Procreation is selfish.

[diadem99]

Imagine thinking bringing life into this world is a great thing to do. Natalists produce offspring against the wishes of said offspring. We don't have a say in this, and culture and society have shunned and berated us for talking against the cult of reproduction.

The very idea of reproduction disgusts me. Culture has forced the aspect of breeding as this wondrous, positive, beautiful thing but the reality is far from this perceived "truth."

Reproduction is selfish. Parents are selfish. Asking, "But how could you let your parents live with that?" to suicidal people adds fuel to the fire.

We didn't fucking asked for this.

Life has no potential to be anything beyond suffering.

 

[Tesha]

Parents are selfish

*most parents are selflessly trying their best to bring up their children.

If you don't feel your parents did a great job and you hate life, then just say that. Criticising other parents with generalisations isn't ok. I'm not shunning or berating you, I'm just disagreeing with your view.

 

[EvisceratedJester]

*most parents are selflessly trying their best to bring up their children.

If you don't feel your parents did a great job and you hate life, then just say that. Criticising other parents with generalisations isn't ok. I'm not shunning or berating you, I'm just disagreeing with your view.

Most parents have children for purely selfish reasons and treat them like property and things rather than like human-beings. Most parents are perfectly fine with beating and hitting their kids, screaming at them, not respecting their opinions or boundaries, using them as pawns to push their views, disowning them over things as dumb as them being queer, etc. The standards for parenting are incredibly low and a lot of parents can't even meet them. Most parents can't even acknowledge the harm they've done to their kids and will even invalidate their feelings and gaslight them into believing that the shitty things they did to them were justified (hence why child abuse is so normalized). @diadem99 is in the right to call out the inherent selfishness of deciding to have kids. You aren't selfless for having to take responsibility for a person you created.

 

[diadem99]

*most parents are selflessly trying their best to bring up their children.

If you don't feel your parents did a great job and you hate life, then just say that. Criticising other parents with generalisations isn't ok. I'm not shunning or berating you, I'm just disagreeing with your view.

I am not calling parents selfish for how they raise their children— be it good or bad— I am calling them selfish for the very act of procreation.

I never once brought up the topic of my own upbringing, so I don't see why I should "just say that."

 

[Forever Sleep]

You aren't selfless for having to take responsibility for a person you created.

I agree with this in a nutshell. I worked in retail for years and once, there was this child screaming its head off. Everyone was wincing at the noise. The customer I was serving said: 'Think of the poor mother. She has to put up with that all day.' But I just couldn't see it that way. Like- didn't she realise babies cried? That they would cost money and time? That they would be their own person that could well not live up to the expectations placed on it? I've even heard mothers complain about the hours of labour they went through to have their children. Like that's the child's fault!

I do find it weird that children are made to feel like they owe their parents. I guess if it's a natural gratitude because they were so good to them and did so much for them, that's nice. But- as a kind of guilt trip, that seems wrong to me. Investing time and money into a sentient being because you want to reap the rewards some day just seems manipulative.

I absolutely applaud parents who do a good job. I admire how committed and loving some of them are. But, selfless for bringing them up ok? No. It was a decision they made to bring that child into the world. It should be standard that they do a good job- it's a huge responsibility they accepted.

Personally, I do hold antinatilist views. I think this world is far too problematic to bring a child in to. I think the very nature of the human body is problematic. Yes, we can experience nice things but there are utterly terrible things we can go through also. Some are 100% guaranteed. That child very likely will witness the death of its own parents and family members and it will likely suffer to some extent before dieing too. Plus- it's unlikely to have free reign in life, unless it's parents are filthy rich. It will be expected to work like a good little drone. So many choices are made for it. It doesn't seem fair to inflict that on a person to me.

It's an experiment basically. Where nice things might happen but, there's also the possibility- sometimes probability that awful things will happen too. How many people would knowingly submit a sentient being to an experiement like that when they didn't actually need to start it?

That all said, who knows what would have happened to any of us if our lives had taken a different route? I expect most parents have children with the best intentions at least. I'm very antinatilist for me. For other parents, I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that their children end up ok and not like us.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

It's pretty selfish but half the time it starts out with good intentions. Just like most charity or philanthropy work it can be interpreted as both selfish and selfless if done right, though it only sometimes is.

 

[Esokabat]

*most parents are selflessly trying their best to bring up their children.

If you don't feel your parents did a great job and you hate life, then just say that. Criticising other parents with generalisations isn't ok. I'm not shunning or berating you, I'm just disagreeing with your view.

These threads are usually absolute echo chambers. There is no dialoge normally so the best thing to do is let them have their echo chamber thread and let them all agree with each other. I guess everyone needs a place for vent. There are threads about other topics that can have real back and forth dialog but these threads will not have those. Dialog requires some thought flexibility, some plasticity in thinking, and if it is missing, the conversation cannot be more than a calcified, set in stone, rigid echo chamber. Whenever anyone is on the very extreme end of any belief, they have calcified their point of view enough whereby no spoken or written words can make a difference on how they think about things. The thought plasticity is gone. The same happens sometimes with old people but their brain loses their plasticity due to aging. In this case, it is probably some extreme life experiences that caused that. With every topic, we always have the bell curve, the
normal distribution curve with two extremes on the two sides and the large average in the middle. You can usually have a dialog in the middle part as it has enough room in viewpoint to discuss different points of views. Once someone swings to either extremes of the bell curve, they usually just want to talk to each other and have the same ideas repeated back to them. So these threads are more for venting than actual conversation between different ideas. Which is fine, everyone deserves to have a place to vent.

 

[diadem99]

I

These threads are usually absolute echo chambers. There is no dialoge normally so the best thing to do is let them have their echo chamber thread and let them all agree with each other. I guess everyone needs a place for vent. There are threads about other topics that can have real back and forth dialog but these threads will not have those. Dialog requires some thought flexibility, some plasticity in thinking, and if it is missing, the conversation cannot be more than a calcified, set in stone, rigid echo chamber. Whenever anyone is on the very extreme end of any belief, they have calcified their point of view enough whereby no spoken or written words can make a difference on how they think about things. The thought plasticity is gone. The same happens sometimes with old people but their brain loses their plasticity due to aging. In this case, it is probably some extreme life experiences that caused that. With every topic, we always have the bell curve, the
normal distribution curve with two extremes on the two sides and the large average in the middle. You can usually have a dialog in the middle part as it has enough room in viewpoint to discuss different points of views. Once someone swings to either extremes of the bell curve, they usually just want to talk to each other and have the same ideas repeated back to them. So these threads are more for venting than actual conversation between different ideas. Which is fine, everyone deserves to have a place to vent.

What's.. With the ad hominem? Your condescending tone is unnecessary. I am open to all and any viewpoints. As I corrected the person you replied to above, I called parents selfish for choosing to reproduce, rather than attack or "generalize" them and criticize them for their parenting style.

I hold antinatalist views, and you don't, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Rather than choosing to refute my arguments, you have chosen to infantilize people who hold similar opinions as me.

 

[JKFleck]

Couples become evil as soon as they become parents, period. Regardless of how well they raised/will raise the child.

 

[Esokabat]

I

What's.. With the ad hominem? Your condescending tone is unnecessary. I am open to all and any viewpoints. As I corrected the person you replied to above, I called parents selfish for choosing to reproduce, rather than attack or "generalize" them and criticize them for their parenting style.

I hold antinatalist views, and you don't, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Rather than choosing to refute my arguments, you have chosen to infantilize people who hold similar opinions as me.

I

What's.. With the ad hominem? Your condescending tone is unnecessary. I am open to all and any viewpoints. As I corrected the person you replied to above, I called parents selfish for choosing to reproduce, rather than attack or "generalize" them and criticize them for their parenting style.

I hold antinatalist views, and you don't, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Rather than choosing to refute my arguments, you have chosen to infantilize people who hold similar opinions as me.

I don't believe that people with extreme views can be persuaded even just one millimetre. Look at this thread, "parents are evil". Just the word "evil" normally shows extreme viewpoints that is often used by extreme religions, extreme politics, extreme sects and extreme ideologists. But you are 100 per cent right that is absolutely OK everyone having the right to have different viewpoints. I also think this is OK. I generally don't think that extreme views on things, whether politics, religion, dietary beliefs, etc are constructive because they make things two-dimensional, black and white, no shades of any color, and the truth normally have many colors and shades. If you want real debate, you first need to get comfortable with shaded and colors. For any topic.

 

[FuneralCry]

I truly do find it disturbing how many see it as acceptable to so cruelly burden others with the ability to suffer in such a hellish world where there's no limit as to how much one can be tormented.

Procreation is a devastating tragedy that causes endless amounts of harm as well as being so selfish, I'm disgusted by how many choose to procreate even know nobody can suffer from never existing at all with their being no need for existence in the first place. I really wish I never existed more than anything, it's especially hellish to me how there's no acceptance towards suicide even know we were so harmfully brought into existence in the first place, imposing decades of meaningless suffering onto others and insisting they must continue to suffer no matter what with no straightforward way to die in peace truly is criminal to me.

 

[betternever2havbeen]

So it's extreme to have anything but a positive reaction to having life forced onto you or to even discuss it? I'm sure parents are eager to shut conversations like this down since it's uncomfortable for them. I wouldn't call them "evil" but I still don't understand having kids and inflicting the possibility of all manner of pain and suffering onto them, and certain death one day. I'm sure they'd very much like everyone to think this is "extreme" but nothing I've said isn't true. And then there's the people who think as long as you weren't neglected that's all that matters. I had great parents, more than I deserved whilst others aren't so lucky but I'm still in pain purely from having to go through life which wasn't even necessary and is all down to my parents. I struggle to come to terms with and forgive them for that. It's almost as if people think parents turned up to take care of us out of the goodness of their hearts and had little to do with why we're here, rather than literally being the ones responsible for all of it.

 

[divinemistress36]

People often don't stop to think how much their child could suffer in this world they tend to only think about how the kid will make them happy and bring meaning to their life . I get that procreation is a biological instinct but birth control is a beautiful invention

 

[1MiserableGuy]

Achilles heels:

1. You assume anyone has any say in the amount of kids they have or don't, unless they do something permanent and regretable

My wife and I got pregnant with an IUD in. The odds of that happening are less than one in ten thousand. Ever since, we have failed to reproduce on purpose for over a year.

2. You assume everyone is just as miserable as you are

I hate to break this to you, but your experience is unique to you. Not everyone is suffering that severely, and some people aren't whatsoever.

3. You assume the unborn, who cannot choose to be born, somehow can choose to not be born

Make one argument or the other, but keep them logically sound.

 

[wisteria3]

I feel like this is a pretty polarizing subject, and I understand why people (especially parents) take it so personally. It is really hard to admit that something you did may have been selfish. I have the most amazing parents who are unconditionally loving, insanely supportive, and gave me a blissful childhood. They are incredibly empathetic people and had the means to provide me with lots of support. And it's not like they spoiled me - they raised me to be very responsible. I say all this because a lot of people here had awful or abusive parents, or they had loving parents who tried their best but may not have had the means to be supportive.

Despite having what I consider the ideal parents, I am literally miserable and want to die. I wish I had not been born.

My parents are so selfless, and I would NEVER consider them selfish people. Nevertheless, I do think procreating is morally wrong from a philosophical point of view. Life is full of suffering that even the best parents cannot prevent or foresee, and to me the risk/inevitability of misery is not worth the potential joy someone can have but would not miss if they were never born. I do think having kids is a selfish act - at the end of the day, you're doing it for your own happiness/desire to be a parent (assuming the child is planned). But I don't think the parents are necessarily selfish, because they aren't thinking that way. They are usually thinking of the joy they can share with their child, and they are of course influenced by a society that is CONVINCED life is a gift, so they don't even question it. Also, we are all influenced by our biological intuition which is also CONVINCED having kids is a good thing. However if I were to have kids, I would consider myself selfish because I don't think it's morally right but did it regardless.

I think we can acknowledge that procreating may be morally wrong (although feel free to disagree with me, I am receptive to other points of views!) but that doesn't make parents bad people. We all would do things that are selfish or wrong, if society heaped praise on us for it and if our biology was wired to want it. We wouldn't even consider that it is wrong, in that case. Personally, I think a lot of people have kids because life is generally pretty sucky and they want to relive the bliss of their childhood in some way. Although that is purely anecdotal.

Also, this does not apply to people who are abusive parents. Those people should not have kids, and I am so sorry to anyone with that experience.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I agree. What you state isn't even an opinion. It's rather an irrefutable fact. The parents who say that procreation aren't selfish are simply coping immensely. There is no unselfish reason for procreating

 

[betternever2havbeen]

Achilles heels:

1. You assume anyone has any say in the amount of kids they have or don't, unless they do something permanent and regretable

My wife and I got pregnant with an IUD in. The odds of that happening are less than one in ten thousand. Ever since, we have failed to reproduce on purpose for over a year.

2. You assume everyone is just as miserable as you are

I hate to break this to you, but your experience is unique to you. Not everyone is suffering that severely, and some people aren't whatsoever.

3. You assume the unborn, who cannot choose to be born, somehow can choose to not be born

Make one argument or the other, but keep them logically sound.

Well I certainly won't be having a kid I don't want so I disagree that we have no say. In some countries yes, but if you live in a western country with access to contraception and abortion if it fails, how does it happen? Probably best to double up on contraception-you'd have to be exceptionally unlucky to conceive a child using two forms of contraception.

I don't think it's about being miserable, we're more than aware that the normies love life and think it's the best thing ever despite the suffering. I just don't think it's ethical to create people who will potentially go through that suffering. And creating a being that will literally die one day is ok? People minimise it when it's a natural death, I reject it being natural and necessary, life isn't necessary to begin with I'm terrified of death, I can't think of a good way to go. Even SN is gonna be hella scary, a natural death would be terrifying.

We know you can't choose to be born, that's kind of the whole point...

I think we can acknowledge that procreating may be morally wrong (although feel free to disagree with me, I am receptive to other points of views!) but that doesn't make parents bad people. We all would do things that are selfish or wrong, if society heaped praise on us for it and if our biology was wired to want it. We wouldn't even consider that it is wrong, in that case. Personally, I think a lot of people have kids because life is generally pretty sucky and they want to relive the bliss of their childhood in some way. Although that is purely anecdotal.

You made some really good points. I think a lot of people don't wanna be alone when at their most frail and vulnerable in old age as well, which is why you get a lot of formerly childfree people cave once they hit middle age and then have kids. I have to admit it's a strong motivator for having kids cos even being young and ill is terrifying never mind facing old age and death alone. I still couldn't do it to my kids and make them deal with that though so I guess that's another reason for going out early. You have to be selfish to have a good life.

 

[1MiserableGuy]

Well I certainly won't be having a kid I don't want so I disagree that we have no say. In some countries yes, but if you live in a western country with access to contraception and abortion if it fails, how does it happen? Probably best to double up on contraception-you'd have to be exceptionally unlucky to conceive a child using two forms of contraception.

The older I get, the more opposed to preventative measures against conception I become. If you are not in a position to have a child, don't have sex.

I don't think it's about being miserable, we're more than aware that the normies love life and think it's the best thing ever despite the suffering. I just don't think it's ethical to create people who will potentially go through that suffering. And creating a being that will literally die one day is ok? People minimise it when it's a natural death, I reject it being natural and necessary, life isn't necessary to begin with I'm terrified of death, I can't think of a good way to go. Even SN is gonna be hella scary, a natural death would be terrifying.

Wrong use of literally, for one. Two, you have zero way of being able to determine someone in the future's perception, whatsoever. Which bring us to:

We know you can't choose to be born, that's kind of the whole point...

Because you can't, you also can't choose to not be born.

 

[thewalkingdread]

 

[MatrixPrisoner]

Any parents that can honestly say that they thought they could give their children a wonderful life - and put in the constant 24/7 effort to required to so, I can somewhat understand. Meaning they thoroughly analyzed their financial situation, extensively planned and accepted that there were going to have to devote their entire lives to raising children. I'm talking pre-natal vitamins, folic acid, maternity leave..,the whole nine yards. Extra points if they actually succeeded in raising children that have good lives.

