Misconceptions About Teenaged Mothers

Even as single motherhood has become commonplace in our society, and the stigma against out of wedlock births has disappeared, another prejudice has come to replace it: the bias against teenaged mothers.

Here are a few misconceptions about teenaged mothers:

  1. Teenaged mothers are less educated than other mothers.
  2. Teenaged mothers come from broken homes or are the result of bad parenting.
  3. Teen pregnancies are all unplanned and result in unwanted babies.
  4. Teenaged mothers are welfare recipients.
  5. Teenaged mothers did not have strong father figures.
  6. Teenaged mothers end up having too many children

And, finally, last but not least:

7. Mature mothers, women who have waited to become mothers until their social position and career are established, make more reliable mothers than teenagers.

Theodosia Burr Alston

Portrait of Theodosia by John Vanderlyn Theodosia married when she was seventeen and gave birth to her only son in the following year. Credit: Wikipedia
Portrait of Theodosia by John Vanderlyn Theodosia married when she was seventeen and gave birth to her only son in the following year. Credit: Wikipedia

While some teen-aged mothers fit the negative stereotype, these descriptions are not all accurate for most teenaged mothers, and there certainly are, and have been, teenaged mothers in America about whom none of these assumptions are true.

I would like to focus on two historical figures from the American past to illustrate my points. These are both women I admire very much, and each of them became a mother when she was a teenager.

1. Many teenaged mothers are quite well educated

Theodosia Burr Alston was the daughter of Aaron Burr. She was educated at home by her father and was able to write fluently in Greek and Latin, as well as French and English. Aaron Burr was ahead of his time in believing that a young woman should be given the opportunity to receive the same education as a man.

When Theodosia was seventeen years old, and her father was about to become Vice President under Thomas Jefferson, (both had received the same number of votes in the electoral college while running for president), Theodosia married Joseph Alston, the governor of South Carolina. They honeymooned at Niagra Falls, the first American couple ever to do so. Their son, Aaron Burr Alston (“Gampy” for short), was born in the following year.

Laura Ingalls Wilder

Laura Ingalls married Almanzo Wilder when she was eighteen. She gave birth to Rose Wilder Lane when she was nineteen Credit: Wikipedia
Laura Ingalls married Almanzo Wilder when she was eighteen. She gave birth to Rose Wilder Lane when she was nineteen Credit: Wikipedia

Some might argue that Theodosia came from a privileged background and was not a self-made woman. Many parents, when trying to deter their children from following the examples of celebrities, point out to them that what a rich and famous person may do is not acceptable in a person from a more humble background.

My second example lays to rest the notion that successful teen pregnancy is something open only to the privileged class.

Laura Ingalls Wilder was the daughter of a hard working frontier family. While growing up, Laura had no luxuries. Everything the family used, they had to hunt, fish, catch, build, grow and make. Except for sugar and coffee and some kinds of flour, almost all their food staples were home grown. Except for gingham cloth which they did purchase, almost all their clothes were home made. They built their own houses, cured their own meat, hunted their own venison and made their own butter and cheese.

Nevertheless, in this frontier home, there was also time for music, reading and book learning.

Charles Ingalls, Laura’s father, played the violin. On cold winter days when nothing else could be accomplished out of doors, the family sang together, told stories, read the Bible and studied other important literary and historical works.

Much of Laura’s education was acquired at home, although she did attend public school in DeSmet, when she was able. At the age of fifteen, Laura earned a teaching certificate and began to teach in one room school houses, where some of her pupils were older, bigger and rougher than she was. When she was eighteen years old, Laura married Almanzo Wilder and the couple began to homestead together. Laura’s daughter, Rose, was born when she was nineteen.

2. Many teenaged mothers come from good homes

Both Theodosia Burr Alston and Laura Ingalls Wilder came from loving homes where their parents offered an appropriate mix of affection and discipline. Aaron Burr doted on his only daughter, but he did not hesitate to correct her when she made a mistake, whether it was a question of Latin grammar or appropriate decorum when acting as hostess to guests of state in their home. Theodosia’s mother died when she was only a child, and Aaron Burr did not remarry while Theodosia was growing up. He took his role as a father very seriously.

Charles and Carolyn Ingalls were loving parents who did not hesitate to correct their children if they thought their behavior was inappropriate. Despite a strict upbringing, Laura was given the freedom to go out into the world at fifteen and earn a living. Laura was raised to be responsible and self reliant, and her parents trusted her judgments. She met her future husband during the period when she was teaching, and her parents did not interfere with the courtship.

3. Many Teen Pregnancies are Planned, and Most Babies Born to Teen Mothers are Wanted

I don’t know that the teen pregnancies of Theodosia Burr Alston and Laura Ingalls Wilder were planned, but I’m pretty sure that they were not unexpected or unwelcome. In those days, couples didn’t work hard tracking ovulation charts or wearing unusual underwear in order to ensure fertility. They did not know exactly when a pregnancy would occur, but it was common knowledge that pregnancy usually followed naturally within about a year of getting married. People who married were people prepared to start a family.

When we hear of teen pregnancy today, the prevailing assumption is that young women are interested in becoming sexually active, but have no desire to have children. When a pregnancy occurs, people think, it must be the result of carelessness. No teenager would actually want to get pregnant.

I can tell you from introspection that this is not necessarily true.

When I was nineteen, I had just graduated from college with a B.A. in foreign languages, and I was about to start law school. My grandmother took me on a special trip to Paris as a treat. In a park, we came across a group of little children. At the sight of those children, my heart almost overflowed with feeling, and I was overwhelmed with the desire to have a baby. It was a really strong emotion, and it never really went away. Not ever.

When I told my parents about it, they didn’t take my desire to have a baby seriously. They thought I was too young, and I should just concentrate on my studies. I didn’t agree with them, but I did as they said. My parents had nothing to worry about. I didn’t even have a boyfriend.

However, a friend of mine, who was a year older, did have a boyfriend. She married at nineteen and had a baby seven months later — a baby that was not premature. She had been the valedictorian of her high school class and was enrolled in college at the time, though still living at home. She was smart, well educated and came from a loving home. My parents were sure that she had simply gotten carried away with pre-marital sex. My view was different. I thought then, and still think now, that the only people who weren’t planning that pregnancy were her parents.

My friend is still married to the same man. They have four children. The eldest of those children married before my daughter was born.

I had to defer my dream of becoming a mother for many years. When my daughter was born I was thirty-eight. I turned thirty-nine two weeks later.

I am very lucky to have my daughter. I just don’t think the twenty year wait was absolutely necessary.

5. Teenaged mothers often have strong father figures in their lives

BothTheodosia Burr Alston and Laura Ingalls Wilder had strong fathers who were very much involved in their lives when they were growing up. Charles Ingalls became a good father-in-law to Almanzo, and Aaron Burr doted on Gampy.

My friend, the valedictorian who married at nineteen, also had a loving and involved father. Her parents had a good marriage and are still together.

Choosing to become a parent early doesn’t necessarily indicate a girl has had trouble with either parent. Sometimes it just means that her parents set a good example, and she wants to follow in their footsteps.

Even though I didn’t get to realize my dream to be a young mother, I, too, was motivated by my parents’ good example. They were both great parents, and I couldn’t wait to get started down that path, myself.

6. Teenaged mothers can be financially self-sufficient and do not necessarily constitute a burden on the public

Theodosia Burr Alston was married to a wealthy plantation owner who was also the governor of South Carolina. She was clearly not on the dole. Her father had a plan to make her Empress of Mexico, but that’s a different story.

Laura and Almanzo were hard-working, self-sufficient homesteaders. They went through many hard times, but they were good parents, and they always provided their daughter, Rose Wilder Lane, with what she needed when she was growing up.

Despite managing to save money for their retirement, the Wilders found themselves in financial difficulty later in life, due to the stock market crash of 1929. It was their daughter Rose who supported them and helped them get through this rough time. It was also Rose, a journalist and writer, who helped Laura to edit and then publish her Little House series of books. If not for Rose, the daughter Laura gave birth to when she was only nineteen, none of us would ever have heard of Laura Ingalls Wilder.

7. Women who give birth to their first child when they are teens do not necessarily end up having more children

I am concerned about overpopulation, and I have noticed that some of the hubpages dealing with this issue talk about how the more education a woman has, the more likely she is to use contraception to prevent pregnancy while she pursues a career. Education for women is the best way to lower birth rates, the argument goes, and the better educated a women is, the more she will postpone motherhood. The unstated implication is that the later motherhood is postponed, the fewer children women will manage to have, due to age-related fertility issues.

In fact, a woman who has an early pregnancy will not necessarily end up having more children. Theodosia never had another child after Gampy. When her son died in childhood of malaria, she was inconsolable. Sick herself, she boarded a ship to go visit her father in New York. The ship was lost at sea, and Theodosia was never heard from again. Her line died with her.

Laura Ingalls Wilder did give birth to another child after Rose, but he died in infancy. Rose was her only grown child. Rose left no children after her, so I think that we can safely say that Laura and Almanzo, despite their early union, are not guilty of overpopulating the planet.

Wendy Wasserstein gave birth to Lucy Jane when she was 48 years old and died when she was 55....               Photo Credit: New York Times
Wendy Wasserstein gave birth to Lucy Jane when she was 48 years old and died when she was 55…. Photo Credit: New York Times

7. Young mothers are more likely to survive long enough to see their children to adulthood and self-sufficiency

It can be argued that if people are going to make responsible choices about bringing children into the world, it is better for a woman to have her children early rather than late. Later pregnancies are more likely to result in birth defects, underweight babies, and pre-term delivery.

Despite the major advances in fertility treatments in recent years, waiting too late to become a mother puts both the child and the mother at great risk.

A case in point is the playwright Wendy Wasserstein, who gave birth to her daughter Lucy Jane when she was forty-eight years old. Lucy Jane was extremely premature, despite the drugs that Wendy had been given to keep her from going into labor too early. For a while it was touch and go for the baby, who was in intensive care. Nobody can dispute Wendy’s dedication as a mother, or the fact that her involvement helped Lucy Jane to thrive and overcome her problems. Eventually, Wendy was able to take Lucy Jane home, a beautiful, healthy baby. And then, less than seven years later, Wendy Wassersteinn died of lymphoma, a disease she probably succumbed to in part due to the drugs she was given in order to allow Lucy Jane to come into the world.

When I heard this story, it hit me pretty hard. I was thirty-eight when my daughter was born, and Lucy Jane and my daughter are of similar ages.

What would happen to Sword and Bow if I died unexpectledly?

After Wendy Wasserstein died, there were some hateful commentaries on the net, suggesting that this had happened because Wendy was “selfish”. The commentators seemed to equate choosing to be a single mother with choosing to be single. There was the implication that if Wendy Wasserstein had wanted to, she could have married someone earlier and had a baby the normal way. Her deferral of parenthood, it was suggested, came from an unwillingness to compromise over the choice of a mate.

However, when Laura Ingalls married Almanzo Wilder, she wasn’t compromising. She was in love, and the life they made together, despite all its trials, was a dream come true.

The problem with Wendy Wasserstein’s choice to become a mother when she did was not that she was single. It was not that she wanted to be happy. The problem was that she was too old. At that age, she should have been a grandmother. Despite her best efforts, Wendy wasn’t able to be there for Lucy Jane.

