[–]▶ No.32045>>32046 >>32119 >>32130 >>32312 >>32321 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]
How do you feel about the idea of starting a family?
▶ No.32046>>32047
>>32045 (OP)
I'm cautious, what if I'm not a good father?
▶ No.32047
>>32046
I am not a father myself but I suppose that all you need is willing to dedicate every split second of your life to family.
If you genuinely do, I imagine it's impossible to fail.
▶ No.32048>>32119
Too much work, and responsibility. Altruism doesn't really appeal to me.
▶ No.32058
Hell yeah I want a family.
I'm a fucking monkey and monkeys make babies.
I'm gonna be such a good Dad and make sure I can give my kids a house with a loving wife.
I really don't want a girl that wouldn't want to have kids. I think a little 'me' running around is pretty fun.
I wouldn't mind 2 girls, 2 boys, a boy and girl or a whole lot of whatever in a 10-man fuckfest - but it all seems good.
There's nothing I can think of that would make this seem bad.
Kids are great for your sanity. Gives you a natural purpose, and I'm sure it would improve you as a person.
▶ No.32079
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Creating and maintaining a stable family is getting harder as time passes, but it's still the best way to achieve happiness, meaning and success in life, aswell as an imperative for the maintenance and growth of a healthy society.
I feel guilty for being such a weak-spirited and selfish individual compared to my ancestors, but at least I'm aware of this.
▶ No.32082
Since it'd never happen since the chance of finding someone who finds a depressive friendgot interesting enough to love is slim to none, it's not a thought I've given time to.
No need to transfer those genes over anyway.
▶ No.32083
Scary, I had a fucked up family life, I know im going to make the same mistakes unless I pour my heart and soul into not doing the same, only to become a barely functional parent and husband. Not worth it imo and most importantly not fair for my kids.
Wonder what I'll do when I turn 50 though.
▶ No.32091>>32096
I feel it's better never to be born. I couldn't live with the fact that I've forced some innocent soul into existence.
▶ No.32096>>32106 >>32120 >>32133 >>35490
>>32091
There is no experience outside existence. That soul would come to be eventually anyway. What you have the ability to do is to change things for your kin.
My family is kinda fucked up (one of my parents and one of my siblings is trans, /pol/ would probably tell me to murder my family or some shit) but I am grateful for their guidance, and for the ability to realize what I want to be as a father to my future children I hope to have.
The difference is this, that loli could be in our reality crying silently, or could have a kind father to give her a hug. I take the latter path.
▶ No.32104
Never, ever, ever!
My ancestors can go befriend themselves. I will not bring one of those little noise-making poopmachines into my life.
▶ No.32106
I thought about having a family, but after taking care of my nephew for a year, that really made me think I was unfit to be a father.
But I don't know. I think it was a combination of me having little experience in taking care of children and the fact that said nephew was more or less Satan incarnate. It's like making someone who has never played Touhou before and making them play Subterranean Animism on Lunatic mode. I'm in no state to be raising any kids now.
>>32096
>/pol/
Outside of the obvious "kids need a mother and father in their lives" even then being raised by a single mother/father doesn't mean you're destined to be the next Anthony Burch any parenting advice that comes from anything heavily politically biased in one way or another should be taken with a grain of salt at best.
This being the internet, it's really hard to tell who is joking though.
▶ No.32111
Behold my trips
I don't think about raising a family because my job sucks, family relations suck, fitness sucks, income sucks and I live with my dad. I'm trying to gym and apply new jobs but hope is fleeting and procrastination is infinite. I'm a depressed fuck and if I can't make myself happier, then I dare not bother creating off-spring.
▶ No.32112
No thanks, people were more interested in having children in the past simply because there wasn't really anything to do aside from fucking your wife and talking with people.
But times have changed.
▶ No.32113
Previously, I would have said no way in hell. My line of thinking goes that there are enough kids suffering and living shitty lives in the world. I don't want to help create a child that could either perpetuate the problem or be a victim. Not to mention any large number of genetic problems possible. I personally am not susceptible to passing anything on, but you never know. It's simply too many dice rolls for me to feel comfortable with. But that was a little while ago. I think I may have grown up since then, or maybe just meeting more people, seeing more things has changed my view a bit. Now I've definitely warmed up to the idea of having a cozy little house somewhere far enough outside of a city to be quiet and scenic with little light pollution, but close enough to be able to easily reach it, and settling down with a nice girl and having a small family of my own. Maybe I'll act on it, maybe not. Those are my immediate reactions to the question. With days/a longer amount of time, I'm sure I could come up with a more comprehensive answer.
▶ No.32119>>32121 >>32123
>>32045 (OP)
First of all, I could never in good conscience create a new person and condemn them to live in this society. If they were remotely like me they'd come to despise it just as I have.
Having a child would be deeply unethical - not altruistic as >>32048 claims.
Secondly, I'm not really attracted to 3DPD. I don't fancy taking the (high) chance that they're a piece of shit who would hate me if I ever opened up to them.
So no, I don't want to start a family.
▶ No.32120>>32123
>>32096
The number of possible configurations of human minds far exceeds the number of humans who ever have or ever will exist in this universe. I can't speak for other universes, but in this one your decision of whether or not to have a child is very much the decision between nonexistence and ~100 years of suffering for that child. It is astronomically unlikely that the same mind would randomly be born to another set of parents.
▶ No.32121
▶ No.32123>>32131 >>32132
>>32119
I meant altruistic as in providing for a family at your own expense. Becoming a father would mean I'd have to give up everything that has any meaning to me.
I'm pretty happy with my life, suffering and all. One might argue that depriving a potential life of that kind of experience could be "unethical". Not me though, since "ethics" are rubbish.
>>32120
Possibility implies that we're not living in a deterministic world.
>100 years of suffering for that child
>implying all life is suffering
Happiness, and pleasure are very well documented phenomena my delusional friendgot.
▶ No.32130
>>32045 (OP)
Terrible idea.
I have a genetic disorder. It's hereditary, and dominant.
I have anger issues, so I'd be a terrible father.
And, frankly, I can't stay sane for a period of years.
On top of that, I don't want to bring a child into this world.
▶ No.32131
>>32123
but anon, this world ISN'T deterministic, at least not at a quantum level. It might all trickle up, who knows.
▶ No.32132>>32137
>>32123
One might argue, but it would be a mistake. It would lead to a pretty big mess about all kinds of potentials, both positive and negative.
It's much easier to argue that which does not exist cannot be deprived.
▶ No.32133>>32140 >>32143
>>32096
…or you could adopt an already existing silently crying loli instead of contributing to the collective suffering of humankind. Making children is extremely selfish and un/kind/.
▶ No.32136
Yes.
I want to be able to understand someone and be understood, therefore a wife.
And also little kids that I can give everything I was never given.
I want to have children and a wife.
The only physical requisite I see is not being ugly and kissless virgin. I'm one myself so I suppose I could get the privilege of demanding that. Problem is I'm stupid, and by the women become more and more immoral.
▶ No.32137>>32149
>>32132
>does not exist
Can you say that with absolute certainty? Seems like a unfalsifiable matter to me. I don't think we have a way of observing the state of "non existence" if such a state even exists. As far as we're aware only a mind can generate consciousness, but is that view based on ignorance or empirical evidence?
I don't really get why people pretend as though "suffering" is objectively and absolutely negative or detrimental. Suffering can be and often is beneficial, and positive. For instance the suffering that I have experienced has only served to enrich that experience. From my perspective suffering is just a necessary part of growth with the exception of being brain wormed or crippled of course. Also don't forget masochism, not that I'm a masochist. I guess I'm just trying to say it's not so black there's some white mixed in there too.
So if you believe that suffering is to be entirely avoided would it have been kind for my parents to abort or just not consive me at all? Would it not be a terrible injustice to deprive me of such a wonderful experience? The swift and painless eradication of our species must be the highest calling for someone with such a world view. That way maybe suffering could be avoided from then on. How /kind/.
▶ No.32140
>>32133
It's only un/kind/ if you decide to have more children than 3. Despite what television tells you, having a big family isn't worth the effort, I come from one after all.
I will say though the one benefit from it is that I don't have to worry about the "moral responsibility" of carrying my genes because pretty much everybody else in my family has already done so.
▶ No.32143>>32146 >>32148
>>32133
It might be selfish but not always unkind and most certainly necessary for the continuation of our species.
