Sunday Night Show - 'Childfree Mothers'
Hi All,
I wanted to make a post so I thought this was something interesting I saw coming up on TV tonight (Sunday Program). Sorry I don't know how to display the vid but here it is - http://au.news.yahoo.com/sunday-night/video/watch/17176671/childless-by-choice/ It's the usual current affair rubbish but this segment is about 'Childfree' mothers. It asks the rhetorical question 'are they selfish' but the episode is clearly implying that they are. I think they really don't deserve to be labelled as such. It really comes down to gender bias and roles etc. What do you guys think? Secondarily, what about having kids in general? Do you think society sort of forces us to breed and reproduce and then justify that it was a right decision (especially given the documented cost of children). We are humans and operate by logic (mostly) so why is it that some people just uncontrollably breed (see inala etc) without any thought to the consequences? Personally, I don't think I want kids. They seem like to much bother and would detract from a fun life. I respect those women a lot. Cheers for the input. |
02:03pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Shouldn't it be "childfree" women?
|
02:18pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Technically, yes, but we can overlook that obvious contradiction.
|
02:28pm 19/05/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
02:39pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I don't get why it's selfish not to have kids? Isn't it more selfish to have screaming kids annoying everyone?
|
02:39pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Of course it isn't selfish
I'm constantly being hassled by other breeders asking when i'm going to pop one out with my missus, they definitely like to push their choice on other people |
03:56pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Its a complex question.
It must be difficult for a Woman to choose not to have kids. You only get one life and passing up an experience like that wouldnt be easy. But the facts are Educated Women have less kids. Its always been a Mans World. Womens role was having babies and serving Men. Now Women dont have to serve Men. Im not saying thats a bad thing but it has led to unintended consequences. |
03:56pm 19/05/13 Permalink
That's fairly straight forward but the next question is, why breed in the first place? Sometimes it seems the urge to reproduce and the experience it offers counteracts all logic and common sense.
|
04:14pm 19/05/13 Permalink
The more obvious point after seeing the promo on 7 is do you want those people breeding...lol.
|
04:18pm 19/05/13 Permalink
The urge to reproduce comes largely from Social pressure.
Once more Women have less kids then that Model begins to gain acceptance. So there is less Social pressure to have kids today than say 40+ years ago due to things like The Pill, Feminism, Equality, work oppertunities. |
04:28pm 19/05/13 Permalink
The urge to reproduce comes from basic instincts....
The urge to force it on everyone (ie. Stories like this) that might not have that stong an urge to reproduce comes from society When i see people say "oh my kids are my life" like some badge of honour i just cringe and think that sounds like a s*** life to me. I did see a story on sunrise this morning (lul) about the emergence of single child families, that is probably where i'll end up |
04:35pm 19/05/13 Permalink
The thing is people in general don't function on logic, they function more on emotion and necessity. People who claim that logic is the main driving force behind people or that a purely logical approach to situations should be some celebrated trait are usually sad internet losers who don't interact with other people in real life and want to appear smart on forums.
The dog whistle racism in the OP was a nice touch also. You should probably try and keep that out of your posts if you really want to try and pretend you are some deeply thoughtful sage bringing up the big issues. |
04:47pm 19/05/13 Permalink
It wouldn't be an fpot post if it isn't accusing some if being racist
|
04:56pm 19/05/13 Permalink
hey pave, when are you and the missus gonna have a kid? you guys have been together for a few years and you are pretty old now
|
05:34pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Only if your a sociopath. Humans barely function on logic... I have kids, it certainly sucks away time that could spent doing fun stuff, and the money. It is also pretty stressful at times, can get pretty annoying and frustrating too. I wouldn't swap it for the world... |
05:49pm 19/05/13 Permalink
So if you didn't have kids you would have no limits, rich, full of fun and stress free. Sounds like an awesome alternative. Are you justifying that to yourself because of social pressure (you would be a 'bad' parent if you hated it) or because you really do think it's better. |
05:55pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I always wonder how many people that make statements like toll "having kids is pretty s***" but throw the little disclaimer in at the end that they "wouldn't change it for the world" actually deep down think "f*** i wish i'd taken the other option"
I mean it is not like they have any choice but to say they love it, without everyone thinking they are a complete c*** I find it impossible that every single person i have ever seen comment about having kids actually believes they "wouldn't change it for the world" if they had a time machine |
05:58pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I don't think it is selfish to have kids or not have kids, both options are actually good for the world/society as a whole.
I have 1 daughter and she costs me a ton of money, I use to buy whatever I wanted whenever I wanted but now I have to be choosey on what I want. I also was able to just drop everything and go out to the pub, go away for the weekend without notice or anything else spare of the moment which I really miss. It is terribly stressful at time, hard work and I don't think I understood what tired meant before I had a kid. Saying all of these things I would never go back to not having her around, she is awesome and I get way more than I loose from having her, just like Tollaz0r says I wouldn't swap it for the world. But I wanted to have a child, so I made a choice and did it because I wanted to be a Dad and have fun with my kid. She is 4 now and we get heaps of pressure and guilt from family, friends and even school teachers about having more, which I think it terrible and pisses me off. Both my partner and I are perfectly happy having one and as she grows up we can do more things easily, like travel, so we are starting to get the best from both worlds. The worst thing you can do is have a kid for somebody else, you should only have kid if you truly want one. Not because society says so, your parents want a grandchild or child needs a sibling. Childless, single child or many child are all equally great. |
06:08pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I find it impossible that every single person i have ever seen comment about having kids actually believes they "wouldn't change it for the world" if they had a time machine well you do have those people who abandon their kids, neglect them or just talk them down every day of their existence, so not everyone enjoys it. I just can't stand parents that judge other parents. "Shyeah, like you're the perfect parent." |
06:08pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I always wonder how many people that make statements like toll "having kids is pretty s***" but throw the little disclaimer in at the end that they "wouldn't change it for the world" actually deep down think "f*** i wish i'd taken the other option" This kinda comment it a bit crap, having a kid is f*****g hard work and you sacrifice a lot of things and at times you do miss it but that doesn't mean you would change anything. You probably wish you could have all the good without the bad but you wouldn't trade away the good just so you didn't have the bad. Society has got an issue with people complaining about being parents, always jump to "you must hate your kids/being a parent" if you complain about the hard work. People are allowed to complain about everything else in their life when they've had a s*** day/week but not about being parent? |
06:13pm 19/05/13 Permalink
This kinda comment it a bit crap, having a kid is f*****g hard work and you sacrifice a lot of things and at times you do miss it but that doesn't mean you would change anything. You probably wish you could have all the good without the bad but you wouldn't trade away the good just so you didn't have the bad. parenthood is 100% voluntary. |
06:21pm 19/05/13 Permalink
You're joking right, about people having a go at parents because they whinge ?
I've never seen that because there is always the disclaimer about loving it I'm not saying anything about any one person here, infi is probably right the most of the types that genuinely hate it do something about it one way or another. I am just voicing my thoughts and things i've noticed about this social consensus that you have to spawn or you're a bad person |
06:23pm 19/05/13 Permalink
You're joking right, about people having a go at parents because they whinge ? What I am talking about is why people use the disclaimer.
I completely agree with this, the number of kids you have has nothing to do with your quality as a person. Each option has it's benefits to society and diversity should be embraced. |
06:34pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I think anyone on welfare/dole shouldn't be breeding. If they are found guilty and pregnant the woman is placed in front of a giant boxing glove and punched in the stomach. Do this all over the world and we might be able to save this planet.
|
07:07pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Palmer United Party is calling you Rev.
|
07:10pm 19/05/13 Permalink
But you get $5k bro and a family tax benefit, just for spawning...... (though that last bit doesn't affect people on the dole)
|
07:11pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I don't think it is selfish to have kids or not have kids, both options are actually good for the world/society as a whole.I have 1 daughter and she costs me a ton of money, I use to buy whatever I wanted whenever I wanted but now I have to be choosey on what I want. I also was able to just drop everything and go out to the pub, go away for the weekend without notice or anything else spare of the moment which I really miss. It is terribly stressful at time, hard work and I don't think I understood what tired meant before I had a kid.Saying all of these things I would never go back to not having her around, she is awesome and I get way more than I loose from having her, Ok hypothetically, if you had a wizard who could un-parent you and basically put you in a position you never had children, HOWEVER, your child still existed and was happy and looked after in some other alternate universe family, would you go ahead with the procedure and change your life? |
07:20pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Haha i'm not really sure how the answer to that question makes any difference to the argument
You either have a kid or no kid |
07:29pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Ok hypothetically, if you had a wizard who could un-parent you and basically put you in a position you never had children, HOWEVER, your child still existed and was happy and looked after in some other alternate universe family, would you go ahead with the procedure and change your life? Ok hypothetically, ask that question again so it doesn't sound retarded. |
07:34pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Well I guess it proves that large numbers of people breed for social pressure and would perhaps take it back if they could do so avoiding being labelled 'bad parents' by further societal pressure.