Governor Sarah Palin is the mother of five children, including pregnant teen Bristol and Trig, an infant with Down's Syndrome       Photo Credit: Wikipedia
Governor Sarah Palin is the mother of five children, including pregnant teen Bristol and Trig, an infant with Down’s Syndrome Photo Credit: Wikipedia

The Special Needs Child and the Older Parent

Lucy Jane Wasserstein is probably going to be just fine. She is living with her uncle and his family, and they will see to it that all her needs are met until she is ready to take responsibility for herself.

If I die tomorrow, my family will do the same for my daughter. Being orphaned is not good, but children survive such an experience, and even if there is no father, there is usually a family member who will look out for the child until the child is able to stand on its own as a self-sufficient adult.

The case of special needs children, however, is quite different. I know. Bow is my special needs child, and he will need help long after I am gone. Bow is a chimpanzee, but there are humans who face the same problem.

In the news recently there has been a lot about Sarah Palin, the current governor of Alaska, and McCain’s choice of a running mate.

Some of the criticism has been centered on the reproductive choices that Sarah Palin has made, and about the choices of her teenaged daughter, Bristol.

Two facts bother the critics:

(1) Palin’s daughter Bristol is seventeen years old and five months pregnant. She and the father of her child plan to marry after the baby is born.

(2) Palin’s infant son Trig was born with Down’s Syndrome. She was aware of the condition before he was born and chose not to have an abortion.

As I understand it, Bristol’s unborn baby is healthy and without any special disabilities.

Of the two issues, the first seems entirely unproblematic. What Bristol and her boyfriend are doing is not so different from what teenagers throughout history have done when starting a family. Bristol Palin is not significantly different from Theodosia Burr Alston or Laura Ingalls Wilder. Whether the young parents marry before the birth, after the birth or during the birth makes no difference. Even if they don’t marry at all, there is little danger that the child Bristol is carrying will be abandoned, malnourished or in any way mistreated. The parents are taking responsibility for the child, and there is no danger that the burden of caring for this baby will ever fall on the public.

The same cannot be said about Trig. In all likelihood, despite the best intentions of the Palins, Trig will need support and care long after his parents are gone.

Even though Sarah Palin is healthy and though she may have a long, productive life ahead of her, like Wendy Wasserstein with Lucy Jane, she will probably leave her youngest child before he is ready to support himself. This is because the lifespan of Down’s Syndrome children has increased through medical intervention. In previous centuries, a Down’s Syndrome child often did not survive to adulthood. Therefore, the burden of caring for such children, while it may have been heavy, could still be carried by parents during their lifetime.

Sarah Palin already had four healthy children when Trig was conceived. Given her policy against abortion, it seems odd that she didn’t consider using ordinary contraception to prevent a fifth pregnancy this late in her life.

Contraception is less controversial than abortion, and it is a good tool for sexually active people to use, whether they are married or not, to avoid unwanted or problematic pregnancies. While I am less concerned that Bristol didn’t choose to use contraceptives, I am far more concerned about Sarah Palin, since as an older mother, she must have known the odds for a Down’s Syndrome baby in her case were higher.

The Burden of a Parent’s Choice

I support the right to choose, including Sarah Palin’s choice to maintain her pregnancy and give birth to her son. My concerns about Trig do not stem from a prejudice against people who look different, act different, or have a different number of chromosomes from me. All those things are true of Bow, and I am as dedicated to him as Sarah Palin is to her special needs child.

The legitimate public concern about every Down’s Syndrome baby is: who will care for it when it is grown and the parents are no longer able? A perfectly acceptable question to ask Governor Palin is this: “What measures have you taken to ensure that when you are gone, other people and their children do not end up having to earn money, against their will and without their consent, in order to support your child?”

That was always the real issue behind the stigma attached to illegitimacy. It is the hidden reason that people still frown on teen pregnancies. It isn’t that anybody really cares about anybody else’s reproductive or sexual activity. What people want to know is: who will support this child?

Everybody has the right to have children. Nobody has the right to have them at somebody else’s expense.

Pregnant Teens and You

Laura Ingalls Wilder

Comments

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on February 09, 2014:

Jodie, I did not mention the baby boy who died who was the son of Laura Ingalls Wilder, because it was not relevant. Infant mortality in general was common in those days and did not imply neglect. Every single baby boy that Laura’s mother, Caroline, gave birth to also died in early infancy. Rose Wilder also gave birth to a baby boy who died. It seems that in that family, only baby girls survived, possibly due to a genetic anomaly that was sex-based. I am sure they wanted those baby boys to live — boys were highly valued on a farm — and did their best to help them survive. Not every tragedy can be blamed on the youth of the parents.

As for the fire being Rose’s fault, I don’t think we know that for sure. I am a Libertarian, and I have read some of the works of Rose Wilder Lane and biographies about her. My information is not all from the Wikipedia . I am also aware that people have been scrutinizing the relationship between Rose Wilder Lane and Laura Ingalls Wilder and their collaboration on the Little House books.

The fact that childhood was difficult in those days and not every child survived is part of the background to that period. Not supervising children every moment of the day was the norm, rather than the exception. Nobody was guaranteed a happy childhood then, nor are they now, with all the technology and public assistance that we have in the present day.

jodie on February 09, 2014:

Your information about Laura Ingalls Wilder is really not very accurate. Her father did “interfere” in her courtship, and greatly disapproved of the age difference between her and her future husband. He made them wait until she turned 18 to marry. She did indeed have her first child at 19. While not supervising her child when she was about 3, the child managed to burn down the house- this was right after Laura had her second child, who died.

Did the kid die because she was young? Probably not, it was a common occurrence of the time- but interesting that you would fail to mention it. Also, Rose, the child that lived (and who burned down the house) reportedly grew up to be a seriously depressed and unhappy woman, who blamed her unhappiness on her childhood of poverty and her relationship with her mother. Rose also made references to her mother not being a “grown-up” while Rose was a child, and this greatly distressed Rose.

Read “Becoming Laura Ingalls Wilder” rather than Wikipedia for a slightly more factual accounting of her life.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on July 20, 2013:

Thanks, babynology.

babynology from New York on July 20, 2013:

Congratulation on maintaining a great hub. And a lot interesting subject. My hub is about baby names and baby names meaning – All suggestion baby naming.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on December 05, 2012:

Having a baby — or even merging your life with another person — is a huge risk, Angelo. The older we get, the less likely we are to take those huge, life risking leaps. We become risk averse. Taking too many risks can end in death — but not taking enough risks can end in not reproducing oneself. It makes sense that people tend to fall in love earlier in life, because falling in love is a huge risk. It was designed that way.

Are you sure that all girls (or boys) need to study for so many years? What are they learning? Are they reading Greek and Latin classics in the original, the way Theodosia Burr did before her marriage? Or are they just wasting their time in schools that teach nothing? Is it really necessary for girls to be a drain on their parents well until their mid-twenties? Couldn’t they become self-supporting — or married — before then?

How early a girl gets her period is related to the ethnic group from which she derives. Historically, girls from ethnic groups that mature earlier came from cultures that allowed for marriage earlier.

Angelo on December 05, 2012:

Yes women are able to have children at a young age but that doesn’t mean they are mentally or emotionally ready to. As a teenager women are still doing studies and being supported by their parents and are not yet ready to make such a huge choice. Until the age of 25 are brains are prone to taking huge risks because the part of our brain that throughly weighs consequences is not yet developed. A child needs a mother who will help stop them from making really dumb choices not one that still make them herself. I do believe as well that teen mothers should get as much help as possible after the child is born and all the support from those around her as she can. Also there have been girls who got there first period at the age of 9, is that a good age to have a baby to you too.

Angelo on December 05, 2012:

Now I don’t hate young mothers who have a child but i do think that we should try to prevent it from happening. I don’t look down upon people who have a child when they are young so don’t misunderstand my point. I just think it’s wrong that it seems like you are trying to encourage people to have children at a younger age. Also that’s an outrageous claim about how there should be no well fare in this country. Making everyone in the world strictly independent is a horrible thing t do in this country. It would tear down community and make it so that people who really need it have to suffer. Didn’t anyone teach about sharing, sure there are always the few who abuse it but it is still a necessary program to have in this country. The government needs to care for all people so we can try to avoid them ending up homeless or broke. How would you like it if your job made some budget cuts which ended up in you getting fired so that those on top can stay rich and there was no well fare to help you. Most of the claims you have made were ignorant and wrong. Again you did not give any good evidence to support your claims you just took all of them from observing three or four people and only one or two of them I would consider liable. I am pro-choice but i don’t necessarily think that teens should get aborted, i think it should be a carefully thought out decision which it almost always is. Also saying that women should have children when there younger because they won’t have health problems isn’t that good of a point when you look at all of the bad that outweighs it. Teens are still becoming adults them selves and to deliberately bring a child into this world when they are still children themselves is wrong. Also I think 26 years or around that age is a good time to have a baby to me, you are done with most your studies and you won’t deprive the child of any attention because you don’t have time.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on December 05, 2012:

Angelo, the social norms may have changed, but women’s bodies and souls have not. It was designed to work this way that when a woman is ready to experience love, she is ready to have a baby; if something needs to be done to prevent suffering from social stigmatization, it would be to have a society that conforms better to the needs of mothers and children.

Many women do put off child-bearing these days because of the social pressure to do so. They face infertility, reduced fertility and is some cases a lifetime of caring for children who are genetically or otherwise damaged due to the lateness in the mother’s life of their conception. Meanwhile, a majority of healthy children born are to younger and unmarried women. Instead of blaming those women for following nature’s plan, wouldn’t it be better to make our society more accepting of what works in human reproduction?

Angelo on December 05, 2012:

That was an unreliable hub, you only spoke of 3 examples to support your claim and two of which were from a time when becoming a parent while still in teenage years was the norm. The truth is teen pregnancy ruins peoples lives and is a huge problem in this country. Usually it is wrong and irresponsible to have a child when you are still growing up yourself. it is unfair to the child to have a mother who still isn’t even past high school to look up to. Of course there probably are those rare occasions like your friend when everything works out great but in reality it usually tears peoples lives apart. You should have our own future in place before you worry about someone else’s anything else is unfair to the child

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on March 18, 2012:

Julie, you misunderstand my point about Trig Palin. I absolutely agree that the abilities and disabilities and future contributions of our children are nobody’s business but our own. But what goes along with that is that we, and only we, should be responsible for providing for our children, so long as they remain in a dependent state. If there were no welfare — and there shouldn’t be any — then the fact that Trig has a disability would be the exclusive business of his parents. Because there _is_ welfare, it becomes everybody’s possible future burden.

Julie on March 17, 2012:

While the article makes some interesting points, I think there is too much emphasis on people’s children being the business of others. For example, Sarah Palin’s child was born with a known disadvantage and probably will need support for his entire life, and may survive his mother. This article seems to imply that this is a concern of ours, and Sarah Palin should have done something to prevent this. The glaring error of this is that, while most babies are born perfectly healthy, they navigate an entire lifetime. In the course of this, they will at times be more helpful than not to their fellow man, and at other times will need a hand. Some, of course, seem to devolve into perpetual neediness even though they were “perfect” at birth. Also, this line of talk reduces human beings to the value of their material contribution and ignores the unquantifiable value of the deep bonds between humans even if an outsider might see more “take” than “give”. I imagine that Trig Palin’s siblings and extended family will be happy to pitch in for him later as they apparently do now, and no one should be judged for welcoming a child.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on January 04, 2012:

Thanks, Paxwill. I think that people are beginning to see past some of the prejudices against young mothers that such shows tend to enshrine.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on October 01, 2011:

MCLeodgi, thanks for sharing this unusual set of circumstances and the different perspective on it all.

