Vladimir Putin recently questioned why large families are seen as outcasts in the western nations. He was right. There is an aggressive materialistic or/and ecological mindset in the USA and much of Europe that anyone who has a large family is a horrible and selfish person. Of course the opposite is actually the case but a lot of people with large families, particularly if the are middle class, catch a lot of negativity from people who can't see how we are, as a culture, on a self-inflicted genocidal path.
Hope Putin is successful in getting young people in Russia to have big families. We need more leaders like him in the west.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Everyone huddle around the campfire, the solstice approaches. Look carefully, for the michaele will a'happen to come on by and play a tune a-bout that one thing we need most of all —
Polygamy, Polygamy, we all love Polygamy, And fertility, go pump out a big family, Every year or so I come talk about it, yes me, Got to find a good fertile woman or three, Go on to a forum, talk about it reliably, With a pattern so very easy to foresee, Throw out some platitudes 'till everyone flees The truth is so clear, why can't everybody see, I even posted a link here to world net daily Genocide inevitable unless you make a baby, And more putin and conservative mentality, From a land in which chain e-mails define reality, And I express made-up truths about bisexuality, Homosexuality, porn, science, and psychopathy, And I do this all With great congeniality, Run and hide once Countered with factuality, But my departure Is merely a formality, Since 2004 Been rocking on liberality, Ain't never Gonna find a new way.
Drop mic, walk off stage
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Vladimir Putin recently questioned why large families are seen as outcasts in the western nations. He was right. There is an aggressive materialistic or/and ecological mindset in the USA and much of Europe that anyone who has a large family is a horrible and selfish person. Of course the opposite is actually the case but a lot of people with large families, particularly if the are middle class, catch a lot of negativity from people who can't see how we are, as a culture, on a self-inflicted genocidal path.
Hope Putin is successful in getting young people in Russia to have big families. We need more leaders like him in the west.
Remind me how large Putin's family is. Two children? So population neutral?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:There is an aggressive materialistic or/and ecological mindset in the USA and much of Europe that anyone who has a large family is a horrible and selfish person. Of course the opposite is actually the case...
I personally don't think the size of your family correlates strongly to materialism or ecological interest. In either direction.
Now, American Mormons are materialistic as all hell, but that's another issue. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Not saying this is for everyone, but it at least helps to replace an average of 9 yuppie couples who did not have kids.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because it's vital that as health care, agriculture, housing, public safety, peace, etc., have improved over the slow progress of human history, we must continue to breed at rates matching those of older times. For some reason, it's unclear why exactly.
As for the laurels Putin wears...pah. He's an autocratic, corrupt, oppressive opportunist whose transgressions could only begin to attempt to be excused in the name of stability, which is all well and good for those willing to run other people over in its pursuit...except for the part where it's Putin-dominated 'stability'. I can only conclude by your praise of the man that more ordinary arguments-respect for human rights, rule of law, popular sovereignty-wouldn't carry weight with you at all.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakesh, are you suggesting that United States and its current regime are in any way any better than Russia's? Even Chomsky has said Obama should be tried for war crimes.
And then we can look at the famous whistleblowers like Seymour Hersh:
America was a free and open society and now is going the other direction. Russia was once an oppressive and closed society and now it is going the other direction. So in 20 years...
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
To return to the subject of the thread: The world’s richest half billion people - about 7 per cent of the global population - are responsible for about 50 per cent of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions, a surrogate measure of fossil fuel consumption. Meanwhile, the poorest 50 per cent are responsible for just 7 per cent of emissions, Pearce wrote in an article for Yale University’s “Environment 360” website. “It’s overconsumption, not population growth, that is the fundamental problem,” Pearce argued, referring to Oregon State University research by Paul Murtaugh that accounted for the “intergenerational legacy” of today’s children.
