Bombshells and Baby Daddies: How Single Moms Are Destroying Kids and Society, Part 1
Former USC basketball star Brynn Cameron has just had baby number two out of wedlock with yet another sports star. Her first baby daddy was NFL quarterback Matt Leinart and the newest addition to her growing family is the child of the NBA's Blake Griffin. Cameron is neither married nor in a relationship with either sperm-donor. (Rumor has it the stars of the NHL are competing with the pros of the PGA to see who will be next in line for PDA with the leggy blonde.)
While Cameron may not be struggling as a single mother because of her reported $15k a month child support paycheck (from baby daddy #1), the money alone will not protect her children from her stupid choice to raise them without a partner. Worse, Cameron's lifestyle may seem attractive to her young fans, who will suffer far more harm than she if they follow in her ill-advised footsteps. Time and time again, statistics prove children raised in single-parent homes suffer compared to their peers in stable, married households. And yet, fauxminists still insist that single mothers are superior because they're fighting the patriarchy... or something equally unintelligent.
In an essay titled "The Increase in Single Mothers is Actually a Good Thing," Hugo Schwyzer claims that the rise in single motherhood is a result of women having babies with men they find inferior and thus not marriage material. Schwyzer uses an example of a woman whose "boyfriend was so dependent that she had to buy his cigarettes. Marrying him never entered her mind."
Perhaps having sex with him should never have entered her mind.
Why are today's women so stupid that they allow men they wouldn't trust to run errands deposit their DNA inside of them? Perhaps it's related to the lie from the progressive feminists that birth control works and there is such a thing as consequence-free sex. Here's a secret: It doesn't and there isn't.
Any woman who decides to have a baby without a husband (not a baby daddy or a guy who visits on the weekend) needs to understand she is making the choice to put her baby and society at risk for the unforgivable disadvantages of poverty, teen pregnancy, sexual abuse, a life of crime, and incarceration and suicide. The first part of this series will deal with the crippling scourge of poverty.
Forbes reported in 2011 that single motherhood and, more specifically, having multiple children with multiple fathers is a “key component to the net of disadvantage that many poor and uneducated women have every day.” According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
Single parent households are substantially more likely to have incomes below the poverty line.
And the numbers are escalating. NBC news reported that 28% of American women have at least two children with different fathers. Ann Coulter did extensive research on single motherhood and the cost to children and society in her book Guilty: Liberal "Victims" and Their Assault on America. In her heavily-annotated tome, she discovered shocking numbers.
From a 2008 study led by Georgia State University economist Benjamin Scafidi: single mothers are six times more likely to be in poverty than married families. More than 80 percent of homeless families are led by single mothers. Not surprisingly, unmarried women with children are much more likely to use government programs that cost taxpayers billions. According to Scafidi's research only 16% of married couples receive food stamps while 42% of single mothers collect them. The government has replaced the role of the husband in many of these women's lives. Had they chosen marriage instead, the numbers would be drastically different. Pro-single-mother feminists do a disservice to women when they tell them they are better off without a man. Says feminasty site Jezebel (hilariously named after the famous whore queen who was so evil she was shoved out of a window and eaten by dogs):
It's not that men are less economically viable than they were in the past — it's that even poor women want more from a marriage than a lifetime union with a good provider. Rising rates of illegitimacy, in other words, may signify that more and more women can afford to be choosy. ... In that light, rising rates of single motherhood reflect undeniable progress for women.
In what bat-guano crazy world are food stamps and poverty "progress"? I would bet that the majority of the women living in poverty and raising a child alone on food stamps would settle immediately for a "good provider" if one could be found. The problem is women have lowered their worth in the eyes of men so dramatically by playing the whore and having babies (or destroying them through abortion) outside the lawful constraints of marriage that men no longer feel honor-bound to support them. When 1 in 5 women have multiple baby daddies, why not let the next guy take care of her? Or why not let her do it on her own? After all, a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, or so we've been told.
I'm sure my detractors will say I am letting men off the hook by not addressing absent fathers, but the truth is this is a female-centered problem. Ladies, stop having sex with unsuitable men. Women have the power to turn this situation around simply by saying, "No." If you truly believe it's your body and your choice, then choose to be wise about the decisions you make with that body. Don't get into the sack with anyone who isn't 100% committed to you and having a family because sex leads to babies. Whether or not there is birth control involved, nature will eventually win! Don't have sex with anyone who wouldn't be a good father and husband. Problem solved.
Others will say I am denigrating all single mothers, some of whom have done well and raised decent kids. This is a falsehood. There are some children who make it out of a single-parent situation in spite of their circumstance, but let's not be blinded by anecdotal evidence which would never hold up in any study. The numbers don't lie, and children of single-parented (especially female-headed) homes are at a much bigger disadvantage than children of intact families. The push on the part of our culture to elevate "alternative" families is dangerous to the economic well-being of children and to our society, which is already facing economic crisis. The studies prove that marriage drastically decreases poverty levels, so why aren't the extremely wealthy and privileged ladies on The View, who say they care about poor people, agreeing with Ann Coulter and the indisputable facts of what single-motherhood does to children?
Along with marriage, adoption is another excellent solution to this problem. Statistically, adopted children do as well or better than children in biological, intact families. Adoption fights poverty! The bravest, kindest thing that can ever be done for a child who is conceived in error is to gift that child with a loving, intact family. Society has a stake in the promotion of marriage for the raising of healthy children. It is an institution with clear benefits to everyone, and any deviation from this tested and successful method of advancing the culture should not be embraced or heralded as good but shamed and exposed as the blight it is.