Stop aging at the cost of having no children - would you do it?

[MaryKB]

@yung.carl.jung I'm really glad for you that you got to have such a wonderful travelling experience. But would you really stay at some random person's house you've never met before? Such an idea seems so strange to me, aren't you at all worried about what might happen to you? Did someone you trust at least know where you'd be staying each time? Gosh, I just find the thought of messaging some random stranger and staying at their house the next day to be absolutely terrifying.

I've used AirBnB a couple times when traveling by myself, mostly if I want to stay somewhere that doesn't have a hotel nearby or if I wanted a kitchen for preparing meals. But I spent a great deal of time looking up my hosts, and checking with past guests to make sure it'd be safe for a single traveler, and I'd also make sure I had someone nearby who knew exactly where I'm staying. I don't think in Europe I'd ever feel safe though staying anywhere other than a reputable hotel, I've heard too many horror stories to ever be able to relax (especially when I have a language and customs barrier to overcome)

 

[yung.carl.jung]

@yung.carl.jung But would you really stay at some random person's house you've never met before?

Yes. Not "would", I did, with like 10 different people I think. I knew none of them beforehand and often messaged them one or two days beforehand, so I also did not have the possibility to chat much.

It only went wrong twice. One time the man I was messaging about staying over asked me if I was okay with nudity and sharing a king size bed with him. I wasn't. the other time I really ticked off my host and they threw me out (one day before I wanted to leave, anyway). they were a little neurotic, but definitely justified, so I can't complain

@yung.carl.jungDid someone you trust at least know where you'd be staying each time?

Nah, I purposefully didn't message my homeboys nor my family nor my girlfriend at home about where I would be staying each day. I phoned my girlfriend every now and then, but I tried to really stay where I am.

one thing that kinda ruined my semester abroad in Korea for me is that I was always in contact with my family and my girlfriend. I never truly set foot in Korea because "home" was always holding me back.

@yung.carl.jungSuch an idea seems so strange to me, aren't you at all worried about what might happen to you?

I never really am. travelling alone through Europe is super safe in my opinion. I mean I was travelling Latin America and India when I was 16, so this was really nothing special for me, nor did it occur to me as in any way dangerous.

@yung.carl.jung
I've used AirBnB a couple times when traveling by myself, mostly if I want to stay somewhere that doesn't have a hotel nearby or if I wanted a kitchen for preparing meals. But I spent a great deal of time looking up my hosts, and checking with past guests to make sure it'd be safe for a single traveler, and I'd also make sure I had someone nearby who knew exactly where I'm staying. I don't think in Europe I'd ever feel safe though staying anywhere other than a reputable hotel, I've heard too many horror stories to ever be able to relax (especially when I have a language and customs barrier to overcome)

Too many horror stories.. from Europe? I think Europe is a lot safer than northern America in many ways Not sure if the same goes for Canada, Canada is probably super safe. but don't forget that you're also a woman, which makes you vulnerable in ways that men usually aren't.

but still, 2 years ago my sister travelled India on her own. statistics want to make you believe that travelling any non-western country is inherently dangerous, but it really isn't. it comes down more to how you behave and where you are than anything else.

yeah, if you're pale as hell, looking helpless, running around with a rolex and showing off your new iPhone and 500$ worth of change to street vendors, you'll probably get robbed at some point. if you're the type of person who can blend in, get along with the locals, and if you look remotely confident and not too much like a rich westerner, I think you'll be mostly fine.

I have the habit of looking like a complete hobo when I'm on vacation anyway so I doubt anyone would get the idea that I have things worth stealing. I actually don't when I travel I carry around some cash and my chinese mobile phone, that's it.

 

[Birdjaguar]

so I decided that the only correct thing to do was to stop living up to anyones expectations, not mine, not other people's, but instead to do things without any external motivations that could end up disappointing me. this came in part from my reading the Tao Te Ching, from my revisit of existentialist philosophy, which I already had a thing for in my teens, from my studies and readings in the cultural and social sciences.

Always a great source of inspiration.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Where do you get off calling me vain? What person in their right mind wouldn't want to live longer? Especially if you are in good health?

If you want to have a whining, squalling ball of snot and feces that will grow up to lip you off and disappoint you, by all means do so.

I have no problem with people having children if they want to. In fact, I think it's tragic how some people can't have children when they really want to have them, for medical reasons or the like. I really feel bad for them.

That being said, I am entitled not to have children if I don't want to. It is my uterus after all, and I say what will be done with it. I'm sorry that I don't feel the rapturous, harmonious joy that you feel when you think about children. I just don't feel it, and I'm entitled not to. Yes, the nasty lady loathes children. I don't really care what you think. I'm glad that people like you don't run the world. I'd just be lying on my back rutting and pumping out babies to feed the political-correctness machine, because God knows I should be selfless and altruistic. What is this? The Handmaid's Tale?

Since you're the local authority on my personal qualities, let me ask you something: What is so altruistic and selfless about bringing a child into the world that you cannot love?

LM change your Avatar. Everytime I see it I think it's @MaryKB , then I see your name at the bottom of the post and start thinking that we're playing the Avatar switching game, then I get all confused and I think I'm developing dementia, and then, and then... you get the idea...

Why are you confusion me? ANSWER ME!

Spoiler :

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I really like Lemon Merchant's ava, just sayin

 

[Lemon Merchant]

LM change your Avatar. Everytime I see it I think it's @MaryKB , then I see your name at the bottom of the post and start thinking that we're playing the Avatar switching game, then I get all confused and I think I'm developing dementia, and then, and then... you get the idea...

Why are you confusion me? ANSWER ME!

Spoiler :

You're confused? That will be $135 please.

I really like Lemon Merchant's ava, just sayin

Awww. You're sweet. Thank you.

 

[caketastydelish]

Is your avatar you?

 

[Tristan_C]

Let's say at some point they find a cure for aging. Notice I said "cure for aging", not "live forever" because there are still a million ways you can die unreleated to old age. But even then, they would probably insist on sterilizing you to prevent overpopulation. Would you agree to do such a thing? Personally, I would.

If this is about Darling in the Franxx the catastrophically deteriorating situation with the last 10 episodes is definitely every bit as bad as they say. Even my low standards for being entertained could not accommodate it. Either watch up to ep19 to see /ourguy/ get his arm bitten clean off by dino waifu and practically climax on the spot, or otherwise keep going all the way to the end and pretend you didn't.

 

[civvver]

that's absurd, unless you mean it in a formal way: i.e. we have the "legal" right to destroy the earth, in which case sure, but it means nothing.

we have absolutely zero right to inflict suffering on anyone or anything, unless it is to defend our very lifes.

So when you find a spider or fly in your house you don't swat it but capture and release into the wild? What about walking in the street, do you look before you step to ensure you don't squish an ant? Are you a vegetarian? What about plants? They're alive aren't they? They procreate and have biological impulses to do so.

What about lab rats and all the research done on them that benefits us?

 

[El_Machinae]

Plants and ants don't feel pain. But the concern that lab animals feel pain is true. You can use a complicated argument about using their pain to defend against other people's suffering, and this makes sense with disease, but people still understand that the pain they feel is a natural evil that we've obligation to reduce.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

So when you find a spider or fly in your house you don't swat it but capture and release into the wild? What about walking in the street, do you look before you step to ensure you don't squish an ant? Are you a vegetarian? What about plants? They're alive aren't they? They procreate and have biological impulses to do so.

What about lab rats and all the research done on them that benefits us?

I mean, just because you asked: when I find a spider in my house I cherish it and make it my friend. I give him a designated corner and try my best not to bother him. when there's a moth or similiar insect I always try my best to capture it and release it back into the wilds. not like any of this matters though.

your whole argument is dumb. the simple fact that we make other beings suffer constantly does not mean that it's okay, or that we should continue doing it. you're acting like it's okay to kill animals, like we have some kind of god-given right to slaughter anything that isn't human. just because I personally take part in the torture and slaughter of millions of farm animals doesn't mean it's in any way justified, it simply means that I'm an a-hole. and I am, and I stand for that. it's the same kind of dumb argument as asking a vegan person if they eat honey or wear leather. be glad that there are people out there who're trying harder than you are, don't put them down because you're lazy.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Unrelated to Civvver, none of this post applies to him. I don't want to drag him into this, because I like him a lot and this is just a personal ramble.

But I see this argument all the ****** time. Only few days ago the head of the Green party in Bavaria was attacked from all kind of media outlets because she.. used an airplane to go on vacation. Big ****** deal. She's not Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, just some woman who wants a carbon tax. People who advocate against rapid technological progress are made fun of because they use computers, even though it's entirely legitimate to make use of a medium to rail against it. Every idea is taken to the """"logical extreme"""" (has nothing to do with proper logic, by the way) and then ridiculed.