I understand what you are saying about your fiance’s mother. But I also wonder: if you are not having a baby because you want the baby very much, then why have it? It’s almost paradoxical to think being unplanned for or unwanted makes for a better start in life.

Are you saying that your fiancé doesn’t love his mother? If so, surely it has to do with something she has done to him, and is not necessarily the result of wanting a baby so much that she was willing to have him alone.

There are a lot of social factors involved in finding and keeping a mate. Sometimes people who have social disabilities choose to have a child alone, because they cannot manage the complex social machinations necessary to keep a relationship afloat. It then may also transpire that they are not as good at parenting as other people, for the same reasons. But do you really want to doom social outcasts to a life of complete isolation? Are you saying that a woman who can’t get and keep a man should also forget about raising a child?

I like how you express gratitude for the fact that your fiancé was born. Maybe if you express this gratitude to his mother, she will feel better in her loneliness and isolation. If she is trying to hold on too tight, this might help her to let go and enjoy a better relationship with both you and her son.

Ginny McLeod from Overland Park on September 30, 2011:

New and fresh perspectives are always appreciated. The reasons why you want to have a child is also very important. My fiance’s mother had him at the age of 26 and has never married (his father was already married with three other children). She had been trying to get pregnant for a year by then. She came from a rather abusive background and simply made the mistake of believing that having a child would guarantee having someone who would love her back. I can tell you right now that I think this is one of the worst reasons to have a child and she and my fiancé have had struggles like you wouldn’t believe.

If on the other hand, he hadn’t been born (what’s strange is that he also wouldn’t have been if c-sections hadn’t been invented by 1980’s), I would probably hardly know what it’s like to have someone love me for who I truly am. It’s one of the world’s strangest feelings.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on April 06, 2011:

Exmoor, thanks for your comment. I didn’t say that I thought Sarah Palin’s youngest child was necessarily going to be a burden on the government. What I said was that while she was a candidate for public office, asking Palin what measures she was taking to make sure that her son would never be a burden to others was a legitimate question, considering the sorts of public funding that are currently in place to support disabled persons. Asking about her daughter’s personal life, including her daughter’s private reproductive choices, was not.

Exmoor on April 05, 2011:

Good article. It was very informative and helped with understanding many concepts and myths. I don’t agree with your stand on abortion and contraception and Sarah Palin’s son being a burden on the government though. It depends on the severity of the Down’s Syndrome child too. I applaud Palin for going through with it. Down’s children might be a lot of work, but they can be a real joy to be around, provided you have the right attitude. 🙂

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on October 04, 2010:

Amanda, I agree. Every individual is different, and what is right for one person may be wrong for someone else. Women can be successful mothers at nineteen, at twenty-nine and at thirty-nine and beyond. We just have to stop pressuring everyone to conform to a single acceptable pattern.

Amanda Severn from UK on October 04, 2010:

Hi Aya, like you, I had my babies in my late 30s. I didn’t plan it that way, it was just the way things worked out for me. I’m one one of a family of 6, and 3 out of those 6 began their families in their teens. It’s been interesting to see how my nephews and nieces have turned out. I don’t know whether there is an optimum age for having children. Every individual is different, and will cope with the prevailing circumstances in their own individual way.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on October 02, 2010:

tlpoague, thank you for sharing your story and the reasons for making your decision. Were there problems with your aunt’s child that she had when she was forty? This is an unusual motivation for a young woman to choose to have children early, but it makes a lot of sense. A lot of women of my generation were encouraged to wait, and I think some did not realize the risks of waiting.

Congratulations on your twentieth wedding anniversary! It’s good to know that early marriages can still be successful in this day and age.

tlpoague on October 02, 2010:

Very informative hub…Thanks! I am one of those people that chose to have children while being a teenager. I was married while still a senior in high school and had my son by the end of my senior year. I received lots of ridicule and criticism for my choice. I had my daughter 2 months after I turned 20. I will admit that having two children so close together and while I was so young was hard. I have no regrets for my decision. I will be married 20 years this year. My choice was due to my aunt waiting till she had a child at the age of 40. I have a cousin six months younger than me that waited till we were 30 before she had her children. She told me one day, after an apology for comments made when I had my children, that she could understand now why I had my children so young. I never had the health issues that she had with herself and her children. My children, thankfully, were healthy when they were born. For myself, I have seen the downfalls of teenagers getting pregnant by mistake. I have seen some teens get pregnant to make their parents angry, and some that had decided they wanted children at a young age. I come from a long line of women on my mother’s side whom all had children at young ages. The youngest was my great grandmother who had her first at 15. I think it was wonderful that you took the time to write a hub as powerful as this about the stereotype that young teens have when having children. As for my children, both of them want to wait till they are a little older before settling down. Thanks again and great hub!

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on October 02, 2010:

FirstStepsFitness, thanks. I agree. Every woman has a right to make her own choice. It is not up to society to condemn her.

FirstStepsFitness on October 01, 2010:

Excellent Hub ! Every woman has a right to her choice , it is not up to society to control or condemn her choice for it is her personal choice ! Every teen should be given the 3 choices to delve into to make as an informed decision as possible for she will have to live with the outcome .

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on April 24, 2010:

GmaGoldie, thanks! I think that whether one is pro-choice or pro-life, the best thing we can do for young mothers is to respect their right to choose to be mothers, and not to pre-judge their ability to provide for their children. Most women don’t want an abortion. Those who get one are usually giving in to social pressure.

Kelly A. Kline from USA on April 24, 2010:

Great Hub! Well discussed and laid and great title too!

My great grandparent had “children” very young – the stories are interesting and I thank God every day that the babies were not aborted or I would not be here. I used to be a “pro-choice” person but as I age, I now know the miracle of birth. Whatever the age, birth is a gift directly from God. In our society we emotionally hang teenagers for having children.

Vrajavala makes an important point – the expense of someone else – hmmmm.

The value of life needs a different paradigm. I want to keep my money but if an Einstein is not walking this planet because of the expense, we as humanity have paid a larger price.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on November 10, 2009:

R.G. San Ramon, thanks for your input! It sounds as if you have made a wise and well-considered decision to have a child earlier rather than later. There is a time for every thing in life, and it is good to choose the time that is best for us and our children.

R.G. San Ramon on November 10, 2009:

#7 is simply the best! That’s the reason why I got pregnant early. I want to see my child grow and have her children of her own before I die. Yes I know that I cannot control destiny entirely, but I’ll have more chance with this. And, I get to be “free” from parental roles earlier than usual. 😛

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on October 25, 2009:

Vrajavala, thanks for your comment. I think children are wonderful, and I am very grateful for mine, but it would not be right to expect others to pay for my happiness. So it is for all of us. What would have been a deeper way to think of it?

vrajavala from Port St. Lucie on October 25, 2009:

good article, very informative. One thing I do disagree with is when you said “Nobody has the right to have children at someone else’s expense.” Seems you could have thought it through a little deeper.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on January 15, 2009:

Momma09, thanks!

M0MMA09 from Northern Virginia on January 15, 2009:

What a great hub! Thank you for guiding me to this (I love the detail you went into.) :]

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on January 04, 2009:

Maria Reza, thanks for commenting and sharing your experience. It sounds as if everything turned out very well for you! Sometimes shouldering responsibility at a young age is a positive thing.

Maria Reza on January 03, 2009:

Hi,

I am so glad that you do not look down at young mothers. I feel that all those misconceptions are so true. I am a young mom at age of 16. I was blessed with so many great people in my life. I think instead of society looking down at all young moms, there should be education on being a great role model. All we need are people willing to invest a little time. I am not saying it is okay to be a young mom, but I tell you one thing. I took advantage of all the advise given to me. My husband of 14yrs is great support. Marriage is hard but worth fighting for. Being a young mom I matured at a very young age. I did not feel sorry for myself, I think people did that for me. I own my own business. I was open to oppurtunities. One thing that young moms suffer from is low self esteem. All they need is positive guidance!! All your info helps!!!

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on September 12, 2008:

Lela, thanks for the input!

I tried to follow the link for the event on Saturday, but I got this message:

File ozark-writers08I does not exist! 

Is there another way to get there?

Lela Davidson from Bentonville, Arkansas on September 12, 2008:

Interesting research and personal observation. Great Hub. If you get a chance, come to the OWL event at the FPL this Saturday!http://www.faylib.org/events/press_releases.asp?an… will be speaking on online writing.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on September 04, 2008:

Allshookup, that’s okay. I’m sorry if I didn’t make it more clear. Once a pregnancy is underway, nobody can or should tell the mother to terminate it. I was just saying that older mothers need to be more careful before a baby is conceived.

Of course, it’s none of our business what married people do in the privacy of their bedrooms. The only time it becomes any of our business is if we’re told we have to pay for it.

allshookup from The South, United States on September 04, 2008:

I’m sorry if i misunderstood what you meant. That’s just how it came across to me. I am pro-life and I believe that a baby is a baby at the second of conception. No matter what name pro-choice people give it. It’s like they call it an embryo or other names to make it not sound like a baby so it will be easier to murder them so the mother doesn’t have to feel as bad about murdering her child. But for me and all the pro-life people I know, no matter what name it is given, at the moment of conception, it is a baby and it has a soul. Again, I’m sorry if I misunderstood what you meant.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on September 04, 2008:

Allshookup, I don’t think I implied Sarah Palin should have had an abortion. What I said was that because she knew ahead of time that an abortion was out of the question for her, then she needed to take extra care to make sure she didn’t run the risk of a problem with the ovum. An ovum isn’t considered a person even by pro-lifers. That’s why, for someone with those convictions, the point of taking responsibility has to be earlier, before the point of no return, when the ovum turns into an embryo.

I support a woman’s right to choose to carry a pregnancy to term no matter what. I also believe that all parents are responsible for supporting their own children.

Aya Katz (author) from The Ozarks on September 04, 2008:

Gwendymom, thanks for the support.

Anna Marie, thanks for the input. In fact, I don’t think there’s that much that we disagree on. I didn’t say that Trig will necessarily ever be a burden on others. It could be that he will become one of the self-sufficient success stories concerning Down’s Syndrome children. What I said was that it’s a legitimate question to ask Governor Palin, considering her public position.

Whether Trig becomes a burden for others to carry doesn’t just depend on him, his abilities or his upbringing. It also depends on the laws in place at the time when he is an adult. As a candidate for national office, Sarah Palin has an opportunity to help shape those laws. This is why we should find out where she stands when it comes to public assistance to people with disabilities.

