|
AceOfFlames posted:To be honest I am seriously starting to believe most people have children because they are BORED. If you’re not a workaholic and don’t have a really intense hobby, at some point you can have all this time remaining. People avoid adopting because either they want something "theirs" or because it's too much of a long and expensive hassle. It’s hosed up. "It's so hard to adopt" should be a wake up call for people that they maybe aren't ready for a kid, but no, it is the system that is wrong.
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
I really like this SA thread and loathe it at the same time. We have sadbrains who are contemplating suicide or asking where they can run to avoid global catastrophic issues. We have the no-kids guy(s), good luck with that. We also have people who think the horribly inefficient western lifestyle which is already straining the environment should be a global phenomenon (and then we maybe do something). Sandwiched in-between are some really interesting posts and people posting good articles/reports. Things are just going to keep getting worse and the real million dollar question is at what point we will truly reach the collective 'oh poo poo we REALLY need to actually do something' moment. Logically that would have been many years ago, but what do scientists know. Some countries and groups have tried, but the problem really needs to be looked at on a global scale politically and economically. Global pushes to ban coal usage, global sharing/subsidizing of green tech, global efforts to resettle people. It should start with us living in western countries taking one for the team first, since we have enjoyed a hundred plus years of CO2 spewing industrialization. Good luck in America, for instance trying to shift to a greener vehicle fleet or mandating a minimum MPG for vehicles, half measure that themselves are almost impossible. Our last president who at least pretended to care about the issue only managed to ram through some minor measures because our legislative branch is utter gobshite. So yeah, most of us are unfortunately saddled to political systems that are completely resistant to long term thinking, or any concept of equity. Not that I think socialism now would magically fix things, but the current capitalist model is totally incapable of dealing with a crises such as climate change. Meanwhile the general current of research tends to be, things are worse than we expected. I don't spend too much of life depressing about it, but I do wonder if in the next 20 years we will see some really ugly conflicts (god-forbid India/Pakistan) or if the tidal wave of migrations will actually get the rich nations to do something more than plop a few wind turbines and pat themselves on the back. Like I said before, there really is only so long you can kick the can down the road with this. It would be nice to at least attempt to address things before millions of people die.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:I really like this SA thread and loathe it at the same time. We have sadbrains who are contemplating suicide or asking where they can run to avoid global catastrophic issues. We have the no-kids guy(s), good luck with that. We also have people who think the horribly inefficient western lifestyle which is already straining the environment should be a global phenomenon (and then we maybe do something). Sandwiched in-between are some really interesting posts and people posting good articles/reports. I mean people are gonna gently caress and I get that, it's just that if you know even a little bit about what climate change can potentially do to civilization over the next 50-100 years, you are either hopelessly naive about our chances or a huge piece of poo poo to inflict that on your offspring. If in 2018 you just cannot fathom the idea of not being a parent, please consider adoption first.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Spawning from your loins is the height of selfishness when you could adopt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:33
|
|
|
Save the 'good luck' wishes for a parent. It's hilariously easy to be a DINK in a major metro area, and my wife enjoys travel more than babies, too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:I mean people are gonna gently caress and I get that, it's just that if you know even a little bit about what climate change can potentially do to civilization over the next 50-100 years, you are either hopelessly naive about our chances or a huge piece of poo poo to inflict that on your offspring. It is not me personally, I am saying societally it is mostly a non-starter. There are huge physical and social drives to procreating, even pushing for a one-child policy is really difficult. The one successful case we have for that was basically a totalitarian government and it had a number of issue/repercussions. Either way population growth is slowing in many regions and declining in some, it happens when standards of living and women's rights improve. Obviously both should happen faster. Conspiratiorist posted:Spawning from your loins is the height of selfishness when you could adopt. Fine, but the adoption process itself is often a total shitshow in many countries. It is easier to just dump out your own kid for most people, not to mention added bonus of it having your DNA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:37
