Wow, this is incredibly academically aggressive. Tendering on an academic "male perspective". I would like to make the point that this does not only apply to "mothers" but daughters of mothers who have not given birth to their own children (as noted) but have been "mother figures " in lines of lineage, but not solely because they saw children as 'unsavory vertebrae ' getting in the way of thier careers. Most often women who have given birth brush aside the importance of other women in bloodlines or adopted family lines who have played an important role in maintaining family her- story and have sacrificed thier own direct blood line to pool resources and time to help with child rearing and the "extra time" to maintain family oral history, agriculture, traditional medicine, and research. This is becoming more prevalent with the increasing cost of living and childbearing especially within women who were born in the late 70s and the being exposed to two recessions, and social media during pivotal times in their economical and childbearing years. There will be alot of women without children who are the knowledge keepers. This moves beyond the neo-European perspective and more connected to the African and Indigenous cultures. Perhaps next time take a deeper dive but I'm happy this at least has begun the conversation. Aunties, and women without direct bloodline children in these cultures were highly respected and wasn't based purely on academics or thier "fear" of children or loss of academic status.