Allshookup, thanks for the support. I think every experience always seems a little different when it happens close to home. Teen mothers who act as responsible parents are not that rare.

allshookup from The South, United States on September 04, 2008:

I agree also. Good hub. I love how you pointed out so many prejudices against young mothers. Well done. Teenage pregnancy happens in all races and all walks of life. We should be supporting them, not putting them down as seen so much in the last few days on such a public platform. I feel it it were those people’s daughter, they would be seeing things in a different light. I can’t imgaine having to deal with this issue at such a young age and in the public eye like this. I admire her for keeping the baby and going through all of this for her/him. But, I disagree with the 2 facts that you named being labeled ‘bother.’ They are the ones making the decision to marry and care for the child. Their parents are having to think this through now and see how they feel about it before they sign for them to get married. They are not running off and getting married. So, I feel they are taking time now to consider if this is what they should be doing. I’m glad they are thinking it through before taking such a commitment. And I disagree strongly about the fact that you implied that Sarah should have had an abortion when she found out Trig was going to be a ‘special’ child. He is that way for a reason that God knows. She said herself that he is a blessing in her life. How many blessings like Trig have been murdered because the mother didn’t want a perfect child. I admire her very much for keeping him. Since I am not in her shoes, I do not know if she used protection or not when having sex with her husband. That, again, is their business. He has 4 siblings older than he is and I’m sure will help with him. I have worked with Down’s children/adults, and I cannot see how anyone would want to kill them. In your poll, I answered ‘Other’ because you did not put an acceptable answer on there for me. I would NEVER and I repeat NEVER ask my daughter to kill her baby for the reason of birth control. That option would never have been brought up in this instance. Bristol chose to have sex and this baby is the result. She should take responsibility, which she is. I would have my daughter do the same. Raise the baby. If they wanted to marry, we would consider that with alot of prayerful consideration, but she would have the baby, married or not. This child is not a mistake. S/he is a baby and should be treated as one. You did a good job showing that teenage pregnancy happens in different walks of life. Which I agree with. But the ‘bother’ list, I just can’t agree with. Like I said, if it were the critics daughter pregnant, they would be looking at this differently, I’m sure. Or at least they should.

Anna Marie Bowman from Florida on September 04, 2008:

I agreed with a lot of what you had to say. I did not, however, agree with your opinion on Sarah Palin’s son, Trig, being a burden on the government, and that she should have used protection to avoid a pregnancy so late in life. While it is true that great advancements have been made in lengthening the life span of children born with Down’s Syndrome, it is also true that many more people struggling with Down’s Syndrome are leading fairly self sufficient lives, holding down jobs, living in their own homes, or in communities, similar to communities for retired people, that offer a minimal amount of assistance where it is needed. There are varying degrees of disablilty when it comes to Down’s Syndrome. I applaud Sarah Palin for her courage, and for sticking to her convictions.

gwendymom from Oklahoma on September 04, 2008:

Thanks for publishing this hub, I agree that not all teenage mothers are a burden on society.

Posted in Books and Authors, Child Rearing, Family | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Is Ableism Just Another Word for Meritocracy?

Ableism, derived from “able” plus “-ism”, is a term for discriminating against people based on disability. Just like racism and sexism, ableism is a form of discrimination. Discrimination is bad when it targets irrelevant traits in disqualifying a person for performance of a job. But how can it be wrong to discriminate against a person for being unable to perform the job? If the disability in question is relevant to job performance, then ableism is not that different from meritocracy.

In an odd form of gaslighting, termed by Kate Gladstone as “information scapegoating” some people on the autism spectrum have been discriminated against as being too able — or possessing knowledge that the average person does not have.

Meanwhile, current autism advocates insist that autism is only a disability, and that if a person on the spectrum does not need special accommodations, that person cannot be entitled to an autism diagnosis. The idea that autism is a super power that enables autistics to perform at a higher level than neurotypicals is soundly denied.

Clearly the DSM–V is a diagnostic and statistical manual that is intended to allot government interventions and funding based on a series of criteria. As long the government is involved in the diagnosis and allotment of special privileges, the autism diagnosis will be used to thwart meritocracy and to promote disability over ability.

Posted in Education: Teaching and Learning, Opinion Pieces and Editorials | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Has Autism Been Co-opted by the Left?

In the early two thousands, at the turn of the millenium, we saw a sharp upswing in autism diagnosis. Was it because there was a greater awareness of the phenomenon, or could it have been that the greater awareness was a result of a real epidemic of global proportions? It might have been a little of both. As more and more very young children were receiving an autism diagnosis, more and more parents were researching the subject, and many of them discovered that they themselves had a milder version of their children’s condition: they had high functioning autism, known as Asperger’s Syndrome.

In 2001 I moved with my two year old daughter to a remote location in rural Missouri, in preparation for an ape language experiment. I was planning to adopt a baby chimpanzee and to bring it up with my daughter, in a cross-fostering environment calculated to allow the chimpanzee to pick up human language naturally, in an environment of total immersion.

The Cover of my Children’s Book, When Sword Met Bow

Before we arrived in Missouri, my daughter and I had been living in Taiwan. My daughter had had a nanny who spoke to her in Mandarin Chinese, and I spoke to my daughter in Hebrew. It was only when she started going to preschool in the United States that my daughter picked up English.

The language experiment with Bow, the chimpanzee that I adopted, originally used lexigrams in Mandarin, Hebrew and English.

The Project Bow DVD Playlisthttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLvKl93VPL_oNJtFvdQcpSC3WEy4bDCCpZ

At the time when I adopted Bow, it was believed by many that chimpanzees lacked a theory of mind, and that in that sense they were like autistic individuals. (This is not actually true. Chimpanzees have an excellent theory of mind, much better than that of most neurotypical human beings.) Because of this belief, I started researching therapies for autistic children, and I came across Stanley Greenspan‘s Floortime DIR.

Floortime required caretakers of a child to get down on the floor on the same level as the child and to try to see the child’s point of view, while gently enticing the child to join the caretaker in as many circles of communication as the child was able. Instead of coercing behaviors that were desired by a rough system of punishment and reward, as was done in the competing treatment system called ABA, Floortime used lighthearted play sessions and enticement. ABA used operant conditioning to brainwash a subject into behaving as the caretaker desired. Floortime did not use coercion. It fostered genuine, spontaneous communication between the caretaker and the child.

Floortime worked with Bow. He did learn to communicate with us, and because of this, Bow is able to continue to live in my home to this very day, when he is 22 years old, going on 23.

In the meanwhile, as I was learning about autism, it did occur to me, based on an analysis of my life history, that I may have been on the spectrum. I never got a diagnosis, nor did I ever seek special accommodations. It was just somewhat satisfying to think that many misunderstandings in the past may have stemmed from clashes with neurotypicals, who viewed life through a hypersocial lens, believing that one can negotiate a shared reality through enforced social consensus. I likened the neurotypicals to Ayn Rand’s social metaphysicians, who could not determine truth or falsity of propositions except by reference to a social yardstick. Neurotypicals were altruists, in that they let others think for them, while autistics were autoists, individuals who thought for themselves.

And then one day, Asperger’s was cancelled! The diagnosis entirely disappeared from the DSM. Why? The initial response is that it was because Hans Asperger was a Nazi. However, this response is highly unsatisfactory, because to the extent that Asperger was a Nazi, he had always been a Nazi. Nothing about his Nazi affiliation changed in the new millenium. Why were we told Asperger’s syndrome was a diagnosis in the year 1994? Why did it become a non-diagnosis in 2013?

Hans Asperger was an Austrian psychiatrist who collaborated with the Nazis when they took over his country after the Anschluss. By creating a special category of autistics who were high functioning — Asperger’s Syndrome — he saved many children from certain death. However, he did not save all the children. Those who were nonverbal and low functioning ended up at another clinic where many were “euthenized.”

Is Asperger evil because he did not save all the children from the Nazis? Or was it good that he was at least able to save some of them? And if he discovered a real psychiatric phenomenon, does it matter whether Asperger was good or evil? Are we going to change the name of every diagnosis based on fluctuating views about the personality of the scientist who discovered it?

The Left is constantly looking to level real differences between individuals, while co-opting every label to serve their own collectivist agenda. Today on social media we see many so-called autistic influencers who are very social, well groomed and manipulative. They assert that autism is a disability, and anyone who does not need accommodations need not apply for a diagnosis. The diagnosis is merely a ticket to another form of identity politics, allowing for government funding and differential treatment of individuals.

Something that was once a doorway to self-understanding by individuals with unusual levels of autonomy from social pressure has now turned into another weapon of mass manipulation. It is not surprising, under these circumstances, that the government funds the oppressive ABA therapies and entirely ignores Floortime DIR.

Posted in Apes and Language, Child Rearing, Opinion Pieces and Editorials | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Matter of Milk

Updated on September 26, 2008

Aya Katz profile image

There has been a lot in the nutritional literature lately about milk. Some have suggested that children should never be given milk. Others have said that children should never be given soy as a substitute for milk. Some have stated that we can all do without milk, since there are other sources of calcium and other sources of fat. I have provided links to many of these articles, so you can read them for yourself.

I am not much of a milk drinker myself. The story goes that when my mother weaned me of her breast milk, she offered me the bottle, instead. I don’t like substitutes. I am very suspicious when someone tries to pass off one thing as something else. I rejected the bottle as a poor substitute for my mother’s breast. I also pretty much rejected milk as a beverage. I use milk in my cereal as a sort of condiment, though I don’t drink what’s leftover in the bowl after the cereal is gone. I like cheese, and the only reason I don’t eat butter is that I’ve stopped eating bread. Milk, in and of itself, is not a big factor in my diet. However, I am not anti-milk, and the current nutritional trend of completely rejecting milk has me curious.

What is behind such a strong reaction, by the same people who used to tout milk as the most nutritious of substances only a couple of decades ago? Why do Americans, in particular, have such strong feelings for or against milk? And why are there suddenly so many people who are lactose intolerant? How did that come about? Twenty years ago, I never even heard of such a thing. There were people who liked milk and people who didn’t, but intolerance?That’s a pretty strong word.

And what’s more, did you know that people are now saying that milk is bad for cats? Have the cats heard about this?

Determined to get to the bottom of this mystery, I decided to do some research.

Holstein Cows — Milk Producers

Photo Credit: The Wikipedia
Photo Credit: The Wikipedia

Milk and Honey

“Milk and honey are the only articles of diet whose sole function in nature is food. It is not surprising, therefore, that the nutritional value of milk is high.” This is a quote from the article on milk consumption whose link is provided to the right. When we say that the nutritional value of milk is high, we mean a number of different things: (1) milk is a calorie dense food, so just a little of it provides enough to eat, as opposed to a food like lettuce or garden greens. (2) Milk contains most of the types of nutrients that we need to live: fat, protein and carbohydrates, as well as calcium and vitamins A, D, E and K. (3) If you had only milk to consume, you would not starve. This is not true of most foods.

Having said that, I don’t know of any human being above the age of five who would want to live only on milk. Most people enjoy variety in their diet. While someone living only on milk would not starve, he might still experience some serious nutritional deficits. For instance, there’s not any vitamin C in milk, and in order to live healthy lives, we need that nutrient as well.

It’s nice to have options. Milk and dairy products are good choices, but they are not the only choices we have, and it is also very easy to get all the nutrients found in milk by eating a variety of other foods. There are people for whom milk is not an option, and they manage to get by just fine without it.

