"I couldn't bring a child into a world like this" is a bit of mental gymnastics that people use to convince themselves that they're being noble and selfless with this decision, when in reality it's neither noble nor ignoble, neither selfless nor selfish. Every child eventually hits their parents with the classic "I never asked to be born!", and while it's certainly true, NOBODY asks to be born, and life has ALWAYS sucked in some way or another. Should pre-humans have refused to have kids because it would be cruel to bring them into a world where they have to kill to eat? Nonsense.
If people simply don't want to have kids, they should simply say that and own it. They don't OWE it to anybody to have kids - but they don't owe it to anybody to not have kids, either. It's not a moral decision in either direction. It's simply a case that some people don't feel up to the responsibility, and that's fine: not superior, just fine.
And before anyone says that not having kids helps to keep the surplus population down: no problem on Earth is a result of the population being too high. There's enough food for everyone; the problem is distribution. There's enough land for everyone; the problem is that some people are hoarding. If the population starts using renewables and just generally going green, corporations build more data centers and invent other novel ways to waste resources.
Why not? Pre-humans were not smart enough to recognise that having children would cause the children to suffer. Perhaps it would be better to simply die out as a species. It all depends on how you view morality and how you weigh non-existence
Except morality is subjective and thus inherently dependent upon how one views it. There is no such thing as "objective morality". Morales are always about personal preferences.
no problem on Earth is a result of the population being too high.
Pre-industrial humans caused mass habitat loss, species extinction, and even climate change, and that was with their relatively miniscule populations and emissions. What quality of life are you imagining over eight billion people having such that we somehow don't continue wrecking the environment? And how do you plan on putting the genie back in the bottle regarding all our polluting technological "advancements" that require fossil fuels and/or intensive mining? Who's declaring to the world that plastics, electricity, and all forms of motorized technology are over, and how do you imagine this would be enforced?
Even completely stripped of all our technology, humans are still animals, and any animal species will wreak havoc on their environment when overpopulated. Hell you don't even have to be an animal; go look up the Great Oxygenation Event or what happened when trees first evolved. What do you suppose Earth is going to be like for the millions of years required for it to adapt to the changes we're making? Unlike monocellular organisms and plants, however, we are sapient creatures; if we can observe this is happening and know we're the ones causing it, how is it not in any way a moral issue?
If you accept the concept of objective morality, then yes, it's a moral issue. But I've already pointed out that population size is not the cause nor the solution. These are not actual percentages, but if I say "20% of the people cause 80% of the waste", hopefully you'll understand the underlying concept I'm trying to communicate.
My selfishness pushes me to not make life anyone else's problem.
Every child eventually hits their parents with the classic “I never asked to be born!”, and while it’s certainly true, NOBODY asks to be born, and life has ALWAYS sucked in some way or another
Just because something has always been bad or worse and for everyone, that doesn't make it ok.
Multiple reasons can be true. I could afford kids but I don't like them. At the same time I lack the energy for such a constant responsibility. But both of these reasons don't exclude the fact that I'd rather have humanity die out than set another person in this world as long as the current downward trend continues.
What reasons I tell people depends on who I'm talking to. Especially old people get really condescending if you simply tell them you don't like kids.
No, they don’t owe it to anyone else to have kids. There is a biological imperative to procreate, generally, which I think is why a lot of people treat having kids as the default - something you need a reason not to do.
None of this is really relevant at an individual level. A person is free to do what they wish for whatever reason or no reason. But when an entire population stops procreating, after millennia of compulsively doing so, there is probably some cause worth understanding.
Even in that, I’m not saying it’s a problem that must be solved. Just that there is probably some cause. I do believe the biological imperative is there.
You slash s, but real talk. Make sure your food is up to temperature. A lot of people are about to find out why past us made the FDA in the first place.
CDC is currently having trouble finding the source and keeping track because a few years ago Trump literally dismantled the very programs that were tasked with doing so.
Do you have any idea how much you have to abuse a living being for it to consciously not want to have kids?
And we achieved this level of abuse on humans! And we did it very well, in reproducible way, with reproducible results across multiple countries! We should make a research paper about it.
Unironically thinking it's better to keep jamming unloved kids into this hateful world instead of making it a better place for those already in it is pretty fucked too
What makes you think their kids are unloved? You just seem extremely bitter. It's cool that you decided not to reproduce. Whatever, it's your life and your decision to make. But fuck you for thinking like that about people who do have kids. Fuck. You.
It's justified. You are not thinking straight, and are shoving non-consenting people into a world that is overburdened, and explicitly does not want them.
We need to fix this place, before forcing anyone to live in it.
I was looking at the costs of raising a child the other day and I don't know how anyone does it. My job pays garbage with trash health insurance.
I'm just so mad at the management class with their high pay and not doing any actual work. My boss seems fine - I think he knows this is bullshit and goes a little out of his way to make it easier for me. But everyone above him? If I saw them drowning I'd have to think a long time before throwing a life vest.
I could totally afford a child, but if I chose to do that, I wouldn't be able to afford anything else fun, so I haven't chosen to. By all means, I make a pretty decent living and would've probably been in the upper middle class 20 years ago.
Generally agree, but where did the air quality decrease compared to some decades back?
(80s kid here, so maybe my brain is to slow to realize it, because of the remains still in my bloodstreams of the lead fumes and unfiltered coal power plant exhausts I inhaled back then...)
It didn't. Air quality is substantially better world wide, there are better, real indicators of how bad the state of the world is the artist could have used. But also far more metrics about how better the world is, which no one ever likes to talk about. Way less extreme poverty, way less starvation, way less war, way more access to clean water, way more vaccinations, etc. The problem is the ultra rich are making life worse for the majority of privileged people, and we are really feeling it. But worldwide, humanity is objectively leaps and bounds better than it was 100 years ago
But its also air pollutants like smoke particles and car fumes. I'm genuinely thinking of taking the bus today instead of biking because I don't want to kill my lungs.
Update:
In case anyone reads this. The Canadian wildfire smoke moved into my city and completely blocks sight within a mile, I couldn't see the two biggest buildings (not to mention the huge but smaller towers) in downtown from a bridge I bike across everyday. When I tried breathing through my mouth all I could taste was smoke, so I solely breathed through my nose.
Yes but those were worse in the 80s too. Cars used leaded fuel and diesel cars didn’t have mandatory soot filters. I drove behind a Mercedes with a broken (or removed) soot filter the other day and half of the backside of that car was just covered in soot. Like it had shit itself.
You’re probably still better off riding a bicycle due to the simple fact that you’re getting exercise, unless you’re in, say, New Delhi or you ride along a literal highway filled with diesel trucks.
Well, but still during the eighties most of the houses in my area burned brown coal in crude ovens to heat their homes, the cars spit out blue, only half-burned lead-enriched and carbohydrate-tasting exhaust in huge amounts, while the surrounding forests were dying because of all the unfiltered sulphuric acid the power plants emitted.
During winter, we often had dense smog in the valley, heavily tasting like a mixture of wood smoke and burnt rubber and triggering frequent coughing.
And just staying in the inside also wasn't that great of an option, as constant cigarette smoke was a given everywhere.
If I had to name one thing that definitely has gotten better by an insane amount, it would the air quality.
