AIBU to think people who say they're 'only' having 2 children for environmental reasons drive me nuts?

[thedaisychain]

Surely, if you were genuinely concerned about the environment, or it was a big factor when considering the size and shape of your family, you'd have no children or possibly just one?!

Saying you're not having more than two children for environmental reasons really grates me. Given the total fertility rate for women in the UK is 1.9, it's not like they're doing anything fucking special! They're just the average!

People who say this, get down from your high horse!

(P.s. Prolific name changer)

Toneitdown

🤣

In my experience, the most vocal hypocrite spotters are climate change deniers, or people who just want to shut down the debate.

It seems to me to be bizarre that anyone has to be coaxed to worry about the environment!

David Attenborough?

Who gives a fuck about that guy?

In my experience, the most vocal hypocrite spotters are climate change deniers

No, people who spot hypocrites just really dislike patronising people. They also can critically think about a situation and see who is benefitting from it.

I would say the people who blindly follow campaigns are lemmings if they can't take a minute to dissect them.

@BertrandRussell Give me a hypocrite who at least does something over a hypocrite spotter who does nothing any day.....

That @ BertrandRussell genuinely made me laugh ( sorry do not mean to make make light but it did . )

I have 1 child - would have liked another but did not happen . Well - we are grateful for what we have.

Hope this works semi-rad.com/2013/02/are-you-making-the-world-awesome-or-angrier/xkcd-someone-is-wrong-on-the-internet/

"Experts" have been telling women since my DM was a girl that they should have no more than 2 children because of "overpopulation".

After 70 years of that we then get told that there aren't enough young people to work to keep the pensioners so now we have to important thousands of foreigners. Bit of a slap in the face for all those like my DM who would dearly have liked more children.

David Attenborough is a hypocrite. Can’t stand the man

Out of interest- can anyone name a non hypocritical environmental spokesperson?

“After 70 years of that we then get told that there aren't enough young people to work to keep the pensioners so now we have to important thousands of foreigners. Bit of a slap in the face for all those like my DM who would dearly have liked more children“
We are talking about the population of the world- not the population of the U.K.!

Out of interest- can anyone name a non hypocritical environmental spokesperson?

Greta Thunberg springs pretty quickly to mind!

And look at the stick she gets!

This I like - and again not answering the question but the phrase "the gap between your aspirations and your actions is a measure of your hypocrisy " - I paraphrase but I think is interesting.

Personally I am not keen on Bear Grylls but don't have a well reasoned argument.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/aug/06/activists.kingsnorthclimatecamp

So George Monbiot ? Or is that naive ?

I don’t think you have to be a perfect person to champion the environment; I just think that maybe, just maybe, we’d get more traction with “hey, tiger numbers have increased recently in India, isn’t that great? Let’s support similar schemes elsewhere to help these other endangered species” Rather than “you are a fucking terrible person for accidentally forgetting your reuseable water bottle and needing to buy a plastic bottle”.

One gets people inspired and encouraged to do more, the other puts people on the defensive and makes it easier to write off environmental concerns as pointless.

I haven't rtft, but the OP reminded me of. news article I recently read which was by an engaged man, who made a lot of the fact that they were planning on remaining childfree after marriage, because environment

The last line was the clincher: 'if we feel at some point in the future that we do want kids, we may change our minds.' So basically they may want kids but not yet. So much virtue signalling from him, so much eye rolling from me. I think this is common

It doesn’t bother me I’d probably think good on you. Depending on how it was said.

@TheBitchOfTheVicar ha!! Brilliant!

at the theory that population decline won't make a difference to elderly care because.....robots?!
Nothing more appropriate for the personal intimate care of the vulnerable... than a robot.

Some 1 parent families have 2 cas. I know of one who had 6 children and no cars. Kids are only part of the issue.

WeaselsRising Did your mum really not have more children because experts told her generation not to though? For us it was more about becoming impoverished through constant wars and state policies targeting my community (Irish) and that of others. I think it has made my generation pretty much afraid to breed.

In my experience 100% of "we're not having a third kid because of the environment" couples fall into one of two buckets:

The ones who have one member of the couple who would LOVE to have more children, three or maybe even four or five. But the other person is absolutely against it because of the time/monetary commitment, and may have wished for no children or one child. So the way the small-family desirer talks the big-family desirer into stopping at two is environment, with tangential appeals to cost.

People who simply can't afford a third and would like one, but talking about money isn't very nice, especially when people will start criticizing the choices you made for your other kids. "If you didn't get them so many little toy cars, maybe you could afford to have a little brother or sister for them..."

And couples where one or both people would like a third but infertility is an issue. Some people are perfectly comfortable talking frankly about fertility journeys but not everyone.

If you don't want to say "our fifth round of IVF to have #2 almost destroyed our marriage and we can't do this again," "Nursery fees are killing us and we want to be able to take our kids places and buy them nice food instead of eating beans and staying home," "we couldn't agree on how many kids to have and two was a good compromise position," the environment becomes a safe culprit. It's a polite lie people say to save face when the real story is not so pleasant.

In my experience 100% of "we're not having a third kid because of the environment" couples fall into one of two buckets:

Surely in reality it is a combination of things. I doubt anyone 100 per cent doesn’t have a baby JUST because of the environment. If I wanted a third baby so much a cried myself to sleep every night thinking of how incomplete my family felt then I would no doubt have a third child anyway.

I conceived very easily both times, nursery fees of around 3k a month while working 4 days a week IS a bit of a killer frankly (most people would miss the thousands and an extra day’s pay I imagine) but the eldest would be at school by the time the third was in nursery, DP would have had another if I wanted to, raising a baby/ small child is a bit of a pain at times and very time consuming... none of these things are deal breakers for me though. I would love to see what our next child might be like. I can’t help but feel like on balance nobody needs three children and it just seems a bit excessive. The environment/ resources IS a contributing factor. Although I would never say that’s why we only had two. Maybe I just feel like two is enough because I only really wanted two anyway, who knows?!

People who smugly tell you anything are bloody annoying, it isn’t limited to this issue.

Ultimately raising three children to a high standard is better than only having one child and not bothering to educate them properly.

This is nonsense you've made up to justify your position.

I don't understand why so many posters are absolutely convinced that others are lying when they say the environment is the reason they didn't have (more) kids.

What on earth makes you so arrogantly confident that you know better than the people whose actual decision it was?