Spain is experiencing a wave of protests by single women and lesbians who oppose the current legislation specifying that public funds can only be spent on fertility and conception procedures to assist couples consisting of a man and a woman.
For the longest time, Spain has struggled with a demographic crisis of massive proportions. Today, the economy is in shambles, and fewer people than ever want to procreate. To fill the demographic hole, Spain has adopted a set of very lax immigration requirements. As a result, the country has begun to suffer from the same host of issues that idiotic immigration policies have caused in other Western European countries.
It is mind-boggling that in view of all this the Spanish government would persist in its practice of imposing barbaric, Franco-era limitations on who is worthy of having a family. Instead of being happy that there are women in Spain who feel like creating little future taxpayers, the stupid government of the stupid Mariano Rajoy is in thrall to its barbaric prejudices.
Isn’t it time to accept that Franco is dead and no amount of political sorcery will resiscitate him?
Clarissa's Blog 
As Sherman Alexie said, “When somebody says ‘Family values’ they usually mean ‘I hate families that aren’t exactly like mine.'”
LikeLike
People who need others to live in a way that will reaffirm their life choices are, in reality, very insecure of those choices. Happiness has no fear of otherness but misery does.
LikeLike
Which brings a whole new dimension to the phrase “misery loves company” . 🙂
LikeLike
Slightly related.
LikeLike
Actually, the Spanish gov’t is completely correct in doing this.
http://www.dottal.org/LBDUK//effects_of_fatherlessness.htm
“…children from a fatherless home are:
5 times more likely to commit suicide.
32 times more likely to run away.
20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders.
14 times more likely to commit rape
9 times more likely to drop out of high school.
10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances.
9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution.
20 times more likely to end up in prison.”
If the legitimate birth rate is too low, here’s much of what’s needed to fix it:
1) encourage women to marry young (ideally, by early 20s, or at least by 25);
2) discourage women-caused divorce by ending child support and alimony;
3) have fathers get automatic custody in >95% of divorces as was done for most of American history;
4) have slut/frivorcer registries online (so those women can be avoided by marriage-minded men);
5) have major affirmative action in the workplace for men in general, and married men with children in particular (in wages as well as job availability) (in places in professional school slots as well, desirably);
6) women to close their legs outside of marriage;
7) increase in religiousness among the citizenry.
These would be a start. Phillip Longman’s “The Return of Patriarchy”, Daniel Amneus’ “The Garbage Generation”, and Roger Devlin’s “Home Economics” (all 3 available online for free) discuss this subject well.
LikeLike
Have you tried contacting a psychiatrist? Insanity is not curable but it’s treatable.
LikeLike
In other words, Spain should revert to the 1950’s as experienced by the US.
Apparent correlation does not equal causation. Also, there are homosexual couples consisting of two males. “Fatherlessness” is not the issue.
LikeLike
Spain had a fascist dictatorship in place until 1975 which implemented all these policies. And the funny thing is that the demographic crisis is still there.
The depopulation also existed during the times of the Inquisition when there was no divorce and no women’s rights.
Yet, the ignorant keep blabbing. . .
LikeLike
I know next to nothing of Spanish history, so I couldn’t reference it. It makes sense, though.
Normally I wouldn’t argue so much with people like that, but I’m in a particularly argumentative mood. And he insulted the people in my field. An especially heinous crime, when I’ve just been invited to a conference.
LikeLike
Congratulations on the conference!
People like Luke exist in order to be ridiculed. This is their social function. So feel free! 🙂
LikeLike
ROFL. Worst attempt at trolling ever! Did you and a few mates make up this list over a few beers?
LikeLike
Clarissa, I take it then that you want children to be subjected to the inferior average life outcomes that growing to maturity without fathers entails? I consider that advocating felony-level child abuse.
LikeLike
I want you to be subjected to intense psychiatric treatment. Has nobody ever mentioned to you that you are completely insane? Your sentences are a weird, meaningless jumble.
LikeLike
Are you implying that male-male couples should be allowed to have kids, and that male-female couples should be allowed to have kids, but not female-female couples? What about single mothers? Widowed mothers? Are you implying that those children be taken away, or the mothers forced to marry?
