you're a strong, thoughtful, healthy adult with a great head on her shoulders.
It is really great to be an adult, isn't it?
I sense impending moderation. This very personal topic strikes me as a highly inappropriate place to restart arguments.
I disagree with the "chain of life should not be broken" comment. There's already way more people on this planet that it can handle; many of them in poverty, a lot of them under oppressive regimes, some of them being handed drugs and a gun at 8-years-old and told to shoot "the bad guys." Unless you're really sure you have a safe place for a child in this world, you should let someone else do the parenting. Besides, loving a cat is admirable.
Hartal, you have brought other "threads" into a converstion about parenting and love... don't poison yet another blog. Try to restrain yourself... commenting in such an ignorant fashion about my photograph and marriages belies your lame attempts at civility. I never called myself "totally insane", that had been a joking response to someone else's post. The photo is not of a madman, your characterization is that of a mean spirited young fool, a spirit that one can hope you do not pass along to the innocents you will stroll with this afternoon.
I want to thank all of you for your kind responses to my post. I'm usually a little less emotional on the anniversary of my mother's death, I choose to celebrate her birth, instead.
Suza - while you can feel sad for the child that I was, it is a testimony to the love of my mother that you needn't pity the adult me.
Sometimes, when I tell the story of my life people think it's depressing. I figure that since I am still here to tell it, it's actually an inspiring tale of survival. (Perhaps if I told the whole story...nope, saving that for the book! - jk)
Oracle - I am not holding onto hurts from my childhood. What I am doing, is evaluating the skills that I have and the tools that I was - or was not - given as a child. My formative years did not lay a strong foundation - IMO. I appreciate you saying that you think I'd be a good mother. I know what mothering means to you, so I take that as high praise, indeed.
I had to stop back in to re-read FH's beautiful post. Let me add my request to the others -- hartal, this thread isn't about your passion for persecution. Let that go. I am a bit interested in your family, however.
JMF: Your story is not depressing, it is inspirational. Margie found you, and you, her. While her passing devastated you then, it was her love that saw you through that devastation. What greater gift than a love that brought you strength even as decades passed?
Last Week's Winner
Last Week's Caption Contest Winner:
"Hey Sully, can you keep my political career afloat too?"
— Greg Cooper
And our runners up:
"That Splash down in the Hudson, Sully, was so realistic. How'd you do it?"
— Jim Corrigan
Real American Hero meets "Last Action Hero"
— Marja Rafiee
No, Arnold, you can't play me in the movie."
— Jean Ferretti
I do feel hurt for the child ferrethead, but I know the adult one is far to strong and well put together to want or need anything resembling pity. :)
I'm sorry - I don't seem to be able to write anything today without sounding patronizing. I don't mean it that way, really...
Gina, I agree that life is a chain, and I am hopeful that I have had an influence on the lives of a few people over the years. It doesn't have to be through my own children.
And hartal's comments on this thread have been thoughtful, and his off-topic remarks have been much less objectionable.
I have no passion for persecution. Oracle told me to let my hurts go. She brought my imagined persecution into this thread. I told her I don't feel hurt.
About my family, I'll tell you this--my older daughter's preschool teacher told us that she is as happy as a kid as she has seen in thirty years, brimming with life and enthusiasm. And because I don't think it's appropriate I am not going to get into how advanced she is for her age. Gosh those kids in those pictures I mentioned are cute.
And michaeltwinfan's response suggests what to you all?
I said nothing about persecution. Address any problems you have with that issue to Gina. I didn't respond to anything you said in reply to her that could be taken as objectionable. It's just my opinion, like it or not, just as twinfan has his opinion and you have your opinion. Keep them all separate, keep them all in perspective, and we might yet avoid sullying Jean's very personal reminiscence.
wv: myogi :-X
Suza - you didn't sound patronizing at all. I really appreciatd what you wrote.
Hartal - you go right ahead and brag on your child! I love stories of bright, happy children - and it's perfectly correct to be unabashedly proud of them! Give your babies a hug from their 'Auntie Ferrethead', okay?
