Keep Breeding

Darlughda

I've noticed recently that there is an assumption in society that having kids is inevitable, or indeed the supposed goal.

Couples are encouraged towards family and/or marriage, a mortgage and that is seen the next steps on the ladder, just like doing the leaving cert, going to college and/or getting a job.

It never ceases to amaze me how people change when they have children.

From indoctrinating their children by baptism, to ensure they get into the 'best schools', regardless of what that same religion's protagonists have done to countless of other children, before their childrens' own lifetime,(or indeed the role of the Dept of Education in all of that), nonetheless, it seems once you have children, you become a willing cog in the machine.

Everything is excusable once you have children.
Yes, you are willing to fight for a job. Any old demeaning underpaid ****, because you have children.

Therefore, everybody else should be willing to accept the same.

People seem to think that a mortgage is some kind of security of tenure that = stability, and therefore is the only housing option for them and their children, but is it really?

Well, we know consumerism sucks. but it is utterly aimed at the family. Divided as it is during the day between children, teens, mothers, fathers and other ideals of how to create the perfect unit.

Why do people assume reproducing is the next step?
Some people really want children, and fair play to them-have your 7 kids.

But, why do so many people assume having a 'family' is their next step?

I suspect that there is a determined effort to encourage people to reproduce, and to have the family unit: For reasons of advertising, consumerism, it does seem easier to target the nuclear family as a unit.

It is a role being played out again and again by too many people I know who may have enschewed the idea of playing to the mainstream ideal in their more activist days, of which they were disgusted by corrupt and overly capatalistic influence in their lives, yet now behave patronaising towards anyone who has not had to accede their autonomy like they have, for the reasons stated, to hear of 'yeh know, that's the way things are... no need to be so negative by the way'...

Jonny7

Darlughda wrote: »

I've noticed recently that there is an assumption in society that having kids is inevitable, or indeed the supposed goal.

Couples are encouraged towards family and/or marriage, a mortgage and that is seen the next steps on the ladder, just like doing the leaving cert, going to college and/or getting a job.

It never ceases to amaze me how people change when they have children.

From indoctrinating their children by baptism, to ensure they get into the 'best schools', regardless of what that same religion's protagonists have done to countless of other children, before their childrens' own lifetime,(or indeed the role of the Dept of Education in all of that), nonetheless, it seems once you have children, you become a willing cog in the machine.

Everything is excusable once you have children.
Yes, you are willing to fight for a job. Any old demeaning underpaid ****, because you have children.

Therefore, everybody else should be willing to accept the same.

People seem to think that a mortgage is some kind of security of tenure that = stability, and therefore is the only housing option for them and their children, but is it really?

Well, we know consumerism sucks. but it is utterly aimed at the family. Divided as it is during the day between children, teens, mothers, fathers and other ideals of how to create the perfect unit.

Why do people assume reproducing is the next step?
Some people really want children, and fair play to them-have your 7 kids.

But, why do so many people assume having a 'family' is their next step?

I suspect that there is a determined effort to encourage people to reproduce, and to have the family unit: For reasons of advertising, consumerism, it does seem easier to target the nuclear family as a unit.

It is a role being played out again and again by too many people I know who may have enschewed the idea of playing to the mainstream ideal in their more activist days, of which they were disgusted by corrupt and overly capatalistic influence in their lives, yet now behave patronaising towards anyone who has not had to accede their autonomy like they have, for the reasons stated, to hear of 'yeh know, that's the way things are... no need to be so negative by the way'...

The family unit has been around for thousands upon thousands of years. I don't think those tribes they just discovered on the Peru border have formed into family units for advertising and consumerism somehow.

Darlughda

I hear ya , J.

But, nowadays things are different. Yet there does seem to be a mainstream determination to force an ideal onto the nuclear family unit.

nyarlothothep

I think some people want kids as a form of immortality, at least something of themselves survives in the genetic stream. On the other hand its also cultural as you say. I wouldn't be surprised if you get an evolutionary psychology class on this thread which would be misleading as culture and the environment play significant roles in my opinion.

