Many people did not know her until recently, but the name of Samanta Villar is already on everyone's lips for his statements when presenting the publication of his book "Mother there is more than one". And when I say it on everyone's lips, I do it because in social networks many people are talking about her, her children, her words and her motherhood. And as always when dealing with issues like that, criticism is not lacking.
However, if I have learned something in all these years (eleven already as a father and nine as editor of maternity and paternity issues), it is to try to take a little distance, put the words in context and try to put myself in their shoes To understand the reason of things. And although he has said that "to have children is to lose quality of life" and that he has suggested that if I could go back, I would rather not have had them, I tell you my opinion about it, and why I think we should not criticize Samanta Villar.
But what did he say?
If you still don't know what he said, I summarize it here. As we read on ABC, the 41-year-old journalist has announced the presentation of her book with the intention of breaking with what she considers to be topics of motherhood and various taboos. As he explains: "There is a unique story of motherhood as an idyllic state, which does not coincide with reality and stigmatizes women who live it differently."
In addition, he adds that "I am not happier now than I was before", and that "having children is losing quality of life", despite the fact that "there are times you say: they are precious. One thing does not take away the other ".
All this led her to write the book to tell what she considers to be "real" motherhood, without forgetting "hardness, extreme difficulties, unbearable inconveniences and stratospheric sacrifice." And because "nobody tells you what motherhood really is, you make a deceived decision."
"Let us abandon this idea that motherhood is the last step in the pyramid of a woman's happiness," says Villar, who continues explaining that "it is best to be an aunt" because "it is the closest to the mother", but it saves "the physical pain of exhaustion and the moral collapse of saying: I can't do it anymore!"
Finally, ironically, he says that "now it is too late, now I am a mother and we have to get attached", and that she is prepared to return to television, to "light work".
We shouldn't criticize her for respect
The first reason, which is the most obvious, is because each mother lives her motherhood in her own way. And that way is personal and non-transferable, as they usually say. You have to be in your skin to understand what you are living, and if we can not put ourselves, we must put into perspective what it says to try to understand the motivations.
And I understand it, or I think I understand it by knowing your personal history. Obviously I can be wrong, but I understand it when it says everything it says (although I don't feel it the same as far as my relationship with my children is concerned), and just for that reason I would not dare to criticize it. And out of respect, of course.
Being a mother when work smiles at you
Samantha is 41 years old and was a mother with 40 of two twins, Violeta and Damià, who arrived after an ovodonation treatment. We could say that it was one of his last opportunities to be a mother and he didn't want to miss it. The problem is that she was going to have the babies she thought she was going to have, and not the ones she ended up having.
I explain myself: when he says that the motherhood of which society speaks does not correspond to reality is explaining something that we have commented on other occasions. That postpartum that nobody talks to you about, or that hypocrisy of pushing you to have children (there is no couple without children who are not asked when they will have them) and then, when you have them, abandon you to your fate and ask you to give them to them to society as soon as possible, so that you return to the labor market and children enter the maelstrom of deficiencies and consumerism.
Society is determined to tell us that having children is a wonderful thing, and by having them we are many parents who take a slap in reality by realizing that babies are not always as they tell us, of those who eat, fall and sleep, but they are much more dependent, day and night, and that requires a lot of time from mom and dad.
But dad doesn't have much time because parental leave ends immediately, and then it is mom who, speaking badly and soon, eats most of the brown, seeing that household chores accumulate, hours without sleep accumulate, fatigue accumulates, hours of loneliness accumulate, accumulate hours without caring, hours without talking to adults, hours of care for ungrateful babies (because with silence and calm they appreciate that everything is going well, but after a while they cry again), and a long etcetera.
And now put on that you are Samantha, that you have had two children, and that you were just in a vital moment in which work was going well. After the success as a reporter in the program "21 days" of Four, from 2009 to 2010, she presented "3 sixty", which later became "Samantha Connection". In the fourth season he became the program director, and this is how he derived in "9 months with Samantha".
That is, he had been directing his own program on television for a short time when work stopped to be a mother. He took advantage of the pregnancy to narrate the adventures of a woman who gets a pregnancy as a recipient of a donation, and the stories of other pregnant women, and finally showed her birth in May last year (although the babies were born, I think, in March).
At such a time in his career, to have children had to be at least as told, so that being a mother gave him a similar joy. A maternity tired yes, exhausting at times too, but that it was a vital moment capable of providing that happiness plus that many times the work does not give you.
And she felt cheated as many of us felt at times to think about how little society is involved with parents, except that she had two instead of one, which surely makes it a little harder. Normal to consider that you have lost quality of life if you thought that taking care of two babies was somewhat easier.
But he says he is not happier now than before
And why does it have to be? Of course, many of us are happier as parents. Some even end up repeating and we have three, like me, or even more. But that does not mean that there are people who feel that this is not what they expected. And having children gives you many positive things, but it involves many responsibilities, a lot of physical energy and also a lot of psychological energy.
The good thing is that everything happens. That is why many of us repeat, because with time you realize that everything that makes you say "I can't do more" is left behind, and better times come. And she is not alone: there are many women who cry because you can no longer. In fact, when I talked about it in 2015, there were many visits that post had, that in which a baby told his mother that he could be calm, because everything happens.