DSG - we can never know how far the ripples of our actions extend. That's why I feel so strongly that we need to strive to make those ripples positive. It sounds like yours most definitely are.
Just a note: I may take this post down soon. Things have a way of deteriorating around here, and I don't want 200 comments of "I know you are, but what am I" to be associated with this particular post. I'll try to put something up so you can stop being so darned nice!
DSG, don't get mushy on me
sorry I wasn't replying to you, dsgnozale6. I think xootsuit and joe bernard advised me to keep my sense of persecution out of it. But I hadn't said a word about myself; then oracle told me to let my hurts go. She upbraided me. So I responded to it. Perhaps I should have ignored her. But I am not comfortable with completely changing the nature of our interactions just because this blog entry discusses childhood trauma. There would be something pitying and paternalistic in it; that is part of the reason I chose to respond to oracle's upbraiding of me.
But move on on to the role of child rearing in our society. I have a lot to say about it. I am proud of myself as a father, and my wife fills our house with love.
Ferret, I didn't mean you, although like the most of us, you probably have a hurt or two that could stand to be healed.It certainly sounds like it.
Most people think I'm on some sort of expense paid vacation at some science camp, but I'm getting an opportunity to know my father for the first time in my life. My parents divorced when I was too young to even remember him living at home, and to this day my mother can't get over a very nasty divorce. Her inability to get over her hurts really affected me and robbed me of the opportunity to even know my father. He tried, I never knew that. I always thought that he had abandoned me. Now I know otherwise and I'm letting a lot of things go that kept me imprisoned. If someone can take something valuable away from my experience, I'm more than happy to give them some perspective.
It's taken me 45 years to come to this point. I don't know how old you are, Hartal, but life is just brimming with opportunites to learn things.
And dsg, I said that life is sacred. That means no fucking with it, pardon my French.
Ok about my kid. She just turned four and a half. She wrote her Christmas list--tedy bar, doll with shine har
She can read, she speaks two languages, she is an excellent dancer. We love her up, and she has somehow given us back more energy than she uses up. So we just started again. And I better leave the computer screen.
What about just changing the nature of our interactions because it's the better thing to do?
Gina, that's your view, and you're entitled to it. I believe it's not a bad view, just that it's not for everyone.
You do love to argue for the sake of arguing, don't you? I told you I'm finished with that subject and I meant it. If you can't see, it's not time for you to do so. End of subject.
wv: doporp
Sometimes, when I tell the story of my life people think it's depressing.
**
Let me guess, J.M. They also wonder how you can be so calm and/or humorous while telling, right? I get that all the time. I think it's the resilience of youth along with the passage of time that takes away the sadness and replaces it, at least in my case, as something of an adventurous chapter. But when someone's not been through the exact thing, they don't get it.
And not to diminish anything at all, but probably everyone has gone through some sort of "Oh My God! How'd You Get Through That!" chapter in their life that can now be told with calm and humor.
Am I making any sense?
Probably not. usually don't anyway.
;
My daughter is in her thirties now, she was an infant when her mother died. In a rather sad turn, she watched her maternal grandmother die in the same bed ( albeit a different home), decades later. We watched "Moutie" in shifts over the last few days, there was but a minute when neither of us were in the room, and that is when her grandmother died. The hospice nurse later told us that that was common, that Martha chose that moment, to spare us the instant of her death. I don't know how many of you have been in "attendance" at the passing of another, but you will know what I mean if you have. There is an unmistakable absence of spirit, and a peace that is quite literally painful in it's finality. I would suppose that a photo of Martha in her final days would be quite frightening to some, and not at all a vision of the woman she had been. Yet when she left us, the pain and the worry had vanished, and her face had eased into one that recalled her youth.
Michael - tomorrow is the 16th anniversary of my maternal grandmother's death. I stood at her bedside, with my mother's brothers, holding her hands and sending her off at the moment of her death. I felt at that moment that I was a surrogate for my mother, and was grateful that I was able to be 'present' for my Nana, as we told her that it was okay to stop struggling, that we loved her...as painful as her passing was for us, it was peaceful for her when she finally let go. I hope this doesn't sound morbid, but it was a really beautiful experience for me. I was given my Nana's Claddagh ring after she passed, and I have her with me every day as I wear her ring.
As one of those who knows Ferrethead to be a real person, I can say she'd make a fantastic Mama... just ask her cats.
Just because someone doesn't have children, it doesn't mean they can't make a difference in non-blood-related kids' lives. I have not reproduced either, but I have a very close, loving relationshop with my godkids, ages 13 & 4.
But having said that, not every person on the planet is cut out to be a parent, IMHO.
WV: "subbe" ...as in substitute parent?!
It's amazing the lengths to which people will go to have children who share some of their genetic substance. There is a case of a fifty year old woman who had already had five children marrying a younger man to whom she wants to give children. Her eggs were no longer any good, so she had one of her daughter's eggs fertilized with her new husband's sperm and implanted. So the new fertilized egg carries part her old husband's and part her new husband's genetic material. And her daughter now has a daughter and a sister. The end of Chinatown, I guess.
Oops, make that "relationship"! I don't believe in forced child shopping either!
The thing about kids is that it gives you the one great opportunity for selfless love of other human beings, and when caught up in things, parents often forget that this was their reason for deciding to have kids in the first place. Yet in in my opinion it's very important to remember that child-rearing can give you wrong-headed illusions about your capacity for selfless love. The child's perspective always comes first.
Your daughter sounds like a lovely child, Hartal. And I wouldn't worry too much yet, not all children have learned to spell at four and a half years...
(You can laugh, it's a joke)... give her 6 months.
You know of the child who didn't speak for 5 years, don't you? Tests were done, specialists brought in... one evening he said "The peas are cold"
Mom cried out in disbelief, "Jimmy,You've never spoken before!"
"Everything was OK until now", Jimmy replied...
One of my proudest moments as a parent is that when our older daughter started preschool the teachers told us that though she was among the youngest she was the first to rush to comfort a crying child. When then candidate Obama implored fathers to teach their children empathy, I knew I had the politician for whom I would fight.
I've had some proud parental moments too, over the last 18 years.
My older son, as a toddler, knew he had to brush his teeth well. Otherwise the evil Leprechaun Perry O'Dontal might steal into his bedroom while he slept and seed tooth decay. The evil Perry O'D, I told the child, knows the difference between the scent of well brushed teeth and teeth merely smeared with paste. If the evil Perry O'
D stops by at night and sniffs a fraud, your teeth will rot! So brush well.
Sp my son brushed his teeth well. Everything was fine. The evil Perry O'D was a family myth.
We moved to an upscale town famous for its good schools. Everything was fine. Then, in March, the kindergarten teacher prepared to celebrate St. Patrick's Day. Does anyone know what a Leprechaun is? she asked the class.
Oh, I do, said my son. And I know about a really evil one who . . . .
The kindergarten teacher had never heard of Perry O'D. Or so she claimed, when she called me to discuss the issue.
I've been thinking about this and your situation. It's true that some people aren't cut out to be parents, and some parents are lousy ones, but there is a lot more to it than that. No one is perfect in all senses. Some of us have strengths where others' have weaknesses and vice-versa. I think, ferret, that this is more about conquering your fears. You do have a good heart, that is something apparent to many of us. You come across as mentally stable and financially solvent. If the one thing keeping you back from a child that was in the same position that you once were in is your fear of the unknown, aren't you being controlled by your fears instead of controlling them? Maybe that's one of your life lessons.
Oracle, I don't think we should argue someone into having a kid. For example, saying having fear is being mastered by fear. But what ferrethead said is true. Foster children can come with emotional wounds, and it can be challenging to raise many of them. This is a challenge that no one should blithely tell another to assume. I am an atheist, though I would say this is God's work. And not everyone can do God's work well. I don't know whether I could.
