A reader a href=”http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/minette_marrin/article7052537.ece”sends in this article/a from span style=”font-style:italic;”Times Online/span about the new generations of male-free homes:br /br /blockquoteAre men surplus to requirements? The answer, after more than half a century of feminism and the welfare state, depends largely on class. Men from the employable and educated classes are still in strong demand among women. But much lower down the socioeconomic scale, among the least privileged, men have become — or have come to seem — entirely optional. br /br /As many of these women become grandmothers, a new pattern has emerged of three generations of mothers without a man in the house — lone granny, lone mum and fatherless children, all expecting the state to stand in for daddy, as of right. These women are not so much welfare queens as matriarchal dynasties of welfare Amazons…br /br /The culture is passed on, as you might expect. Lone grannies are significantly more likely to have lone and workless daughters than grannies with husbands or employment, and the same is true of their daughters’ daughters. Baby daughters (and baby sons, too) are imbibing with their mother’s milk the idea that men, like jobs, are largely unnecessary in any serious sense.br /br /The problem with this new type of extended family, Dench says, is that it is not self-sustaining but tends to be parasitic on conventional families in the rest of society. In fact, it appears to lead inexorably to the nightmare of an unproductive dependent underclass. /blockquotebr /br /Nightmare for the poor and for the conventional families who support them but perhaps a boondoggle for the political class. Isn’t this what socialism is all about?
"These women are not so much welfare queens as matriarchal dynasties..."