Anyone else not want children?

old hippy

smiley_face400 wrote: »

It's not selfish exactly. It's just how people who don't understand how you couldn't want children put it because it's incomprehensible to them for anyone to not want a child

I just feel they could chose their language a bit more sensibly, so.

Ruudi_Mentari

I can be very clingy, with a girl I might fall for and tend to see my children in their eyes so I have to be careful with my heart man......

it is an important facet/stage/experience of one's life and I have seen people put it off; in total denial until the seemingly inevitable happens far too late on when they are nearly 60, even and it's just not fair on the kid nor themselves

smiley_face400

I'm not putting it off. I just don't want it to happen. Luckily the boyfriend doesn't either so we're fine on that one

smiley_face400

422nd wrote: »

As long as everyone who does this, decides not to have kids, I'm happy.

Oops. Missed that one, I'm normally pretty good for the grammar. You can't have bad grammar on the internet, they'll eat you alive :P

Ruudi_Mentari

That's fcuking weird

I mean here I am, not even in love with anyone bar myself yet with these urges and yet there you are; in an apparent loving relationship but is clearly not that loving if this seemingly inevitable urge didn't transpire??

Stop being a shìt troll and giving me the platform to be a schmoozer.

anncoates

smiley_face400 wrote: »

I'm 26 and don't want kids. Ever. I'm just not a maternal person. Kids in general irritate the ****e out of me

That a quite a unique and revolutionary viewpoint for a 26 year old.

ibarelycare

Ruudi_Mentari wrote: »

That's fcuking weird

I mean here I am, not even in love with anyone bar myself yet with these urges and yet there you are; in an apparent loving relationship but is clearly not that loving if this seemingly inevitable urge didn't transpire??

Stop being a shìt troll and giving me the platform to be a schmoozer.

Huh?

**Vai**

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I'd disagree a little on the pet point. I have mine because they simply found me (they're all rescues) and I took them in, my life would be much easier without them (ah dont mean that really, love them to bits) but I never actually went out with the intention of bringing an animal home

Ive a couple of rescues myself but I don't think they found me! I just meant that in a very basic sense, its for the same reasons. Not to carry on the bloodline obviously but for love and companionship. You wouldn't have taken them in if you didn't want that feeling from them.

**Vai**

anncoates wrote: »

That a quite a unique and revolutionary viewpoint for a 26 year old.

I think you can say that for a 16 year old. By the time you reach your mid 20's, you should have the cop on to know what you do and do not want.

wolfpawnat

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I'm seven years past the 22 mark without kids and you havent missed that much

At 26 I still can't see what it is I am supposed to be missing???

Femme_Fatale

kunst nugget wrote: »

How many people are having kids they don't want to appease society? From reading this, you'd swear it was every second person out there.

Nah I think what people mean is that it's not a good idea to have children if you don't want them, just because you feel it's the thing you're supposed to do in order not to look selfish. I've no doubt that's rare nowadays though.

ibarelycare wrote: »

Huh?

They just seem to post ream upon ream of incomprehensible babble.

**Vai** wrote: »

I think you can say that for a 16 year old. By the time you reach your mid 20's, you should have the cop on to know what you do and do not want.

Ah now, you could easily change your mind, because of circumstances, in your early 30s. I would say you'd need at least another five years to know exactly what you want when it comes to having children.

OldNotWIse

**Vai** wrote: »

Ive a couple of rescues myself but I don't think they found me! I just meant that in a very basic sense, its for the same reasons. Not to carry on the bloodline obviously but for love and companionship. You wouldn't have taken them in if you didn't want that feeling from them.

I took them in because I didn't want them to die on the street, not because I wanted a feeling of love and companionship from them. Of course that follows, but it certainly wasn't the driving force behind my decision to take them in.

**Vai**

@Femme Fatale; Depends on the person I suppose. I knew a long time ago but I sure there are folks in their late 30s/early 40s who still don't.

**Vai**

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I took them in because I didn't want them to die on the street, not because I wanted a feeling of love and companionship from them. Of course that follows, but it certainly wasn't the driving force behind my decision to take them in.

Well no, you take them in out of kindness but its not entirely selfless either. People who don't like animals for example, wouldn't take them in, wouldn't even think twice about it. Slightly off topic anyway, apologies!

wolfpawnat

I think my son tantruming on the bus about 10 minutes ago has, at the very least, caused people to reconsider ever having kids if they were considering it in the first place.

Ruudi_Mentari

ibarelycare wrote: »

Huh?

Thaaat right I said that.

is what I feel... for there is no logic, in love.

bronte

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3442/3951585990_6999e7f280.jpg

Nearly have the full card.

**Vai**

bronte wrote: »

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3442/3951585990_6999e7f280.jpg

Nearly have the full card.

"Your child could cure cancer" and I think we're there!

OldNotWIse

**Vai** wrote: »

Well no, you take them in out of kindness but its not entirely selfless either. People who don't like animals for example, wouldn't take them in, wouldn't even think twice about it. Slightly off topic anyway, apologies!

