4 ms·

Or, perhaps we (the United States) as a society shouldn't be stressing out mothers in the critical first year by shoving them back to work after, what, three mo

Or, perhaps we (the United States) as a society shouldn't be stressing out mothers in the critical first year by shoving them back to work after, what, three months (if you have good bennies)? Or completely drain our social welfare system and establish a demand-starved economy with wealth inequality and a draconian health care system that leaves all families stressed and overworked? Or we can go with your bullshit predetermined social darwinianism.

jayajay 10y ago
trigger warning, ideas may be involved that do not agree with conventional liberal attitudes What would you suggest a society of N = 620 people should do if there are 20 infertile women, and the resource state permits that only 600 of them can make it until the next resource drop? Should they let fate determine who the 20 deaths will go to? Or should they be smart? Or is being smart here too emotionally hard for you? At some point, engineering society is the difference between having a society and not having one. There may have been many tribes and villages that perished in history because organisms did not understand how to engineer viable populations (e.g. the difference between sending an old woman to gather berries instead of a younger fertile woman). For example, you would not let someone become "trans" because they don't like being a woman, if your population size is too small. They'll have to suck it up and copulate. As will people who are gay and asexual. There is no room for these modern concepts when the population size is critical. But, this is too emotionally difficult to understand. We have been pampered with "rights" in large N society. We won't understand this until we hit a resource critical stage and we are forced to make harder decisions about our population. If you have been to civil court, you will start to wonder about which humans should stop reproducing first. Parents who beat their children, verbally abuse them, and use drugs will likely be the first to go. At some point, a decision will need to be made and our morals will be redefined to do what is necessary. Until then, you can be happy that you will not live to see such a time. You and I are so damn lucky. Someone someday will be making those decisions, and whoever they are, they deserve our respect, not our dismissal, disapproval, and hostility.
- twblalock 10y ago
  > trigger warning, ideas may be involved that do not agree with conventional liberal attitudes > Or is being smart here too emotionally hard for you? When you write stuff like this, you are insulting people for no good reason.
  - jayajay 10y ago
    Trigger warning well justified.
- thesumofall 10y ago
  This has been tried by many regimes and has proven to be disastrous - especially for the children involved. Take a look at this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensborn https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensborn
  - jayajay 10y ago
    I'm not talking about "racial purity", I am talking about minimizing the probability of a critical population dwindling to zero. These are very different things. That you would immediately put words into my mouth reflects what is in your heads. Do you guys really think you can avoid population engineering when we reach critical values for the population count, e.g. N = 2, 3, 100, 500, 1000, ... Do you really think that careful consideration of breeding will not be made for critical populations? How can you think that the same rules that govern large N societies or resource-unsaturated societies also apply to societies whose population counts are critical or societies who are oversaturated in resource consumption? It's all fun, games, and comparing everyone you disagree with to Hitler until our lives depend on it. We never know what the future will bring us. Maybe one day, when I'm dead and you guys are lucky enough to survive a nuclear catastrophe, you will actually remember these offensive words. Fuck, have I watched too much televsion!
    - pjc50 10y ago
      N is near 10 billion, which makes reasoning about N=2 kind of irrelevant. > Fuck, have I watched too much televsion! Yes.
njloof 10y ago
One of the reasons I'm glad I moved from the States to Canada. It's remarkable how once you get used to the idea of a year of parent leave (partly shareable between mother and father), business adjusts to it like any other constraint.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

jayajay 10y ago

trigger warning, ideas may be involved that do not agree with conventional liberal attitudes What would you suggest a society of N = 620 people should do if there are 20 infertile women, and the resource state permits that only 600 of them can make it until the next resource drop? Should they let fate determine who the 20 deaths will go to? Or should they be smart? Or is being smart here too emotionally hard for you? At some point, engineering society is the difference between having a society and not having one. There may have been many tribes and villages that perished in history because organisms did not understand how to engineer viable populations (e.g. the difference between sending an old woman to gather berries instead of a younger fertile woman). For example, you would not let someone become "trans" because they don't like being a woman, if your population size is too small. They'll have to suck it up and copulate. As will people who are gay and asexual. There is no room for these modern concepts when the population size is critical. But, this is too emotionally difficult to understand. We have been pampered with "rights" in large N society. We won't understand this until we hit a resource critical stage and we are forced to make harder decisions about our population. If you have been to civil court, you will start to wonder about which humans should stop reproducing first. Parents who beat their children, verbally abuse them, and use drugs will likely be the first to go. At some point, a decision will need to be made and our morals will be redefined to do what is necessary. Until then, you can be happy that you will not live to see such a time. You and I are so damn lucky. Someone someday will be making those decisions, and whoever they are, they deserve our respect, not our dismissal, disapproval, and hostility.

twblalock 10y ago
> trigger warning, ideas may be involved that do not agree with conventional liberal attitudes > Or is being smart here too emotionally hard for you? When you write stuff like this, you are insulting people for no good reason.
- jayajay 10y ago
  Trigger warning well justified.
thesumofall 10y ago
This has been tried by many regimes and has proven to be disastrous - especially for the children involved. Take a look at this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensborn https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensborn
- jayajay 10y ago
  I'm not talking about "racial purity", I am talking about minimizing the probability of a critical population dwindling to zero. These are very different things. That you would immediately put words into my mouth reflects what is in your heads. Do you guys really think you can avoid population engineering when we reach critical values for the population count, e.g. N = 2, 3, 100, 500, 1000, ... Do you really think that careful consideration of breeding will not be made for critical populations? How can you think that the same rules that govern large N societies or resource-unsaturated societies also apply to societies whose population counts are critical or societies who are oversaturated in resource consumption? It's all fun, games, and comparing everyone you disagree with to Hitler until our lives depend on it. We never know what the future will bring us. Maybe one day, when I'm dead and you guys are lucky enough to survive a nuclear catastrophe, you will actually remember these offensive words. Fuck, have I watched too much televsion!
  - pjc50 10y ago
    N is near 10 billion, which makes reasoning about N=2 kind of irrelevant. > Fuck, have I watched too much televsion! Yes.

njloof 10y ago

One of the reasons I'm glad I moved from the States to Canada. It's remarkable how once you get used to the idea of a year of parent leave (partly shareable between mother and father), business adjusts to it like any other constraint.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]