▶ No.32146>>32161
>>32143
There's a good amount of humans on the planet, we don't have to worry about going extinct anytime soon.
▶ No.32148>>32153 >>32161 >>32167
>>32143
The continuation of our species is unkind itself.
▶ No.32149>>32162
>>32137
This is a dead end, don't force it. You either claim that you are depriving millions of potential kids from experiencing the wonders of life by not mating with every fertile woman you see, or claim that only certain individuals are predestined to experience life, in which case it's already decided and you choosing not to reproduce won't change anything.
▶ No.32153>>32161 >>32167
▶ No.32161>>32163
>>32146
I'm sorry but that's not an argument that can convince me. Declining birth rates are a dagger to the chest of any nation. With countless old people and few working age men, pensions become one of the biggest expenses in the country. Tax payers are taken much of their wealth just to ensure that the elderly can breathe. That's what happening in Japan. They are crazy over what to do with crumbling population pyramids. The other alternative is to do what the European Union is doing and import cheap labor en mass from war thorn countries. The problem with this is the fundamental conflict between peoples of different nations. It is a fact that all sects of Islam, even the most liberal ones, have fundamentally conflicting beliefs with the western ideas of freedom and democracy. This cultural shock inevitably leads to chaos and violence. Therefore, we must not analyze the issue from Earth's perspective, but rather from the perspective of each nation. There are villages in all sides of Europe that are literally ghost towns. No more lives there anymore, and the governments of the countries from whereas these villages are in are literally having to sell these empty towns so they can at least make money out of them.
>>32148
>>32153
And why is that?
Objective morality (religion) proclaims that the existence of human beings is inherently a good thing for the well being of nature.
▶ No.32162
>>32149
Like I said I'm not trying to further the argument I had mentioned before. If you're saying those are my claims then you're just misrepresenting me and my position.
>So if you believe that suffering is to be entirely avoided…
Would it have been the right choice for my parents to abort or just not conceive me at all so that I might not experience the suffering that I have and will experience?
Is murder kind simply because it would prevent that person from experiencing suffering in the future?
Do you think that potential happiness and pleasure for your prospective child are good justifications for conceiving said child?
What is the basis for a belief in non-existence?
▶ No.32163>>32465
>>32161
I see where you're coming from. I'm not against anybody wanting starting a family. It's just that it's hard work. And quite frankly not everybody is cut out for it. I just want people to be adequately equipped as possible to be able to raise happy, healthy children as much as they can.
Maybe I'm in the wrong for thinking this, but I don't want people who aren't ready to have children to be raising them, even if there's a risk of a group becoming extinct. What's the point of raising a family if they'll ultimately become dysfunctional due to the parents' incompetence and become more of a nuisance in society? I'll admit I'm coming from this from a perspective of someone who is an individualist. But I may not agree with it, but I think that if someone wants to create a family for the mere existence of continuing their ancestry line, then that's their choice to do so. I'm just a bit worrisome about people being able to raise large families due to my own experiences, which I'll admit and even hope isn't common.
I would even be against something like a legal enforcement on the size of families like China has or had, I just want people to be more aware about the choices they make when deciding to make a family and be able to handle it to the best of their ability.
▶ No.32167>>32259
>>32148
>>32153
Without sentient beings like us there would be no kindness to begin with. A world without kindness sounds immensely more unkind than a world with kindness like ours.
▶ No.32168
>How do you feel about the idea of starting a family?
That's an awfully tough question. I vacillate between yes and no. When I was a kid, I thought I was destined to be a bachelor because I wouldn't be able to find the right intelligent woman. Well, it turns out I'm not so smart at least on paper anymore so I would be fine with a modest, cute but mentally unendowed wife. Now in my present condition, it seems highly unlikely I'll ever have a family. I am enthused about continuing my line and hoping my descendants would accumulate honor, but I am also individualist and of a somewhat anti-natalist bent. There is no duty or morality that compels one to reproduce besides that of biology. This is contrary to some nationalist or religious opinions based on objectivity that is only true when you subscribe to their worldview. The world has more than enough people - they are probably just not likable to you. I wish people especially responsible adults would look at the issue of reproduction with their eyes wide open even though I am not one of those myself. It is a fundamental portion of our human existence, but people can't seem to let go of their gut instinct of I want kids. It's funny because oftentimes the people most well-equipped to have kids don't out of selfishness, while those that don't have the means do out of selfishness of a quite different sort. Selfishness as /unkind/ as it may be is a necessary thing for life. The degree of course is what matters practically. I do not believe in a greater good, but I don't believe in bringing a child into the world irresponsibly either to meaningless misery. Being a man and a father? Those are some big shoes to fill, and I'm not sure I'm quite up to the task. Considering I have thought long and hard about education of children throughout my life, I could never bring one into a suboptimal learning environment. I just don't believe I'll ever have the means for a proper upbringing. My child may be weak like I was and that would be a disaster. If I ever had a biological child, one of the first things to do would be to acknowledge his/her being born as an /unkind/ act of selfishness on my part. All of my love and care cannot obscure the fact that it is so. As this is the case, I would be much more open to adopting. An orphan is one who is already in this painful world of ours, and I could at least help ease that pain knowing it was not by my hand that I was responsible for it being able to happen to them but that I can help them make the best of it. Adopting is the really /kind/ thing to do though of course the majority aren't suited to it.
▶ No.32259
>>32167
Counterexample:
I propose a universe which contains two things. One is a kind man who gives an ice cream to a child. The other is a machine which clones a billion babies every second and sprays them with weak acid so that they die over the course of a few hours in intense agony.
Is it more ethical for this hypothetical universe to exist or not exist?
▶ No.32265
Nope.
Mental illness runs in my family. Anxiety, depression, bipolar, psychosis, alcoholism. Odds are they'll be fucked from the start by my shit genetics. Even if they luck out on the genetic lottery, they'll still be fucked because I'm too messed up from all the childhood trauma plus my bipolar that the odds of me being a good parent are almost nonexistent.
It would be unkind to force an innocent child into that mess.
▶ No.32305>>32306
not in this world
>age 1-3 constantly crying out the worst sound known to man
>age 4-12 sells their soul to the disgusting corporations and becomes obsessed with the 2020s equivalent of minions and/or frozen
>age 9-15 becomes obsessed with youtube celebrities, dumb social media trends and their iphone
>age 15-18 continues to do the above and get a low-end job, date chads/stacys and "accidentally" get pregnant leading to yet another cycle of banal parasites that feed off the world's resources and make the world a worse place to live in.
worst part is that if you try to prevent any of the above. you'll be labeled as a "soccer mom" who hates their child and doesn't want them to have fun.
(keep in mind that not all children grow up like this. but 80% does and i'm not risking the chance + over 20 years of my life)
▶ No.32306
>>32305
>80% does
[citation needed]
▶ No.32312
>>32045 (OP)
ITS ALL I THINK ABOUT
▶ No.32321
>>32045 (OP)
I want to, I really do.
But it's a big jump and I'm well aware of the responsibilities associated with it, and honestly it scares me.
Another thing is, I have a brain/mental disorder that may be genetic. I got it mostly fixed now, or at least coping with it for the better, but it's still in my genes. And the days that I've had to suffer through due to it was absolute hell.
I just don't want my child to experience what I experienced due to my bad genes. And then even though adoption is a viable solution, but then I still have the former problem to deal with.
▶ No.32326>>32327 >>32355
This thread is saddening. Obviously, some people aren't meant to have children and I completely understand those who don't want to pass on genetic mental illness or similar.
But it is especially disheartening to see those who claim that having children is cruel, unkind or selfish in and of itself. Why? For a very circular reason: those who have the intelligence to question a basic human duty are the very ones who need to procreate! This phenomenon is well known: low-IQ trailer trash, Gypsies, whatever have massive families while the top minds are the least likely to value having offspring. This has a 'dysgenic' effect on society: intelligence is bred out.
Of course, it's not so simple. You can talk about the Flynn effect, but that doesn't last forever since it's mainly the function of nutrition, which has basically reached a peak in the West.
If you don't want to have children because you hate society (and what, may I ask, are you doing to better it?) then you are most likely being more unkind by letting dysgenics determine the future. Don't be discouraged just because other parents have failed - take it as a challenge to succeed.
