Dubai Debt Issues Push Stocks Down
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
Photos of D Train Murder Depict Bloody Panic
Mayor: Sex Trafficking Victims, Please Speak Up
Stuy Pyro Leaves Notes In Hieroglyphics
On Saturday, Fort Greene photographer Erin Patrice O'Brien unveiled her new exhibit at Brooklyn's Corridor Gallery. The images on display were not that of her normal clientele (she used to take portraits of celebrities), but of the young mothers living in New York. She told the Daily News, “I was interested in someone who never gets their story told as opposed to someone who always has the limelight."
This wasn't the limelight that Diablo Cody gave pregnant teens in Juno, these photographs put a different story on the statistics--teen mothers, from the ages of 14 to 18, spending most of their time home alone while their husbands work 70 hour weeks. The exhibit, titled Mamás Adolescentes: NYC 2006-2007, is on view through the 24th.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
14 is scary young to have a kid.
Oh boy. This thread should turn ugly quick.
Jen Carlson trolling for pageviews.
I've never understood the problem with teenage pregnancy, or more like what's so bad about it?
As long as the mother is not using the public for welfare, I have no qualms. I hope there is much private charity in such areas.
Furthermore, it might mean an abortion was averted, which is even better.
Our culture has established that you should be in your 20s and now even early-30s before having a child. But that doesn't mean the public opinion is correct, right? In fact, the people who think they're liberating women by demeaning teenage pregnancy are doing more harm than good by inadvertently scarlet-lettering these women. These women are not inherently flawed. Our society has really failed them in this regard.
I completely support blog posts like these. There's a slice of New York in it, while still be thought-provoking.
Anyway, I'm not much for pregnancy, no matter how old the person is, so perhaps my views are skewed, but my problem with teenage pregnancy isn't so much the general "omg teenagers having sex" issue. I don't know about the rest of you, but I knew plenty of people in that age range who were having sex when I was a teenager. It's not uncommon and it's foolish to deny that sexual curiosity and desire is pretty rampant in both sexes by ages 14 and up. It's also foolish to think that all 14-18 year olds are going to make good decisions.
The problem then is more that, in this country especially, being a teenage mom makes it incredibly difficult to pursue an education, or even any type of 9-5 job (flexible-hour jobs, ie: low-paying jobs, are more viable). Sure, some people are able to do it, but statistically very few. Having a baby at that age has massive negative impacts on your chances to become well-educated, successful, and comfortable.
And the statistical correlation between low-education, low-income populations and teenage pregnancies makes it pretty easy to figure out that the kids being born in those conditions thus become more likely to repeat the mistake.
how old are the "husbands" of these children?
This is a fallacy in a way. The statistic is correct, but poor schools are to blame. It's not that they don't get money, as city schools generally require more money per pupil than suburban schools. It's that these school cater to absurd curriculum and there's no choice where to send your kid.
Those kids aren't inherently dumb, though born to lower educated and poor parents. It's the public school system that fails them and the parents.
I also disagree with your implication that every child has to be well-educated according the state's curriculum.
Children having children. The hallmark of a 3rd world nation.
I certainly never said that the children were inherently dumb. "Poorly-educated" has nothing whatsoever to do with intelligence. Additionally, I never stated that a person being well-educated meant they had to follow traditional routes to do so. I say this as someone who dropped out of college after three semesters and has done very well for himself nonetheless.
Indeed, culture plays as much a part in a child's education as school does, and the culture of low-income, low-education neighborhoods tends to breed more of the same, just as does the culture of rural neighborhoods, upper-class suburbs, and the like. State educational policies are just one piece of the puzzle.
As a side note: any insinuation that public education institutions, particularly those in the city, are not underfunded is laughable. Whether the city schools or the rural schools get more dough is irrelevant; they're pretty much all underfunded, all across the country (the usual exceptions are districts with a lot of business that can be taxed). Many city schools have the additional burden of being located in downtrodden areas where teachers do not want to live or teach.
Ared,
It's called a linea nigra and it's a change in the skin color. Some women get it during pregnancy, when an increase in melanin from increased estrogen causes hyperpigmentation. Your comment skeeves me.
Aside from everything else cwbuecheler wrote, teenage parenthood shows poor ability to make good decisions. Face it, very few teenagers are emotionally ready to be parents. Many people aren't even ready in their mid-20s.
Education is only part of the picture. There must be a life outside the school. If a father is working 70-hour workweeks, he's not doing much to raise kids other than putting food on the table and a roof over their heads. That's a start, but hardly all of what it takes to create a successful adult.
# 9 - And the statistical correlation between low-education, low-income populations and teenage pregnancies makes it pretty easy to figure out that the kids being born in those conditions thus become more likely to repeat the mistake.
This is a fallacy in a way. The statistic is correct, but poor schools are to blame. It's not that they don't get money, as city schools generally require more money per pupil than suburban schools. It's that these school cater to absurd curriculum and there's no choice where to send your kid.
Those kids aren't inherently dumb, though born to lower educated and poor parents. It's the public school system that fails them and the parents.
-----------------------------------------
Are you kidding me? On what planet is the school system responsible for these children having sex and not using birth control.
