Nov 10, 2015

Breed, (white, rich) women of Australia!

There is a baby drought! Except it seems to be a drought of a very particular kind of baby ...

Shakira Hussein — Writer and academic in multiculturalism

Shakira Hussein

Writer and academic in multiculturalism

For a field that relies so heavily on dry-as-dust statistics, demography has a lot of media sex appeal. This month’s report from the Australian Bureau of Statistics about the decline in Australia’s birth rate generated a wave of headlines about the national “baby drought” and the likely impact of a rapidly ageing population. Get thee to the bedroom, men and women of Australia. But conversations about birthrates are never just about the numbers of babies. They’re about the bodies from which of those babies emerge. The Sydney Morning Herald illustrated the ABS finding about birth rates in the inner city (the most baby-parched zone of the drought-stricken nation) with the story of artist Piers, his wife, Bridget, and their only child, Lucien -- not Abdullah and Fatima and their little baby Osama, or even Darren and Brittney and their adorable baby Maverick. Our narratives about demography illustrate our racial and class anxieties, as “undesirable” (black, brown, low-income) women are disciplined for having too many babies while “desirable” (white, middle-class) women are scolded for not having enough of them. Take up the White Woman’s Burden, Bridget. Politicians in a range of locations have extolled childbirth as a national duty. Peter Costello urged Australians to get down and dirty with his line about having “one for the mother, one for the father and one for the country”. Yasser Arafat was even more enthusiastic, urging Palestinians to have one for each of the parents and “10 for the struggle”. It’s interesting to juxtapose the stories about the “baby drought” with those about the global refugee crisis, given Australia’s twin obsessions with fending off invaders from Asia and with building and maintaining a strong population base. As academic Erica Miller notes: "When people or practices are likened to floods threatening Australia’s security, asylum seekers, for example, present an external threat. Conversely, abortion threatens to erode the white nation from within." The subtext to the baby-drought stories is fear that falling birth rates in Australia and Western Europe may force future generations of Australians to welcome the Yellow Peril with open arms. Except these days, the Yellow Peril has been replaced by the Muslim Peril. The viral YouTube video “Muslim Demographics” (15,625, 315 views as of this morning) warns the world to “wake up” as Muslims threaten to conquer the globe not through force of arms, but through demographic conquest. Europe (or “Eurabia”, as the demographic panic-mongers refer to it) is already past the tipping point. Can Australia be far behind? Former Liberal Party MP Danna Vale expressed this fear during the 2006 debate about providing access to RU486:
“I have read … comments by a certain imam from the Lakemba Mosque [who] actually said that Australia is going to be a Muslim nation in 50 years’ time. I didn’t believe him at the time. But … look at the birthrates and you look at the fact that we are aborting ourselves almost out of existence by 100,000 abortions every year … You multiply that by 50 years. That’s 5 million potential Australians we won’t have here.”
Last month, former Hawke/Keating minister Peter Baldwin joined the demographic fear-mongers in an op-ed for The Australian:
 “High Muslim birthrates combined with a stagnant or declining population ensure a Muslim majority in Europe is only a matter of time.”
Fortunately, he concludes, Tony Abbott has saved Australia from a similar fate. And his former colleague Gary Johns has just published a book with the title No Contraception, No Dole, in which he states that access to welfare benefits ought to be conditional on women’s willingness to subject themselves to the use of long-term contraceptives. This, he concedes, “undoubtedly will affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders people in great proportions”, but that is no justification for tax-payer funded breeding. “Some families, some communities, some cultures breed strife.” Black babies are apparently not going to be up to the task of supporting an ageing white population, then. As Aboriginal writer and activist Celeste Liddle said in response to the baby-drought stories: "I'd breed, but I'm reasonably clear that they're not after the kind of babies I'd produce. They're always trying to take them away!" If some women are being urged to open their legs and think of Australia, others are being told to keep them firmly crossed. And the children languishing in detention on Nauru and in refugee camps around the world -- well, they’re not fit for purpose.

Free Trial

You've hit members-only content.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

9 thoughts on “Breed, (white, rich) women of Australia!

  1. Roger Clifton

    In the 1970s, it went thus –
    “One for each parent and one for the road”

    But we only need that as an average. A few large families with lots of childless uncles and aunts would do the trick. Wasn’t it ever thus? For some reason, that minority of people with strong family values keep reappearing from generation to generation.

  2. SusieQ

    and the Age would feature a couple in Fitzroy, same names and everything. Its Fairfax’s ongoing obsession with the middle class bores who inhabit our inner suburbs – the food they eat, the houses they live in etc etc. Reporters from Fairfax turn into pumpkins if they drive more than 5ks out of the city centre.

  3. Jaybuoy

    This eugenic racist rubbish is a symptom of our swing to the right and always ends’s already eroded our standing internationally..

  4. DaveinPerth

    “Black babies are apparently not going to be up to the task of supporting an ageing white population, then.”[email protected]/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features20Nov+2013

  5. Norman Hanscombe

    For a long time the Left were strong supporters of eugenics as a means of building better societies; but nowadays anything above mediocrity in any field other than sport tends to be attacked as ‘elitist’.
    Then again, in the past there were times when the leadership of the Left wasn’t as intellectually mediocre as it is today.

  6. Jack Robertson

    It’s all very well to tut-tut the undeniable racist overtones inherent in these discussions, but there are valid potential questions to be explored, and that can only be done by starting with some hard data. Do we actually know what the various ethnic and racial group birthrates are with any accuracy? Do we know what employment v. welfare rates across ethnic and racial groups are with any accuracy?

    If it is true that groups with historically higher welfare dependancy and lower employment rates are having significantly larger familiies than others, then that’s a legitimate econo-demographic problem that needs to be examined carefully without kneejerk accusations. (Though of course racism may be one of the factors in lower employment rates…)

    But we do need to look at hard data. Is it available?

  7. DaveinPerth

    Jack Robertson. See above link.

  8. AR

    If the hard right get their way and gut/abolish the pension and other welfare then large families will again be seen as they once were, security in old age.

  9. Roger Clifton

    AR – high rents have already gutted the value of pensions. It’s not the right alone whose greed has endlessly pumped up the housing bubble. The white woman is rich and childless because she had to go out to work to pay the mortgage instead of minding a home for the kids.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details