Single mothers devalue fatherhood?

[DevilDoll]

I was channel surfing earlier and stumbled across Entertainment Tonight. I usually skip right past it, but the topic of discussion was actually intriguing. Apparently there is a public stink going on between Bill O'Reilly (shocker, I know) and Jennifer Aniston regarding comments she made in an interview to support her summer comedy "The Switch". The romantic comedy is about a middle aged woman who wants a child. She opts to use a sperm donor and become a single mother. In an interview to promote the film Aniston made this comment "women are realizing it more and more, knowing that they don't have to settle with a man just to have that child." O'Reilly then came back with his thoughts on her perspective. He finds it destructive to society and stated that it diminished the roles of fathers.

Hearing this made me wonder if other's shared his opinions? I find myself disagreeing with his statements (as usual). Yes, I can see the benefits of a two parent household. However, I don't think a woman should have to settle into a relationship just to fulfill her desire to have children. I suppose it varies from person to person. So, I'd like to hear what you think. If you aren't in a committed relationship by the time to hit 35 or so and you wanted a child, would you settle for the first guy you could hook, give up your dream of motherhood, or would you consider artificial insemination?

 

[bamf]

One loving parent is better than two parents who can't get along for five minutes in my opinion.

 

[IndigoSensor]

The whole concept of "family" has never really made much sense to me. People seem to put so much value into it to the point where it controls every aspect of their lives, sometimes in completely irrational ways too. The majority of social conservitives put a huge level of importance in The Nuclear Family. I truly don't know many people irl who feel this way, but I have observed them from a distance. I actually do think an ideal environment would be a wife, husband, and child. However, that doesn't need to be in place for it to "work". You could have two fathers, two mothers, one mother, one father, whatever really. As long as the parent(s) are level headed people who can raise a child, there isn't much of a problem.

Single mothers catch a lot of flack though, just even saying the word single mother to Ann Coulter(lolz) causes her to tare your face off (but I just find her giggle worthy for her insaneness). I will say this though, one parent along, is more diffucult then two parents. It's simply for the fact that they have to put more effort into the matter; they have all the work. But detracting from fatherhood? I see no logic in that all. You don't need an exact formula to raise a child. I had a very strange family upbringing as a child to say the least, and it seems like 75% of the people I know had an atypical childhood as well. So to say it makes children worse off, is just baseless.

Would I actually want a child of my own as a single parent? No I wouldn't. Despite me not really caring about family values and dynamics, I want to hold to them at least somewhat myself (I feel kind of akward being gay in the sense that if I have a child, they won't have a true mother, and that does bother me). To me, having a child of my own isn't worth it without having a "family" to go with it, having a family is mutually exclusive to having a child. That is my view on the matter though, and that is just how I as a parent would do it. Other parents could do things by others methods and that works for them. As such no one has a right to dictate how to have a family, nor does anyone have any say in forcing people to adhear to core family values because they are not uniform in the least.

 

[Faye]

How can they devalue fatherhood when there is no fatherhood (in this case)? Unless you're talking about the act of getting the woman pregnant.

As far as the structure of family is concerned, the nuclear family is a minority and the nuclear family of the 1950s even more so; it is in the process of becoming a myth. Artificial insemination isn't a big deal in this context.

 

[Blind Bandit]

I actually do agree that simply choosing to be a sing parent without even trying is destructive and I do think the comments made do devalue the father figure. I agree with indy that having a parent(s) is more important than not. But I can't accept the idea of willing being a single parent. With no effort to make it work with someone. I guess I'm just sick of oepple pooping out babies without consider the effect their choices have on the children they create.

 

[DevilDoll]

I actually do agree that simply choosing to be a sing parent without even trying is destructive and I do think the comments made do devalue the father figure. I agree with indy that having a parent(s) is more important than not. But I can't accept the idea of willing being a single parent. With no effort to make it work with someone. I guess I'm just sick of oepple pooping out babies without consider the effect their choices have on the children they create.

So, opting for artificial insemination via a sperm donor is destructive for the child? I actually think it would be healthier for the child, because the mother would have to seriously think through the situation before doing it. That child would be incredibly loved and cared for, in most cases. I find that this would be a better situation than waiting around for the right guy to procreate with. Eventually the clock is going to start ticking, Do you expect the woman to simply settle for a man to fulfill her desire to have children? That's not healthy for anyone involved. Especially not the children that may result.

 

[Billy]

Children need a father, especially boys, anyone who says otherwise is a damned fool.

 

[Gaze]

I think the question is too general. If on an individual level, a single mother tells her child that his or her father is not important or relevant because she (the mother) is not involved with him or doesn't need or require his presence or support to raise the child, then yes, she is devaluing him. I won't address the Jennifer Aniston/Bill O'reilly incident because i think that's ridiculous. I'm not sure why she responded to him.

In any case, fatherhood is being devalued in our culture, whether we want to admit it or not. Women are given more support and preference when custody cases arise just because they're women, not necessarily because they are better parents, as an example. Many single moms hold the kids as financial ransom - "won't see the child unless i get money".

So, i don't think the question is whether choosing to be a single mother automatically devalues fatherhood, at least in my opinion. There's no doubt a woman can raise a healthy child on her own. My issue is when women teach their kids directly or indirectly that men are simply sperm donors or "child support". So, it's not an issue of moms or dads being better parents. Both offer something unique, valuable, and important. Devaluing one because the other is not present is not a great message to teach children.

 

[54192&#cmy]

Men in general are demeaned. Most TV commercials today show the wife as the fix it person. She tends to be smarter than her hubby and makes all the decisions. So it would not surprise me that the modern day woman would only think of a man as a sperm donor to fulfill her wishes. And as far as Jenifer Aniston goes. Of course she would be for artificial insemination. Brad Pitt has made her asexual I guess...

 

[Billy]

Plus Jennifer Aniston is a complete moron, who gives a shit what such a retard thinks.

 

[Blind Bandit]

Children need a father, especially boys, anyone who says otherwise is a damned fool.

I don't agree with you often billy. But I most certain do here.

 

[Blind Bandit]

Men in general are demeaned. Most TV commercials today show the wife as the fix it person. She tends to be smarter than her hubby and makes all the decisions. So it would not surprise me that the modern day woman would only think of a man as a sperm donor to fulfill her wishes. And as far as Jenifer Aniston goes. Of course she would be for artificial insemination. Brad Pitt has made her asexual I guess...

Pretty much. And women really wonder why men are so pissed off all the time.

 

[Shai Gar]

Daddy Issues + Young Girl = Prostitute, Stripper or WOW!

While researching the issue*, I came across this brilliant page. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/TroperTales/StrawFeminist


*looking for tropes to back up my argument based on watching tv shows...

 

[Shai Gar]

The romantic comedy is about a middle aged woman who wants a child. She opts to use a sperm donor and become a single mother. In an interview to promote the film Aniston made this comment "women are realizing it more and more, knowing that they don't have to settle with a man just to have that child."

How many millions does Aniston have? How many millions does the average single mum have?

Aniston is a moron.

 

[bamf]

Why anyone would bring a child into the world on purpose without the means of supporting it is beyond me, and is hardly a credible knock on fatherhood. For someone to pose a threat they'd have to be intelligent enough to know what they are doing.

What worries me about this is the reasoning behind why these women want to have kids so badly. I'm not a woman, but I see it as fulfilling a personal desire and putting that before the needs of the child. They are purposefully bringing a kid into the world that will have the possibility of being disadvantaged. A kid having only one parent is hard enough because it's a drain on their social capital. I'm not knocking single parents, but having two loving parents is better than one and provides more in social capital. If the woman has strong family ties with other adults I can see a make up of social capital, but I still feel that it's a selfish desire for a child. I'm not saying to disallow it, but it doesn't make any sense to me. You can adopt and give a child who has less something more (not to mention I believe there are too many people as it is and adoption seems like a viable option for fulfilling child-raising needs of adults).

I don't think the "movement" in general is a knock on the importance of a father, I just fail to see how it's anything but selfish because of the hindered social situation the child may be brought in to.

 

[slant]

Why anyone would bring a child into the world on purpose without the means of supporting it is beyond me, and is hardly a credible knock on fatherhood. For someone to pose a threat they'd have to be intelligent enough to know what they are doing.

What worries me about this is the reasoning behind why these women want to have kids so badly. I'm not a woman, but I see it as fulfilling a personal desire and putting that before the needs of the child. They are purposefully bringing a kid into the world that will have the possibility of being disadvantaged. A kid having only one parent is hard enough because it's a drain on their social capital. I'm not knocking single parents, but having two loving parents is better than one and provides more in social capital. If the woman has strong family ties with other adults I can see a make up of social capital, but I still feel that it's a selfish desire for a child. I'm not saying to disallow it, but it doesn't make any sense to me. You can adopt and give a child who has less something more (not to mention I believe there are too many people as it is and adoption seems like a viable option for fulfilling child-raising needs of adults).

I don't think the "movement" in general is a knock on the importance of a father, I just fail to see how it's anything but selfish because of the hindered social situation the child may be brought in to.

Adoption is a difficult process.

 

[the]

Men in general are demeaned. Most TV commercials today show the wife as the fix it person. She tends to be smarter than her hubby and makes all the decisions. So it would not surprise me that the modern day woman would only think of a man as a sperm donor to fulfill her wishes. And as far as Jenifer Aniston goes. Of course she would be for artificial insemination. Brad Pitt has made her asexual I guess...

I agree. Men in general are devalued and are depicted as Homer Simpson in most tv shows. I am not surprised that women do not value what a man brings to the table these days.

 

[Siamese cat]

Why anyone would bring a child into the world on purpose without the means of supporting it is beyond me, and is hardly a credible knock on fatherhood. For someone to pose a threat they'd have to be intelligent enough to know what they are doing.

What worries me about this is the reasoning behind why these women want to have kids so badly. I'm not a woman, but I see it as fulfilling a personal desire and putting that before the needs of the child. They are purposefully bringing a kid into the world that will have the possibility of being disadvantaged. A kid having only one parent is hard enough because it's a drain on their social capital. I'm not knocking single parents, but having two loving parents is better than one and provides more in social capital. If the woman has strong family ties with other adults I can see a make up of social capital, but I still feel that it's a selfish desire for a child. I'm not saying to disallow it, but it doesn't make any sense to me. You can adopt and give a child who has less something more (not to mention I believe there are too many people as it is and adoption seems like a viable option for fulfilling child-raising needs of adults).

I don't think the "movement" in general is a knock on the importance of a father, I just fail to see how it's anything but selfish because of the hindered social situation the child may be brought in to.

In most countries you can't adopt if you are a single parent or want to become one with the process of adoption. Actually even some families are not suitable for adoption and it is easier to make yourself one than to adopt, which is really sad in my opinion because I eventually want to adopt one and for various reasons I might not be suitable because of strict standards.



I'll agree that when an immature woman wants to become a single parent it is nothing more than a selfish act that will eventually cost the child that will be born out of it, but making it a generalization that all women who want to become a single parent are selfish is weak. It is harder to find a right guy when people of both geneders are working non stop.

As for the tv shows, I think that the way men are depicted made lots of men out there even lazier and not willing to show that they are not like that. It is a s if they are saying "If men are depicted that way, we might as well be like that".

In my opinion child needs a father but if there is none around, or there is a lousy one, than a kid could be better without one. Same goes for the mothers. I strongly believe in good parenting and that if it is done properly any disadvantage that a kid might have in the process of becoming an adult could be nullified by good parenting.

 

[aeon]

Given the probability of, and inequity of divorve in the United States, it does not make sense for most man to marry, from my perspective.

If women want to be mothers without a father, all the more power to them.

In all cases, I would hope the needs of the child would have primacy.


cheers,
Ian

 

[Shai Gar]

Given the probability of, and inequity of divorve in the United States, it does not make sense for most man to marry, from my perspective.

If women want to be mothers without a father, all the more power to them.

In all cases, I would hope the needs of the child would have primacy.


cheers,
Ian

I completely agree. That's why I'll never have kids (child support), and never get married (alimony).