Reading this article in UK Daily Mail from 2006 pisses me off on many levels. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-397672/Sorry-children-bore-death.html

In this article, the mom argues that her children bore her, and she worked and hired nannies to avoid having to pay attention to them. Why have two children then? Why did you have kids if you are only going to ignore them or farm out the day-to-day work to someone of lower socioeconomic status who is paid to love them in your stead? I am not saying do not work, or that child-rearing is not at times boring, but this upper-middle-class mother seems to think the solution to boring children is to hire a nanny so that she can have her highlights done and shop. Over the years, she says, her children have learned not to expect her to show interests and attend any events or play with them, but that as long as she provides them shelter and tells them she loves them, they will be fine. Right.

My question to the author, Helen Kirwan-Taylor, is: Why did you have kids? Why not stop at one when you realize that motherhood is not your cup of tea? Why have another? Are your children merely an extension of your own ego? You'd rather be thinking about your highlights and which skirt to wear tomorrow than listening to your kids talk? How boring. Who cares what skirt a 42-year-old self-involved emotionally unavailable woman wears? Or how she is off to get highlights to cover her mousy hair? Paying more attention to what you have to give, rather than what you get, makes a person interesting. She claims to be smart and educated, but how enlightened can one really claim to be if their interests lie in the superficial? What is the point of all her education if she still does not get to look beyond the surface for something deeper?