Mailbucket #18: Woke’s Not Dead

Also: Celebrating the Semiquincentennial with ... a “garden of abortifacients”?

What happens when you fine people send emails too long to read out loud, but too full of value to not share? We put ‘em in a Bucket, and publish ‘em here, with the lightest of editing and responses appended in italics.

From: “For the love of God please don't use my name”

Subject: Museum Rant

Date: Sept. 6, 2025

Hello Fifth Column,

I very much enjoyed Episode #520, particularly the ranting about museums!

As someone who started out working at a museum and now works at a public garden that is married to a university art museum, I want to give my perspective on why it's hard to walk into any museum without "feeling the woke." It's the people.

The people who go into interpretive work at museums are -- generally -- people who thrive at elite institutions. I would wager that a majority are women. They are ardent adherents of the religion of the devoutly secular: pronouns in bio, land acknowledgements, fight the patriarchy, free Palestine, trans women are women, mask up or pack up, etc. If you believe anything different, you had best keep it to yourself or risk your collegial relationships and probably your career.

It's worst in the arts and humanities museums, where reality is whatever you want it to be. It's better in the sciences; data doesn't care about your feelings.

So, why are the exhibits at the California Academy of Sciences so abysmal? And why is the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum not so abysmal (yet)? Again, it's the people. The folx behind exhibit design and interpretation at CAS know their audience. They can graft the woke-est bullshit onto their science exhibits without offending donors or patrons. You can't do that at the Smithsonian to quite the same degree; conservative politicians are drooling at the chance to defund.

So, how do we fix it? Fix academia. Fix the reward structure in museums so that DEIB (or as it is increasingly termed, EIBD) isn't a metric of hiring or professional advancement. Fix the ethos of museums so that truth has a higher value than truthiness. Money plays a big part here: ticking off a big donor is not something cash-strapped museums want to do, and donors can tie up their money in ways that force institutional hands.

If you want to see a good humanities museum, the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian (called out by name in #520) is worth a visit. The NMAI was controversial when it was first designed; the exhibits were not science-y enough for the old school anthropologists. But that museum is now 20-ish years old, so it isn't nearly as woke-ly phantasmagoric as it could be.

Also, the NMAI cafeteria is one of the best places to eat on the Mall.

Brace yourselves for 2026. I predict that American museums will celebrate the semiquincentennial with an orgy of self-flagellation. The woke tide might be ebbing a bit but the people who debauched themselves in the rising wave are still employed, and they haven't changed their minds about anything. If anything, Trump's antics have only ossified their beliefs.

As I said, I work in a public garden and liaise with my museum colleagues. Let me give you a peek into our joint planning for 2026: one suggestion that was floated from our museum colleagues is to plant a garden of abortifacients, because, you know, the Spirit of '76 was all about women casting off the shackles of unwanted pregnancy. Are we going to do that? No. Only an idiot would plant a garden of toxic herbs next to a college campus and advertise their alternative medical uses. But the fact that an "abortion garden" was the first idea to slide down the chute.... I think it gives you a taste of what's so come.

Happy almost sesquicentennial, all! Thanks for your work, good humor, and especially to Mr. Moynihan for his clear-sighted support of Israel.

Best regards and for the love of God please don't use my name if you for some reason decide to quote any of the above.

(A “garden of abortifacients.” I … just won’t be able to unsee that phrase.

Can enthusiastically confirm that the NAMI cafeteria is by far the best eats on the Mall; we used to go in just for that. And thanks for this grim testimony/warning! Hopefully that funding mechanism will work at least a little bit….)

***

From: David J.

Subject: Ideology in Museums -- with a Tartan Twist

Date: Aug. 26, 2025

Gentlemen,

Long time listener, medium time subscriber, first time emailer. Insert dings (including, but not limited to, muthafuckin’ dings) as appropriate.

Firstly, thank you for providing more entertainment and insight on the regular than a chap really has the right to expect for only 10 bucks a month.

