Jill says she can't endorse Daniel Engber's odd framing of the population question in Slate. This is actually something that the Sierra Club has been advocating for some time, mainly in other countries. To me, I think framing it the way Daniel proposed is not really a good idea. The whole "babies make pollution" sentiment triggers a vicious reaction. I do think that all of the things that feminists advocate for (better access to contraception, access to abortion, advocacy for better education for women, better equality at work and at home) are things that that would correct the whole population problem anyway. If women have better access to birth control and feel more value than just a baby producer, they'll probably tend to produce fewer children. So feminists don't need to throw their weight behind a scary term like "population control," they just need to advocate for the same policies they have been for years.
3 comments:
..hey like ur blog..!
Kay -
Did you post a comment using the name "rish"? Be honest!
Yes, Megan, I think you hit the nail on the head. I checked out what Kay amusingly refers to as her "archives" and found that for July and August she had 99 posts. There were only 30 comments posted over this time period. Obviously, only Kay knows how many comments she posted herself. In any case, a piece of paper on the ground at the University of Minn. (it's Kay's alma mater, don't ya know!) has a better chance of being picked up and read. But I suppose that's only fair: it probably also has a better chance of being worth reading.
Well, enough for now. I'm gonna watch a trained chimp on tv. He'll be addressing the nation. Then, I've gotta go pass out condoms to black people, pet a dolphin, review chi-square (and, no, Kay, that's not a frat at the U of M), read a book by Madeleine L’Engle, work on my blog...
Post a Comment