5 ms·

I find t hard to believe anyone genuinely doesn’t want to. I suggest they’re wrong about their feelings. They only exist because every ancestor of theirs has ch

I find t hard to believe anyone genuinely doesn’t want to. I suggest they’re wrong about their feelings. They only exist because every ancestor of theirs has children. Every person who exists today shares that quality. It seems like a critical part of life to have kids or a kid at least.

LandR 9y ago
Guy here, I genuinely don't want kids and honestly can't see that ever changing.
- tonyedgecombe 9y ago
  I remember saying that to myself ...
malnourish 9y ago
We haven't had to make decisions solely based on survival and bloodline continuation for a long time. We're also capable of meta-cognition, so even if some realize that they may want children, they might reason that it's an infeasible idea. Further, some people simply would rather spend the time for themselves. Personally, I grew up in a below poverty line single parent home and would like to spend time and money for myself and my SO now that I'm doing OK financially.
jchw 9y ago
Your logic here reminds me of this Onion article: https://www.theonion.com/report-finds-children-of-parents-often-become-parents-t-1819576757 https://www.theonion.com/report-finds-children-of-parents-of... Nonetheless, common misconception that everyone on earth is having children. Nearly half of women in the U.S. have never had children. The exponential population growth that would follow from every single adult having at least one child every generation would be insane and absolutely unsustainable. It seems like it could be a natural response to crowding in populations that people stop having children, or it could just be a result of people feeling uncertain about their future. Not sure, but either way, I know for an absolute undeniable fact that right now, I could not want anything less than having a child. I'd rather go to prison. Besides, not everyone should be a parent. There's plenty of criminals with mental disabilities that make them hugely unfit parents even if they wanted to be. The world really would be a better place if said people simply chose not to procreate.
- trothamel 9y ago
  Isn't it perfectly sustainable if adults have, on average, two children per generation? (Since each child has two parents, you can account for them twice.) That case (<2) is the case for most of the developed world.
  - jchw 9y ago
    No - because the U.S. life expectancy is somewhere in the ball park of 80 years, whereas adulthood is reached in a forth of that. So before the average parent dies off, they will have seen around 2 or 3 generations of adults who are all having children, and their children having children. Also, in the U.S.'s case, you have to consider externalities like immigration, and the fact that some areas are already massively overpopulated. Though I was definitely wrong to say 'exponential growth' since that isn't actually true.
    - sremani 9y ago
      USA is one of the most under-populated country in the world. Even its densest populated areas in the North East is still "expansive". From arable land to person ratio, US has lot of room to grow. The over-population problem is not of US, or even not of even Americas (North and South) they are pretty much stabilized at around 1.1 Billion. The coming population "boom" is in Africa which will likely grow from 1 Billion to 4 Billion.
      - jchw 9y ago
        I don't think at all that the U.S. is overpopulated, but I think that there are areas of the U.S. that are severely overpopulated. The distribution of the population isn't equal, most people would not be able to thrive at all in rural areas.
      - jdietrich 9y ago
        Americans use such a grossly disproportionate share of the world's resources that the US is drastically overpopulated compared to African nations. We could fit the entire world's population into a city the size of Texas at a perfectly liveable density, but we can't magic up more oil or copper or neodymium. We have enough arable land to easily feed 20 billion people, but not if we squander 95% of those calories by raising cattle. Population growth is a total non-issue if we're halfway sensible about how we use finite resources. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956247806063978 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956247806063978 http://data.footprintnetwork.org/ http://data.footprintnetwork.org/
auggierose 9y ago
I first downvoted you, but then undid that, because what you believe or not is really none of my business.
darrenf 9y ago
That you find it hard to believe does not make it any less true.
- hateduser2 9y ago
  This can be used to rePly to any comment anywhere.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
That's like saying homosexuals can't be real because all of their ancestors clearly had heterosexual sex.
ionised 9y ago
A critical part of life would suggest to me that you die without it. Food and water are critical. Kids are not.
- Chaebixi 9y ago
  > A critical part of life would suggest to me that you die without it. Food and water are critical. Kids are not. It depends on your perspective. For instance, if all your cells decided to totally stop reproducing one day, you'd die eventually.
  - ionised 9y ago
    No it doesn't. Kids are not analogous to bodily cells and you will not drop dead by deciding not to have any.
    - Chaebixi 9y ago
      I said: >> It depends on your perspective. You didn't change yours. If too many people choose to not have kids, their community dies. So, if you change your perspective to the community then childlessness starts to sound like: >>> A critical part of life would suggest to me that you die without it.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
monktastic1 9y ago
"I find t hard to believe anyone genuinely doesn’t want to. I suggest they’re wrong about their feelings." Consider that this is a failure of cognitive empathy on your part. When other people don't feel the same way we do, it's natural to believe that ours is the only reasonable perspective, and maybe even that it's our duty to enforce it on others. But it is possible to develop empathy, and discover that maybe we don't actually have access to all the data like we thought.
- hateduser2 9y ago
  Are there wrong povs? Your comment addresses nothing specific about mine.
  - monktastic1 9y ago
    Essentially all of everyone's ancestors had straight sex; is this good evidence against the existence of people who dislike straight sex? The point is that your finding it hard to believe that someone feels a particular way is very poor evidence that they do not feel that way, especially when applied to a population. We know that longtime meditators are able to distinguish micro-expressions in others that reveal emotions that they might not even realize they are having. And they are experts in identifying their own emotions as well. Do you have any such qualifications? If not, then your disbelief in other people's claims about their experience is likely much stronger evidence of your own difficulty empathizing.
    - hateduser2 9y ago
      If people can be wrong about their feelings then that seems like good evidence, save for some biological disorder, yes. I suppose you’re saying I can’t make this argument unless I’m a master meditator? And what if I don’t believe in meditation the way you do?
      - monktastic1 9y ago
        Your argument seems to be that all people who believe they have this feeling are mistaken about it. The fact that people can be wrong about their feelings is not good evidence that everyone with a particular feeling is wrong about it. It's usually much better evidence that the person making the claim is not yet able to take on a particular perspective that exists in others.
greenshackle3 9y ago
> It seems like a critical part of life to have kids or a kid at least. Please, do go on cargo-culting your life. Some of us will be over there, trying to find our own paths.

LandR 9y ago

Guy here, I genuinely don't want kids and honestly can't see that ever changing.

tonyedgecombe 9y ago
I remember saying that to myself ...

malnourish 9y ago

We haven't had to make decisions solely based on survival and bloodline continuation for a long time. We're also capable of meta-cognition, so even if some realize that they may want children, they might reason that it's an infeasible idea. Further, some people simply would rather spend the time for themselves. Personally, I grew up in a below poverty line single parent home and would like to spend time and money for myself and my SO now that I'm doing OK financially.

jchw 9y ago

Your logic here reminds me of this Onion article: https://www.theonion.com/report-finds-children-of-parents-often-become-parents-t-1819576757 https://www.theonion.com/report-finds-children-of-parents-of... Nonetheless, common misconception that everyone on earth is having children. Nearly half of women in the U.S. have never had children. The exponential population growth that would follow from every single adult having at least one child every generation would be insane and absolutely unsustainable. It seems like it could be a natural response to crowding in populations that people stop having children, or it could just be a result of people feeling uncertain about their future. Not sure, but either way, I know for an absolute undeniable fact that right now, I could not want anything less than having a child. I'd rather go to prison. Besides, not everyone should be a parent. There's plenty of criminals with mental disabilities that make them hugely unfit parents even if they wanted to be. The world really would be a better place if said people simply chose not to procreate.

trothamel 9y ago
Isn't it perfectly sustainable if adults have, on average, two children per generation? (Since each child has two parents, you can account for them twice.) That case (<2) is the case for most of the developed world.
- jchw 9y ago
  No - because the U.S. life expectancy is somewhere in the ball park of 80 years, whereas adulthood is reached in a forth of that. So before the average parent dies off, they will have seen around 2 or 3 generations of adults who are all having children, and their children having children. Also, in the U.S.'s case, you have to consider externalities like immigration, and the fact that some areas are already massively overpopulated. Though I was definitely wrong to say 'exponential growth' since that isn't actually true.
  - sremani 9y ago
    USA is one of the most under-populated country in the world. Even its densest populated areas in the North East is still "expansive". From arable land to person ratio, US has lot of room to grow. The over-population problem is not of US, or even not of even Americas (North and South) they are pretty much stabilized at around 1.1 Billion. The coming population "boom" is in Africa which will likely grow from 1 Billion to 4 Billion.
    - jchw 9y ago
      I don't think at all that the U.S. is overpopulated, but I think that there are areas of the U.S. that are severely overpopulated. The distribution of the population isn't equal, most people would not be able to thrive at all in rural areas.
    - jdietrich 9y ago
      Americans use such a grossly disproportionate share of the world's resources that the US is drastically overpopulated compared to African nations. We could fit the entire world's population into a city the size of Texas at a perfectly liveable density, but we can't magic up more oil or copper or neodymium. We have enough arable land to easily feed 20 billion people, but not if we squander 95% of those calories by raising cattle. Population growth is a total non-issue if we're halfway sensible about how we use finite resources. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956247806063978 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956247806063978 http://data.footprintnetwork.org/ http://data.footprintnetwork.org/

auggierose 9y ago

I first downvoted you, but then undid that, because what you believe or not is really none of my business.

darrenf 9y ago

That you find it hard to believe does not make it any less true.

hateduser2 9y ago
This can be used to rePly to any comment anywhere.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago

That's like saying homosexuals can't be real because all of their ancestors clearly had heterosexual sex.

ionised 9y ago

A critical part of life would suggest to me that you die without it. Food and water are critical. Kids are not.

Chaebixi 9y ago
> A critical part of life would suggest to me that you die without it. Food and water are critical. Kids are not. It depends on your perspective. For instance, if all your cells decided to totally stop reproducing one day, you'd die eventually.
- ionised 9y ago
  No it doesn't. Kids are not analogous to bodily cells and you will not drop dead by deciding not to have any.
  - Chaebixi 9y ago
    I said: >> It depends on your perspective. You didn't change yours. If too many people choose to not have kids, their community dies. So, if you change your perspective to the community then childlessness starts to sound like: >>> A critical part of life would suggest to me that you die without it.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

monktastic1 9y ago

"I find t hard to believe anyone genuinely doesn’t want to. I suggest they’re wrong about their feelings." Consider that this is a failure of cognitive empathy on your part. When other people don't feel the same way we do, it's natural to believe that ours is the only reasonable perspective, and maybe even that it's our duty to enforce it on others. But it is possible to develop empathy, and discover that maybe we don't actually have access to all the data like we thought.

hateduser2 9y ago
Are there wrong povs? Your comment addresses nothing specific about mine.
- monktastic1 9y ago
  Essentially all of everyone's ancestors had straight sex; is this good evidence against the existence of people who dislike straight sex? The point is that your finding it hard to believe that someone feels a particular way is very poor evidence that they do not feel that way, especially when applied to a population. We know that longtime meditators are able to distinguish micro-expressions in others that reveal emotions that they might not even realize they are having. And they are experts in identifying their own emotions as well. Do you have any such qualifications? If not, then your disbelief in other people's claims about their experience is likely much stronger evidence of your own difficulty empathizing.
  - hateduser2 9y ago
    If people can be wrong about their feelings then that seems like good evidence, save for some biological disorder, yes. I suppose you’re saying I can’t make this argument unless I’m a master meditator? And what if I don’t believe in meditation the way you do?
    - monktastic1 9y ago
      Your argument seems to be that all people who believe they have this feeling are mistaken about it. The fact that people can be wrong about their feelings is not good evidence that everyone with a particular feeling is wrong about it. It's usually much better evidence that the person making the claim is not yet able to take on a particular perspective that exists in others.

greenshackle3 9y ago

> It seems like a critical part of life to have kids or a kid at least. Please, do go on cargo-culting your life. Some of us will be over there, trying to find our own paths.