singing the song of angry (wo)men

[pensnest]

I often find myself talking back to the Am I The Asshole posts on Reddit to which I am currently addicted, but I have *no* desire to make myself a Reddit account and actually post anything.

That said, there was one I read today which made me incredibly angry. It's here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/comments/olu1jm/aita_for_forcing_my_son_to_call_me_mom/

There were SO many comments in reply about how genetics are the only important things that make a person a parent.

'just a womb'

'All the surrogate did was carry [the child]'

'there's no biological connection between the son and the surrogate'

Jesus H Christ, how disrespectful! "All" the surrogate did was the part the child's genetic mother wasn't willing to do - she undertook all the risks, from stretch marks and incontinence through to death; she put the physical strain on her heart, her kidneys, all her systems, she underwent the discomforts of morning sickness and the pain of childbirth. The effort that built that baby from a pair of joined cells into seven or so pounds of infant human being did not come from the genetic mother, it came from the surrogate. She's the one who had to give up alcohol and coffee and French cheeses. She's the one who took the risks that the pregnancy might damage her body for ever. Oh, and the IVF, whatever has to be done to implant a viable foetus, the surrogate went through that. Yeah. That's "all". That 'just a womb' is part of a whole human being, and the whole human being was involved in gestating that child. She breathed for that child, she ate for it and disposed of its waste, her blood flowed to bring that child life. She undertook all that so that somebody else could have a child.

As for there being no biological connection between surrogate and child, bzzzzt!!! The surrogate now has some of that child's cells in her body, and they will be there for the rest of her life.

Genetic Mom, who didn't want to do any of that icky stuff, gets to be Mom. That's nice. And, truly, I understand the reluctance to put one's own body through it all. But she has a responsibility towards both child and surrogate to acknowledge that somebody else went through the risks and difficulties of pregnancy in order to bring that baby to life.

I mean. The FUCK? Have none of these people heard of adoption? The genetic mother supplied approx half of the genes (it's a bit more complicated than that) to create the child. So she gets to ignore the contribution of the person who actually brought the child into the world? If she was an adoptive mother, denying the existence of a birth mother, there would be an outcry.

And frankly, there are too many reproducers in the world who think that contributing genetic material is what makes them parents.

Comments

[tielan]

Apart from the complete dismissal of the surrogate mum, the woman is an asshole anyway for making such a big deal about it and behaving exactly like her teenaged son in the whole matter. (Only answering when he called her 'mom', like tit for tat? No.)

[pensnest]

I have to admit, I pretty much decided she was the asshole for not wanting to have her own baby - but that's not really fair, as there are all kinds of possible bad consequences from pregnancy and labour, so I *tried* to give her the benefit of the doubt.

But yes. Not a grown-up. Anyone with common sense could figure out that the news that he was gestated by someone he doesn't even know would come as a shock, and would cause some kind of reaction. That, surely, is why adopted children should be told when they are young where they came from. Grrr!

[watervole]

I always remember Harpo Marx's biography.

All of his children were adopted - and he and his wife always told the children this from the start. They used to tell them bedtime stories of how they came to be chosen by their new parents.

I remember the story he recounted of one of his children being pitied by a classmate for being adopted.
The boy instantly retorted: "You just happened. I was chosen. My parents really wanted me." (or words to that effect)

[pensnest]

Absolutely the right approach. I had a neighbour with an adopted daughter, and that was basically how they played it, and all went very well. Finding out something that fundamental as a teenager would shake a person's world, I think.

[author_by_night]

Yeah, AITA is a guilty pleasure of mine too, but the comments are often so off-base.

It's been suggested that a lot of people who comment are actually quite young, and that's part of it. I hope so, because while a teenager thinking that is still obnoxious, it's at least a bit better than a 34 year old saying it. However, I also think it's generous to assume it's all teenagers, sadly. A lot of comments... do not sound like they're coming from teens.

Comments can also be strangely forgiving of fathers who realize they're not the bio fathers AND ABANDON THEIR KIDS. Are you kidding me? I'm talking twelve year old kids. "It's the hurt." So if a parent of an adoptee divorces, should they be allowed to abandon their adopted child? You're right, there's absolutely no acknowledgement there.

Then again, I forget if it was AITA or r/relationships, but it's often the same people and on one of those, a bunch of comments said "smoking crack all the time is normal." They'll also encourage obviously sheltered teens and early twenty-somethings to just leave home. "You'll figure it out." How do they know? It's bizarre.

[pensnest]

There are definitely some very odd 'mores' in there, but I was quite surprised at the absolute dismissal of the contribution of the surrogate in this case. And yes, the abandonment of a son who turns out not to be a genetic child... it's so weird in there.