Childfree

chambers

Sinead_g wrote: »

Hi there,

We have all at some stage met people that have called us selfish for choosing no to have children. I also heard that we are not contributing to society and that we don't give anything back!!

I find this so intolerant. They probably feel very jealous that we are free like birds and cannot accept it...

It can be so tiring to have to justify yourself all the time about a choice that is in the end so personal!!!!

childfree people should get tax breaks cause were not costing the state that much money...:mad:

chambers

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

How many adults die everyday without leaving any trace of having been here?

but who cares about leaving a trace here..you'll be dead..were born with nothing, we die with nothing..its the way of the world

InFront

chambers wrote: »

childfree people should get tax breaks cause were not costing the state that much money...:mad:

Yeah, but you have a greater probability of being of a greater burden on the state in your old age than if you had your own children...

Dudess

Chambers, the fact that you went to the trouble (as a newbie) of digging up this thread and posting several contributions to it, ditto with the "is marriage pointless" thread, makes me suspect you have underlying issues.
What's with the bitterness?

On the other hand, latchyco - you didn't become a father til you were 27? My, what a wise old dad you were!!
Xavi6, at 22 you no doubt think you and everyone your age will be settled by 27. Believe me, it's highly unlikely.
I must say I do think having kids is the end of your life as you know it - not a bad thing necessarily but the fun is over, let's face it. That's why I'm gonna relish my freedom for as long as possible and wait until I'm well into my 30s. Sure, I may decrease my chances fertility-wise but that's a risk I'm prepared to take.

chambers

ned78 wrote: »

Childree here, and plan to stay that way. People seem preprogrammed to housebuying, getting married, and having kids. It's too sterotypical for my likes, and want to have the freedom to what I wish with my life.

couldn't agree more..there all the same rail track and they can't get off..its marrying and breeding..it bores the living ****e out of me...why can't they think of something more interesting to do...they are just becoming their parents,,repeating the same old crap

the_syco

chambers wrote: »

couldn't agree more..there all the same rail track and they can't get off..its marrying and breeding..it bores the living ****e out of me...why can't they think of something more interesting to do...they are just becoming their parents,,repeating the same old crap

Childless at the mo, but the above is a load of BS. "all the same rail track", you say? Every child is different, and it depends on the parents. Some have kids that are dull, but some have kids that are encouraged to strive forward.

On a side note, some people are scared of raising a kid, as they were complete scum/mad when they were young (in their own eyes), and are afraid of how to handle their kids when the kids become rebellious as they once did.


=-=


Chambers, you also stink of being a conformist, of trying to be nonconformist, by "sticking it to the man", you actually become conformist, as you're following all the people before you who "lived free", etc. But no worries. Like most of those who went travelling, you'll come back, no longer having lived a boring life, and you'll wish to settle down, raise a family after seeing the joy of parents worldwide, and also wishing to grow old with the knowledge that someone will carry on your family history...

Xavi6

chambers wrote: »

no offence but your only 22.. a young one..wait another 10 years..life can become a bit tedious..more of the same of old crap every day..and the day to day routine with kids is not riveting..bringing them to school and back..making meals,:( wiping asses..i work with teenagers..there not that interesting.believe me..even if they were my own..people tend to take everything for granted after a while..too much familiarity..

Wow I'm amazed how someone can have such a self centred, negative attitude. Would you adopt the same attitude to your mother or father if it got to the stage where they require help such as ass wiping, meal preparing etc? Or would you simply turn a blind eye and ship them off to a home? I'm guessing the latter. Also -

i work with teenagers..there not that interesting

Then why the hell do it? I certainly wouldn't want someone dealing with my children if they had no interest in them. Ever think that you're daily exposure to them has contributed to your disliking of them? If you worked in a job that didn't involve children then maybe you would be a bit more warming to them

Dudess wrote: »

Xavi6, at 22 you no doubt think you and everyone your age will be settled by 27. Believe me, it's highly unlikely.

I'm not stupid, I know that. It is however nice to have a plan, and mine involves kids.

chambers wrote: »

couldn't agree more..there all the same rail track and they can't get off..its marrying and breeding..it bores the living ****e out of me...why can't they think of something more interesting to do...they are just becoming their parents,,repeating the same old crap

So let's all adopt the none baby making attitude and look after ourselves and ourselves only. As stated already, it seems that you have underlying issues. Maybe you need to address them.

Terry

Dudess wrote:

I must say I do think having kids is the end of your life as you know it - not a bad thing necessarily but the fun is over, let's face it. That's why I'm gonna relish my freedom for as long as possible and wait until I'm well into my 30s. Sure, I may decrease my chances fertility-wise but that's a risk I'm prepared to take.

Whle I don't have any siblings, I do have some cousins who I am very close to.
The youngest is nine years older than me and they all have children.
I spend a lot of time around those kids (well, some are in their late 20's at this stage and married and have kids of their own) and I have to say that kids are great fun.

