[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo / 420 ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/siberia/ - Off-topic

"No chin, no right to speak."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!


 

Stop having children. There are more than enough people on the planet as it is, we don't need any more. We're all full up, thank you. Stop. Having. Kids. Reasons to stop having kids:

  1. They consume too many resources over the course of their life; your kid drains resources from the rest of the world. Is that what you want?
  2. Human beings contribute to ecological ruin through overfishing, deforestation, and other such activity, and that includes human overpopulation
  3. Your kid probably won't amount to much anyway, and if the technocrats succeed in making AI that displaces the entire workforce, then your kid will live in squalor as a result of a lack of economic opportunity, and that's the last thing you want, right?
  4. The Halocene Extinction is ongoing and we're all going to die, DON'T YOU GET IT, WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE, LARGE SWATHES OF THE PLANET WILL BECOME INHOSPITABLE AND WE'LL BE PACKED LIKE SARDINES INTO THE LANDMASSES THAT ARE LEFT. Is that what you want, for your kid to live in jobless purposeless squalor in a slum with third-worlders from the global south, who they have to fight against tooth and nail in order to secure for themselves what little resources that remain?
  5. Kids are a pain in the ass anyway, and you won't be able to write that book, or develop that game, or do whatever it is that you wanted to do if you have to drop everything to tend to your child (and you're a piece of shit if you delegate the child rearing to someone else like your in-laws)
  6. Basically, there are no upsides to having a child, save for the boost to your ego that you might gain for having successfully achieved the biological imperative (not that impressive, I know crackheads who managed to pop out some kids)


There are many more reasons, I'm sure, but that's more than enough for you to chew on. STOP. HAVING. CHILDREN. STOP IT. Don't do it. You help no one, least of all the child you bring into this boiling piss pot of a planet.

>>815537
Do they have sex? Anyways since I don't expect to ever have sex I'm most likely never having children but I think I would've if I had had sex by now. I probably would've been a shitty father but that's another issue.

>>815539
They do have sex, yes.
>I probably would've been a shitty father
Yet another reason to abstain from having children: You're likely going to be a shitty parent anyway. Is that what you want?

Post them having sex.

>>815542
I don't really want anything except maybe sex. But since I'm not getting it then I guess I want nothing.

I hate antinatalist sentiments that are based on misopedia.

Adults waste far more resources than kids and are bigger pain in the ass.

>>815547
So what you are saying is that we should still have kids, but prevent them from growing into adults?

>>815543
I don't have video of them having sex, sorry.
>>815546
Ok. Fair enough.
>>815547
>misopedia
I don't hate children, though I am something of a misanthrope. You are correct, adults waste a lot of resources and are a bigger pain in the ass when you get right down to it. That doesn't exempt children from being little resource sponges, though.

File: 1786992626915-6.jpg (42.37 KB, 634x636, now thats terror.jpg)

antinatalism is a bourgeois lie to control the working class because they're scared we outnumber them
they are so sure they can replace the working class with robots or some shi

>>815537
But yeah I agree with forced sterilization if its targeted at rightoids.

> They consume too many resources over the course of their life; your kid drains resources from the rest of the world. Is that what you want?


Adults do that way more.
Adults but cars, houses, jewelry, appliances and whatnot that consume more energy than mere kids toys

> Kids are a pain in the ass anyway, and you won't be able to write that book, or develop that game, or do whatever it is that you wanted to do if you have to drop everything to tend to your child (and you're a piece of shit if you delegate the child rearing to someone else like your in-laws)


Adults are pain the asses as well. Ever had roommates or family memebers? Or romantic partners? Kids don’t have autonomy which makes them difficult.
But that’s mainly all.
Adults have autonomy but are much more needy for some “relevance”


0/10
This OP is just misopedia

Elderly people, drug addicts, disabled adults, gambling addicts, consume more resources than kids.

And I notice that the people who complain about kids being “leeches” are often extremely fond of their own childhood or are prone to “childish” indulgences.

