File under brains?

Today I went to watch the Mr. give a lecture about brain evolution, and why he studies birds. I sat in the back of the room, and directly in front of me was a woman (early/mid 20s, I would guess) with her infant daughter. Although I generally don't appreciate children in college classes, this particular lecture was part of a series that is open to the general public, so I thought nothing of it. The baby babbled some, but did not pose a real distraction for me. Apparently, other people did not have the same experience. Eventually, a faculty member came up to the back of the room, sat next to the mother and whispered "It's being distracting." Although I more often than not refer to children as "it" rather than by gender, it seemed a bit rude, considering that she was already implying that the woman should leave.
The main thing that bothered me was what the whole situation implied. We expect women who get pregnant to continue the pregnancy. Women who proclaim to be childfree by choice are regularly told that they'll regret not having children; they are told they're being selfish; they are asked how they could deny their husbands; they are told that when they do get pregnant, they'll change their minds. We expect women to want children. We expect women to be overjoyed upon becoming pregnant. There is an entire store in my town dedicated solely to baby supplies. On the flip side, we don't talk about Abortion in anything but the abstract. We don't talk about abortion as a procedure that we or someone we love has had. We expect women who have abortions to feel guilt and remorse. We talk with condescending tones about women who "use abortion as birth control." By the way, who are these women? I've never met one. They must be rolling in dough with lots of free time, because abortions are neither cheap, nor are they easy to obtain in many areas. When we do talk about abortion, it's in reference to women who are victims (of rape, incest, health, socioeconomic standing, etc), and not as something that a woman simply chooses to do in order to end an unwanted pregnancy. That's not to say that all women made a difficult or easy choice, only that women make the decision to abort for a variety of reasons, and not all women regret making that choice.

And yet, when a woman does make the choice to continue a pregnancy and keep the baby (because lets' face it, adoption is not really a viable, socially appropriate choice for an adult woman to make; after all, women are supposed to want babies, to give up your child implies that you don't, which implies other characteristics, but I digress), we don't have enough options to help the woman and her child. For all anyone knows, this young woman was a single mother with relatively limited means, who's babysitter got sick. Or she may have a significant other who was not able to care for the child today, and there was no one else she could trust. I don't know her circumstances. All I do know is that this woman was trying to obtain an educational experience and was effectively denied, because her daughter babbled (rather quietly, I may add). How can anyone expect cycles to break if we don't offer some form of support for women without the option of a nanny? It's easy to say that she should have just stayed home, but where does that leave us? That woman should not have had to choose between caring for her child (today) and caring for her and her child's future by improving her education. What this situation really highlights is just that: everyday there are people who have to make the decision to better themselves or provide for care today. And that's just not right. We are all supposed to have equal access to education, but we are effectively denying a large portion of the population. Because they did what society deems "right," they also have to give up something extremely important. And how, in this day and age, can a parent truly care for their child without having the means to improve their own socioeconomic situation?

I don't know how to fix this. Obviously, tolerance and understanding part of the solution. The lecture was only an hour, including the question and answer portion (during which people left, which was far more distracting than the child was). While I generally abhor people who chat during classes or lectures, or text for that matter, this was a baby who was not aware of social etiquette. A little patience would have gone a long way. Should schools or other public venues be required to provide childcare, when hosting a public event? I don't know, though if I were a parent I don't think I would trust some stranger to watch my child. I do think that as long as childcare remains not only "woman's work," but also the work of one woman, there will be no easy solution. More community support may be another part of the answer. Either way, I don't think we can move forward in the world, or rather how the rest of the world views us, if we continue to follow the idea that everyone has to help themselves alone. We are a social creature, no one can support themselves in a vacuum.

This, of course, does not speak to the inequalities that many other people suffer, but it is a problem. To compare how much worse or better someone has it is not my point for this post. People are regularly denied education, health care, housing, food, etc. My point for this post has been to highlight this one situation. I plan to discuss other social issues as they come up on my radar, which is quite frequent. I planned to have a separate blog for my take on social and political issues, but since they are as much a part of my life as my other topics, it only makes sense to bring them here.