Beautiful writing, as always, Megan. I agree with much of this.
But I lean towards thinking that what you outline as natality is a kind of pronatalism. I think that pronatalism is a word people dislike because of its connotations, such as its association with controversial public policy or with unsavory characters like Elon Musk. But the word “pronatalism” literally means “for birth” or “in favor of birth.” Your focus “choosing children” feels synonymous to me. In fact, given that research strongly suggests that cultural factors matter more than economic factors for people choosing to have children, I think your focus is core to what pronatalism is (or at least what it should be).
Relatedly, I disagree that pronatalism is necessarily about control or fear. For example, the pronatalist Lyman Stone frames the argument for higher birthrates in the developed world as “helping close the gap between the number of children women say they want and the number they end up having.”
Hi Peter! Always good to hear from you. Yes, I do think that, in the very best of worlds, natality would be the heart of pro-natalism (as a movement/ideology). As a movement, I am allergic to pro-natalism because it is too-often coopted to mean more than just "pro-birth," and it also has a pretty crummy track record. I view natality as more encompassing than pro-natalism (and although Arendt did not write about natality with the idea of natalism, at least, as far as I see it--I can see Arendt scholars disagreeing with me for other reasons!), I think that natality allows for the unexpected, and perhaps even allows for more grace than pro-natalism.
Also, I disagree with Lyman Stone on a few things. :) I think that Ivana Greco's response to him (after she wrote a piece not dissimilar to this one I just posted and he disagreed with her) encapsulates much of my own thinking of why I am not a pro-natalist: https://thehomefront.substack.com/p/why-i-am-still-not-a-pro-natalist
Happy to discuss this more in a DM or something, since we both might get in the weeds!
Beautiful writing, as always, Megan. I agree with much of this.
But I lean towards thinking that what you outline as natality is a kind of pronatalism. I think that pronatalism is a word people dislike because of its connotations, such as its association with controversial public policy or with unsavory characters like Elon Musk. But the word “pronatalism” literally means “for birth” or “in favor of birth.” Your focus “choosing children” feels synonymous to me. In fact, given that research strongly suggests that cultural factors matter more than economic factors for people choosing to have children, I think your focus is core to what pronatalism is (or at least what it should be).
Relatedly, I disagree that pronatalism is necessarily about control or fear. For example, the pronatalist Lyman Stone frames the argument for higher birthrates in the developed world as “helping close the gap between the number of children women say they want and the number they end up having.”
Hi Peter! Always good to hear from you. Yes, I do think that, in the very best of worlds, natality would be the heart of pro-natalism (as a movement/ideology). As a movement, I am allergic to pro-natalism because it is too-often coopted to mean more than just "pro-birth," and it also has a pretty crummy track record. I view natality as more encompassing than pro-natalism (and although Arendt did not write about natality with the idea of natalism, at least, as far as I see it--I can see Arendt scholars disagreeing with me for other reasons!), I think that natality allows for the unexpected, and perhaps even allows for more grace than pro-natalism.
Also, I disagree with Lyman Stone on a few things. :) I think that Ivana Greco's response to him (after she wrote a piece not dissimilar to this one I just posted and he disagreed with her) encapsulates much of my own thinking of why I am not a pro-natalist: https://thehomefront.substack.com/p/why-i-am-still-not-a-pro-natalist
Happy to discuss this more in a DM or something, since we both might get in the weeds!