Are single childless cat ladies and gentlemen really "the problem"?

Question

J.D. Vance "ignited a firestorm" when his comments about single childless cat ladies being a problem was pulled up and re-splashed all over headlines for people to see.

In a 2021 interview with Fox News host Tucker Carlson, then-Senate-candidate Vance complained that the U.S. was being run by Democrats, corporate oligarchs and "a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they've made and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable, too."

"It's just a basic fact — you look at Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, AOC — the entire future of the Democrats is controlled by people without children,” Vance continued. “And how does it make any sense that we've turned our country over to people who don't really have a direct stake in it?"

He said also said "that people who choose not to have children should have less political power and should face a higher tax rate."

As you can imagine, this didn't sit well with, well, a lot of single childless cat ladies. Basically boiling down to this notion that they shouldn't have any political stake in a country they live in and pay taxes for, simply because they have no children either by choice or because they can't. HE perceives them all to be miserable, not even taking into account Harris has step children, for example, and it doesn't account for the many women out there that cannot physically have children--so therefore by no choice of their own, they should have no power? No say? The same goes for men as well. If men can't have biological children, should they just be useless to this country as he did also mention Buttigieg in his comments?

Whatever side you vote on, how do you feel about this?

Justneedtokno · Accepted Answer

I really don’t play any blame on men for being single I think at this point in my life is just me choosing to be single, but not even that I think I just haven’t put myself out there enough to be open. I am working on that. I feel like I have been out there enough. I’m going to parties with friends and being around with family and doing stuff. I just am also afraid to be doing too much too desperate and don’t want to attract the wrong attention which I’ve gotten so playing it. Safe isn’t a bad idea.

MzAsh · Accepted Answer

They make policy restrictions that negatively affect parents and kids and then throw a tantrum that child bearing adults are less interested in having kids in the first place.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

Constitution covers all. Not some. That side can never understand that the world does not revolve around them.

Nifrayu · Accepted Answer

All I know is that we're over populated. Less reproduction is a good thing.

MrOracle · Answer

Right now, most Western countries are experiencing some degree of population collapse, and when that happens, it typically leads to the end of the entire culture. You can dismiss the end of western culture, but what do you see replacing it? The most likely answer would be fundamentalist Islam. Anyone think THAT would be an improvement?

Japan has had 3 decades of economic stagnation and a decline in lifestyle, and it's still getting worse as such a big percentage of their population is elderly and needing expense care. They had many advantages to help weather the crisis, including a close relationship with the west, so it's not as bad as it might have been.

China and Russia are 20 years behind China and are in big trouble. China is already collapsing and the Ukraine war has killed so many young Russian men that there won't be enough working age people to maintain that culture. The country is very likely to break up and become a shell of its former self if it survives at all.

Europe and the US are following the same path, just not as far along. Imagine the US being governed by Mexico and Europe by Islam. Imagine only having electricity a few hours a day, Imagine office jobs largely disappearing and being replaced by manufacturing jobs because global commerce largely goes away. Imagine the US and Europe as third world countries. That's what the population crisis means, quite literally.

The reason so few people talk about this is because it was literally engineered by the World Economic Forum - videos of their lectures are online so you can see for yourself. They want to reduce the population by 15/16ths - from 8 billion to half a billion - just enough poor, powerless workers to maintain their billionaire lifestyles. Bill Gates has been funding much of this, but he's not alone. Academics have been pushing this a long time, and are encouraging anything that reduces the population. They've even talked about ways to sterilize people, either without their knowledge or by tricking them in various ways.

It's not hard to understand. In the US, the birthrate is 30% below replacement, and it's worse in much of Europe. Smaller generations mean smaller tax bases paying back loans taken out by larger generations, and more elderly being cared for by fewer people means even higher taxes. Imagine a 75% total tax rate.

