According to Salon, women who have taken a personal decision to help save the planet, by not having children, are angry that celebrity hypocrites appear to be ignoring the climate issues which they claim to take so seriously.
Baby Doomers: As climate change threatens to strain resources, women are increasingly reevaluating reproductive decisions. Now, these women are angry
When Sara Kelly, the 30-year-old founder of SAK PR firm in Philadelphia, posted an article to her Facebook page in December — one describing the growing trend of women refusing to have children for environmental reasons — it received more than 60 impassioned comments, mostly from friends of childbearing age debating the merits of the movement. “The topic comes up at least once a week,” Kelly told Salon. “People on both sides are having to put a lot more thought into their reasons than ever before. We’re forced to weigh the impact of climate change more than any generation before us. At dinner, cocktail hours, birthday parties. . . it’s on everyone’s mind.”
…
So, in the great population debate of 2016, who came out on top: the pro-baby set, or population-control enthusiasts? It doesn’t really matter, some experts contend, because we’re having the wrong conversation.
“We have a generation of people whose decisions are deeply and painfully complicated by climate change,” Josephine Ferorelli, co-founder of the nonprofit Conceivable Future, which frames global warming as a reproductive justice issue, told Salon. “There isn’t a correct answer here — it’s an impossible choice. So we’re trying to refocus the conversation to something larger.”
…
Conceivable Future — a network that welcomes parents as well as non-parents — encourages women of every experience to share their struggles in an attempt to put political will behind emotion. So far, they have more than 70 testimonials and counting. While they’re often mistaken for a population control advocacy group, this isn’t the case, largely because discussions of population control, they believe, are often rooted in classist ideology. Because it’s women in developing countries who tend to have more children, it’s these women who are often targeted. In reality, the largest per capita carbon emissions come from America. According to Mother Jones, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie’s daughter Zahara will likely produce 45,000 pounds of CO2 yearly, but that number would shrink to 221 pounds had Zahara stayed in Ethiopia.
It’s this discrepancy that’s increasingly shaping the plans of future mothers. Take Mary Sullivan, a 31-year-old school teacher from Newton, New Jersey, who has decided to foster children rather than have her own. “Climate change is already killing children in the developing world, and soon we will see the effects on the most vulnerable citizens of our country,” she told Salon. “Arguably, we are already. I don’t consider myself especially vulnerable, but I also don’t think I’ll ever be in a financial position to guarantee my child’s safety in the midst of a global crisis. With that in mind, yes, it does make me angry that there are people in the world who don’t even have to think about this — and these are often the very people making the decisions causing this disaster or refusing to address the problem.”
…
It is good that jet-setters who claim to be concerned about CO2 emissions are receiving more public criticism for their hypocrisy. But in my opinion, the real tragedy is women being terrorised out of child bearing by climate propaganda.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The truth to the matter is that the Fight Against Climate Change is taking trillions of dollars and pi$$ing it down the toilet, instead these funds could be saving lives in undeveloped countries. I believe Mr. MacRae has previously quantified the lives that could have been saved if this money was used instead to provide clean drinking water to those in need. 50 million comes to mind.
Truly amazing. Utterly ridiculous! Completely unnecessary.
Let’s hope these fools breed themselves out of existence. Perhaps they should start by giving up cocktail parties.
Women refusing to have children is an old, old phenomenon. It was common two thousand years ago in the Roman Empire. Actually going through childbirth was a nuisance and spoilt the figure, so upper-class women often adopted children rather than have their own.
I suspect that a lot of the women who proudly announce they are foregoing procreation in order to save the planet are merely using this as an excuse. What they are really saying is that childbirth is too much of a nuisance and gets in the way of their hedonistic lifestyles, but prefer to virtue-signal rather than admit the true reasons.
It appears to be a more-or-less universal phenomenon that when the wealth of a given society increases beyond a certain level, the birth rate declines quite dramatically. Why this should be so I am not sure, but the reasons given by individuals in these societies for not having children are just just froth on the top of a large wave.
