Elon Musk Has Fathered 13 Children, But a Conservative Pro-Family Expert Claims Something is Lacking.
Brad Wilcox delves into the expanding family of the tech billionaire.
TroibNews 
When conservative influencer Ashley St. Clair revealed that she had given birth to Elon Musk’s child—marking his 13th—the response from the right was both explosive and sharply divided.
Some, including former Rep. Matt Gaetz, celebrated the “incredible genetics” of the newborn. In contrast, others expressed outrage; former Turning Point USA staffer Jon Root stated, “Much of conservatism is filled with godless, hypocrites who couldn’t care less about conserving traditional family values.”
To explore the possible rift within Donald Trump’s Barstool bros and Bible study coalition, PMG Magazine spoke with Brad Wilcox, a conservative sociologist from the University of Virginia and a strong proponent of marriage as an institution.
Wilcox highlighted Musk's role as a prominent advocate for pro-natalist initiatives in Silicon Valley and the new right. However, he emphasized that while the desire for more children is positive, the absence of a two-parent household can hinder a child’s well-being, regardless of the father's wealth.
“Wealthy kids who are raised in non-intact families are more likely to flounder than wealthy kids who are raised in an intact family,” he remarked.
The following discussion has been condensed for clarity and length.
After the announcement of Musk's latest child, you expressed on X, “Happy that Musk loves kids. Unhappy that he doesn’t realize how much marriage matters for them.” Can you elaborate on that?
Research shows that children are significantly more likely to thrive in various domains—such as graduating from college, experiencing less depression, and avoiding legal troubles—when they are raised in stable, married households. I commend Musk for advocating pro-natalism, which encourages a society that appreciates and supports child-rearing. However, I believe Musk has yet to recognize the crucial role marriage plays in stabilizing family life and fostering a more equitable society.
With the recent pro-natalist movement primarily centered on the right and in Silicon Valley, could this be at odds with the pro-family agenda?
Indeed, there appears to be a faction within pro-natalism that is less focused on the circumstances of a child’s conception. In contrast, the pro-family movement emphasizes raising children in the context of marriage. The declining marriage and fertility rates are concerning; married Americans tend to have more children than their single counterparts. To boost the birth rate in the U.S., making marriage more appealing and accessible should be a priority. Some Silicon Valley proponents of pro-natalism, however, seem indifferent to the family context in which children are born.
The news surrounding Ashley St. Clair seems to highlight this conflict sharply.
Congressman Matt Gaetz commented on the situation, suggesting that the child would possess good genetics. This indicates that some on the right may prioritize heredity over the familial environment in which children are raised. Some believe that possessing the "right genes" or ample wealth is sufficient for a child's success, as reflected in reactions to my statements on Twitter. While wealth is important, the evidence clearly shows that even affluent children from non-intact families are more likely to struggle than those from intact homes. The presence of two married parents is a significant factor for a child’s development.
How has the definition of pro-family evolved within the GOP since the rise of social conservatives like James Dobson in the '70s and '80s?
For social conservatives, the emergence of the new right has led to a greater focus on economic issues alongside social ones. It's not just about legislation surrounding abortion or marriage; it’s crucial to address the economic well-being of families to strengthen and stabilize working middle-class households.
Has Donald Trump’s approach to marital fidelity impacted perceptions of marriage and fatherhood?
I don't believe so. As I’ve discussed in previous works, marriage has indeed been declining in the U.S. over recent decades. However, looking at trends, the marriage gap between Republicans and Democrats has widened: in 2000, 71% of Republicans were married compared to 61% of Democrats. That gap has shifted slightly in recent years to 65% and 50%. Although both groups have seen declines in marriage rates, Republicans still tend to marry at higher rates.
Regarding fidelity, Republicans report a higher likelihood of remaining faithful. Interestingly, while there is a general decline in fidelity norms, it appears more pronounced among Democrats, whose values have shifted leftward, as noted by Matthew Yglesis, aligning with the cultural shift known as the Great Awokening.
You’ve pointed out that elite progressives have grown skeptical of marriage. Should conservatives be concerned about influential figures like Musk dismissing this institution?
Absolutely. The Republican Party has become a broad coalition encompassing various beliefs. Recent years have seen the emergence of Barstool conservatives, nationalists, and an anti-woke coalition responding to perceived excesses from the left. The challenge is for these diverse groups to coexist, especially when figures like Elon Musk show little concern for traditional family values, in contrast to those like JD Vance, who uphold a more conventional Republican outlook.
I believe there is a growing awareness among individuals like Musk of the family formation crisis, and there could be opportunities for bipartisan cooperation on family policies, particularly in addressing housing affordability.
Do you foresee a potential split within Trump’s coalition of Barstool and Bible study supporters?
That largely hinges on the actions of the Democratic Party. If Democrats are willing to moderate on issues like transgender athletes in women's sports and other controversial cultural topics, it may affect the dynamics of conservative coalitions.
Sanya Singh contributed to this report for TROIB News
Some, including former Rep. Matt Gaetz, celebrated the “incredible genetics” of the newborn. In contrast, others expressed outrage; former Turning Point USA staffer Jon Root stated, “Much of conservatism is filled with godless, hypocrites who couldn’t care less about conserving traditional family values.”
To explore the possible rift within Donald Trump’s Barstool bros and Bible study coalition, PMG Magazine spoke with Brad Wilcox, a conservative sociologist from the University of Virginia and a strong proponent of marriage as an institution.
Wilcox highlighted Musk's role as a prominent advocate for pro-natalist initiatives in Silicon Valley and the new right. However, he emphasized that while the desire for more children is positive, the absence of a two-parent household can hinder a child’s well-being, regardless of the father's wealth.
“Wealthy kids who are raised in non-intact families are more likely to flounder than wealthy kids who are raised in an intact family,” he remarked.
The following discussion has been condensed for clarity and length.
After the announcement of Musk's latest child, you expressed on X, “Happy that Musk loves kids. Unhappy that he doesn’t realize how much marriage matters for them.” Can you elaborate on that?
Research shows that children are significantly more likely to thrive in various domains—such as graduating from college, experiencing less depression, and avoiding legal troubles—when they are raised in stable, married households. I commend Musk for advocating pro-natalism, which encourages a society that appreciates and supports child-rearing. However, I believe Musk has yet to recognize the crucial role marriage plays in stabilizing family life and fostering a more equitable society.
With the recent pro-natalist movement primarily centered on the right and in Silicon Valley, could this be at odds with the pro-family agenda?
Indeed, there appears to be a faction within pro-natalism that is less focused on the circumstances of a child’s conception. In contrast, the pro-family movement emphasizes raising children in the context of marriage. The declining marriage and fertility rates are concerning; married Americans tend to have more children than their single counterparts. To boost the birth rate in the U.S., making marriage more appealing and accessible should be a priority. Some Silicon Valley proponents of pro-natalism, however, seem indifferent to the family context in which children are born.
The news surrounding Ashley St. Clair seems to highlight this conflict sharply.
Congressman Matt Gaetz commented on the situation, suggesting that the child would possess good genetics. This indicates that some on the right may prioritize heredity over the familial environment in which children are raised. Some believe that possessing the "right genes" or ample wealth is sufficient for a child's success, as reflected in reactions to my statements on Twitter. While wealth is important, the evidence clearly shows that even affluent children from non-intact families are more likely to struggle than those from intact homes. The presence of two married parents is a significant factor for a child’s development.
How has the definition of pro-family evolved within the GOP since the rise of social conservatives like James Dobson in the '70s and '80s?
For social conservatives, the emergence of the new right has led to a greater focus on economic issues alongside social ones. It's not just about legislation surrounding abortion or marriage; it’s crucial to address the economic well-being of families to strengthen and stabilize working middle-class households.
Has Donald Trump’s approach to marital fidelity impacted perceptions of marriage and fatherhood?
I don't believe so. As I’ve discussed in previous works, marriage has indeed been declining in the U.S. over recent decades. However, looking at trends, the marriage gap between Republicans and Democrats has widened: in 2000, 71% of Republicans were married compared to 61% of Democrats. That gap has shifted slightly in recent years to 65% and 50%. Although both groups have seen declines in marriage rates, Republicans still tend to marry at higher rates.
Regarding fidelity, Republicans report a higher likelihood of remaining faithful. Interestingly, while there is a general decline in fidelity norms, it appears more pronounced among Democrats, whose values have shifted leftward, as noted by Matthew Yglesis, aligning with the cultural shift known as the Great Awokening.
You’ve pointed out that elite progressives have grown skeptical of marriage. Should conservatives be concerned about influential figures like Musk dismissing this institution?
Absolutely. The Republican Party has become a broad coalition encompassing various beliefs. Recent years have seen the emergence of Barstool conservatives, nationalists, and an anti-woke coalition responding to perceived excesses from the left. The challenge is for these diverse groups to coexist, especially when figures like Elon Musk show little concern for traditional family values, in contrast to those like JD Vance, who uphold a more conventional Republican outlook.
I believe there is a growing awareness among individuals like Musk of the family formation crisis, and there could be opportunities for bipartisan cooperation on family policies, particularly in addressing housing affordability.
Do you foresee a potential split within Trump’s coalition of Barstool and Bible study supporters?
That largely hinges on the actions of the Democratic Party. If Democrats are willing to moderate on issues like transgender athletes in women's sports and other controversial cultural topics, it may affect the dynamics of conservative coalitions.
Sanya Singh contributed to this report for TROIB News
