Despite overpopulation and the inability of most parents to meet their children’s needs in a satisfactory way, people who have done little more than have large numbers of children and grandchildren and great-grandchildren are socially lauded, as if they have done something excellent and praiseworthy. I see and hear this every day, even in reputable news sources.
I recently saw a billboard advertisement that showed a picture of a set of twin babies. The caption beneath them read, “Double the love.” The meaning of this could be ambiguous, until we consider that parents don’t realistically have double the love to offer two kids. Really the ad is saying that these “lucky” parents will now receive double the love, based on the backward idea that children are there to love their parents. But children don’t love their parents: they need their parents. Yet most people don’t know the difference between love and need. This is why the idea sells.
When I was a child, my father often told me that he loved me unconditionally. And he did, as long as I met the unspoken condition of putting his needs first.
If a man rapes a woman, then people consider it okay to remove him from society to protect other women. Yet if parents abuse their child, even in extreme ways, it’s considered legally (and often socially) acceptable for them to continue having more children, even if they have undergone no rehabilitation. It seems pretty obvious that in our world the right to procreate trumps the right of the child to be protected.
Around the world, many prisoners, despite being denied most social rights, are offered conjugal visits, which, among other things, afford them the right to procreate.
On the news, we see refugees streaming out of war-torn and poverty-stricken countries with little children and babies in tow. We feel for the little ones, but do we in any way hold their parents accountable for having brought them into a world of obvious misery?
Many times my mother told me she would die in order to save my life. And I think she actually meant it. What she didn’t say, though, because I think it never crossed her mind, was that she would die to save my life as long as I fit into the mold of who she required me to be. When I stopped fitting into that mold she instead wanted to kill me — and tried to, psychologically.
As our world goes down the tubes, more and more I hear people say, “You need a license to drive a car, and often pet adoption agencies do a home visit before they let you adopt a pet — but anyone can have a kid!” I think a lot more people are going to be saying this in the coming decades. I think people are slowly waking up.
I’ve never heard anyone in the United States say that China’s one-child policy was a bad thing, or that it denied people their “human right to procreate.” But how many Americans would support a one-child policy in our own Nature-depleted, overpopulated land?
The only thing that seems to have fewer rights than a child is Nature. But ironically, Nature will outlive us all, and we can’t destroy it.
If an abusive parent only abuses his or her child psychologically (e.g., manipulating, using double binds, lying, gaslighting), even to the extreme of driving that child insane, it is almost impossible for anyone in society to step in and put a stop to the abuse. What does that say about our society?
I have observed that parents have the legal right to torture their child psychologically. If you don’t believe me please give me an example or two in which you or anyone in society can stop them.
Most people look the other way when they see parents abusing their children in public. They say, “Well, it’s their kid. Plus, if I step in and say something it’ll probably just make them more angry and then they’ll take it out on their kid at home.” Which they probably will.
I was genitally mutilated at birth by a doctor, without anesthesia and with the consent of my parents, because of some strange social customs veiled in quasi-medical dogma. When I tell people about this, my experience is that most honestly don’t care. I think people would react more strongly if I told them my parents had had my newborn ears pierced instead. “Sick,” they might say. And because I am a boy they might even label my parents perverts.
I think a lot of people connect their value in being human with their reproductive capacity. For many people, both men and women, the loss of this reproductive capacity is tantamount to becoming worthless. I have even seen people become suicidal over realizing they are infertile.
Many parents say to their grown children, in one way or another, “Give me a grandchild.” Perhaps they add, “That is your job.” To them, and to much of society, babies and children really are just property, there to make people happy, give status, prove worth, give purpose.
It is no mystery that many parents live through their children. What kind of role modeling is that?
My dad had a well-polished veneer of being a sophisticated, mature adult. But this veneer was just his puppet skin. Pulling the puppet strings was a needy, unresolved, abused child who had never gotten enough and couldn’t help but use me to try to make up for his parents’ failures. And my mother wasn’t much different.
I have often noticed that when I say to parents, “Your child is so artistic” or “Your child is so smart,” the parents reply, “Thank you,” as if I am actually complimenting the parents. But I’m not. I’m just making an observation. To me, a much more appropriate reply would be, “I know,” or perhaps, “Yes, isn’t she amazing?”
Does a child have a right not to be born into insanity?