Quantcast

Black Anti-natalists

leahx

General Manager
Joined
Jul 24, 2017
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
Reactions
8,801 525 498
9,415
Alleybux
0
Hello everybody. I didn’t know exactly where to put this thread but since it is related to black people, I thought this would be the appropriate place. In another thread I created, I encountered a black anti-natalist which is rare online and in real life. I’m sure most of you are aware, but for those of you that aren’t, anti-natalism is a philosophy that suggests human life should cease because having children is selfish and it is unethical to summon beings into existence that will experience more suffering than not irregardless of the magnitude of the suffering/pain. While I do not believe it is reasonable or practical to suggest all humans stop having children, I agree with the principles that people have kids for selfish reasons (not judging, just an observation), the world is overpopulated, there are not enough resources to go around and that some people should seriously consider an anti-natalist/child free lifestyle.I just wanted to create this thread so that we have a designated space to talk for those interested in this topic. We can talk about anything. There are so many things that draw people to anti-natalism. I would love to know how you came to this conclusion. Do you think anti-nataism or the desire to be so is a part of Eugenics? Are you a happy anti-natalist(I hope so)? Do you think human consciousness was created to allow us voluntary population regulation? Anything!
 

LazyDaisy

Team Owner
Joined
Nov 6, 2015
Messages
35,404
Reaction score
Reactions
212,294 3,161 1,231
237,637
Alleybux
537,743
Anti-natalism sounds extreme and apocalyptic. I do think that humans need to self-reflect on why they want to have children and if they're capable of raising them properly. We'd get a better crop of humans growing up in the world raised by fully prepared parents.
 

PrinceNelson

Eat your pancakes
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
36,138
Reaction score
Reactions
161,287 17,486 9,412
158,911
Alleybux
206,441
I'm anti natalist to an extent.

If you don't have the emotional and financial ressources to provide the best life for your kid, then you shouldn't have one especially if you're bringing black children into this world.
 

T H I E F S

A Person
BANNED
Joined
Dec 18, 2011
Messages
14,815
Reaction score
Reactions
124,410 8,683 13,079
119,690
Alleybux
0
I'm vaguely anti-natalist to the extent that the philosophy partially aligns with my personal beliefs. However I have no desire to impose that belief on anybody else's life.
 

ZeeZeeblue

Team Owner
Joined
Sep 29, 2011
Messages
37,973
Reaction score
Reactions
350,359 16,548 14,653
349,340
Alleybux
754,459
If the Parents have ...
No Home
No Job
No Health Insurance
No Education
No Car
No Money
A Mental Illness ...

They should not bring children into the world.
 

Honeydripper

Team Owner
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
11,342
Reaction score
Reactions
108,159 6,295 2,486
120,264
Alleybux
907,356
Remember that show with the dwarf parents? They had a bunch of kids and I thought it was unethical, my friend said I was wrong to devalue a life. I don't even know where I stand now on the issue but we can't be afraid to have children and we can't wait or expect a perfect situation in an imperfect world
 

leahx

General Manager
Joined
Jul 24, 2017
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
Reactions
8,801 525 498
9,415
Alleybux
0
This is interesting. Everyone is talking about being able to financially care for the child. When I’ve typically seen this discussed it’s usually by white dolls that can afford to take care of kids. It’s less about being able to take care of them and more about the moral implications of having a child that didn’t ask to be here. Interesting comments nonetheless.
 

leahx

General Manager
Joined
Jul 24, 2017
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
Reactions
8,801 525 498
9,415
Alleybux
0
Anti-natalism sounds extreme and apocalyptic. I do think that humans need to self-reflect on why they want to have children and if they're capable of raising them properly. We'd get a better crop of humans growing up in the world raised by fully prepared parents.
It is apocalyptic because it’s takes into account the destruction caused by humans, even though we know the primary contributors are white. However I believe the angle many come from is that humans already engage in apocalyptic behavior. Weapons of mass destruction exist, modified foods, disease all of these things that could harm children when the end game is the same. Their mark on this word will be neutral or negative because they live and they die, and with and an exponentially growing population and ever growing carbon footprint, the impact is more likely going to be negative which effects the quality of life for everyone. But aside from that, there is the moral dilemma of justifying reason for bringing the child here.

