Edyta Broda is the author of the recently published book "Honestly about life without children", she also runs a blog bezdzietnik.pl. He writes about life without children, about people who do not want them. It turns out that the topic - although often ignored in silence - is important and necessary. Why? You will learn this from our conversation!
- Does a Pole or a Pole don't want to have children or just dislike them and talk about it out loud?
Edyta Broda:Of course, we may not want to have children, there is no institutional pressure in this matter, no one can order us to do anything. However, we are dealing with moral pressure. Lots of people give themselves the right to comment on the choice of childlessness.
Friends and relatives want to instruct us on this matter. Even if you are already a parent, you also hear questions about how many children you have, then you find out how many you really should - and especially should - have, what gender they should be.
Our society, at least in part, does not want to hear about childlessness. More than once I have heard: "But why are you talking about the fact that you don't want to have children? Why are you writing about this? Who is interested in this?".
It turns out, however, that a lot of people are interested in the topic. It is worth talking about it, as I can tell from the readers' reactions to my book or the statements of people who comment on my blog entries, also devoted to childlessness. There are a lot of them and they are often full of commitment.
- In the book you emphasize that you do not like the terms "childless", "childless" because it is pejorative and suggests that a given person lacks something. In English, we have the term "child-free", which means freedom and full possibilities without children. Do you think that in this case the saying that language shapes reality works?
Yes. It seems that childlessness is a shame to say, because "without" means lack - someone should have something, but not. So it's best for him to camouflage this childlessness, and many people do so, if only because he doesn't want to talk about why he doesn't have children.
I had to overcome this unconscious shame myself, look at the words: "childless", "childless". On August 1, the International Day without Children is celebrated each year. On this occasion, on my blog, we looked for the best - less stigmatizing - synonyms for "childlessness". There were various suggestions, e.g."niedzietność" or my favorite "non-multipliers".
I also once analyzed scientific articles written in the 1990s and at the beginning of the 21st century, dealing with the problem of childlessness. Theoretically, they should be neutral, but even in them there were such phrases as "the epidemic of childlessness" or "the plague of childlessness".
In English it is similar to Polish - "childless" means "childless", but the English also have the word "child-free", which has a slightly different shade of meaning and defines a person free from children. Not one that lacks something.
- Is it this freedom to shape your life without having to plan everything for children that is the most important reason why you never wanted them?
The most important reason I don't want children is … I don't want to have children. I just don't feel like it. When I thought about my future, I didn't see a child in it.
If I wanted to have them, nothing would stop me from doing it (well, maybe apart from infertility). Neither dreams of a career nor fear of responsibilities. In my case, the reluctance to have children is not due to any external reasons.
- I know a few women who grew up convinced that they wanted to be mothers, and when they became mothers - said, to their horror, that they actually accepted what society requires of them for their will . The image of motherhood created by the Catholic Church, the media, literature, art, and other mothers on social media turned out to be painfully different from reality. Why is so much pressure placed on women to be mothers and are only presented with a frosted version of motherhood?
I think it comes from the past. The woman has only recently stopped being perceived solely through the prism of her biological role. Formerly, there was no contraception, so the women gave birth to children. However, when they gained access to contraception, they tried to limit the number of offspring.
In the beginning of the industrial age, there were also social requirements. Women were pushed out of the emerging labor market, locked at home because it was decided that it would be better for society: a man works, a woman looks after children. It turned out, however, that for women this is not a good deal.
Today, when women have risen to independence, and contraception is available, that social pressure is still there. In a conservative vision of the world - which many people do not want to say goodbye to - it is hard to imagine women deciding on their own fertility. About how muchwill have children when and if they will have any …
- Until the nineteenth century, a child was treated in the family as a small adult - no one was especially sorry for him, he did not take into account his emotions, feelings, needs. Today, it seems that it is completely different - the model of a mother who is always watching her child is promoted: she should feed her naturally, for at least 3 years, give birth naturally and without anesthesia, prepare lenses and soups on her own. Why do we always put the needs of the child above those of the mother?
As I mentioned earlier, it used to be a result of the patriarchal culture, the lack of contraception, today women can decide for themselves whether they want to have children. And although society does not limit them as it used to, they stay at home … alone.
What does this result from? Perhaps it was because more children were born once, but their mortality was also higher - one died, and a few others remained. Today it is different - we have fewer children, and the more limited a good is, the more we value it.
We live in a child-centered culture - the youngest are now little VIPs, whose upbringing engages a lot of money, strength and emotions.
Women pay a lot of tribute for being a mother - on the one hand, they want the baby to have the best, and on the other hand, they have their own dreams, goals and plans. They expect more and more from the world, and they must somehow reconcile these expectations with motherhood. It's a challenge.
- Before talking to you, I saw what the natural increase in the world looks like. So what turned out? Poland ranks 169 among 193 countries. They have more children - it would seem that the more liberated French, Dutch or Swedes. In our country, the priority is 500+, we have long maternity leaves, and yet women do not want to bear (many) children. How do you think - what does it result from?
From being brought up in a different culture with a different idea of how motherhood should be realized. In France, it is simply easier - the woman does not stay alone with it, she has the support of her partner, the state. There are no such high expectations of mothers as in our country. The burden of maternal responsibility on women is smaller.
