• GingaNinga@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    123
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Thats one of the reasons i’m not having kids. I have a decent life by any metric but I had to work my ass off and face a tonne of resistance in my career. It always feels like I’m playing catch up with the cost of everything going up and up to the point where I’m just exhausted and depressed. Like, what is the point of living?! it honestly feels like theres just nothing left to enjoy anymore, everything has been monetized to hell and back. They told us as kids that you can be anything you want when you grow up, the future is bright and if you work hard you will be rewarded and its just not true. I can’t do that to another person, these problems are only getting worse with no end in sight.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s the point? The left get demoralized and the right can’t be because they have no morals. Its part of the reason right wingers tend to have a dozen children, it’s quite literally biblical drown them in numbers bullshit.

        • Bahnd Rollard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          59
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          It absolutely isnt

          President Comacho has a problem, finds the most qualified person to fix it, does so (reluctantly) and then dosen’t take credit. This so divorced from reality that it should be concidred high fantasy.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 month ago

            Yeah, Idiocracy has this basic assumption that people are generally acting in good faith, even the ones with more selfish tendencies. It’s been a while since I’ve seen it, but didn’t someone else get frozen along with the MC and started out with a “fuck you, I’ll take care of myself however I need to” before later pivoting to a “we need to work together to save the world!”

            Just like that Batman scene where the boat full of civilians and the boat full of criminals have the trigger for each others’ bombs. In the real world, I’d bet the guard that was handed the trigger on the prisoner boat would have pressed it almost immediately. And if he didn’t, there would have been a riot on the civilian boat to push it rather than a calm vote that decides against it, followed closely by the same thing on the prisoner boat. And many from both boats would have just bailed into the water rather than trust the other boat to not kill them. Joker would have been completely right in his prediction of how things would go. Especially in a city like Gotham. The catch should have been that the boats had their own trigger instead of each others’.

              • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                Well I’d assume Joker was lying and that each boat actually controlled their own bomb to fuck with the ones who didn’t press the button, because who would believe they didn’t press it? It would cause so much more chaos that way (actually max chaos might be to rig both buttons to blow up the prisoners, though I could also see reasons for him to rig up both to blow up the civilians).

                I’m not even sure I’d be on the boat in the first place, though it’s easy to say that in hindsight, knowing how things turn out. I’d probably have made every effort to gtfo of Gotham earlier than that if I could.

                But for an answer that doesn’t completely sidestep the question, I don’t know. It’s a prisoner’s dilemma and I know the optimal solution is if both sides trust each other, but I’d also have a hard time trusting both the other prisoner as well as the “guards” (in this case Joker) setting up the whole situation, knowing there’s no reason they need to be honest about the outcomes of each choice. Like even in the movie, Joker was going to just blow up at least one of the boats anyways when neither of them pressed the button.

                Best bet would probably be to go for a swim.

                What about you?

                • gbuttersnaps@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  I’d like to think that I wouldn’t, but I guess you never really know until you’re in the situation. Family would make the equation harder as well, I think I’d be much more willing to trust a stranger with my life rather than the lives of my nieces and nephews.

          • PwnTra1n@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            I thought about it and it’s just unfortunate kimbo slice died before he could eventually be president. He could have been the one.

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        it’s quite literally biblical drown them in numbers bullshit.

        Yes, it’s called (disgustingly) the “Quiverfull Movement”

      • Bob@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        40
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        The comic is very America-centric if you look at the problems mentioned in totality.

        • silasmariner@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 month ago

          Not the same level of problems with mass shootings in the UK. And whilst I take the point about healthcare it’s a very different kind of issue, and if you get triaged conveniently it can work out for you… Really just depends what you need and how old you are, but at least having a baby and keeping it alive is fairly well covered

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        the UK has 2 out of 3 of those

        Change “shooting” to “knifing” and its 3 for 3. The UK has a huge hooliganism problem. The country is rife with domestic violence. But no (non-police) guns!

      • Siegfried@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Most countries have racism, some have violent racism… and there are some in which terrorist organizations like KKK are freely roaming the streets and are ok for some reason.

        Anyway, it feels wierd to speak shit of the USA when there currently are countries actively working on ethnic cleansing.

