Asexuality and Resisting Pro-Natalism

Learning How to Navigate Compulsory Sexuality

"Humanity is dying," billionaire Elon Musk told Fox News anchor Bret Baier in March when asked what keeps him up at night. "The birth rate is very low in almost every country. And so unless that changes, civilization will disappear."

Musk isn’t the only powerful right wing figure fixated on declining birthrates. Vice President JD Vance has also been sounding the alarm—warning us to beware the danger of “childless cat ladies.” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson once said in a House hearing that abortions were harming the economy by eliminating would-be workers. Trump himself is reportedly considering “pro-birth” policies, like a $5,000 bonus to encourage women to have children.

Welcome to the rise of Pro-natalism.

Gilead in The Handmaid’s Tale is an example of a pro-natalist regime.

Have More Babies

Pro-natalism refers to a belief or policy that promotes reproduction of human life as a core objective for humanity. In brief, boosting birthrates is pro-natalists’ goal.

But why are people like Musk, Vance, and Johnson so focused on birthrates?

The U.S. birthrate has been falling for decades and is now at historic lows. This is concerning to capitalists—and their lackeys like JD Vance—because a falling birthrate means a lower availability of future workers.

Fewer workers means that labor (i.e. wages) becomes more expensive. Rising labor costs can empower workers and threaten the social order. For example, Europe experienced massive population decline due to an outbreak of the Black Death in the 14th century, leading to widespread labor shortages. This increased the cost of labor and helped end feudalism.

Gee, I wonder why this would make oligarchs like Elon Musk nervous…?

The right wing’s fight to restrict and eliminate access to abortion and birth control is often framed as religious zealotry. And some of it is. But when we look closer, we’re quickly reminded, “it's the economy, stupid.” That’s because anti-choice politics is informed not just by religion, but also by pro-natalist, nationalist, capitalist, eugenicist and fascist impulses.

Have More of the Right Kind of Babies

Truthfully, it’s somewhat misleading to say that pro-natalists’ guiding goal is to maintain the supply of workers (via a boosted birthrate). Because if their goal was that simple, then pro-natalists have another, arguably easier solution to turn to: immigration.

This is perhaps where we can most readily see the role of racism, nationalism, and xenophobia in pro-natalist politics.

Conservative opinion is not inherently hostile to immigration. After all, big business interests have a well documented history of advocating for pro-immigration policies. It’s easy to forget in today’s MAGA-dominated Republican Party, but supporting immigration has historically been supported by Republicans. As recently as December 2024, former President George W. Bush said on Fox News that “immigrants help build the economy” and “immigrants fill a critical gap in our labor market.”

Why, then, do prominent pro-natalists reject immigration as a solution to impending labor shortages? Because immigration may address capitalism’s need for plentiful labor, but it is incompatible with white nationalist goals.

In other words, pro-natalists don’t just want more babies. They want more of the “right kind” of babies.

Pro-natalism is, I’d argue, best understood as a project fueled by eugenics, or an effort to “improve” a population’s genetic quality. This is pursued through selective breeding, in which the reproduction of certain traits/population is encouraged… while the reproduction of other traits/populations are repressed.

The Nazi regime is the most famous example of a eugenicist regime (though it should be noted that Hitler built on eugenicist ideas that originated in the U.S.). Nonetheless, eugenicist ideas are still alive and well in the United States. And this is not just a MAGA problem; the CDC under President Biden displayed disturbing eugenicist logics too, essentially saying COVID was no longer concerning because it was mostly killing disabled people. “Life unworthy of life,” as the Nazi regime put it.

Eugenicist politics, much like pro-natalist politics, are often deeply concerned with the sanctity of “The Family.” But again, not all families—after all, the right wing has no problem separating children from their immigrant parents. They similarly want to repeal the rights of queer families, not even viewing queer families as “real” families.

In other words, pro-natalist politics operates at an intersection of racism, capitalism, anti-queerness, xenophobia and Christian nationalism. This is how we can begin to make sense of the simultaneous attacks on abortion, bodily autonomy, queer people, and immigrants.

Refusing Compulsory Sexuality is a helpful book for learning about compulsory sexuality.

Compulsory Sexuality

Asexuality offers some footholds to understand and resist the rise of pro-natalism.

A core argument in much of my research is that seeking asexual perspectives is beneficial to everyone. People at the margins of society often have knowledge that is less accessible to others, a lesson from Black feminists that I take very seriously. Asexual people exist at the margins of sexual “normalcy,” since our culture tells us that everyone does—and should—pursue sex. As a result, there is valuable marginal knowledge that asexual people have to offer.

For example, asexual people already know that we live in world that can tell us we have an obligation to be sexual (and reproduce).

In fact, asexual people have a term for this societal pressure: compulsory sexuality.

Compulsory sexuality refers to the cultural assumption that everyone does and should experience sexual attraction and pursue sex. A focus on compulsory sexuality helps us see how sexuality can be enforced upon people.

Asexual people offer a unique lens into how society pressures us to have (reproductive) sex. I’ve written before about how centering asexual perspectives helps us see how compulsory sexuality can emerge in unexpected places, such as conservative Christian purity culture.

Pro-natalist politics is bringing compulsory sexuality closer to the surface of American culture. But this doesn’t mean compulsory sexuality is a new phenomenon. Asexual people have been identifying elements of compulsory sexuality and discovering how to resist it for decades.

As we find ourselves facing a rising tide of pro-natalist politics, we need not fear being adrift without a compass. Marginalized groups like asexual individuals offer us useful tools, like the concept of compulsory sexuality, for navigating these troubled waters.

Canton Winer is an Assistant Professor of Sociology and Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Northern Illinois University. His research focuses on the relationships between gender and sexuality, with specific focus on the experiences and perspectives of people on the asexuality spectrum. You can keep up with his research on Bluesky.

Want to support my research on asexuality? Consider becoming a contributing subscriber by clicking on the button above. I am committed to keeping my work free, without paywalls. Consider your paid membership a token of appreciation, an investment in research on asexuality, and a small but meaningful way to join a community that shares your interests.