Woman Got Herself Sterilized to “Save the Planet”

• Tim Giachetti
  November 29th, 2007 at 2:59 am

  Good for her! But, that really does reinforce the old saying, “Only stupid people are breeding.”
  LOL

• shecky
  November 29th, 2007 at 3:06 am

  Hey, it’s her body. Seems a really goofy reason to me, though. I’d just say, “kids are too big a pain in the neck to go through the trouble” and be done with it.

• Kenny
  November 29th, 2007 at 3:14 am

  Having smart kids would probably be the best way to save the planet.

• buttape
  November 29th, 2007 at 3:15 am

  ironic that a gorgeous intelligent woman cut off her line, but ugly retards poop away…

• yudonomi
  November 29th, 2007 at 3:19 am

  The real shame is that when she’s 40, ultimately regrets her decision, and realizes how bad she messed up by limiting her options, nobody will care enough at that point to do another story about what an idiot she was.

• sp
  November 29th, 2007 at 3:36 am

  excellent choice !! in a perfect world this kind of
  ” thinking ” people shouldn’t even have the choice of reproduction .I suggest her husband should be sterilized too to eliminate the possibility to reproduce his part of genetic line .
  We already have millions of morons.

• Vexorg
  November 29th, 2007 at 4:05 am

  Sounds like a great way to spend your declining years alone, miserable and friendless, while not really accomplishing anything in the process.

• crapsalad
  November 29th, 2007 at 4:25 am

  @Vexorg

  At least you’ll have ur kids visiting u when ur old.
  Pitty that most kids choose to put their parents in an old peoples homes
  so they dont have to bother anymore.

• sara
  November 29th, 2007 at 4:30 am

  she prob. thinks this sounds like a good idea, but 5 years from now when her husband leaves her to go reproduce with another woman, she will think very poorly about this rash decision.

  it just logically doesn’t make sense. why doesn’t she just commit suicide, and save the world from another parasitic human. it’s a good thing she won’t have children though, obviously she is irrecovably stupid.

• Laurel
  November 29th, 2007 at 4:48 am

  She’s exercising her reproductive rights, just as she would be if she had an abortion or gave birth. I don’t understand why this is newsworthy in any way.

  There are plenty of happily childfree types out there, including me. I’m now 42 and I regret nothing–but I must admit I’m still, after all this time, baffled by th outright hostility some people think they have a right to display about my life and choices.

• Ursula
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:01 am

  I’m amazed by some of the comments here, and the patronizing, scolding tone of the original article. Why is it so stunning and appalling to people that these women figured out relatively early in life that children simply weren’t for them? Most of you probably know people who made the same decision and have lived happy lives without breeding. That’s their choice, and you’re in no position to judge them for it. And if the ladies in this article believe in zero population growth, they’re doing something admirable by acting on it. To suggest that they should kill themselves is idiotic. They want to make life better for the creatures on this planet NOW, by not crowding the planet with still MORE creatures. Zero population growth obviously does not mean killing the population that’s here!

  Yes, it’s possible that some day they’ll decide they wants kids. If so, they can ADOPT. There are already millions of kids who need parents.

  Still… it is a little scary when smart girls like these decide not to reproduce, and all the dopes start hollerin’ about the sanctity of breeding. Next stop: “Idiocracy”.

• heather
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:23 am

  if it makes her happy, who cares what we think. she can always adopt if she wants a kid in the future. but going to a news agency (or however she did it) to get her “message” out there just makes her another attention whore.

• Matt
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:30 am

  Her reasoning is demented. But good for her.

• bongoman
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:32 am

  Hasn’t she heard of contraception? A little less drastic than sterilisation.

• Aeris
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:48 am

  I think not having children is selfish, too, it means that you can use all your money and time for yourself and have way more fun in the world. I seriously don’t believe her reasoning, it is just an excuse to get attention from the media. I myself am thinking seriously about whether or not to have children, and if so, how many (although that is just a choice between “1″ and “2″ ;)) for two reasons:
  a) I also want to have some fun myself and not go through the cycle of suffering (”school - uni - work - mother” and nothing else in between)
  b) I am not sure if I could cope with being a mother. I think I would be a bad one :/

  other than that, there are, of course, quite a few reasons pro having kids.

  but well… just my 2c.

