The good kind of dirty

It's 2012, and the industrialized world is driven by social media. Most of us use Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest and a host of other sites where we can communicate our thoughts, likes and dislikes with other people. This blog is a perfect example. But with social media comes the inevitability of trends and memes, where you'll see the same thing posted by multiple people. This image is one iteration of something I've seen posted by many parents:

Sometimes it's an image, sometimes it's a typed out status. All of them point to the same thing: that having a house that looks like a tornado tore it apart is ok if you have children. Now before anyone hangs me out to dry, I want to say I know kids can be messy. I was terrible for not picking up my toys as a child. Even as an adult, I tend to put off doing dishes or cleaning up Nonetheless, I disagree with the above statement for a few reasons.

Generalization

This message of a messy home and happy kids is one of those statements that fosters a sense of community and solidarity amongst parents, because it's justification. Parents with messy homes don't feel so bad because other parents have messy homes, so it must be ok. It's a common thread in any subculture: If the herd does it, then it must be right.

There are some who flat out hop on the bandwagon because it gives them an excuse. An acquaintance of mine knows someone (we'll call her M) who is just such a person. Statements like this one give her an excuse to not do housework, so she has more time to play on her laptop while the kids are being raised by the television. Being selfish and attention-loving as she is, M will brag about not putting any time into the housework because she's looking after her family. She is the exception, not the rule, and I realize that. It's still a sad situation all around.

Causality

The statement implies that the messy house is because of the happy kids. In other words, dedicating more time to family life while sacrificing time spent doing chores. That is invariably seen as an acceptable trade off, because there is nothing more important than taking care of the kids. It's a noble sentiment in and of itself, but I find it too absolute.

I grew up in a clean house. Not a spotless one, but a clean one. My toys were put away when I was done at the end of the day (much to my chagrin), the dishes were done, any dirty laundry was in the hamper. The house looked lived in, for sure, but it wasn't a wreck. Nowadays, I see so many houses that require you to watch where you step for fear of putting your foot in a plate of food left on the floor, or stepping on a toy, spare battery, set of keys, fork, stray shopping bag or whatever else that was left where it was set down. I lived as a bachelor for 9 years, and my apartment never even came close to looking like that (and bachelors are notorious for being slobs). Maybe the times are different.

My mother was a stay at home mom until I was about 9 or 10 so when I was very young, she was home all day and in the evening, she and my dad would take turns taking care of me while the other one cooked/cleaned. I also have a brother who is 5 years older than I am. That was a large enough gap that they didn't have to watch us both with the same diligence. My brother could be left to his own devices while they cared for me. He could even help look after me. So it's entirely possible that my personal experience has clouded my judgement. I also have no memory before the age of 4. Perhaps my house was a pig sty during my toddlerhood (Is that a word? It sounds like it should be a word).

If you don't feel like dusting or doing dishes or putting away laundry, be my guest. It's your house. If you don't mind having your belongings strewn about your house where every day is a scavenger hunt, go for it. Honestly, I won't judge so long as it doesn't become a hazard and no one's safety is at risk. But don't tout yourself as a super parent because your stove top is a mess or because your socks are hanging form the ceiling fan. That's something M would do, and I don't want any parent to turn into M.

For the Cause

I am childfree by choice. I have reasons that I firmly believe in for making that decision. With that being said, my choice isn't the only valid one. Far from it. There are a multitude of different life situations out there, mine being only one of them. And though I created this blog to establish a foothold, a platform from which to express my ideas on child freedom, the current parenting phenomenon and society in general, I try as much as possible to keep a "live and let live" mentality. I rant, I complain and I criticize, but I am always open to dialogue. At the end of the day, I want my position to be validated, not emulated. I don't want my views or my choices to be acknowledged as better, I just want it respected that they are better for me.

