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.

102 points
*

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

permalink
report
reply
16 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

The population very well might drop suddenly. Clearly that 10B is too many, but what happens after that. Some projections have a very steep decline, looking at developed countries approach an average closer to one child instead of closer to replacement value. What happens when most of those 10B age then pass, but there are only 5B to replace them? In the time of one generation, we could see a very serious depopulation in places

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

i think another factor is that we are reaching or have maybe surpassed the earth’s carrying capacity for humans, which is only going to get worse with climate change. in the past, more kids also meant more labor and there was still lots of land to colonize and spread into with those extra people. but we already have more than enough people and no realistic places left to expand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

but we already have more than enough people and no realistic places left to expand.

…in the current economic model. Currently we have enough built housing and grow enough food globally and produce enough consumer goods that ever single person can be fed, clothed and shelter. But the wealthiest few would rather crops rot in fields, hoard houses to extract rent and burn unsold clothing instead of slightly lowering ther profit margins.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

The earths carrying capacity thing is old eugenic nonsense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points

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

permalink
report
reply
-82 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
111 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

it’s a political one.

we’re doomed!!!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

If it is solved it will definitely be through technology of some sort. While I agree it will not be one brilliant scientist, technology will be the solution.

That technology may come in the form of a way to produce more energy without fucking up the climate, and the engineering and logistical capacity to roll out the change at a breakneck pace.

It may come in the form of simply developing a way to control the global climate directly.

It might come in the form of some technology to control the behavior of humans so that we can actually respond appropriately.

Or it might come in the form of the singularity, when self improving machines grow so far beyond us so fast that they can just do what is needed whether we like it or not.

But one way or another I guarantee that if it’s solved, it’ll largely be a technological solution, because getting humanity to just…stop using energy at our current rate…is just not going to happen.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

…. And all we needed was that brilliant orator, the Great Persuader on the side of good, someone to rally around to save the world!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I would have done it, but when i looked around, looked to the future, and realized people had been horrible to me overall, i declined.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Maybe it is going to be solved by a brilliant political activist or leader. Jokes aside, of course it won’t be a couple of people who will magically solve something. Strong leaders will however ease the cause by promoting issues best.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Political problems can be addressed through science and technology. Like the firearm, or the bicycle, or bittorrent. We need a way to coordinate a defense that won’t simply be shut down.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

Everything is a science problem. Big refrigerators. Really big. Cool the whole world. Store heat in barrels and shoot them into the sun. Time machines. A whole host of solutions!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points

Oh ok I guess we should stop trying and lose all hope then

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

We don’t have time to wait for kids to grow up before doing what we can. Ah, sorry. Before putting all of that responsibility on them and screaming “NOT IT!”

permalink
report
parent
reply
-14 points
*

Wow, bunch of twats not understanding a joke

Edit: about; it was not a joke, I repeat it was not a joke. Torpedo it

permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points

People are just so down on the world they want to crush all hope and joy for others too. In the long run I think people will be fine. The other planet’s residents probably not so much. But people will adapt. I’d rather experience life than worry too much about what I can’t solve.

I have kids too and seeing them experience joy and happiness is super rewarding. All you worry warts are just going to miss out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
58 points

Something something literally Idiocracy (2006)

permalink
report
reply
31 points

At least the president in Idocracy had the humility and self awareness let the smartest guy in the room advise him on policy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I donno, you really think that guy was that smart? He wanted to give plants water. Like, you know, what is in the toilet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Seriously. Plants crave Brawndo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Yeah, you quote that meme! Don’t go having any original thoughts there champ!

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Hmmm, what would Krishnamurti do?

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points
*

+ Don’t look up

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
45 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Wow, wtf, that’s crazy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Nice. I’m getting snipped this week at 37. I felt comfort in keeping that door slightly ajar, but recently a lot of my friends having kids really pushed me over the line.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

fixed

Sorry but does it mean that you cut your tubes?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

In my case I had a procedure called Essure done. But yeah I’m sterilized.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Recently cut, myself! Happy to have done so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
12 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I was referring to the general female population not having kids for any reason.

A quick search resulted in articles indicating that the average for the 21st century is somewhere between 1/6 - 1/9 around the developed world. One would expect the people most aware of how fucked the future will be would be dramatically less likely to expose their own children to that — not 20-80% less likely.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Exactly so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

COVID lockdowns weren’t sustainable and while they reduced pollution to some extent they didn’t come close to eliminating it. Like in my country we turned off coal, but only because we don’t have much coal to begin with. We were still using plenty of gas power, as that’s our second largest energy source. Here in the UK our largest energy source is Wind, and we aren’t even doing that well compared to France or Spain on the energy front.

Things also still got manufactured and sold, and that’s where a lot of pollution comes from. Food and goods production. Eliminating transport pollution would help for sure, but it’s like 14% of the problem. Electricity generation, heating, and agriculture are the things we need to fix the most. Fixing electricity generation would also help with transport emissions as we could use more electric vehicles and trains.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Is that really surprising to you?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

humans are selfish, and most of us are not willing to make major sacrifices to avert disaster

I am sick and tired of this cynical bullshit argument. It’s wrong in two ways (and neither are the way you think):

  1. It assumes that we have to reduce our standard of living in order to reduce our fossil fuels consumption, instead of innovating
  2. It presumes that the lifestyle changes that we do have to make (e.g. higher density zoning and walkablity) represent some kind of deprivation, rather than the improvement they would actually be.
permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

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/

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 221K

    Comments