• Xayzer
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:56 am

  Good thing she decided to do that. We don’t want idiots like her reproducing.

• Jean
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:00 am

  Hmm, yeah, one less child in the world is gonna save tha planet… *ahem*

• Jeff
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:09 am

  If only she can convince another couple billion people to follow her example, we’ll be in pretty good shape.

• Moodindigo
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:16 am

  I made the decision not to have children at age eighteen and was told at the time that I couldn’t have a vasectomy until I was in my mid-thirties. Twelve years on I still have yet to experience a single paternal instinct. That’s okay, that’s my choice.

  However, I am amazed at how many people think that my decision is misguided. I find it highly insulting and absurdly patronising when I am told that I will “change my mind” by people who failed to have the courage of their convictions and purport to know my mind better than I do!

  I made my decision based on three factors: 1) I don’t like kids, they make me nervous that I will screw up their lives. 2) I would rather own a porsche some day than spend my money on some mewling cabbage who will probably grow up to a) dislike me and b) resent me. 3) I don’t like poop. At all.

  However, I don’t see why she has to dress up her perfectly logical decision in an environmental argument. The increased strain on our planet’s resources, food supply problems and dwindling space are engineering problems and the only way to solve them is to apply human ingenuity and creativity. This is the one resource we have that is truly limitless; provided of course that we maintain a plentiful supply of human grey matter! So breed one you cheerful breeders, just please keep your kids away from me.

• Joe H
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:17 am

  Well, I’m glad we won’t be seeing somebody as stupid as her running around in about 24 years!

• Lasse
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:24 am

  So, the solution to all the problems created by humans is to remove the human race altogether? Well, i guess that would solve a lot of things…

• leemz
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:31 am

  I wouldn’t be surprised if she actually did want kids, but saw alot of mothers with like 5-8 baby prams going to kfc and did not want that. If she wanted to be a real trooper she could have gone to another country ( Swedens populations is close on declining )and have a baby there. Sure the lil environment sucking kid would take up resources, but hey, he/she might just save the world and is helping out the economy of. :/

• Evan
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:46 am

  hm. too bad she is going against a humans natural evolutionary process to pass on one’s genes.

  one less nutjob’s kids to have to worry about i guess.

• Sammy
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:55 am

  An excellent, thoughtful choice.

  Unfortunately though, for every one person who does not heed the inborn need to breed, there are several billion who pump out progeny on a more or less continual basis.

  It’s a further pity that most of these “blessed events” even in the educated “Western World” have no more planning associated with them than the careful selection of a reasonably inexpensive bottle of wine.

• Dan
  November 29th, 2007 at 7:21 am

  I agree with the majority of responses. Stupid people will keep reproducing no matter what. What if her child could have cured cancer or solved global warming? We’ll never know.

• sqirrel
  November 29th, 2007 at 7:24 am

  I think that the statement she’s making is powerful, and it really demonstrates her sincere dedication towards her beliefs.

• Diamond
  November 29th, 2007 at 7:54 am

  I will give her kudos for trying, but it was the wrong way. We should be fighting to sterilize the parents that are unfit and should not be having kids. She sounds wonderfully intelligent and therefor should at least have one child. You never know if the next person born is going to be the one to change the world.

• ted
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:08 am

  Slow news day, obviously.

  It’s never a good idea to have major, unnecessary surgery when you have simpler options:
  a) quit having sex
  b) use contraceptives
  c) vasectomy - way less drastic and often reversible (in case you change your mind)

  Having this type of surgery has repercussions for your body, including hormone changes, etc…

  That’s why it’s a dumb idea.

• Capella
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:08 am

  As a woman who had a child - I can’t help but feel sorry that she will never experience that joy, but if this is what she believes - I just hope that some day she will decide to adopt a kid or two and at least have a chance to be a mother that way.

• Tempscire
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:15 am

  Because of course a woman not having a child is depriving herself of joy.

  ‘Cos, you know, she’s a woman. How can she NOT have babies? That’s what women are for, right?

  And she could never act in accordance with her belief of helping the planet by adopting one of the millions of children who were born to irresponsible* parents who felt no reason to use the brain evolution gave them to think about or avoid that baser urge to breed themselves silly.

  I think ted has the only rational criticism of this woman.

