Like It Is

So, yesterday was Earth Hour. There was a lot of build up to switching off the lights across the globe for an hour as part of the drive to look at how live in a more eco-friendly way. Use less of the earth’s resources, reduce carbon emissions etc. And after a while it began to rather irritate me.

I am all for looking at ways of living responsibly so that there’s less pressure on the planet’s resources.

However, as a childfree person, I couldn’t help thinking that many are missing the point or at least a crucial part of the point. While everyone is smugly patting themselves on the back for turning out the lights for an hour, it’s really not going to do a whole lot for the environment – except of course for that one hour… when predictably consumption dropped. Of course, everyone knows that, and it’s supposed to be more about to raising awareness of what people can do.

Which is all well and good.

Except, as I said to my hubs yesterday, everyone’s going to go right back to their usual way of living. And no-one has yet mentioned one of the most effective ways of reducing our footprint… have fewer children. Fewer children means less people, means less need to use resources, means – hey less pressure on the earth’s resources! Fancy that!

I can almost hear the scream of indignation from the pro-natalist (green) corner (yawn) “Whaddya mean have fewer children?? Who’s going to pay for your old age, blah, blah…” “Are you nuts? We NEED more children to… well, to ensure we (and our ways) continue. For ever! We wanna leave our name behind when we go. Besides, we LIKE having kids!

Sure you like having kids. The more the merrier. And I said having fewer, not none at all (although having none at all because of your convictions is a good thing, regardless of what others say). Having kids is mercilessly marketed at everyone from cradle to grave as The Thing To Do To Be Accepted Into Civilized Society. Everyone does it. And if they don’t, life will not be particularly easy for them. Not having kids is Most Definitely Frowned Upon. Ask for a permanent form of contraception and you’ll be sent off to… go have a kid or two first.

So, while Earth Hour is a nice little feel-good blip on the eco-monitor, it’s going to do very little unless people make some big choices in the face of the environmental challenges, and basically put their proverbial money where their mouth is.

Having kid(s) puts pressure on the environment like nothing else. Consumption in all its forms increases exponentially. Getting the kids to school? Well, still have to drive that people carrier, or that SUV, because we can’t let them take transit to school. And, anyway, since most families live out in the ‘burbs (have kids, so got to get a bigger house) there often isn’t much in the way of transit, everything is made for cars.

And then the family owns 2 cars. Thinking about this reminds me that the number of ads for cars and car related products seems to be on the rise. But maybe that’s just me.

When the kids are young, they need diapers – among lots and lots of other things. Diapers don’t degrade biologically as far as I’m aware (or maybe they do) so off to the landfill they go. I’m sure you can think of many more things that result in increased usage of the earth’s scare resources.

Though not confined to childed families, I still see cars commuting into town, with ONE driver. I hear people telling me they’re off to have their 2^nd, or third child because they love having babies and love being pregnant and want a big family. And of course, I hear the folk who tell me I should be doing the same, ‘cos I’ll regret it.

Presumably they aren’t among those that took part in earth hour, because if they were there’s more than a wee bit of hypocrisy there. Having kids is directly incompatible with saving the planet… that’s if you really want to conserve resources. And should some believe that doing their little recycling bit cuts it… it doesn’t. You’re using more, so you recycle more.

Apart from giving a nice little “feel good cos I’m doing my bit for the environment” glow, it’s next to nothing. Most of the recycling ends up in the general garbage anyway. And I don’t even want to think about all the resources that families with children use up and will continue to use.

As a childfree family, my hubs and I do not own a car. We take transit, walk or take cabs. We live in a condo and have no need of a three-bedroom house which needs extra resources to maintain. We buy energy-efficient appliances. We still have to pay all the extra “green taxes” that are creeping in from air travel to anything else you care to name. But while we do what we can we’re not eco-warriors. Some of the worst so-called “environmentals” are those who come along with kids in tow, urging us to “save the environment” while in the same breath informing us that we should be parenting, and shouldn’t be “going against nature.”

Meanwhile, they also want to make it even easier for people to have more kids at the expense of those who choose not to do so.

While I am not childfree specifically to save the environment and we do what we can, let’s not forget that there are many who’ve decided to be childfree because of environmental concerns. Concerned about over population, they’ve decided the planet does not need more human beings (who, lest we forget, do nothing but consume). Those who decide not to have kids, even for logical reasons like being eco-friendly are pilloried, as the article below clearly shows.

Earth Hour. Nice idea. Maybe it will make a point. For a while. Everyone’s reminiscing about how wonderful it was by candlelight and patting themselves on the back because they “did their bit for an hour” to save the planet or reduce climate change. Who’s kidding who here? A childed family can never, as has been pointed out, be as eco-friendly as a childfree one.

Having fewer (or no) children is a logical way,perhaps the logical way, to reduce our footprint on the environment. But no-one dares to mention it… except the childfree.

Don’t you think it’s time for “eco-folk” to deal with the great big elephant in the room? Or is it only childfree people that get it?

Kids are more important than being green by Britgirl.

Going green by sterilization by Mel

Babies are not eco-friendly, so we’re not having any

How to make every hour earth hour

Technorati Tags: childfree, childfree

Not for the first time have I wondered why the thought of anyone being childfree, wanting to remain childfree or thinking of not having children evokes such a violent reaction in certain circles. See example of last article as case in point. As many have related, when childfree people say tell people of their happy status, it’s enough to make some childed people rear back in in disbelief, righteous indignation, criticism and umbrage.

Why?

A simple expression of difference, such as “No I don’t want kids” seems to be worse than saying “ I’m an axe-murderer.”

Terrible things happen to many kids at the hands of their carers and parent (this is no longer rare, check out the site Parents Behaving Badly) yet all these seemingly pale into significance beside a women or man declaring that they’ve declined to re-produce. And that they are childfree. Without any further thought (and with no brain engagement) the expression of a life choice becomes equal to “ Selfish, child-hater.”

Totally bizarre.

The worst people can become parents. They may not be able to care for their kids. But it’s always o.k. They are never questioned. Never asked “why are you having kids, or why they don’t stop having kids… seeing that the last four of them are all by different fathers. Planning, plotting and lying to unsuspecting – or unwilling – spouses are par for the course – if a baby is the intended outcome.

But say you’re childfree? Read the rest of this entry »

Technorati Tags: childfree, childfree

Those “evil” Childfree people

And NFP calls this an apology?!

Thanks to Christopher W for finding this link.

Folks, I thought you’d be interested in knowing that, in an effort to “apologize” Natural Family Planning seems to have completely lost the plot. And she’s still on her bender about the Childfree.

Here’s a quote from her latest post:

“First, I’m going to say something long overdue, knowing full well this doesn’t mean much to those embittered by my words and clinching their own acrimony.”

In fact they don’t mean anything at all, because – surprise, surprise – they aren’t an apology. An apology doesn’t go on to insult the people you’re supposedly “apologizing” to. And “embittered by her words?” Self-delusion is a sad thing.

“I never meant for my post to be a personal indictment on the souls of readers.”

Of course she did! She still does.

But here’s the thing. It doesn’t matter what she meant. Who cares? The fact is she summarily dismisses a whole group of people as evil, simply because she disagrees with the way they’ve decided to live their lives. the fact that they are childfree and like it.

As for personal indictment… talk about flattering oneself….

The rest of her ugly and ill-informed, fundamentalist post is of course on NFP’s blog. You can read it if you like – she calls it her “truth” – but it’s just as ignorant as her previous post – maybe worse because she’s so obviously wriggling on her self-imposed hook. Even if she did consult a dictionary rather carefully to check she had just the right number of words to verbally deride the “evil childfree people” who, well, who don’t want to have kids. (How dare they?)

This person calls herself a Christian??! Well, at least she didn’t quote (a child-free, childfree) Jesus, preferring instead to fall back on Freud and Gandhi!

It took all these weeks for her to come up with a load of claptrap that only makes her look sillier than ever.

Discernment ? Not a chance.