Also, I have been trying to suggest that having kids is not the only way to make a connection to the next generation. Ferrethead for example espouses a politics that has the long term health of our Republic at heart. That is a connection, a real one.
A lot of unusual silence on this thread...
"A lot of unusual silence on this thread..."
.
And I thank you for that.
What are you thanking me for, anonymous?
In the history of this floating rock, many, many species have come and gone. Humans, too, will one day be extinct. Probably before the state of affairs can be described as a 'void'.
Having been raised in a religious home, I'm no stranger to the 'holy bible'. One of the snippets of brain teaser I've always liked from that collection of human ideas is the notion that 'the first shall be last'. In my own human mind, I like to think in terms of a continuum of many, not just the two extremes. I see them as an endlessly rotating shell game of sorts, like olympic medalists doing some kind of Reebok stepdance cum musical chairs.
Extinction awaits, and in the end, none of us gets even a bronze.
TS, in the long run, we'll all be dead, but in the short run, there's still quite a lot of value to be done.
BTW, we just picked up a TC Helicon VoiceTone Harmony-M. That's a really cool piece of equipment for creating vocal harmonies.
wv: iackle--Gina, are you messing with me? ;)
dsgonzale6, no disagreement from me there. My point was more to the 'the purpose of life is procreation' set. I don't see any real purpose, but the existence of love and pain points the way toward peaceful coexistence.
~
That sounds like a fun toy. Probably cheaper than voice lessons for the bass player ;)
TS, on the basis of an hour of testing, the sound is very realistic.
Huh?
Would you make Hartal go away--he's annoying.
And TS, procreating is not the whole purpose of life. I never said that. It's one of the purposes, how can anyone in their right mind think that was wrong? Unless less you're some sort of rabid nihilist.
I love this.wv: curbiona
ps. I hate to snark, but do you think La Salle will get the ax?
I didn't say 'whole purpose'. I said 'purpose'. I don't believe reproduction is even a purpose of life, in the sense that those who don't are not leading less purposeful lives than those who do.
WV: panti. *Now* we're talking!
I would agree that procreation can be "a" purpose, as long as that allows for other valid purposes that a person might pursue to the exclusion of procreation.
You're such selfish buttheads. God.
You think you're the only ones that have this idea? Look around you. How many people in ourr age group have your attitude? It's not just here that I notice it. It's my in family, siblings, cousins, schoolmates, everywhere. We're like the salmon-- we're dying out.
Funny, I thought the human population was still growing significantly.
That's why the salmon are being overfished, dsg.
Well if there is no procreation here in the US--and so far only the Latino population seems to be saving us from below replacement rates of reproduction, Japan's is 1.3 per woman and Italy and Spain seem headed for demographic collapse--then you guys won't have enough people working to pay into social security for your retirement or make it possible for your portfolio to give you the returns that you will need, much less expect.
Society can only exist as on going intergenerational affair. It seems that dsgonzale6 and too sense want to free ride on the process. I'll have to agree with Oracle that you dudes are coming across as pretty selfish.
There is indeed a duty to protect the procreation process and to provide infants with the protection and education and resources that they need to become adults.
hartal, you say "There is indeed a duty to protect the procreation process and to provide infants with the protection and education and resources that they need to become adults." The second part of your sentence is perfectly uncontroversial; I know I don't disagree with it, and I doubt TS disagrees with it. But what specifically do you mean by "a duty to protect the procreation process"? I think you are misreading what I've said. Specifically, I said "We all should be thankful for those gifts and should also be prepared to use those gifts for more than just our own benefit. If it's your children, that's great, but as long as it's something besides yourself is the most important thing." How is that selfish?
wv: quaysi :-X
Well per the moderator's request I am trying to get an argument started. I don't see how you and toosense are giving a positive moral value to procreation. It is because procreation has value for society, for example, that business which has its privileges from society (e.g. limited liability) must respect the procreative process, e.g. not punishing women who need maternity leave and providing women with the paid time to express milk once they return to work. It just did not seem that you and toosense were giving much positive value to the whole reproduction process; of course one need not be directly involved in it to recognize the moral duty of supporting it.
