3 ms·

This is bullshit. (I might've agreed before I had kids). My kids are the only joy I've ever known, I mean I love my wife lol, but not as much as my boys. Nothin

This is bullshit. (I might've agreed before I had kids). My kids are the only joy I've ever known, I mean I love my wife lol, but not as much as my boys. Nothing makes life worth living as much as my kids, I wouldn't trade that for anything and I don't think one can truly know what it means to be alive until you feel the pride of a mom/dad when your kid learns to read or do something amazing for the first time. I say this as an agnostic (ex-mormon), anarcho-socialist(i.e. left-libertarian NOT libertarian party - more aligned with DSA than lib party), global warming believer who believes thorougly in masking-up and calling out any business who refuses to enforce it. In other words, I'm as left and anti-authoritarian as you get on the political compass... This only matters, because you just assume the people "for families" is your evangelist types and right-wingers, not true. We almost didn't have kids (took 14 years at age 38 we finally had our first) thanks to infertility. I was ready to say oh well, you win some/lose some. My wife who is still mormon but not very active felt that - her whole purpose was motherhood, so we kept trying. I'm so glad I didn't give up on that... I've had anxiety/depression/etc the past few years. My boys are what keeps me from going over the deep-end, and made me get therapy and lose weight. Gay, Trans, Childless, Polygamy, Monogamy, Polyamory, whatever your lifestyle I say do your thing, and always have. I've told church leaders to go to hell for bashing people that didn't fit their idea of "family values" (i.e. lgbtq), don't bash those of us who family life is part of our identity. Edit: That said, I once wanted like 8 kids (cause that's what mormons do?), now I'm happy with 2, though I wish we could've had a girl, but that ship's passed (health reasons), so I'll be happy w/ my boys or maybe we'll adopt.... but as I've gotten older, I think maybe some people are a bit too...ambitious on child-rearing. Like the Duggars... 2-4 should be plenty and economical, I think moderation is a virtual and a moral tenet.

Daho0n 6y ago
Biologically programmed joy. Good or bad? You decide.
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  Well, you ever eat anything but soylent or slim fast or dog food? I mean, why would you? That would maybe increase your endorphines or joy-centers and be less robotic. I guess that is bad? Getting any sort of joy at all? When a child gives you a hug, even if it's not yours (we fostered a decade ago), it does something to your over-all well-being, does it matter if it's "real" or just "pre-programming" isn't everything we do some sort of pre-programming? I mean there's very high odds we're living in a simulation if you ask some people... I mean the odds are very high we run our own super simulation someday, and if we do we end up creating a sentient civ like us inside it, which would mean -- what are the chances someone else did and that's why we exist?
  - Daho0n 6y ago
    Well, it's a long and difficult discussion with cons and pros for both sides. I think it does say a lot that women who choose not to have children risk getting harassed, ridiculed, ostracised etc. I read some days ago that more and more women publicly acknowledge that they regret having children (super taboo) which is a healthy sign IMO (though maybe not so for the children). I know you aren't totally serious on the eating dogfood but if we only followed our wants and needs we would all be like in the Disney movie Wall-e, stuffing our face and masturbating all the time. Learning not to be a slave to one's needs ("needs") is healthy. I don't see how this is different with children. We have humans enough and definitely enough children who needs a home. Maybe a simulated child will be a thing in the future.

Daho0n 6y ago

Biologically programmed joy. Good or bad? You decide.

gremlinsinc 6y ago
Well, you ever eat anything but soylent or slim fast or dog food? I mean, why would you? That would maybe increase your endorphines or joy-centers and be less robotic. I guess that is bad? Getting any sort of joy at all? When a child gives you a hug, even if it's not yours (we fostered a decade ago), it does something to your over-all well-being, does it matter if it's "real" or just "pre-programming" isn't everything we do some sort of pre-programming? I mean there's very high odds we're living in a simulation if you ask some people... I mean the odds are very high we run our own super simulation someday, and if we do we end up creating a sentient civ like us inside it, which would mean -- what are the chances someone else did and that's why we exist?
- Daho0n 6y ago
  Well, it's a long and difficult discussion with cons and pros for both sides. I think it does say a lot that women who choose not to have children risk getting harassed, ridiculed, ostracised etc. I read some days ago that more and more women publicly acknowledge that they regret having children (super taboo) which is a healthy sign IMO (though maybe not so for the children). I know you aren't totally serious on the eating dogfood but if we only followed our wants and needs we would all be like in the Disney movie Wall-e, stuffing our face and masturbating all the time. Learning not to be a slave to one's needs ("needs") is healthy. I don't see how this is different with children. We have humans enough and definitely enough children who needs a home. Maybe a simulated child will be a thing in the future.