I believe David Benetar makes some poignant points about this but he is a “South Afrikaner”, so I think him pushing this message is just a new form of Eugenics in SA. But I understand your position.
 

leahx

General Manager
Joined
Jul 24, 2017
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
Reactions
8,801 525 498
9,415
Alleybux
0
Remember that show with the dwarf parents? They had a bunch of kids and I thought it was unethical, my friend said I was wrong to devalue a life. I don't even know where I stand now on the issue but we can't be afraid to have children and we can't wait or expect a perfect situation in an imperfect world
I think it was called Little People Big World
 

Alestra

General Manager
Joined
Oct 28, 2018
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
Reactions
10,660 447 241
10,787
Alleybux
4,455
  • Eugenics and anti-natalism aren't related since Eugenics actually advocates for people to have children so long as they meet the genetic requirements. It's selective breeding, not anti breeding, which is anti-natalism,

  • I don't believe it's morally wrong to have children, so I'm not completely anti-natalist, however I do advocate for responsible, stable nuclear families with the proper investment into each child, so families should be smaller.

  • I don't understand what you mean by "Do you think human consciousness was created to allow us voluntary population regulation". Human consciousness wasn't created and it's not about consciousness and involves our social values. Natural selection is the natural population regulation, but because of our advancement in technology, natural selection doesn't apply to the human species.
 

leahx

General Manager
Joined
Jul 24, 2017
Messages
1,360
Reaction score
Reactions
8,801 525 498
9,415
Alleybux
0
  • Eugenics and anti-natalism aren't related since Eugenics actually advocates for people to have children so long as they meet the genetic requirements. It's selective breeding, not anti breeding, which is anti-natalism,
  • I don't believe it's morally wrong to have children, so I'm not completely anti-natalist, however I do advocate for responsible, stable nuclear families with the proper investment into each child, so families should be smaller.

  • I don't understand what you mean by "Do you think human consciousness was created to allow us voluntary population regulation". Human consciousness wasn't created and it's not about consciousness and involves our social values. Natural selection is the natural population regulation, but because of our advancement in technology, natural selection doesn't apply to the human species.
Eugenics and anti-natalism are completely related since the major proponents of it are white. I often see them telling people that’s are impoverished with no resources are most at fault for child rearing which would mean most of the blacks and non whites of the world.That would mean the creation of white children not black ones. That’s why I mentioned David Benetar, the white South Afrikaner pushing this message there. In more recent years I’ve seen in influx of native East and Southern African people claiming to be anti natalist. I understand your point about natural selection, that’s makes sense. To the second point I’m not sure if partiality works with the moral argument against anti-natalism, but I guess just like politics we all fall on the spectrum somehow. It sounds like you just want people to practice responsible parenting which makes sense.I mean, I just think it’s interesting that we talk about consent for so many other things like rape and xesual harassment, but not consent to the creation of a human life. Of course it’s obvious a child cannot consent to its own birth, but that’s why the moral deliberation falls upon the parents. Even having discussions about this with people I know, I haven’t heard any reasons for having children that are selfless. The selfless work comes after having the child. But thank you for your contribution. You opinion is appreciated.
 

skybantralist

Dookie Braid God
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Messages
20,575
Reaction score
Reactions
110,648 9,306 8,625
113,064
Alleybux
696,783
If the Parents have ...
No Home
No Job
No Health Insurance
No Education
No Car
No Money
A Mental Illness ...

They should not bring children into the world.
Honestly, there would hardly be enough human beings to keep the world functioning if that were the case. We need low paid third worlders until we can get our automation and AI up to par.
 

GreenEyedDevil

Hairy Lesbian
Joined
May 14, 2018
Messages
21,381
Reaction score
Reactions
266,425 12,266 4,623
344,602
Alleybux
350,028
My antinatalism stems from mortality; having children knowing that they are mortal is the same as killing them to me. It’s cruel to bring a conscience being aware of its own eminent demise into the world.

