Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured Solidaridad Identität BolzenStefanie loteria navidad

A real feminist, has no children

your book has triggered in Germany, a fierce debate. Why? We live in liberal societies, one of the advantages of a big private Agency. Well, Yes. In the Unite

- 6 reads.

A real feminist, has no children

your book has triggered in Germany, a fierce debate. Why? We live in liberal societies, one of the advantages of a big private Agency.
Well, Yes. In the United States and in England it is far more, there's never such a riot. My approach has been debated in the Anglo-Saxon years ago. In the German-speaking countries, it's different, that's why I wrote the book. Many families remain with us, as we lived in the 1950s. Believe, you have found the definitive form of life. So, as a would be destroyed so that the basis of our life, our future would not be in acute danger. I wanted to shake up. The responses are now so heavy, I did not expect, however. I am sorry to say this: We Germans are pseudo-tolerant.

But your approach is not tolerant, but imperative: you have to change your life to change, and Pronto.
So I say Yes. It would be nice if there were only "Birth Strike in England", but also "Birth Strike in Germany" ... In the so-called developing countries, lack of water is due to the climate changes already now a Problem, but apparently not many people care here.

you can expect an Eco-Apocalypse, in which you do not want children.
The "Guardian" recently stated that in the year 2040, the natural resources are so scarce that it is likely to come in Europe to get Distribution. Since my child is 20. Excuse me, but since I had a bad Conscience. So in a future I would never do this to another child. And again: children's waiver is the best environmental protection, the largest individual contribution we can make to climate protection.

children's waiver, and all will be well?
of Course, you can still do more. I, for example, fly, and eat no meat. I'm already exemplary on-the-go, I must say. (laughs) But I don't teach alone can also.

we Lived in the year 1970, they would have probably children?
Then it would be more likely. Because the world was at that time a■.

you are questioning the children only for ecological reasons. In the book, you have to count meticulously the consequences and dangers of pregnancy and finally that nature is a misogynist. It is so simple? All the feelings of happiness, of which many Pregnant women and mothers all talking nonsense?
Such women I already know. But I hear also incredibly often, as awful as a pregnancy can be. A friend of mine died while giving Birth almost. Children a very dangerous thing to get still, but which is now concealed. To do so, as the medicine would have everything under control. Unfortunately not true: Even in Germany, mothers die each year during childbirth. To give birth is and remains dangerous to life.

you call enthusiastic moms as "Mombies".
(laughs) That is a term from the Anglo-Saxon debate, and teasingly meant. But it is what it is: A pregnant woman loses her autonomy. Under the Patriarchy.

only child-free feminists believe feminist worthy?
A real feminist, has no children. I would say so, Yes. I know that there are other feminists: liberal, queer and so on. For them, motherhood and feminism are not contradictory, and that is also okay. To the life of the so. For me, it fits together with a consistent feminist attitude.

Prove with their fierce criticism of the children and the family, ultimately, not as a victim of the neoliberal separation, therefore see the family no longer have value?
Oh, no. I have very close Girlfriends and friends. The are practically my family, and I, of course, very important. For some, even the Pets. From the narrow Patriarchal understanding of Family, I've adopted myself for a long time.

you say, children would be born in a bad world. It is in the world but in many areas, getting better and better: infant mortality rates, extreme Hunger and so on.
Has not already been said Leibniz, as lived in the best of all possible worlds? (laughs) Well, I think the presence is still not so great. And the prospects are scary, that cannot be denied. Now, if somewhere in the world, the children of mortality, what is going back a bit – that's the key? This child then eh has no clean air and no clean drinking water. And of the animals, to which we can deprive the life basis or have already withdrawn, we have not talked yet. For me, a man is not worth more than a Rhino or other large mammals. Also for the Survival of the rhinoceros, we should not have children.

quote Nietzsche: "A new child: Oh how much new dirt also came to the world!" But that's who we are, imperfect dirt producers. Do not reject you to ultimately the people themselves?
But no. But today, we are just too many. In Germany we have today twice as many people, as it is for the environment would be ideal. Kill, we can't have, so we have to drive the production now. And don't forget: A German child as many resources as 30 children consumed on the African continent. So we cannot say that it is not too much children to our Problem.

When Homo sapiens becomes extinct, would also be okay for you?
(laughs) We're going to die, don't worry. Perhaps it comes in faster than we believe today, the "Global One Child"Policy. A child who would, in fact, are so nearly there. Then we could delay the collapse a little.

(editing Tamedia)

Created: 28.03.2019, 14:28 PM

Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.