  *yeah, yeah, super-generalisation, especially in consideration of the amount of war and famine and disease in the world that can leave kids orphaned (of course, why try taxing your body to nurture a fetus and give birth to a child in that kind of environment…?)

• J
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:23 am

  I think it’s great, hopefully more people like her will do the same … then in a generation we won’t have to deal with folks who deal only in ultra-shock tactics and we get down to the real work of working “together” to save the planet

• CW
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:25 am

  By sterilizing herself, isn’t she depriving the world of a person that could potentially be an “environmental savior”? If she put half her effort into teaching her child about the environment and fostering a respect for the planet in him as she has put into thinking up inane ways to minimize her footprint, she might actually make a difference through him. Instead, she gained 15 minutes of fame and (possibly) a future of regret.

• Mark M
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:59 am

  I’m glad she did it. Now she won’t have any kids to brainwash with her moronic left-wing ideas. We are causing global warming just like we caused the ice age that killed the dinosaurs. Or maybe it was all of the cars they were driving, and their use of fossil fuels they were burning. What, you say? Our fossil fuels come from creatures that died during their era? Oh….

  The Earth is like a woman. She goes through cycles. It’s natural and normal for her.

• Jonathan Stampf
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:02 am

  It’s her personal choice whether to allow herself to get pregnant or not, but it is fair now for us to comment on it because she also chose to make a public statement out of this personal choice.

  If she had done this becasue she sees herself as not good parent material, or that she just doesn’t want children in her life, or that the world isn’t a good place for a child, fine.

  But to see a child as bad for the planet, and making this public statement out of it, she chooses “the planet” over her future children. This reflects an opinion that humanity is a disease infecting the earth. I’ll assume she doesn’t wish for a desolate, lifeless planet; so logic dictates that other life forms are good, just humans bad. Or is it all mamals that are bad for “the planet?” Or all animals and there should just be plants? I wonder.

  Actually we’re doing a wonderful job managing the planet. We exploit our resources to provide fullfilling lives for the vast majority of humanity, being the only species to often live long enough to know our grandchildren. Don’t even get me started on color TV, dentistry and indoor hot running water. This contrasts with the more virtuous forms of life, which often die of starvation, or being eaten by a neighbor or relative.

  She can make her public statement that she is a disease infecting this planet. But she doesn’t speak for me, or my family. We’re more important than a ball of dirt.

• Brad
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:04 am

  Wait… I don’t understand why this is news or even interesting? I got my dog neutered (to try and save the planet) can I get a post on the website?

• DRukus
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:19 am

  Wow. Why are we reading about this?

  She can do what she wants, but why are we reading about this? Also, I am amazed by the amount of closed minded, sheep responses this has brought on.

  Our planet can sustain us, and at the rate we are/could be growing without thinking like a lot the above posters. The real problem is that it cannot support so many greedy “Westerners” (of which, I am one).

  We are as nature intended us to be. We just do not live as nature intended us to. We all know that the excesses of North America could feed the world but we don’t change our society. We come up with ideas like zero population growth so that we can continue to do all the unnatural and destructive things we love so much.

  Above this post are numerous postings spewing praise for one lady doing what she feels is right and contempt for others who do what they feel is right. It is so arrogant and hypocritical. We all have a role, why do we need to judge each other and take such harsh responses to their choices.

  I just hope she looked at the studies that connect divorce to voluntary infertility and the projected US age ratios. When she is old no one will be able to take care of her. The infrastructure will not be there, simple economics. The only reason modern science is calling for a cut in birth rate to “save the planet” is because the scientific community thinks it is the only option with the chance of by in. Like Aeris said, for a lot of people voluntary infertility appeals to their selfishness not their selflessness.

  Smart people breed stupid people everyday and most of our respected human brothers and sisters that have changed this world for the better came from “stupid breeders” like the people being cut up in these comments.

  Our society shapes our children us much as we do. Own up people. If you are a capitalist consumer (like most of us with internet access), it is our society that is bringing this planet down.

• Powell
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:27 am

  Buffoon!

• badgirl
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:36 am

  Glad she’s not reproducing. Sounds like an attention-seeking nitwit. Brad’s right…this isn’t news. I’m a childless woman and don’t regret it. If she regrets it later, she can adopt or work with kids in other settings etc.
  In any case, the argument for the environment is baseless and nothing more than political. If she can sell her childless idea to the Chinese/Indians etc. where the population density makes our western hemisphere look downright barren then go for it.