As a West-of-Scotland Protestant, I know more than I would care to about the Northern Ireland Question, and so I appreciate Michael’s occasional forays on the topic, most recently about the excellent drama Say Nothing. And as someone who spent two years in Prague in his twenties (in the early 2000s), I find my views on central and Eastern European politics (particularly about those dang Russkies) align very closely with Matt’s, and I wonder if it is the years spent among paneláks and other Communist-era degradation that is the common denominator there. But it was seeing clipped videos of various TV appearances by the one-and-only Kmele which ultimately brought me along to paid Fifdom (via a couple of positive mentions on the Blocked and Reported podcast), equally impressed as I was by the sharpness of his analysis and his ability to keep cool in the face of idiocy. And so here I am.

I was moved to email by your recent discussion about the ideological stranglehold of a certain view of history over museums in the U.S., and I am sad to report that my hometown of Glasgow is no different. I have lived in the Arabian Gulf for 13 years now, and don’t get back to the Auld Country very often, but last time I did I made sure to take the kids to a favourite haunt of mine from days past, Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum in Glasgow’s West End. Well. No sooner had we walked in than we were hit by this gut-punch of a mission statement: Apparently, “Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum is a museum of Empire.”

Going around the exhibits, my initial conclusion that the curators have completely lost the plot was very quickly confirmed. Every other display now comes with a mini-lecture on slavery, colonialism or “systemic racism.” No historical personage is safe -- Queen Victoria is described solely as “figurehead of an empire that engaged in widespread colonial violence and oppression.” No mention of anything else. Zero subtlety. And poor old David Hume -- the greatest empiricist and skeptic of the Enlightenment, and arguably the finest intellect Scotland has ever produced -- his only mention is a reference to a footnote he added to a text in the 1750s containing remarks that, viewed through a modern lens, would be regarded as racist. Even the lizard exhibit blames the British Empire for nearly wiping out one species by introducing mongooses on sugar plantations. Something has clearly gone very awry.

I emailed a complaint, not expecting much in the way of redress or even response. And sure enough, what I got back lived down to my expectations, truly exemplifying the high-handed, patrician, self-flagellating and downright patronising attitude of what many in Scotland have come to refer to as “the Lanyard Class.” And I REALLY pulled my punches in the complaint -- I have very fond memories of visiting Kelvingrove over many years with my mum, my grandparents, and especially with my now-wife when we were in our late teens and “courting” (as said grandparents would have said), so I am reluctant to hear a word against it. To put it another way, “I’m not angry, I’m just disappointed.”

I have copied the exchange below, and attached some photos from my visit, so you can come to your own conclusions.

Anyway, keep up the good work, more power to your collective elbow, etc.

The complaint:

Dear Sir or Madam,

I recently visited Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum for the first time in several years and wish to share some feedback on the interpretative framing that now accompanies much of the collection.

While I fully support honest engagement with history, I was struck by the extent to which the museum now appears to adopt an overtly ideological lens. Specifically, there has been a clear direction to prioritise narratives of slavery, empire, racism, and provenance, to the exclusion of all other interpretative dimensions. From explanatory panels to display labels and contextual signage, there is a consistent tendency to subject complex cultural objects and historical episodes to modern moral judgments.

This results, in my view, in a number of unintended consequences:

· A flattening of historical nuance, where figures like Queen Victoria and David Hume are presented solely and simplistically as emblems of oppression;

· The marginalisation of aesthetic, artistic, scientific, and curatorial value in favour of accusatory narratives about the histories of donors, artists or those depicted;

· A tone that borders on the didactic and moralising, presuming an audience in need of correction rather than one capable of thoughtful engagement; and

· The inappropriate conflation of contemporary issues (such as modern policing incidents) with museum collections intended to reflect longer historical trajectories.

I was particularly struck that the only reference to David Hume I could find was a passing mention of a footnote he added to an essay in the 1750s -- remarks which, through a modern lens, would rightly be considered racist. Yet this is a Scotsman who rose to become the greatest empiricist and skeptic of the Enlightenment, a figure who should be a source of immense national pride and occupy a prominent place in any Scottish cultural institution. That his intellectual legacy should be handled in this manner by a Scottish museum, of all places, is frankly extraordinary.

This is not to suggest that the subjects of slavery and empire should be excluded from interpretation entirely; far from it. They are historically significant and merit thoughtful treatment. However, when these themes become the dominant, and at times exclusive, lens through which the collections are presented, the result can feel unbalanced and even counterproductive. Critical inquiry feels like it has been abandoned in favour of an approach of institutional self-flagellation. The current interpretative approach appears to leave little room for alternative viewpoints, and in doing so, risks aligning the museum too closely with a particular ideological stance. At a time when there is growing public fatigue with overt moral messaging from our institutions, in particular our cultural institutions, this direction may inadvertently alienate a substantial portion of your audience.

Kelvingrove remains an extraordinary museum, but I would urge Glasgow Life to reflect on whether this interpretative strategy genuinely serves the educational, cultural, and civic mission of a museum, or whether it risks undermining public trust in the neutrality and integrity of curatorial practice.

Yours faithfully,

The response:

Thank you for taking the time to write to us following your recent visit to Kelvingrove Museum.

Glasgow Life Museums has a legal and moral duty to play its part in eliminating the evil of racism in our city. Our collections provide testimony to the histories of the British Empire and transatlantic slavery. We have a responsibility to present our heritage as honestly and fully as possible, which involves confronting how racism is part of our history. Our work is influenced by the anti-racist policy of Glasgow City Council and its commitment to ensuring that the voices of black and ethnic minority people are heard and represented, and its aim to challenge and eliminate racism in Glasgow. It also aligns with Scottish Government policy for museums to research, interpret, and share the histories of Scotland’s links to empire, colonialism, and historic slavery.

Until relatively recently the displays at Kelvingrove did not fully reflect this aspect of our history and the views of black and ethnic minority people were not adequately represented in the museum. We have therefore been engaged in programmes of activity that aim to make the museum more inclusive and to reflect wider perspectives of Glasgow’s position within the world. The City of Empire display was co-curated with members of the Our Shared Cultural Heritage Changemakers, a group of young people exploring the shared cultures and histories of the UK and South Asia. The display acknowledges and explores the fact that wealth flowed into cities such as Glasgow from the exploitation of enslaved and colonised peoples and lands, funding civic development and even the creation of museums such as Kelvingrove. Where appropriate, we have also updated other displays across the museum to reflect contemporary approaches to interpreting the legacies of slavery and empire.

Our work is influenced by the results of the Glasgow Household Survey of 2022 which asked specific questions in relation to the city’s links to slavery. The majority of respondents wished to learn more about the subject and supported initiatives to encourage understanding of the city’s links with the slave trade. We have received some extraordinarily positive feedback from visitors, schools, the press, and the museum profession for the way we have tackled these issues.

Our approach to developing these displays is always to carefully research and curate them to ensure that only statements of fact are presented coupled with an encouragement for visitors to reflect on what they see. We understand that confronting these issues can be difficult for some people, but we feel it is important to stimulate thoughtful engagement with these uncomfortable legacies.

In terms of your specific complaint regarding David Hume, we have no objects in the collection relating directly to him and there is no interpretation relating to his views or achievements. The only place he features in the museum is in a montage of press clippings relating to the reporting of violence towards minority ethnic people in Scotland and anti-racist protest and activism. Similarly, we provide no interpretation on contemporary policing. The interpretive text simply states: Reflecting on these incidents can be uncomfortable, but it is important when exploring Scotland’s past and present to continue to shine a light on them.

Only a small number of displays engage directly with this subject matter. The majority of displays in the museum celebrate various aspects of art, culture, and history. There is much to enjoy in Kelvingrove, and this is reflected in our consistently high visitor satisfaction ratings.

Thank you again for visiting and for your feedback.

Yours sincerely

[Redacted]

Senior Museums Manager – Operations and Curatorial

Your complaint has not been upheld.

(HAS. NOT. BEEN. UPHELD. We should start doing that when listeners bust our chops….

Your bullshit-calling was not in vain, Master Scotsman! That renegade green-grocer was initially alone, after all….)