I wouldn't see having children as an end to your life. I'd see it more as a new beginning.

I've spent the last 18 or so years getting drunk all the time and going to parties and crap. It gets old after a while.
I would have no problem settling down with a family. You can't party forever.

kelle

Dudess wrote: »

I must say I do think having kids is the end of your life as you know it - not a bad thing necessarily but the fun is over, let's face it. That's why I'm gonna relish my freedom for as long as possible and wait until I'm well into my 30s. Sure, I may decrease my chances fertility-wise but that's a risk I'm prepared to take.

I had all my kids in my 30's. And my friend had them in her forties (married at 39). I don't think you're any less able for parenting when you're older, children are exhausting no matter what age you are. It's just that you may resent them more if you have them when you're not ready.
I married at 26 with the intention of never having children, but changed my mind at 30. I did a lot of partying and travelling before then.
I enjoy my life now. I work part-time, I look forward to each stage the children reach (it passes quicker than you think) and we enjoy a sun holiday every year. The only restriction I feel at present is not being able to go on a ski-ing holiday - however, I'll be able to go again once my youngest reaches 4. I don't get out much, but I don't miss it, and I REALLY don't miss hangovers!

SimpleSam06

chambers wrote: »

childfree people should get tax breaks cause were not costing the state that much money...:mad:

Um 99% of those expensive children eventually grow into taxpayers who repay the amount spent on their "free" education exponentially.

Sonnenblumen

chambers wrote: »

but who cares about leaving a trace here..you'll be dead..were born with nothing, we die with nothing..its the way of the world

To live and die with nothing is the way of an idiot.

Latchy

QUOTE=Dudess;
On the other hand, latchyco - you didn't become a father til you were 27? My, what a wise old dad you were!!

Lots of accidents with unwanted pregnancies ( not me i add lol ) for sure and condoms were not freely available . Any fool can make a baby but it takes a man to be around and raise them up .

I must say I do think having kids is the end of your life as you know it - not a bad thing necessarily but the fun is over, let's face it. That's why I'm gonna relish my freedom for as long as possible and wait until I'm well into my 30s. Sure, I may decrease my chances fertility-wise but that's a risk I'm prepared to take.

Good for you Dudess ,good advice for anybody i think ....

kelle

chambers wrote: »

who will come to your funeral..sure you will be dead..you won't care..who will visit you in the nursing home:rolleyes:..who is going to put me on the commode..probably a nurse i hope..not my son or daughter that I won't be having anyway....i wouldn't expect them to change my nappy..anyway i will have more money to pay for the nursing home..cause i won't have had kids..

My parents were both diagnosed with cancer at the same time. They got weaker and weaker and were very quickly not able to fend for themselves. They only wanted me to help them with toilet and bathing duties, they did not want nurses to help them and I respected that. Maybe if they never had children, or had children who couldn't/wouldn't help them, they would probably have overcome this embarassment and allowed the nurses to do so. I'll never know.

kowloon

kelle wrote: »

My parents were both diagnosed with cancer at the same time. They got weaker and weaker and were very quickly not able to fend for themselves. They only wanted me to help them with toilet and bathing duties, they did not want nurses to help them and I respected that. Maybe if they never had children, or had children who couldn't/wouldn't help them, they would probably have overcome this embarassment and allowed the nurses to do so. I'll never know.

Sorry for your loss kelle, particularly nasty to have both diagnosed at the same time.

kelle

kowloon wrote: »

Sorry for your loss kelle, particularly nasty to have both diagnosed at the same time.

Thanks, Kowloon.

chambers

Kernel wrote: »

Aw Sinead, you are obviously having issues about the lack of continuity of your genetic lineage. Don't worry, someday you will find a man and reproduce before your womb turns to a dry husk and you end up a bitter lonely oul wan living with 12 cats. All you like-minded (ie. self deluded) chicks will probably be the same, but starting threads about how happy you are without sprogs, and not at all jealous of your friends and their families, is just too transparent to resist. *kisses*

that is so rude and nasty..you sad piece of ****..people are entitled to live different lifestyles..you have to show some respect for that.:mad:

chambers

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

To live and die with nothing is the way of an idiot.

i said you die with nothing..as in you can't take anything with you when you leave this world..you tit..not to live on nothing..

Mr. Incognito

I've just come across this and it's amazing how animated people get about something they profess not to care about. IMO, you're all idiots. Go live your own lives and give up the "my life is better" argument. Who gives a flying.........

chambers

squibs wrote: »

I think not having kids might be something you regret more as you descend into old age, especially if you lose a spouse. There are some very lonely old people out there.

true..but we got to join clubs or something..a lot of people i know rarely visit there elderly parents..they just dump them in the nursing homes..or leave them to rot..which is terrible but its a fact..people don't have time or can't be bothered with old dudes..

chambers

RainyDay wrote: »

Have you got even the vaguest idea of what is involved in adaption?

Have you considered trying the 'unsubscribe' button?

i know all about adoption..i know it costs a lot and is a huge hassle and it takes years....but it makes people think carefully about if they really want to be parents..if they do they would be willing to go through that process..instead most people just seem to fall into parenting..i'm not sure if they really know anything about looking after children or teenagers..most of them presume that they will just pick it up as they go along..i'm sure its really really difficult to be a good parent..a lot of people i know who have kids or who are thinking about having kids shortly know nothing whatsoever about kids or childrearing and they presume its really easy.they have never worked with kids or had much to do with them at all..then they hit 35 and think that they will automatically drop a sprog and it will all work out just fine and it doesn't..:)....i work with young people so at least i have some idea of what i'm talking about..

Sonnenblumen

chambers wrote: »

i know all about adoption..i know it costs a lot and is a huge hassle and it takes years....but it makes people think carefully about if they really want to be parents..if they do they would be willing to go through that process..instead most people just seem to fall into parenting..i'm not sure if they really know anything about looking after children or teenagers..most of them presume that they will just pick it up as they go along..i'm sure its really really difficult to be a good parent..a lot of people i know who have kids or who are thinking about having kids shortly know nothing whatsoever about kids or childrearing and they presume its really easy.they have never worked with kids or had much to do with them at all..then they hit 35 and think that they will automatically drop a sprog and it will all work out just fine and it doesn't..:)....i work with young people so at least i have some idea of what i'm talking about..

is this a child minder telling would-be parents how to be a parent?

Sonnenblumen

chambers wrote: »

i said you die with nothing..as in you can't take anything with you when you leave this world..you tit..not to live on nothing..

I don't suppose you understand the concept of leaving a legacy?

Dudess

chambers wrote: »

that is so rude and nasty..you sad piece of ****..people are entitled to live different lifestyles..you have to show some respect for that.:mad:

It is a horribly vicious and nasty post but why lower yourself to that level by dishing out personal abuse?

Giblet

Keep it civil or there will be bannings.

Kernel

chambers wrote: »

thats just plain rude..people who don't want kids have put a lot of thought into the good reasons why they shouldn' t have them..maybe they actually care more about the future of the planet than a lot breeders who want to add to the over population of the world and who just follow in their parents footsteps without thinking about the fact that there are already 6 billion humans around and half of them are starving in the third world..

I agree that overpopulation is a serious problem, one which Henry Kissinger addressed in the late 50s and early 60s... (there's some evidence that the AIDS virus was engineered to address the population problem in the third world). Hell, going back even further to the origins of eugenics and eugenics' modern day branches of 'family planning' and abortion clinics, we can tell overpopulation is a problem.

Nevertheless, the socially responsible could have 2 children and live guilt free. The larger socio-economic problem is that skangers are outbreeding decent people nowadays. Skangers who sponge off the state, produce criminal offspring and the uneducated masses.

Anyway, my original post last year simply commented on my opinion that the OP was verbalising some self-delusion that she didn't want kids when I felt that she did or would at some stage, if she got the chance. I'm not bothered about your later personal attack, since there's no substance in the post.

Terry

Kernel wrote: »

I agree that overpopulation is a serious problem, one which Henry Kissinger addressed in the late 50s and early 60s... (there's some evidence that the AIDS virus was engineered to address the population problem in the third world). Hell, going back even further to the origins of eugenics and eugenics' modern day branches of 'family planning' and abortion clinics, we can tell overpopulation is a problem.

No to eugenics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxFQcxy2jFg

kowloon

Kernel wrote: »

I agree that overpopulation is a serious problem, one which Henry Kissinger addressed in the late 50s and early 60s... (there's some evidence that the AIDS virus was engineered to address the population problem in the third world). Hell, going back even further to the origins of eugenics and eugenics' modern day branches of 'family planning' and abortion clinics, we can tell overpopulation is a problem.

Nevertheless, the socially responsible could have 2 children and live guilt free. The larger socio-economic problem is that skangers are outbreeding decent people nowadays. Skangers who sponge off the state, produce criminal offspring and the uneducated masses.

Anyway, my original post last year simply commented on my opinion that the OP was verbalising some self-delusion that she didn't want kids when I felt that she did or would at some stage, if she got the chance. I'm not bothered about your later personal attack, since there's no substance in the post.

Are comments even needed?

Kernel

kowloon wrote: »

Are comments even needed?

They would be helpful if you want to make a point.

kdave

[QUOTE=dame;53112442
Is hearing about someone's plumbing/roof/carpet/garden problems in their new house as sickening or boring? :[/QUOTE]

Yes

Zzippy

Kernel wrote: »

I agree that overpopulation is a serious problem, one which Henry Kissinger addressed in the late 50s and early 60s... (there's some evidence that the AIDS virus was engineered to address the population problem in the third world). [/QUOTE]

Huh?! Care to provide a link to said evidence?? :rolleyes: