Recently I came across this article by Carol Hartsell of the Huffington post highlighting her outcry against those that pity and refer to her as being childless. Hartsell says' that she is also not...
"monsterless, RV-less, ferretless, wingless, third-nippleless, portmanteauless, Ryan-Seacrestless, crippling-sense-of-self-loathingless and teaching-certificateless..."
And thus by placing these labels on her It dismisses the fact that not having children is ultimately a choice that for Hartsell is one that should be respected. This article reminded me again of one of Sam's comments on how in our discussion about Gay and Lesbian rights the case of choice over genetics is often dismissed yet still needs to be considered. Hartsell argues that...
...almost every woman you know has been socialized from the time she was in diapers to believe that she is supposed to have a child of her own...
So consequently one can imagine that how within the LGBT community genetics can be used as a means of socializing with factual and tangible support. So while the case is being made for genetics within the LGBT community can it be argued that leaning to heavily on genetics can actually cause repercussions for those who feel that it is a choice, one being that they have even made?
No comments:
Post a Comment