        • steel_nomad@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yep. You dumbfucks want to talk about “muh racism”? Be Uyghur or Palestinian or STFU. That’s REAL shit.

          • balderdash@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Just because a problem is worse somewhere else, doesn’t make the problem trivial here.

      • Cypher@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Most countries have less violent racism now than at any other point in history.

        • Ech@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          That bar you’re bragging about stepping over is subterranean.

    • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      The US is far from the only country with violent racism. In terms of healthcare, the privatization. The Canadian healthcare system is being increasingly enshittified by conservatives up here, too.

      • steel_nomad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        The Canadian healthcare system is being increasingly enshittified by conservatives up here, too

        FTFY

        • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          The conservatives are the main ones behind it, and as usual everyone believes it is failing on its own due to ‘free means shit’ and not realizing just how deep conservative shit is being encrusted into it.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Nah bro, trump try will nuke the superbowl for his false flag and accidentally have his ketchup covered fingers slip and push to many buttons and nuke the rest of the USA leaving the rest of the world and native American reservations in tact

  • FilthyShrooms@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    If I ever decide to have kids then I’m adopting because I can’t in good conscience bring a life into this shitty world

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 month ago

      Given the glut of unwanted children from our abortion prohibition, we’ll be needing a lot of new adoptive parents in the near future.

        • Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          Not foster kids. Foster parents/adoptions are always needing people, even babies. Sometimes the babies have to sleep in the DHR office, because there’s nowhere for them to go.

          • andros_rex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 month ago

            Talked to a social worker - kids in DHS care sleep in homeless shelters, hospitals, DHS offices. Teen group homes are inherently damaging to them; I’ve never seen a good one.

            Foster teens. Short term commitment. They will have severe trauma and can be hard to deal with, but you would be amazed at how they respond if you can genuinely provide love. Love and Logic is fucking magic.

            If you can’t foster, you can be a child advocate. Many states have CASA programs. Visit the kid once a month, let them know someone cares, and tell the court what you think is best for them. Even just something like a phone call “hey, kid left something behind at the group home - any way we could get that moved?”

            Or even just someone to protect them from the group home. A dozen seriously traumatized kids, with staff paid less than $15/hr on a week of training. A place that provides opportunities for people to be around children, who are already isolated and have limited access to supportive adults… and financial incentives to cover anything up.

            I don’t think there’s much hope for the future, but we can focus on the now and helping the children who are already here.

              • andros_rex@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                The big idea is about giving children choice. “Do you want to get out of the bath and brush your teeth now, or do you want to brush your teeth in the bathtub?” “Should we work on math homework or our essay first?” “Would you like to do your homework at the table with me, or would you like to sit in the living room and listen to music while you do it?”

                Both choices should be choices you are happy with.

                Many traumatized foster kids will react very poorly to just being told to do things. They struggle with a lot of feelings of powerlessness - being moved from place to place with little consideration of what they want, having to follow new rules from strange adults. You have to work around some “pathological demand avoidance” - you have to avoid tripping them into that flight or fight mode. You empower them by providing them with two acceptable options, instead of reminding them that they have no power over their own lives.

                They won’t always go along with those two choices, but then the focus is going to be on natural consequences - “you didn’t clean up your room, so I don’t think we have room for a new squishmallow.”

                The name of the book is perfect. You start from a place of love - you want this child to grow into a healthy and happy adult, you want to provide them opportunities because you care deeply for them and that informs your actions. You give them rational rules to their behavior - it’s not about control, it’s about teaching them how to function.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Babies get adopted quickly.

          Healthy, white babies do. It’s a lot harder for minority kids, preemies, and anyone with congenital health issues (even relatively minor ones)

    • dafo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah I don’t really get comics like these, or any other form of “[my generation] has it the worst, the world had been destroyed, why should I have kids” that more or less ignores all of history.

      For context, I’m gen Z/millennial with a child and planning another with my wife. We’re not rich or living in nice city of whatever, just living in a smaller city in Europe.

      • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Oh thank god one person on this threat who is not opposed to children or straight out antinatalist

  • vaper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    1 month ago

    The catch-22 is that if the people with environmental values don’t have kids, those values aren’t passed on to the next generation (unless they become teachers or media personalities).

    • Slotos@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 month ago

      You don’t need to have kids to pass on values. The basic premise of your statement doesn’t hold up.

      • vaper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well, like I mentioned you still need some sort of interaction with kids. Or maybe influence their parents enough to have them indirectly pass on those values you imparted on them. But I still think that if the smartest, kindest, most compassionate people among us stop having kids… well then that’s not great for that next generation. I’ve just always felt that giving up one of the primary factors of life, reproduction, seems very defeatist. But on the other hand, if someone genuinely doesn’t want children then by all means don’t.

        • Otter@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 month ago

          I know at least one friend that wants to adopt/foster once they’re ready, instead of having biological children.

          The justification was similar to what you said, where they want to pass on their values / legacy, but don’t care about the genetic side

          • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 month ago

            This is the answer. The problem is the huge expense to adopt at least in the US. Money that could make a better life for the child being adopted is taken by the state.

            We need to streamline adoption while still vetting the potential parents as unlikely to be abusive.

        • errer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yeah this has always pissed me off with my non-parent friends. You really think you have that much influence on random kids you have fleeting interactions with? Unless you’re a teacher or in some other position where it’s your job to interact with kids, your opinions aren’t getting passed down to anyone.

          • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            They could always get more involved with their community. They don’t have to be a parent or have some specialized education to be a coach or volunteer at a youth center.

            My scoutmaster did more to instill honesty, leadership ability, and respect for community in me than my mom or absent father ever did.

            Now in my career I take mentoring new hires more seriously than anything other than general safety. My company hires a lot of young men with no direction and shitty childhoods. It’s not as good as getting to them when they’re young, but when I’m their only friend 200 or 800 miles from home I get the privilege to impart some important ideas and philosophies.

            • errer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              Scoutmaster is a job that works with kids, so I agree with you there. And mentoring is important too. But these things are less important than the impact you make as a parent. For most people the family is the anchor.

          • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Your opinions get passed on whenever you open your mouth, like the dumbass opinion you gave just now. What’s the big fucking deal with influencing kids, anyway? If you aren’t hanging out with any kids, you can influence other adults.

            Or is it appealing because you believe that kids are so easy to influence that they’ll just believe any dumb shit that plops out of your mouth? If you give your opinions to adults, then they might disagree and even push back on you. Oh, shit! That isn’t as much fun as brainwash—er, I mean, passing on your enlightened opinions to easily-molded young people!

    • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Any society that doesn’t impart those values across the board to its citizens will devolve into shit regardless.

      It’s basically just math.

      People with zero values are going to fuck like rabbits and people with values aren’t.

      If trash family has 5 kids they can’t take care of and a dad that leaves, that’s at least 4 really mad poor kids that are going to blame a lot on somesuch minority for their problems in 18 years.

    • kreskin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It seems like vanishingly few people in the US care about the good of broader humanity anymore. Destroying the environment is fine as long as it creates jobs. Poisoning the water tables forever with fracking is fine as long as it makes cheap gas. Genocide was supported by both parties in the last election. Both parties are waving guns around even as school kids die in ever more frequent mass shootings. Its a race to the bottom and no one cares to change course.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      For all those values, even in yourself. There’s no better motivator to make an effort for the future, than having a kid you want the best for. If you don’t have a kid, you’re not passing your environmental values, or you educational values, or all the other values you may have for what makes a better society. Nor do you have any reason to hold to them yourself.

      I don’t mean to try to push anyone toward having kids, but if you do want to have kids but give up thinking the world is getting worse, that decision is part of the world getting worse. If you do want kids, there’s all sorts of opportunity to make this a better world for both yourself and them, and longer, and plenty of opportunity to make an actual difference

      Just passing along the value of the bidet may be worth it, according to the comic

      • Lustrate@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        By that rote though everyone that has had children in the past has cared for their future and the future of the social and actual environment they will inherit. We wouldn’t be having this discussion if any semblance of that was true.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          There are plenty of reasons to think this true, and plenty of reasons the world is getting better over time. Maybe not the next four years, and maybe not for everyone, but there are so many stays at global and national levels that have trended up for decades and continue to do so.

          And before someone single-minded chimes in about Gaza. War and atrocity has always been an ugly part of our history and also has trended downward over the last several decades. Just the fact that we can get so worked up about ending atrocities somewhere else in the world that doesn’t affect us, is a great sign for the future

      • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        If you don’t have a kid, you’re not passing your environmental values, or you educational values, or all the other values you may have for what makes a better society. Nor do you have any reason to hold to them yourself.

        Why does it have to be my kid for me to care?

        Like actually. Are you seriously saying being a parent somehow intrinsically makes someone a better, more caring, and impactful, person? Or that parenthood is the only way to achieve true conviction? That’s literally not how any of this works.

        Not bringing children into the world in no way prevents you from caring about making the world a better place, and acting to make it so. And doing the things that make the world better doesn’t functionally require having a kid. All it takes is some basic fucking decency.

        Which is something people already have, but get taken away by the grind of survival or material success. That is maybe why you have this fucked up idea that people get it by having a kid, but in reality that’s just a huge life event that wakes some people up enough to take a look around and start caring again.

        And passing good things on doesn’t require having descendants. If you’ve ever changed someones mind on something for the better, you’ve successfully passed on “values you may have for what makes a better society”. The person whose mind you changed doesn’t even need to be younger than you, thought doesn’t procreate through fucking genetics.

        Plenty of parents are made no more profound than they were before by the act of procreating, and will conently continue to do nothing to improve the world. There are parents who will protect their own to the detriment of everyone else.

        Kids though, if raised by caring parents, care from the start, but then have that heart crushed by society until they too have a kid of their own.

        But in there is way for everyone to care, all the time.

        The whole idea that it’s ok not to care about and deal with bad stuff unless you personally are somehow impacted is the whole reason we’re in this mess, and it’s perpetuated by people being forced to live in a constant scramble of stress and consumerism.

        Not by people not having children.

        • Carnelian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I would add that the sentiment is also wrong in the other direction. I’ve personally encountered multiple parents and grandparents who hit me with the “well it won’t affect me, I’ll be long gone” reasoning regarding climate change.

          So yeah. What a stupid and offensively self centered thing to say. If you personally didn’t give a shit about other people before, that’s actually a character flaw, not a rite of passage you complete by roping children into this mess

  • Squorlple@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    What is the acceptable level of tragedy to impart upon a non-consenting progeny? I vote for zero

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      You’d have to be immortal, first. Most kids are gonna live to see their own parents pass.

      Tragedy is a part of life.

      It’s easily avoidable tragedy, unaddressed by those who could do something about it, that’s the problem.

      Even worse, there’s potentially extinction level tragedy happening right now, going unaddressed by those who can do something about it.

      • Squorlple@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Tragedy is a part of life

        Yes. And tragedy is categorically bad, and tragedies cannot be experienced by that which is not alive (i.e. non-sentient). Thusly, a total absence of (sentient) life would be a total absence of tragedies and vice versa; in other words, sentient life and tragedy are virtually biconditional. The continuation of sentient life and tragedy is wholly avoidable if the relevant capable parties were willing, and it can often be abated on a small scale on an individual basis.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Most kids though? I’m not going to go looking for stats but let’s just say 95% of children are outliving their parents right now. Awkward sentence there. I mean parents who are dying today, 95% of them didn’t outlive their children. I hope that makes sense. Yes that’s not how statistics work, I’m trying to make a point.

        What’s an acceptable level to drop to before we say fuck this we’re done having kids? I knew I didn’t want kids when I was a kid, but I’m an outlier.

        Let’s say 85% is the number for kids born today. I believe that’s already unacceptable. It’s so unnatural.

        I think the number is worse than that. The mass climate migration/water wars are going to really get moving in the 2040s if not earlier. I don’t want to live through that. I definitely don’t want a child to live through that.

        • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 month ago

          Historically we’ve tolerated MUCH higher rates of infant and child mortality than we do today. People will keep having kids even if most of them will die.

          • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            Agreed. It’s just now we have more options. At least we did before the Christian Nationalist Supreme Court made abortion illegal in half of the US. Even with this there are still more options and more education than in the distant past.

          • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            People will keep having kids even if most of them will die

            “even if”? Biologically, knowing that most of your offspring are going to die is a reason to have as many kids as possible.

          • bitcrafter@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            All of their children will die; it is only a matter of when.

            Put another way: every time a parent gives birth, they are bestowing the irrevocable gift of one day experiencing dying to their child.

  • stinky@redlemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 month ago

    DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN REPEAT DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN

    THIS MESSAGE IS FOR ALL RESIDENTS OF PLANET EARTH

    NO ONE NEEDS YOU TO BIRTH THEM

    ABORT. ABORT. ABORT.

    WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE, THE PLANET IS BURNING, THEY WILL NOT LEAD GOOD LIVES. IT’S NOT WORTH IT. PULL OUT BEFORE YOU NUT HOLY CHRIST PLEASE DO NOT HAVE KIDS

  • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    At this point I think the GOP are just taunting people who won’t bring kids into this. Jokes on them though, if theyre having kids from some sort obligation and not to love and properly nurture them it’s just bad news for everyone involved. Have fun with all that trauma.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Conservatives are often very insecure people who have never overcome their own childhood trauma or understood why they want children. That trauma and insecurity just gets passed down.

      • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I know, I’m the child of two. For the last 20 years I’ve been completely isolated from all my family by no doing of my own. I often wonder what the fuck all that was about. You know, the whole, bringing 4 kids into the world then putting fasicists into power. Like I got problems, true, but I’d of prefered keeping myself and not being a plague to those around me.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yeah sounds like my childhood. My parents made my life a living hell then suddenly grew up and realized that everyone around them was broken. We have a better relationship but the damage was done long ago to me siblings and we still have problems.

            • stoly@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              This plus observing and learning from others convinced me that most people should not have children prior to the age of 30. This is time to grow up, party some, get established, and become yourself. Then you’re ready to parent.

              Thanks for the nice words. I’ll keep an eye out for you in the future. Need to figure out Joe to do tags.

        • steel_nomad@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 month ago

          What country are you from and what exact “fascists” are you speaking of? That word doesn’t mean what you think it means.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Craziest thing about this graphic is that it leaves so many major issues off while also covering so much horseshit.

  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Why do you think the politicians that are accelerating inequality are the same politicians that are trying to outlaw abortion?

    They want babies because they need more workers to distribute inequality and produce more wealth for the shareholders. Foster kids are less likely to go to college, so they’re perfect fuel for the machine.

  • EisFrei@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 month ago

    When in human history was ever a good time to have children?

    Is there an objective “this was the best year/decade/century”?

    • darthelmet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s the neat part, there isn’t!

      But being more serious: I think I can express the feeling of things being particularly worse now in a way that isn’t just recency bias.

      Sure, over time technology has improved and that’s generally speaking allowed for better standards of living, at least for the people at the right end of that technology. (Not so great if you’re being conquered because someone shows up with guns for example.) So you could look at the past and say it was worse because materially things like food availability and medicine have become better over time.

      But key to this was that all of this was a struggle of humans over nature. To the extent things were bad, there were tangible things we could do to improve.

      These days, so many of our problems are self-inflicted and technology and economic development mostly makes them worse. Climate change is the obvious big one, but then there’s stuff like:

      • Weapons have become increasingly destructive and centrally usable. A small number of people can cause a lot more damage than they ever could in the past.

      • Surveillance technology invades our privacy in a way that’s unprecedented in human history.

      • Automation, communications, and transportation technology have made workers less and less powerful and therefore more subject to abuse and artificial poverty. This is one of the more messed up things about capitalism. Technology gets better and rather than getting the benefits of that progress, it actually hurts a lot of people.

      • Advances in science and technology, particularly data science, allow the powerful to hyper-optimize the bad things they were always doing or enables them to do things they’ve wanted to do.

      • A financialized economy creates economic catastrophes where people go homeless or starve without any actual changes to material conditions. The numbers got screwed up or the investors panicked and now everything sucks for no reason?

      • More generally, we can produce enough of the necessities of life for everyone, but capitalism ensures that those necessities won’t make it to people. Capitalism depends on scarcity. If you had a house you wouldn’t need to pay a landlord. If you had food you wouldn’t need to pay food companies. If you had both you wouldn’t need to go work and put up with awful conditions. We’ve solved our most fundamental problems and yet because of the interests of the system and those in power, that progress gets held back.

      In the past, even if things were rough now, you could maybe look forward to them improving. Now it feels like the walls are closing in. Unless we actively do something about it, things are going to get worse for most people as more and more wealth accumulates in private hands, as we become subject to increasingly powerful forms of control, and as the powerful destroy the environment we need to live.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Now it feels like the walls are closing in.

        loads automatedselfsufficientdronearmy.exe

        selects ‘working class extinction’

        opens options, selects filter

        opens Facebook and uploads the profiles of desired sex slaves

        presses execute button

    • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      In the past, children were your labor force, health care and pension plan. People had many children so at least some survived into adulthood. There wasn’t much alternative back in the day.

      Now children are a net cost. They can’t even take care of you in old age if government pensions or retirement plans don’t pan out because many can barely feed themselves.

      So, the best time to have children was roughly before 1900. That’s when things started to change.

    • Steak@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah that’s how I feel. People still had kids during wars, famines, imprisonment, potential nuclear war. Every problem humans have ever faced really. This is the best time to be alive ever. There are tonne of problems we are going to face in the near future but that has always been the case.

      The biggest reasons people are having kids is we’re all overweight and feel bad about ourselves and are constantly comparing to people/couples online. We have phone/shopping/gaming addictions to deal with all this mental stress. Online dating is shit. 3rd places don’t exist anymore. We are all lonely and meeting someone and figuring everything out to the point where children are an viable option seems impossible. Easier to just say fuck it and just post memes and complain about the world is bad now so I’m not having kids. And to be fair all of that has a lot of truth in it.

      • Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Incorrect. The biggest reason people aren’t having kids is that the planet is dying and no one can afford them anyway. Life is nothing to do to a person at this point.

  • Orbituary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I’m Gen X, but cusp with Millennial. I said at 15 or 16 I’d never have kids & stuck with it. I’m more resolute than ever & feel like I would have massive guilt if I had caved. I felt the world was too fucked up back in the 90s. I wonder how my younger self would deal with the world today.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m on the other side of the generational gap (nearly gen x, but millennial), and I was terrified during my late teens/early 20s of becoming a parent. I could not imagine raising a child the way I was living paycheque to paycheque, if I had a paycheque at all…

      That feeling never went away, and I still wouldn’t know how I could possibly afford that. I decided in my mid 20s that children would be a decision I would leave up to my wife (wherever I had a wife to make the decision). I was/am instinctually driven to want them (a feeling I mostly disregard), but given the state of the world and my own financial situation, I can’t say that I want to force any intelligent being, especially one that is my offspring, to suffer through a lifetime of this shit like I have been forced to so far.

      I didn’t ask to be here. If someone had given me a choice, I would have probably opted out of gestures all of this.

      I’m currently in a long term relationship, and we’re planning on signing the papers next year, so soon I’ll have someone I can legitimately call my wife. She is very much on the side of “never have kids”. So that’s my decision as well.

      Instinctual drive isn’t enough to cause me to overlook how things are going. I love my (non-existent) children too much, than to force them into living a life in these circumstances. Fuck no.

      • Orbituary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        I was/am instinctually driven to want them (a feeling I mostly disregard), but given the state of the world and my own financial situation, I can’t say that I want to force any intelligent being, especially one that is my offspring, to suffer through a lifetime of this shit like I have been forced to so far.

        This is interesting to me, as I’ve never had the biological urge to have kids. I love them and enjoy hanging out with them, joking, playing, etc., but never my own. In any case, I commend you on being resolute.

        I’m currently in a long term relationship, and we’re planning on signing the papers next year, so soon I’ll have someone I can legitimately call my wife. She is very much on the side of “never have kids”. So that’s my decision as well.

        My girlfriend doesn’t want them either. She’s a good deal younger than me - 31 years old - but she says something similar to me: raising kids in this world would be a tragedy.

        Frankly, I’ve always felt there are too many humans. I never understood the push for more. Just maintain or reduce the population naturally.

        Good luck staving off that biological imperative. I feel lucky not to have it myself.

        • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s not difficult for me, to say the feeling isn’t felt very strongly, would probably be an understatement.

          The other comment I want to make is that I agree that there’s too many humans, however, the economy survives by constant growth, so that’s a thing. It has to do with how money works and is valuated.

          The video “money as debt” is a good resource for more info on that.

          Bluntly, I don’t care since I’ll be long dead when the economy collapses under it’s own weight.

          • Orbituary@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            I considered that and it was part of my early stands: IF i had a kid, I would adopt since there are so many without parents.

            Just like Millenials and Gen Zs, my life is hard enough to pay for financially. I don’t know that I could provide something positive for a child. I need to be honest with myself about this shit.

    • microphone900@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I got a vasectomy as soon as I could which was at 26. I would have done it sooner but I had insurance problems and was broke before that. It was the best decision I’ve ever made for myself.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Yeah I’m afraid that the lesson is that Gen Z is not actually the future, they are going to repeat the past. What makes me sad is that they should have been the future but social media made sure that didn’t happen.

      • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Did social media make sure that didn’t happen, or did the fact that virtually every generation ultimately repeats the mistakes of the one before it ensure that didn’t happen?

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          That they could have been so much better without Zuckerberg, Savage, Peterson, etc.

          • Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Exactly. They’re turning young men into the generation that will force American women into burqas. Or at least support / help with the move.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      but the system is rigged or my vote doesn’t count or genocide joe or some stupid shit

      • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean genocide joe is calling any democrat who wants to stop sending weapons to israel a hamas supporter. I can understand why they didn’t believe the dems would fix the situation.

          • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            Credibility that a politician will do what the people they’re asking to vote for them want isn’t stupid shit, that’s the absolute most basic aspect of representative democracy.

            Do you think the republicans would have voted for Trump if his messaging was mostly about how the democrats are correct and he’s going to do what the democratic voters want more competently, and called his constituents antisemitic terrorist supporters?

            Then surely you understand why the dems trotting out Liz Cheney to represent them and talking about the importance of building the wall, being tough on crime, tax-cuts for businesses, increasing military spending, etc all lowers democratic turnout?

              • alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                27 days ago

                That’s just how representative democracy works. You can go “Damn I wish people tended to vote for a party they don’t believe will do what they want because the other side is worse”, but that’s just not how it works in reality.

                The democrats failed the people, the people did not fail the democrats.

                • ripcord@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  27 days ago

                  The democrats should have been able to run a goddamn cardboard cutout and people should have turned out in droves to vote against that shitstain. This isn’t 2000. This wasn’t the kind of election where any of the things you mentioned should have been a factor. It’s insane.

                  Yes, I absolutely can blame the people for being too lazy or stupid to do the minimum possible to protect themselves and their neighbors. These excuses are just goddamn braindead, and it will never not astound me that when comparing a functioning adult to a giant corrupt sack of shit, that anyone anywhere had to have a conversation about why they should bother to show uo to vote for the functioning adult.

                  You’re/they’re/we’re now going to pay for having a complete lack of perspective. Buckle up, it is not going to be fun for anyone. Except the oligarchs I guess.

    • Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      So says the headline, but the entire article focuses on males and how much they love that he did shit like Rogan. I’m not saying young women can’t also be idiots or angry at the present state of things, but they didn’t completely forget that the right sees them as procreation slaves.

      https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/4986243-trump-gen-z-voters-shift/amp/#amp_ct=1732198304481&amp_tf=From %251%24s&aoh=17321982963326&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com

    • Goodmorningsunshine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well yeah, young men bought into all the incelfluencer crap they were being fed. Probably a good thing since young women by and large are flocking the opposite way and absolutely don’t want to fuck conservatives.

    • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I mean, they did vote for change… just not the change we were hoping for, I guess. Things will most likely change for the worse now.

      That said, real good change wasn’t really on the ballot either.

    • Glytch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Look at this guy thinking that we can vote our way out of this when we only have two, corporate sponsored, candidates.

  • wrekone@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    You can be damned sure the crazy fundamentalists are gonna have a shit ton of kids. And some of those will vote.