Lactose

Image Credit: The Wikipedia
Image Credit: The Wikipedia

Lactose Intolerance

According to the wikipedia article whose link appears above the picture of the Holstein cows, milk is an emulsion of fat globules in a water-based liquid.So basically, it’s fat floating in water. Only unlike most fat and water mixes, it stays even.Each fat globule is surrounded by a protein membrane that keeps it from breaking up. Inside the fluid part of the milk are casein protein “micelles”: groups of several thousand protein molecules that are bound together by calcium phosphate strands.About forty percent of the calories in milk come from the carbohydrate lactose. Lactose is made up of two simple sugars, glucose and galactose.

People who are said to be “lactose intolerant” are unable to digest lactose. They don’t have enough of the enzyme lactase which is found in small intestine and helps to break up lactose into its component sugars, glucose and galactose.

Common symptoms of lactose intolerance are nausea, cramping, bloating, gas and diarrhea occurring within thirty minutes to two hours of milk consumption.

Healthy normal infants start out with reasonable amounts of lactase at birth. Lactase production diminishes after age two, but most people don’t notice any deficiency until they are much older, if ever. A primary lactase deficiency is one unaccompanied by other disease. There is also such a thing as secondary lactase deficiency, which come about as a result of injury to the GI tract or through disease. Secondary lactase deficiency is a symptom of certain gastro-intestinal diseases, like celiac disease, IBD, and Crohn’s disease.

There are genetic factors in the predisposition for developing a primary lactase deficiency. Scientists speculate that lactose tolerance is the innovation and that intolerance is the natural state of humans prior to the domestication of milk producing ruminants about 10,000 years ago. I will get back to this point later.

In addition to lactose intolerance, there is also a rare form of milk allergy due to the inability to process casein.

Casein Free Diet for Some Autistics

  • Diet and Autism: Myths and miracles
    Autism Spectrum Disorder is a broad spectrum of disorders, hence the use of the word “spectrum” in its title. Autism is becoming more understood nowadays by the public, due in part to publicity by celebrities…

The Casein Free Diet

Some infants and children who suffer from low-functioning autism have been cured simply by removing gluten and casein from their diets. A gluten free/casein free diet is one that totally eliminates milk, due to the protein casein. In those individuals, the inability ot properly metabolize either gluten or casein produces a morphine like substance that sedates them and inhibits normal cognitive development. Such children, once on the diet, suddenly gain the ability to interact normally with others and to have normal language development.

For these children and their families, the elimination of milk from the diet (as well as all other foods with either gluten or casein in them) is a very small price to pay for a complete cure.

However, most forms of autism have nothing to do with casein, and a milk free diet does nothing to help most people with an autistic spectrum disorder. This is because autism is a syndrome whose similar symptoms can be brought about by a wide range of causes.

Genetic Research on the Causes of Lactose Tolerance

Lactose intolerance seems to be on the rise, and it has recently become quite common to find the cause for this under discussion. For some reason this has led to widespread condemnation of milk in general. The most popular form of this trend takes the following line of attack: milk is a product intended by nature to be consumed by helpless infants. Mammals produce milk for their own young. Milk is not intended for the young of another animal or for adult members of the species.

Extreme versions of this position maintain that nobody over the age of two should drink milk, and no animal, including humans, should drink the milk of another animal. To support this position, advocates point out that no animal in the wild drinks any milk other than that produced by its own mother, and even that only when it is an infant.

Okay, so that means that Romulus and Remus were probably in mortal danger of dying of lactose intolerance when that She-Wolf suckled them!

But, seriously, what is the scientific evidence? Researchers theorize that “lasctase persistence”, meaning the presence of the enzyme lactase in the gut after a child is weaned, is a relatively new trait in adult humans.

In an article by Edward Hollox, in The European Journal of Human Genetics “Genetics of Lactase persistence; fresh lessons in the history of milk drinking(2005) 13, 267-269, the following rationale is given: “In humans, epidemiological analysis has shown that the cultural development of dairying preceded selection for lactase persistence.” In other words, first we started drinking milk, and only later we began to tolerate it. How realistic a scenario is that?

Now if he had said that first we began to herd ruminants for meat, and later we gradually started drinking their milk, then it might have made a certain amount of sense that there would have been a selective advantage to being able to tolerate milk as well as eat meat. But, according to Hollox, the development of dairying came first, and then there was a genetic selection for lactase persistence. This would mean that generations of humans would have milked goats and cattle and other milk givers, drinking the milk and getting sick for hundreds and maybe thousands of years, before finally some of their descendants could stomach it? Why would they keep drinking it, if it made them sick? Isn’t it more likely that people discovered that milk was good to drink, and then they developed dairying? In which case, lactase persistence must have preceded dairying.

According to Hollox, a genetic mutation accounting for persistence of the enzyme lactase in adult Europeans has been identified, and another, separate genetic mutation allowing for lactase persistence is found among Africans.

Asians are not mentioned. But it was in Asia, in Mesopotamia, the cradle of civilization, where wide-scale agriculture was developed about 10,000 years ago. At that time, Europeans were still savages.

Historical Evidence on Milk Consumption

Canaan is described in the Old Testament as the land of milk and honey. This was supposed to be a good thing. In ancient writings milk is always spoken of highly. It was a calorie dense food, and the ancients appreciated it as such.

In the book of Judges, the general of the Canaanite army, Sisra, fleeing from the onslought of Barak, found shelter in the tent of Ya’el, the wife of Hever the Kenite. She offered him milk and a place to sleep. Later, she drove a stake through his skull. I suppose we could argue that giving him milk was part of Ya’el’s overall plan to kill Sisra. However, that’s not how it was intended. He asked for water. She gave him milk. She is praised for her generosity. She was a good hostess, up until the point when she rammed a tent stake through his skull. (Judges 4:19-21).

This story is told twice in succeeding chapters of the Book of Judges: once in prose and a second time in poetry. In the poetic version, she also offered him butter. (Judges :25).

In the Baghavad Gita, ghi, or clarified butter, is seen as the utmost in luxury foods, fit for the gods, but undoubtedly consumed by men, too.

Did any of these people suffer from the inability to digest milk or dairy products? There is no indication that they did.

Leprosy and epilepsy are mentioned in the Bible. Lactose intolerance is not.

Do Snakes Drink Milk?

https://youtube.com/watch?v=t_TESL0CKqc%3Fwmode%3Dtransparent%26start%3D

Comparative Evidence on Milk Consumption

We probably all have experiences from our own life, or stories from our grandparents’ era, that bely some of the current claims about milk. For instance, it’s suggested that we become lactose intolerant over time, but that we come into the world as infants completely able to digest milk. However, we all know that you can’t give a newborn kitten or a newborn human baby straight cow’s milk. They can’t digest it. That’s why baby formula had to be carefully developed. Prior to its invention, goat’s milk was used for infants who had no mother to suckle them, if a wet nurse could not be found.

A baby kitten will die if fed on cow’s milk, but an adult cat can drink it. A human newborn can’t be given cow’s milk, but an older child or adult can. The problem with cow’s milk thoughout history was not that the enzyme lactase was present in infancy and disappeared as we matured. The problem was that babies couldn’t tolerate cow’s milk, but as soon as they were able to transition to solids, all animals, including humans, could drink cow’s milk in addition to eating other foods. When dairying was first introduced into our culture, it was not in order to feed babies. It was for adults.

Then there is the argument that all other animals besides humans don’t drink milk beyond infancy. That’s not true. My dog Teyman drinks milk. Bow, my chimpanzee son, drinks milk. If lactase persistence were a genetic innovation selected for by a dairy culture that has lasted 10,000 years, how would you account for that?

Why don’t other adult mammals drink milk in the wild? It’s not because of the inability to digest it. It’s because other animals haven’t domesticated cows! If you give them milk, they will drink it.

In India, today, many people still believe that snakes drink milk. Snake charmers claim that this is what they feed their snakes. I’ve also seen the argument confidently made that this can’t possibly be true, because snakes are reptiles, and only mammals drink milk.

I don’t know whether snakes drink milk. I do know that the argument that they could not drink milk because they are not mammals is completely unconvincing. We are not insects, and yet we eat honey!

The Evolution of the Mammary Gland

All flesh is kin. All animals on this planet are related. Life emerged only once. The building blocks of life are the same, regardless of the multitude of differences between and among different organisms. The common fruitfly has a very similar genetic structure to our own. Many different animals can subsist on the same foods, because we all use the same basic nutrients: fats, proteins and carbohydrates.

The milk-producing gland in mammals developed from non-mammalian sources. According to the wikipedia, the immediate ancestors of modern mammals were similar to monotremes like the platypus. They produced a milk-like substance from glands on the surface of their skin (but with no nipple) for their young to drink after hatching from eggs. The idea that only mammals drink milk is unfounded.

Milk became the food of infant mammals because the non-mammalian ancestors of mammals were already secreting milk.

So do snakes drink milk? Who knows. It depends on who you believe, the snake charmers or the nutritionists. Neither group is known for complete truthfulness. If I had to bet, my money would be on the snake charmers, because at least they know something about snakes.

Modern Production and Preparation of Milk

There is such a thing as lactose intolerance, and some people do suffer from it. To find out if you are one of those people, there is a medical test that you can take. However, the claim that tolerance of lactose is a relatively new trait in humans is not particularly convincing. All the evidence points to the idea that we were able to drink milk long before we began keeping cows. It seems more likely that lactose intolerance is a disease of recent origin.

Also, not everybody who experiences indigestion after drinking milk is lactose intolerant. In many cases, lactose has nothing to do with it. You could be reacting to the processing that modern milk undergoes before it is marketed at the grocery store.

Milk is pasteurized before it is marketed. Pasteurization destroys harmful microbes in perishable food products using heat, without destroying the food itself. In addition to pasteurization, milk undergoes homogenization in order to keep fat from separating out. These processes destroy some of the nutrients present in milk. Some vitamins are then artficially re-introduced into the milk we drink, sometimes in higher quantities than what was there to begin with. For some people, these artificial vitamin additives are highly irritating. This can account for some of the difficulty that modern man has digesting milk. These are problems that we don’t experience with raw milk, straight from the cow.

Conclusion

As I mentioned before, I don’t drink a lot of milk, because it doesn’t taste that good to me. My daughter likes milk, and sometimes, when I forget to offer it to her, she asks for milk. It always surprises me when she prefers milk to lemonade. However, I honor her preference and I let her have as much milk as she wants.

I don’t force anybody to drink milk. I think that our own appetites are a good indication of how much we should have. I never supply Bow with milk as a matter of course, because milk is not a normal part of the chimp diet. However, when he specifically asks for milk, I let him drink it. He never experiences any problem digesting the milk that he drinks. He also doesn’t ask for it as often as my daughter does.

While all animals have the same general use for all nutrients, there are also significant differences from one person to the next. We should honor those differences and understand that what is an adequate amount of milk for one person may be inadequate for another or excessive for a third individual.

I know that at one time in America children were forced to drink a great deal more milk than they wanted to, because their parents believed it was good for them. This caused a lot of damage, including obesity and anti-milk sentiment in the following generation of adults. Forcing a child to consume a food he doesn’t like usually backfires.

How much milk and dairy products you choose to consume is up to you. If you don’t like milk, then by all means don’t drink it. If it makes you feel sick, don’t drink it. It’s possible to get all your nutritional needs met without consuming dairy. However, we don’t have to declare milk as a dangerous substance or forget the entire course of history concerning milk consumption by humans and other animals in order to make that choice.

