U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 04-20-2009, 12:07 PM
Location: NJ
980 posts, read 2,477,643 times
Reputation: 1860


It's not provocative to me, but I can see how a parent might find it off-putting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 04-20-2009, 12:16 PM
Location: Columbus,Ohio
1,014 posts, read 3,187,510 times
Reputation: 495
New Hope in Bucks County is a possibility. It is a pretty trendy town and was a hippie mecca in the late 60s and early 70s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-20-2009, 12:34 PM
1,623 posts, read 5,965,113 times
Reputation: 449
Reasons for having kids do vary, but I have to disagree with the feeling that people have kids because "it's expected". Actually it's a biological imperative - we are only here to reproduce - everything else is secondary to continuing the species. Sure we live better and longer now but in the end we're all worm food sooner or later. So while you can intellectualize it all you want, the fact is it is much more of a choice on your part to not reproduce than it is a conscious decision on the rest of mankind to do so. Does it make you better or smarter? Nah, just different. The truth is that acting against one's own best interest can be seen as selfless, heroic or just plain crazy depending on your POV.


I have read about and exchanged flames with people who really are indignant about having to share the planet with people who they don't like. Wah, wah, wah. Maybe that is the reason they hate children so - because they take all the attention from themselves and can cry longer, louder and better than they do and adults pay them attention because they are still growing and usually have a valid reason for crying.

The childhaters, however, do not. Feeling marginalized and disenfranchised when the facts support the feeling is one thing, and for people who can't change who/what they are, I completely understand. But I think you are in the camp that for some reason is paranoid that the reproducing world is out to get them and that we really care how you live your life. Sorry to break it to you but we are way too busy and tired to give you and your lifestyle a second thought.

To choose to not have kids is fine; to call those who do "breeders", "moos", call their children "crotch" this and that, "sprog", etc. is hate speech plain and simple - on par with the Nazis calling the Jews vermin, rats, a cancer - if the hated group is dehumanized it is easier to talk about it in ways one would only reserve for animals.

This is the stuff I have a HUGE problem with. You wouldn't do it to other races, religions or sexualities, you shouldn't do it to children, the most defenseless of all.

I am not hostile to the childfree - I'm hostile to the childhaters; unfortunately the latter is generally a subset of the former.

I think the funny part is that childhaters think they are disliked because they don't want or dislike children but rather it is because they are so self-centered that they expect the world to conform to their ridiculous and petty demands and they have no problem shooting their mouths off about their open disdain for children and families - in the presence of children and families - who, being the now-angry majority, socially sanction them for their inappropriate behavior, and rightfully so. If only their parents had done a better job...


Last edited by orrmobl; 04-20-2009 at 12:53 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-20-2009, 01:02 PM
9,237 posts, read 19,610,621 times
Reputation: 22318
Again, relax. Read my posts. I'm not a child-hater, nor did I use terms such as those you cited to refer to parents or children (crumb-crunchers aside, and that's a "cute" term, not insulting). I've never even heard of calling children "crotches" or "sprog" ???? Who the heck are you hanging out with!

Also, I never said nor implied that parents and kid-lovers are "out to get me" or people like me. When I said 'marginalized,' I merely meant that so much of the world is set up for kids and families with kids so that those of us who don't have kids have very few options. I did not mean intentionally "disenfranchised." I know that people with kids aren't giving me a second thought. Unfortunately, I am always encountered with situations in which I have to give families with kids a second (and third) thought. My childlessness doesn't affect anyone with kids, but their having kids impacts me.

For the most part, I accept that because I realize that, yes, for the sake of the species, we need to have lots of kids, and for the sake of Western civilization, people in the west need to reproduce more or we will be gone in a few generations. I know that in deciding to not have kids, I'm the one who's the freak. I get it. But I just resent it when I say something like I applaud someone for having the courage to say they are looking for a non-kid-oriented nieghborhood, and someone like you attacks me for it, based on some militant anti-child people you've encountered in the past.

Please don't pin the psychopathology of those you have flamed with in the past on me! I don't hate sharing the planet with kids; I just don't want to constantly be around them. My decision to not reproduce has nothing to do with self-centeredness and needing attention to focus on me. That migth be the case with some people you've met, but don't assume I'm one of them.

Just a note, since you introduced self-centeredness. I know numerous people who have decided to have kids based ONLY on their own narcissism. I'm not implying that you're in that group. But just as I can recognize that some child-free people you've met are self-centered whack-jobs, You need to also recognize that there are lots of folks who have kids only because of their own self-absorption and narcissism (i.e. "My genes are so wonderful that I have a duty to make more people just as wonderful as me, and if I have trouble doing that, I need to spend tons of money on reproducing my genes rather than adopting a child who doesn't have my superior genes" or "My children are an extention of me" or "Having kids brings more attention on me and people must now see how special I am" or even "I had kids so there would be someone who would always love me"). Yes there are people like that, and I know lots of them.