• DrJones
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:43 am

  Maybe she too ole Bob Barker a bit too seriously…

• Michelle
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:46 am

  Just like the 23 year old guy on the Today show that chose to get a vasectomy, I say good. If having children is selfish, then I think the world is better off not having the offspring of this woman and her husband. She would teach them the same values that she possesses, which, as far as I am concerned, is selfishness. Not having children to maintain a figure, maintain your income for yourself, and/or not allow yourself the opportunity to mold a young mind for the next generation…..selfish…..

• el Gordo
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:56 am

  While it’s her body and hence her own choice (certainly has no impact on my life whatsoever) I’m drawn to the description of her as demonstrating an “almost religious zeal”. This does smack of fanaticism to me. While being Earth-friendly is an admirable trait her methods, to me, are unsound.

• snarf
  November 29th, 2007 at 9:58 am

  Yay one down and a lot more to go! My own genetic line might still succed in overtaking this world!

  This is simply a stupid mediastunt.

• Zandt K
  November 29th, 2007 at 10:06 am

  Wow, her reasons are illogical. If you really believed all that save the planet stuff raising a child with those ideals would do much more for the effort than not having children. This whole story seems made up in my opinion.

• Simon
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:08 am

  As alluded in previous comments, the irony is that smart people with a deep respect for the environment are exactly the people who should be having children! I hope she adopts: that would be a true win-win.

• Another Jake
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:12 am

  Too bad her intended child was destined to invent cold fusion, solve global warming, and cure HIV. Oh well.

  And anyway, everyone here is calling her smart? psh. hardly.

• dch
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:18 am

  Segway to future, there IS world overpopulation, biological advances to longer lifespans, and human society is dominating the natural world. A vision is needed for the world and one is humans evolving via scientific and genetic means to higher standards.
  Population controls should be used appropriately to
  fit social need for balance, and that balance is
  changing as technological advances occur.
  While many will serve current social roles,
  we constantly need role models to stretch and shape society’s view of what’s needed and normal.

  She is a role model making a statement to society
  to think about. New norms are needed for balance.

• Stuart
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:24 am

  Read “The World Without Us.” A different solution would be to just have 1 child then get ‘fixed.’ If each woman had only one child the global population would decrease to tolerable levels within our lifetime, naturally. After a few hundred years women could start having 2 children each which would keep the population at a fixed level that the earth would be able to sustain.
  She’s not a ‘hero’ any more than people who have children are ‘evil.’ It’s we as a society that are evil, we refuse to control our population and eventually it WILL catch up with us. When it does it will result in millions or horrible deaths all of which could be prevented is we (as a society) took some preventative action.

• Jeff
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:37 am

  another “progress” bites the dust. Way to go…

• allison
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:44 am

  thanks DRukus.
  That was the smartest comment made. We have more than enough to take care of everyone but we just aren’t willing to change the way we use our resources. I certainly hope people like you keep breeding.

• adoption
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:44 am

  everony who is an opponent of her cutting her line forgets abou that little ol thing called ADOPTION. her kid very much can still cure cancer or find the cure of ACNE or whatever..having a genetic child or an adopted child does not undermine the care you give that indiviual. or it shouldn’t at least.

• remember adoption
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:45 am

  everone who is an opponent of her cutting her line forgets about that little ol thing called ADOPTION. her kid very much can still cure cancer or find the cure of ACNE or whatever..having a genetic child or an adopted child does not undermine the care you give that individual. or it shouldn’t at least.

• buttape
  November 29th, 2007 at 11:56 am

  christ, where did all the smarmy neocons come from? YOU bitchy trolls are the ones that should be sterilizing yourself and preventing children that have to suffer twenty years of your regressive mindlessness before finally moving to the opposite coast for a life of substance abuse and horrible relationships. Maybe this woman ought to look into adopting some of YOUR kids, save them from a life of quiet rage.

• pronoblem
  November 29th, 2007 at 12:06 pm

  She should just admit that she’s afraid to have kids rather than this self righteous parade. Or, if she’s serious about it, take her own life. That I’d be impressed with.

• Tempscire
  November 29th, 2007 at 12:14 pm

  …and/or not allow yourself the opportunity to mold a young mind for the next generation…..selfish…..

