• arthurpizza@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    The environmental impact was not the ONLY reason I’m child free but it was definitely a factor in that decision. Same with being carfree. In fact I do a lot of things for not than one reason.

    • r1veRRR@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The point is that even without that reason you wouldn’t have any kids. It’s not the cornerstone of your childfree-ness. Neither is it for me, which is why I recognize that it’s morally lazy to rest on the imaginary laurels of not birthing children.

      By that logic, every parent could ALSO claim they are doing their part for the earth. Simply by not having EVEN MORE children. Hell, maybe they are better than you because you only didn’t have 2 kids, but they didn’t have 4 additional kids. Thats twice the savings, twice the reason to not make the world a better place and blame everyone else!

      • arthurpizza@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The average family has 1.6 to 2.4 children depending on the region. The “even more” argument doesn’t really hold up because that’s not the societal norm.

        I also don’t own a car and cycle/bus everywhere. My girlfriend and I made the choice not to have kids, and we try not to be wasteful. It’s not about sacrifice, it’s about being aware of what you do.