French women finish breastfeeding quickly, have short maternity leaves, and after giving birth, they are offered exercises for the perineum and abdominal muscles. Nobody accuses them of being bad mothers. As the example of Poland shows - the financial incentive to bear children does not work, women simply want to efficiently combine various activities.
- Part of your book consists of conversations with people who do not want to have children - they have different education, financial situation, gender, he alth condition, some gave the impression of being more confident, others - more sensitive, exactly like that the same as for people with children. Meanwhile, the stereotypical image of a man without children is either a complete egoist or an unfortunate man who "failed" to get them. Can this stereotype be overcome and where, in your opinion, it came from?
Since the mother is caring, then - by reversing the vectors - a childless woman must be her opposite. Since I am childless, I must have a void within me that needs to be filled. This is the stereotypical perception of childlessness. I also think that flat and silly portraits of childless people make their own - in the press and on the Internet, they are usually shown on the beach, under a palm tree, over glasses of wine …
In the social perception, their life is an eternal party, no responsibility. Added to this is increasingly louder anti-natalism. Not everyone without children by choice is an anti-natalist, but it is their voice that can be loud. All these comments hitting children and their parents do not bring social sympathy to the childless. In addition, childless people can be irritated - with pressure, negative comments, the eternal evaluation of their attitude … And they can express this irritation with a sharp expression.
I used to answer the questions of "kind" aunts and uncles not very elegantly, today I think that it is worth taking a calm approach to the subject. I do not emphasize at every step how hopeless motherhood is, since I did not choose it myself, because it is idiotic. It is not about whose choice is better and whose choice is worse… It is about the laws of procreation. Each of us can choose what is best for him. And that's beautiful!
À about the choice - when I was looking for a motif for the cover of the book, I had a hard nut to crack. I did not want a sign with a crossed-out image of a child on it, because not having children does not mean being against them. On the other hand, I avoided symbols such as, for example, a lollipop, which were meant to mean that life without a child is sweet, easy and pleasant. It finally stood on a neutral yellow and black cover.
- Why are childless people feeling sorry for them? Why the belief that this life of a person with children is fuller, more valuable, since a person without children, as he has no obligations related to them, has more time to fulfill himself?
I think that when it comes to children, each side "sympathizes" with the other. After all, "no one will serve a glass in their old age" for childless people, and "parents" don'ttime for oneself. "In my opinion, the most important thing here is the certainty of choice and respect for it, even when some aspect of the non-chosen life seems tempting to us. Perfect choices are only in an ideal world.
I know parents who fulfill themselves in parenting - they like to spend time with their children, reading, cooking, playing, etc. They are definitely not among those who "carry their cross" and I hope they are like them most. Such parents do not feel sorry for the childless, because they themselves are satisfied with what they have. The problem with childlessness is experienced by people who are not completely reconciled with their role as a parent.
- "You ingrate, how can you not thank for such a gift of fate" - I once read on a forum for moms in a thread started by a woman who got pregnant and was terrified because she never wanted to. In the book, one of your interlocutors recalls situations in which the child's grandfather played a fairy tale to the child on the train so loudly that people in the same compartment did not hear the movie they watched with headphones. After drawing attention, the grandfather was indignant and challenged his fellow passengers from the worst. Why do people who care for a child feel not even privileged over childless people, but allow themselves to behave beyond the principles of savoir-vivre in the belief that they can? And it often turns out that they really can …
There are indeed demanding parents who can go astray in demanding rights for themselves, but the famous 500+ does not hurt me - I believe that the state should wisely help parents. On the other hand, parents should also be aware of childless people and their needs. This is required by the rules of social coexistence.
- Recently in social media there was an entry of a mother who received a bill at the hotel with the note "extra payment for a brat". I followed the comments on social media about it and most of it was … positive. Users wrote that they dream of a place without children, where they can rest. So maybe something is changing and Poles do not blindly worship children, but still do not have the courage to admit it in public places?
In my opinion, sometimes we are all children tired, and parents even more than childless people! In the past, children were in a nursery, kindergarten, at events organized especially for them, but the world of philharmonics, theater and restaurants belonged to adults. Today we can find children in each of these places. And good!
However, a new social need has emerged that is not being met - the need for adult-friendly places. Children should be in public spaces, butwe need adult enclaves. That is why I am not surprised by the increasing popularity of places - hotels, restaurants - that guarantee rest to those who are looking for peace and quiet.
In such places people behave completely different than where there are, for example, playgrounds. They do not raise their voices, they tiptoe … They respect silence, because in today's world silence is a luxury.
Edyta Broda- feminist, editor, blogger. He works in a press publishing house, and since 2022 he has been running the Bezdzietnik blog.
About the author
Anna SierantEditor in charge of the Psychology and Beauty sections, as well as the main page of Poradnikzdrowie.pl. As a journalist, she cooperated, among others. with "Wysokie Obcasy", the websites: dwutygodnik.com and entertheroom.com, the quarterly "G'RLS Room". She also co-founded the online magazine "PudOWY Róż". He runs a blog jakdzżyna.wordpress.com.
Read more articles from this author