Why I'm Not Having Kids and You Shouldn't Either

This great article from Grist prefectly summed up many of the reason I'm childfree:

Some women struggle with the decision whether or not to give birth, but I am not one of them. As I see it, the benefits of parenthood are far outweighed by the consequences. I’m not just talking about late nights, early mornings, and all that money you could spend on yourself instead of your children (although those are legitimate enough reasons to abstain): I’m talking about the end of the world.

I doubt you need reminding that parts of the planet are running out of water, other parts are flooding, and industry and government leaders are sitting on their well-padded asses doing nothing about it. Is this really a world you want to bring children into? As Canadian hero Naomi Klein wrote in This Changes Everything, “there is a very high chance that our children will spend a great deal of their lives fleeing and recovering from vicious storms and extreme droughts.” Reproducing when climate apocalypse looms seems selfish, misguided, and, even worse, cruel. It’s a dick move, breeders, especially considering the 7.2 billion other humans who would be vying for the same resources as your little punkin. None for me, thanks.

But the truth is, citing climate change and population growth as the reasons I won’t be reproducing is, in part, an excuse — something I tell people to make them think I’m a good steward of the earth. In reality, I’ve never wanted kids, even before the levels of carbon in our atmosphere reached a terrifying tipping point. I adore my nephews, most my friends’ kids are very cute, but I will never in my life pick up a baby and declare that my ovaries hurt. If my ovaries hurt, it’s because I’m on my period or I’ve been kicked in the belly — both of which are preferable to parenting.

This lack of maternal instinct is convenient because not only am I a tote-bag-carrying-nature-loving-gun-hating-child-free-atheist (a.k.a. Satan, for those of you in red states), I’m also a homosexual (a.k.a. Super Satan). For us gays, having kids is more complicated than it is for those of you who can just knock your parts together and wake up pregnant. It takes planning, and I never been much of a planner. Besides, even though homosexuality has been so normalized that Tiffany’s now has ad campaigns featuring Adam and Steve, when I was a teen gay, things like marriage and parenthood just didn’t seem possible. Fifteen years ago, gay marriage was as legally binding as two 5-year-olds exchanging ring pops. It was something I didn’t think I’d ever be able to do, and so I never really considered it an option. Same with parenthood. And though the times have changed, I have not. At this point, I’m about as likely to give birth to a mini fridge as to a human.

Of course, there are consequences to not reproducing, and the one that concerns me most is what the hell is going to happen when I’m a grumpy old bitch with no kids to take care of me. As I see it, there is only one solution to this conundrum: I have to get rich. That way, I can hire someone to change my adult diapers when the time comes. The problem with this plan is that my career path has gone from publishing to public radio to, now, an environmental nonprofit, so I’m actually getting less wealthy as I get older, and now, at the age of 31, the most valuable thing I own is a bus pass. The good news is, while my window to reproduce is swiftly closing, I’ve still got plenty of time to make a fortune and find a nice young nursing assistant to wipe my butt.

There’s also some bad news, however, and that’s this: I alone cannot save the world. If this planet it going to survive the scourge that is humanity, we all have to stop reproducing. Yes, all of us. In that spirit, I propose we lower barriers to adoption, make sure all the little nuggets out there get placed with a family, and sterilize every human male on his 10th birthday. This may seem extremist, but just indulge me for a moment. In this hypothetical future, you live your life as normal, but instead of giving birth, you adopt, saving yourself both the weight gain and the nine months of sobriety. It will take a few generations for everyone to sign on, but for males, ritualistic vasectomy will take on the emotional heft of a bar mitzvah or a quinceanera, a rite of passage complete with lots of presents and a special Gaia-themed ice pack for the balls. We’ll tell children what an honor and privilege it is to forgo parenthood, and because kids believe anything you tell them, they won’t even question it (also, it’ll be true). After everyone’s good and sterile, we’ll spend a few decades preparing the earth for the end of people — tearing down dams, disposing of nuclear waste, correcting the myriad of bad decisions made since industrialization, etc. Sure, in a century or so there will be no humans left, but you’ll be dead by then anyway. Under my plan, you’ll still be dead but the planet will live on. Really, it’s the least we could do.

Should you, for some reason, decline to join my cult of zero population growth, at least prepare your babies for the worst. Take them to high ground, teach them to survive, make them understand the price of their place in the world. Long after you and I are gone, they’ll be left with a ruined planet — and they’ll wonder, as they flee, why anyone would bring life into this world. Then again, I could be wrong. It’s possible that the world will go cold turkey on fossil fuels, that our infrastructure will outlast climate chaos, that we’ll invent some miracle technology to suck the carbon out of the atmosphere. But I wouldn’t bet my life on it. Or, for that matter, anyone else’s.

Good article but as per usual the Breeders are having a field day calling the CF commenters "sad" and "pessimistic" --er, no how about realistic?

Here's one that says yeah, we may have environmental problems, but "cool people" should breed like rabbits to keep the Duggars from breeding. (As if that's possible.)

Quote

I respectfully disagree with the assertion that Grist readers shouldn't have kids, at least not for environmental reasons. It's true that the world has too many people, and most of those people are filler. But the world still has, and will probably always have, a dearth of cool people. We will always be in need of more people who are awesome, and chances are, if you are reading Grist and care about the planet, we need more people like you. Whenever greens say they won't have kids for environmental/social justice reasons, all that means is we are clearing the way for the Jim Bob and Michelle Duggars of the world to pump out two dozen kids, level the rainforest to build factory farms to feed them, and outvote us every November.

What greens should be doing is the exact opposite- having tons of kids, so that twenty years from now we have a huge population of young people who are genetically and culturally prone to valuing environmental protection. Then we will see massive investment in innovation and technology that will help us build a better future. And then, we can think about scaling back on our numbers. Maybe.

Here's a crunchy Dud who doesn't understand the pyramid of REDUCE, reuse, recycle. And of course his crotch-turds are going to Save The World^TM eyes2

Quote

We have a large family - more kids than you can count on one hand. We live minimally in a cabin on a farm out in the country and are learning how to become self-reliant in the context of community. We moved from northern Virginia where one or two people live in gigantic suburban mansions and commute for hours at a time in humungous SUVs. Somehow I have my doubts about who is to blame for hastening the apocalypse - breeders like me - or the ultra-rich. I am teaching my children how to heal the world, provide for themselves and others. From my perspective this article brings up some interesting points but is dead wrong about the cruelty of bringing the next generation into our troubled world. Even if it was the end of the world I would still take Wendell Berry's advice and plant sequoias. What if my children hold the keys to solving some aspect of our crisis or at least saving many in the midst of the chaos? This is my hope and why we intentionally have children.

Breeders fail Economics 101. FINITE resource, people. FINITE RESOURCES. Your stupid crotch turd won't be able to solve anything if he/she starves to death or dies from lack of potable water or is killed for one of the above. :headbrick

And here's another thought: Much of the world is fucked up because people mindlessly breed and subcontract the problems to the NEXT generation. What if people actually had to buck up and make a difference themselves, instead of cranking out brats and abdicating their environmental responsibilities?

I offer a standing ovation. :yr :yr :yr :yr

Quote
bell_flower

Here's a crunchy Dud who doesn't understand the pyramid of REDUCE, reuse, recycle. And of course his crotch-turds are going to Save The World^TM
{...}
Much of the world is fucked up because people mindlessly breed and subcontract the problems to the NEXT generation. What if people actually had to buck up and make a difference themselves, instead of cranking out brats and abdicating their environmental responsibilities?

That mentality (for lack of a better word) has probably been going on for centuries now-- definitely for the most recent one, at least. Every generation currently on the earth was allegedly the previous one's Great Hope for the Future, remember? How's that workin' out for ya, humanity? z

Following that "logic", cancer, environmental issues, and other fun stuff should've been eradicated YEARS ago. Instead, we've got increased incidences of cancer (which now elevates its victims into celebrities/saints!!), self-described "crunchy" fuckwits not being earth-friendly at all, and an excess of morons running around fucking it all up even more.

But yeah, breeders, keep banging that "the next generation will solve it all" drum. You might think that sounds more noble than "Me wanna make babbies!!1!", but there are literally billions of examples of proof out there that it's just bullshit rationalizing.

What we learn from history is... that we don't learn from history.

In the vein of breeders ruining environmental things, they ruin things meant to save the environment by turning it into trends and driving up the costs. Look at the current tiny house movement. Granted, it started in hipster central, aka, Portland, Oregon, so it was always going to become an overpriced fad, but once the hipster breeders got wind of it, they found a new way to get bragging points and street cred with their fellow granola breeders (and new life for the waning breeder blogs). Now I'm looking at 875-sq.ft. homes that are $350K. I live in an area with some of the highest cost of living in the country due to be one of the wealthiest counties and yet, I can get a house with more than twice the square footage for that price. I'd happily live in a tiny home, but a mortgage should not match my mother's on the 2000+ sq.ft. home I grew up in.

Like a family of vegan breeders living in a tiny home, recycling, composting, and growing their own vegetables is going to offset the fact that they've bred. No matter what, my carbon footprint will always be smaller (and I will never give up meat willingly. I've tried).

Quote

What greens should be doing is the exact opposite- having tons of kids, so that twenty years from now we have a huge population of young people who are genetically and culturally prone to valuing environmental protection. Then we will see massive investment in innovation and technology that will help us build a better future. And then, we can think about scaling back on our numbers. Maybe.

Again, running on the assumption that these children are going to grow up exactly like their parents. Why do people not understand that when you have children, you are not creating your clones that will think exactly the way you do, have the same opinions, and follow the same political ideology? You are creating PEOPLE that will form their own thoughts, opinions, and decide their own politics. These greens may very will create neo-conservatives that will continue to sacrifice the environment for the almighty dollar and their big luxurious houses full of energy and water wasting resources.

------------------------------------------------------------
"Why children take so long to grow? They eat and drink like pig and give nothing back. Must find way to accelerate process..."
- Dr. Yi Suchong, Bioshock

"Society does not need more children; but it does need more loved children. Quite literally, we cannot afford unloved children - but we pay heavily for them every day. There should not be the slightest communal concern when a woman elects to destroy the life of her thousandth-of-an-ounce embryo. But all society should rise up in alarm when it hears that a baby that is not wanted is about to be born."
- Garrett Hardin

"I feel like there's a message involved here somehow, but then I couldn't stop laughing at all the plotholes, like the part when North Korea has food."
- Youtube commentor referring to a North Korean cartoon.

"Reality is a bitch when it slowly crawls out of your vagina and shits in your lap."
- Reddit comment

"Bitch wants a baby, so we're gonna fuck now. #bareback"
- Cambion

Oh whatever. Abortion doctors are crimestoppers."
- Miss Hannigan

Not to mention that the next generation is projected to be half autistic. So what then? Are we really to believe THEY are going to solve the environmental crisis?

Quote
paragon schnitzophonic
In the vein of breeders ruining environmental things, they ruin things meant to save the environment by turning it into trends and driving up the costs. Look at the current tiny house movement. Granted, it started in hipster central, aka, Portland, Oregon, so it was always going to become an overpriced fad, but once the hipster breeders got wind of it, they found a new way to get bragging points and street cred with their fellow granola breeders (and new life for the waning breeder blogs). Now I'm looking at 875-sq.ft. homes that are $350K. I live in an area with some of the highest cost of living in the country due to be one of the wealthiest counties and yet, I can get a house with more than twice the square footage for that price. I'd happily live in a tiny home, but a mortgage should not match my mother's on the 2000+ sq.ft. home I grew up in.

Hopefully this doesn't run off into a tangent, but ..... damn, preach it.

This is the 14x24 outbuilding that we had dropped in our backyard in 2012



Raw interior



The Chinsters and Annie inspect and give it their approval



My space



The overall view (we've since changed the green walls to a light mocha color - another week of painting for me )



Dh's space is embarrassing, but it's a typical Guy Space. He faces a 42" tv eyes2

That 336 sq foot space, where we spend all our time, cost $10K. Built offsite, totally finished, wood floor, wood ceiling (which was a biiiiitch to paint, but I love it) all we had to do was run a power line from the house to the building (which was part of the 10K cost). It's heated with a couple of small space units and cooled with window A/C.

We are so in love with that space, I suggested to Dh that we could add a kitchen and bath to it and make it a permanent dwelling. That idea being impractical, we are in the process of getting ready to sell that property (the primary dwelling is a few steps from the studio) so we can stick build a cottage that was inspired by the studio. It will look like this


without that lofted ceiling and overhead sleeping space. We'll probably set up a Murphy bed for sleeping quarters.

The 640 sq foot cottage we plan will probably come in at $50K (we've already started checking builders). Looking at the site (Kanga Cottage) from which those pictures came, you're looking at $80K, bottom rung price. Showing our graph paper sketches to our go-to guy, he *sniffed* when I told him about the Kanga site and said, in a drawl, "yep. I heard o' them little house people; lot o' articles in the buildin' magazines 'bout them. I guess if they got money to burn, it sure makes somebody rich. I'm not interested in rippin' people off. Them little houses don't cost that much to build."

I love tiny houses. Both my roommate and I want to build two right next to each other that connect. We want to live off the grid and have solar panels or windmills or some other awesome shit. I want mine to be purple and she wants a bay window where she can read. And I want a spa.. Because spa.