File: 1786992719746-2.png (241.15 KB, 320x480, provide source.png)


>>815548
No. I’m saying that you should stop blaming them for your selfish adult conveniences.
Adults do way more consumption and you know it. Kids merely lack autonomy

>>815550
No, because I am here to compete with your little cumsprouts for resources. That's right, lady. I'm going to take as many cheeseburgers as I can get away with, and your kid ain't getting none. Two for me, none for you.
>>815551
Interesting theory, but the bourgeoisie need people to keep having kids in order to keep the working class flush with reserve labor.
>>815553
I do not hate children, though. It's OVERPOPULATION that is the problem, and well, having children contributes to that problem, but of course, your existence does as well.
>>815554
Sorry, fren. I know the audio is from a porno, tho.

>>815558

you think too high of the bourgeoisie in a time and day where they try to keep as many from the job market

>>815549
> That doesn't exempt children from being little resource sponges, though.

That’s why I say kids should be trained in basic labor but this place thinks that’s “abusive”
The main reason why kids are resource sponges is due to adults objectifying them as pets

In fact, less people are having kids now, which is a good thing. Unfortunately, they’re now wasting money on dogs and cats.
There’s people that spend hundreds of dollars on vanity products for pet animals
Or people who mindlessly buy pets while being stuck in dead end jobs and leave them locked in the house all day.

>>815558
> No, because I am here to compete with your little cumsprouts for resources. That's right, lady. I'm going to take as many cheeseburgers as I can get away with, and your kid ain't getting none. Two for me, none for you.

So your antinatalism is based purely on selfishness.

> I do not hate children, though. It's OVERPOPULATION that is the problem, and well, having children contributes to that problem, but of course, your existence does as well.


Why then do you keep pointing to their existence as a problem and referring to them with depersonalizing terms?
Why do we never refer to offspring of animals and plants as “crotch fruit” or “cum sprouts”?

>>815550
This.
I notice people who promote antinatalism are less willing to self-sterilize or share.
Most antinatalism is based on contempt for children and unwillingness to share resources with their fellow Man.

You could solve the overpopulation crisis by reducing the number of elderly and disabled people. Yet, it’s considered wrong to discriminate against elderly and disabled especially in geopolitical affairs.

Yet, children are seen as fair game to view as ballast.

It’s just the polar reflex of pro-natalism, where kids are seen as pets/avatars of the elders

>>815560
This.
I’m an antinatalist but I don’t agree with their contempt for children like that.
If I were to talk about disabled and elderly people like this, I would be labeled as fascist.

Also, OP is just using antinatalism as justification for ethical self-indulgence

>>815559
This sorta.
But the real problem is that they want people to be customer service workers

>>815559
They only keep the cushy well paying pointless jobs away from you; don't you know there's a shortage of truck drivers, plumbers, electricians, warehouse workers, etc.? WHY DON'T PEOPLE WANT TO WORK ANYMORE??
>>815560
That's very cute, but I am way over here and you are way over there and there's no way you can actually lay a finger on me so… I win :3
>>815561
>kids should be trained in basic labor
Hm, perhaps, but then wouldn't those children be competing with adults for participation in the workforce?
>your antinatalism is based purely on selfishness
Yes and no; I would like to continue living, sure, however, it is also true that the destabilization of our ecosystem is going to see the quality of life for the already existent human population severely drop in the coming 20 to 50 years or so, and it's something of a moral conundrum, the act of bringing children into the world. It would be irresponsible to not give the act of childbirth due consideration in lieu of such trying times, even moreso than usual.
>>815563
How many times do I gotta say that I don't hate children?

File: 1786993758241-1.jpg (19.17 KB, 370x302, 1607021904040-jenk.jpg)

>>815551
>>815559
Sabiny, uncharacteristically good takes.

I don't think antinatalists generally hate children but they're either more misanthropic or even more altruistic than the average person. They're just generally weirdos like the typical image board user or rather they're generally a bit weirder than the average person. Not that this makes the average person better but it's how I see it.

File: 1786994024598-2.jpg (359.99 KB, 1616x2313, media_HCpWUaqWYAA-klE.jpg)

You're so right OP. There 's too many people and too many problems. And one might even say there's not much love to go around. Many people are calling it the land of confusion.

>>815565
> Hm, perhaps, but then wouldn't those children be competing with adults for participation in the workforce?

Not really. By having kids as apprentices, they can help with workload.
Our modern pedagogy reduced kids to being purely students. That along with the excessive romanticization of childhood as some anti worldly utopia where its only good vibes to downplay bullying and abuse, it’s sociocognitive conditioning to make adulthood into a more reflective system of a customer rewards program

> How many times do I gotta say that I don't hate children?


Then why aren’t you also focusing on elderly and disabled? Or even adult activities in general?


>>815551
Wrong. Antinatalism isn’t bourgeois.
Misopedia is bourgeois.
Misopedia has hijacked antinatalism.

>>815568
Wrong. Most antinatalists aren’t “weird”.
The popularized form of antinatalism in media is misopediac and is adapted by average people. (Its also pro-hedonistic)

The misanthropic/altruistic antinatalists are a minority.

Also, imageboard users are more like the average person then they care to admit.

>>815569
OP is right for the wrong reasons.
OP could’ve listed the atrocities of child abuse, the amount of neglected disabled/elderly, or even the rise of neurocognitve disorders

>>815572
>Then why aren’t you also focusing on elderly and disabled? Or even adult activities in general?
Because it would be immoral to just murder a bunch of people who already exist for the sake of population control, obviously.

>>815542
This is the main factor that’s overlooked.
It’s funny how abusive/incompetent parents are sympathized even by progressive society

>>815574
Children already exist. Yet you wanna murder them for “convenience”

Also, elderly people are already nearing the end of their lifespan
And disabled people cannot do anything for themselves without assistance.
They cannot even work.

>>815573
It's crazy because i wanna ask people like OP: Now, did you read the news today? They say the danger's gone away, but I can see the fires still alight. They're burning into the night.
But sheeple like OP don't even think about this stuff tbq&h

>>815574
>it’s immoral to target the adults who have shaped or continued the geopolitical crises
>instead let’s blame the youngsters who aren’t even old enough to wipe their own asses

Every single time.

>>815551
lol no, they want to increase the working class population so we have less bargaining power and they can treat us however they want.

>>815577
People like OP use antinatalism as a vehicle for self-indulgence. The same kind I see on imageboards and Reddit.

All the “concern” for ecological equilibrium is really just concern for whether or not they can mindlessly consume their favorite products as adults without thinking about the next generation
People are having less kids in the west anyway, thank goodness, so OP beating a dead horse here

>>815580
Wrong.
The elites will power regardless of there’s ten thousand people. Also, if anything, more proles means less stability of bourgeois control.
It means a bigger potential for a really bad insurrection

>>815576
>Yet you want to murder them for "convenience"
Incorrect, I said that you should stop having children, not that you should murder children that already exist.
>elderly people are nearing the end of their lifespan
It'd be immoral to not provide them with healthcare for as long as they live, unless they're adamant that they'd like to refrain from accepting it so as to accelerate their own demise.
>>815578
It's immoral to kill people who already exist, yes. Age doesn't really factor into that.
>>815581
>antinatalism as a vehicle for self-indulgence
Stop saying this, Christ sake. It's not indulgent to say that overpopulation is a problem. If anything, it's the opposite. You're being indulgent if you deny it and then contribute to that problem by producing more mouths to feed.

>>815581
Honestly? True. And also: My generation will put it right. We're not just making promises. That we know we'll never keep

>>815583
> Stop saying this, Christ sake. It's not indulgent to say that overpopulation is a problem. If anything, it's the opposite. You're being indulgent if you deny it and then contribute to that problem by producing more mouths to feed

I never said overpopulation isn’t a problem. I too am an antinatalist. But I don’t approve of how children as often used as scapegoats for ecological crises.
Like, even if everyone stopped having kids, people will just focus that en energy on more adult activities which are just as voracious.

If anything, I am more of the preference that humans should either develop human photoautrophic cells to be inserted in human skin as to reduce our dependency on food.

I also would prefer mandatory birth control supplements in middle/high schools.

