A higher number of fathers cited their partner as the most important person in their life, whereas mothers were more likely to select their child. Mothers came out as the group that was "significantly happier with life than any other group...From this it could be inferred that children are the primary source of happiness for women rather than a partner."
40% of mothers and only 10% of fathers agreed with the statement "my partner wants to have sex more than I do" Dr Jacqui Gabb, a senior lecturer in social policy at the Open University, who led the study, said: "It does seem that women are getting a greater sense of happiness with their life from their children than fathers."
It appears people seem to require caffeine and validation from others
The Independent picked up on LGBTQ couple's happiness points, going with the headline "The key to a happy relationship? Be gay. Or childless. Or make tea." Whereas the Telegraph was more interested in the other high flying happy group, mothers "How mothers are the happiest people in Britain - and how a cup of tea is a bigger turn-on than sex." American site Jezebel went with "Sorry, Parents: Childless Couples Say They're Happier Together."
What does this say to me? That it appears people seem to require caffeine and validation from others.
Whether it be from a baby, a partner or the media. It often seems that more right wing media believes that conceiving and having a child is biology's ringing endorsement of your relationship. Which is why pregnancy and children can only make you happy. This of course leaves out single parents, child-free people and nurtures a habit of using the words 'mums' and 'women' interchangeably. Broadcasting the happiness of mothers is supportive of mothers and they need that.
More left leaning publications use the LGBTQ results as a show of the strength and foundations LGBTQ relationships are. Breaking down stereotypes of promiscuous gay men and hopefully contributing to the realisation that same sex couples are more than capable of creating a stable home for a child. LGBTQ relationships are so often ignored and the case studies concerning such couples found that younger LGBTQ people were nervous about showing affection in public. Publicising their happiness in relationships is supportive.
And the feminist blogs and columns? Well of course they've gone with the hook that child-free couples are apparently happier. It's a knee jerk reaction I understand. When your reproductive rights are constantly being chipped away at or put at risk because men in power don't seem to understand some women aren't maternal (or well enough, or rich enough, or realise you need a valid reason not to have a baby) it kind of puts you on edge. Particularly after 10 or more years of people thinking it is appropriate to assure you you will want a baby - in a year, tick tock. A mean smirk can cross your face when you see it is those without children who have the more rewarding relationships. This is not supportive. It is divisive.
Am I saying feminists are nothing but mean and barren? No, I am saying we often miss a trick and focus so much on women who say phrases such as "speaking as a mother..." we forget that while women and mums are not interchangeable words, mums are (identifying) women and there seems to be a habit of separating ourselves from them and therefore we both lose support.
I don't know what singles are supposed to glean from this. Improve your skills in making a brew?