The main argument is that having children is illogical given the lack of benefits associated with that choice. If I voluntarily flushed 100K+ down the toilet (literally) for no real benefit would it be considered a stupid decision? But I wouldn't change it for the world. |
07:39pm 19/05/13 Permalink
hmmm taylor, you seem to be posting a bit much for my liking
|
07:42pm 19/05/13 Permalink
It isn't illogical, it is hardwired into our genetics to procreate for the good of the continuation of the species that is why people do it despite all the s*** and still love it
The problem is that some of us have control of those basic instincts and don't see it as the be all end all of life. |
07:44pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Taylor, your opinion is super edgy. Did you come up with it by yourself?
The fact is that normal human beings value relationships with other normal human beings. The ultimate form of human relationship (imo) is that between a loving parent and their child. A bond of unconditional love develops that doesn't exist or is at least extremely rare in other types of relationships. Now I don't have children, so I am only speaking from the experience of being a son here with two parents who I love more than anything and that I think the world of. The emotional connection that I have shared with them my whole life is deeper and more rewarding than any other person I have interacted with. The main reason people have children is so they can experience this same thing. I know it is the reason I will eventually have children. Now note that what I said above only applies to normal human beings. Try-hard sociopathic internet f***-ups like yourself whose every second word is logic I don't think it applies to, hence your apparent confusion about the situation. |
07:46pm 19/05/13 Permalink
The main argument is that having children is illogical given the lack of benefits associated with that choice. Maybe originally having kids was for "just having kids". Like what humans were made to do. But these days it's prolly different for some people. Welfare people have kids because of the baby bonus (although not for much longer). Others have kids because it's the cool thing to do. Muslims have kids so they can hopefully out-breed the rest of society and have their religion as the dominant one. |
07:49pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Haha rev
Fpot i share the same relationship with the money in my bank account, spook is jealous of this relationship |
08:01pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Try-hard sociopathic internet f***-ups like yourself whose every second word is logic I don't think it applies to, hence your apparent confusion about the situation. It's not really logical for you to be angry at me expressing an opinion. |
08:09pm 19/05/13 Permalink
I'm not angry, I am just breaking your balls about your s***** super-edgy opinion. Next time you're on the bus and you see a mother or father with kids you should try and explain to them how they only had kids due to societal pressure and then ask them your ridiculous hypotheticals to see how they react. You'll probably get the same bewildered and insulting response that I gave you.
|
08:16pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Because I love my children you c*** knuckle. There is no 'logic' about it. |
08:29pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Fpot it isn't even that edgy it is mostly just wrong/not informed
|
08:31pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Of course it's not edgy, it's just trying to be :P
|
08:33pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Not having children is the illogical choice. Believe it!
|
08:37pm 19/05/13 Permalink
It's just an opinion that might hopefully start some discussion. If you want to take it personally and get offended, that's your issue. Next time I'm on the bus I'll pity the people I see who are way less happy than I am.
|
08:37pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Proves? Okay. Most people that have kids, I would argue, is because they grew up in a loving family and want to continue that, not because of 'society'. It is also pretty amazing to mold this little bundle of awesomeness that grows and behaves in their own way, with your inputs, from your genetics. That 'disclaimer' wasn't a disclaimer at all. It was a subtle method to explain that even though there are a bunch of s***** cons to having children, the benefits far, far outweigh the bad. So much so that, "I wouldn't change it for the world" However you seem so bent on a world without emotion you don't see that possibility, instead you see it as a disclaimer. What does that say about you? |
08:38pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Also fpot, interesting fact.
You say you love your parents more than anything. Well when you have children, you'll find that actually your parents love you more. It seems that you love your children more than anything else, including your parents, well it is a different love I suppose. You'll see one day and go ' ooohh yeah'. It gives an even deeper appreciation of your parents though, for most people. It would suck to grow up in a crappy family :( |
08:42pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Having babies is a female obsession. I personally couldn't give a crap but my missus wants to get knocked up bad.
|
09:07pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Having babies is a female obsession. I personally couldn't give a crap but my missus wants to get knocked up bad. I dunno, I'm a dude (I think) and I sort of wouldn't mind a family. I'm too much of an a****** though, no one deserves to have to deal with that. |
09:38pm 19/05/13 Permalink
Having babies is a female obsession. False. Missus chose to be 'fixed' late last year, declaring she never wanted to have children. Ever. Oh and neither she, nor I, give a s*** about what anyone thinks. Tough biccies. |
04:11am 20/05/13 Permalink
Yeah, +1 to not having kids here.
I get pretty sick of breeders rabbiting on about how wonderful their kids are. News Flash. Your kid ain't that f*****g special, it's just like every other peanut on the planet. There should be more of the following happening. http://www.members.optushome.com.au/gpahl/009.jpg |
08:13am 20/05/13 Permalink
I can't afford kids and I only seem to attract crazy vegetarian cat ladies or bushpigs whose arses have their own postcode.
So if I can't afford 'em and I can't find a decent chick to breed with ... then what is the f*****g point? |
08:33am 20/05/13 Permalink
Slaps reminded me of this gem.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sP4NMoJcFd4 Can't embed from IPhone for some reason. |
07:36pm 20/05/13 Permalink
Well I guess it proves that large numbers of people breed for social pressure and would perhaps take it back if they could do so avoiding being labelled 'bad parents' by further societal pressure.No one has kids because the neighbour or someone else told them too d*******. The majority do it cause only they themselves want to. You know some people love others other than themselves. Obviously in your case you're too much into you and your stupid idea that having kids takes all the "fun times" away. What a knob. I have just as much fun as before kids and I still do everything I did before. Kids don't stop you from jack s*** and they give so much back that are great and fun. I still fish, camp, holiday overseas and do whatever I friggin like except now I get to do it with my kids as well ya dumb f***. The main argument is that having children is illogical given the lack of benefits associated with that choice.F*** you're a knob. There are many benefits to having children and seeing how you have no f***ing idea on the subject why don't you just shut the f*** up. If I voluntarily flushed 100K+ down the toilet (literally) for no real benefit would it be considered a stupid decision?When you have kids and spend time and money on them it's not flushing anything down the toilet you stupid f****tard of a geek. But I wouldn't change it for the world.I'm sure the world won't worry not having your progeny around. |
07:56pm 20/05/13 Permalink
I encourage people who don't want to have kids to not have kids - generally they're so self-centered that they wouldn't provide a loving & nurturing environment that a child needs.
But those who do want to have kids, don't put it off until you're nearing 40 I'll happily admit that one of the reasons I wanted to be a dad was so I can be a kid too and play trucks and slot cars and go to the speedway and the model train show and ride bikes and light fires and build bottle rockets and so on. |
08:18pm 20/05/13 Permalink
Proves? Okay. I've always wondered how much of what you're saying is a mixture of hormones and genetics kicking in. If your old self pre-children came into existence would they be feeling the same emotions? People with children and people without should both be celebrated. I encourage people who don't want to have kids to not have kids - generally they're so self-centered that they wouldn't provide a loving & nurturing environment that a child needs.Retarded logic. You're a f***tard. IMO there is nothing more selfish then trying to bring something into this world just so you can enjoy it for your own pleasure, so you can mold it, instill your own ideologies and misconceptions about the word, to make another you in the world. If you really loved children and consider yourself selfless than adopt. |
08:26pm 20/05/13 Permalink
08:33pm 20/05/13 Permalink
well, if people like me don't have kids, then bad things are going to happen to the human race :)
|
08:36pm 20/05/13 Permalink
'One of' not 'the'. When did people stop growing up and get stuck in the angsty teenage years of life?
|
09:08pm 20/05/13 Permalink
That's fairly straight forward but the next question is, why breed in the first place? I suppose it depends on how you see your world. some of us truely believe we'll leave this place a little better than when we first found it... it's a feeling not everyone has.. |
09:43pm 20/05/13 Permalink
selfish adults say "haha no way i'd have kids"
aren't you glad your parents didn't think the same thing |
07:02pm 21/05/13 Permalink
I suppose it depends on how you see your world.some of us truely believe we'll leave this place a little better than when we first found it...it's a feeling not everyone has.. How does breeding 'leave it better than you found it.' Surely doing something intelligent, impacting and beneficial is higher on the ladder than mindlessly thrusting. Your parents bred you... big whoop.. you can actually do something and change humanity, rather than mindless breeding. |
07:47pm 21/05/13 Permalink
I'm loving your back handed comments hardware, why don't you just come and tell everyone that doesn't want kids that they straight out c**** - you might as well, you're 75% of the way there
|
08:06pm 21/05/13 Permalink
I know guys with a drive to reproduce.
The classic idea that guys have is obviously that feeling of legacy.h Honestly though is it really a debate whether some people feel the need to reproduce? That doesn't mean that some don't or all do. You can feel outcast and yell 'tough biccies' but you're not exactly unique in that choice either. But puff your chests up either way you choose like the decision is so huge that the world is against you either way. aren't you glad your parents didn't think the same thingWell no, if i didn't exist i wouldn't think anything. You're fighting some kind of philosophical battle here i think. I hope there's a few more players, because honestly when you're fighting philosophies it's like a fight of two religions. you can actually do something and change humanity, rather than mindless breeding.Oh f*** yeah, breeding totally ruins your entire life so you can never achieve anything beyond producing that child. Wait, there might be proof that isn't true. |
08:18pm 21/05/13 Permalink
.Oh f*** yeah, breeding totally ruins your entire life so you can never achieve anything beyond producing that child. Wait, there might be proof that isn't true. It's quite logical really - children are a substantial opportunity cost @fat bastard - obviously you're a person who is regretting a number of your life choices and is having trouble coming to terms with that. It's ok mate, perhaps your descendants might do something useful |
08:27pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Can you stop saying logical, everytime you do you come across stupider than your last post
|
08:57pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Who's investment can often pay off well. Taylor, from what I understand SFB has had a pretty darn successful career, at a guess probably much more so than you. |
09:32pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Every time I hear logical, I just think of Spock.
|
09:41pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Who's investment can often pay off well. How are children an investment? SFB wouldn't be so angry unless he felt some degree of inner regret. |
09:51pm 21/05/13 Permalink
i'm not calling anyone a c***.
if someone realises that they are not mature enough to raise a child, good on them. too many parents don't do enough personal development before having a child, and they end up having their needs come before the childs, which ranges from an annoyance to sickening. |
09:51pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Just curious: how old are you Taylor? Early twenties? Younger?
Cos to me you are coming off as someone with a lack of life experience and insight and, assuming you're not just trolling, some pretty immature opinions about what life's all about. I don't agree or disagree with people having kids, it's a personal choice. I think what you're missing here is that it's not a black and white (or to put it in your terms, logical vs illogical) argument for or against. There are a lot of reasons and subtleties/nuances that you are ignoring. There are plenty of valid reasons for both sides of the argument and to state unequivocally that you are somehow better than the other is flat out stupid. For instance, you have repeatedly used the word 'breeder' in a thinly veiled derogatory way. I believe you use the 'breeder' because it sounds more animalistic, more what we attribute to sheep or cattle. You are using this word to (not so) subtly point out that people who have children ("breeders") are somehow indicative of an animal in its thoughtless primal urge to procreate, and thus less evolved, inferior to you. While the basis for this impetus to continue the species is hard wired, we have evolved beyond mere primal urges and most humans operate is a more complex manner. But hey, if simplifying the argument justifies your position and makes you feel like you are somehow better than the billions of people who did "breed" and continue to celebrate the amazing gift of life, knock yourself out. Not everyone gives a s*** about "substantial opportunity costs". Reminds me of the scene in Uncle Buck with the headmaster. Don't worry, you might be too young to remember it. |
10:24pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Taylor, you won't get it. It's OK. Just spend your life how you want and let people be people.
|
10:30pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Exactly my point. Overcoming the basic human urge to procreate is essentially the next step to evolution. It is animalistic. Take for example people claiming having a baby is an achievement. It's not an achievement, it's an animalistic task. You've done, in your words, what billions have already done, not to mention the feral cats in the lane. Being less evolved is not a slight, people are simply members of the breeding class. Leave the human advancement to people like me. I mean no offence, I m simply stating my point of view and life philosophy. |
10:47pm 21/05/13 Permalink
inner regret.Reading imbecilic trolls is my only regret and you just added to the collection of that regret. I always laugh how those that can't score a woman denigrate those that do. It must make them feel better about their miserable lives. |
11:02pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Leave the human advancement to people like me. So by your logic this "human advancement" will last approximately one generation i.e. your lifetime. Sounds awesome. Obviously troll, since you do mean offense quite deliberately. But just in case, I'm sure you won't take offense when I say that your POV and "life philosophy" is spot on, as taking yourself out of the gene pool is by far the best thing you can possibly do for "human advancement". If only your mum had have swallowed you and saved me the trouble of typing this response, now that would be some evolutionary progress right there. Please try not to use up too much oxygen and shut the door on your way out. |
11:12pm 21/05/13 Permalink
Being less evolved is not a slight, people are simply members of the breeding class. Leave the human advancement to people like me. Isn't this coming from the guy whose display name is Taylor because he was so confused by a simple registration form that he ended up putting his surname in the display name field? |
11:46pm 21/05/13 Permalink
I never said I was more intelligent, I just said I would dedicate my life to human advancement rather than breeding.
|
11:54pm 21/05/13 Permalink
When you're someone who is easily confused by a simple registration form and who believes that people who have children are less evolved, I'm not confident you're the best person for the job of "dedicating your life to human advancement"...
Perhaps you should consider dedicating yourself to a life of quiet contemplation instead, emphasis on the quiet. |
12:03am 22/05/13 Permalink
I just said I would dedicate my life to human advancement rather than breeding. This is the bit I like the most. The complete loss of the irony that in essence, without breeding... there is no 'advancement'. I'm not a vastly learned man, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you're not even remotely a fan of even basic levels of philosophy? On the flip side, another delicious serving of irony hits knowing that if Taylor doesn't breed. Then BAM, stupidity removed. Charles Darwin, there's a guy who knew stuff. (He had kids too). |
12:30am 22/05/13 Permalink
Overcoming the basic human urge to procreate is essentially the next step to evolution. Outsourcing pregnancy, like getting Indian Women to carry your baby. Womb for hire. Pretty soon i suspect Baby farming will take off. No need to pay Pregnancy Leave, no need for a Baby Bonus coz the Woman will be able to work during the period the baby is being farmed. Wont even need a Mother of Father donor either. Stem Cells manipulated to create Babies. Are we still on board the Evolution Train at that point ? Or does that become Intelligent Design ? |
01:39am 22/05/13 Permalink
Although sarcastic, that was the best idea ever. If we could cut out the randomness and produce only elite specimens, then that would logically be the best course of action for humanity.
Why not do that faceman? Wouldn't it be a step towards equal rights for women etc? A separate breeding class who chose that life? I don't know why you all have this obsession with the thing called 'life' without any desire to improve or redefine it. It's also easy to identify the Neanderthals here.. Just listen to the club bashing. I'm just putting my ideas out there. No need to stifle me with your hate. |
07:42am 22/05/13 Permalink
Exactly my point. Overcoming the basic human urge to procreate is essentially the next step to evolution. It is animalistic. Take for example people claiming having a baby is an achievement. It's not an achievement, it's an animalistic task. You've done, in your words, what billions have already done, not to mention the feral cats in the lane. i'm sorry since when was causing your own species extinction through by not procreating "the next level of evolution" ? you musn't understand evolution either |
07:52am 22/05/13 Permalink
i admit i was super anti having kids before i had them. me and petal fought about it pretty hardcore. i didnt want to give up my skyline driving, party having, cashed up money life for dumb kids.
now i drive a $1000 corolla (hardware <3), i look at pictures and moofies of people partying on the internets and im always broke. but its all worth it, coz my kids are fricken awesome and the best thing ive ever done. (even better than that epic drift i did once) |
08:36am 22/05/13 Permalink
haha, now you're in favour of eugenics. Honest question: did you just get out of high-school? Your philosophy and views sound like the sort of thing an angsty high-schooler who couldn't get a date on formal night would say.
And while it might not be an achievement having children, it is an achievement to raise one that is happy, well-adjusted one. Something your parents obviously failed to do. |
02:51pm 22/05/13 Permalink
haha, now you're in favour of eugenics. Honest question: did you just get out of high-school? Your philosophy and views sound like the sort of thing an angsty high-schooler who couldn't get a date on formal night would say.And while it might not be an achievement having children, it is an achievement to raise one that is happy, well-adjusted one. Something your parents obviously failed to do. I'm 30 and am a well balanced person. I work with children and also work in areas where families are destroyed on a day to day basis. I'm generally at a point where I could be having kids but I'm really not that keen on doing so. You're all really using personal attacks to distract from the main point that people tend to have children just to satisfy some notion that they should, rather than considering the actual benefit one might actually gain from doing so. The main answer that has been given is generally one that you do it because you want to experience it and it's a loving thing to do with your partner. In response, I say that children cost a hell of a lot. They take a major sacrifice to bring into the world with some degree of success. I honestly mean no offence and am not trying to degrade or make out to be lesser people who do decide to have children. You have to accept though, some people out there are purely just 'breeders.' Think the centrelink line. Are those people really that productive? Do they really provide any benefit to society and humankind whatsoever? Their lives are that pitiful that the only contribution they can make is to mindlessly duplicate themselves? What I was leaning towards is that perhaps the notion you should reproduce should be challenged. There's already plenty of people in the world. Perhaps it might be a good idea for certain people to choose not to have children and instead devote their lives to humanity in a productive way. We're all caught up in this rat race. Just because I put out an alternative view doesn't mean I deserve to be pariahed. The first step in the elevation of human conciousness is to encourage discourse and change. The second step is to face reality and not to create overlapping realities to reinforce the decisions you have made are the right ones. |
03:25pm 22/05/13 Permalink
I just said I would dedicate my life to human advancement rather than breeding. are the two mutually exclusive? |
03:31pm 22/05/13 Permalink
this thread is depressing on many levels
|
03:32pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Just a heads up, I've been trying to get out of having children by citing financial reasons, and I am losing the battle because I put too much stock into that position. Apparently you can raise a couple kids for next to nothing. Living as a childless couple makes it very easy to be wasteful with resources. We wind up throwing a lot of food out. Having a dog or child would just reduce the waste rather than add more expense.
