മലയാളം: പാഷൻ ഫ്രൂട്ട് (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I like the idea of a childfree dictionary. Tongue-in-cheek of course, no haters please! While “crotchfruit” may be condescending, insulting or disgusting, it is damn creative, if not just plain funny. No?

Babble’s Jabberwocky explains the peculiar language of the childfree culture.

So go ahead. Try not to be mean, but give us your contributions and definitions for a child free dictionary. We’ll re-post the tally.

Related articles

• Day 139 | Jabberwocky by Lewis Carroll
• The Happiness Project – “Lighten Up” on the Childfree
• Childfree Celebrity: Vincent Kartheiser (Pete Campbell) of Mad Men
• Psychology declares war on childfreedom.

The post Submit additions to a childfree dictionary? appeared first on Why No Kids?.

The leader of a private effort to colonize Mars hopes the Red Planet’s first few pioneers don’t bring children into the world there.

Mars, 2001, with the southern polar ice cap visible on the bottom. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Check out:

Private Mars Colony Is No Place for Children (Yet)

Related articles

• More than 78,000 people ready to colonize Mars
• 78,000 People Apply for One-Way Trip to Mars
• NASA Planning on Farming on Mars?
• Volunteers wanted for one-way ticket to Mars

The post Childfree Mars!!! ? appeared first on Why No Kids?.

English: Air Asia X Airbus A340-300 (9M-XAB) approaching Stansted Airport (STN) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

By now we’ve all heard about Air Asia X’s quiet zones, seven designated economy class rows at the front of planes where children under 12 are not allowed, a point of contention for some pissed off parents and a supposed paradise for business travelers and the childfree, like me.

To access this frequent flyers’ Eden, you need only pay the extra $11-$35 fee might otherwise pay for apremium seat. But what do you get for your money?

You get a bulkhead barrier and a childfree bathroom (which is never enforced by attendants). So In the short-term, you may, if you are very lucky, get some relief from screaming and seat kicking. But I think quiet zones are actually a huge risk, and may ultimately turn basic economy cabins into a flying free for all.

Noise travels and reverberates and quiet zone seats do not come with complimentary noise-cancelling headphones. If you are seated at the back of the quiet zone, a screaming, kid could still be seated directly behind you.

You remember the smoking section? Sure, the air was worse in the back of the plane than the front, but the entire plane reeked, and sitting one row in front of the smokers was no better than joining them.

I shouldn’t care how people choose to spend their money, and as a childfree traveler I should probably encourage Air Asia X’s strategy, even if it is gimmicky. If they are successful, maybe other businesses will recognize the spending power of childfree travelers and exhausted parents’ need/desire for peace and quiet when they are on a date or vacation.

But for now, I am skeptical about QUIET ZONES.

I think the risks of segregated seating could ultimately outweigh the rewards.

I am concerned that quiet zones may perpetuate an “us against them” mentality, a friction that is not conducive to peaceful interactions in confined spaces with absolutely NO EXIT STRATEGY.

Also, I don’t like paying for things that should be free. Like simple consideration of others.

The bar for acceptable behavior in public spaces, for kids and adults, is already set so, so low. And I think setting a precedent where people have to pay extra for a little (or no) peace and consideration may lead to the bar falling to Chuck E Chees setting, where parents can sit back and let their kids go crazy.

Imagine yourself sitting on an Air Asia X light in row 20. A kid’s video game is chiming and beeping. He’s kicking your seat while his sister runs the aisle (even through the premium seats) shrieking. After 2 hours, you’re compelled to say something. You politely ask the parents if they might turn down the volume or put an end to the chair soccer. They not so politely tell you that you can pay up to move up, or shut up. Then what?

Parents are overworked and exhausted and the last thing they want to do on vacation is worry so much about offending others that they nag and scold their child until they break down completely, start crying or screaming, and offend others anyway. These are tiresome battles to fight for the benefit of others. And the value of considering those around you already appears to be waning in our society.

So when Air Asia or another airline steps in to set the standard for behavior in one particular part of the plane, are they effectively obliterating the societal standard for the rest of it? Are they telling parents in the rest of the plane that they no longer need to fight the battle at all? By saying, “THIS zone is for quiet people”, are they insinuating that the other section is for loud people? By defining rules for one section, are they suggesting that there are NO rules in the other (at least enough so that exhausted, indifferent or lazy parents can let their guards down and lower their expectations even further?

I say yes.

There is no reason for parents to try at all (or at least an excuse not to) when an institution defines rules that should be self evident, and effectively assumes the role of the quiet police. Even if we all know it is just a gimmick to make more money.

