We raised 7 kids, never used contraception (obv. Haha), and formula never touched the lips of my children. I don’t say this as a way of bragging. I say it because, to me, at the time, it was just what I did. Many of my friends used formula and bottles, but just as many didn’t. The ones who did, typically had careers outside the home, drove cars of the Porsche and BMW ilk. I homeschooled my kids. My side of the family made snide remarks about how we’d have more money, if I used my college degree and had a career. They were also horrified that I homeschooled.
One time, when I was out grocery shopping with my 4 kids under the age of 7, a man stopped and asked me if I knew “how that happened.” This was, ostensibly, a joke implying I didn’t realize that intimate relations causes babies. THEN, he had the audacity to ask me if they were all from the same man! I was very young and really didn’t know what to say. If memory serves, I simply responded to his questions with a short “yes,” not quite realizing how rude they were (even if he didn’t mean to be rude) until sometime later.
The other day, my husband and I were at the feed store to replenish supplies for our animals. There’s a young girl there -- maybe about 19 to 22 years old. She recently had a baby. I believe, but am not certain, she is the daughter of the owners. She brings her baby to work (which is a great blessing), but I was saddened to see her bottle feeding him. And I KNOW it was formula, which looks quite different from expressed breast milk.
Out of 7 kids we raised in this house, ONLY 2 have told us they hope to have many children when married and live on one income (which is NOT easy nowadays). The others have expressed the desire for either NO kids (one has said this), or only ONE no more than TWO. We gently remind them of the joy of children, the dangers of birth control, and all the “things.” But it doesn’t seem to be getting through. Maybe it is, but I don’t see any outward indication of this.
I claim no great power to predict political movements, but I have a feeling that we need to start with the 'language' and then the 'culture' parts before we can get to the 'legal' parts, even the ones that I think are legitimate.
But right now I think the biggest problem is that even most pro-natalists would faint dead away at the sight of some of these.
It starts & end with the women of the society. Feminism & College started us down this path. The more educated & career driven women become the more likely they push the biological functions out. This structural imbalance has 1st, 2nd, & 3rd order affects that manifest in the polical, social, economical, & educational decay of the society. Coupled with the glass ceiling theory forcing competition between male & female, leading the women to take on more male characteristics leading to incapability furthering the destruction of the nuclear family, mostly in the West.
This is further encourage because of the economical benefits to the owners of capital, which I must confess to be a part of. 80% of household economic decisions are made by women, GIRL POWER! Tanslation, it is profitiable for the people selling products to continue pushing the women of the society in the direction of delay biological duty & into workforce compeition with their male counterparts, increasing the velocity of money! Goverment see this as well, the increase in the velocity of money increases tax revenue & allows the political class to have a voting block.
The antiquated state of family law in the West is another factor. As their is no legal reason why a man should open himself up the oneside outcomes. Men are rewarded for being fathers as they have limited parental rights yet have all the financial burden, receive no tax benefits further emasculating the male of the species.
Can this be solved? In the west no. There is no political, economical, or societal will to do anything about it. The women of the society are the key & I don't see them coming to the resuce.
Yeah, no, I don't actually agree with that. I believe that the women or our society have done what they have done because the men of our society have abdicated their responsibilities and, indeed, have pushed for it themselves. Let's remember that pretty much all of the bad laws that we have were passed with a majority of men. Indeed I doubt there is a law you can point to where the vote was literally men vs women.
Right. Men lead whether they want to or not, whether they acknowledge it or not, or whether anyone else acknowledges it or not. To oversimplify it, good women follow good men and evil women follow evil men. And everyone bears personal responsibility to choose the good.
I remember an open carry rally I attended in Austin almost a decade ago. At that event this older, largish, angry woman who was mad that some guys were walking around with guns exercising their right to “bear” arms. She was carrying around a sign that said “more boobs, less guns” from her "logic" and she was walking behind the group hurling insults while walking around bare chested with a sweater like thing but with both of her mammaries intentionally hanging out. The truth is that there was nothing sexy about it and it wasn’t appealing at all. People were embarrassed for her. This kind of situation would in my mind make those teenage boys a bit less intrigued and I think your point is probably accurate.
I've been trying to think how to respond to this :)
Each society has a way of sexual signalling. Thus in Britain a few years ago, it was considered quite risqué for a woman to show off her ankles... quite sexually suggestive. In Africa, where we worked, only prostitutes wore pants, and women would rather be seen in public with their shirts off than their heads uncovered. (Funny missionary story, that)
So obviously, a woman in our society who wishes to make a sexual suggestion can do so by taking her shirt, or part of it, off. But like in your case, or in my case in Africa, when it is clear that no sexual suggestion is meant, or when the sexual suggestion is welcome (I remember a story where some topless women were protesting and Putin was there. He made some comment about how he liked it, which kind of ruined their protest.) then the issue kind of morphs.
But I hope I am succeeding in making a point in a different direction, namely that a society where women routinely, openly, casually breastfeed in front of all and sundry will end up sending a very pro-natalist suggestion, and not a pro-porn one.
We raised 7 kids, never used contraception (obv. Haha), and formula never touched the lips of my children. I don’t say this as a way of bragging. I say it because, to me, at the time, it was just what I did. Many of my friends used formula and bottles, but just as many didn’t. The ones who did, typically had careers outside the home, drove cars of the Porsche and BMW ilk. I homeschooled my kids. My side of the family made snide remarks about how we’d have more money, if I used my college degree and had a career. They were also horrified that I homeschooled.