I decided to take a crack at it, my comment:

Well, here's the way I see it. I'm CF. If I'm wrong, and we DON'T crash in the next hundred years (and we MAY not since many people are going CF and population is reducing), then I will have enjoyed my free time, disposable income, and lack of parental guilt. If I'm right.. Well then that doesn't bode well for the little punkins... So the real question is, who's up for a gamble?

If you want to, go ahead. If you don't want to, don't. But calling people sad and pessimistic for caring about the next generation is only hurting the parental cause. It's making the world look like Idiocracy: Dead Earth Edition. Quite frankly, even if we weren't on the cusp of the Anthropocene Epoch (mass extinction of humans), I would still not be having kids. I have incredibly high standards for what sort of world my child would grow up in and this situation just doesn't cut it.

has anybody here seen the movie idiocracy? if you havnt, as CF people you should be able to appreciate it, it highlights very well that the dumb breed in masses, and the smart (even those who want to breed, but want to do it right) die out, because its never the right conditions to breed, to young, to old, not enough money, plenty of money but dead spouse.

im not really one to belive everything I see in movies, but god dam this ones on the nail for our future. its true that each generation grows up thinking that it'll be them who dose something great and changes the world, but kids got in the way, and now their to busy, but its okay, their kids will surely hold the answer they never had to current and impending problems -aaand repeat

Quote
catharsist
I love tiny houses. Both my roommate and I want to build two right next to each other that connect. We want to live off the grid and have solar panels or windmills or some other awesome shit. I want mine to be purple and she wants a bay window where she can read. And I want a spa.. Because spa.

Dogtrot house?



I had kind of envisioned something like that for Dh and I. I can keep my side as neat and tidy as I like, not having to walk past his area and *sigh* over the clutter of debris that satellites his chair and table. And a tin roof - gotta have one of those. Sit in the trot area on a rainy day and listen to the rain drum on the roof. Being a kid-free household, that would be the noisiest it would ever get - but it would be a soothing noise, not a howling noise.

Quote
Dorisan

Quote
catharsist
I love tiny houses. Both my roommate and I want to build two right next to each other that connect. We want to live off the grid and have solar panels or windmills or some other awesome shit. I want mine to be purple and she wants a bay window where she can read. And I want a spa.. Because spa.

Dogtrot house?

web-barrington-farm.jpg

I had kind of envisioned something like that for Dh and I. I can keep my side as neat and tidy as I like, not having to walk past his area and *sigh* over the clutter of debris that satellites his chair and table. And a tin roof - gotta have one of those. Sit in the trot area on a rainy day and listen to the rain drum on the roof. Being a kid-free household, that would be the noisiest it would ever get - but it would be a soothing noise, not a howling noise.

I didn't even know that a house like that existed! I just thought we would just mash two little houses together! This is a great idea to discuss with S! Thanks!

Quote
catharsist
I didn't even know that a house like that existed! I just thought we would just mash two little houses together! This is a great idea to discuss with S! Thanks!

It's a southern thang eyes2

Dogtrot

The architecture migrated north, typically closing in the "trot" with doors and windows because of winter effects, but leaving the option to open those apertures in the heat of the summer to funnel cooler breezes through.

I love it.. :drool and my roommate loves it too! You may have determined our housing destiny. Lol!

Bottom line: People are going to breed/not breed based on what they already want to do with their lives. If they want kids, they'll justify it by spewing made-up supporting evidence like "overpopulation is a myth" and "low birth rate destroys the economy." Meanwhile, those of us who lack parental instincts will stick to our doomsday scenarios (which are 100% realistic but aren't usually the primary reason for not reproducing if we're being honest). We're a selfish species who puts our own desires above the greater good.

Further proof that humans suck and we don't need more of them. ongue2

Quote
trance formation usa
Bottom line: People are going to breed/not breed based on what they already want to do with their lives. If they want kids, they'll justify it by spewing made-up supporting evidence like "overpopulation is a myth" and "low birth rate destroys the economy." Meanwhile, those of us who lack parental instincts will stick to our doomsday scenarios (which are 100% realistic but aren't usually the primary reason for not reproducing if we're being honest). We're a selfish species who puts our own desires above the greater good.

That's why I admire people who want children but opt for adoption instead of breeding their own. Most people are indeed focused on their own desires (as am I, of course, otherwise I'd adopt even though I don't want kids).

Agree: adoption is the ultimate selfless act. It costs a shit-ton of money and doesn't involve replicating your own DNA for narcissistic purposes. Adopted kids are sometimes damaged and difficult and don't always look like you.

I wish I were that selfless so I could lord it over these faux-righteous breeders :spin