Chazmatazz269 · Answer

They are A problem; one of many. They are not THE problem.
Vance’s point is clearly about the fact that people who don’t have kids, and some who do have kids but don’t give a shit about them, can and will likely be more reckless with their choices than those who are heavily invested in leaving a better world for their children to inherit. It’s simple facts like this that seem to upset the snowflakes most. You can feel bad if it makes you feel better, but it won’t change the facts one stitch.
He clearly has a lot to learn about how the US tax system works though. People with kids, single mothers especially, already get tax breaks that married couples and single people without kids don’t get. Single people have more credits than married do though. I know several lifetime couples who won’t marry because of the extra tax burdens. Maybe they should offer more incentives for marriage if they want to turn those trends around. I can’t imagine how they could do that, but they can’t fix anything by not trying! Ell oh ell!

MisterWack · Answer

No they aren’t a problem, frankly I don’t get why JD Mandel oh sorry JD Vance (someone tell Trump JD’s real last name) gets so much criticism over being ‘cringe’ & ‘weird’.

Donald J Trump never kept his promises to help millions of Americans while in office, told those same millions of Americans “People are dying, that’s true, it is what it is”.(interview March 2020) & “I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute, something we could do that… By injection inside”(May 2020 on LIVE White House Feed) “This is more deadly than even your most strenuous flus… I’ve always played it down… I didn’t want to create a panic”(said in February 2020 on tape in private interview)

We have a civilly liable rapist who defamed his sexual assault victim, a man who defends ‘grabbing women by their genitals’, someone found GUILTY on 34 counts of falsifying business records which was the same crime his lawyer was found guilty of a few years before him even admitting to committing those crimes under Trump’s orders with receipts to back it up enough so that a jury of his peers found him guilty of criminal conduct lying to a bank for the express purpose of reimbursement of a “legal expense” which was secretly hush money. Lying to a bank is a crime when done on official documents (which all have receipts)

Not to mention his coup attempt after months long misinformation campaign to rile up the mob that would do the coup against his VP & Republicans & Democrats in Congress. P. S. To all those saying Pelosi had some sort of control, no she didn’t. We all know the US Pres has the power to move troops without Congress Approval though cannot declare war on any foreign body without Congress Approval (checks & balances we learn back in Middle School / High School)

All far worse than JD Vance possibly having sex with his couch (he didn’t by the way)

ClaircognizantEmpath · Answer

hey, im responding first to the question headline only at this point, im not childless, but i knew instinctively i shouldn't have children, everyone understood that then one moment of madness and i did it, cats i have five was six, one died old age, but then a stray took her place... but currently even though i can stroke him whilst eating he has absolutely no desire to be petted, its all about food! i laughed at myself getting like, hey dude its a two way street... but at least he's stopped hissing at me... cat owners are beings who have a kinda secure vibe about themselves, even can appear, self sufficient, partly can't be doing with most peoples shit, just like a cat, happy to be chill, dont have a need for approval or attention or confirmation, dont have a need to be in control... needs the space of freedom... i would suggest if a guy or girl likes a cat girl most likely a healer/empath/witch/hippy type, she's well worth getting to know... and if you believe you are not a cat person, and couldnt stand it, it will work its magic on you... a cats vibration is that of a frequency which heals, even at which bones can be affected.. a cat will lay upon your chest to balance your vibration... their purring has no scientific understanding, or so called reason... being a neurodivergent household, it stands to reason all of my pets have special needs if you like... like us... and i let them be special and chill in their own way... so we the feline owners are most likely the answer in actual fact... a being who can have a spiritual connection with a super sensed animal in place perhaps of a need for partnership or offspring... i salute it... now i am looking forward to going back to read the article you have written... here goes... would love to hear your thoughts..

patois · Answer

What's the point in lying when the interview is recorded. Anyone can go watch it. Having no direct stake in the future of a country, means that you have no children. Children are the future of every country. They are the future workers, innovators, leaders, tax payers, soldiers, care givers to the elderly, and so on. Parents evenly enter a stage of generativity where they show concern for people beside themselves. That's the general principle of The American Dream. You strive for your children to be better off than you, and that means you strive to make America Great, not just for yourself but for others. That is the general sentiment of what JD Vance said in the interview. People that opt out and only think of themselves in the moment are a problem to all nations. It's a problem that needs to be tackled in order for nations to survive. You must work to make it possible for people in your nation to have healthy families with a stable economic base and incentive that action. That has nothing to do with your fantasies of becoming a second class citizen with made up differences in voting rites or different taxation. When you lie, you just make yourself look stupid.

