Why do we still demand that....

[jpw.in.wi]

I'm 28 with a 4 year long girlfreind and a mortgage (together) but i know i would not cut it as a dad, i think of myself as a 28 year old boy.

Untill that changes(i might never feel like i can cut it) i wont have children.

I will feel like i have missed out on something but im not putting a kid through me being crap.

To start, I can't believe we're fighting over who is "better": parents or non-parents. We all know there are those who long for children but can't have them, and those who could care less but who pop them out left and right. It seems to me a discussion of the nature of family and the vocation of being a parent would be more productive. I'm hearing some forum members whose parents were obviously open to having children arguing forcefully that it's a better choice somehow for people NOT to be open to becoming parents. That doesn't make much sense to me. I suspect in the background there may be some issues with wanting to have plenty of sex while avoiding all natural consequences, but I won't go there ...

Anyway, Brain Matter, I'm getting the impression that your GF is expecting you to pop the question--you're living as though you're hitched already--and that she would like to raise a family. But you're, naturally, a little nervous about that.

So, as we guys typically do, we come up with all sorts of excuses for why we shouldn't go there ... and I'm a dumb ass who could never handle changing a diaper seems to be on the top of your list. (I bet your GF won't buy that one, by the way.)

Speaking as a father who was about as nervous as you can get about this whole baby thing, I'll just say don't count yourself out so quickly. If I can be a dad, a husband, hold down a full-time job, and actually find happiness in those roles and in the midst of the chaos, YOU CAN TOO!!!!!!

Now, if your GF is worth it to you, go buy that ring, get down on one knee, propose, and be open to children!!!!!

 

[MafiaGeek]

I think that the trouble these days is that alot of people who are having kids shouldn't be having the kids. An some of the people that dont have kids and dont wont kids should be having kids. Lets face it smarter people don't reproduce very quickly and the slower ones do its a really shame.

 

[CapnG]

I don't think we have too may people, rather we have too many of the wrong people (poor/uneducated) having too many children.

Most people would argue that's because we live in a more "civilized" society. More access to things like sex education, family planning, contraception, etc. etc. I can't help but wonder if it has more to do with the impression (even if it only exists on a sub-concious level) that there actually is a finite amount of stuff to be had and unless we want our standard of living to start dropping down to the level of third world countries we better ease up on the baby-making.

Mind you none of that explains the Gosellins, the Duggers or Octomom...

Now, if your GF is worth it to you, go buy that ring, get down on one knee, propose, and be open to children!!!!!

Says the devout Catholic...

 

[skunkape]

I would adopt a child for humane reasons.
I feel it would be irresponsible for me to make a child just so my ego could rest in the knowledge that my genes were being perpetuated.
My girlfriend/primary-mate for 20 years now feels the same.
Both of us are of families with all sorts of traits that would, perhaps, best be removed from the gene pool to be honest.
Her side has health issues, my side has suicide and murderousness issues.
We're happy doing our time without breeding for now.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

 

[AnnetteMarie]

I think the original idea behind this thread was more along the lines of why do so many people sneer at people who choose not to have children?

Neither is better than the other, but to consider where you live on this planet to be a valid reason for whether or not you should reproduce? HUH??? Third world countries can produce geniuses amongst all the great unwashed, poor, uneducated masses. The great riches of educated, well-dressed populations in our countries can produce a bunch of ignorant idiots who keep voting in greedy, self-serving jerks who don't give a rat's ass about making the entire world a better place, just their own bank balance a better size.

oh well. that's the way it is.

 

[DrLogic]

So if the limit is 7bn people, might we not want to slow down at the 6bn mark?

If the limit truly is 7bn then the population will naturally stabilize, no overt action will be required on our part, not that we have that power anyway of course (up there with fighting climate change and wining wars on abstract ideas I'm afraid).

I'm just looking at the OP from a different perspective, saying that there are too many people is a loaded statement, which might be a product of, or conversely a precursor to his ideas on the demands of society. Note i am not disputing choice, I'm just hi-lighting the potential for false dichotomies when making generalizations.

