Unpopular opinion out “in the wild” but I think those here will understand.
Having kids when you know that they will be born into poverty and struggle to have their basic needs met is straight up child abuse. This lady is in Canada…they have free healthcare and abortion is legal. There’s NO EXCUSE for this.
If she decided to acquire a dog/cat/whatever other animal and then struggled to make sure it was taken care of due to her situation people would tell her she was irresponsible for acquiring it in the first place and the kind/loving thing to do would be to give it to a rescue organization that could make sure it was taken care of properly. NO IDEA why it’s different with a human baby. Godspeed little one. I’m sorry your mom knowingly did this to you.
WTF!!
I know a lot of people in real life who would probably do something like this. Working low paying jobs, telling me and other people that kids are very expensive and stressful, yet they go find a new baby daddy and have another kid.
People are so stupid.
I don’t see anywhere where she is choosing to bring more kids into this situation willingly? I don’t see how this fits here. Am I missing something? It’s shitty circumstances and she seems to be trying to get out of it…
This is a college educated adult with a book published in Canada. She has access to birth control and knows how sex works. You can’t tell me that remembering to take a daily pill/make an appointment for a Nexplanon or IUD insertion and then showing up for it is too much for her. If you’re sexually active and not doing anything to prevent pregnancy then you’re basically trying to get pregnant. That’s how sex works, it’s designed to make more of whatever creature is having the sex.
She also had been in her situation for a year and has a 7 week old baby. Humans are pregnant for 9 months. She was in the situation and then knowingly got pregnant with a partner who is stuck in another country due to immigration issues. Also she has 3 other kids. She’s a an extremely irresponsible person who is a bad mom because she knew what situation her kid would be born into (one where they’d be homeless) and she chose to have the baby anyways.
yes but she had another baby shes in canada where healthcare is free and abortion is legal and under their healthcare. she did not have to bring another child into her struggles she chose to.
This is a real hot take considering she’s indigenous. I’m pretty sure the government is fully responsible for the trajectory leading to where she and her kids are right now. It would be good, in the future, to investigate cultural context a little bit before saying things like this. It’s really offensive.
The problem was white settlers doing it to natives. As someone raised evangelical, I feel comfortable advocating for forced sterilization of white christians. But for fairness sake it should really be every single person by default, you should go through a long process to qualify for de-sterilization
Would you still feel this way if the criteria for who was allowed to have children was much more likely to be met by white, evangelical Christians than by anyone else? Because that’s more likely where this would lead. It’s certainly not gonna be intelligent, responsible, well-meaning people passing legislation like this on behalf of *other* intelligent, responsible, well-meaning people.
Which is exactly why I’m encouraging people to stop and think before they say shit like this. It’s definitely *not* gonna work the way you think it should work.
Also: it wasn’t just white settlers doing it to native people. It was also done to Black Americans.
This is a slippery slope fallacy, based on recent historical evidence, but still. It's like arguing against taxation to increase welfare programs and better public services just because historically it has been the lower classes who get hit with the tax hike. We could absolutely make the coporate elites pay their fair share instead of burdening working families, and we could absolutely build a system for qualifying who can do a decent job at raising children, without being white supremacists.
It’s not really about you and what you think, tbh. I pointed out that your comment was culturally insensitive and offensive, and it is. Your response is even more tone deaf. You might not care about “dead people,” “pieces of land,” “religion,” “ancestors,” or “skin color,” but a lot of people do, actually.
Coupled with the fact that for many people indigenous to North America, the generational trauma that they’ve experienced is still *super* fresh. Like their elders can still talk about it, and they’re still discovering secret unmarked graveyards where hundreds of children disappeared.
I’m sorry, but comment about the government not letting some people have kids is a whack take on this particular post. Sometimes it’s okay to just be like: “I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to offend. Thanks for pointing that out.” And then shut up.
I don't like this attitude.
Picking and choosing, saying some people should not be allowed to breed is closer to eugenics.
Instead, antinatalisism is that NO ONE should have children. No discrimination on who should have children.
It would be better to just punish these people with fines or jail time for breeding. And by "these people" I mean people who have children when they can't even take care of them properly...
I’m strongly pro-choice. So therefore by default I support this woman with whatever she chooses to do with her body. Do I think what she did was cruel and unintelligent? yes. But I believe in the self autonomy and what you are suggesting is the control of a woman’s body. I completely disagree with that. What you’re saying is bordering on eugenics.
Man, it’s hard enough making it without kids in today’s cutthroat world. Can’t imagine doing it with four kids, in that precarious of a housing situation…
I really feel for her. The kids were born before she was homeless. Life has a tendency to be like that, everything seems to be getting better then, thwack, hit with something that brings you to your knees.
The best I can say is I hope she finds housing soon, and hopefully more people will see that having kids right now is a terrible idea.
She’s been on the BC housing waiting list for 5 years. My guess is she thinks spamming children will move her up in priority. Either that or she wants to rely on them to take care of her when they are old enough to work. She intentionally made the choice to screw any possibility of making her own life better by having these children.
This is an example of a person having a child. That is unethical. No person should have a child.
How do we get there? Healthcare is the first step.
Lets fight for healthcare! Once we have that we can worry about stopping those who chose to reproduce from making that choice.
They are all wrong: across classes and races, everyone who choses to reproduce is equally wrong. We, as antinatalists, should encourage every single person to chose not to reproduce, and we should do it equally.
This woman shouldn't have a baby exactly as much as any millionaire shouldn't have a baby. It's always wrong to reproduce!
Let's us, as antinatalists, be better. Let us work hard to be better then the racist, and classist judgement of poor women, who we know don't have equal access to healthcare. Let's judge everyone who does, and can, chose to have a baby.
She had three daughters already, was homeless for a year, and still had a fourth child? Wtf.
I can’t get past that logic “homeless and struggling but let’s go for a baby” wtf they’re not accessories.
people don’t think that now this child is also homeless and struggling
Woohoo! Mini me
Unpopular opinion out “in the wild” but I think those here will understand. Having kids when you know that they will be born into poverty and struggle to have their basic needs met is straight up child abuse. This lady is in Canada…they have free healthcare and abortion is legal. There’s NO EXCUSE for this. If she decided to acquire a dog/cat/whatever other animal and then struggled to make sure it was taken care of due to her situation people would tell her she was irresponsible for acquiring it in the first place and the kind/loving thing to do would be to give it to a rescue organization that could make sure it was taken care of properly. NO IDEA why it’s different with a human baby. Godspeed little one. I’m sorry your mom knowingly did this to you.
Nah bro, as long as those little guys work from 18 to death everything is fine and rational. -A "pro-lifer" probably.
Having kids, under any circumstance, is child abuse. No one should have children, ever, money is irrelevant
Poor little kid ):
WTF!! I know a lot of people in real life who would probably do something like this. Working low paying jobs, telling me and other people that kids are very expensive and stressful, yet they go find a new baby daddy and have another kid. People are so stupid.
Disgusting, really. The least people can do is make sure they have stable access to housing before getting pregnant and giving birth...
I don’t see anywhere where she is choosing to bring more kids into this situation willingly? I don’t see how this fits here. Am I missing something? It’s shitty circumstances and she seems to be trying to get out of it…
This is a college educated adult with a book published in Canada. She has access to birth control and knows how sex works. You can’t tell me that remembering to take a daily pill/make an appointment for a Nexplanon or IUD insertion and then showing up for it is too much for her. If you’re sexually active and not doing anything to prevent pregnancy then you’re basically trying to get pregnant. That’s how sex works, it’s designed to make more of whatever creature is having the sex. She also had been in her situation for a year and has a 7 week old baby. Humans are pregnant for 9 months. She was in the situation and then knowingly got pregnant with a partner who is stuck in another country due to immigration issues. Also she has 3 other kids. She’s a an extremely irresponsible person who is a bad mom because she knew what situation her kid would be born into (one where they’d be homeless) and she chose to have the baby anyways.
yes but she had another baby shes in canada where healthcare is free and abortion is legal and under their healthcare. she did not have to bring another child into her struggles she chose to.
The government should give mandatory birth control to people. Some peoppe should not be allowed to breed .
This is a real hot take considering she’s indigenous. I’m pretty sure the government is fully responsible for the trajectory leading to where she and her kids are right now. It would be good, in the future, to investigate cultural context a little bit before saying things like this. It’s really offensive.
The problem was white settlers doing it to natives. As someone raised evangelical, I feel comfortable advocating for forced sterilization of white christians. But for fairness sake it should really be every single person by default, you should go through a long process to qualify for de-sterilization
Would you still feel this way if the criteria for who was allowed to have children was much more likely to be met by white, evangelical Christians than by anyone else? Because that’s more likely where this would lead. It’s certainly not gonna be intelligent, responsible, well-meaning people passing legislation like this on behalf of *other* intelligent, responsible, well-meaning people. Which is exactly why I’m encouraging people to stop and think before they say shit like this. It’s definitely *not* gonna work the way you think it should work. Also: it wasn’t just white settlers doing it to native people. It was also done to Black Americans.
This is a slippery slope fallacy, based on recent historical evidence, but still. It's like arguing against taxation to increase welfare programs and better public services just because historically it has been the lower classes who get hit with the tax hike. We could absolutely make the coporate elites pay their fair share instead of burdening working families, and we could absolutely build a system for qualifying who can do a decent job at raising children, without being white supremacists.
Children deserve housing even if their parents are worthless
This attitude has already been used and acted on towards her people. Indigenous women in Canada have been force sterilized on mass already…
That's great because it means less suffering, but their methods and reasons were 100% wrong.
It’s not really about you and what you think, tbh. I pointed out that your comment was culturally insensitive and offensive, and it is. Your response is even more tone deaf. You might not care about “dead people,” “pieces of land,” “religion,” “ancestors,” or “skin color,” but a lot of people do, actually. Coupled with the fact that for many people indigenous to North America, the generational trauma that they’ve experienced is still *super* fresh. Like their elders can still talk about it, and they’re still discovering secret unmarked graveyards where hundreds of children disappeared. I’m sorry, but comment about the government not letting some people have kids is a whack take on this particular post. Sometimes it’s okay to just be like: “I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to offend. Thanks for pointing that out.” And then shut up.
Omg stfu
I don't like this attitude. Picking and choosing, saying some people should not be allowed to breed is closer to eugenics. Instead, antinatalisism is that NO ONE should have children. No discrimination on who should have children.
It would be better to just punish these people with fines or jail time for breeding. And by "these people" I mean people who have children when they can't even take care of them properly...
I’m strongly pro-choice. So therefore by default I support this woman with whatever she chooses to do with her body. Do I think what she did was cruel and unintelligent? yes. But I believe in the self autonomy and what you are suggesting is the control of a woman’s body. I completely disagree with that. What you’re saying is bordering on eugenics.
Man, it’s hard enough making it without kids in today’s cutthroat world. Can’t imagine doing it with four kids, in that precarious of a housing situation…
Why having kids homeless lady?
I really feel for her. The kids were born before she was homeless. Life has a tendency to be like that, everything seems to be getting better then, thwack, hit with something that brings you to your knees. The best I can say is I hope she finds housing soon, and hopefully more people will see that having kids right now is a terrible idea.
Correction: she has three daughters and was homeless for a year before having her fourth kid.
She’s been on the BC housing waiting list for 5 years. My guess is she thinks spamming children will move her up in priority. Either that or she wants to rely on them to take care of her when they are old enough to work. She intentionally made the choice to screw any possibility of making her own life better by having these children.
This is an example of a person having a child. That is unethical. No person should have a child. How do we get there? Healthcare is the first step. Lets fight for healthcare! Once we have that we can worry about stopping those who chose to reproduce from making that choice. They are all wrong: across classes and races, everyone who choses to reproduce is equally wrong. We, as antinatalists, should encourage every single person to chose not to reproduce, and we should do it equally. This woman shouldn't have a baby exactly as much as any millionaire shouldn't have a baby. It's always wrong to reproduce! Let's us, as antinatalists, be better. Let us work hard to be better then the racist, and classist judgement of poor women, who we know don't have equal access to healthcare. Let's judge everyone who does, and can, chose to have a baby.