Tom McMahon has a provocative post up about the difficulty of the life of a single mom. It proves, I think, just the opposite of what he seems to think it proves.
I gather he thinks it shows the tragic foolishness of trying to shoulder the whole burden of single motherhood. What it really shows, I think, is that no matter how bad her life is now, she finds it easier than putting up with a man.
Why do women take up with men? In an ill-ordered society, they want strong men to breed them strong sons to protect them from the vicissitudes of the world. In a better-ordered society, they want men who will help raise the children. Or at least to pay the bills.
But none of these reasons work any more. Say what you like about our problems, we really aren't so anarchic as to require strong sons. And no matter what you see on (some) sitcoms, men really aren't much help around the house.'
Which leaves money but these days (perhaps outside the professional class), men are far more likely to be a liabillity than an asset. They're falling behind in general employment numbers and in education. And in the current recession, they are falling off the cliff (cf. passim).
Sure you have to multitask, to do everything at once. But hard as it is, it appears to be easier (in many cases) of putting up with the deadweight baggage of a male presence.
Men, in short, are surplus. Except perhaps for the occasional transitory idyll, but as Andy Rooney would say, why buy the pig when sausage is cheap?
No comments:
Post a Comment