This reference can be found in the UN's publication 'People and possibilities in a world of 7 billion'
This given, reducing population by family planning for the poorest 50 per cent will not help at all to solve the overpopulation problem. So what would we expect when it comes to recommendations from the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) to work on solving the overpopulation problem? Ideas to reduce overconsumption maybe? But no:
(end of May 2012) Lawmakers from 110 countries reaffirmed today their support to the principles and goals of the 1994 Cairo ICPD, emphasizing their continued centrality to efforts to reduce poverty and safeguard people’s health and rights, including sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights. In particular, they committed to strive to “attain at least 10 per cent of national development budgets and development assistance budgets for population and reproductive health programmes.” They pledged to support policies that give special attention to the specific concerns and needs of young peope by promoting and protecting their right to “access good quality education at all levels, health, sexual and reproductive services, including comprehensive sexuality education,” and to adopt measures to prevent all types of exploitation and abuse against them.
That's all. Family planning again and nothing else. Estimated costs 68 billion dollars only to start with...
So I agree it is the agressive materialistic mindset that should be changed, not the size of families.
Posts: 135 | Registered: Sep 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
GinetteB, the problem is waste, and also production. First, the 10% of the world with the highest consumption also produces a disproportionate amount of the useful items for the people of earth. Second, if you want to deal with waste then the way to do it is not to tell people to have less children but move people into an ethic that is far less consumption/materialistic oriented. And then there is the whole thing with the USA feeling like it has to dominate the world. How many resources are wasted when we send a fighter jet to blow the heck out of innocent people around the world? How many resources are used when we want to intimidate some small nation with our fleets? Please, having fewer kids in the USA, Japan or Europe does not help a thing.
Lastly, the entire adding CO2 to the "harmful gasses" category sort of is ironic don't you think? Plants need CO2 to breath and they produce oxygen. I could see CO being something to be concerned with but then making lots of gasses into "carbon credits" is merely a scheme to make people feel guilty and therefor support massive wealth transfers -- and that will only benefit the mega-rich corporations that would administer them.
Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Michaele, did you actually read what I wrote? I did say, having fewer kids - anywhere - does not help. Also, in the above CO2 is only used as a surrogate measure for fossil fuel consumption..so an indication marker of the amount of consumption.
Posts: 135 | Registered: Sep 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by GinetteB: Michaele, did you actually read what I wrote? I did say, having fewer kids - anywhere - does not help. Also, in the above CO2 is only used as a surrogate measure for fossil fuel consumption..so an indication marker of the amount of consumption.
Noted. And yes, I did catch that. Posts: 232 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about those that don't want large families don't have large families, and you stay the hell out of the way of those that want them?
I always find it interesting that people that are completely pro abortion and a "woman's right to choose what to do with her body" are often those that also say "Well, you have the right to choose to do what you want with your body.... As long as you stop at 2 or 3 kids."
I am the oldest of six children, my mother never worked a day in her life because my father did whatever he could to make sure she could stay home. At the beginning that often involved working more than one job. My mother was very frugal and didn't spend money unless absolutely needed. We LOVE our large family, especially now that we are older.
It has nothing to do with polygamy. We never got a handout from anyone, and we never needed one.
My wife and I have agreed that two children is enough for us. We will be having our first in March (I don't think I told anyone on here yet, I'm going to be a father) and another in a few years. We'll see at that point if she wants a third, but I doubt it!
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Who, for heaven's sake, has tried to stop American families who can afford them from having kids? Though, by the way, the economy has changed. It is not so easy to get by on one salary as it once was.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
But seriously, I have never heard anyone argue that body sovereignty ends with the 2nd or 3rd kid.
quote:We never got a handout from anyone, and we never needed one.
Not to be a jerk, but your family got child tax credits and tax exemptions.
quote:...my mother never worked a day in her life...
Also, I'm relatively sure that she worked long days for something like 30 years. I know what you meant, but six kids is a damn lot of work, so there has to be a better way to put this. Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by michaele8: Russia was once an oppressive and closed society and now it is going the other direction.
Right, that's why they just recently criminalized overt acts of homosexuality and why there's been a brutal crackdown on dissent, like with Pussy Riot, right? These are all emblematic of a society opening up and becoming less oppressive, right?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by michaele8: Russia was once an oppressive and closed society and now it is going the other direction.
Right, that's why they just recently criminalized overt acts of homosexuality and why there's been a brutal crackdown on dissent, like with Pussy Riot, right? These are all emblematic of a society opening up and becoming less oppressive, right?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Who, for heaven's sake, has tried to stop American families who can afford them from having kids? Though, by the way, the economy has changed. It is not so easy to get by on one salary as it once was.
