• Twentytwodividedby7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    No, you’re a fool if you truly believe this. Every generation has had some form of this feeling. Imagine considering having children during WW1, or WW2, or during Vietnam or Korea? Then after that we had McCarthyism and the Cold War - all seemingly hopeless days. Yet there is still so much beauty in the world, and there is so much that makes life worth living.

    My son will turn 2 in a few months. It’s tough being a parent, but it is entirely worth it. You cannot give into myopia - every time I hear him laugh, I am reminded that there is good in the world and it is worth fighting for. He will have his own challenges to face in life, but it is our job as a society to equip him, and all of the next generation, with the tools they need to succeed.

    I’m troubled about the future, but you cannot make that stop you from striving for better days. As Marcus Aurelius said, never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same weapons of reason which today arm you against the present.

    I’ve been re-reading the Lord of the Rings lately, and there is a lot there on this topic, but I always think back to Sam. We all should be so lucky to have a friend like that, but what he says when all hope seems to be lost is truly striking:

    “It’s like the great stories, Mr. Frodo, the ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were, and sometimes you didn’t want to know the end because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad has happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing this shadow, even darkness must pass. A new day will come, and when the sun shines, it’ll shine out the clearer. I know now folks in those stories had lots of chances of turning back, only they didn’t. They kept going because they were holding on to something. That there’s some good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and it’s worth fighting for.”

    Tolkien wrote this after his experiences fighting in The Somme. If he could find hope and found the courage to keep striving for better days, then so should we.

    • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’d say you can find things that make life worth living if you’re already here. But if someone’s not “here”, why drag someone you’re supposed to love the most into this mess when we can’t even properly look after the children that are already here.

      I’m not anti-child - I’d consider adopting if it didn’t cost like $20k. I’m anti-new child for myself, and yeah I get sad when I see other people have kids, especially now. It’s like having another kid when you lived in the middle of the dust bowl and people were actively dying from starvation and the dust. Probably not the best time to have kids, similar to now. They just couldn’t easily make the choice to not have kids back then.

      There are tons of arguments in favour of having kids like what if they cure cancer etc.

      However, for myself, I truly believe there will be an ecological collapse due to climate change if not during my lifetime, in the immediate next generation. And we’re still not doing enough. I don’t want to flee natural disasters with a child in tow. One of best things you can do for the climate is not have kids. I’m privileged enough to make that choice so I did, but it’s not my only reason. You got late stage capitalism and the accelerating concentration of resources with the hyper wealthy, war / nuclear war, and the fact that pregnancy is one of most risky things I can medically do. Social media, the toxic drug supply, the rise of fascism (again), microplastics in literally fucking everything. I don’t even think we’ll have social healthcare or social security in Canada by the time I die because they’re gutting our programs so badly.

      I get that people have a strong reaction to their choices being called immoral. Morality looks different for everyone. However, the counterargument of “Well I have children and they’re great and bring me so much joy etc” falls on deaf ears, because it truly does not sound like joy to me and when I say I am anti-child for myself I am telling you that. It’s like trying to convince someone skydiving is the greatest thing - some people love it, but not my cup of tea. It is so foreign to me that whenever I hear parents say this it feels like they are trying to convince themselves that they made the right choice.

      • ebc@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        Have you watched Idiocracy? I consider myself a smart guy, and having children is my way to fight against the world getting stupider.

        Also, it is a joy. Yeah, it’s expensive, and yeah, it’s a ton of work. But it’s like working on a very big project that you know you’ll be proud of when it’s done. I didn’t understand it before because I only experienced other people’s children, but it’s different with your own children in a way that’s hard to explain.

        • CommanderCloon@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          What I don’t get is, why not just adopt? Instead of creating more potential for misery, why not reduce it while still being able to enjoy parenthood?

          • yuri@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s usually exceptionally expensive, especially considering insurance won’t be any help.

            What I don’t get is why people pretend fostering isn’t even an option!

        • Orygin@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 months ago

          Idiocracy is eugenics propaganda. People don’t get dumber because of their genes but because of worse education.
          Like the other commenter said, adopt if you want to improve the world (and not just your own life), but that’s harder without the biological attachment that comes from your own kids.

          (Not trying to be rude btw, just noting generally my thoughts)

    • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t want to have kids simply because I’m miserable and never consented to being born. I am not suicidal but I would have rather not been born in the first place.
      Most people grow up happier than me, so I can’t really make a philosophical argument out of my own experience. All the best to you and your family!

    • Femcowboy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’d have to disagree from the angle that, you cannot philoshpy your way out of ecology. If you actually look at a population graph for any species which experiences a massive spike in birthrates, and what comes for them afterwards, you would probably come to a conclusion that the rate at which we’ve been producing kids is very unsustainable, and while we probably shouldn’t tell people not to have kids completely we should probably begin to consider how to transition towards more sustainable population numbers. A given ecosystem can only sustain so much of one species before it begins to break down. Our Eco system is the entire world and it is very much breaking down as we hit record temperatures year after year. There were lights at ends of tunnels during every war as they’ve always like, ended with a winning side that could rebuild/regrow, and even ecological collapses have been recovered from by humans but we’re not going to get to be the humans that recover, and it doesn’t look like our kids will be either. So, if we want to have kinda okay lives we should maybe consider minimizing the impact from what is about to happen, and also not bringing children into a world that has pretty much no chance of being better for them than it was for us.

      • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re conflating population growth with capitalistic and exploitative growth. the fact that we’re destroying our ecology does have little to do with the population and everything to do with capitalist overextraction.

            • Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m being a little snide but yeah supply and demand right? If the population reduces it impacts the demand for products and also the supply of workers.

              Capitalists aren’t going to stop ruining the earth out of the goodness of their hearts or anything.

        • Femcowboy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Socialism would no doubt increase the planets carrying capacity for humans, but not make it limitless. It is also nowhere near close to being implemented so I am assessing the world that we have, not the one I’d like it to be. Also, even if we did away with capitalism tomorrow we’d probably still need to discuss reasonable population growth and come up with a reasonable estimate for our planet’s carrying capacity which could be weighed against quality of life, human happiness, etc as we transition our economy away from late stage capitalism.

          • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’d argue that it’s more likely that capitalism is abolished tomorrow than any government having a proposed solution to population control that’s not fundamentally evil.

            • Femcowboy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              I wouldn’t. Really all post industrial countries need to do is stop trying to directly insentivize having kids and maybe provide access to free/low cost contraceptives. I think that’s a lot easier than having socialism implemented in enough countries for it to matter.

    • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      I agree that having kids can be awesome, but the idea it’s foolish to see it as a waste of time is shitty as well. OP is perfectly reasonable to find it terrible, because for many people, it is. People are less happy after having children on average, as alien and counterintuitive as it may seem to you. It’s a spectrum, with many people actually being happier, or at least more content with their life after. However, many people don’t.

      The problem is that people make the mistake of seeing children as a means rather than an end. If they knew the truth, that raising children is the end goal for a parent rather than a step to something else, they wouldn’t want to do it. Those people shouldn’t be mislead. If you won’t get satisfaction out of nurturing your kid, it’s better for both you and your potential offspring that you live your own life. The kid might grow up and love life, but both of you will suffer for it.

      Someone else, someone who really wants to change diapers and deal with tantrums to see a human grow, can raise the next generation just fine. If you want to pass on genes or whatever, but see no purpose beyond that, then have someone adopt them and be on your way. It’d be a win-win for us both.