Vogue magazine recently asked a very puzzling question indeed. To sum it up, this magazine basically raised the ire of everyone when they posed the following question: “If you have a baby in 2021 is it pure environmental vandalism?” The author of this vogue piece actually had the gall to suggest that those who were considering procreating should keep the “current climate emergency” in mind. The author asked this even though she herself had already given birth to a baby and would even bring another one into the world.
“If you are a scientifically-engaged person, then there are a few questions that are troubling. ONe of these would be whether you should have a baby in light of the current climate emergency,” writes Nell Frizzell in the fashion magazine. “If your body is just throbbing to produce, then you probably passively believe that having a child is in the cards for you some day. On the other hand, you might have already decided to remain child-free. Either way, you should consider the declining health of the planet and let that factor into your thinking and decision-making.”
Frizzell has even claimed that before she became pregnant she had “worried feverishly about what kind of strain on the resources of our planet another Western child would have on it.” Most notably, she was concerned about the food he would eat, the electricity that he would use, and whether the child was going to be living in a dystopian world by the time he was an elderly man.
Even though she insisted that these fears were overwhelming, Frizzell still ended up bringing another person into the world.
“Like millions of others, I decided to do it anyway,” Frizzell said. “I decided to have a baby. I would even have another if my partner agreed.”
One of the main ways that Frizzell tried to justify her position was through stating that every individual who has a baby will need to “learn to live within our environmental means, and turning away from our consumerist fever, all the while overturning a political system that rewards a tiny rich minority.”
If that sounds like an early seventies hippie to you, then trust me, you aren’t the only one.
Apparently, Frizzell’s argument was challenged by an organization called Human Progress, which stated that children simply “do not strain the resources of our world. If anything, the opposite is true: each new child brought into the world wil be correlated with a continued increase in the abundance of our resources.”
Of course, calling procreating vandalism did get its share of backlash, even from some members of the view. IN fact, co-host Meghan McCain responded to the piece by saying, “NOT TODAY SATAN!”
Insider columnist Josh Barro also weighed in on the opinion, saying, “These are some completely insane people. This concern should be reserved for your therapist, not a major fashion magazine.”
Reagan Escude’ Scott is the media administrator for Turning Point Media, and she said, “There is nothing that will motivate me more to have children than garbage nonsense like this. I should have 10+ kids just to spite these morons.”
There were several other comments, and they all demonstrated just how ridiculous this position truly is.
But what do you think? Your comments are appreciated!