Antinatalism has a point but it upsets me

@sakura184

At the end of the day, I mean this gently, you have your children. You made your choice. Is this endless ruminating making your life, theirs, or the well-being of the planet any better?

If I were you, I really would try to stop yourself mulling this point over and over, and find a positive action you can take to improve the world you brought your children into.

Feministcat, if you think there are too many people, why are you still alive?

Again, antinatalism is not coming only from “one view”. It is not a new idea only promoted by incels. So many of these posts demonstrate a very narrow view of antinatalism, kind of like judging all vegans and vegetarians by the loudest activists amongst them. It also reminds me of when people see the word “radical” in radical feminism and think it means “extreme” without understanding the etymology behind the term.

Not all antinatalists promote extinction, it is just they assign a negative value to birth (compared to natalists or pronatalists who assign a positive value). Anti here does not mean “hate”.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism

is a philosophical position that assigns a negative value to birth. Antinatalists argue that people should abstain from procreation because it is morally bad (some also recognize the procreation of other sentient beings as morally bad). In scholarly and in literary writings, various ethical foundations have been adduced for antinatalism.[1] Some of the earliest surviving formulations of the idea that it would be better not to have been born come from ancient Greece.[2] The term antinatalism is in opposition to the term natalism or pro-natalism, and was used probably for the first time as the name of the position by Théophile de Giraud (born 1968) in his book L'art de guillotiner les procréateurs: Manifeste anti-nataliste.[3]

It can have religious or social background. The Shakers were for example antinatalists. For some it is a negative utilitarianism. For others it is environmental. I myself come
to antinatalism from an environmental standpoint mostly because of the harm I believe we as humans have caused and so cause:

www.independent.co.uk/environment/mass-extinction-humans-causing-earth-deaths-end-times-warning-a7765856.html

sciencenordic.com/humans-have-always-caused-plant-and-animal-extinctions

I don’t think that human beings are a great positive influence on the planet. I don’t believe humans are more “special” than the other sentient beings that inhabit this planet or the ones we have pushed into extinction.

I don’t believe adding to the 7.4 billion we have (the world population has grown by 3 billion in my own lifetime!) is a “good thing” ie a positive value. Indeed, I think it harms not just other sentient beings or life forms, but other humans. Not just in the competition of resources like food and shelter (ie look at real estate prices in densely populated areas even, or the have/have not situations in places like San Francisco), but also in terms of financial well being, health (ie more people in more densely populated areas increases exposure to disease), etc.

I am a radical feminist. I am also an antinatalist. I don’t hate women. I don’t hate children. I love my nieces and nephews. I volunteer in organizations that promote the well being of children and their families. I am not telling others absolutely not to have children even if I chose not to.

I just think that as humans we have consciousness and that biology does not have to determine our choices even if it influences them. This is also where my feminism crosses with my antinatalism - I think that in the world as if is now, having children can and often does harm women including from achieving freedom from patriarchal oppression. Still their choice but I encourage women, all women, to consciously think about whether having children will be a positive value in their life versus a negative value on an individual basis rather than blaming biological determinism.

The writer of the blog linked to hates everyone. She is clearly having a terrible time because of her illness but every article is a torrent of bilious invective against everyone she meets.

She comes across as an Incel's more disgruntled big sister than a feminist.

Some people just hate other people. They might find an excuse in politics, religion or ecology, but the fact is they want rid of other people. It’s never themselves who are the problem.

Is their view that humans should make ourselves extinct to save the planet?

These are evil and moronic views. Just ignore them.

The thing is there is a strong biological urge to procreate for most (though admittedly not all) people.

I find any kind of extremist view like this, which tries to deny that we are, beneath it all, a mammalian species with hormones, primitive impulses and inherited behaviours, both impossibly obtuse and magnificently egotistical.

We might be a neurologically advanced species, compared with other animals, but we are still, at the heart of the matter, animals. And however much handwringing we do, we can’t change that.

We can do the best we can, to live as a more just, egalitarian, free and fair society- but, regardless of individual choices, holding our fellow humans to impossible philosophical and theoretical standards (militant veganism, extreme zero wasters, antinatalism etc etc) only sets us up for further discord and division.

I have a child, just one, and he’ll be my one and only. I worry about the world I brought him into but he’s here now- why should I feel guilt, for obeying my instinct? Which was to continue a pregnancy and give birth, not abort? It was instinct, as pure as I’ve ever felt, when I faced the choice, to bear him or not- why should I berate myself for that?

It's extremism.

And in theory there are currently enough resources in the world to support our population of it were managed better. The problem is really western excess and population growth being too high. Both these things are, in theory, things that could be changed. The issue is the lack of international political will to address exploitation and non sustainability of resources on the one hand versus the right of those to find a living to merely survive.

It's a supply and demand issue which is out of control.