It is the most vile and uncalled for defensive reaction, because it genuinely stops people from doing good things. In a way, vegans themselves are some of the worst perpetrators. They will exile someone from their own community for wearing leather, for using the wrong make-up, for liking honey, for eating a bit of meat or fish, even if it's for freakin medical reasons. With this kind of toxic one-up culture people get the idea that they can never "truly" be vegan, never "truly" be environmentally conscious, and they just abandon it. Because what's the point. It's a purely reactionary force, which has at its heart the own inferiority. You put someone else down for not being perfect, while doing **** all yourself. It's a great excuse for not trying, for passivity.

 

[MaryKB]

I feel what you're talking about is related to something I've heard people call "virtue signalling," where someone wants to look good and feel morally superior. "Oh you had a bit of honey one time? Well ha! You're not as good a vegan as *I* am! I'm better than you! WORSHIP ME FOR HOW MUCH MORE PERFECT I AM!"

That's how I feel at least. I feel anyone trying to do something good should be applauded for his or her efforts, not chastised because they're not perfectly pure.

 

[Commodore]

Where do you get off calling me vain? What person in their right mind wouldn't want to live longer?

The thread is not about living longer, it's about stopping aging. Meaning you maintain a youthful appearance for the entirety of your life, however long that may end up being. So you are vain because you clearly think your physical appearance is so important that you would risk permanently altering yourself in an unnatural way to maintain that appearance.

If you want to have a whining, squalling ball of snot and feces that will grow up to lip you off and disappoint you, by all means do so.

And now you are dehumanizing children by refusing to refer to them as people. Just continuing to prove my point that you are a miserable person who can't derive any joy from anything that doesn't directly benefit you personally.

I'm sorry that I don't feel the rapturous, harmonious joy that you feel when you think about children. I just don't feel it, and I'm entitled not to.

Agreed. But I also am entitled to express my criticisms of your choices when you choose to express them in a public space. If you don't want to face criticism (which your rant here shows you clearly don't want to face criticism), then you should refrain from expressing yourself in public.

I don't really care what you think.

Clearly you do though. Otherwise you wouldn't have responded in the way that you did. You should probably examine why exactly what I said made you as angry as it did.

 

[MaryKB]

I feel you're really out of line, telling her she's selfish, miserable, and vain because she'd prefer to not turn her body into a baby factory is really disgusting. You have no right to bully her for her desire to exist, this isn't some Atwoodian nightmare world we're living in.

 

[Lexicus]

You should probably examine why exactly what I said made you as angry as it did.

Look in the mirror buddy. What she said clearly made you feel so strongly that you couldn't stop yourself from insulting her though she hadn't said a word to you beforehand. Why was that?

 

[Commodore]

I feel you're really out of line, telling her she's selfish, miserable, and vain because she'd prefer to not turn her body into a baby factory is really disgusting.

I'm not criticizing her decision to not have children, I'm criticizing her hatred of children. You can decide to not have kids without hating them and hatred of children is 100% unjustified since there is no possible way a child could ever do anything that would make it okay to hate all children.

Why was that?

Because I'm getting tired of the whole celebration of selfishness shtick and the irrational hatred of children that often comes from people like Lemon Merchant. I mean, how heartless of a person do you have to be to look at a group of kids and say to yourself "I can't stand those little (insert expletive)" when they are doing nothing to harm you. I have no problem admitting that what she said made me angry and why it made me angry.

The difference though is I never claimed that I don't care what she thinks. Quite the opposite since the fact that I felt the need to respond means that I do, in fact, care what she thinks. She, on the other hand, claimed that she doesn't care what I think. And in my experience whenever someone says "I don't care what you think" they are really trying to convince themselves of that rather than the person they are saying it to. So I'm just saying maybe she needs to think about whether or not she really cares about what I, or others, think and why what I said elicited the response that it did from her.

 

[MaryKB]

She's perfectly within her right to hate the idea of children. She's not advocating that children should be rounded up and exterminated or something, she just says they bother her. She's not maternal enough for you?

Our culture has a toxic attitude toward women who dare to step away from the baby-factory role. Our society has used attitudes like yours for such a very long time to force women into subservient roles, and expressing your opinion on this the way you did is totally unacceptable. I myself love children, but for a lot of people the idea of having a child is such an overwhelming and unrewarding burden that they're allowed to not want them in their lives. A woman is not "selfish" because she doesn't want to be a mommy, there are other ways she contributes to society. Birthing children isn't all a woman's good for.

I feel she may perhaps have been personally affected by your bullying, but your opinion isn't going to affect how she lives her life.

