My childhood hasn't been rocked by the gentle affection of parental warmth. My parents were not demonstrative at all, not keen on touch, not warm, moreover I was rather lonely. As an adult I suffered a lot. I used to look longingly at the children hugged by their parents, telling to myself with much tears that I'll never know how it feels. Time passed by, I looked around me and now I don't have regrets about my lack of affection. I've always thought that affection was a good and magic balm. Not at all. It is above all a mean of expression, therefore it can be well used or misused. when misused, what happens? Toxic addiction for instance.
When parents kiss their children's cheek, what are their intentions? The intention changes the scope of the actions. For instance a person who shows a lot of affection for a child to compensate an unsatisfactory life, can damage the child by developing a relationship resembling a platonic incest. Experiences have taught me that the people who love their children more than their partner, drive them mad without even knowing it, for they are blinded by the flows of affection. In general, it seems that selfishness make the affection become toxic. In this case the parents only see their own desires and not the real needs of the child. The adult satisfies his own desires, without even realizing that his child may need something else at that time. As affection is always advertised as a positive thing, parents who act selfishly believe to have a beneficial behavior.
As for the child, he may develop an addiction toward this affection, while suffering from its toxicity. He learns to automatically solve all his problems with affection, without even seeking any appropriate solution, without even trying to identify them. An abused child can grow up to then become aware of the damages he has suffered from, because the violent acts perpetrated against him can clearly be identified. What about the child who has bathed in toxic affection? He only remembers apparently loving acts. How can he manage to identify the harm which was subtly hidden inside the soft attitudes? As an adult he may suffer from a kind of fuzzy uneasiness, even if his life seems to be externaly successful. Deep inside of him, his real needs torture him because they are never taken into account.
No, affection is not magic. When it is misused it can even be harmful. The intention is the real magic. Prior to the 60s, children's education was rather tyrannical. Since then, affection has become widespread in homes. A normal family must swims in a constant flow of positive emotions. This has given rise to quite varied phenomena, ranging from the king-child who requires every single desire to be immediately fullfilled, to the slave-child who can only stand positivity, collapsing at the slightest negativity. If the affection was unconditionally good, the Western world would be a paradise, because it would be mostly populated with blossoming people. But the consumer society reveals that excess, lack, or toxicity of affection, rather lead to frustration, requiring countless compensations. The discomfort of the school teachers shows that wanting absolute happiness for the children, is not necessarily the relevant option because rights must come along with duties. So what to do?
Maybe we should reconsider the way we see the children. Society tells us that children bring joy, purity, love, spontaneity, freshness, innocence... Plenty of good things they bring the Kidz. So people who have children expect pure happiness from them. All this is just pure fantasy. In fact a child is the result of an encounter between two gametes. In fact it creates a human which construction is in progress, someone who must accompanied toward adulthood. Among others, being an adult means to be able to make the right choices. So the main purpose in making a child should not be to please oneself or to please him but to ensure that he becomes able to assume his life in all circumstances.
I think it would be a good idea to decrease the emotional aura wich surrrounds childhood because it blurs the judgment, it conceals the real issue of a birth. A birth adds one more individual to the population. A birth is a commitment to oneself, to the child to the partner, to the society. Seeing one's child becoming more independent, strong, intelligent, clever, opened, smart, caring, generous... This should be the main source of joy for the parents. The rest is mere hopes and speculations, the rest should remain in the background and be seen as the icing on the cake.
In order to decrease the emotional aspect of parenthood, why not using artificial wombs to conceive the children? Yeah! Long live magic'brood! I think that this option would really be despicable. Despicable for the child because his learning begins in the womb. He learns from every move of his mother. A machine can not replicate the richness of a human life. The ectogenesis can only shrink the child, setting a 9 months delay before he can start to learn. The ectogenesis can only shock the child as he would suddenly shift from a dead tank to a living world. The natural womb allows him to gently learn through his mother, before discovering the world by himself. The transition is smoother.
The artificial womb would be depicable for the parents because the excessive comfort of the modern life brings childish attitudes among adults, by removing their responsibilities and exempting them from effort. A machine to lay babies? What a boon for the lazy, the cowards and snobs who want to get rid of the procreation's stress. Simply insert a few banknotes in magic'brood slot and wait for 9 months! It's easy, it's convenient, you don't have to change your life. Officially this machine is presented as an altruistic savior, intended to solve fertility problems but we know it is designed for the sole purpose of enriching its manufacturers. At first they will address to the infertile couples, then the homosexual populations and finally to all those who want to not disturb their little selfish lifestyle.
And according to me, this is precisely what's wrong. With selfishness, children are treated as mere objects for well-being and personal development purposes. Parents are supposed to give. They take instead, because they want to receive happiness. Many people expecting to be flooded with joy, end overwhelmed by the personal investment required by parenthood. This silly magic'brood would increase the level of selfishness and immaturity in the society. Currently the child is an object which must be obtained by making efforts. With an human foetus incubator, the child would become a consumming object like any other item that money can buy!!! That's a golden opportunity to freely cast more fantasies on the child.
- Your child in just 9 months. 100% satisfaction. 0% drawback. Satisfied or money back!
- Honey, can we take one?
- Wait, I check our bank account. Yes, it's good. Can you give me the credit card, please?
- Oh! Look. If we take 2, the 3rd one is free.
- Great! Let's order 1 blue eyed girl and 2 green eyed boys, to make a symmetrical set. Ok?
A little less selfish fantasies, a little less emotional expectations, a little more reflection, a little more awareness, a little more responsibility, a little more realism. It seems to me that this would be great for the parents because they would not face the disappointments of frustration, by seeing the child growing away from their fanciful projections. It seems to me that this would be great for the children, because it's already quite hard to build oneself physically, intellectually, emotionally and socially. If they must assume in addition the excess, the lack or the toxicity of the affection of those who are supposed to oversee their growth, their unfoldment is not harmonious, their futur adulthood will hold more torment that anything else.