No one gets my viewpoint though, so I don’t mention it in real life at all.
 

animelover

General Manager
Joined
May 1, 2017
Messages
1,810
Reaction score
Reactions
15,360 1,761 139
15,694
Alleybux
46,132
My antinatalism stems from mortality; having children knowing that they are mortal is the same as killing them to me. It’s cruel to bring a conscience being aware of its own eminent demise into the world.

No one gets my viewpoint though, so I don’t mention it in real life at all.

This is my opinion as well. I'm not as hard core as I was in my 20s but I still adhere to this as my personal primary reason against having kids as opposed to the financial or emotional aspects.

I think it would be better for a child to not exist than to be constantly aware that he/she will die.

I feel if anyone wants to raise a child that person should just adopt - that life is already in existence and needs as much help as possible. However, I don't "preach" this to others and I understand if others want to create their own children.

Live and let die.
 
Last edited:

SkekSIS

By a Black woman's hands, or else by none.
Joined
Mar 8, 2018
Messages
1,718
Reaction score
Reactions
9,737 182 452
11,195
Alleybux
582
In another thread I created, I encountered a black anti-natalist which is rare online and in real life.

Do you think anti-nataism or the desire to be so is a part of Eugenics? Are you a happy anti-natalist(I hope so)? Do you think human consciousness was created to allow us voluntary population regulation? Anything!

I was one in the past.

Nope. At its core, it is anything but. However, we cannot deny that suffering and pain is, today, inexplicably linked to racial and ethnic origins, which can come across as Eugenics.

I am no longer one. And I do not qualify nor quantify my happiness. I generally just do what I do. But if I had to say, no, I was not happy. I was complacent and bored.

Human consciousness, I do not think, has anything to do with population regulation itself. I see that is maybe an indirect consequence of our ability, but imagine us not having consciousness. Animals easily regulate their populations in ways that humans should (and do) consider unethical.[/QUOTE]
 

Mrs.G

Team Owner
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
15,025
Reaction score
Reactions
60,879 1,460 749
64,438
Alleybux
56,150
To be honest, some of my beliefs could be described as eugenicist. Stupid people should not have children but they tend to have the largest families. People with serious chronic illnesses or disabilities of any kind should not have children.

The world does not need any more ill or simpleminded people. It's unfair to bring a child into the world if they are at a severe genetic and/or health related disadvantage. Life is hard enough so why make it more difficult for those children?
 

9Aries9

Soul Plane Attendant
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
1,352
Reaction score
Reactions
5,340 236 28
5,899
Alleybux
34,414
I'm an unconditional anti-natalist. I don't impose my beliefs on others, but I see no point in procreating.

ETA: One really has to remember, they are rolling the dice when having kids. They cannot protect them from everything. They could have all the wealth, all the resources, all the love, and something will still slip through and destroy their child. It can happen when their offspring is a kid, or when their offspring is an adult. Something will happen. The way most people talk about their kids, let's me know they wouldn't give a damn, especially when their kids is grown.
 

9Aries9

Soul Plane Attendant
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
1,352
Reaction score
Reactions
5,340 236 28
5,899
Alleybux
34,414
Do you think anti-nataism or the desire to be so is a part of Eugenics? - Anti-natalism is more so a philosophy based on no one having kids based on "morals." Eugenics picks who can and who can't based on what's "moral." Anti-natalism is everything in the physical realm sucks, so none of it. Eugenics is "This sucks, but that don't; more of that."

Are you a happy anti-natalist(I hope so)? I'm so-so. I have my peaks and valleys. Most of life is just mesas.

Do you think human consciousness was created to allow us voluntary population regulation
? The way the question is asked makes human consciousness something outside of ourselves. It wasn't created; it just is. Then again, that depends on your spiritual beliefs as well. We can either be primal, automatons, or use our brains for what we want. We have the urge to have xesual release, but I don't think we have the natural urge to have kids. I believe the wanting to have kids is based on the society around us.
 

everythingirie

Starter
Joined
Feb 22, 2019
Messages
224
Reaction score
Reactions
1,102 99 43
1,080
Alleybux
12,335
I am not anti natalist personally because I love children and want a family of my own. I also think the anti natalist community goes hand in hand with racism and classism. It’s majority privileged white people advocating for the middle and lower class to stop reproducing, which mainly accounts for POC who have been historically disenfranchised by whites.

