Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Feminist icon Gloria Steinem thinks coercing women to have children they don’t want is the fundamental cause of climate change.
…
People argue that climate change and other issues are also feminist issues. What do we lose by broadening the meaning of the term?
“Are you kidding me? Listen, what causes climate deprivation is population. If we had not been systematically forcing women to have children they don’t want or can’t care for over the 500 years of patriarchy, we wouldn’t have the climate problems that we have. That’s the fundamental cause of climate change. Even if the Vatican doesn’t tell us that. In addition to that, because women are the major agricultural workers in the world, and also the carriers of water and the feeders of families and so on, it’s a disproportionate burden.”
…
Climate advocates are often (though not always) population control advocates. Unborn children are an easy target for the population control freaks – they can’t defend themselves.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So climate science is finally settled then. Kids cause climate change. Can we ash can the models now and save a lot of money?
Gloria Steinem and her ilk are a major cause of the destruction of the family in the US. Women have been taught they are of little worth unless they have a career outside of the raising of children. Unlike the old Soviet Union, we did not force them to work but enticed them through femanist propaganda, pay them less than men in the same jobs thereby reducing the number of jobs that can support a family and requiring two people to work to support a family. Big corporations love the cheaper labor, kind of like illegal aliens. Yep, the femanist movement has really “empowered” women.
The belief that women are paid less for the same job has been demolished more times than I can count.
When you factor in all the differences, the so called pay gap disappears.
Men work more hours per week.
Men take time off to have and raise children in much lower percentages.
Men dominate in the dangerous occupations, and are compensated for that extra risk.
Men dominate the engineering professions. (Honestly don’t know why more women don’t go into these fields, programs to encourage them to enter STEM fields have existed for decades.)
Mark,
Your arguments are mostly supportive of why women get paid less, not that they don’t get paid less. And I agree with those arguments. There is also the PIA factor (pain in the ass). My wife, in our previous business, after three disastrous female hires, refused to hire any more women. One of our close friends, a woman manager, indicates that her 12 female employees have a much higher PIA factor than her men employees. My daughter’s soccer coach says the reason for this is that girls/women “bring more baggage on to the fieldd with them than do the guys”. There are, indeed, significant behavioral differences by gender and trying to ignore or deny them does not work. Women are much better at some things than men, no doubt, but not so much other things. And it differs by the individual woman or man. I shoot handguns competitively and the person who wins most often in our group is a woman. My wife is not a bad shot herself, but would hesitate in a life or death situation…….unless she was protecting the kids……..then you’d be dead before you could respond. As a group, skills and emotional response are generally different between genders. Of course, I am an old male chauvinist pig.
The problem is not women are paid less. The problem should have been women are paid less for the same work.
That men have a larger variance in fitness should not come as a surprise. Most really stupid but also some gifted individuals are men.
Oh well, that’s all right then. Glad we’ve got it straightened out.
Jim G1, those factors are all voluntary. That is women choose flexibility of work over higher pay.
It’s not businesses imposing lower wages, it’s women making lifestyle choices that result in lower wages.
Hugs, when you compare like to like, women are not paid less for the same work.
Jim G1,
I think the main reason it takes two bread winners to support a family is simple inflation. When women started working in large numbers after WWII, it temporarily increased the purchasing power of some families. However, as more women got jobs, there were more dollars chasing the same amount of goods and services, and the prices went up to where it took two people to buy necessities. Consider that in the 1800s a $20-dollar gold piece was an acceptable monthly salary ($240 per year). In the early-1900s, an average salary for a male worker in San Francisco was about $900 per year! A new Corvette sold for $5,000 (an annual salary) in the early ’60s, and they now go for more than $50,000 (again a middle-class annual salary). Everything else has gone up proportionately, except housing in California!
That’s what minimum wage, excessive forced benefits, mandatory health insurance and a host of government taxes have done.
