Single Mother by Choice Rant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like the phrase either, but thought it had a different connotation and intent. I had not seen it as differentiating in the same way as OP.

When I have seen the phrase, it is more to convey that because a woman shows to be a single parent, she should not be asking for, or receiving, more slack, assistance, or sympathy based on her going it alone. There is, for better or worse, a kind of victim status often given to "single mothers". They are revered for their fortitude, and receive extra slack, and admiration for "getting through" parenting alone. If someone is identified as going it alone by choice however, it indicates that she is not a victim at all and has chosen to parent without a partner. Haven't gotten there by choice, others may feel it last necessary for the community to help her out with parenting responsibilities.

I'm taking this a bit off topic, but this is worth discussing because it's interesting. I find this to be very much a double edged sword. I've both received the slack and also been seen as an absolute liability in the workplace when presented as a single parent. I've not found any particular overwhelming wave of help offered up without my asking for it specifically (which you hopefully learn to do at some point in life no matter what your circumstances, because life isn't a solo sport). The strong woman stereotype has an ugly side. People who are expected to be superheros sometimes get heaped on when they reveal that they aren't. I'm interested in others' thoughts about this.

When I was a single mom, I never experienced the wave of help. I did get a lot of "I don't know how you do it alone..." from women who would kind of melt down when their partners would go away for a few days. Obviously not all women were like that, but that happened a lot more than people actually offering to help and following through on that offer.

Absolutely agree. I have not been offered a lot of help and honestly, I haven't asked for much help either. We're doing okay for the most part.

Also agree and have also gotten the "I don't know how you do it alone . . . " You just do, that's all. You play the hand you're dealt.

[Anonymous]

If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I know of one single dad by choice. Need an egg donor and someone to carry the baby so it's not a cheap endeavor. He has twins.

Adoption is another choice for single dads by choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

I see you've worded this to get around the lesbian question.

What's the difference between having one mom versus having two moms?

[Anonymous]

While I am one, I hate the term and have never used it. Ever. When asked where my husband is, I simply say I'm single and their is no father involved with our lives. That's it.

I agree that it implies a separation between the 'I got knocked up' mom and the 'I spent a zillion dollars on ivf' mom. To me, there is no distinction. We have all chosen to be single parents. Whether a father is involved in my child's life is no ones business but our family's.

As an aside, there are some people who push me for details because, for some reason, they feel the need to know if I fall into the SMBC bucket or not. I simply repeat what I said initially ("just me and my daughter") and change the subject.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

Not sure why you think we would be seeking out your sympathy or empathy. In fact, I RARELY mention how tough it is because I knew what I was getting into before having a child (to the best that any person can).

Also, could you explain how this is different from families where one parent travels all the time, or works 80+ hours a week, or got trapped into it when they really didn't want a child.

Strange how you focus only on single women. Must be a weird hang up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

Not sure why you think we would be seeking out your sympathy or empathy. In fact, I RARELY mention how tough it is because I knew what I was getting into before having a child (to the best that any person can).

Also, could you explain how this is different from families where one parent travels all the time, or works 80+ hours a week, or got trapped into it when they really didn't want a child.

Strange how you focus only on single women. Must be a weird hang up.

Agreed - I don't need any sympathy or empathy. I am loving life as a mother.

I'm also curious what "feed your ego" means. ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

Wow, such rage!

A single mom by choice's choice must have affected you personally and deeply for you to be spitting such vitriol.

Tell us about it.

Go ahead.

We're waiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

...ZZZzzzzzzzz

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can I just say that I hate this fucking term. It is condescending. Those who use it don't want to be associated with those that were somehow "forced" into single motherhood? If we had a failed marriage, at least we got to marriage. If we never got married, we chose to be mothers and keep/parent the baby. Why do you feel the need to make this distinction, what does it gain you? Can I just say I'm a single mom, and it is my choice. Every single day, I choose to wake up and be a parent. We all have choices. The use of that term judges and diminishes the lives and choices of others. You are no better or worse than the rest of us. And let me tell you, I'd rather be a single mom, than a married mom who hates her husband/life, or a mom who gave up or aborted her baby and regrets it (totally pro-choice and pro-adoption, just saying I know I would regret it). You didn't chose to not find a suitable partner anymore than I did.

So yes, I choose to be who I am just as much as you do.

Rant over.

Some people are childless by choice and some aren't. Some families are blended and some aren't. Sometime you need to make the distinction to convince y your situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

I have a child with a committed partner. My friend is a single mom by choice. Are you saying that if both of our children have a stomach bug and are up all night puking, I can expect your sympathy but my friend cannot? What's more sympathetic about my kid's puke? Single parents do not get sympathy when things are hard? I think it would actually work better the other way - partnered parents, you get no sympathy, because you have a partner to help with any struggle you might have. If your partner doesn't help, that's on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

I'm a single mom by choice. I'm also an economist. All I expect to hear from a person living in a democracy with a pay-as-you-go social safety net is "Thank you for contributing another worker who will be paying into various public and private health insurance schemes when my saggy, broken-down future self is drawing out of them."

I should also mention that the majority of children born to mothers under 30 in the US are born to single mothers, despite the decline in teen pregnancy. If you limit childbearing to upper middle class people in monogamous Christian marriages, let me assure you, your society will collapse. (See Japan).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

Why would you assume someone wants your empathy or sympathy or interested in what you have to say about her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

I'm a single mom by choice. I'm also an economist. All I expect to hear from a person living in a democracy with a pay-as-you-go social safety net is "Thank you for contributing another worker who will be paying into various public and private health insurance schemes when my saggy, broken-down future self is drawing out of them."

I should also mention that the majority of children born to mothers under 30 in the US are born to single mothers, despite the decline in teen pregnancy. If you limit childbearing to upper middle class people in monogamous Christian marriages, let me assure you, your society will collapse. (See Japan).

I like you. Can we be friends?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you choose to be a single mother with no committed partner then expect no empathy, sympathy for me. This is the most selfish thing a woman can do because all children need two participating parents. Having a child to feed your ego is just plain wrong.

I see you've worded this to get around the lesbian question.

What's the difference between having one mom versus having two moms?

There's a lesbian question?

Who asked it? Is it extra credit? Do I have to show my work? Here:

The difference between having one one mom versus having two moms is that when you have one mom there is one mom and when you have two moms, there are two moms.

You're welcome!