View Single Post
Old 07-29-2010, 07:49 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,217

Originally Posted by redpepper View Post

Ygirl- question... In your oh so interesting opinion, would I not be considered child free if I didn't want a baby until I was 31? I was adimently against kids until then. For all the reasons I hear on here and elsewhere; drain on the environment, too many kids in the world, etc. Then I had this huge overwhelming desire to have the child I have. I dreamt about him. He came into my life for some reason.
I know this happens quite a bit. "I never wanted kids until my biological clock went off." I choose to not consider people who go that route (yourself included) because this is one reason why people who REALLY ARE CF AND WILL ALWAYS BE CF are not taken seriously about it. We go to the doctor asking for permanent sterilization and are told "You'll change your mind" and it's because of people such as yourself who DO change their minds. The CF people that I know on the other forums are fed up by being told that we don't know our own minds. We are held hostage by a medical establishment and a society that glorifies pregnancy and child-rearing and perpetuates the myth that women are baby machines who are at the beck and call of their reproductive-endocrine systems. Does ANY of this sound familiar? It seems as though the movement for reproductive freedom / family planning has exhibited some backlash in the form of making it look like there is now no good "excuse" for saying "no" to procreation. If I were to meet a stranger in a coffeeshop and somehow get into a conversation about whether or not we both have kids, and I said "I can't have kids", they WOULD assume that I "can't" have them due to some circumstance beyond my control, when in fact I "can't" because my parts have been surgically removed by CHOICE.

Although, I should explain that I was able to obtain the procedure rather easily due to the fact that I have a severe case of endometriosis and a GYN who is very pro-patient. I also live in a part of the country that is more liberal about these things than other parts of the country.

I don't agree. I don't think that having genetic offspring in the world is the same thing as "having children" (as the dictionary definition you linked to defined it.) I don't see a sperm donor who isn't even aware of whether or not his genetic material has been used as a parent, and therefore he does not "have children." And I don't think many men who donate sperm do so because they desire to procreate. Nor is a man who accidentally got a woman pregnant, never saw her again, and was not aware that the baby was born, a parent.
I'm going to copy-pasta something from in a thread on a CF forum which speaks to this issue. These are not my words, but these words describe my standpoint rather well:

I think people are a little too optimistic about the privacy of sperm donation, egg donation, closed adoptions, and the like. I know several people who came of age right around the time that adoption records started to become available to the kids who had been adopted, and one girl I know made her real mom's life an absolute fucking mess because the girl was manic-depressive and unwell mentally, refused to receive treatment or meds because she wanted to keep hearing the voice of God inside her head which told her to do stuff (I think she was a tad schizophrenic too but mostly she had bipolar symptoms)....and she latched onto and stalked her real mom. Her real mom had been one of those sad teens of the early 1960's forced to give up her baby because she was an unwed mom; years later she got married and had two kids with her new husband. Then her adopted daughter shows up with a huge bucket of unfulfilled emotional need, and it totally wrecked all of the people involved.

I have also heard of people finding out who their sperm donor daddy was. So I don't think any of those activities like donating sperm or eggs should be seen as being childfree at ALL because you can DEFINITELY end up with a kid on your doorstep at some point. Same with "closed' adoptions. Laws change, records end up being shared (whether legally or through bribery) there is no such thing as total anonymity with that stuff. Which is scary!

I don't really see the point in the comparison, because virginity is a fundamentally useless concept to me. The pro-virginity movements does, as you say, accept "renewed virgins", which makes a lot more sense to me than sticking to the dictionary definition of the term "virgin" no matter what.
The point of the comparison is that you can't un-do it once you cross the line. I don't really care if the pro-virginity movement accepts "renewed virgins". How are they renewed? Do they sew them back up? Take a time-machine back in time and not have sex? That just doesn't make any sense. It also does not make any sense if you have a biological offspring and call yourself "child-free". I can't imagine why anyone would want to do that, except to impress someone else who really is CF. If someone gave up a kid for adoption or had a kid that died or whatever and they want to call themselves CF, I can't really stop them, and if they don't tell me, then I have no way of knowing, but if I found out, I would certainly wonder why they find it necessary to identify themselves to the world as CF. There are some things you can change or un-do, such as marriages or sexual orientations, and some things you can't change, such as a limb amputation or having your genetic material used for the purpose of creating another organism.

Last edited by NeonKaos; 07-29-2010 at 08:09 PM.
Reply With Quote