I completely agree. If “saving the planet” was the only reason they were not having children, most of these women would be adopting or fostering children. You hear similar things from celebs: “oh, I would love to have kids at some point…” Then they hit mid-forties and are still childless, even if they have been in a stable relationship for years. If you really want kids, you either have them yourself or you adopt/foster.*** Own it. You simply are not willing to change your lifestyle to accommodate children. If that is what you want, fine. But don’t act like you are doing the world a favor.
***Caveat: some women do not have children because they are not married or in a relationship, and they believe that children need/deserve two parents. However, such women tend not to go about crowing about their non-reproduction.
Little Zahara, being a child of the jet-setting celebrity elite, will certainly be responsible for the production of far more than the US average of 45,000 pounds of CO2 annually, probably as much as ten times. How much power is needed just to air condition their mansion in Southern California?
The anti-human environmentalists are having a heyday with this — and have been since the days of Zero Population growth and the Club of Rome nonsense.
George Will recently wrote: “Tom Nichols relates this to myriad intellectual viruses thriving in academia [and among the Hollywood entertainment elite]. Carried by undereducated graduates, these viruses infect the nation’s civic culture.”
I like this idea of intellectual viruses being passed around by the infected — WUWT is one of the vaccines against them.
“Conceivable Future — a network that welcomes parents as well as non-parents — encourages women of every experience to share their struggles in an attempt to put political will behind emotion.”
Says it all about science and CAGW really. Never let the facts get in the way of a ripping good emote eh warmies? With brain dead leftys it’s always all about the struggle which is why they’re such an unhappy, restless lot disturbing the peace.
They call for using “political will”, and in the next breath claim to not be advocating population control. So how exactly ARE they going to use that political will…and for what?
..for emotion apparently. Do try and keep up and to be fair they do mention something about a struggle.
Stupidity has always, eventually, been self regulating, like many believe is the climate.
Poor misguided fools.
Maybe we will have to revisit the saying “One’s born every minute”.
If one were to be politically consistent, warmists should be anti-immigration and would support a ban on immigration. As the person noted Zahara will have a carbon footprint of 45,000 lbs, but if she had remained in Ethiopia it would have been only 221 lbs.
….but they are not politically consistent…. they just virtue signal their way out of any inconsistency
We should encourage this kind of nonsense so that the lunacy espoused by snowflakes, social justice warriors, eco Nazis and left wing nutbars will eventually dissipate when they all die out. Let them create their own demographic death spiral so that the rest of us can come up with real solutions for actual problems facing the world.
I think this is a win-win situation. Considering the nonsense that these women would teach their children, we all win when they don’t reproduce. Problem solved.
Yeah…but I just had a thought: What if they had kids? Mightn’t many of them be spending their time preaching the CAGW myth to them (instead of treating the rest of the population as their private class of malleable know-nothings)…then what percentage of those kids would then rebel against the myth???
I say it would serve them right!
“…We’re forced to weigh the impact of climate change more than any generation before us. At dinner, cocktail hours, birthday parties. . . it’s on everyone’s mind…”
Who are these nitwits who are so ridiculously obsessed? And why are they celebrating another year of CO2-emitting life? Why is their life important while other lives should never happen?
Malthus for thee, but not for me (sayeth the glitterati).
Actors aren’t necessarily dumb, but being smart isn’t exactly a pre-requisite. Win the genetic lottery, get noticed at a cattle-call audition, and you can be famous forever. And these days, you don’t even need to audition, because you can be famous without talent.
I saw an actor (who plays a brilliant scientist on TV) on one of the 500 talk shows. Once they talked about he new project and his dog, it was evident the writers of his TV show were actually brilliant ones…
My baby sister is a lesbian (I love her dearly — her sexual orientation is a non-issue to me) and describes women with children as “breeders”. This seems to be the mindset discussed here.