▶ No.32327>>32328
>>32326
>you are most likely being more unkind by letting dysgenics determine the future
Nothing I could do could change that. In a population of 7 billion an individual is statistically insignificant. The problems which have driven me to the brink of suicide are so ingrained in our culture that no grandiose PR campaign or bitter struggle could change anything.
Also, the problem isn't really genetic - it has much more to do with how people are taught to think than the underlying brain structure. Even a very intelligent person can follow the path of good intentions all the way into hell if they never experience anything which forces them to question what society has taught them. Equally a very stupid person can learn to be compassionate if they are raised in a compassionate society, even if they never consider the deeper philosophy behind compassion.
▶ No.32328>>32329 >>32330
>>32327
>The problems which have driven me to the brink of suicide…
Are those really problems in our culture or are they problems in you? Mental fragility is more of a personal problem.
▶ No.32329>>32330
>>32328
Also saying that individuals can't make great changes is a flagrant denial of our history.
▶ No.32330>>32331 >>32352
>>32328
They are problems in our culture. Being "mentally strong" tends to be equivalent to being ignorant of the truth in my experience. Pic related.
>>32329
Individuals can make significant changes, but only by being extremely lucky to be in the right place at the right time. The people who do make significant changes are far from the best or the most persevering. On average, any individual will have almost zero influence.
▶ No.32331>>32332 >>32333
>>32330
>On average, any individual will have almost zero influence.
Almost zero is greater than zero, which is what you are left with if you leave no offspring. Humans leave no bigger imprint on anyone than their children, and you are sacrificing the last of your influence, the one chance to live on in the world through someone, by giving up on having children.
▶ No.32332>>32356
>>32331
That imprint is ever diminishing with time and generations. The ethical cost of the suffering of those individuals is not worth whatever negligible influence it has on the future.
Honestly I just don't care about this society any more. You fuckers have dug your own graves and continue to fuck things up time and time again. If you want to shit in the sandbox, you can play in it on your own. There are likely billions of other sapient species out there, and I only care that at least one of them succeeds.
▶ No.32333
>>32331
Also, I should mention that in my particular situation it would be a whole heap of effort to form a relationship, and then unless things went extremely well I could expect that relationship to fall apart within a few years leaving me with no influence at all over the kids.
I don't think having kids is a good idea in general, but it's an especially terrible one for me in particular.
▶ No.32352
>>32330
I agree that there are problems, but your reaction to these problems is more telling about you, and your mental fitness than it is about the problems themselves. I doubt your interpretation of this supposed "truth" of yours is anywhere near objective.
▶ No.32355>>32356 >>32358
>>32326
>those who have the intelligence to question a basic human duty are the very ones who need to procreate!
This. The more terrified you are by the responsibilities of parenthood, or the problems in society, the more you really ought to take the plunge and start shitting out offspring often and early who can work together to improve the world.
Awful people, and stupid people, have no moral or intellectual considerations there. They either do not care, or simply procreate because they might not even understand how to fuck like bunnies without causing a pregnancy.
In all likelihood, you are far more suited to raising children than you think you are. Simply because you have these ethical considerations and deep thoughts. If nothing else, your children will know that you tried your best and did not neglect them. Isn't that what makes a family work, no matter what?
>In a population of 7 billion an individual is statistically insignificant.
>On average, any individual will have almost zero influence.
Do you also litter, because one candy wrapper every once in a while will have almost zero influence?
>Even a very intelligent person can follow the path of good intentions all the way into hell if they never experience anything which forces them to question what society has taught them.
What exactly does society (and which society?) teach that is SO abjectly horrible?
>The continuation of our species is unkind itself.
I don't want you to take this as serious advice, but doesn't your stance mean that you have an ethical obligation to go to sleep as soon as possible?
You don't want the child to suffer the evils of this world, but apparently you know these evils better than most. In all likelihood, you will have to live with these evils until the day you die. Therefore, it is deeply /unkind/ for you to allow yourself to live another day.
Although I would much prefer you to set your fear and procrastination aside and start the family you want.
Personally, I don't see how you could possibly want one.
▶ No.32356>>32358 >>32363 >>32391
>>32332
>>32355
As someone who was raised by two mentally ill depressive individuals, I object. /r9k/ types shouldn't have children.
▶ No.32358>>32363 >>32391
>>32355
Didn't the fact that Hitler lost the war prove that eugenics is a load of horseshit? Anyway I agree with >>32356 people who have mental weakness aren't great parents.
▶ No.32363>>32369
>>32356
>>32358
Disagree.
If their problem is just loneliness instead of a real mental issue like Schizophrenia or autism, then I suspect they would make actually better parents than the average person, seeing that a lonely parent would probaly devote all of his love he never had nor ever gave to his newly formed family.
▶ No.32369>>32373
>>32363
No. The problem with such people isn't "just loneliness", because that could be solved by "just getting friends", but if they are unable to do that, it's because there are more problems which they are yet to address. If such people are incapable of looking after themselves, how do you suppose they could take care of another?
▶ No.32373
>>32369
Reread my post, friend. Specially the later part of the second sentence.
▶ No.32391>>32392 >>32420 >>32438 >>32444
>>32358
>Didn't the fact that Hitler lost the war prove that eugenics is a load of horseshit?
What? My friend, you have most certainly misplaced your marbles. You assume that:
1: Hitler had the best understanding of eugenics
2: The fact that a war happened negates biological fact
In fact, Hitler not only took the worst possible approach to realizing eugenics, but he was really only using it as a tool to motivate people into fulfilling his revenge for the reparations.
Eugenics just means breeding, and to disbelieve it is to arrogantly assume that the rules of Mendelian genetics and natural selection magically do not apply to our species. Even though we can clearly see from the evidence that they do.
Example: Blond hair lets more sunlight reach the scalp, making it easier to get your vitamin D requirement in cloudy, cold regions. If you have blond hair, and you live in a cold place, you would be better off breeding with another blond person. Since blond hair is recessive and it is easily bred out. Of course, I'm exaggerating, blond hair isn't a huge deal. But what about alcoholism, which is also proven to be a genetic risk factor? What about our own Hotwheels' brittle bone disease?
Eugenicists had a simple solution, which also satisfies our sense of pity and morality: Pay people not to reproduce.
Of course, thanks to Hitler, this idea is now thought to be extremely racist. Ironically leading to widespread support for unchecked migration and breeding. Only now are we seeing a backlash.
>>32356
>As someone who was raised by two mentally ill depressive individuals, I object. /r9k/ types shouldn't have children.
But who says they are /r9k/ types? They just think the world is a cruel place, and producing a little bundle of joy and feces might actually alleviate that problem a little.
▶ No.32392>>32414
>>32391
>Pay people not to reproduce
And what if they do? Would they be punished and have their offspring killed?
>But who says they are /r9k/ types?
I was talking about the person/people they were trying to encourage.
▶ No.32414
>>32392
>And what if they do? Would they be punished and have their offspring killed?
They would submit to voluntary sterilization upon signing the agreement, of course. No sneaky beaky, Mr. Cheaty!
▶ No.32420
▶ No.32438
>>32391
basically this whole top part.
My genetic soup is just jam-packed with bad choices. While I can see the argument for "well, if I had a kid things would be better for me", it would be severely unkind to my child to make them deal with what I do.
Besides, how selfish is that statement? "If I had a a child, MY life would be better for ME."
If they'd pay me to get snipped, I would in a heartbeat.
▶ No.32444>>32447 >>35482
>>32391
So how would you determine who needs to reproduce or not? I have gluten and lactose intolerance, but I'm able bodied and if I'm kept busy I forget about my one mental flaw (stupid Jews made me think I was a woman). So tell me Mr. Eugenicist, what are my breeding privileges?
▶ No.32447>>32449
>>32444
>So how would you determine who needs to reproduce or not? I have gluten and lactose intolerance, but I'm able bodied and if I'm kept busy I forget about my one mental flaw (stupid Jews made me think I was a woman). So tell me Mr. Eugenicist, what are my breeding privileges?
Someone has not been listening. No gets their breeding privileges taken away.
Basically, we take the list of traits you graciously provided and weigh them like so:
+Able bodied
-Gluten intolerance
-Lactose intolerance
-Mentally ill
-Goyim knows, snip him
Obviously, things like NEETdom would go in the negative, and a good employment record or level of education would go in the positive.
