More
69

Hello, I hope this is the right circle for this, I didn't know which one to choose.

Basically, I want to start a discussion about overpopulation. My stepsister posted that our population reach 8 billion yesterday and started calling women "breeders". I sent her a message saying I felt that calling women breeders was misogynistic and that we should be directing our anger at all the big corporations that rape and pillage the Earth, not women and children.

Back in high-school, I bought into the antinatalist rhetoric but as I've gotten older, I have felt like a lot of the things being said were very anti women. Now, whenever I see the word breeder, I see red.

When people talk about overpopulation, I always see the blame put on the women. It doesn't seen fair, it feels like mother's and their children are the scapegoat.

Hello, I hope this is the right circle for this, I didn't know which one to choose. Basically, I want to start a discussion about overpopulation. My stepsister posted that our population reach 8 billion yesterday and started calling women "breeders". I sent her a message saying I felt that calling women breeders was misogynistic and that we should be directing our anger at all the big corporations that rape and pillage the Earth, not women and children. Back in high-school, I bought into the antinatalist rhetoric but as I've gotten older, I have felt like a lot of the things being said were very anti women. Now, whenever I see the word breeder, I see red. When people talk about overpopulation, I always see the blame put on the women. It doesn't seen fair, it feels like mother's and their children are the scapegoat.

97 comments

[–] arete 114 points

I've always been anti-natalist, but I'm pretty sure the main reason for overpopulation is men. It's no coincidence that countries where women have lower status tend to have higher birth rates. And I bet if men and women were to share the pains of childbearing, there would be far fewer babies born.

[–] DurableBook 84 points

Yup. Every single study on the subject has always found that if women are given the ability to control how many babies they have, birth rates plummet. If women are given opportunities for education and careers other than "breeder," birth rates drop even more.

Furthermore, in every culture around the world it has been demonstrated that increasing women's income and economic control links DIRECTLY to improved quality of life for everyone. When men control all the money they tend to spend it on themselves while women and children starve; when women control all the money, they invest it back into their families and communities. This also comes into play when we try to send charitable help to communities or countries in crisis...men are invariably trying to steal and hoard whatever is sent, creating a false scarcity of resources.

[–] GenderHeretic 34 points

Yup. Every single study on the subject has always found that if women are given the ability to control how many babies they have, birth rates plummet. If women are given opportunities for education and careers other than "breeder," birth rates drop even more.

And when a country wants to increase its birthrate, the go-to solution is to take away women's reproductive freedoms. They know it's the bReEdEr women who reduce the population when they have choices over their lives.

The amount of power women have in countries where we have reproductive freedom is incredible.

Every time I see an article blaming women for the low birth rate, I see women doing the brunt of the work to actually stop overpopulation and subsequent environmental problems. It's not even a collective decision, it is millions upon millions of women making individual choices to better our own lives and those of our families by reducing the number of children we have. And despite all the action governments could take, that massive corporations could take to stop climate change, THIS has made a huge, tangible difference, all in spite of these massive, powerful entities only exacerbating these environmental problems. In the face of world overpopulation, women wherever they have the choice have had such an impact, though millions of individual choices, that they've not only slowed down the birthrate, but started reversing it, in a time that our population needs not stability, but gradual reduction. Who else is having such an impact on climate change? Not the entities with far more power.

I've never seen women credited for that.

This sudden exercise of female power without male permission is so strong that it sends governments into a panic over the birthrate. Rather than do anything to prepare for the incoming age care crisis, all energy seems to be being spent on blaming women and calling for us to be sent to breeding pens, where the men will then blame us for overpopulation and subsequent environmental crises like climate change. Overpopulation would not have been a problem at all if women had reproductive freedom from the start. Overpopulation is a problem that has been caused by men, and women are the only ones solving it, in the face of opposition and hindrance from the men with all the power.
[–] jadegreen 11 points

Great comment! The "inverted triangle" age crisis is only a problem because of how we distribute labor and resources in society.

[–] nektarin 1 points

Can you link the studies please?
[–] DurableBook 2 points Edited

Here's a lay article that summarizes some data on subSaharan African women:

https://blogs.worldbank.org/health/female-education-and-childbearing-closer-look-data

The references for the data are provided in case you want to read primary sources. If you want references for other countries or populations, just go to the reference lists on the primary articles and follow the titles.