  Whoa whoa whoa. I hope that’s ironically-intended because otherwise… You think it’s selfless to have a child for the purpose of, what, imprinting your personality and beliefs upon it?

  And for all you who keep talking about her would-have-been child being destined to solve the world’s woes: a)Statistically unlikely. b)If there is such a thing as destiny that would foretell this, destiny would also have already dictated her particular child would not be the one to do it, as it would be her destiny to not be a mother.

• Ian
  November 29th, 2007 at 12:19 pm

  The woman refers to those who have kids as selfish. She is the one who begins with a callous remark, the commenters are just following her lead. I wish her parents would have thought of her idea. How pretentious can you get? Just because you dont have a child you are now a champion of the planet? Does she drive a car? Toni, how about reducing your carbon footprint instead of speaking of one that doesnt even exist yet?

• Ian
  November 29th, 2007 at 12:20 pm

  PLUSSSSSSSSSS

  if she had kids, she would know what an unselfish act it is to raise kids correctly.

• Bob
  November 29th, 2007 at 12:37 pm

  I think shes being incredibly self centered and selfish for not pulling the plug entirely.

• Mar85
  November 29th, 2007 at 12:59 pm

  If she’d deprive the world of her child and finally succeeds in ridding the world of us… who’d be around to say it’s improved?

• zantimisfit
  November 29th, 2007 at 1:01 pm

  Dear Neatorama,
  Now that everyone’s all inflamed about some woman who doesn’t want kids, in the interest of equal time please post a story about how “neat” it is that the Duggers are at 17 kids (and probably counting) so we can unleash our vitriol on them too.

• Michelle
  November 29th, 2007 at 1:36 pm

  Good for her!

  If she does decide maybe one day to have kids, then adopt! The world really is overpopulated and there are so many uncared for kids who may not ever have a chance.

• kid icarus
  November 29th, 2007 at 1:46 pm

  i wonder…..what if she didn’t do this and gave birth to the person who saved the planet? does that now mean our planet is doomed?

  personally, it’s her body and her decision, who am i to judge?

• natalie
  November 29th, 2007 at 1:51 pm

  Do whatever you want. The choice to not have kids isn’t newsworthy if you ask me.

• astrodex
  November 29th, 2007 at 2:01 pm

  Too bad that in making her own choice on a very personal subject she has decided to judge so harshly the choices of others. My children are killing the planet? Maybe my children will save the planet. I believe that caring, educated people have the duty to breed if only to balance out the truly over populating idiots.

  If she is so worried about the negative effect of each individual on the planet’s welfare she could commit suicide as the ultimate selfless act. Or she could go on a killing spree and then commit suicide. By her logic, the more people she could take out the better off the planet will be.

  I don’t begrudge anyone deciding not to have children. The reasons for or against are extremely personal. Unfortunately she has decided to judge me and declare me selfish.

  And wouldn’t it be a more truly selfless act if she did it in silence without seeking 15 minutes (probably more like 15 seconds) of fame?

• cuimhne
  November 29th, 2007 at 2:07 pm

  I’m a bit surprised about all the negative comments about this woman! I think that she’s doing what she wants with her body and good for her! To all the people saying that not having children is selfish…cop on! How dare someone spend the money they earn on themselves! You work hard to get a career and earn money. You only get to live once, why not enjoy yourself?

  I personally can’t ever see myself wanting children…I have never felt maternal feelings in my life. Having children just so you’ll have someone to look after you when you’re old is a pretty sad reason to reproduce in my opinion.

• ruby
  November 29th, 2007 at 2:15 pm

  Hmm,… I am almost afraid of saying anything. I am 36 and without children. I do see her point of view as I see the other side (pro-having children.) While I am saddened by the fact many here have “jumped” on her for deciding against being a mother, I am not surprised.

  I have heard from many folks “oh, you must have children-they would be so cute!” Or, “What does your husband think?” (now ex-husband for non-related issues. In case you are wondering-I left him, not the other way around.) “You’re not fully a woman until you give birth”… and on and on.

  While I have three (incredibly cute) nieces from my younger brother, my family has finally accepted that I will “bear no fruit.” It’s simply a personal choice, just as it is of those who had children.