You're not wrong but it certainly feels like it right now, I'm in the Twin Cities and the air is just so gross right now due to being downwind from the Canadian wildfires. We're just straight up being told to not go outside with a hazardous rating.
Exactly what I was going to say. The comic is only a couple days old, and I don’t know where the artist lives but here in the Twin Cities there has been smoke from Canadian wildfires around this time for several years straight now. I had to postpone my tennis plans today because of it. My older coworker this morning told me it used to never be like this. The office custodians closed the outside air dampers because the smoke was leaking inside.
So, let's say you have a system where people go to work, do their job, and get paid. The employer wants more productivity, so the work becomes more stressful ("a full workload"). The worker does more for less, the company celebrates.
There is a hidden element here: stress. Your workers will be more productive, however their baseline stress levels will rise over time. It's cumulative and takes years to show; but it means everyone above a certain age who works a well paying job has a high stress burden. A lot of people live without any job security.
I'd put it this way: being a parent is basically a second job. If your workplace takes 100% of your work capacity, then there is none left for raising children.
I just don't want kids. Knew I never wanted to be a parent ever since I was a kid having to help my parents raise my nephews and niece. I could be a billionaire and every problem on Earth could be solved, I still wouldn't have kids.
@FistingEnthusiast in most of america you cannot say that or you get blacklisted. I always just say well, not right now! Which really means hopefully never because their lives will be only suffering.
I find your "purpose and outlook" comment to be condescending, clichéd and pointless
You will spend the rest of your life justifying your choice, and the fact that you felt the need to do so, unprompted, to a complete stranger, who clearly does not give a fuck tells me that you know deep down that you fucked up
You weren't CF for 35 years if you suddenly changed your mind
You either weren't CF, or you had kids for some stupid reason, and now feel that you have to justify your "change of heart"
Mate, calm down. It was absolutely not my intention to condesend - quite the opposite. However, your reaction has shown me your true character and, like you, I am now absolutely convinced that fatherhood is not for you.
I think what riled that person up, is that the first thing people always tell you when they learn you don't want children is "Oh you'll change your mind!" or "I never knew children could be so great until I actually had them", in an attempt to convince you to bang out some children against your wishes.
It gets really old, really fast, and your comment is down the same road.
Sure—folks sometimes share their lived experience, and sometimes they're insensitive. I tried not to be and had shared a genuine opinion, based on my own life.
But remember, I also had no desire or interest in having children until I did. I've been on that side of the fence, and therefore felt comfortable sharing my experience of the other.
To some folks, it certainly stings when they face clumsy (but likely not malicious) questions about having a family.
For what it's worth, I think it's a foolish question to ask, as you never know someone's circumstances. But if it's a decision you've got agency over, then is being asked about your choice really such a big deal?
After all, everyone is just trying to figure out their own lives, and being curious about other people's choices is only natural. How we interpret and perceive the question is key.
Personally, I've always been interested in people, how we form opinions, and if someone shares a viewpoint I once held that my lived experience changed, I don't really see the harm in mentioning my own perspective.
On the flip side, I make an effort not to get irritated by people who by definition do not have that lived experience and make sweeping, negative generalizations about having kids.
In a funny way, it reminds me of the folk who go out of their way to comment on the EV I drive and tell me why they would never, ever get one, despite having never driven one. I have experienced both, and feel I can comment honestly on the pros and cons. If the person opining how bad they are doesn't like my answers or finds them condescending, that's a shame, but it's not intentional.
Yep. Having children necessitates becoming narcissistic. I'm sure parents don't believe this, but to force existence into this world, and call it benevolent is just fucking lunacy. Work on making the world a better place before making new chattel.
I won't believe you're a better person just because you did the most animal thing there is, instead of the most human thing you can do and actually work towards a better existence for everyone
I really want being childfree to be normalised. The world will be a much better place when the only people having children are the ones who genuinely want to be parents. I'll never understand why some people get so mad at the idea of others just not wanting to have kids.
@Ryanmiller70 same. And I'm pretty sure my parents didnt want them either. Maybe its genetic lol. Never once have wanted one. They dont bother me and I don't mind taking care of them for short periods though.
Yeah, I was gonna say that's probably the biggest factor. All of these are environmental, which I support but I know many who don't care. It's money...
I'm in a pretty bad way, unfortunately. Stroke 'survivor' at 21, with more-or-less the right side of my body as deadweight :(. I wasn't in very good condition before but since, I'm a burden to everyone around me.
Everyone should have the choice to have children or not.
Pushing propaganda that it’s a crisis that the birth rate is falling is to help strip women of their autonomy over when and how many children they have.
Governments should support families more than they do because it’s the right thing to do and not to force women to have more babies than they want.
So what does it mean that I've held these same beliefs for over 20 years now and didn't need a comic? What does it mean that my wife holds the same beliefs, and that we're both pro choice? Am I brainwashed? Have I been for decades now?
Or have I looked around and known I do not believe there is a moral way for me personally to bring life into this world. Adopt maybe, but not new life.
As a parent, I will defend your right and choice to not have children every single day. People should only have children if they really want to and have the mental capacity to guide a child to relatively stable adulthood.
One of those things I don't get, with all if the news on bad parents, why are we so eager to force people who obviously don't want a child to have them? Obviously it's not good for the child or the parent.
Of course then you realize it's not about the child or the parent, but the person picketing and screaming and their own personal emotions. They think they are thinking of the children, but it's much more selfish.
Heck, you don't even have to go into morals. There are so many people who can barely take care of themselves. I wouldn't entrust them to take care of another human being as well, and certainly not force them to do so.
because my life is ruined shitheap of misery and i dont have the emotional capacity to deal with kids, the financial capacity to afford kids, and my genetics are a ticking timebomb that i really wouldnt want to inflict on kids the way it was inflicted on me.
and lets not even get into the world itself and how its a festering cesspit on teetering on the edge of fascistic ruin because an elite group of corrupt billionaires don't want to ever give up their dragon hordes, or their ability to fuck infants and toddlers.
I was raised in a very dysfunctional household. I broke free, met an amazing partner, and we both wanted children. I finally have the opportunity to be a kid again with them, provide them the childhood I never had and be apart of it, by having the childhood I never had.
My kids are 9 & 11… and we are slowly having to pull back on fun active activities outdoors during the summer months because the environment is getting worse and worse year over year…
I broke the cycle, but their childhood is slowly being robbed of them.
Record rain in my area to where water drainage infrastructure is being destroyed bit by bit every fucking night. Massive tornado inducing storms where we normally don’t see them (a freak event killed a bunch of people and destroyed nearly a billion dollars in property back in the 80s, nothing since and nothing before). Record amount of tornados in my Province, humid as fuck when I live in the prairies. Smokey unbeatable air because of the one area not getting rain burning down.
Same. Never had a tornado warning in my life. Now we get several actual tornadoes every year. I love my kids and I love being a parent but I feel so guilty.
I went to the Arctic in 2006, learned a lot about our climate future, and decided that if any of it started coming true I wouldn't have any kids. 20 years later, it's all far worse than we imagined and i am happy i didn't bring kids into this mess.
