4 ms·

Is it hedonism if a child-free adult gets fulfillment out of nurturing and caring for others, mentoring, caring for themselves and their community? That's like

Is it hedonism if a child-free adult gets fulfillment out of nurturing and caring for others, mentoring, caring for themselves and their community? That's like, the complete opposite of the hedonistic young couple not using protection and accidentally getting pregnant.

MontyCarloHall 4mo ago
I'd call it hedonism if a couple wants to be able to go out on a date on a whim, easily take a vacation, watch adult-appropriate movies on a big TV in the living room, maintain good sleep/health habits, keep a flexible schedule unconstrained by school pickups/staying home with a sick kid, etc. These are all real examples of why people I know delayed having kids, curtailed the number they had, or never had them altogether.
- happytoexplain 4mo ago
  It's unclear what you're saying. Obviously it's not hedonistic to "want" those things, as you say. You might use the term if they try to have their cake and eat it too, irresponsibly. Hedonism has negative connotations, colloquially (and colloquially is how we are speaking).
  - MontyCarloHall 4mo ago
    As I wrote in another reply, I meant “hedonism” in its non-colloquial, neutral sense, i.e. the pursuit of individual pleasure and happiness above all else, which was a mistake on my part. My general point is that all the activities I listed (which only become abundantly available in rich, industrialized societies) yield more individual pleasure than having children.
    - Supernaut 4mo ago
      I've heard a lot of vox pops in recent years on the subject of why young couples where I live are not starting families, and by far the most common reason given is that the cost of living has risen to such an extent that they feel that rearing children has become unaffordable. It's not a yearning for hedonism that's dissuading them, it's the fact that they can't even afford to buy somewhere to live. I won't comment on your assertion that the freedom to watch "adult-appropriate movies on a big TV in the living room" is a more fulfilling state of being than parenthood, except to say that I'm very grateful that I'm not that shallow.
      - MontyCarloHall 4mo ago
        >[B]y far the most common reason given is that the cost of living has risen to such an extent that they feel that rearing children has become unaffordable. That's certainly a factor, though very aggressive financial incentives for parents don't seem to work very well [0, 1, 2]. Not to mention that in rich countries, educational attainment and income are negatively correlated with fertility [3]. My theory there is that people's high-powered careers provide them more self-satisfaction than having kids. >it's the fact that they can't even afford to buy somewhere to live. It's funny you mention this. Some friends said they weren't having a second kid because they couldn't afford a three bedroom house, not realizing that kids sharing bedrooms was the norm for middle class families until very recently. Having one bedroom per kid was a luxury just 30-40 years ago. >I won't comment on your assertion that the freedom to watch "adult-appropriate movies on a big TV in the living room" is a more fulfilling state of being than parenthood It's not my assertion, it's something a couple deciding to not have another kid literally told me. They missed being able to have substantial amounts of adult time, and were actively counting down the days until their only child was old enough to amuse himself for long periods of time. Having another kid would reset that clock. [0] https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/03/19/viktor-orbans-pro-natalist-policies-are-not-working https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/03/19/viktor-orbans-pr... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/28/south-korea-fertility-rate-2023-fall-record-low-incentives https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/28/south-korea-fe... [2] https://worldcrunch.com/culture-society/boosting-birth-rates-government-incentives/ https://worldcrunch.com/culture-society/boosting-birth-rates... [3] https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/society-at-a-glance-2024_918d8db3-en/full-report/fertility-trends-across-the-oecd-underlying-drivers-and-the-role-for-policy_770679b8.html https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/society-at-a-glance-202...
        nemomarx 4mo ago
        How aggressive are those incentives really, compared to cost of childcare? Do they fully cover the cost of daycare and education for the kids for 18 years, alongside paying for a larger home? > But financial and other inducements are failing to convince couples who cite skyrocketing child-rearing costs and property prices, a lack of well-paid jobs and the country’s cut-throat education system as obstacles to having bigger families. I know South Korea has both expensive cram schools and a difficult housing market. If the incentives aren't as large as the additional costs from child raising, does it really tell us anything? Ideally you'd want it to exceed those costs. Of course, that might be impractical or impossible for a government to fund, which is something.
