Courtney, a question:

How do you conclude that the Gloucester teenagers are "white"? I haven't seen any mention of their race or ethnicity in news coverage. The pictures I have seen show relatively light-skinned girls, but many Latinos, Portuguese, and Italians are light-skinned. The ethnic demographics of Gloucester make it likely that most of these girls are not the descendants of English Puritans. Whiteness has been redefined many times in the history of this country; there was a time when Irish were not considered white. I question whether your historical analysis applies to this situation.

Good piece, but you repeated the divorce rate stat. that is wrong---never have 50% of marriages ended in divorce in this country, and currently, the divorce rate has dropped from a high in the low to mid 40's to the low 30's.

Here is an article explaining the statistically flawed methods that lead to the statement that 1 in 2 marriages end in divorce. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/19divo.html?_r=1&sq=divore%20rates%20statistics&st=cse&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&scp=1&adxnnlx=1218637137-5JFxqMwZg5iLaU3xE/ZJ2A

Sorry, I had trouble understanding the "So What?" ie, what's the connection between the historical trends & this present day Gloucester episode? I find the history interesting--Puritans were freaky, who knew?--but don't understand how it informs the media perception of the Gloucester girls.

"Sorry, I had trouble understanding the "So What?" ie, what's the connection between the historical trends & this present day Gloucester episode?"

I think it is that what the surprising part of the Gloucester teens isn't that they got pregnant -that has been happening for centuries. What is surprising and what the media is focusing on is how these girls are not getting married. Puritan women would often be pregnant before the wedding bells rang; as have women for a goodly portion of history. But these girls aren't, and that is what is so "shocking".

I thought one of the most interesting lines in the article was this one:
"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?"

sly, I thought the point of the historical analysis was to show that young proper white women have always been getting knocked up, this is not something that WOC or "modern" white teens invented.

FrumiousB: How do you conclude that the Gloucester teenagers are "white"? I haven't seen any mention of their race or ethnicity in news coverage. The pictures I have seen show relatively light-skinned girls, but many Latinos, Portuguese, and Italians are light-skinned.

Indeed. My Turkish former employer and his Iranian associate could easily pass for "white" but not for their accents. There are fair-skinned people from enough parts of the world that classifying someone as a member of what we think of as "white" based on a picture is careless.

Hey Courtney- I really liked your piece, and I agree that this analysis is what was missing from the media coverage.

Maybe the links between Puritans and these "white" girls (whether white or not- or regardless of the idea of "white" having no real meaning- that's how they've been portrayed by the media) is tenuous, but I don't think that the article claimed to establish a direct link.

You wrote: "Do these young mothers embody the fulfillment of the feminist promise that girls can be whatever they want and don't need to rely on a man? Or is it evidence that the feminist promise is fading for girls who cannot see a meaningful future other than as mothers?"

It's hard to decide in this case since we cannot talk to these girls, but I believe the latter is more likely. I was told by a social worker when I was a teenager that a desire for an established and respected identity, as well as unconditional love, was one of the main reasons teenagers she had met had children.

Having said that, I couldn't understand why the media went so crazy over this "pact". At least they had thought up a plan! Not to mention the fact that my friend and I have a similar pact; when either of us has a baby, we've promised to take a leave of absence or a long holiday from our careers and live with whoever is the new mom, and help- laundry, groceries, yes, but also emotional support, friendship, laughter- all of life's necessities.

It goes directly against the very white, very privileged idea that we were taught and that we see every day with the new moms in the neighbourhood- that new moms need quiet, uninterrupted peace, that you shouldn't "bother" her. I've seen a lot of 'yummy mummy'- looking women who feel they have to do it all on their own, and they're so lonely!

Fuck that. If I'm going to give birth to a baby, I want support and help- I want my mom there when I change the first diaper, and my best friend making us veggie stew downstairs. And not just women- I want my guy friends over helping too!

I would also like my partner to be equal parents in the process, but knowing I'm supported by a larger community than just the other parents makes me feel more stable. And since I don't believe in Mr. Right, if I never find someone I want to have a baby with, I know I can still do it on my own- without having to be alone all the time.