I mean, doesn't really stop people in some places. Some are raising a family of five during famine, civil war and all sort or shit going on. But those places often have less choice for the women.
But still, most in the Western world, they have conditions vastly better to raise a child than a lot of the third world.
Number One: I'm a homosexual, so I'm not having the reproductive type of copulation, EVER.
Number Two: Bigots. They poisoned public perception of homosexuals. They fought to legislate away our rights and prevent us from adopting children amongst many other things like legalized marriage. They pushed gay people into the fringes of society, lead our friends and families to abandon us, marginalized, and isolated us. Those scars run deep and the societal damage is still festering. Even if I were still young enough to feel confident I could raise a child and live long enough to finish the job now that things are "better" and these rights are an option to me, I wouldn't adopt. I have seen the inside, and I know it's all too easy for society to fall back into the abyss. NO thank you. I'm already at max capacity caring for adult parents, can't imagine if there were children in the equation as well.
Now that's just me personally. On the other hand...
Fewer couples have the capacity and/or desire to support a family, let alone a large one, as it means a loss of income from one or both partners not working, vastly increased expenses, strain on relationships, and a myriad other problems. If most people could live comfortably and with reasonably fulfilled needs/desires on the income from one person and it didn't require that one person to work themselves to death, then you might see higher birth rates.
Anecdotally, the people I'm seeing having the most kids (like 3+) are pretty much all financially very well off or struggling really badly. There are exceptions, of course, but most couples who are keeping their heads above water (if only barely) know their limits and recognize that having kids, let alone multiple children, would bring hardship to all involved.
Trying to find a moment in history when the long term outlook was rosey enough to say "Now is the right time to have kids", and I can't.
Part of having kids is the struggle of supporting other people. Part of the joy of having kids is positioning a future person to do things you lacked the opportunity to do, yourself.
If humanity can solve climate change, we still will not be the generation that lives to see it. We'll pass the torch and then our children will pass the torch and then our grandchildren will know if we were successfully.
My bloodline survived oppression, war, famines, subjugation, violent storms and many more things. I fully understand and agree that people who don’t want kids and can’t see themselves emotionally/financially supporting them should not have kids. It should be a choice and should be a passionate one and there’s nothing wrong with deciding it’s not for you. This doomsaying crap is an awful excuse though. Other than the highest form of elite in a society, there has never been a guarantee for safety or security.
Is it scary that we will be experiencing climate change and the associated catastrophic events associated with it? Yes, it’s terrifying. It’s terrifying that there will be death there will be suffering and there will be violence. It sucks that while we’ve gone through big culture shifts as a species we haven’t united over this or are making big shifts to fix it. We CAN though. We HAVE united under struggle historically. We DO survive the impossible and the terrible and while I can’t say with any absolute that most people are great, there are great people and have been those who have made a positive change.
I would like to have kids, and that's as far as that joke is allowed to go. I just want little people to clean my house while I get drunk, that's the joke.
feeling like the whole society is absolute delulu atp. the world is going down so why the fuck would you set kids in this world? everybody is acting like they dont fear the future and everybody is just thinking one day ahead. do they really think its going to get better by magic?
never got that.
like i get the drive to have sex, to do risky things or somethink spontaneous. But you can think about kids for years. you can always decide and take your time with the decision.
i know for most people its not that deep, but for me i never got the feeling to want my own kids. why would i?
you can choose to adopt.
i also think kids are cute, but the world is going down and i dont want to be responsible for a human, because i think if you start your life right now the whole world will be shit like 10-30 years from now on. the world is already shitty & im trying to life as good as possible. i also like cute dogs, but if i cant provide i dont get one. imo nobody is ready for whats comming.
so yes ill use condoms ffs
I... Look, can we be real for a minute? None of these are why people aren't having kids.
Climate change is primarily affecting the global south, countries that have had the slowest drop in birth rates. Air quality globally has been increasing for decades. Yes, the current generation has less attainability than their parents, but modern life quality is still higher than any point in history. Even if you were to attribute it to that decrease, there have been decreases in resources between generations before without anywhere near the dropoff of births. Sumerian peasants didn't have this level of decrease during concurrent wars and famine, both demonstrably worse conditions than most people alive will ever face.
Current studies point to one correlative factor: Smartphones. Now, we can discuss why: Personally I believe it is a mix of several reasons, including beneficial ones. I would argue that smartphone have made people more aware than ever of the unfairness of life in modern society, as an example of a beneficial cause. 30 years ago, a woman in Nebraska wouldn't know intimately the firsthand account of a modern genocide, for example. Let me be clear: This is undoubtedly, unequivocally a good thing.
But we also need to address the sheer amount of slop content and unending access. Shortform content is proven to inflict users with symptoms reflective of ADHD and anxiety. Social media is built to make us not just dependent but addicted. The rise of smartphones has been part and parcel to the loss of third spaces; it's not just that people lost community, it's that we have also replaced it with instant access to online communities that cannot and will never be a viable replacement. We let the rich finally build the ultimate circus. And fixing that will not just require a fundamental restructuring of society, but also tough conversations about our responsibility to escape these systems.
The arctic sea ice extent is declining rapidly and we're likely headed into a Blue Ocean Event later this year, and potentially a double BOE depending on how the El Nino and summer in the southern hemisphere go.
I never said just affecting the south, I said disproportionately. And you're kind of proving my point: Before widespread information access, you probably wouldn't even know. And yes, that is a good thing, as I stressed repeatedly in my post; not all reasons to blame the smartphone are bad, many are even good. It is a good thing people know about climate change. About the human cost of imperialism. About genocide. But that alone doesn't account for the sheer drop, either, and there are negatives to this technology that need to be addressed.
There's more people alive now than ever before. This insane need for infinite increases on a finite planet is why the world is ending.
Smart phones and short form content aren't causing birth rates to decrease, that started decades ago when western women started getting access to contraception and gaining human rights.
A) we don't need infinite growth; what we need is a tapering down so we don't end up with an entire generation spending their golden years in a ditch.
B) As I've stated to another user, you're equivocating. Stop that. We've had the same percentile decrease in the last 20 years as we did throughout the previous century; you're looking at two different rates of decrease and calling them the same because they both happen to be decreases. That's not how math works.
Lmao, don't worry about your pension, the water wars will get you long before you're old enough to retire. Billions upon billions of us will die in the next 50 years.
It's more important to you to hold some personal sense of moral superiority than engage with the death of millions; your blasé attitude speaks volumes towards your privilege. I have no doubt that the reason you don't want kids has far less to do with climate change than being able to say you won't because of climate change.
Did that make you feel better? I bet it did. Go on, let it all out. Tell me all the shitty things you've assumed about me because being angry at me is easier than accepting the world is ending.
You're obfuscating: It's been well documented that the availability of resources is inversely correlated to birthrates. We've had as much dropoff since the phone as we did since the industrial revolution. You're calling two different rates of drop the same because they're both drops; that's not how math works.
I didn't create demographic trends older than I am to obfuscate anything.
Demographically most of the world has shown an explosion of population as industrialization of agriculture, medicine, and sanitation almost eliminate famines and childhood disease. And then you see the curve go down. Often all the way to negative. This is repeating in other countries, and just like they're catching up faster economically, the social results are following as well. I'm not as sure about other countries, but Canada would have had negative growth since the 80s if not for immigration.
So, while smartphones might be a factor, they can't be the primary or only cause of a trend that predates their existence by over a quarter of a century.
Yeah I agree that smartphones have a huge role to play in lower birth rates all over the globe.
There is a correlation between the adoption of certain entertainment technologies and birth rates, such as TVs becoming widespread causing a small decrease in births, simply because people are spending more free time not being bored. Same thing happened with smartphones, but with a much more drastic impact.
More recently, during 2020 and 2021 the birth rates increased drastically due to the pandemic lockdowns making people bored and with far more free time on their hands.
155 Comments
Allero@lemmy.today · 65 pts · 37d
Not to mention the clear financial aspect
Tango@piefed.ca · 18 pts · 37d
This is a much better reason, frankly.
"I couldn't bring a child into a world like this" is a bit of mental gymnastics that people use to convince themselves that they're being noble and selfless with this decision, when in reality it's neither noble nor ignoble, neither selfless nor selfish. Every child eventually hits their parents with the classic "I never asked to be born!", and while it's certainly true, NOBODY asks to be born, and life has ALWAYS sucked in some way or another. Should pre-humans have refused to have kids because it would be cruel to bring them into a world where they have to kill to eat? Nonsense.
If people simply don't want to have kids, they should simply say that and own it. They don't OWE it to anybody to have kids - but they don't owe it to anybody to not have kids, either. It's not a moral decision in either direction. It's simply a case that some people don't feel up to the responsibility, and that's fine: not superior, just fine.
And before anyone says that not having kids helps to keep the surplus population down: no problem on Earth is a result of the population being too high. There's enough food for everyone; the problem is distribution. There's enough land for everyone; the problem is that some people are hoarding. If the population starts using renewables and just generally going green, corporations build more data centers and invent other novel ways to waste resources.
milk@discuss.tchncs.de · 13 pts · 37d
Why not? Pre-humans were not smart enough to recognise that having children would cause the children to suffer. Perhaps it would be better to simply die out as a species. It all depends on how you view morality and how you weigh non-existence
Tango@piefed.ca · 6 pts · 37d
If it depends on how you view it, then it's not a moral obligation, it's a personal preference. Which is fine, but just acknowledge that.
Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net · 1 pts · 36d
Except morality is subjective and thus inherently dependent upon how one views it. There is no such thing as "objective morality". Morales are always about personal preferences.
Tango@piefed.ca · 1 pts · 36d
Then there's no such thing as morality, but personal preference.
Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 36d
Yes.
Tango@piefed.ca · 1 pts · 36d
fireweed@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 37d
Pre-industrial humans caused mass habitat loss, species extinction, and even climate change, and that was with their relatively miniscule populations and emissions. What quality of life are you imagining over eight billion people having such that we somehow don't continue wrecking the environment? And how do you plan on putting the genie back in the bottle regarding all our polluting technological "advancements" that require fossil fuels and/or intensive mining? Who's declaring to the world that plastics, electricity, and all forms of motorized technology are over, and how do you imagine this would be enforced?
Even completely stripped of all our technology, humans are still animals, and any animal species will wreak havoc on their environment when overpopulated. Hell you don't even have to be an animal; go look up the Great Oxygenation Event or what happened when trees first evolved. What do you suppose Earth is going to be like for the millions of years required for it to adapt to the changes we're making? Unlike monocellular organisms and plants, however, we are sapient creatures; if we can observe this is happening and know we're the ones causing it, how is it not in any way a moral issue?
Tango@piefed.ca · 1 pts · 36d
If you accept the concept of objective morality, then yes, it's a moral issue. But I've already pointed out that population size is not the cause nor the solution. These are not actual percentages, but if I say "20% of the people cause 80% of the waste", hopefully you'll understand the underlying concept I'm trying to communicate.
conartistpanda@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 36d
My selfishness pushes me to not make life anyone else's problem.
Just because something has always been bad or worse and for everyone, that doesn't make it ok.
Tango@piefed.ca · 5 pts · 36d
The concept that either life must be perfect or else we're all better off having never been born, is a hell of an extreme.
conartistpanda@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 33d
Yes, just like life. There's also no perfection in life, if life was perfect it wouldn't be life in the first place.
Jako302@feddit.org · 2 pts · 36d
Multiple reasons can be true. I could afford kids but I don't like them. At the same time I lack the energy for such a constant responsibility. But both of these reasons don't exclude the fact that I'd rather have humanity die out than set another person in this world as long as the current downward trend continues.
What reasons I tell people depends on who I'm talking to. Especially old people get really condescending if you simply tell them you don't like kids.
stickyprimer@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 36d
No, they don’t owe it to anyone else to have kids. There is a biological imperative to procreate, generally, which I think is why a lot of people treat having kids as the default - something you need a reason not to do.
None of this is really relevant at an individual level. A person is free to do what they wish for whatever reason or no reason. But when an entire population stops procreating, after millennia of compulsively doing so, there is probably some cause worth understanding.
Even in that, I’m not saying it’s a problem that must be solved. Just that there is probably some cause. I do believe the biological imperative is there.
TrippyHippyDan@lemmy.world · 56 pts · 37d
In the US you can't even buy vegetables right now without worrying about getting explosive diarrhea. Just the thing you want for your children.
Joelk111@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 37d
Our government is just trying to help the people of America by tackling the obesity crisis with this all natural ozempic alternative!
/s (if it wasn't obvious)
BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 37d
You slash s, but real talk. Make sure your food is up to temperature. A lot of people are about to find out why past us made the FDA in the first place.
SteelAnt@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 37d
Doc_Crankenstein@slrpnk.net · 7 pts · 36d
CDC is currently having trouble finding the source and keeping track because a few years ago Trump literally dismantled the very programs that were tasked with doing so.
SteelAnt@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 36d
matlag@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 36d
Nah, you meant it was because of Biden, surely, and maybe Obama too, right?
BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 36d
Honestly, the government trying to help you is bad.
-ronnie
HrabiaVulpes@europe.pub · 35 pts · 36d
Do you have any idea how much you have to abuse a living being for it to consciously not want to have kids?
And we achieved this level of abuse on humans! And we did it very well, in reproducible way, with reproducible results across multiple countries! We should make a research paper about it.
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 36d
Nah,
I just think that they're annoying, and they would absolutely ruin my life
There's not a single thing that appeals about having children. Everything I enjoy would be ruined by them
I wasn't beaten or abused by society. I live in a civilised part of the world, rather than the shit show that is 'Murica
It's not neccesary to invent grand reasons for not breeding
I just didn't want to
HrabiaVulpes@europe.pub · -10 pts · 36d
I mean, cynical part of me wants to thank you, since my kids will have better chance at life with less competition for it.
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 12 pts · 36d
This is exactly the kind of thing breeders say that makes me cringe at the thought of reproducing another human into this world. Fucking lunatic
AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 36d
It's people like that that comfort me in my belief that leaving the trees was a mistake.
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 36d
I find people that say "breeders" are even more cringe.
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 36d
Okay?
man_wtfhappenedtoyou@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 36d
Unironically calling another person a breeder is kinda fucked though.