At any rate, I am trying to figure out what the debate here may be.
Now I don't want to get involved in a prolonged knock out fight with you, so I am hoping that FH, TS, Oracle and others chime in. When you respond next, I may back off until others have voiced their opinions.
A duty to protect the procreation process? I agree with DSG: what the hell does that mean? I can tell Mr. Hartal what it means to Gina AKA Oracle: it means that women who have abortions will burn in hell. If that's not your view, do explain what your view is. Are gays lax in their "duty"? Earlier you say "Also, I have been trying to suggest that having kids is not the only way to make a connection to the next generation." Now you are taking TS and DSG to task for saying essentially the same thing? Get your story straight.
hartal, I said that procreation was a valid purpose, how more specific must I be? "I would agree that procreation can be 'a' purpose, as long as that allows for other valid purposes that a person might pursue to the exclusion of procreation." In other words, as far as society is concerned, procreation would be included among many valid purposes. As far as individuals are concerned, they should be able to choose among the valid purposes, as many or as few as they feel they can satisfy, without being compelled to choose any specific one.
Excuse me, I didn't see your post. I stand corrected, it's about letting your wife breast feed at her desk. "At any rate, I am trying to figure out what the debate here may be." Well, there probably isn't one, but you'll find it, keep looking.
The picture, BTW, is of Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange.
Good questions, Michael.
No I do not mean a woman is obliged to carry to term or gays/lesbians forced to adopt or use artificial insemination.
I am saying that society depends on procreation; it is necessarily an ongoing intergenerational affair. So opportunity has to be provided to women to choose to have babies. They have to have access to paid maternity leave, perinatal and prenatal care, and work time to express milk. Business screams murder but since procreation is a social value and business only exists by way of society its institutional imperatives must respect the constraints of society.
People need not have children to help in the procreative process. They can support politicians who support the above policies; they can vote for taxes even they don't have kids that will benefit from them; they can help at the YMCA as dsgonzale6 does.
I hope that clarifies, but perhaps not.
Yes I think procreation is more than a valid purpose; it is the basis of society, and and as a foundation for society it has greater value than the term "valid purpose' implies. So that may be the disagreement.
Express milk at your desk? Michael twin fan do better than that.
So other than trying to start an argument as your hostess has implored of you, you have no dispute at all with DSG and TS.
I think there is a real disagreement between toosense/dsgonzale6 and Oracle around the value of procreation. I am trying to explore what it could be. At any rate, have you seen Children of Man? Why is it that the animals other than humans seem to be still procreating?
"take a few minutes to gently massage your breasts down and out toward the nipple. If possible, apply warm, moist wash cloths to your breasts three to five minutes before expressing. Thinking about or looking at a picture of your baby helps stimulate a let-down reflex.
Support your breast between your fingers and thumb, which are placed about 1 to 1-1/2 inches back from your nipple. You may have to adjust this position forward or back to get the best results.
Push inward, straight back toward your chest wall to get behind the milk ducts.
Next, roll your thumb and fingers toward your nipple. This motion is not a squeezing or sliding motion, but rather a rolling motion as if you are making thumb and finger prints. Do not squeeze your nipple, only the areola.
Repeat this process, rotating your hand around your breast.
Switching breasts every few minutes will improve your results. It allows your milk to come down and collect in the ducts of the breast you are not expressing."
What boss wouldn't pay for that?
You're not a teenager, Michael, so the scintillation you get from that description should be minimal. But perhaps not. You also don't seem to get my point about why society and the bosses in particular should pay for that. It's part of the cost of labor that labor be able to reproduce itself.
It was a joke, Hartal. You overthink things, young man. It was your clumsily worded assertion that women be paid to "express milk"... no, at work they are paid to work, you imply this is like an additional work duty and an employer's duty to "protect procreation". She can go to the goddamn bathroom. Paid.
Procreation of healthy, intelligent and motivated children is a social obligation in the sense that people have to support the process in some way, but that also means society has to be organized to allow women to feed breast milk to their children.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/13/health/13brea.htm
You know what I meant; her pay shouldn't be docked for the time she's at the designated area to express milk.
"her pay shouldn't be docked for the time she's at the designated area to express milk." Agreed. Goodnight.
So three men close out the discussion on mothers and motherhood. Well at least we agree.
hartal, my issue with Gina/Oracle is that she believes that human life begins at conception and that the mother should thus have no right to an abortion. My view is that the Supreme Court has ruled that women have a privacy right to control their bodies that allows them to choose to have abortions until the fetus is viable, at which point the state has an interest in protecting its life. If I seem a bit forceful in making my points with Gina on the issue of procreation, it's because I understand that she has a pretty forceful view herself.
Yes, I have to be very careful that my putting a high value on procreation does not imply support for what is called the pro life position. I want to marry natalism with choice and family planning and the freedom to terminate pregnancies when even one of some genetic screens come up negative, but I haven't done that yet.
A free ride. That's interesting. All that paid time off means that some childless male has to pick up the slack on the job. Not to complain, but let's not fool ourselves, here. Women get pregnant for three reasons, primarily, and all as a side effect of satisfying the sexual urge. The first is carelessness with regard to the use of birth control, the second also carelessness concerning the absence of means to afford the luxury of parenting, and the third is to enjoy that luxury by accepting the cost and time burdens responsibly. Now, I'm not a heartless bastard, regardless of what gina (the Oracle) says. Children are members of society, and as such, require a certain level of support to avoid unpleasant societal consequences. I have little problem pitching in my fair share to correct mistakes that are made in pursuit of earthly pleasures. However, I do, as always, resent pitching in to correct poorly planned mistakes for those capable of alternatives. Perhaps this is what gina finds so offensive-- that I would assist the impoverished over the privileged. Entitlement is far different from charity. Those with the education and the means to prevent a pregnancy that would burden co-workers, for example, are acting out of a sense of entitlement when they go ahead with such plans anyway. We're not talking about genuine need for assistance when childless males in the workplace are expected to pick up the slack while a pregnant co-worker attends to her family in their suburban home with the two car garage and the registry at Baby Gap. Let's get real. This is a welfare scam of the most blatant kind. And to think these folks have the nerve to come around with their hand out while mothers in true need practically jump from delivery to dress for their second job to afford formula because they're just too stressed and exhausted and the whole world hangs off their teats. And with a country increasingly full of the first kind, I really do feel no shame in laughing off the implication that I'm not pulling my societal weight because I choose not to practice such foolishness myself. Let's face it, most people become parents because they screwed up, or out of vanity, (consider the number of parentless children overlooked in favor of DIY models). Few are the parents who proudly hoist the burden of societal continuity without leaning on everyone else to make it possible for them to maintain a standard of living the childless earn. And in the end, I'm just sick and tired of 'family values' that promote reproductive control of others. If it's not outlawing abortion, it's insisting that the childless are selfish slackers. Have a baby if that's what you choose to do. I'll likewise make my own choice, thank you, including trailing after mothers picking up their loose ends without a word... until I'm attacked for not doing my part. Please!
I can't follow what you're saying, but this discussion seems to have touched a nerve.
But you're complaining abou slack on the job? So you think reproducing and raising the next generation--and children need a lot of attention in the first three years, and that attention requires work--is not part of the work of society? Who's going to pay for your social security? Whose labor will be behind the returns on your portfolio on which you depend for your retirement?
It does not matter what the reason is for people to have kids; the point is that people have to have kids if society is to be viable because society is necessarily an intergenerational affair.
Gee, TS, not a bit of the romantic in you, is there? I can only imagine what you really think about ferret's existence. It's a good thing that not everyone born in early America or the depression, or the Gold Rush, or now even, takes your enlightened view of things.
