Julie Bindel writes about child-free planes and trains (Child-free sections on planes is a good start. Now let’s sort out the trains, theguardian.com, 7 October). Yes, she’s a child-free feminist; she dissects the roots of oppression of women in our reproductive potential. However, this piece is neither feminist nor humane. She demonstrates that hostility and intolerance of children and mothers is the last remaining acceptable “ism”. Power relations are interesting – children are powerless, voiceless, dependent and immature. The advocacy of isolating and marginalising women and children. From a feminist. Thanks for that.
I wrote Liberating Motherhood to advocate for and speak to mothers, many of whom feel they are persona non grata in a culture in which care, dependency, love and nurture are seen as for wimps. Bindel might want to reflect on child-free spaces when she is old, incontinent and isolated, and railing at the kids playing in the street. But by then, maybe we will have ensured that our society is burdened by neither the sick, the young or the elderly. We reap what we sow. Let’s not sow such hatred and hostility to our little people.
Vanessa Olorenshaw
Sevenoaks, Kent
• Julie Bindel’s use of the phrase “unwanted children in care” is deeply inaccurate and offensive. Many children in care are desperately wanted by their parents, even if they cannot care for them safely. Many children in care are loved and wanted by their carers, friends and extended families. And for the children in care who have not been given the opportunity to form deep, reciprocal relationships – well, shame on the state for failing as a corporate parent. Carelessly branding children as unwanted only reinforces stigma and is never acceptable.
Anna Comboni
(Social worker), Hampton, Middlesex
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
.jpg?w=600)