But for Samantha it hasn't happened yet, much less. Your babies they don't have a year yet. She is still immersed in care and that is why she is looking for oxygen and air to breathe ... too little time, in my opinion, to draw conclusions. So if something I had to reproach him is precisely this, that talk about what it is to be a mother when you just started.
Of course you have to explain to people how hard it can be to be the beginning, the beginnings, without support, feeling alone surely in too many moments, and devoid of your life to the point of feeling disappear between care, tears, diapers and tits . But over the months, and over the years, being a mother, being a father, is becoming more and more beautiful, something you can taste, something you can live with more tranquility and then yes, enjoy it much more.
There are dishes, there are recipes, very difficult to make, which require hours and hours of work. Those moments are hard ... even while they are done, or when finished, you have to pick up the kitchen because everything is lost, and in the end one thinks if making that recipe compensates, for all the work it entails.
But it is not until one does not sit down to eat, when the first bite is finally brought to the mouth, and the second and third, that the time does not come when you can tell if the work time was worth it or not. There will be people who will say yes, that it is so good that everything worked and collected was worth it; there will be people who say that it is not so much; and others who say no, it would have been better not to do so. And none is really wrong because each one will explain their vision and valuation of the whole experience.
That is the little thorn that I have left with the subject of Samantha, to think that her children are not even one year old and that she is still "cooking" her motherhood ... in fact, while taking care of her she has written this book, something that makes the equation: "Of course it is very hard to cook that complex dish, if while you do it you take time to write how you do it" (and I don't judge, I just try to take a picture of what I think is your situation).
But in any case, he's talking about feelings, and the feelings are their own and do not admit other people's assessment. You cannot tell someone that what they feel is wrong, so we may or may not agree, but we cannot tell them that they should feel otherwise about their children or about their motherhood.
That is why we cannot criticize her and that is why we can even value as positive the one who has decided to explain to the world, in a book, that motherhood may not be precious, nor liberating, nor happy, nor ... women deserve to know that having a baby In this world it can be very hard. Why there is no financial support in this regard, because the maternity leave only lasts 16 weeks, which are only enough to start working leaving at home a totally dependent baby, because there is no type of reconciliation with face and eyes that takes care of those people who have just been parents, because we are at a time when with a single salary it is very difficult to live, and we have children even though today's society seems to be thought, as I say, quite the opposite.
It's a shame to say it, but to parents nobody helps us in any way. The country ages to forced marches but the state doesn't care, so bringing children to the world is just an individual act of love and responsibility. If we reduce the schedule, they reduce our salary. If you stop working, you stop charging. If you decide to take care of your baby, or your children, the day you want to return to work you will have many problems to do so.
Parents they should be protected in a community; protected and cared for in turn to take care of the little people who will be the future of all. But this does not happen. So today's parents just dedicate ourselves to trying to survive, spending the days without realizing between taking care of them for a while, working and trying to keep the house from falling on us. Thus, there are those who even seem to have to choose between educating well and living: "If I want to give them more time from me, I have to work less and, consequently, not reach the end of the month."
So yes ... I also help explain to our society how bad it is mounted, and how little he thinks about babies and parents.
"But he's hurting his children!"
But back to what I was saying: there are people who do not see this well because to explain it is hurting their children. And it is that he says that it is best to be an aunt, and that now he can do nothing because he is a mother and has to get attached.
I don't share your words, I think that it is better to be a father than uncle, but again I understand that in your situation, if you know it, perhaps you would have decided to do it differently. Is it your fault? It is not? Well I do not know. Just do not look guilty, but simply be aware that not everyone is prepared to be father and mother, or that not everyone lives the same, or that the clash between expectations and reality is quite important.
Their children are not even one year old, so right now there is little harm that their words can do to them. Maybe in the future they want to read mom's book and then it can hurt them (this is what many people say, that when they read it they will suffer a lot); but then, if so, there is nothing to worry about. If the greatest suffering of these children will come when they read it, there will be a mother to tell them that when they were little they had a very bad time and wanted to explain to people how they felt. Who knows if the next book, in one or two years, is not an ode to motherhood and the happiness of being the mother of beautiful children of two or three years.
And if this does not happen, if that book does not arrive, if that maternity that is "cooked" in a difficult way waiting for the best to arrive does not just improve, then the "suffering" of those children will not be for these few words, nor for a book, but for a day-to-day relationship in which mom, Samantha, still thinks she should have made another decision.
And here is the crux of the matter. It is not what he said, that perhaps it is taken out of context (I do not think that any of those who have opined have read the book), but what it will be. And I only hope for them, and for her, that this relationship has much of what she has also commented: "There are moments that you say: they are precious. One thing does not take away the other." It's amazing to see your children grow, change, and realize that every day you fall in love more with them.
Don't miss it, Samantha. Do not miss those moments, because although it can be very hard at first, the balance can turn around when you least expect it. Surely if you want you can the way, like me, of falling in love every day with them and to be happy as a mother, more than ever.
