Thinking
In my last post, I said there are things in society which I hope will be on the way to changing, as our son matures into adulthood. Fundamental to any change, is the art of thinking. In the modern world, we can access information from many sources. We have little time to absorb, let alone digest, the information which we encounter. And therein lies a problem. We don’t spend enough time thinking. Through avoiding thinking, we (consciously or otherwise) accept the status quo. Technology advances, and provides more information than ever before. Meanwhile, our critical minds stagnate, as we struggle to find time to think consciously. To understand what we really believe, and why. Indeed, we forget to try to understand basic concepts by thinking them through. In the process, momentum towards creating a more enlightened society is lost.
An example …. a few years ago, a twenty-something friend hurried towards me one morning, bursting to say something. “Em, do you know how milk is produced?” they asked. I was taken aback. Was this a trick question? Apparently not. My friend knew that most milk is produced by cows. What they hadn’t realised was that in order to lactate, a cow first has to become a mother. I don’t know why they suddenly thought about the milk production process. Perhaps in fact they just stumbled across the information. Either way, they had always accepted milk comes from cows and that was as far as they thought on the matter.
It is too broad a generalisation to suggest that we should all think more consciously. Some already do. But if a majority of people accept the way things are, or believe what they are told without challenging, change will take much longer. Take a 21st century family, for example. Two parents, one parent, parents of the same sex, children, no children, children with different parents … the permutations are many. And – rightly – as a society people are more accepting of the idea that there is no such thing as a ‘traditional’ family. Yet it is still common to see ‘mother and baby’ groups advertised, and to find baby changing facilities in women’s cloakrooms only. It surely shouldn’t take too much thought to realise that this set up excludes all male child carers.
And what of when we think of a woman’s position in society? Coverture might have been replaced by legal equality in marriage, yet some elements linger, even in the 21st century. For example, name changing on marriage dates back centuries, to a time when the man would ‘own’ the woman on marrying. This English custom never entered law. Yet the idea persists that it is something that a woman ought to do. An educated and open-minded friend once told me that it was illegal not to become ‘Mrs’ on marriage. They were extremely reluctant to hear anything to the contrary. The point is not whether it matters. It doesn’t. What matters is that people don’t question the origin of the custom but go along with what they think they are supposed to do. Those that break with tradition, by thinking and doing something contrary, are seen as ambitious, stubborn, rebellious.
Thinking of some of the changes which have happened in my lifetime, it seems incredible that they weren’t brought about years earlier. If people had only thought, or listened to those who did think, the changes might not have taken so long.
- Before the Sex Discrimination Act of 1975, any employer could fire a woman for becoming pregnant
- From 1984, mothers’ occupations were included on their child’s birth certificate
- Until a law came into force in 2005, unmarried or same sex couples were not allowed to adopt (and the UK is one of only 14 countries which permits same sex couples to adopt)
- Gay marriage was not made legal in the UK until 2013
- It wasn’t until 2018 that women could apply for any role (including combat roles with the special forces) in the armed forces
- In 2019, mothers’ names could appear on their children’s marriage certificates (the custom of only listing the fathers’ names dated back to 1837!)
- By the end of 2019, heterosexual couples will be able to enter a civil partnership (previously only available to same sex couples)
As our son grows, I hope he will learn to think consciously, and not just accept things because they have always been done a certain way. Thinkers are sometimes perceived as being awkward. By formulating their own thoughts, they also begin to raise questions, they might even reach conclusions of their own. Ones which differ from the accepted norms. The next step is to share their thoughts, and encourage others to think too. Here’s hoping for a new generation of thinkers and visionaries.
“Nothing limits achievement like small thinking; nothing expands possibilities like unleashed imagination.”
— William Arthur Ward
As always, a wonderfully written blog post. I’m grateful that I know you, you’ve challenged some of my ‘beliefs/brainwash’, and as a result, I feel that I know myself a little better. Your son will grow to be a very intelligent, thoughtful, well rounded person.
What a lovely comment, thank you. If our son grows up to be as sparky, intelligent, and soulful as your daughter, we will be very happy indeed x
Some of the legislation out there continues to surprise me. Unmarried friends told me that when they had their children (the youngest was born in 2009) the father couldn’t register their births on his own, and the mother had to be there too. Yet because I was married I didn’t have to struggle out of bed or add yet another thing to the long to do list, but could just let my husband potter off and do it on his own (which he did will all 3 of ours). I’m not sure if that’s been challenged in the past 10 years but it seemed terribly outdated!
That’s so outdated, I agree. Fathers of children whose births were registered before 1 December 2003 have no parental responsibility for their child(ren), even if the father’s name is on the certificate. In legal terms this means that they have no say over some of the major areas in the upbringing of their child(ren), unless there’s an agreement between the parents.
On another outdated ‘tradition’, something which made me smile wryly was the record that antiquarian, William Camden wrote, with some disdain, in 1605: “And yet in France and the Netherlands, the better sort of women will still retain their own name with their husbands… But I fear husbands will not like this note, for that some of their dames may be ambitiously over-pert and too forward to imitate it.” I guess that makes me ambitiously over-pert and forward!!