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 36d
Unironically thinking it's better to keep jamming unloved kids into this hateful world instead of making it a better place for those already in it is pretty fucked too
man_wtfhappenedtoyou@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 36d
Having and raising kids and bettering the world we live in aren't mutually exclusive.
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 36d
They certainly aren't mutually inclusive either
Sanctus@anarchist.nexus · 0 pts · 36d
You just assume every child is unloved and maybe in their lifetime they won't make the world a better place? Lol
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 36d
Maybe they will, maybe they won't, but with parents like this:
"I mean, cynical part of me wants to thank you, since my kids will have better chance at life with less competition for it."
I don't expect the world to become a nicer, better, place.
Ibuthyr@feddit.org · -1 pts · 36d
What makes you think their kids are unloved? You just seem extremely bitter. It's cool that you decided not to reproduce. Whatever, it's your life and your decision to make. But fuck you for thinking like that about people who do have kids. Fuck. You.
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 36d
It's justified. You are not thinking straight, and are shoving non-consenting people into a world that is overburdened, and explicitly does not want them.
We need to fix this place, before forcing anyone to live in it.
frostysauce@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 36d
Or, your kids could have less support.
jtrek@startrek.website · 34 pts · 37d
I was looking at the costs of raising a child the other day and I don't know how anyone does it. My job pays garbage with trash health insurance.
I'm just so mad at the management class with their high pay and not doing any actual work. My boss seems fine - I think he knows this is bullshit and goes a little out of his way to make it easier for me. But everyone above him? If I saw them drowning I'd have to think a long time before throwing a life vest.
velma@sh.itjust.works · 16 pts · 37d
They don't want to make it more affordable to have children so that women are forced to drop out of the workforce to stay home and raise them.
Frenchgeek@lemmy.ml · 17 pts · 37d
But they also don't pay enough to be able to raise a kid without both parents working too, I take it?
velma@sh.itjust.works · 13 pts · 37d
Keep them poor and distracted.
Joelk111@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 37d
I could totally afford a child, but if I chose to do that, I wouldn't be able to afford anything else fun, so I haven't chosen to. By all means, I make a pretty decent living and would've probably been in the upper middle class 20 years ago.
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 36d
I was in the top 2% financially in my country before I walked away from that life (the work I did was lucrative, but a brutal grind)
At no point did money feature into the equation
I just really don't like kids.
Joelk111@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 36d
Yeah, there are other reasons than just money for me too, though I do want to have one or two some day.
Multiplexer@discuss.tchncs.de · 29 pts · 37d
Generally agree, but where did the air quality decrease compared to some decades back?
(80s kid here, so maybe my brain is to slow to realize it, because of the remains still in my bloodstreams of the lead fumes and unfiltered coal power plant exhausts I inhaled back then...)
Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world · 41 pts · 37d
It didn't. Air quality is substantially better world wide, there are better, real indicators of how bad the state of the world is the artist could have used. But also far more metrics about how better the world is, which no one ever likes to talk about. Way less extreme poverty, way less starvation, way less war, way more access to clean water, way more vaccinations, etc. The problem is the ultra rich are making life worse for the majority of privileged people, and we are really feeling it. But worldwide, humanity is objectively leaps and bounds better than it was 100 years ago
Aneb@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 37d
But its also air pollutants like smoke particles and car fumes. I'm genuinely thinking of taking the bus today instead of biking because I don't want to kill my lungs.
Update: In case anyone reads this. The Canadian wildfire smoke moved into my city and completely blocks sight within a mile, I couldn't see the two biggest buildings (not to mention the huge but smaller towers) in downtown from a bridge I bike across everyday. When I tried breathing through my mouth all I could taste was smoke, so I solely breathed through my nose.
Photonic@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 37d
Yes but those were worse in the 80s too. Cars used leaded fuel and diesel cars didn’t have mandatory soot filters. I drove behind a Mercedes with a broken (or removed) soot filter the other day and half of the backside of that car was just covered in soot. Like it had shit itself.
You’re probably still better off riding a bicycle due to the simple fact that you’re getting exercise, unless you’re in, say, New Delhi or you ride along a literal highway filled with diesel trucks.
Multiplexer@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 37d
Well, but still during the eighties most of the houses in my area burned brown coal in crude ovens to heat their homes, the cars spit out blue, only half-burned lead-enriched and carbohydrate-tasting exhaust in huge amounts, while the surrounding forests were dying because of all the unfiltered sulphuric acid the power plants emitted.
During winter, we often had dense smog in the valley, heavily tasting like a mixture of wood smoke and burnt rubber and triggering frequent coughing.
And just staying in the inside also wasn't that great of an option, as constant cigarette smoke was a given everywhere.
If I had to name one thing that definitely has gotten better by an insane amount, it would the air quality.
ripcord@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 37d
Right, it's like - is it worse now than being, say, a middle ages European serf? Or anyone at almost any point in 99% of human history?
AlligatorBlizzard@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 37d
You're not wrong but it certainly feels like it right now, I'm in the Twin Cities and the air is just so gross right now due to being downwind from the Canadian wildfires. We're just straight up being told to not go outside with a hazardous rating.
Jaycifer@piefed.social · 4 pts · 37d
Exactly what I was going to say. The comic is only a couple days old, and I don’t know where the artist lives but here in the Twin Cities there has been smoke from Canadian wildfires around this time for several years straight now. I had to postpone my tennis plans today because of it. My older coworker this morning told me it used to never be like this. The office custodians closed the outside air dampers because the smoke was leaking inside.
RoquetteQueen@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 37d
Yeah, I'm pretty sure the comic is talking about the wildfire smoke. It smells like burning tires outside my home right now and everything is yellow.
madeinthebackseat@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 37d
Utah
ivanafterall@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 37d
Inversion days in the Salt Lake valley were so dystopian while I was there.
SharkWeek@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 37d
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 36d
So, let's say you have a system where people go to work, do their job, and get paid. The employer wants more productivity, so the work becomes more stressful ("a full workload"). The worker does more for less, the company celebrates.
There is a hidden element here: stress. Your workers will be more productive, however their baseline stress levels will rise over time. It's cumulative and takes years to show; but it means everyone above a certain age who works a well paying job has a high stress burden. A lot of people live without any job security.
Stressed organisms do not reproduce.
alleycat@feddit.org · 16 pts · 36d
I'd put it this way: being a parent is basically a second job. If your workplace takes 100% of your work capacity, then there is none left for raising children.
Burray_Mookchin@lemmy.ml · 16 pts · 36d
Haha I wish
MolochHorridus@piefed.social · 26 pts · 37d
But imagine if your kid would be so special they could invent solution to all these problems!
/s
Banana@sh.itjust.works · 8 pts · 37d
Twist: the solution is communism
Jako302@feddit.org · 2 pts · 36d
The solution also includes lowering our standard of living to a sustainable level
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 1 pts · 36d
They have lowering birth rates, too, though, I thought.
bridgeenjoyer@gamepad.club · 2 pts · 36d
@MolochHorridus literally every parent of all times thoughts. I'm sure Hitler's parents thought this.
nil@piefed.ca · 24 pts · 37d
There are a whole lot more reasons to NOT have kids imo.
