Antinatalism

[SuicidalTiger]

A few simple questions nothing more.

• What do you think of antinatalisim?
• Do you hold contempt towards your parents?
• Do you blame them?
• If so is one more responsible then the other?

 

[davidtorez]

What is Antinatalism

dontprocreate.org

Main Anti-Natalist Arguments

dontprocreate.org

Common Pro-Natalist Excuses

dontprocreate.org

Antinatalism is one of the most compassionate life views IMO. I also believe prevention is better than cure .
I don't hold contempt towards my parents, it does take constant mental and conscious reminding though telling myself it's not their fault as they were not educated on the antinatalism philosophy.
I do blame my mother more than my dad in my case because she only had kids to make my dad happy , and it showed. Even these days my dad says if he knew the current state of the world that he wouldve never had kids . He now agrees with Antinatalism after I explained it to him.

 

[DeIetedUser4739]

All for it
Yes
Yes
They both agreed to have children so both responsible, although I know a couple that the lady was trying to get pregnant (and did) to baby trap the guy.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

What do you think of antinatalism?

I generally agree that creating new life means introducing more suffering into the world and is overall a harm. Assuming I don't CTB in the next decade or so, I have ruled out having children myself. I do not, however, think people who have already done so (ie. parents) are categorically immoral.

Do you hold contempt towards your parents?

Yes, I was my mom's third kid and my dad's seventh, there was no reason to have me. They had adequate access to protection and were not under any external pressure to have another child, it was their free choice.

Do you blame them?

By definition I wouldn't be here suffering without them, so in that sense, yes.

If so is one more responsible then the other?

No, equal responsibility.

 

[Darkover]

Human rights
I'll be frank. I've always felt that it's horrible to send a person into the world who didn't ask to be there. (...) Look around you. Of all the people you see, no one is here by his own wish. Of course, what I just said is the most banal truth there is. So banal, and so basic, that we've stopped seeing it and hearing it. (...) Everyone jabbers about human rights. What a joke! Your existence isn't founded on any right. They don't even allow you to end your life by your own choice, these defenders of human rights.
and to think all my problems wouldn't of existed if two idiots had used a condom

The only loving parents are the ones who don't have any children
No matter how many people argue that the opposite is true, there are no loving parents, as bringing a creature into this world could never be an act of love; it is an act of pure selfishness. The child is not asking you to bring them here, you bring them here to fulfill whatever desires you have (whether those desires are about being a parent, experiencing love, etc.).
The true act of love and selflessness is to do everything in your power to never reproduce, either by getting a vasectomy or a tubal ligation, or by simply staying celibate. Condoms alone aren't really reliable, since they can break (among other things).
Bringing a baby into this world is beyond despicable. Trapping them in these awful bodies, which are constantly whipping us to do chores just to avoid pain. Having to go to school and work at a job just to survive. Mental illnesses, physical illnesses. Being disabled. Being born in poverty and living in filth. Being abused in any way. Being tortured. War. Having to deal with jackasses. The fact that there is absolutely no easy way out of here. It's just preposterous.
There are so many things that could go so horrifically wrong, and in so many ways, that no amount of the so-called pleasures of life could ever make up for it. Quite simply, it's criminal to have children; if you love them, then don't have any!

my future non existent children who won't have to come to this shithole of a world to suffer and die

 

[davidtorez]

Human rights
I'll be frank. I've always felt that it's horrible to send a person into the world who didn't ask to be there. (...) Look around you. Of all the people you see, no one is here by his own wish. Of course, what I just said is the most banal truth there is. So banal, and so basic, that we've stopped seeing it and hearing it. (...) Everyone jabbers about human rights. What a joke! Your existence isn't founded on any right. They don't even allow you to end your life by your own choice, these defenders of human rights.
and to think all my problems wouldn't of existed if two idiots had used a condom

