I wonder if JD Vance thinks about what he says before he opens his mouth. In that respect, he and Trump complement each other. Neither of them really thinks before he speaks. That was a golden rule in my house growing up--think before you speak. Another rule was--if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. Both Vance and Trump could benefit from some introspection and reflection before they open their loud-mouthed traps.
Much has been made of Vance's comments about childless cat ladies running the country. My first thought after his utterance was--WHO? Who is he referring to? Politicians? Teachers? Family members? Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton, both powerful politicians, have children. Likewise Kathy Hochul, governor of New York State. In 2023, there were about 30% women in Congress; the overwhelming majority of Congressmen are men. Men run the USA, and that's true in pretty much any area of society you choose to look at. It's changed somewhat in scientific research and in the medical health field, thank God. So who is Vance referring to? Teachers? Grammar schools these days have many female lay teachers. Vance didn't grow up Catholic; he converted to Catholicism as an adult, so I doubt he meant Catholic school nuns, but in the rest of my post, I'll focus on them.
If Vance had grown up Catholic, he'd probably have attended a Catholic grammar school, which in my day was governed by nuns (it didn't matter if they were Carmelite, Dominican, or Sisters of Mercy nuns). They ran the schools, often with an iron hand. They were disciplinarians, but also remarkably educated women, many with masters and doctoral degrees, who imparted their love of knowledge to us, or at least to those of us who were interested in gaining an education. I remember my senior year high school advanced biology teacher--Sister Margaret Costa. She is directly responsible for my choosing to major in biology in college, after having worked independently in her lab for one year, studying fruit fly genetics, learning how calculate chromosome loci, and studying population genetics and evolution. She provided instruction and the necessary supplies, and then left us on our own to get the intended results. If you made a mistake, you could start your experiment over, as long as there was enough time to do so. If you made a mistake, you learned from it. She didn't chastise us for making mistakes. And that's important, because in laboratory work, you make mistakes. You learn from them and you can start over. That was high school. In grammar school, girls were encouraged to open their mouths, to answer questions, to debate, to speak in front of the class. The female lay teachers were nowhere near as interesting as the childless nuns. Many of the nuns seemed to love children, in contrast to the female lay teachers, who were often uncaring and sometimes even mean. And that brings me back to childless cat ladies. I don't know if the nuns kept cats in their convents. If they did, I'm sure the cats had wonderful and pampered lives, with plenty of affection and love.
Vance's assumption is that if you are childless, you don't understand family values or what children need, and that your childlessness makes you self-focused and selfish. He couldn't be more wrong. Just because you are childless does not mean you cannot or do not love children. It does not mean you cannot take care of children. It does not mean you don't value family life. I could not have my own children due to health problems when I was younger. But I have always enjoyed being around children. When I was a teenager, I worked at a daycare center for one summer, and loved it. I loved being around the kids, and several of them came to love me, one in particular. I will never forget him--Butch--who sought me out constantly so that he could sit in my lap. He felt protected by me, and of course when I was a teenager, I didn't understand that. I just knew that I felt great affection for him. He was an adopted child who later ended up on the wrong road and who died young. My heart twists with sadness when I remember him as a six-year old. When I was twelve years old, I started babysitting for the children in my neighborhood, and enjoyed that as well. And now I have a step-granddaughter whom I love. So it hurts when people say that childless women don't know how to raise children or how to care for them, or that they are selfish and not interested in promoting family values. It's simply not true. The nuns were childless (by choice of vocation) and were wonderful women, most of whom were good with children. If Vance has a problem with women like the nuns 'running the country' and being childless, he should push for changes in his church that allow priests and/or nuns to choose their vocation and to marry. But he won't.
One last point. Many women with children have done and are doing lousy jobs of raising them, usually because if they are married, they are married to men who are not committed to family life or their wives. The wives take out their frustrations on their children. I saw a lot of this when I was growing up in my neighborhood. Men who were fooling around on the side and barely saw their children because of their so-called important careers. Men who drank and abused their wives and children. Are these family values? Are you automatically enrolled in the 'family values' program simply because you have children? You are not. You shouldn't have children for the sake of having children or because peer pressure around you forces you to have children, or because your parents and siblings nag you to have children. You should have children because you are in a committed relationship, where both parties love children and put their interests ahead of their own. You should have children because you enjoy family life. And family life is often messy and unpredictable. I applaud many younger men who have prioritized family life at the expense of their careers. Vance should focus more on changing federal policies to make it easier for men to make these choices, such that women could again begin to rely on the men in their lives when children come along. As it is now, I don't see how high-powered Wall Street careers are conducive to anything but greed and more greed. They are certainly not conducive to family life. I always remember my brother, God rest his soul, who was fired from one of his Wall Street jobs because he wanted to spend more time with his children. He got his wish at the expense of his health and eventually his life. He never regretted his choice, and I got a chance to see how much he loved his kids. It's not just women who can love and take care of their children; men too do a great job too of raising children. Why don't we as a nation make it easier for both men and women to raise children? Why focus only on childless women? Why stigmatize a group in this way? Why is there so much unkindness and ignorance in politics, society, and the world?