ManOnFire · Answer

He is part of the problem, as most politicians are anyway. He wants to raise taxes on single people who don't want kids, when a large reason they don't want them is already because life is more expensive now. These ignorant politicians are not seeing that, or they're seeing it but don't care.

Who wants to have kids when you have young single people out there already fighting to survive and to afford basic stuff? We live in an age where many Americans are working two jobs more than ever before, or they're having to rent a place with roommates because they can't even afford a one-bedroom apartment. These are the issues the politicians refuse to see and don't want to change, meanwhile blaming the single people for not wanting kids. You can't get more messed up than that.

imtiaz45 · Answer

No, single, childless individuals with pets are not "the problem." This stereotype unfairly stigmatizes a diverse group of people who lead fulfilling, independent lives. Many choose this lifestyle for various reasons, including personal preference, career focus, or circumstances beyond their control. Pet ownership often provides companionship and emotional support. Society benefits from the diversity of lifestyles and contributions from all individuals, regardless of marital or parental status. It's important to challenge and move beyond outdated stereotypes to foster a more inclusive and understanding society.

hahahmm · Answer

They are part of the problem but society has many, many problems. I would say that the real root cause is that people have become too self centered for society to function properly. In the old days people believed in bigger/more important things than themselves. Belief in God was part of it, even tho atheist don't like to hear it, it's just a fact that for most of human history that is a big part of why people bothered to create and maintain civilizations. It wasn't because they wanted to experiment with destroying every random tradition just to see what would happen... aka social experiments we see today.

normalice · Answer

It's just another attempt to divide. That's all the GOP knows how to do. They tried tricking people into uniting behind their bad policies but people quickly cut their losses when none of those policies did what was promised and instead resulted in exactly the socioeconomic disasters the "liberal media" said they would. But they still want those bad policies, so they can benefit from the disaster, and discovered that people are happy to unite against them because they dont like disaster. So, they found keeping those people divided was critical to keeping those bad policies in place. This is just another example of it.

ShadesVow · Answer

The issue is 2 fold. 1 politicians without kids are being allowed to make decisions that affect children. There is a reason nearly all of the supporters of trans and lgbtq etc issues are childless democrats. Look at the flip side most of those against it have children. And 2nd politicians that have never served in the armed forces are being allowed to make decisions regarding what our military does or does not do. Personally I would never vote for a childless politician that hasn't served in the armed forces. It should be a requirement because as it stands we have people that are not mentally competent deciding what happens to all Americans. I have been in the armed forces still am active duty and I also have children. I can say for certainty I would do a far better job governing people than 90% of the current politicians

82lynx · Answer

I can’t take either side, and besides, I can’t vote in US elections anyway.

All political parties do things I can’t stand. That aside, we have taxes up the yin yang already, and now big daddy government wants to make life harder for those choosing to live more simply? What rubbish. As for cats, they’re low-maintenance and are often good for a few laughs. So, if one can deal with litterboxes, hair ending up on any article of clothing placed on a flat surface, shredded chair arms, et cetera, go for it.

DarkWinterNights · Answer

If you don’t have children you aren’t passing along your values and traditions. Single people tend to vote to benefit themselves in the moment, not society in the long term. People should be less concerned about JD Vance and realize if current trends continue (and they’re currently exponentially increasing) the West is likely to look more like the Middle East in the next 50 years. That means limited freedoms, less technology, more violence and dying of things like basic infections and malnutrition.

The Roman Empire is collapsing and people are partying.

DextroShade · Answer

He's 💯 right about this. Civilization is built upon the family unit, any deviation from this and it starts to crumble. Men need an incentive to do the dirty and dangerous jobs that keep society running, and for most of human history this has been a family to take care of; men won't bust their asses to support a bunch of spinsters. So, I hope you stupid, ungrateful thots are willing to treat your own sewage, haul your own trash to the dump, run the offshore oil rigs, and mill your own lumber, because if it all collapses you will just be part of some warlord's harem or left to starve to death if they don't want you.