The only loving parents are the ones who don't have any children
No matter how many people argue that the opposite is true, there are no loving parents, as bringing a creature into this world could never be an act of love; it is an act of pure selfishness. The child is not asking you to bring them here, you bring them here to fulfill whatever desires you have (whether those desires are about being a parent, experiencing love, etc.).
The true act of love and selflessness is to do everything in your power to never reproduce, either by getting a vasectomy or a tubal ligation, or by simply staying celibate. Condoms alone aren't really reliable, since they can break (among other things).
Bringing a baby into this world is beyond despicable. Trapping them in these awful bodies, which are constantly whipping us to do chores just to avoid pain. Having to go to school and work at a job just to survive. Mental illnesses, physical illnesses. Being disabled. Being born in poverty and living in filth. Being abused in any way. Being tortured. War. Having to deal with jackasses. The fact that there is absolutely no easy way out of here. It's just preposterous.
There are so many things that could go so horrifically wrong, and in so many ways, that no amount of the so-called pleasures of life could ever make up for it. Quite simply, it's criminal to have children; if you love them, then don't have any!

my future non existent children who won't have to come to this shithole of a world to suffer and die

And there's always the choice of adopting a child for those people who feel they have the need to have kids.

 

[poilala1]

• Great.
• No.
• No.
• No (hypothetically).

 

[Agon321]

I don't agree with antinatalism. I try to understand human nature and having children is the foundation of our nature.
I don't like life at the moment, but if I hadn't been born, I wouldn't know about it.
The irony of our world.

Of course, I am a liberal person and having children should be a completely private matter.
If someone wants to have a child, let him have one, if he doesn't want to, don't have one.
In my opinion, antinatalism is a bit of a denial of liberalism.
To my knowledge, antinatalists do not want anyone to have children.
Such people want to end procreation.
Where is liberalism here? Where is the freedom here?
I definitely won't have a child in my life, but I'm not going to complain about people who have a child.
This is a completely individual matter.

Of course, I understand the argument that none of us wanted to be born.
But this is a problem with the entire world, not just with our species.

Some people enjoy life even if they have very bad moments in their lives.
Why would I take that away from them?
I really don't like the current reality.
I'm disappointed, but that doesn't mean I have to turn everything into ashes.
It's enough for me to turn into ash myself.
This is freedom, which is the primary value for me.

I certainly don't blame my parents for being born.
Even my father, with whom I have a terrible relationship.
It's just our nature.

I'm not a normal person, so my perception is distorted.
Someone else in my place might be happier.

I love freedom, so antinatalism contradicts my values.
Of course, I would also like to leave this world whenever I want, but as we all know, it is not that simple :/.
Of course it's possible, but more difficult than making a baby.

In hindsight, I can say that I regret having been born.
But this is only in hindsight.
I had to be born to find out, unfortunately :/

I came, I saw, I didn't like it.

 

[thewalkingdread]

I do not, however, think people who have already done so (ie. parents) are categorically immoral.

But the antinatalism thesis doesn't state that parents are immoral... This is a distorted representation — i.e. strawman fallacy — most people make about it — usually pro-lifers/natalists, as an ego defense mechanism.

Antinatalism states that the act of procreation is immoral. This makes a huge difference.

The focus of the antinatalist argument is THE ACT not the person doing it.

 

[Dark Window]

• What do you think of antinatalisim?

It's an understandable view and I sympathise, but don't follow it. I have no desire to have kids of my own. I think I'd agree more with AN's if their main reason for being that way were more focused on environmental concerns, cost of living and just the impracticality of bringing a child into a world that doesn't adequately provide for many people's needs. But it's the fact that their main reason for being AN is that they consider having a child in any scenario immoral because the child cannot consent, and therefore the only moral choice is voluntary extinction as there's no chance of a child ever being able to consent. As if the lack of consent is what primarily matters here.

I get where they are coming from, but every person who lived a satisfying life didn't consent and were glad they were born. It's just an unfortunate aspect to life, but I still think it can be worth it if the child is being brought into a healthy enough environment. I know there's no guarantees, which is why I am for assisted suicide if it doesn't work out well enough. But I think if you asked most people if they have preferred to have lived or not lived at all, despite the suffering, a large portion of the population would say they are glad they lived, despite the negatives of life. I don't know this for a fact, but I believe it to be the case because many people seem to have at least a few things in life they enjoy, and make life worth living.