Darlughda

Well, ithink it is sad when people want kids as a form of immortality, Yet, too often this seems the case and is actively encouraged by the manistream society that most people live their lives in.

I thought it was the evil overlord's plan to reduce the population and are trying to sterilize us....

Maybe you're a government agent trying to trick us all.

Darlughda

King Mob wrote: »

I thought it was the evil overlord's plan to reduce the population and are trying to sterilize us.....

Wow, was wondering how long it would take you to turn up, King Mob. Surely even you would have gleaned by now that there possibly no evil overlord? Too much to deal with? Then get back to yer Xtra vision movies.. so

King Mob wrote: »

Maybe you're a government agent trying to trick us all.

Yep. Have me sussed.
Can I kindly suggest you speak to the nearest Hollywood scriptwriter/producer regarding your erm..characters?


I must admit a compulsive breeding programme/ family resulting from a couple union could well be an aim determineded by coporation led interests for the reasons of consumerism and tax slavation, but for older people the population control theories have even more ground in the face of the push towards the young population idealiasation.

Brown Bomber

I don't think consumerism is directed towards the family at all. I spent way more on useless shiny and flashy crap before I was married, you get a new perspective and I guess your not trying to stand out from the herd anymore to attract potential mates. I think consumerism is directed towards shallow and selfish single/dating folk. Just look at the people who are put forward as icons - Paris Hilton, the Kardashians, the sex and the city slags and so on.

Darlughda

Darlughda wrote: »

Wow, was wondering how long it would take you to turn up, King Mob. Surely even you would have gleaned by now that there possibly no evil overlord? Too much to deal with? Then get back to yer Xtra vision movies.. so

Yep. Have me sussed.
Can I kindly suggest you speak to the nearest Hollywood scriptwriter/producer regarding your erm..characters?

Just replace "evil overlord" with who or what ever you think is pulling the strings in your narrative and the point stands.

There are people who believe that there is a global conspiracy to reduce the population. Do you think they are wrong? If so, why do they think something that is wrong?

n900guy

Darlughda wrote: »

But, why do so many people assume having a 'family' is their next step?

Because it may be a basic part of the human life cycle. It's not an assumption, it simply is - like breathing, learning to walk, etc.,. Normal sexual development "ends" with reproduction.

Brown Bomber

King Mob wrote: »

Just replace "evil overlord" with who or what ever you think is pulling the strings in your narrative and the point stands.

There are people who believe that there is a global conspiracy to reduce the population. Do you think they are wrong? If so, why do they think something that is wrong?

Seriously WTF has any of this got to do with the topic? The OP has put a fair amount of effort into the thread and should be respected for that.

"Why do they think something that is wrong?" might be the most idiotic question I have witnessed in these parts.

Darlughda

King Mob wrote: »

Just replace "evil overlord" with who or what ever you think is pulling the strings in your narrative and the point stands.

There are people who believe that there is a global conspiracy to reduce the population. Do you think they are wrong? If so, why do they think something that is wrong?

Having internet speed difficulty tonight.
Anyway, I have never been a great believer in a puppet master pulling the strings.
Having said that, is it such an outlandish belief that certain banker corpoate interests are now dictating measures which the IMF are enforcining on the ordinairy people?

They need people to pay these taxes, so child bearing people are the ones to target. If you have a kid or a number of them to support you will accept the shyete jobs and the unfair taxes because you will have no other choice.

If there is a conspiracy to reduce the population, in my opinion, it is aimed at the older, non breeding age, rather than young people who can be good, fertile, workers for the corporations and pay taxes.

Darlughda

Darlughda wrote: »

If there is a conspiracy to reduce the population, in my opinion, it is aimed at the older, non breeding age, rather than young people who can be good, fertile, workers for the corporations and pay taxes.

