Maternal instinct

Maternal instinct, as discussed in The Second Sex, is not an inborn force that determines a woman’s feelings toward a child. Maternal love is a variable attitude shaped by circumstances and acceptance, and parenthood is a commitment rather than a natural destiny. This distinction also exposes the danger of treating motherhood as proof that a child will be safe or happy: parents’ unresolved conflicts can injure the family relationships they are expected to sustain.

A Variable Relationship, Not an Instinct

The argument rejects “maternal instinct” as an adequate description of human motherhood. A mother’s attitude toward her child depends on her total situation and on how she accepts that situation; it can therefore vary rather than follow a universal biological script. The term “instinct” obscures the personal and social circumstances through which the relationship takes shape.

This account allows for markedly different experiences. The discussion acknowledges that, when circumstances are not positively unfavorable, a mother may find her life enriched by a child. Colette Audry’s description of a young mother presents the child as a response to her sense of existence, giving her an initial grasp of the world and of herself. Such an experience is possible, but it does not establish a rule binding every woman.

Parenthood as Commitment

Having a child is described as taking on a commitment, not fulfilling an obligation dictated by nature. Because a moral choice entails engagement, a woman may not be compelled into motherhood in the name of supposedly natural duty. The relation between parent and child, like the relation between spouses, must be freely chosen.

The text also disputes the assumption that a child is every woman’s ultimate fulfillment. Women’s sexuality, ambitions, and other pursuits are often represented as substitutes for a child, while the desire for a child may itself arise amid varied circumstances, including the absence of love, occupation, or an opportunity to fulfill homosexual desires. These competing possibilities point to indetermination, not a single natural explanation. Calling the child a woman’s ultimate end is therefore treated as a social prescription disguised as nature.

The Child Is Not Automatically Happy in the Mother’s Care

Rejecting a natural maternal instinct does not mean that mothers are inherently unnatural. It means that maternal love is not guaranteed by nature, and that bad mothering is possible. The discussion turns against the comforting presumption that a child is certain to find happiness in its mother’s arms: parents’ conflicts, quarrels, and dramas can make them harmful company for children.

Adults may approach their children through frustrations and conflicts rooted in their own family histories. In particular, maternal sadomasochism can produce guilt in a daughter and contribute to her repeating sadomasochistic behavior with her own children. The resulting chain of misery can continue across generations. Parenthood, on this account, demands attention to the actual relationship and its consequences, not reverence for a presumed instinct.

Social Expectations and Maternal Responsibility

The argument identifies a contradiction in a society that limits women’s education, culture, responsibility, and public activity, yet entrusts them with the formation of human beings. Women may be denied opportunities and then assigned babies as though children could compensate for an otherwise restricted life. That arrangement makes motherhood a social role imposed under unequal conditions, not evidence of an effortless natural aptitude.

This contradiction also clarifies why a woman’s situation matters to her relationship with a child. The text observes that people can be more rational and balanced in their work than at home, where intimate relationships may invite self-indulgence. A child is less able than an adult partner to defend against a parent’s conduct. Maternal feeling cannot therefore serve as a substitute for education, independence, or the conditions needed to develop emotional balance.

Childbirth and the Claim of Natural Bonding

A note examines the claim that the pain of childbirth creates maternal attachment. Antifeminists invoke childbirth suffering as a source of maternal instinct, and Helene Deutsch appears drawn to that view. Yet she also recognizes that women who have given birth and suffered can experience the same emptiness and strangeness attributed to women who did not feel labor in the same way.

The note emphasizes a further tension in Deutsch’s position: she maintains that maternal love is a conscious feeling or attitude, not an instinct, and that it need not be tied to pregnancy. A woman may maternally love an adopted child or her husband’s child from an earlier marriage. The proposed link between childbirth suffering and an inevitable maternal bond thus fails even within the account that gives suffering special importance; the text locates the contradiction in the effort to assign women a destined masochism and to make feminine suffering valuable.