It's another of those ideologies that looks at a problem from the wrong angle and decides the way to solve it is through projecting their hate at a chosen target to blame; a target which really isn't the ultimate source of the problem.

This is why you read it and think 'oh they have a point' because they have identified a genuine social problem. The issue is where they go with that problem is complete arse.

Same with all extremism.

i just ignore these people. They arent concerned with me or my childrens rights, so their cause is a bit different to mine. I get what theyre saying in theory, but it obviously has no bearing on my reality, and im not leaping at the chance to take on even more maternal guilt than i already have, when life is shit enough already cheers

I've not come across them before but, from your description, they sound like Antifa's less sensible sibling.
If they have enough power over you to make you upset then I would disengage and walk away. Don't give them brainspace.

Also ffs us men could just abstain from sex, we’re just as morally culpable. How someone could say it’s feminist and yet seemingly absolve men of any and all responsibility seems a little ass backwards to me.

Sorry Fuckit cross posted there it doesn’t just feel right it’s empirically measurably and objectively true. It also reduces political/religious extremism too.

Well everyday is a school day I hadn’t heard of this peculiar brand of nihilism before. The hope that human ingenuity cannot innovate around this problem is as valid as we’re fucked beyond all chance, because nobody can actually predict the future.

Not saying that gives us carte blanche to continue screwing the environment, but still, have some perspective. The solution to bringing the birthrate down boils down to two essential principles: give girls equal access to education, and give women reproductive rights. It’s empirically repeated across every culture that has tried it.

Spending time trying to convince western women to feel crippling guilt over having children is a little pointless on two counts, one it doesn’t commit mental resources, effort and focus on where actionable steps could be taken (namely third world and developing countries women’s rights) secondly western women in the main seem to be walking guilt factories anyway.

I think Feminism has a long way to go in this world. I do feel that if globally women everywhere could be given access to a decent education and the right to control her own fertility the birth rate would drop.

I waited to have children until I could afford it. why anyone would bring a child into this world in a war zone, when you have no food to eat or where there is awful sanitation and waterborne disease is beyond me. It is easy to look from the outside in. You realise a lot of these mothers were children themselves when they were married off and probably have no choice whatsoever over their sex lives.

I also think that necessity is the mother of invention, and there will get to a point where we will have no choice to treat our world better, and come away from the disposable, want, want, jet set lifestyle. It will be a different world, but hopefully a better world. Our children are going to have to build this world. I have 3 children and they are being brought up to care about this planet.

In the future I don’t doubt people will die. People already suffering and struggling to get by in poor nations with better respect for the planet than us are going to be affected the worst.

They are right that bringing new life into this world is probably selfish, and over population does not help. However if humans are so evil then why as someone said upthread are they not committing suicide? Are they living the high life? Foreign travel? Cars? Fancy food? Expensive tastes? Buy from new each and every time? Because if they are they are hypocrites who are probably a little bit bitter.

I got involved in quite a radical group and as time went on I learned about antinatalism

So is the woman who’s blog you posted part of the radical group? You seem to be classing antinatalism as a branch of feminism and I just don’t see it.

I know it’s early, but i’m completely failing to see the “logical progression of thought” that goes from radical feminism to “the world is going to shit and it’s all women’s fault”

These people hate mothers, have always hated mothers, and the environmental angle is just a new trendy stick to beat them with.

Whao, the person in that last link is so incredibly negative, it is untrue. He or she loathes her mother and her family while at the same time complaining that they won't take them in

I read some of her other articles and they are all the same. Unremitting negativity and general hatred of everyone.

The OP referred to her as a woman she admired for her feminist writing but she is so extreme and so full of loathing I can't see how it is possible to take it seriously.

I think that biological denialism is the other extreme of biological essentialism.

I think that there is such a raw truth about what it means to be human in motherhood, and that conscientious women raising conscientious children is a potential not to be sneezed at. I think that society would collapse into a ginormous shitshow without mothers. Basically, they sound like insufferable loons.

I also really agree with Goose here:
I think we actually have to be very careful about how we conceptualise having children. There is a very strong push these days to see them as a sort of consumer choice, a luxury product. In this view people choose to have them in much the same way people choose to buy a pedigreed dog. That has a lot of implications for how we see family support, support for parents in law, and also issues like surrogacy are very much affected by this mindset.

Whao, the person in that last link is so incredibly negative, it is untrue. He or she loathes her mother and her family while at the same time complaining that they won't take them in.

When I was anti-family in my youth, at least I was coherent and didn't feel entitled to any favours.

They are right
What are they right about? Beyond the world's problems are caused by humans? They are certainly not right about anything else.

and I suppose it's a good thing to educate young women and girls

Do you think there is anything in that blog you linked to which is useful for young women and girls? I don't think the writer should be allowed anywhere near young girls.