684
submitted 6 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

A fifth of female climate scientists who responded to Guardian survey said they had opted to have no or fewer children

Ihad the hormonal urges,” said Prof Camille Parmesan, a leading climate scientist based in France. “Oh my gosh, it was very strong. But it was: ‘Do I really want to bring a child into this world that we’re creating?’ Even 30 years ago, it was very clear the world was going to hell in a handbasket. I’m 62 now and I’m actually really glad I did not have children.”

Parmesan is not alone. An exclusive Guardian survey has found that almost a fifth of the female climate experts who responded have chosen to have no children, or fewer children, due to the environmental crises afflicting the world.

An Indian scientist who chose to be anonymous decided to adopt rather than have children of her own. “There are too many children in India who do not get a fair chance and we can offer that to someone who is already born,” she said. “We are not so special that our genes need to be transmitted: values matter more.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] octatron@lmy.drundo.com.au 107 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The population is actually tipped to massively reduce on the next 100 years due to a large portion of people not have babies simply due to crappy economic conditions, inflation, war the lying flat movement in china and the ever increasing destruction of the middle class into the homeless poor. Aside from rich people destroying peoples ability to have happy lives, there's also the plastic problem that's quite literally made every male living thing have a reduced sperm count and it continues to drop as plastic is in the air, our clothes carpet and oceans. Endocrine disruptors in our bodies are being effected by chemicals found in vinyl products, thermal receipts and Tupperware releasing chemicals when heated in microwaves. These things are so small they enter the bloodstream and pass through the blood brain barrier.. Fuuuck

So if you want to save the future start by sniping off rich oligarchs and ban plastic completely

[-] Wogi@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago

It'll start to level off around 10 billion, in 35 years.

The thing about a growing population is that fewer people having babies has a diminished effect when there are so many more people. Each new pair having a slightly smaller chance of reproducing doesn't matter when there are twice as many new pairs.

The population won't decrease dramatically, save for some catastrophic event.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kinsnik@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago

i agree with your general idea, but not with all the reasons. war, crappy economic conditions and inflation have all happened multiple times before (and much worse that the current situation), but I've never heard that there were large portion of people choosing not to have kids before (please, correct me if I am wrong)

i think that the current mental health crisis (which is caused by all those problems + the housing crisis, destruction of middle class, climate change concerns + social media) makes it different this time

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 23 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

war, crappy economic conditions and inflation have all happened multiple times before

And they've all been paired with downturns in new births. The Thirty Years War, the Bengali Famine, and the Great Depression all resulted in sharp declines in birth rates.

i think that the current mental health crisis (which is caused by all those problems + the housing crisis, destruction of middle class, climate change concerns + social media) makes it different this time

I don't think its limited to mental health. Two big changes from historical periods have been the sharp decline in dying kids and introduction of effective contraception. Historically, the only thing that countered a human's innate horniness was malnutrition, massacre, and high rates of infant mortality. With vaccines and contraception, the idea of family planning isn't "Have five kids and hope two live" but "Have two kids and hope you can pay for their college".

A big contribution to the 40s-era Baby Boom was the fertilizer revolution, which dramatically boosted crop yields. This, combined with early vaccine technology, saw a drop in maternal deaths and infant deaths, leading to parents with enormous family sizes who all lived to adulthood. These adults arrived just in time to start taking The Pill. Consequently, the Millennial second-tier Boom was much smaller than the first. And now Millennials are having even fewer kids, because contraception is trivial to obtain and large families are stigmatized against.

But as to mental health? I think that's tangential and hardly unique to the modern moment. If we didn't have fertilizer and contraception and vaccination, we'd have just as many mentally ill people running around and making babies who died before they turned three years old. And the population downturn would look the same as any other 18th or 19th century trend line.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BigBenis@lemmy.world 66 points 6 months ago

I decided that I personally felt unethical bringing people into this world nearly a decade ago

[-] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago

What if your kid was going to be the one to fix everything though? Lol now we are doomed

[-] mutant_zz@lemmy.world 112 points 6 months ago

We're not in a movie. Climate change isn't going be solved by one brilliant scientist. It's not even a scientific/technology problem at this point, it's a political one.

[-] 3volver@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

You nailed it with this comment, I agree completely. We have the technology, we've HAD the technology to solve the problem, and we've KNOWN what the problem is for a long time now. We have GREEDY fucks in high positions of power who wouldn't make any money solving it though, that's the problem.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

Maybe his kid was going to assassinate a bunch of billionaires.

[-] Wolfy21_@lemmy.ml 8 points 6 months ago

Cool, now you, an educated, well intent person with good morals won't have any offspring to pass those values to, and thus won't have any representation in the next generations. Meanwhile redneck Terry will make 7 children with 3 different women and teach them to hate the libruls and that the earth is flat.

