734-321-9353

Outgoing childbirth: environmentally concerned women refuse to have children

0 Comments

Outgoing childbirth environmentally concerned women refuse to have children

The problems of the environment and climate change have led to the emergence of a group of people who believe that in order to save the planet, humanity must be slowed down to reproduce its own kind. Izvestia found out who the birth strikers are and whether they are different from their predecessors, childfree and anti-natalists.

What are they

Rodosbasters attracted media attention in March 2019. Before this, in February, a member of the US House of Representatives, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes, in her Instagram account, asked the question: is it wise to have children in a world that flies full steam ahead to an environmental catastrophe?

View this post on Instagram

Publication from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@ ocasio2018) January 19, 2019 at 8:59 PST

An error occurred during the download.

The question of the 29-year-old activist and politician provoked a stormy and ambiguous reaction from her 2.7 million subscribers, as well as other users of social networks and the media. Some people openly called the statement Okacio-Cortes fascist. Nevertheless, the congresswoman is not alone in her fears that the birth and upbringing of children are badly combined with the future that awaits the planet.

BirthStrike is a social organization that was founded by Briton Blythe Pepino, inspired by the frankness of Ocasio Cortes. In just a couple of weeks, more than 140 people (mostly women) joined the ranks of the labor insurers.

The 33-year-old Blythes was a young man, but she abandoned the idea of ​​starting a family after attending a lecture by the Extinction Rebellion community (“Revolt against extinction”). There she learned more about how the state of the environment will affect the world in the coming years. “I’m not sure that I could do this (to have children. – Ed.), Considering what is known. If politicians do not want to fight [с экологическими проблемами]we have little chance [выжить]"- says Blythe.

What is the ultimate goal of the movement? After all, it is obvious that rodosbastovschiki will be in the eternal minority: few people are ready to refuse from having children in principle, and for environmental reasons in particular.

Proponents of "ecological childlessness" do not particularly hope that a decline in the birth rate will become a popular idea and thereby immediately save the planet from overpopulation and the consequences associated with it. Although there are studies that prove that such measures could theoretically work, but only in a very long term, to which it would be nice to live.

View this post on Instagram

Publication from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@ ocasio2018) 10 Sep at 2018 at 9:53 PDT

An error occurred during the download.

As Pepino said in an interview with the British The Guardian, BirthStrike is, first of all, “radical recognition” of the fact that the imminent threat to existence already now “forces us to change our ideas about the future.” "We are not trying to solve [экологические проблемы] using BirthStrike. We want to bring information to the outside, "- says the Briton. “Out of Sounds” is probably up to politicians and other large public figures who really can still influence the situation with the environment.

The financial portal MarketWatch wondered: what will happen if the movement of protesters really becomes massive? And he answers: the refusal of citizens from the birth of children theoretically could become an instrument of pressure on the state. The lack of a sufficient level of population growth is destructive for the economy of any country, since it causes a shortage of labor and a decrease in consumer demand for goods produced, MW notes.

It is worth adding to this: it also leads to a gradual decrease in the number of taxpayers, whose deductions make it possible to pay pensions (and without natural reproduction, the number of pensioners will quickly exceed the number of taxpayers).

Rodosbasters – is it childfree?

By definition, the Oxford Dictionary, childfree (child-free) – voluntary childlessness. The term childfree appeared in English at the end of the 20th century. But of course, the phenomenon itself is as old as the world — it simply did not have such a sonorous definition.

There are several main reasons why they become childfree (and they can be combined for the same person). You can list them for a very long time, here are just a few of the most common:

– financial and family (fear of spending, refusal to “produce poverty”, the presence in the family of people with disabilities who are in need of care and the disabled);

– medical and aesthetic (unwillingness to sacrifice beauty and health);

– career;

– social (fear of losing the usual leisure and rhythm of life);

– love (reluctance to "share" the love of a partner with someone else);

– non-conformist (rejection of the need to meet the expectations of society);

– no need for paternity / motherhood.

A look at the modern world as an unfriendly environment for raising a child is also on this list. So Rodosbasters are definitely chilefri.

Where the legs grow BirthStrike

Antinatalists are perhaps the closest to protesters – not in theory, but in philosophy.

Antinatalism is the teaching that non-birth is the highest good. At its center is the idea that bringing new people into this unsafe and imperfect world is immoral and meaningless, because they will have to suffer, grow old and die. Anti-natalist statements are in quotations attributed to the Buddha. Antinatalists were among the philosophers of ancient Greece.

Many anti-natalists believe that one of the main reasons for wanting to have children is the inability of most people to sensibly assess the surrounding reality.

In addition, anti-natalists have another argument against procreation. They tend to believe that the human race is the most destructive force on Earth, and therefore, the optimal population of our planet is zero.

Antinatalists believe that a much more moral way to satisfy your parental instinct is adoption. In their opinion, it would be better for everyone to take on the education of already existing orphans.

Most people are not prone to so deep reflection on the continuation of the race. Nevertheless, for various reasons, many developed and developing countries are not able to achieve fertility rates that would ensure the reproduction of the population. In the course of time, uncertainty and anxiety about environmental issues may well become for those who doubt whether procreation is yet another argument "against."

See also: Battle of opinions: childfree against large families.

Chief editor of the blogFelix.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *