Keep your damn money, but at least admit you're an asshole.

In my last post, I gave some examples of arguments against Shanesha Taylor's position. One of those examples was that she shouldn't have had kids if she couldn't afford them in the first place. I have been reflecting a lot on that example, and just really want to make it clear that I do not hold that position - it is an EXAMPLE of one of the (stupid) arguments I have heard repeatedly to justify dismissing the needs of lower income families.

Here's the thing: it is really difficult to pull off denying food to hungry children and still come up smelling like roses. Hungry kids are one of the most sympathy-inducing images around the world. It is very difficult to successfully argue against feeding a hungry child. For some reason, though, if the argument is made that a parent should have chosen to not have a child in the first place, and somehow the parent's irresponsible behavior and selfish decisions have resulted in a new human being, then it is okay to watch kids go hungry.

Continuing along that vein of "logic," feeding hungry kids will only encourage people who "shouldn't" have had kids to go ahead and have kids anyway, since someone else will be taking care of them. Supposedly exacerbating this problem is the fact that more benefits are available if you have more kids, so OBVIOUSLY people are just having kids willy nilly in order to get more money from the government so they can go get their nails done and buy new rims for their cars and do illegal drugs, since being eligible for public assistance CLEARLY means you are incapable of prioritizing your child's health over your own vanity.

Following this line of thought leads to the conclusion that feeding hungry kids will result in having more hungry kids to feed, so we HAVE to not feed any hungry kids, or we are only perpetuating the cycle of poverty and "entitlements." Backing this up are different economic theories postulating that the only way to really put an end to poverty is to invest in capitalism, because more money for people who already have money is the true way to "motivate" poor people to "work harder" and get their own money, thereby eradicating poverty.

I'm sure my simplification of the American Way can be challenged, but the bottom line - for me, anyway - is that I don't fucking care. Hungry kids are hungry. If you can afford to give them some food, then give them some fucking food. If you don't want to give them food, that's fine, too, but at least have the decency to accept that you're an asshole.