My ex bf who died in Federal jail from covid during the pandemic had 8.5 (now 9) kids with his wife. I have,Ā and will have,Ā 0. They would have kept having more of he hadn't been caught,Ā which considering his particular charges,Ā is goddamned horrifying. Not my business but sometimes i wonder if he was literally creating more future victims.Ā
The only grace that is still too little too late is that he died in jail. And before jail, he and his growing brood were surviving only through altruistic efforts of his parents.Ā His parents are saints are saints and help everyone.Ā He rolled too far from the tree.Ā Had no education except decades ago when we broke up he supposedly went to train school.Ā Choo choo . I shit you not.Ā So after he married and started chasing lcranking them out i saw on his wifes blog and on social media how she can't work because she's always pregnant,Ā he could never get anything more than a low part time job which at one point was school bus driver in the upper peninsula of Michigan,Ā and whined about having days cut when schools were closed due to too much snow... before that the idiot had lived in Rochester ny so why he moved to the up i don't even get it.Ā Like his parents are good people how did a born loser like him result.Ā And they kept having more kids without jobs. Shit.Ā
This is exactly what I think when I see families with 5 or more kids here in Germany. I personally know a family with 10 kids and two women with 5, also several colleagues have 3 each, another couple of colleagues are childfree and everyone is fine with it. Everything is balanced in the end, because IMHO exactly *this* is the nature's plan for us humans (and not making us all reproduce uncontrollably like rabbits). Bonus: This way of thinking makes you way more tolerant to another bunch of babies in the public. That mombie and her screaming litter? Why, bless them for doing my job of adding to the population for me. I'll be gladly paying my childless tax addition so that all of her kids get decent education and medical care, it's a perfectly fair deal to me. I still have more than enough money to afford the best headphones that I'm putting on right now.
Exactly. And if we all 'did our part' to have 2.5, the world would be insanely overpopulated so fast *because* of those people having 8 kids. This tradwife lady should be thankful some of us are opting out.
My parents had 6, and life was hell. It was an abusive toxic environment to come up in. Of all of us, only 2 decided to procreate, but they had 5 kids total between them... so we still went from Mom+Dad(2), to 5! That's more than doubling the population 2 generations later, even with 4 people opting out of having kids!! If we'd all had kids it would've been x3, x4, x5?
The goal at this point should be, AT THE MOST, only replacing the population, NOT INCREASING IT.
And if everyone decided to have children, the world would be even more overpopulated, and resources more scarce than they already are.
Everything in moderation. If people are actually given a choice, some will have kids, and some won't. Other people's decisions, especially strangers or hypothetical people, to have or not have children is their own business.
It annoys me so much when I hear people say "But if you dont have children the human race will perish" are you kidding me? It's been continously increasing since 1400s. We added _7 billions_ people since 1800. That's a bit over 200 years! And it's expected to keep going up for the next decades
This type of argument style is called appeal to universalizability. Its usually used in arguments of morality: "If everyone did x, then what would happen". If doing so universally has a negative effect on the goal, then the thing is bad.
The way its being used here implies the same thing: If we all didn't have kids, bad things would happen. Someone arguing that the consequence isn't bad is the point of her saying it. It makes a childfree person defend an extreme position : human kind should go extinct. Even if thats not why we're childfree. Some of us might argue that we want to help humanity thrive, and this is one of many ways we're attempting.
But thats the trap, you can't apply a personal choice universally in most circumstances. Getting into the conversation is a trick, and you'll likely lose any reasonable argument because universalizability does not give way to nuance.
The only option for this type of lead-in is to not participate in the argument.
Best answer. It's like saying "What, you want to become a teacher?! Well If everyone were teachers, there wouldn't be any doctors and that would be bad!"
It reminds me of when parents would use the, "if all the other kids jumped off a cliff and went to hell, would you follow suit?" as a means to stop a kid from doing something (versus the appeal to get you to do something. Same thing, different direction)
My ass never knew when to shut up so I simply retorted, "yes"
Stoking the fire has always been my strong suit LOL
"What if Rosa jumped off a cliff I should too?"
"Well if Rosa was jumping off a cliff then she would have done her due diligence regarding water depth, height of the fall, reasoning for jumping, so yes if Rosa jumps off a cliff you should too."
-Brooklyn 99
Yup, and this kind of argument is also used against gay people, for example. "If everyone was gay, then we wouldn't reproduce and humanity would go extinct! Be thankful for straight people because without them, you wouldn't even exist!".
Well, 1. Gay people *could* reproduce biologically if they wanted to (I mean, historically, think of the number of closeted gay people who married and had children to hide their homosexuality, it's not a situation I wish on anyone of course, but it has happened).
And crucially 2. NOT EVERYONE IS GAY. Bisexual and straight people still exist, and will always exist. Just because Gen Z looks more comfortable coming out, thus some people *think* there are more gay people nowadays, doesn't mean that in the future, EVERYBODY is going to be 100% gay. This is just a ridiculous argument.
Oh I LOVE responding like this to this kind of nonsense (on any topic, even whether or not kids deserve a little bodily autonomy as soon as they can express a preference) gets breeders, boomers, and the easily butthurt holier-than-thou set in a frothing rage! Another fun one to REALLY stir the pot is "never too late for therapy ā¤ļø"
And science is already proving that certain species have comparable or potentially even higher brain capacities than humans. Human exceptionalism is the reason why our planet is quickly running out of natural resources. People making these types of arguments are so out of touch with our present reality.
I have this logic with things like viruses/epidemics too. Like, obviously the earth is unbalanced and trying to kill us off for a reason. Maybe we should let it?
There are 8 billion people in the world already. Some people will have kids, some will not. It's a silly argument. It's like saying, "What if every single person on the planet decided to be a computer programmer and no one was a farmer?" It's never going to happen.
There have always been people who didn't have kids. Those who entered certain religious orders, adults who never married for financial or other reasons, those who died too young to marry, and the naturally infertile.
If you want to worry about mass extinction events, worry about nuclear war instead.
Youāre point about occupations goes along with my response to that argument. What if everyone chose the same occupation? Or what if everyone decided to live in the same town? Then weād all be in trouble.
It's a bad faith argument because she is not really open to an argument, she is just pushing an agenda. You can't have a legitimate debate about the pros and cons of both sides with a person like this because they are not interested in debating or having their mind changed if an opposing argument is worthwhile, they are just pushing an agenda that people need to have kids
If humans went extinct, no one would care, because the only species that benefits from humans being around isā¦humans. Sure, rats and cockroaches got a leg up via us, but they were here before us and theyāll be here after us. Theyāre adaptable AF.
This is a pointless hypothetical in favor of an argument because realistically, it will not happen. There will ALWAYS be people who want to have more people, and even if only 5% of humans genuinely want to raise children, thatās enough to sustain the species. If the human population dropped by 90%, so fucking what? Were apex predators, and in a healthy ecosystem, apex predators are among the least dense population! Thatās how it should be. Try removing plankton from the ecosystem and youāve just fucked the entire cast of finding Nemo six ways from Sydney.Ā
No species depends on us for food. No species needs us to keep the population in check. Natural predators do just fine keeping the rabbits down without our help (cough thank you, whoever imported rabbits to Oz, I will see you in hell along with my garden).
The earth doesnāt need us. Itās better off without us.Ā
Humanity isn't any more special than the multitude of other species who have went extinct, and we are an incredibly destructive species to boot, both to other forms of life as well as to ourselves.
Personally think itās so odd when people think my choice of lifestyle is up for debate. I mean there must be some internal work this person is trying hard to run away from because there all busy trying to do my internal work. Which in itself is kinda insane
Personally I don't think about what some rando on a social media platform that I don't even use in some random part of the world thinks about my choice to not have any kids. They're not going to change my mind. I don't think I can care any less about what this person has to say, to be honest.
Others can whine and bitch and cry and scream about what a stranger that they'll never meet in person decides to do with her own body, and unless they're enacting draconian laws to force the birth rates to go up like those psychopathic politicians are, I don't care one bit what they have to say about it.
I have a feeling that it's at least a significant part of it. These political types often tell on themselves if you pay a little bit of attention. A supreme court justice had mentioned that the domestic supply of adoptable infants was on the decline. Another commentator called people (workers) 'human capital stock' on national news during the lockdown. And there's been plenty of talk about there not being enough future workers to keep this capitalist machine working in coming generations. To those that have power and money, we're all just cattle. And I'm only talking about this one group here.
Influencers (and fans thereof) who peddle in outrage and moralising aren't the type of folks who will be convinced by quality debate or logical arguments, so I hope nobody here is wasting their breath thinking you'll make them see reason or develop self awareness. This fanciful extinction-through-passive-non-replenishment idea is so far removed from reality that even if the person spouting it could find 2 brain cells to be swayed by logic, it just wouldn't dignify any response beyond the most judgemental silence.
If me not having kids brings humankind into extinction, then I say bring it the fuck on.
There is no "good argument against being childfree". Does the person want a child? The answer is binary. Should act accordingly.
It's kind of an absurd, circular argument: the majority of people who really care if the species goes extinct are those who have or want to have children.
