I: The Changing (Consumer) Climate

Climate change. Global warming. Summer. Whatever you want to call it, based on how cynical, skeptical, or self-righteous you are, you simply can’t deny the effects it is having on the consumer.

That’s right, I said consumer. That’s you, Bucko. Hey, don’t give me that look, I know it’s me, too. That’s why we’re here. We’re all consumers.

I’m not going to tell you that humans caused the climate to change. I simply don’t know that. Neither do you. I do know, however, that all the buzz about climate change has certainly heightened the average consumer’s awareness of their impact on their environment, and the consequences of their own actions. The concept of the ‘carbon footprint’ and illustrations thereof has opened many eyes to the wonderful world of forward thinking, which is no small feat. People are now thinking about whether that cup of coffee might expedite the extinction of some far-away animal, even if they are still thinking about whether or not it’s going to give them the perk they need to sit through that time-share sales pitch to get a free dinner or handbag or what-have-you. I applaud that.

So, as consumers are driven with more of a desire to be ‘green’ producers have been providing them with a variety of alternative products to help them, along with hours of sponsored programming and advertisement. This is, of course, to help ‘educate’ you and me about our actions, their far-reaching consequences, and the ways we can spend–er I mean change our habits in order to help the world!

This is all well and good, except there is one organization that I don’t see advertising their ‘green’ solution. So, I am going to advertise it for them, right here. Be patient, it’s coming.

II: The Problem

The way I see it, people are failing to take into account one very important factor when they think about their carbon footprint: children. Every being is seen as having its own carbon footprint. Even when I look at green-oriented media, they talk about reducing one’s child’s carbon footprint, as if it’s the kid’s fault that they consume, even though they didn’t ask to be created. I think I have a pretty foolproof method for reducing a child’s carbon footprint: don’t have it.

Yep. I am almost positive that if the kid didn’t exist, it wouldn’t have a carbon footprint.

My thinking is that when you are choosing to have a child, you have to take responsibility of everything. That means the screaming, the bleeding, the torn vagina (even if it’s not yours, dad), the diapers, the grocery bill, the repainting of the hallway wall because you left the crayons out and went downstairs to change a load of laundry, the feeling you get when you watch him ride away on the school bus that first time, and yes, even his carbon footprint. Just think about what that little tyke is going to do to your eco-reputation for the first 18 years of his life while you’re responsible for him. It’s your fault the li’l guy is here, he couldn’t have done it on his own. It’s only fair that you accept the weight of your decision on your–make that our–environment.

Fewer children means less consumption, less emissions, less waste, less urban sprawl, less deforestation, etc. If what’s happening to the environment is a direct result of people, then why not have fewer people?

III: The Irony

A popular reason for changing the way we behave is to make the world a better, safer, longer-lasting place. Since adjusting our actions for a more ‘green’ outlook tends to have an immediate negative impact on our own convenience or quality of life, we like to think that what we are doing is not for us, but it’s for our children’s children’s children, and so forth. The irony there, of course, is that if the solution to a better world for our children’s children’s children is not to have children, then whose children are we making the world better for?

IV: The Solution

Adopt. Somewhere out there is a living human being that is already consuming. It’s a carbon footprint just waiting for someone to come along and take responsibility for it. Why create another consumer when you could give an existing one a better life, and make the world a better place in the process. They could even grow up to adopt a little abandoned consumer of their own, and then you could have little grandkids of your own to take to Starbucks and feed full of sugar and caffeine before handing them back to your kiddo to drive them insane for the next 14 hours.

Creating a newborn consumer just because you want it to have your eyes or your lover’s nose is simply selfish.

V: The Aftermath

If you read all of this and you are already angry at me or you think you still want to create your own children, then my next opinion will probably do nothing short of make you livid:

The only people who should be allowed to make their own children are probably smart enough to know that they shouldn’t.

If you don’t believe me, go watch the first 15 minutes of Idiocracy.