However, I do not agree with the mentally ill, handicapped or drug abusers getting pregnant and birthing children. It is not fair to the innocent child to be birthed into neglect, danger and possibly the burden of caring for their parent.
 

bubblimi

Team Owner
Joined
Nov 15, 2018
Messages
5,578
Reaction score
Reactions
33,958 2,352 2,392
32,659
Alleybux
575
Hello everybody. I didn’t know exactly where to put this thread but since it is related to black people, I thought this would be the appropriate place. In another thread I created, I encountered a black anti-natalist which is rare online and in real life. I’m sure most of you are aware, but for those of you that aren’t, anti-natalism is a philosophy that suggests human life should cease because having children is selfish and it is unethical to summon beings into existence that will experience more suffering than not irregardless of the magnitude of the suffering/pain. While I do not believe it is reasonable or practical to suggest all humans stop having children, I agree with the principles that people have kids for selfish reasons (not judging, just an observation), the world is overpopulated, there are not enough resources to go around and that some people should seriously consider an anti-natalist/child free lifestyle.I just wanted to create this thread so that we have a designated space to talk for those interested in this topic. We can talk about anything. There are so many things that draw people to anti-natalism. I would love to know how you came to this conclusion. Do you think anti-nataism or the desire to be so is a part of Eugenics? Are you a happy anti-natalist(I hope so)? Do you think human consciousness was created to allow us voluntary population regulation? Anything!
i agree with it
 

FRED

General Manager
Joined
Jul 21, 2013
Messages
1,852
Reaction score
Reactions
6,743 275 51
6,722
Alleybux
36,040
I identify with it. I would have rather not existed. The only thing certain in life is death. If i had been born into a 1 percenter or royal family, its no guarantee I would have been healthy or happy. All that would have been certain is that I would die.
Reproducing is kinda the "point" to life so going against it on purpose makes people surprised. But why bring people into a world where they will be likely to suffer? Esp as a black person in the USA?
 

LeBronFan

Team Owner
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
26,860
Reaction score
Reactions
46,803 2,676 1,826
55,324
Alleybux
0
Hello everybody. I didn’t know exactly where to put this thread but since it is related to black people, I thought this would be the appropriate place. In another thread I created, I encountered a black anti-natalist which is rare online and in real life. I’m sure most of you are aware, but for those of you that aren’t, anti-natalism is a philosophy that suggests human life should cease because having children is selfish and it is unethical to summon beings into existence that will experience more suffering than not irregardless of the magnitude of the suffering/pain. While I do not believe it is reasonable or practical to suggest all humans stop having children, I agree with the principles that people have kids for selfish reasons (not judging, just an observation), the world is overpopulated, there are not enough resources to go around and that some people should seriously consider an anti-natalist/child free lifestyle.I just wanted to create this thread so that we have a designated space to talk for those interested in this topic. We can talk about anything. There are so many things that draw people to anti-natalism. I would love to know how you came to this conclusion. Do you think anti-nataism or the desire to be so is a part of Eugenics? Are you a happy anti-natalist(I hope so)? Do you think human consciousness was created to allow us voluntary population regulation? Anything!
Interesting.

leahx, let me see if I understand this correctly.
If I am incorrect, please correct me in a courteous manner.

Thank you in advance.

So your definition to the term "Anti-natalist" is:
"a philosophy that suggests human life should cease because having children is selfish and it is unethical to summon beings into existence that will experience more suffering than not irregardless of the magnitude of the suffering/pain."

And when you say Black, you are mending a person who is classified as Black. That also believe in this type of code?
 

Didyme

Flat Tummy Teas
Joined
Feb 18, 2017
Messages
8,705
Reaction score
Reactions
93,199 5,056 1,399
97,046
Alleybux
217,765
Eugenics and anti-natalism aren't related since Eugenics actually advocates for people to have children so long as they meet the genetic requirements. It's selective breeding, not anti breeding, which is anti-natalism,
This is absolutely wrong.

