Bindi Irwin, contraception and the birds and the bees

Bindi Irwin can’t be blamed for making stupid comments. She is, after all, only 15.

And because she is an eco-evangelist, it’s no surprise that she is running with the tired, worn-out lines of imminent planetary doom caused by overpopulation. You’d expect nothing less from her.

You see, Bindi believes that the birds and the bees are more important than human beings.

She also thinks that we should control the birds and the bees, so to speak, by implanting contraceptives in 11 year old girls from Third World countries.

In case you didn’t know, 11 year old girls are still in primary school.

I’m not sure how Bindi thinks impregnating school children with long-term contraceptives and then teaching them that a sexual free-for-all is their right in life is going to help anything.

Especially if she is of the view that Third World school girls are already the play thing of males. Her plan will just objectify them further.

The problem with Bindi and her thinking is that on one hand she thinks sex should be for grown ups who are able to take responsibility for their actions. Hence her taking this seemingly moral position to protect children.

But on the other hand, she wants to remove all responsibility for sex altogether. Hence her support for contraceptives and the immorality that goes with them.

And if you promote immorality at the same time as you promote morality, you end up with all sorts of disordered thinking and useless ideas.

If Bindi really wanted to solve the population problems this world is facing she would be arguing the case for more children. Because the current situation is unsustainable.

Just look at Detroit. It is a scary and brutal glimpse into the future.

And if Bindi really wanted to help Third World school girls, she would advocate something very different than contraceptives for them.

She would advocate societal sexual responsibility.

You know, the old fashioned type where men and women dated only after they were in a position to marry. And where the birds and the bees were only called upon after wedding bells chimed. And where sexual misconduct, like adultery, or prostitution, or homosexuality, or pornography was frowned upon as a scandal.

I know this is a bit hard to comprehend for those who have been brought up on the lie that sexual freedom has made life better. It hasn’t.

Just ask any childless feminist in their fourth relationship whether they’re happy.

And when her mouth finishes saying yes, look into her eyes and you will see a big no. They can lie out loud but the truth is written in their faces.

The fact is that women want to marry a man who will look after them, cherish them and care for them. And guess what? There is nothing wrong with that at all.

Because men want to marry a woman who they can love, cherish and adore.

But when you start acting with the sexual maturity of our age, everything is overturned.

Sex is no longer about love and, thanks to the pill, women are no longer cherished.

They have procured the freedom to used and discarded by men who have been allowed to become perpetual adolescents.

I mean, think about it. Fifteen year old boys are sex-crazy. The pill has made their teenage fantasies come true. So men no longer grow up.

True love is really nothing more than complete sacrifice of one’s self. Contraception is born of selfishness. Bindi Irwin would do well to think about that.

And also, next time she wants to release a video that moralises about poverty and a lack of resources and the shocking fact that 150 children are born around the world every minute, she might like to leave off the bit about donations for the animal hospital at Australia Zoo.

It just seems a little tacky.

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of eight children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On

14 Comments

  1. This is what happens when people over simplify a complex issue.
    While I agree that girls as young as 11 years old should not be using contraception for both moral and physical reasons, I do not believe that Bindi meant it in the way you interpreted it.
    From a worldly perspective it is obvious to presume that Bindi’s solution was meant for young females in Third World countries who are continuously put at risk of either rape or child prostitution. Would any 11 year old choose that life willingly?
    I don’t think this is merely Bindi attempting to voice her opinion on over population, but, as she states in the interview: ”Girls as young as me or even younger are having kids and that doesn’t seen right to me,”
    Maybe it’s just me, but I think I agree – being a girl myself and only a few years older than Bindi.
    I don’t agree with her method of preventing pregnancies, as you said, in girls who are still in primary school. However, you mentioned that Bindi should support sexual responsibility rather than implanting contraception. I fear you have ignored the fundamental reasoning behind her logic; to prevent pregnancies resulting from forced sexual activity, not to encourage sexual activity at a young age and not bear the consequences.

    Post a Reply
  2. Similar sentiments to those expressed by Miss Irwin were expressed by the Foreign Minister, Sen. Carr, in an interview back in late 1999 or early 2000, when he was Premier of New South Wales; he said that “all our foreign aid has got to be made dependent on population control policies in [Third World] countries”, because of “overpopulation” and “global warming”. With Australia winning a seat on the U.N. Security Council late last year, that interview helps us understand why Sen. Carr wrote, just after winning that seat, that on “the Security Council we’ll be working for the rights of women and girls – to education, training and jobs, and to maternal and reproductive healthcare”.

