- Mary Bad Things
- Posts
- A Bunch of Loser Freaks Want You to Have A Bunch of Babies
A Bunch of Loser Freaks Want You to Have A Bunch of Babies
Not every sperm is sacred
Mary Drummer
25 Feb • Estimated Reading Time: 9 minutes
Elon Musk is probably the world's most famous pronatalist, even offering to use his sperm to populate a Martian Colony. And as he told (or warned, for the rest of us) the mother of his alleged 13th child, he’s got a legion of kids to make.
This tweet, like much of what he says, is bullshit.
Tomas Sobotka heads the the research group on Fertility and Family and serves as deputy director of the Vienna Institute of Demography and he douses the flames on Elon’s fire warning about the risk to civilization: “With 8 billion people and counting on the earth, we don’t see a collapse happening at present time, and it’s not even projected.”
Pronatalists are people who believe that underpopulation is one of the most serious – if not the most serious – worldwide threats, and the only way to defeat it is for more people to have a lot more babies. While many pronatalists are not Chrsitian Nationalists or claim to share right-wing views, they seem to have no problem aligning with them!
As Gaby Del Valle points out in her deeply researched and reported profile of NatalCon (yes, they have their own yearly conference) in Politico:
“Broadly speaking, the people who have paid as much as $1,000 to attend the conference are members of the New Right, a conglomeration of people in the populist wing of the conservative movement who believe we need seismic changes to the way we live now — and who often see the past as the best model for the future they’d like to build. Their ideology, such as it exists, is far from cohesive, and factions of the New Right are frequently in disagreement. But this weekend, these roughly aligned groups, from the libertarian-adjacent tech types to the Heritage Foundation staffers, along with some who likely have no connection with traditionally conservative or far-right causes at all, have found a unifying cause in natalism.”
Both before and after WWII, societies across the globe have panicked about low birth rates and have instituted policies to help increase those rates. These range from free or reduced-cost housing, free prenatal care and childcare, and tax incentives. A country that currently has numerous monetary incentives for families to have more babies — with the amount increasing the more babies you have — is Hungary, who has seen their birth rates decline anyway.
While these are policies that would undoubtedly help parents, they’re only given as long as a person produces the right amount of children to curb population decline. What we do know is that when countries introduce these seemingly pro-family policies, they go hand-in-hand with policies that curtail reproductive freedom, restrict access to contraception, and outright ban abortion.
But pronatalists – even the most altruistic ones — don’t want just any kind of babies, they want the right kind of babies. As the movement gains momentum, so too does the technology of predictive embryo screening that will help you screen your embryos for things such as likelihood for high IQ scores and other objectively desirable traits. Nevermind that a lot of these things can be attributed more so to environmental factors than genetics. Hand over your DNA and pay some fees and a startup will tell you anyway!
One such embryonic testing company, Orchid, will help you screen for “...genetic errors linked to severe diseases before pregnancy begins.” What are they testing for? According to their website, they’re testing for things like neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism and epilepsy, and “birth defects such as vision and hearing loss.
An article from the European Journal of Human Genetics not only called predictive embryo testing unproven and unethical, they point out the unforeseen (or maybe not) consequences this would have for society at large:
“It will be vital that a societal debate takes place before any potential application of the technique, and this should be focused on what would be considered acceptable with regard to the selection of individual traits, in particular. Without proper public engagement and oversight, the practice of implementing PRS test for embryo selection could easily lead to discrimination and the stigmatisation of certain conditions.”
I’m not trying to call anyone a Nazi or make assertions about their intentions or worldviews, but if it sounds like some Nazi-type shit it’s probably because it shares a lot of similarities to the Lebensborn program that was established in 1935 by the SS in order to “promote the growth of the ‘Aryan’ population.”
According to the Holocaust Encyclopedia:
“The SS screened individuals' personal medical histories as well as their family records. Applicants could be denied on the basis of their alleged racial “impurity” or health issues. They could also be denied if they had a family history of physical, mental, or psychiatric disabilities. Nazi theories of eugenics advanced the idea that personal character traits like loyalty and bravery were inheritable and could be promoted through the process of selective breeding. In this way, the SS hoped to stimulate the growth of a strong, “racially elite” German population to advance Nazi goals of conquering and colonizing the territories of Eastern Europe.”
JD Vance is the worst white man to come out of the state of Ohio since Jeffrey Dahmer and he’s one of the biggest supporters of pronatalist policies, even if he doesn’t publicly describe himself as one.
When talking about Hungary’s pronatalist policies, that loser said:
“Viktor Orbán, who is, of course, the bugaboo of nearly every liberal in the mainstream American media, has implemented a couple of policies that I think are really interesting.
They offer loans to new married couples that are forgiven at some point later if those couples eventually stay together and have children. Why can’t we do that here? Why can’t we actually promote family formation here in our country?”
As I said before, it doesn’t fucking work, and pawning the kids off to grandma, grandpa, or family members to raise isn’t the solution either, JD.
What the fuck does that even mean?
Wanting the government to incentivize people — cisgender women in this case — to have a bunch of babies, but not wanting to invest in things like quality childcare, and decimating public education via abolishing the Department of Education sounds like JD wants to remove women from public life. Because he does.
In 2021, JD appeared on the right-wing American Moment podcast. While railing against racial and gender equity, JD blabbered:
“You have women who think that truly the liberationist path is to spend 90 hours a week working in a cubicle at McKinsey instead of starting a family and having children.”
The rest of his spiel seems to be directed at anyone who supports racial and gender equity (although with an emphasis on women, since he believes men have been “emasculated” in this country):
“What they don’t realize – and I think some of them do eventually realize that, thank God – is that that is actually a path to misery. And the path to happiness and to fulfillment is something that these institutions are telling people not to do.
“The corruption is it puts people on a career pipeline that causes them to chase things that will make them miserable and unhappy,” Vance said. “And so they get in positions of power and then they project that misery and happiness on the rest of society.”
The only one projecting anything is JD, and I can’t believe millions of people voted for that loser from Middletown, OH to become the Vice President of the United States.