Why women shouldn't have children

[M14 Shooter]

Reproductive instincts is governed by the reptilian brain

Correct.
For the entire purpose of sex, and everything around it, is reproduction, brought to you by your friends at Natural Selection, Inc
Its not some evolutionary holdover or quirk or vestige or some other non-essential -- it is literally what nature gave the species as a means to guarantee its survival.
To simply dismiss all that it to hate the science.

Not to be "alive"...

That's not what you said, son.
Its all on record, Go back and re-read.

 

[Midnight FM]

Correct.
For the entire purpose of sex, and everything around it, is reproduction, brought to you by your friends at Natural Selection, Inc

Nope, "purpose" is a human construct. People don't "have to survive" unless they want to.

And in the modern world, threats to survival are rare. Our population is far larger than what we need to merely "survive" as a species, life expectancy is longer, and infant mortality is rare. This is why people have fewer children in the modern world than they do in the undeveloped world.

We could cull our global population down to just 150 people and still "survive" as a species, so having billions of people on the planet does not in any way aid our "survival".

Its not some evolutionary holdover or quirk or vestige or some other non-essential --

It is. It's an instinct which developed from the reptile brain.

The reptile brain engages in many behaviors which would have aided our survival in our primitive past, but don't aid us in contemporary life, such as the "fight or flight" response.

it is literally what nature gave the species as a means to guarantee its survival.

Right, and as I said above, survival doesn't matter.

Our more-recently developed neocortex allows us to rationalize that "survival" may not actually be all that important, and that focusing on things which improve quality of life (e.x. sex for pleasure) rather than those which merely sustain life are a better option.

To simply dismiss all that it to hate the science.

Ultimately, science is bullshit. It's simply a dated amalgam of information gathered by humans which originated centuries ago, and we could easily devise superior systems of gathering information. To have any utility, science requires interpretation.

And you're grossly misinterpreting it.

That's not what you said, son.
Its all on record, Go back and re-read.

What I said is that it doesn't matter if a zygote is biologically alive or not. Skin cells are biologically alive. They contain human DNA.

But when we talk about an individual being a "human life", we're referring to their consciousness, not to their body being a "biological organism".

So, since a zygote has no brain or consciousness, killing it doesn't matter.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Nope, "purpose" is a human construct.

Your heart. It has a purpose. Not a human construct. A natural one.
See how easy that was?

What I said is that it doesn't matter if a zygote is biologically alive or not.

No. That;s not what you said.
Do I need to go back and copy/paste your text?

 

[luiza]

Children give you something more important than yourself. Something sacred that's worth fighting and even dying for. It's love that can't be measured or rationalized. That's how I see it anyway.

FAKE NEWS
It is not what they are worth up to the age of 7 , say . Your post .
It is what they then turn into .

Revolting ,cruel and greedy adult kids .
And the parents all go blind .

 

[Leo123]

Nope, "purpose" is a human construct. People don't "have to survive" unless they want to.

And in the modern world, threats to survival are rare. Our population is far larger than what we need to merely "survive" as a species, life expectancy is longer, and infant mortality is rare. This is why people have fewer children in the modern world than they do in the undeveloped world.

We could cull our global population down to just 150 people and still "survive" as a species, so having billions of people on the planet does not in any way aid our "survival".


It is. It's an instinct which developed from the reptile brain.

The reptile brain engages in many behaviors which would have aided our survival in our primitive past, but don't aid us in contemporary life, such as the "fight or flight" response.


Right, and as I said above, survival doesn't matter.

Our more-recently developed neocortex allows us to rationalize that "survival" may not actually be all that important, and that focusing on things which improve quality of life (e.x. sex for pleasure) rather than those which merely sustain life are a better option.


Ultimately, science is bullshit. It's simply a dated amalgam of information gathered by humans which originated centuries ago, and we could easily devise superior systems of gathering information. To have any utility, science requires interpretation.

And you're grossly misinterpreting it.


What I said is that it doesn't matter if a zygote is biologically alive or not. Skin cells are biologically alive. They contain human DNA.

But when we talk about an individual being a "human life", we're referring to their consciousness, not to their body being a "biological organism".

So, since a zygote has no brain or consciousness, killing it doesn't matter.

I hope you don't have children.

 

[SweetSue92]

While we may always need a minority of people having children simply to keep the human race alive, here are some reasons why women shouldn't have children:

*Having children is an outdated holdover of our evolutionary past. In ancient times, there were far more threats to our survival and life expectancy was shorter. This is why, in the modern world, we already have fewer children than we did in ancient times.

*Having children drains time and money which can be spent on pursuits which better benefit humanity, such as acquiring wealth, becoming educated, and becoming self-actualized.

*Having children adds to the global population, which is extremely high compared to what it has been in history, and may not be sustainable.

*If poor people didn't have children, the cycle of poverty and government spending to support the children of poor people would end. If only a minority of wealthy or educated people were having children at any given time, it would eliminate poverty.

Those are some reasons I can think of off the top of my head.

SOME women should not have children because they are horrid mothers, which perpetuates a lifetime of trauma which is often passed on to generations.

But not EVERY woman should remain childless. Raising children is easily the most difficult, but most rewarding aspects of life.

 

[braalian]

Women are going to keep having babies.

Just because they’re not popping out one every few years like they did for most of human history is no reason to panic.

Remember, the reason women got pregnant so often back then (aside from lack of birth control) was because half of babies died in infancy. Even in well-to-do families. The medicine was just that primitive.

 

[braalian]

SOME women should not have children because they are horrid mothers, which perpetuates a lifetime of trauma which is often passed on to generations

I’ll agree with this.

Back in the 50s, 60s etc. the expectation was that ALL women were meant to be mothers.

This resulted in a lot of women who never really wanted kids and never really had the personality for it becoming mothers, and not very good mothers at that

 

[Unkotare]

...

This resulted in a lot of women who never really wanted kids and never really had the personality for it becoming mothers, and not very good mothers at that

How do you know that?

 

[braalian]

How do you know that?

Can I provide tangible proof? Of course not that’s impossible either way

But there’s a reason the stereotype of the cold, distant mother from that era is so prevalent.

Women aren’t walking incubators for babies. Some women want kids. Some don’t.

When you create a society where the pressure is absolute that all women just have babies or else there’s something wrong with them, this is going to result in a number of women going down that path who never really wanted to and, frankly, never should have

I think the reason this came to a boil in the 50s/60s was because, all of a sudden, women had nearly as many options in life as men.

For the first time ever, women weren’t stuck with the only options in life being a mother/wife vs being a pitiful spinster dependent on charity