The way I see it, it takes a village to raise a child. As for the Gloucester girls, maybe it's a bit of both: they want the identity of "mom" because that's the only way they can see the future, but maybe they also see the role of mom reconfigured in a way that won't drive them nuts. It's hard to tell exactly what motivates teenagers, though...

kasia,

that's a beautiful plan between you and your friend... among my friends, folks are really good about sharing responsibilities in certain situations, but it could be even stronger... it absolutely does take a village.

I'm going to have to agree with some of the other posters in that the emphasis on white seems to be kind of irrelevant given the location and social location of Gloucester.

While I get what you're saying, the girls races are not given anywhere [that I could see anyway] and the Gloucester area is a highly immigrant area. I'm always having this debate with someone because since when did white have the same definition everywhere across every domain? It doesn't. Furthermore, you can be white and immigrant, white and low SES, white and black, according to some people's perceptions.

Upon reading the post I thought it was a little uninformed and unresearched, because if you knew the area then you would also know that while people may appear "white" they are in fact not the white you speak of. They are what I like to call "other" because while theyre skin may lack sufficient melatonin to place them in other color categories, their parents immigrated here, they are probably first generation Americans who may or may not fluently speak their "native" ethnic language, have an accent, have parents with an accent, have relatives who can't speak English.... ie are considered by many standards as "foreign" get my drift.

I think the media frenzy focuses on the pact issue. Every article or mention I saw of the pregnancies made reference to this alleged pregnancy pact and I think that's what people are most concerned with. Not only do they not feel comfortable with teen pregnancy but they also do not feel comfortable with teens openly choosing pregnancy.

It's not like teen pregnancy is a novel idea here in MA, or anywhere in the US for that matter.

And also, when I first heard about the Gloucester teens I did not think "wow what a beautiful thing, go feminism" I thought "wow that is so ridiculously stupid, who would ever have such a pact." I couldn't handle cooking chicken properly at that age, nevermind my own child. And while feminism focuses on the ideals of choice and sexual freedom, it does not mean that every choice is warranted. After all people choose to be anti-choice don't they? I grew up in a city much like Gloucester and I can remember strange "trends" similar to the Gloucester pact that a. died out and b. expressed more of a cry for help and support and public/societal involvement than what the girls actually "pacted" about [ie. some girls become into witchcraft, are they witches? no. They just wanted some attention, which they got, and then they were over it].

Aren't we always complaining about women assuming the burden of childbearing and how opportunity and choice are now available? This argument seems to contradict that just a lil. As in we get angry when theres no choice and angry when there is....

I was thinking along the same lines as kasia and puckalish. It reminds me of an interview I read with Toni Morrison. The person interviewing her asked her about teen pregnancy, and Morrison responded that women have been having children in their teen years for a long time - it's not something new (as Courtney's article pointed out). What I really thought was interesting was when the interviewer responded to that by mentioning the fact that even though that's true, there are so many more opportunities for young women today, and aren't they limiting themselves now if they have children so young? Morrison said that what needs to happen is that we as a society need to do more to help these young women to make sure that they AREN'T being limited. There's no reason why young mothers can't finish high school and go to college if they want, and pursue whatever kind of life they want for themselves. What it will take is for us as a society to go beyond the nuclear family as an enclosed support system. The individual parents shouldn't have to do it all. We need to focus more on a larger community-based network. I can't find the link to that interview now, but if I do I will post it.

Oh, and I don't know a lot of specifics about the girls in Gloucester, so my comment is more about teen pregnancy in general and how our society views it.

I found it:

http://www.time.com/time/community/pulitzerinterview.html

Y'all might have read it, but if you haven't, you should!

Regardless of whether the "hoax" turned out to be "true" -- whether the pregnancies were planned, or unplanned, or (like huge numbers of pregnancies) in between, these girls are keeping their pregnancies and choosing to be moms at 16. For thoughts about that choice, about race, and about the need for revolutionizing sex ed, see: http://www.miller-mccune.com/article/457