TL;DR - My view is, a massive portion of kids are brought into the world by selfish parents who just fucked without caring about the consequences, or only thought of their own desire for kids, rather than focusing on the kids needs. But I think it's not necessarily immoral to bring kids into the world if the parents are prepared financially and emotionally for the kid, and are ready to try and give it a good life. I think it's a bit extreme to literally think there's no ethical way to give birth so lets just go extinct. It all depends on whether or not you think the positives of life are worth the negatives, and that depends completely on the person. I believe that science should find a way to sterilise humans by default and only reverse the procedure once parents have passed tests to prove they are capable.

• Do you hold contempt towards your parents?

Absolutely not. If your parents abused or neglected you, then I understand. If they were not prepared to meet your needs because they had kids unprepared, and I suppose I can understand your hatred of them then. But anyone who hates their parents purely because they had them is an idiot. Realise you have no been anti-natalist throughout your life, these views were probably only exposed to you in adulthood. Your parents may simply not have had anti-natalist beliefs/info available to them. Many of our parents were born in the early/mid/semi-late 1900's, and didn't grow up with the the internet, so their ability to access useful info was far more limited than ours is in millennial/gen-z times.

• Do you blame them?

No.

• If so is one more responsible then the other?

Responsible for what? Life is life, and living beings have strong drives to survive and reproduce. Getting the species to go anti-natalist completely will be an incredible task, certainly not achieveable in our lifetimes, and maybe not ever.

 

[Alexei_Kirillov]

But the antinatalism thesis doesn't state that parents are immoral... This is a distorted representation — i.e. strawman fallacy — most people make about it — usually pro-lifers/natalists, as an ego defense mechanism.

Antinatalism states that the act of procreation is immoral. This makes a huge difference.

The focus of the antinatalist argument is THE ACT not the person doing it.

I agree, I just specified that because whenever this topic is discussed on SaSu, there are often people arguing that parents are not just immoral but actually evil.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

What do you think of antinatalisim?

From a purely rational and logical perspective it seems to make sense, to me at least. I have no genuine arguments against it and yet I can't fully embrace it because I'm still selfish. I know that it's better to adopt and yet I just don't think I could. I had my own thread once where I personally grappled with this moral dilemma but ultimately I decided that if I were to somehow feel happy enough to stay alive then eventually I will have kids no matter how evil that makes me, which is why people here should be glad at the idea of me CTBing before that could happen. I know that kids of mine are bound to suffer in worse ways than some average children might simply because they would have me as a failure of a dad. I'm pretty sure my unborn children have already been using time travel powers to keep me a miserable virgin in order to prevent their own existence.

• Do you hold contempt towards your parents?
• Do you blame them?
• If so is one more responsible then the other?

Not for my mother. She was just a victim of naïveté and being human. My father on the other hand is a total asshole and definitely responsible for a fair amount of my worst aspects. I never want to see him again if I don't have to. I would only ever feel safe being around him if I knew he had gone senile and immobile which would allow me to actually confront him and tell him everything wrong with him without fearing his retaliation. Unfortunately the genes I received from him make him seem a lot younger than he actually is so even though he's 68 years old, he's still going relatively strong mentally. I don't think I can wait long enough for dementia or Alzheimer's to hit him if it even will at all. I don't blame him though. He too is a victim of being human and thus all of the same drives, instincts, and other urges every living creature must fight off.

 

[thewalkingdread]

there are often people arguing that parents are not just immoral but actually evil.

This is true. There are people who extrapolate the antinatalist thesis and go that far.

But the way I see it, these cases happen because people are venting about how they FEEL. And, to me, this is somewhat a natural/expected result because when people are talking about how they were personally harmed by something, they tend to get emotional and do not mesure words in an appropriate manner.

Who knows... Maybe the person was born into a nasty family environment, where she was abused... To me, that would be enough to grant the use of the word 'evil' in their heated argument.

It's a very different scenario from having a serious, carefully balanced, philosophical discussion.

---

But it's the fact that their main reason for being AN is that they consider having a child in any scenario immoral because the child cannot consent, and therefore the only moral choice is voluntary extinction as there's no chance of a child ever being able to consent.

You're just plain wrong in your description of what the main argument for anti-natalism is.

The "consent debate" is just one of many aspects of the argument and it's definitely not the main reason for anti-natalim, as you've put it.

The main reason, or argument, for anti-natalism is that procreation imposes unjustified, inevitable and unnecessary harm on an individual.

As if the lack of consent is what primarily matters here.

Therefore, as you've stated above — and that is a true proposition —, what primarily matters here, for anti-natalism, is avoiding harming others — unnecessarily.

 

[FuneralCry]

It's horrifying and disgusting how they impose the futile and torturous burden that is human existence onto others, why cant they just leave the non-existent alone in peace and not force them to suffer. It's a devastating tragedy how they procreate even know nobody can be harmed by never existing at all with there never being a need for existence. All that procreation does is harm existing beings. It's evil to me as it's the source of all suffering and I'm against making others suffer, what's so tragic is how the human species hasn't gone voluntarily extinct yet, humans truly are the worst most repulsive species with how they continue to commit this abhorrent crime even know they have the ability to be conscious and aware unlike animals.

Of course those who procreate are at fault, they are creating and prolonging all the suffering, existence itself is the true problem, it's a punishment to exist and we are paying the price all because others so harmfully decided to procreate. More than anything I wish I never existed at all, I despise existing.

 

[sserafim]

Before you were born, you didn't miss anything at all. Because you were born, you have to suffer. Life is suffering. It's one of the four noble truths of Buddhism. As another member said, the best policy is prevention. The unborn don't know and don't care about the "joys" and "pleasures" of life that they're "missing out" on. They also will never feel pain and suffering, and this is the reason why people are antinatalists: to reduce suffering. It's better never to have been. There's a pleasure and pain asymmetry in life: there are endless ways to suffer and few ways to feel pleasure. Existence is also harmful to an individual. The sad truth is that the bad in this world outweighs the good. It's also immoral to bring someone into this world without their consent to satisfy *your own* desires. You're taking away an individual's right to choose

 

[Forever Sleep]

I agree with the idea of antinatilism because life brings with it such enormous risks and I don't see much at all negative about not existing and not being aware that you don't exist because- you don't exist. The idea that someone might be happy here for brief periods doesn't really justify the risk factor for me for other things they will 100% have to encounter in life- death, taxes, very likely illness at some point.

Plus, I think choice is the most important gift we have. Seeing as our choice to leave life is so restricted- I don't think it's fair to conscribe a sentient being to a life they may well end up hating and struggling enormously to change or leave. If assisted suicide were widely available and accepted, maybe I'd feel differently. But effectively, we are forced to come here, forced to comply and prevented from leaving as far as possible.

I'm mostly antinatilist on my own behalf. I'm so grateful for all potentially involved that I didn't have children. Otherwise, I suspect they would now be suffering or, they'd be worried about the state I'm in. So- we'd both be suffering. That said, I don't hate parents for their choice. I just pray to God (if there is one) that it turns out ok for them.

I love my parents but yes, contempt has started to creep in sadly. I spend at least part of each day thinking: 'Why did you do this to me?'

My Mum was diagnosed with cancer at the same time they confirmed she was pregnant. She so desperately wanted children. I guess I'm happy for her she got her wish for a few years. (She died when I was 3.) I just wish they could have gotten their wish without involving me!

Plus, maybe they were just both optimists but I can't really believe they didn't consider the worst case scenario- that she would die young and my Dad would be left to parent alone. I can't really believe they wouldn't think that outcome wouldn't devastate all of us. Still, I guess it's quite hard to kill off something when you know it's growing inside you and it's what you desperately wanted.

I guess I can envisage thinking like that- being more 'normal'. In which case, I don't think many people have children to be mallicious- so, maybe it's not fair to feel so angry at them. I just wish we could see their futures. Or- I wish we got the chance to choose to live or not. Or, at a minimum- it was easier and more acceptable to leave if we couldn't make life work for us.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I think that many people who claim to be antinatalists aren't actually antinatalists but rather a conditional natalist. Seeing an actual antinatalist is rare. As for my views on antinatalism, I think that it's almost correct. The asymmetry argument that is present within antinatalism is entirely correct. However, the thing that nearly made me accept antinatalism is the idea of how there isn't a reason to create a child for that child's sake combined with how it's a gamble to create life and it's entirely possible that the person who you created would wish to be dead. Procreation is selfish and immoral but I believe that legalising euthanasia for everybody who wants it would make procreation neutral instead of immoral hence why I can't really be considered as an antinatalist

 

[thewalkingdread]

What do you think of antinatalisim?

To me, it's the most astute, sensible, reasonable, liberal, freedom loving, benevolent and common sense defiant ethical philosophy there is.

And it's actually a quite obvious and simple truism/ethical proposition:

1. Life is entailed with inevitable suffering.
   1. Aging is inevitable suffering.
   2. Sickness is inevitable suffering.
   3. Death is inevitable suffering.
2. Therefore, procreation produces inevitable suffering.
3. A minimalist ethical system demands that we ought not to produce unjustified and unnecessary harm upon others.
4. Therefore, procreation is immoral.

It's a shame that most of humanity can't see how obvious antinatalism is because most people don't really like to spend their time with introspection and reflecting about life's inconvenient truths. Therefore, most people end up having their best judgment clouded by their own selfish desires and "passions".

Do you hold contempt towards your parents?

Yes, absolutely.

And just for the fact of bringing me here, to this pigsty of a world — infested with violence, diseases, lies and injustice! —, knowing that I would suffer and die. It doesn't really matter if they had the best intentions or the worst ones. As the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with "good" intentions.

By the time people are able to procreate, they've lived long enough to fully understand the three key concepts of life (Aging, Sickness and Death) even though they might not be fully aware of them by a clouded judgment.

Do you blame them?

Yes, absolutely.

There isn't any good excuse for what they've done.

Plus, they're both DSM's cluster B pathologically evil dirtbags.

If so is one more responsible then the other?

It takes two to tango. So, both are equally responsible.

But if one thinks of procreation from a strict biological perspective, women obviously have a greater part in it — it takes only 9 minutes to ejaculate but 9 months to incubate.

 

[JKFleck]

- BASED
- YES
- YES
- no

 

[xinino]

A few simple questions nothing more.

• What do you think of antinatalisim?
• Do you hold contempt towards your parents?
• Do you blame them?
• If so is one more responsible then the other?

Not practical
No
Yes
Yes

Before you were born, you didn't miss anything at all. Because you were born, you have to suffer. Life is suffering. It's one of the four noble truths of Buddhism. As another member said, the best policy is prevention. The unborn don't know and don't care about the "joys" and "pleasures" of life that they're "missing out" on. They also will never feel pain and suffering, and this is the reason why people are antinatalists: to reduce suffering. It's better never to have been. There's a pleasure and pain asymmetry in life: there are endless ways to suffer and few ways to feel pleasure. Existence is also harmful to an individual. The sad truth is that the bad in this world outweighs the good. It's also immoral to bring someone into this world without their consent to satisfy *your own* desires. You're taking away an individual's right to choose

I think you can't semantically talk about nothing.

I think that many people who claim to be antinatalists aren't actually antinatalists but rather a conditional natalist. Seeing an actual antinatalist is rare. As for my views on antinatalism, I think that it's almost correct. The asymmetry argument that is present within antinatalism is entirely correct. However, the thing that nearly made me accept antinatalism is the idea of how there isn't a reason to create a child for that child's sake combined with how it's a gamble to create life and it's entirely possible that the person who you created would wish to be dead. Procreation is selfish and immoral but I believe that legalising euthanasia for everybody who wants it would make procreation neutral instead of immoral hence why I can't really be considered as an antinatalist

"There isn't a reason to create a child for that child's sake." I think that our reward system used to work without our consent. "Humans were like animals without or underdeveloped neocortex." I think we just followed our SI.

I think we should only see ourselves as a circle in the chain of selfish genes's procreation: "This is how our body considers itself, anyway." Selfish genes who are following the second law of thermodynamics of the universe to increase entropy use more complex systems.

Meaning, a child is his mother and father; parents are creating a more developed version of themselves to carry their existence, "their gene," not necessary "their consciousness.".

 

[JKFleck]

The fact that other people from outside SaSu call Anti-natalism and/or nihilism as "Cults" rather than a form of philosophy already tells in itself how people are so brainwashed to be pro-life and procreation on auto-pilot and "SUICIDE BAD LIFE GOOD" CENSOR EVERYTHING THAT'S RELATED TO SUICIDE