The American school system exists to educate children so that they may be prepared to grow, work and better themselves. Yet it is used, especially here in the city, as free childcare, or as a means to feed children at least two meals a day and now you want teachers to raise these children and install values and morals as well?
I understand and agree with the whole "it takes a village..." but where is everyone else? The first time a child goes astray, everyone is quick to point a finger at the school or the teachers or the curriculum. I wish people could see how it really is; how parents send their kids to school with the same unwashed clothes every day, or without checking to see if their child has done their homework or with no money and no food for the child. How about trying to call a sick child's mother or father and all you have is an old beeper number? Yes, beeper number.
It's hard enough to educate children without the necessary supplies, tools and parental support while ignorant people are making all sorts of judgements.
I've know Erin all her life, and she really does love these kids. A few where at the opening, and there is a video documenting their day to day life if you stop by Rev Run's Brother's gallery.
Think what you will about babies having babies, it happens, and now its documented. There are so many families that are the spine of this city, and we never think about what that home life is like. They have had no voice, no exposure. Don't know the conditions, the cultural pressures etc what its like to be a stranger in the land you live, and to have your life paused by a child.
BTW Erin is an amazing photographer... check out her web site.
according to the NY DN she's 35.
Completely agree with NYC Stef. My roommates teaches middle-schoolers and I have never seen anyone more exasperated with the parents of NYC schoolchildren. They don't return his phone calls about their kids' bad behavior, and when they do, they defend the kids to the end. The kids always come to school having not done their homework. They don't have adequate school supplies. What they do have are iPhones, Blackberries, handheld games, etc., which they play with in class. What is my roommate supposed to do? Ground them? Send them to bed with no dessert? Take away their unlimited text messaging? It's not his job -- and he can't do anything about his students going astray when the parents are inclined to send the kids off to their babysitters -- er, sorry, teachers -- with toys to keep them occupied, and not care if their kids get detention after detention, or even suspension after suspension, or fail all of their classes. These teachers can only do so much. If the kids don't mind failing or being punished, and the parents don't mind the kids failing or being punished, then the worst that teachers can do to kids to bring them into line...means nothing to them.
Of course, not all of the parents are uncaring deadbeats. Some face language barriers; others are single parents working 70-hour weeks; some actually DO care but are ineffective disciplinarians. It seems to me that a 14-year-old girl with a baby would have to work long hours to support her child, if she were single; would not have the resources to educate herself to overcome obstacles like language barriers or to gain a full understanding of her children's progress in school; and, lacking maturity and the experience of being an adult, would not necessarily have the parenting skills to effectively discipline her kids once they encounter peer pressure and slip out of control.
Gotta have those anchor babies early!
You're not refuting anything I said, as I never said schools were responsible for teenagers have sex or having unsafe sex.
I completely agree with your statement on schooling being a vehicle for people to grow, whether that be in sports, math, english, auto repair, discovering who you are, or whatever it is.
I also agree with you on schools being daycare for many now, which is a shame.
Was your vitriol pointed at me? Because if you read what I wrote, I think we agree up to this point.
This is where we differ.Public schooling has become a daycare in the inner city for many. As the spending per kid increased and the quality went down, the test scores went down and the violence went up too. I propose something different than the status quo. A less centralized system of education where a student has a say in what he/she wants to learn. Why do many trade schools and technical schools across the country do so well? Because the kids choose to go there. Choice is something that could make things for the better, and only requires a parent's signature---as I'm sure many are aloof as you claim. Though, I think many would become more active should the parent have a more active role in their child's future.
The culture of a low-income, low-education neighborhood isn't that way because those people are inherently destined to fail**. Economic and government policy shoulders a brunt of the load as well as individual responsibility.
**You misunderstood the first comment about the kids not being inherently dumb. I wasn't accusing you of directly saying that, but you infer it. Logically, if a poor neighborhood stays in abject poverty and then you claim that the system is just one piece and that it's the culture...how is one not to infer that the people are naturally flawed, too.
This is factually incorrect, so I'm not sure why you're laughing. By and large, urban areas receive more funding per student than suburban areas. For instance, Washington DC--run entirely by the federal government and is one big city of mostly poor, black students--almost always ranks #1 in per pupil spending. I agree with your last claim, but only to the extent that the disruptive schools because of the lack of choice is what makes it tough on new teachers.
As a photographer and a nyc educator, I hope that the exhibit says more than these images do here. Does she really uncover anything that is not familiar to what people think an immigrant teenagers life is like?
just looked at her website and the "album" that accompanies the show. not too much uncovered, but just a generally sad story.
HUSBANDS????????? How many 14-18 year old mothers have husbands?
thank you Erin Patrice O'Brien for putting your racism into your art.
"I was interested in someone who never gets their story told"
because mexican immigrants haven't been in the news the past few years, so erin decided to perpetuate the stereotype of mexicans (& by extension, all latinos) as stupid baby-making factories who use up tax-payer resources.
erin also thought it would be cool to glorify unwed mothers, teenage pregnancy & unprotected sex. way to go erin, you taught those 2 girls in that 1st picture that if you screw up your life someone will take pictures of you because you are art.
Erin Patrice O'Brien can f- herself.
Overpopulation and education are two points 100% missing here.