4 ms·

If you tried to take care of a baby or a toddler, you would see that it's like a second job in terms of how much time and effort it requires from you every day.

If you tried to take care of a baby or a toddler, you would see that it's like a second job in terms of how much time and effort it requires from you every day. Now imagine yourself doing all that x2 amount of work, would you ask for help or extra accommodations? It's not a model, a mental experiment, or a charitable action. It's the x2 amount of work you need to do, day and night, 365 days a year.

nicbou 6y ago
I am well aware of that. This is precisely why I chose not have children.
- ethanwillis 6y ago
  Why should society bear the cost of you wanting to work less than everyone else?
  - nicbou 6y ago
    Bear what cost exactly?
    - cloverich 6y ago
      Extinction is the implication. I agree but its a bit of a boring argument. How about: Society is no social contract, you cannot really choose to leave society. Instead I'd argue, you are required to contribute to society, whether you like it or not. Helping raise children -- whether you have them or not -- is a part of that requirement. I can promise you, whatever subsidies go to parents, $$, time, and effort are still very very far in the favor of the childless.
      - shock 6y ago
        The human race is not an endangered species. We are not in danger of going extinct due to lack of people.
        kochikame 6y ago
        And yet we need people to have children
        jelliclesfarm 6y ago
        People can have children without congratulating themselves for a sacrifice well delivered. Newsflash: there is NO village that will raise the kids. Families raise kids. Not society. The trade off for the hassle of procreating is making sure that ones genetic pool continues. That’s how we evolved. Kinship for species only extends so far and not much at all when there is parental entitlement.
        edfletcher_t137 6y ago
        > People can have children without congratulating themselves for a sacrifice well delivered ... Kinship for species only extends so far and not much at all when there is parental entitlement. This, 1000%.
        betterunix2 6y ago
        "there is NO village that will raise the kids. Families raise kids. Not society." What do you think nannies, daycare centers, and schools are doing? It is exceedingly rare for a child to be raised from birth to adulthood by just their close family. "That’s how we evolved" BS. We evolved to live in groups of 100-200 people (i.e. villages). Primates generally live in such groups (size varies by species) and will generally help with raising the young within the group, often with some form of social structure determining which group member is helping or being helped (e.g. lower-ranking females will act as "nannies" for higher-ranking females prior to mating and having their own offspring). Moreover, humans evolved a many-to-many mating pattern, so the "village" was the smallest unit of genetic closeness until extremely recently (and even so, people often break the social rules and have adulterous sex, and often change partners multiple times in their lifetime, resulting in a large number of half-siblings).
        jelliclesfarm 6y ago

nicbou 6y ago

I am well aware of that. This is precisely why I chose not have children.

ethanwillis 6y ago
Why should society bear the cost of you wanting to work less than everyone else?
- nicbou 6y ago
  Bear what cost exactly?
  - cloverich 6y ago
    Extinction is the implication. I agree but its a bit of a boring argument. How about: Society is no social contract, you cannot really choose to leave society. Instead I'd argue, you are required to contribute to society, whether you like it or not. Helping raise children -- whether you have them or not -- is a part of that requirement. I can promise you, whatever subsidies go to parents, $$, time, and effort are still very very far in the favor of the childless.
    - shock 6y ago
      The human race is not an endangered species. We are not in danger of going extinct due to lack of people.
      - kochikame 6y ago
        And yet we need people to have children
        jelliclesfarm 6y ago
        People can have children without congratulating themselves for a sacrifice well delivered. Newsflash: there is NO village that will raise the kids. Families raise kids. Not society. The trade off for the hassle of procreating is making sure that ones genetic pool continues. That’s how we evolved. Kinship for species only extends so far and not much at all when there is parental entitlement.
        edfletcher_t137 6y ago
        > People can have children without congratulating themselves for a sacrifice well delivered ... Kinship for species only extends so far and not much at all when there is parental entitlement. This, 1000%.
        betterunix2 6y ago
        "there is NO village that will raise the kids. Families raise kids. Not society." What do you think nannies, daycare centers, and schools are doing? It is exceedingly rare for a child to be raised from birth to adulthood by just their close family. "That’s how we evolved" BS. We evolved to live in groups of 100-200 people (i.e. villages). Primates generally live in such groups (size varies by species) and will generally help with raising the young within the group, often with some form of social structure determining which group member is helping or being helped (e.g. lower-ranking females will act as "nannies" for higher-ranking females prior to mating and having their own offspring). Moreover, humans evolved a many-to-many mating pattern, so the "village" was the smallest unit of genetic closeness until extremely recently (and even so, people often break the social rules and have adulterous sex, and often change partners multiple times in their lifetime, resulting in a large number of half-siblings).
        jelliclesfarm 6y ago