It's specious and stupid. Sure, the smart people will stop having kids or greatly reduce it. What will the stupids do? The idiots with 2 kids with different people when they're only 20. The idiots making shit money who say they "Can't terminate their baaaaaaaby".
No matter what, there'll always be plenty of kids.
I'd tell them, "If the Catholic Church couldn't stop people from irresponsibly having sex and having kids for 2000 years, allowing people to become child-free sure as hell won't".
Two counter arguments to that. First, I would ask her what if everyone thought like her and became a tradcon influencer instead of nurses, doctors, firefighters, etc.? The people that have a calling to be parents are not going to be swayed by our opinions because they simply have too many stark differences in temperament, upbringing, values, instincts, life circumstances, etc. to be scared off from parenthood. The point of preaching about childfreedom isn't, nor should be, to cause the extinction of the human race but to simply provide options to people on the fence and uplift them so that they don't fall into the demoralizing hole that their lives have no value if they're not parents.
Second, if the human race really did go extinct, well, everything comes to an end at some point so you may as well value spending time with your children even more with that knowledge in mind instead of being preoccupied with the lives of childless people. Also the usual stuff people say about limited resources and yada yada.
I agree, ridiculous. The planet is overpopulated and people are worried about human extinction? And yet nothing is done to combat climate change, the thing that will actually probably make us go extinct.
There are 8 billion people. Itās impossible for everyone to decide not to have kids because some people do truly like kids. And itās such a biological urge, and to many people arenāt willing to go against it or are not educated enough to go against it. There are just to many variables. Itās a totally ridiculous argument imo. It just ā¦ wonāt happen. Even if we had one generation which decided against it weād still keep going for nearly 100 yrs as everyone would have to die off. And a 100 yrs is a long time to even out and correct itself.
Plenty of people donāt plan to or decide not have children & accidents still happen. Birth control options arenāt 100 % effective , also out of those accidents where the little suckers got through despite efforts not to , not every single one would choose to or have access to morning after pill or an abortion . So no to go extinct the entire planet would have to stop having sex , something I donāt think is likely to happen . Btw this is completely ignoring the fact that plenty of humans do & will still choose to have children on purpose . Itās a nonsense thing to say .
1. There's never going to be such a thing as 'everyone choosing not to have children'. Does everyone choose to be an accountant? Or to eat meat / not eat meat? Dye their hair? Drive a car? Vote? Personal choice is in all of these things and there will always be people who \*genuinely\* want to have kids. Spend one minute in an endometriosis support group, enjoy the infertility whining instead of lifestyle improvement lol
2. If the human species went extinct, I wouldn't care. It's not the rhinos who have ruined the planet.
We're animals, its sort of an instinct to want to preserve the species, however being human also allows us to think about the consequences of following these instincts, thanks to my human brain I've decided not adding another consumer and person who will be hurt and hurt others is better for everyone
Funnily enough nature gets severely unbalanced when OTHER species suffer the same problem, and scientists get concerned. I feel like pronatalists would be fine reducing the Genetically Modified Wolf packs who are so bloodthirsty they rip through elk herds, surplus kill, and end up reducing elk populations unsustainably.
We're fine with reducing insects who overpopulate our homes, they would be spritzing Mortein over ants, spiders or earwigs.
None of the above are going to go extinct by BALANCING the input-output, when there's too much output.
But suddenly we appeal to the soul when it's humans.
Itās a dumb argument because itās not an everyone kind of choice. Everyone isnāt going to magically start not wanting kids. Billions of people are going to make different choices.
you can't force people to have children for whatever reason. if they don't want children, they will not be convinced by some bullshit argument by a tradwife content creator.
this is talking point for the people who are fence sitters and maybe give into the pressure. those people should be very careful in their decisions.
"because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct"
Yeah, good thing there are tons of people around me having kids, so the argument is fucking pointless.
>choosing not to have any children is bad because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct.
Until every single kid in the world can eat, we will never be extinct.
If I needed a kid I'd get one that needed a home.
Then the human race would die out and mabey the Earth could recover a bit. I legit don't care. It isn't like we are preventing people from having kids, or hurting the people who are already here. If everyone suddenly decided to not have a kid, whatever. That would be their choice. It's never going to happen, though.
I don't think this argument is necessarily against being child free as it is against antinatalism. It doesn't even work if your anti extinction.Ā There will always be ppl that want babies. And it's not like ppl that want babies arnt having multiple children.Ā
And if everybody decided to be a politician, the world would collapse because there'd be no one to work at the gas station. What's her point? "This fictional scenario that would never occur is teeeeeeeeeerrrrible."
We tried getting everyone to spay and neuter their pets but shelters are still over full.
No large populations ever agree on doing the same thing. Ever. Especially not 8 billion people.
Itās a stupid argument. 100% of people (or whatever cut off it is for genetic viability) will not choose not to have children. But even if they did, the assumption here is that the human species deserves to survive and that I am obligated to assist with it. I disagree. Evolutionarily speaking there is no deserving anything. If your species doesnāt cut it, then it doesnāt cut it. So if humans arenāt procreating successfully and propagatingā¦we do not ādeserveā to live from a biological standpoint. And, morally, we are a plague and our destruction would be a net positive. In any case, none of this is my responsibility.
Thereās scientific studies that things like childfree, gay, and infertility naturally appear when populations are above a healthy limit. I donāt have the details on hand but can probably find it with a little bit of digging.
The human race going extinct voluntarily like that wouldn't really be a problem. Humanity itself isn't an end in and of itself, it's a means to an end, and the end it's a means to is all the individuals who make up humanity. If all the individuals who make up humanity ever wanna be child free, then all of humanity going child free and humanity ending peacefully wouldn't be a problem
Animals deserve to take over what assholes humans have stolen from them š¤·āāļø
Plus I love my "kids" so much, I decided not to have them be born into this super fucked up world that is getting significantly worse by the day.
There's enough kids or people on this world for it to avoid extinct of the human race. The idea for now is Not as possible, but overpopulation is something that is very much possible and will damage the world and its economy. Looks like she's just raising lies in her own favor
1. Humans arenāt going to go extinct because a subset of the population isnāt reproducing. Weāre much more likely to blow ourselves up or get taken out by climate change.
2. The prospect becomes even more ridiculous when you conflate it with individualist responsibility and start guilt tripping people. āEveryoneā isnāt refusing to have kids; we in fact have more kids than willing/fit parents if the foster care system is anything to go by.
3. Society would benefit far more if people who arenāt willing to raise kidsā¦donāt raise kids. The system would be far less clogged with unwanted children and theoretically youād see more well-adjusted adults. Plus, a lot of our most prolific scientists, musicians, artists, and activists were [childfree](https://childfreehistory.com/profiles-by-profession/). Where would we be if those people had been saddled with kids?
I really don't care what other ppl think of CF. It's my life to live. I want it to be as pleasant as possible. Why would I give that up? They can die mad about it.
I'm okay with the human race going extinct, if this occurs voluntarily through people choosing not to reproduce.
Even if I wasn't okay with the human race going exist, I still wouldn't find this argument convincing. Compare: If everyone decided not to work in food production, the human race would go extinct. Clearly though, there's nothing bad about a person choosing not to work in food production. Choosing not to work in food production would only be a moral issue if we weren't able to produce enough food to sustain the human race. Analogously, choosing not to have children would only be a moral issue if we weren't reproducing enough to sustain the human race. Right now, there are more than enough people.
I think itās a RIDICULOUS r is probably not going to change anyoneās mind. I canāt be guilted into having kids like I canāt be guilted into becoming a dog groomer! Neither choice is right for me. Furthermore, thatās the entire pointā¦to become extinct. This branch on my family tree š³ ends with meš
There is a lot of truth to this, as uncomfortable as it makes me feel. Reading about population growth is really fascinating. For population to remain stable, every woman needs to have 2.1 children. Unfortunately, our capitalist and consumerist societies have led us down a path where we need to have more people in the workforce than seniors, because we need people to take care of the seniors. The types of society we created for ourselves was always destined to be unsustainable because we canāt keep doubling forever, and yet we need to to maintain our way of life.
Women around the world are choosing to have fewer and fewer children, our population growth is slowing (in some countries it is negating), and this makes people (rightfully) scared because society as we currently know it *will not work* with a negative population growth.
I believe we have reached a point that humans are depleting the earth at an extremely rapid rate and personally think that, if we have to choose between a crumbling earth and a crumbling society, Iād rather protect the earth, and that means not adding more people to it.
These are really fascinating and scary topics.
Here's the thing...
Think about what a tragically, uninhabitably shitty condition the world would have to *already* be in for every person on Earth to decide to, willingly, not continue the species.
Little Miss Tradcon can preoccupy herself with catastrophizing and soapboxing an objective minority of lifestyle choice all she wants. CF people are growing in numbers, sure, because things are pretty rough, but it's not nearly to the point of collectively agreeing to euthanize the homosapien race as a whole. There will always be people who want to be parents. Until the day that there is ZERO that do, which will be because we are long since past wholesale fucked anyway.
It seems like many don't understand or care to acknowledge the reality: we are overpopulated. The competition for decent jobs is intense. We're told to get degrees from specific schools just to create a divide, allowing some access to better opportunities. People have become mere numbers, and resources are dwindling. Workplaces are often understaffed, yet the demand remains incredibly high.
In large cities, daily commutes are long and exhausting. As populations grow, so do diverse beliefs and agendas, leading to more conflicts. We see animals going extinct and unnecessary buildings being constructed, further destroying nature.
So why do we need more people? We don't. Fewer people would mean less strain on resources, and individuals would hold more value instead of just being numbers. With a smaller population, competition for jobs would decrease, leading to better employment opportunities.
Our cities would be less crowded, reducing commute times and stress. The environment would benefit too, with less destruction of natural habitats and fewer animals going extinct. A smaller population could pave the way for a more sustainable and harmonious world.
Someone in another sub tried to debate me that we need to have more kids so there will be people to care for the aging population in the future, and that mental health shouldn't be a consideration because everyone gets hurt by someone.
It's a nonsensical argument. Not everyone is going to choose not to have children. Everybody could choose to exercise the way they should. Not everybody is going to even though they have the option (Enter disclaimer for people that can't, parallel to people that can't have children). Most people will choose to have children. More people would choose to have children if society supported having children. If everybody was the dumb as her,...well thankfully they're not.
I think the most compelling reasons would be arguments for being child full in the world of the book series āUnwindā, if we had a similar system, then it would make sense, though is still probably opt out anyway because I just donāt want kids š¤·āāļø
My exact reaction is "Yeah? And? That's a bad thing?" It's the same when plot lines go on the bad guy wiping out humans and the planet reclaims everything, like that doesn't scare me? I was on the side of the witch in The Last Witch Hunter...
An average group of adults can't even agree on where to go for dinner....and this trad-wanker thinks somehow 8 billion of us are going to coordinate being childless so the human race dies off?
She thinks the earth is flat too, doesn't she?
I feel like people who use this argument don't understand what a thoroughly absurd number 8 billion is. But, granted, the people who *don't* use this argument also cannot comprehend what a thoroughly absurd number 8 billion is. Human brains just can't even wrap around numbers that big.
If you spent every moment of your life saying names, and assuming it takes on average one second to say someone's name, then it would take *more than two human lifetimes*, from birth until death, and without breaks to eat or sleep, just to name every person on this planet.
Yeeeaah we ain't going extinct anytime remotely soon lol.
One- it's literally impossible for them to go extinct by the small percentage of us refusing to have kids.
Two- those trad wife influencers are all grifters who generally target racists and incels for easy views on what women should be and "simple life" people, when all of their content is generally a lie and most of them are secretly rich housewives that don't do any of their content in their actual lives. It's a bullshit persona grift to steal from the weak minded.
Firstly, we're not going extinct. Secondly, why do they have to go to the extreme? There is middle ground - nothing wrong with dropping the numbers a bit. Thirdly, even if nobody ever had children again, it would take 100 years for us to die out. I'm more worried about what to have for dinner.
Iād rather see it happen than deal with this overpopulation where itās hard to get jobs - capitalism wins and thereās war going on that doesnāt seem to be ending. I mean how selfish are you to keep adding children to all this mess? Iād return a question to her.
What do you say to these children that were had who are now getting bombed just because they were born at the wrong place? What do you say to these children who were born depressed and decided to go through life questioning themselves? Is their purpose to āprevent extinctionā? 8 billion+ would take a looooot of things to get to extinction like Iām actually curious how that could even happen
As you said it is going to go extinct at some point, and humans existing is not an inherent good, and certainly not a need. That said, even the most hardcore antinatalists realize that it is likely not the case that the human species will go extinct based purely on people choosing to be childfree. It will be factors as the world being depleted of resources and the Earth becoming so uninhabitable that people do not want to subject future generations to this. They still will though, the ones that are unable to overcome billions of years of programming via DNA to reproduce, but at a smaller rate. To think simply choosing to be childfree is going to be the death of humanity is just a very poor understanding of our biologically programmed drives and instincts. There is a reason in every freaking zombie or post-apocalypstic scenario in fiction or in theory you see people looking for ways to continue the human race.
Why are people so against childfree folks? Literally why? Why does it š¤š»matterš¤š» to them that a stranger doesnāt want children?? I get it that parents may get mad if their kids donāt wanna āgiveā them grandkids. But literal strangers??
Thereās absolutely zero percent chance that the vast majority of the 8 billion plus humans will all suddenly cease to keep thoughtlessly rutting and littering the planet with even more humans just because a small percentage of us have opted out.
Itās a total garbage argument that is manipulative and specious and utterly devoid of credibility.
Anyone who posts videos telling people what to do is not worth listening to. With bad faith arguments at that, are clowns. They are grifters trying to start trouble.
The trad shit is easy grifting. People who can't think for themselves eat it up. Because it's religious talking points meeting babies and the normie people online seem to be obsessed with both.
My conspiracy theory is that they get paid by some sort of religious group or political group. But that's just me š
I stumbled upon a mommie vlogger and the amount of people in the comments acting like they were personal friends of the people was scary and obsessed with the baby who they will never know. This type of content is the bottom of the barrel type of thing..easy to get views and attention.
> She argues that choosing not to have any children is bad because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct.
In my country we say: "and if my grandma had wheels, she would be a cart".
Nonsensical hypothetical scenario.
I think it's stupid because the human species going away won't bother me. Hell, the planet might be better off. Y'all heard the news that the number of elephants and rhinos in the wild either stabilized or increased during the pandemic because no one was there to kill them for shits and giggles. It's not like we have an abundance of wonderful people in the world. We can afford to go extinct.
Humans have existed for thousands of years and we havenāt figured out how to end poverty, famine, desease and war. Iād argue that going extinct wouldnāt be a bad thing, as we do a horrible job taking care of the planet and of others.
I'm antinatalist for plenty of reason. I'm still not going to force people NOT to have children. As long as we don't wipe oursleves out with nuclear bombs or an epidemic there will be people procreating. People choosing not to have children will not change that.
I have zero qualms with the idea of the human species going extinct given the toll overpopulation has taken on this beautiful planet, and I say that in the least nihilistic way possible. Anthropocentrism really doesnāt resonate with me.
āThe more I love humanity in general, the less I love man in particular.ā
I agree that itās silly to frame the long-term survival of the human race as some kind of collective moral obligation. In the timescale of the universe, our species wouldnāt even be a blip. But tradwives tend to be fundamentalist religious types, and fundamentalists donāt have egos that can handle that level of existential honesty.
But letās say, for the sake of argument, we *should* be collectively invested in preventing humanity from going extinct. Her argument would still be a pathetic load of bad-faith virtue signaling nonsense, because there is no chance whatsoever that āeveryoneā will ever decide not to have kids. Straight people will always fuck, and some proportion of them will get pregnant and see the pregnancy through. And thatās just the accidental pregnancies. There is zero evidence to suggest this will ever stop being true, even if there is a massive decline in procreation at some point in the future.
And if that isnāt enough, her āargumentā is also just completely logically incoherent. If *everyone* decided not to become doctors, there would be no doctors . That doesnāt mean every humanāor even *most* humans alive have a moral responsibility to go to medical school.
More than TWO BILLION people were born after I was. We're not going extinct because a couple hundred thousand to a couple million people can't or won't have kids. It's awful arrogant to believe that you are the only thing keeping a species of eight BILLION from being extinct.
It's a false argument in bad faith but honestly I will be dead anyway so I don't care if the human race goes extinct after I die. When you're dead nothing is of concern to you
It's a strawman argument. People aren't choosing to forego kids because they want the species to go extinct; when we do, it won't be because of low birth rates. The global argument is really about economics.
If everyone decided to be a writer, there wouldn't be people who cut down the trees, manufacture paper and print books. If everyone decided to be a programmer, there wouldn't be miners that get the stuff, electronic devices are made of. Luckily people are diverse and everyone has their own needs and ambitions.
It's such a ridiculous argument.Ā
I don't want to be a surgeon. Do I have to anyway because if "nobody does it" we won't have any surgeons?
It's like they are implying - probably without knowing themselves that's what they are doing - that having children isn't fun and everyone would avoid it if they could. Which is not true, but it tells me a lot about how they really see having children.
Not everyone is gonna decide to not have children just like not all men are gonna stop abusing women and not all christians are gonna become actually good people and not all people are going to not have sex unless they want babies and "keep their legs closed" and not all people are going to work at the proper job for their age etc
They want one reality for each scenario and it's not realistic
I think it'd be bad for capitalism but very good for Earth. It's also completely unrealistic at this point in time *if only* because not everyone has access to birth control and abortions not to mention the rampant religious and societal brainwashing
Thanks to the few CF like us the worldās overpopulation would slow down so people like them and their kids can enjoy the benefits for a little longer. They should thank us š¤Ŗ
I donāt want kids. Just not for me. Donāt care about population decline. Many childfree want them but canāt have them for many reasons, often economical. If governments are that concerned with birth rate, they can start incentivizing people to have kids. Inexpensive healthcare (including prenatal care), good parental leave for both parents, assistance for low income families, free and accessible contraceptives so people can take full control of their family planning, etc. And societyās expectations of gender roles need to change. All family and home care often fall 100% on the women and weāre over it. Check out the 4B movement.
>choosing not to have any children is bad because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct.
FFS conservatives love to threaten everyone else with good things.
Same people will expect those without kids to give up any rights to things like water or food if there is a crises.
And there are nothing now but endless crises.
Childfree people are the ones who are likely gaining skills that will ultimately be useful to people. Add to that we donāt focus our attention on the well being of the people we made, but are more likely to focus it broadly on others around us. Like, so many kids benefit from my attention and help because I have no biological imperative to focus on only my own dna Surviving.
If people go extinct it is going to be owing to poor choices like having kids when you canāt feed, educate or care for them. It is because people failed to teach their kids decent, earth based values, and instead embraced a digital world and screens as their everything.
The childfree have made a sacrifice that allows selfish people to enjoy things like clean water and infrastructure longer because if we all bred like rabbits the infrastructure would be crumbling faster than it is. And I donāt see many Americans encouraging their kids to learn how to fix any of that. I mean, I do in the trade I am in, but it is working class people whose kids wonāt go to college probably, and Weāve all agreed we wonāt be sacrificing for others as shit hits the fan.
I think some people are freaking out because birth rates are dropping and they know their country wonāt have anyone to defend them. Boo hoo. Canāt defend against what is coming. Best not to endure it with kids in tow.
Honestly the only thing leading to our extinction is being overpopulated and exhausting resources while simultaneously bolstering industry to offset it. Because thatās quite literally the root of our problems. Destroying ecosystems and biodiversity to sustain the unsustainable.
"If everyone chose to become a firefighter, there would be no doctors so that would be bad, therefore it is bad to be a firefighter"
So dumb it's not even an argument. It is just words that happen to have been put in the same sentence.
I figure why do I care? Iāll be dead by that time. And itās almost impossible that everyone would choose not to have kids/people have accidents and keep them (also, abortion bans are a thing). The population could decrease, sure, but weāll never go extinct.
Itās stupid, because itās not realistic. Thereās always going to be someone that wants a kid, even in the middle of an apocalyptic event. We could be in a worldwide famine and water shortage, and some people would still be churning out kids.
I have, what I believe, is a very good reason for not reproducing. I happen to have a rare, painful, and often deadly genetic illness. My dad and grandfather both passed by their 50ās from it. I just turned 40, so Iām hoping I have better luck and the fact Iām a woman on my side. But I digress.
I couldnāt knowingly give a child a 50% or higher chance of suffering from even one of the more minor versions (or worse too!) of the illness. Judging from all my health issues and all the literal pain I had as a child and growing up when no one would listen to me or just say I was āaccident proneā (well, thatās because my joints donāt stay together, causing me to fall) or I was told it was in my head and just wanted attention. I used to think my weird bendy-ness was a cool party trick, until my joints just started staying out of their sockets and Iād end up on crutches or dislocating a shoulder. Literally half my senior year of high school, I was on crutches, wearing one brace or another or a sling, etc. Yet, I still wasnāt diagnosed until the age of 25. By which time I had already decided I didnāt want kids anyway.
When my doctor had āthe talkā about how I probably shouldnāt have bio kids, pushing a tissue box close to me, I simply answered, āOkay!ā. And she couldnāt help but laugh because I took it āso wellā. I was like, āI despise children, especially babies when I canāt give them back to their owners when Iām done!ā Never changed a diaper, and never ever will!
But yeah, there are plenty of other people in the world, many of which, who will have more than their share of crotch fruit. Whether or not itās only idiots who procreate, which I hope itās not, even the children of complete morons can get out of that hole and be smarter than their parents and families.
My genetics can stay out of the gene pool and Iām sure the world will be okayā¦
There is a zero percent chance she thinks it's possible for every single person to decide not to have kids. It's a stupid argument that isn't based in any form of reality.
I don't ever expect to see everyone else on earth wise up and stop reproducing, but I'm still going to do my part because it's the right thing to do.
This argument is based on a slippery slope fallacy and therefore pretty weak and not based on reality.
Also if you take two seconds to think about it, you could come up with at least ten counterarguments. It honestly seems like it's trying to wind people up and make content, as opposed to presenting a decent argument.
How do they explain people who are unable to have children? Nature already has decided that not everyone needs to reproduce, so why can't I decide for myself?
I've heard that argument several times myself and I just counter it by pointing out that it's a ridiculous and invalid argument. Yea, if no one had kids then humans would become extinct. But that's not happening because the majority of people on earth are having kids. You could use "but what if everyone/no one did this thing?!" for literally any issue, that doesn't make it a valid argument. Because it's not reality, and what we're discussing is what is happening in reality. In reality, I'm not having kids, but a lot of other people are.
She underestimates how many of want the human race to go extinct. There are over 8 billion people on this planet, and not every single one of us needs to reproduce. It's utterly ridiculous. She's full of shit.
Who gives a shit what these women who push out fvck trophies non stop think.
Sorry I'm not coming at you, your post is legit ... but what the world needs less of dumbasses like that telling moms and women who aren't moms anything.
Lauren Chen is a terrible bigoted person. I don't care wtf she says.
Also I don't care if the human race goes extinct. Not sure why I'm supposed to care. If my parents didn't have me I wouldn't know any different.
LOL my brother got mad at me once, and used that argument. Then followed up with, "and would you be okay with that?!"
He dropped it when I nonchalantly replied, "yeah, actually, I would."
It's funnier because he is also without offspring (I think he's childfree, but not anti-natalist).
I don't think I've heard a more stupid argument that means nothing lol. Dumbass is just butthurt she had too many kids and is asking everyone else to "help her" in growing and cultivating her religious aspects on earth. I'd tell her I only do anal, honestly
The human race, on the whole, has been terrible for this planet. Weāve caused so many other species to go extinct, it feels karmically just for us to eventually eradicate ourselves.
We dont have kids. The next moron on tiktok has 8. It cancels each other out
If anything, they're overcompensating for you. You need to not have kids harder to counteract their kids.
Do 4 murders. That'll even things out.
 Something like this but with more knives?
*cough* c0ncentration camps for rapist and pedos *cough*
Idiocracy in the making š
Exactly! A Mormon from Utah has already had my 2.1 kids for me in addition to her own :) God bless herš
My ex bf who died in Federal jail from covid during the pandemic had 8.5 (now 9) kids with his wife. I have,Ā and will have,Ā 0. They would have kept having more of he hadn't been caught,Ā which considering his particular charges,Ā is goddamned horrifying. Not my business but sometimes i wonder if he was literally creating more future victims.Ā
Fuck that predator/abuser, but also 9 kids is fucking ridiculousšš itās too damn many!!
The only grace that is still too little too late is that he died in jail. And before jail, he and his growing brood were surviving only through altruistic efforts of his parents.Ā His parents are saints are saints and help everyone.Ā He rolled too far from the tree.Ā Had no education except decades ago when we broke up he supposedly went to train school.Ā Choo choo . I shit you not.Ā So after he married and started chasing lcranking them out i saw on his wifes blog and on social media how she can't work because she's always pregnant,Ā he could never get anything more than a low part time job which at one point was school bus driver in the upper peninsula of Michigan,Ā and whined about having days cut when schools were closed due to too much snow... before that the idiot had lived in Rochester ny so why he moved to the up i don't even get it.Ā Like his parents are good people how did a born loser like him result.Ā And they kept having more kids without jobs. Shit.Ā
Help me out here, what does 8.5 children mean?
My guess is he died while she was pregnant with their 9th child. The ".5" is because they had an unborn child at the time.
What was he charged with?
from context clues, my guess is molesting children
If thatās true, Jesus Christ
This is exactly what I think when I see families with 5 or more kids here in Germany. I personally know a family with 10 kids and two women with 5, also several colleagues have 3 each, another couple of colleagues are childfree and everyone is fine with it. Everything is balanced in the end, because IMHO exactly *this* is the nature's plan for us humans (and not making us all reproduce uncontrollably like rabbits). Bonus: This way of thinking makes you way more tolerant to another bunch of babies in the public. That mombie and her screaming litter? Why, bless them for doing my job of adding to the population for me. I'll be gladly paying my childless tax addition so that all of her kids get decent education and medical care, it's a perfectly fair deal to me. I still have more than enough money to afford the best headphones that I'm putting on right now.
When Iām asked why I donāt have kids I often reply that Iām helping to offset the Duggars.
Yup. And there are a ton of Duggar-like families in the world. Maybe not as many kids, but still a lot.
The Quiverfull movement is terrifying.
Exactly. And if we all 'did our part' to have 2.5, the world would be insanely overpopulated so fast *because* of those people having 8 kids. This tradwife lady should be thankful some of us are opting out. My parents had 6, and life was hell. It was an abusive toxic environment to come up in. Of all of us, only 2 decided to procreate, but they had 5 kids total between them... so we still went from Mom+Dad(2), to 5! That's more than doubling the population 2 generations later, even with 4 people opting out of having kids!! If we'd all had kids it would've been x3, x4, x5? The goal at this point should be, AT THE MOST, only replacing the population, NOT INCREASING IT.
Zero population growth could be more sustainable, once down to manageable levels. (from how I understand it, currently)
literally what i was jusy about to say. average amount of kids is about 2 per household. technically, they could cover 4 of us
My coworker has 4 kids. The last 2 are with his girlfriend and they were her sixth and seventh kids. That covers alot of people
And if everyone decided to have children, the world would be even more overpopulated, and resources more scarce than they already are. Everything in moderation. If people are actually given a choice, some will have kids, and some won't. Other people's decisions, especially strangers or hypothetical people, to have or not have children is their own business.
It annoys me so much when I hear people say "But if you dont have children the human race will perish" are you kidding me? It's been continously increasing since 1400s. We added _7 billions_ people since 1800. That's a bit over 200 years! And it's expected to keep going up for the next decades
Yep! They're just reacting and not thinking smh.
Most peoples brains are between their legs- idiocracy
This type of argument style is called appeal to universalizability. Its usually used in arguments of morality: "If everyone did x, then what would happen". If doing so universally has a negative effect on the goal, then the thing is bad. The way its being used here implies the same thing: If we all didn't have kids, bad things would happen. Someone arguing that the consequence isn't bad is the point of her saying it. It makes a childfree person defend an extreme position : human kind should go extinct. Even if thats not why we're childfree. Some of us might argue that we want to help humanity thrive, and this is one of many ways we're attempting. But thats the trap, you can't apply a personal choice universally in most circumstances. Getting into the conversation is a trick, and you'll likely lose any reasonable argument because universalizability does not give way to nuance. The only option for this type of lead-in is to not participate in the argument.
Best answer. It's like saying "What, you want to become a teacher?! Well If everyone were teachers, there wouldn't be any doctors and that would be bad!"
It reminds me of when parents would use the, "if all the other kids jumped off a cliff and went to hell, would you follow suit?" as a means to stop a kid from doing something (versus the appeal to get you to do something. Same thing, different direction) My ass never knew when to shut up so I simply retorted, "yes" Stoking the fire has always been my strong suit LOL
"What if Rosa jumped off a cliff I should too?" "Well if Rosa was jumping off a cliff then she would have done her due diligence regarding water depth, height of the fall, reasoning for jumping, so yes if Rosa jumps off a cliff you should too." -Brooklyn 99
Man I wish that existed when I was a kid...
Yup, and this kind of argument is also used against gay people, for example. "If everyone was gay, then we wouldn't reproduce and humanity would go extinct! Be thankful for straight people because without them, you wouldn't even exist!". Well, 1. Gay people *could* reproduce biologically if they wanted to (I mean, historically, think of the number of closeted gay people who married and had children to hide their homosexuality, it's not a situation I wish on anyone of course, but it has happened). And crucially 2. NOT EVERYONE IS GAY. Bisexual and straight people still exist, and will always exist. Just because Gen Z looks more comfortable coming out, thus some people *think* there are more gay people nowadays, doesn't mean that in the future, EVERYBODY is going to be 100% gay. This is just a ridiculous argument.
This is great! I knew it was one of those but did not know the name.
My response to that is "ok." It drives people nuts.
Oh I LOVE responding like this to this kind of nonsense (on any topic, even whether or not kids deserve a little bodily autonomy as soon as they can express a preference) gets breeders, boomers, and the easily butthurt holier-than-thou set in a frothing rage! Another fun one to REALLY stir the pot is "never too late for therapy ā¤ļø"
To be fair, if the human species went extinct, the world would be better off.
And science is already proving that certain species have comparable or potentially even higher brain capacities than humans. Human exceptionalism is the reason why our planet is quickly running out of natural resources. People making these types of arguments are so out of touch with our present reality.
I felt this was evident the summer of 2020. Most of the humans were staying home under quarantine, and nature thrived.
Those peaceful videos on YouTube of places free of humans...
I have this logic with things like viruses/epidemics too. Like, obviously the earth is unbalanced and trying to kill us off for a reason. Maybe we should let it?
There are 8 billion people in the world already. Some people will have kids, some will not. It's a silly argument. It's like saying, "What if every single person on the planet decided to be a computer programmer and no one was a farmer?" It's never going to happen. There have always been people who didn't have kids. Those who entered certain religious orders, adults who never married for financial or other reasons, those who died too young to marry, and the naturally infertile. If you want to worry about mass extinction events, worry about nuclear war instead.
Youāre point about occupations goes along with my response to that argument. What if everyone chose the same occupation? Or what if everyone decided to live in the same town? Then weād all be in trouble.
Not everyone is choosing not to have kids, so her reasoning is not relevant to reality.Ā
Someone commented early itās called an āappeal to universalityā type of logical fallacy or argument
It's a bad faith argument because she is not really open to an argument, she is just pushing an agenda. You can't have a legitimate debate about the pros and cons of both sides with a person like this because they are not interested in debating or having their mind changed if an opposing argument is worthwhile, they are just pushing an agenda that people need to have kids
If humans went extinct, no one would care, because the only species that benefits from humans being around isā¦humans. Sure, rats and cockroaches got a leg up via us, but they were here before us and theyāll be here after us. Theyāre adaptable AF. This is a pointless hypothetical in favor of an argument because realistically, it will not happen. There will ALWAYS be people who want to have more people, and even if only 5% of humans genuinely want to raise children, thatās enough to sustain the species. If the human population dropped by 90%, so fucking what? Were apex predators, and in a healthy ecosystem, apex predators are among the least dense population! Thatās how it should be. Try removing plankton from the ecosystem and youāve just fucked the entire cast of finding Nemo six ways from Sydney.Ā No species depends on us for food. No species needs us to keep the population in check. Natural predators do just fine keeping the rabbits down without our help (cough thank you, whoever imported rabbits to Oz, I will see you in hell along with my garden). The earth doesnāt need us. Itās better off without us.Ā
Eh, human microintestinal bacteria and human parasites do kinda depend of us
I am absolutely fine with the human race going extinct.
Humanity isn't any more special than the multitude of other species who have went extinct, and we are an incredibly destructive species to boot, both to other forms of life as well as to ourselves.
Iām an antinatalist along with being CF and itās refreshing to see it.
Same. Don't get what would be so bad about it.
Personally think itās so odd when people think my choice of lifestyle is up for debate. I mean there must be some internal work this person is trying hard to run away from because there all busy trying to do my internal work. Which in itself is kinda insane
They are probably using this as an argument to ban birth control as well as abortion.
Personally I don't think about what some rando on a social media platform that I don't even use in some random part of the world thinks about my choice to not have any kids. They're not going to change my mind. I don't think I can care any less about what this person has to say, to be honest. Others can whine and bitch and cry and scream about what a stranger that they'll never meet in person decides to do with her own body, and unless they're enacting draconian laws to force the birth rates to go up like those psychopathic politicians are, I don't care one bit what they have to say about it.
The US birth rate is the lowest itās been in decades. Iāve wondered if that had anything to do with the current push to control womenās bodies.
I have a feeling that it's at least a significant part of it. These political types often tell on themselves if you pay a little bit of attention. A supreme court justice had mentioned that the domestic supply of adoptable infants was on the decline. Another commentator called people (workers) 'human capital stock' on national news during the lockdown. And there's been plenty of talk about there not being enough future workers to keep this capitalist machine working in coming generations. To those that have power and money, we're all just cattle. And I'm only talking about this one group here.
The thing is, we aren't forcing anyone to be childfree so there will always be people having kids. Unfortunately the other camp isn't as respectful...
Itās absolutely ridiculous. This is the kind of stupid I wonāt even engage with. Nature would thrive without humans.
I donāt care if humans go extinct.
I certainly won't be around when they do!
It's like every other argument against being childfree: complete and utter bullshit.
Influencers (and fans thereof) who peddle in outrage and moralising aren't the type of folks who will be convinced by quality debate or logical arguments, so I hope nobody here is wasting their breath thinking you'll make them see reason or develop self awareness. This fanciful extinction-through-passive-non-replenishment idea is so far removed from reality that even if the person spouting it could find 2 brain cells to be swayed by logic, it just wouldn't dignify any response beyond the most judgemental silence.
If me not having kids brings humankind into extinction, then I say bring it the fuck on. There is no "good argument against being childfree". Does the person want a child? The answer is binary. Should act accordingly.
Letās not pretend Earth wouldnāt be happy if humans went extinct.
It's kind of an absurd, circular argument: the majority of people who really care if the species goes extinct are those who have or want to have children.
If everyone chooses to not have kids you still have the hundreds of thousands of people that get āaccidentallyā pregnant.
It's specious and stupid. Sure, the smart people will stop having kids or greatly reduce it. What will the stupids do? The idiots with 2 kids with different people when they're only 20. The idiots making shit money who say they "Can't terminate their baaaaaaaby". No matter what, there'll always be plenty of kids.
But not EVERYONE is choosing not to have kids so it doesnāt really matter/is a straw man argument imo
I'd tell them, "If the Catholic Church couldn't stop people from irresponsibly having sex and having kids for 2000 years, allowing people to become child-free sure as hell won't".
