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.
Having the good life is good, but millennials in decent shape can travel and do brunch and work in their career into their 80s.
"Living the good life" is one conceivable (pun intended) reason for child-free life. I quite agree, that if this is the only or even the main reason, then we have shortchanged ourselves, misapprehending priorities and causing us detriment later in life... to ourselves personally, let alone to society in aggregate.
But a powerful reason for eschewing reproduction is, pardon the now-hackneyed phrase, existential. That I was born, tripped a cascade of unpleasant and fractious experiences. We navigate through life as best as we can, having been saddled with the responsibility of living. That responsibility began the instant that I was born, and continues until the instant that I die. But were it to have been counterfactually possible to have had the choice, I'd have "chosen" to not be born. Now, if I were to be a party to the creation of new human life, that life is automatically robbed of the choice. It is presumptuous and cruel of me, to sentence to non-choice, an entity resembling me.
I am now of an age where the more reproductively precocious are becoming proud grandparents, while the "professional classes" who delayed the having of children, are now taking their teens to prospective college-visits. There is intense feeling of being an outcast from society, a fringe-case. Even so, I rejoice daily, at not being a parent, at not having been complicit in the creation of new human life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil P
When childfree people hit 60, and have careered and traveled and brunched themselves out, will there be a tinge of jealousy at their counterparts who are retiring with the grandkids while they go adopt another dog?
In some cases, yes... just as there is a "tinge of jealousy" among some renters, vs. homeowners. Or employees, vs. business owners. Any time that a costly investment is made earlier in life, to yield returns later in life, those who have foregone the investment, are apt to later harbor regrets.
But you are omitting or discounting the case, that a widespread and intense antipathy to the very notion of reproduction and parenthood, exists as a concept in itself; thus my prior paragraphs. More to the point, a human is not a possession or a badge of success. If by lacking children, I lack such success, and consequently feel envious, then this is a particularly vile and selfish jealously. It reduces living breathing human beings to mere instruments of success!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike from back east
Without long term stability, neither people nor corporations can plan for the future and take action. Right now there are few who believe we have the sort of long term stability that makes a successful family life feasible and operable, thus we get a society that sees its only option as living for today because tomorrow is a crap shoot.
An abiding sense of stability matters, but it is doubtful that "long term stability" was better 100 or 150 years ago. Yes, there was likely a blip of perceived stability shortly after WW2 in the West, and especially in America. But just one generation prior to that, stability was abjectly less.
Instead it would appear that our standards and demands are higher. Our threshold of satisfaction is more demanding. We expect more from ourselves, and from society. We prepare more, and hedge risks more. Even if today our lives are more settled and prosperous than they were 150 years ago, with much higher expectations, we are more loath to take life-altering risks, such as having children, than would have our ancestors.
Affluences accords us all sorts of luxuries, and not just materially. We have the luxury to ponder the "big questions". Affluence also allows us to take unorthodox and unpopular views, without much fear of repercussions. And so we in larger and larger numbers both are freer to take a dimmer view of "what's it all about", and to act on said view. The result, I think, will be increasing reluctance to reproduce.
Trying to placate the natural human desire to reproduce with degrees, therapy, and pets isn't healthy.
Except for some, there is zero, nyet, kaput desire. None.
Now in my 60s, having been part of childfree communities across a spectrum of platforms, I've seen the discussions go on for 30 years. There are some for whom it isn't even a decision.
"Do you want/plan to have kids?"
"Wut? You mean this is something I have to decide?Wait - really? Well, no. It hasn't even been a thought to me."
There has been conjecturing among us CF folk that, in some instance, childfree can be considered an orientation. It would be interesting to see a study done.
To the younger CFs coming up in the world, hearing the blame laid for a declining population, we older ones tell them "don't listen to that nonsense. It's not a matter of not enough people, it's because the human population is poorly utilized." And it is.
Even here in the US, on our travels (yeah, we're the CFs who like to travel - with dogs) we pass through town after town after town where there are no opportunities, the education is very underwhelming, and few people leave to find a greater future. Crap, I GREW UP in a town like that. Podunk, Arkansas. Population 725. I left after graduating high school, used scholarships and financial aid to attend college in a different state, and spent the first three semesters taking the math and science courses not available in the s*-for-heels place I escaped. With my computer science degree, I ended up with a job at an aerospace company. Most of my classmates stayed in town and found jobs at Walmart or the boat factory. I've been back once and found those people now into the third generation, repeating the lives of their parents and grandparents.
We need to scoop the young people growing up in those areas and offer them a chance to succeed and become more than what is available to them in the small, useless towns where they were born.
children are expensive,easily $1 million per kid,by the time you are done feeding,educating them,which does not mean they wont come back and ask for more.
Those who are worried about population decline.... should advocate for making it easier to raise children. Decent and affordable child care that doesn’t put you on a months-long wait list would be a start. It would also be nice to not have to spend an extra 3 years’ wages just to live in a school district good enough to make sure your kids won’t end up on the street or in drug rehab as adults...
