In case you have forgotten atheist feminist Miriam Mogilevsky (@sondosia on Twitter), she is the “queer, gay, femme . . . homoflexible . . . lesbian with exceptions” who is “on the asexual spectrum somewhere” and does not “experience primary sexual attraction.” Ms. Mogilevsky’s confusing welter of identities is typical of Third Wave feminists, who are in favor of every kind of sexuality except normal sexuality.

Did I mention she’s into “polyamory”? That’s what we used to call “screwing around,” but when intellectuals screw around, they need a fact word for it, to make it sound clever. But I digress . . .

Ms. Mogilevsky recently shared some good news with her blog readers — she has decided against spawning any little weirdos:

When I say that I probably won’t be having children, people tend to assume that I’m firmly against the idea of it, that I hate the thought of having children, or even that I hate children themselves.

None of those is true, especially not the last one.

I’m ambivalent about having children. There are some things that make me want to–I love children, I think I’d be a good parent, I like the idea of raising kids who will become the kind of people we need more of in the world. . . .

(Is there a weirdo shortage?)

I think I would find many aspects of parenting enjoyable. I think it would change my opinions and worldview in interesting ways.

But I also have reasons for not wanting to have children, and there are more of those and they are more emotionally salient. I don’t think I could mentally handle such demands on my time and energy, on my very body itself. I don’t want to give up all that brainspace that was previously spent on friends, work, writing, and other stuff and instead spend it on feeding schedules, shopping lists, doctor visits, and all the many, many other forms of emotional labor mothers have to do. . . . I don’t want to slow or damage my career. I don’t want to stop having sex, or be forced to have it in secrecy and silence. . . .

(How much sex does someone “on the asexual spectrum somewhere” who does not “experience primary sexual attraction” have anyway?)

I don’t expect to have enough resources and social support to make parenting financially and emotionally sustainable, not even with one co-parent. (Raising children in a large polyamorous household would be a different story, but one unlikely to happen in this society.) I am wildly terrified of pregnancy and childbirth and literally any medical procedure, so the only options for me are adoption or co-parenting with a partner who already has children. . . .

(America, keep your children far away from Miriam Mogilevsky!)

Those are just a few of my personal issues with having children. And sure, I recognize that most of these are not inevitable, that in a different society with proper support for parents (especially mothers), none of this would have to be the case. But if I have children, I have to have children in the society we have now, or the society we have in ten years when I’ll be in a position to have children. I don’t get to have children inside my own hypothetical science fiction novel with widespread democratic socialism and polyamorous communes and super advanced reproductive technology that instantly teleports a fetus out of my womb and into an incubator where it will develop for the next nine months. . . .

OK, enough — read the rest of that crazy stuff, if you want. Strange as it may seem, my 23-year-old son and his wife already have two sons, and somehow manage to mentally handle the demands. Meanwhile Miriam Mogilevsky, a 25-year-old alumna of elite Northwestern University with a master’s degree from Columbia University, is so “terrified of pregnancy and childbirth” that she would require a democratic socialist state with “super advanced reproductive technology” even to consider motherhood as a possibility. Why is it that, despite her (allegedly) superior intelligence, Ms. Mogilevsky is such a psychiatric casualty that she could not cope with the ordinary tasks of normal human life?

Never mind. Another feminist heading toward the Darwinian Dead End — manifestly unfit for survival, she subtracts her defective DNA from the future — and all we can say is, “Bon voyage, Crazy Cat Lady!”

Liberalism must ultimately result in the extinction of liberals.









Amazon.com Widgets

Share this: Share

Twitter

Facebook



Reddit



Comments