One time, when I was out grocery shopping with my 4 kids under the age of 7, a man stopped and asked me if I knew “how that happened.” This was, ostensibly, a joke implying I didn’t realize that intimate relations causes babies. THEN, he had the audacity to ask me if they were all from the same man! I was very young and really didn’t know what to say. If memory serves, I simply responded to his questions with a short “yes,” not quite realizing how rude they were (even if he didn’t mean to be rude) until sometime later.
The other day, my husband and I were at the feed store to replenish supplies for our animals. There’s a young girl there -- maybe about 19 to 22 years old. She recently had a baby. I believe, but am not certain, she is the daughter of the owners. She brings her baby to work (which is a great blessing), but I was saddened to see her bottle feeding him. And I KNOW it was formula, which looks quite different from expressed breast milk.
Out of 7 kids we raised in this house, ONLY 2 have told us they hope to have many children when married and live on one income (which is NOT easy nowadays). The others have expressed the desire for either NO kids (one has said this), or only ONE no more than TWO. We gently remind them of the joy of children, the dangers of birth control, and all the “things.” But it doesn’t seem to be getting through. Maybe it is, but I don’t see any outward indication of this.
Six kids, 23 grandkids. We started from a very serious religious perspective.
As far as the 'joke', we perfected a whole string of answers:
Don't you know what causes that?
-No, we've been wondering. Would you mind sharing?
-Yup. And we enjoy it.
Why don't you get fixed?
-As you can clearly tell, I ain't broken.
Are these all yours?
-No, we left some of them at home.
-No, I was just coming in the store and they followed me.
Hahaha I love those answers! Would that I had been witty enough to think of and use them!
Interesting post. You're right though. None of these would be "gov't approved".
I claim no great power to predict political movements, but I have a feeling that we need to start with the 'language' and then the 'culture' parts before we can get to the 'legal' parts, even the ones that I think are legitimate.
But right now I think the biggest problem is that even most pro-natalists would faint dead away at the sight of some of these.
Thanks for the restack.
Language + culture + genuine evangelism + teaching them “all things”
It starts & end with the women of the society. Feminism & College started us down this path. The more educated & career driven women become the more likely they push the biological functions out. This structural imbalance has 1st, 2nd, & 3rd order affects that manifest in the polical, social, economical, & educational decay of the society. Coupled with the glass ceiling theory forcing competition between male & female, leading the women to take on more male characteristics leading to incapability furthering the destruction of the nuclear family, mostly in the West.
This is further encourage because of the economical benefits to the owners of capital, which I must confess to be a part of. 80% of household economic decisions are made by women, GIRL POWER! Tanslation, it is profitiable for the people selling products to continue pushing the women of the society in the direction of delay biological duty & into workforce compeition with their male counterparts, increasing the velocity of money! Goverment see this as well, the increase in the velocity of money increases tax revenue & allows the political class to have a voting block.
The antiquated state of family law in the West is another factor. As their is no legal reason why a man should open himself up the oneside outcomes. Men are rewarded for being fathers as they have limited parental rights yet have all the financial burden, receive no tax benefits further emasculating the male of the species.
Can this be solved? In the west no. There is no political, economical, or societal will to do anything about it. The women of the society are the key & I don't see them coming to the resuce.
Yeah, no, I don't actually agree with that. I believe that the women or our society have done what they have done because the men of our society have abdicated their responsibilities and, indeed, have pushed for it themselves. Let's remember that pretty much all of the bad laws that we have were passed with a majority of men. Indeed I doubt there is a law you can point to where the vote was literally men vs women.
I believe in revival and societal transformation.
Right. Men lead whether they want to or not, whether they acknowledge it or not, or whether anyone else acknowledges it or not. To oversimplify it, good women follow good men and evil women follow evil men. And everyone bears personal responsibility to choose the good.
I remember an open carry rally I attended in Austin almost a decade ago. At that event this older, largish, angry woman who was mad that some guys were walking around with guns exercising their right to “bear” arms. She was carrying around a sign that said “more boobs, less guns” from her "logic" and she was walking behind the group hurling insults while walking around bare chested with a sweater like thing but with both of her mammaries intentionally hanging out. The truth is that there was nothing sexy about it and it wasn’t appealing at all. People were embarrassed for her. This kind of situation would in my mind make those teenage boys a bit less intrigued and I think your point is probably accurate.
I've been trying to think how to respond to this :)
Each society has a way of sexual signalling. Thus in Britain a few years ago, it was considered quite risqué for a woman to show off her ankles... quite sexually suggestive. In Africa, where we worked, only prostitutes wore pants, and women would rather be seen in public with their shirts off than their heads uncovered. (Funny missionary story, that)
So obviously, a woman in our society who wishes to make a sexual suggestion can do so by taking her shirt, or part of it, off. But like in your case, or in my case in Africa, when it is clear that no sexual suggestion is meant, or when the sexual suggestion is welcome (I remember a story where some topless women were protesting and Putin was there. He made some comment about how he liked it, which kind of ruined their protest.) then the issue kind of morphs.
But I hope I am succeeding in making a point in a different direction, namely that a society where women routinely, openly, casually breastfeed in front of all and sundry will end up sending a very pro-natalist suggestion, and not a pro-porn one.
I think we’re on the same page. I’m not advocating that it become the norm, just pointing out that it might be less detrimental than some might think.
You're not advocating that what be the norm? Topless protestors?
Yes, protesters.