Implementation of anti-natalism would directly result in eugenics. In an anti-natalist world child birth and conception would be highly monitored.

In order to maintain our species we must reproduce. Anti-natalism cannot be wholly implemented— this should have been quite obvious to you. Thus, all reproduction would be regulated in the interest of furthering and bettering the human race. All babies would refined and curated from a genetic standpoint.

Low quality eggs and sperm: rejected.

Low intelligence markers: rejected.

Ugliness: rejected.

Genetic disease: rejected.

Any undesirable quality would be weeded out of the gene pool through elimination of individuals and looking gene editing.

That is the definition of eugenics.

Most likely there would be mass sterilization and governmentally regulated reproduction if this implemented on a wide scale.

Already people use IVF to select gender, get rid of genetic disease, replace mitochondrial DNA, and more. That is a form of eugenics. Countries have a history of sterilizing people with illness and dwarfism as well as undesired races-- today! Native and Black women have been sterilized in several cases in our history. In modern sperm and egg banks, ethnicities are ranked: whites on top and blacks on the bottom then they are rated by intelligence, accomplishments and more. The better qualified, the higher the price.

Modern eugenics.

In such a world, it would be rampant.

The world would be very sterile.

You really need to study up more on your history before stating things like this.

Anyways, I do not think it behooves our race to practice or support anti-natalism. It's a slippery slope into much more extreme practices.
 
Last edited:

Alestra

General Manager
Joined
Oct 28, 2018
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
Reactions
10,660 447 241
10,787
Alleybux
4,455
This is absolutely wrong.

Implementation of anti-natalism would directly result in eugenics. In an anti-natalist world child birth and conception would be highly monitored.

In order to maintain our species we must reproduce. Anti-natalism cannot be wholly implemented— this should have been quite obvious to you. Thus, all reproduction would be regulated in the interest of furthering and bettering the human race. All babies would refined and curated from a genetic standpoint.

Low quality eggs and sperm: rejected.

Low intelligence markers: rejected.

Ugliness: rejected.

Genetic disease: rejected.

Any undesirable quality would be weeded out of the gene pool through elimination of individuals and looking gene editing.

That is the definition of eugenics.

Most likely there would be mass sterilization and governmentally regulated reproduction if this implemented on a wide scale.

Already people use IVF to select gender, get rid of genetic disease, replace mitochondrial DNA, and more. That is a form of eugenics. Countries have a history of sterilizing people with illness and dwarfism as well as undesired races-- today! Native and Black women have been sterilized in several cases in our history. In modern sperm and egg banks, ethnicities are ranked: whites on top and blacks on the bottom then they are rated by intelligence, accomplishments and more. The better qualified, the higher the price.

Modern eugenics.

In such a world, it would be rampant.

The world would be very sterile.

You really need to study up more on your history before stating things like this.

Anyways, I do not think it behooves our race to practice or support anti-natalism. It's a slippery slope into much more extreme practices.
Anti-natalism is an ideology that views having children as morally wrong for everyone, which means it's not specific to race, gender, etc. Antinatalism isn't "selective breeding" or "discrimination breeding" - it's "anti breeding", while eugenics advocates for breeding as long as people have the correct genetic material. You're wrong by saying "In an anti-natalist world child birth and conception would be highly monitored." No, in an anti-natalist world child birth and conception would be outlawed. The two don't correlate.


"Low quality eggs and sperm: rejected.

Low intelligence markers: rejected.

Ugliness: rejected.

Genetic disease: rejected."

Again, these aren't properties of antinatalism, which states that ALL eggs and sperm are rejected because giving birth to ALL children is morally wrong. Eugenics is what you're describing.

Definition of antinatalism: Antinatalism, or anti-natalism, is a philosophical position that assigns a negative value to birth. Antinatalists argue that people should abstain from procreation because it is morally bad (some also recognize the procreation of other sentient beings as morally bad)

Definition of eugenics: the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics
 

9Aries9

Soul Plane Attendant
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
1,352
Reaction score
Reactions
5,340 236 28
5,899
Alleybux
34,414
Can somebody honestly answer this: What is this fear of a dystopian future where there will not be enough black people on Earth?