Did she talk to her parents about this. Maybe they wouldn’t have bothered to have her. What she says is easy now that she has alife.
“Are you kidding me? Listen, what causes climate deprivation is population. If we had not been systematically forcing women to have children they don’t want or can’t care for over the 500 years of patriarchy, we wouldn’t have the climate problems that we have. That’s the fundamental cause of climate change. “
Wimmin!
Unfair. She could have been a male eejit.
An XX is not a man just as an XY is not a woman
Oh no again, agreeing with Eric two post in row.
Could not post earlier because I was watching our granddaughter while everyone else slept. I get happy baby when she first wakes. Getting cranky baby to give up and go to sleep at the end of the goes to mom or my wife.
This what life is all about. Thanks to abundant energy we have time enjoy the environment instead of struggling to just survive what nature throws at us. There is the crowd that wants the best seats in the best restaurants in NYC or LA. The environment is a cause for them not something you enjoy with your kids and grand kids.
We’ve got two of our five here today, 2 and 4 yrs old. What fun! Have one, two or three here most days while the kids all work. Figure we’d rather they learn our bad habits than those of some strangers.
This is becoming a habit… 🙂
Indeed.
This isn’t innovative thinking. What does she have Planned?
Studies show that washed-up has-beens are contributing even moreso to climate change.
“SAVE THE PLANET: MAKE SENICIDE LEGAL!”
If we had not been systematically forcing women to have children
========
not only that. more people today die every day than almost any time in history. More than 150,000 people die every day. The number 1 cause of death in human is women having children.
if women weren’t having children, all human problems could be eliminated. In less than 100 years we could almost entirely wipe out death, disease, famine, poverty, ignorance. You name it, this would solve almost every problem humanity faces.
So while some see the Paris Agreement is a huge step forward, the real solution is for women to stop having children. Long before CO2 levels become a problem, all human problems will be eradicated completely.
Humans have managed to be the most successful primate despite the “obstetrician’s dilemma”. We are extra-uterine fetuses for long after birth because our brains are so big. Most other mammals can walk soon after birth. We are now at the limits for normal birth, which is why childbirth is so dangerous for women.
For human evolution to achieve even bigger brains, in future we’ll all have to be born by C-section. Just one of the ways in which cultural and biological evolution intersect. This alone should be a check on population growth, since few women will want more than two scars.
for every problem there is a solution waiting to be found:
I like big butts and I can not lie
You other brothers can’t deny
That when a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
And a round thing in your face
Maybe nature will find a way, but IMO surgery is a better alternative. Or having babies Brave New World-style, with artificial wombs.
Humans are not evolving.
And the more population grows, and the more multicultural and global we get, the lower the chance of anything close to “evolution” happening.
Nope, our genetic profile seems here to stay for quite a long time.
If you’re reproducing and your population is growing, you’re evolving. Humans are actually evolving quite rapidly. Our generation time is long, so it’s harder to notice than in fruit flies.
https://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v47/n5/full/ng.3171.html
https://www.wired.com/2007/12/humans-evolving/
Our genetic profile changes in every generation.
So 20th Century. Population Bomb? Only if one calls something associated with an implosion a bomb. An un-bomb? In the advanced countries, negative population growth is already ushering in demographic winter. In the less advanced countries, it’s now demographic autumn. In 2100, the notion of population growth will be met with a curious furrowing of the brow.
Steinem espouses Planned Parrothood…..
As hideous as her comments were, at least it is out in the public now. Her view is held by many. As per the WHO 55-56 million children per year are being sacrificed in order to “save the planet”.
I quess that is not enough for her. One can only hope that someday there will be an accounting.
Planned Parenthood is listening to you, Gloria. They have a new ad where they call on “every single one of us” to unleash our inner hero and “use our superpowers to slay.” They don’t exactly say who you should slay, but who else would an abortion clinic want dead other than Steinem’s “unwanted children.” I don’t know what your idea of a superhero is, but I always thought of heroes as those who protect the innocent and the helpless, not slay them. It was always the villains who went around killing the innocents who got in their way. When did we become Bizarro World?