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 35d
I agree
daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 22 pts · 37d
I was educated not to leave trash around when I visited nature.
TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 37d
"Abortion is green."
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 36d
And yet, red...
Taste the rainbow!
SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 37d
I was educated to not leave trash around whatsoever.
nbsp@programming.dev · 20 pts · 37d
all true, but...
we enjoy our free time, hobbies, and traveling the world? want more of that not zero.
Ryanmiller70@lemmy.zip · 17 pts · 36d
I just don't want kids. Knew I never wanted to be a parent ever since I was a kid having to help my parents raise my nephews and niece. I could be a billionaire and every problem on Earth could be solved, I still wouldn't have kids.
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 36d
That's something that people deliberately ignore
There's still so much stigma in being child-free that people make up more socially palatable excuses rather than just saying "I don't want kids"
There is no part of my life that would be improved by having kids
Every part of my life would be less pleasant if I had kids
Simples.
bridgeenjoyer@gamepad.club · 5 pts · 36d
@FistingEnthusiast in most of america you cannot say that or you get blacklisted. I always just say well, not right now! Which really means hopefully never because their lives will be only suffering.
YeahIgotskills2@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 36d
Child-free for 35 years, then had 2 within 2 years. Entirely a personal decision and nobody should dictate to anyone else how they live their lives.
Needless to say my entire perspective has shifted. Its given me a purpose and an outlook I never dreamed I could have. Your mileage may vary.
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 36d
Of course it shifted
I find your "purpose and outlook" comment to be condescending, clichéd and pointless
You will spend the rest of your life justifying your choice, and the fact that you felt the need to do so, unprompted, to a complete stranger, who clearly does not give a fuck tells me that you know deep down that you fucked up
You weren't CF for 35 years if you suddenly changed your mind
You either weren't CF, or you had kids for some stupid reason, and now feel that you have to justify your "change of heart"
YeahIgotskills2@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 36d
Mate, calm down. It was absolutely not my intention to condesend - quite the opposite. However, your reaction has shown me your true character and, like you, I am now absolutely convinced that fatherhood is not for you.
MBech@feddit.dk · 5 pts · 36d
I think what riled that person up, is that the first thing people always tell you when they learn you don't want children is "Oh you'll change your mind!" or "I never knew children could be so great until I actually had them", in an attempt to convince you to bang out some children against your wishes.
It gets really old, really fast, and your comment is down the same road.
YeahIgotskills2@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 35d
Sure—folks sometimes share their lived experience, and sometimes they're insensitive. I tried not to be and had shared a genuine opinion, based on my own life.
But remember, I also had no desire or interest in having children until I did. I've been on that side of the fence, and therefore felt comfortable sharing my experience of the other.
To some folks, it certainly stings when they face clumsy (but likely not malicious) questions about having a family.
For what it's worth, I think it's a foolish question to ask, as you never know someone's circumstances. But if it's a decision you've got agency over, then is being asked about your choice really such a big deal?
After all, everyone is just trying to figure out their own lives, and being curious about other people's choices is only natural. How we interpret and perceive the question is key.
Personally, I've always been interested in people, how we form opinions, and if someone shares a viewpoint I once held that my lived experience changed, I don't really see the harm in mentioning my own perspective.
On the flip side, I make an effort not to get irritated by people who by definition do not have that lived experience and make sweeping, negative generalizations about having kids.
In a funny way, it reminds me of the folk who go out of their way to comment on the EV I drive and tell me why they would never, ever get one, despite having never driven one. I have experienced both, and feel I can comment honestly on the pros and cons. If the person opining how bad they are doesn't like my answers or finds them condescending, that's a shame, but it's not intentional.
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 36d
It's impossible to stress how little your opinion matters to me
infinitecredits@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 36d
4chan is the other way
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 36d
That's quite a leap
I'd happily burn every incel, bigot and halfwit that uses 4chan
But, I'm sure you think you're clever, or that you have somehow scored an imaginary point
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 36d
Yep. Having children necessitates becoming narcissistic. I'm sure parents don't believe this, but to force existence into this world, and call it benevolent is just fucking lunacy. Work on making the world a better place before making new chattel.
I won't believe you're a better person just because you did the most animal thing there is, instead of the most human thing you can do and actually work towards a better existence for everyone
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 36d
Anything two idiot teenagers in the back of a car can achieve accidentally is not worthy of praise
WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 36d
Well, there is an element of giving back for being well, born.
But in this world, that's a no-go.
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 35d
Don’t forget there’s many legitimate reasons why people can’t have kids
RoquetteQueen@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 36d
I really want being childfree to be normalised. The world will be a much better place when the only people having children are the ones who genuinely want to be parents. I'll never understand why some people get so mad at the idea of others just not wanting to have kids.
bridgeenjoyer@gamepad.club · 1 pts · 36d
@Ryanmiller70 same. And I'm pretty sure my parents didnt want them either. Maybe its genetic lol. Never once have wanted one. They dont bother me and I don't mind taking care of them for short periods though.
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 35d
SteelAnt@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 37d
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 5 pts · 36d
Yeah, I was gonna say that's probably the biggest factor. All of these are environmental, which I support but I know many who don't care. It's money...
wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 37d
This, + my health is awful (so I'm not going to subject another being to a rerun of my suffering), and 💕 boys 💕
JamesBoeing737MAX@sopuli.xyz · 0 pts · 37d
Well, adoption exists. You don't have to create a person, but you can still take care of children who need it.
wreckedcarzz@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 37d
I'm in a pretty bad way, unfortunately. Stroke 'survivor' at 21, with more-or-less the right side of my body as deadweight :(. I wasn't in very good condition before but since, I'm a burden to everyone around me.
velma@sh.itjust.works · 13 pts · 37d
More propaganda so it's easier to strip women of their autonomy and access to contraception.
It's not a crisis that the birth rate is falling.
deliriousdreams@fedia.io · 11 pts · 37d
I get the feeling people read your comment and didn't actually understand it so they think you mean the comic is propaganda.
velma@sh.itjust.works · 11 pts · 37d
I also have some dedicated manosphere types that stalk my account frequently. Doesn't bother me, but thank you for your comment :)
pr6o99xq@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 37d
So true
And this people from Lemmy/reddit are... Well, you know what
Kids are pure love and happiness
velma@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 37d
Everyone should have the choice to have children or not.
Pushing propaganda that it’s a crisis that the birth rate is falling is to help strip women of their autonomy over when and how many children they have.
Governments should support families more than they do because it’s the right thing to do and not to force women to have more babies than they want.
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech · 8 pts · 37d
So what does it mean that I've held these same beliefs for over 20 years now and didn't need a comic? What does it mean that my wife holds the same beliefs, and that we're both pro choice? Am I brainwashed? Have I been for decades now?
Or have I looked around and known I do not believe there is a moral way for me personally to bring life into this world. Adopt maybe, but not new life.
velma@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 37d
As a parent, I will defend your right and choice to not have children every single day. People should only have children if they really want to and have the mental capacity to guide a child to relatively stable adulthood.
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech · 8 pts · 37d
One of those things I don't get, with all if the news on bad parents, why are we so eager to force people who obviously don't want a child to have them? Obviously it's not good for the child or the parent.
