6 ms·

Yes, but. If you’re looking for an excuse to not have a kid, you’ll find one. There’s a cultural element too.

by dcow 3y ago

chrisandchris 3y ago
Yes, sure. I'm not sure I want to give up my landhouse for a six-story building in which I share a place with hundreds... just because of "having children".
- sambazi 3y ago
  just be glad your parents chose to err on the side of life
  - Thiez 3y ago
    Honestly, why?
  - the_gipsy 3y ago
    Is this some kind of pyramid scheme?
    - sambazi 3y ago
      exactly :)
    - rs999gti 3y ago
      Yes social programs are pyramid schemes and babies and immigrants are the new money in that scheme.
      - sambazi 3y ago
        population growth was always been a factor in faction power. debatable if that has changed
- petre 3y ago
  Actually living in a building with families is way more pleasant than living with student neighbours. Those are almost always a nuisance.
lnsru 3y ago
Don’t forget, that having kids is really hard. They cost time, money and require support from living environment. There must be kindergartens with sane opening times, not until 2 PM. There must be supportive employers allowing home office on 2-3 days. Especially when kids are sick. Spoiler alert: before school kids are sick at least once a month. Housing is a real problem, but one can have kids in cheaper area too. There is not need to live in super expensive big city center. Having no kids is simple very easy life without any bigger problems.
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  This really is the crux of the issue, I've found. There is, at least for me and many others, simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids, beyond the nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment, which is not necessarily always the case (postpartum depression or the lack of people who openly talk about regretting having kids as that's not socially acceptable).
  - apsurd 3y ago
    no other reason to have kids? we're biologically programmed to have kids. i don't have kids myself, but I'm shocked at how intellectual you're coloring is of the situation. Procreating is our only purpose, as a life form.
    - satvikpendem 3y ago
      For many species, having offspring is a no-op. The Luna moth literally has no mouth (and I'm not sure if it must scream, either), so when it procreates, it creates yet more offspring that also have no mouths. The moth does not do anything while it exists beyond procreating, as there is nothing it can do; in other words, it existing is simply a no-op, in the computer science sense. Therefore, even if procreating is our only purpose, we can still ponder what the point of doing so actually is. Since we are intellectual beings, we can decide whether it's a logical decision or not, so that we don't end up no-ops either. I've seen friends and family members where kids are born to teen parents, who then have kids as teens, who then have kids as teens, and so on. Those are the equivalent of the moths, those teens have not had the chance to grow and achieve more, they were simply procreating to procreate, and they could not get out of poverty as their entire life was only dedicated to sustenance. Personally, their lives were very sad to me. Finally, do not fall for the fallacy of appealing to nature, as just because something is natural does not mean it is moral. Many animals will forcefully mate with one another or eat their prey alive, that does not mean that humans must do the same. So too for procreation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
somedude895 3y ago
I agree. Most people I know who don‘t want to have kids it’s primarily because they don‘t want to give up their lifestyle. Having a child means less money, less free time and less individualism. Our priorities have changed but some want to be able to have everything without compromise.
- IshKebab 3y ago
  That's true, but you can't just dismiss the fact that modern life (primarily the fact that both parents work) makes having children extremely difficult. It's getting better - especially since the pandemic - but most jobs are not remotely flexible enough to deal with school hours or sick children. Nursery is insanely expensive in most countries. I really think a mortgage style option would make a lot of sense here because it's a ton of money for a short time. Or, just make it free like some countries do (and the Tories pretended to do in the UK). Life still assumes only one parent will work. Our school regularly schedules meetings and events in the middle of the day at short notice and expects that will be fine.
  - perrygeo 3y ago
    This is something that child-free people fail to understand. It's not just about priorities and "scheduling time" to be a parent. That would be great but it's a fantasy. Reality is being on-call 24/7 to deal with the dozens of logistical problems that come up. It's not just the number of hours but their distribution across the day, the fact that you've got to coordinate 2 work schedules + n children's calendars, and the fact that parents largely don't have any control over the agenda. Does this impact parent's earning potential? Absolutely. I cannot find a single day on my calendar where my wife and I had an solid block of 8 hours to focus on work. It just doesn't happen. Thankfully I have flexible work hours otherwise it would be literally impossible. As it stands, it's merely exhausting and unsustainable.
    - hyperbovine 3y ago
      That has always been true in some form or fashion though, what you are describing is not a uniquely modern problem. To me the x-factor that makes child rearing especially challenging is lack of a support network. Mobility has made it routine to live hundreds or thousands of miles from your family in a way that did not happen before fairly recently. For most of us, our network consists only of other couples with young children who are all going through the same thing.
rs999gti 3y ago
The OP mentioned some women want careers and that is fine. But what about women who want families or want both? What can western societies do to encourage these women to have at least 2 children? We need taxpayers or these social benefits will be gone in a century or sooner.

Yes, but. If you’re looking for an excuse to not have a kid, you’ll find one. There’s a cultural element too.

by dcow 3y ago

Yes, but. If you’re looking for an excuse to not have a kid, you’ll find one. There’s a cultural element too.

Yes, sure. I'm not sure I want to give up my landhouse for a six-story building in which I share a place with hundreds... just because of "having children".

sambazi 3y ago
just be glad your parents chose to err on the side of life
- Thiez 3y ago
  Honestly, why?
- the_gipsy 3y ago
  Is this some kind of pyramid scheme?
  - sambazi 3y ago
    exactly :)
  - rs999gti 3y ago
    Yes social programs are pyramid schemes and babies and immigrants are the new money in that scheme.
    - sambazi 3y ago
      population growth was always been a factor in faction power. debatable if that has changed
petre 3y ago
Actually living in a building with families is way more pleasant than living with student neighbours. Those are almost always a nuisance.

lnsru 3y ago

Don’t forget, that having kids is really hard. They cost time, money and require support from living environment. There must be kindergartens with sane opening times, not until 2 PM. There must be supportive employers allowing home office on 2-3 days. Especially when kids are sick. Spoiler alert: before school kids are sick at least once a month. Housing is a real problem, but one can have kids in cheaper area too. There is not need to live in super expensive big city center. Having no kids is simple very easy life without any bigger problems.

satvikpendem 3y ago
This really is the crux of the issue, I've found. There is, at least for me and many others, simply no tangible, concrete reason to have kids, beyond the nebulous sense of pride and accomplishment, which is not necessarily always the case (postpartum depression or the lack of people who openly talk about regretting having kids as that's not socially acceptable).
- apsurd 3y ago
  no other reason to have kids? we're biologically programmed to have kids. i don't have kids myself, but I'm shocked at how intellectual you're coloring is of the situation. Procreating is our only purpose, as a life form.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    For many species, having offspring is a no-op. The Luna moth literally has no mouth (and I'm not sure if it must scream, either), so when it procreates, it creates yet more offspring that also have no mouths. The moth does not do anything while it exists beyond procreating, as there is nothing it can do; in other words, it existing is simply a no-op, in the computer science sense. Therefore, even if procreating is our only purpose, we can still ponder what the point of doing so actually is. Since we are intellectual beings, we can decide whether it's a logical decision or not, so that we don't end up no-ops either. I've seen friends and family members where kids are born to teen parents, who then have kids as teens, who then have kids as teens, and so on. Those are the equivalent of the moths, those teens have not had the chance to grow and achieve more, they were simply procreating to procreate, and they could not get out of poverty as their entire life was only dedicated to sustenance. Personally, their lives were very sad to me. Finally, do not fall for the fallacy of appealing to nature, as just because something is natural does not mean it is moral. Many animals will forcefully mate with one another or eat their prey alive, that does not mean that humans must do the same. So too for procreation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

somedude895 3y ago

I agree. Most people I know who don‘t want to have kids it’s primarily because they don‘t want to give up their lifestyle. Having a child means less money, less free time and less individualism. Our priorities have changed but some want to be able to have everything without compromise.

IshKebab 3y ago
That's true, but you can't just dismiss the fact that modern life (primarily the fact that both parents work) makes having children extremely difficult. It's getting better - especially since the pandemic - but most jobs are not remotely flexible enough to deal with school hours or sick children. Nursery is insanely expensive in most countries. I really think a mortgage style option would make a lot of sense here because it's a ton of money for a short time. Or, just make it free like some countries do (and the Tories pretended to do in the UK). Life still assumes only one parent will work. Our school regularly schedules meetings and events in the middle of the day at short notice and expects that will be fine.
- perrygeo 3y ago
  This is something that child-free people fail to understand. It's not just about priorities and "scheduling time" to be a parent. That would be great but it's a fantasy. Reality is being on-call 24/7 to deal with the dozens of logistical problems that come up. It's not just the number of hours but their distribution across the day, the fact that you've got to coordinate 2 work schedules + n children's calendars, and the fact that parents largely don't have any control over the agenda. Does this impact parent's earning potential? Absolutely. I cannot find a single day on my calendar where my wife and I had an solid block of 8 hours to focus on work. It just doesn't happen. Thankfully I have flexible work hours otherwise it would be literally impossible. As it stands, it's merely exhausting and unsustainable.
  - hyperbovine 3y ago
    That has always been true in some form or fashion though, what you are describing is not a uniquely modern problem. To me the x-factor that makes child rearing especially challenging is lack of a support network. Mobility has made it routine to live hundreds or thousands of miles from your family in a way that did not happen before fairly recently. For most of us, our network consists only of other couples with young children who are all going through the same thing.

rs999gti 3y ago

The OP mentioned some women want careers and that is fine. But what about women who want families or want both? What can western societies do to encourage these women to have at least 2 children? We need taxpayers or these social benefits will be gone in a century or sooner.