[36chambers]

10 Things That Only Parents Will Understand (and other gatekeeping bullshit)

[Will Hunt]

10 Things That Only Parents Will Understand (and other gatekeeping bullshit)

What are the things that dog owners understand which the rest of us are oblivious to? There must be some!

[tomtom]

10 Things That Only Parents Will Understand (and other gatekeeping bullshit)

What are the things that dog owners understand which the rest of us are oblivious to? There must be some!

Clearing up shit for a lifetime rather than just a few years...

[Oldmanmatt]

10 Things That Only Parents Will Understand (and other gatekeeping bullshit)

What are the things that dog owners understand which the rest of us are oblivious to? There must be some!

Fucking black haired Collies “blowing” their their summer coat. Vacuuming twice a day and yet still having to empty the vacuum and unclog the brushes six times in the lounge and seven in the hallway.

(We have three dogs. The eldest being a large 8 yr old, long haired, Retriever, who sheds, but the frickin Border Collie (just turned 2) doesn’t shed, it fucking explodes. Repeatedly).

[36chambers]

10 Things That Only Parents Will Understand (and other gatekeeping bullshit)

What are the things that dog owners understand which the rest of us are oblivious to? There must be some!

That puppies are only cute through darwinism, as that's the only thing stopping you from throwing them into a river.

[spidermonkey09]

That puppies are only cute through darwinism, as that's the only thing stopping you from throwing them into a river.

I knew you'd come round to my method of dog training in the end.

[Bonjoy]

I've never liked arguments that exclude or demote somebody else's view because they don't have kids or are not directly affected by the issue being discussed (though when it comes to race/gender issues it's obvious that white/men/cis people etc won't have the perspective that a minority will have - so they need to listen to and think very carefully about what's being said before arriving at their own conclusion). Obviously people who don't have children are still capable of empathy and understanding the issues.

...

I think that's what "those people" are drawing upon when they roll out the "you don't have kids" argument. But they shouldn't because it denies the other person agency, empathy, is insulting, and could well be very hurtful indeed.

At the risk of blowing the discussion off course and creating another topic split, why do you feel the need to make this special exception from denial of agency, empathy and giving insult/hurt to "white/male/cis people"?
Is this a special class of human that is so innately lacking in empathy and perspective that the normal rules of discourse shouldn't apply? Or is it that you don't want to undermine your rhetorical freedom to have your cake and eat it according to the topic under discussion?

[Will Hunt]

I've never liked arguments that exclude or demote somebody else's view because they don't have kids or are not directly affected by the issue being discussed (though when it comes to race/gender issues it's obvious that white/men/cis people etc won't have the perspective that a minority will have - so they need to listen to and think very carefully about what's being said before arriving at their own conclusion). Obviously people who don't have children are still capable of empathy and understanding the issues.

...

I think that's what "those people" are drawing upon when they roll out the "you don't have kids" argument. But they shouldn't because it denies the other person agency, empathy, is insulting, and could well be very hurtful indeed.

At the risk of blowing the discussion off course and creating another topic split, why do you feel the need to make this special exception from denial of agency, empathy and giving insult/hurt to "white/male/cis people"?
Is this a special class of human that is so innately lacking in empathy and perspective that the normal rules of discourse shouldn't apply? Or is it that you don't want to undermine your rhetorical freedom to have your cake and eat it according to the topic under discussion?

Slightly separate issue (I think). In discussions that I've seen about trans rights or BLM I've seen white people or straight people excluded from the conversation and told that they need to be quiet and accept what they're being told because they can't understand the issue having not been on the receiving end of racism or transphobia. I think it's true to say that I can't personally know the extent of systemic racism or transphobia because I'm not exposed to it, and because it's risky for a racist/transphobe to be openly so (i.e. they could lose their job etc) it is actually obscured from most white/straight people's view - we have to rely on the affected people to explain their experience to us in good faith and the onus is upon us to take that information at face value. To me it seems unarguable that we have a problem with systemic racism and that we have a fair amount of transphobia in our society, so where people put forwards arguments denying it to be the case I can understand why they're being told that they "don't get it".
If a white/straight person can see that there is a problem and gives an opinion in good faith on what to do to make things better but is excluded from the debate on the grounds of their whiteness/straightness, that's a problem I think. It seems obvious to me that in a discussion about equality that both parties will need to be involved.

