Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Teen Moms of Gloucester: What the Media Didn't Tell You

By Elaine Tyler May and Courtney E. Martin, AlterNet. Posted August 12, 2008.


Teen pregnancy is nothing new. So what made the Gloucester girls such a big story?
Advertisement

Gloucester, Massachusetts, a sleepy fishing town better known for cod than controversy, hit the headlines after seventeen teenage girls at the local high school became pregnant -- a fourfold increase over previous years. And it appeared that at least some of them did so intentionally. Reporters descended on the town desperate to get the scoop. Did the girls make some sort of secret pact to raise their babies together? Were they imitating Juno or other pop culture images of happy teenage moms? Was it the school's fault for offering too little sex education or too much child care for students' babies?

But few were asking the most basic question: Why is this such a big story? Put bluntly, because these girls are white.

Americans seem to have collective amnesia about the long history of white, "respectable" girls getting pregnant. Black, brown, immigrant and working class girls have long been the public face of teen pregnancy, thanks in no small part to Ronald Reagan's racist invocation of the "welfare queen." When these young women get pregnant, it is often framed as an economic problem: who will support these babies? When young white women get pregnant, however, it is the moral question -- not the bottom line -- that fuels the debate: Who will marry these girls?

It turns out that the only thing truly unprecedented about the Gloucester girls is the way they are answering -- or more accurately, not answering -- that very question. They don't seem to want to get married.

Teen pregnancy among the white "respectable" classes is nothing new. What is new is that the "lock" in "wedlock" seems to be sprung.

Historically, most pregnant young women hoped to marry the fathers of their babies. Among the New England colonists, unfairly given a bad name for their "puritanical" sexual repressiveness, unwed pregnancy was no big deal. The Puritans had a custom called "bundling," which allowed betrothed couples to sleep in the same bed before marriage as long as they kept their clothes on. They didn't. By 1800, nearly one third of all babies were conceived before a couple officially wed.

During the nineteenth century, many brides-to-be found every excuse to postpone the wedding day, aware that marriage and motherhood meant the end of freedom and the beginning of domestic burdens. But if passion got the best of them they hurried to the alter. For the seduced, betrayed, or unlucky pregnant woman with no husband on the horizon, redemption was possible but marriage unlikely. As historian Regina Kunzel notes, the "fallen women" of the nineteenth century became the "problem girls" of the twentieth.

One commentator proclaimed that "sex o'clock" had struck in America as the twentieth century dawned. When automobiles arrived in the 1920s, some called them "houses of prostitution on wheels." Historian Beth Bailey explains that courtship moved from the front porch to the back seat. By World War II, "problem girls" became "victory girls" who considered it patriotic to frolic with a soldier before he went off to war. Wedding bells often followed.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: pregnancy, gloucester, teen pregnancy race

Elaine Tyler May is the author of Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era.

Courtney E. Martin is the author of Perfect Girls, Starving Daughters: How the Quest for Perfection is Harming Young Women. You can read more about her work at www.courtneyemartin.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Gloucester's economy
Posted by: no1kstate on Aug 12, 2008 1:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not an expert and don't claim to be. I just wonder how the town's economy impacted the girls and their decision. The girls of color that usually represent the face of teenage pregnancy are usually low middle to lower class, if not underclass.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

[using bugmenot.com login]
Posted by: login@bugmenot.com on Aug 13, 2008 9:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A well written and thoughtful article, but I have no reason to believe that these girls are raising these babies on their own.

Firstly, if they truly are all coming form privileged white families, likely the mothers' parents are playing huge support roles in regards to finances and child-rearing.

Secondly, how do we know that they're not raising the children with their "baby daddies" outside of the legal confines of marriage, e.g. they're still romantically involved or have even decided to cohabitate. It is my assumption that it is only the most uncaring and callous individuals who just walk away from their offspring, and that these teenage dads probably aren't quite that jaded.

So, nontraditional family situations they may be, I'm doubtful that we're talking feminist child-rearing commune here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Like Polygamy, except without the single "husband?"
Posted by: luzmejor on Aug 15, 2008 8:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if these girls saw the American women describing on television their polygamous relationship with one "husband."

It was obvious they considered their relationship with him repugnant, but they enjoyed their quiet, cooperative lives with their friends and children in their own homes.

They were, of course, taking advantage of welfare funding too. With the poor financial support of ordinary families lately, perhaps the girls have started a return to primitive days of a more matriarchal, tribal existence.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]