I'd rather have a baby at 22 than 42

Why can't I have a baby? Right now, that is. Why can't I have one now? Of course, I am single, but that's because, at 21, society tells me to be. Society tells me that I'm a university student who should be having fun and not WANT to settle down just yet. Society tells me that my 21 male counterparts aren't ready to settle down and not even to try talking to them about families until they're about 30. Society tells me it's hopeless and that if I accidentally were to get pregnant, it would be the end of my life. But would it?

I have always wanted babies while I was young and energetic. PHysically, the ideal age of have a baby for a woman is 22. NOt all women are ready to have a baby at 22, but Canadian bourgeous society does a very good job of trying to make us believe that no woman really is. Why have a baby at 22? Party at 22 and have a baby at 32. It's ironic that I'm spending the most fertile years of my life trying desperately NOT to get pregnant, and will probably spend the least fertile years of my pre-menopausal life desperately trying to get pregnant as a result. Why couldn't I take advantage of being 22, the age my body obviously intended for me to have children at (if not my society) and have a baby now! Then, when the baby is grown up, when I'm 40, I can party then. IT's not physically impossible to party at 40, but despite us chicks being spry and good looking into middle age these days, our eggs are not so fresh. Why can't I have kids young AND then focus on a career once they're gone, as opposed to starting a career, taking a break in my mid-thirties to rear babies, then trying to catch up again in my 40's. Does that really make me professionally better off than not really trying to start a high-power career until the kids I had in my early twenties are at school full-time? Joy Behar and Madeleine Albright found that kids young and careers older was a way to great professional success. That's even in a society that looks down on young mothers, though I suppose it probably wasn't as bad in their youth.
Anyway, there is a reason 40 year old executives the world over are discovering they missed out on having a baby - they were told to go for their careers first, and families second, and sometimes, it just can't work that way. NOt only is it harder to conceive, when you're older, it's harder on your body to have a baby and your baby is more likely to be born with birth defects or miscarry in the womb. I'm sorry, but why does this sound like a good age to have a baby? Because I've had more time to buy designer shoes with my pre-baby disposable income? Because that's the only real advantage I can see. People say they are wiser, better mothers at 40 than they would have been in their 20's. I ask, how do you know that? What did all your yuppy parties and late nights in the boardroom really teach you about parenting? Unless you have a job working with kids, I don't buy this argument. I know there are people who mature more slowly, and can't imagining the all-encompassing job of caring for another human being until they're 36. I know there are people who want a partner before they mate and can't find one who sticks until they are older, for some reason. I'm not saying these women should remain childless forever; however, I am saying we should stop discouraging people who don't fall into these categories from having babies at the age their bodies meant them to start.
SO, no, I'm not going to have a baby at 22. It's just not going to happen. PArt of this is due to socially constructed barriers that don't have to exist, and part of this is because, whether I'm brainwashed or not, I'm not quite ready. But I would like to be able to have a baby before my twenties are over. Sure, there's a possibility I could get away with clubbing my youth away and still be able to get pregnant no problem at 42, but I'd rather not take that risk. I value the prospect of motherhood more than drinking $18 martinis at some yuppy bar...