over the past few days, a new “movement” has been brewing, almost to critical proportions. the “no wedding, no womb” discussion seems to call for (based on what i’ve read here) an end to single parenthood, and what seems to be specifically mother hood, in the black community. their premise is the “idea that a two-parent household is better than a single, struggling one.” it calls for accountability in child bearing, and sexual responsibility. ok. i can get with that. i mean, raising children IS a huge responsibility, not to be taken lightly, and who doesn’t love the ability to make sexual reproduction choices? that’s what reproductive justice is about, right?
i’ve read numerous articles by various contributors to this blogging movement. It might be impossible to read them all, there are probably a hundred of them at this point- all with slightly different viewpoints, and stories to share. each one is valuable in their own way, and there is no arguing with people’s personal experiences– so i won’t. full stop. i have also had numerous conversations with people who vehemently disagree with this movement’s theory and solutions to what may be a very real issue, worth discussing. I might even venture to say that many of us disagree about the very root of the problem.
i guess i shouldn’t really be so worked up about this conversation- it is very clear that no matter what i do, I will ultimately be a dysfunctional parent. no matter how much love, safety, affection, attention, resources i give my children and no matter how much healthy, happy, stable, well-adjusted community they have, they will underachieve because…they won’t have a father [in their very traditional sense of the word]. it seems, based on the information page i have read, that this campaign is targeted to mothers who co-parent with men. only. wait. maybe i can’t get with this.
But NWNW doesn’t NECESSARILY equate to marriage, per se, but commitment–a lifelong partnership between mother and father. Both are “married” to the idea that a two-parent household is better than a single, struggling one.
now, based on this definition of what constitutes “good parenting,” I completely fall out of the norms of what society and NWNW deems as healthy for children. i am so glad that it does at least mention that marriage isn’t the only option for raising children. but I am so curious about why the idea of a two-parent home is better. maybe there is an assumption that being a single parent always means a struggle. or that being single means “alone” or “without any support networks.”
also, they have made their stance on sexuality and gender pretty clear [from most of the blogs I have read]. only men can raise boys [to do manly things, of course, like throw footballs, and such]. i was also perusing, and found this little nugget of a comment, written by the founder of the #nwnw movement herself, regarding her post “funny friday: funny excuses to have kids with no daddy.” i wonder if being a lesbian couple in a long-term, committed relationship and adopting children is a funny excuse to have kids with no daddy. needless to say, i did not find this comment by her funny. at all.
Oh OH! I got another one: Having a baby with two parents is SO “heteronomative!” (Da hay-ll does that mean anyway? Should we all be “heteroABNORMATIVE?” WTF with a dash of What the CUSS and OMG. The world has gone MAD!)
so, if the person who created this “movement” cannot even be bothered to read a queer theory book to find out what heteronormative means, and thinks that challenging heteronormativity is mad, and hasn’t asked about LGBTQ parenting experiences in a meaningful [and not comedic or condescending] way, I will go ahead and assume that my voice, as a queer, black woman, who will potentially mother, has fabulous support networks and resources, is not valued in this conversation. not to mention that even for those lgbtq folks who want to get married, for many of us, marriage is not even an option.
there are so many times that we as black women are excluded from movements, but it is especially damaging for our communities to not consistently challenge patriarchy, gender expectations and class issues. i believe that we all have a stake in the health and safety of our children. i also believe that the concept of family, for most people of color is so much bigger than a marriage license or institution can hold. and who’s to say that’s less valid? as an afro-latino, who grew up with afro-latino and afro-carribean neighbors, i knew how important extended family was and is to many black folks from all over the diaspora. some of us are living with our mothers, (and fathers), grandparents, and an aunt or two. it is not uncommon in other parts of the world, to live it different types of family unit models than the one NWNW is suggesting.
how do we undo the ideas that an “institution” is going to make us better parents to our children? how do we create community responsibility in child nurturing that fall outside of institutions that often, are not in place to keep us safe and protected [just look at black incarceration rates]. how do we get past the idea that the ideal family consists of one “man” and one “woman” and move towards goals like “children have the right to good books and lives free of street harassment and sexual abuse?”
i mean, if we want to keep our children safe, maybe we should be talking about the fact that 40% of our little black girls will be sexually abused before they turn 18 [and all of the emotionally, psychological damage that can do to a child- especially when she is not believed], often by a father, or father figure. maybe we should be talking about the school to prison pipeline. or talking about domestic violence, and the fact that black women are killed three times more often by a spouse than white women. we’d talk about lack of affordable childcare, fair wages, fair housing, sexual education, sti and pregnancy prevention.
you see, there’s so much more that our community needs. we don’t need another slap on the wrist as black women. “women, keep your legs closed” rhetoric is so patriarchal, and dated. and frankly, I’m tired of the shaming, and tired of having other folks make demands on my womb. i mean, there was [and is] slavery, forced sterilization in puerto rico, anti-abortion laws, rape, sterilization of women with disabilities. no one has the right to tell me what kind of body is ok for pro-creation, and what kind of bank account, educational level or house size is worthy of child rearing. let’s talk about radical love instead. i reject the myth that queer families are not fit to love and care for children. I reject that idea that a two-parent model is the the only way we as black folks create loving families.
i care deeply about black children. i’m not saying that our children don’t need loving supports. i agree that black mothers cannot do it all by themselves. i’m through with being a strong black woman. we don’t have to be strong black women. but what i am suggesting, is that i, in fact, am my sister’s keeper. i have worked at rape crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, homeless shelters, all in love for, and solidarity with black [and brown and queer, and low income] women, and their [our] children. i care so much about us, that I believe it takes more than two parents– more specifically, one man and one woman to raise a child. it takes a loving, safe village to raise our children.

this is by far the best criticism of the nwnw movement i’ve read so far. i read blogs by several authors who participated in the movement and though most of them had excellent things to say i find that i do not agree with the core of #nwnw itself because of some of the reasons you’ve outlined here.
thanks for this!
Excellent.
I’m laughing that we had the same thoughts, but then again that’s why we are sister friends! Great review and wonderful points.
oh yeah… here’s my blog-response: http://focsimama.wordpress.com/2010/09/29/no-wedding-no-womb-no-way/
I do agree that it takes a village, which is why I was so blessed to have friends and their families to be extended family for my kids.
Now, I don’t mind that my blog was linked to in this post, but keep it in context. I’m a bit puzzled that the one thing you took away from my post was “only men can raise boys [to do manly things, of course, like throw footballs, and such” ? Why? Did you miss my point that so lines up with your own? That I had friends and their husbands to do ALL KINDS of things with BOTH my son AND daughter? How is attending a play and graduation a ‘manly thing’ that only men can do?
I stand by my statement that I can’t teach my son to be something I don’t have any experience with – and that is being a man. Luckily he has other good influences for that.
I can throw a football with the best of them, played soccer with my kids, raced them both until they got old enough to finally beat me in a 100 yd dash…but for my son, what do those things have to do with BEING a man? How do these things help him recognize and handle ‘manly’ things, such as dealing with his difference in emotional needs. Men are different from women and have different needs, emotionally and physically. Period. There is no getting around that fact.
Do I think that one man and one woman is all it takes to raise a child? Nope. But it’s a hell of a lot better start than just a woman by herself.
Recommend: His Needs, Her Needs by Willard F. Harley
Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, by John Gray
hi tj.
i never said that the only thing i took from your blog was “only men can raise boys [to do manly things, of course, like throw footballs, and such].”
what i said was: they have made their stance on sexuality and gender pretty clear [from most of the blogs I have read]. <– that included yours.
so, while i was not doing a literature review, or even an analysis to tear your blog apart, or to discuss all of the points of your blog, what i was analyzing, was the way that i have seen most of the authors of #nwnw "support blogs" address gender.
here's where we differ. from what i'm reading here [I stand by my statement that I can’t teach my son to be something I don’t have any experience with – and that is being a man] it seems like you believe boys and girls should be raised differently. please correct me if i'm misunderstanding your words. but it seems like you are suggesting that boys are raised in one way, girls in another, and only the parent with the matching gender can teach a child about adulthood.
while i might venture to agree that it can be important to teach male-identified children, and children who want to do things traditionally assigned as "male" some things in different ways than girls (discussion about male privilege), i don't think the general lessons have to be different at all. for example. we should teach all children about sexual violence, from a young age. however, usually, we don't talk to boys about how they can prevent violence, and be good allies to girls– even though we know that boys and men are the only ones who can actually prevent violence from happening. instead, we teach girls to "not be fast." how much violence might we prevent, if we had these conversations with boys and girls?
i disagree that only "men" can raise "boys" based on emotional needs. i think boys have different emotional needs based more on socializing than on biology. there is some research to prove that biology of physical needs may be different, but most of the emotional behavior and gender roles/expectation of boys vs girls is completely cultural (and varies in different cultures), and social. i think that ignoring the socializing aspect leaves out complexities of gender and sexuality. now, as i said in my post, i'm not arguing with your lived experience, i'm stating why #nwnw could not work for me.
here’s more about gender socialization- it’s not a scholarly (master’s or phd peer-reviewed) article. but think it’s a good reference for what i was describing. http://bit.ly/c9uXh2
Thank you for adding your voice. It was appreciated. I am so sad about this “movement” and that it is orchestrated by a black woman who is gaining celebrity from condemning women who look like she. This is the tragedy of this all.
http://ka-cwritingportfolio.blogspot.com/2010/09/no-wedding-no-womb-is-not-and-can-not.html
I’m a white adoptive mother of two Black girls. Both were born to (different) mothers who had A) no choice about whether or not they were having sex and B) no access to basic reproductive health care.
Now, I love my babies and I’m glad I get to raise them, but I hold that in tension with hating a world that hates them and their first mothers.
How about “no basic reproductive health care, no government dollars?” (since one of my kids’ first mothers was denied BC by the Catholic hospital medicaid sent her to). How about “no tolerance for sexual predators on young Black girls and women” (both my kids’ mothers take sexual assault for granted in a girl’s life). How about “no adoption — esp. by ‘strangers’ — until single moms are given the financial and social support they need to raise their own children?”
[...] It takes a village- We see the fallout of thinking that children are the individual responsibility of their parents in #NWNW own posts. In the greatest of ironies, the founder said the crisis of black fatherlessness was responsible for Eddie Long’s indiscretions as opposed to reading his marriage and patriarchal power as an enabler of his behavior and the reason that people thought he was safe. Surely a married, wealthy, pastor with kids who does good things in the community can’t hurt these boys. We remain attached to the myth of the predator “out there” as opposed to examining the conditions that create the power imbalances that cultivate abuse. How might this situation have played out differently if everyone thought of those boys as their “spiritual sons?” What would it mean for all adults to feel accountable to all children in their community? Would individual fathers who weren’t present matter? As is evident in cultures around the world, the primacy of biological parents is not a given. There are a myriad of traditions of child rearing that don’t center biological/nuclear parenting and the kids are more than all right. Two people, man and woman, even with rings need resources to raise children and to ignore that as well as the accompanying hypermasculine gender expectations for black men in those structures is to miss the issue all together. Perhaps black folks’ ambivalence about marriage signals problems with the institution itself and not with black people. [...]