Reality Will Do That
Lifted from the comments, via pst314:
Ms Watson, now not so young herself, tells us,
The specifics of this pressure, allegedly pervasive, overpowering and entirely social in nature, are unclear. No examples are forthcoming. The physical realities of reproduction are, however, less mysterious.
The idea that Ms Watson, or likely anyone she knows, any of her multi-millionaire celebrity peers, is being pressured by others, by a brutal society, to get married and presumably have children – and that such hypothetical pressure constitutes “violence” – is, shall we say, difficult to believe.
It seems rather more likely that Ms Watson, 35, is, like many of her self-involved peers, struggling to process her own age-related anxieties. At 35, that fertility window is closing quite rapidly and options that have perhaps been taken for granted, or deferred as insufficiently fashionable, will soon expire.
As someone quips in reply,
Update, via the comments:
EmC adds,
Well, quite. I don’t follow these things closely, but my impression is that there’s a class dynamic in play. That, for some, getting married and having children during the window of optimal viability is now considered low-status, proletarian, somewhat déclassé, especially among women with progressive leanings.
As if this time were obviously better spent pursuing a statusful career and asserting some womanly empowerment, or, in Ms Watson’s case, indulging in activism of a faintly ludicrous kind and insisting that bewigged men are somehow women.
My impression of any social pressure, any class convention, is that it goes in a different direction to the one being claimed. At least among ladies of Ms Watson’s political persuasion. Readers may wish to speculate as to whether childlessness and middle-aged regret will also, in short order, be deemed “violence” and something to complain about during celebrity interviews.
And for some reason, this came to mind:
Something about the dynamic, perhaps.
Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.
Don’t think her ‘activism’ will be much of a consolation.
Well, I don’t wish to seem any meaner than is necessary, but I’m inclined to wonder whether childlessness and middle-aged regret will also, in short order, be deemed “violence” and something to complain about during celebrity interviews.
For some reason, this came to mind:
Something about the dynamic, perhaps.
I can’t take anyone seriously who misuses the word ‘violence’ like that.
Well, quite.
I don’t follow these things closely, but my impression is that there’s a class dynamic in play. That, for some, getting married and having children during the window of optimal viability is now considered low-status, as somewhat déclassé, especially among women with progressive leanings.
As if this time were obviously better spent pursuing a career or, in Ms Watson’s case, indulging in social-media activism of a faintly ludicrous kind and insisting that bewigged men are somehow women.
My impression of any social pressure is that it goes in a different direction than the one being claimed. At least among ladies of Ms Watson’s political persuasion.
[ Post updated. ]
And from the replies on X, this:
Not entirely inapt, I think.