And if someone were to say to me that there are too many people and wishes the demand to have children was removed from society, whilst at the same time saying they don't support passive eugenics, i would say to them that they are talking out of both sides of their mouth.

Personally i don't see these demands by society, maybe it is localized to the area/family you are in. For instance I have two sisters, both of whom are married and one has had children and the other has decided not to go down that route. Then my parents who evidently decided to have children, together for going on 35 years never once felt the need or demand to get married. I myself am different again in that I'm unmarried and without children (so far ), all that from just one family.

I don't think theres anything wrong at all with deciding to not have children, I just don't believe its on the basis of a contrary stance to society as I think its a fairly common and accepted practice in this day and age.

 

[Siani]

I think women who choose to be childless get a tougher time than men. When I meet people for the first time, and they realize I have no kids, the first thing I get is pitying looks, as they assume I'm childless due to medical issues. Then, when they realize I chose not to reproduce, they become very suspicious of me, because apparently, being a woman who doesn't crave motherhood, somehow makes me a very dodgy individual, and highly unnatural.

I make no apology for not wanting kids. I'm not maternal, have no patience with shrieking and puking, and refuse to take responsibility for another life for one simple reason. What if I got it wrong?

 

[DrLogic]

I think women who choose to be childless get a tougher time than men. When I meet people for the first time, and they realize I have no kids, the first thing I get is pitying looks, as they assume I'm childless due to medical issues. Then, when they realize I chose not to reproduce, they become very suspicious of me, because apparently, being a woman who doesn't crave motherhood, somehow makes me a very dodgy individual, and highly unnatural.

I make no apology for not wanting kids. I'm not maternal, have no patience with shrieking and puking, and refuse to take responsibility for another life for one simple reason. What if I got it wrong?

I'm intrigued to know, would you you say this is a general reaction, or more so from women than men, or visa versa?

 

[Siani]

I'm intrigued to know, would you you say this is a general reaction, or more so from women than men, or visa versa?

I have to say, it's mostly from women that I get this reaction. Not sure why. Any thoughts, anyone?

 

[sher]

I think you have to know yourself very well before embarking on parenthood. I see it as the most important job I will ever do and when/if it happens I will consider it a blessing because having children is a very strong desire that I have. I've always had a very strong maternal instinct, same as some women/men have strong desire NOT to be a parent.

Saying that though,as much as I want that, I would never do it for selfish reasons. It's very sad that for some people it's the only way to 'up' benefits, be given a house, not work etc. I can't stand that!.

I also consider the state of the planet, what's it going to be like in the next 50-60 years?-would I really want to leave a child, brought here through love, to deal with the mess that's been made?-it's a very real concern of mine-resources running out, violence escalating, when I think like that there's a small voice in the back of my mind that tells me that 'things could work out though', I'm not so sure

It's a huge decision, and not one to be made lightly-which is a shame because in a better world I'd hope to be able to fulfil this urge, and a lot earlier in my life-it's just situations that have caused delay.

My heart tells me that I should/could/want to be a mum, and yet my more logical thoughts are what prevent me from taking that step.

At the end of the day, it's up to the individual(s) concerned.

The way I see it is:
Have a child for LOVE, not NEED.
A child is NOT there to repair relationships-it will not make things better! times often get harder and more challenging when the enormous responsibility sets in. The child needs strong role models and a balanced home life.

On the flip side; and unplanned baby isn't always an unwanted baby and can indeed be a happy 'accident'' it's tragic when a couple have communication problems and the end result is a pregnancy that one of them doesn't want.

There are so MANY if's, but's, why's that the subject causes people to ask, that's why the decision has to be yours, and no-one elses.
Everybody will always have an opinion as long as you know your own heart and reason for wanting children, that's the most important thing-along with being prepared in every sense for an enormous life change. If you can selflessly love a child, provide for it and be the best parent that you can and encourage the child to be the very best he/she can, then I don't see a reason not to have them.

 

[Will Penguin]

I have to say, it's mostly from women that I get this reaction. Not sure why. Any thoughts, anyone?

I think some may feel threatened/jealous, since you seem happy with your decision. Maybe they're not. (It's not like people get to say "I really regret having kids", even if they do) Also, it's- unfortunately- human nature to pick on the "different one."

And if someone were to say to me that there are too many people and wishes the demand to have children was removed from society, whilst at the same time saying they don't support passive eugenics, i would say to them that they are talking out of both sides of their mouth.

All anyone here is saying in that regard is that they wish for others to respect their decisions on procreation, and they'll return in kind.

As for "too many people"- nobody here is being an apologist for eugenics, rather, pointing out that the Earth is not underpopulated is an answer to the ridiculous "but we've got to keep the human species going" crap people spew.

Personally i don't see these demands by society, maybe it is localized to the area/family you are in.

The fact that you don't encounter this attitude doesn't mean it's not a very real thing.

 

[truthseeker]

I don't think we have too may people, rather we have too many of the wrong people (poor/uneducated) having too many children. Populations in all first world nations are in decline. Only America, because of illegal immigration, has a steady fertility rate of 2.1 All of the other first world nations are losing people faster than they are replacing them.

The countries of the world with growing populations are typically Muslim and generally poor third world places. As those countries become more advanced and cosmopolitan their populations eventually decline as well though.


Look at places like Hong Kong, Italy, South Korea, Spain, Japan, Taiwan etc. all below 1.3!! That means their population is dropping by nearly half every generation.

CIA - The World Factbook -- Country Comparison :: Total fertility rate

It's scary to think what the world is going to look like 40-50 years from now if those statistics are true. If it's not an insentive for developed, civilized nations to increase their populations I don't know what is.

 

[DrLogic]

I have to say, it's mostly from women that I get this reaction. Not sure why. Any thoughts, anyone?

Well I was going waffle about echos of tired gender roles that still get dragged out and given a dusting every now and then. But it occurred to me that alot of the criticism might be coming from other women, hence my question.

Obviously only looking at it from a man's perspective, to qualify that I'd like to think a modern man's perspective , the idea of equality for women in a modern society really goes without saying. So for instance, if queried about a woman choice to not have children, I think a lot of men can empathize with that. And frankly, any given day we can look back on those men that came before us and how they treated woman, its enough to leave a knot in any guy's stomach. So yeah for modern men I think we are weary of jumping to conclusions with respect to what constitutes a womans role in society.

As far as one womans attitude towards another goes I can only speculate, on the roller coaster that was womans right movement, perhaps not every passenger was a willing participant?

 

[DrLogic]

As for "too many people"- nobody here is being an apologist for eugenics, rather, pointing out that the Earth is not underpopulated is an answer to the ridiculous "but we've got to keep the human species going" crap people spew.

I think its important to qualify that I stated passive eugenics, there is nothing sinister about it IMO. I don't think I'm taking a massive leap of logic to state that someone who believes there is too much of something would, by extension believe that it would be preferable if there were less. But it just goes to show my point about it being a loaded statement, a touchy subject.

The fact that you don't encounter this attitude doesn't mean it's not a very real thing.

I didn't say it wasn't happening, i just said i think it comes from closer to home than blaming it on society in general, the high numbers of people opting out remove any credibility toward the argument IMO.

 

[AnnetteMarie]

I have to say, it's mostly from women that I get this reaction. Not sure why. Any thoughts, anyone?

misery loves company????

 

[CapnG]

I think its important to qualify that I stated passive eugenics, there is nothing sinister about it IMO.

Come now Dr, surely someone as logical as yourself understands the word "eugenics" is so heavily burdened with nazi baggage that it can never be used in a non-sinister context.