NFP Works – Intolerance is intolerance – no matter how many meaningless “apologetic” bleatings you wrap it with. Save your apologizing… it’s showing your hypocrisy, and the funny thing is the only person you’re fooling is you.

That you take all this time worrying about our reproduction - something that’s none of your business AND which you can do nothing about - is very sad. But guess what? We’re used to fundies… you’re not the first and you certainly won’t be the last.

And we’re still not having kids.

I agree with ChrisW – childfree people have no need to affirm or prove anything to this woman or people like her. And this fact is also true…nothing anyone says to this woman will make a blind bit of difference…so have a laugh at her post, but save your energy for… not making babies!

Technorati Tags: Childfree, childfree

Of all the bingoes that the Childfree get one of the most patronizing ones is the variation on this one:

“Oh, you’ll change your mind when…”

It’s usually pronounced by strangers and non-strangers alike, completely disregarding any other possible outcome. There are many translations of the “you’ll change your mind” bingo. Whether you’re going to change your mind because your partner/husband wants kids (and won’t commit without some promise that he’s got a chance of being a Daddy) or because you’re suddenly going to be struck with “baby fever” (and feel that life is simply not worth living if you don’t have an infant to make you feel “whole” ) the implication is the same.

The implication is that your childfree decision isn’t worth a bean in the face of your supposed directive to procreate. And, as far as they (the childed) are concerned, you don’t know your own mind. Just wait until the old biological clock kicks in they say. The odd thing is, it’s not as if as a childfree person I go around announcing my childfree status. Unlike parents and parents to be, who never lose an opportunity to tell anyone and everyone that they have kids, expect to have kids or are about to have kids. It’s usually in the process of informing the world of their childed (or about to be childed) state, that they decide to ask the childfree person about their intentions.

When they get the answer “I’m childfree” or “I don’t want /decided not to have children” or similar, it’s clear they neither expect it, nor like it. Whether they like it or not isn’t my issue. What’s clear is that they automatically assume that a choice to be childfree isn’t as valid as their own choice to procreate. In other words, they do not respect the decision.

Yet, we are expected to not only respect their choice to have kids, but to say nothing that doesn’t completely support it. Read the rest of this entry »

Technorati Tags: childfree

This is a very interesting article, particularly from a childfree viewpoint. The subjects of the Daily Mail article are most definitely not childfree.

Why We should Sterilise teenage girls - temporarily at least

It would be interesting to know if Britney Spears’ mother would welcome this proposal or throw up her hands in horror. I suspect that it might be the latter even though her daughter is going to be adding to the Spears offspring - at the tender age of 16.

Popping out a kid or bredding like rabbits takes no thought whatsoever, and, with many teenage girls is often the result of a teenage fling. What’s worse is, as this article points out, getting pregnant as a teenager is no longer something the girls worry about. There really isn’t a stigma any longer. They get benefits, such as a “free” home the unconditional love of a baby and most of all – a status symbol. So why bother to prevent pregnancy? For many it’s a way out. Lest we forget, we all pay to look after these teenage mothers with our taxes.

“Currently, our [UK] teenage pregnancy rate is twice as high as in Germany, three times as high as in France and six times as high as in the Netherlands. Is this because, in this country, getting pregnant while still at school has become a status symbol for the girls, as ASBOs have for the boys?

In spite of all the efforts of the Government’s Teenage Pregnancy Unit, and millions of pounds spent on initiatives to persuade girls that having babies young is a bad, bad thing, the rates stay sky-high”

There are government plans to get young mothers into work… except they can’t get a decent job because (they’re under-age), have no education (as they’ve dropped out of school) and anyway it’s cheaper to live on benefits (since you get them for every child up to a certain age, what’s the point of getting a job?). Far easier to have a baby, especially as all the celebrities are sporting babies as the “must-have” accessory. For examples look at the latest pages of the mags by the checkouts… it’s like a breeding frenzy. Message: baby = you’re someone!

And it’s not as though the morning-after pill isn’t available in England… it is. The problem is the girls aren’t interested in not being pregnant, they want a baby. Read the rest of this entry »

Technorati Tags: childfree, childfree