But I think she misunderstimates what I want for my children especially because she's not from the city. Sports, dancing, music, extra education, Air Jordans, Master System II... you want the best for your kids and I don't think I could just relax and let them grow up like bushpigs living off my dregs. You live FOR your kids at that point, and if their lives dictate a large expenditure then you should be ready for that.... Yeah that's right folks, someone is putting pressure on me to breed. |
03:36pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Thermite, just accept it now. You've lost. Instead play the game and call for a compromise and get a new toy or something.
|
03:55pm 22/05/13 Permalink
If you really don't want them, don't accept it. Go and get a secret vasectomy or something. It's just as I've been talking about, the social pressure to reproduce. The clock is ticking with you partner and if you don't want to have kids, then you shouldn't have to. Just wait until the pill magically 'fails.'
There's no reason why you can't love her just as much and have a happy life without children. Or, alternatively, adopt a child... there's thousands of orphans who need a good family. |
04:04pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Taylor,
It seems you just cannot accept that the majority of the human race do not run on logic but are instead driven by emotion. I would argue that to deny emotion is to reject your humanity, that it makes you less human.
You imply that to have children is to exclude yourself from devoting their lives to humanity in a productive way. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Albert Einstein, Socrates, Martin Luther King Jr, O god this list could go on for a very, very long time. These people change the world in many ways, they advanced humanity as you want. They had children, most of them had multiple children. You sir, are a Troll or a fool. |
04:05pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Smug nerds ITT. Kids rule.
|
04:10pm 22/05/13 Permalink
You're all really using personal attacks to distract from the main point that people tend to have children just to satisfy some notion that they should, rather than considering the actual benefit one might actually gain from doing so.Your main point is almost certainly objectively wrong. At the very least I strongly disagree with it. People in this very thread have tried explaining to you the reason they have children. Instead of listening to them you have decided to ignore them and ask them ridiculous hypothetical questions. The questions you are asking them (would they go back in time and remove the kids etc) are pretentious and rude. You see the problem is that you've already got your mind made up. There is no discussion here - it is just a random word salad of your poorly developed thoughts spurred on by watching some current affairs program. The fact that you think this is a discussion let alone a worthy one is actually a little bit amusing. So far the only sane person who has even come close to agreeing with you is paveway, and it seems the societal pressure put on him to have children has only hardened his resolve not to. People on forums who parrot on about how children are illogical and refer to people who have children as breeders are a dime a dozen, and they are pretty much only worth mocking. The fact that you'd use a derogatory term like breeders and then say it's unintentional is ridiculous. Breeding is a term that is pretty much exclusively used when referring to animals procreating. Either you were using the term deliberately to be offensive, or you are so socially retarded you didn't even know what you were doing. If you knew a couple, would you ask them 'have you bred yet' or 'are you going to breed soon'? Of course you wouldn't. Choosing this worn-out tired discussion as your little introduction to a forum makes me think you aren't quite as well-adjusted as you think. Don't even get me started on your support of eugenics. Read a f*****g history book. |
04:10pm 22/05/13 Permalink
I disagree. My points are very valid. You are disregarding everything I say because you assume your position is right. Great arguing style. Is this how you usually win discussions in this forum? Just state 'you're wrong' and that's it? So what I said something which might be called offensive, it doesn't detract from my points. It doesn't make what I'm saying any less valid. I clarified what I mean by 'breeder' and pointed out that some people are in fact, just that. I'm not saying it's child-free vs breeders and that is the only two classes you can have.
Take thermite, for example. He is suffering from exactly the point I am making. The social pressure to breed. That is the issue I am getting at. The argument 'we are humans, so we just have to deal with it' doesn't really cut it. We are humans and are therefore capable of thought (which you, fpot, find quite hard) and basically can question these social constructions and conditions which have been forced upon us since birth. NOTHING about humans is set in stone. That is what makes us human. We may or may not be emotional creatures. We have the ability to create, and challenge these preconceived ideas. The typical response when a person challenges one of these social conditions is to get angry, spaz out and attack the person who is bringing it to light. It's a typical, normal reaction for you to become angry, which is what you are doing. Thermite has a choice. He can decide not to breed but by doing so, he will face the entire weight of society on his shoulders. All the questions 'when is the bun in the oven?' 'When you guys starting a family,' the looks, possibly his partner leaving him. He must face the burden of society. That is the point I am making and that is the discussion. Please stay on topic. You're obviously a veteran bully of this forum but I think I ought to have responded to you in a mature, intelligent way to set an example for you. |
04:34pm 22/05/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Abusive |
04:58pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Taylor, your arguments you have put forward have been shown to be rather thin at best.
Point 1. Having children does not reduce ones capacity to contribute to humanity. It could be argued that it is increased by way of further contribution of the children to humanity. I listed a bunch of highly influential people in my above post, all who had children. Point 2. If you do not have children, then eventually life stops. This kind of prevents evolution. Point 3. We are a long, long way off making test tube babies. Point 4. Most people don't have children due to logical deduction, in fact even with the logical facts laid out in front of them, highly rational, intelligent people still choose to have children. Having children, it can be argued, should not be a logical choice at all. Emotion plays a very large role. Point 5. I argue that logic does not 'breed' creativity. Creativity is essential to 'the advancement of humanity'. Emotion is a strong driver of creation. Therefor emotion is what is needed to advance humanity. Point 6. Having children is irrelevant to ones ability to live a long happy life. Therefor having children should be the choice of people involved and none other, nor should people treat others different because they chose to have or not have children. Point 7. Calling people 'breeders' is an intentionally insulting term to most people of reasonable intelligence and social awareness. Therefor, upon your revelation that you do not intend to be insulting, you should drop using the term as you have, at least for this aspect, been educated on why that term is insulting. Point 8. If you want to call someone up for getting aggressive, perhaps give a thought that they are aggressive because you just insulted them by comparing them to a dog. |
05:07pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Once again, disregarding my points and not putting anything in constructive whatsoever. Also being abusive in breach of forum rules. Thank you for you well thought out input/abuse.
Edit : Thank you for the genuine constructive response. I understand all the points you are making but some of them I find challenging, as I live my life by logic, rather than emotion. Much like spock. |
05:08pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Do some people actually have a check list of reasons as to why they would want to raise a child? Because it kind of sounds like it, as if having a family wasnt enough. We as humans seek out the company and friendship of other humans its in out nature and living in tightly bonded groups is the only reason we as a spieces even exist today.
If you cant find one even half decent reason to want to be a part of a family its probably a good thing you dont want to be a parent because quite frankly youd suck at it. (Edit) btw the only times i have ever heard people use the term breeder its always been some tw@t that seems to think they are above all the mere mortals that make up the rest of the human race as though they are some kind of higher functioning being. Well enjoy your higher plane of existence dude youll have the entire place to yourself which shouldnt be a problem since you clearly enjoy your own company. |
05:18pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Except every so often Spock, like all Vulcans go through a period called Pon farr, the Vulcan mating period. If they do not satisfy it, it can kill them.
I'm such a nerd for knowing that. |
05:23pm 22/05/13 Permalink
And as a result we get an awesome, awesome fight scene with some of the best music ever made.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AphxyjrH4SE |
05:39pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Edit : Thank you for the genuine constructive response. I understand all the points you are making but some of them I find challenging, as I live my life by logic, rather than emotion. Much like spock. Such extreme logic is what brands you as cartoon. Extremists views must be tempered to operate in a mainstream society. You must accept by now from the tone of this discussion that your concept is highly unpopular. It is contrary to societal expectations. What are you trying to achieve by this? A lower population? more selective breeding? It is a humans inherent right and freedom to reproduce if they want to and who are you to say otherwise. Live and let live, Taylor. Re fight scene: cmon dude.... |
05:51pm 22/05/13 Permalink
I live my life by logic, rather than emotion.It is really sad that you are 30 and still think that this is a positive trait. Honest question: do you have aspergers syndrome or are you autistic? This isn't some underhanded way to insult you, being either of those two things isn't bad. If you are, I'll just drop it because it's not cool to rag on people who suffer from it. If you don't, then what the f*** is actually wrong with you? Please enlighten us. edit: another funny thing, if I had actually taken the time to outlay your stupid non-points like Toll did, it would have been a complete waste of time because you didn't even respond to them. You just paid them lip service and then continued on your merry old way. |
06:13pm 22/05/13 Permalink
I live my life by logic, rather than emotion. Much like spock. I can assure you that unless you are some sort of complete sociopath you most definitely live your life by a combination of logic and emotion, maybe if you ever mature a little emotionally you'll realise that. By the way you talk to and about people, it seems that you have a pretty severe inferiority complex which causes you to attempt to live by some sort of extreme interpretation of a concept in order to try convince yourself that most other people are inferior or of less worth in some way. At the end of the day, even if you dedicate your whole life to "human advancement" there is basically zero chance that you will achieve anything near what millions and millions of very intelligent and balanced people with children have achieved and will achieve in the future. |
06:14pm 22/05/13 Permalink
The actual fighting was better but the music was ultra lame.
