A couple of law professors eventually slip a little affordable family formation heresy into Slate's XX after the usual Bad White Man verbiage:I suspect this is giving Lily considerably more credit for her ability to link cause-and-effect than is justified. Here she is, literally in tears over her inability to get to her two jobs that she isn't going to be able to work effectively when the child arrives, but she's insisting that she can support herself.
Just Say No
For white working-class women, it makes sense to stay single mothers.
By Naomi Cahn and June Carbone
The following is based on Marriage Markets: How Inequality Is Remaking the American Family, out in May 2014 from Oxford University Press.
Lily had grown up in a rural town, more than an hour from Kansas City, Mo. She was four months pregnant and not feeling well, and she was in tears. She was also not married, but that’s not what was upsetting her. The car that she needed to get to her two jobs in the city had broken down, and she had no other way to get to work. We asked whether her boyfriend, Carl, could help her. Lily frowned. She had recently broken up with Carl, she explained, because “I can support myself. I always have. I can support myself and our kid. I just can’t support myself, the kid, and him.”
You know, Lily, if Carl is such a loser that you don't want to marry him, why did you want 50% of your child's genes to be his? Are you really that convinced that your 50% are going to be so awesome that your kid won't wind up a loser?
So, instead of having Carl work while Lili stays home and raises the child, the Brave New Society of Bastards has Lili trying to simultaneously work and raise the child alone, while Carl spends his time living off the government while pursuing his next Lili.
This should be sustainable.