This week, a Spanish town did not actually hold a clitoris festival, an economic analysis fears that as global temperatures rise our sex lives (and birth rates) will suffer, and new research suggests veterans suffer from sexual dysfunction.
Sadly, the more Pope Francis speaks, the more things stay the same.
Anti-choice arguments against contraception are perfectly pitched to bring in conservatives who are motivated by the politics of resentment, as the anti-choice and anti-environmentalism alignment demonstrates.
Past “population control” efforts often trampled human rights. So talk about condom distribution as causes concern among liberals. Can we overcome history to create new solutions?
A new study from Oregon State University puts numbers on the obvious: having children has a high carbon impact.
In recent years, population has fallen off the international environment and development agenda. Could climate change refocus our attention on population growth?
If we don’t stay in the discussion on population and climate change and insist on family planning and reproductive health programs that respect individual rights, what solutions might emerge from people who are unaware about what can happen when population policies and programs are driven purely by demographic targets?
Just as climate change unequally impacts wealthy and low income countries, as well as the rich and poor within countries, it also disproportionately takes a toll on women.
There are many ways to frame the linkages between population and climate change — and the reproductive health community can make the connection in a way that promotes women’s rights and empowerment.