Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

delete

135

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,271 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Sure, corporations might like for more people to create more individuals in order to prolong their message, but where do you see the evidence for this in our modern age?

    Families are smaller due to the costs involved in having a family... but *drum roll* people are still having families, either in or out of wedlock. Depending on the culture involved, marriage is still extremely popular, as is having kids. Just as many companies place emphasis on hiring married people due to the stability, and that the research tends to show that married men outperform single males at middle/top management. Naturally, this is more of an American thing, but the conservative nature of many older/established private firms in European countries, also place a lot of emphasis on married people being hired.

    In any case, you missed the point completely. The conditioning exists to cover just about every lifestyle choice, considering the wide range of influencers within society, through media, and the more traditional modes of social conditioning. So, you can't really elevate one choice of lifestyle over another, because we're all conditioned to one degree or another.

    Also, why would allow you to disregard religion and family, both of which have had enormous influence over how society, our values, etc have developed... Religion is declining in importance now, but that's a relatively recent thing.. and family/parents remain one of the strongest sources of conditioning for any individual. You can't dismiss it so easily, just because you want to focus on corporations.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    OP has disappeared?

    Quelle surprise.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Neither is yours. Having a vasectomy doesn't guarantee that you won't have children.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    And good luck to any childfree man or woman looking of childbearing age getting a doctor to sterilise them. All they'll get is a patronising "You'll change your mind".



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don't think it's the cult of the individual that has caused us to veer away from the traditional path in life since the 1960s - well maybe it's one factor, along with contraception, further education, rigid social mores being deconstructed/reduced social pressure, fewer taboos and stigmas, secularism, people just becoming more confident, women being able to work and not needing to marry as a way of being financially secure... more choice basically.

    I'm certainly not someone who would celebrate the end of the nuclear family - but most people do marry and have children. It's still mostly the standard. Any threat that it's under is not, in my opinion, due to people like me, who choose not to have children (we're the exception rather than the rule)... but due to people who irresponsibly have children with different fathers/mothers and cannot provide them with a stable, secure home.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    That all sounds fair enough to be honest. I guess I am mainly aiming at the "undecideds", the ones who've never really thought it through, who are happy with their status quo lives, but don't have kids for more shallow narcissistic reasons like they enjoy their TV and video games. For people who consciously think about it and decide not to be parents, I have a great deal of respect for. They have given it thought and it's better for them not to be parents if they think they are not suited to it.


    I guess deep down I am probably talking to a version of myself from 5-10 years ago. I was single, unable to meet anyone, and I convinced myself that I didn't want to get married and have kids, that I'd be happier being free to socialise and travel anywhere anytime. But I realise now it was possibly a coping mechanism, that deep down I did want to have kids.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    And if your wife/girlfriend gets pregnant by another man, or another method, you'll still be considered to be responsible for their care. So...

    Say you don't want children, take the reasonable precautions, but in reality, it all comes down to luck and trust.

    I don't want kids of my own, however if I ever had such a relationship/marriage, I'll leave the choice to my partner to make.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,841 ✭✭✭buried


    All traditional modes of social conditioning have nearly been eroded, or there is a concise effort upon the part of establishment entities to completely erode them, religion is classed as nothing but voodoo, the notion of the family or the function of the family has also nearly been abolished. Western states, such as this one we reside in, have recently given children the right to override the roles of their parents, so what future does the traditional family actually have when that is the case? You say "Families are smaller due to the costs involved in having a family", but who controls the costs? Governments? The same governments who are lobbied and basically glued into the globalist corporate framework who are the ultimate ones who decide how the society is deemed to be run. So much so, that governments or regimes such as ours in Ireland won't tax these corporations fairly for the vast trillions of dollars they make while they continue to have a nefarious influence over not only our nation, but every other nation on the entire face of the planet? And you are trying to tell me that none of this matters or even has an effect? C'mon Klaz

    "You have disgraced yourselves again" - W. B. Yeats



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,271 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    It adds an extra layer. Failure rate is something like 1 in 1000 so it will beat any other method

    If I were in his position, I'd trust the vasectomy rather than what he is otherwise implying which is that he would tell the woman not to get pregnant


    Would I get one myself? No. But I'm not the one declaring I never ever want kids



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    No plan ever is. It’s the best I am willing to do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    No, this is what you said and doubled down on in subsequent posts:

    You need to have kids. It's our entire reason for being. Your legacy will be your kids.

    No mention of those who are undecided until this post, in fact, you've contradicted those who have decided that parenthood isn't for them.

    It's great that having children has made you happy and given you purpose. It's great that you see them as your legacy, but not everyone shares your opinion. You'll note that no one has told you you shouldn't have had children or that you'll realise one day that you're wrong.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24 jay432


    I disappeard because this discussion is a heap of bullshit. I wanted to hear from women in a similar situation and all I've seen are people arguing over having kids. I dont care about their views on it and i tried to delete this thing



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    All traditional modes of social conditioning have nearly been eroded, or there is a concise effort upon the part of establishment entities to completely erode them, religion is classed as nothing but voodoo, the notion of the family or the function of the family has also nearly been abolished

    That's a rather blinkered view. Formal religion in Ireland is declining, but it's still very much present for a lot of families. Which impacts on the development of children, both from a familial aspect, and the influence they gain beyond the home. As much as you'd like to make religion redundent, it's not. There are still hundreds of millions of people who follow a religion, one way or another. Some religions are still growing in population, ie. Islam. Then, there's Buddhism, Daoism, etc which are more connected with spiritualism, but are set to take over for many people who would previously have been catholic.

    As for the family being abolished.. that's complete horseshit. The greatest amount of influence for the personal development happens during childhood, because many of our core values and beliefs come from that period. And... it is our parents who we spend most of that time with, and have the greatest trust in, therefore, ideas and concepts are most likely to be accepted. As we age we become more careful/cynical of where information or ideas come from, which lessens the impact from external sources, but for many people, their parents remain sources for guidance. That's particularly true when it comes to siblings who grow up close to each other, and the exchange of concepts/ideas is compounded by those bonds.

    You've jumped too far into what's possible, in how society might develop, rather than what currently is.

    And you are trying to tell me that none of this matters or even has an effect? C'mon Klaz

    Now you're projecting arguments on to me that I didn't make, posing new questions, and answering them yourself.

    C'mon buried.

    Don't put words or concepts in my mouth, and then, argue against them yourself. I'm more than capable of explaining my own position without your "help".. especially if you decide to respond/deal with what I've written, rather than what you've just done above.



  • Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Michael Large Unicorn


    @jay432 if you're serious, post in https://www.boards.ie/categories/personal-issues

    You'll get more mature responses there.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ahh well.. in his position, I'd just not have sex, or at least, sex with anyone that I'm going to keep in contact with (so have sex in another city or country with strangers). Then I could be guaranteed that I'd be fine.

    However, any sexual intercourse carries a risk. There are no guarantees. I agree that your suggestion is far safer than what he said, but.. yeah.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24 jay432


    @[Deleted User] how do i delete a discussion?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You don't. Only the mods can.

    Just ignore the thread, and move to PI.



  • Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Michael Large Unicorn


    The moderators usually do that. I suspect it'll be done whenever a mod is online.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    If the question was genuine, After Hours was not the best place for it.

    Personal issues more balanced.

    I can answer as a woman in your situation, but it would be shouted down, as others know better, obviously.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    You're not in her position though as you chose not to have children.

    That's not shouting you down btw.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,462 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    Anyone can have someone,but this someone doesn't want just anyone



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I can answer as a woman in your situation, but it would be shouted down, as others know better, obviously.

    Shouted down = having different opinions.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme



    Well,the OP asked specifically for womens opinions, but men seem to know better. That is not having different opinions, that is not reading/respecting the brief.


    I disappeard because this discussion is a heap of bullshit. I wanted to hear from women in a similar situation and all I've seen are people arguing over having kids. I dont care about their views on it and i tried to delete this thing



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,409 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    I gave my opinion and I'm a woman. Not all the original response you got were from men.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    Not all, but majority.

    Bit weird to ask for womens opinions, and then for men to dispute/dissect those opinions as if the woman are not entitled to their opinion. But thats Boards for you.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    Maybe the OP needs to realise that you cannot dictate who responds to a thread?



  • Registered Users Posts: 11 sparksps




  • Registered Users Posts: 24 jay432


    @jequ0n maybe you need to realise the OP(ME) hasn't replied to anyone because it's aggressive crap that everyone replied. I posted in the wrong forum and deletd the post so take your **** elsewhere. I don't want to read anymore opinions from anyone. A lot of people here need anger management. Not one person was relatable or gave proper advice. Enjoy arguing ✌



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Bit weird to ask for womens opinions, and then for men to dispute/dissect those opinions as if the woman are not entitled to their opinion.

    You're the one suggesting that men shouldn't have an opinion on the topic, or that their own viewpoints have no relevance. Sure, the OP asked for female opinions, but males contributing to the thread doesn't stop that from happening. Oh, and if the OP had asked the same question, directing it towards only men, you'd (along with other women) be in here voicing your opinions just as much as the males.

    The point is that you're projecting. "Shouting women down. As if the woman is not entitled to her opinion." There's been very little if any, of that on the thread. The OP posted to AH.. which everyone knows isn't the place for a serious discussion.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don't want to read anymore opinions from anyone.

    Then, might I suggest a different medium. Sites like boards, reddit, or whatever are not going to produce the answers you want. They're too open to posters of all types, and on the internet, everyone has an opinion.

    As for aggressive crap.. err.. I suspect you're just looking for answers that match your own established viewpoints. I looked at your OP when it first opened up, and there was little there (or following) to suggest a personal issue, or any real personal stake in what you asked. Just another average thread on boards.. and any thread that involves the male/female positions in society, tends to produce "friction" with differing viewpoints.

    TBH, Which is what I thought you wanted. To see that friction kick off, because you didn't try to steer the discussion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    Well, the OP said they were specifically asking for women's opinions. It is a straight enough question.

    Agree re posting to After Hours is not the best place for either serious opinions and for women's opinions as the majority of posters are men.

    OP seems to have realised that and deleted their question.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,409 ✭✭✭✭Sardonicat


    I was not aggressive in my reply to you.. There were plenty of non aggressive replies. Now maybe you didn't like the replies. I'd reply in exactly the same fashion in P.I.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,450 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Men, up to their old tricks as usual.

    Glazers Out!



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,412 ✭✭✭Jequ0n


    Then just leave this thread and let us argue.

    Posters weren’t aggressive, you just didn’t like their responses.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,860 ✭✭✭Pissy Missy


    I don't think I replied aggressively OP but best of luck with your situation



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    Well your opinion was at first a smart comment about the OP being the poster's first post, then another "quelle surprise" about the OP disappearing.

    You then said you could have offered advice as a woman in her position, when you've posted numerous times about being happily childfree by choice. So, not in her position.

    Women have replied and, as is the nature of any discussion, the conversation meandered and didn't just revolve around finding the OP a man.

    You view any thread that doesn't agree with your feminist views as 'shouting down'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    Where's the aggression? As for relatable advice, have you considered that none of us are in your position? We can't control that fact that other 37 year old women didn't reply, no more than you can control those of us who did.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    I am not sure if the post was genuine from the outset, seemed like a strange first post but we can only take posters at face value that they put their post in the wrong forum and then deleted it, as is their right.

    The OP has detailed the reason they deleted their post was due to aggressive replies. To me it looked like the mod deleted it first. I would not agree that all responses were aggressive either, but that is how the OP viewed them.

    When I said I could give advice as a woman in her position it is not for you to question me on that either or put words into my mouth- I may be childfree by choice now but that might not have always been the case, so stop making assumptions /'judgements about other people and their lives.

    If I said I could offer advice to a woman in her position now, then that is for me to decide if I can. It is not for you to dispute that. The decision to have / not have children is a complicated one and there can be many twists and turns before a person comes to their ultimate decision.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    I wasn't putting words in your mouth, but I know you're not in the same position as the OP. That point stands.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11 sparksps


    It is bafflingly ironic that you tell people that you and you alone can decide whether or not your advice can/should be given while questioning others for doing the same thing.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,021 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    I think you need to take that up with the OP - they have said they wanted women's opinions.

    If I fit the criteria, then its not for anyone to tell me I don't.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    So, this describes you?

    Are there any single women in their 30s worried about finding someone and having kids? Has anyone noticed that irish men are awful at making an effort? They dont ask you on dates just squeeze u in for an hour for coffee if you're lucky. I've dated foreign men and they make an effort and always talk. I'm thinking of moving abroad!




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Very human of you. Find something in life that is so personally profound and transformative that you genuinely wish everyone else finds the secret to life and happiness and fulfillment that you have. To the point you imagine them on death beds having revelations of regret for not having spent their life as you did.

    So we can see paragraphs from such people that (emphasis mine) "You need to have kids. It's our entire reason for being. Your legacy will be your kids.". Somehow missing that 1) many people live fulfilled lives without, 2) there is seemingly no actual "reason" for being other than the reasons we find for ourselves, and 3) plenty of people have left legacies small and large not involving children.

    Countless 1000s of people find the same effects from entirely different things. And many look at others with the same thoughts as you - that they just wish the world would discover what they have. Or your phrase that anyone without is somehow "ducking their responsibility" - a responsibility they do not actually have - but you have ascribed to them anyway?

    Hell you get it in simple things like diets too. Some people discover a diet that works for them - sends their energy and health and well being through the roof - so they can not wait to preach the diet to everyone else. Telling them that it is _the_ path to better health and energy and drive and well being. They can not understand why others do not want to try it. Or when they do try it - it fails to have a similar effect.

    Not to mention people who discover things like "god".

    I have kids. 4 now. I do not feel they are my "legacy". I do not feel anyone else "needs" to have them because I did. They are life altering as you say sure but not _the most_ life altering thing I've ever done nor the most complex. In fact in many ways it has been incredibly simple and most of the complexities I have heard of were illusory.

    All the things that have been life altering to me I discuss very often on this forum. But I never tell anyone they need to try it too or that doing so will enrich or change them. Rather I describe what has been transformative to me in the hopes it inspires others to find what is transformative to them. All the while realizing they might get absolutely nothing from what has been profound for me.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11 sparksps


    Your experience is your own, but I would imagine you are in the minority.

    I personally can't imagine anything that could be more life altering than raising a child.

    This is not saying you are wrong however.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11 sparksps


    It's also not up to you to tell anyone they don't fit the criteria.

    Plus, by your own admission, you don't fit the criteria.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think my post seems to have really riled a few people. My intentions were not to belittle, demean or patronise people.


    I was addressing one poster (who I assumed was a young man) who seemed to casually dismiss the idea of having kids. Which is fine, but I just get frustrated when men dismiss the idea so frivolously. I was trying to use emotive language to emphasise the importance of having kids.


    I think having kids is the be all and end all of our life on this planet. When you boil everything down that is. I think the fact that people get so riled up at my bluntness shows how emotive it is, and by extension, how important it is to all of us.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    No, you've told people who don't have children that their lives have no purpose.

    Not everyone wants children to be the purpose of their life.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11 sparksps


    I think it's a little unfair to take that ungenerous interpretation of what the poster said.

    It does raise an interesting question though. What do you think that people who actively choose not to have children want the purpose of their life to be?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,549 ✭✭✭✭Leg End Reject


    It's a fair assumption based on all their posts.

    What constitutes a purpose to life will vary widely from individual to individual, none are any less valid than choosing to have children.



Advertisement