Perhaps I 'extremised' my views to make for a good discussion but I more or less accept that the way I feel is outside the scope of normal society thinking. I really don't care if people reproduce. I hope that people in thermite's position might just think twice about happiness in the long run and make a decision that leads to a sum-total gain. |
06:15pm 22/05/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
06:19pm 22/05/13 Permalink
I more or less accept that the way I feel is outside the scope of normal society thinking. Thinking that makes you feel special doesn't it? There are better, more balanced ways to convince yourself that you are a unique and special person than saying that all people who have children are less evolved or "breeders" / Neanderthals. |
06:25pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Hey fpot, it's interesting you mentioned Eugenics (not that there's anything wrong with it) - but in the new Star Trek movie, the villian is 'Khan' who was responsible for the Eugenics wars in the star trek universe - which was linked from the eugenics wikipedia page.
|
07:15pm 22/05/13 Permalink
I'm sad to see this thread degenerate like it has
thermite, you'll find that kids cost very little at all, so long as you're happy to have a parent stay at home with them from 0 to about 3.5 (kindy). Like seriously, my kid must cost me about $7 a day - a bit of toast, some fruit, some bickies, an extra quarter serve of whatever we're having for lunch and dinner and a bit of yoghurt and about six nappies, which are like 20c each. I was not expecting to get a cent from the government with my wage, but they do give me a small amount, and i'm relatively sure it actually means my kid is cost-neutral. |
08:03pm 22/05/13 Permalink
LOL hardware are you insane?? What about schooling? Medical Bills? Pocket Money? Birthdays? Private Schooling?
That's probably the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. You've really just put a nail in the coffin that is this thread with hilarious ridiculousness. |
08:18pm 22/05/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
08:28pm 22/05/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
08:33pm 22/05/13 Permalink
This post has been removed.
Reason: Off-Topic |
09:02pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Haha you should have taken the opportunity to change the subject while you had it because you were getting no where
And you not surprisingly ignored my call out about your incorrect comment about evolution |
09:13pm 22/05/13 Permalink
So on the topic of Eugenics, how exactly is it morally wrong? I think it's a good idea, although it would most likely result in my lineage being erased in the first generation. But wouldn't we deal with genetic illnesses like cancer etc and make peoples immune systems better?
You also have to take into account pop culture distorts the idea by making blond hair blue eyes big tits attractive traits whereas in a geniocracy other traits would be held to be more desirable. |
10:00pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Eugenics is a cautionary tale in The Law of Unintended Consequences. Any time a community engages in social engineering it fails miserably. Look at Communism, China's one child policy, financial stimulus. Don't f*** with the universe's rhythm or it will f*** with you.
|
10:03pm 22/05/13 Permalink
The bottom line is each to their own. Have kids, don't have kids, do what you want it's your life. I'm sure there are circumstances (eg bad childhood/experience growing up), personal issues (eg lack of self confidence or selfish nature), concerns about hereditary conditions and a bunch of other perfectly valid or valid seeming reasons not to have kids.
To be honest though, if you're considering the question purely or even primarily in monetary terms, you're doing it wrong. If you care that much about money and having your "toys" and whatever else, you really are ultimately living a fairly shallow existence. You cannot buy genuine personal interaction, friendship and a family. That experience is worth a lot more than your car or your computer or even your round the world trip. The sad part about it that until you make that transition you really have no idea. As I said, there are people who genuinely have no interest in having kids and there's nothing wrong with that. But if you put it off indefinitely because you want more "stuff" soon you'll realise (maybe too late) that all that "stuff" is ultimately meaningless if you lack the basic human connection of family. I definitely agree that some people shouldn't have kids and have them for all the wrong reasons but it doesn't change the fact that there is no clear cut black and white logic that you can apply that somehow makes you better by standing in one camp or the other. |
10:18pm 22/05/13 Permalink
Do you think society sort of forces us to breed and reproduce and then justify that it was a right decision (especially given the documented cost of children). which society? Australia is full of them.. |
10:24pm 22/05/13 Permalink
There was a recent story of a woman that where she basically said she regrets having her children everyday. For me personally you have to be some kind of total f*****g screw up to not form enough of a bond with a child over several years to make everything worth while.
Thinking that makes you feel special doesn't it? Probably not but he's trying hard to convince himself that he is. Its the kind of bulls*** that some 15 year old socially maladjusted kid will construct for themselves to make it feel like the reason they feel like an outsider or they don't fit in is because they are special. You know the misunderstood genius being all lonely at the top rather than seeing the reality of the situation which is they are a total retard that fails to grasp some real basic s*** about people and fitting in. |
09:53am 23/05/13 Permalink
Your level of thinking is outdated, maladjusted and archaic. You are just accepting things as they are, rather than questioning them, which is the purpose of this thread. Do I question? Yes. Do I have an opinion? Yes. Is that wrong? No.
If I am a 15 year old kid, you are a mindless sheep, slowly marching through the procedure of everyday life, earning pay check by paycheck, accepting all that is told to you and waiting to die. That's the sum of your existence. A mindless journey from one point to another, barely even raising enough conscience to consider if what you're doing is wrong or right. It just IS. Your prime focus is gaining the most enjoyment in your miserable life despite being forced into decision after decision you have no real control over. Lay off the personal attacks. Address the argument and don't make moronic assumptions. If you pricks want to play hard ball and use these really, really low bullying tactics then bring it the f*** on. This thread has used every dishonourable, disgusting internet arguing technique in the book from straw man to personal attacks. Get over yourselves. If you don't agree with what I am saying intelligently state why not. Don't call me a child and do lower yourselves to such pathetic levels. What I'm saying is NOT crazy and is NOT maladjusted. It is simply challenging a very real and existing pre-condition which, as you've proven, most people accept as gospel. |
10:09am 23/05/13 Permalink
If I am a 15 year old kid, you are a mindless sheep, slowly marching through the procedure of everyday life, earning pay check by paycheck, accepting all that is told to you and waiting to die. That's the sum of your existence. A mindless journey from one point to another, barely even raising enough conscience to consider if what you're doing is wrong or right. It just IS. Your prime focus is gaining the most enjoyment in your miserable life despite being forced into decision after decision you have no real control over. And in the next breath... Lay off the personal attacks. Address the argument and don't make moronic assumptions. Gold. |
10:13am 23/05/13 Permalink
I earn money paycheck to paycheck to pay for awesome things like my house and fun activities for myself and family. Quadcopters, motorbikes, computers and their games, holidays to exotic locations in the world. I'm also putting away a tidy sum for retirement so that when I hit 65ish I can leave the workforce if I want and party on for 20+ years. My job is interesting and stimulating, a great environment to work in. Wait a second, children or no children really doesn't change that plan at all :/ Also I would hazard a guess, and this is pure speculation as I have no real info on it, I and most others on this forum have spent more time philosophizing throughout life then you would think. How much reading of the subject have you done? How much time have you spent in other worlds? |
10:20am 23/05/13 Permalink
This guy is 100% trolling
Still ignores evolution call out |
10:21am 23/05/13 Permalink
O for sure he is Trolling, he is also taking dumps on other threads with similar provocative comments.
I'm not sure if he realizes he is trolling though. |
10:29am 23/05/13 Permalink
i'm sorry since when was causing your own species extinction through by not procreating "the next level of evolution" ?you musn't understand evolution either Accusing me of being a troll to derail thread. Well done, another trick in the book of argument avoidance. I am not trolling, I am putting my opinion out there which I genuinely hold. If you can't handle it, run a magnet over your HDD. This was your call out?? You big call? The big intelligent call? Another trick in the book, claim I 'didn't respond to your call out' when basically it's ridiculous and taking what I said way, way out of context. For one, in no way was I suggesting the entire human race stops breeding. That's ridiculous. My suggestion was that people stop being slaves to the societal construct that 'reproduction is part of the rat race, despite the negatives.' My whole point is people start questioning this and perhaps considering whether they can do something productive with their lives other than breeding. I earn money paycheck to paycheck to pay for awesome things like my house and fun activities for myself and family. Quadcopters, motorbikes, computers and their games, holidays to exotic locations in the world. I'm also putting away a tidy sum for retirement so that when I hit 65ish I can leave the workforce if I want and party on for 20+ years. I'm not saying you don't breed, I'm saying you should question whether you really want and not be influenced by societal pressure. Having kids will take of lot of that fun away. |
10:55am 23/05/13 Permalink
Taylor you are trolling for one simple reason. The entire argument of not having children to improve the world is fatally flawed. If a species does not reproduce it dies. How can that be good for humanity? If you can answer that I will be fine for you to keep trolling...
We are experiencing a baby boom induced tax crunch at the moment in Australia where the number of welfare recipients to taxpayers is expanding. Can you imagine how much worse that would get if the birth rate fell further. We would have an economic collapse. just let people do what they do, stop judging others. |
11:01am 23/05/13 Permalink
Taylor you are trolling for one simple reason. The entire argument of not having children to improve the world is fatally flawed. If a species does not reproduce it dies. How can that be good for humanity? If you can answer that I will be fine for you to keep trolling... Please refer to the question at the bottom before stating more rubbish. I am calling you all out to consider my question. It's a very simple answer and I've made the point about 10 times already. I'm not saying people should stop breeding altogether, that's ridiculous. Reproduction keeps the species alive. What I'm saying is that it would not harm the population if certain people in a position to do so decided not to breed and instead devoted their lives to increasing humanity. Reproducing takes time and if 100% of a persons time was dedicated to making humanity better there would be a greater net gain in the long run. If enough people did this, then overall, the net gain would be higher. This is an indisputable fact and you can not deny it. If you want to prove me wrong, answer the following question. This discussion goes no further than addressing my question. If you don't address this question, YOU are trolling : Two groups of 100 people, equal mix of males and females, equal mixes of intelligence. Group A and B. Group A does not breed and they all focus on bettering humanity - research, art, philosophy etc. For every beneficial thing they do, they get one 'humanity' point. They accumulate X points over their lifetimes. Group B pair off and breed with each other. They have 2.5 kids each, the average. In addition to this, they focus on bettering humanity. They do the same as the other group. They accumulate Y humanity points over their lifetimes. Question : Who has more points at the end of their lives? Group A or Group B? My hypothesis : Group A will always end up with more points than Group B. If certain people choose not to breed, the net gain for humanity will be higher. |
11:15am 23/05/13 Permalink
So far the total sum of your insight is that kids cost money and that having kids reduces the amount of freedom people have. These are the conclusions I'd expect a child to be able to reach. You're not questioning or challenging anything - you're telling people what they already know and then trying to push your narrow and emotionally immature worldview on people when they try and explain their situation to you. When people react negatively to this, you bring out the I am a unique little snowflake routine and everyone else are just sheep. It's really obnoxious and I'd like to know how many real life people you have alienated with it. Like you'd ever admit that, though
|
11:27am 23/05/13 Permalink
I asked a question. Please answer it. I have narrowed the discussion down to one point and you're incapable of a) reading or b) addressing an argument.
You are now trolling me to get a reaction and I will continue to refer you back to my question, above. |
11:34am 23/05/13 Permalink
I didn't see your question until I had already posted.
It's a stupid f*****g question. There is no way to form a solid answer unless you make thousands of assumptions. The only reason you reached your conclusion is because like I said, you already have your mind made up about it. |
11:40am 23/05/13 Permalink
That question is only answerable in the context that it has been asked - a completely abstract sense that in no way represents reality. You cannot just write some maths and then think it applies to how things work.
(In any case, there's not enough information in your example to answer the question - there's no way to derive values for X and Y based on the variables you provided.) infi is right (except I don't buy into the economic collapse theory); positing a future in which noone is having babies is counterproductive and useless. Having /less/ babies is fine. Having no babies isn't (even I, a notorious hater of population growth and proponent of the parenting license and planned parenting and free contraceptives, think that). |
11:41am 23/05/13 Permalink
Then discuss the variables, smart guy. If you need more information, ask. It's called philosophy. So far you've proven that you have the intelligence level of a piece of dirt and can't even have a go at the question.
Come on, fpot. Where you like this when all your school assignments were hard? Just refused t have a go? The first step is having a try, little buddy. Answer the question. |
11:44am 23/05/13 Permalink
If you want to prove me wrong, answer the following question. The question is worthless and hypothetical. There is no referee in life, there is no points scored in life. Life is not a competition, it is organic, chaotic, unpredictable. Life is for existing and experiencing. Life is real and kids are real. your "game of life" is not real. That is why your question is idiotic. |
11:45am 23/05/13 Permalink
Something relevant to this thread:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-23/kids-eat-into-family-budget-like-never-before/4708076 Kids cost money. Anyway, Taylor, for such a logical person your point system is missing a vital mechanism:
Group A. Their contributions end when they die. Group B. Whilst they may have less time to devote to the 'humanities', they have instead invested some of that time into raising a child who will also contribute to the humanities. So across the 2 generations, at the least (remember this continues on as the children have children) the amount of points humanity received is higher. Therefore, by your own logic, it is in humanities best interest that people continue to procreate. Please also note, that you have been told on several occasions that using the word Breed is a derogatory comment regardless of what you think it means. If you continue to use it as you are, then your case of not being a Troll is severely hampered. At least use the word procreate. |
11:47am 23/05/13 Permalink
Ahhhh yes of course, it is other people's fault that you ask stupid questions that are impossible to answer in any meaningful way. How silly of me.
|
11:49am 23/05/13 Permalink
Also, I have stressed this several times now. A great majority of the most influential people on this entire planet, across all of human exists, have had children and it didn't diminish their capacity to advance humanity. In fact, their children contributing in the footsteps of their parents have only increased it further.
|
11:50am 23/05/13 Permalink
don't breedPlease don't breed as you've displayed and proven here you're nothing but a complete knob. |
11:57am 23/05/13 Permalink
Group B will earn more humanity points :
1 ) They will live healthier happier lives as they have children to drive their research and gain inspiration from. 2) They will be able to pass on their knowledge and skills to their children. 3) Procreating grants humanity points in itself. 4) They have passed on their DNA to their children, so if in their lifetimes they don't get more points, their successive generations will. 5) They can work from home and not really be impeded by having children 6) Scientific and cultural advancement is subjective - you can't measure it. My point, I am able to a) answer the question in a meaningful way and b) present opposing arguments |
11:59am 23/05/13 Permalink
I'm not saying you don't breed, I'm saying you should question whether you really want and not be influenced by societal pressure. Having kids will take of lot of that fun away. Having kids is fun, it's a lot of work of course but any parent will tell you that they wouldn't trade the good times for anything. It's insanely arrogant of you to think you need to remind an adult to ensure they are really thinking things through as if to say you are the only person here enlightened enough to make such a choice. Either that or your just a f*****g socially inept tool. The only real upside to this thread is knowing that you will likely never reproduce and in that sense the world is most certainly better. So I guess perhaps you are right. |
12:20pm 23/05/13 Permalink
http://www.news.com.au/money/money-matters/is-having-kids-really-rational/story-e6frfmd9-1226650511066
Wow - a front page article on news.com.au 'is having kids really rational?' It's extremely ironic that my views were decried as horrible, that I was trolling and in addition to that, subjective to personal taunts and insults when the very same opinion is published on the front page of a national web newspaper!! In fact, I'd suggest Jessica Irvine, a female journalist actually plagiarised my work! She must be a member of the ausgamers forums. The stupid woman has tried to pull the wool of my eyes by substitution 'rational' for 'logical.' Same thing really. If I haven't changed anyone's mind on having kids, if it's any consolation, I'll be enjoying my $812,000. |
10:36pm 26/05/13 Permalink
newsdotcomdotau is a piece of s*** rag and I'd consider it a personal insult if any of my views aligned with the absolute and utter crap that they print. If this thread didn't exist and I happened to read that article (which would be almost an impossibility because I have them blocked from my google news feed and would never in a million years visit their website) I'd be thinking the exact same things about the article that I have posted in this thread. That you look at this as some sort of vindication is utterly hilarious.