I didn't say it wasn't happening, i just said i think it comes from closer to home than blaming it on society in general, the high numbers of people opting out remove any credibility toward the argument IMO.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick there. Everyone who has opted out is stating in nigh-unanimity that this societal pressure does indeed exist. Whereas you having not experienced it to any greater degree closer to your home (ie in it) feel it less. The reality of it is all around you if you care to look, on almost every sitcom, on the covers of dozens of magazines, spewing forth from the mouths of religious leaders, hell there's an entire branch of conservative politics dedicated exclusively to it ("focus on the family", "family values", etc).

In other words: Forest, meet trees.

 

[sher]

I think that the trouble these days is that alot of people who are having kids shouldn't be having the kids. An some of the people that dont have kids and dont wont kids should be having kids. Lets face it smarter people don't reproduce very quickly and the slower ones do its a really shame.

Very well put that was a sentiment of mine that I meant to convey in my post to this topic too.

 

[DrLogic]

Come now Dr, surely someone as logical as yourself understands the word "eugenics" is so heavily burdened with nazi baggage that it can never be used in a non-sinister context.

Oh yes I totally agree, it in of itself is heavily burdened. However the passive system im describing is a post war concept that is regularly discussed in modern science today. For instance a clear example today, the single child rule in China, unfair? I would say so, I'm not sure i would go as far as sinister though. However, due to the demographic economic paradox effect a one child rule is inevitably a process of passive eugenics.

I think you've got the wrong end of the stick there. Everyone who has opted out is stating in nigh-unanimity that this societal pressure does indeed exist. Whereas you having not experienced it to any greater degree closer to your home (ie in it) feel it less. The reality of it is all around you if you care to look, on almost every sitcom, on the covers of dozens of magazines, spewing forth from the mouths of religious leaders, hell there's an entire branch of conservative politics dedicated exclusively to it ("focus on the family", "family values", etc).

In other words: Forest, meet trees.

I think it is really more a discontinuity in the way we are looking at it than a disagreement, obviously just an ambiguity of what we define society as alone can obscure the subject. Especially as the definition itself can have a large bearing on the role individuals allow it to play in their lives.

 

[AnnetteMarie]

brains - lots or little - in the parent has very little to do with how intelligent a child can be. some very simple-minded people have had absolutely astounding children, some very intelligent people have had idiot children.

to go around and suggest that it is a shame that 'slower' people reproduce more than 'smarter' people is saying something very disturbing.

 

[jpw.in.wi]

... there's a small voice in the back of my mind that tells me that 'things could work out though', I'm not so sure

My heart tells me that I should/could/want to be a mum, and yet my more logical thoughts are what prevent me from taking that step.

The way I see it is:
Have a child for LOVE ...

... an unplanned baby isn't always an unwanted baby and can indeed be a happy 'accident''

Wow! Thanks for taking the risk and sharing what's been on your heart, Sher!!!! Outstanding post!

I think you hit on something important here. At a metaphysical level, I would argue we have children because "love is diffusive of itself." The loving desire to share the gift of life is naturally written into that troubled heart of yours. Of course there are all sorts of scary things in the world, but in themselves those shouldn't stop you from responding to that call. Our ancestors had much more going against them. We've got it pretty easy.

So many of the posts in this thread just come off sounding like whining:

"Oh, there are some crappy people out there who look down their noses at me just because I don't have children."

Well, yeah ... so what? That is really crappy of them, isn't it? There are crappy people who will judge you for all sorts of dumb reasons. We're human beings, and we LOVE to judge people who aren't exactly like us: they have no children; they have too many children; they're fatter than me; they're skinnier than me; they're balder than me; they're hairier than me; they have BO; they wear too much cologne ... and on and on and on.

Don't worry about what others think. Trust that small voice, Sheri. It won't be easy, that's about the only guarantee anyone can give. But love isn't supposed to be easy. Love isn't a feeling, it's a conscious, deliberate choice to commit yourself to willing the good of another. Keep up the great posts!

You're in my thoughts!!!!!!!