My fear or theory is: When institutions step in, many parents check out. And we all lose. Instead of being accountable to one another, we become accountable to the powers that be, even if that “power” is a profit driven company with little interest in enforcing their policy.

So, for me, Quiet Zones are not something I want to encourage or support necessarily. They are not effective or realistic, not worth the extra fee, and ultimately, maybe risky.

What do you think?

Related articles

• Airplane Etiquette – Who’s in charge??
• Jeremy Clarkson prompts fierce debate on child-free flights

The post No Quiet Zones for this childfree traveler? appeared first on Why No Kids?.

does not mention children specifically, but… should it?

Is the modern desire for children, like our want for other new, shiny things, a result of relentless marketing?

The most defensible, obvious answer to both of the questions above is “No”.  Biology, instinct, and the innate need to survive and thrive fuel our animalistic drive to procreate. Hormones propel us to copulate and populate, so chow can one lay the blame for overpopulation at the feet of media and advertising?

For starters, in developed countries at least, children no longer have utility beyond fulfilling the (selfish) desires of parents. As many others have reminded us (as in the first story on the following link) children are no longer needed to work the farm or otherwise help support modern families. While children were once a valuable asset, they now appear exclusively on the debit side of a family balance sheet. They are expensive, and the return on capital is not something that can be measured with a calculator. (Nor should it, I promise all the detached, cold calculus leads to something resembling a point.)

So how do we modern, western humans place a value on having babies and raising families? Well, this is where one might reflect on what we see in commercials or hear from celebrities. What about the endless celebration of babies on movie and TV, starting with Disney movies? Which life events are repeatedly, FOREVER, packed with the most drama, joy and possibility? How many babies do you think are born to TV characters every year during sweeps week? More importantly, WHY?

Money?

Babies are big, big business. Since the value of children can no longer be calculated, corporations are compelled to fill us with fantasies of a perfect life dependent upon, or punctuated by, a perfect child. The messages we constantly hear and see tell us that babies are priceless, and they make us happy. So, am I imagining things, or is this possibly the western worlds most effective marketing scheme?

Since babies are priceless, there is no ceiling on the amount of money that can/should be spent on them. If you do not spend every earned and borrowed penny on them, you are depriving them, and probably guilty of bad parenting. Your kids probably won’t succeed because you didn’t buy them every possible toy, tool and opportunity. No one is allowed to openly disagree. Parents, especially celebrities, must constantly and publicly repeat the same vague platitudes like “It’s amazing!” or “It’s all about the baby.” or “It gives my life meaning.” If you have 1 child, their birthday better be the best day of your life. (Meaning that it was all down hill from there?) If you have 2, it better be a tie!

Biology does not account for these things, does it? So what does? Marketing? Brilliant marketing?

This item is priceless + it is virtually guaranteed by your neighbors and celebrities to make you happy + fear + guilt + insecurity = ?

What do you think?

Related articles

The links in the text above provide more links to related stories. And here is one about an actor swimming upstream:

• Childfree Celebrity: Vincent Kartheiser (Pete Campbell) of Mad Men

The post Study: Wanting Things (Kids?) Makes Us Happier Than Having Them appeared first on Why No Kids?.

Cover via Amazon

The NYTimes bestseller by Gretchen Rubin is a year-in-the-life exploration of a writer trying to live her life happier. What does that mean? Each month is broken into a theme: energy, love, play, etc. April’s theme is “Lighten Up” with a subtitle: Parenthood. Hmm. Maybe that means you don’t need to “lighten up” if you don’t have kids or you are already pretty enlightened?
Nope. Not according to the author. Rubin cites a study that says “child
care” is only slightly more pleasant than commuting, and one that says
marital satisfaction declines after the first child is born (picking up
again after they leave the nest). Then she disputes these findings, all
the while complaining about her kids and marital satisfaction mostly
relating to fights about her kids.

“Now as a parent myself, I realize how much the happiness of parents depends
on the happiness of their children and grandchildren.”

Really? But then again the kids did give Rubin a reason to write a bestseller.
We at WNK believe that by being childfree, everyday is a project in
happiness.

From the Happiness Project Blog:

Do your children make you happy? Some research says NO! I say YES!

Read the article here

Hey WNKers have you read The Happiness Project?

The post The Happiness Project – “Lighten Up” on the Childfree appeared first on Why No Kids?.

This week let us introduce you to the hilarious  Sh*t My Kids Ruined

After all everyday is a Friday to the childfree!