I hope that helps. |
11:02pm 26/05/13 Permalink
TD*******, you sure are a knob. It certainly hasn't cost me $800k to raise three kids to adulthood. Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you read in a newspaper. On top of that I couldn't give a rats arse what a tosser like you think, period.
|
11:03pm 26/05/13 Permalink
^ You sure are a knob:( edit: I know dude :) |
11:04pm 26/05/13 Permalink
Wasn't referring to you fpot you posted while I was writing mine. I've corrected it to explicity detail who I was referring to.
|
11:05pm 26/05/13 Permalink
newsdotcomdotau is a piece of s*** rag and I'd consider it a personal insult if any of my views aligned with the absolute and utter crap that they print. If this thread didn't exist and I happened to read that article (which would be almost an impossibility because I have them blocked from my google news feed and would never in a million years visit their website) I'd be thinking the exact same things about the article that I have posted in this thread. That you look at this as some sort of vindication is utterly hilarious.I hope that helps. What about the AMP and the National Centre for Economic studies. Is every study they put out absolute nonsense as well? I'd hazard a guess and say the experts who put the report together are far more educated than anyone who responded negatively to what I just said. It's a scientific and through study and the journalist was simply reporting on that study. It wasn't an opinion piece. Ah, I certainly do love vindication. |
11:47pm 26/05/13 Permalink
Ah, I certainly do love vindication.That you're a whacko. Yep you sure have vindicated yourself there. |
11:51pm 26/05/13 Permalink
You really don't get it. The fact that kids cost money and reduce the amount of freedom someone has isn't really up for debate. It's undeniably true.
The reason you have copped flak in this thread is because you presented the idea as some sort of revelation you yourself have made. It may have been, but it is the same revelation most people made the first time their parents bought them their school uniforms and schoolbooks after not being out drinking the night before. You then went on to ask people who said they had children and were happy with their decision if in a hypothetical world where they could reverse their decision with no negative ramifications for their children if they'd do it. In my opinion this is an incredibly rude and pretentious question to ask someone. It's pretentious because you are assuming you know more about their needs and personal situation than they do. People then went on to explain that your hypothetical was silly and that even in a situation where it existed, they still wouldn't do it. At this point you turned the autism to max, and ramped your logical choice argument up to full obnoxiousness, ignoring other people's views while constantly repeating and trying to reinforce your own. While you were doing this you were also accusing other people of bullying you, and using tricks to try and bring you down under the pretense of a discussion. There was no discussion, there never was. It was only you trying to be the special little individual and using the forum as your little dumping ground for your kids are illogical argument. Why you would use a forum like this for that I don't know. Maybe you have alienated every person in your life. Or perhaps you've tried this same thing on other forums and this is your latest attempt to sway people to your viewpoint. It's a mystery that I guess will never be answered. So to summarize, everyone knows that kids cost money and that when you have them you'll lose a lot of freedom. People already know this but despite it they have children anyway because the journey of giving birth to a child and raising it is something worth more than money and freedom to get pissed whenever you want. You also brought up at one point something about having children vs human advancement. This is a false dichotomy. Those two things are not mutually exclusive as Toll pointed out. Because of all these things people have reacted negatively towards you and because of the nature of forum discussion and the frustration of seeing someone go on and on about utter nonsense it has sometimes been insulting and included personal attacks. If it was real life, people would just get up and walk away from you. You haven't been vindicated at all. |
12:08am 27/05/13 Permalink
Overly pedantic point: Jessica Irvine is a journalist not an economist.
|
11:07am 27/05/13 Permalink
Not to revive this trainwreck of a thread, but didn't want to start a new one - this new report puts the cost of having two kids in a middle income family at $812,000 (up from $537,000 in 2007).
|
01:00pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Vindicated yet again. Thanks for the input, trog. It goes to prove the illogical choice people make when deciding on essentially a financial decision. The 'emotional' value you receive from children must be worth a lot. For most of the poor sods in this thread I hope it's worth $812,000!
When I am in my huge house with an epic rig, 6 x 24 inch monitors, a hot wife and driving an Aston Martin, I'll do burnt outs past the local school laughing at all the dumb asses who were sucked into believing breeding is the only way to find happiness in life. The ill shag my hot gold digging wife. Meanwhile, my friends kids trust is making generous contributions to my friends children's education etc so I'm really living the best of both worlds. Ill be the beloved uncle Tdog. It's so funny to hear the bitter hate from people who realise their moronic, stupid decisions have ruined thier lives and they are just another cog in the breeding cycle. Rich - tick Watching kids grow up - tick Epic rig - tick Happiness - tick Owning a huge epic company and employing breeders - tick My life philosophy, Vulcanism, is what makes me such a winner. Might start a new thread soon to educate you all in it. |
01:44pm 11/06/13 Permalink
That is a post I'd roll my eyes at if a teenager made it. You're a 30 year old man and I use the term man very loosely.
It makes me think back to when you called yourself a well-adjusted person. You're an emotionally immature little man-child who is almost certainly a virgin. Please do make a thread about Vulcanism, this forum needs more hilarity. |
01:51pm 11/06/13 Permalink
wonders why we took his post about natural medicine serious...
|
01:58pm 11/06/13 Permalink
OK Tony Stark
wait no, he uses epic holographics to aggregate the other system's like PRISM they don't want you knowing about pity the fool. |
02:05pm 11/06/13 Permalink
My life philosophy, Vulcanism, is what makes me such a winner. I'm with you friend, not enough people revere the great John Seru. |
03:31pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Trog if you bothered to even read this thread I posted that ages ago hehe.
Anyway, back to the hilarity. |
05:16pm 11/06/13 Permalink
He made the thread about Vulcanism but it was locked. On one hand I am sad that I couldn't have a chuckle at it, on the other hand the impotent rage he would have felt after having his wall of text nuked before anyone could read it is good too. Overall it's a win.
|
05:23pm 11/06/13 Permalink
I was just trying to please you fpot. I wasn't angry, only disappointed I couldn't enlighten others as to a better way of life. It only proves my point, the deletion of my thread was illogical, as is procreation when it costs so damn much.
The only win is the small joy some lesser beings might experience because, in their mob-like mentality, think they got the one-up on the superior Vulcan intellect. My point has been proven. No sane person would logically have children and be happy about it once the actual fiscal impact was demonstrated to them. The only reason people argue this point is because of epic self loathing and denial of the very, very bad choice they made simply to port their miserable genetics into another human. |
05:32pm 11/06/13 Permalink
It's cute how the thread started with you going from 'hey guys I saw this thing what are your thoughts?' to full blown frothing at the mouth ranting seen in your latest post. You see the reason I was mocking you from the start is I knew you were a frothing at the mouth ranter from the beginning, and were just using the illusion of a discussion for... some reason. I don't even know. Maybe you can enlighten us on that? Is it just simply to feel superior to internet people or is it something else?
|
05:46pm 11/06/13 Permalink
My life philosophy, Vulcanism, is what makes me such a winner. Hahahahaha, hahahah, haha... ahh. Oh yes, such a winner. Who needs kids to say the darndest things when you have Taylor, the "winner" who gets confused by simple website registration forms? Thank god the betterment of humanity is in Taylor's and not you worthless breeders' hands. |
06:58pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Tdog do you make all your decisions in Life based on Money ?
Money is only useful for things you can buy. What do you have in your Life that didn't come from Money ? |
07:36pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Tdog do you make all your decisions in Life based on Money ? My partner. She is pleasant to be around and allows me to pool our resources in order to achieve a better standard of living ie survival. She also provides me with physical relief. Not an exhaustive list. There is the possibility of increased future financial gain. Overall, a logical, rational decision based upon an overall net benefit. Should that benefit cease, or should the cost outweigh that benefit, I will find a new partner who does provide positive net benefit. It is not a union driven by 'love' or some other magical, esoteric concept.. it is one that simply provides me with a greater benefit than I would have obtained were I by myself. This feeling of constant benefit results in releases of endorphins giving me a sensation you non-vulcans would refer to as 'love.' The reason people would feel love for a person who did not provide an overall positive benefit? Those people are unintelligent, illogical creatures who live their lives driven by things they don't really and will never understand. I pity them. |
08:02pm 11/06/13 Permalink
hahaha, yeah sure you have a partner! Girls just love socially repressed, emotionally undeveloped guys whose motivation for having them around is that they provide a net benefit. Yep, no bulls*** there at all!
If you actually mean this stuff you type you are literally mentally ill. You really need some help. A regular psychiatrist couldn't even help you. You need to go to, like, Vienna or something. You know what I mean? You need to get involved at the university level, like where Freud studied, and have all those people looking at you and checking up on you. That's the kind of help you need. Not the once-a-week for eighty bucks, no. You need a team. A team of psychiatrists working around the clock, thinking about you, having conferences, observing you like the way they did with the elephant man. That's what I'm talking about, because that's the only way you're going to get better. |
08:10pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Tdog, just become a computer. Who needs humanity, right?
O god the troll is powerful in this one :( |
08:16pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Not sure if computer bot or sociopath
|
08:25pm 11/06/13 Permalink
My partner. She is pleasant to be around and allows me to pool our resources in order to achieve a better standard of living ie survival. She also provides me with physical relief. Not an exhaustive list. There is the possibility of increased future financial gain. So your relationship came about because of money. What if your GF lost her Job or became seriously ill ? |
08:26pm 11/06/13 Permalink
I think the guy is a gigantic bulls***ting troll
Hopefully someone will lock this thread soon |
08:58pm 11/06/13 Permalink
O he totally is, there is no way anyone thinks like that. Unless they are really broken in the head, in which case dude needs some help, of which there may be no fix. But meh, each to their own. If he has found a partner that accepts him for what he is then cool.
