Jenny’s Pennies

French writer, economist and psychoanalyst Corinne Maier, author of Bonjour Laziness, in which she encouraged workers to do as little as possible, has written another provocative book: No Kid: 40 Reasons Not to Have Children. Now it’s here in Swedish and Svenska Dagbladet has picked up the story.

On her list of reasons not to have kids are that they will kill your sex life, force you to eat junk food, and kill the dreams of your youth. From what I’ve heard about Maier’s last book, I think a lot of it is tongue in cheek - she uses humor and irony and exaggerations. Granted, I haven’t read either of the books, but I have skimmed through a bunch of comments and reviews and many of them are appalled that she is taking on the biggest taboo of them all: regretting having children. You see, Maier is a mother herself.

You know, I do think some of us childfree-by-choice people sometimes use an overly insulting rhetoric, but bear in mind that it is a reply to a society in which, especially if we are women, are constantly belittled, pitied, questioned and deprived of our agency, and sometimes even blamed for the demise of civilization. Just look at some of these comments on Svenska Dagbladet’s article on Maier’s book:

Immoral not to have children
To all those who think they have the right to chose not to have children. The classical question “what would happen if everyone did as I do” is pretty sharp. It’s hard for a fully healthy human being to morally defend the decision not to have children just because you can’t be bothered. We human beings exist because we have an ability and an urge to procreate. Those who don’t contribute to that even though you could, leech on us who have children and endured the first 8-10 tough years.

Well, how is this for a moral defense of not having children: every child should be wanted and loved, and forcing people to have them against their will isn’t really a recipe for that. And saying that you had to “endure” the first 8-10 years: that isn’t recruiting me either (and if your kid’s childhood was something you had to “endure”, well, maybe they had to “endure” it as well).

Evil
This woman have been manipulated by the feminists. For these feminist, the woman should become like a man and not have anything to do with children at all. It is the most terrible thing that can happen when the women are becoming more and more like men and won’t take care of the children. It is actually pure evil!!!

Yes, because once the manly man has spread his seed, the sole responsibility for the children lays with the woman. And it’s not like feminists ever have children. And it’s not like it’s the feminists who have been, and still are, working with issues relating to childbearing and parenthood, such as health care, parental leave, better education, daycare and preschools. But thanks for telling me I am actually pure evil. BTW, speaking of evil…

See through the propaganda!
For decades there have been propaganda saying that Europeans shouldn’t have children. The people behind this should be exposed for what they are, treacherous Marxists and cosmopolitans with a Europe-hostile agenda. This propaganda are mostly directed towards white western women who are encouraged to “fulfill themselves” and live some kind of teenage life until well over 40, and when they realize that they want children after all, then it’s too late.

Are you comfortable in that tin-foil hat?
I have known for years that I don’t want any children, I can’t tell you when it first dawned on me, but I was definitely a young teenager (maybe even younger). But thanks for letting me know that it was some sneaky Marxists and cosmopolitans out to destroy civilization who brainwashed me in to it. So, did they place subliminal messages in the horse magazines I read or in the Pippi Longstocking TV-series?

Seriously though, by choosing not to have children, I am not stripping you of your choice (conscious or unconscious) to have them. Your life is in no way affected by my choice in this matter. And unlike others, I am not constantly trying to talk, scare or shame people over to my side.

Yes, I can identify with this. I do judge people based on what they read (or not read). I have been out of the dating game for quite a while now, but hypothetically, if I were to look for a partner, literary tastes are up there on the list on what I think is important when it comes to deciding who to spend time with. It’s a compatibility thing - if the only book in your bookcase is the Bible, or worse, there are no books in your bookcase, only porcelain figurines and family pictures, I’ll know that no, we won’t have much in common. Other people couldn’t care less about what and if their partner reads, but find it very important that they share their sports passion, or love for the outdoors, or deep religiousness or whatever. We all have our ideas on what is important in a partner, and unless it’s truly ridiculous stuff (like wearing the wrong shoes), I don’t think we should pass too much judgment on that. For me, if and what you read do tell me a lot about you as a person, and if you hail Ayn Rand and Per Ahlmark (Swedes will get that one) as purveyors of Truly Awesome Ideas, I know that any discussion with you over the morning paper will not result in my thoughts being challenged and my arguments sharpened, but just a lot of headache from banging my head in the table. Equally, if you read tons of self-help books and stuff like “The Secret“, I’ll nod and back away slowly. That goes for new age-y books as well, with titles like (I made these up) “Healing through dolphins” and “What color is your soul?”. Thanks, but no thanks.

It doesn’t mean I judge your value as a person based on your reading choices, but it does clue me in on whether or not we’ll get along. Call me snobbish and elitist, but that’s the way it is.

In the arts section of yesterday’s Dagens Nyheter, there is an article called “The glamorous prostitution” (Den glamorösa prostitutionen). It starts: “They say sex sells. And the luxurious and happy whore sells even better. Now the Swedish books are here. But why is everyone so happy?”

Well, after reading that intro, I just knew what was coming.
The article then talks about pseudonymous London call girl Belle de Jour and Tracy Quan’s “Diary of a Manhattan call girl”. Now, a former Swedish stripper, Caroline L Jensen, is telling her story in “Champagneflickan. En svensk strippa berättar” (The champagne girl. The story of a Swedish stripper).

The author is (predictably) critical of the subject. In the end, the not so objective article reads (my translation):

Publishers are thus putting out books that portray prostitution and stripping as exotic occupations - but without caring about what signals they are sending out. A lot of the themes addressed in the books (buying sex, exploitation, the “happy whore”, free choice and so on) are of course pure mine fields. Behind the tough girls in luxurious packaging lays a lot of unanswered questions. As a reader you have to be careful not to be tricked by the glamour and the shiny covers.

You know, I have nothing against critical examination of the sex industry (or the publishing industry). I have read neither of the books, but I can buy that they might have been published more for cheap thrills and money than for their actual literary qualities. But then, isn’t that true of a lot of books?

To me it seems as if the article writer, Matilde Sköld, doesn’t want voices like those of Belle de Jour or Tracy Quan and Caroline L Jensen to be heard. Should the books include a mandatory chapter about the downsides of the sex industry? Advisory stickers on the covers? Or should they not have been published at all, because they don’t fit Sköld’s understandings of how sex workers are supposed to behave and feel?

And since then does publishing houses have to care about what “signals they are sending out” by publishing one book or another? You know, there are a lot of books out there which in detail describes sadistic murders and torture. In which sick and twisted individuals are portrayed without much, if any, criticism. In which the bad guy is getting away. And people that have done pretty awful stuff have published memoirs and biographies. Should books like those also be questioned on what “signals they are sending out”?

Belle and Tracy and Caroline have the right to tell their stories and to own their experiences and feelings (just as those who have terrible experiences of being sex workers have the right to their feelings and experiences). If they say they are happy, who are you to question them?

My comment for the day is this, that I found over at PostSecret (go there for more Valentine’s day themed good stuff).