But that's not the conspiracy being presented in other threads, it's about the overlord deliberately trying to sterilize people and preventing them from having children to lower the population.

Darlughda

Brown Bomber wrote: »

I don't think consumerism is directed towards the family at all. I spent way more on useless shiny and flashy crap before I was married, you get a new perspective and I guess your not trying to stand out from the herd anymore to attract potential mates. I think consumerism is directed towards shallow and selfish single/dating folk. Just look at the people who are put forward as icons - Paris Hilton, the Kardashians, the sex and the city slags and so on.

In fairness BB, it could be said the single male was accomodated in consumerism, but seriously, the face you cannot see who all the advertising is aimed at the male/female aiming to unite as a couple and with the ultimate goal of family just shows how blind you have become, especially as you consider single/dating folk shallow and selfish. The mind boggles indeed.

King Mob wrote: »

But that's not the conspiracy being presented in other threads, it's about the overlord deliberately trying to sterilize people and preventing them from having children to lower the population.

Look, this is my thread, King Mob, I am well aware there is a theory out there regarding population control.
Nonetheless, I do not think any population control theory can take away from the fact that the workers paying the taxes are needed at the end of the day.
Therefore, is my contention that there is a concerted effort to promote the idealiased nature of young love/relationships into childbearing and the family unit, as these are the people now willing to accept any conditions and/or taxes to support their family.

Darlughda

Darlughda wrote: »

Look, this is my thread, King Mob, I am well aware there is a theory out there regarding population control.
Nonetheless, I do not think any population control theory can take away from the fact that the workers paying the taxes are needed at the end of the day.
Therefore, is my contention that there is a concerted effort to promote the idealiased nature of young love/relationships into childbearing and the family unit, as these are the people now willing to accept any conditions and/or taxes to support their family.

But there's people out there who use the exact same argument you're using to reach the exact opposite conclusion.

Why do you not accept their theory? Do these reasons apply to your theory?

Darlughda

King Mob wrote: »

But there's people out there who use the exact same argument you're using to reach the exact opposite conclusion.

Why do you not accept their theory? Do these reasons apply to your theory?

Quit trying to derail my thread, King Mob. Next attempt and I'll report you to the mods and den you'll be sorry, young man:p

Anyway, this thread is about the insidious attempt in consumerist society that we all live in with - advertising to promote the inevitability of a couple having children, and this ideal being encouraged in mainstream life and beyond, through conversation, expectations and all the facile chat that makes up community life.

Iindeed, the greater corporations must be rubbing their hands in glee.
Once, you have a child, it seems, ideals go out the window.

Everyone wants the best for their sprogs, don't they? They will work whatever jobs with taxes are available, and will sign their children up for the 'best' schools regardless of what religious hegemony memerships of such a school provides.

Darlughda

King Mob wrote: »

But there's people out there who use the exact same argument you're using to reach the exact opposite conclusion.

Why do you not accept their theory? Do these reasons apply to your theory?

Cannot believe my response to this has somehow been lost in cyberspace.

Anyway, in a nutshell, I don't give a rats' ass about other peoples' theorys , King Mob, all I am sayin, as this is the forum to air such views, that I reckon there is a considerated effort on behalf of the behemoths that feed us our consumerist desires via advertisting and marketing, to idealiase the state of the family, as in a couple who get together are pushed towards this ideal, not only by society or community, but the corporations that have interest in us, now need people who are willing to do 'anything for their children'.

Therfore, working awful hours at dead end jobns paying ridicilous taxes is just what people have to do. To fous on what matters in their lives. Their children. Therefore, my belief, that certain corporate banking elites do want us to keep breeding, to pay off their debts.

Jonny7

Darlughda wrote: »

Quit trying to derail my thread, King Mob. Next attempt and I'll report you to the mods and den you'll be sorry, young man:p

Anyway, this thread is about the insidious attempt in consumerist society that we all live in with - advertising to promote the inevitability of a couple having children, and this ideal being encouraged in mainstream life and beyond, through conversation, expectations and all the facile chat that makes up community life.