  Good for you and your choices. Thank goodness that we think differently from one another. I appaude her for making a well thought out choice. She made a choice based on her belief system. America is full of those who simply follow the status quo (talking about everything here from clothing styles to car choices.) It may be out of line for you, but for her and her husband, it was a perfect choice.

  So, I kneel before you and place my neck on the chopping block and expect the enevitable…

• Miss Cellania
  November 29th, 2007 at 2:32 pm

  She’s an adult; she has a right to decide not to have children, ever. I think she may have looked at this from all angles before making her decision, but publicized the reason that’s easiest to communicate AND fits her agenda. Many people never reproduce, some regret it, some don’t, some adopt.

• amywithlemon
  November 29th, 2007 at 2:45 pm

  i have no problem with her not wanting to have kids…it’s perfectly normal for some.

  i only have a problem with her calling me ‘SELFISH’ for having them.

  gee… it’s a natural inborn desire (and some would say, ‘be fruitful and multiply’) to have a child.

  oh and SELFISH?

  uh, yeah, the hundreds of dollars i spend on my kids teeth, the thousands when i had to put them BOTH in the hospital when they were sick together, not to mention the every day getting up early just to make the breakfast eggos they love (and NOT the plain ones mommy! the choc. chip kind! please!), the waking up in the middle of the night to clean vomit off the beds, and to have 2 inches of sleeping space in my own bed because someone got ’scared’, the reading ‘goodnight moon’ for the 5th time today, and the not going out with my husband all month to save money because i wanted to have a great party for my 7 year old and make her memories wonderful…

  yeah, us parents are horribly selfish people. i really should start thinking of others more.

  if she truly was that dedicated to being ‘green’ she’d be out of the limelight and volunteering to teach kids how to keep the earth clean. you know, cause i’m too selfish to do it myself.

• amywithlemon
  November 29th, 2007 at 2:52 pm

  for the record i am not against her not wanting kids… my brother doesn’t have any and doesn’t want any, and it’s cool, it suits him and i support that.

  but he doesn’t look at me like i’m a selfish person and that i’m destroying the planet because i’ve had his niece and nephew.

  although, they do a great job or destroying the living room…

• Jacques
  November 29th, 2007 at 3:04 pm

  Stupid stupid woman. Oh well, darwin wins again. She will almost certainly regret this decision. I’ve met dozens of women who’ve had sudden change of mind wrt bearing children aroudn the age of 30. And if she thinks that by sterilizing herself that she’s somehow helping the planet with a population of over 6 billion, she’s completely out of her fscking mind. Idiot.

• kristina
  November 29th, 2007 at 3:06 pm

  How did she manage this? I have been trying to get my tubes tied for a few years {I’m 27} and gynecological response ranges from disapproving looks to insistance that I could have them tied if I had a husband, and his permission.

• Dan
  November 29th, 2007 at 4:00 pm

  Bad Lady! Lady not have baby!
  All Lady MUST have baby! Or not REAL Lady!

  Lady not want baby.
  So Lady not want to live…
  So Lady must die!

  Good old Daily Mail.

• Vonskippy
  November 29th, 2007 at 4:50 pm

  Wow you herd of breeders really got your panties in a knot over this one.

  Sorry to see that a few points of IQ doesn’t often over ride 2 million years of “breed then die” evolution for most of the planet.

• -Ron
  November 29th, 2007 at 4:54 pm

  Oh come down off of the cross already.

• FABIO
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:16 pm

  WELL AT LEAST SHE WON’T SPREAD HER SEMI-RETARDED GENES.

• Radin
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:19 pm

  Maybe next week we’ll find out that she faked her own sterilization to get a moment of fame. By the way, this is the first time I’ve seen more comments in regular post than a ‘What is it’ contest. Time to move on!

• Anita
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:22 pm

  How bout we all sterilize ourselves, and then we can have an “end of humanity” party. WooHoo!

• Emily
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:25 pm

  While it would be extreme for me personally, i value her commitment and all that… that aside, i don’t see why this is big news. A lot of people have done this (or similar).

• Ali S.
  November 29th, 2007 at 5:57 pm

  Well, good for her. However, I can’t expect her to enjoy the irony when her current boyfriend decides that he would enjoy have a child and leaves. But if she is true to herself she won’t regret doing this.

• Dave
  November 29th, 2007 at 6:26 pm

  If that’s really what she wants, fine. But if she was really serious about “saving the planet” from human infestation, she’d take the next logical step.

