Is it me or would anyone else like to beat their mother to a pulp?

Well, clearly. Noted that the tabloids have already taken her to task for this statement.

I don't know what the answer is. Perhaps it is the mother's fault but even if she had been more vigilant or given the girls more education or discipline, what exactly could she have done? Locked her children in their rooms until they were 18? And what about the boys who fathered the children? They are just as irresponsible - what should their parents have done to prevent this?

Now whether that's a good or bad thing is another argument.

I may sound a little Nazi-like here, but I don't really care - before giving birth, you should be vetted - if you aren't deemed to be a suitable parent, then it's abortion time.

You sound a lot dick-like.

But fuck the mother! It's an extremely sad situation but I hate parents blaming schools for fucking everything...take some responsibilty.

Which one?

if there's anyone in this story who needs to be beaten to a pulp it's this boyfriend. does she get to rape his bank account for alimony? not that I think there'll be much there but whatevs.

also, did no one sit this girl down and tell her: T-Jay. Not a good name. Don't inflict it on your already godforsaken child.

ya-hah. so if it's "class," then why is it (britain* that is a disgrace, not the working classes of other countries? you talk about cultural differences as if they were unchangeable -- ie as if they were *natural* differences, which they are not. quite obviously the teenage birthrate is a national failure.

It's pathetic when poeple automatically pull out the "I blame ver Guvvermunt" line whenever something goes wrong in their own lives. Whatever happened to personal responsibility and a sense of fucking SHAME? That goes for the mother, the daughters and the errent fathers.

I don't think I did anything of the sort, N_RQ. I was saying that irrespective of the pragmatic value of early pregnancy, it's more culturally accepted amongst the working class in this country than the middle class. I can only talk about now. The fact that you think early pregnancy is a "disgrace" seems to indicate that you're the one who's got problems with cultural difference.

Let's be honest though, these arguments keep happening cos you think I'm some wooly anarchist dilettante and I think you're an unreconstructed Stalinist. P'raps we should aim for a rapprochement.

Why can there be no discussion about differences in cultural values? The gist of my argument was that people make pragmatic arguments based on their life experiences. The gist of your argument was that some people are stupid. I know which argument I prefer, and which I think is more authoritarian.

ex nihilo? no, they make choices 'based on' what they perceive as possible, and things like education and wider cultural phenomena, are involved here, substantially -- because these are part of that 'life experience'. what sort of society do we want? one which says 'sauve qui peut' -- and therefore abandons welfare payments -- or one we participate in and in which obvious idiocies like 12-year-old mums are kept to a minimum?

It must be fairly obvious anyway that early pregnancies have increased in the UK at the same time as sex education has increased/improved - don't suppose in 1955 there was a great deal of discussion of condoms in class. So at least in part the reasons for this rise must lie outside education.

hang on, is this true? thinking about it, although the working-class teen pregnanciy rate is higher, that doesn't mean it, any more than alcoholism or petty crime, is more 'acceptable'. certainly neither the grandmother nor the absent fathers seem to find it acceptable! and most working-class people, i think, would probably say dropping sprogs before you hit your teens is a poor move.

The idea that everybody's life will be immeasurably improved if they all go to university and broaden their horizons is laughable on so many levels it's not true.

I know! I mean, for chrissakes, T-Jay?!? How do you come up with that name?

I can understand she didn't realize her 12yr old kid was having sex, but from a certain age you have to sit down and talk about sex and anti-conception. One thing I wonder: can you put a 12 yr old (or even a 14 yr old) on the pill? Is that healthy?

The idea that everybody's life will be immeasurably improved if they all go to university and broaden their horizons is laughable on so many levels it's not true.

who said it would?

i mean, here you gotta ask: what does society want?

People are at least as great at calculating their best interests as they're bad at it.

which is a nice platitude anyone can use -- bush has, of course, used this to justify his tax cuts.

I'm sorry I don't have a set of concrete policies available for comparison - I was talking about things as they are, not proposing a Utopia. Utopias are by definition authoritarian.

this implies that proposing alternatives to things as they are is authoritarian, doesn't it? maybe i wasn't taught reading comprehension so well, but hey at least i evaded the iedological state apparatus that determines 'reproductive correctness' (ye gods).

anyway, this is having your cake and eating it. you are able to say i'm a stalinist authoritarian because i think x is bad; but at the same time you affirm nothing. if observing that society as a whole thinks teen pregnancy is A Bad Thing makes me authoritarian, so it goes. but i think that's what i observe.

you havn't actually argued againstmy point that acceptance of teen pregnancy is less prevalent among the working class than you think.

Having cake and not eating it seems pointless, unless you really like to look at cake.

How you can't see that a specific set of moral values are the product of a specific historical situation is beyond me. How can universal pronouncements ever escape the moment that produced them? Perhaps some people have access to a set of universal values denied to lesser beings.

um, what if they are? you're not affirming anything here. also this 'specific historical situation' is, well, not very specific is it now? and of course your linking this morality to capitalism is pure stalinist reflection theory.

Perhaps some people have access to a set of universal values denied to lesser beings.

no, it's more complex. societies, classes, evolve values; the most stalinist thing is to equate all values that are held with 'capitalism'. plenty of values are evolved in opposition to capitalism.

On a Utilitarian note, why doesn't the Paternal State just strive to remove the social disabilities that it thinks early parenthood brings?

well, i knew you were an idiot, but...

"So decrying teenage pregnancies becomes a reinforcement of the value systems that the teenage mothers are already rejecting by becoming pregnant."

this is tangled, isn't it? what value systems, specifically, are you referring to?

and above all, what gives you the right/ability to speak for these 'autonomous bodies'. none whatsofucking ever, unless you are a teenage mum. it is precisely *you* who is 'speaking across bodies' (omg i heart jargon!)

so speak for your own autonomous body first.

I said Universal values. I've tried to avoid the use of Capitalism, preferring to think in terms of Capital and concentrations of power. I made one passing reference to Stalin in a different context. He's dead, you know. Misreading is fun, also simplifies debate. You live in a specific historical situation, which is easier, I write a 20,000 word description or you stick your head out the window.

This is why I hate Old Labour more than New. Certainty in the service of evangelism.

"I've tried to avoid the use of Capitalism, preferring to think in terms of Capital and concentrations of power."

oh, zing!

"I don't trust the urge to educate"

well, i'm guessing you had the advantage of an education then.

If being pregnant at 13 fucks you up for life, why not at 17? or 47? Akshully kids don't stay at home for life, usually. Also, like I said above, the State could remove whatever disabilities are incurred by early pregnancy far more easily than preventing those pregnancies happening.

I don't think I'm a nihilist. Maybe somedays.

xpost

the media's OMG paedophiles contains part of your concern i think -- it's not *all* hot air.

It's interesting that the youngest one got pregnant first and then the older two did -- maybe they made some sort of pact?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1493556,00.html

"There is now good evidence in the US that with the right kind of emotional and practical support - for example, good access to education and childcare - teenage mothers can catch up by the age of 30 with the average outcomes for their age group - ie in comparison with women from all social-economic backgrounds."

wa-hey! you too can spend your teens and twenties 'catching up', because after all between having to bring up a child during your own adolescence and working as a shelf-stacker, there isn't all that much choice at all! *all* negative side-effects are other people's fault: you don't have enough money, people treat you a bit differently (hi, it's friday, can you come out? no) -- yes, teen pregnancy (or, fuck it, pre-teen pregnancy in this case) is such a clear in-itself virtue that the government is clearly in the wrong trying to discourage it.