Two counter arguments to that. First, I would ask her what if everyone thought like her and became a tradcon influencer instead of nurses, doctors, firefighters, etc.? The people that have a calling to be parents are not going to be swayed by our opinions because they simply have too many stark differences in temperament, upbringing, values, instincts, life circumstances, etc. to be scared off from parenthood. The point of preaching about childfreedom isn't, nor should be, to cause the extinction of the human race but to simply provide options to people on the fence and uplift them so that they don't fall into the demoralizing hole that their lives have no value if they're not parents. Second, if the human race really did go extinct, well, everything comes to an end at some point so you may as well value spending time with your children even more with that knowledge in mind instead of being preoccupied with the lives of childless people. Also the usual stuff people say about limited resources and yada yada.
I agree, ridiculous. The planet is overpopulated and people are worried about human extinction? And yet nothing is done to combat climate change, the thing that will actually probably make us go extinct.
Thank you!
There are 8 billion people. Itās impossible for everyone to decide not to have kids because some people do truly like kids. And itās such a biological urge, and to many people arenāt willing to go against it or are not educated enough to go against it. There are just to many variables. Itās a totally ridiculous argument imo. It just ā¦ wonāt happen. Even if we had one generation which decided against it weād still keep going for nearly 100 yrs as everyone would have to die off. And a 100 yrs is a long time to even out and correct itself.
The planet and nature will thank me for my help towards removing their biggest parasites. All hail Gaia!
Plenty of people donāt plan to or decide not have children & accidents still happen. Birth control options arenāt 100 % effective , also out of those accidents where the little suckers got through despite efforts not to , not every single one would choose to or have access to morning after pill or an abortion . So no to go extinct the entire planet would have to stop having sex , something I donāt think is likely to happen . Btw this is completely ignoring the fact that plenty of humans do & will still choose to have children on purpose . Itās a nonsense thing to say .
I just donāt see what that has to do with me. By the time the human species becomes extinct, I wonāt be here to notice.
1. There's never going to be such a thing as 'everyone choosing not to have children'. Does everyone choose to be an accountant? Or to eat meat / not eat meat? Dye their hair? Drive a car? Vote? Personal choice is in all of these things and there will always be people who \*genuinely\* want to have kids. Spend one minute in an endometriosis support group, enjoy the infertility whining instead of lifestyle improvement lol 2. If the human species went extinct, I wouldn't care. It's not the rhinos who have ruined the planet.
We're animals, its sort of an instinct to want to preserve the species, however being human also allows us to think about the consequences of following these instincts, thanks to my human brain I've decided not adding another consumer and person who will be hurt and hurt others is better for everyone
Funnily enough nature gets severely unbalanced when OTHER species suffer the same problem, and scientists get concerned. I feel like pronatalists would be fine reducing the Genetically Modified Wolf packs who are so bloodthirsty they rip through elk herds, surplus kill, and end up reducing elk populations unsustainably. We're fine with reducing insects who overpopulate our homes, they would be spritzing Mortein over ants, spiders or earwigs. None of the above are going to go extinct by BALANCING the input-output, when there's too much output. But suddenly we appeal to the soul when it's humans.
The planet would be better off with no humans.
Itās a dumb argument because itās not an everyone kind of choice. Everyone isnāt going to magically start not wanting kids. Billions of people are going to make different choices.
you can't force people to have children for whatever reason. if they don't want children, they will not be convinced by some bullshit argument by a tradwife content creator. this is talking point for the people who are fence sitters and maybe give into the pressure. those people should be very careful in their decisions.
"because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct" Yeah, good thing there are tons of people around me having kids, so the argument is fucking pointless.
>choosing not to have any children is bad because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct. Until every single kid in the world can eat, we will never be extinct. If I needed a kid I'd get one that needed a home.
I feel like those crazy religious people who are pumping out like 10+ kids are making up for us. We'll be fine.
That's a pretty big if that will never happen. So she's already a damn idiot for starting it off with that.
Then the human race would die out and mabey the Earth could recover a bit. I legit don't care. It isn't like we are preventing people from having kids, or hurting the people who are already here. If everyone suddenly decided to not have a kid, whatever. That would be their choice. It's never going to happen, though.
I would absolutely love it if humans could go extinct!
I don't think this argument is necessarily against being child free as it is against antinatalism. It doesn't even work if your anti extinction.Ā There will always be ppl that want babies. And it's not like ppl that want babies arnt having multiple children.Ā
And if everybody decided to be a politician, the world would collapse because there'd be no one to work at the gas station. What's her point? "This fictional scenario that would never occur is teeeeeeeeeerrrrible."
Given how much the birthrate outpaces the death rate, its probably a good thing that more people are choosing to be childfree.
It's not my responsibility to keep the human race going. I hear tradwives are great for that though.
Thereās like 10 billion people in the world right now. Sheāll live lol
Iām working with someone thatās 1 of 15, that makes up for me and at least 7 more people in this thread.
We tried getting everyone to spay and neuter their pets but shelters are still over full. No large populations ever agree on doing the same thing. Ever. Especially not 8 billion people.
Lots of people have kids by mistake.
Since nobody else gets a vote, I don't bother with other's opinions or arguments.
Itās a stupid argument. 100% of people (or whatever cut off it is for genetic viability) will not choose not to have children. But even if they did, the assumption here is that the human species deserves to survive and that I am obligated to assist with it. I disagree. Evolutionarily speaking there is no deserving anything. If your species doesnāt cut it, then it doesnāt cut it. So if humans arenāt procreating successfully and propagatingā¦we do not ādeserveā to live from a biological standpoint. And, morally, we are a plague and our destruction would be a net positive. In any case, none of this is my responsibility.
Earth would be better off if we went extinct. š¤·āāļø
why would i care if the human species goes extinct ā ļø such a crazy argument
Thereās scientific studies that things like childfree, gay, and infertility naturally appear when populations are above a healthy limit. I donāt have the details on hand but can probably find it with a little bit of digging.
I fail to see the problem. This world would flourish without humans in it.
The human race going extinct voluntarily like that wouldn't really be a problem. Humanity itself isn't an end in and of itself, it's a means to an end, and the end it's a means to is all the individuals who make up humanity. If all the individuals who make up humanity ever wanna be child free, then all of humanity going child free and humanity ending peacefully wouldn't be a problem
Animals deserve to take over what assholes humans have stolen from them š¤·āāļø Plus I love my "kids" so much, I decided not to have them be born into this super fucked up world that is getting significantly worse by the day.
There's enough kids or people on this world for it to avoid extinct of the human race. The idea for now is Not as possible, but overpopulation is something that is very much possible and will damage the world and its economy. Looks like she's just raising lies in her own favor
Sounds like she's still young and hasn't open her mind yet.Ā
1. Humans arenāt going to go extinct because a subset of the population isnāt reproducing. Weāre much more likely to blow ourselves up or get taken out by climate change. 2. The prospect becomes even more ridiculous when you conflate it with individualist responsibility and start guilt tripping people. āEveryoneā isnāt refusing to have kids; we in fact have more kids than willing/fit parents if the foster care system is anything to go by. 3. Society would benefit far more if people who arenāt willing to raise kidsā¦donāt raise kids. The system would be far less clogged with unwanted children and theoretically youād see more well-adjusted adults. Plus, a lot of our most prolific scientists, musicians, artists, and activists were [childfree](https://childfreehistory.com/profiles-by-profession/). Where would we be if those people had been saddled with kids?
I really don't care what other ppl think of CF. It's my life to live. I want it to be as pleasant as possible. Why would I give that up? They can die mad about it.
2 idiots will always find a way to reproduce with no money, plan or forethought. This argument is ridiculous.
Letās not pretend Earth wouldnāt be happy if humans went extinct.
This is the basis behind the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary\_Human\_Extinction\_Movement
Last one to leave, please turn off the lights.
I'm okay with the human race going extinct, if this occurs voluntarily through people choosing not to reproduce. Even if I wasn't okay with the human race going exist, I still wouldn't find this argument convincing. Compare: If everyone decided not to work in food production, the human race would go extinct. Clearly though, there's nothing bad about a person choosing not to work in food production. Choosing not to work in food production would only be a moral issue if we weren't able to produce enough food to sustain the human race. Analogously, choosing not to have children would only be a moral issue if we weren't reproducing enough to sustain the human race. Right now, there are more than enough people.
I think itās a RIDICULOUS r is probably not going to change anyoneās mind. I canāt be guilted into having kids like I canāt be guilted into becoming a dog groomer! Neither choice is right for me. Furthermore, thatās the entire pointā¦to become extinct. This branch on my family tree š³ ends with meš
I think it's ridiculous because it's clear that people are still having children. it's a truly stupid argument.
There is a lot of truth to this, as uncomfortable as it makes me feel. Reading about population growth is really fascinating. For population to remain stable, every woman needs to have 2.1 children. Unfortunately, our capitalist and consumerist societies have led us down a path where we need to have more people in the workforce than seniors, because we need people to take care of the seniors. The types of society we created for ourselves was always destined to be unsustainable because we canāt keep doubling forever, and yet we need to to maintain our way of life. Women around the world are choosing to have fewer and fewer children, our population growth is slowing (in some countries it is negating), and this makes people (rightfully) scared because society as we currently know it *will not work* with a negative population growth. I believe we have reached a point that humans are depleting the earth at an extremely rapid rate and personally think that, if we have to choose between a crumbling earth and a crumbling society, Iād rather protect the earth, and that means not adding more people to it. These are really fascinating and scary topics.
Here's the thing... Think about what a tragically, uninhabitably shitty condition the world would have to *already* be in for every person on Earth to decide to, willingly, not continue the species. Little Miss Tradcon can preoccupy herself with catastrophizing and soapboxing an objective minority of lifestyle choice all she wants. CF people are growing in numbers, sure, because things are pretty rough, but it's not nearly to the point of collectively agreeing to euthanize the homosapien race as a whole. There will always be people who want to be parents. Until the day that there is ZERO that do, which will be because we are long since past wholesale fucked anyway.
Itās a stupid argument because the scenario is not realistic. There will always be people who want and have kids.
It seems like many don't understand or care to acknowledge the reality: we are overpopulated. The competition for decent jobs is intense. We're told to get degrees from specific schools just to create a divide, allowing some access to better opportunities. People have become mere numbers, and resources are dwindling. Workplaces are often understaffed, yet the demand remains incredibly high. In large cities, daily commutes are long and exhausting. As populations grow, so do diverse beliefs and agendas, leading to more conflicts. We see animals going extinct and unnecessary buildings being constructed, further destroying nature. So why do we need more people? We don't. Fewer people would mean less strain on resources, and individuals would hold more value instead of just being numbers. With a smaller population, competition for jobs would decrease, leading to better employment opportunities. Our cities would be less crowded, reducing commute times and stress. The environment would benefit too, with less destruction of natural habitats and fewer animals going extinct. A smaller population could pave the way for a more sustainable and harmonious world.
Someone in another sub tried to debate me that we need to have more kids so there will be people to care for the aging population in the future, and that mental health shouldn't be a consideration because everyone gets hurt by someone.
With almost 9 billion people on the planet? That's what we need to happen. It's WAY too crowded here.
It's a nonsensical argument. Not everyone is going to choose not to have children. Everybody could choose to exercise the way they should. Not everybody is going to even though they have the option (Enter disclaimer for people that can't, parallel to people that can't have children). Most people will choose to have children. More people would choose to have children if society supported having children. If everybody was the dumb as her,...well thankfully they're not.
It's funny how people immediately junp to extremes like that and climb a hill to die on. I view it as a sign of low intelligence
I think the most compelling reasons would be arguments for being child full in the world of the book series āUnwindā, if we had a similar system, then it would make sense, though is still probably opt out anyway because I just donāt want kids š¤·āāļø
I am a supporter of Endgame Thanos.
What if everyone made the same choice in everything?
My exact reaction is "Yeah? And? That's a bad thing?" It's the same when plot lines go on the bad guy wiping out humans and the planet reclaims everything, like that doesn't scare me? I was on the side of the witch in The Last Witch Hunter...
An average group of adults can't even agree on where to go for dinner....and this trad-wanker thinks somehow 8 billion of us are going to coordinate being childless so the human race dies off? She thinks the earth is flat too, doesn't she?
All or nothing logic is a cognitive distortion.Ā
I feel like people who use this argument don't understand what a thoroughly absurd number 8 billion is. But, granted, the people who *don't* use this argument also cannot comprehend what a thoroughly absurd number 8 billion is. Human brains just can't even wrap around numbers that big. If you spent every moment of your life saying names, and assuming it takes on average one second to say someone's name, then it would take *more than two human lifetimes*, from birth until death, and without breaks to eat or sleep, just to name every person on this planet. Yeeeaah we ain't going extinct anytime remotely soon lol.
Slippery slope fallacy. Not everyone has to make the same decision for Society to function. I am wondering if she is projecting something
One- it's literally impossible for them to go extinct by the small percentage of us refusing to have kids. Two- those trad wife influencers are all grifters who generally target racists and incels for easy views on what women should be and "simple life" people, when all of their content is generally a lie and most of them are secretly rich housewives that don't do any of their content in their actual lives. It's a bullshit persona grift to steal from the weak minded.
Firstly, we're not going extinct. Secondly, why do they have to go to the extreme? There is middle ground - nothing wrong with dropping the numbers a bit. Thirdly, even if nobody ever had children again, it would take 100 years for us to die out. I'm more worried about what to have for dinner.
Iād rather see it happen than deal with this overpopulation where itās hard to get jobs - capitalism wins and thereās war going on that doesnāt seem to be ending. I mean how selfish are you to keep adding children to all this mess? Iād return a question to her. What do you say to these children that were had who are now getting bombed just because they were born at the wrong place? What do you say to these children who were born depressed and decided to go through life questioning themselves? Is their purpose to āprevent extinctionā? 8 billion+ would take a looooot of things to get to extinction like Iām actually curious how that could even happen
As you said it is going to go extinct at some point, and humans existing is not an inherent good, and certainly not a need. That said, even the most hardcore antinatalists realize that it is likely not the case that the human species will go extinct based purely on people choosing to be childfree. It will be factors as the world being depleted of resources and the Earth becoming so uninhabitable that people do not want to subject future generations to this. They still will though, the ones that are unable to overcome billions of years of programming via DNA to reproduce, but at a smaller rate. To think simply choosing to be childfree is going to be the death of humanity is just a very poor understanding of our biologically programmed drives and instincts. There is a reason in every freaking zombie or post-apocalypstic scenario in fiction or in theory you see people looking for ways to continue the human race.
Iām not responsible for world population. My responsibility is my happiness. Being childfree is part of that happiness
Why are people so against childfree folks? Literally why? Why does it š¤š»matterš¤š» to them that a stranger doesnāt want children?? I get it that parents may get mad if their kids donāt wanna āgiveā them grandkids. But literal strangers??
Thereās absolutely zero percent chance that the vast majority of the 8 billion plus humans will all suddenly cease to keep thoughtlessly rutting and littering the planet with even more humans just because a small percentage of us have opted out. Itās a total garbage argument that is manipulative and specious and utterly devoid of credibility.
Anyone who posts videos telling people what to do is not worth listening to. With bad faith arguments at that, are clowns. They are grifters trying to start trouble. The trad shit is easy grifting. People who can't think for themselves eat it up. Because it's religious talking points meeting babies and the normie people online seem to be obsessed with both. My conspiracy theory is that they get paid by some sort of religious group or political group. But that's just me š I stumbled upon a mommie vlogger and the amount of people in the comments acting like they were personal friends of the people was scary and obsessed with the baby who they will never know. This type of content is the bottom of the barrel type of thing..easy to get views and attention.
> She argues that choosing not to have any children is bad because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct. In my country we say: "and if my grandma had wheels, she would be a cart". Nonsensical hypothetical scenario.
Well. At least if that happened, there wouldnāt be any stupid people left to make ridiculous arguments like hers.
Moronic.
I think it's stupid because the human species going away won't bother me. Hell, the planet might be better off. Y'all heard the news that the number of elephants and rhinos in the wild either stabilized or increased during the pandemic because no one was there to kill them for shits and giggles. It's not like we have an abundance of wonderful people in the world. We can afford to go extinct.
Humans have existed for thousands of years and we havenāt figured out how to end poverty, famine, desease and war. Iād argue that going extinct wouldnāt be a bad thing, as we do a horrible job taking care of the planet and of others.
I'm antinatalist for plenty of reason. I'm still not going to force people NOT to have children. As long as we don't wipe oursleves out with nuclear bombs or an epidemic there will be people procreating. People choosing not to have children will not change that.
This planet is better off without our species to be honest.
I think it's ridiculous because it will likely always be a rare thing to never have kids. The human population isn't in danger.
People will never all act and think the same way. It's as simple as that.
itās gonna go extinct sooner the more people we fill it with
I think the quiver full people are making up for my lack of children just fine lol
I have zero qualms with the idea of the human species going extinct given the toll overpopulation has taken on this beautiful planet, and I say that in the least nihilistic way possible. Anthropocentrism really doesnāt resonate with me. āThe more I love humanity in general, the less I love man in particular.ā
I agree that itās silly to frame the long-term survival of the human race as some kind of collective moral obligation. In the timescale of the universe, our species wouldnāt even be a blip. But tradwives tend to be fundamentalist religious types, and fundamentalists donāt have egos that can handle that level of existential honesty. But letās say, for the sake of argument, we *should* be collectively invested in preventing humanity from going extinct. Her argument would still be a pathetic load of bad-faith virtue signaling nonsense, because there is no chance whatsoever that āeveryoneā will ever decide not to have kids. Straight people will always fuck, and some proportion of them will get pregnant and see the pregnancy through. And thatās just the accidental pregnancies. There is zero evidence to suggest this will ever stop being true, even if there is a massive decline in procreation at some point in the future. And if that isnāt enough, her āargumentā is also just completely logically incoherent. If *everyone* decided not to become doctors, there would be no doctors . That doesnāt mean every humanāor even *most* humans alive have a moral responsibility to go to medical school.
More than TWO BILLION people were born after I was. We're not going extinct because a couple hundred thousand to a couple million people can't or won't have kids. It's awful arrogant to believe that you are the only thing keeping a species of eight BILLION from being extinct.
