3 ms·
How many of us who didn't want children have siblings that had children in our place? The drive for reproduction wins, even without considering that without the
by ASalazarMX 5y ago
How many of us who didn't want children have siblings that had children in our place? The drive for reproduction wins, even without considering that without the drive for reproduction of our parents we wouldn't even exist.
More so, the drive for reproduction isn't necessarily about kids, but sexuality. Sex sells. A big chunk of our civilization is about food and sex.
- jl6 5y agoNot having children is very common and always has been, and yet seems to me a somewhat radical decision when you think that you represent an unbroken line of reproduction going back 4 billion years, and somehow that line ends with you.
- hypertele-Xii 5y agoIf you fail to reproduce (voluntarily or otherwise), only a small mutation in a giant cross-breeding pool is lost, not some great bloodline of ancestry. Provided, of course, that you're not literally the last living descendant of some genetic bottleneck. The total genetic consciousness of humanity cares for your particular genes about as much as you care for a single hair or cell of skin falling off the greater whole.
- ASalazarMX 5y agoA branch. A tiny, insignificant, microscopic branch is ended when one doesn't reproduce, the main line keeps going strong.