Here’s an excerpt from Planned Parenthood’s website:
https://secure.ppaction.org/site/SPageServer/;jsessionid=00000000.app20109a?pagename=pp_ppol_WhedonVideo_0517_Landing_c3.html&s_subsrc=3NALz1711W1N1V&s_src=WhedonVideo_0517_Landing_c3_c3web&NONCE_TOKEN=7AB189E94BD54A3F0BE668EABDC1C2D4
Mods, is there a reason why my comment at 12:35 pm is still awaiting moderation after 3 hours?
It’s worse than you thought
https://cliscep.com/2017/05/19/sick-butchering-little-kids-to-save-the-planet/
Pretty sure that’s a parody, not a real Time article.
Not that I have any use for Time Magazine.
It is 500 years this year since Martin Luther published his Ninety-five Theses/ Disputation on the Power of Indulgences. Perhaps Steinem thinks she has bought and paid for her own indulgence and it is tnow ime to pull up the drawbridge on the rest of humanity?
I must agree with her on this point: the world would be far better off if her mother had been able to access birth control.
Gloria, you have hypocritically been silent on female genital mutilation and a host of other egregious violations of women’s human rights because of either personal fear or political correctness. I thought you had died or retired in old age. But here you are waxing (waning?) impotently and gutlessly on Malthusian claptrap.
Gee, you’ve been part of the success in expelling light-skinned men from the ranks of “diversity”. It sure isn’t your old vanquished foe who are making the babies. We are the least fertile of the lot now. So, why don’t you show us some of the old fire and identify who you mean? You might with the same stone irradicate FGM while you are at it. PC got your tongue? Take the advice of friends who I’m sure have told you your work is done. You are irrelevant now. Don’t show that off in your golden years.
When the sculptor Bartholdi wanted to personify Liberty, he chose a woman.
What a noble (and in the case of many, undeserved) compliment he paid to women in that choice. At the heart of Liberty, is Love. Love is the most powerful force in the world. When you love someone, you want what is best for him or her. When you love someone, you give her or him the freedom to choose and, so far as it lies within your power, the means to make that choice happen. This is true feminism. True feminism does not require killing another human being. It does not require dooming people to energy-poverty (and all which that entails: ignorance, want, misery, disease …. and having 5 children because you buried 3 of them).
Love wants Liberty for women (and men). Therefore, Love wants the poor of the world to enjoy the health and happiness and freedom which fossil fuel (and nuclear) power brings. And Love hates lies (like the lie about human CO2 emissions causing significant shifts in the climate of the earth).
This is the kind of woman the world needs:
for she, too, personifies:
Liberty:
**********************
**********************
Well done, Eric W.!
And yet, the liberal left attacks her and threatens her with death constantly..Yet still she stands, tall and proud !! I would be proud to call her an American !
Great post Janice!
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is hero. Her personal courage, especially in the face of serious death threats, is an inspiration to us all.
Ayaan Ali’s courage shows the utter moral bankruptcy of modern feminists who made sharia-loving Linda Sarsour co-chair of their DC woman’s march, and who defend her despite Sarsour’s ideological commitment to the position that women are only half as intelligent as men. The irony would be funny were it not so bitter.
Thank you, Pedric. And yes, indeed.
Follow-up: after finding this defense of Ms. Sarsour I had to leave a comment. It may not survive. If it does not, the irony of ‘feminists for free speech‘ will be compete.
“fellow idiotic women”
Isn’t that the truth !
Hope all is well with you Janice, : )
There is probably more scientific rational behind the idea that unwanted children cause climate change then the idea that CO2 affects climate.
Yeah but when is this killer climate change supposed to happen?
Suggestion for a bumper sticker:
?raw=1
Tasteless, you say?
Well, I understand that a bland diet has its benefits.