 

[Commodore]

She's perfectly within her right to hate the idea of children.

And I'm perfectly within my right to criticize her for it. That's how a free society works.

Actually, now that I think about it though, no she doesn't have a right to hate children. Why? Because that hatred could certainly affect her decision making that could have harmful effects on others. I mean, what if she's in a position sometime in the future where she makes hiring decisions or is managing employees? Do you really think her views on children and families won't have an impact on her decisions to the detriment of candidates or employees that have children? What about if she finds an abandoned child somewhere? With the sentiments she expressed here, would you truly trust her to even do something as simple as take the kid to a police station or hospital? Or would she just leave the baby laying there because she doesn't want to deal with a "a whining, squalling ball of snot and feces" even for a few moments?

Our culture has a toxic attitude toward women who dare to step away from the baby-factory role. Our society has used attitudes like yours for such a very long time to force women into subservient roles, and expressing your opinion on this the way you did is totally unacceptable. I myself love children, but for a lot of people the idea of having a child is such an overwhelming and unrewarding burden that they're allowed to not want them in their lives. A woman is not "selfish" because she doesn't want to be a mommy, there are other ways she contributes to society. Birthing children isn't all a woman's good for.

Again, I did not say anything criticizing her, or anyone's, decision to not have children. What I criticized was her unjustifiably hateful comments about children in general. Regardless of how one may feel about having children, they are still human beings and dehumanizing them in the way Lemon Merchant did is what is truly unacceptable.

And no, she wasn't just saying that they bother her. She straight up insulted and expressed hatred for children for no justifiable reason. Allow me to remind you what she thinks of children:

a whining, squalling ball of snot and feces that will grow up to lip you off and disappoint you,

I detest children.

Those aren't the words of someone who is merely bothered by children. Those are the words of someone who actively hates children, including mine. And someone hating my children for no good reason is not something I'm going to let go unchallenged. Not to mention the inherent selfishness in the this statement:

a whining, squalling ball of snot and feces that will grow up to lip you off and disappoint you,

For all that talk of rights and bodily autonomy in her rant, this statement (especially the bolded part) comes off as more than a little hypocritical.

Parenting isn't about you or what you want Lemon Merchant. Children are not supposed to be your obedient little slaves who only exist to please you or only need your attention when you want to give it to them. They are people with their own thoughts, feelings, and dreams that may not necessarily coincide with what you want, either for them or for yourself. So yeah, maybe it's best you never have children of your own, whether biological or adopted.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Actually, now that I think about it though, no she doesn't have a right to hate children. Why? Because that hatred could certainly affect her decision making that could have harmful effects on others. I mean, what if she's in a position sometime in the future where she makes hiring decisions or is managing employees? Do you really think her views on children and families won't have an impact on her decisions to the detriment of candidates or employees that have children?

Doesn't matter. All that matters is whether actions demonstrate unfair/illegal practices. Hating them is irrelevant beyond the existence or lack of such practices. Burden would be on proving wrongdoing.

What about if she finds an abandoned child somewhere? With the sentiments she expressed here, would you truly trust her to even do something as simple as take the kid to a police station or hospital? Or would she just leave the baby laying there because she doesn't want to deal with a "a whining, squalling ball of snot and feces" even for a few moments?

First, this is not a reasonable attribution of character in context. Second, it doesn't matter if you trust her or not. What matters is whether she does it or not, and it's disingenuous to argue from an assumption someone would do nothing/let people die just because they don't like them.

For all that talk of rights and bodily autonomy in her rant, this statement (especially the bolded part) comes off as more than a little hypocritical.

That's fair to point out, but isn't inconsistent. I'm disappointed in a few people over the years, but that doesn't imply a right to force them to behave differently. It just means I don't like what they've done/chosen. This does mean I will avoid associating with them. If one reasonably anticipates disappointment then freedom of association implies the freedom to not associate also.

Parenting isn't about you or what you want Lemon Merchant. Children are not supposed to be your obedient little slaves who only exist to please you or only need your attention when you want to give it to them. They are people with their own thoughts, feelings, and dreams that may not necessarily coincide with what you want, either for them or for yourself.

If someone states they dislike children, it's reasonable (even preferable) for them to choose to avoid having them. I don't see the issue with that. It would be more strange if someone detests children but wants them anyway or something similarly incoherent.

I don't see how someone's merely "detesting" children absent actions on it is a threat to children, especially yours in particular. She might not jump in front of a train for them or something, but it's not reasonable to expect that either.