Anonymous · Answer

if you look at the cost of living including the housing prices, he's absolutely right

instead of houses being accommodating to couples and families, they are now becoming more accommodating to singles and divorcees. the supply is low and the demand is high thus driving up the house prices

not to mention how expensive divorces are these days and divorce attorneys know this and deliberately scam their clients

and single childless cat ladies are the ones pushing for feminism which divides the genders and pits them against each other

Juxtapose · Answer

Well it's stupid because your consciousness doesn't live on through your young. You're not some ancient, primordial witch that can swap bodies with your young like you're from freaking Dragon Age 1.

You will die just like the rest of us no matter how many kids you have. Explosive population growth cannot be kept up forever and people have freedom of choice.

If you really want people to have more kids, make it more affordable. Having a kid while you are poor is probably one of the stupidest things you can do so a lot of people that are finding themselves in more poor places aren't fucking doing it.

Brittanyroseee · Answer

Im conservative and I don’t like the idea how not wanting kids is = to being a democrat. Its not. Its just a personal choice and these days now we have more freedom to do what we want vs what society wants. Back then women were expected by society to birth children. Now, we have the choice. We have more opportunities now, more interests in life. Some people just aren’t maternal either.

purplepoppy · Answer

So what's the solution? Crippling big taxes? Heaping shame and ridicule? Making it not a crime to rape single women? Breeding farms? What about simply executing anyone who hasn't reproduced by 25?

These solutions sound crazy but that's where ideas like his lead if they're not nipped in the bud. It wasn't that long ago we planted nettles on the graves of childless people and before that it was used as evidence you were a witch.

Anonymous · Answer

He does make a solid point. I wouldn't go as far as to say he's right. But it is a clash of cultures.

I do think most the democrats want what's right for the country regardless of how misguided thier ideology may be. And that is why I don't think Vance is right when he said married couples should have more of a say. Vance is playing to conservatives (as though conservative are the ONLY one who have kids😆).

I did see some of the so-called cat ladies who came to the defense of the cat ladies the other day though. People like Chelsea Handler who wrote a book called "my horizontal life". Oh, the Irony.

Berethor · Answer

Someone without chidren have no future, it's better not let such person to lead.

Anonymous · Answer

I think this is a stupid reasoning for something un-American (taxation without representation) that is little more than a power grabbing feverdream... the examples they give are poor (Pete and Kamala both have kids, and AOC was elected 5 years ago and still has childbearing years ahead of her if she should choose to).

In their dream women would have children immediately after college, if they bother to go, and then forever be either stuck in the home or in a stunted career, thus subordinate to men.

It is also a silent admission to the fact that educated people have children later in life and vote blue while rednecks breed like rabbits and like to cut their noses off to spite their faces by voting red.

ProbablyClueless · Answer

They're certainly one big part of it.

The big thing is to have a variety of voices being heard. JD's point isn't that childless men and women shouldn't be heard, it's that they aren't the ONLY people we should be hearing from. And unfortunately, our political dialogue at that time was being dominated by people like AOC and Pete Buttigieg.

It's a really sad and disturbing situation when the country's intelligencia is so unrepresentative of the country it claims to think for.

Anonymous · Answer

my opinion is.. my cat looks like a damn snow-tiger

I’m not getting rid of my cat, because hideous males of terrible health and genes. Want to bust their daily nut. 🖕

That would be pure stupidity, and the actions of a codependent imbecile

bobby_bush_eater · Answer

I ain't reading all that but no, single cat ladies are not the problem in society.

What Vance is driving at is that these people have no incentives or stake in the future and focus only to enrich themselves. The merit of that argument is a different discussion

Agape93 · Answer

How about they make parenthood appealing for more than just fucking tax benefits, instead of forcing it on people and kicking them while they're down for having kids they never wanted.

TheSpaceGnome · Answer

I'd actually marry a sterile cat lady, provided she also plays video games and makes art.
I generally don't give a shit who J. D. Vance is, or what he thinks. I'm not in the habit of being told what to do with my penis and balls,

Daniela1982 · Answer

If illegal immigrants can vote, so can my cats!