Just for the record, I never worked until my youngest was school aged. I've always sent them to private school--never took public funds to educate my children. I never once expected anyone to pick up my slack. I rarely left my kids with babysitters, or even had parents willing to watch them. I did all the work myself. And I've never been anywhere but Disneyland.
And, it's gonna be my kids, not yours that are part of the machine that run the system when you can't. Think about that when you are bitching about why no one cares in your old age.
And dsg, your contributions are pretty selfish. You want to be able to say you made a fair contribution while doing the least amount of real work possible. That's slacking just as bad as any working mom expecting to get a lighter ride. The true working hero is someone like Xootsuit, or Hartal.
Have you ever considered just why feminism has been so embraced by corporate America?
One more thing, dsg. I really am tired of this argument. But if life doesn't begin biologically at the moment of conception, just when does it begin? And if the zygote/embryo/fetus/baby isn't alive, then why the need for a physical abortion--which essentially stops the development? Why not just will the baby away if it's so inconsequential?
wv:dedfei
I believe it's the geneticist Francis Collins who makes this point. It does not make sense to say that the embryo has the potential to become a living being as an acorn has the potential to be an oak. It is not the case, after all, of the embryo that it grows: it is grown by the mother. It is not a potential living being ; the mother is the potential mother of a living being. Abortion need not result in the death of a potential living being.
Oops the argument comes from Francis Kaplan, not the distinguished geneticist Francis Collins. You can read it here:
http://www.humaniteinenglish.com/spip.php?article637
Bleah...My fault for not taking it down.
LOL... so it's from the wrong distinguished Francis? That's a real problem, isn't it? You get all these distinguished folks together, who can tell them apart? To weed out the poseur, see who mixes the peas and mashed potatoes all up and eats it with a soup spoon...
gina said, 'Gee, TS, not a bit of the romantic in you, is there? I can only imagine what you really think about ferret's existence.'
This absolute misunderstanding of my point was as predictable as rain today in SF. Gina, I love children. Might even have some one day. It's the idiot parents who think children are an absolute necessity like cable TV that I don't like. If they can afford it, by all means, go for it. But I do have a hard time taking advice from a group of people who, for the most part, can't even make good on the practice they're condemning me for avoiding.
Not that's it's my place to judge ferret's family situation, but if there is any blame to pass around, it certainly doesn't go to ferret.
As to the incessant point you make about your children's vendetta against me for not multiplying, I can only say that if one seeks an example of selfishness, that is it. In response to hartal's point about social security, this is one of those damned if you do/don't scenarios. All the money spent raising children doesn't get invested (not that this means much in the immediate moment) to ensure that a paltry ss check is not the bulk of one's retirement funds. You're overlooking the fact that the childless are simply financially better off as a result, and in less need of government assistance in the end.
Again, to sum up. I choose not to have children. It doesn't mean I hate yours. That's a false dichotomy.
Wow you got me checking something I let be known that had to be checked; I share my sources so that others can follow the path. Remember I'm not Arun Gupta. The argument, at any rate, stands on its own. It does not need Collins' credentials.
"In response to hartal's point about social security, this is one of those damned if you do/don't scenarios. All the money spent raising children doesn't get invested (not that this means much in the immediate moment) to ensure that a paltry ss check is not the bulk of one's retirement funds. You're overlooking the fact that the childless are simply financially better off as a result, and in less need of government assistance in the end."
Not following
Gina, I think my contributions reflect those matters where I can contribute to the best of my ability. You don't ask a bricklayer to bake a cake, you ask him to build an oven.
TS, what it seems to boil down to is one's view of humanity. Are humans a force for good, or not? I think I understand and appreciate the point that both Gina and Hartal each make about "slackers" or "society is an intergenerational affair." On the whole, they (and I) have concluded that the universe is better off with humanity in it than not. As such, humanity in general must procreate to ensure that this goodness continues. Again, however, that goes for society in general; it doesn't necessarily mean that each person must procreate. Also, as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't mean that procreation should be left to chance. I appreciate the argument that a woman could very well be aborting the next Gandhi or Thomas Edison; the problem is that, so far, the nature of the child that is produced is entirely a matter of chance. In that case, in my view, there's simply no good reason to deny women the ability to choose to abort, at least up to the point that the fetus is able to survive outside the mother.