Of course then you realize it's not about the child or the parent, but the person picketing and screaming and their own personal emotions. They think they are thinking of the children, but it's much more selfish.
bridgeenjoyer@gamepad.club · 1 pts · 36d
@scrubbles more factory slaves for the rich of course. You must have a child who will work 9 hours to make funko pops.
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech · 1 pts · 36d
And then also go home to buy said funko pops, making the rich richer
Flagstaff@programming.dev · 4 pts · 36d
Heck, you don't even have to go into morals. There are so many people who can barely take care of themselves. I wouldn't entrust them to take care of another human being as well, and certainly not force them to do so.
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 36d
because my life is ruined shitheap of misery and i dont have the emotional capacity to deal with kids, the financial capacity to afford kids, and my genetics are a ticking timebomb that i really wouldnt want to inflict on kids the way it was inflicted on me.
and lets not even get into the world itself and how its a festering cesspit on teetering on the edge of fascistic ruin because an elite group of corrupt billionaires don't want to ever give up their dragon hordes, or their ability to fuck infants and toddlers.
AeonFelis@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 36d
Implying the politicians in the government are capable of feeling shame?
lugal@sopuli.xyz · 10 pts · 37d
This is fine
TheGreatRapsBeat@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 36d
I was raised in a very dysfunctional household. I broke free, met an amazing partner, and we both wanted children. I finally have the opportunity to be a kid again with them, provide them the childhood I never had and be apart of it, by having the childhood I never had. My kids are 9 & 11… and we are slowly having to pull back on fun active activities outdoors during the summer months because the environment is getting worse and worse year over year…
I broke the cycle, but their childhood is slowly being robbed of them.
Record rain in my area to where water drainage infrastructure is being destroyed bit by bit every fucking night. Massive tornado inducing storms where we normally don’t see them (a freak event killed a bunch of people and destroyed nearly a billion dollars in property back in the 80s, nothing since and nothing before). Record amount of tornados in my Province, humid as fuck when I live in the prairies. Smokey unbeatable air because of the one area not getting rain burning down.
I want off this ride.
RoquetteQueen@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 36d
Same. Never had a tornado warning in my life. Now we get several actual tornadoes every year. I love my kids and I love being a parent but I feel so guilty.
IEatDaFeesh@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 37d
Idk how you'd draw lower wages and less fulfilling jobs, but that too.
MBech@feddit.dk · 9 pts · 36d
The short answer is: I don't want to.
The longer answer is: I really, seriously, don't want to.
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 35d
That's the thing that so many people seem to miss
They want reasons that they find acceptable, not "I don't wanna"
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 0 pts · 35d
FistingEnthusiast@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 35d
The fact that I just don't want kids is a "legitimate" reason
It's offensive that you think there are "legitimate" reasons, because it implies that anything else is "illegitimate"
MBech@feddit.dk · 3 pts · 35d
I don't need one of your "legitimate" reasons. I don't want to. I also don't want to have a dog, do I need a "legitimate" reason for that?
isekaihero@ani.social · 7 pts · 37d
maybe pay us more
FoxtrotDeltaTango@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 35d
They refuse to pay us more
They don’t pay us enough to live
radiofreebc@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 36d
I went to the Arctic in 2006, learned a lot about our climate future, and decided that if any of it started coming true I wouldn't have any kids. 20 years later, it's all far worse than we imagined and i am happy i didn't bring kids into this mess.
ButteredBread@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 36d
Saapas@piefed.zip · 7 pts · 37d
I mean, doesn't really stop people in some places. Some are raising a family of five during famine, civil war and all sort or shit going on. But those places often have less choice for the women.
But still, most in the Western world, they have conditions vastly better to raise a child than a lot of the third world.
lokalhorst@feddit.org · 6 pts · 37d
!mrlovenstein@sh.itjust.works
InvalidName2@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 36d
Number One: I'm a homosexual, so I'm not having the reproductive type of copulation, EVER.
Number Two: Bigots. They poisoned public perception of homosexuals. They fought to legislate away our rights and prevent us from adopting children amongst many other things like legalized marriage. They pushed gay people into the fringes of society, lead our friends and families to abandon us, marginalized, and isolated us. Those scars run deep and the societal damage is still festering. Even if I were still young enough to feel confident I could raise a child and live long enough to finish the job now that things are "better" and these rights are an option to me, I wouldn't adopt. I have seen the inside, and I know it's all too easy for society to fall back into the abyss. NO thank you. I'm already at max capacity caring for adult parents, can't imagine if there were children in the equation as well.
Now that's just me personally. On the other hand...
Fewer couples have the capacity and/or desire to support a family, let alone a large one, as it means a loss of income from one or both partners not working, vastly increased expenses, strain on relationships, and a myriad other problems. If most people could live comfortably and with reasonably fulfilled needs/desires on the income from one person and it didn't require that one person to work themselves to death, then you might see higher birth rates.
Anecdotally, the people I'm seeing having the most kids (like 3+) are pretty much all financially very well off or struggling really badly. There are exceptions, of course, but most couples who are keeping their heads above water (if only barely) know their limits and recognize that having kids, let alone multiple children, would bring hardship to all involved.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 36d
Trying to find a moment in history when the long term outlook was rosey enough to say "Now is the right time to have kids", and I can't.
Part of having kids is the struggle of supporting other people. Part of the joy of having kids is positioning a future person to do things you lacked the opportunity to do, yourself.
If humanity can solve climate change, we still will not be the generation that lives to see it. We'll pass the torch and then our children will pass the torch and then our grandchildren will know if we were successfully.
raininthebowl@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 36d
My bloodline survived oppression, war, famines, subjugation, violent storms and many more things. I fully understand and agree that people who don’t want kids and can’t see themselves emotionally/financially supporting them should not have kids. It should be a choice and should be a passionate one and there’s nothing wrong with deciding it’s not for you. This doomsaying crap is an awful excuse though. Other than the highest form of elite in a society, there has never been a guarantee for safety or security.
Is it scary that we will be experiencing climate change and the associated catastrophic events associated with it? Yes, it’s terrifying. It’s terrifying that there will be death there will be suffering and there will be violence. It sucks that while we’ve gone through big culture shifts as a species we haven’t united over this or are making big shifts to fix it. We CAN though. We HAVE united under struggle historically. We DO survive the impossible and the terrible and while I can’t say with any absolute that most people are great, there are great people and have been those who have made a positive change.
Impractical_Island@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 36d
I would like to have kids, and that's as far as that joke is allowed to go. I just want little people to clean my house while I get drunk, that's the joke.
efty@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 36d
feeling like the whole society is absolute delulu atp. the world is going down so why the fuck would you set kids in this world? everybody is acting like they dont fear the future and everybody is just thinking one day ahead. do they really think its going to get better by magic?
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 35d
The drive to reproduce is very deeply seated.
efty@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 35d
never got that. like i get the drive to have sex, to do risky things or somethink spontaneous. But you can think about kids for years. you can always decide and take your time with the decision. i know for most people its not that deep, but for me i never got the feeling to want my own kids. why would i?