  I’m curious though; did she get this out into the mainstream through a press release or what? Attention seeking behavior at its extreme?

• rach
  November 29th, 2007 at 7:19 pm

  *note: I totally didn’t read the entire comment thread*

  Honestly, she sounds sanctimonious and very, very judgemental. The whole ‘overpopulation’ argument is flawed at best. In many countries there is a significant demographic transition occurring, where people are having fewer children and populations are growing older. This is a problem which will bite us on the arse in the future (note; someone probably commented to point this out, but what can I say? I love jumping the gun).

  I am certainly not denying that we’re facing an epic environmental crisis. But sanctimoniously tying your tubes and snitting about those who just ‘poop out kids’ is hardly going to help. We need to radically change the way we use our planet’s resources if we are going to survive.

  And, also, making comments about how we need her ‘gorgeous, intelligent bloodline’ really does make my skin crawl. I thought we’d moved past eugenic thinking. Reproduction is a basic human right. Think about the ideological and political implications when you bitch about how ‘morons need a licence to breed.’

• Dogrun81
  November 29th, 2007 at 7:24 pm

  Good grief…. By her logic isn’t she being immoral by still living?

• Hmm
  November 29th, 2007 at 7:53 pm

  I think she just wanted to have unlimited sex without having to use protection or take pills and came up with this as an excuse for it.

• Darwin
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:28 pm

  Xayzer said it best. Stupidity doesn’t need to have kids.

• DCer
  November 29th, 2007 at 8:50 pm

  Right and there’s a guy I knew in college who believes in Eugenics and white supremacy and used to spout the exact same line of bull this woman does. Why would someone promote racist theories on a blog like Neatorama? And then for the racists to come out of the woodwork and agree with her?

  Get a grip people, Eugenics was popular in Hitler’s time, it’s totally discredited in 2007. She’s wrong. You’re wrong. Eugenics is wrong.

• jonn
  November 29th, 2007 at 10:56 pm

  Let’s all not have kids. That way the humans can die off and the world can be natural again. Except we evolved too… wait… head… exploding… contradiction…

  Oh. And has anyone heard of these guys?

  http://www.vhemt.org/

• priscilla
  November 30th, 2007 at 12:00 am

  I dont see how having babies is selfish. I’m not thinking of “maintaining [my] genetic line” when I think of having one. I think of how awesome it would be to have a kid…

• tc
  November 30th, 2007 at 12:19 am

  Well if that’s that case why doesn’t she correct her parent’s mistake and kill herself? She is killing the planet just like everyone else, right?

• duh
  November 30th, 2007 at 12:44 am

  If there’s no overpopulation, we run the risk of having a devastating “soilent green” famine.

• Adam Farrington
  November 30th, 2007 at 1:20 am

  I wish I would have posted my vasectomy adventure, I love attention too! But really, sterilization is awesome, there are so few sure things in life. It’s great to know I can do whatever I want forever, without some stranger popping out of my loins to hassle me. Don’t trust the genitals, they’re colonial opportunists who want to take your freedom. Most people just let things happen, and don’t decide anything. This girl’s got balls. If she wants to save the planet that’s great. I just want an extra portion of it to have fun with.

• Abestar
  November 30th, 2007 at 5:25 am

  She didn’t really think out the fact that wiping out intelligent people might be a bad thing.

• Tim
  November 30th, 2007 at 10:43 am

  Having a raising a child is the most selfless thing you can do in your life. It’s 20 years of hard work, sweat and tears. It also gives you satisfaction like no other to see your children grow to be healthy, happy adults. Futhermore, parenthood binds a couple together like no other bond. This is coming from a father of 3 children.

  In my opinion, this woman is hiding her selfishness beneath the veil of some insincere concern for the planet. That being said, parenthood is not for everyone. It’s better to not have kids if you aren’t absolutely sure that you want to. There is nothing more tragic than an unloved, unwanted child.

• Momofmany
  November 30th, 2007 at 2:10 pm

  Perfect! So glad that she wont be reproducing! This kind of person is full of selfishness and Satan! So THE LESS THE MERRIER!

• Chris
  November 30th, 2007 at 4:01 pm

  Wow. 92 Comments.

  Here is mine : Natural selection at work. Period.

• Tommy John
  November 30th, 2007 at 4:40 pm

  OK…no reproduction, 80 yrs into the future…no people…no problem. Planet saved.

• Persephone
  November 30th, 2007 at 7:02 pm

  As usual, psychos from boths sides come out of the woodwork. “She must be selfish, abnormal and stupid because she doesn’t want kids.” “Everyone who has kids must be selfish, abnormal and stupid.”

  Here’s the situation: there are too many people on the Earth. Our population is using the Earth’s resources at the rate of 1.6 Earths. It’s completely unsustainable. So, no there isn’t enough to go around.

  A lot of people are having too many children. We are living too long and too many children are surviving to adulthood. Global warming or not, we are using up this planet.

  China’s been doing the 1 child thing for years with limited success. Unless the entire world does it, nothing is going to change. Within the next few decades, disease, famine and drought is poised to do what the lack of birth control has not done, take this planet’s population to a manageable level.

  When your children are starving, what will you tell them? “Oh, honey, I just had to have a baby, because I didn’t want to be selfish.”

• Dypok
  November 30th, 2007 at 8:24 pm

  A good idea, but whats wrong with finding a partner and only having one with just that person? That way the philosophy won’t die.

• Tom
  November 30th, 2007 at 9:11 pm

  um… who exactly is she saving the future for?

• kjv
  November 30th, 2007 at 10:43 pm

  well she could have done a whole lot more for the environment by taking her self out, but no instead, she lingers around and sucks up and wastes natural resources all in the name of selflessness. not buyin it. she can’t do it. know why? ‘cuz she is what she doesn’t want to be… selfish.

• Jeff
  December 1st, 2007 at 2:58 am

  I agree with the whole “why not kill yourself” idea. OR, better yet, why not have a baby, give it to a loving family, THAN kill yourself. Excellent! Christianity is a necessary and loving religion; it is that which keeps me from wanting to kill people like this woman. Luckily for her the commandment I follow is “thou shalt not kill.” HOW funny is it that they don’t choose to see themselves as parasitic things crowding the planet…

• Beezy
  December 2nd, 2007 at 12:22 am

  I don’t think this is really news. Luckily, she has a choice. And this affects all of you others HOW exactly?

  It’s interesting that people feel so threatened by this woman’s choice that they need to respond with such hatred. The need to have your own decision validated is pretty basic, I guess, but to respond that she needs to kill herself is incredibly immature. And pathetic. The world will keep spinning even if we all don’t agree with your views.

  Also, there are just as many selfish reasons to have children are there are selfish reasons NOT to have children.

• jujueyeballs
  December 2nd, 2007 at 12:57 am

  Save the planet?

  Not with THAT blouse.

• L
  December 2nd, 2007 at 3:43 am

  This thread is full of hatred. How does it affect any of you if this woman doesn’t want to have a baby? Or if any other woman doesn’t want to have a baby? There will always be plenty of women who are willing to have lots of babies. I don’t think you need to worry about under-population of the planet. And second, why would you wish her dead?

  After reading these comments, I’d certainly think twice about bringing a child into a world that’s filled with such cruel people.

• aliocha
  December 6th, 2007 at 9:56 am

  I totally agree with Persephone about the kid starvation thing.
  And I also agree with this woman’s choice, except that i think it’s to late : why should we care about a planet we already fucked up ? So I act like a good christian and act as God asked to me, and i’m taking the life out of this damn earth because I am human, and only me and my siblings deserve to suck it dry. So, my new opinion is : why not doing as much as kids as possible then ?

  The first comment was right : “Only stupid people are breeding.”

• Donnie
  December 6th, 2007 at 4:51 pm

  Good for her. Why breed in an all ready overpopulated world of morons? the last thing we need on this planet is another person.

• danny
  May 16th, 2008 at 10:55 am

  I applaud her actions. By sterilizing herself,she’s also preventing the possibility of having a defective,disabled,disfigured human being coming into existance,especially in a developed nation like the United States,where social crulety and harassment seem to be the norm,all in no small part to our Zionist/Neo-con dominated media. Some people are just better than others. I much rather prefer death to being a disabled American I am. Over population is strongly related to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic culture which encourages people to ‘be fruitful,multiply,to subdue the Earth,have dominion over the fowl,beast and planets’ as He commanded it.

Want your own avatar? Get one for free at Gravatar!