Milk is good food. We as humans have a long history with milk consumption. It is one of the many foods that we are capable of consuming to good effect. We don’t have to have it every day, but it’s good to keep that option open.

(c) 2008 Aya Katz

Posted in PubWages Staff | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Pronatalism: Interviews with Malcolm Collins

WHAT IS PRONATALISM?

If birth rates continue to fall at the current trajectory, most industrialized nations will face population collapse within five generations. Pronatalism is a movement that aims to lessen the effect of this imminent collapse by fostering reproductive rates that are well above replacement levels. According to Simone and Malcolm Collins, of Pronatalism.org, falling fertility rates do not have an “organic floor.” This means that population collapse will not create a course correction on its own. Populations headed toward extinction face a turning point past which there may be no return.

The first of two interviews with Malcolm Collins

Rather than offering coercive measures to prevent the imminent population collapse, the Pronatalist movement seeks to encourage anyone who genuinely wants to have children to do so, with creative solutions for child care, education and intellectual tools to resist the “urban monoculture”, whose goal seems to be to render all who join it infertile. The Pronatalist movement welcomes ethnic and cultural diversity and wants to foster a pluralistic society.

Using the most modern reproductive methods available, including genetic screening and IVF, the Collinses try to ensure a selective process that minimizes disease and disability. Since the current culture selects against higher education and intellectual ability — fertility is highest in those portions of the population without a college education — there is an expectation that within seventy-five years the IQ of the urbanized population may drop by one standard deviation. Natural selection is operating against intellectual ability in the general population, while the pronatalists use genetic screening to optimize health and intelligence in their own offspring.

Following the example of groups most resistant to the urban monoculture, like the Amish and Hasidic Jews, the Collinses are creating a culture and religion that will help their children resist the pressures that are bringing down fertility rates in most industrialized countries. However, instead of turning their back on technology, like the Amish, the Pronatalists are embracing the latest technology and even hope to propel their descendants into outer space, to colonize the universe and escape the limitations of our home planet.

Much of this sounds like science fiction. However, today’s technological reality is yesterday’s science fiction. It will be interesting to see what the Pronatalists may achieve.

Related Links

Pronatalist.org

The Pragmatist Foundation

Posted in Books and Authors, Child Rearing, Family, Opinion Pieces and Editorials | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Evolution of Selfishness

The Evolution of Selfishness

Updated on July 10, 2009

Aya Katz profile image

Aya Katz  

Against Idleness and Mischief by Isaac Watts

How doth the little busy Bee
Improve each shining Hour,
And gather Honey all the day
From every opening Flower!

How skilfully she builds her Cell!
How neat she spreads the Wax!
And labours hard to store it well
With the sweet Food she makes.

How doth the little busy Bee
Improve each shining Hour,
And gather Honey all the day
From every opening Flower!

How doth the little honey bee
In self-defense excel!
She gives her life for one small sting
Yet hath she spent it well!

 

Children in the 18th and 19th centuries were expected to memorize the poem Against Idleness and Mischief by Isaac Watts and to emulate the selflessness of the honey bee. The cloying sweetness of the self-sacrificing worker bee was irritating to Lewis Carroll, who wrote this parody concerning a more predatory and self-interested species:

How doth the little crocodile
Improve his shining tail
And pour the waters of the Nile
On every golden scale.

How cheerfully he seems to grin,
How neatly spreads his claws,
and welcomes little fishies in
With gently smiling jaws.

Of course, the Lewis Caroll poem misses the point. The crocodile in his parody is exploiting other animals — not crocodiles. It is the altruism of the honey bee in her attitude to her fellow bees that inspires humans to long for a brotherhood of man — a spirit of all for one and one for all similar to the creed of the three musqueteers and a sharing of resources sometimes known as socialism.

Individual bee collecting pollen on behalf of the entire hive

Image Credit: Wikipedia
Image Credit: Wikipedia

Against Idleness and Mischief — last two stanzas

In Works of Labour or of Skill
I would be busy too:
For Satan finds some Mischief still
For idle Hands to do.

In Books, or Work, or healthful Play
Let my first Years be past,
That I may give for every Day
Some good account at last.

Wikipedia entry on bees

Throughout recorded history, rulers, theologians, philosophers and teachers have tried to instill the unselfishness of the honey bee into human populations. If we all behaved like bees, it has been argued, then we could pool our resources and no one need ever be hungry. The strong would protect the weak, and the young would shelter the aged. However, true unselfishness, as manifest in the apiary, does not actually work this way. Truly unselfish living means not overstaying your welcome:

  • each honey bee lives only so long as it is useful to the hive and is discarded as soon as it no longer serves.
  • honey bees are expected to commit suicide in the service of the hive by stinging any perceived threat and dying in the process
  • shirkers — or anyone too sick or weak to keep working — are promptly executed by enforcer honey bees
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lE-8QuBDkkw%3Fwmode%3Dtransparent%26start%3D

Queen Bee and Attendants

Image Credit: The Wikipedia
Image Credit: The Wikipedia

The Mother of All Bees

Why aren’t honey bees more selfish? Why do individual bees not consider their own survival as more important than the survival of the hive?

The answer is simple: there is no mechanism of natural selection to favor the reproductive success of selfish bees within the hive. (There is, however, a mechanism that allows rogue bees to leave the hive and become independent — more on that below.)

Individual honey bees within the hive do not produce and rear their own young. Reproduction is a collective undertaking. If a honey bee behaves in a more selfish way — eating more honey than it produces when doing so jeopardizes the success of the hive, the hive may perish because of it, and the genetic traits that might have led to this behavior are not going to be replicated. If a bee behaves in a way that serves the purposes of the hive, then the hive is more likely to prosper, and more bees of this sort will be produced in the future.

Honey bees behave like collective entities, because they reproduce and rear young collectively. Nature brings selective pressure to bear on organisms based on reproductive success. That is why natural selection operates upon the hive as a whole, and not on individual bees.

This is also why honey bees are not individuals in the more colloquial sense of that word.

Bees and Communication

Self-Awareness in the Wikipedia

Honey bees have complex social organization and they are even able to share information with one another about the location of good sources of pollen. Despite this, there is no reason to believe that bees are self-aware.

One of the little understood aspects of communication is that it is not necessary to understand the difference between “self” and “other” in order to transfer information from one being to another. We do not need a theory of mind in order to decode or encode information.

While a theory of mind is useful if you are planning to deceive another individual, it is of no use whatever when all are working cooperatively at predetermined tasks and when the motivation for completing the task is completely internal.

Honey bees are motivated to work by an internal compulsion. A bee that does not have this compulsion is defective and is discarded by the hive. Sometimes the bees who are responsible for killing a defective worker are called “Enforcers”, but their job is not to motivate workers by fear of punishment. Defective workers are eliminated in the same way that a defective part is replaced in a machine.

Eusocial Insects

  • The Mighty Bugs
    Since basically, everyone living in Florida, outside of those smack dab on the beach, are all walking on the skeletons of swampland — which means many things, but most of all — its all about how we are…

Most animals carry any surplus they have acquired on their person in the form of fat, to be consumed later during leaner times. Bees produce a tangible surplus outside their person — honey — and this makes them easy prey to other species who would enslave them.

When humans domesticated honey bees, they exploited the social organization of the bee to serve their own ends. If bees were not already in the habit of deferring gratification and creating a surplus, they would not be such easy targets for exploitation by humans.

However, even exploiters have got to take into consideration the basic needs of the population they are enslaving. A bee keeper who takes all the honey and leaves none for the hive to winter on will find that he has no bees come spring.

Langstroth’s Hive and the Honey-bee

Honey bees are an example of “eusocial insects”. Eusocial insects include wasps and ants. What they all have in common is the following:

  • the creation of a food surplus outside their own bodies
  • specialized roles for different members of the group
  • collective reproduction and child-rearing
  • a high degree of genetic uniformity within the group

Non-social bees

Most insects are not eusocial, and in fact, not all bees are! An example of a non-social bee sub-species is the “cuckoo bumble bee”. This particular sub-type of bumblebee has lost the ability to gather pollen. All female cuckoo bumblebees reproduce their own young, and there are no specialized roles among the cuckoo bumblebees.The alkali bee (Nomia melanderi Cockerell) is a non-social ground-nesting bee that has been extensively used to pollinate alfalfa. Large populations of such bees can exist side by side and yet not work cooperatively. Each has its own nest, gathers its own pollen, and produces its own young.

It seems that just as eusocial insects depend on a surplus, specialized roles and collective reproduction, those who give up the creation of a  large surplus also discard specialized roles and collective breeding.

Solitary Bees

Why is it that when we think of bees, we automatically tend to think of the eusocial ones? The answer is obvious: because of the surplus! We crave honey. Individualist bees are good pollinators, but they don’t make much honey. Therefore, they are less likely to be exploited and enslaved.

Individualist bees are not enslaved by humans precisely because they do not allow other bees to enslave them. This is something to keep in mind when thinking about our own social organization.

So, which came first, solitary bees or eusocial ones? This is the sort of chicken and egg question that will be answered differently depending on your context.

If read in a broad context, the answer will be “solitary insects came first, so a pre-bee would have been asocial.” Read in a finer context, the answer may be: “eusocial bees are the precursors of solitary bees, because the first actual bees were eusocial. Pre-bees don’t count.”

If we want to see the big picture, though, the answer is: it comes in cycles.

The Cyclical Social Evolution of Bees

 

pre-bees ==>(communal)==> eusocial bees ==> (communal) ==> solitary bees

Genetically Identical Bees can have Different Social Structure

A difference in social organization precedes genetic differentiation between groups of bees. First they behave differently and only later, with time, do genetic differences between different populations begin to appear.

Genetically identical bees have been found living side by side in the same physical environment, with one group engaged in egalitarian communal living (each female producing her own young, but sharing chores with other females) and the other living under a strict eusocial regime with a full caste system under the rule of a single fertile queen.

We see a lot of eusocial bees becoming solitary, but we seldom see this pattern of egalitarian communal living. Richards, von Wettburg and Rutgers discuss the reason for this in their article entitled A novel social polymorphism in a primitively eusocial bee: “Why then is the cooccurrence of communal and eusocial behavior in halictine bees so rare, especially given the large number of halictine reversions from eusocial to solitary behavior? A communal transition between solitary to eusocial colony cycles is likely to be unstable and should disappear rapidly. As in any type of society based on mutualism, communal societies are open to cheating by nonegalitarian members. If dominance hierarchies associated with reproductive skew are formed, the colony ceases to be communal. This means that attempts by some individuals to dominate reproduction will tend to promote either the evolution of caste-based societies (eusocial or semisocial) or the founding of solitary colonies in which females can simply avoid cheaters, so communal, casteless societies would tend to be transient.”

Are squirrels social? Yes and No!

Social Animals in the Wikipedia

Throughout nature the choice of social arrangement is dependent on a myriad of factors, but some rules hold firm. No animal has a society that can operate at a deficit. If the bee hive is not sufficiently productive to support the bees, then the colony collapses. Individual bees may or may not survive, but those who do survive make alternate social arrangements. Communal living pays off only so long as individual members of the commune are well served by the communal arrangement. Situations that encourage pilfering are replaced by situations where pilfering is deterred. Unstable arrangements are transient. Stable arrangements tend to last.

