The UN released a controversial tweet regarding what is traditionally a women’s burden – childhood, referring to it as a “Motherhood Penalty”. This is very typical of today’s Liberal\SJW backwards way of thinking, that men need to be feminine, women need to be masculine, gender doesn’t exist until it does and so on. However, in this particular instance there are some large grains of truth in this piece of Liberal propaganda. The author seems to want the reader, especially women to see the list of difficulties associated with 21st century motherhood and choose not to have children. I on the other hand agree that there are many barriers to motherhood but from a strategic standpoint on the national/civilizational level these barriers must be all but removed. This list is not a reason to have children, but a call to action to return the freedom for women to be mothers and as we move towards an Illiberal future of some sort motherhood will become a critical issue as the entire so-called “developed” and much of the developing world are facing an uncertain demographic future.
So let’s take a look at this UN tweet. It is of course presented from a “feminist” perspective that motherhood (something that is an inherent part of womanhood) is somehow evil and a form of victimhood and oppression. The part about this penalty being issued by P. Atriarchy is particularly cringy.
But, in practical terms, living in a market driven economy, in direct contrast to all of human history children have now become an expense rather than boon for the family. Excluding the possibility that children will help their parents financially when they become adults today’s system in an economic sense makes it seem insane to have children, when a nice 401K package or Roth IRA could replace them without having you replace dirty diapers/nappies.
Motherhood is a 24/7 challenging long term contract unpaid profession that exists in a world where we are having to work more and more for less and less. Very few women can afford to be stay at home moms, but even those who can create large holes on their resumes and essentially sacrifice any future ability to make money from a developed career. Given today’s rampant divorce rates this is a very high risk decision for mom to make. Furthermore, children are staying “children” longer and longer with adulthood seemingly coming only after attaining a college degree, we no longer live in a time where 14 year olds went out to bring money back home.
The expensiveness and riskiness of 21st century motherhood is why you see a major demographic problem in societies that have reached “developed” status with a growing or established Middle Class. It must also be noted that this is not some sort of European phenomenon but a very universal one that is most seen (but not exclusively so) where Liberal values meet Free Market influences. In order to combat this problem it is critical to no longer view this as some Euro-trend but as a natural consequence of economic “success” in today’s world.
Even in massively populated and not socially Liberal China, due to their economic success, market factors are defeating traditional values. In a post “One Child Policy” China, the necessary birth rate of 2.1 is almost completely absent from the nation’s subdivisions and the regions around Russia (for some reason) don’t even exceed a birth rate of 1.0, which is European demographic collapse levels.
Population heavy India as a whole has a healthy but still not particularly amazing birth rate as a nation of 2.4 meaning that despite what bloggers may tell you there is no Indian population bomb. Furthermore if you look at this ancient civilization by region you can see that a developed south is experiencing the same birth rate problems as Europe. Again we see a punishment for the rise of an Indian Middle Class. Bollywood producers can either have babies or have a career and as India continues to go Liberal more and more women will choose the safer option of career.
Japan has been a developed Middle Class Liberal Free Market type society for far longer than India or China and this becomes even more evident when you look at a birth/death comparison by prefecture.
Japan, despite its wealth, longevity and in theory “happy” population is culturally commiting suicide along with the West. The West just hit the wall first and so the effects of making motherhood increasingly impossible are much more vivid but the rest of the world is “catching up” rather quickly. But the question is, for those who value their culture and want it to survive into the future, what can be done? What sort of strategy can be put in place to destroy motherhood “penalties”?
1) The critical importance of motherhood for society must be acknowledged both officially and in mass media.
If motherhood remains economically unviable and socially considered an option then in a direct sense, cultures will simply die out from lack of people. In an indirect sense good parenting creates better people which makes society better. The whole trope about single-parent homes creating criminals, drug addicts and sex offenders is not some sort of Christian propaganda, but proven a reality of life.
Motherhood is a key component to an effective society full stop and this opinion needs to become as widespread and accepted as the sky being blue. Motherhood is a heroic selfless act that is a pillar of society. No matter what you do you will be surrounded by other people, would you prefer them to be raised by a loving mom with plenty of free time to actually instill good values?