So be fair, I'm not lumping you in with them, so don't lump me in with the people you've met. Deal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-20-2009, 01:36 PM
Location: NJ
980 posts, read 2,477,643 times
Reputation: 1860

We will have to agree to disagree on our reason for existence. Perhaps your reason (and many peoples' reason) for existence is to reproduce, but that's not my reason for existence. Nor is not reproducing working against my best interest. My best interest is to live a life that I find rewarding and fulfilling and that allows me to live to my highest potential, period. As you said, we are all worm food regardless of what we do while we are on this earth - that includes reproducing. It gives people some comfort to reproduce and think that doing so makes them immortal, but it's just an illusion. Having a child does not make you live forever - but it may make you think so and make you better able to cope with your own mortality.

Whether human reproduction is in our "best interest" in the bigger picture could also be debated - again, not to belabor the point, but looking at the destruction humankind has done to our planet, animal species, not to mention each other - I am not at all convinced that it's "plain crazy" to consider cutting back on human reproduction. I think everyone and everything would be better off if there were fewer human beings on our planet. Don't confuse this with the message that nobody should reproduce. That's not what I am conveying.

Finally, I am very active in childfree communities and have met lots of childfree folks. I can tell you that most of them do not dislike or hate children. They just don't want the lifestyle that comes with having them. As with any subgroup of people, there are always extreme types, so yes, there are some child haters out there. But I meet plenty of extreme parents who think the entire world revolves around them and their kids and think parenthood is the be-all and end-all of everything - and condescend to those of us who choose not to parent like we are some confused, lost souls. Are all parents this way? No. But neither are all childfree folks child-haters, or self-centered.

Generalizations are always a bad thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-20-2009, 01:38 PM
Location: NJ
980 posts, read 2,477,643 times
Reputation: 1860

I LOVE New Hope - that would be my dream place to live. But sadly, New Hope is out of our range of affordability.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-20-2009, 02:15 PM
1,623 posts, read 5,965,113 times
Reputation: 449
Sorry Sassy, we will have to agree to disagree is right.

The purpose of ALL living things is to reproduce; we're just lucky to be intelligent enough to make conscious choices and have effective means of making those choices stick. Think about it - without the brains, sense, technology or money, you too would likely have children, like it or not.

And reproduction, at least for me, is not all about my immortality but rather for the continuation of the human race - that is one of the areas where the childfree argument falls down, IMO; not only does the human race stop without reproduction, but the altruistic childfree are actively pruning what may be the best parts of humanity from the human genome. Haven't you ever wondered: If all the childfree people don't reproduce, doesn't that mean there will someday no longer be a childfree movement, and is that a good or bad thing?

I have heard the overpopulation argument bandied about but the flip side is what about the need for not only labor going forward but great scientists, artists, altruists, all of them? People are both irreplaceable and replaceable at the same time, if you know what I mean.

I didn't consciously have kids for much more reason than I love kids and thought it would be a fulfilling, worthwhile endeavor for both parties. Having something to give is great, passing that something down through your family is even better, in my opinion.

As far as being involved with Childfree groups - do some members refer to parents and children in derogatory terms? If so, and no one speaks up in their defense, everyone, including those who like children, are culpable and actively participating in a hate group. That really is what gets me so riled up. I've known racists, sexists, homophobes over the years and have spoken against them on occasion, on occasion, not. But I've never met someone who actively hates and disparages children. Probably because children are really the only true innocents - that's why child molesters are on the lowest rung in prison - even other prisoners think they are vile.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-20-2009, 02:45 PM
Location: PA
2 posts, read 3,384 times
Reputation: 10
Default Have you tried West Chester?

I lived in WC in the early to mid 80's and it was starting to experience a bit of a "comeback." It definitely has a small town vibe, is walkable, is a county seat and college town, so there is a good bit of activity and even some culture. Also, lots of different neighborhoods, so you have choices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-20-2009, 02:52 PM
8,048 posts, read 18,469,927 times
Reputation: 2738
While the general points about (not) having children are duly noted by yours truly, many of the posts in this thread would be more appropriate for the Parenting or Other Topics forums.

Let's get back to the original topic, please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 04-21-2009, 03:07 AM
Location: NJ
980 posts, read 2,477,643 times
Reputation: 1860
Thanks, Laura. West Chester is definitely on the list of places we are considering. We explored it a couple times and it has the vibe we are looking for and low taxes which is a huge plus. The downside is it's a little farther out than we prefer and with the exception of row homes, it doesn't seem easy to find older homes (1920s - 1930s) that are nice in our price range. (We'd rather have a single home). Are there any specific neighborhoods within WC you know of that have nice older homes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Philadelphia
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top