Parents who refuse to allow their pubescent kids to have mandatory contraceptives will be disqualified from tax benefits and student enroll in public schools.

I also would make parenting have mandatory licensing

Schooling will not be universal compulsory. I’m sorry but not every kid is cut out of higher education. There should be mandatory competency exams for people who wanna continue past seventh/eighth grade. If you don’t make the cut, you’ll have to do community service or go into vocational training.

>>815584
I had that album on cassette

File: 1786996023631-8.png (47.91 KB, 1024x1024, monocle.png)

>>815585
>even if everyone stopped having kids, people will just focus that en energy on more adult activities which are just as voracious
You understand that children don't stay children forever, right? They "grow up" and become adults, right? Ergo, less children NOW means less adults TOMORROW. If you want to reduce human consumption, regardless of whether or not it comes from adults or children, then you must reduce human activity, and that starts by reducing the population size. There is no other way to really control that aside from curtailing the birthrate. Besides, if humans were smart, they'd recognize the need for a reduction in their activity as well, which is something we can control.
>human photoautrophic cells to be inserted in human skin as to reduce our dependency on food
Weird, but ok.
>mandatory birth control supplements in middle/high schools
>Parents who refuse to allow their pubescent kids to have mandatory contraceptives will be disqualified from tax benefits
So you seemingly understand the importance of curtailing the birthrate.
>Schooling will not be universal compulsory… mandatory competency exams for people who wanna continue past seventh/eighth grade
A little weird, because education is important.

>>815592
See I told you antinatalists are weird. I mean I think I agree but still.

>>815574
>Because it would be immoral to just murder a bunch of people who already exist
Okay but is it immoral if someone sterilizes you without your consent? If not, why?

File: 1786997023464-6.jpeg (118.72 KB, 1140x1140, shrug.jpeg)

>>815597
Maybe there's nothing we can really do to turn things around, anyway. Maybe we're all doomed to extinction. Maybe people should just have as many kids as they can possibly churn out, for the lulz. I mean, if we're fucked either way, what does it really matter? Go out with a bang, right?

>>815599
Well, I'd say that it would be immoral to sterilize someone against their will, yes. Is that happening to you? I'm not advocating for that, it'd have to be willing on your part, of course.

>>815602
>Well, I'd say that it would be immoral to sterilize someone against their will, yes.
Why is it immoral if youre an anti-natalist? Arent you saving babies from ecological nonsense?

File: 1786997506884-4.png (569.84 KB, 1172x958, 1682432471821666.png)

>>815603
I'm not sure I understand the question. Nobody's forcing you to do anything. It's for your consideration only. You have free agency, do as you will. It's just, maybe you should think about it, is all.

>>815592
>A little weird, because education is important.

Education is important relative to practicality. Right now for the first time in history, we have so many people enrolled in higher education yet there’s no prospects for them.

>You understand that children don't stay children forever, right? They "grow up" and become adults, right? Ergo, less children NOW means less adults TOMORROW. If you want to reduce human consumption, regardless of whether or not it comes from adults or children, then you must reduce human activity, and that starts by reducing the population size. There is no other way to really control that aside from curtailing the birthrate. Besides, if humans were smart, they'd recognize the need for a reduction in their activity as well, which is something we can control


You can also control population size by euthanizing criminals, elderly, and disabled.
Also, if humans are smart enough to recognize a need to slow down their activity, why haven’t we done it yet? Why are we still making products and places for consumption.
Also, adults are the main producers and consumers of slop. Population control is just the first step. We also will need to curtail urban development.

>Weird, but ok


How is it weird?
People wanna talk about AI automation is gonnnareplave humans entirely which is weird.
Humans are still gonna be needed for maintenance and programming.

>>815597
Antinatalists are the most ethical form of weird. Pro natalists are an egocentric form of weird.

>>815600
>Maybe people should just have as many kids as they can possibly churn out, for the lulz. I mean, if we're fucked either way, what does it really matter? Go out with a bang, right?

So you think that kids are pets to be subject to whatever dystopian perversions you want without consequences?
Isn’t this the same thing we accuse boomers of doing?