This is different to the "you've not got kids so you don't get it" argument because you don't have to have children of your own to "get it", but I can see how it might throw it into sharper focus for some people. To put it in a much simpler way, if you watched a disaster film set in the future, do you think you'd have a stronger reaction to it if the cast of people being drowned in rising seas/burned in raging forest fires/made refugees by horrible wars were replaced by family members and close friends? I suspect most people would find it a harder watch!

Does that all make sense? I'm not sure myself. I could be quite wrong.

[Bonjoy]

I get what you're saying and it's obviously well meaning. I just don't see that it's meaningfully harder for "white/men/cis people" to empathise with other races and genders, than it is for non parents to see things from the point of view of parents. You're going to get empathy and total lack of it in both instances.

[Will Hunt]

I think we both agree with each other 

[seankenny]

Having kids certainly increase your consumption - of everything. But it also gives you a different perspective and a greater stake in the future.. and future wellbeing of the world. N=1 etc..

It was really just a personal perspective. Becoming a parent quite late in life (46) having watched many friends around me have kids and me thinking to a degree 'so what' etc.. has made me appreciate that for me it changes my outlook on many things. From air pollution (pushing a pram next to a road for a couple of years is an eye opener to how bad it is...) to quite literally "what kind of world am I bringing him up into". A child is a great mirror to your soul - and often that mirror isnt flattering!

Theres lots of things in life I've not done - or not had happen to me - that may change my views on things - but my statement was meant as a comment (in a positive way) on what has. Not in any way meant to say I'm better than you etc... which I think was the thrust of Leadsoms comment...

Speaking as someone in their late 40s, no kids and don't want them, there's almost no way I can read the sentiments in the first quote, expressed like that, and *not* bristle. That's a purely emotional response from what can feel like a socially sanctified way of insulting people, particularly childless women and homosexuals, that sits on a shelf of ready to use phrases. I know you don't mean it like that! (Or I do when I read the second quote) But it's very hard not to have a negative reaction to the way this is commonly expressed. (Not having a go here, this is nothing personal!)

If, as I think you mean it, that you're comparing your pre-child to your post-child self, then that's great... but how often do these sentiments come with this caveat? I tend to get the sense that parents assume their sudden emotional expansion on producing offspring means that non-parents' emotional lives don't continue to expand, or indeed expand in different ways. Many families are deeply myopic, and lots of parents can't see beyond the ends of their noses. And of course whether I had kids or didn't, my depth of feeling about the world would never approach that of someone like Austin, Woolf or Mantel.

In fact I'd go so far as to say that society absolutely needs childless women, more so than it needs childless men... 

[dunnyg]

My brains not really on at the moment, so why do you think the world needs childless women mpre than childless men? Not kicking off just interested.

[seankenny]

My brains not really on at the moment, so why do you think the world needs childless women mpre than childless men? Not kicking off just interested.

Not having a familiy allows people to explore other roles and approaches in life, but I'm not sure men need this quite so much as an awful lot of the burden of childcare and emotional work of family falls on women. (Except with right-on UKB dads obviously.  ) We live in a patriachal world in which women are still second class citizens, and often for women to fulfil themselves outside of the family means eschewing family altogether. And I think that contribution childless women can give is really important, whether thats acting as a community caregiver, intellectual, artist, or just plain old witchy savant, simply because our world is made predominantly by and for men. Childless women give us perspectives that can be outside that, they are less beholden to men too, put that together and I think that's why they're often derided and scorned. But often the world needs what it doesn't like!

[tomtom]

Societal perception and treatment of women who choose not to have children is very different from that of men who choose not to have children...

It’s normally pretty judgemental and frequently negative. Things I don’t like - and I’ve tried to re-wrote this paragraph about 5 times and decided it’s best I stop.

However, widening the issue a little, There are lots of experiences in life that can lead to wholesale changes in your perspective. Loss, trauma, finding fame and/or fortune (for the other side of the coin) - the issue for me is the zealousness that some people exude after this “you should....” etc...

Some parents can be especially bad at this. Some not.

[ferret]

Having a child places a burden on the planet, that is an undeniable fact.
The point about being a parent expanding viewpoints and increasing long term buy in on important issues is a good one.
I'd say adopting/fostering a child would avoid the environmental cost yet still create the long term buy in all while creating a better living situation for a child.
Lastly I don't think we should be judging anybody on their choice to have children or not. It is tied in to us mentally, socially, and biologically. In no way should it be equated to other life choices like driving a Prius instead of a Range Rover.

[Doylo]

Whilst I couldn’t comprehend having more than one myself surely having 3/4 these days should be deemed extreme gluttony and climate terrorism (and I include my sister in that). I’ve just seen a pic of my mates sister with her newborn and other 3 kids and my first thought was ‘you’re an actual fucking lunatic’.

[Anti]

I think it becomes a problem when parents lose perspective. I never particularly wanted children, I don't particularly like children either. Now I've got a 2.5y/o I still don't really like (other) children. I'm under no illusion; I know that without her I'd probably be having way more fun in a general sense. We'd still be able to hop in the van at weekends for spontaneous climbing trips across the country. We'd be able to stay up past 9pm. We could arrange to go out for pizza or a curry without also having to arrange a grandparent to have a sleepover etc.

That said, I had absolutely no concept of how much I could possibly love someone. Watching someone grow up so intimately into a funny, adventurous toddler who can roll burritos, wants to set the table or walk up to the river and look for beetles etc. It completely blindsided me and not something I think I'd have ever known without having a child. Maybe people do feel like this without children but I certainly didn't, so it's given me that.

Anyone who thinks parenting is some sort of magical journey to happiness is nuts. It'd be like being a dog owner and enjoying scraping shit off the pavement. It does give you access to a whole new world of action and consequence, a responsibility to a brand new human who looks entirely upon you for cues as to how to react to the world, but it doesn't potentially make you a better person; there's tonnes of shit parents, I might be one of them to someone!

[mrjonathanr]

Nice post Anti.

[JohnM]

Whilst I couldn’t comprehend having more than one myself surely having 3/4 these days should be deemed extreme gluttony and climate terrorism (and I include my sister in that). I’ve just seen a pic of my mates sister with her newborn and other 3 kids and my first thought was ‘you’re an actual fucking lunatic’.

I think having kids is a compulsion for some people. I know a couple of people who are on 3-4 kids and with every extra kid their lives, health, finances and relationship with their partner gets evidently worse but they just cannot stop.

I probably won't end up having a kid but I would be lying if I said it was for climate change reasons.

[Oldmanmatt]

Whilst I couldn’t comprehend having more than one myself surely having 3/4 these days should be deemed extreme gluttony and climate terrorism (and I include my sister in that). I’ve just seen a pic of my mates sister with her newborn and other 3 kids and my first thought was ‘you’re an actual fucking lunatic’.

I think having kids is a compulsion for some people. I know a couple of people who are on 3-4 kids and with every extra kid their lives, health, finances and relationship with their partner gets evidently worse but they just cannot stop.

I probably won't end up having a kid but I would be lying if I said it was for climate change reasons.

Ha!

As I almost constantly mention (I wonder why), I have four.

Not actually through over indulging in sub-duvet athletics (with four, this is not possible), but through blending two families.

There is no doubt that there is a good deal of strife that comes with this. Not a day goes by that there isn’t something happening, given that all the usual childhood dramas have four times more probability of occurring at any given moment.

However, ultimately it is a hugely chaotic, loud, messy, all consuming, bizarre, odyssey; that fills our lives.

I’m currently occupying the role of “house husband” (Polly’s bosses are a couple. He has a stage four cancer, entering it’s final act and his wife is not up to dealing with that, their own kids and running their business; so Polly has gone back full time to run the show and I won’t be going back to work until April). Today I will squeeze in a few hours training (having already got four teenagers out the door to school, including two lost pairs of trousers and one school tie), clean the house again (because dog number three is still exploding black fur in all directions), take No.4 to visit with Granny, pick up No.1 from an after school study group and then cook a stir fry for six (effectively) adults, as well as remember to pick up hay for guinea pigs and about 30kg of dog food (double, so I don’t have to do it again before new year). I also have to go in tonight to assess the new staff member, who’s just set his second lot if problems at the wall and deal with whatever has cropped up there, today and over the weekend.

I other words, we are alive.
Really, really alive and no time to think about death or loss (or at least, not too much) and I wouldn’t change it for the world.
Until I was 35 and No.1 came along, I bounced from adventure to adventure, with little regard for social norms or “expectations”.
That hasn’t changed, only the nature of the adventure. I taught my kids to SCUBA dive this summer (that’s scary!), I (basically ) throw them off cliffs or down rivers in kayaks (or just a wetsuit, depends) and my heart is in my mouth every time.
Scariest shit I’ve ever experienced.