Thankfully no one is. I've heard calls right here on Hatrack for putting birth control into the drinking water, but that's Hatrack, and it's not the only crazy thing someone's proposed that's never going to see the light of day.
There is considerable and increasing criticism toward large families from more than one front, at least from my perspective. I think I notice it more because we have a huge family by current standards--5 kids. I rarely bring that up because it doesn't always go over well. Being in my shoes, I'm obviously an advocate for parents being able to make their own choices regarding having children or not. I think it's an intensely private decision whether to have a child, and when, and how many, and no one else has the right to butt in, including close family members. Yes, I think many people continue to make very ill-advised decisions to have children, or decisions that result in children they weren't planning for. But that fact shouldn't be the basis for others stepping in and trying to make those decisions in the parents' stead. Insofar as the ideal still is that each child is planned for and wanted, the parents and no one else gets to make that call.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with you, Advice for Robots. I also have five kids and I get looks and comments all the time from people who think I'm immoral for it. It probably has something to do with living in Portland... The 'tolerant' crowd here doesn't like my decisions, apparently.
My dad was one of ten kids and having such a large family has been a joy. When we get together every year we usually have over 100 family members involved.
Posts: 298 | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wait, so smaller families don't help *anywhere*? Like, a family of twelve living in a slumlord's two bed apartment in a ghetto, having another child-that doesn't just not hurt, it actually HELPS? At *worst*, extra children are only ever neutral?
For pity's sake, it's easy to see religion is thick in this line of thinking.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would agree that I'm not seeing any genuine efforts towards eliminating large families in Western culture. However, criticism of large families does happen. I think most of it comes about as parents become more intensely focused on structuring their childrens' lives. Its part of the whole parenting style which has kids being shuttled from soccer practice to extra tutoring and then scouts and then bible study, etc. Its a schedule which becomes more impossible to maintain and implement in larger families. More families are choosing to pour all of their focus into two, three, or even just one child.
I'm not a fan of the hovering, controlling parenting style myself, but in a hyper-competitive Western culture, its an expected side effect.
I think its also worth noting that large families are still prevalent in lower income families with less access to birth control and family planning services. I think there is some cultural association that large family=poor and small family=wealthy.
Of course, there's also a noticeable backlash against childfree adults and families. There's always going to be an "ideal" within any culture or society, and anyone who deviates whether by having more than three or less than two children is going to be viewed as acting outside the norm.
Personally, I grew up one of three children and most notably, my brothers and I grew up with very little access to our extended family (both of my parents are one of six children.) As an adult, I find family reunions to be incredibly uncomfortable. I do not like the idea of forced social bonds just because I share DNA with these people. I would much prefer to spend my time with friends of my choosing than with my mom's racist brother or my dad's ultra-religious family.
I've decided that I do not want children (a statement which is ALWAYS greeted with "you'll change your mind") and honestly, I think there's no worse idea that forcing or influencing people to having more children than they want or can personally handle.
Children should grow up feeling wanted by their parents.
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Who, for heaven's sake, has tried to stop American families who can afford them from having kids? Though, by the way, the economy has changed. It is not so easy to get by on one salary as it once was.
The way you phrased your question is confusing. Before I give you a list of people that have talked about population control, I wanted to see if you could clarify your question. Are you referring to stopping American families who CANNOT afford them or stopping ANY American Family from having more than a few kids?
Scifibum, you are right, I should clarify. My mother did not have a job outside the home while raising us. Wait, I take that back. She taught water aerobics for 20 years or so a couple of times a week. (About 3 hours a week)I'm PRETTY sure it was for the free gym membership. Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Eh, I think large families have some positives, the older children learn to help look after the younger ones and they all generally I think rely on each other more.
It also helps that if one gets picked on you got a half dozen brothers and sisters who'll zerg rush the jerk.
I think implicitly there's probably some tension and competition but that could be a pro too in some circumstances as it could help instill good societal survival values to encourage one to grab opportunities while still having a large support network to rely on.
Also the matter of they can generally probably each experiment and do their own thing. No need to pressure one to become some sort of superperson.