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:Fine, but the adoption process itself is often a total shitshow in many countries. It is easier to just dump out your own kid for most people, not to mention added bonus of it having your DNA. DrNutt posted:"It's so hard to adopt" should be a wake up call for people that they maybe aren't ready for a kid, but no, it is the system that is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:It is not me personally, I am saying societally it is mostly a non-starter. There are huge physical and social drives to procreating, even pushing for a one-child policy is really difficult. The one successful case we have for that was basically a totalitarian government and it had a number of issue/repercussions. Either way population growth is slowing in many regions and declining in some, it happens when standards of living and women's rights improve. Obviously both should happen faster. Yeah but if improvement comes from helping people and giving them better lives instead of through weird elaborate punishment for environmental sins how will I be able to have jerkoff fantasy about global warming punishing all my enemies?!?!?!?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:40
|
|
|
Well, when I say non-starter, how are the less/no-kids people suggesting to implement their change? Do you think you are going to be able to pass legislation in countries to that end or is this just meant to be a social movement that is going to reach a large enough amount of people to make any appreciable difference? It seems like a weird place to focus on, but that is just my take. You might actually be able to slowly push through traditional environmental reforms. At least EU countries are making a slow go of that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 22:59
|
|
|
Look at this guy over here that thinks 'passing legislation' is going to solve climate change, when literally a few posts before there was a wildly optimistic scenario that required the world's combined military spending to even be remotely feasible. I'm not focusing on poo poo, and I don't care whether you have kids - we are not having kids because it seems wildly inhumane to do so considering what the science says they will likely face.Owlofcreamcheese posted:Yeah but if improvement comes from helping people and giving them better lives instead of through weird elaborate punishment for environmental sins how will I be able to have jerkoff fantasy about global warming punishing all my enemies?!?!?!? Mmm, no, sorry. 'Improvement', which in this context means 'not raping the biosphere to death', doesn't really have poo poo to do with 'helping people and giving them better lives'. In fact, the people with the 'good lives' are the ones that got us into this mess in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
call to action posted:Look at this guy over here that thinks 'passing legislation' is going to solve climate change, when literally a few posts before there was a wildly optimistic scenario that required the world's combined military spending to even be remotely feasible. I'm not focusing on poo poo, and I don't care whether you have kids - we are not having kids because it seems wildly inhumane to do so considering what the science says they will likely face. Yeah, how naive of me to mention one of the few levers of change in democratic systems. Better to resign to total defeat and act high and might about people having kids. That will show everyone how edgy you are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:Well, when I say non-starter, how are the less/no-kids people suggesting to implement their change? Do you think you are going to be able to pass legislation in countries to that end or is this just meant to be a social movement that is going to reach a large enough amount of people to make any appreciable difference? It seems like a weird place to focus on, but that is just my take. You might actually be able to slowly push through traditional environmental reforms. At least EU countries are making a slow go of that. At least in the context of climate change, it is less an issue of the actual Having Of Kids than it is that each individual Kid adds a consumer of carbon-intensive resources at X rate to the pile. I don't mean to be flippant because we're talking about human life, but the calculus is essentially that. You could theoretically, through a broad program of energy, environmental, economic and political reforms effect a similar reduction in CO2e emissions, but right now the cost incurred in energy inputs by giving birth is a discrete giant leap in total consumption.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:Yeah, how naive of me to mention one of the few levers of change in democratic systems. Better to resign to total defeat and act high and might about people having kids. That will show everyone how edgy you are. Yes, it is extremely naive of you to think that climate change will be solved by democratic systems. I'm not sure how I'm being high and mighty or edgy though? My wife and I discussed this a long time and it's one of our primary compatibility factors - I think it says a lot more about you that you think this is 'edgy', than anything. "Good luck" reconciling your belief in yourself as a good person as you consign your kids to Hellworld. Gunshow Poophole posted:At least in the context of climate change, it is less an issue of the actual Having Of Kids than it is that each individual Kid adds a consumer of carbon-intensive resources at X rate to the pile. I don't mean to be flippant because we're talking about human life, but the calculus is essentially that. Oh yeah, there's that whole thing too. The 'having children in the first world is, objectively and inarguably, the worst thing you can do for the climate'. I didn't even get there yet, no fair. call to action fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Apr 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:07
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:Well, when I say non-starter, how are the less/no-kids people suggesting to implement their change? Do you think you are going to be able to pass legislation in countries to that end or is this just meant to be a social movement that is going to reach a large enough amount of people to make any appreciable difference? It seems like a weird place to focus on, but that is just my take. You might actually be able to slowly push through traditional environmental reforms. At least EU countries are making a slow go of that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:19
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:Well, when I say non-starter, how are the less/no-kids people suggesting to implement their change? Do you think you are going to be able to pass legislation in countries to that end or is this just meant to be a social movement that is going to reach a large enough amount of people to make any appreciable difference? It seems like a weird place to focus on, but that is just my take. You might actually be able to slowly push through traditional environmental reforms. At least EU countries are making a slow go of that. Seeing 'spawning humans' with the same eyes as rolling coal would be a good start, yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
AceOfFlames posted:To be honest I am seriously starting to believe most people have children because they are BORED. If you’re not a workaholic and don’t have a really intense hobby, at some point you can have all this time remaining. People avoid adopting because either they want something "theirs" or because it's too much of a long and expensive hassle. It’s hosed up. What the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:43
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What the gently caress yeah i deliberately did not dig in on that one
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Spawning from your loins is the height of selfishness when you could adopt. And yet you need someone to spawn from someone's loins to adopt in the first place. Checkmate, climate change believer 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:23
|
|
|
Ok so what is this thread abo... WHAT THE CHRIST! Well, good luck with having no kids, and no one to take care of you in old age or inherit your environmentalist ideals. You 'stop climate change by not having kids' guys are all insane.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
Nice strawman bro
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:45
|
|
|
I mean it's pretty clear that the "have no kids" people are milquetoast in their views anyways. Anyone sane with that sort of viewpoint would realize that you have to simply eliminate all kids, a la Children of Man. Ever notice how they weren't having that many issues with climate change?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:51
|
|
|
Pharohman777 posted:Ok so what is this thread abo... said the man who's a proud member of the videogame cult that hated women so hard they became nazis
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:57
|
|
|
Pharohman777 posted:Ok so what is this thread abo... I'm the sincere, dramatic shock (This is a really fun thread to read / pass around)
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:00
|
|
|
kill your children to own the climate changes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:06
|
|
|
This is exactly the same thing that always happens. It is an irrefutable fact that having kids is the number one worst thing you can do for the environment. Even mentioning this, along with not eating meat or flying anymore, is enough to make people furious at you and decide that climate change isn't real after all. This is why a democratic system is absolutely never going to meaningfully address climate change, people will never be willing to make significant changes to their lives until it's wayyyy too late.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:13
|
|
|
"But people are never going to stop having kids/eating meat/flying planes so why are you even bringing it up? You're just a goony sadbrains closeted fascist."