I have an idea….If women don’t want children, they should get their tubes tied or, for free, close their legs !!
Now Butch, we all know that a woman can’t get pregnant without a man forcing himself on her
/sarc
That is simply not a realistic or reasonable demand.
We’re already overrun with brats their parents can’t support, thanks to government welfare subsidizing that irresponsible breeding, and if abortion is restricted we’ll be overrun even worse. I modestly propose that women who bear children while on the dole should not get increased payments, but instead should get a visit from an official who will put the child in foster care, permanently. Result: the child has a future as something other than a welfare eater himself (which he’ll never have if he stays with his mother), and other potential mothers learn the lesson that breeding will no longer bring them more money.
Then maybe we can start to get a handle on riots and other problems caused by too many welfare eaters.
The problem with the welfare system is not too much money given to unwed mothers, but the incentive/requirement to be unwed.
A child in an intact home with a mother and a father will rarely grow up in poverty.
Child Mortality by Max Roser
‘…Since the beginning of the age of the Enlightenment and over the course of modernization, the mortality of children below 5 years of age has declined rapidly. Child mortality in rich countries today is much lower than 1%. This is a very recent development and was only reached after a hundredfold decline in child mortality in these countries. In early-modern times, child mortality was very high; in 18th century Sweden every third child died, and in 19th century Germany every second child died. With declining poverty and increasing knowledge and service in the health sector, child mortality around the world is declining very rapidly: Global child mortality fell from 18.2% in 1960 to 4.3% in 2015; while 4.3% is still too high, this is a substantial achievement….’
The awful and venal Steinam would be of the demographic that would be unwilling to accept that democracy, modern capitalism and a cheap reliable enegy provider…fossil fuel…are significant causes of this fantastic improvement in human longevity and the extraordinary reduction in child and infant mortality rates.
And the massive benefits that have become available to men, women, boys and girls as a result of our harnessing and usage of these fabulous fossil fuels.
“Climate change is a feminist issue” is a bit of a stretch, but calling it a so-called social justice issue would make a lot of sense. Like the whole notion of SJ, CC is all about bogus victim-status and the nonexistent “oppression” that produced it. And the real ultimate goal of both those views is the same — to destroy the rich world and make life nasty, brutish, and short for everyone except a small leftist elite.
Glory glory we must stop evolution?
My conviction is that we must sell electricity to the poor that they can afford.
Do you want to watch a 13 yo have painful dying from inhalation of particulate polution from burninģ a day long walk for wood and cow manure?
Do you want intelligent minds snuffed out by poverty and light depraration?
What makes you belive that the babies you want not to be born are of course destined to be morons?
deprivation
Leftists’ anti-human ideologies, especially their war on motherhood, will be their demise.
Currently, 48% of the world’s population (3.3 billion souls) live in countries with fertllity rates below 2.1 children/family, which is required to maintain population growth.
To offset this reality, Leftist European political hacks have orchestrated a massive invasion of 3rd-world “refugees” (aka future welfare-state Leftist party voters) into Europe, assuring the eventual extinction of Western Civilization…
At this moment, it’s estimated that there are 6 MILLION “refugees” waiting in North African coastal cities to illegally invade Europe this summer… Oh, goody..
That’s why the Leftists’ CAGW sc@m is so nefarious.
Since failed Leftist economic policies create high unemployment and ever increasing cost of living expenses, double-income-no kids (DINKs) families are required just just to survive, and large families become logistically and economically impossible.
The tenets of CAGW propangdadize that large families are “unsustainable” (I HATE that Leftist term) making DINKs’ lifestyles a virtue rather than the economic necessity that it is, and to deal with the demographic devastation DINKs create, open-border immigration policies are created, which assures the eventual death of Western Civilation if continued…
The world has gone temporarily insane…
It’s true humans are one of the biggest polluters, just look at China and India.
I know most of you here value life but breeding like rats will damage us all.