Anonymous · Answer

His message was not about single, childless men and women.

It was about the political influences that have encouraged the condition, and convinced women in particular that being a mother is a torturous, miserable existence. And those political influences are largely liberal and feminist. And he's not wrong.

Account · Answer

Seriously, such statements make me want to gather my stuff and live off the grid. This is getting fucking exhausting.

PeachyPie93 · Answer

Well I still think they should have normal rights to vote and whatnot but the tax thing seems legit since you are not making any new workers to keep the world running lol.

Avicenna · Answer

Low fertility rates are a huge problem, but I'd attempt to solve it by making childcare less expensive and give much greater tax breaks to people who DO want to have children.

Hispanic-Cool-Guy · Answer

No. Very stupid and dense comment by J. D. Vance. People are individuals and have different backgrounds and don't have children for various reasons so that doesn't make them less valuable to society.

Dargil · Answer

Are Trad Wives with 3 kids, dogs and cats and go to church on Sunday (or Saturday) and their faithful, loving husbands, who proudly served their country in uniform really the problem?

OhLongJohnsoning · Answer

This is what republicans want you to believe That it's "wrong" to be childless I'm a man, i don't want kids, or marriage. I'm not a cat person though. I'm a dog person, jd vance is a piece of shit

FreyaRed · Answer

No. The 1% who own 90% of everything are the problem

Drewtate · Answer

He's not wrong. Because they only care about the now not the future.

Jersey2 · Answer

The future is for the children. If you don’t have children you should focus on that as well along with parents. But I am not sure that happens a lot.

OtterMan68 · Answer

James "The Father of the Constitution" Madison was childless. George Washington had no biological children. Dolly Parton has no kids. Laura Ingraham has no kids

lightbulb27 · Answer

No i know ones that support trump. But too many if them in power wouldn't be representitive.

blueonblack22 · Answer

Just fixated and acting deranged over a stupid JD Vance comment made 3 years ago are we?

Anonymous · Answer

Yes, without a doubt they are. Single people are among the most self centered people on earth.

gorydetails · Answer

single liberal white women are 100% A menace to the country.

Anonymous · Answer

In general cat people suck. I have no idea why and it's not true 100% of the time (obviously) but goddamned if it isn't true WAY more often than random chance would suggest.

Anonymous · Answer

I don't believe people without children should have any right to vote on policies and decisions that directly effect children and families. It's that simple. No children, no opinion.

Anonymous · Answer

I love having sex with the cat ladies. Not a problem for me! And there are plenty of them for us single me to indulge in!!!

Anonymous · Answer

Vance may be the singular dumbest choice for VP ever made. Dumber than Quayle, and Palin.

msc545 · Answer

I want him to keep mouthing off like this so that fewer people vote for Dump.

Anonymous · Answer

I think that if you're single and without kids it isn't a problem; but once you get cats it becomes a problem. A problem that becomes exponentially worse with each cat you have.

captain_voidwalker · Answer

Well if people don't have kids then there is no next generation to take over

Anonymous · Answer

The problem he is addressing is not single, childless people, but the people who push the narrative to encourage it.

NotSlowestSloth · Answer

Men usually don't want to live long enough. They would kill themselves beforehand

Idkwhattoput03 · Answer

No, there is nothing wrong with being single and loving cats

sahibtheking · Answer

i don't think so, people live single by their coice and we must respect them for who they are.

Anonymous · Answer

No, There not the problem. It's just Female standards are too high in Dating.

strateguy632 · Answer

good point about aoc!

Peridot25 · Answer

What if I had a dog? 🤔

MikeyObrien · Answer

This would have been better as a poll

OddBeMe · Answer

No…we’re literally the solution.

Aiko_E_Lara · Answer

The problem is people just make it their business.

BetaBucks · Answer

#bancats

DaBiggestBird · Answer

I love cats

Are single childless cat ladies and gentlemen really "the problem"?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Why do people especially have an issue with childless cat ladies?

Are single childless cat ladies and gentlemen really "the problem"?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Why do people especially have an issue with childless cat ladies?

We're glad to see you liked this post.