The post Childfree Friday Funny – Sh*t My Kids Ruined appeared first on Why No Kids?.

When a woman reaches a certain age, she is expected to start thinking about having children. If she doesn’t, society demands an answer. (Telegraph)

Childless Woman Taboo

Sarah Rainey recently took up the much discussed and debated February Vogue article in which Dame Helen Mirren “confronts the final female taboo“: childlessness. Like many commentators, Rainey finds Mirren’s candor refreshing in a media maelstrom prone to condemning childless celebrities (or at least badgering them to explain and justify why they are childless.) Regarding her own experience, Mirren explains that women never judged or harassed her. Men did.

[It] was only boring old men. And whenever they went ‘What? No children? Well, you’d better get on with it, old girl,’ I’d say ‘No! F— off!’ ~ Dame Helen Mirren (Telegraph)

Female childless celebrities like Cameron Diaz, Jennifer Aniston and Kylie Minogue are relentlessly interrogated. Pregnant? Baby bump? Just pudgy? Why no baby bump? When will you become mother? Why aren’t you a mother?

“The expectation is that they [women] will marry and have children,” explains Sue Fagalde Lick, author of Childless by Marriage. “If they don’t, everyone wants to know what’s wrong with them.” (Telegraph)

What’s Right with Them

Sure, once upon a time, looong ago childbearing was an almost essential and unquestioned connubial responsibility. Make babies to chop firewood, grow crops, protect us from marauders, care for us when we are old. I get. We get it.

But one of the really groovy perks of living in the first world in the dawn of the 21st century is that we’re no longer locked into this breed-or-bust marital model. Here’s a telling statistical arc.

An ONS study in 2010 found that just one in nine women born in 1938 remained childless, rising to one in five women born in 1965. It is projected that a quarter of 45-year-olds will be childless by 2018. (Telegraph)

Who are these disreputable, irresponsible scallywags? It’s time to expose them, to reveal them for who and what they are!

“You will find them among the higher educated, the ambitious and the high-flyers,” explains [author Fay] Weldon. “They, like Mirren, have a different but equal service to make to the community. They should be praised, not condemned.” (Telegraph)

Oh.

Right. Different but equal. Ambitious, highly educated high-flyers.

Childless Women: From Taboo to Equality

A strong woman stands up for herself.
A stronger woman stands up
for everyone else. (Credit: Quoteswave)

Yet, as Mirren articulates, women are frequently derided when childless. And while she lays the bugaboo at the insensitive feet of men, it seems that she may be oversimplifying the equation.

Tracey L Anderson‘s post “Childfree: All Women are Created Equal” sees women as the primary culprits, perpetuating the medieval childless taboo upon their female contemporaries.

It was mostly women who were negative about my decision… I saw that it’s often women who don’t support other women’s life choices; it’s often women’s stereotypes of what we should be and do that get in our way. (Flurt!)

We’ll let Dame Mirren and Ms. Anderson debate whether men or women are more to blame for reinforcing long stale judgments and condescension toward childless women. What is evident is that the taboo endures despite statistical shift and more widespread recognition that motherhood should be a decision, not destiny.

Men, women, society. Something is stuck. Or clinging. Either way, it is high time we move forward. There’s a bright future ahead. It is a Technicolor tomorrow where equality reigns and we encourage and celebrate diversity of all flavors. Moms respect dads. Dads respect moms. Let’s start with that! And parents respect childless couples. And childless individuals. And childless by choice respect parents. And all of us embrace and support those who wanted to be parents but couldn’t. We might even discover that it is pretty fascinating to hear each other’s stories about why we are the way we are, to listen without judging or sneering or condescending or belittling. Sounds great, right?

To all women with children who unfairly judge those of us who have decided not to follow in your motherhood footsteps, I say, “accept every woman for who she is. Respect the decisions she has made for herself. Just because her choices are not the same as yours is no reason to criticize or belittle. She is not any less a woman than you are because she chose not to have children. Women need to support one another and to encourage one another to be who and what we each want to be.” (Flurt!)

Transform Childless Taboo into Folklore

In truth, it is “boring old men” and myopic mothers who perpetuate the breed-or-bust stereotype for women. But it’s also true that many of us in the childless by choice camp perpetuate “breeder” stereotypes that offend parents. Sometimes it is unintentional. Sometimes not. Often we are just as guilty of judging and sneering and condescending and belittling. Perhaps it’s a defensive mechanism or a way to vent after absorbing yet another breeder bingo. But it is not helpful. And it too reinforces the divide between parents and childless couples.

Let’s stop. We can. I challenge us to transform childless women taboos into folklore. Trite, amusing folklore. Yes, we can.

Can’t we?

Related articles

• Helen Mirren confronts the final female taboo
• What? No children?
• Childless by choice: Statistics show more are opting out of parenthood
• Childfree Celebrities: Artist Edition – Women’s History Month
• On Being Childless, Childfree, and True
• Why is there a taboo around childless women?

Related articles

The post Childless Woman Taboo appeared first on Why No Kids?.

Mad Men (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Tonight is the anxiously awaited season six  premier of Mad Men. While the show is always controversial, so are many of the show’s stars. Famously kid free and car free, for environmental reasons, Vincent Kartheiser just got engaged to co-star Alexis Bledel–his mistress on the show. (Big congrats from WNK!)

Does that mean we can add Bledel to the childfree celebrity roster? So far no comment from either celebrity regarding their kid or car plans. Like the Mad Men this story could be titled: To Be Continued…

Not only is Greenie Kartheiser childfree he is also: car-free, meat-free and toilet-free. Is he mad?

Video from msnbc via PopCrunch:

Pete Campbell (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Related articles

• Alexis Bledel and Vincent Kartheiser Are Engaged (nymag.com)

Alexis Bledel (Photo credit: gdcgraphics)

The post Childfree Celebrity: Vincent Kartheiser (Pete Campbell) of Mad Men appeared first on Why No Kids?.

Why no kids? Dependent 20 somethings! (Photo credit: Junior Achievement)

In what could be an indicator of either a massive drop in teens’ financial prospects or the fact that teens today are getting more realistic about their financial futures, a new survey shows that the percentage of teenagers who expect to remain dependent on mom and/or dad until at least age 27 has doubled in just the last two years. (Consumerist)

Chris Morran’s post, “Number Of Teens Expecting To Depend On Parents Into Adulthood Has Doubled Since 2011“, breaks down the startling figures from a Junior Achievement study released on March 27.

Junior Achievement is the world’s largest organization dedicated to educating students about workforce readiness, entrepreneurship and financial literacy through experiential, hands-on programs. (Junior Achievement)

The statistics, based on a survey conducted with The Allstate Foundation does indicate that teenagers have become more optimistic since 2011 about their financial futures, but there’s a catch.

Junior Achievement USA^® (JA) and The Allstate Foundation’s 2013 Teens and Personal Finance Poll shows that teenagers are more optimistic about their financial futures, with a 20 percent increase in teens believing they will be financially better off than their parents. However, part of their financial security comes from depending on parents until a later age. (Junior Achievement)

Read: teens eye a brighter financial future so long as they can maintain their allowance cord into their late twenties. Hang on, ‘rents, don’t snip the dinero umbilical cord yet! But when exactly is “yet”?

The survey found that 25 percent of teens think they will be age 25-27 before becoming financially independent from their parents, up from 12 percent in 2011. (Junior Achievement)

Umbilical Cord Bungee Jump (Credit: Rob Caswell)

Heck, by then these coddled teens might even have children of their own. Having spent a few years living in France and Italy as a 20 something where this social trend was common, this sounds familiar. Jack E. Kosakowski, the President and CEO of Junior Achievement USA fleshes out the news a bit.

[I] infer that teens expect to live with their parents longer because 23 percent are unsure about their ability to budget and nearly 20 percent express similar feelings about the use of credit cards. Additionally, 34 percent of teens express a lack of confidence in their ability to invest their money. (Junior Achievement)

A 40 Something on Dependent 20 Somethings

I’m no finance wizard (Team WNK relies on BrianWNK for all matters economic) nor do I claim a stellar post adolescence financial trajectory. In short, I’m ill qualified to opine on the dramatic shift over the last two years highlighted in these sorts of survey results:

In 2011, 75% of teens said they would be supporting themselves at some point between 18 and 24. In just two years, that has decreased to 59%. (Consumerist)

Sounds like bad news to me, probably in keeping with US financial outlooks in general, but my macroeconomic barometer is probably not that relevant. Nor is it worth my weighing in on these findings (via Junior Achievement):

• Of the 33 percent of teens who say they do not use a budget, 42 percent are “not interested” and more than a quarter (26 percent) think “budgets are for adults.”
• More than half of teens (52 percent) think students are borrowing too much to pay for college, yet only nine percent report they are currently saving money for college. Nearly 30 percent have not talked with their parents about paying for higher education.

The times are a’changing. I suspect that our collective unconscious should be unsettled. But I’ll leave the really wise and useful conclusions to scholars and pundits.

So, if I’m not going to slash around in the statistics and social science mosh pit, then why-oh-why did I bring up all these distressing survey results? And why are they distressing?

Well, in a very selfish way, they are not too distressing. Not to me. Personally. Because… I have no children, dependent or otherwise. But if I did, if Junior were texting me another request for an advance on his allowance to cover his Verizon bill, then I might well be extremely distressed about the survey results. The odds seem to be increasingly good that Junior will be siphoning off funds for a looong time. And, frankly, I’m pretty sure I’d be concerned if my 20 something were still totally dependent into the dawn of his/her third decade.

Do you follow me?

Dependent 20 somethings strike me as another really good reason why not to have kids. Let’s call it reason #1972. Actually I might have already used that. There are a lot of reasons why I don’t have kids. Cash hungry 20 somethings had never before crossed my mind. Overall expense? Check. Tuition? Check. But the possibility of having a 20 something that fails to launch? Add it to the list…

Why no kids? Dependent 20 somethings!

Related articles

• Number Of Teens Expecting To Depend On Parents Into Adulthood Has Doubled Since 2011
• 1 in 4 Teens Plans to Rely Financially on Parents Until Age 27
• At 27, Kids Aren’t Ashamed To Live Off Their Parents

The post Why No Kids? Dependent 20 Somethings! appeared first on Why No Kids?.

You’ll regret being childfree when you’re older…

One of most common Breeder Bingos is, “You’ll regret being childfree when you’re older.” To which most of us roll our eyes or nod agreeably but dismissively.

“I hope not,” I say when feeling more generous. Or, “I’ll let you know when I get there…”

I sigh inwardly and add another mark to the childfree regrets blotter hanging on a hook inside my otherwise rather upbeat skull, and then I recite a quiet mantra to myself:

Do not encourage this condescending know-it-all.
Do not suggest that s/he will regret having children when s/he is older.
Do not explain my childfree choice because his/her judgment is made.

Rebuttals About Childfree Regrets

Despite frequent suggestions that the childfree choice will inevitably morph into childfree regrets, most of us learn to avoid engaging. We become tired with countering judgment with reason and dialogue. Parent conviction is deeply ingrained and generally inflexible. Trying to be understood (or, god forbid, respected) by parents who inflexibly assume that we will experience childfree regret down the road is akin to the dysfunctional dialogue between theists and atheists/agnostics. Patience, passion, logic, science, conviction, etc. need not apply.

So reading “What I Regret About Being Childfree” offered a welcome antidote. This admittedly snarky post written by Julie Was Here (aka The hiking Humanist) originally emerged from a response to a childfree-basher.

So this list was originally written as a response to a rather persistent troll on another website, who tried to insist that the childfree (namely, me) are envious of her life as a grandmother (by her own admission, breeding is about all she ever did with her life,) and secretly regret being childfree.

Her childfree regrets range from spot-on to hilarious, and the list is virtually endless. I’ve culled my favorites into a top ten parade to entice you to wander over and read the full post.

Top 10 Childfree Regrets

Please note that the following is excerpted and quoted directly from Julie Was Here‘s post.

1. I regret that I don’t just mindlessly follow the herd like any lazy, unimaginative cow…
2. I regret that I’ve served my country proudly, gotten a pilot’s license, competed in and won art competitions, traveled the world, and generally do all the things most people only dream of, and all by the age of 24…
3. I regret having a healthy, fit, thin body, complete with perky (though admittedly small) breasts, an unmarred abdomen, and…
4. I regret that I have never looked nor felt like a bloated whale…[nor] like a deflated balloon…
5. I regret not being covered in the bodily fluids…
6. I also regret enjoying peaceful slumber every night, not interrupted by screeching shit-factories…
7. I really regret having an actual healthy and happy relationship… [that] is not strained or destroyed by children…
8. I regret that my typical free-time resembles what other people consider a rare vacation treat…
9. I regret that I never get calls from school about bullying or being bullied…
10. I regret that there is no one around to smash all breakable objects in the house, attempt to feed inappropriate items into disk drives… [and] flush toys down the toilet…

 What are Your Top “Childfree Regrets”?

Related articles

• Schmutzie’s Kid-Free List
• Childfree Celebrities: Artist Edition – Women’s History Month
• Taking Part in NPRs Tell Me More’s Segment “Not Having Kids Bad For the Economy?”
• Childfree FUN
• On Being Childless, Childfree, and True

The post Childfree Regrets? appeared first on Why No Kids?.