Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 281 posts

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#131

Post by bell-cot »

Another thought...

Over {mumble} decades, I've been stereotyped as good uncle / father / grandfather / etc. material pretty often, based on how I reacted to or interacted with various kids.

I've also seen quite a few men react less well to young children, and had less-favorable stereotypes quickly applied to them.

I wonder how the men featured in the article were stereotyped when younger. Back when couples mostly got together in larger/richer social contexts (churches, tighter-knit communities, etc.) - having the young women hearing unflattering whispers (about a young man's parenting aptitude) could certainly dim his prospects for having children.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#132

Post by anon291 »

bitsandbooks wrote: post #48

We ought to be converting these people into adoptive or foster parents.

Contrary to popular belief there's, in general, a shortage of children to adopt in the United States. Most of the children open for adoption have several needs that a random single man without any child development experience may have trouble meeting.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#133

Post by em-bee »

_V_ wrote: post #52
tr888 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hate this attitude. It's a condescending and patronising attitude - that men who don't (or can't) have children are less. Are you really saying that absolutely nothing is more important than reproducing? For everyone, in every situation? I sincerely hope not.

Is it? I don't see anything patronising in there. It is just a statement. I don't think that people who cannot have children are seen as something less. This is just you wanting to be offended. And yes, in general there is almost nothing more important other than reproduction from the perspective of species. Nothing controversial about that either.

the offending part is that there should some kind of drive to have your own children or more specifically that the desire to have children is reduced to the need to reproduce.

i have children because i love them and want to care for them. i would adopt children for the same reason. i felt no drive to have children be my own. i could not care less if it is me who reproduced instead of someone else.

of course if humanity as a whole were in danger because there are not enough kids then i would want to contribute that however i can. but even then that could mean helping someone take care of their kids so they can have more kids.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#134

Post by bluefirebrand »

xyzzy4747 wrote: post #102
alphabettsy wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad parenting or neglectful often produces bad outcomes does it not? This is unfortunate to read. Of course everything doesn’t need to be planned, but food and shelter are the bare minimum.

Bad outcome in what way? Even if you’re a so-called bad parent, they’ll still have a similar life expectancy, and a similar chance of creating grandchildren. Maybe they won’t be an A student when they reach school but does it actually matter? There’s kids who literally survived the Holocaust in Nazi Germany and lived very successful lives after. That said there is a natural instinct to be a decent parent. You don’t r…

Success as a parent is much more than just "my child is alive and getting older"

Are they becoming a happy person? good, moral person? Do they contribute to society or are they a drain on society? Do you, the parent, have to bail them out of jail every other weekend?

Don't neglect your kids, people. Please.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#135

Post by poisonborz »

em-bee wrote: post #71
basisword wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like most young men have always wanted to extend their youth and avoid the responsibility that family life would bring. However, until recently (with easy access to birth control, abortion, and proper education) this wasn't really possible. You would accidentally have a child and be forced into the lifestyle you were trying to avoid. And most of the time things worked out and you were forced into a situation t…

i think the smart thing to do is to have kids when you are 20 and then enjoy life when you are 40. at that time you are much better off financially (unless you live in a country where you have to pay for your kids education maybe) which gives you a lot more freedom to explore your interests.

That's an opinion an algorithm could come up with based on raw data, but in real life you will not enjoy life the same way when you are 20, especially given at what life stage other 40s are at in most societies.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#136

Post by scruple »

ninkendo wrote: post #60
bt4u wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It will absolutely occur. Men who take their kids to the playground by themselves are often confronted (by moms of other kids). At some point things are so obvious that not many people are going to bother finding a peer reviewed study to cite. Maybe they should but they won't.

Everyone's experience is different, but my understanding (and experience) has always been the opposite: People see a dad taking his kid out to the playground and think "dad of the year" before they think of a pervert, because the bar for what it takes to be a good dad is so low. There are so many uninvolved dads out there that the smallest token gesture like taking your kids to the playground is seen as some huge acc…

But it's also insulting when someone makes off-hand remarks about "giving mom a break," etc. I have 4 year old twins and a nearly 2 year old singleton. We're all busy as fuck here, but no one ever diminishes my wife's ability to be a parent.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#137

Post by slothtrop »

There is an analogous grief for those dealing with a broken adoption system. I know someone who cared for a newborn for 9 months, before it was forcibly taken away at the request of the biological grandparents. This is in Canada, so you can guess why. They loved and cared for it as any parent would.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#138

Post by koonsolo »

bell-cot wrote: post #6

Geezer* Perspective... [*If not in the USA, read "Old geezer". Credit: Aachen] Many varieties of "I really regret that I [did|didn't] do X when I was younger" occur in older humans. The stereotype of young men wanting to avoid all the work and commitment of setting down, marrying, and raising children is older than the pyramids. It is obviously not true of all young men, but there's very seldom been a shortage. Sure,…

As the title says, it's not about not wanting kids, it's about thinking it will happen automatically.

Some guys think that relationships magically start in a romantic setting, like shown in Hollywood movies. Reality is: if you want something, you should actively purchase it.

So if you don't want kids: fine, enjoy the freedoms it will offer.

If you want a relationship and/or family, don't sit on your ass until it will magically appear to you. Go get it!

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#139

Post by neilv »

I love teaching/interacting with the occasional good-natured, learning-sponge kids, but the stars haven't yet aligned to have kids of my own.

Now that I'm 50-ish, although I'm energetic and not yet noticeably graying, when I think about kids of my own, I have to consider:

* A dear friend adored her father, and when he died while she was in college, she was devastated. I could nurture a kid to be resilient in that possibility, but I don't like the idea of setting them up for that possibility to be not-unlikely.

* I'd want the other parent to be a life partner, and that probably means in a close age bracket. So biological clocks are a factor, at least for building from scratch. Or, if partner is significantly younger, that means we'd have to consider how much time we could have before the woman likely outlives the man, and where that would leave her.

That said, I haven't written off the idea of a family, and I'm paying every month to keep a life insurance policy, just in case there's someday a family who might need it.

Re: ‘I just assumed it would happen’: the unspoken grief of childless men

#140

Post by bryanlarsen »

anon291 wrote: post #122
ant_li0n wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow yeah you really hit the nail on the head for me. My wife and I weren't trying to have kids but we weren't trying not to have kids either, if you get my drift. Looking back on it, if we had been "smart" about deciding when the right time would happen, we might never have had kids. Having kids is hands-down the best thing I've ever done but also the hardest. Not because of the amount of work, because it's really no…

The entire phrase 'trying for kids' is a neologism only enabled by birth control For most of history, people just did what you did and had the results you did

On the contrary, "trying for kids" was accompanied by an elaborate ceremony to kick off the process. This big ceremony was often so successful that the kids would arrive 5 months after the ceremony!
Post reply on HN