The point is it shouldn't be of interest to anybody but a woman and her fast shrivelling ovaries. If she has a partner then it also becomes their business. A woman, whether in the public eye or not, does not owe the general public or media any kind of womb-watch or fertility status updates.
Katherine McPhee of Smash (and no doubt other credits) fame is the latest woman celebrity to undergo a grilling about her vacant uterus. And instead of telling us all where to go (to our TVs! To watch Smash!) McPhee offers an explanation: "I once thought that by now I'd have lots of children, but actually I'm really enjoying being able to go from point A to point B and the only worry I have is have my dogs been walked” Oh, OK, that sounds sensible, we shan't ask again, so long as we know you're thinking about it. But just in case that explanation is not enough McPhee has a confession: “I'm selfish right now, but that's how and where I should be. The thing is, work is the thing I love the most."
YEAH, selfish. There's no other way to describe it. I can't believe a successful woman would want to get established on the scene she loves and earns a wage from when there are unborn babies! Waiting to get borned!
YAWN, when are you going to hurry up and have a baby?
After the seemingly mandatory question of 'what was your diet and work out routine for this role?' for all young film actresses it seems very important at a press conference to ask about the content of their womb and when they plan for it to be occupied. Surely this is tantamount to asking for a schedule of the menstrual cycle of the leading actress.
What would happen if, instead of shamefully claiming selfishness, or saying how busy they are with work, or declaring their new album/film/project their baby the woman questioned simply said “I don't know” or even “I don't want children”.
Nothing? A host of other women saying 'me neither' perhaps? Maybe this would halt the never-ending pity articles about poor millionaire star Jennifer Aniston who is yet to procreate or adopt from foreign lands? Or is the reason so many women in the public eye are oddly apologetic about their lack of broodiness/brood because they know how they will be met with heaps of articles not just concerned about what the childless are missing out on, but offended by their choice not to contribute to the populace.
For instance in November the DM pounced upon some women who had been vocal about their choice not to have children. They fact they were vocal about it because the DM asked them is neither here nor there: “Blessed with both brains and extraordinary drive, she already has plenty to show for her hard work...There is just one asset she cannot lay claim to: Louise, 34, doesn’t have children. There are no tiny feet running around her impressive...home; no bedtime stories to make her smile or loving cuddles given with abandon. Yet being childless doesn’t make Louise feel incomplete.”
The implication being...it should and clearly there's something odd about Louise, 34. Louise, 34's reasons for not having children – she's too busy building her business and would resent the presence of children – are “explosive and highly contentious sentiments.”
Louise, 34 and Katherine McPhee, 28 haven't had children, instead they've had to give birth to various excuses as to why they haven't. All of their actions will be interpreted as something to fill the void of a childless life. As the DM knows that being childless leaves a woman “incomplete”. Until you have children you don't know the joy of tiny feet on floors (also if big feet run in the family you won't know this joy), hugs, you also can't read aloud come evening apparently.
I will leave you with F1Kate's sad observation about choosing not to give birth: “Until you give birth you will never combine 23 of your chromosomes with 23 of someone else's...”