    Reginaldvs Cantvar

    Post a Reply
  3. Bees and birds do have an important role in keeping the biosphere active. No pollination = No flora = No fauna. Humans are an irrelevant pest species. So I am willing to go ahead and say that insects and birds are more important than Humans. Contraception should be used in the third world countries. It’s cruel to allow children to be born in a country where they’re highly likely to starve to death or die from a horrible disease. Allowing impoverished people to have more kids will only add to the problem.

    Post a Reply
    • I don’t agree with forcing contraception down the throats of teenagers in developed countries like Australia. There’s no need for Australian girls to be using contraception when all that’s needed is for boys and girls to be taught to use self control. The option should be there for persons over 18 to use them, but only if they foot the bill. Tax payer’s money should not be used to fund promiscuity.

      Post a Reply
  4. The world’s population will continue rising until it reaches around 8 billion and will then start to decline according to UN population forecasts. This will involve radical demographic change and an influx from rural regions to cities in developing nations. Bindi Irwin has been used here, I feel. If not, perhaps she will promise to do her bit for population control by pledging to remain childless herself.

    Post a Reply
  5. You had me until you suggested the world was under populated. lol Growth isn’t sustainable because growth has a limit. I don’t think for a second the human population is currently at risk of dying out tomorrow, but nor do I think everyone should just go out there and have huge families. In theory, 2-5 children per couple is enough to sustain the human population, but more than that is ridiculous. I for one would rather not be forced to move to the middle of no where just so I’m not in the middle of a concrete jungle. Now, this idea of implanting children with contraceptives is ridiculous. We should be discouraging teen sex if possible, but ignoring contraception all together in the name of morality is foolish. I know if people like you had their way, I’d be forced into fathering children just so I could enjoy the pleasure of sex, but I don’t even like children. I know you’d love to think otherwise, but there are people with a sex drive out there who don’t have the willingness, ability, or patience to raise children, and denying ourselves pleasure so we can meet your standards of morality is simply unreasonable, and for some, unrealistic. Better to enjoy sex without consequences with a loving partner than reproduce and be a lousy parent.

    Post a Reply
    • We can always convict such people of sentimentalism by their weakness for euphemism. The phrase they use is always softened and suited for journalistic appeals. They talk of free love when they mean something quite different, better defined as free lust. But being sentimentalists they feel bound to simper and coo over the word “love.” They insist on talking about Birth Control when they mean less birth and no control. We could smash them to atoms, if we could be as indecent in our language as they are immoral in their conclusions.”

      “Normal and real birth control is called self control.” -GK Chesterton

      Post a Reply
      • Oh really? Your conservatism is showing. I said nothing about going out and having sex with someone different every night. It is possible for 2 people to love each other, enjoy having sex, and not want children. Why should a couple who love each other avoid physical intimacy just because someone else says contraception is wrong?

      • Webboy, I actually meant to comment on the post by Benard, I accidently hit the respond button to yor post.
        But since you asked, self control is something people are not familiar with. Contraception cases husband and wife to veiw each other as objects, causing an unatural barrier of devices and pills to which can be harmful to ones health.
        The Contraceptive pill is classed as a group 1 carcinogen ( cancer causing) by the WHO. any man who wants his wife to take that must love her too much, if he knew this infrmation.

      • The Contraceptive pill is classed as a group 1 carcinogen ( cancer causing) by the WHO. any man who wants his wife to take that must not love her too much, if he knew this information.

      • Ultimately, it should be up to each married couple to decide what they do, not up to the holier-than-thous. There’s more than 1 way to prevent a pregnancy, and each with its own pros and cons.

      • I am sure the methods of contraception used are a mood killer.
        They can decrease the sex drive as well, make one put on weight and mess with hormones. some devices can increase the likelyhood of ectopic pregnancy, and the pill can act as an abortifacient.
        its like saying I will love you just the way you are, but will love you more if you use this device or pill.
        Fertility is not a disease, but so commonly is it treated as such.

      • You make your own choice ultimately, however when one undertands fertility in its natural uninterrupted form, contraceptives look quite invasive and unessesary.
        NFP methods ( creighton NAPRO technology, Symptothermal etc) are very effective when used properly, unlike contrapceptives it can be used to acheive or avoid pregnancy. However these methods could be quite difficult to use for those who do not know or never practiced self control.

    • The problem in the Third World, for anyone noticing, is not unplanned pregnancies. It’s forced marriage, rape, and child prostitution. So contraceptives won’t really help these young girls. Contraception will only lead to more abuse by rapists and traffickers, whose crimes will now go further hidden and underground. Wake up people!

      Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares