- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
As a 30-ish married woman who has no doubt about having kids (soon hopefully) I am of the opinion that if procreation were a purely rational decision, no one would ever do it. I have a tremendous desire to have a baby, and part of that may be socially influenced, but I personally feel myself to be at the mercy of an almost palpable hormonal urge that up-ends my rational ideas about career, finances, etc. I feel in my bones that I want to have a baby and raise a child-- I suspect reason has little to do with it. It's the biological imperative: life wants to live and reproduce, whether that life is a protozoa or a sophisticated mammal.
The people who decide not to have kids do not have inferior genes or any other such silliness, but maybe they actually have some lowered biological drive to reproduce, which lets their individual reason tell them "I'd rather take care of number one than procreate the species", which is perfectly reasonable on an individual level and, since we're not an endangered species, it's not as though they're threatening the future of human existence (we're doing that collectively with environmental degredation, which could be partially remedied by less reproduction, not more). And perhaps, on more of a sociological rather than biological level, these people have other, equally important roles to fulfill in society besides parenthood. There is room in society for both, and given that we probably all agree disgruntled, regret filled parents don't do anyone any good, why judge those who don't reproduce, whatever the reason may be?
I think most posters are being awfully hard on Larry and Piper-- what's up with all the meanness? I think they'll be fine whatever they ultimately decide, but the agressiveness of some of these posts isn't good for anybody! But I guess reason isn't governing that process either...
