kid-related | Some observations on kid-obsessed America

When non-American women are introduced, their professional position, job title, education, and achievements are mentioned. The same is true when women introduce themselves. Whether they appear in the media or in other professional settings, they are labeled and label themselves as professionals and experts in their discipline, their reproductive choices not being mentioned, as they are something that belongs to the private sphere not to be discussed publicly. Americans, however, tend to define women through procreation. Not only does the media label women this way, but also women tend to picture themselves as mothers whether is it relevant in the situation presented or not. Also, the emotional term of “mom”, not the biological term of “mother” is used in relation to a stranger.

Some of the examples are article authors’ introductions in the media: Jane Smith, mom, wife, lawyer or Jane Smith, mom of 3, author, doctor, the term “mom” often being capitalized in the middle of a sentence. Where European, Latin American, or African media focus on the characteristics relevant for the information presented, the American ones not only bring up the person’s private information on her reproductive choice, but also put it in the first position, before all the achievements she had to work so hard for. Another example are news articles like: Washington Mom Sues the State Over (here comes the reason completely unrelated to her status as a mother) and further down the article mentions that the woman in question also happens to be a highly educated professional in a prestigious field. Why not a “Washington Scientist” then?

This way of defining women seems to be so deeply rooted in the culture and so strongly and persistently drummed into women’s heads that they do not seem to notice that there is something wrong here. While their European counterparts would protest against this gender discriminating approach, American women not only do nothing about it but also internalize it as a way of defining themselves, regardless of their scientific or other achievements. I have never encountered this approach in other societies, not even when talking to a civil society activist in a remote Angolan village who had a baby in a scarf attached to her back. She never mentioned anything kid-related in a professional interview even if her society is known as conservative and kids are very important in her culture.

American women not only introduce themselves or let others introduce them as “mom” but also label their cars this way. Proud Army mom, proud Air Force mom, volleyball mom, swim mom, gymnastics mom, insert-any-sport-discipline mom, are widespread in kid-obsessed America. When I first saw a bumper sticker “hockey mom” on a vehicle, I was still very innocent about the kid-obsessed culture. I thought this meant that the car owner plays hockey and happens to have a kid as well. When my friend corrected me, I was shocked that the person in question defines herself through the kid or as an attachment to the kid. All of us, not only successful professionals, have certain qualities that distinguish us from the others, like fast knitter, sunflower grower, or pet rescuer. If a person has a need to be exhibitionist about her privacy, it can be done in a thousand ways, not necessarily through the kids. At that time, however, I had no idea that in kid-obsessed America there is no life besides kids.

When trying to buy a book from an online book store, I was struck by lightning. A book review started: “As a busy mother of 3…” This one at least was not as emotion-loaded as the ones using “mom” instead of “mother”. But anyway, the book subject matter was not even distantly related to kids. At that point I skipped to the next one. I have no reason to read a review written by someone who has no identity apart from reproduction. People can be busy with many things, not necessarily by having a kid. However, it looks as though in this kid-worshiping society women were programmed to be walking wombs that do not exist without a kid and cannot imagine that it could be any different.

Another story comes from a supermarket. I could not find an item so I asked about it. I was told: “see that mom at that aisle? It is right there”. The salesperson labeled a complete stranger she knew nothing about just because that lady happened to be with a kid. Maybe she was a sitter, an aunt, an elder sister, any other relative or a friend? No, she was described with the emotional term of “mom”. If I asked the same question anywhere else, I would get an answer: “see that person in a red sweater and blue jeans?” or “see that woman with long brown hair?”. Not in kid-obsessed America. Here a woman is described as a “mom”.

The most shocking comment to me was what my non-American friend heard from a salesperson in a women’s clothing chain store in New Jersey. My friend is a highly achieving professional and out of the blue she was told the following about her successful career: “when your husband makes you a kid everything will end”. She was left speechless. Very assertive as she is she could not say anything in self-defense because in her worse nightmares she would not imagine that not only a woman may say something like this to another woman but also as a customer she did not expect this level of disrespect from a salesperson. The same actually happened to her in a doctor’s office in the same state when she was told something very similar by a nurse. Similar to my reaction to the bumper sticker, she was then new to the kid-obsessed culture and too shocked to act. Coming from a modern European city she could simply not imagine that a Western society can be so backward. Now she says she would definitely sue both companies and make sure that the two women would be fired.

What other Western society has an expression of “career woman”? In modern societies a career is a normal part of life for both men and women and no labels are used because there is no need for them. In this kid-obsessed society, however, women are nagged by friends, relatives, coworkers and complete strangers about their reproductive plans, and patronized or condescended based on their answer. It seems like in America uteri are public property, open for anyone to look into and comment. Strangers, instead of talking about something neutral like weather, literature, music, or art, nosily interfere in women’s privacy and reserve themselves the right to make negative remarks or even harass women who say they are not interested in procreation. On the other hand, these women are unable to defend themselves from aggressive interference or even are afraid that any self-defense would be impolite (and what is the intrusive interference if not a lack of basic manners in its extreme version?) and end up cornered and humiliated.

The American society needs to stop treating women like attachments to a kid and learn basic manners and respect. American women need to be much more assertive in defending themselves and more willing to show that they have identity, personality, and achievements apart from a kid and that these characteristics are equally or more valid in comparison with procreation.

When people announce that they do not want to have children, they are often confronted with a statement: but God said “Be fruitful and multiply”. I am pretty sure many childfree Christians were exposed to this problem whether hearing this phrase as a reproach made by someone else or even considering by themselves if their choice is right in the light of their God while remembering only this short part of it.

People who use the phrase “Be fruitful and multiply” to scold or undermine someone else’s reproductive choices always omit its further part. Actually, the exact phrase of Genesis 1:28 reads as follows: “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

Fill the earth. Subdue it. Have dominion. Sounds familiar?

There seems to be little consensus today regarding when exactly was Genesis written. The Book of Genesis itself does not state it either. Its authorship is arguable. Assuming, however, that Moses was the author, the date of composition for the Book of Genesis would have to be between 1446 B.C. (the date of the Exodus) and 1406 B.C. (the death of Moses), according to Bible.org.

The data on world population in 2000 B.C. varies between 27 million and 35 million, while for 1000 B.C. it is estimated to have been about 50 million. Let’s assume that the world population in 1400s when Genesis was written was approximately the same as the current population of California (just above 38 million as of 2012), or Argentina, Algeria, Poland or Sudan, eventually half of the population of today’s Egypt, Germany, or Iran.

According to the United Nations (as of June 13, 2013), current world population of 7.2 billion is projected to reach 8.1 billion in 2025 and 9.6 billion by 2050. These figures are based on the so called “medium variant” projection, which assumes a substantial decline in fertility rates. According to the “high variant” projection, however, the world population in 2050 could be 10.9 billion.

When the world population was around 40 million, the calling “be fruitful and multiply” could not have done much harm and was even justified. However, using the phrase in today’s planet that carries over 7 billion souls and intentionally leaving the rest of it omitted, prevents the person on the receiving end from realizing that this part of God’s plan (whether you believe in God or not) has been exceeded by way too much. The world is overpopulated and humans have too much dominion over the other creatures and their environments. If anything, the complete phrase should lead people to ponder whether they have overachieved this plan and need to modify their behaviors to sustain life on the planet for many future years.

As of 2013, we face the problems of deforestation, CO₂ emissions, global warming, unsustainable agriculture, water and air pollution, resource depletion, species extinction, and other serious environmental issues resulting from overpopulation and environmentally irresponsible behavior.

There is also a personal level to this problem: following the calling with its second part omitted may make some people unhappy – these people that did not want to have child, but gave in to the peer pressure of the “be fruitful and multiply” manipulative advocates. On the global level, however, it means a further serious devastation of the already devastated environment.

When Americans hear “overpopulation” in relation to “environmental problems”, they point their blaming fingers at the developing countries, especially African ones, where the birth rates are higher. Very few of them would consider that in their kid-obsessed country fewer, but extremely spoiled kids do more harm to the environment than a larger number of African children raised in modest conditions. In child-worshiping America people buy tons of plastic toys, disposable diapers, use a lot of fuel to drive the kids in monster-size SUVs, waste the food their fussy kid does not eat, buy brand new clothing, while in developing countries there is little waste, kids have to be creative in inventing their toys and ways of playing, they recycle clothes, walk, do not waste food and are still happy and respectful. This does not mean that the birth rate should continue being this high, but it is not only the developing world with multiple children per couple that is to blame for environmental problems. Child-related overconsumption in America is worse in this regard.

Today, instead of “be fruitful and multiply”, the calling for all, Christians or not, should be: Be responsible and use birth control, stop cutting down rainforests, lower CO₂ emissions, stop mass scale plastic manufacturing, and biodiversity depletion, have respect for the fish of the sea and the birds of the heavens and for the trees of the Amazon, and for heaven’s sake, stop the kid-related overconsumption. The Earth is filled to the limits, subdued way too much, and human dominion has done a lot of harm.