***

From: “TERF, DVM”

Subject: A Good Veterinarian Could Do This Job Better Than These Crackpot MDs

Date: Sept. 6, 2025

Dear Gentleman,

Long time listener, paying subscriber, first time complainer. Love you guys, but you were too hard on Graham Linehan and are misreading the trans issue. I respect that this isn't your topic of interest, and you choose to not focus on it, but it is not wrong for people to be upset about it, and I'd argue it affects U.S. culture and politics way more than you think.

I’m a veterinarian and I specialize in biomedical research. Yeah, I do lab animals -- everything from mice to monkeys. Go ahead, make your jokes about vets vs. “real” doctors, and my qualifications to have opinions on this issue. While I may not have expertise in human pediatrics or in psychiatry, all that is needed to see this for what it is, is a very basic understanding of principles in the practice of medicine.

Given my specialty, I understand the process of how new medical and surgical treatments are developed. I know a lot about regulatory frameworks, research ethics, clinical decision-making and informed consent, medical licensing, and off-label or experimental usage of drugs. Vets use a LOT of drugs off label -- just last week I was considering giving Dramamine to a pig. Had to look it up on vet message boards and formularies and see if it’s been done before. Nobody publishes studies on that. And then we do a risk/benefit analysis and decide whether to treat. Because ultimately it’s on me if I give an unsafe dose that causes side effects, or I don’t figure out a safe drug-withdrawal time for an animal that may go into our food chain. But whether a pig with vertigo or a delusional teenage girl who thinks she needs testosterone, principles of practicing medicine are the same. I think the latter scenario would require a formal controlled study to evaluate the treatment and side effects (and, let’s be honest, even before that, a competent therapist who employs critical thinking rather than affirming because it’s politically expedient). There have been no studies. Zero! But the drug is already FDA-approved for other indications and thus readily available for those willing to recklessly prescribe it. We just started doing the experiment without getting the IRB (institutional review board) approval, no planned long-term follow-up or proactively considered data collection, and no truly informed consent with complete honesty that WE HAVE NO DATA ACTUALLY SUPPORTING THIS PRACTICE. I am absolutely livid at how this will set back trust in science and medicine more broadly.

It is infuriating that my colleagues in the medical research arena have been kowtowing to this insanity for so long. During the pandemic years, I worked at a research center in a very liberal coastal city. Hundreds of millions in federal grant money annually. (But they quickly scrapped their DEI program the minute Trump threatened that funding -- I guess those were strongly held principles.) I eventually quit this job because of the minefield of stupidity and ideological contradictions I had to navigate every fucking day. (On the gender front, there were concerns that the staff training presentation on maintaining breeding colonies of transgenic mice was too “heteronormative.”)

After we had exhausted all staff via forced struggle sessions on our inherent racism during the first year, we next had to direct equal attention to gender identity equity. Don’t just stand there -- do something! So they formed a committee, inclusive of people from all sectors of the institution. They worked for months to develop a plan that thoroughly explored all the tangible ways we could make our workplace more inclusive of this very intangible cultish obsession. We eventually received an institution-wide email from this committee, proud to reveal their opus of inclusiveness. I really wish I had saved that email before I left. But from memory, highlights included:

· Each building and floor would have at least one bathroom repurposed as all-gender. All language was to be gender-neutral.

· Immediately after the above language declaration, we went back to acknowledging the existence of men by stating we would put tampon dispensers in their bathrooms.

These first two points are silly and perhaps can be privately mocked while you move on with your day. But then came the more dystopian reveal of their understanding of this phenomenon. (Keep in mind, these are people primarily with MDs and PhDs in biological fields.)

· The previous “Mother’s Rooms,” which had been assigned as dedicated spaces for new birthing parents having returned to work and needing a private space to pump milk, would now be “Wellness Rooms” to encompass other medical issues that may require a private space. That in itself isn’t weird, but this was followed by a bizarre explanation on how we needed this space for post-operative recovery for all of our trans employees. They were obviously going to need all kinds of ongoing care after returning to work in the office. (We actually think they are going to be this chronically debilitated from an elective surgery, and we’re all still OK with this?)