[–] GreenBottle 23 points

If it was men's responsibility to gestate humans the human species would literally die out immediately. Imagine trying to convince a man to make even the smallest sacrifice such as "don't drink alcohol" for a year. If abortion wasn't allowed (and if men could gestate it would be), so many babies would be born with fetal alcohol syndrome.
[–] momofreyrella 77 points

Its mens fault. Women dont just fall pregnant

[–] Redmage 47 points

Typically (not on ovarit, but we're a different breed), I see the conversation on overpopulation centered around "women need to stop having babies." It's never "men need to stop having sex."
[–] DurableBook 35 points

Men don't even have to stop having sex! They could give a dozen women each a dozen orgasms every single day and never contribute to a single pregnancy. They could exchange manual or oral sex as many times as they want. They could get vasectomies and continue having penetrative sex with condoms.

Literally all they have to do is stop leaving their sperm in women's vaginas. That's it. That's the sole sacrifice they would have to make.

[–] chocolatefondant21 19 points

How are women supposed to stop having babies when they are coerced into marriages and having sex with men? The whole world is set up so men would have access to sex. Never mind the consequences.

[–] MG 21 points

Yes. While I think that 8 billion is too many humans for our planet - the real problem is consumption and especially the obscene consumption / destruction / consumption that created by/for WAR - and whole military industrial complex. And wealthy people and their damn yachts, private planes, excessive houses, etc. And the chemicals / pollutants that companies don't test adequately that people have lived without for forever before the 20th century.

I believe in upholding life and the life-affirming nature of women. I think it is that love of all life - in addition to human life - that will save us.
[–] Positronic_waves 3 points

I have lived in relatively poor 1st world countries and in different economic strata in the 3rd world. It's the economically developed world trashing the rest of world. Their waste of resources has no limits. The germans are crying rivers bc of not wanting to pay for their homes being heated to 22 degrees on winter, then they proceed to have a record consumption anyway. Not even a war can stop the obscene consumerism.
[–] NotCis 31 points

I'm concerned about high birth rates (6 or more children per woman), but not because I'm concerned about overpopulation (I'm concerned about climate change and human extinction, but I don't think overpopulation is the main issue right now). It's because any woman having 6 or more kids is almost certainly not in control of her own fertility. It's no coincidence that birth rates have plummeted in the countries that have the best protections for women's rights.
[–] Cigarsofthepharoahs 17 points

The thing is, the global birth rate is slowly dropping. The population seems to be growing, but it's actually down to people living longer.

If you look at somewhere like China, when the current generation of grandparent age citizens die off, there will be a massive drop in population because, on average, there is one grandchild to four grandparents. In other areas of the world the drop off wont be quite so stark, but families are, in general, having fewer children.

[–] pennygadget 7 points

I was just about to comment this.

Places like China and Japan are scrambling to get the birth rate up because, when the population is aging, a country needs young people around to take care of them.

That's the one downside to people living longer and having fewer kids. There's fewer family members to pitch in and help care for relatives who are elderly and/or disabled.
[–] BlueToyotaTacoma 24 points

I hate overpopulation, but it's definitely the fault of men, not of women. A woman has to have sex with a MAN to become pregnant, and a man can father more children in a period of time than a woman can give birth to children in. Women become pregnant in the first place because of men. We're overpopulated because men have too much sex.
[–] Pixietree 14 points

I been seeing articles talking about a birthrate crisis, apparently people are not reproducing enough. They said that there is not enough people being born to replace the current workforce. And that's it's going to put a strain on social services when people retire. And of course I've seen women take the blame for this. Apparently having standards and choices is bad for the population.

I guess it really just depends on what part of the world you are in and what news you see. In lower economic countries the birthrate is higher. But it's because women have less access to bc and usually have less rights. They get trapped into having multiple children.

Nothing wrong with having children, have them, don't have them. Whatever makes you happy, as long as it's your choice. It's sad that whatever that choice is your get crap for it. Either you are "adding to the population problem" by having a kid. Or your "denying" some bloke fatherhood or "not fulfilling your duty" if you are childless. A bunch of whining man children I swear.
[–] SecondSkin 16 points

This ^

Climate change is women’s fault because we selfishly breed and over crowd the world with spawn to use up resources (and we buy the puppies and ponies who use up even more resources).

It’s women’s fault there aren’t enough children to cope with the tax burden for services for adults living longer and longer.

It’s women’s fault we put ambition first and go back to work so our spawn have no manners and start school not potty trained.

It’s women’s fault we claim benefits so we can be insta mummies and yummy stay at home mummies and burden the men folk with paying for our life style choice.

It’s women’s fault we don’t get enough of an education and work experience to earn equal pay for equal work.

It’s women’s fault we aren’t satisfied doing poorly paid care work and cleaning and early year’s education and child care, so these jobs are desperately under staffed which has a massive burden on nhs and social care and causes nurseries to close.

Whatever the fuck women do when it comes to reproductive choices and parenting and employment, we will always be doing the wrong thing and causing the biggest burden for the rest of the world.