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 35d
Do you think condoms co-evolved with life on Earth? What do you think happens after sex? You're programmed to respond to miniature copies of yourself.
efty@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 35d
you can choose to adopt. i also think kids are cute, but the world is going down and i dont want to be responsible for a human, because i think if you start your life right now the whole world will be shit like 10-30 years from now on. the world is already shitty & im trying to life as good as possible. i also like cute dogs, but if i cant provide i dont get one. imo nobody is ready for whats comming. so yes ill use condoms ffs
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 3 pts · 37d
Even more importantly: kids suck.
velma@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 37d
So do adults.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 12 pts · 37d
That's why I'm not making any adults either.
bridgeenjoyer@gamepad.club · 1 pts · 36d
@velma little shits grow up to be big shits.
velma@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 36d
Big shits have the life experience to know better though.
makeshift0546@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 37d
The projections in here are wild 🤣
alcea@feddit.org · 1 pts · 33d
I like how its so obvious there is no need to talk a single word. This could have easily been much longer, but these arguments are sufficient.
NahMarcas@lemmy.ml · -2 pts · 37d
Politico publish a note where european population start getting more deaths than borning. https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-population-shrinking-eurostat-fertility-birth-death-migration/
Garbagio@lemmy.zip · -4 pts · 37d
I... Look, can we be real for a minute? None of these are why people aren't having kids.
Climate change is primarily affecting the global south, countries that have had the slowest drop in birth rates. Air quality globally has been increasing for decades. Yes, the current generation has less attainability than their parents, but modern life quality is still higher than any point in history. Even if you were to attribute it to that decrease, there have been decreases in resources between generations before without anywhere near the dropoff of births. Sumerian peasants didn't have this level of decrease during concurrent wars and famine, both demonstrably worse conditions than most people alive will ever face.
Current studies point to one correlative factor: Smartphones. Now, we can discuss why: Personally I believe it is a mix of several reasons, including beneficial ones. I would argue that smartphone have made people more aware than ever of the unfairness of life in modern society, as an example of a beneficial cause. 30 years ago, a woman in Nebraska wouldn't know intimately the firsthand account of a modern genocide, for example. Let me be clear: This is undoubtedly, unequivocally a good thing.
But we also need to address the sheer amount of slop content and unending access. Shortform content is proven to inflict users with symptoms reflective of ADHD and anxiety. Social media is built to make us not just dependent but addicted. The rise of smartphones has been part and parcel to the loss of third spaces; it's not just that people lost community, it's that we have also replaced it with instant access to online communities that cannot and will never be a viable replacement. We let the rich finally build the ultimate circus. And fixing that will not just require a fundamental restructuring of society, but also tough conversations about our responsibility to escape these systems.
OryxAndCake@slrpnk.net · 16 pts · 36d
Climate collapse, resource depletion, the enshittification of everything and my ever growing misanthropy, are exactly why I'm refusing to procreate.
And no, climate collapse and resource depletion are not just affecting the global south. Not by a long shot.
90% of earths topsoil is at risk of depletion by 2050
Global freshwater demand will exceed supply 40% by 2030
Global human population has surpassed Earth’s sustainable carrying capacity.
Global carbon emissions are still rising
The latest CFSv2 model runs now show the Nino 3.4 SST anomaly forecast peaking at 4.10°C in November.
The arctic sea ice extent is declining rapidly and we're likely headed into a Blue Ocean Event later this year, and potentially a double BOE depending on how the El Nino and summer in the southern hemisphere go.
June 2026 came in as the second warmest on record since 1940 at 1.39°C above the 1850-1900 pre-industrial baseline, second only to 2024 at 1.50°C above the baseline
The world is likely to exceed a key global warming target soon but the earths alebedo with the declining sea ice and lack of cloud cover will impact these numbers massively and isn't being predicted for, which means that 4.5c above the baseline by 2060 is now possible.
Garbagio@lemmy.zip · -3 pts · 36d
I never said just affecting the south, I said disproportionately. And you're kind of proving my point: Before widespread information access, you probably wouldn't even know. And yes, that is a good thing, as I stressed repeatedly in my post; not all reasons to blame the smartphone are bad, many are even good. It is a good thing people know about climate change. About the human cost of imperialism. About genocide. But that alone doesn't account for the sheer drop, either, and there are negatives to this technology that need to be addressed.
OryxAndCake@slrpnk.net · 6 pts · 36d
There's more people alive now than ever before. This insane need for infinite increases on a finite planet is why the world is ending.
Smart phones and short form content aren't causing birth rates to decrease, that started decades ago when western women started getting access to contraception and gaining human rights.
Garbagio@lemmy.zip · -3 pts · 36d
A) we don't need infinite growth; what we need is a tapering down so we don't end up with an entire generation spending their golden years in a ditch. B) As I've stated to another user, you're equivocating. Stop that. We've had the same percentile decrease in the last 20 years as we did throughout the previous century; you're looking at two different rates of decrease and calling them the same because they both happen to be decreases. That's not how math works.
OryxAndCake@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 36d
Lmao, don't worry about your pension, the water wars will get you long before you're old enough to retire. Billions upon billions of us will die in the next 50 years.
Garbagio@lemmy.zip · -2 pts · 36d
It's more important to you to hold some personal sense of moral superiority than engage with the death of millions; your blasé attitude speaks volumes towards your privilege. I have no doubt that the reason you don't want kids has far less to do with climate change than being able to say you won't because of climate change.
OryxAndCake@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 36d
Did that make you feel better? I bet it did. Go on, let it all out. Tell me all the shitty things you've assumed about me because being angry at me is easier than accepting the world is ending.
Bad_Ideas_In_Bulk@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 36d
The demograpic downturn started decades before that, but in the west it was (and to some extent still is) hidden by immigration.
Garbagio@lemmy.zip · -4 pts · 36d
You're obfuscating: It's been well documented that the availability of resources is inversely correlated to birthrates. We've had as much dropoff since the phone as we did since the industrial revolution. You're calling two different rates of drop the same because they're both drops; that's not how math works.
Bad_Ideas_In_Bulk@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 34d
I didn't create demographic trends older than I am to obfuscate anything.
Demographically most of the world has shown an explosion of population as industrialization of agriculture, medicine, and sanitation almost eliminate famines and childhood disease. And then you see the curve go down. Often all the way to negative. This is repeating in other countries, and just like they're catching up faster economically, the social results are following as well. I'm not as sure about other countries, but Canada would have had negative growth since the 80s if not for immigration.
So, while smartphones might be a factor, they can't be the primary or only cause of a trend that predates their existence by over a quarter of a century.
Famko@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 36d
Yeah I agree that smartphones have a huge role to play in lower birth rates all over the globe.
There is a correlation between the adoption of certain entertainment technologies and birth rates, such as TVs becoming widespread causing a small decrease in births, simply because people are spending more free time not being bored. Same thing happened with smartphones, but with a much more drastic impact.
More recently, during 2020 and 2021 the birth rates increased drastically due to the pandemic lockdowns making people bored and with far more free time on their hands.
ButteredBread@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 36d
Famko@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 35d
They got close to each other because they were already living together.
Obviously a lot of new relationships didn't magically form during the lockdown.
ButteredBread@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 35d
pr6o99xq@lemmy.world · -11 pts · 37d
Absurd argument