Iindeed, the greater corporations must be rubbing their hands in glee.
Once, you have a child, it seems, ideals go out the window.

Everyone wants the best for their sprogs, don't they? They will work whatever jobs with taxes are available, and will sign their children up for the 'best' schools regardless of what religious hegemony memerships of such a school provides.

Considering the forum we are on and the tone of the post, you possibly make it sound like some grand "plan" or something.

The bolded sentence I find very strange.

I work to feed/clothe/house/etc myself, and I pay taxes to the government for the crap roads/police/services/etc

I will probably have kids because I want them or because of the social pressure put on me by family/friends/etc.

We strive to fit in.

And before anyone comes in with the whole, oh its the corporations subliminally indoctrinating us to do this, no its not - tribes in the amazon, same thing.

I don't really get where you are going with all this otherwise?

clever_name

Darlughda wrote: »

Therfore, working awful hours at dead end jobns paying ridicilous taxes is just what people have to do. To fous on what matters in their lives. Their children. Therefore, my belief, that certain corporate banking elites do want us to keep breeding, to pay off their debts.

Do you think there is anything new in people working hard to support their family?, or people enduring harsh times?

The idea that the "banking elites" are orchestrating a masterplan to make people have children so they will work hard lacks logic.

Firstly populations increase over time naturally so the "banking elites" would be wasting their time and effort to force what would happen anyway.

Secondly suggesting that the "banking elites" want an increase in population to repay debts makes very little sense. Why do "they" need more people to generate money?, remember they are the "banking elites" so they already control the money right?

In basic terms children being born does not increase the amount of money in the banking system it, instead it moves the existing money around. So unless the "banking elites" have shares in mothercare the whole thing would be a waste of time.

Penn

This thread is not about anyone trying to decrease the population. It is about pressure to have families. Any further discussion about decreasing the population will be deemed to be off-topic and deleted.

ed2hands

Interesting stuff OP. Reckon you're spot on about consumerism part. Corporations want to suck every last penny you earn out of your pocket as quickly as it goes in there. Back into theirs.
They target everyone, but young adults especially as they have most to spend and less responsibilities. (as BB said )
As you say, we all get bombarded with advertising to convince us that by buying their crap, we'll reach the level of happiness those shiny people in the ads have. Total bull**** of course.
Planned obsolescence means the stuff is not meant to last anyway. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence)

Wouldn't really agree myself though as regards they want people to breed as such as in have 2 or more kids. But corporate greed targets the "breeders" as they do everyone. Would tend to go with what nyarlothothep said on it as a starting point.
I'd hazard that corporations and politicians encourage the family unit as a general rule for the moment, so they can have passive non-rioting consumers. Don't think they're too hot on us having much choice about how many sprogs we have in future though, as we're "useless eaters" and are consuming too much of the worlds resources. Why? Well, because of the very consumerism they shove down our throats and get rich on. You won't hear much from Mr BuyMyCrap about "Reduce, Re-use, Recycle" (especially the reduce part)
So they're hypocrites basically. Just my two-cents;)

Edit: Sorry Barrington didn't see that before i pressed submit.

Jonny7

ed2hands wrote: »

Interesting stuff OP. Reckon you're spot on about consumerism part. Corporations want to suck every last penny you earn out of your pocket as quickly as it goes in there. Back into theirs.
They target everyone, but young adults especially as they have most to spend and less responsibilities. (as BB said )
As you say, we all get bombarded with advertising to convince us that by buying their crap, we'll reach the level of happiness those shiny people in the ads have. Total bull**** of course.
Planned obsolescence means the stuff is not meant to last anyway. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence)

Wouldn't really agree myself though as regards they want people to breed as such as in have 2 or more kids. But corporate greed targets the "breeders" as they do everyone. Would tend to go with what nyarlothothep said on it as a starting point.
I'd hazard that corporations and politicians encourage the family unit as a general rule for the moment, so they can have passive non-rioting consumers. Don't think they're too hot on us having much choice about how many sprogs we have in future though, as we're "useless eaters" and are consuming too much of the worlds resources. Why? Well, because of the very consumerism they shove down our throats and get rich on. You won't hear much from Mr BuyMyCrap about "Reduce, Re-use, Recycle" (especially the reduce part)
So they're hypocrites basically. Just my two-cents;)

Edit: Sorry Barrington didn't see that before i pressed submit.