You can spout statistics all you want. But the same statistics can be used by two different people to support two opposite sides. The important thing to remember when looking at statistical “advantages” is that apparent correlation does NOT equal causation. It does not necessarily define the rule. It does not even come close to touching upon the individual nuances in a person’s life: socioeconomic status and mobility, cultural status, neighborhood, education, friends, family (immediate and otherwise), quirks, and individual emotions. There are so many more factors that go into the “inferior average life outcomes” that you speak of than growing up without a father for whatever reason.
LikeLike
Another question for you, Clarissa. I advocate policies that in the past were associated with fertility rates above replacement by the productive portion of the native-born citizenry. Current policies (welfare, affirmative action for women in jobs and schools, divorce courts favoring women, etc.) have resulted in fertility rates below replacement by the productive native-born. Presuming that you neither want the nation to become depopulated nor to become another Afghanistan under the Taliban/Mexico Norte, why would you not also support policies that work for something so absolutely crucial? (The nation continuing is surely more important than large numbers of women getting to have corner offices.)
LikeLike
Buddy, seriously, get treatment, ok? Or you will start shooting up schools soon.
All of these “policies”, “corner offices” and voices in your head are not real. Just breathe and look for a doctor.
LikeLike
Ah. You have responded to my posts here twice with advocating force upon me to alter my positions, rather than to rebut a single one. Are you a Marxist as well as a gender feminist?
LikeLike
It’s rare that one gets to see somebody in the midst of a dissociative episode. Poor crazy idiot.
LikeLike
I love the way that he talks about “gender feminism” as if it’s a thing.
LikeLike
He must be a fan of the scary Hoff Sommers character.
LikeLike
“It’s rare that one gets to see somebody in the midst of a dissociative episode. Poor crazy idiot.”
That infrequency depends upon where you spend your time. Feminists are sadly fairly common in the less rigorous college departments, behind the counter at Starbucks, and the Democratic Party. They’re not so common in STEM departments and jobs, maternity wards, and as the couple being honored at Diamond Wedding Anniversary celebration parties.
You’ve probably never read Phillip Longman’s “The Return of Partriarchy”, have you?
He IS a self-proclaimed liberal, but did write one good essay (his other stuff is largely worthless).
LikeLike
You do seem to believe that this verbal diarrhea you are producing makes sense, don’t you? You are completely unaware that grammatically not a single comment you have made here makes any sense?
OK, you are free to go get treatment now. Don’t come back to this blog. I hope you get help for your sickness. There should be psychiatrists even in Wichita.
LikeLike
Excuse me? Define for me your idea of a feminist and I can give you names of a heck of a lot of people in STEM fields from the early 1900’s to the present day. A few even in the 1800’s.
Thank you very much for openly insulting a growing population of people in STEM fields. I have to agree with Clarissa on this one. You’re really very hopeless, aren’t you?
LikeLike
Here’s some help for you, Clarissa, if you can bring yourself to read something referencing objective history and statistics (to say nothing of applying inductive reasoning):
“The Garbage Generation” by Daniel Amneus and “Home Economics” by Roger Devlin.
Both are available online for free at multiple URLs.
Otherwise, enjoy your cats.
LikeLike
Yes, I totally believe you fuck cats because a human being wouldn’t touch you.
LikeLike
Point the first: There exists no such thing as objective history.
Point the second: There exists no such thing as objective statistics.
Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. The FIRST thing I learned in history is that an objective reality does not exist. History is rewritten all the time by people with different agendas and ideals.
LikeLike
Actually, chick, I’m married with 4 kids so far, and one more expected next year.
You’re what the Chinese call “a bare branch”, I take it?
If you’d read the Longman article (it’s far shorter than a typical Andrea Dworkin pornography-abundant “book”), you’d see that liberals such as feminists routinely reproduce at far below replacement. Like homosexuals, they have to recruit, else they’d die out.
LikeLike
And now the freak is fantasizing about a branch that is sticking from his ass.
I wonder, are you really so lacking in self-respect that you keep begging me for attention so pathetically and submissively? Is the branch in the ass not doing it for you any longer?
LikeLike
Go fuck another cat, Luke. And hope for another good litter this year. Cheers!
LikeLike
Had to reply to this, 50 something female, and I was that guys BOSS! Found this inadvertently on my computer one morning. Wake up call as to who really sat in the chair at night. Sorry. This was actually posted on what I considered to be mytime
thx
LikeLike
I agree that lesbian couples in a legally sanctioned relationship should be eligible though I don’t think the numbers are sufficient to do anything important about the birth rate.
I agree with the policy in terms of single women (unless heavily means tested). A single woman and infant is only very rarely going to be an economically viable family unit and there’s no need to encourage people into making economically dysfunctional life choices.
In essence I think (and seem to recall reading) that it’s not fatherlessness per se but single parenting that correlates with a lot of sub-optimal life patterns (so two same sex parents work about as well as a traditional couple). Two adults can spell each other or at least give the care provider some much needed adult company while a household consisting of a single parent with an infant and no escape is much more liable to turn into a ball of codependent confusion.
LikeLike
What the hell do you mean “legally sanctioned”? There are loads of lesbian couples out there who aren’t married, who have children, and are doing just fine. There are also many gay male unmarried couples who have children and are doing just fine, and, surprise, many heterosexual couples who are not “legally sanctioned”, and have children.
A slip of paper from the court house has absolutely no impact on one’s ability to be a good parent.
LikeLike
Same sex marriage is legal in Spain so I think of the getting married part as kind of a down payment, proof of serious intent (and longer term thinking since a legal relationship protects all involved better if something goes wrong, as in separation or death of one of the partners).
LikeLike
I think it is extremely naive to think that getting legally married is proof of anything, let alone seriousness. I got legally married at 19 and would have laughed at anybody who assumed I meant the relationship to continue.
My sister, on the other hand, started a relationship at 19 that has been very happy and committed without any piece of paper to sanction it. They’ve been together for 12 years which is something crowds of people with huge weddings and all of the paperwork in the world don’t manage to do.
LikeLike
Just because marriage is legal doesn’t mean every couple who intends to have children is going to be rushing to the courthouse to get a marriage certificate before procreating. There are lots of people, queer or straight, who have reasons for not wanting to get legally married, ranging from personal beliefs to tax reasons to “I just don’t feel it’s necessary”.
Speaking as a queer person who fought hard for there to be same sex marriage in the U.S when I lived there, I also recognize the legitimacy and respect the choice of couples who don’t want to get married for whatever reason. Thinking of a marriage certificate as a talisman of serious intent is just plain goofy.
LikeLike
Let’s say a lesbian couple has a kid and a few years later the relationship ends acrimoniously. Then the birth mother decides to use the lack of a marriage certificate to claim her ex-partner should have no custody-visitation claims. A marriage certificate gives the non-birth-parent and child more legal protection in relationships gone wrong.
Or let’s say the birth mother dies in a car crash and her parents (who never approved of the relationship) sue for exclusive custody on the grounds that there is no biological or legal relationship between the surviving parent and the child.
Yeah, legal workarounds can be figured out without a marriage license but in these cases, and others, getting legally hitched solves a lot more problems than it causes. And it frees up court time for more pressing issues that could not have been foreseen.
” I … respect the choice of couples…for whatever reason ”
This is probably a big difference between us. I, being a cynical and judgemental and heartless person, don’t respect all choices.
LikeLike
To be perfectly clear, my reservation of public funds for traditional straight couples would also be limited to those in legal relationships.
LikeLike
I’d think actually the big difference between us is that I have more experience being in lesbian relationships than you. 🙂
Whatever legal hypotheticals are thrown about, that won’t change that fact that queer couples have the exact same right as straight couples to decide whether or not they feel that it is right for them to get legally married. I imagine that a policy of obligatory marriages for couples who want children (regardless of the genders of the parties involved) would be given a positively chilly reception from people who actually care about individual rights and liberties, especially if it’s done in the name of what’s “best” for the hypothetical children. That never ends well.
LikeLike
“I think it is extremely naive”
I think it’s naive to open up public funds for all comers and no screening whatsoever to not expect some real bad outcomes. A marriage license isn’t a guarantee but, again, it’s a proxy for adult values.
Again, to use the down payment analogy, back about ten years ago they decided to to open up home sales to anyone and everyone and dispensed with the whole down payment concept and nothing very bad happened, if you don’t count a world economic crisis.
Lots of people make lots of stupid choices and having a small roadblock in the way can save lots of time and regrets later on.
What screening would you use?
LikeLike
If a person is willing to undergo pregnancy and childbirth in today’s harsh economic conditions of Spain, that is a much more serious indication of the person’s seriousness than getting a slip of paper. These women are organizing politically. That is a lot more adult than signing some meaningless paper which is something crowds of people do without a moment’s reflection.
My own marriage certificate meant nothing to anybody, so I find it hard to see it as indicative of anything.
LikeLike
” I got legally married at 19 and would have laughed at anybody who assumed I meant the relationship to continue.”
Clarissa! Do you also come from a family where the first marriage is practice for the “real” one? I have crowds of aunties/uncles and cousins who got married at 18-24, only to divorce and then move onto the “real” marriage in their early thirties.
LikeLike
The birthrate thing seems to be a function of education more than anything else.
When women (as a group) in a society reach a certain education level then the birthrate plumits. One of the biggest demographic collapses in the modern world is in conservative, religious Iran (also western Turkey). Education and birthrate correspond more than any other variable that I’m aware of.
I think this is basically unsolvable in terms of getting women to have more kids and needs to be looked at from the other end – how do we keep societies with ageing populations viable?
LikeLike
Of course, women who have even a glimmer of choice do not have 15 children. Reasonable immigration policies could address the issue but for now they are not reasonable anywhere in the world. Canada had a good idea with its professional immigration but Quebec messed all that up with its fixation on French.
LikeLike
I think the problem is learning how to live with ageing and shrinking populations. Unless the host country is serious about imposing its language and culture on the children of new arrivals (as european governments are mostly not doing) you don’t have immigration but population replacement (an odd thing to establish as government policy but a lot of european countries seemed to be determined to go down that path).
Also the current porblem in economic terms is that for much of the world there is no more real scarcity and no one’s yet figured out how to build an economy on plenty rather than scarcity.
The part of the world with growing populations need education (for the sake of education) but there’s a lot of cultural and historical barriers in the way.
LikeLike
“I’d think actually the big difference between us is that I have more experience being in lesbian relationships than you. :)”
You’re profiling me! …. though in this case you’re correct (though trivially so since you seem to be arguing about something different than I am (about the narrow issue of dispersion of public funds, aka ‘other people’s money’.)
“queer couples have the exact same right as straight couples to decide whether or not they feel that it is right for them to get legally married”
I fully agree in the abstract, but if they want government subsidies to have kids (in a time of economic crisis) then I prefer for there to be some conditions. If they’re funding themselves then I don’t care what they do.
“a policy of obligatory marriages for couples who want children (regardless of the genders of the parties involved) would be given a positively chilly reception from people who actually care about individual rights and liberties”
Again, my position is only about access to taxpayer money. It’s reasonable for the government to put some conditions on access. In this narrow case, I think legalizing the relationship is a reasonable condition.
LikeLike
Again, my position is only about access to taxpayer money. It’s reasonable for the government to put some conditions on access. In this narrow case, I think legalizing the relationship is a reasonable condition.(Cliff)
Rarely is reasonable brought into the conversation with such an emotional topic. I agree with you, unfortunately one of the reasons governments are going broke is because many individuals want complete access to public funds.
LikeLike
Normally, I’d be opposed to any public money going to anybody’s reproductive endeavors . But this is not a normal situation. In Spain it’s either this or importing immigrants from regions where women are only seen as voiceless, faceless breeders. The experience of other Western European countries shows that this creates enormous problems and is also extremely costly.
LikeLike
There’s no need to get argumentative with ideologues. Detroit was bound to happen even if we hadn’t predicted it.
LikeLike
Clarissa, you’re right!. Daughter says that Spain is in trouble with this stupid Mariano Rajoy. I am exhausted now and going to have a bite after a long trip by bus.
LikeLike