What is Kate Manne's "Don't Have Children" trying to achieve?
demanding change is simply too much so guess I'll just tell everyone to give up out of spite
There’s a special sort of hypocrite out there: A parent that tells other people to not have children. I grew up with someone like this. Not my biological parent, but an adoptive one, who has her own child a few years older than me. As I explored my own sexuality and womanhood as a teenager, alongside developing a very serious phobia of pregnancy (honestly, why was that even in my head? I was 14!), I asked her what having a child was like.
I was told, numerous times, that parenting is actually quite boring, babies are REALLY boring, and that having (biological) children is an ultimately selfish act. Crucially, she did not think of herself as selfish, because back in the ‘80s when she was pregnant, nobody knew the world was on fire (In my past life as an environmental historian, I did plenty of research that disproves that. Don’t forget to remind your boomer parents!).
It all worked out for me, though. Growing up in this environment served to a) provide me with weak female role models and therefore not make motherhood or child-rearing particularly attractive and b) removed any expectation for me to provide grandchildren (granddogs are far more welcome in my family). As such, there was absolutely no resistance to my being sterilised the second I turned 30.
In this regard, I’m lucky. I had the freedom to make my own choices and my wishes are respected and supported.
The funny little paradox of voluntarily refusing to reproduce is that you end up engaging more in discourse on the very things you’re rejecting. I know way more about pregnancy, birth, and parenting than an infertile 32 year old ought to. Becoming overly informed on the grim realities is what contributed to this decision in the first place. A close friend - who is the parent of a feisty and strong willed 2-year-old - looked right into my soul when she told me that this aversion has turned into a morbid fascination for me. It got me right in the ego because she’s totally right. It’s the childfree equivalent of snooping on a car crash to see what’s happened.
But enough scene-setting. Whilst on my daily mission to consume as much reality TV content as possible to distract myself from the pain that is being alive, I stumbled across an episode of Glamorous Trash with fellow childfree icon, Jameela Jamil. She was discussing a viral essay from Kate Manne, a famous writer and philosopher who I’d never heard of. In this essay, bluntly titled “Don’t Have Children”, Manne provides 5 reasons why having children is a terrible idea right now.
Manne is straight (or at the very least, in a straight reltionship) and American, and the reasons discussed are specific to the heteronormative American experience (ie. private healthcare, no maternity leave, high maternal mortality, expensive childcare, deadbeat husbands, fascist government, and rabid pro-natalism).
Naturally, my first criticism of this piece is that it should specify that this article is aimed at American women. A classic American crime, assuming the rest of the world doesn’t exist! Making such sweeping absolutisms without clarifying that these problems are deeply American in nature is lazy, though totally unsurprising. Imagine my surprise when I then discover Manne is Australian and living in hell by choice, not by birth.
The motivation behind Manne’s article seems to be the most recent round of memeable, pro-natalist bullshit from the Trump administration and the $5000 bonus being dangled at women to breed, which barely covers the cost of giving birth to the damn thing. She also clarifies that she is specifically writing to women who are undecided, on the fence, or doubting whether parenting is the right decision for them.
I can’t believe I’m saying this, as a perpetually miserable and pessimistic cunt who can’t stand people who are a bit too cheerful, but: Manne’s entire vibe here is so deeply negative and bleak, which is not what people who are undecided about a huge life-changing decision need. If we don’t have hope, we may as well lie on the ground and let the worms get a head start.
Let’s break down her points (in bold) and my perfectly observed rebuttals (in italics):
Pregnancy is more dangerous than it ought to be. Yes, pregnancy and birth can be dangerous, especially in the US. Maternal mortality is very high for a “developed” country and 80% of maternal deaths are preventable. Some people who get pregnant and give birth are totally fine; for others, it’s deadly. For most, it’s somewhere in the middle. There’s really no way of telling, but being younger and healthier tends to help. This point is further complicated by the appalling state of reproductive care in the US in general, with abortion bans leading to dying, non-viable fetuses rotting away inside people’s uteruses (which is VERY BAD for one’s health).