Not everyone tries to keep this balance. In every cause, there are fanatics, zealots who insist that their way is the only way and they will try to impose that on anyone who will listen (or get in the faces of those who won't). Religion, politics, sports, even the great Coke vs. Pepsi debate has its share of people who will unleash their infinite rage upon those who don't capitulate and come completely to their side (I'm a Pepsi guy, in case anyone is wondering). The child freedom cause is no different. There are those who believe that everything should be segregated, that children should be banned from public spaces, that there should be no special provisions for families under any circumstances. There are those who believe that fines and other punitive measures should be implemented for anyone whose child might be an inconvenience to anyone. This isn't right. Fanaticism never leads to any progress. I've always been a firm believer that one person's freedom ends where the next person's begins. There are situations where loud noise levels due to lots of children are to be expected. I won't go there to read quietly, that just doesn't make sense. But if I'm going to a library, and there's an inordinate amount of toddler-screaming going on, I expect the parent/guardian to show the same courtesy and try to fulfill the purpose for which the space was designed.

Respecting boundaries is more important than (and can help avoid) drawing lines in the sand.

Great Expectations - revisited

Last week, I posted about a sense of entitlement some parents have. There was some back and forth in the comments with a friend and fellow blogger of mine, and I wanted to give her voice the spotlight and respond to her comments rather than let the conversation fall into a comment thread that may have less attention. So Felicia, this one is all about you :)

I won't rehash the comments, I invite everyone to go read them to establish context before I respond to Felicia's points.

So in most cases, it's not exactly free money, it's tax credits we didn't get (that your parents got)

I over simplified the section about government benefits in my previous post, mainly because I didn't want to bore people with the semantics of it. I may have misrepresented the situation somewhat. For that, I apologize. It is not a matter of the government cramming money into parents' hands every month. There are tax benefits (started at the same time as income taxes themselves, during the time of the Second World War). Those are income dependent. There are other benefits that vary based on a multitude of factors. Flat payments aren't really the norm (I can think of one off the top of my head, but that's not the point). I will be the first to admit I'm not the most well versed in this particular type of government benefit because it doesn't affect me, the point of my statement was that taxation and benefits can be very different for parents vs. the childfree, and in some cases that has led to what I consider to be an over-dependence.

Otherwise, I agree. People are way too self entitled. And that has much to do with how they were raised.

I agree, 100%. This is a symptom exhibited by society at large. I'm just looking at one particular slice of humanity.

I love the way you say "the choice they made". While I don't begrudge you not wanting kids, someone has to ensure that there will be a next generation

Strictly speaking no, someone doesn't. There are very few things that humans absolutely must do. Consume food and water in sufficient amounts, expel waste, breathe, and take sufficient shelter from the elements. That's it. From a strictly biological standpoint, that's all that's required. Having or not having children has zero impact on those necessities of life. Bear in mind that I'm looking at this from a scientific point of view. I'm not talking about a comfortable life, or a happy one. I'm talking about life in the strictest biological sense. That same biology, over millennia of evolution, has instilled most humans with a drive, a desire to procreate to ensure propagation of the species. A great number of people follow through with that powerful instinctual drive. Others just want to have a legacy. I fully admit that if everyone stopped reproducing and no one ever started up again, we would disappear as a species in a very short time. But we could. We do have that option. It may seem unpalatable or even unfathomable to some, but it is absolutely possible (in theory, at any rate). And so if people are having children out of some sense of obligation that the propagation of the species is required, that's still a choice. One that is made because all other options are summarily rejected out of hand, but a choice nonetheless.

The human race is a few thousand years old. Our planet precedes us by 4 billion years, and the rest of the universe is almost 10 billion years older than that. We have no idea what was or wasn't before that. The necessity of the human race to survive is relevant only when observed through the lens of our collective arrogance.

If it weren't for some services or courtesies, as you put it, no one could afford to have kids

I honestly had no facts to back up a response to this one, so I crunched a few numbers. Let's take a family with 2 parents and 2 children with no special needs, living in my hometown. No fancy tax loopholes or any other complications.We'll only consider the 2 main federal benefits, the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB), and the Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB).

According to Statistics Canada, the average family income after taxes in 2010 was $88,900 for a household with 2 working parents with children. (Source)

Given their tax bracket, this family is taxed at a rate of roughly 47% (Source). That means that their UCCB would be $530 a year after taxes. or $44.16 a month.

According to the Canada Revenue Agency, this family would get a CCTB of $84.19 a month (Source), for a total income of $90,440.28, or $7,536.69 a month

The only data I could find on the cost of raising children (something that can vary greatly) was from Manitoba Agriculture, which is far from where my imaginary family is living (Source). Still, better than no numbers at all. They estimate the cost of raising a child to the age of 18 to be roughly $166,760.50 (boys are a bit pricier than girls, this is an average). That breaks down to roughly $772 a month.

