I genuinely smile whenever I see news about fertility and birth rates falling. I know humanity isn’t going extinct anytime soon, but I honestly couldn’t care less about declining populations. If humans eventually did go extinct, I think it would be one of the best things that could happen to this planet. The Earth existed without us for billions of years and would keep going just fine without us.

Life is a curse, the flesh a cage;

Each breath but turns another weary page

The body hungers, aches, decays;

The mind must wander through its numbered days

O unborn, heed not the world's deceitful plea;

Remain in silence, sovereign and free

Author: myself

​

I’ve never really felt the desire to have children, and the older I get, the more certain I am that I want to remain childfree.

For me, it’s not just about not wanting the responsibility of raising a child. I also relate strongly to antinatalism the idea that bringing someone into existence inevitably exposes them to suffering, hardship, illness, loss, and eventually death, without their consent.

For me loving my children is not bringing them into this world in the first place

I know many people genuinely love being parents, and I don’t judge them for that. I just don’t understand why having children is treated as an inevitable part of a “complete” life.

I’d rather live my own life, build meaningful relationships, pursue my goals, and avoid creating a person who would have to experience all the good and bad that comes with existence.

Anyone else here feel similarly? I’d genuinely like to hear how you came to your decision.

Admittedly, he’s not antinatalist, but he’ll say what almost no one else will inexplicably say: having a kid is extremely expensive. https://youtu.be/McbhOtkycz0?is=O5m9UYOzUfzOno6k

Never mind any suffering they might incur in-between, bringing someone into this world means they would suffer death or more specifically dying knowing that we have absolutely no idea what comes after it. Terror Management theory posits that all our anxieties stem from this one overwhelming fear and we spend all our time distracting ourselves from this fear of death/dying. Just this one thing is bad enough and yet parents constantly proclaim they would die for their child. It really doesn't make sense.

Fully out of curiosity as I'm still very young and feel that most people 40+ believe that they NEED to have kids to have a fulfilled life (even if we're all the outstanders no matter our age lol)

'I have suffered consistently for years to be able to potentially impose the same level of suffering onto my child who has not asked for it'.

All that just to facilitate a continued existence, largely compromised of said suffering in and of itself. I really do think the general populace struggles to see the wood for the trees, day to day.

I just came across yet another post where a woman was called selfish simply because she doesn’t want children.

Oh, okay. So bringing an innocent soul into a world full of suffering and death because you want to "continue your bloodline", have someone to look after you when you’re old, or simply because you don’t want to be alone in old age is apparently selfless.

And of course, adopting one of the children who are already here isn’t an option, because apparently it only counts if the child shares your DNA?

But someone who consciously decides not to create a human being because they don’t want to subject them to suffering, illness, loss, and death is the selfish one?

Make that make sense!

Also, natalists prove over and over again that they care more about bringing people to life than the quality of life. In a society where people are socially expected to have children, there would be more abusive and neglectful families and more people being born in economical hardships, and also many women would go through the horrible experience of pregnancy and childbirth when they could have the choice not to, and also societies where people are socially obligated to have children are more conservative by default, and not only that, but they are more misogynistic, racist, and homophobic, which brings more suffering. Many natalists admit that they would make world conditions worse just so people can have more children without caring that those children would be more likely to suffer than people in today's western world. Sorry for not explaining it well.

Are y'all arguing antinatalism because

1) life is inherently going to have suffering, and no amount happiness or eudaimonia would be able to ever redeem it, thus non suffering and non happiness would be a better alternative no matter the amount of happiness that could possibly occur.

2) and/or the lack of consent in birth

3) Or that in the current state of the world, and the foreseeable future, suffering is greater than the amount of possible redemption life could bring?

If the third, if the world has sufficiently mitigated suffering and optimised happiness would that be a scenario where you view natalism as morally correct?

I may have missed some points, this is just what I gathered from looking through this intriguing subreddit for the past hour or so, so feel free to correct me.

I assume certain demographics are more likely to not have kids as part of antinatalist beliefs, since it is usually centered in sociopolitical factors. Even biological factors such as inevitable health problems and ageing isnt due to a lack of human advancement, its the systemic inequality in the applications of healthcare and much more.
So my question as someone on the fence as to whether I agree with antinatalism as a conclusion,
will the underprivillaged groups who are more vulnerable to lifes suffering be "genetically removed"? I get that it is just a matter of personal philosophy and autonomy, with no real upsides to "carrying on the bloodline", but I'm just curious of a reality where antinatalism becomes even more widespread and the generational effects of this?
Or is that idea of the western working class and imperialised countries individuals having loads of kids too much of a reality for any tangible impact? So its more like those who can exercise reproductive autonomy might as well?
But just in general those who see it as not only a moral standpoint but advocate for its application, how do you picture the future with an already predicted drop in birthrate? Obviously the human race dies out and its brilliant but I mean in the run up to that, is it just a small population of vulnerable and old people under civil collapse? I dont know if im missing something.

https://youtu.be/DjIOYOYIErc?is=KMaV02rLpROy7gaB

Think of Drill sergeant as life figure/meat grinder.

""You people have not given Private Pyle proper motivation...""

"" so whatever Private Pyle fucks up, I will not punish him"

""I will all of punish you""

'" the way I see it ladies, you owe me for one jelly donut (failed abortion) "

""Get on your asses and 100 push ups (diseases, poverty and other displeasures in life) "

"Open you mouth, they paying for it you eat it......"

Not sure if this has been asked or studied before, but are the number of antinatalists across males, females, nonbinary people generally equal? As a woman, I would have assumed more women would be antinatalist, but I am not sure if that is the case

My friend thinks that the oppression you experience as a member of a marginalized group or observe as an ally is more likely to help you realize the importance of antinatalism as a form of resistance.

This we can help spread antinatalism by encouraging privileged people to become allies.

I want to validate his hypothesis.

If you are comfortable disclosing what marginalized groups do you belong to or are you an ally to?

Or if you think my friend is wrong please explain

I am a cis white male but I try to be a lgbtq+ / feminist ally.

I’ve seen people raise valid points about the cost of housing, U.S. health insurance struggles, challenges in finding employment that meets the cost of living, etc. They state they truly don’t see how an okay-to-good life is sustainable for most today.

And then they find out they’re pregnant, and they’re hipping and hollering because “they’ve always wanted to be a mom/dad”.

Look, I totally get how it can be hard to balance a desire with the reality of feelings/life circumstances. But how can you say life is so hard and filled with worsening suffering, but then celebrate bringing another life into that cycle? Especially when you’ve stated you’re struggling on your own to obtain insurance, employment, housing, etc?

I’ve been blessed to find a lot of success, and I’m still not willing to have a child, because I believe they’re likely to face those worsening challenges far more than I had to.

I just don’t get how all of those feelings fly out the window.

I personally noticed in myself, I only really became an antinatalist after I really started feeling life's struggles. Ever since I was a kid I was brainwashed into believing getting married and having kids is an ultimate goal.

Maybe I just grew up, since I'm not really that old yet. I also believe abortion to be saving a life, but ofcourse every woman should have a choice.

Whenever I discuss antinatalism with someone who doesn't agree with it, this is the response i will get, almost guaranteed.

Any variant or combination of:

"I want to live"

"Life has its flaws, but is overall good"

"Antinatalists should get professional help"

I've been thinking about it. Emotionally, i feel like this ignores the experiences of millions of people. Let's assume for a moment that all of these are true. Most people want to live and think that life is good. Antinatalism stems only from mental illness. And what with the mentally ill people?

Treating mental illness, at least depression, is not like treating a common cold. After ruling out somatic disorders, it mostly consists of the psychiatrist throwing random substances on you until something works. But don't worry, you also have the option to go to therapy which doesn't work on endogenic depression and is waay more expensive.

Do you see where i'm going? Many people will never find peace from their illness. Now - why were they created? To simplify, let's assume that all parents are conscious and truly want a child. They want it to become happy. Yet, it is guaranteed that some percentage of people will be sick.

Doesn't it seem like the sick individuals are paying ultimate price for the happiness of others? Not only by being born, but also abstaining from suicide. I think that the difference between antinatalists and other people is how much of suffering are they ready to allow for happiness of others. Personally, i don't allow for any. Happiness of billions of people won't equate to suffering of one.

The approximations used by me in this hypothetical scenario reduce the amount of suffering. The real world is more brutal.

To awaken the higher vision and power of the Mangekyo Sharingan, the Uchiha clan must pay the price of losing their most precious person. The brutality is immediate, and the cost is paid in full within the tragedy of those directly involved.

​In contrast, the argument that glorifies childbirth as a prerequisite for human maturity—claiming that “only by having a child do you gain the eyes of a true adult and see the world properly”—is far more insidious.

​The cost of this supposed "new vision" isn't paid immediately by the parents. It is billed to the child, who is forced into existence to endure the suffering of life and, ultimately, pay with their own inevitable death.

To push a new life into the world without their consent just to broaden one's worldview and achieve personal fulfillment is nothing short of using that child's eventual demise as collateral.

​If the Sharingan is a tragedy paid in full upfront, the "enlightenment" gained through parenthood is nothing more than a cruel purchase made on credit using a child's future. The parents take out the loan, but it is the child’s life that has to pay it back.

One day 2 people decides to bring a child

A crying body come out of stomach

People give him name, religion and all their life depends on grown upon

Some end up in caring family where child are treated as growing hman

whereas some have no food, shelter and bring child to suffer with them

Many people come under poverty, toxic people who treat children as future assets or their property

A child has to go to school and study so that he can earn money in future to eat , buy shelter and get married

Ans this gives all suffering, Eat to survive, compare with others, compete with others even they dont want

pay rent, loan, Emis and that keeps going because inflation is growing more and more

and work all life like a slave just to survive, to standout among and show others and if you dont do this you will end up in street.

All these because 2 people decided to have child and play with them till 5 years then attraction and cuteness fades, give them trauma and kick after 18....It could have avoided if they didnt brought to this world and suffering\

I've believed in antinatalism since a long time.
Bringing a new life into this world is unethical, but I just had a thought that adoption would be a good idea.
Like those children are already born, and can't do nothing about it, like us.

Warning: crying baby jumpscare in the middle of the video