Now, here is the kicker: You do not benefit from the positive list. In fact, you benefit from having lots of negatives, because all this list is meant to do is determine how much you would be compensated for allowing yourself to be sterilized.
You know why? Because if you have the overwhelming force of will and reproductive drive to refuse this compensation, then that is inherently a decisive positive in favor of the human species.
▶ No.32449>>32451
>>32447
I'm thinking if you do this without putting out some sort of family encouragement campaign, we'll just end up like Japan.
▶ No.32451
>>32449
There's no Japanese equivalent to these fucks. we'll probably break even at worst.
▶ No.32465
>>32163
I agree entirely. What's the point of making mentally unfit people have kids when the kids will grow up mentally unfit as well?
I don't want kids. It's fine if other people do, other people can do whatever they want. I don't care about leaving an imprint in this world, and while the lower birth rates in more "enlightened" countries is an issue, it's not my fault. Call me selfish, but I think when it comes to topics that directly impact a person, they have a right to be selfish. It'd be a great world if everyone was considerate of everyone else, but that won't happen, and is most likely impossible. It's up to the individual to choose whether or not to be selfless, otherwise selfless acts wouldn't have any meaning.
In my opinion anyway.
I'm a girl but I wouldn't want to ruin my body for a screaming brat. However, I'd be fine with being a foster parent and even adopting a few kids. There's not enough foster parents and parents willing to adopt, and sometimes even those parents are abusive/otherwise unfit to be a parent. One of my friends was adopted but his adoptive father is terribly abusive, which makes me feel more strongly about wanting to foster and adopt: I want to be a good foster/adoptive parent, because I know other foster/adoptive parents aren't always doing a good job. I'm choosing to foster/adopt, and so my choice has more meaning to me; I'm choosing instead of someone else making me.
Not everyone can influence the world, but influencing a few people (in a positive way) is enough for me, and all anyone can hope to do.
sorry if I'm not adding much to the thread
▶ No.32519
I would like to have a wife and kids but I don't think I'll ever be able to afford it.
▶ No.35479>>35481
Didn't expect this thread to end in eugenics. Pic unrelated.
▶ No.35482
>>32444
>stupid Jews made me think I was a woman
From what age, for how long and how much time have passed since you've changed your mind? If it's not too personal.
▶ No.35490
>>32096
>Calling your daughteru a loli
Strictly haram.
▶ No.35491>>35492 >>35494 >>35505
itt: gayfriends express sour grapes over their inability to biologically produce children through their relationships
▶ No.35492
>>35491
What's sad is the majority (straight men) seem like real human beans who'd have at least above average chance of being good parents if they had someone or something to help them cope with stress and various hardships. As long as the challenge wouldn't overtax them and force to retreat into themselves they'd do a great job, in my opinion.
▶ No.35494>>35495 >>35504
>>35491
>thread full of people discussing how they are hesitant since don't think they are good enough to be a father and eugenics
>clearly gays ruining my precious threads by talking about how they might like a wife but are worried about raising children
keep your sour rapes to yourself friend
▶ No.35495>>35500
>>35494
>>don't think they are good enough to be a father
>>eugenics
>>are worried about raising children
>>clearly gays
▶ No.35500>>35501
▶ No.35501>>35516
>>35500
I wish I love you too, friend.
▶ No.35505
▶ No.35516>>35519
>>35501
You're so kind. Thanks for being such a great person despite that nasty comment. You seem really sweet and I'm glad you're on this board. :')
▶ No.35519>>35524 >>35528
>>35516
That's how most anons from imageboards call themselves since the dreaded normies became the majority of those calling themselves "bronies". Besides, it's usually hard to get under someone's skin with words on this site.
Also, for some reason I find it easy to channel /kind/ness these days.
Also also, parteh tiem!
▶ No.35524>>35526
>>35519
>tfw not having sex with a pony in the shape of a human and having ponies with them
feels bad man
▶ No.35526
>>35524
>in the shape of a human
Lyra, pls.
▶ No.35528>>35529
>>35519
don't bully normies!
▶ No.35529
>>35528
The "dreaded" part was meant to be sarcastic and I thought it'd be obvious, but Poe's law is a bitch.