Liz Jones, probably, makes a few good points, but I have posted her in the stupid section as what normally comes out of her mouth is not subject to any process of the brain.


Must they subsidise motherhood as if it were dormant farmland?

By LIZ JONES - More by this author » Last updated at 21:24pm on 15th September 2007
Comments


What a strange week. First the Government pledges £120 for pregnant women to encourage them to eat more fruit and veg.


Next thing you know, David Cameron distances himself from a Tory Policy Group environmental report, which controversially suggests a ban on free supermarket car parks, saying his priority is to ensure families can still make ends meet.
I can keep quiet no longer. I am going to say the unsayable.
There is no point fiddling while Rome (or London or Beijing) burns fossil fuels by suggesting we all boil less water in our kettles and switch off our plasma screens at source.
The only way to be really green is not to have children.
Of course, this is a terribly non- PC thing to bring up. Mothers are the last sacred cows in our society, untouchable, beyond reproach.
When I was the editor of a woman's magazine, my then fashion director told me she was off on her second maternity leave in two years, to which I responded: "Oh, that's annoying."


From the looks on the faces of the assembled (female) staff, you'd have thought I'd made a racist remark.
The government has announced plans for pregnant women to receive a one-off payment of £120 to spend on wholesome food


No one is allowed to complain when they are left to pick up the slack as every mum in the office hares out of the door at six on the dot, millions of plastic carrier bags in tow, hell-bent on creating a nappy mountain.
No one is allowed to yawn while a new mum, who surely made this particular rod for her own back in the first place, complains about lack of sleep, or time, or affordable child care, or a big enough house.
And while I can understand the need to have one child, or even two, why on Earth have three, or four?
No one is allowed to even raise an eyebrow at the Ruth Kellys and Nicola Horlicks of this world; au contraire, they are labelled Superwomen.
And don't try to tell me that men these days are more involved.
You only have to read Alastair Campbell's diaries to realise that children are mere dots on the horizon; good God, what woman, with Campbell's job and offspring, would find time to go swimming and train for a marathon?
When I asked a friend of mine with three boys why she was trying for a fourth child, she responded indignantly: "I just really want a girl."
Why on Earth does the Government subsidise motherhood as if it were dormant farmland, with lump sums of £250 at birth, free IVF, the right to an expensive home birth and help with child care, when in reality it is fuelling a society in which we all think we deserve everything, from a new car to an exotic holiday to an iPhone or a baby of the right sex, no matter the (environmental) cost?
Isn't parenthood just rampant consumerism? Like leaving the tap running while you floss, only a million times worse?
A brood is the ultimate badge of goodness, used by everyone from the Blairs to the Camerons to the horrid, high-maintenance mum who lives not far from me, who is always posting "Do not ring bell, baby sleeping!" signs on her front door, but then takes the wretched child to a fashion show where the decibels surpass rock-concert levels.
The idea that only parents make up the hard-working backbone of Britain, that the singletons of this world are frivolous and selfish, is nonsense.
I have just read Singled Out by Virginia Nicholson, a fascinating book that celebrates women who, having been forced to abandon expectations of becoming wives and mums due to the shortage of men after two world wars, became married to their careers in nursing and teaching instead, and were amazing, inspiring, dedicated.
'The only way to be really green is not to have children' says Liz Jones


I know that after 40 years of feminism, we are all supposed to toe the "having-it-all" line, but I think too often a child is conceived as a status symbol, to prove that you can.
I have a friend who is a very powerful magazine editor, and she told me that when she hit her early 40s she earned more money than she could possibly spend, felt her life lacked meaning and so decided to have a child as "something to do".
This is worse than catching a plane, surely?
Now, I know I will be accused of sour grapes, and I'm the first to admit that while on the outside I might still wear Balenciaga jodhpurs and toe-rings, on the inside my womb is now lined with a doily.
I left motherhood too late not because I was trying to shatter the glass ceiling, but because I never met the right man.
I have ended up child-free not by design but by misfortune, so shouldn't I at least get the £120 towards cat food?
Or a special designated parking space right by the door at Waitrose, with "Barren, likely to die alone" daubed in white paint on the ground as my reward for not contributing to the predicted global population of 7.6billion by 2020? Probably not, but I can dream.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770