Men do not help nearly enough, and women find themselves with a “second shift” problem when they have children. Men are trash! Who knew! In a setup where the birthing parent is a woman and the other parent is a man, men historically and consistently don’t pull their weight. Men aren’t socialised to be caring or nice, and even in the year of Our Lord 2025, child rearing and housework are dismissed as being women’s work and a natural fit for those with tits. Manne’s solution to the unequal distribution of labour in the home is to persuade women to refuse to have children, rather than to think of ways to make men put in the work. How exactly does withholding fatherhood from men teach them to be responsible?
Heterosexist norms within relationships mean mothers don’t get cared for. Women’s health is perceived as less important than men’s health, and women are expected to suck up the physical and mental challenges that come with having a human wrenched from your birth canal. Again, I don’t really see how refusing to have children improves this.
Social support is nil to nonexistent. No paid leave, no free childcare, no support in physical recovery from birth. The classic American approach to supporting new mothers! Why try and make it better when you could just whinge!!!
Childcare is ludicrously expensive, and often unavailable and unreliable. Childcare costs disproportionately affect women and force them out of the workforce as they are pressured to choose their career over bonding with their baby. Feminism is about choice, not forcing people to make a choice.
According to Manne, these are all good enough reasons to not have children.
The lack of emotion in this article is mind-blowing to me. Perhaps I don’t consider the practicalities of parenthood because I can’t emotionally fathom wanting to be a parent to get to that stage. To my barren mind, having a child and choosing to start a family is an emotional decision before it is a practical one.
Furthermore, the article assumes that the practical reality - ie. doom - is unlikely to change. This article has irked me so that I am standing up for people who have children and promoting positivity. Who am I?
The reasons Manne has given for avoiding child-rearing - deep heteronormativity and economic inequality, to name just two - are totally valid, and should awaken a flame of rage in you that motivates you to make the world better for everyone. But I don’t really understand why she insists on calling her stance “feminist antinatalism” because feminism is fundamentally about giving women the freedom to make choices on how to live their lives just like men do, and attempting to remove the barriers that make women’s lives crap by default because that’s just how we’ve always done it.
The cherry on top of this cake is Kate Manne admitting that she has a child herself - during the last Trump administration, no less - and her favourable life circumstances (a steady job, good health insurance, and a male partner who was willing to actually be a father) made things much easier for her. Good for you, babes.
It’s as if she’s rubbing it in everyone else’s faces. She is in a privileged position telling the less privileged that they cannot enjoy what she has, because her life is nicer than theirs. Sucks to be you!
Kate, don’t you want people to have the same nice things you did? Don’t you want to make the world a slightly nicer place with your platform? Should family be a privilege only afforded to those who can afford to exist under fascism?
Naturally, writing a manifesto on how things ought to be done and 99 Other Top Tips for Achieving World Peace might be a bit of a stretch on a Sunday afternoon. However, as a European peering into the fish tank that is the US and tapping impatiently on the glass to try and make it do something, the stranglehold that late capitalist misery has on the place feels so needlessly permanent.
The people I’m assuming Manne’s article is aimed at are educated women who have the right to choose whether they want to be parents or not. That is not a marginalised group; on the contrary, white women who are not living in abject poverty are a large and privileged group. Imagine if they realised how many others there were and demanded change together. Regardless of political orientation, I’d hazard a guess that women between 20 and 40 in the US right now would like it if they had more time to spend with their baby, physical and mental health support following having a baby, and partners who will behave like fathers. Even the most MAGA hat wearing dead-behind-the-eyes Mormon housewife (mother to Kayden, Brayden, Aiden, and Jayden) gets postpartum depression and continence issues. And I’m sure she’d love to get some support if she does.
Why are we acting like the bare minimum is radical? Americans have had their brains so broken by late stage capitalism and neoliberal garbage that when you suggest that a new mother shouldn’t have to go back to work after a week then you can faintly hear the national anthem of the Soviet Union playing in the background. When I say “let this radicalise you”, what I’m really saying is - rethink what you think is radical. Set the bar higher. Be entitled - you are entitled to better than this. Just remember who benefits from telling you that you’re asking for too much.