Baby and the Bathwater

The May edition of the Walrus had two separate articles that I don't think were meant to be compared to each other but in fact are, at least in my mind, two sides of the same coin.

Lauren McKeon's article Here's Looking at No Kids discusses the growing number of women who are not having children. Some of those women are not able to have children, but there appears to be an increasing number of women who are making a conscious choice not to be mothers. The article discusses amongst other things the incredible pressure that women are placed under to have children and when they decide to not - how society can view that decision. When I first read the article it struck me that we are living in an extraordinary world where it can be recognized that all sorts of people and their very specific issues can be identified as being different and that they need special attention. It is a world where everyone has the right to feel discriminated against and to have those issues addressed. It struck me as I was reading McKeon's work that we, at least in the west, are at some risk of being so fragmented by our special needs that we will have almost nothing in common with each other.

The second article, Lonely Boys by Rachel Giese discusses the fact that young men (and older ones too) are more likely to be socially isolated and at risk of a whole range of mental and physical health ailments because of that isolation. She discusses the various factors that at some point around puberty encourage/force boys to separate from their best pals, that boys they may have been close to throughout their childhood - but no longer seem to be as important. Giese suggests that much of that separation is because society does not encourage or perhaps even allow young men to be close to each other. Giese further suggests that there was a time when men were allowed, by society, to have warm relationships with other men, that in the time of all male clubs, universities, service clubs and the military there was ample opportunity for men to develop strong relationships - relationships that could sustain them throughout their lives. And that as women started to demand access to those all male bastions of power and influence, men lost their places to develop relationships.

As I read those two articles it occurred to me that as we become more aware of individual special needs for growth and development, as we continually reject societies demands for us to conform - there is value in being careful that in making the changes, that we do not destroy the very institutions that have made it possible to survive as a species.

As well while some women are demanding that society cannot and should not expect them to follow the tradition that all women need to have children and that society must support that decision - at the same time men need to be able to demand a society that allows for and facilitates the growth of the male's capacity to develop relationships. And that may include male only institutions.

Depressing News

The Ford Motor company has announced that within a few years they will no longer be making sedans. The company is abandoning its Fiesta, Fusion and Taurus line of vehicles and will instead concentrate on pickup trucks and SUVs. Not  for the entire world, just for the United States (and presumably Canadian) markets. It can only be assumed that the other big American car producers (GM and Chrysler) will follow suit.

While I am not one of them, for anyone who follows the car market - this business decision is not a surprise. In fact the almost complete switch to larger vehicles is obvious to anyone who parks in a large box store parking lot. As a driver of a small car, I am constantly aware that that the majority of vehicles surrounding me are either trucks or SUVs. Consumers have for the past decade have been making the switch from sedans and cars to bigger, boxier vehicles, vehicles with big tires that are reputably safer (except of course if you are driving a smaller import and get hit by a SUV). It is clear that the American (and Canadian) markets are enamoured with the concept of driving something big. Not that most of them need to - they just want to.

This news is particularly discouraging in that in spite of the  general acceptance that global climate change is real and that the change is caused at least in part because of the amount of carbon that is released into the air; in spite of the fact that a significant percentage of the public list environmental concerns as being one of their top three concerns; in spite of the fact that there is a constant debate about how safe it is to transport oil, we are insisting on driving larger vehicles that consume more gas. As is so often the case, there is a large disconnect between what we say and what we do.

I can appreciate that pickup trucks and SUVs are far more fuel efficient than they use to be. I understand why all of that space is attractive. As I pack my car for market day, or have to rearrange the back of my car to ensure that I can get two booster seats into the back seat or wonder how I am going to get that 10 foot piece of fragile wood trim home - I think about how I would love to have a bigger vehicle. But I do not need one. What I need is a reliable vehicle that will meet most of my needs, most of the time. What I need is a vehicle that is fuel efficient all of the time.

There are some Canadians who argue that we need larger vehicles because we have to drive large distances (as compared to people in Europe or Asia), there are others who argue that we need to have big vehicles with all wheel drive because our weather conditions are terrible for so many months of the year. While the former argument has some limited validity, the reality for most people is that they do not drive those great distances all of the time; the latter argument's validity becomes questionable when it is made by those who live on Vancouver Island or by people whose chosen life styles occasionally force them to drive through harsh conditions (e.g. choosing to live in a  new house on a poorly maintained rural road and then saying you need to own a SUV).

 

According to Statistics Canada, 81% of Canadians live in urban areas. Why would one need a vehicle that is, at least supposedly, made for rough roads or carrying heavy loads? If car manufacturers have been able to fabricate more fuel efficient vehicles, that does not mean that we get to drive bigger cars.

As we sit and ponder the environmental fate of the world, as we are alarmed by the violent weather patterns that seem to be emerging, as we bemoan the irresponsible producers of oil - maybe we should drooling over the newest SUVs.