Women deserve more than the Meghan Markle treatment
RAMPANT speculation about a woman’s procreation timetable is the very height of rudeness, writes Katy Hall.
Rendezview
Don't miss out on the headlines from Rendezview. Followed categories will be added to My News.
AFTER months of speculation, anticipation and strategically planned outfits, the world has been gifted with the sweet relief that comes from knowing that the Duchess of Sussex is finally pregnant.
It may have taken her five long months of marriage, but we got there eventually.
Seriously, is this what women still have to look forward to?
Large lunches being speculated on as early bumps, any ailment read as a sign of morning sickness, a floaty blouse considered to be an attempt to hide the news? Good to know we’ve come so far and yet remained so close to the deeply sexist belief that the most important thing a woman can do — even in 2018 — is procreate.
For Meghan Markle, the question of when she hoped to transform into a radiant, expectant mother began even before she made it down the aisle. Because, let’s not forget, she’s 37. And in case she somehow missed that fact (and every article ever written about women’s fertility odds), a large portion of the world decided to remind her that the race should be very much on from the minute Prince Harry slid his custom-designed diamond ring onto her finger. Tick tock and all that.
For the average woman living outside of the spotlight, you’d think (and hope) that such expectations would be a little different, but alas, it seems not. Now, if you boast a freshly-signed marriage certificate, at least one good ovary, and are over the age of 30, your reproductive plans are a fair topic of discussion around the table.
“I didn’t even get a few months off before the questions started piling on,” a friend married last August told me this week. “It began at the reception and has been incessant since. Last week some friends of my husband brought a box of their old baby clothes to the pub and gave them to me in front of everyone while I was sinking a pint. It was so awkward.”
It’s a story I’ve heard over and over again from so many women.
From colleagues initiating an inquisition the day a woman returns from her honeymoon, to meddling in-laws offering day care services, siblings who like the idea of having children aged closely together, and friends who are just downright nosy, it’s a question that starts 24 hours before a woman’s white gown is donned and doesn’t seem to stop until you’re well over 40 and into “IVF is no longer a viable option” territory. Don’t believe me? Look at Kylie Minogue and Jennifer Aniston.
Interestingly, this line of questioning doesn’t seem to apply to men anywhere near as frequently, despite new evidence showing they also have a biological clock of their own ticking away.
Of course, there’s nothing wrong with wanting to have children — and being open about the fact as both the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been — soon after being married. Lots of people feel the same way and follow a similar time frame. And good for them, I say. But short of you being a professional breeder, everyone should be free to make their own timeline choices away from the prying eyes and suggestions of outsiders.
The question of “when” simply shouldn’t be one that we’re still asking women when it comes to having children. God knows there are have far more interesting things to be talking about right now.
Like the environmental catastrophe currently threatening our planet, or the children who are already in the world and living in detention on Nauru, or the viability of nuclear power. Hell, it doesn’t even have to be that big. Asking someone about their next holiday would do the trick. So long as it’s anything but “when”.
Katy Hall is a RendezView writer and producer.
Originally published as Women deserve more than the Meghan Markle treatment