This leaves the family with $6,764.69 a month for the parents food, monthly bills, and miscellany. Without the government benefits, they would have $6,636.33. Is that enough? To me, it seems like it would be, but I don't have any first hand experience to say for sure. There are so many variables, and my example situation is very simplified. Still, these numbers were pulled from the middle of the field, the average wherever possible. That means that half of Canada's families have more money than this. Benefits increase as income goes down, so if the statement had been "no one <below income amount X> could afford to have kids", then it would be 100% correct (though I don't know exactly where that line would be). Those are the people I had mentioned in my previous post, the ones who have that expectation of government support for something that was, as previously mentioned, their choice.

And then who would work at McDonalds in 20 years?

You got me there. I do love my McNuggets!

Anyone is welcome to add to this be it corrected math, facts I missed, etc. All I ask is that all parties keep it civil regardless of whom or what you agree with. If you'd like to read more from Felicia's own blog, you can do so here. Very insightful, and far less rant-filled than The UnParent!

Wheels of progress

To my droves of readers (all 4 of you!)

You may notice slight changes in the design of the site over the next little while. I'm trying to get more momentum behind this blog, and so I'm tweaking things here and there. Some of the back end stuff may have disrupted some people's access to the blog over the course of yesterday evening and this morning. Not to worry, things seem to be back to normal. The look of the site is changing slightly, but nothing dramatic. You may see more sidebar content pop up over the next little while as I try to get as much usefulness out of the site as possible. I've already set up a Facebook page and revived the Twitter account I created for the site (direct link icons are on the right hand side. Go look, I'll wait).

I've also disabled the CAPTCHA confirmation for comments, at the urging of some blogging enthusiast friends of mine (who better to give me advice?). It was in place to prevent some of the spam I've had on other blogs, but I'm giving it a trial run. Should there be a SPAM issue, I'll have to do something else.

If anyone has any other suggestions, by all means send them my way.

A round of BINGO

Some of you will remember my first BINGO-related post. For the uninitiated, childree BINGO is basically a list of things that we, the childfree, hear over and over again from people who don't accept or don't understand our choice of lifestyle. These statements are usually meant with no ill will, and any judgement is usually inadvertent. It just gets... redundant for us. And so, without further delay, I give you round 2 of CFBC BINGO (we're actually doing 2 sayings!).

"But you'd make such a great dad!"

Yup, I would. I'm financially stable and have the means to pay for a child's needs. I can cook, clean and have proven to be a competent educator. I have the mental discipline to follow a routine, I love challenging people's minds and senses, and I still have some of my whimsical childhood magic (I still have my favourite childhood teddy bear, and watch cartons daily). I have the makings of a good parent, but I don't want to be one. So when I get BINGO'd with this one, I usually offer the following facts:

I have higher than average upper body strength for my size. I'm skilled with knives and other clandestine weapons. I'm practiced (soon to be formally trained) in archery. I plan to learn and get certified in handling and storing firearms. I have heightened senses of hearing and smell (though my vision is weak, I'll admit that). I have an intermediate knowledge of human anatomy and know more ways to hurt someone than the average person. I would, in essence, make a good murderer. Maybe not great (let's not get away with delusions of grandeur, here), but good. I do not, however, go on nightly rampages killing other people.

"Come on, Rock. That's not the same!"

Well, ok. So murder isn't exactly socially acceptable or legal. I get that, but I wanted to make a point. And that point is that even though I have the ability to do something doesn't necessarily mean I should, and no one but me is qualified to say otherwise. No one has the right to tell me that I should or shouldn't father a child, regardless of how suited they think I might be. Besides, if it's something I don't actively want to do, and I force myself to do it, how good of a job will I really do? This isn't a set contract, this is a lifelong commitment. If I don't enjoy it or want to do it, then odds are my performance is going to suffer.