My question to these women (I won’t ask it of my sister — keeping comity et al) is: What do you think you’re saving the planet for — or from? You seem to imagine a future without people — and that it would be morally superior to humanity and culture.
Just a few years ago the rallying cry for population control was the threat of a “nuclear winter”, i.e. “How can you bring a child into this terrifying world?”
I think the root of this is the progressive dogma of Margeret Sanger — let’s sterilize the inferior races so they can’t breed — and murder their unborn.
Well, my wife is not a lesbian (and I also love her dearly), and she also refers to women with children as “breeders” (I have a son from a previous marriage).
Hey, at least Japan is trying to fix their low birthrate (and very, very low immigration) with robots.
I’ve read that the birth rate in China went up a bit after they drastically cut back their one child policies.
When I have heard people use the “breeders” term, it is usually deriding women who choose to make their children and home their priority. I suspect it is in part because becoming a mom (and *gasp* enjoying it) is seen by some as a betrayal of the “feminist” movement. “Breeders” is a favorite insult in the mommy wars. Because having children is so unfeminine. Oh wait. Femininity is bad. Having kids is so unfeminist. One should not be a mother because the role was created by the patriarchy or something. Women only have children because men force them to do so. Maternal instinct is a myth perpetuated by the patriarchy…blah blah blah.
I am only slightly exaggerating. There really seem to be people who think this way. It is always about the superiority.
Well said, AllyKat.
I have seen and heard similar. Suggest, when confronted with those derogatorily labeling mothers and fathers as ‘breeders’, that you use the antonym label ‘barrens’ to describe those that deign their personal choice to not have children as a sign of ethical or moral ‘superiority’. Reserve such usage only for those derisive few…..
https://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about-population/
https://www.gapminder.org/videos/population-growth-explained-with-ikea-boxes/
I got a kick out of this one – Russell Brand as Aldous Snow … although to be fair, HE was only pretending to be this stupid.
https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=yfp-t&p=aldous+snow+we+gotta+do+something#id=1&vid=2dc3a7905e255c931405f3fe0ed6fd7a&action=click
Absolutely nothing that Humans do or say surprises me ever since I realised that 50% of the population are below average intelligence.
On reflection,perhaps that should be because 50% of the population are above average intelligence!
The best news I’ve heard in years! ; ) With luck in another generation the left wing climate nuts will be extinct! : D
“We’re forced to weigh the impact of climate change more than any generation before us. At dinner, cocktail hours, birthday parties. . . it’s on everyone’s mind.” For those women who forego having a child thinking they are saving the planet, they are going to be really angry when it is finally accepted that the whole climate change/global warming was based on political needs and the science was heavily manipulated. Sadly, revelations like this will greatly impact the integrity of scientific endeavors. How do you gain the public trust when intelligent people were willing to push this hoax. It may have started out as a genuine concern but then it took on a life of its own.
Think of the dinner conversation.
Think of the children!
I haven’t read all the comments but a lot were in reference to it being a good thing that such don’t reproduce, along the lines of the “The Darwin Awards”.
But don’t forget that the last one mentioned is a school teacher. They don’t need to reproduce. They just need to “educate”. They want to raise your kids for you.
Pay attention to what your kids are being taught, their teachers and your local school board.
They are your kids to raise. Don’t delegate that responsibility to people you don’t know.
Gunga Din: “But don’t forget that the last one mentioned is a school teacher. They don’t need to reproduce. They just need to “educate”. They want to raise your kids for you.”
Bingo!!! Just what I was thinking.
The sheer number of comments is amazing.. that plus the content of most comments is an indicator that population control is indeed the number one problem we need to face, and it has nothing to do with CO2 or Global Warming.
This sounds like a problem that will solve itself 🙂
If Zahara had stayed in Ethiopia she would most likely have birthed a lot more children into the world than she will in the US.
I wonder, now that these eco-zealots have noticed the hypocrisy of the Hollywood elite in having lots of children, how long will it be until they notice the hypocrisy of those same Hollywood elites and eco-doomsayers for their massive carbon footprints?