· How to further modify the bathrooms for all these post-op sex-reassignment patients? Well, most bathrooms had an entry alcove with hooks and shelves to set down a backpack or jacket. We needed to lower all of these to accommodate people in wheelchairs. You know, like post-op trans patients. (Because they all can’t walk now? Again, we expect this as an outcome and we’re all good with it?)

I will reiterate -- yes, I am a veterinarian, but that means I have a basic understanding of mammalian anatomy and endocrinology. Sex changes are literally not possible. You will seriously fuck up an organism by trying to force the wrong hormones on it. So many MDs are willing to ignore their training in the interest of patient-demand medicine and good PR for their social circles. We’ve taken clinical judgment out of the equation, and this is very dangerous.

Apart from the medical and psychological malpractice, it’s not a small issue, and it does not affect merely a tiny segment of the population; it impacts > 50% of the population (because you have to include not just the people who think they are trans, but also all the people known as women, i.e., adult human females). No, not all trans women (i.e., dudes) are perverted psychos, most are just confused, but if you have self-ID allowances in society, it just takes a few creeps to decide to impose themselves on these real women and undo decades of progress against misogyny. It’s the same thing as when it’s so often pointed out that with cancel culture only a few people are really cancelled -- but it’s really about the impact to everyone else around watching the cancellation and learning to shut up and take it.

And in case that analogy doesn’t convince you, think about your criticisms of Covid and how our government prioritized political biases over intelligent data-driven health policy. This is just the same thing, but potentially with chopping off dicks.

Sincerely,

TERF, DVM (yeah, please don't use my real name; my professional connections are all quite woke and vindictive. For now my only recourse to be brave and call bullshit while continuing to earn a living has been to not vote Democrat.)

(Your complaint has not been upheld! j/k…

Yikes, double yikes, and thank you very much for the testimony!)

***

From: Elliot

Subject: Glinner

Date: Sept. 4, 2025

Hey Guys,

Sorry, this became longer than I planned.

Long time listener and paid subscriber here. Just listened to the latest pod, and I can't help agreeing with you that the UK is currently sliding into illiberalism. We currently have an ongoing closed-door discussion happening amongst MPs and “experts” to propose a definition of “Islamophobia,” for example.

However, there are some murmurings from MPs like Wes Streeting about how the laws need to be changed, and as you mentioned, the police chiefs seem to think this stuff is largely unenforceable (won't someone think of the poor cops #notallcops).

One thing that may have escaped your attention is just how captured the UK police (and other institutions) have become by special interest groups, such as Stonewall, who provide courses to the police which seem to go against the actual rule of law here and [instead] present the world they want.

The case of Harry Miller is one such instance where the police visited his house to "check his thinking" after he tweeted a dumb limerick about trans people. He subsequently took them to court and sued them successfully.

I think Glinner's case is another instance like this, and he will also be successful in suing down the line (he was in the U.S. when he posted those tweets FFS). There is credible evidence that this was actually planned in conjunction with trans activists who previously worked in the police. Also, there have been many other cases against other institutions, and I think they will eventually be corrected by their dwindling bottom lines.

The trouble is that in the UK we have a class of people who think of the world in a certain way, and try to enforce their vision without actually asking anyone outside their bubble. And they don't seem to realize that the debate has been won in the UK by Graham's side. The Cass Review of puberty blockers, and the Supreme Court's recent legal clarification of the legal definition of sex mean that there is no real argument left to be had in any meaningful sense. And yet the SNP (and other institutions) are now being taken to court for not acting in accordance with the legal clarification from a few months ago.

I'm not hopeful in the short term, but I feel like this has lit a fire under people and we can get through this. I hope we don't get Farage, but we probably will.

Love the pod, especially the variety you guys bring, and Michael's racist impressions, and Matt's rants, and Kmele's blackness.

(If the public is indeed on Linehan’s side, and the key institutions are indeed so captured by the 20 side of a 20/80 issue, that sounds like a situation ripe for change via explosive politics. Here’s hoping your long-term optimism can lead even to short-term sanity.)

***

From: James L.

Subject: Hebrew Israelites, Dave Matthews and The Fifth Column Making the World a Better Place

Date: Sept. 3, 2025

Gentlemen,

I wanted to share a memorable experience I had recently while listening to The Fifth Column. Last Friday evening, I was heading to a Dave Matthews Band concert in Inglewood.

As I was walking to the venue, I came across a gentleman on the corner wearing a very fancy green academic robe. He was preaching the gospel of the original 12 tribes of Israel, detailing who they really were and what the Bible truly said—a Hebrew Israelite preacher, to be exact. I immediately remembered learning about this topic through your discussions, partly thanks to the legendary artist Kanye and the revelations made in the fall of 2022 (it was a simpler time). The man was live-streaming, and me being slightly intoxicated and high, I thought it would be fun to engage him in conversation. Unfortunately, he kept talking and had no interest in listening whatsoever, going on and on about the 12 tribes, their identity, and their gifts from God, all while reading Bible verses completely out of context.

I ended up asking the gentleman if he had ever heard of Fred the Genius, the artist who gifted the world with the song "We Are the Jews." (Members Only #141) Surprisingly he had not, and because of you, I was able to connect a man with a musical artist of his faith. While the world seems to be moving at an increasingly rapid pace these days, it's worth taking a moment to appreciate these wonderful instances where we can connect with another human being over musical artists, discussions about the truth, and the international kabal trying to hide the real 12 tribes of Israel.

See people, that's the real value of Fifth Column membership. Your knowledge base expands, and you become an ambassador to all. My membership doesn't just keep you all in booze, but makes the world a smaller place.

On another note, I'm not sure which of you has ever made snide comments about Dave Matthews (I'm thinking Moynihan, but in his defense he had probably been drinking), however I can tell you it's an amazing live concert experience. I was never a huge fan myself, but I went to a concert a few years ago because my wife is a fanatic, and I could instantly see why those concerts are so popular. It's an incredible live show; the musicians are virtuosos creating a phenomenal wall of sound. Dave himself is a great live singer who commands an arena of thousands. Even if you're not a fan of Dave Matthews, if you enjoy music and top-notch production, you will love one of his concerts. Also, get high before you go.

(In Yakub’s name, A-men!)

***

From: Sam

Subject: You Guys Helped My Relationship with My Dad Before he Died

Date: Aug. 26, 2025

Hello guys,

Long time subscriber, first time emailer.

My dad passed away Friday night. He was old, but it was still sudden and still a shock.

I spent every possible minute with my dad as a kid growing up -- he was my hero.

He was always a conservative guy, and I had my own ideas growing up, but I know where my dad stood. My dad emerged as a huge Trump supporter, and I remember that being such a shock to me. Trump’s personality seemed everything my dad raised me not to be. I remember feeling confused, and ultimately disappointed. The politics didn’t surprise me, but my dad wasn’t “holding his nose” and voting for Trump -- he went full MAGA.

In those early years of Trump 1, I remember hating talking to my dad about politics, and for a period of months, almost wanting to avoid him all together.

My friend Bobby put me onto you guys, and you helped me realize just how WRONG I was. The way you guys encouraged open discussion and debate has [had] a real effect on me. Instead of avoiding those subjects, and my dad, I dove into them head-first. We argued, we debated, we found common ground, argued some more, debated some more, traded books, traded links [of] episodes of Uncommon Knowledge, of Thomas Sowell and Victor Davis Hanson, and we grew so much closer, and had so much fun.

I spent these last few years with my dad closer than ever, and I just loved him fiercely, and made it my project to understand this complex man who raised me. I don’t have many regrets when it comes to him, but there will always be a void on my heart.

To you, this may be just some podcast, but for many of us it represents much more.

Thanks,
Sam

(The thanks, as I told Sam in a private email, are to HIM. Sharing this story with the whole class as a lesson for all of us -- me very much included -- to spend more time with our elderly parents, and try valiantly to never let politics get in the way of love.)

***

From: Reid

Subject: Should I Hit it Raw? (There’s Context, I Promise)

Date: Sept. 6, 2025

Good morning boys and greetings from Madison, Wisconsin!

I'm a paid subscriber who found his way to your particular brand of bullshit by way of Blocked and Reported. While I know you hear this regularly, it's so unbelievably refreshing to have another consistent voice of political reason in my commentary rotation.

To give you an idea of how starved I am for nuanced commentary, this year I started making my way through your backlog, beginning with Episode #1. It's an immense credit to the three of you that I find myself losing track of whether I'm listening to a new episode or an old one, because you have been so ruthlessly consistent in your views (while having the stones to admit when you're wrong), calling balls and strikes across the aisle no matter who in our government is fucking up today. So before I begin begging you three assholes for advice, thank you for being a (mainstream?) North Star of contemporary liberal philosophy.

Anyway. Here's the reason I'm writing this email (over a glass of locally made cask strength Bourbon, shoutout to J. Henry): You are a pretty explicitly pro-natal podcast. My wife and I (about to celebrate one year) are in our early thirties and would like to start a family, but the looming weight of all the ways we can possibly screw it up terrify the hell out of us. We'd like to own a home together before we have kids. We'd like to be more financially stable before we have kids. We'd like to overcome the demons our parents left us before we have kids.

There's this annoying voice in my head that tells me that we should just go ahead and have kids. But we both grew up in financially unstable households, and the prospect of bringing new life into this beautiful world without having the means to provide for them seems so irresponsible. I know that every parent screws up and all you can do is your best, but I'd love to hear each of your perspectives about where you were in your life (career, relationship, finances, etc.) when you started building your family.

I'll add that while we aren't rich by any means, both of our careers are on an upward trajectory and we're fortunate to be in the black at the end of the month even after setting aside savings and retirement. Perhaps this is just my millennial angst creeping through but if the hurdle of home ownership seems insurmountable as two DINKs, I can't imagine how to overcome it once we have kids.

Alright, rant over. Thanks again, cheers, and hit me up if you ever dip your toes in the frozen wasteland that is Wisconsin.

(Number 1, flattery will get you everywhere. Number 2, I semi-apologize for jumping the gun on answering this solo, but I happen to know the next two Members Only episodes will not be able to accommodate this query, so as the biggest pro-natalist on the pod, here we are.

Throat-clear: I am not here to ram my preference [language!] over anyone’s individual circumstances. Your families’ backgrounds in particular are things I can’t feel in my bones. But!

It’s very very very VERY very common, in my experience, for those of us who had similar reticences during our late 20s and 30s to, upon experiencing the miracle of parenthood, go “What the HAIL was I thinking???” And it is also at least semi-common for those of us who will qualify for Social Security when our youngest graduates high school, for said youngest at various times to express genuine, heart-rending sadness that she will not get to spend enough of her life with you.

I will always remember the advice given a decade or two ago by my old friend Heather Havrilesky, which went along the lines of, “You think you’ll never have enough time to have kids and be a good parent and do all your excellent work stuff? Well OF COURSE you won’t have enough time! That’s the great thing about being in demand, and about still being hale enough to try your level best to fill it!” [She writes better than this.] It’s true: Conditions will never be perfect. And that’s fine! I mean, my God, you’re setting up savings and retirement; I only started that kinda stuff when I was in my late 30s, if that. Have trust in yourselves that you will figure something out, and that your hellspawn will be adaptable to whatever jury-rigged solutions you have to apply in the downtimes.

Liz Wolfe, currently preggo w/ #2 [and younger than you], is fond of pointing out that it’s actually pretty fun to be a young or even youngish parent, on account of you still having some bounce in your knees and mischief in your heart. Us older crusts have a harder time getting into the minds and physicality of our 10-year-olds.

As for home ownership, it’s a wonderful goal [if you’re into such things; I am not], but also one that’s more difficult than before, albeit solvable if [unlike too many Americans] you are willing to move where housing is cheap. Just to say, if that’s really a pre-condition, you can hustle to meet it, but also, it doesn’t have to be a pre-condition.

Being a parent brings you a joy and satisfaction and purposefulness that my limitations with language prevents me from adequately describing to someone who is not. That’s why I’m pro-natalist – to help people avoid unnecessary self-deprivation! I hope that other listeners who have gone through similar thought processes will chime in below. Good luck keeping it raw!)