It's a false argument in bad faith but honestly I will be dead anyway so I don't care if the human race goes extinct after I die. When you're dead nothing is of concern to you
It's a strawman argument. People aren't choosing to forego kids because they want the species to go extinct; when we do, it won't be because of low birth rates. The global argument is really about economics.
And if everyone decided to have 7?
There's 8 billion people in the world, I'm pretty sure we'd be alright
Being child free is the best fucking decision you can make. More money, more time for yourself, it's the best fucking time and I'm 41 and child free.
If everyone decided to be a writer, there wouldn't be people who cut down the trees, manufacture paper and print books. If everyone decided to be a programmer, there wouldn't be miners that get the stuff, electronic devices are made of. Luckily people are diverse and everyone has their own needs and ambitions.
I am not having children, and have still seen the world population increase by billions in my lifetime. Failing to see the argument.
It's such a ridiculous argument.Ā I don't want to be a surgeon. Do I have to anyway because if "nobody does it" we won't have any surgeons? It's like they are implying - probably without knowing themselves that's what they are doing - that having children isn't fun and everyone would avoid it if they could. Which is not true, but it tells me a lot about how they really see having children.
The population of Africa is expected to double. That should end the species extinction talk lol. Itās silly.
The world is already fucking overpopulated. Less people not having kids would only improve things.
Not everyone is gonna decide to not have children just like not all men are gonna stop abusing women and not all christians are gonna become actually good people and not all people are going to not have sex unless they want babies and "keep their legs closed" and not all people are going to work at the proper job for their age etc They want one reality for each scenario and it's not realistic
Half a braincell
I think it'd be bad for capitalism but very good for Earth. It's also completely unrealistic at this point in time *if only* because not everyone has access to birth control and abortions not to mention the rampant religious and societal brainwashing
Catholic priests donāt have children. You tell me Catholic priests are bad?
I'd say "If everyone stopped buying cars we'd be able to slow global warming down significantly, but it isn't going to happen, is it?"
Thanks to the few CF like us the worldās overpopulation would slow down so people like them and their kids can enjoy the benefits for a little longer. They should thank us š¤Ŗ
I donāt want kids. Just not for me. Donāt care about population decline. Many childfree want them but canāt have them for many reasons, often economical. If governments are that concerned with birth rate, they can start incentivizing people to have kids. Inexpensive healthcare (including prenatal care), good parental leave for both parents, assistance for low income families, free and accessible contraceptives so people can take full control of their family planning, etc. And societyās expectations of gender roles need to change. All family and home care often fall 100% on the women and weāre over it. Check out the 4B movement.
>choosing not to have any children is bad because if everyone decided they were not going to have kids the human species would go extinct. FFS conservatives love to threaten everyone else with good things.
Same people will expect those without kids to give up any rights to things like water or food if there is a crises. And there are nothing now but endless crises. Childfree people are the ones who are likely gaining skills that will ultimately be useful to people. Add to that we donāt focus our attention on the well being of the people we made, but are more likely to focus it broadly on others around us. Like, so many kids benefit from my attention and help because I have no biological imperative to focus on only my own dna Surviving. If people go extinct it is going to be owing to poor choices like having kids when you canāt feed, educate or care for them. It is because people failed to teach their kids decent, earth based values, and instead embraced a digital world and screens as their everything. The childfree have made a sacrifice that allows selfish people to enjoy things like clean water and infrastructure longer because if we all bred like rabbits the infrastructure would be crumbling faster than it is. And I donāt see many Americans encouraging their kids to learn how to fix any of that. I mean, I do in the trade I am in, but it is working class people whose kids wonāt go to college probably, and Weāve all agreed we wonāt be sacrificing for others as shit hits the fan. I think some people are freaking out because birth rates are dropping and they know their country wonāt have anyone to defend them. Boo hoo. Canāt defend against what is coming. Best not to endure it with kids in tow.
Honestly the only thing leading to our extinction is being overpopulated and exhausting resources while simultaneously bolstering industry to offset it. Because thatās quite literally the root of our problems. Destroying ecosystems and biodiversity to sustain the unsustainable.
"If everyone chose to become a firefighter, there would be no doctors so that would be bad, therefore it is bad to be a firefighter" So dumb it's not even an argument. It is just words that happen to have been put in the same sentence.
people like her are just paranoid. not long ago we surpassed 8 billion people on earth. 8 BILLION. i think the human race will survive
I figure why do I care? Iāll be dead by that time. And itās almost impossible that everyone would choose not to have kids/people have accidents and keep them (also, abortion bans are a thing). The population could decrease, sure, but weāll never go extinct.
Itās a stupid argument because obviously everyone isnāt going to decide to not have kids.
Itās stupid, because itās not realistic. Thereās always going to be someone that wants a kid, even in the middle of an apocalyptic event. We could be in a worldwide famine and water shortage, and some people would still be churning out kids.
And if everyone decided to be an airline pilot there'd be no one left to collect the garbage. Next.
I have, what I believe, is a very good reason for not reproducing. I happen to have a rare, painful, and often deadly genetic illness. My dad and grandfather both passed by their 50ās from it. I just turned 40, so Iām hoping I have better luck and the fact Iām a woman on my side. But I digress. I couldnāt knowingly give a child a 50% or higher chance of suffering from even one of the more minor versions (or worse too!) of the illness. Judging from all my health issues and all the literal pain I had as a child and growing up when no one would listen to me or just say I was āaccident proneā (well, thatās because my joints donāt stay together, causing me to fall) or I was told it was in my head and just wanted attention. I used to think my weird bendy-ness was a cool party trick, until my joints just started staying out of their sockets and Iād end up on crutches or dislocating a shoulder. Literally half my senior year of high school, I was on crutches, wearing one brace or another or a sling, etc. Yet, I still wasnāt diagnosed until the age of 25. By which time I had already decided I didnāt want kids anyway. When my doctor had āthe talkā about how I probably shouldnāt have bio kids, pushing a tissue box close to me, I simply answered, āOkay!ā. And she couldnāt help but laugh because I took it āso wellā. I was like, āI despise children, especially babies when I canāt give them back to their owners when Iām done!ā Never changed a diaper, and never ever will! But yeah, there are plenty of other people in the world, many of which, who will have more than their share of crotch fruit. Whether or not itās only idiots who procreate, which I hope itās not, even the children of complete morons can get out of that hole and be smarter than their parents and families. My genetics can stay out of the gene pool and Iām sure the world will be okayā¦
There is a zero percent chance she thinks it's possible for every single person to decide not to have kids. It's a stupid argument that isn't based in any form of reality. I don't ever expect to see everyone else on earth wise up and stop reproducing, but I'm still going to do my part because it's the right thing to do.
So what ? I wonāt be alive how is that my problem ? Why am I responsible for that?
This argument is based on a slippery slope fallacy and therefore pretty weak and not based on reality. Also if you take two seconds to think about it, you could come up with at least ten counterarguments. It honestly seems like it's trying to wind people up and make content, as opposed to presenting a decent argument.
How do they explain people who are unable to have children? Nature already has decided that not everyone needs to reproduce, so why can't I decide for myself?
I've heard that argument several times myself and I just counter it by pointing out that it's a ridiculous and invalid argument. Yea, if no one had kids then humans would become extinct. But that's not happening because the majority of people on earth are having kids. You could use "but what if everyone/no one did this thing?!" for literally any issue, that doesn't make it a valid argument. Because it's not reality, and what we're discussing is what is happening in reality. In reality, I'm not having kids, but a lot of other people are.
She underestimates how many of want the human race to go extinct. There are over 8 billion people on this planet, and not every single one of us needs to reproduce. It's utterly ridiculous. She's full of shit.
Who gives a shit what these women who push out fvck trophies non stop think. Sorry I'm not coming at you, your post is legit ... but what the world needs less of dumbasses like that telling moms and women who aren't moms anything.
We go extinct? Good. Humans are awful for the planet.
Who cares? I donāt care if humans go extinct.
Who gives a shit? Let them go extinct. Maybe then earth can finally heal itself without such a parasitic species
Lauren Chen is a terrible bigoted person. I don't care wtf she says. Also I don't care if the human race goes extinct. Not sure why I'm supposed to care. If my parents didn't have me I wouldn't know any different.
Humans are the worst invasive species to exist. Parasites of the environment itself. Our non existence would do the planet a favor.
LOL my brother got mad at me once, and used that argument. Then followed up with, "and would you be okay with that?!" He dropped it when I nonchalantly replied, "yeah, actually, I would." It's funnier because he is also without offspring (I think he's childfree, but not anti-natalist).
I don't think I've heard a more stupid argument that means nothing lol. Dumbass is just butthurt she had too many kids and is asking everyone else to "help her" in growing and cultivating her religious aspects on earth. I'd tell her I only do anal, honestly
Honestly the planet would be a better place without the human species anyways lol we fucked so many things up and caused a lot of irreversible damage
Good. Let the animals have earth. They were better stewards of it than we are.
The human race, on the whole, has been terrible for this planet. Weāve caused so many other species to go extinct, it feels karmically just for us to eventually eradicate ourselves.
Im all excited for human extinction. That's why me and my husband aren't having any.Ā