and she gets all of the flack? Why is there a class of people so vindictive towards single mothers? They try to deflect all blame away from dead-beat dads (and even oppose that appropriately perjorative title) and use terms like “ho-bags” and all the other misogynistic slurs as if she went out and stole some guy’s semen. I know the anti-PC craze means its cool to hate the minority in any situation, but common sense says that if one person takes on all of the consequences of an act she was only halfway responsible for, she deserves nothing but praise. And I’d love to see one of these idiots refere to single mothers as “ho-bags” in real life to the wrong person…
Great rant, but do you have a linkitylink?
Indeed, what are you talking about?
Sure.
Seriously though, not immediately. It’s just something that’s been in the back of my mind…
Seriously that link just goes to fark, and I can’t find what bit of (mostly dross) on the page you are ranting about.
If your rant is just general I would think the people who say such things about single mothers are likely to just be sexist biggot, misogynists picking on the weakest available target.
Just? Just sexist bigots and mysogynists? Like it’s just a glass of spilled milk? Opinions like those detailed in the OP are pretty common, among women and men both, and by probably 90% of the office-holding politicians in this country. You know, the ones who make policy that shits all over single moms?
I’ve said for years now that this is the defining feature of inequality in our time. The laws are based on biology here, not equality. If a woman gives birth and leaves the hospital without the baby and without telling anyone, she will be pursued. Once upon a time she would have been jailed or committed. She might still face that sentence depending on where she is. Still, the mother will be pursued at least for the reason of termininating parental rights, if not punishment. Men do not have to deal with this.
Parents ought to be responsible for every aspect of the care of the children they create when possible. These dead beat dads–and guys who pay child support but spend no time with their children (if allowed) are dead beat dads too–are allowed to get away with stuff we would never allow a mother to. Stuff that will get a mother pitted if she does–but hey, it’s just sexist bigots and mysogynists.
This isn’t a rant about the new attempt at a series of class-action lawsuits, is it?
Sorry my use of ‘just’ was missinterpreted. I meant it as a sign of disdain not to signify unimportance. As in ‘that was just December posting’ not as in ‘it is just a small scratch’.
I’,m still not clear precisely what the OP is in particular about (is it those black shirts pitted in another thread?)
What would you call a woman that has 3 kids by 3 different daddy’s and still ho’s around like it’s all just fun and games? Plus collects child support and welfare so she can stay home and not have to get a real job. And the worst is that she is home all of the time but still can’t supervise her kids? Or goes out clubbing while leaving her kids with mom or even worse, alone? Isolated case? Not hardly. Okay, the collecting child support statement from 3 different fathers may not be such a true thing to say. They pick such losers to have kids with that it doesn’t take a crystal ball or a rocket scientist to figure out he ain’t gonna be around long. That doesn’t excuse him, and I personally think there should be something more that could be done to make these losers be fathers. But maybe in a lot of those cases the kid is better off without him. In a lot of those cases the kid would be a lot better off without either of the losers (ho bags and deadbeats).
So to be offended by the term ho bag being applied to single moms all I can say is that their are plenty of ho bags out there that are single moms and that may even be a lot of the reason they are single.
Richard, can we call you Dick ?
pesidebt, I loved your post.
But the other side of the coin is giving fathers the freedom to “take responsibility” before their child is born.
I hate that thought. Hate, hate hate. The thought of seeing women forced to carry children to term makes me sick, and it would take all of the victory out of the potential for social justice if we altered the status quo.
Biology does not allow for fathers to take on 50% of the burden of childbearing. Not currently, anyway. Who knows what the future will bring. When that changes, maybe we can make changes that are equal and just for both parties.
But of course! 
<bows>
Where do you live? 47 states have enacted safe haven laws, where a woman is completely and utterly free to give up her baby after birth with zero consequences.
safe haven update
I’m not calling anyone a ho-bag, never have, but I don’t see single moms getting crapped on by our legal system either. They may not be living the high life, but that’s not the fault of our laws.
Not to mention the numerous people who think that the only way to prevent teen pregnancy is to lock daughters in a tower. The idea of teaching sons that they do not have a god-given or constitutionally granted right to sex doesn’t seem to occur to many people. Curtail girls’ freedom, but let boys run wild. Then wonder how the daughter “got herself pregnant”.
I object strenuously to the phrase “deadbeat dads” because my experience as a long-term employee of Family Court’s support part suggests that although “deadbeat dads” are more numerous than “deadbeat moms,” it is strictly due to the fact that more moms have custody of their own kids than dads. In other words, there are plenty of biological mothers out there (and that’s just what we call them, “bio-moms,” to distinguish them from whoever ended up with their poor kids) who are just as scummy and selfish as any runaway father you could possibly meet. Percentage-wise, I’d say it’s an even match, if not a little worse, when the mother is the one who is supposed to be paying.
If you want to talk about “deadbeat parents,” you’ve got a deal.
I have never heard anyone refer to a single mother as a “ho-bag.” (At least not since I left high school in 1979.) There are, however, “serial moms” (who pick up semen like they’re at a sperm buffet, to judge by the parentage of their many offspring), “frequent flyers” (who turn up in court just about every other week with one or another of their “baby mamas” or “baby daddies”) and “Johnny Appleseeds” (the definition of which should be apparent from context – they’re guys who spray their genes around like their penises are attached to a pumper truck, the run like hell when the bills start coming due).
I will admit to a great deal of frustration and a distinct lack of sympathy for women who get prignant by some creep who already has a half-dozen kids by a half-dozen other women, then act all surprised and hurt when he turns out to have no interest in helping her raise (or even just support) the child he fathered with her. What **really ** makes me nuts is that the fact that they hooked up with a lowlife guy and didn’t use adequate birth control is NEVER the problem, from their point of view. The PROBLEM, as they will tell you at great length, is that “the Court doesn’t give a DAMN about mothers and children” – in other words, the Court can’t wave a magic wand and turn the creep that U]***they chose ** * to father their child into a decent and responsible human being. In other words, pizzabrat, not every single mother deserves either respect or sympathy.
It sucks, but there it is. I see incredible amounts of irresponsibility on both sides.
“Prignant”?! :smack:
Im impressed that you all understand what you’re arguing about, because I certainly don’t. I’m sure there are some women who are aply called 'ho bags". I’m sure there are some men who are aptly called ‘deadbeat dads’. And let’s not forget ‘deadbeat moms’, and hell, I’ll even throw in ‘slut boys’. I’m sure these are appropriate terms for some people.
So?
I think the OP was griping about people who label all single mothers as anything in particular beyond single mothers. In other words, it’s your garden variety rant against stereotyping and generalizations. “All Xs are not Ys!”
To which T.L. says “Zzzzzzzzz”
I got the rest of what you were talking about, but this one baffled me. Help?
“Frequent fliers” is a term stolen from the air travel industry. It means somebody who turns up at your workplace on an unusually regular basis. “Baby mamas” or “baby daddies” are people you don’t have a relationship with, but who you do have a child with. The guy you had sex with for a few weeks who knocked you up isn’t your boyfriend or husband or fiance or SO, so those terms are out. He never was any of those things, because you didn’t have a relationship, so calling him your ex isn’t really fitting either (although the term can be used as a substitute for ex). He’s your baby daddy. Flip the sexes, and you got yourself a baby mama.
People who have multiple kids with multiple partners (the aforementioned baby mamas and baby daddies) tend to have lots of custody and support issues, so they’re in court pretty frequently (thus the “frequent flier” label).