It is your decision not to have kids, I chose so myself too. But your line of thinking is in discord with the argument.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Asclepiaz@lemmy.world 51 points 6 months ago

I knew when I was 12 I never wanted children. I got married at 20. I got fixed at 24. I am almost 40 and have no regrets other than not getting fixed sooner, but finding a doc to fix a lady at 18 is damn near impossible.

[-] SoleInvictus 46 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

A friend of mine had the same issue at 22. She even had already had a child at 16 but multiple doctors refused, claiming "she might want more". One doctor would do it but wanted a signed permission slip from her husband first.

All women deserve bodily autonomy.

[-] Asclepiaz@lemmy.world 20 points 6 months ago

Yeah I also needed my husband to approve for some reason. So demeaning.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 37 points 6 months ago

1/5th is low, and doesn't appear very different to the general female population.

This really just highlights the underlying problem and why our "efforts" are destined to amount to little more than shuffling deck chairs on the titanic — humans are selfish, and most of us are not willing to make major sacrifices to avert disaster; hell, most struggle to accept minor inconveniences.

[-] maegul@lemmy.ml 14 points 6 months ago

most struggle to accept minor inconveniences.

This is the really jaw dropping thing whenever I see it. I just have no idea what to say and don’t get how people don’t have an instinct for when there might be a bigger picture.

Some are really cruising through life just trying to maximise convenience and comfort.

[-] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 21 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

COVID lockdowns demonstrated that we could kick climate change with enough will power. Id start by mandating work from home where possible.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 12 points 6 months ago

due to the environmental crises afflicting the world

You're removing the context behind the reasoning. Unless you're claiming 1/5th of the general female population does not want to have kids due to climate change as well.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 26 points 6 months ago
[-] PhAzE@lemmy.ca 15 points 6 months ago

1/5th want no or fewer kids... so 4/5 were pushing forward like normal.

[-] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Ohe of the 4/5. I have 3 kids under 13. You gotta.be optimistic that they're the generation to finally fix the mess we made.

If everyone stops having kids then hope disappears.

When we have exhausted all other options, we will do the right thing.

Edit - I love that having hope and optimism for a future is downvotes lol

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] olicvb@lemmy.ca 20 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

lmao 'starting' ?? I believe starting should have been done years ago.

Reminds me of this South Park clip XD (youtube link)

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 17 points 6 months ago

Title could have said majority of millennials

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] bleistift2@feddit.de 16 points 6 months ago

no or fewer children

So… they killed other people’s children?

[-] Kalothar@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 months ago

Gotta fight climate change somehow

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Kedly@lemm.ee 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

How do you have fewer than no children? (=P tongue in cheek purposeful misunderstanding, not true pedantry)

Edit: (Damn, even being clear I was being cheeky I still managed to piss someone off xD)

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] treefrog@lemm.ee 6 points 6 months ago

You've thrown the worst fear That can ever be hurled Fear to bring children Into the world

For threatenin' my baby Unborn and unnamed You ain't worth the blood That runs in your veins

[-] PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago

Oh no! Think of the hypothetical children!

[-] Bo7a@lemmy.ca 12 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

This is a powerful lyric from the song masters of war by bob dylan.

It is a song about how the Rich and powerful use and abuse normal people as Grist for the war mill or in this case Grist for the oil mill.

How the fuck is this being downvoted?

[-] Welt@lazysoci.al 7 points 6 months ago

Because on face value it looks like an anti-abortion lyric.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] HubertManne@kbin.social 6 points 6 months ago

im surprised its a fifth have no or fewer and not the other way around.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Even 30 years ago, it was very clear the world was going to hell in a handbasket.

And 30 years before that. And 30 years before that.

I mean, if you don't want to have kids more power to you. I get it.

But what I'm reading is far more a consequence of a social stigma against having kids without sufficient economic independence. And extraordinary rates of inflation in housing, food, health care, and education make kids utterly unaffordable even if the climate situation looks great.

“We are not so special that our genes need to be transmitted: values matter more.”

I think that's true up until a point. When I see the genocide in Gaza or forced sterilization policies aimed at black and Hispanic women in police custody in the US or caste violence in India or Myanmar or the Bill Gates Foundation's effort to quash population size in West Africa...

What values are we transmitting when we've got a policy of eugenics? What does it say about the western impulse to homogenize and euthanize everything it comes into contact with?

I can very easily see a world in which the impulse towards mass extermination gets us before the heat pushes us all into the upper reaches of Canada and Russia. And I'm loathe to see anti-natalism harnessed as one more tool in the bigot's bag of tricks, to justify why a population with high birth rates is an efficient target for population rightsizing.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
684 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39019 readers
1931 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS