I confess my bias. I am childless. I have never felt a compulsion to spawn a mini-me. It is just not part of my being. I think puppies, kittens and babies are cute enough. I feel the brain chemistry kick in when I am gurgled at by a cherubic face. But I know that it is brain chemistry, not a conscious moralistic decision to smile back.
None of that has anything to do with reproduction for me. Reproduction is one of the most primal animal functions retained by humans throughout their evolution as a species. Producing another human is as primal is eating, defecating, sleeping or copulating. A human being devoid of intelligence can reproduce. Adolescent females can reproduce. Elderly females can reproduce with mad-scientist intervention. I could have reproduced without even knowing it under certain circumstances. Old men can spawn children. Human beings have perverted the process of natural selection to their own detriment as a species.
The current feminism of "Me First" has obliterated any ethical discussion about children and villages. The aggression of modern feminists is understandable and is also not new. This reflects the inner struggle of the great mass of the female species after millennia of conditioning. It is unfortunate that modern feminism has confused reproduction with feminine empowerment. The simple mathematical reality is that unintelligent reproduction does more to erode female power than to bolster it.
The conflating of reproduction with personal fulfillment by cis-females resembles the conflating of plastic surgery with fulfillment by those who are not cis-gendered, in the current parlance. A woman who is not intellectually and economically free cannot be truly fulfilled by giving birth to totally dependent human beings. That woman can only be stressed and inhibited in her personal development in favor of providing for the development of her offspring. Her biology will dictate these terms, unless she is disordered in some way. The human species is increasingly losing developmental ground because of the increasing breakdown of female fulfillment and the production of too many children with too little nurturing. Unintelligent reproduction is at the core of poverty and the decline of civilization.
I have spent my adult life supporting the evolution of male and female roles in society. My decision to forego medical school due to the homophobia in a male-dominated medical establishment at the age of 19 was a painful one. As I progressed through my work as a secondary-school teacher to my work as a nursing assistant and then a registered nurse, I realized I had made the right choice as a man committed to breaking down restrictive gender roles. I looked around me at the women I worked with in nursing. Few of them shared my interest in change. Most of them were obsessed with being the perfect traditional stereotype of mother, wife and daughter. Those women in nursing who did not share that mindset stood apart as much as I did as a male nurse.
The confusion of modern feminism is ironically sympathetic with the child-village fallacy. The increase in single-motherhood across the planet may well place a greater demand on a mythical village to raise a child. But this trend seems more likely to lead to the development of child soldiers, sex slaves, gangsters, homeless addicts and terrorists. The village in a time of burgeoning capitalism and dying socialism is a mirage. Wealthy single mothers pay for expensive day care. Impoverished and far more plentiful single mothers depend on welfare in industrialized societies. In less developed nations, single mothers may sell or abandon their children.
"Me First" feminism of privileged women, like Hillary Clinton, is hard of hearing and myopic. It does its best to avoid the issues of overpopulation and environmental degradation. It supports the self-oppression of religious women who subscribe to misogynist ideologies. This feminism is confused and ineffectual. It alienates many intelligent women and men from conversations about the development of women in society.
Hillary Clinton has made it clear that she supports "Me First" feminism. While her own life exemplifies rational decisions by a well-off intellectual with specific life goals, she politically espouses a form of feminism which undermines the ability of less advantaged women to do what she has done. She may well be elected. If so, she will become the captain of a sinking ship rather than the mayor of a thriving village. I doubt she will contribute to raising healthier and happier children worldwide unless she takes a drastic turn in her world view. Supporting vicious capitalism and war does not a peaceful village make for any of us.