There has been conjecturing among us CF folk that, in some instance, childfree can be considered an orientation. It would be interesting to see a study done.
That's a fantastic idea! Everyone today, it seems, can benefit from declaring membership in a protected class. I don't begrudge those folks their success... but I do envy it. So why not have us CF people thus start calling ourselves, as such a class?
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Luv Chins
To the younger CFs coming up in the world, hearing the blame laid for a declining population, we older ones tell them "don't listen to that nonsense. It's not a matter of not enough people, it's because the human population is poorly utilized." And it is...
That's the argument for immigration. Take the most ambitious, clever and motivated people from any country, any region of the world... and offer them passage to the most enterprising and advanced countries, to work in engineering, the sciences, the arts, finance, medicine, or wherever else smart manpower is needed.
We also need an internal immigration system, to select the best and the brightest from the Podunk towns in America, plucking them out of there and giving them passage into the more prosperous and advanced cities in the nation.
Except for some, there is zero, nyet, kaput desire. None.
Now in my 60s, having been part of childfree communities across a spectrum of platforms, I've seen the discussions go on for 30 years. There are some for whom it isn't even a decision.
"Do you want/plan to have kids?"
"Wut? You mean this is something I have to decide?Wait - really? Well, no. It hasn't even been a thought to me."
There has been conjecturing among us CF folk that, in some instance, childfree can be considered an orientation. It would be interesting to see a study done.
To the younger CFs coming up in the world, hearing the blame laid for a declining population, we older ones tell them "don't listen to that nonsense. It's not a matter of not enough people, it's because the human population is poorly utilized." And it is.
Even here in the US, on our travels (yeah, we're the CFs who like to travel - with dogs) we pass through town after town after town where there are no opportunities, the education is very underwhelming, and few people leave to find a greater future. Crap, I GREW UP in a town like that. Podunk, Arkansas. Population 725. I left after graduating high school, used scholarships and financial aid to attend college in a different state, and spent the first three semesters taking the math and science courses not available in the s*-for-heels place I escaped. With my computer science degree, I ended up with a job at an aerospace company. Most of my classmates stayed in town and found jobs at Walmart or the boat factory. I've been back once and found those people now into the third generation, repeating the lives of their parents and grandparents.
We need to scoop the young people growing up in those areas and offer them a chance to succeed and become more than what is available to them in the small, useless towns where they were born.
Your post comes across as rather arrogant. You act as if though someone choosing to remain in small town life is a bad thing. Like you I grew up in a small town and migrated to the cities. It was the right choice for me and have no regrets. I have classmates who chose to remain because they generally value being around family, raising their children in a small-town environment, low cost of lviing, and having better access to nature. Sure, they had to take lower paying jobs, but they do not define themselves in their job title. It works for them.
Population is indeed declining - in socialist paradises.
In the non-socialist nations, populations are still increasing. Guess where they're shipping their surplus?
Those who are worried about population decline.... should advocate for making it easier to raise children. Decent and affordable child care that doesn’t put you on a months-long wait list would be a start. It would also be nice to not have to spend an extra 3 years’ wages just to live in a school district good enough to make sure your kids won’t end up on the street or in drug rehab as adults...
That's not the issue. People who desire children will have them regardless of the circumstances. Look at the amount of money spent on fertility treatments. I found people just use the arguments in your post as an excuse to receive some levels of sympathy or deflect. If one desires the lifestyle of being childless simply state so, please stop with the endless excuses and especially the "why would I bring a child into this messed up world” line. Seriously when has the world ever not been messed up.
Those who are worried about population decline.... should advocate for making it easier to raise children. Decent and affordable child care that doesn’t put you on a months-long wait list would be a start. It would also be nice to not have to spend an extra 3 years’ wages just to live in a school district good enough to make sure your kids won’t end up on the street or in drug rehab as adults...
Population decline and lowering Total Fertility Rate is a world wide phenomenon - not just in America. Leading the charge downward are South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan. There are 196 countries in the world and about half of them are below 2.1 TFR. Unfortunately, it is the most progressive countries with the most affluent populations that will be losing population first.
The trend is clear; educate the women and they stop having large families. Or, you could do like China and punish them for having children...
Nearly everything you can think of has been tried in one country or another. Nothing has worked. Not saying that's good or bad, but it is a fact.
The childless poster above has made it very clear; there is no program that would induce him to have children. That attitude was unthinkable just a decade ago, but is fast becoming the norm. Everywhere!
The childless poster above has made it very clear; there is no program that would induce him to have children. That attitude was unthinkable just a decade ago, but is fast becoming the norm. Everywhere!
Why do you regard it as having been "unthinkable"? The child-free stance remains unusual even today, but it was never entirely exotic amongst professionals or other well-educated people... not even in the 19th century, before industrialization... let alone a mere decade ago. What's new now, is the rising costs of parenthood. People who have no particular philosophical animosity against reproduction, are being swayed from it, because of the material and emotional costs.
Last edited by ohio_peasant; 09-09-2022 at 03:30 PM..
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.