I couldn't agree with you more dsgonzale6.
hartal, you're a smart guy... I don't get why you have such a hard time following my posts. True, my sentence structure is not the simplest. Let me break it down:
No children = more disposable income to invest in retirement, thus reducing the need to rely on social security to fund it.
Children = the inverse.
So the concern about social security becomes less relevant if one has no children. Ironically, those with the most concern also have their own children upon whom they can become a burden.
Well, Gina is against abortion. Hartal seems to approve of it if the "screening" process turns up a lemon. Take 'em all to term or weed out the dummies? Such a dilemma.
So,abortion is a matter of letting a woman decide whether or not she kills her child? The price or value of a human has now been reduced down to economic convenience? I think what I said regarding euthanasia is the natural outcome of this philosophy. And I say fine, it's no longer up for debate--but be prepared to live and die by your sword and don't expect any caring from me or my children or the children that you imposed these rules upon.
And TS, how's that 401k treatin' ya these days?
No there genetic screens for all kinds of disorders, Michael. I don't think there is a clear case to abort in the case of Downs. But there are other disorders that would result in overbearing pain before an early and painful death, and for those disorders there is a strong case to allow abortion upon a negative result. I think Ruth Cowan is one of the most important experts on this topic in which many of us became interested during Palin's candidacy.
Genetic screens can be justified as pro natalist too. That is, older women and couples with chances of double recessions that would otherwise not have babies take a chance knowing that they can abort in the case of a grave disorder. Don't let the Christian fundamentalists and the Pope following Cahtolics monopolize what it means to be pro-life. Pro life is not in necessary contradiction to pro choice.
double recessives, not double recessions. Wonder why I would have made that slip.
gina, as I said:
'All the money spent raising children doesn't get invested (not that this means much in the immediate moment) to ensure that a paltry ss check is not the bulk of one's retirement funds.
I'd be in even worse shape if I had extra mouths to feed, school tuitions to pay, cell phones to buy...
As to the abortion/euthanasia debate, abortion isn't murder, euthanasia is, unless it is the wish of the one whose life is ending. I'm all in favor of voluntary euthanasia, and a woman's right to choose. You take an odd delight in predicting your children's role in what we all agree is murder (involuntary euthanasia), while you condemn those who practice a medical choice that, while controversial, is not considered murder by all. I can say without reservation that I don't condone murder. I don't think you can say the same, gina.
Darlin', Cucumber, if abortion ain't killin' somethin' just what is it then? And children are unbelievably less expensive than you might imagine. No more than say, a trip to Venice or two or three.
And, on behalf of all the aborted babies, all 45+million of them, I would say that they were probably murdered involuntarily also.
Yes, I would say that. And to the Nazi's the Jews were also meaningless globs of snot. Which brings us to a very important point in this argument.
That you and I are in complete agreement that you're worse than a Nazi just by the sheer number of people that have been murdered unjustly.
What people?
Gina, I've admitted before that attempts to reach agreement on this are futile. If I felt as you do, I'd be just as stubbornly adamant about the topic. I'm glad I don't feel that way. :)
Hmm. I said I was finished with this argument. You guys brought it up again. Maybe we just keep engaging in pleasant social intercourse then.
wv: manderty...how are they doing this?
No is denying that the embryo is alive; one question though is whether it is yet a potential living being in the way that an acorn is a potential oak tree. But the embryo is grown by the mother; the pregnant woman is indeed a potential mother but that does not mean that the embryo itself is not yet a potential living being.
excise last 'not'
By the way, I loved the Perry O'Dontal story.
indeed. I enjoyed that story, too. We had one character similar to that. But he was called the 'Spy Elf'. Spy Elf watched all year long for Santa, rather relentlessly. It really worked on the poor little guy--who just also happened to be born on Christmas to boot.
Post a Comment