Equality denies special rights to pregnant wives

Together we always pull through.

Together we always pull through. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Just a quick note for any of the trendy “equality” enthusiasts who are actually as open-minded as they like to think that they are. Here is my big question: are pregnant mothers to be considered equal with everyone else or considered to be of a special, favored status?

Photo of Inuit /Eskimo mother and child by Dr. Weston A. Price, DDS

Historically, consider that the “special” rights regarding marriage (like from an anthropologist’s view of multitudes of cultures worldwide) were originally for promoting the welfare of the pregnant mother. The mother has a “sacred disability” during pregnancy (and at least during the years of nursing etc) in which she is (in many societies) entitled to special protections and privileges. The legal union between a mother and a father (or a man and a women who are expected to reproduce together) also created special rights for the wife (AKA a woman intending to be a mother) in regard to the property/ assets of her husband (at least in situations when men were considered to be of less social value, so they were sent off to fight wars and hunt dangerous animals or work in risky mines and so on, with the wife being entitled to certain privileges if she is widowed because of her husband being drafted in to the military or otherwise coerced to pursue the interests of the tribe rather than the household- kind of like life insurance).

The community specifically celebrates the young women in initiation rituals (coming of age ceremonies) and then further may have honored the ones most valued for continuing the lineage of the tribe or clan (similar to modern beauty pageants with sometimes rather large prizes). Then, in wedding ceremonies, the entire tribe would present gifts to help support a couple in the coming period of pregnancy and the raising of infants.

Young Woman Mother with Daughter Girl

Young Woman Mother with Daughter Girl (Photo credit: epSos.de)

What else would anthropologists note about “equality movements?” Their popularity corresponds to (falling) social values of motherhood and children.

When motherhood is not considered an honored and sacred privilege, then why should pregnant women have any special legal protections? Why not give the same protections to elderly women and why not let four men all marry each other and share SSI benefits? It is a ridiculous and offensive “injustice” when four men are not given the equal right to marry each other so they can share in SSI benefits, isn’t it?

Anyway, for those of you who are furious with why stubborn, conservative grandparents like the idea of giving special honors and privileges to pregnant mothers and to parents (and even to unborn fetuses!), you will probably not have read all of this anyway. Perhaps because you are too hysterically¬†passionate (arrogant?) to have any real respect for the perspective of others… though you may be very defensive if someone suggests that you might be more interested in talking about “respect and dialogue” than in actual respect and dialogue. I do not have any condemnation of homosexuality, homosexuals, or their movement (noting that criticism does not equate to fear or hatred or condemnation- as much as certain people might like to scream “racism” every time that someone disagrees with Barack Obama- only to find that the person disagreeing is twice as black as Obama…), but anyway I do see the public attention shifting away from “core issues” including things like the welfare of children to, well, subjects of drama and controversy. Then again, maybe there is way too much emphasis on young people and the rights of pregnant women and so on, but I do not think it is really even close to “too much,” but just not a very enlightened form of attention.

SB wrote:

RE: your big question…. What you mean by “special, favored status” in terms of pregnant mothers? Do you mean revered and admired?

JR replied:

Yes I do mean revered and admired, but I also mean that, in a primitive culture, a pregnant woman would be offered special support from the community in the event that her partner (the father of her children) was injured or killed- like she would be entitled to the extra support of the community that she would normally get from a healthy, productive husband- but support that she would not get if she was a virginal, unwed women.

As societies grow more complex, those special support privileges have taken the form of welfare programs for pregnant mothers, wives being entitled to death benefits from insurance companies when their husband dies, and a variety of benefits- some for every citizen through the government and some for anyone married who then invests in an insurance policy. In other words, marital benefits have always been a special privilege of women within the presumed context of child-bearing, which is why people would be required to get blood tests (before receiving a marriage license) to check for certain genetic disorders (because the society did not want to issues permits to people to get married and qualify for those special benefits without at least checking for risk of genetically-transmitted health issues that could make a particular pregnancy much less likely to result in a child that lives to adulthood).

Note that in modern times, anyone can be listed as the beneficiary of an insurance policy. The “gay marriage” controversy is not really much of a controversy to me, but just a bunch of sensationalism.


IMG_0195 (Photo credit: dinoboy)


Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: