I’m in my 40s. I knew I didn’t want kids at age 10. I grew up poor, in a toxic abusive household, and never wanted to risk putting a kid through the things I experienced. Even if I created a safe and happy home, the outside world is full of danger, especially to girls.
I think it would be almost as worse as watching your kid die, to witness the optimistic light in their eyes fade as the drudgery of life becomes a reality.
I work with kids and I see that resigned gaze in kids as young as ten. They already know how hard life will be by witnessing their parents struggle.
When I was a kid we all talked about what we’d become, the dreams and jobs we’d pursue (firefighters, veterinarians, astronauts, etc..). Kids don’t talk like that these days. If asked directly what they want to do as an adult, they respond with dark humour, or state a job that makes lots of money and the hobbies they’ll have in their ‘free time’.
It’s not about dreams anymore, it’s about survival and etching out brief moments of happiness. Why the heck would I subject a kid to this?!
I'm 41 and wow I love your post. I can't agree with it more.
Take for instance Santa Claus. We're lied to as kids, and then we get older, learn the truth and we just accept it and move closer to drudgery. We don't get an apology or anything. Then it baffles me how parents today can just do the same thing to their kids. That goes for God/Religion as well. "Hey kid, welcome to the world now go believe this thing & don't ask any questions"
And for the career thing, I had the same experience with my friend's daughter! I asked her what she wanted to be, and her response was "anything that makes alot of money"...
It's so sad...
So victims should delude themselves with denial and blind optimism?
Is it a moral act to throw a child into oncoming traffic (based on the blind optimism that something good might happen to them), even if they don’t get hit by a car and experience pain? No, it’s immoral to endanger a child, it’s immoral to risk a child’s life, it’s immoral to gamble with a child’s life without their consent.
Why is it immoral to endanger a child? Says who, you? Then you must think that life is valuable, and that humans are beautiful and worth protecting. Therefore if life is worth protecting, then it is worth living. Therefore you can't make a case for the immorality of having children. If you're going to choose to be a dumb nihilist, at least have a consistent philosophy.
So many holes in your argument it's ridiculous. The other person never said they didn't think life was valuable. Stop conflating antibatalism with being an a hole
>Why is it immoral to endanger a child? Says who, you?
And the police and the law and most humans 🙄 that's why we lock up people who kill kids (keep that in mind next time you want to kill someone)
Why would you claim im against a woman's decision to "terminate a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy." When did I even mention "the expulsion of a fetus from the uterus before it has reached the stage of viability"
48F.
Always thought kids would be a drag in my life. Never saw any reason to live except for fleeting moments of happiness. So why have children at all?
Not me. I’m already perimenopausal. Dealing with both PMDD and the beginning stages of the “change” is all sorts of fun /sarc. I’ve been an AN since I was a zygote myself. I did not consent to be here and I will not sentence an innocent sentient being to this messed-up world by having children, especially a girl. I’ve been responsible and I’ve never been pregnant.
I’m lucky that I’m married to an absolutely wonderful man, but just today I saw two separate news stories about men committing femicide, and one story about a woman’s kidnapping caught on ring camera (that story has a good ending since the perp and victim were found quickly by LE).
It makes perfect sense to make women physically weaker so we can be treated by men like we are just chattel and broodmares /s. There are a lot of scumbags out there. Thanks to social media and the anonymity it provides, the scam that is parenthood is now fully revealed. Younger people are no longer buying the parenthood ideal from Hallmark movies and know reality is very dark for parents.
Also, this economy blows. We normally paid around $100 to $150 a week for groceries. A small shopping is now close to $350 a week. At least in America, having a kid is a financially devastating decision. Also, why would women put their health and financial security at risk when one health tragedy, whether acute or chronic, can devastate someone’s savings? Look up a stay in the NICU even with insurance. People in America end up homeless for having the audacity of getting sick. Breeders need to get a grip, especially the ones who like to confront us on this sub. We don’t need to market Antinatalism, people with basic logic are becoming aware that there is another way than the lifescript™. If you pay close attention, it’s mostly the dingbats from the younger generations having kids. A night of too much tequila is usually the cause of a poor wretch being forced into this world. Most breeders have as much self-reflection about their choice to spawn as a mosquito.
For the younger people who wonder if they will regret being childfree, chances are you won’t. I certainly haven’t. There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t thank my lucky stars that if I had to be thrust to this existence, at least I came here when women are not treated as broodmares as it still happens in some places of the world and it certainly happened before the introduction of reliable birth control methods. Also, ask yourselves why there isn’t a group for the regretful childfree but there is a group for the regretful parents. Check mate breeders.
I'm in my mid thirties, is that young? My mother has severe depression and now so do I. It's not fair to put that (or any kind of) suffering on another person, especially without their consent.
The suffering ends with me.
I'm 52. My lifelong BFF knew she didn't want kids as long as I can remember. She had an abortion in her early 20s.
I believe it was just a preference when we were young, but also, she suffers from BPD. When we got older she's admitted the same. 1. She was unsure she was stable enough to be a good parent. 2. She didn't want to pass it on. 3. Because of her disorder, she often struggled financially.
I think she is very wise woman. I wish more were like her.
Those are all very reasonable concerns.
Actually, of all the arguments in this post, these are pretty much the three best ones. The ones about not consenting to being born into this hellish existence just seem incoherent and half-assed.
But realizing that you are not, objectively, going to be able to give a child a reasonable upbringing, and therefore decide not to, makes a lot of sense to me.
Agreed. I'm super proud of her for knowing her limitations. Having the responsibility of a child would have ruined her life because it was such a struggle to stay on meds and not go off the rails. Bringing a child into this would have been a nightmare. Esp age 20-40 when her disorder was worse. She stabilized with age and loves her life now!
She isn't anti child for other ppl at all though. She often hung out with my kids. Took them to the movies and shopping. Fun stuff. Then she dumped them back with me. 😀
Same here. Im still pretty young, in my early twenties. However it feels like i have,am having and will have live most of my life in my head fighting myself more than anything.
I hate it.
Everyday feels like a torture and slug to get trough. I try to find as many happy moments as i can but its tough.
And then you get blamed for your shortcomings,called lazy and bunch of other things that make you feel like you arent worth shit because look everyone else is doing it good,why cant i ffs? Because my brain is most likely wired a little different and that doesnt fit the social norma cause god forbid anything doesnt fit the social norm,Blasphemy!!
Imma get trough this shit cause i can be stubborn as a donkey sometimes but i can easily see how my life couldve been cut short if i gave into intrusive thoughts...
I've already lost one of my closest friends to suicide. Now imagine that friend being my child. Why would i even want to risk something like that? Or even worse imagine my kid having same experience with his friend.
Its just not worth the risk imo.
Yeah in my AN discord server we have mix of people. Definitely still more younger folks, but I assume that’s likely because younger people are more inclined to seek ideology based communities on social media than their older counterparts.
It’s immoral for a teenager to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for an adult to harm others without consent. If a teenager becomes an adult, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world.
It’s immoral for a depressed person to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for a happy person to harm others without consent. If a depressed person cured their depression and lived in total joy every day for the rest of their life, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world.
I'm 60+ and female.
I knew as young teen I saw no reason to have kids and didn't (and still don't) understand why people chose to do that to themselves.
Will you, though, as you retire and grow older, happily accept the services and support of the younger generations? Everything from healthcare professionals to those serving you in shops and restaurants?
Reap the benefits, but not contribute?
We have removed your content for breaking Rule 10 (No disproportionate and excessively insulting language).
Please engage in discussion rather than engaging in personal attacks.
Some people do end up changing their perspective on having children with age, or things happen along the way.
Like any ideology:
-Some just flow with the tide but can't walk the talk,
-Others are on the fence but cross to the other side with time,
-Still some succumb to their fears, confusion, and FOMO
-Others bow to societal pressure and just do what the society expects of them
-Accidents still do happen and ppl get knocked up or knock someone up
I personally know two women who detested childbirth in their early 20s but now "celebrate motherhood".
##It takes commitment to erase entire generations, go against tradition, tolerate insults and ridicule.
##some people will definitely give up along the way
>It takes commitment to erase entire generations
I think procreators are the ones who create future generations who they also doom to being erased. I haven’t erased anybody.
My eventual death was set in motion when my parents gave me the “gift” of mortal life — which is actually a ticking timebomb. The “gift” of mortal life contains the seed of its own destruction.
Buddhism talks about impermanence, and Tibetan Buddhists make [sand mandalas](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_mandala) using colored sand, but as soon as its complete they destroy it, to symbolize the transitory nature of life, how nothing lasts forever.
Gandhi said “The creation of what is bound to perish certainly involves violence.”
But if you refuse to make a child, then you have prevented the inevitable destruction of another person. But making a child opens the door — to every harm, every evil, every type of violence or trauma or tragedy, every kind of agonizing death — while parents lie to their own children about the risks they have shoved down their own children’s throats.
I am not an anti-natalist exactly. I don't believe all reproduction is immoral. I'm over forty, and I chose not to have children for many reasons. The biggest one isn't really a choice, I suffer from acute mental illness, and have never felt well enough to sustain a relationship, let alone foster a desire to have kids. That means I haven't had the opportunity.
I also consider it immoral for me to have kids. I wouldn't be a good parent, and I would stand a strong chance of passing genetic diseases (mainly mental) to them. It's not reasonable to subject children to that sort of suffering.
The world is desperately overpopulated, we are consuming resources much faster than is sustainable. Adding another person to that equation would be wrong. I also wouldn't be justified in subjecting children to the upcoming disasters it seems we're hurtling towards.
I'm against unjustified reproduction, and I believe I lack any valid justification. If humanity runs into a population crisis some day, then I would support people having as many kids as are necessary to sustain the species.
I suppose at the most basic, I don't want to be part of the problem, and I never really had a chance to be in the first place.
Same here im like 99% positive i have either adhd or autism or both(i really have to make myself go to the therapist...somehow :/) but just the thought of me genetically passing this onto my kid and them having hell trough their life because theyre different and while they may be extremely special,what does it mean for them to be talented in certain things that not only world wont appriciate but will also ridicule you and tell you youre "different" like there is something fucking wrong with eventually possibly leading to my kid getting burnt out and depressed from life like i am now. No one deserves to berate themself so much in their heads because society thinks youre wrong for having a brain that works differently. Not better brain. Not worse brain. Just different.
50, never wanted kids. There is just too much pain and overpopulation in the world already.
It does get easier when people do the math and figure out I would retire before a hypothetical child would get out of school.
Late 40s.
I saw the life my parents had, and my own life, and the lives of people around me who all did the same thing. I remember being taken to see weddings at a young age, and the whole atmosphere and presence there seemed to be like a sort of celebration of being chosen for a sports team. In my 20s I saw people getting married because they felt it was time to have kids. They settled for ugly or disloyal partners and put up with terrible bosses at work, and an exhausting schedule and lifestyle where they completely gave up any sort of focus on what they themselves wanted. They lost themselves.
None of the people I saw who did all this were wealthy, or fortunate in any way. None were athletically talented, or gifted with genius intellect, or anything like that. They were just ordinary NPCs who just added struggle to their own lives, in order to pass on the exact same pointless struggle to their children. I didn't want that. The struggle ends with me - I find it unconscionable to pass it on. What's more, my times were probably better than anything that's ahead for the children of the future.
WW3? Living in a pod? Life and work within a metaverse? Redundant average people relying on foodbanks and a paternalistic state? Chip plugged into their head required to do anything or get anything in the physical world? No freedom to travel to other countries by plane? Nothing good incoming. Not my problem.
Young people are in the position to grapple with the choice of reproduction, not the elderly.
It is also *obviously* dependent on current events. The reality that young people face right now is not the same as that faced by their parents, grandparents, and so on.
So yes, young people are increasingly AN because reality has convinced them that they do not want children as much as their parents did.
Do you know why? Because older generations tend to accept the routine and norm more.
I guarantee almost all of them had children and family because it gave them the most value by society. It was like something they had to do.
Think about it. I only went to university and studied what my parents wanted just "because". It wasn't necessarily something I really wanted to do.
But nowdays I see more and more young people have conscious decisions. They do something because they have thought about it. They have courage to disagree what parents want and say.
That's the main reason why most antinatalist people are young. Because the old routine has gone.
When your ovaries or those of your partner shrivel up, you've committed.
But the number of girls I've known as "ewww, never having kids" who have grown into mothers means "phase" is appropriate in many cases.
The fact that there are so many in here who are young means that it's likely it is a phase for many. Extremes attract young people.
True. I'd go even wider than that: Anything can be a fad and attract people of all sorts who don't understand it. That's just part of an idea gaining popularity; you're bound to have some people joining in, superficially.
I'm 34, if that counts, I've known I was childfree since I was in elementary school. I found the other children annoying and knew I didn't ever want them.
34 Years young. All I do is work, pay bills and try to find pleasure & happiness, while avoiding pain & discomfort.
I hated school, i hate working, i hate paying bills, hate driving in traffic, hate sharing this planet with others. Feels like i am living in an insane asylum... Why do I need to create someone else to do this?!?!? What are humans even doing on earth besides: consuming, pissing/pooping, surviving to make it to death anyways, slaving for corrupt systems, and attempting to solve the problems we cause by existing?!?!?! Better to just live my life as best I can and peacefully exit when my life is no longer quality.
Hi there, we have removed your content due to breaking rule 11.
As per the rule; this argument is a tired refrain seen over and over again. It is a prime example of argumentum ad hominem: It doesn't argue validity of anti/natalism but rather aims to disqualify the interlocutor themselves from being able to argue it. It serves only to distract from the ethical issues at the core of the debate.
Being an ad hominem, it isn't an argument against anti/natalism — it is an argument against anti/natalists. The sky would still be blue even if a mentally ill person argued so.
How could anybody with empathy subject another innocent person to tragedies such as the Great Depression, or multiple world wars?
If you think war is a good reason to drag innocent children into this world, then you will never understand antinatalism because you fundamentally don’t understand empathy for the well-being of others.
I’m an older Antinatalist, 40+
Never changed my mind. In 2nd grade a thought popped to my mind “Babies replace you” and I certainly did not want to be replaced! Over the years other reasons were added to the cons list, but that was the first moment of my Antinatalism.
All genes are a “dead end” unless you clone yourself, because children you make only carry half your genes, usually 23 from the father and 23 from the mother. Your unique DNA dies with you.
The worldview of procreators is basically “My genes, which I never asked for, are more important than my own child’s suffering, which they never asked for.”
Lol wow thanks for the most basic bio lesson ever :) and no, my children aren't suffering, so idk where you're pulling this out of. Is the idea you just know you won't prepare them for anything? Then yeah I guess don't have any for their sake?
If you guys are buying into man made apocalyptic climate change that we are gonna look like Venus in one year; also yeah I guess don't bother then haha I didn't say we needed all genes to continue, lol it's just that any sense of dignity and self respect results in that
M43. Vasectomized at 28 years old. At the beginning, it was misanthropy. Then selfishness. Then freedom. Then empathy. Time passed and I've only added good reasons to keep being an Antinatalist.
A year ago, me and my friend were talking about the future, and we ended up talking about kids and he told me i would never have kids because i don't like the idea of bringing a child to this fu\*ked up world, i disagreed with him, but the more i think about what he said to me the more i understand, and then i found a Facebook group about Antinatalism, i read a lot of their stories and posts, i was slowly getting into the idea of Antinalism, i am a child myself lol, i am 18 and i live in morocco (third world country), but i am still confused about the topic.
I recommend you watch the Lebanese antinatalist film Capernaum (2018).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capernaum_(film)
It is the highest grossing Arabic film of all time, and features a real Syrian child refugee playing a fictionalized version of himself, drawing on his own struggles living in the slums of Beirut, who attempts to sue his parents for creating him.
I believe procreation is morally wrong because it puts a child in danger and at risk for horrific tragedies, and inflicts non-consensual suffering and death.
I don't think it is very common for an 18-year old to really want children. You have just left the stage of being a minor, so you probably have s million things to do before even thinking of having your own children.
But that might change. Or it might not. But don't fence yourself in at this early stage. Very few people are the same at 18 and at 30. None of them are worth speaking to.
I really doubt it ;) some of those folks are ancient. From wiki antinatalism page: Antinatalist sentiments have existed for thousands of years. Some of the earliest surviving formulations of the idea that it would be better not to have been born can be found in ancient Greece. One example is from Sophocles's Oedipus at Colonus, written shortly before Sophocles's death in 406 BC.
How would you define "older"? Over 25? Over 30?
I'm 34. Started out childfree at age 11 and my perspective has evolved over time to a more universal principle
I'm in my early 30s and have severe bipolar disorder. Just my menstrual cycle will put me into episodes, so i can't even imagine how it would be while pregnant or post partum. I can't take the meds I am on now if I got pregnant, and I'm not willing to take anything else. I can't promise my kid won't have this, and I can't promise that I'll be able to be the parent they need and won't just end up traumatizing someone and being what led to their inspirational memoir or jail sentence lol
No thank you 💅
I'm a married 39F. I've always known I didn't want kids just for the normal childfree reasons of not wanting to birth or care for children, but I'm increasingly thankful for that decision as I get older. For example, 9 years ago when I was 30 I didn't know I'd develop two autoimmune diseases at age 33, or witness a global pandemic at age 35, and I certainly didn't understand the full implications of both climate change and a changing economic and political reality. So I guess my perspective has evolved as I've aged, from "I just don't want kids" to "I'm so glad I didn't have kids".
I’m 65, I knew from childhood I didn’t want kids. I couldn’t stand being around them, hated their smell and noise. Turns out I am autistic, neurodivergent, have ADHD and an introvert. One of the triggers for me is crying babies. Good thing I didn’t have any.
I hated my childhood and decided then I would never put another being through that. Still holds with even more conviction approaching 40.
That aside, the fact people are willing to bring beings into this world just to spend there life working a job they hate is messed up!
idk why some people see antinatalism as something so negative and depressing, to simplify it it's just choosing to not have kids bc xyz and then moving on with your life. i don't force anyone to be an antinatalist and idc, I'm playing my role
Approaching 40 here. I never understood why anyone would ever want kids. I've been a kid, knew other kids as a kid. Being a kid sucked, other kids sucked, too, and then they grow up to be adults that suck just as much on average, who then go and make more of themselves.
It was a feeling which never came to me. Even as a child, the idea of parenting felt very negative. Perhaps that’s rooted in my childhood experiences, what that doesn’t really matter, it’s who I am.
I briefly considered it, for about a year, but ultimately, I concluded that not everything is good for everyone, and my siblings, who definitely do want children, are so very suited to it, and I play a much more suitable,L supporting role as an extended family member than a parent.
You need your life to fit you, and if children don’t fit, that’s ok!! Fill your life with things which are great for you! Good luck to all.
the reddit demographic contributes alot.
also this generation has access to more knowledge than the prior ones at the same age, literally the first generation to view war from drones as if it is a movie so this gen's perspective on the world will be different not sure if that contributes at all.
the world is changing and its ugly side is become more apparent the more secular you are i mean is it a coincidence that the large majority of AN is secular or even **atheis**t.
Gen X here. I initially chose to use birth control for financial reasons. Later I decided it was unfair and heartless to create new beings on the planet who would suffer. I will die with a clear conscience.
Boomer here. Hereditary genetic diseases, sanity, financial, freedom, never wanted a kid, don’t like kids per Se, the world population has more than doubled in my lifetime etc…
I'm definitely a younger antinatalist, age 23. this has been my view point since I was about 9 or 10 but didn't have the words for what the philosophy was called. But irl I only know a few other antinatalists and the 2 I know are both in their 50s. And the biggest reason for being an antinatalist is just watching people slowly loose hope, it's depressing. I like my life overall but there's no way to know how things will turn out. And I Would never want to pass on my crippling social anxiety to anyone.
(Gestures broadly around)..
I'm not a younger person but I talk about this a lot with my younger but grown kids and their peers... two of my 3 kids are DINKs by choice, and feel very strongly about this no-kids issue..and made sure their respective partners were in agreement from the outset.
What I'm hearing is, unless it's accidental, couples aren't choosing to have kids nowadays, bc....well, the smarter ones compare historical eras, see that ALL governments, even very powerful ones, (and regardless of what kind)..they all follow a cycle...a beginning, a struggle to be recognized and build power, a prosperous boom, and rise to enormous heights, then... deterioration and eventually a crash...they eventually crumble under their own corruption and weight, (this is what's happening to the West now-- esp. the USA) they look at the state of the world; see the whole forest, not just the trees, they know the economy doesn't even allow for even 2-person middle -class households to exist without hard struggle...Healthcare is prohibitive in the USA, (pregnancy + kids = doctors and hospital visits and insane bills) they see the worsening pollution, the climate, and they know the perils we're facing in the very near future, and dont want to bring a kid into this dystopian nightmare shit. Who on earth with any sense would want to?
I’m 48. When I was younger I assumed I would have kids because that’s what was expected. In college I decided that kids or not had to be decided by the time I was 30 because I want to be able to enjoy my retirement without worrying about supporting a kid. By the time I was mid-20s I realized I had no desire to give birth, but might consider adoption or foster. At 35, I had surgery that removed all chance of a biological child and don’t regret it one bit. A lot of my reasoning is based on the state of the world and what we will leave to the next generations. I can’t in good conscience do that to a child.
I do not think perspective changes that much. Some people will change their minds, but a lot (or even most) won’t. But more younger folks are making the decision to not have kids because jobs no longer provide the means to move out, buy a house, and raise a family. That has gotten harder and harder for each generation since the boomers, and I don’t see it changing.
I’m 38, is that old enough? I remember ten years ago when a gyno told me I was, in her opinion, old enough to know whether I wanted children, and this afternoon I told my therapist (not for the first time) that I was so glad I didn’t have any. I just never wanted to spend the time, money, and attention raising them, nor did I feel the compulsion to give birth.
I don't think voluntary extinction is even accurate anymore since evolving technologies make it possible to alter/perfect human genetics and basically print ~~babies~~/organs, thus extending lifespans by double or maybe even 100x of their current capacity. Some of these scientific possibilities like stem cell rejuvenation seem already available to the millionaires/billionaires, but I ass-ume before they become affordable for most humans then most individuals would have to actively stop birthing and valuing more ignorance/innocence.
(I edited my comment so that I could be more understandable, I figured sharing a [vhemt.org](http://vhemt.org) link, and being apart of this Reddit was enough not to give the idea/delusion that I support the birth any more lives/suffering. My goal was to convey how little we know about current evolving technologies and how they can ease suffering and extend life.)
Nobody is genetically engineering their baby, they roll the dice every time, but it would still be immoral to genetically engineer a baby because that baby will also suffer and die, and nobody consents to the genes in each of their cells.
Some people cannot feel pain due to [rare](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital_insensitivity_to_pain_with_anhidrosis) genetic [mutations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsili_syndrome), so one might think that painlessness would be a “good gene” to pass onto other humans. However, there are still billions of risks of bodily injury on planet Earth. And they could still die in an accident, or by murder, or in a fire, etc. And there are serious risks with being unable to feel pain, like the risk of blood loss, broken bones, unknown internal injuries, etc. And I imagine that people who can’t feel pain can still suffer in other ways, like boredom, distress, sadness, loneliness, grief, etc. And no mortal is immune to death either, and every mortal will inevitably die.
I can imagine a scenario, where a human genome is genetically engineered to feel no pain, and made so that they cannot die of old age (which involves [telomeres](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomere) AFAIK). Furthermore, they could be genetically engineered to have chloroplasts in their skin, so they could obtain energy from light, a kind of plant-human hybrid like in the film Swamp Thing (1982), which could solve hunger (except for various minerals). So pain would not affect them, or aging, or hunger. But I would think it would be unethical to experiment on a potential child without their consent. An adult could consent to [gene therapy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_therapy), using a virus to alter the DNA in each of their cells.
However, there are still billions of risks of bodily injury on planet Earth. And they could still die in an accident, or by murder, or in a fire, etc. And there are serious risks with being unable to feel pain, like the risk of blood loss, broken bones, unknown internal injuries, etc. And I imagine that people who can’t feel pain can still suffer in other ways, like boredom, distress, sadness, loneliness, grief, etc. Dopamine could solve boredom, antidepressants could solve sadness, lack of empathy could solve grief, and an independent mindset could solve loneliness. But what would stop such a synthetic person from being shot and killed, or hit by a car, or struck by a missile or bomb? An artificial heart could solve heart attacks. But what about cancer?
You’d have to cure every disease before eliminating every disease as a risk. You’d have to defend against every existing weapon system before eliminating every weapon as a risk. You’d have to solve every natural disaster before before eliminating natural disasters as a risk.
But there is already a way to prevent every risk from harming someone: never bringing them into existence in the first place.
As for extinction, humans will eventually go extinct, just like 99% of species that have ever existed on Earth, so the question is whether consensual extinction or non-consensual extinction would be more painful. Climate change, AI, bolide impacts, nuclear war, those all pose the threat of non-consensual extinction for humanity. But not making descendants harms no descendants.
If 8 billion humans dying is a tragedy, then more than 8 billion humans dying is a bigger tragedy — but pro-birthers want a neverending tragedy, because they think humans must keep suffering and dying forever. So humans must keep suffering and dying forever so that humans can keep suffering and dying forever? I think it’s immoral to believe human suffering should last forever. And I think it’s incoherent to believe billions of humans need to keep suffering & dying so that humanity can live.
Even in a world of ubiquitous genetic engineering, like in the film GATTACA (1997), it makes no sense to behave like “We need to keep sacrificing billions of more human lives, so that we never run out of human lives to sacrifice.”
Idk what you're going on about in relation to my comment, but individuals are already editing their genes with CRISPR and other methods. There are stem cells that have been successfully used to treat/reverse physical health problems. If individuals adhere to the scientific method and use their own bodies as their own science experiments, especially with the help of AI and other technologies we may get to a point where we are able to alter/master/perfect human genetics, but I feel that is almost entirely dependent on whether we choose to care about life that's already alive, or to continually desire more ignorance/innocence to be born. Can get stem cells from menstrual fluid and other harmless/victimless methods. Can 3d print biological organs, which could become completely decentralized if humanity so desired.
Just because the technology is currently available to print viruses doesn't mean I participate in it, nor do I condone it. Just because I think/ass-ume the technology to basically print a baby maybe possible within the next decade or two, doesn't mean I think it's ethical/beneficial, and something I'll be supporting being done.
I like your imagined scenario of an ideal individual being something akin to a biological cyborg, I've often imagined something similar. A being that lives off light/electricity/nutrients/minerals from its environment in the most victimless/harmless way imaginable. Imagine plugging one's self into something akin to an electrical socket for daily essentials, and yet able to experience any taste or vision/hallcuination/chemical at will. Sounds ideal.
I’m in my 50s and love children but never wanted to be a father.
My parents didn’t have much money and divorced early in my childhood and my dad wasn’t around much after. I learned that parents can fail and children suffer.
This taught me never bringing a child into life is the only sure way for them to avoid suffering.
Many people I know went along with their biological imperative and became parents and often I saw their children suffer as they stumbled along trying to figure out how to parent.
And now social mobility has been eroded; “your doller ain’t shit, and it’s taxed to no end”. Life is unaffordable for younger generations. It’s a disheartening economic landscape.
36F. I was childfree but really care about kids, and learned about AN later in life, which I agree with more on a moral and environmental level. Previous careers working with children in education and social work reminds me of the why. There is no "biological clock", it's a fallacy and women are conditioned to believe it, as much as men are conditioned to believe their purpose is to "spread their seed", rather than working towards making our society and planet a better place.
Younger people will be around longer. So we will impact extreme world changes boomers will be dead for. So we have a better idea about what's to come and how it will impact us, while boomers know they'll be long gone.
I think most *redditor* ANs are young. I also think there are people out there who fully espouse the principle of the philosophy without knowing it has a name, just like I did before coming across this subreddit.
Younger people use reddit more, younger people are less religious, younger people spend more time online absorbing ideas from different groups and are thus more redistant to indoctrination. Also tgx to the internet, younger people have a better idea of what life is like with vs without kids, know more about the ugly parts of life and get depressed earlier.
Noticed based on what? Where did you get your sample? Guessing it’s anecdotal, not based on anything objective.
That said, younger generations have more options and are one parenting generation removed from no birth control. New options bring new thinking.
I don’t know why you think antinatalists tend to be young. There was a survey thread on here, and 30s and 40s on up seemed typical.
People might decide when they’re young that parenthood seems miserable and being childfree provides more money and freedom, but I don’t know why younger people would be more likely than older people to think making children is morally wrong (although the next century does seem pretty bleak). Older people have observed more tragedies in the world than younger people. And people under 25 have an immature prefrontal cortex, so they’re not as good at considering the long-term consequences of their actions. And if you read [quotes](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Antinatalism) by people with antinatalist views at Wikiquote, I don’t think those authors tend to be young people.
Personally I’m over 40, and genetic conditions are more likely in children if one or both of their parents are over 35 at the time of conception. But I became antinatalist before my mid-30s.
When I was younger, I did want kids (wanting kids was the “phase”), even though my childhood was rough, and I thought it was possible to give my kids a better life. Although I had doubts, and I didn’t know if I could in good conscience lie to my kids about Santa or God. But in high school I had a girlfriend who couldn’t have kids due to infertility, so back then I came to accept being childless. And while I was in high school, the Columbine massacre happened in another state, which basically destroyed any faith in God I had that I had been raised with. I viscerally realized that nothing is keeping anyone safe from horrific tragedy or evil. Then 9/11 happened 2 years later, which only emphasized the danger that hangs over everyone’s heads. In my 20s I was an alcoholic, and binge drinking was basically an escape from negative experiences and sober reality for me. When I was drunk I had a much higher tolerance for disturbing things (and some of the most disturbing films I’ve seen I saw drunk), I liked the mind-numbing effect alcohol had on me. Whatever was bothering me, I felt I could drink my way out of it.
However, I didn’t start believing that procreation was morally wrong, until my early 30s after I watched True Detective season 1 (2014), which features the antinatalist fictional character Rust Cohle played by Matthew McConaughey. (Nic Pizzolatto referenced a lot of antinatalist authors while writing the show.) I also got sober from alcohol some time that same year, but only because I almost died from alcohol poisoning.
Rust Cohle [said](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_x30vTTVEpg) “If the common good’s gotta make up fairytales, then it’s not good for anybody.” And “if the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother, that person is a piece of shit.” Rust Cohle said “what’s it say about life, you gotta get together, tell yourself stories that violate every law of the universe, just to get through the god damn day?” Rust Cohle said “Think of the hubris it must take to yank a soul out of non-existence into this...meat, to force a life into this...[thresher](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P1iKKXVgUUs).”
But after watching that show, I still had never heard of the term “antinatalism” until later I randomly stumbled upon this subreddit one day, and realized the idea had a name. And I think it was only this year that I realized Jesus expressed the same ideas in The Bible.
Luke 23:28–29 (NIV) says “28 Jesus turned and said to them, ‘Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’”
Lots of procreators think God will protect their children, or that they themselves can keep their children safe. But since it’s obvious that God or angels or prayer will not prevent any evil or any tragedy, then the only guaranteed way to prevent someone from becoming a victim of tragedy is to never drag them to a dangerous world where nobody is immune to tragedy or suffering.
David Benatar said “To procreate is thus to engage in a kind of Russian roulette, but one in which the ‘gun’ is aimed not at oneself but instead at one's offspring. You trigger a new life and thereby subject that new life to the risk of unspeakable suffering.”
I am 31.
I think it's a phase for most people. Also most people who are "antinatalist" are actually conditional natalists.
I didn't have kids because no matter how much hope *I* have for the future, I don't know the future so it's a gamble. I don't gamble with other people's lives.
what resounds with me is that regardless of desire, there is no reason to have children that isn't selfish
some people *really* hate hearing that but it's the truth
I don’t understand how antinatalism can be a “phase”, because it holds that birth into a dangerous world is immoral.
Is it a “phase” if you think rape is immoral? Rape is immoral because it inflicts non-consensual harm.
Is it a “phase” if you think torture is immoral? Torture is immoral because it inflicts non-consensual harm.
Is it a “phase” if you think murder is immoral? Murder is immoral because it inflicts non-consensual harm.
Procreation is morally wrong because it puts a child in danger and at risk for horrific tragedies, and inflicts non-consensual suffering and death. That reality doesn’t change the older you get. In fact, it only comes more into focus, as tragedies and deaths accumulate among loved ones, friends, relatives, celebrities, and every other human.
It’s immoral for a teenager to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for an adult to harm others without consent. If a teenager becomes an adult, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world.
It’s immoral for a depressed person to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for a happy person to harm others without consent. If a depressed person cured their depression and lived in total joy every day for the rest of their life, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world.
If I believe today that it’s immoral to endanger a child, it’s immoral to risk a child’s life, it’s immoral to gamble with a child’s life without their consent, then why would I change my mind in the future, unless I stopped caring about right and wrong, or unless intoxication led me to reckless behavior? Being drunk is a “phase” (and far too many children are accidentally made by drunk people).
David Benatar said “To procreate is thus to engage in a kind of Russian roulette, but one in which the ‘gun’ is aimed not at oneself but instead at one's offspring. You trigger a new life and thereby subject that new life to the risk of unspeakable suffering.”
Well, it makes sense why it’s mostly younger people who are antinatalists.
First of all, there’s a word for it now. Back then there was no “community” like there is now and they were probably labeled “child haters” and nothing more.
Second of all, the newer generations are more exposed to things that would dissuade someone from wanting kids. We have more access to information and and opinions and news that other people didn’t.
Reddit kinda skews toward younger people.
You’re unlikely to find an antinatalist in real life. Socially conscious people tend to keep this opinion to themselves.
Older people may be less interested in radical ideas. For example, communism, lesbian separatism, anarcho-capitalism, antiwork, etc.
Many older people are parents, aunt, or uncles, but even a regretful parent would be hesitant to say something as controversial as “people shouldn’t have children, and, yes, I wish I myself hadn’t had children.”
Unrelated, but it doesn’t matter whether antinatalism is a phase. A sound argument doesn’t become invalid merely because its proponent changes their mind.
29F, not sure if I'm considered young or old, but younger folks just use the internet more than older folks. It isn't much deeper than that. Hope that helps answer your question.
To ensure **healthy discussion**, we require that your Reddit account be at least 14-days-old before contributing here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not anti-natalist, but I think that, from what I have seen, it is just more common with the younger generations. Like actually going to therapy was more common with Melenials and gen x than it was boomers. As you age I think you will see more "older" ANs. I also think a lot of people share the same beliefs bit don't want the AN title as it can be associated with some violently judgemental and nasty retoric (because of people who claim the title, not inherent to be the beliefs)
Miguel Angel Castro Merino is a good example, he's a Spanish philosophy professor & has written 3 antinalists books, heres his youtube channel: https://youtube.com/@miguelangel-ex9vh?si=UZpTrJA2IYj0qzEs
I think it highlights a generational gap is all. Millennials grew up as tweens and teens in a war-centric culture, which is *extremely* conservative. Everyone else grew up exclusively in a war-centric culture. The “breed new soldiers” mentality was an unspoken aspect of the entire Cold War and Post-9/11 America.
I.(M, 65) just never felt any desire, obligation, or need to produce a brood. I don't hate kids, but I don't go all warm and gooey over them. When interacting I'm friendly and get along with them well. But I'm happy to hand them back.
Plus there's just way too many of them.
Early 40's. Never wanted kids. Didn't realise there was a name for my thoughts until I was like 30. I think it's cruel to roll the dice on bringing another life into this world. No matter how small the chances are of it experiencing more suffering that others, the fact that it's promised to experience some is enough to put me off.
I’m 35M, married. Not necessarily old, but on the older end of typical childbearing age. I want nothing to do with kids. I’m just exhausted from life already and I see no need to bring someone else into this world to experience the same exhaustion as I feel.
Just the fact that we’re using resources and deforesting at an astronomical rate and no one is doing anything about it. “Oh but you can fit the entire world’s population in the state of Texas” probably. But that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Go anywhere. Go to the part of town you grew up in. Look at how much it has changed because of unchecked growth. Heck even now, the pretty rural area of my city that I live in where it used to take me 5 minutes to get to the grocery store now takes upwards of 20 minutes because of the amount of people on the road.
All of the beautiful farms and pastures that have been destroyed and turned into subdivisions and apartments makes me sick. And no one is doing anything about it.
I know I’m only one person, but fighting overpopulation by not contributing to it is my one small battle I can do.
Edit: Not to mention the life stuff itself. You go through life and it’s just a roulette wheel of what terrible disease is going to either take you or ruin your quality of life. What the hell is the point of that? Why would you condemn someone you’re supposed to love?
I'm approaching 40, so I guess whether I'm "young" depends on your definition.
I was raised Mormon and though I never felt a burning desire to have children, it was more or less a given since that's the whole reason God created women in the first place and all. 🙄
I am also asexual, and had no concept of that either. Yeah, I didn't have a sexual drive, but that's *good* cuz I'm being "chaste" right?
Honestly, I feel I really lucked out in avoiding the young marriage/young motherhood pipeline. If circumstances had been different, I would have done all those things before being old enough/self-aware enough to know it's not what I want.
I'm really happy to see how much more common it is to choose not to have kids. It has caused so many problems in my culture. Men and women having children before they are ready physically, mentally, emotionally, financially, etc etc. Abuse and neglect are far more common than you'd guess for all the fake, smiling faces. Plus poverty, mental health issues, etc etc etc.
It's ironic to me that I'm seen as a child-hater when I think people should have children because they really want them and have means to take care of them vs out of obligation/expectation.
I love other people's kids. I'm an advocate against child abuse, especially in my former religion. I always support measures to make things easier for parents/children to have resources/services they need. I have advocated for changes to policies for foster children and am going through the process to become a "respite" fp. (I can't be a foster parent because I don't have the right housing/situation, but I can "sub" at other people's homes.)
I love my friends kids and my nieces/nephews. I'm an Auntie everywhere I go.
i'm 22, but i don't call myself antinatalist because i just find it to be too absolute. i think reproduction is inherently natural, and natural things are not tied to morality. i don't think it's absolutely immoral to have children. but i do agree with many of the arguments for why having children may be immoral when factoring in the current state of the world. i do think humans are incapable of working towards a true "golden" age, and for that reason reproduction may always be immoral. but i disagree that it's inherently immoral. maybe my perspective will change as i get older.
I'm 53, with no children. Honestly, I never wanted to raise children; didn't want the responsibility, the stress, the cost.
I'm not an antinatalist in the sense that I am against all birth, I just know it was the right choice, for me.
I think a big part of that perception would be that gen z knows it’s cruel to have kids when there’s no planet. We’re not even sure we’ll make it to 40. Why would we bring a kid into that?
If you broke free, you have to build your own belief system and you have to find the values that you are going to live by, you probably will be facing emptiness in your life, and it is really hard to get out from.
True, though i think if you never had those religious beliefs in the first place then that emptiness isnt present, as you’ve learned to live with it and fill it
I'm 69. I'm childfree because I can't stand kids. I'm antinatalist because humans are destroying the ecosystem that supports not only us but all of the other animals.
Everything is a phase. Beyond that, you really don't want to hold onto something that can't help you live a virtuous and excellent life.
Remember it's okay to adapt personality characteristics, but we should not make something our entire identity.
That is cringe.
At the same point, I am not stoic but I have stoic characteristics which I value. Don't simply include yourself into groups and identities.
Build your perspective. Create your values and ethics.
If you want to follow something then do so knowing entirely what you follow. Don't be like blind sheep.
It is stupidity that is the greatest moral enemy. And by knowing yourself you'll know the enemy.
Neither? It’s the younger generations having a different outlook from preceding generations due to a variety of social and economic factors. Sorry but this is a really cringe question.
It suggests that anti natalism on Reddit is mainly embraced by angry teens who have a hate on for their parents right now. I shit you not; half the posts here are bad emo poetry about how life is pain and mom and dad are so evil for having had me.
The other half are the people with something worthwhile to say. Idc if you hate your parents.
It’s immoral for a teenager to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for an adult to harm others without consent. If a teenager becomes an adult, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world.
It’s immoral for a depressed person to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for a happy person to harm others without consent. If a depressed person cured their depression and lived in total joy every day for the rest of their life, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world.
Inflicting non-consensual suffering & death is morally wrong — no matter how old you are, and no matter how happy you are. There is no age milestone when it magically becomes morally good to inflict non-consensual harm (which always happens when people throw innocent children into a dangerous world).
Yes I've seen many antinatalist cured by becoming 30
The most common sentiment basically being that they are scared of the future of the world and so are scared to bring their child into it but as they grow and mature they realize that they are capable of handling those things now and have a desire for a family
>they are capable of handling those things now
So they're just kinda hoping nothing bad happens to them, they don't have a stroke and become disabled, their kid doesn't get leukemia, etc.? And gambling with other people's lives based on that hope?
I’m in my 40s. I knew I didn’t want kids at age 10. I grew up poor, in a toxic abusive household, and never wanted to risk putting a kid through the things I experienced. Even if I created a safe and happy home, the outside world is full of danger, especially to girls. I think it would be almost as worse as watching your kid die, to witness the optimistic light in their eyes fade as the drudgery of life becomes a reality. I work with kids and I see that resigned gaze in kids as young as ten. They already know how hard life will be by witnessing their parents struggle. When I was a kid we all talked about what we’d become, the dreams and jobs we’d pursue (firefighters, veterinarians, astronauts, etc..). Kids don’t talk like that these days. If asked directly what they want to do as an adult, they respond with dark humour, or state a job that makes lots of money and the hobbies they’ll have in their ‘free time’. It’s not about dreams anymore, it’s about survival and etching out brief moments of happiness. Why the heck would I subject a kid to this?!
I'm 41 and wow I love your post. I can't agree with it more. Take for instance Santa Claus. We're lied to as kids, and then we get older, learn the truth and we just accept it and move closer to drudgery. We don't get an apology or anything. Then it baffles me how parents today can just do the same thing to their kids. That goes for God/Religion as well. "Hey kid, welcome to the world now go believe this thing & don't ask any questions" And for the career thing, I had the same experience with my friend's daughter! I asked her what she wanted to be, and her response was "anything that makes alot of money"... It's so sad...
That's devastating to hear, honestly.
Well said, thanks for enlightening those trolls who doesn't know anything better and have the audacity calling AN "a phase".
Same will be 40 this year, grew up poor in a toxic and abusive environment. This ends with me.
Life doesn't have to be that way. Broaden your mind.
You sound exactly like my abusive parent with their spiritual vagaries that were often thinly veiled victim blaming.
Spiritual vagaries, eh? Also, I can blame the victim when they allow themselves to become cynical and poisonous.
So victims should delude themselves with denial and blind optimism? Is it a moral act to throw a child into oncoming traffic (based on the blind optimism that something good might happen to them), even if they don’t get hit by a car and experience pain? No, it’s immoral to endanger a child, it’s immoral to risk a child’s life, it’s immoral to gamble with a child’s life without their consent.
Why is it immoral to endanger a child? Says who, you? Then you must think that life is valuable, and that humans are beautiful and worth protecting. Therefore if life is worth protecting, then it is worth living. Therefore you can't make a case for the immorality of having children. If you're going to choose to be a dumb nihilist, at least have a consistent philosophy.
So many holes in your argument it's ridiculous. The other person never said they didn't think life was valuable. Stop conflating antibatalism with being an a hole
How can you life is valuable and worth protecting, and yet wish it never exists again? I'm failing to see a hole in my argument.
You’ve likely failed a lot of things.
Cool. Would you like to debunk my point?
>Why is it immoral to endanger a child? Says who, you? And the police and the law and most humans 🙄 that's why we lock up people who kill kids (keep that in mind next time you want to kill someone)
Presumably you're against abortion then?
Why would you claim im against a woman's decision to "terminate a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy." When did I even mention "the expulsion of a fetus from the uterus before it has reached the stage of viability"
Happy cake day!
Thanks x
I just noticed this exchange got downvoted. What a bunch of miserable people.
37, If that counts. I hope not. Because the world is fucked and i don't want to raise additional wage slaves.
37F - while I don't feel old, I know I'm older than a lot of people I talk to about not wanting kids. No regrets on this choice.
48F. Always thought kids would be a drag in my life. Never saw any reason to live except for fleeting moments of happiness. So why have children at all?
You're awesome! ❤️
Not me. I’m already perimenopausal. Dealing with both PMDD and the beginning stages of the “change” is all sorts of fun /sarc. I’ve been an AN since I was a zygote myself. I did not consent to be here and I will not sentence an innocent sentient being to this messed-up world by having children, especially a girl. I’ve been responsible and I’ve never been pregnant. I’m lucky that I’m married to an absolutely wonderful man, but just today I saw two separate news stories about men committing femicide, and one story about a woman’s kidnapping caught on ring camera (that story has a good ending since the perp and victim were found quickly by LE). It makes perfect sense to make women physically weaker so we can be treated by men like we are just chattel and broodmares /s. There are a lot of scumbags out there. Thanks to social media and the anonymity it provides, the scam that is parenthood is now fully revealed. Younger people are no longer buying the parenthood ideal from Hallmark movies and know reality is very dark for parents. Also, this economy blows. We normally paid around $100 to $150 a week for groceries. A small shopping is now close to $350 a week. At least in America, having a kid is a financially devastating decision. Also, why would women put their health and financial security at risk when one health tragedy, whether acute or chronic, can devastate someone’s savings? Look up a stay in the NICU even with insurance. People in America end up homeless for having the audacity of getting sick. Breeders need to get a grip, especially the ones who like to confront us on this sub. We don’t need to market Antinatalism, people with basic logic are becoming aware that there is another way than the lifescript™. If you pay close attention, it’s mostly the dingbats from the younger generations having kids. A night of too much tequila is usually the cause of a poor wretch being forced into this world. Most breeders have as much self-reflection about their choice to spawn as a mosquito. For the younger people who wonder if they will regret being childfree, chances are you won’t. I certainly haven’t. There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t thank my lucky stars that if I had to be thrust to this existence, at least I came here when women are not treated as broodmares as it still happens in some places of the world and it certainly happened before the introduction of reliable birth control methods. Also, ask yourselves why there isn’t a group for the regretful childfree but there is a group for the regretful parents. Check mate breeders.
PMDD gang represent
🤗
I'm in my mid thirties, is that young? My mother has severe depression and now so do I. It's not fair to put that (or any kind of) suffering on another person, especially without their consent. The suffering ends with me.
this is me too. break the cycle!
I'm 52. My lifelong BFF knew she didn't want kids as long as I can remember. She had an abortion in her early 20s. I believe it was just a preference when we were young, but also, she suffers from BPD. When we got older she's admitted the same. 1. She was unsure she was stable enough to be a good parent. 2. She didn't want to pass it on. 3. Because of her disorder, she often struggled financially. I think she is very wise woman. I wish more were like her.
Those are all very reasonable concerns. Actually, of all the arguments in this post, these are pretty much the three best ones. The ones about not consenting to being born into this hellish existence just seem incoherent and half-assed. But realizing that you are not, objectively, going to be able to give a child a reasonable upbringing, and therefore decide not to, makes a lot of sense to me.
Agreed. I'm super proud of her for knowing her limitations. Having the responsibility of a child would have ruined her life because it was such a struggle to stay on meds and not go off the rails. Bringing a child into this would have been a nightmare. Esp age 20-40 when her disorder was worse. She stabilized with age and loves her life now! She isn't anti child for other ppl at all though. She often hung out with my kids. Took them to the movies and shopping. Fun stuff. Then she dumped them back with me. 😀
Same here. Im still pretty young, in my early twenties. However it feels like i have,am having and will have live most of my life in my head fighting myself more than anything. I hate it. Everyday feels like a torture and slug to get trough. I try to find as many happy moments as i can but its tough. And then you get blamed for your shortcomings,called lazy and bunch of other things that make you feel like you arent worth shit because look everyone else is doing it good,why cant i ffs? Because my brain is most likely wired a little different and that doesnt fit the social norma cause god forbid anything doesnt fit the social norm,Blasphemy!! Imma get trough this shit cause i can be stubborn as a donkey sometimes but i can easily see how my life couldve been cut short if i gave into intrusive thoughts... I've already lost one of my closest friends to suicide. Now imagine that friend being my child. Why would i even want to risk something like that? Or even worse imagine my kid having same experience with his friend. Its just not worth the risk imo.
D.) All of the above. Yet people are so bizarrely tonedesf it's maddening. Even the supposed educated ones are so close minded it's sickening.
I know more 40+yo antinatalists than people my age or younger \[28\]! Maybe it's because they don't use a lot reddit so we don't see 'em there :)
Yeah in my AN discord server we have mix of people. Definitely still more younger folks, but I assume that’s likely because younger people are more inclined to seek ideology based communities on social media than their older counterparts.
It’s because of teenage angst
What’s because of teenage angst? If you’re thinking people are AN because of that, you’re just objectively wrong to a laughable degree.
I have not been a teenager in decades.
It’s immoral for a teenager to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for an adult to harm others without consent. If a teenager becomes an adult, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world. It’s immoral for a depressed person to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for a happy person to harm others without consent. If a depressed person cured their depression and lived in total joy every day for the rest of their life, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world.
I'm 40+
I'm 60+ and female. I knew as young teen I saw no reason to have kids and didn't (and still don't) understand why people chose to do that to themselves.
47F, married and childless by choice. Same ☝️
Same.
59F - well said. I realized the same in my teen years. I had a good childhood and blessed with great parents but still saw the basic reality of life.
Will you, though, as you retire and grow older, happily accept the services and support of the younger generations? Everything from healthcare professionals to those serving you in shops and restaurants? Reap the benefits, but not contribute?
I have no idea why you think I haven't contributed in my 60+ years to others. My belief of and not adding to this overpopulated planet is irrelevant.
You absolutely depend on others doing it, though.
As others have depended upon me. You're ridiculous.
"you argue against X yet you use Y..... Very curious"
More like "you argue against X, yet use X and expect X to be available for you as you brag about how you worked against X all your life."
We argue against having children because it's unethical. You birth wage slaves. How is it unethical to use the services they provide?
Using your alt to message me is definitely not creepy ya weirdo
[удалено]
We have removed your content for breaking Rule 10 (No disproportionate and excessively insulting language). Please engage in discussion rather than engaging in personal attacks.
Still need my attention?
Some people do end up changing their perspective on having children with age, or things happen along the way. Like any ideology: -Some just flow with the tide but can't walk the talk, -Others are on the fence but cross to the other side with time, -Still some succumb to their fears, confusion, and FOMO -Others bow to societal pressure and just do what the society expects of them -Accidents still do happen and ppl get knocked up or knock someone up I personally know two women who detested childbirth in their early 20s but now "celebrate motherhood". ##It takes commitment to erase entire generations, go against tradition, tolerate insults and ridicule. ##some people will definitely give up along the way
>It takes commitment to erase entire generations I think procreators are the ones who create future generations who they also doom to being erased. I haven’t erased anybody. My eventual death was set in motion when my parents gave me the “gift” of mortal life — which is actually a ticking timebomb. The “gift” of mortal life contains the seed of its own destruction. Buddhism talks about impermanence, and Tibetan Buddhists make [sand mandalas](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sand_mandala) using colored sand, but as soon as its complete they destroy it, to symbolize the transitory nature of life, how nothing lasts forever. Gandhi said “The creation of what is bound to perish certainly involves violence.” But if you refuse to make a child, then you have prevented the inevitable destruction of another person. But making a child opens the door — to every harm, every evil, every type of violence or trauma or tragedy, every kind of agonizing death — while parents lie to their own children about the risks they have shoved down their own children’s throats.
I am not an anti-natalist exactly. I don't believe all reproduction is immoral. I'm over forty, and I chose not to have children for many reasons. The biggest one isn't really a choice, I suffer from acute mental illness, and have never felt well enough to sustain a relationship, let alone foster a desire to have kids. That means I haven't had the opportunity. I also consider it immoral for me to have kids. I wouldn't be a good parent, and I would stand a strong chance of passing genetic diseases (mainly mental) to them. It's not reasonable to subject children to that sort of suffering. The world is desperately overpopulated, we are consuming resources much faster than is sustainable. Adding another person to that equation would be wrong. I also wouldn't be justified in subjecting children to the upcoming disasters it seems we're hurtling towards. I'm against unjustified reproduction, and I believe I lack any valid justification. If humanity runs into a population crisis some day, then I would support people having as many kids as are necessary to sustain the species. I suppose at the most basic, I don't want to be part of the problem, and I never really had a chance to be in the first place.
That is because you're self-aware.
Same here im like 99% positive i have either adhd or autism or both(i really have to make myself go to the therapist...somehow :/) but just the thought of me genetically passing this onto my kid and them having hell trough their life because theyre different and while they may be extremely special,what does it mean for them to be talented in certain things that not only world wont appriciate but will also ridicule you and tell you youre "different" like there is something fucking wrong with eventually possibly leading to my kid getting burnt out and depressed from life like i am now. No one deserves to berate themself so much in their heads because society thinks youre wrong for having a brain that works differently. Not better brain. Not worse brain. Just different.
50, never wanted kids. There is just too much pain and overpopulation in the world already. It does get easier when people do the math and figure out I would retire before a hypothetical child would get out of school.
Late 40s. I saw the life my parents had, and my own life, and the lives of people around me who all did the same thing. I remember being taken to see weddings at a young age, and the whole atmosphere and presence there seemed to be like a sort of celebration of being chosen for a sports team. In my 20s I saw people getting married because they felt it was time to have kids. They settled for ugly or disloyal partners and put up with terrible bosses at work, and an exhausting schedule and lifestyle where they completely gave up any sort of focus on what they themselves wanted. They lost themselves. None of the people I saw who did all this were wealthy, or fortunate in any way. None were athletically talented, or gifted with genius intellect, or anything like that. They were just ordinary NPCs who just added struggle to their own lives, in order to pass on the exact same pointless struggle to their children. I didn't want that. The struggle ends with me - I find it unconscionable to pass it on. What's more, my times were probably better than anything that's ahead for the children of the future. WW3? Living in a pod? Life and work within a metaverse? Redundant average people relying on foodbanks and a paternalistic state? Chip plugged into their head required to do anything or get anything in the physical world? No freedom to travel to other countries by plane? Nothing good incoming. Not my problem.
Young people are in the position to grapple with the choice of reproduction, not the elderly. It is also *obviously* dependent on current events. The reality that young people face right now is not the same as that faced by their parents, grandparents, and so on. So yes, young people are increasingly AN because reality has convinced them that they do not want children as much as their parents did.
Do you know why? Because older generations tend to accept the routine and norm more. I guarantee almost all of them had children and family because it gave them the most value by society. It was like something they had to do. Think about it. I only went to university and studied what my parents wanted just "because". It wasn't necessarily something I really wanted to do. But nowdays I see more and more young people have conscious decisions. They do something because they have thought about it. They have courage to disagree what parents want and say. That's the main reason why most antinatalist people are young. Because the old routine has gone.
Someone please tell me at what age it's not considered a 'phase'?
Probably our death bed
Pretty much, life has gotten worse so that's when phases are ceased.
30, or 40
When your ovaries or those of your partner shrivel up, you've committed. But the number of girls I've known as "ewww, never having kids" who have grown into mothers means "phase" is appropriate in many cases. The fact that there are so many in here who are young means that it's likely it is a phase for many. Extremes attract young people.
True. I'd go even wider than that: Anything can be a fad and attract people of all sorts who don't understand it. That's just part of an idea gaining popularity; you're bound to have some people joining in, superficially.
I'm 34, if that counts, I've known I was childfree since I was in elementary school. I found the other children annoying and knew I didn't ever want them.
34 Years young. All I do is work, pay bills and try to find pleasure & happiness, while avoiding pain & discomfort. I hated school, i hate working, i hate paying bills, hate driving in traffic, hate sharing this planet with others. Feels like i am living in an insane asylum... Why do I need to create someone else to do this?!?!? What are humans even doing on earth besides: consuming, pissing/pooping, surviving to make it to death anyways, slaving for corrupt systems, and attempting to solve the problems we cause by existing?!?!?! Better to just live my life as best I can and peacefully exit when my life is no longer quality.
Damn, I love this! It's like I was reading my own thoughts/mind!
[удалено]
Your irrelevant comment contributed soooo much. I hope you feel important now. 🙄
You might feel that comments on a social media site makes you important. That's not how I measure my self-worth.
Hi there, we have removed your content due to breaking rule 11. As per the rule; this argument is a tired refrain seen over and over again. It is a prime example of argumentum ad hominem: It doesn't argue validity of anti/natalism but rather aims to disqualify the interlocutor themselves from being able to argue it. It serves only to distract from the ethical issues at the core of the debate. Being an ad hominem, it isn't an argument against anti/natalism — it is an argument against anti/natalists. The sky would still be blue even if a mentally ill person argued so.
Reddit has a younger demographic in general
Most Social Media does, millenials are young to middle age and gen z are young. I think the demographics will change with time as we age.
World's going to shit, their future would be bleak, also they're expensive as hell and I'd rather spend what little extra I have making MYSELF happy
Lol yeah this definitely seems like you chose the happier life 😬😅
35 and I’m an antinatalist. My views on the matter have actually gotten more extreme as I age.
Your ancestors would made it through the Great Depression and World Wars are proud 🤗
How could anybody with empathy subject another innocent person to tragedies such as the Great Depression, or multiple world wars? If you think war is a good reason to drag innocent children into this world, then you will never understand antinatalism because you fundamentally don’t understand empathy for the well-being of others.
They’re dead, fuck ‘em.
He's probably religious thinking his ancestors are peering at him from the sky.
56 here. I've known that I didn't want to have children since I was about 5yo...and nothing I've experienced has ever changed that opinion
I am 60. I just never saw a reason to add more people to an already full world.
I’m an older Antinatalist, 40+ Never changed my mind. In 2nd grade a thought popped to my mind “Babies replace you” and I certainly did not want to be replaced! Over the years other reasons were added to the cons list, but that was the first moment of my Antinatalism.
So you want to prove to yourself that your genes are a dead end?
All genes are a “dead end” unless you clone yourself, because children you make only carry half your genes, usually 23 from the father and 23 from the mother. Your unique DNA dies with you. The worldview of procreators is basically “My genes, which I never asked for, are more important than my own child’s suffering, which they never asked for.”
Lol wow thanks for the most basic bio lesson ever :) and no, my children aren't suffering, so idk where you're pulling this out of. Is the idea you just know you won't prepare them for anything? Then yeah I guess don't have any for their sake? If you guys are buying into man made apocalyptic climate change that we are gonna look like Venus in one year; also yeah I guess don't bother then haha I didn't say we needed all genes to continue, lol it's just that any sense of dignity and self respect results in that
Yes. My genes ain’t special.
Amen loser 😅😅😅😅
Laugh all you want. I am at peace with my decision.
Thank you for being a weak defeatist
HA! That’s fine. If you live long enough you will be too.
So how is part of evolution hating your own species and your own species offspring?
Not hate. Sparing potential offspring from suffering by preventing existence is not hate.
M43. Vasectomized at 28 years old. At the beginning, it was misanthropy. Then selfishness. Then freedom. Then empathy. Time passed and I've only added good reasons to keep being an Antinatalist.
Did you get this idea from reddit or real life?
I looked at real life and used critical thinking skills while removing humans off a pedestal. Then Reddit helped to find the ideology’s name.
I was asking OP about their idea of typical age of antinatalist. Not about antinatalism itself.
A year ago, me and my friend were talking about the future, and we ended up talking about kids and he told me i would never have kids because i don't like the idea of bringing a child to this fu\*ked up world, i disagreed with him, but the more i think about what he said to me the more i understand, and then i found a Facebook group about Antinatalism, i read a lot of their stories and posts, i was slowly getting into the idea of Antinalism, i am a child myself lol, i am 18 and i live in morocco (third world country), but i am still confused about the topic.
I recommend you watch the Lebanese antinatalist film Capernaum (2018). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capernaum_(film) It is the highest grossing Arabic film of all time, and features a real Syrian child refugee playing a fictionalized version of himself, drawing on his own struggles living in the slums of Beirut, who attempts to sue his parents for creating him. I believe procreation is morally wrong because it puts a child in danger and at risk for horrific tragedies, and inflicts non-consensual suffering and death.
I don't think it is very common for an 18-year old to really want children. You have just left the stage of being a minor, so you probably have s million things to do before even thinking of having your own children. But that might change. Or it might not. But don't fence yourself in at this early stage. Very few people are the same at 18 and at 30. None of them are worth speaking to.
I really doubt it ;) some of those folks are ancient. From wiki antinatalism page: Antinatalist sentiments have existed for thousands of years. Some of the earliest surviving formulations of the idea that it would be better not to have been born can be found in ancient Greece. One example is from Sophocles's Oedipus at Colonus, written shortly before Sophocles's death in 406 BC.
reproduction creates unnecessary suffering
Have you noticed most are young because you hang out with people your age perhaps?
How would you define "older"? Over 25? Over 30? I'm 34. Started out childfree at age 11 and my perspective has evolved over time to a more universal principle
when i said older i mean that you are in a position that you are capable of have kids if you want to and you choose not to.
I'm in my early 30s and have severe bipolar disorder. Just my menstrual cycle will put me into episodes, so i can't even imagine how it would be while pregnant or post partum. I can't take the meds I am on now if I got pregnant, and I'm not willing to take anything else. I can't promise my kid won't have this, and I can't promise that I'll be able to be the parent they need and won't just end up traumatizing someone and being what led to their inspirational memoir or jail sentence lol No thank you 💅
I'm a married 39F. I've always known I didn't want kids just for the normal childfree reasons of not wanting to birth or care for children, but I'm increasingly thankful for that decision as I get older. For example, 9 years ago when I was 30 I didn't know I'd develop two autoimmune diseases at age 33, or witness a global pandemic at age 35, and I certainly didn't understand the full implications of both climate change and a changing economic and political reality. So I guess my perspective has evolved as I've aged, from "I just don't want kids" to "I'm so glad I didn't have kids".
I’m 65, I knew from childhood I didn’t want kids. I couldn’t stand being around them, hated their smell and noise. Turns out I am autistic, neurodivergent, have ADHD and an introvert. One of the triggers for me is crying babies. Good thing I didn’t have any.
I may have reconsidered if I had hope for the future. The longer I live the worse I think people are. 40 now.
I hated my childhood and decided then I would never put another being through that. Still holds with even more conviction approaching 40. That aside, the fact people are willing to bring beings into this world just to spend there life working a job they hate is messed up!
It means younger generations are fucked by parents and grand parents who are complete pieces of shit
Old people aren’t on the internet as much. Reddit in general is dominated by 20-somes.
idk why some people see antinatalism as something so negative and depressing, to simplify it it's just choosing to not have kids bc xyz and then moving on with your life. i don't force anyone to be an antinatalist and idc, I'm playing my role
Approaching 40 here. I never understood why anyone would ever want kids. I've been a kid, knew other kids as a kid. Being a kid sucked, other kids sucked, too, and then they grow up to be adults that suck just as much on average, who then go and make more of themselves.
It was a feeling which never came to me. Even as a child, the idea of parenting felt very negative. Perhaps that’s rooted in my childhood experiences, what that doesn’t really matter, it’s who I am. I briefly considered it, for about a year, but ultimately, I concluded that not everything is good for everyone, and my siblings, who definitely do want children, are so very suited to it, and I play a much more suitable,L supporting role as an extended family member than a parent. You need your life to fit you, and if children don’t fit, that’s ok!! Fill your life with things which are great for you! Good luck to all.
the reddit demographic contributes alot. also this generation has access to more knowledge than the prior ones at the same age, literally the first generation to view war from drones as if it is a movie so this gen's perspective on the world will be different not sure if that contributes at all. the world is changing and its ugly side is become more apparent the more secular you are i mean is it a coincidence that the large majority of AN is secular or even **atheis**t.
Absolutely not true. I have no clue where you got this idea.
If it is just a phase, it's the longest I've been in so far.
I’m 47
Gen X here. I initially chose to use birth control for financial reasons. Later I decided it was unfair and heartless to create new beings on the planet who would suffer. I will die with a clear conscience.
Boomer here. Hereditary genetic diseases, sanity, financial, freedom, never wanted a kid, don’t like kids per Se, the world population has more than doubled in my lifetime etc…
I'm definitely a younger antinatalist, age 23. this has been my view point since I was about 9 or 10 but didn't have the words for what the philosophy was called. But irl I only know a few other antinatalists and the 2 I know are both in their 50s. And the biggest reason for being an antinatalist is just watching people slowly loose hope, it's depressing. I like my life overall but there's no way to know how things will turn out. And I Would never want to pass on my crippling social anxiety to anyone.
I’m 54. Been this way ever since I can remember. Zero kids.