As you type that from your HP computer, on your Ikea desk, in your Levi's, etc, etc, etc

Remember, there's plenty of places in the world without these items that feed the huge evil corporations

hooradiation

Darlughda wrote: »

I hear ya , J.

But, nowadays things are different. Yet there does seem to be a mainstream determination to force an ideal onto the nuclear family unit.

I think you have this backwards. Advertising is far more effective if it taps into existing needs and wants rather than trying to trying to invent them.

The "nuclear family unit" describes a lot of households because people, generally, want to marry and have children - and we have been doing this since time immemorial. It's nothing new.
Advertising can then exploit this to sell stuff.
They're not "forcing an idea", people want that already.
All they're presenting an image of said idea and then suggesting that the product they are selling might help people reach this.

robtri

Darlughda wrote: »

Therfore, working awful hours at dead end jobns paying ridicilous taxes is just what people have to do. To fous on what matters in their lives. Their children. Therefore, my belief, that certain corporate banking elites do want us to keep breeding, to pay off their debts.

where you getting this from, is it just a theroy pulled out of the air or are you seening advertising and marketing from banks and corporate eleite to have kids???

Monty Burnz

Darlughda wrote: »

I suspect that there is a determined effort to encourage people to reproduce, and to have the family unit: For reasons of advertising, consumerism, it does seem easier to target the nuclear family as a unit.

And how do you think that humanity got into the 1950s or therabouts, before all this advertising and consumerism? :rolleyes:

Tiny flaw in your theory there.

mrsdewinter

Darlughda wrote: »

Everything is excusable once you have children.
Yes, you are willing to fight for a job. Any old demeaning underpaid ****, because you have children.

I know plenty of people without children who have to fight for their job, OP. And demeaning, underpaid **** isn't the preserve of those blessed with children, you know. It's part and parcel of being an adult in today's economy...

All about Eve

I had my daughter because I wanted her to experience Life. There was no other reason. I didnt do it to stroke my ego or my husbands . I just wanted to give life to something and for this being to be alive and experience all the good and all the not so good stuff. I wanted to be there to help her through the not so good stuff. If i never had her she wouldnt know any different but im glad she has her little 2 year old life.

Torakx

My apologies,its after 6 am and i havent read alot of the replies so far.
So i may be repeating what someone else posted.
Just wanted to refer people to the saying,
Which came first the chicken or the egg.
Did they cater for the family unit when forming means to psychologically,monetarily and any other way control nations?

Or did they incorperate and encourage more breeding than is naturally going to happen through the same means.Kinda like our own type of matrix.
The citizens with birth certs and rsi numbers could be the batteries and we just need more power.
After all if there is one guy on an island all alone he is the most powerfull man on that island.But of what use it all that power when you cannot wield it.
Im sure someone with more of a head for maths and equations can write a smart equation to say power gets greater when human numbers go up.
power >= population?

It also may be the case that people are being encouraged not to have kids,i dont know really.there is alot of bullcrap on the tv now that caters for everything.
The growing popularity and catering for homosexuality on tv could be seen by some as a sign that population control has been in effect for a good many years now.
There are many gay role models these days compared to the past.Every show needs to represent the gay community.
And wether the side effect of introducing more children and teens to the idea of being gay(and it being cool) is premeditated or just catering i wont say.That is too big a question,but i think worth thinking about.
Everything is linked in my mind, so its hard to make seperations and be sure of your convictions on any one topic.