How my mother stopped telling me to look for a boyfriend

[Narz]

My mom always told me I was stupid/irresponsible for having a kid.

And of some level she's right, I made a very bad 'choice' for mother of my child & I wasn't emotionally & financially stable enough at the time. I've learned alot from the experience though. And I plan to do it again sometime with my new knowledge and a better partner.

 

[Hehehe]

That's debatable.

Here's a link that I think does a pretty good job of refuting the idea that we are suffering from overpopulation:

https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/dubunking-the-over-population-myth

Of course, if you don't want to read the whole thing (it is quite long) then this one sentence from it should tell you just how overblown the idea of overpopulation really is:

A half acre of arable land is more than enough to feed an individual or even several individuals. So no, we are not overpopulated.

It's complicated but I would argue that over-population is a huge problem in some countries.

I feel like this is why the phrase, "to each their own" was coined. Its biological imperative for most humans, I like tricking that imperative over and over.

Well, as long as you're happy, I guess.

Not sure intelligence is that straight forwardly genetic. Sure more intellectual parents can give their children more social capital, but that is why we need free quality education for everyone from the kindergarden to the university.

No we actually have a wealth of evidence that intelligence is, in fact, very much genetic. There have been many adoption studies, and studies done on identical twins. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that, for adults in industrialized Western countries, intelligence is about 80 % genetic.

 

[mrt144]

Well, as long as you're happy, I guess.

No need to guess or doubt. I'm telling you plainly that it is a happy life and one that isn't likely to be enjoyed by many if not most. Why the empathy gap?

 

[Hehehe]

No need to guess or doubt. I'm telling you plainly that it is a happy life and one that isn't likely to be enjoyed by many if not most. Why the empathy gap?

I mean I guess I can understand not wanting kids because of the hassle, even if I don't share that feeling. I feel like I'm just repeating myself here, but doesn't it bother you that your lineage ends in you? That you will leave no legacy?

 

[Sommerswerd]

Of course, if you don't want to read the whole thing (it is quite long) then this one sentence from it should tell you just how overblown the idea of overpopulation really is: A half acre of arable land is more than enough to feed an individual or even several individuals. So no, we are not overpopulated.

One problem with that approach to conceptualizing overpopulation, is that there simply isn't and could never be a scenario where everyone could get their acre share of land. Just for one example, the whole planet has roughly 38 billion acres of land, including for sake of discussion, Antarctica, the Himalayas, Greenland, the Sahara etc., so that's around 5 acres each... But O'Hare Airport is over 6000 acres, so poof that's 1200 people who just got screwed out of their share... and remember, that's completely sidestepping the discussion of "arable" land versus wasteland. A hundred more airports (which we definitely have) and you've got an army worth of angry folks who've been cheated out of their land which means you've got a war on your hands...

But who are we kidding? what about amusement parks? Universities? Six Flags Great Adventure is 500 acres, the Ohio State University is over 1,700 acres while Disneyworld is 27,000 acres by itself. So the idea that there's enough land for everyone to get a half acre seems more like philosophy than anything with real world practical implications. All the land (the good land anyway) is owned... and you're only "redistributing" that land over a lot of dead bodies.

 

[mrt144]

I mean I guess I can understand not wanting kids because of the hassle, even if I don't share that feeling. I feel like I'm just repeating myself here, but doesn't it bother you that your lineage ends in you? That you will leave no legacy?

Procreating in and of itself doesn't provide legacy as far as I'm concerned, especially in societies where you can go to great lengths to ensure you procreate. Maybe if I was in a small Amazonian tribe with very little contact with the modern world I could see a viable claim to legacy in the village but in an interconnected world, I just feel like the shot at legacy is drowned out by the sheer magnitude of people on the planet.

As to legacies in and of themselves, what is the foundation of a legacy? Acts and deeds that are carried on by your offspring in their own acts and deeds and evaluated positively on the premise that your benevolent influence guided them to a similarly benevolent place? By that measure though the biological link isn't imperative.

And I joke with my parents now that if they wanted grand children they should have given me a sibling or 3 to maximize odds. It's a leap of faith that your legacy will continue after you're dead, even if it sustains you while living. And I could never place that burden of legacy on someone who didn't have a choice in the matter.

 

[Lexicus]

As to legacies in and of themselves, what is the foundation of a legacy? Acts and deeds that are carried on by your offspring in their own acts and deeds and evaluated positively on the premise that your benevolent influence guided them to a similarly benevolent place? By that measure though the biological link isn't imperative.

Yeah but what do you expect from someone literally spouting Nazi tropes about the genetic basis of intelligence?

 

[mrt144]

Yeah but what do you expect from someone literally spouting Nazi tropes about the genetic basis of intelligence?

To realize how Hitler as a last name or Adolph as a first are legacies no child should have to carry?

 

[Lexicus]

To realize how Hitler as a last name or Adolph as a first are legacies no child should have to carry?

The blood of the Volk must be preserved!

 

[Ryika]

We must secure the existence of our forums and a future for civilized discussion.

 

[Hehehe]

Procreating in and of itself doesn't provide legacy as far as I'm concerned, especially in societies where you can go to great lengths to ensure you procreate. Maybe if I was in a small Amazonian tribe with very little contact with the modern world I could see a viable claim to legacy in the village but in an interconnected world, I just feel like the shot at legacy is drowned out by the sheer magnitude of people on the planet.

As to legacies in and of themselves, what is the foundation of a legacy? Acts and deeds that are carried on by your offspring in their own acts and deeds and evaluated positively on the premise that your benevolent influence guided them to a similarly benevolent place? By that measure though the biological link isn't imperative.

And I joke with my parents now that if they wanted grand children they should have given me a sibling or 3 to maximize odds. It's a leap of faith that your legacy will continue after you're dead, even if it sustains you while living. And I could never place that burden of legacy on someone who didn't have a choice in the matter.

Sure, the entire world won't be populated by my kids, but at least they will live in it. And sure, perhaps they will choose to not have kids, and I will respect their choice. And although biology isn't everything, I think that my kids will have stronger environmental link to me in addition to the biological one.

Yeah but what do you expect from someone literally spouting Nazi tropes about the genetic basis of intelligence?

"Nazi tropes"? Sir please, the heritability of intelligence is pretty well established. If you're trying to argue against this, then you are out of touch with reality.

The general figure for the heritability of IQ, according to an authoritative American Psychological Association report, is 0.45 for children, and rises to around 0.75 for late teens and adults.[5][6] In simpler terms, IQ goes from being weakly correlated with genetics, for children, to being strongly correlated with genetics for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with age and reaches an asymptote at 18–20 years of age and continues at that level well into adulthood.[7] Recent studies suggest that family and parenting characteristics are not significant contributors to variation in IQ scores;[8] however, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease can have deleterious effects.[9][10]

 

[Lexicus]

"Nazi tropes"? Sir please, the heritability of intelligence is pretty well established. If you're trying to argue against this, then you are out of touch with reality.

Intelligence itself is a white supremacist concept with little real meaning. IQ measures the ability to take IQ tests, and heredity is not necessarily due to genetics.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Heritability of IQ is not the same as heritability of intelligence. Mind you, I'm not saying intelligence isn't, to some degree, genetic. All I'm saying is that intelligence is far, far greater than IQ.

 

[Hehehe]

Intelligence itself is a white supremacist concept with little real meaning. IQ measures the ability to take IQ tests, and heredity is not necessarily due to genetics.

May I see your sources my good sir?

Heritability of IQ is not the same as heritability of intelligence. Mind you, I'm not saying intelligence isn't, to some degree, genetic. All I'm saying is that intelligence is far, far greater than IQ.

Of course not, but IQ does correlate with real world success. It's not a perfect predictor but it is a predictor nonetheless

 

[Akka]

The main problem with intelligence is that we still can't manage to actually define it, so good luck trying to measure it.
The second problem is that even things which are massively genetics (like skin colour or hair length) can have noticeable variations even between siblings, so again, good luck trying to isolate which part is down to variation into genetics and which part isn't.

Genetics still massively count - the difference between a dog and a child I both educate the same way will dwarf the difference between two twins who are educated by completely different persons.

Of course it takes to not be blinded by the childish behaviour of mixing up "what I want to be" and "what is", which is not exactly the forte of people who jump on the Godwin's point.

 

[Lexicus]

May I see your sources my good sir?

I don't generally argue by appealing to authority, so no. That IQ measures the ability to take IQ tests is self-evident; heredity is not necessarily due to genetics because e.g. wearing earrings is a highly hereditary trait but obviously not a genetic one; and that intelligence is a white supremacist concept is not a fact that would need to be 'sourced,' it's just an interpretation that I believe better explains the world than assuming that "intelligence" is real. "Intelligence" was invented to give a faux objective basis to the favorite Nazi pastime of sorting people into desirables and undesirables.

 

[Ryika]

So how would you go about measuring how intellectually capable a person is?

 

[Hehehe]

The main problem with intelligence is that we still can't manage to actually define it, so good luck trying to measure it.
The second problem is that even things which are massively genetics (like skin colour or hair length) can have noticeable variations even between siblings, so again, good luck trying to isolate which part is down to variation into genetics and which part isn't.

Genetics still massively count - the difference between a dog and a child I both educate the same way will dwarf the difference between two twins who are educated by completely different persons.

Of course it takes to not be blinded by the childish behaviour of mixing up "what I want to be" and "what is", which is not exactly the forte of people who jump on the Godwin's point.

First of all, if you want to define intelligence, you can just Google it. We can discuss how accurate that is but it's not like there is no definition for intelligence. Second, as to which things are caused by genetics and which things are caused by environment, we can actually test this by using studies with identical twins. As I'm sure you understand, identical twins share 100% of their genes. So if they're raised separately in different environments, and still turn out similar, we can assume that the lack of variation is due to genetics, can we not?

I don't generally argue by appealing to authority, so no. That IQ measures the ability to take IQ tests is self-evident; heredity is not necessarily due to genetics because e.g. wearing earrings is a highly hereditary trait but obviously not a genetic one; and that intelligence is a white supremacist concept is not a fact that would need to be 'sourced,' it's just an interpretation that I believe better explains the world than assuming that "intelligence" is real. "Intelligence" was invented to give a faux objective basis to the favorite Nazi pastime of sorting people into desirables and undesirables.

So you're just going to make a bunch of statements with nothing to back them up? Well if IQ measures nothing, why does it correlate with real world success? IQ is a better predictor of income and educational attainment than parent's socioeconomic status

 

[mrt144]

Sure, the entire world won't be populated by my kids, but at least they will live in it. And sure, perhaps they will choose to not have kids, and I will respect their choice. And although biology isn't everything, I think that my kids will have stronger environmental link to me in addition to the biological one.

You tapped on a great reason to have children. You want to share the splendor of living with someone who is new to the world. Seeing a few of my buddies with kids take their kids to the zoo and point out everything and explain everything and seeing the amazement in their kids eyes fills me with happiness for them and the journey they are on.

Its awesome they made the leap and want to be there from -9 months onward, 24/7. I couldnt sustain that obligation because really, when I evaluate the things I enjoy in life, most of then rely on adult tastes with adult ability to converse and articulate them. As silly as it seems, I prefer letting everyone else do the legwork of growing adults I enjoy the company of rather than putting a huge burden on myself to raise someone better than myself. Not cause Im awesome but because my experience of growing up gave me some pretty questionable lessons i had to forget as an adult.

 

[Hakim]

I've been thinking about getting a vasectomy myself, tbh, because I honestly think it's unethical to reproduce given how awful I think the future is going to be.

A common argument but some places are not that awful. In a wealthy safe country, most kids will grow up to have a happy life. Not getting a kid there is more like having the possibility to give someone a lottery ticket with guaranteed win, but instead tear it apart.