Posts: 12931 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Geraine: I always find it interesting that people that are completely pro abortion and a "woman's right to choose what to do with her body" are often those that also say "Well, you have the right to choose to do what you want with your body.... As long as you stop at 2 or 3 kids."
If the people who view abortion as a woman's right were attemting to get legislation passed to limit how many kids a person could have I'd be more inclined to agree with you that they were being hypocritical. As it is, though...it's just people having opinions, and voicing them. There's nothing wrong with that.
quote:We will be having our first in March (I don't think I told anyone on here yet, I'm going to be a father)
posted
My grandmother is number 8 of 12. In her words, that was too many children to have. She says her mother didn't have much of a choice in the matter, as the Catholic church at the time (rural Quebec, 1910s) was up in your business if you weren't having children. She describes here as a "motherly" mother.
Her oldest sister was required to stop her education at first(!) grade to care for the family.
One child died as a toddler. Three died in a fire when the children were left unattended overnight (then they emigrated to the US). My grandmother was seven at the time.
When my great-grandmother was ill, my grandmother was sent to live in an orphanage (this was in the USA) because they couldn't afford to fed her.
My grandmother never got to go to high school because she had to work. She wonders if she was smart enough to go there. Not knowing English at first was pretty traumatic. She has also had mental health issues at other times in her life, and spent time away from her children as a young mother. I don't quite have the details on those.
In general, my grandmother's family couldn't afford their kids. Her mother died at around age 50.
Did I mention my great grandmother was my great grandfather's second wife? The first died in childbirth. HE lived to be 107, dying in the late 1980s. Basically he paid into social security for 10 years (or whatever the minimum is), retired in the 1940s and collected for 60 years. (and they say no one back then could do that. hahaha). Seven of his twelve children lived until their 90s, with the oldest, with two still around, the oldest at 95.
I can't name all of my relatives on that side of the family, but as far as I know, they are all productive members of the american middle class.
All and all, I like existing, but I think that people shouldn't be pressured into having children that they don't want or can't afford. People have a right to say no to parenthood. We don't need as many people on the planet as we currently have, especially as technology eliminates unnecessary jobs, and reduces the amount of necessary ones. As a child of immigrants on one side of the family, I have zero problem with people from other countries coming here and propping up the birth rate. So what if they aren't white? Or Christian? I promise you, in 60 years, their descendants will be having two children families and whining about lazy foreigners with the rest of us.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:We will be having our first in March (I don't think I told anyone on here yet, I'm going to be a father)
Congratulations!
Thank you! We found out we are having a boy...
The wife and I had agreed on a name if it was a girl, but we have absolutely no boy names. She doesn't like even one that I have suggested:
Marty McFly Lindsay Beuford Tannen Lindsay Charles Norris Lindsay Atreyu Lindsay (From Never Ending Story, not the band) Mclain Lindsay (Because.... Die Hard...)
Anyone have any suggestions for hardcore boys names? Idealy with some sort of 80's reference? Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
According to my mother, dad wanted to name me Alistair Dylan after his favorite people, Alistair Cooke and Bob Dylan. Fortunately mom's favorite won out, Sean Connery.
Me, I'm a racer so if I ever have a boy, I'm leaning towards Michael Sena. Michael for Michael Andretti and Michael Schumacher and Sena for Ayrton Sena and the fact that it's a rearrangement of my name.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why does that make me think of super bowl winning quarterback Brad Johnson who named his son Maximus?
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wingracer: mom's favorite won out, Sean Connery.
Hey, that's who I'm named after.
As a musician, I've always wanted a boy and a girl named Dorian and Lydia.
LOL, you had me scratching my head trying to figure out which famous musicians you were referring to. Then I assumed you meant the modes. I love dorian mode.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The wife and I REALLY like Maximus, but unfortunately one of her best friends has a son with the same name so she said she would feel awkward naming him that.
Then I suggested Varo, Spartacus, Dotore, Crassus, and Tiberius.
She said no to those as well >.<
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
I don't know why, but that has always been my favorite name to say. Just the way it sounds or feels or whatever, it works for me.
Posts: 891 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know someone whose Max is a Maximus. Other kids are Dante and Apolo to round out their crop of boys with awesome names.
Posts: 1757 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
