Crazy Rich Selfish Animal Lovers
Mar 23, 2026
This month's blog won't be about food. Or wellness. Or self-care. And it is going to be angry.
It is going to tackle one of the topics that is close to my heart, and also a societal topic that has been of my interest for quite some time. And that is the topic of women without kids in society. I am a woman without kids, and to be more specific I am a kids-free woman, and this linguistic nuance is going to be explained in just a moment. Women without kids live thru decades of explaining themselves or ditching uncomfortable comments ("You will change your mind"), with the crown jewel of questions "When are you going to have kids?" increasing in frequency as we get older.
So, let's talk about the language first: while terms "childless", "child/kid(s)-free" and "without / with no kids" are still used in an exchangeable way, there is a narrative suggesting that these terms can be more defined, and they propose that:
- Childless could be used by women and families who would like to have kids but who can't - because of biological, medical or other issues. "-Less" indicates lack, the inner desire for having something that one does not have, a form of longing.
- Child-free could be used by women and families who choose not to have kids; they can, they just don't want to. That choice here is a key distinction: "I can and I just don't want to" versus "I would love to, but I can't" (childless). And finally
- Without / with no kids could be used by women and families if they don't want to disclose reasons for not having kids; it would serve as more of a neutral expression that does not disclose reasons, possible biological/medical difficulties or choices. "I don't have kids and it's none of your business as to why"
I personally like these distinctions: they provide linguistic freedom/options to individuals to discuss their situation with more neutral language available as well as more personal options if they are willing to disclose more about their situation.
When I was a child the idea of not having children in the society I grew up in was almost unheard of. Women without kids were in minority, and they could be deemed "old ladies" before they were 30, if they weren't married. If they were married but didn't have kids it was a bit of a societal taboo topic, but it was clear that "there was something wrong with them".
That was something that you were just doing: you were growing up, getting married and then procreating. No questions asked and no option to ask questions.
Workspace has proven itself to be equally limiting and - dare I say - prejudicious. Every Christmas, every Holiday, every day off that needed to be covered at work - eyes were on me and three of my other co-workers who for various reasons didn't have kids. I kept covering these undesirable shifts without any fuss early on, but after several years of covering every July 4th, every Thanksgiving Day, every Christmas Day and every New Year's Day, I started questioning: "is my time with my family less valuable simply because nobody at the table believes in Santa Claus?" It certainly felt like that at times. Besides holidays, I witnessed young moms just leaving the work, sometimes an hour earlier without any issue, stating "I need to leave earlier to pick up my kid" while heading out the door, while others stayed till the end of the shift. Could I leave as easily if I was to announce that I needed to go to Petco? Could I pass my coworkers and say "Heading out. I want extra time today to doll up for the show by my favorite artist?"
It is not about not extending help and support to moms.
It is not about not stepping in.
It is about seeing these work benefits that exist, and expanding them to all employees. If it is OK for moms to leave earlier when they deem it is needed (and they are trusted with that decision!), it should be OK for non-moms to leave earlier too, when they needed it, and the judgement of the "societal value" (because let's be honest, this is what it boils down to) shouldn't be a factor here.
If you don't believe me that it is all about the "societal value" of having kids, I invite you to check out (hot off the press!!!) research by PLOS Global Public Health. Titled "Framing reproductive narratives: A thematic discourse analysis of news representations of childlessness in 86 countries (2015–2025)", it looks at 131 media articles published in 86 countries, and basically identifies 5 narratives related to being child-free and how these narratives are being used by countries to shape the narrative. These articles, ladies and gentlemen don't reflect what's going on in the society, they are being used as a tool to shape the societal reality.
THE GUINEA PIG OF THE STATE:
Used in countries that focus on state control and pronatalist policies (in this context, USA is listed with China, Iran, North Korea and Russia) where women are urged to have babies as an expression of patriotic duty and traditional gender roles.
“A woman is like an incubator that delivers new warriors, new people to be exploited, new people for the government. We see that a lot in propaganda and on billboards about how you’re going to give birth to a soldier who is going to protect our land.” (Washington Post, Russia)*
CRAZY RICH SELFISH ANIMAL LOVERS:
Used in countries where stigma, societal moral judgment and religion shape the narrative. Within this narrative being child-free is seen as "selfish, immoral or unnatural"*
“Today … we see a form of selfishness. We see that some people do not want to have a child. They have dogs and cats that take the place of children. This may make people laugh but it is a reality. A denial of fatherhood and mother hood diminishes us, takes away our humanity.” (Pope Francis, Vatican City)*
This narrative took a very interesting spin in 2024 when JD Vance referred to Kamala Harris as a “childless cat lady” and unintentionally started a political campaign of "Single Child-Free Cat Ladies for Kamala"
Another interesting theme needs to be highlighted here: "Couples who voluntarily remain childless are often labelled as DINKs (Double Income, No Kids), with assumptions of selfishness or excessive wealth."* I have seen that myself, and among my (mostly female) friends. When once every so-many-years we splurge on something pricey (like a designer bag), we are assumed to be excessively wealthy by the very people who spend 12 times as much for a year of daycare. As I say when I find myself (often involuntarily) involved (and sometimes attacked) in this type of conversation: "It is not an avocado toast that killed fertility rates in USA."
NO BABY, NO CRY:
With focus on empowerment and autonomy of child-free individuals this narrative emerges as - effectively - a counter-narrative that attempts to re-assert child-free lifestyle as a legitimate and valuable lifestyle. It challenges the idea of procreation as the only road to personal fulfillment. While these individuals can be still marginalized within their environment, they speak boldly about pursuing goals and fulfillment outside family.
“As a woman who chooses to be childless, I’m viewed as a woman who isn’t fulfilling her potential, but I am fulfilling my potential as a human being. I feel complete and I am not any less of a woman without a child.” (Egyptian Streets, Egypt)*
BRINGING CHILDREN INTO A BROKEN WORLD:
Individuals may want to have children, they just don't want to have them in this world - and I think it is an important element of this conversation. It is not about what the country wants me to do, or what the Pope thinks about me, or what I want to do in my life, it is about what I don't want for my kids. Climate change, war, economic instability, gender inequality, overpopulation, environmental degradation, societal pressures, lack of psychological well being - all these elements play role in individuals rejecting parenthood.
“It is a great crime to marry and have children under wartime conditions, to expose them to fear and death, to feed them with people’s charity, and to heal them with our tears and sorrows. It is a crime to make them suffer from the heat of summer and the cold of winter, from harsh conditions, from deprivation of education, and from misery… These are the most basic rights of children and human rights, so why do we participate in their misery?” (BBC Arabic, Syria)
WINTER REGRET AND LONELINESS:
This narrative focuses on aging, loneliness and elder care without children and a retrospective regret of not having children. Woven into this narrative is also a broader discussion about providing care, support and services for elderly. This narrative shows that "[i]n most societies, care responsibilities are still largely placed on the family, leaving childless older adults especially vulnerable."* In our more-and-more dynamic and more-and-more mobile society it takes one job offer to remove an individual from the orbit of their parents; it takes working for one international company to suddenly find oneself on the other side of the globe doing business. The desperate situation of “elder orphans”* cannot be effectively solved with "just" having kids.
“Carsten Lorentz is also at a point where he is beginning to look back on his life. He will retire in two years’ time. The fact that he won’t be passing on his genes doesn’t bother him. Above all, he is afraid of the emptiness.” (Süddeutsche Zeitung, Germany)
The topic of people not having kids is here to stay. We need to be aware that media may be used to politicize it, or take a moralizing or a pathologizing stand --- and that it may have a direct impact on the national dialogue. It may lead to stigmatization, discrimination, exclusion, or - on the other side - recognition and inclusion. That in turn will have a direct impact on society, public behavior and - frankly - individuals: starting with reproductive health and access to birth control.
----------------------------------------------------------------
All quotes marked with "*" taken from the research article; https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0005695
Accessed on 03/23/2026