The ones that chose to just haphazardly have children - without being financially ready and thinking they could wing everything as they go along should be downright ashamed of themselves. The uneducated, the unmotivated, the irresponsible, with clearly no quality genes to pass on...they can all burn in hell.

 

[thenamingofcats]

The ones that chose to just haphazardly have children - without being financially ready and thinking they could wing everything as they go along should be downright ashamed of themselves. The uneducated, the unmotivated, the irresponsible, with clearly no quality genes to pass on...they can all burn in hell.

The irony is that people with the most education, good finances, high achievers, etc are most likely to put off having kids and to have less. There's a really good snl skit about it but I forget the title.

 

[MatrixPrisoner]

The irony is that people with the most education, good finances, high achievers, etc are most likely to put off having kids and to have less. There's a really good snl skit about it but I forget the title.

Must have been like the opening scene of the movie Idiocracy

 

[thenamingofcats]

Must have been like the opening scene of the movie Idiocracy

Haha that's exactly what it was it wasn't an snl skit! I was wondering why I couldn't find it.

 

[betternever2havbeen]

The older I get, the more opposed to preventative measures against conception I become. If you are not in a position to have a child, don't have sex.

Well I have no idea why you'd be opposed to preventative measures but you do you. I think you meant to say "if you can't manage to figure out contraception, don't have sex" FTFY. Abstinence shouldn't be the only option, many childfree manage to avoid having kids without resorting to total abstinence (not that there's anything wrong with that either) besides OP was talking about the act of procreation in general being selfish, regardless of the position any potential parents are in.

Wrong use of literally, for one. Two, you have zero way of being able to determine someone in the future's perception, whatsoever. Which bring us to:

Neither do parents so why do they get to decide for others?

Because you can't, you also can't choose to not be born.

Parents are choosing for us, because they think they have the right to play god. I happen to think they don't.

 

[wisteria3]

Two, you have zero way of being able to determine someone in the future's perception, whatsoever.

Neither do parents so why do they get to decide for others?

Without trying to prolong the argument... I think the antinatalist point of view is that suffering reduction takes precedence over everything else, even over the promotion of happiness. So everyone agrees that the unborn child cannot make a choice or consent to birth. To someone who views reducing human suffering as MORE important than increasing human joy, then it seems like it's wrong to have that child because their potential to suffer takes precedence over their potential for joy. To someone who values increasing human joy as worth the risk of increasing human suffering, then it could be justifiable to have the child after weighing the risks. Personally, I take the former point of view, especially since suffering is a lot more inevitable/long lasting than joy in my opinion (which is biased, of course).

Anyway, I think having children would be a lot less morally ambiguous if everyone had the right to die.

 

[1MiserableGuy]

Well I have no idea why you'd be opposed to preventative measures but you do you. I think you meant to say "if you can't manage to figure out contraception, don't have sex" FTFY. Abstinence shouldn't be the only option, many childfree manage to avoid having kids without resorting to total abstinence (not that there's anything wrong with that either) besides OP was talking about the act of procreation in general being selfish, regardless of the position any potential parents are in.


Neither do parents so why do they get to decide for others?


Parents are choosing for us, because they think they have the right to play god. I happen to think they don't.

1. Because preventitive measures promote the sexual anarchy we currently live in where everything is allowed but none of it is private, much less sacred.

2. Again, you're assuming anyone has control over that. They don't.

3. Natural outcomes are not playing God. Denying his existence and tampering with natural outcomes is.

Without trying to prolong the argument... I think the antinatalist point of view is that suffering reduction takes precedence over everything else, even over the promotion of happiness. So everyone agrees that the unborn child cannot make a choice or consent to birth. To someone who views reducing human suffering as MORE important than increasing human joy, then it seems like it's wrong to have that child because their potential to suffer takes precedence over their potential for joy. To someone who values increasing human joy as worth the risk of increasing human suffering, then it could be justifiable to have the child after weighing the risks. Personally, I take the former point of view, especially since suffering is a lot more inevitable/long lasting than joy in my opinion (which is biased, of course).

Anyway, I think having children would be a lot less morally ambiguous if everyone had the right to die.

This whole train of thinking runs on the assumption that any of that even matters. We have cards we're dealt, and no amount of not liking them doesn't redeal them.

 

[thenamingofcats]

Without trying to prolong the argument... I think the antinatalist point of view is that suffering reduction takes precedence over everything else, even over the promotion of happiness. So everyone agrees that the unborn child cannot make a choice or consent to birth. To someone who views reducing human suffering as MORE important than increasing human joy, then it seems like it's wrong to have that child because their potential to suffer takes precedence over their potential for joy. To someone who values increasing human joy as worth the risk of increasing human suffering, then it could be justifiable to have the child after weighing the risks. Personally, I take the former point of view, especially since suffering is a lot more inevitable/long lasting than joy in my opinion (which is biased, of course).

Anyway, I think having children would be a lot less morally ambiguous if everyone had the right to die.

This is a great summary on the topic, best I've seen here actually. I take the opposite view since I see the most fundamental human right as the right to exist and antinatalism completely removes that. I also see it as parallel to forced sterilization.

 

[-Toplox-]

Imagine thinking bringing life into this world is a great thing to do. Natalists produce offspring against the wishes of said offspring. We don't have a say in this, and culture and society have shunned and berated us for talking against the cult of reproduction.

The very idea of reproduction disgusts me. Culture has forced the aspect of breeding as this wondrous, positive, beautiful thing but the reality is far from this perceived "truth."

Reproduction is selfish. Parents are selfish. Asking, "But how could you let your parents live with that?" to suicidal people adds fuel to the fire.

We didn't fucking asked for this.

Life has no potential to be anything beyond suffering.

Definitely agree. Ya know how people say "Everyone is special, everyone is here for a reason blah blah" I think that's bullshit. What about mass shooters? So they were special too? I mean the idea is just bullshit. Every human is NOT here for a reason. Every human is NOT fuckin special lol. They're here because two idiots decided that they wanted a human so they made one, simple as that. I don't think life is horrible for everyone. I think there are tons of people who love life and I'm happy for them but I don't. I just don't. I mean there are some great things but the negatives outweigh them. I won't go into detail but I do NOT believe I was supposed to be born and if so I wasn't supposed to be alive this long. Personally, I don't enjoy life that much. People have called me "weak" or ungrateful for what I have etc and I don't necessarily blame them. I sort of agree, which fuels my argument even more - I SHOULDN'T BE HERE.

Everything is foreign to me. Relationships, romance, friendships, work, ANY social interaction, none of feels "right". I've felt like this since 10 or 11. I'm 33 now. I believe if I tried hard enough to turn my life around, if I went balls to the wall with therapy etc for 10yrs I could probably do it. But guess what? I don't want to. I could also walk from Maine to Arizona if I wanted to. Why am I not? I don't fucking want to. Life just is not worth it to me. Why the fuck am I putting effort into something I don't want. Life doesn't even make any sense lol. I pass.

 

[wisteria3]

This is a great summary on the topic, best I've seen here actually. I take the opposite view since I see the most fundamental human right as the right to exist and antinatalism completely removes that. I also see it as parallel to forced sterilization.

Thanks! I think debates become futile when neither side is willing to consider that there is any truth to the other's arguments (which is rarely the case) Also yeah, with the "forced sterilization" my argument didn't consider the rights of the parents (which I do believe have the right to procreate), or the wellbeing of society (which would collapse and suffer if we all stopped having kids).

 

[thenamingofcats]

Thanks! I think debates become futile when neither side is willing to consider that there is any truth to the other's arguments (which is rarely the case) Also yeah, with the "forced sterilization" my argument didn't consider the rights of the parents (which I do believe have the right to procreate), or the wellbeing of society (which would collapse and suffer if we all stopped having kids).

A problem I have with both sides is how fantasy based the entire argument is. My solutions to the problem of suffering are social programs or communities that work which I think is not realistic. Then both sides have the fantasy of easy access, painless ctb which I also think is a fantasy, and the idea of people not procreating is too.