TJKeranen on 13/7/2009 at 11:13
Most of the pickering on this thread is not over lifestyle choices, but over terms like "childfree", which seems to mean different things to different people.
For the record, I tend to get confused with what is a derogatory term and what is not, when speaking for example of people of African origin in US. Is the proper neutral word of the day "black" or "african-american"? I realize that "nigger" is bad, but why is "negro" negative as well? We don't have a lot of African people willing to live up in the arctic circle (until very recently), so I can't really connect with the feelings those words conjure up in the American crowd.
I heard the word "childfree" for the first time probably a couple of years ago, and during all this time I haven't thought about the "-free" part as any kind of high horse to gallop around on. For me it's just something to make it different from the people who are "childless" against their own will.
And for fuck's sake, it's not even a word that anyone I know would use in a conversation to describe him/herself or anyone else, not seriously at least.
Shadowcat on 13/7/2009 at 13:57
Quote Posted by Thirith
If it's not too personal: what sort of relationship do you have to your parents, Shadowcat? And do you think they were good parents? I'm asking because I've seen a number of couples who don't want children, whose relationship to their own parents was less than ideal. Don't think it has to be like that, but it's an interesting pattern.
Actually I had a pretty good upbringing, and the family is quite sociable. I've occasionally wondered if there's anything more than coincidence to it, but I rather doubt it.
There are potential influences that I could speculate about, mind. For instance, we didn't have a whole lot of contact with any of my extended family. There was an annual holiday to visit my mother's family who didn't live nearby, and Dad's family were across the other side of the world and I've still never met any of them. Maybe that's "less than ideal" in context (although I suspect that's not the sort of thing you were thinking of).
In the end, though, the desire to have children is so lacking, and the number of reasons I can think of to not have children are so numerous, that I doubt changing any particular factor in my life would have been enough to over-balance my opinion on the matter.
Stitch on 13/7/2009 at 14:42
Quote Posted by Vasquez
But the inevitable result of a childfree choice is that there will be at least one less human to use up the resources. If there will be less people on earth in the future, that will mean more resources for everyone (different story how it will be distributed, but there are already predictions of "water wars" and such).
It's a simple thing: You have a cake and you have 20 eaters, they get much less if there were only 6 eaters.
Except you're forgetting who bakes the cake in the first place. A declining birthrate means (in part) more elderly with less young/middleaged people to provide support, both physical and emotional. A generational imbalance is actually a pretty big issue, just ask Japan.
Having said that, this is no reason for
you--or anyone--to have kids. In the grand scheme of potential threats to the human race, a dwindling birthrate wouldn't even make the top ten.
As for the problem with the whole "childfree" mentality, Fingernailed that one nicely.
DDL on 13/7/2009 at 14:52
Is the dwindling birth rate the major contributor, or is it simply "people are living longer, at increasing economic cost to society the older they get"?
I would've put money on the latter, personally (but the taxman already took it to spend it all on cancer treatment for some crumbly in berkhampstead).
EDIT: Also is it worth pointing out there are strong and valid genetic reasons for species like ours (relatively few children, with HIGH investment in each child) selecting for at least some tendencies to not desire children? If a group of people can raise 20 children badly, or 10 children well (if half the people choose not to breed), it's often a better strategy to adopt the latter.
Vasquez on 13/7/2009 at 15:02
Quote Posted by Stitch
In the grand scheme of potential threats to the human race, a dwindling birthrate wouldn't even make the top ten.
ITA.
As for the "problem" of the word childfree, I can't help it if you want to see it that way. It's simply someone who doesn't have kids, but isn't child"less" as are those who would like to have kids but can't.
It's somehow absurd how people talk rude all over CommChat, name-calling and newbie-trashing, and then you take two words from all my posts, stick them on me like a tail on a donkey and decide it makes me a child- and parent-hating über-exxtreme childfree separatist.
Too bad it's not true, and many people - even here - know it's not true, but feel free to call me anything you like :)
Also good to see the thread back on track - Shadowcat, now there's at least one thing linking two childless by choice ;) I used to go visit my extended family during summer holidays when I was a kid, but haven't been in touch to them after my teens or so. That's partly because most of them live in other parts of Finland, but also because, well, it just went that way.
The only one I regularly see is my mother's younger sister, who is also my godmother and lives in Helsinki. And as it happens, she is childless by choice, too, so maybe there's something like a role-model there? :)
The lack of contact with extended family might have at least some effect on why I don't understand the "continuing the name/heritage of your family" -argument of why one should have kids. People who are close and important to you don't have to be blood relatives, in fact I kind of like the idea of finding one's own family (it's even in one of my novels).
Chimpy Chompy on 13/7/2009 at 15:32
Quote Posted by Vasquez
and decide it makes me a child- and parent-hating über-exxtreme childfree separatist.
No one said that. But then no-one on the kidless side has been "revelling in ill-earned righteous indignation" either. This thread just seems to be pushing people's buttons. :(
Stitch on 13/7/2009 at 15:38
Quote Posted by Vasquez
As for the "problem" of the word childfree, I can't help it if you want to see it that way.
This is responsibility-absolving bullshit, of course. If you're going to use a word at least be adult enough to own up to its implications.
Quote Posted by Vasquez
It's somehow absurd how people talk rude all over CommChat, name-calling and newbie-trashing, and then you take two words from all my posts, stick them on me like a tail on a donkey and decide it makes me a child- and parent-hating über-exxtreme childfree separatist.
I have, of course, done none of the above, and claiming such does you no favors.
Quote Posted by Chimpy Chompy
But then no-one on the kidless side has been "revelling in ill-earned righteous indignation" either.
Nonsense, you quoted some in your post.
I'll cop to being an unforgiving ass in this thread, but at least I'm not going to pretend otherwise.
Chimpy Chompy on 13/7/2009 at 16:24
I read it more as defensive knee-jerking. :p
Vasquez on 13/7/2009 at 17:14
Quote Posted by Stitch
This is responsibility-absolving bullshit, of course. If you're going to use a word at least be adult enough to own up to its implications.
I honestly don't see what's bad about the word "childfree". And I'm being dead serious now. It's just a conveniently short word to use in written language (like TJ said, it's unlikely that it's used IRL that much), compared to "voluntary childless" and "childless by choice". Internet is full of words like that, like in Finnish we have come up with the abbreviation "vela" from the type-clumsy words "vapaaehtoisesti lapseton" (= voluntary childless).
Thirith on 13/7/2009 at 17:40
Quote Posted by Vasquez
I honestly don't see what's bad about the word "childfree". And I'm being dead serious now. It's just a conveniently short word to use in written language (like TJ said, it's unlikely that it's used IRL that much), compared to "voluntary childless" and "childless by choice". Internet is full of words like that, like in Finnish we have come up with the abbreviation "vela" from the type-clumsy words "vapaaehtoisesti lapseton" (= voluntary childless).
This may very well be a native-speaker vs. non-native-speaker thing, but "child-free" does carry at least a hint of "(and proud of it)". Which is understandable if it's a reaction towards people who judge you for not having kids, but like so many (linguistic) counter-reactions it risks being read as over-the-top and/or smug and/or self-righteous. When you need to stress something as positive, it can easily get the implication of "better than the opposite", whether you mean it or not.
