The message Katie left at the Leeds Museum – you can see more photos from our UK trip here:

You can listen to this episode above and subscribe to our podcast on iTunes. You can also listen to this episode on StitcherCyber Ears or download it on (61mins, 43MB).

This episode features The Species Barrier on child-free women. The discussion covers: the importance of adopting kids, debating the issue not the person, the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement, anti-natalism and the origin of the “missionary” position.

We also discuss section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, free speech and privilege.

If you like what you hear, please support the show!


LogicBegging You’, Cyndi LauperGirls Just Want To Have Fun’, MistroYour Lullaby’.

  1. […] Episode 166: Girls Just Don’t Want a Bun (in the Oven) […]

  2. Jo says:

    Marcus, Ruth and Felicity need to stop trying to change what veganism is, vegans. Already get a bad press without these crackpots making us out to be even nuttier,
    Yeah yeah we’re overpopulated but guess what, a natural disaster will sort this out if ..BIG IF.. we do run out of space, seriously do you think that’s gonna happen? Idiots. Reading to much inferno.
    Veganism is about the animals, it is not about antinatalist and people are not any less vegan if they go onto have multiple kids. Yes their environmental impact will be higher but no higher than a fucking antinatalist driving a car sitting in their big house, taking plane rides all over the world, eh Ruth! I’m sure you’re impact is a lot worse than someone with a few kids, you’re never off the computer or phone so are you less a vegan?
    Pair of idiots, especially him with his stupid homemade memes and population matters links 😂😂
    Facts you speciest humans are animals too and we are as entitled to breed ourselves into extinction as any other animal is

    me hijacking you’re child free link and making it about veganism, is the same as you fools trying to make veganism an antinatalist issue. THEIR BOTH SEPARATE ISSUES, DEAL WITH IT

    • Hi Jo,

      Me and Katie will address the relevant parts of your comment on the show at some point. However, as Ruth has pointed out in her comment here (and ironically on the episode you are commenting on too), personal insults do not add to the discussion. Whether or not Ruth (or Katie, or me) fly is irrelevant to whether human population is an important issue to address for the sake of other animals and the environment. Bringing such things up just seems to be a way to avoid engaging with the issue.

  3. Hi Jo, this is Ruth here. Firstly i’ll start by reitterating yet again that there is a difference between the message and the messenger. Ad Hominem attacks really aren’t helpful and actually really take away from any argument you’re trying to make. I am the first person to admit I am, like most westerners, a destructive human being which is yet another reason not to add new humans. We could go into my life and the environmental steps i’m taking but that’s so irrelevant to the message. I must say the effort you’ve gone to with stalking us is quite flattering, if not creepy.

    “Having a child increases your carbon footprint by a factor of about 5.7, and not having a child saves about 9,000 metric tons of carbon emissions.”

    It’s good that you understand that the world is overpopulated but I do worry when people accept this and the high probability that humans will be sorted out by runaway climate change (causing worse and worse weather), a disease fueled by antibiotic resistance etc. To add a new human to the planet after accepting this to me seem very unethical. We don’t want humans who are here to suffer and each new human added is making the situation worse. Who in good conscience would throw a new human into runaway climate change, The Sixth Great Extinction Event and general ecological collapse? They would both worsen the situation and suffer through it.

    Morally responsible parents wish to spare their children pain. There are ways they can minimise the chances of their children suffering certain types of harm, but the only way to prevent harm altogether is to desist from bringing children into existence. Any child will, inevitably, suffer considerable harm.

    As as side note: Inferno was written by Dan Brown to highlight that overpopulation is an issue and even one of the main characters fighting the bad man says that he has a point. Not sure if you read the book or watched the film, they’re quite different.

    I have said this more times than I care to remember and am pretty certain it was mentioned on the podcasts but the point we make isn’t about whether people already have children, that’s a past choice and irrelevant. It’s about discussing and educating people about the impacts of adding new humans in the future.

    Veganism is about avoiding exploitation and suffering as far as practically possible and adding new humans causes suffering to other animals, even if the child is raised plant based then adopts vegan ethics for the whole lives and never, ever waivers. We all know that is highly unlikely and just need to go on any vegan page to see example after example of “vegan army fails”. Just as we were raised by non-vegan parents, they and their many possible descendants will make their own decisions on how to live ethically. A decision that will be made in a speciesist culture, surrounded by speciesist peers.

    They will at best all require fuel/energy, finite resources, housing, land for agriculture, clean water etc. All will hugely impact wild animals who have seen their numbers halved in the the last 40 years, as human animals doubled.

    Consider this article from The Vegan Society magazine which connects the dots:

    We are but one species in millions and seem to be getting disproportionate attention within this anthropocentric “debate”. Also disproportionate are our impacts, which always dwarf those of any other species and impact them greatly.

    You can read a lot more about how human population is a vegan issue here:

    We’d be more than happy to debate the topic if you can step away from the Ad Hominem attacks.

    Anti-natalism and veganism are hugely connected and this goes both ways. We’ve had much success talking to anti-natalists about veganism and have had many go vegan. We’ve also had many people who were on the fence about having children (or more children) contact us to say they’ve made an ethical decision to avoid adding new humans.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s