- vkou 4mo ago
  The degeneracy of these millennials who want to maintain healthy sleep habits...
  - vladms 4mo ago
    Funny enough I know lots of millennials without children with horrible sleep patterns and habits. But you might be up to something: people are too stressed/anxious/depressed (without children) that adding children seems to them like an impossible burden. Now, I am not sure children would not sometimes actually improve their state (biology kicking in), but definitely is a gamble.
    - tasuki 4mo ago
      Children surely help you get your shit together. Otoh if you don't have your shit together, adding children into the mix is a little unfair to the children.
- mekdoonggi 4mo ago
  And do you think this is bad?
  - MontyCarloHall 4mo ago
    I never made any value judgment on whether it’s bad or good. “Hedonism” is simply the focus of individual pleasure and happiness above all else, and everything I listed is an example of things that lead to individual happiness that are antithetical to having many children.
    - aerodexis 4mo ago
      Having children is profoundly more fulfilling and pleasurable than the surface-level pleasures you listed. "hedonism" doesn't create a lack of children, if anything people are not hedonistic enough, but for economic reasons pursue cheap low-quality pleasure over high-quality pleasure.
      - trumpdong 4mo ago
        Not to mention that everyone finds unprotected sex pretty darn hedonistic.
    - tasuki 4mo ago
      Why do you think people have children then? Is that not (perhaps a bad) attempt at hedonism? I've heard (esp women) say "I can't be happy unless I have children". Then they have children, and... it often turns into "why isn't the father helping more".
  - bryanlarsen 4mo ago
    Hedonism is bad because: - hedonic pleasures are adaptive. The first time you experience them is incredible. The 1000th time, much less so. - chasing hedonic pleasures is counter-productive. Studies show that people who actively seek out hedonic pleasure are less happy than those that don't. OTOH, eudaimonic pleasure (aka fulfilment, satisfaction) is much more durable. Work, hobbies, charity work, and children are avenues towards fulfilment. Far too many rely on work to provide it for them, but that's counter-productive for most.
swat535 4mo ago
[flagged]
- happytoexplain 4mo ago
  >The term "child-free" implies relieving oneself of a disease, the way one describes himself as "cancer-free" or "drug-free". Wow, this is an eyebrow-raising degree of uncharitability. There's no reason to attack straightforward words like this. Also, the parent did not make this implication. They implied it's irresponsible to have children unintentionally or flippantly.
  - swat535 4mo ago
    > Also, the parent did not make this implication You're arguing a straw man, I didn't mention that the parent made the implication. I simply refuted a portion of parent's claim that people are forgoing children to foster a care of their community or performing acts of service as they implied here: "a child-free adult gets fulfillment out of nurturing and caring for others, mentoring, caring for themselves and their community" > There's no reason to attack straightforward words like this. If you feel like my interpretation of the term is an attack, that's on you. I simply voiced what the term communicates to me. As an example, there's a reason Anti Abortionists rebranded the term to "Pro Life" because of the connotation. Terms do have an intention behind them.
    - mekdoonggi 4mo ago
      > refuted a portion of parent's claim that people are forgoing children to foster a care of their community or performing acts of service You didn't refute, you just said you didn't think that's what people are doing. In any case it doesn't matter what they do with their time, because it's theirs. > If you feel like my interpretation of the term is an attack, that's on you. > Terms do have an intention behind them. I don't know how you square that circle. You made some claims about the term child-free which are strictly your interpretation and then used it to describe their choice as ignoble. In both cases you're just ascribing a nobility and morality to having children which just isn't there.
TFNA 4mo ago
> Is it hedonism if a child-free adult gets fulfillment out of nurturing... How many people in the developed world are really doing that? My social circle is largely child-free into our thirties and forties, and the big motivation is so that we have time for our hobbies and for travel. Almost no one is dedicating their time to altruism. Especially considering that I live in a long-running welfare state, where helping people in need is generally left to the state and private charity is rare (and often has dodgy religious-sect connotations).

MontyCarloHall 4mo ago

I'd call it hedonism if a couple wants to be able to go out on a date on a whim, easily take a vacation, watch adult-appropriate movies on a big TV in the living room, maintain good sleep/health habits, keep a flexible schedule unconstrained by school pickups/staying home with a sick kid, etc. These are all real examples of why people I know delayed having kids, curtailed the number they had, or never had them altogether.

happytoexplain 4mo ago
It's unclear what you're saying. Obviously it's not hedonistic to "want" those things, as you say. You might use the term if they try to have their cake and eat it too, irresponsibly. Hedonism has negative connotations, colloquially (and colloquially is how we are speaking).
- MontyCarloHall 4mo ago
  As I wrote in another reply, I meant “hedonism” in its non-colloquial, neutral sense, i.e. the pursuit of individual pleasure and happiness above all else, which was a mistake on my part. My general point is that all the activities I listed (which only become abundantly available in rich, industrialized societies) yield more individual pleasure than having children.
  - Supernaut 4mo ago
    I've heard a lot of vox pops in recent years on the subject of why young couples where I live are not starting families, and by far the most common reason given is that the cost of living has risen to such an extent that they feel that rearing children has become unaffordable. It's not a yearning for hedonism that's dissuading them, it's the fact that they can't even afford to buy somewhere to live. I won't comment on your assertion that the freedom to watch "adult-appropriate movies on a big TV in the living room" is a more fulfilling state of being than parenthood, except to say that I'm very grateful that I'm not that shallow.
    - MontyCarloHall 4mo ago
      >[B]y far the most common reason given is that the cost of living has risen to such an extent that they feel that rearing children has become unaffordable. That's certainly a factor, though very aggressive financial incentives for parents don't seem to work very well [0, 1, 2]. Not to mention that in rich countries, educational attainment and income are negatively correlated with fertility [3]. My theory there is that people's high-powered careers provide them more self-satisfaction than having kids. >it's the fact that they can't even afford to buy somewhere to live. It's funny you mention this. Some friends said they weren't having a second kid because they couldn't afford a three bedroom house, not realizing that kids sharing bedrooms was the norm for middle class families until very recently. Having one bedroom per kid was a luxury just 30-40 years ago. >I won't comment on your assertion that the freedom to watch "adult-appropriate movies on a big TV in the living room" is a more fulfilling state of being than parenthood It's not my assertion, it's something a couple deciding to not have another kid literally told me. They missed being able to have substantial amounts of adult time, and were actively counting down the days until their only child was old enough to amuse himself for long periods of time. Having another kid would reset that clock. [0] https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/03/19/viktor-orbans-pro-natalist-policies-are-not-working https://www.economist.com/europe/2026/03/19/viktor-orbans-pr... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/28/south-korea-fertility-rate-2023-fall-record-low-incentives https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/28/south-korea-fe... [2] https://worldcrunch.com/culture-society/boosting-birth-rates-government-incentives/ https://worldcrunch.com/culture-society/boosting-birth-rates... [3] https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/society-at-a-glance-2024_918d8db3-en/full-report/fertility-trends-across-the-oecd-underlying-drivers-and-the-role-for-policy_770679b8.html https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/society-at-a-glance-202...
      - nemomarx 4mo ago
        How aggressive are those incentives really, compared to cost of childcare? Do they fully cover the cost of daycare and education for the kids for 18 years, alongside paying for a larger home? > But financial and other inducements are failing to convince couples who cite skyrocketing child-rearing costs and property prices, a lack of well-paid jobs and the country’s cut-throat education system as obstacles to having bigger families. I know South Korea has both expensive cram schools and a difficult housing market. If the incentives aren't as large as the additional costs from child raising, does it really tell us anything? Ideally you'd want it to exceed those costs. Of course, that might be impractical or impossible for a government to fund, which is something.
vkou 4mo ago
The degeneracy of these millennials who want to maintain healthy sleep habits...
- vladms 4mo ago
  Funny enough I know lots of millennials without children with horrible sleep patterns and habits. But you might be up to something: people are too stressed/anxious/depressed (without children) that adding children seems to them like an impossible burden. Now, I am not sure children would not sometimes actually improve their state (biology kicking in), but definitely is a gamble.
  - tasuki 4mo ago
    Children surely help you get your shit together. Otoh if you don't have your shit together, adding children into the mix is a little unfair to the children.
mekdoonggi 4mo ago
And do you think this is bad?
- MontyCarloHall 4mo ago
  I never made any value judgment on whether it’s bad or good. “Hedonism” is simply the focus of individual pleasure and happiness above all else, and everything I listed is an example of things that lead to individual happiness that are antithetical to having many children.
  - aerodexis 4mo ago
    Having children is profoundly more fulfilling and pleasurable than the surface-level pleasures you listed. "hedonism" doesn't create a lack of children, if anything people are not hedonistic enough, but for economic reasons pursue cheap low-quality pleasure over high-quality pleasure.
    - trumpdong 4mo ago
      Not to mention that everyone finds unprotected sex pretty darn hedonistic.
  - tasuki 4mo ago
    Why do you think people have children then? Is that not (perhaps a bad) attempt at hedonism? I've heard (esp women) say "I can't be happy unless I have children". Then they have children, and... it often turns into "why isn't the father helping more".
- bryanlarsen 4mo ago
  Hedonism is bad because: - hedonic pleasures are adaptive. The first time you experience them is incredible. The 1000th time, much less so. - chasing hedonic pleasures is counter-productive. Studies show that people who actively seek out hedonic pleasure are less happy than those that don't. OTOH, eudaimonic pleasure (aka fulfilment, satisfaction) is much more durable. Work, hobbies, charity work, and children are avenues towards fulfilment. Far too many rely on work to provide it for them, but that's counter-productive for most.

swat535 4mo ago

[flagged]

happytoexplain 4mo ago
>The term "child-free" implies relieving oneself of a disease, the way one describes himself as "cancer-free" or "drug-free". Wow, this is an eyebrow-raising degree of uncharitability. There's no reason to attack straightforward words like this. Also, the parent did not make this implication. They implied it's irresponsible to have children unintentionally or flippantly.
- swat535 4mo ago
  > Also, the parent did not make this implication You're arguing a straw man, I didn't mention that the parent made the implication. I simply refuted a portion of parent's claim that people are forgoing children to foster a care of their community or performing acts of service as they implied here: "a child-free adult gets fulfillment out of nurturing and caring for others, mentoring, caring for themselves and their community" > There's no reason to attack straightforward words like this. If you feel like my interpretation of the term is an attack, that's on you. I simply voiced what the term communicates to me. As an example, there's a reason Anti Abortionists rebranded the term to "Pro Life" because of the connotation. Terms do have an intention behind them.
  - mekdoonggi 4mo ago
    > refuted a portion of parent's claim that people are forgoing children to foster a care of their community or performing acts of service You didn't refute, you just said you didn't think that's what people are doing. In any case it doesn't matter what they do with their time, because it's theirs. > If you feel like my interpretation of the term is an attack, that's on you. > Terms do have an intention behind them. I don't know how you square that circle. You made some claims about the term child-free which are strictly your interpretation and then used it to describe their choice as ignoble. In both cases you're just ascribing a nobility and morality to having children which just isn't there.

TFNA 4mo ago

> Is it hedonism if a child-free adult gets fulfillment out of nurturing... How many people in the developed world are really doing that? My social circle is largely child-free into our thirties and forties, and the big motivation is so that we have time for our hobbies and for travel. Almost no one is dedicating their time to altruism. Especially considering that I live in a long-running welfare state, where helping people in need is generally left to the state and private charity is rare (and often has dodgy religious-sect connotations).