If he is lying to her though, that s*** is low. It is also totally doable guilt free by someone who doesn't give a damn about emotions, theirs or others. |
09:02pm 11/06/13 Permalink
So your relationship came about because of money. I would weigh up the short term loss against long term gain and make a decision. Of course, just leaving as soon as it became a drain would incur a negative benefit from people in my life and that of course would be a factor I would also consider. Appearing to 'do the right thing' might have it's own benefits in the form of sympathy from non-vulcans or potential future partners. Imagine the story to some girl you met : "Ahh well yeah.. my old gf.. she was in a car accident.. I waited by the hospital bed every night for a week.(lie) There was really no other choice, but we had to put her in a home as she's now brain damaged (lie). I visit her twice a week (lie). I really miss the warm hugs at night and am feeling really lonely (lets f***). See how non-vulcans let their emotions rule their lives? I've turned a negative-benefit situation into one where I can release some tension between the legs of some sympathetic female whilst looking for a new parter who can provide me with positive net benefit. Win win for the Vulcans. |
09:07pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Hey TDog,
Wouldn't you be better off with a man instead of a woman? I also don't understand this 'pleasant to be around' statement you make about your current partner? |
09:22pm 11/06/13 Permalink
That post was just 'whoa' but here's a little thing I can't help but say. Mature adults don't let emotions run their lives. They acknowledge that emotions exist, and when faced with a situation that may anger or sadden them realise that emotions are a thing they have to deal with. I mean, if someone calls you a jerk and you punch them in the face or if someone eats the last cookie and you break down crying I'd consider you an emotionally immature person.
To completely ignore emotion and pretend it isn't there is the same thing but different. You are quite obviously a complete c***, and I have no doubt your partner is made up and I also highly doubt you'd have any close friends because based off your froths here there really isn't much reason to know you. This is the price you pay for being emotionally undeveloped on the other end of the spectrum - it is just another way emotions (or lack thereof) can negatively affect someone's life. Now you are going to deny this and say your partner is real and you have heaps of friends, but I am not going to believe you. The reason you are putting yourself 'out there' so much on an internet forum is that people won't listen in real life (not for free anyway) and it's pretty much your last outlet until you go become an old misanthrope who can't even be bother lying about himself on an internet forum anymore. Or you're just a massive troll, in which case bravo. |
09:29pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Bravo indeed
Or option 3 - sosiopathic |
09:40pm 11/06/13 Permalink
OK Tony Stark f*** i lold just wait till your missus wants kids TDog, then you will be smiling on the other side of your face. every woman's biological clock starts ticking eventually... |
09:42pm 11/06/13 Permalink
If he was a real sociopath I doubt he be getting so frothy about everything on the internet. He's one of those pretend sociopaths, who instead of being an adult and dealing with the problems that often come up in your 20s emotionally regress themselves back to a teenager and pretend the problems aren't there.
|
10:01pm 11/06/13 Permalink
I have never once frothed, you idiot. All I've done is answer questions and explain my situation to you. You have nothing better to do than abuse people on the internet. You liken yourself to the Jason Stantham of this forum.
f*** i loldjust wait till your missus wants kids TDog, then you will be smiling on the other side of your face. every woman's biological clock starts ticking eventually... When? My GF is 10 years younger than me (20). If she starts ticking, I'l tick her off for another 20 year old. |
10:17pm 11/06/13 Permalink
f*** you are delusional. let us know how that goes for you. what a wanker.
|
10:21pm 11/06/13 Permalink
What do you have in your Life that didn't come from Money ? How touching. I bet your g/f feels pretty special, what with the mutual financial benefits and the physical relief she is fortunate to be able to offer you. So how often do you rent out your blow up doll? |
10:40pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Vulcans are fantasy characters from a 40 year old TV show.
You live your life like a fantasy character ? Didn't you have any role models from the real world as you grew up ? |
10:50pm 11/06/13 Permalink
For one of the more obvious trolls I have ever seen on QGL, geez there are alot of bites haha.
Using Vulcans as a lifestyle / religion / race choice. A+ for effort. |
11:00pm 11/06/13 Permalink
Yeah, in the end he went full retard, dead giveaway.
I really don't get the point of all this trolling. I mean it's a hell of a lot of effort to go to for not really any obvious gain, isn't it? Where's the appeal/motivation? Edit: on further thought, it's become pretty clear that Taylor is trog's alt/troll account, why else would he revive the thread with information that was already in the thread?!?! |
11:06pm 11/06/13 Permalink
For one of the more obvious trolls I have ever seen on QGL, geez there are alot of bites haha. Using Vulcans as a lifestyle / religion / race choice. A+ for effort. Incorrect. I am certainly not trolling. I do exist in real life. I'm out there, in the streets and in your workplaces. Vulcans are fantasy characters from a 40 year old TV show. You live your life like a fantasy character ? I really do follow this life philosophy. It's not based upon a 40 year old TV show, it's based upon original thought. I just liken to to Vulcans as it is somewhat similar. Think Spock after he has been schooled up on humans by Kirk for a while. How touching. I bet your g/f feels pretty special, what with the mutual financial benefits and the physical relief she is fortunate to be able to offer you. My GF is free to leave at any time. Perhaps she doesn't, as she has some illogical attraction to me. Perhaps it is my remarkable and advanced level of evolution and intelligence. If she does leave, then I will not be upset, as being upset would be illogical. I will simply readjust my life to maximise benefit and find another female to increase my endorphin levels and positive gain once more. She is completely happy at the moment, as I am still with her. If she was not happy, the situation would be one of negative gain and I would not be with her. A perfectly logical cycle. I say this with utmost honesty. You really need some help. A regular psychiatrist couldn't even help you. You need to go to, like, Vienna or something. You know what I mean? You need to get involved at the university level, like where Freud studied, and have all those people looking at you and checking up on you. That's the kind of help you need. Not the once-a-week for eighty bucks, no. You need a team. A team of psychiatrists working around the clock, thinking about you, having conferences, observing you like the way they did with the elephant man. That's what I'm talking about, because that's the only way you're going to get better. Brilliant spiel. Very humorous. You are a good writer and I appreciate it. Unfortunately your intellect is limited to Jason Statham personal attacks. It's easy to just denote what I'm saying as 'crazy' and 'insane' but no one has actually backed up the fact that living life as a slave to emotion is a better way of life, other than 'that's how it is.' As usual, you are hiding behind the 'norm.' As usual, the norm does not need defending as you have the majority and think that because 'it is the way it is' you don't have to justify it. Where's the appeal/motivation?! To educate others and bring humanity into a new phase of enlightenment. |
01:05am 12/06/13 Permalink
so when you run your fingers through your girlfriend's hair while she's looking into your eyes, you feel absolutely no emotion whatsoever
it's a good troll. it's just that you are not the Audi commercial no matter how hard you are trying to conform with it |
01:27am 12/06/13 Permalink
That was actually a Larry David style personal attack.
It is possible for people to be as delusional as this guy is, but they couldn't possibly be so proud of it and paste it all over a forum for strangers to see, so I am with the rest. He is just trolling. How boring in the end after all that built up hilarity. I thought we had a real f*** up here that would bring months of forum schadenfreude :( |
01:36am 12/06/13 Permalink
The more convinced you become that having children is a bad idea the more convinced we become that for you youre most definately right. At 30 years old if you havent straightened a few of your obvious issues out then its a good thing you dont look like having any kids.
You win, we win and even your never to be born children win. End of story |
03:31am 12/06/13 Permalink
.It is possible for people to be as delusional as this guy is, but they couldn't possibly be so proud of it and paste it all over a forum for strangers to see Nice work, Jason, unfortunately, this is simply an illogical statement and contradicts itself on multiple levels. Pride is an emotion and I am not affected by emotions, so pride is not a driving factor behind why I am explaining this. The reason I am explaining myself is that I put a point of view up and people have been curious about my point of view and I am simply educating those people as to my life philosophy in response to those questions. The fact that certain persons are picking up little pieces of personal information and attempting to use it against me demonstrates that they are simply unintelligent and unable to properly contribute anything to the conversation, other than outrage, abuse and a violent frothing of the mouth. What Jason does best. Unfortunately, Jason, it's very transparent that whenever you label something as trolling you impliedly admit that you are not intelligent enough to partake in the conversation. I wish you'd just be honest. The more convinced you become that having children is a bad idea the more convinced we become that for you youre most definately right. At 30 years old if you havent straightened a few of your obvious issues out then its a good thing you dont look like having any kids. You win, we win and even your never to be born children win. End of story By implying I don't deserve, or should not breed, you prove my point, that is, there is an implication in society that you must breed or have a right to breed. It is an illogical assumption. Thank you for reinforcing my point Taipan, albeit unintentionally. All in all I am glad I proved my point. Lets let this thread rest in peace. |
03:45pm 12/06/13 Permalink
