Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know, rodentraiser, this kind of smacks of that movement a few years ago when single women hosted a day to celebrate themselves, as if they were brides, although they weren't getting married and had no partner. Complete with everyone fawning over them, and the whole wedding dress thing, and celebration videos and toasts.
And although deciding not to become a parent and choosing to spend your life on different pursuits is certainly a very respectable choice, I'm not as comfortable with a holiday for, as you say, women who regret that they became mothers.
So when I googled this, apparently today a specific man and woman will be named as sort of poster children for this celebration. Any idea if they've been named?
First of all, if I was a woman who "wants but can't have kids" then the last thing I would want is a special knife-twist -- I mean, hug -- on "Child Free Day".
Second, I can't fathom what "a woman who regrets becoming a mother" would be like. Maybe Charles Manson's mother or Dylan Roof's mother? I bet they have lots of regrets but how does a "special hug" on Child Free Day help them?
Personally if you want to celebrate not having any kids then why not just get a big bucket of ice cream and eat it by yourself in front of the TV? Really expensive ice cream, of course, the kind that you couldn't afford if you had kids.
I think I may have been misunderstood about what I said about childless women and those women who regret motherhood.
I meant in such a child centric society that we have today, those of us who are childfree should maybe not flaunt it so much and those women who have children might want to dial back a bit on bragging about their kids. Women who want but can't have kids and women (and men) who regret having their kids are in a special world of pain of their own. My idea of giving them a hug was to let them know we recognize (as much as we possibly can) the hell they're living in and that we're all here to support them as well.
I wasn't advocating a holiday for these women. Instead I wanted to let them know their feelings about children or the lack of those feelings matter as much as anyone else's. As a childfree person, it was a long time until I learned my feelings about not wanting a child were valid. So I'd like to tell them that the feelings of childless families and families who regret having children are equally valid.
Edited to add: I'm already too fat. So ice cream is out (but it sure sounds good!).
Last edited by rodentraiser; 08-01-2019 at 06:36 PM..
I think a National Childfree Day absolutely ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFBayBoomer
Whether it's national or international, I agree. And I am childfree by choice.
Some people grow up in oppressive religious environments. For those people (myself included) the sentiments of "International Childfree Day" are very much appreciated. It is nice that the choice to not have children is getting some positive attention on a global scale.
Most Americans and Europeans aren't having enough kids for replacement.
I don't think we're seriously going to run out of people in the near future. I'd personally like to see the world population get down to the levels they were around the early 19th century which were 1.6 billion people. I think those are far more sustainable levels than we have today.
Any pandemic with a kill rate of 50% (which is pretty high) is only going to lower the population to 3.8 billion people, still more than double what it was in 1900. So even the worst disease possible isn't going to stop people from over populating the world.
That's a very sobering thought.
Last edited by rodentraiser; 08-01-2019 at 06:37 PM..
I don't think we're seriously going to run out of people in the near future. I'd personally like to see the world population get down to the levels they were around the early 19th century which was 1.6 billion people. I think those were far more sustainable levels than we have today.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