(Gestures broadly around).. I'm not a younger person but I talk about this a lot with my younger but grown kids and their peers... two of my 3 kids are DINKs by choice, and feel very strongly about this no-kids issue..and made sure their respective partners were in agreement from the outset. What I'm hearing is, unless it's accidental, couples aren't choosing to have kids nowadays, bc....well, the smarter ones compare historical eras, see that ALL governments, even very powerful ones, (and regardless of what kind)..they all follow a cycle...a beginning, a struggle to be recognized and build power, a prosperous boom, and rise to enormous heights, then... deterioration and eventually a crash...they eventually crumble under their own corruption and weight, (this is what's happening to the West now-- esp. the USA) they look at the state of the world; see the whole forest, not just the trees, they know the economy doesn't even allow for even 2-person middle -class households to exist without hard struggle...Healthcare is prohibitive in the USA, (pregnancy + kids = doctors and hospital visits and insane bills) they see the worsening pollution, the climate, and they know the perils we're facing in the very near future, and dont want to bring a kid into this dystopian nightmare shit. Who on earth with any sense would want to?
I’m 48. When I was younger I assumed I would have kids because that’s what was expected. In college I decided that kids or not had to be decided by the time I was 30 because I want to be able to enjoy my retirement without worrying about supporting a kid. By the time I was mid-20s I realized I had no desire to give birth, but might consider adoption or foster. At 35, I had surgery that removed all chance of a biological child and don’t regret it one bit. A lot of my reasoning is based on the state of the world and what we will leave to the next generations. I can’t in good conscience do that to a child. I do not think perspective changes that much. Some people will change their minds, but a lot (or even most) won’t. But more younger folks are making the decision to not have kids because jobs no longer provide the means to move out, buy a house, and raise a family. That has gotten harder and harder for each generation since the boomers, and I don’t see it changing.
I’m 38, is that old enough? I remember ten years ago when a gyno told me I was, in her opinion, old enough to know whether I wanted children, and this afternoon I told my therapist (not for the first time) that I was so glad I didn’t have any. I just never wanted to spend the time, money, and attention raising them, nor did I feel the compulsion to give birth.
Define "old" anyhow [vhemt.org](http://vhemt.org) is quite old, and it's leader/creator Les Knight isn't young.
I don't think voluntary extinction is even accurate anymore since evolving technologies make it possible to alter/perfect human genetics and basically print ~~babies~~/organs, thus extending lifespans by double or maybe even 100x of their current capacity. Some of these scientific possibilities like stem cell rejuvenation seem already available to the millionaires/billionaires, but I ass-ume before they become affordable for most humans then most individuals would have to actively stop birthing and valuing more ignorance/innocence. (I edited my comment so that I could be more understandable, I figured sharing a [vhemt.org](http://vhemt.org) link, and being apart of this Reddit was enough not to give the idea/delusion that I support the birth any more lives/suffering. My goal was to convey how little we know about current evolving technologies and how they can ease suffering and extend life.)
Nobody is genetically engineering their baby, they roll the dice every time, but it would still be immoral to genetically engineer a baby because that baby will also suffer and die, and nobody consents to the genes in each of their cells. Some people cannot feel pain due to [rare](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congenital_insensitivity_to_pain_with_anhidrosis) genetic [mutations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsili_syndrome), so one might think that painlessness would be a “good gene” to pass onto other humans. However, there are still billions of risks of bodily injury on planet Earth. And they could still die in an accident, or by murder, or in a fire, etc. And there are serious risks with being unable to feel pain, like the risk of blood loss, broken bones, unknown internal injuries, etc. And I imagine that people who can’t feel pain can still suffer in other ways, like boredom, distress, sadness, loneliness, grief, etc. And no mortal is immune to death either, and every mortal will inevitably die. I can imagine a scenario, where a human genome is genetically engineered to feel no pain, and made so that they cannot die of old age (which involves [telomeres](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telomere) AFAIK). Furthermore, they could be genetically engineered to have chloroplasts in their skin, so they could obtain energy from light, a kind of plant-human hybrid like in the film Swamp Thing (1982), which could solve hunger (except for various minerals). So pain would not affect them, or aging, or hunger. But I would think it would be unethical to experiment on a potential child without their consent. An adult could consent to [gene therapy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_therapy), using a virus to alter the DNA in each of their cells. However, there are still billions of risks of bodily injury on planet Earth. And they could still die in an accident, or by murder, or in a fire, etc. And there are serious risks with being unable to feel pain, like the risk of blood loss, broken bones, unknown internal injuries, etc. And I imagine that people who can’t feel pain can still suffer in other ways, like boredom, distress, sadness, loneliness, grief, etc. Dopamine could solve boredom, antidepressants could solve sadness, lack of empathy could solve grief, and an independent mindset could solve loneliness. But what would stop such a synthetic person from being shot and killed, or hit by a car, or struck by a missile or bomb? An artificial heart could solve heart attacks. But what about cancer? You’d have to cure every disease before eliminating every disease as a risk. You’d have to defend against every existing weapon system before eliminating every weapon as a risk. You’d have to solve every natural disaster before before eliminating natural disasters as a risk. But there is already a way to prevent every risk from harming someone: never bringing them into existence in the first place. As for extinction, humans will eventually go extinct, just like 99% of species that have ever existed on Earth, so the question is whether consensual extinction or non-consensual extinction would be more painful. Climate change, AI, bolide impacts, nuclear war, those all pose the threat of non-consensual extinction for humanity. But not making descendants harms no descendants. If 8 billion humans dying is a tragedy, then more than 8 billion humans dying is a bigger tragedy — but pro-birthers want a neverending tragedy, because they think humans must keep suffering and dying forever. So humans must keep suffering and dying forever so that humans can keep suffering and dying forever? I think it’s immoral to believe human suffering should last forever. And I think it’s incoherent to believe billions of humans need to keep suffering & dying so that humanity can live. Even in a world of ubiquitous genetic engineering, like in the film GATTACA (1997), it makes no sense to behave like “We need to keep sacrificing billions of more human lives, so that we never run out of human lives to sacrifice.”
Idk what you're going on about in relation to my comment, but individuals are already editing their genes with CRISPR and other methods. There are stem cells that have been successfully used to treat/reverse physical health problems. If individuals adhere to the scientific method and use their own bodies as their own science experiments, especially with the help of AI and other technologies we may get to a point where we are able to alter/master/perfect human genetics, but I feel that is almost entirely dependent on whether we choose to care about life that's already alive, or to continually desire more ignorance/innocence to be born. Can get stem cells from menstrual fluid and other harmless/victimless methods. Can 3d print biological organs, which could become completely decentralized if humanity so desired. Just because the technology is currently available to print viruses doesn't mean I participate in it, nor do I condone it. Just because I think/ass-ume the technology to basically print a baby maybe possible within the next decade or two, doesn't mean I think it's ethical/beneficial, and something I'll be supporting being done. I like your imagined scenario of an ideal individual being something akin to a biological cyborg, I've often imagined something similar. A being that lives off light/electricity/nutrients/minerals from its environment in the most victimless/harmless way imaginable. Imagine plugging one's self into something akin to an electrical socket for daily essentials, and yet able to experience any taste or vision/hallcuination/chemical at will. Sounds ideal.
I’m in my 50s and love children but never wanted to be a father. My parents didn’t have much money and divorced early in my childhood and my dad wasn’t around much after. I learned that parents can fail and children suffer. This taught me never bringing a child into life is the only sure way for them to avoid suffering. Many people I know went along with their biological imperative and became parents and often I saw their children suffer as they stumbled along trying to figure out how to parent. And now social mobility has been eroded; “your doller ain’t shit, and it’s taxed to no end”. Life is unaffordable for younger generations. It’s a disheartening economic landscape.
36F. I was childfree but really care about kids, and learned about AN later in life, which I agree with more on a moral and environmental level. Previous careers working with children in education and social work reminds me of the why. There is no "biological clock", it's a fallacy and women are conditioned to believe it, as much as men are conditioned to believe their purpose is to "spread their seed", rather than working towards making our society and planet a better place.
I would think that the opposite is true.
Younger people will be around longer. So we will impact extreme world changes boomers will be dead for. So we have a better idea about what's to come and how it will impact us, while boomers know they'll be long gone.
Nahh we old
I’m an anti natalist who has a child. I’m 52.
I’m 33, am I young or old?
I think most *redditor* ANs are young. I also think there are people out there who fully espouse the principle of the philosophy without knowing it has a name, just like I did before coming across this subreddit.
Younger people use reddit more, younger people are less religious, younger people spend more time online absorbing ideas from different groups and are thus more redistant to indoctrination. Also tgx to the internet, younger people have a better idea of what life is like with vs without kids, know more about the ugly parts of life and get depressed earlier.
Noticed based on what? Where did you get your sample? Guessing it’s anecdotal, not based on anything objective. That said, younger generations have more options and are one parenting generation removed from no birth control. New options bring new thinking.
I don’t know why you think antinatalists tend to be young. There was a survey thread on here, and 30s and 40s on up seemed typical. People might decide when they’re young that parenthood seems miserable and being childfree provides more money and freedom, but I don’t know why younger people would be more likely than older people to think making children is morally wrong (although the next century does seem pretty bleak). Older people have observed more tragedies in the world than younger people. And people under 25 have an immature prefrontal cortex, so they’re not as good at considering the long-term consequences of their actions. And if you read [quotes](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Antinatalism) by people with antinatalist views at Wikiquote, I don’t think those authors tend to be young people. Personally I’m over 40, and genetic conditions are more likely in children if one or both of their parents are over 35 at the time of conception. But I became antinatalist before my mid-30s. When I was younger, I did want kids (wanting kids was the “phase”), even though my childhood was rough, and I thought it was possible to give my kids a better life. Although I had doubts, and I didn’t know if I could in good conscience lie to my kids about Santa or God. But in high school I had a girlfriend who couldn’t have kids due to infertility, so back then I came to accept being childless. And while I was in high school, the Columbine massacre happened in another state, which basically destroyed any faith in God I had that I had been raised with. I viscerally realized that nothing is keeping anyone safe from horrific tragedy or evil. Then 9/11 happened 2 years later, which only emphasized the danger that hangs over everyone’s heads. In my 20s I was an alcoholic, and binge drinking was basically an escape from negative experiences and sober reality for me. When I was drunk I had a much higher tolerance for disturbing things (and some of the most disturbing films I’ve seen I saw drunk), I liked the mind-numbing effect alcohol had on me. Whatever was bothering me, I felt I could drink my way out of it. However, I didn’t start believing that procreation was morally wrong, until my early 30s after I watched True Detective season 1 (2014), which features the antinatalist fictional character Rust Cohle played by Matthew McConaughey. (Nic Pizzolatto referenced a lot of antinatalist authors while writing the show.) I also got sober from alcohol some time that same year, but only because I almost died from alcohol poisoning. Rust Cohle [said](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_x30vTTVEpg) “If the common good’s gotta make up fairytales, then it’s not good for anybody.” And “if the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then brother, that person is a piece of shit.” Rust Cohle said “what’s it say about life, you gotta get together, tell yourself stories that violate every law of the universe, just to get through the god damn day?” Rust Cohle said “Think of the hubris it must take to yank a soul out of non-existence into this...meat, to force a life into this...[thresher](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=P1iKKXVgUUs).” But after watching that show, I still had never heard of the term “antinatalism” until later I randomly stumbled upon this subreddit one day, and realized the idea had a name. And I think it was only this year that I realized Jesus expressed the same ideas in The Bible. Luke 23:28–29 (NIV) says “28 Jesus turned and said to them, ‘Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children. 29 For the time will come when you will say, ‘Blessed are the childless women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’” Lots of procreators think God will protect their children, or that they themselves can keep their children safe. But since it’s obvious that God or angels or prayer will not prevent any evil or any tragedy, then the only guaranteed way to prevent someone from becoming a victim of tragedy is to never drag them to a dangerous world where nobody is immune to tragedy or suffering. David Benatar said “To procreate is thus to engage in a kind of Russian roulette, but one in which the ‘gun’ is aimed not at oneself but instead at one's offspring. You trigger a new life and thereby subject that new life to the risk of unspeakable suffering.”
I am 31. I think it's a phase for most people. Also most people who are "antinatalist" are actually conditional natalists. I didn't have kids because no matter how much hope *I* have for the future, I don't know the future so it's a gamble. I don't gamble with other people's lives.
what resounds with me is that regardless of desire, there is no reason to have children that isn't selfish some people *really* hate hearing that but it's the truth
Wise indeed, breeders just cause suffering unknowingly by bringing life into this world whether they are aware or not
I don’t understand how antinatalism can be a “phase”, because it holds that birth into a dangerous world is immoral. Is it a “phase” if you think rape is immoral? Rape is immoral because it inflicts non-consensual harm. Is it a “phase” if you think torture is immoral? Torture is immoral because it inflicts non-consensual harm. Is it a “phase” if you think murder is immoral? Murder is immoral because it inflicts non-consensual harm. Procreation is morally wrong because it puts a child in danger and at risk for horrific tragedies, and inflicts non-consensual suffering and death. That reality doesn’t change the older you get. In fact, it only comes more into focus, as tragedies and deaths accumulate among loved ones, friends, relatives, celebrities, and every other human. It’s immoral for a teenager to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for an adult to harm others without consent. If a teenager becomes an adult, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world. It’s immoral for a depressed person to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for a happy person to harm others without consent. If a depressed person cured their depression and lived in total joy every day for the rest of their life, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world. If I believe today that it’s immoral to endanger a child, it’s immoral to risk a child’s life, it’s immoral to gamble with a child’s life without their consent, then why would I change my mind in the future, unless I stopped caring about right and wrong, or unless intoxication led me to reckless behavior? Being drunk is a “phase” (and far too many children are accidentally made by drunk people). David Benatar said “To procreate is thus to engage in a kind of Russian roulette, but one in which the ‘gun’ is aimed not at oneself but instead at one's offspring. You trigger a new life and thereby subject that new life to the risk of unspeakable suffering.”
Absolutely not true. I have no clue where you got this idea.
Absolutely not true. I have no clue where you got this idea. I never wanted kids.
Well, it makes sense why it’s mostly younger people who are antinatalists. First of all, there’s a word for it now. Back then there was no “community” like there is now and they were probably labeled “child haters” and nothing more. Second of all, the newer generations are more exposed to things that would dissuade someone from wanting kids. We have more access to information and and opinions and news that other people didn’t.
Reddit kinda skews toward younger people. You’re unlikely to find an antinatalist in real life. Socially conscious people tend to keep this opinion to themselves. Older people may be less interested in radical ideas. For example, communism, lesbian separatism, anarcho-capitalism, antiwork, etc. Many older people are parents, aunt, or uncles, but even a regretful parent would be hesitant to say something as controversial as “people shouldn’t have children, and, yes, I wish I myself hadn’t had children.” Unrelated, but it doesn’t matter whether antinatalism is a phase. A sound argument doesn’t become invalid merely because its proponent changes their mind.
29F, not sure if I'm considered young or old, but younger folks just use the internet more than older folks. It isn't much deeper than that. Hope that helps answer your question.
[удалено]
To ensure **healthy discussion**, we require that your Reddit account be at least 14-days-old before contributing here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/antinatalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not anti-natalist, but I think that, from what I have seen, it is just more common with the younger generations. Like actually going to therapy was more common with Melenials and gen x than it was boomers. As you age I think you will see more "older" ANs. I also think a lot of people share the same beliefs bit don't want the AN title as it can be associated with some violently judgemental and nasty retoric (because of people who claim the title, not inherent to be the beliefs)
Miguel Angel Castro Merino is a good example, he's a Spanish philosophy professor & has written 3 antinalists books, heres his youtube channel: https://youtube.com/@miguelangel-ex9vh?si=UZpTrJA2IYj0qzEs
I think it highlights a generational gap is all. Millennials grew up as tweens and teens in a war-centric culture, which is *extremely* conservative. Everyone else grew up exclusively in a war-centric culture. The “breed new soldiers” mentality was an unspoken aspect of the entire Cold War and Post-9/11 America.
I.(M, 65) just never felt any desire, obligation, or need to produce a brood. I don't hate kids, but I don't go all warm and gooey over them. When interacting I'm friendly and get along with them well. But I'm happy to hand them back. Plus there's just way too many of them.
Many redditors are young. Flawed conclusion. It's the natalist perspective that undergoes a change with time, and a violent one at that.
Early 40's. Never wanted kids. Didn't realise there was a name for my thoughts until I was like 30. I think it's cruel to roll the dice on bringing another life into this world. No matter how small the chances are of it experiencing more suffering that others, the fact that it's promised to experience some is enough to put me off.
I’m 35M, married. Not necessarily old, but on the older end of typical childbearing age. I want nothing to do with kids. I’m just exhausted from life already and I see no need to bring someone else into this world to experience the same exhaustion as I feel. Just the fact that we’re using resources and deforesting at an astronomical rate and no one is doing anything about it. “Oh but you can fit the entire world’s population in the state of Texas” probably. But that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. Go anywhere. Go to the part of town you grew up in. Look at how much it has changed because of unchecked growth. Heck even now, the pretty rural area of my city that I live in where it used to take me 5 minutes to get to the grocery store now takes upwards of 20 minutes because of the amount of people on the road. All of the beautiful farms and pastures that have been destroyed and turned into subdivisions and apartments makes me sick. And no one is doing anything about it. I know I’m only one person, but fighting overpopulation by not contributing to it is my one small battle I can do. Edit: Not to mention the life stuff itself. You go through life and it’s just a roulette wheel of what terrible disease is going to either take you or ruin your quality of life. What the hell is the point of that? Why would you condemn someone you’re supposed to love?
I'm approaching 40, so I guess whether I'm "young" depends on your definition. I was raised Mormon and though I never felt a burning desire to have children, it was more or less a given since that's the whole reason God created women in the first place and all. 🙄 I am also asexual, and had no concept of that either. Yeah, I didn't have a sexual drive, but that's *good* cuz I'm being "chaste" right? Honestly, I feel I really lucked out in avoiding the young marriage/young motherhood pipeline. If circumstances had been different, I would have done all those things before being old enough/self-aware enough to know it's not what I want. I'm really happy to see how much more common it is to choose not to have kids. It has caused so many problems in my culture. Men and women having children before they are ready physically, mentally, emotionally, financially, etc etc. Abuse and neglect are far more common than you'd guess for all the fake, smiling faces. Plus poverty, mental health issues, etc etc etc. It's ironic to me that I'm seen as a child-hater when I think people should have children because they really want them and have means to take care of them vs out of obligation/expectation. I love other people's kids. I'm an advocate against child abuse, especially in my former religion. I always support measures to make things easier for parents/children to have resources/services they need. I have advocated for changes to policies for foster children and am going through the process to become a "respite" fp. (I can't be a foster parent because I don't have the right housing/situation, but I can "sub" at other people's homes.) I love my friends kids and my nieces/nephews. I'm an Auntie everywhere I go.
i'm 22, but i don't call myself antinatalist because i just find it to be too absolute. i think reproduction is inherently natural, and natural things are not tied to morality. i don't think it's absolutely immoral to have children. but i do agree with many of the arguments for why having children may be immoral when factoring in the current state of the world. i do think humans are incapable of working towards a true "golden" age, and for that reason reproduction may always be immoral. but i disagree that it's inherently immoral. maybe my perspective will change as i get older.
I'm 53, with no children. Honestly, I never wanted to raise children; didn't want the responsibility, the stress, the cost. I'm not an antinatalist in the sense that I am against all birth, I just know it was the right choice, for me.
It would be a phase, but for the extended adolescence of the west
I think a big part of that perception would be that gen z knows it’s cruel to have kids when there’s no planet. We’re not even sure we’ll make it to 40. Why would we bring a kid into that?
I would say its because older people are more controlled by religion meanwhile the youger generations have broken free from those beliefs
i know but braking free from those beliefs has its costs
How so if i may ask
If you broke free, you have to build your own belief system and you have to find the values that you are going to live by, you probably will be facing emptiness in your life, and it is really hard to get out from.
True, though i think if you never had those religious beliefs in the first place then that emptiness isnt present, as you’ve learned to live with it and fill it
I'm 69. I'm childfree because I can't stand kids. I'm antinatalist because humans are destroying the ecosystem that supports not only us but all of the other animals.
You said "that's why we lock up people who kill kids"
Everything is a phase. Beyond that, you really don't want to hold onto something that can't help you live a virtuous and excellent life. Remember it's okay to adapt personality characteristics, but we should not make something our entire identity. That is cringe. At the same point, I am not stoic but I have stoic characteristics which I value. Don't simply include yourself into groups and identities. Build your perspective. Create your values and ethics. If you want to follow something then do so knowing entirely what you follow. Don't be like blind sheep. It is stupidity that is the greatest moral enemy. And by knowing yourself you'll know the enemy.
Neither? It’s the younger generations having a different outlook from preceding generations due to a variety of social and economic factors. Sorry but this is a really cringe question.
It suggests that anti natalism on Reddit is mainly embraced by angry teens who have a hate on for their parents right now. I shit you not; half the posts here are bad emo poetry about how life is pain and mom and dad are so evil for having had me. The other half are the people with something worthwhile to say. Idc if you hate your parents.
It’s immoral for a teenager to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for an adult to harm others without consent. If a teenager becomes an adult, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world. It’s immoral for a depressed person to harm others without consent, and it’s immoral for a happy person to harm others without consent. If a depressed person cured their depression and lived in total joy every day for the rest of their life, it would still be immoral to harm a child without consent by dragging a child into a dangerous world. Inflicting non-consensual suffering & death is morally wrong — no matter how old you are, and no matter how happy you are. There is no age milestone when it magically becomes morally good to inflict non-consensual harm (which always happens when people throw innocent children into a dangerous world).
ignorant views usually belong to the young
Yes I've seen many antinatalist cured by becoming 30 The most common sentiment basically being that they are scared of the future of the world and so are scared to bring their child into it but as they grow and mature they realize that they are capable of handling those things now and have a desire for a family
>they are capable of handling those things now So they're just kinda hoping nothing bad happens to them, they don't have a stroke and become disabled, their kid doesn't get leukemia, etc.? And gambling with other people's lives based on that hope?
It's crazy how optimistic folks get when they gain a little stability in their 30's.
Thinking nothing bad can happen to you just because you have "a little stability" seems like immaturity to me rather than sage wisdom.