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
What if the kid becomes the leader of a climate change movement that successfully ushers in an era of progress, that seems pretty carbon neutral.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:17
|
|
|
We are literally biologically programmed to have kids. There is no choice to be made there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:21
|
|
|
call to action posted:We are literally biologically programmed to have kids. There is no choice to be made there. China.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:21
|
|
|
ChairMaster posted:This is exactly the same thing that always happens. It is an irrefutable fact that having kids is the number one worst thing you can do for the environment. Even mentioning this, along with not eating meat or flying anymore, is enough to make people furious at you and decide that climate change isn't real after all. Because it's like waltzing in to a conversation about how to deal with the AIDS crisis and just repeating "just stop having sex" over and over. It's a simple answer that lets you feel sanctimonious and very little else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:26
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Because it's like waltzing in to a conversation about how to deal with the AIDS crisis and just repeating "just stop having sex" over and over. It's a simple answer that lets you feel sanctimonious and very little else. And promoting adoption is equivalent to promoting safe sex as a way to deal with AIDS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:31
|
|
|
I thought the reason not to have kids was because they were going to live to see everything get shittier and shittier and their kids would probably die horribly? Not this weird notion we aren't already hosed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
If you raise your children off-grid it's pretty much nbd, but yeah, they're still going to suffer beyond your comprehension.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:I thought the reason not to have kids was because they were going to live to see everything get shittier and shittier and their kids would probably die horribly? Not this weird notion we aren't already hosed. por que no los dos
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 02:01
|
|
|
call to action posted:Yes, it is extremely naive of you to think that climate change will be solved by democratic systems. I'm not sure how I'm being high and mighty or edgy though? My wife and I discussed this a long time and it's one of our primary compatibility factors - I think it says a lot more about you that you think this is 'edgy', than anything. "Good luck" reconciling your belief in yourself as a good person as you consign your kids to Hellworld. Clearly instead of targeting emissions, consumption rates, etc we should all just pour our efforts into not having kids. Checkmate you solved climate change, all of those scientists are so silly. I am glad that you aren't going to be procreating though, that gets an A+ from me. Also, there really isn't any certainty things are going to be a hell world, but hey whatever makes you feel good bro. Conspiratiorist posted:And promoting adoption is equivalent to promoting safe sex as a way to deal with AIDS. Honestly I don't think anyone here is against adoption, but a lot of people are still going to want to have their own kids.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 02:33
|
|
|
call to action posted:We are literally biologically programmed to have kids. There is no choice to be made there. Well, either 40% of adults in developed nations are missing this programming, or you are objectively wrong, but it's definitely one or the other. Either way, we're past the point of having kids or not having kids mattering. It seems like a dick move to create more humans in the first century to see human gigadeaths, but nobody is gonna stop you. It's weird how personally people take this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 02:35
|
|
|
Wakko posted:Either way, we're past the point of having kids or not having kids mattering. It seems like a dick move to create more humans in the first century to see human gigadeaths, but nobody is gonna stop you. It's weird how personally people take this. I don't think anyone gives a poo poo about peoples choice on a singular level to have kids. The only thing I was taking exception to is acting like it is going to be a meaningful way to tackle climate change. Most of society isn't as misanthropic as SA forums.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 02:36
|
|
|
we really should collab on some kind of OP update that represents some kind of summary-truce so we can stop going round and round *as* much - we don't need a 1 child policy, we don't need any rules at all about what you cant or even shouldn't do - really really basic healthcare for women like birth control, family-planning education, and access to abortion is very very effective - after that the next most effective thing is secondary education levels thats it. we can easily drop the replacement rate well below 2 with rudimentary healthcare and education. there does not need to be a stick *at all*. this is not some vain morality tale about what you and your friends and family should do, this is about moving the global rate from 2.33 to like 1.8 over the course of 2 or 3 generations. the shift is from "have two or three kids" to "have one or two kids". THATS IT. STOP loving SPAZZING OUT ASSHOLES. StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 13:13 on Apr 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 02:44
|
|
|
unlawfulsoup posted:Honestly I don't think anyone here is against adoption, but a lot of people are still going to want to have their own kids. And those people are in their right to be loving wrong because (aside from tangentially addressing the issue through QoL) population control policies are a dangerous slippery slope, that's true... but I'm still going to call out how it's loving wrong. People coming into this thread talking about how it's fine to birth kids to pass on environmental ideas or because it's a basic human desire or whatever the gently caress, should be treated with the same kind of mockery - if not contempt - as those advising others to take trans-oceanic flights to go see the natural wonders that are disappearing. Or the idiots unironically proclaiming how you'll never take beef away from them. Want to raise kids? Adopt. "But adoption is hard and expensive!" poo poo man, having kids is hard and expensive - if you're not willing or able to commit this much effort then maybe you shouldn't have kids. "But I want to pass on my genes!" That's just loving hubris.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 03:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:07 |
|
|
I don’t see people ever not having kids, even with the world falling apart in slow-mo, but it would be interesting if the government flipped the tax incentives so that childless people got a break while those with kids got nothing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 03:11
|
|
