In Defense Of Girls

About the time Madeleine and Emily turned three I started getting questions about whether or not we would have a third baby. After several of these inquiries I noticed a trend. People want to know if we will try for another baby for the sole reason of having a son the next time around.

For about six months I have struggled to discern if this is simply people looking for balance, even if it is gender-balance in a family other than their own; or if it is rooted in subtle sexism. There are days I think people's motivation is pretty harmless and there are days I'm convinced it is sexism. The latter tends to come when I'm told things like "Till needs a son." "Despite what they say, all men secretly want a son." and "She is glad this baby is a boy, so she doesn't have to have another one." - and all of these pearls of wisdom were shared by people I put in the family and friends category.

In the interest of full disclosure, I know more women who have all daughters than women who have all sons. When I ask moms of sons if they are questioned about possibly trying for a girl they tell me - sometimes. When I ask mothers of daughters if they are asked about trying for a boy, they tell me - all the time. Maybe I'm not asking the right women, but it seems there is a trend. The assumption is, if you don't have a son, your family is not complete; sons are necessary, daughters are accessories.

We have never known the heartbreak of trying to get pregnant and having difficulty or the agony of miscarriage. We were blessed with a stress-free, uncomplicated pregnancy and delivery resulting in two completely healthy, full-term babies who left the hospital 36 hours after birth. Our daughters are, and will hopefully remain, healthy, bright, personable and feisty. Are they "less" because they are girls?

October 25th 2004 was the day we had the ultrasound that revealed gender. Honestly, I was hoping for a boy and a girl, simply because I thought it would be easier for each child to see him or herself as an individual, rather than part of "the twins" (a term we do not use), if something as basic as gender was different. My second choice was two girls, because I really wanted at least one daughter. I would have happily taken two boys, but I confess to a secret yearning for pink ribbons and tea parties. Baby A (Madeleine) was probably a girl (80% chance) and Baby B (Emily) was definitely a girl; and not modest. I was walking on air. October 26th 2004 I was in the staff room during lunch and someone asked if we had learned the babies' gender. When I said it was two girls, the first thing I was asked by another teacher was "Is your husband disappointed?" The answer - absolutely not, both babies are healthy and we are thrilled. It was about that time we quit referring to the babies as "the tenants" and started referring to them as "the Schreiber girls".

Over four years later, today, I was asked if we would be trying for a boy "next time" by a stranger at Target. First of all, there may very well not be a "next time", we kind of like having two kids - at least for now. Secondly, Emily and Madeleine were standing next to me when I was asked and they understood the question. Thankfully, they did not understand the implication that they are not enough, that they need a brother in the eyes of many, but they understood there was a question about a boy and if we were going to "try" for this prize that has thus far eluded us. This question is no longer a harmless question. This is no longer someone stepping on the toes of etiquette while prying into a stranger's life. This is a question that sends a message to my daughters that, for a reason that is not viable and is beyond their control, they are insufficient.

I know many people will feel I'm overreacting and my daughters have nothing to worry about. This is the United States; the nation of Susan B. Anthony, Clara Barton, Eleanor Roosevelt, Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinem, Sandra Day OConnor, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama; you can be anything you want to be in our society; women can have it all - career and family. And yet, recently I read an article stating some doctors are alarmed by more people turning to specific infertility treatments, not to become pregnant, but to choose the gender of the baby; most of these people desire sons.

Today President Obama signed The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act ( op-ed here). I watched his remarks following the signing. I watched him invoke the memory of his grandmother who hit the glass ceiling at the bank where she worked. He stated he signed the bill for her and "for my daughters, and all those who will come after us, because I want them to grow up in a nation that values their contributions, where there are no limits to their dreams and they have opportunities their mothers and grandmothers never could have imagined."

While it is wonderful this law is now law, why is it needed if we live in a country that values women as much as men? I don't have the answer. I do have the answer to the question of whether or not we are going to try for a boy - if we have a third child, it will be because we want another child, boy or girl, either would be welcomed with open arms. But, please, don't ask me about it in front of my daughters. Some day they will figure out the implication of the question and I'm not sure what to tell them.