Yes, kindness because I cared about what happened to them, not me. I'm sorry but I dont get how that is selfish at all.

**Vai**

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Yes, kindness because I cared about what happened to them, not me. I'm sorry but I dont get how that is selfish at all.

You are getting something out of the deal too, that's all I meant. It cant be truly selfless if you get something out of it.

Ruudi_Mentari

How is it, some people fail to realize true love and understanding.

wolfpawnat

What has to be remembered too is if someone wants a child, they are selfish if they just want one in many people's eyes too. There is no winning. I was called selfish and mean for not wanting anymore kids.

OneArt

To be perfectly honest, and I know it sounds terrible, but there are too many people in the world. People really should stop having so many f*cking kids. I understand that it's a natural evolutionary thing yada, yada, but it's going to start causing a strain on the world's resources. And that's when nature kicks in and sends in pandemics.

I don't want kids at the moment. I don't think I'll want them in ten years. There's too much I want to do with my life than have to look after a child. Is it selfish? Yes, but it's my life and I'll be selfish if I want as long as I'm not hurting anyone else. Me not reproducing isn't going to be of any detriment to the world.

I may want kids in the far future and if I do, I think I'll probably just adopt. There are plenty of parents who don't want or can't look after the children that they have. I think it'd be much better for the world if more people took to adopting rather than having their own kids. I'm not saying everyone should do this or that it should be law, but in my opinion it makes a bit of sense and can help to ease the population booms.

I know adoption is difficult as well, don't get me wrong. I just think if I am going to have a child in the future I would much rather adopt.

Ruudi_Mentari

wolfpawnat wrote: »

What has to be remembered too is if someone wants a child, they are selfish if they just want one in many people's eyes too. There is no winning. I was called selfish and mean for not wanting anymore kids.

Once you escape the self, you are no longer selfish. Hell you might not even be selfish in what is a predicament

maybe you have difficult relations and they want to project their own bullshìt on you in leaving you feeling never accomplished

wolfpawnat

Ruudi_Mentari wrote: »

Once you escape the self, you are no longer selfish. Hell you might not even be selfish in what is a predicament

maybe you have difficult relations and they want to project their own bullshìt on you in leaving you feeling never accomplished

Oh, even random people in the street. "Is he your only one?" you say yes the one and more than likely only (well not anymore, I am pregnant with another) but when I said I was happy with one, they always say "You can't do that, he needs siblings"

According to my MIL I am now selfish for having another But she genuinely is, as you said, trying to make me feel like I am never able to accomplish anything. No matter what I would do, it would be wrong.

Ruudi_Mentari

yeap...

Difficult relations; across the board. Listen honey I know that feeling...

OldNotWIse

**Vai** wrote: »

You are getting something out of the deal too, that's all I meant. It cant be truly selfless if you get something out of it.

What? Are we descending into some sort of philosphical debate about altruism now?

You said that people get animals for the same reason they have kids - for selfish reasons. I pointed out that I didnt get mine for selfish reasons (I didnt "get" them at all, they "got" me). Then you said I got them for companionship. Again, not true. I simply wanted to make a better life for them. Trust me my life would be far less complicated if I only had myself to worry about! Yet you are still insisting that I am doing it for some ulterior motive. I'm not, and I dont know how to explain that too you any more clearly

OldNotWIse

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Oh, even random people in the street. "Is he your only one?" you say yes the one and more than likely only (well not anymore, I am pregnant with another) but when I said I was happy with one, they always say "You can't do that, he needs siblings"

According to my MIL I am now selfish for having another But she genuinely is, as you said, trying to make me feel like I am never able to accomplish anything. No matter what I would do, it would be wrong.

Meddlers are so annoying :mad: You should have said, "yes he is our only one...we dont need to go again...we got it perfect the first time"

Ruudi_Mentari

wolfpawnat wrote: »

According to my MIL I am now selfish for having another But she genuinely is, as you said, trying to make me feel like I am never able to accomplish anything. No matter what I would do, it would be wrong.

You know for a moment, I thought you were a guy. At which point i would have told you to disregard everything i said -

I'm not a helpline; I'm just trying to get laid.

**Vai**

OldNotWIse wrote: »

What? Are we descending into some sort of philosphical debate about altruism now?

You said that people get animals for the same reason they have kids - for selfish reasons. I pointed out that I didnt get mine for selfish reasons (I didnt "get" them at all, they "got" me). Then you said I got them for companionship. Again, not true. I simply wanted to make a better life for them. Trust me my life would be far less complicated if I only had myself to worry about! Yet you are still insisting that I am doing it for some ulterior motive. I'm not, and I dont know how to explain that too you any more clearly

I think we are thinking in very different ways. You seem to be taking offence to what im saying when I mean no offence. I am in the same boat afterall. It would be very people in glasshouses of me.
If you are totally selfless then fair play but you would be the first selfless human I have ever known. Again I dont mean that as an insult just as a fact of human nature.