You're just being selfish

This is one of my favourites because of how often I hear it. I most often hear this from people who are older and have a few kids already (typically previous generations). They call me selfish because I don't want to give up my lifestyle, because I don't want to change who or what I am for the sake of parenthood, or because I wouldn't enjoy the responsibility. It would be far more noble of me to sacrifice the parts of my life I enjoy to engage in a full compromise of my life so I can bring another person into the world, then care for him/her. i'd like to add that previous generations are also the people who typically tell me how crazy and scary the world has gotten, and that they don't envy any child growing up today. The world is getting over populated, violence is running rampant, politics and economics are destabilized worldwide, and the environment is degrading faster and faster. And yet, I'm selfish for not bringing a child I don't want into this world.

Off the top of my head, I can name half a dozen people who have had children either for the attention, to try and "save" a relationship, or because it's become so trendy in Hollywood. Outside influence is treating their hormones like someone who can't drive a stick shift - switching gears without fully understanding what's going on, and doing more harm than good as a result. But these people's motives are more noble than my selfish ones.

It's an unfortunate double standard that is—I'm happy to say—diminishing. But it still exists. To those who want or have children and are fighting to give them a better tomorrow, I applaud you. It's a difficult job. It's a lifelong job. It's also a rewarding job. But it's not one i'll be applying for, no matter how much the other side might want to hire me. There are plenty of other positions in this world I'm qualified for.

Great Expectations

'Single Mom' Leaves Outrageous Note On Dinner Receipt

(Photo Credit: Huffington Post)

I found this story last week, and it got me thinking about a problem that is widespread among almost all walks of life, but for the sake of this blog's context, we'll limit it to parents. It seems that nowadays, everyone expects something (or everything) to be done for them, or they expect their particular situation to warrant some kind of special treatment. Individual sense of entitlement is at an all time high, and parents are no exception. In this case, a single mother doesn't leave a tip on a $138 meal. Pretty reprehensible behaviour, if you ask me.

Now, there are many unknowns here. Was she actually a single mother, or trying to weasel out of paying a few more bucks? Was it horrible service, and the patron was trying to spare the server's feelings? Who knows. There are so many other variables. The server could be a single parent themselves, or trying to get through college, or just another person trying to make ends meet. What makes the single parent's situation more paramount? The common complaint has been "If you can afford to go out for such a luxurious meal, you can afford a tip, parent or not". This complaint has come from parents. I applaud that, favouring fairness over loyalty to one's own kind.

The restaurant incident was isolated and unique, but it got me thinking about social attitude as a whole. There is so much expectation that certain things will happen. Government benefits, for example. Here in Canada, we have multiple monthly benefits offered by the federal government, sometimes in excess of several hundred dollars a month to a single family. Once upon a time, I worked in a government call centre. On the day those cheques and direct deposits came out, we were inevitably flooded with calls asking "where's my payment?". When we tried to explain that the day the cheque was delivered was an approximation, not an absolute, people would flip their lids. they needed that money to feed their children. They expected it. When there were holidays, or if the mail service was delayed for whatever reason, some people demanded that their cheques be delivered by the government department that issued them. If the direct deposit varied from one bank to another, recipients demanded that the government fix it. After all, they expected their payment. This was not a rare occurrence  Thousands of calls came in each and every month to the very same tune. It was seen as a crime for there to be a slight variation with respect to the day they got their free money from the government. These are people who clearly could not afford to raise children without assistance. In my opinion, that's the equivalent of biting off more than you can chew.

I would like to say that the expectation ends there, but it doesn't. I've seen delivery people ring doorbells or buzzers, and have the door open to the bright red face of a fuming parent. "How dare you ring the doorbell, didn't you think that I might have a child sleeping?" they say. "There's a tricycle and chalk drawings in the driveway, and you can clearly see a car seat in my minivan. You KNOW there are children living here. You should know better". Suddenly, it's become the job of all of society to handle nap time, as though disconnecting the doorbell, or even putting a sign up in the front door aren't viable options. No, mama and papa have fulfilled their most basic biological function, and it's the responsibility of the other 7 billion people in the world to work around that.

Specialized parking spots, special treatment on public transit, and so many more little things come into play every single day. But there are more and more CFBC people out there, and more and more businesses are catering to them. I don't know about you, but I expect things to change soon.

Self delusion, and the great lie

Remember my last post? Of course you do! I left you on a sort of clifhanger saying that I have a theory as to why so many people try to pressure me into accepting that parenthood would make me happy. So here I am ready to lift the tarp off what may be one of the more controversial posts I've made on The UnParent.

Parents lie to themselves (and to others) about how great parenthood is.

I've seen this phenomenon in varying degrees, but just about any parent that tries to convince me of the error of my child free ways shows symptoms. It's not entirely their fault, but I'll get to that part. First, let's look at the different components of The Great Lie.

The compaints

This one has to be gauged on a case-by-case basis, because some of it garners sympathy whereas some of it is just begging for a smack upside the head. The gist of it is parents complaining about how tired they are, how they never get a break, how the little one was up all night coughing/sneezing/fussing/crying/general oozing, and above all else how much hard work they put into being such a fantastic parent. While I wasn't a hellion, I'll admit I wasn't the easiest to raise. I can appreciate how much work is required to raise a child. Really, I can. But every single one of the parents I speak of tells similar stories expecting a parade, a plaque and a congratulatory ham for being the most awesome human being in the history of awesomeness, or human beings. Fertility doesn't automatically entitle one to praise. Parenthood - at least in this part of the world - is largely a choice. So if one choses to be in a particular situation, shouldn't they accept all the consequences of that choice? Why all this complaining?

The lie

Some people make the choice to be parents for the wrong reasons. Being a parent (particularly a mother) is trendy in today's society. Pregnant or adopting celebrities are all the rage (Brangelina, anyone?). Even multiple births are now a thing to be gawked at and admired; to the point of people breeding out of control and having their own reality shows. So people jump into parenthood expecting nothing but smiles and rainbows and pictures to hang on the fridge and Christmas mornings and good mannered kids and flawless bedtime every night and... and... and... They don't really stop to think about the other side of it. The commitment of being responsible for another life is a HUGE undertaking. There are going to be a lot of sleepless nights, a lot of tears, and they will be tested to the very limits of their mind, body and soul. It is one of the longest and most arduous ordeals a person can face. Still, prospective parents prefer to not think of all that. They focus on the positive. Or they engage in the aforementioned complaining to garner praise and admiration from those around them, so they feel validated. But why?

It's all worth it

This one has been around forever. Traditionally, this is said by women referring to the pain of childbirth, and how it was worth putting up with to see their baby for the first time. Frankly, I can't argue with that one. Babies are, after all, miracles. Whether you believe they are by design or pure biology, they are undeniably impressive with all their physical intricacies in such a small package. Seeing a child that emerged from your body for the first time would certainly make a person forget about hours of pain to get to that point. I get that. It seems like the statement has been given too much power, though. It's a catch-all rebuttal whenever you bring up the difficulties and pains of parenthood. No matter how hard it is to be a parent, no matter how much trouble having children can be, it's all worth it. So why always the same response?

No regrets

It's simply not socially acceptable to regret having children. No matter what happens, if a parent gives the slightest indication that having children was a mistake (whether it be timing, the mate they had the children with, or having children altogether), they become a pariah. I want to make a point of saying that it's entirely possible to regret being a parent, but still love your children. Most people won't make that distinction, but it is a very real one. One can regret doing something but love the end result (it's not all piss and vinegar, people). Whatever the nature of the regret, though, other parents will denounce them for heresy. "Being a parent is the best thing in the world, and you will not speak against it", they will cry. So this all begs the question... why does this keep happening, and why do parents keep falling into the trap?

They were lied to

This is not a recent phenomenon, and child freedom is a very new thing. Just a generation or two ago, you were an oddity if you were child free. Countless civilizations have sold their daughters, but only when they were of age to bear children. Marriages weren't considered to be official until there was a bun in the oven, because we've been programmed from prehistoric days to mate for the purpose of procreation. Many religiously-driven people will  live by the credo "go forth and multiply" or something similar. Nowadays, the propagation of the human race isn't so critical, but the pattern was set in motion ages ago. So people have children because it's expected of them. Some of them genuinely do enjoy it, and are suited for it (I happen to know and admire some of these people). The rest have to convince themselves. They have to bear their cross, and so they talk themselves into thinking they enjoy parent hood by telling themselves a tall tale, a grand story, a great lie.

Caveat emptor applies to more than just shopping.