We are selfish for aborting a child whose needs we can’t meet. We are selfish for bringing an unwanted child into the world.

We are sluts when we have sex and frigid teases when we don’t. Up tight if we insist on contraception and reckless and dirty if we don’t.

We can never win. It’s all always our fault.
[–] QueenOfNothing 12 points

“Like a compass needle that points north, a man's accusing finger always finds a woman. Always.”
[–] LOriginedumonde 6 points

They said that there is not enough people being born to replace the current workforce. And that's it's going to put a strain on social services when people retire.

I see more and more boomers (overwhelmingly men) crying about the so called “birthrate crisis” because there won’t be enough people to support them in old age and I honestly can’t bring myself to give a damn.

I can only speak for in the US, but those types of people (who are overwhelmingly selfish and entitled men) were given everything and worked to make sure that no one after them would be given anything, and then they have the audacity to complain about there not being enough people from the generations they fucked over to wait on them and wipe their asses.

I think a big motivator for Republicans banning abortion was not only to control women and girl’s lives and bodies, but also to create a new generation of low wage workers to keep padding their pockets until they’re six feet under, as well as their surviving families pockets. I also suspect that this is one of the reasons why Democrats never codified roe v. wade into law.

Most of the women who are forced to give birth will be condemned to poverty, and it will be extremely hard for their children to climb out of the hole that they and their mothers have been forced into.

[–] ALoudMeow 4 points Edited

That’s bullshit; not what you have to say, but the idea we need more bodies to do work. We already can see how many jobs have been eliminated by replacing people with robotics and computers, and this is just the beginning. There’s no need for more bodies, especially when the climate change window has probably already been passed. The world needs billions fewer people and exponentially less demand on dwindling natural resources.
[–] Galko 20 points

Not defending the term, but in Childfree circles, "breeder" refers to BOTH men and women who have children beyond the replacement rate. So, more than two in most western countries. I've never heard it directed only at women, as most childfree people realize it's women who take all the risks and sacrifice all the things for the kids, but it's men who take all the credit. I've found more sympathy for women in those spaces than Libfem these days. OP's step sister sounds more like hard anti-nat crazy.

[–] pennygadget 5 points

Maybe you've just gotten lucky. Because virtually every childfree space I've ever encountered (including the ones dominated by females) has been viciously misogynistic towards mothers. And many of them just scoff at the struggles of motherhood because "you chose to have that kid LOL"
[–] SecondWaver 5 points

I’ve also heard gay men derisively refer to straight men as “breeders.”

[–] Itzpapalotl 26 points

Yeah, calling women “breeders” is very misogynistic. The term in general is pretty rude and indicates a flavour of self importance imo. Like, I don’t have kids and don’t know if I ever will...I sure as hell don’t look down on people who do or think myself better than them.

Overpopulation is a result of many things, in the western world people are living longer, women aren’t having as many babies. It’s not really commonplace to have more than 2 or maybe 3 kids. Iirc the birth rate is declining?

In poorer countries the women have far less choice, less access to contraceptives, less opportunity to escape oppressive traditional roles so may end up having more kids, to judge the women for that is totally unfair.

Her anger is definitely misdirected. And it takes a male and a female to “breed” so it’s sketchy she seems to place the blame at the feet of mothers.

[–] starsstorm 25 points

Most of the western world now has birth rates below population replacement, which is due to in large part, women being educated and having more choices in reproduction.

[–] Fluffy_gender 11 points

The Eastern world is even worse when it comes to birth rates

[–] starsstorm 1 points

Yes, you’re correct and I should have been more specific. Basically, nearly any country where women can receive a higher level education and have good employment seems to be seeing slowing or flat birth rates.

[–] sohh 25 points

In poorer countries the women have far less choice, less access to contraceptives, less opportunity to escape oppressive traditional roles so may end up having more kids, to judge the women for that is totally unfair.

This is a HUGE piece of it. If you look at where in the world the population has been rising the fastest, this explanation covers a lot of why that is.

And look, I usually take the unpopular opinion on this site that it’s not right to completely write off men as irredeemably bad because I don’t believe an us vs. them mentality is ever productive. That said, OP’s stepsister is whack if she’s blaming “breeding” on women when it’s MEN who are fertile 24/7 and MEN who go around impregnating multiple wives (or/including little girls) and MEN who prevent women and girls from having any choice in family planning in certain parts of the world.

[–] DoomedSibyl 17 points

It is also MEN who are obsessed, obsessed with controlling women’s bodies and reproduction.

Load more (21 comments)
© Ovarit LLC
About Ovarit | Rules | Guidelines | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Bugs | License

“All space becomes male space unless females maintain a concerted effort to mark a space for themselves.” –Sheila Jeffreys