Some animals are social and others are solitary. Some animals care for their young until maturity, and some do not. Many insects, fish, and reptiles tend to lay eggs and then disappear, leaving their young to fend to themselves. Most birds and mammals take responsibility for young, providing them with food and shelter until they are mature. In some species, males and females form partnerships for the rearing of young. In other species, care for offspring falls primarily on one of the sexes and not the other. Many social animals live in groups and have dominance hierarchies.

Most forms of communal living found in nature revolve around reproductive and rearing strategies, and partnerships between and among members are dissolved if they do not serve this purpose well.

Some species of squirrels live communally and others do not. Factors that help to determine whether resources are pooled or kept separate may include the size of the habitat, the availability of food, and overall population density.

The Size of Prairie Vole Social Units is dependent on population density — not food supply

Chimpanzees cooperate with non-kin

Surplus and the provisioning of young among chimpanzees

Chimpanzees are our closest relatives. They are self-aware and highly intelligent. They use tools to harvest ants and to break nuts open. They live in social groups, and they have dominance hierarchies that determine status within the group. However, chimpanzees maintain no food surplus, and hence they have no well-defined caste system, specialized roles or forced labor. For this reason, it is also impossible to enslave a chimpanzee. Chimpanzees can cooperate with humans, but only if they choose to, (It is impossible to force a chimpanzee to do something he does not wish to do over the long run.) The same is not true of human beings.

No matter how low the status of a chimpanzee within the group, he never gives in! He may submit to a more dominant male to avoid a physical beating, but he never agrees that this dominant individual is his true superior. His head is bloodied, but unbowed! When the Alpha is too busy to notice, lesser males mate with females they have been forbidden to touch.

Because of the resilience of each individual chimpanzee and the resistance that they offer to any long term domination, the dominance hierarchies never become a eusocial caste system. For this very same reason, no surplus can ever be accumulated by a group of chimpanzees. “Saving some for later” is not part of their psychology or their mode of life.

In the literature on chimpanzees, the word “surplus” does appear, but it’s not used to mean creating food stocks now for a later use. It’s more like the present disposition of “food that is too much for one person to eat”. Females who break nuts will provision their children with excess nuts. Occasionally, all the males go and hunt together, and some of the meat is shared with females in return for sexual favors. But these instances of social cooperation are occasional rather than habitual. By and large, every chimpanzee picks his own fruit and eats it. Those higher in rank get to pick more and better fruit, but no adult chimpanzee picks fruit for any other adult chimpanzee. Each individual is responsible for supporting himself.

Mothers and Hunter-gatherers

  • Our Mothers’ Backs
    My daughter and I are watching Moribito, a Japanese animated series about a woman warrior charged with protecting a prince of the royal blood from the Mikado’s assassins. Balsa, the warrior, and Chagum, the…

Human beings who live in hunter gatherer groups enjoy a similar freedom to that of the chimpanzee. Hunter gatherers must carry their own weight, and that of their dependent children, and hence the accumulation of a surplus, whether in the form of worldly goods or even just body fat, is highly curtailed. Each hunter-gatherer adult is responsible for himself, and women must carry their small children on their backs. While there is a spirit of benevolence, and women sometimes help to care for other women’s children, this type of mutual help is occasional and not habitual,and every child has a special attachment to its own mother.

Because there is no surplus in hunter-gatherer societies, there isn’t any social stratification. Yes, there are leaders, but these leaders rule by personal charisma alone, and nobody is required to follow. Each individual can make decisions about his own food gathering and live with the consequences. If he chooses to follow a leader, it is only because he believes the leader is right in that particular instance.

Agriculture and Social Stratification

  • Bread: The First Fast Food
    What is a fast food? It is one that tastes good, can be prepared easily, is readily accessible to all, and that has a considerable shelf life. What is a fast food? It is a shortcut to acquiring nutrition. It…

With the invention of agriculture, humanity underwent a very big social upheaval. Food could now be stockpiled, and this surplus led directly to extreme social stratification. A caste system arose in almost every pocket of early civilization:

  • farmers/laborers
  • merchants/scholars
  • warriors
  • kings

Social pyramids that were wide at the bottom and met at a single point at the top were the rule throughout early history in most “civilized” places across the globe.

The “middle class” that everybody is clamoring to belong to today is the second social stratum that I listed above. Clearly, not everybody can be middle class, and still have it be the “middle class”!

We can see that the socially stratified civilization that sprang up with the discovery of agriculture shares some of the features of the social organization of honey bees:

  • creation of a surplus
  • specialized roles or castes

Notably absent is the feature of collective reproduction. (Yes, there were eunuchs and harems, but that trend never really took off!)

Because the reproductive function of “civilized” humans is not all that different from the reproductive function of chimpanzees and hunter-gatherers, human beings never lost their individualist streak completely.

However, religion and philosophy attempted to make up for this by creating moralities that condemned indviduals who rebelled against the system. We were told not to be “selfish”, and the hope was that we would internalize this commandment. The text of Isaac Watts’ poem “Against Idleness and Mischief” is just one of many examples of indoctrination in eusocial ideals.

Explanation of How the Size of the Group Protected is Balanced against Resources

  • Liberty and Justice: Why, How and for Whom?
    The following essay was not written by me. I am merely giving it a new place to appear and a new readership. This is an essay that my father wrote and published in 1989. It helps explain why some people…

Just as the evolution of the social behavior of bees goes through cycles, human social organization also cycles. Free market ideals that found their way into practice in 18th century America allowed many Americans to revert to a way of life more like that of the hunter-gatherer without giving up their surplus. Small farms and shops were run by individuals and families and balanced their books separately from others. The founding fathers chose a loose confederacy of states over a centralized government, and everything was based on the idea that each individual had a choice as to how to spend his time and how to invest in the future.

(Yes, there was slavery and Native Americans were dispossessed in the process of settling the wilderness. I am not condoning these practices. However, for those people in the “in-group” — many of whom had been peasants and serfs in Europe — this was an opportunity to stop being a worker bee and become a solitary bee, instead.)

Social trends in the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries have brought everything back toward collectivization and the ideals of Isaac Watt. The cycle looks something like this:

individual effort ==> surplus/castes ==> individually held surplus ==>redistribution

No doubt the cycling isn’t over, and after the current fling with collectivization, survivors will move toward more individualized social structures. In the meanwhile, many are really baffled by the connection between the conditions that bring about the rise of collectivization and the reasons people suffer when eusocial ideals are the norm.

Whenever a particular socialist regime is held up as an example of the failure of socialism, proponents of socialism will reply that their ideals were violated by the regime, so it doesn’t really count. National Socialism in Germany? That was a fascist regime, and fascism isn’t socialism. Soviet Russia? That was communism, and communism isn’t really socialism.

If you ask what the difference is between an actual instantiation of socialist ideals and the historical examples that we have, you will be told that true socialism is egalitarian. In other words, true socialism is like a commune where everybody works, and everybody is a full partner.

Communes are inherently unstable, but some have survived and prospered despite the odds. In order to thrive, communes require strict control over membership. Various religious orders, and not a few collective farms and kibbutzim have managed to function successfully, by retaining the right to expel unproductive members and by allowing disgruntled members to leave freely, along with their share upon dissolution. These mechanisms of self-selection and forcible ejection can sometimes work in a small group to keep a commune on track.

These are not mechanisms that can easily  be put into effect when an entire country becomes socialist. When a citizen leaves, he can’t take his share of the country with him. Forcible ejection of people who disagree with the current regime is not an option practiced by democratic societies. When a country goes socialist, none of the mechanisms for keeping a commune economically viable are available.

It then follows that strict central government, together with a caste system, are always put into effect. It is not the fault of the particular regime that this is done. It’s the nature of reality.

The Spartan State

Often in discussions of the most suitable social organization, arguments against socialism are made by reliance on the failings that come from our very humanity. It’s human nature, we tend to think, that prevents all the communitarian utopian experiments to fail. As it turns out, the reason egalitarian communes are short-lived is not a matter of human nature, or bee nature, or the nature of any particular organism. It’s just nature. Period.

It doesn’t matter whether the organisms in question are self-aware mammals or the most primitive of insects. It’s got nothing to do with intelligence or self-denial.

Large communes where not all members know one another intimately are unstable, because they are too susceptible to cheating. In order to enforce any rules concerning sharing of resources, or maintaining standards of productivity, it is necessary for each commune member to have a veto in the acceptance of new members as partners. It is also necessary for each partner to be able to dissolve the union and take away his own share, in the event that being in the commune no longer serves his long term goals. When a commune is small, all of this is possible, and the knowledge that it can be done keeps all partners in check. But in a commune so large that most members do not know most other members, it is not practical to give each member a veto. A hierarchical organization with strong central control is required.

For this reason, solitary bees can prosper and eusocial bees can prosper, but communal bees who pool resources but do not have a queen or a caste system, tend to be only a transient phenomenon. For the same reason, monarchies and dictatorships, and Spartan city states can prosper, and nations with citizens who each balance their own books can prosper, but communes that are a great deal larger than a family have been remarkably short-lived.

© 2009 Aya Katz

Posted in Animals and Pets, economics, Marketplace and Trading, Politics and Philosophy | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Restatement of Commercial Chastity

This article was first published in the Inverted-A Horn in 2008.

Commercial Chastity Page 1
Commercial Chastity — Page 2
Commercial Chastity — Page 3
Commercial Chastity — Page 4
Commercial Chastity — 5
Commercial Chastity — 6
Commercial Chastity — 7

Commercial Chastity — 8
Commercial Chastity — 9

Commercial Chastity -10
Commercial Chastity — 11
Commercial Chastity — 12
Commercial Chastity — 13
Posted in Animals and Pets, Apes and Language, Opinion Pieces and Editorials | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Do Humans (or Chimps) have a Language Acquisition Device?

If you have the ability to use language, does this mean you have a LAD hardwired in your brain

When I started Project Bow, one of the purposes of showing that chimpanzees could learn language was to explore the question of the so-called language acquisition device. If a chimpanzee uses human language effectively to communicate, does this imply that there is a shared LAD between humans and chimpanzees? Or, alternatively, does it mean that neither chimpanzees nor humans have language hardwired in the brain. In the video below, I share two articles that address this issue.

Posted in Apes and Language | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Why Use Statistics When Probability Will Do?

There are 22 letters in the Hebreew alphabet — It is Finite

Last night I gave a presentation on Project Bow, an ape language research project, and what issues concerning rigorous proof were presented by spontaneous and non-replicable results.

My Presentation on Project Bow and the Issues of Proof

Modern scientific research, especially in the social sciences, relies on aggregated data which shows replicable, statistically significant results. Many of the researchers in the social sciences don’t actually understand statistics and use programs that do all the calculations for them. However, they are convinced that without statistics, nothing can be proven. They forget the rules of simple logic and finite mathematics. They deny that a single example can falsify a rule, or that an outcome that is greater than chance under probability might be enough to prove a point

When it comes to linguistic data, once we are able to agree on a phonemic inventory for a language, the data is finite. There is a finite number of combinations of the phonemes that are possible. If the data is written, calculating the probabilty of any given form being chosen should be very easy, and it does not require higher order statistics. If the likelihood of the choice is far greater than chance, replication may not be necessary. This way, we can judge that someone speaks our language after a limited exchange, rather than by requiring constant repetition.