The Liberal/SJW line that motherhood is some sort of slavery or punishment must be utterly dismantled and become blasphemy in a future Illiberal society. Motherhood is heroic, selfless and critical for society to function end of story. If you disagree pack your bags and spread your death cult ideology elsewhere.
2) Motherhood needs to become an economically viable profession.
You can nag people all you want to go against market influences but when they are extremely strong there is nothing you can do – money talks. You cannot stack all the economic odds in favor of not having children then expect people to go against this and have children. An Illiberal society must treat motherhood as an important lifelong profession that deserves the same guarantees, standards and perhaps salary as being a soldier or working in a factory.
The economic carrots and sticks of the state need to become pro-motherhood. Having children must become a safe (if not the safest) economic plan for women. The exact mechanisms for this are up for debate.
3) Motherhood is not only a women’s issue.
When politicians discuss demographics the “burden” is always placed on women but men are a huge factor in this. Except for nutjob feminists the overwhelming majority of women want to have a husband as a partner for having children. This means that men should be penalized for not producing children. In a traditional society men bring home the bacon, and in an Illiberal society men should face the choice of having their bacon either taken by the government or taken by their own children. If you lose X number of dollars to taxes, but get to “keep” the money after having children, men will start to become pro-family very quickly.
Men have historically wanted to put their name on something, be it a factory, an invention or their children. There are traditional machismo-based reasons for men to want children and these buttons need to be pushed. Men want a dynasty or a house to bear their name and reflect them. There are masculine reasons to have children but today’s Liberal media has all but buried them. In blunt terms men like status, and having children needs to be part of this status. If it takes having four children to become a general or chief of police you will start seeing a lot more drive for four children households.
Women cannot be expected to produce children in a vacuum, men are a huge part of the equation and at the very least men are the “means of production” in order for a family to exist as the breadwinner. Any efforts focused solely on guilting women into pregnancy because a poster said so will fail.
4) A shift in manpower and a new vision are critical.
Governments especially in Europe are increasingly being more and more influenced by childless politicians and activists who have the infinite free time to push their agenda, while those with families are far too busy and too economically fragile to fight back. Furthermore the massive entertainment industries around us are also filled with childless freaks and sexual perverts.
This again goes back to economics, once a pro-family policy is put in place and having children becomes a boom instead of a bust we will see a rise in pro-family pro-human activism. Government made media needs to simply be culled of anyone who is anti-family, and the seas of naive bourgie activists need to be put to work.
5) Propaganda is the only thing that can move the Overton Window.
Any shift of the Overton Window requires a vision for the public to see why this shift in society will be great so that way they go with it. Right now young people are bombarded by a consumerist selfish childlike existence as the only possible vision for their future. Since it has no competition and seems fun\pleasant on the surface it is a big hit.
Right now Motherhood is simply “not cool” and gets little to no positive push at all. This is in direct contrast to the majority of human history. For centuries women without children were looked down upon as total failures. Nowadays getting married and having children who will love you every day of your life is seen a as a massive failure. I mean you could have become a personal assistant and drink coffee at Starbucks!
What is cool is completely dependent on the right public vision and making family life cool again is very possible given the right honest media approach. If being transgender can be made so cool that Hollywood celebrities will inject their mostly adopted children with hormones and possibly disfigure them with plastic surgery, it should be easy to make women feel successful and proud of themselves by having 3+ children.
Many people may find this strategic breakdown of motherhood in an Illiberal future to be strange but that is exactly why it needs to be written. Motherhood and a stable population are critical for any sort of future other than grey cultureless atomized Globalization.
It is a key component of society that for some reason has had little value or importance placed on it for generations. If we are going to make major changes ideologically\politically\strategically in the 21st century then making motherhood become not only viable but strongly preferable is going be a critical component. If you ignore this fact you are being sexist.
Tim Kirby is an independent journalist, TV and radio host.
Originally published in Strategic Culture online journal. The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.