Seeker, that's a sad way to look at things. Yes children can be used as pawns, but not normally deliberately by their parents at least. Not sure that this is what you meant, but its what I picked up from rading between the lines. Yes, children can used as such by parents (as well as society in general), but for MOST parents, it would be a side-effect, not a deliberate action. Does that make it any less harmful to the kids involved? No, I dont think so, but given lack of intent, its not quite the same.

HRS, like I said, I am my own worst enemy - I really should just leave you to your misery given that you've resorted to sarcasm. Unlike you I dont sit by my computer everyday - I have a life. Going away with my husband for our wedding anniverary was far more important to me this weekend than checking the computer to see whether you had made another silly post.

We have been over the adoption issue before. Its very difficult in Australia due to the regulations surrounding it, and not all Aussie's are as cashed up as Hugh Jackman and his wife, who left the country in order to be able to adopt from overseas. The local approach be it right or wrong, is to foster children rather than adopt them. So whilst adoptions do still happen in this country, they are by far the most difficult way to "obtain" a child. Which is sad really. As I've argued on previous topics, I'd rather see a drop in the abortion rate and a rise in the adoption rate. Even when IVF is available, it is far from foolproof - there is a high failure rate. So even with IVF as the main treatment for infertility, adoption would still have a large role to play. As it is, those for whom IVF fails, generally have to get used to the idea of a childless life

Country Gal,
Someone who is infertile does not necessarily have to be childless. With the wonders of modern IVF a consumer can always outsource and get someone else to have the baby for them. With child minding centers, a consumer can also outsource and have someone else raise their child as well.

Happily my shares in IVF companies are increasing in value, so I’m thinking of extending my portfolio and buying shares in some abortion companies also, and that way I can cover birth and death.

So I’m become quite feminist in my general philosophies, although I still cannot force myself to say that I am feminist without feeling nausea, but I might be able to adjust to that feeling of nausea in time.

I see that you are learning to say the word adoption, although I’m not sure if that is allowed in feminism.

While there has been much talk about the necessity to allow in more refugees (many of whom appear to be quite rich), there has been no talk on the possibility of adopting more children from other countries who are orphans or have been abandoned. I see that feminists always have their priorities right.

Country Gal,

For what it's worth, my advice is to Back. Away. Slowly. Toward. The. Door. You are eminiently sensible and very kind, but I feel there are other issues at play here besides those appropriate to sprited debate. Which is a pity, because there are points I wish I could discuss with you about abortion and adoption and Germaine Greer (unfairly maligned if you ask me). But people get bitter and nasty on these forums - I find it too disheartening and I think there are worthier battles elsewhere.

Nevertheless, I agree with you on many things, and just wanted to give voice to my support.

Thanks Botheration! I'm afraid I'm not one to give up easily, even when bashing my own head against a brick wall (or wishing it was someone else's).

I'd be delighted to participate in an intelligent discussion about children, feminism or any other topic you please! We can always try to carry on here and ignore HRS et al (he forgets that I have sided with him in the past against other posters whom I came to the conclusion were man-haters, so I owe him no favours).

I honestly believe that hard-line feminists such as Germaine Greer had their time. Even 20 years ago the world was a very different place as far as equality of opportunity goes, and hard-liners had a big role to play in getting where we are today. Nowdays though I feel that most of the big battles have been won, and that anything else will have to be gained in increments over time. New generations will help to change views, as they take a different perspective on things to thir parents and grandparents. That said, childhood experiences play a big role in adult expectations. I was lucky to be raised in an environment where I had no restrictions just because I was a girl. My husbands family are very different (and I'm not very popular as a result). But I see my sister-in-law spending her life being miserable mainly because she believes that her job is to win, then please a man, but then spends her life wondering why this doesnt give her fulfillment. My husband also has some pretty deep-seated beliefs about the roles of men and women thanks to his upbringing, but I'm slowly educating him! Actually his views have changed dramatically since our daughter was born, as she has become his little offsider (equally happy playing with dolls or pushing her dumptruck in the sandpit). Interestingly it has also changed his views on perving on women and making derogatory comments about them (used to be perfectly acceptable, but now the "target" is someone's daughter!).

Botheration,
I think Country Gal has begun to open her mind. She has even said the word “adoption”, and all by herself.

That amounts to dissention. So now you want to take Country Gal back to the cult, where you can be secretive and gossip and feel oppressed.

Country Gal won’t be able to resist.

But I am quite honest and open about it. I now fully support IVF and abortion because I plan to make money from it, and that will make me feel good.

There is a definite need for much more adoption, but feminists will rarely mention adoption, and tend to talk in glowing terms about IVF and abortion instead.

I think feminists like IVF and abortion so much because it gives them power over life and death, and that is what makes feminists feel good.

HRS, I too believe adoption is not the panacea it once may have been, just as Country Gal believes it to be also the case for feminism. Abortion may be higher than many believe to be ideal, but it’s not going to magically contract without a proportional increase in the numbers of decent people. Educated, and decent.

And anyway, there are more adoptions occurring in Australia than you seem to be aware of. Men can freely adopt children by marrying single mothers. And what about all those social or residential fathers consciously or unwittingly adopting babies as they pick up their wives or girlfriends from their maternity wards?

Men can accumulate as many biological or adopted children in this way as their pay packets will allow, but at $200k (disposable) to raise each one, and without guarantees of paternity, continuity, or tangible returns whatsoever, my envy goes out to mothers and their sperm donors.

Country Gal, I’m glad you stayed.