The findings of the Neogrammarians about the relatedness of the IndoEuropean languages were based on the idea that the similarities in the roots of these languages could not be due to chance. No statistics were necessary to establish that proof.

This begs the question: why use statistics when probability will do?

Posted in Apes and Language, Language, Opinion Pieces and Editorials, Topics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

How We Judge Metrical Poetry: Inverted-A Horn Submissions Guidelines

Updated on February 12, 2012

Aya Katz profile image

Aya Katz  moreContact Author

Meter in Poetry — Wikipedia Article

The Inverted-A Horn Masthead
The Inverted-A Horn Masthead

How can you tell if something is good? In the case of poetry, aren’t all standards of evaluation strictly subjective? Don’t we all tend to think that what we write is good? Isn’t it all a matter of taste?

In the case of much of modern poetry that is not metrical, this may be true. However, metrical poetry involves both a technical and an artistic component, and while we may sometimes disagree concerning artistic evaluation, the technical part is fairly straightforward.

In this hub, I will explain what we at the Inverted-A Horn look for in poetry submissions. In the process we will discuss the idea of objective merit versus subjective preferences in the selection of poetry.

Objectivity

Having objective standards in a field of endeavor is something that usually elevates the prestige of the field and ensures competitive earnings for those who excel. Some areas in which it is relatively easy to establish objective standards of evaluation include: athletics, mathematics and music.

Objective standards are present when people are able to judge for themselves that others are considerably better than they are at a particular skill. For instance, I can’t stay deluded about my relative strength as a sprinter for very long. All I have to do is measure a course and clock my run to know that I am not in the running for any world record. This does not mean I can’t enjoy running, but it does mean that when someone other than me gets a gold medal, I will know that he deserves it, and that it was not all a matter of politics.

The same is true for mathematics. Since the rules of the game are well defined, we usually can tell for ourselves that someone else has solved a problem that we were not able to solve. (Except for a few cranks, mentioned in the link, most people have fairly realistic notions concerning their own mathematical abilities.)

In classical music, too, there is a certain level of objectivity. Many more people can intuitively appreciate good music than are able to produce it. Simply by judging their own output against that of someone who is more proficient, they can tell when they have been outclassed.

The state of objectivity in poetic evaluation was never as rigorously defined as are excellence in athletics, mathematics and music. However, there was a time when people enjoyed poetry recitation even though they were not poets themselves.They were able to judge the merit of a poem by the effect that it had on them when recited. There were even competitions to determine who had greater skill at recitation.

Just as with music, the effect of the meter and the substance of the poem were felt by its audience, and people could readily enjoy the experience of hearing a poem well recited, when they realized that they themselves were not capable of writing such a poem or even of reciting it to the same effect.

In those days, poets had the prestige of composers and reciters were given the same respect as musicians. Those days are long past. Here at The Inverted-A Horn, we are hoping for a revival.

What is meter?

Meter is composed of units called feet. In a metrical line, there will typically be a fixed number of feet and each foot will be composed of specific patterns formed by the arrangement of weak and strong syllables.

What makes a syllable weak or strong? This varies from language to language. Some languages are stress-based languages, like Modern English. In Modern English a stressed syllable is considered strong, and an unstressed syllable is considered weak. In Latin, which was a time-based language, the contrast was between long and short syllables. For the purposes of meter in Latin, a strong syllable was a long syllable. A weak syllable was a short syllable.

Each language has its own way of determining which syllable is weak or strong. The important thing in understanding meter is to note that there are two things that contrast with each other: a dot and a dash, a ying and a yang. It doesn’t matter so much what they are. Without the contrast, there could be no meter.

Independently of the definition of weak and strong syllables, which varies from language to language, we can define specific meters in the following way, using x to stand for a strong syllable and o to stand for a weak one.

In any specific meter, you will see recurring patterns of x and o, as in the following examples:

1) oox/oox/oox/

Read it out loud: “Dot dot dash/dot dot dash/ dot dot dash.” Or instead you could say: “duh duh dah!” for each three syllables.

2) ox/ox/ox Read it aloud: “Dot dash/ dot dash/ dot dash.” Or alternatively: “Duh dah“, for each two syllables. You can beat the meter out on the table as if it were a rhythm.

3) oxo/oxo/oxo/ Read it out loud: “dot dash dot/ dot dash dot/ dot dash dot.” This time the one in the middle is the strong one.

4) xo/xo/xo Now the strong syllable come first, followed by a weak one. “Dash dot/ dash dot/ dash dot.”

A single repetition of such patterns is called a metrical footAll The Fun’s In How You Say A Thing: An Explanation Of Meter & Versification Buy Now

Labels for Different Meters

The different types of metrical feet have traditional names:

1) ox (or a weak followed by a strong syllable) is an iamb, and when used as adjective is calle iambic.

2) oox (or two weak syllables followed by one strong) is an anapest, or an anapestic foot.

3) oxo (or strong syllable sandwiched between two weak ones) is called an amphibrach or amphibrachus.

4) xo (or a strong syllable followed by a weak one) is called a trochee, or trochaic foot.

5) xoo (or a strong syllable followed by two weak ones) is called a dactyl, or dactylic foot.

There are a few others that the books mention, such as spondee, which consists of two strong syllables together or a tribrach, which consists of three weak syllables in a row. When submitting poetry to us, avoid those kinds of feet. They tend to break up the meter.

Regular meter usually avoids two strong syllables side by side, nor does it tolerate having more than two weak syllables side by side before a strong one appears. Why? Because put two strong things together, and one of them will turn out to be stronger than the other. Put three weak ones together, and one of them will turn out to be not as weak, It’s human nature not to be able to tolerate that much uniformity. If you do manage it, then it will end up sounding like prose.

What does prose sound like? It is unmelodious. It violates the easiest flow of syllables. Prose does this, because there is a tension between metrical rules imposed in a word and metrical rules imposed on a phrase. In a multisyllabic word, two strong syllables will never be found side by side. In a multisyllabic word, more than two weak syllables will not go together. In a sentence or phrase, this does sometimes happen, because, for instance, a word ending in a strong syllable can be followed by a word starting with a strong syllable.The difference between poetry and prose is that prose has irregular meter. Prose doesn’t scan. 

We at Inverted-A don’t have a preference for any particular meter. As long as it is regular, any meter will do. Different poems can include regular combinations of specific numbers of particular feet in each line. For instance, we all have heard of iambic pentameter, which consists of five iambs per line.

Do you need to to know the name of your meter in order to submit poetry to Inverted-A? Absolutely not. Do you need to sit around counting weak versus strong syllables? Again, the answer is no. If you write metrical poetry instinctively, all that will take care of itself.

Why do I mention it then? If you submit a poem with perfect meter, there will be no scansion problem. (Your poem may still get rejected, because of content issues, but that’s a different story.) The only time we may end up talking about the meter is if there’s something wrong with it. In which case, it’s nice to have a vocabulary for discussing it.

Assigning Stress to Syllables in a Line of Modern English

The trick to metrical poetry is that it selects patterns that a language naturally has plenty of, but it just makes them a little more regular. Listening to poetry is like listening to someone talking — only more so! It’s an idealization of a regular pattern that is natural in a language.

In the case of monosyllabic words in English, here is a rule of thumb: in the average phrase or sentence the content words will get the stresses, while the grammatical words will not be stressed:

1) The man was not at home.

2) His phone was off the hook.

3) It’s good to feed the dog.

These are all simple sentences in Modern English that just naturally fall into iambic feet. There are many more such sentences, and this is why writing poetry in iambic feet is easy in English.

Words consisting of more than one syllable in English have a stress assigned to them on a word by word basis. That is, you have to be familiar with the word, to know where the stresses go. What makes things even more complicated, if you bother to notice, is that some English words are so long that a single stress in not enough. According to some theorists, these words have both a primary and a secondary stress. In addition to this, some words have syllables that are not only unstressed, they are actually reduced. For purposes of metrical poetry, though, there are only two kinds of syllables: weak and strong. A syllable with a stress, primary or secondary, is a stressed syllable, and therefore, strong. A syllable that is unstressed is weak. A reduced syllable is weak.

Here I will show you the meter of specific multisyllabic English words:

1) con-sti-tu-tion x-o-x-o

2) spin-ach x-o

3) re-port o-x

4) un-for-tu-nate-ly o-x-o-o-x

When stringing words together in a sentence or phrase, their internal metrical structure rarely gives way to the metrical demands of the phrase. That’s why choosing the right word to suit your meter — or the right meter to suit your word – is important.

In the following line from E. Shaun Russell’s poem, “State of the Union”, which appears in Inverted-A Horn # 28, the word “constitution” fits neatly into an iambic meter, as follows:

“In-voke/ your con/-sti-tu/-tion and/ feel proud

Most of the meter in this line flows naturally and there is no other way to read it except as a series of iambic feet. Can you identify the one foot where a metrical reading does not necessarily coincide with a natural one? It’s the one where the word “and” bears the stress. Because the meter in the rest of the line is so strong, it’s not hard for us to follow the stress pattern and stress “and”. Words like “and” do occasionally get stressed because of the context.(Example: “Do you want the water or the juice? I want the water and the juice.”)

Your metrical poem is most successful when the natural reading and the metrical reading coincide.

The Process of Selection

What happens when we start evaluating a poem at the Inverted-A Horn? The first thing we do is read it out loud, to see if it scans. It doesn’t matter what it looks like on the page. What matters is how it sounds.

Take this paragraph, for instance, which was written by Roy Moore and published as part of “The Ranchman” in Inverted-A Horn #13: “…The mountains rise purple with far off horizons. The sky overhead is blue, silver, and chrome. The valley is tranquil in sunlight and shadow. This is my heaven, this place I call home.”

Was that paragraph prose? No, because it scanned. You can tell something is a poem with your eyes closed. You’re not going to fool us into thinking a prose submission belongs in our poetry section by cutting it up into short lines. (We do publish prose, too!) Some of us are not looking at the paper. We’re listening to somebody else read it. We can tell if it scans.

Must a poem rhyme? No. We like rhymes, but they are optional, like the icing on a cake. We will not accept something that rhymes but doesn’t scan. We will accept it if it scans and doesn’t rhyme. But it has to be good!

Of course, what “good” is has its subjective side. That’s where personal taste comes in. About half the poems we get are rejected because they don’t scan at all. That decision is easy, because it’s completely objective. We then proceed to divide the rest of the poetry submissions into three piles:

1) Those that simply don’t move us, even if they do scan.

2) Those that move us but scan imperfectly.

3) Those that move us and also scan perfectly.

Here’s what happens: We reject the poems in the first group on substantive rather than formal grounds. We offer suggestions to correct the scansion of the poems in the second group. We accept without reservation the poems in the third group.

So what tends to move us? We like romantic/heroic poems. We don’t like to think of humanity as helpless and without redeeming value. We want to see beauty, but we’re not looking for trite sentiments. A poem can be sad and yet good. It can be lyrical, narrative or philosophical. We accept many different subjects.

If you want to get a better idea, send off for a sample issue of The Horn.

(c) 2009 Aya Katz 

Posted in Poetry | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment