3 ms·
Strongly agreed, and it's also worth it for those who think too narrowly along those lines that those aren't even the same axis. I used to be single and childle
by saghm 2mo ago
Strongly agreed, and it's also worth it for those who think too narrowly along those lines that those aren't even the same axis. I used to be single and childless, and my happiness fluctuated a lot, but now I'm married and much more consistently happier. Neither my wife or I want kids, so if we had them, suddenly we'd be back to being less happy again. There are also plenty of single parents, and I'm sure many of them are happy and fulfilled without needing a partner.
Plus, kids who grow up with parents who are unhappy and would prefer to be childless are probably a lot more likely to grow up into unhappy adults.
- MajorTakeaway 2mo agoImportant to define what is happy and what were problems to begin with. I'm 39, no kids, and my parents weren't happy with me, but were happy otherwise. How does this factor how I'm unhappy? Happiness should be the end goal. Contentment is part of it. Compromise. Quality over quantity and the quality doesn't have to always be great, just no regrets according to modern death bed speeches. Being happy can mean chasing one thing and not the other, which would lead to some unspoken regret, loud enough in our head.
- saghm 2mo agoI said "more likely", not "guaranteed". I feel like the whole point I'm trying to make by building onto the parent comment is that there's not a one-size-fits-all template to being happy and fulfilled, and that not everyone will fit expected trends. At no point did I try to prescribe anything to someone as the way to avoid being unhappy, nor did I attempt to categorize the world into buckets of who would be happy or unhappy. That's literally the opposite of what I was trying to say, which is that trying to force expectations of what one person thinks would make someone happy onto someone else is not a good thing. Your second paragraph seems to be mostly quibbling of my use of the term that already was being used throughout this thread (and in the article itself). I don't understand why you chose my comment in particular to litigate the definition when it's not something I've introduced to the discussion.