I don't mean to sound like a nihilist, but what is there to fear? I have a feeling it's becoming like the Romani people, Aborginals, or the First Nations in Canada. Is this on the nose, or in the ball park?
 

Summer Sweetie

Team Owner
Joined
Apr 12, 2015
Messages
33,150
Reaction score
Reactions
315,353 45,122 6,440
334,014
Alleybux
4,500
Everybody suffers in some way. Everybody and when you have a child you sign him or her up for that.




Ive been thinking a lot about this because I know a few people on hospice right now. Disease ravaging the body, being in so much pain that nothing being given can alleviate it, wasting away.

I see certain people feel if you have stuff like a home and money etc then it becomes acceptable to procreate. Those things won't stop people from having a kid with a chronic illness, like schizophrenia, or something.


I won't delude myself into thinking procreation would ever cease because really the drive to procreate is biological.

But I believe those who think themselves procreating more justified because they have more in assets or "stability" are funny.

You're still condemning your offspring just by bringing them into existence
 

2phat

Pro BW
Joined
Oct 10, 2013
Messages
18,659
Reaction score
Reactions
117,592 5,996 4,739
123,942
Alleybux
534,918
Humans are such an incredible species. No creature in existence comes close to our intelligence, adaptability, creativity. No other creature could explore the earth and the stars or create civilizations. Yes people have used their GIFT of humanity in evil ways, but that just doesn't make all of humanity not worth it. On one hand you all sound like wanna-be Albert Camuses yet on the other hand, seem to suggest that life IS worth living if you're born in an upperclass white family....

Roll your eyes all you want but humanity IS special at least on earth. It's all about how we use our gift.
 

You Suck

Put LSA out of its misery
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
6,300
Reaction score
Reactions
37,891 2,426 1,196
40,559
Alleybux
236,109
American society really groomed yall to have this borderline sociopathic, Eugenist beliefs (that many are anti-black and target US to begin with) and ya'll wanna pretend it's contrarian to modern society, a big kii within itself.

Secondly, pretending straight up your weird ass narcissism is "empathy" is also delusional within itself. At least be honest instead of forcing yourself on every corner of the internet outside of super mainstream sites like FB.

This is totally going to go well for the AADOS community :)
 

DrippingCrystal

Team Owner
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
7,964
Reaction score
Reactions
96,346 2,382 1,126
106,301
Alleybux
492,822
This is interesting. Everyone is talking about being able to financially care for the child. When I’ve typically seen this discussed it’s usually by white dolls that can afford to take care of kids. It’s less about being able to take care of them and more about the moral implications of having a child that didn’t ask to be here. Interesting comments nonetheless.

Finances are part of the suffering though, so it is part of the “moral” conversation. It’s actually a concrete example rather than the navel gazing generic “we just shouldn’t because people didn’t ask for hangnails and that’s just wrong”. Most (not all) Parents have you just to throw you out at the world to make a way for yourself. Just trying to survive is torture at times.
 

Didyme

Flat Tummy Teas
Joined
Feb 18, 2017
Messages
8,705
Reaction score
Reactions
93,199 5,056 1,399
97,046
Alleybux
217,765
Anti-natalism is an ideology that views having children as morally wrong for everyone, which means it's not specific to race, gender, etc. Antinatalism isn't "selective breeding" or "discrimination breeding" - it's "anti breeding", while eugenics advocates for breeding as long as people have the correct genetic material. You're wrong by saying "In an anti-natalist world child birth and conception would be highly monitored." No, in an anti-natalist world child birth and conception would be outlawed. The two don't correlate.


"Low quality eggs and sperm: rejected.

Low intelligence markers: rejected.

Ugliness: rejected.

Genetic disease: rejected."

Again, these aren't properties of antinatalism, which states that ALL eggs and sperm are rejected because giving birth to ALL children is morally wrong. Eugenics is what you're describing.

Definition of antinatalism: Antinatalism, or anti-natalism, is a philosophical position that assigns a negative value to birth. Antinatalists argue that people should abstain from procreation because it is morally bad (some also recognize the procreation of other sentient beings as morally bad)

Definition of eugenics: the science of improving a human population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics
Anti-natalism cannot be applied as a whole or the race would die out. Regulated reproduction would have to exist. Guess you cannot understand that concept. Caught up in definitions you cannot think to the moral implications of its application. The two are deeply intertwined.
 

ClarkeShay

The 5th element...
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
2,638
Reaction score
Reactions
21,042 771 158
23,865
Alleybux
479,515
I think that I am partially anti-natalist; I think there should be a license required to breed. Too many numpties are breeding so we just end up with more numpties with extra issues.
But I don't know what those requirements should be to obtain and maintain this 'breeding license' and that is where the craziness of eugenics could sneak in.
 

Alestra

General Manager
Joined
Oct 28, 2018
Messages
1,028
Reaction score
Reactions
10,660 447 241
10,787
Alleybux
4,455
Anti-natalism cannot be applied as a whole or the race would die out. Regulated reproduction would have to exist. Guess you cannot understand that concept. Caught up in definitions you cannot think to the moral implications of its application. The two are deeply intertwined.
I never said I was anti-natalist. I support people having children so long as they are financially stable and have the means to support a child, but I don't think the government should regulate that. Anti-natalism itself isn't specific to any race, which was the point I was trying to get across, which is why it's not eugenics. Anti-natalism says it's wrong for everyone to have children while eugenics says it's wrong for specific people to have children. There is a clear difference between the two but I never claimed to agree with either side.
 

You Suck

Put LSA out of its misery
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
6,300
Reaction score
Reactions
37,891 2,426 1,196
40,559
Alleybux
236,109
Ya'll can pretend it's a lie when I say it's your Westernisation and post modern society that rotted your brain like this, but deep down you know I'm right. :)
 

WishFish

Fishing for Wishes
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
1,160
Reaction score
Reactions
11,287 163 22
13,807
Alleybux
1,507
Honestly, high reproduction rates would drop with proper xes-Ed and having contraceptive products be more available (poor women and birth control), less stigmatization on abortion, and stop pressuring people to become parents.

Also more education on family planning and parenting

not everyone can be a parent, want to be a parent, so why society keeps pressuring people I don’t know

this anti-Natalist thing is crap, comes from an air superiority, and in ways targeting marginalized people because the real people are suffering from the lack education and resources are poor marginalized people.

also I don’t think it’s really a lack of resources but the lack of redistribution. Capitalism creates a false scarcity: you see stores, companies burning or throwing out products that don’t sell rather than give it to charity or food pantry. Companies going out of their way to destroy vegetation, buy land to prevent communities from utilizing it (as in companies will buy land and not do anything with it, just let it sit there, happens to a lot of cities in the USA)

anti-Natalism places the blame on the wrong people. And refuses to actually help out those who are truly suffering

tldr: don’t trust whatever lazy trends white people be pushing (Because this is some white people thinking so they can go back to sterilizing non-Whites)
 

You Suck

Put LSA out of its misery
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
6,300
Reaction score
Reactions
37,891 2,426 1,196
40,559
Alleybux
236,109
Honestly, high reproduction rates would drop with proper xes-Ed and having contraceptive products be more available (poor women and birth control), less stigmatization on abortion, and stop pressuring people to become parents.

Also more education on family planning and parenting

not everyone can be a parent, want to be a parent, so why society keeps pressuring people I don’t know

this anti-Natalist thing is crap, comes from an air superiority, and in ways targeting marginalized people because the real people are suffering from the lack education and resources are poor marginalized people.

also I don’t think it’s really a lack of resources but the lack of redistribution. Capitalism creates a false scarcity: you see stores, companies burning or throwing out products that don’t sell rather than give it to charity or food pantry. Companies going out of their way to destroy vegetation, buy land to prevent communities from utilizing it (as in companies will buy land and not do anything with it, just let it sit there, happens to a lot of cities in the USA)

anti-Natalism places the blame on the wrong people. And refuses to actually help out those who are truly suffering

tldr: don’t trust whatever lazy trends white people be pushing (Because this is some white people thinking so they can go back to sterilizing non-Whites)
agreed
 

Similar Threads

News Alley

Ask LSA

The Lounge

General Alley

Top Bottom