>>815603
This tbh.

>>815606
So its ok if I make children because I have free agency to do so?

>>815606
People like you often end up succumbing and have kids or adopt pets or consume just as much as multiple kids

>>815584
The real problem is that adults are procreating past their prime years rather than forgoing procreation all together.

It’s not good to have children past your early thirties. Genetic quality of eggs declines sharply and especially since everyone is on psych meds and consumes junk food and does a lot of soft drugs, all those chemicals are seeping into your reproductive system.

No wonder why so many kids are born with developmental disorders.

File: 1786998118710-7.png (285.71 KB, 704x512, 1733189916107871.png)

>>815607
>euthanize criminals, elderly, and disabled
Criminals are one thing, but the elderly and disabled? Why are you so eager to kill people?
>if humans are smart enough to recognize a need to slow down their activity, why haven’t we done it yet?
Greed, of course. Also, humanity as a whole is not a monolith; Some people are greedy, while others understand the need for a cessation of human activity that is detrimental to the ecosystem, and some of those people are doing various things. I'm sure you could use a search engine of your choice to find out more.
>humans are gonna be needed for maintenance and programming
Not really, no. Assuming they get what they want, an AGI, then humans will be cut out of the equation entirely. Anyway, it's weird because I don't even think such a technology is currently feasible, and I don't know that it ever will be.
>you think that kids are pets to be subject to whatever dystopian perversions you want without consequences
Not sure where you got that idea, but no, I don't think that.
>>815608
Yes, but your actions have consequences for both yourself, your progeny, and the planet as a whole.
>>815609
I don't have children and never will. There's no possible way I could consume more than multiple people, even if I spent all my days consuming.

>>815611
Excaaaactly. I've BEEN saying this; AND, ALSO:
I must've dreamed a thousand dreams
Been haunted by a million screams
But I can hear the marching feet
They're moving into the street

>>815613
> Not sure where you got that idea, but no, I don't think that.

I was referring to >>815600

> Greed, of course. Also, humanity as a whole is not a monolith; Some people are greedy, while others understand the need for a cessation of human activity that is detrimental to the ecosystem, and some of those people are doing various things. I'm sure you could use a search engine of your choice to find out more.


Humans are not a monolith, but ironically that’s kinda would contributes to ecological imbalance. It’s not just mere consumption that’s the problem.

Not every where on earth is hospitable for humans. A lot of people remake the at the United States has more empty land compared to most other countries. A lot of the empty land is concentrated in the middle the continent

However there’s a reason for that: TORNADOES.
The Great Plains and Midwest are notorious for constant thunderstorms some of which turn into tornadoes due to wind currents coming from the Gulf Of Mexico and the Arctic converging in the heartland.

Also, there’s tundralands like the Himalayas and Siberia.

Or even tropical island countries which are ravaged by hurricanes.

>>815537
>go to imageboard
>tell people not to reproduce
wouldn't this get more speed on a parenting subreddit?

>>815622
True, good point. You got me there. I can't stomach Reddit, though. Plus I know at least a few people here have already had children.

>>815622
That would be too late

Global one child policy until world population decreases to one billion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQyGcwTAHwE

Unironically the best porn acting I have ever seen

>>815781
Second only to Steve Rambo's perfect "hmmm".

This thread gets me thinking about my co-workers because every year I've been working where I'm working somebody or somebody's spouse is having a baby. Last year or year and a half about seven of the people that work at the school I work have had kids. At least two of those people were on their second kids and the rest I'm not sure. It does seem like most of the people who are at least 25 who work there have at least one kid. Most have had multiples and some of the older workers have grandkids.

If you're serious about fighting le bourgeois with antinatalism, then embrace TND because Third World darkies account for 90% of the world's population growth. It would also mean that it's completely fine to round up entire demographics and gas them like Nazis did with heebs and gypsies, but I know that none of the antinatalists would agree because it's a philosophy of xenophile self-hating white libshits, literal commieuyghurpedobeautiful lady😍🥰s and yids.


Unique IPs: 13

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo / 420 ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]