[Mr Tonka]

My wife, who has no idea this thread exists just sent me an email related to this topic....

10 things to never say to a childless woman.

1. "But you'll be so much happier once you have kids."

Actually, there are no studies that definitely prove that people with kids are happier. Or that people without kids are happier. That said, I'd pretty damn happy right now, and if I had a kid, I'd definitely be less happy. You know, because I don't want kids. Happiness is many different things to many different people, and right now, for me, it's this tumbler of Bourbon, this stack of old Sassy magazines, and this old hairy dog snoring on my feet.

2. "I can't imagine not wanting kids."

Great, so you know how I feel. Except about not wanting kids. We have so much in common!

3. "What do you do all day?"


4. "Who will take care of you when you get older?"

Probably a nursing home. Just like you. Let's be real. Or maybe I'll take all that money I save by not having kids and get a(n EXTREMELY HANDSOME) live-in nurse and also an infinity pool and on my final day, I'll have my nurse-boyfriend hook me into an IV of margaritas and I'll drift off to sleep in my floating pool chair. Hasta la vista, baby!

5. "Kids give your life meaning!"

No, kids give YOUR life meaning. Lots and lots of other things give my life meaning. And also, I hope kids aren't the only thing that give your life meaning, because that makes me sad. And finally, in 300 years, nobody will remember any of us, kids or no kids, so there's that. HAPPY SATURDAY!

6. "What do you have to talk to other people about?"

EVERYTHING BESIDES THE EXPERIENCE OF SHOOTING A BABY OUT OF MY VAGINA.

7. "You'll change your mind."
Maybe I will change my mind about having kids, but I'll never change my mind about you being tacky as hell. If you find yourself about to say this to a childless woman, please punch yourself in the face and then go home and watch Gigli five times as punishment.

8. "You should do it before it's too late."

OMG, are you the ghost of Christmas Future and you know that I run out of eggs at 32 and then spend the rest of my life being a jackass to Marley because I never had kids of my own to be grumpy at? Or are you just some nosy idiot who cares far too much about whether or nor I procreate? Wait, that can't be it. I bet this is this some sort of Back to the Future situation and I have to meet and fall in love with your father so you can be born? OK, if that's what's going on, this is an acceptable thing to say. (Also, I'm sorry that you'll never be born.)

9. "If you've never given birth, you don't know what true pain is."

Dude, that's true. Sucks to be you.

10. "Tick tock! Your biological clock is running out of time!"

Good, that means I'm closer to not having to deal with my monthly period. Bring it, Father Time.ss woma.

[JasonCSU]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

My wife, who has no idea this thread exists just sent me an email related to this topic....

Definitely amusing, especially the Mr. Bean clip.

Number 4 is a point I thought about bringing up before, but refrained. For everyone stating their kids will be there to take care of them in the future, are you currently taking care of your own parents or plan on doing so? I don't see how this is guaranteed. Neither of my parents took care of my grandparents when they were no longer able to look after themselves. Assisted living was the best option for everyone for various reasons.

[Endless619]

Originally Posted by carve

Hey guys. I'll be 37 in a couple months, and my girlfriend just turned 32...and it's kind of freaking me out. We're at the age where we have to decide if kids are in the future pretty soon. The thing is, neither of us have a real burning desire to have them, but it's something we still consider. Is that weird? To the people who want or have kids...why did you want them? How would your life be different if you didn't have them?

She has an older brother who is crazy, and sees the emotional and financial burden he continues to put on her parents. I wound up with a brother at age 14 1/2 and saw how much work kids are when I was in high school.

Babies: babies exact a huge toll on the woman's body and changes what initially attracted you to her (unless you're Mrs. Litos, apparently). You also, from that point on, are no longer the most important person in each others lives- there's a higher priority, which seems damaging to the relationship to me. If the relationship does go south, that person will still be a part of your life, at least until the kid is grown up. Everyone on both sides of my family divorced the person they had kids with, except my mom and step dad who have an unhealthy relationship, and I'd hate to put a child through that. You can no longer partake in activities together without lots of advanced planning and added expense This could be as simple as a hike or complex as a last second weekend getaway, which is most weekends for us. We go mountain biking together several times a week...that would pretty much end- if we got to do it at all, it'd be separately. You probably both have less time to take care of yourself so become less healthy and less attractive. You must consider the child first when doing anything risky (e.g. skiing, motorcycle, sports car, etc). They prevent ever becoming fully rested, and I'm grumpy and negative with insufficient sleep, which would further damage relationships. They emit foul substances from every orifice (diaper changing alone is a major factor for me) and destroy your house. They're expensive again- you must lower your standard of living, consider them first when making risky decisions like a career change, and have to work many more years before you can afford to retire.

Ages 6-12 looks kind of fun...they can do things with you, it's probably the least expensive phase, they take care of the basics for themselves (eating, bathing, sleeping, etc.), and you get to really introduce them to the world, which seems kind of fun. Then they become a teenager. They rebel, think they know it all, get into trouble if their boys or become emotional wrecks if they're girls...often wind up resenting you, and become horrendously expensive again. Then they go to college and you're a human wallet for four years. Then they're grown up, move away, and you might see them a couple times a year. It can be fun, or feel like an obligation depending on how good a job you did raising them. Hopefully they become a friend at that point and you've left some kind of legacy, or at least did your biological function of reproducing.

I used to have a Golden Retriever. I really loved that dog, but am dogless now for just a few of the reasons above- tied down, expense, mess, sadness when he got sick, etc. A kid would be an order of magnitude bigger commitment.

This doesn't even touch on stuff out of your control, such as winding up with a kid who has a severe disability, or becomes an addict, or just a disagreeable person. Parents are also statistically less happy than non-parents who are otherwise similar. Most of my friends with kids look frazzled, tired, and stressed out, and their houses are littered with kid-stuff...and that's in the unlikely event I even see them. They tend to disappear after kids. In fact, I noticed that between the mid 20's and late 50's...your prime years, the biggest difference between people isn't whether or not they're married or how old they are, but whether they have kids. People think I'm much younger than I am, and I think it's mostly due to the free-spiritedness you lose with kids...I still have that...hell...I took a year off a few years back just to travel around the world! I went to volatile Egypt last year and planned the trip a few days before I left. Parents who are younger than me tend to be very serious and dour...almost a trapped visage. They have to bring home the bacon...usually in a minivan.

Logically adding all that up it just kids just don't seem to make sense. Given all this, why do most people want to have kids? I suppose if I made a ton of money and could afford a nanny and stuff it would solve most of these problems, but I'm not there. I don't want to regret not having them, but I think it'd be even worse to have them and regret it. What am I missing here, guys? What were your expectations before kids, and how does that compare with the reality?

Hey I am the same age and was married, divorced and have had a lot of gfs but most men and some women are selfish and don't want to have kids. Some just don't have time or patience and that is ok.

On the flip side I have heard some men and women say they want children to continue their legacy and family name.

Keep in mind marriage and kids are not for everyone. This is a fact. Most Americans that get married try to become a team and make life together as a team. Thats fine. Its really society that says "you should get married and have children" but again this is not the case for everyone. Everyone is completely different.

I was married for 6 years and it was great. I would do it again but right now its not a top priority.

I would rather have multiple women in terms of dating. Some of us need a different flavor every couple of months. Not a big deal.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Originally Posted by JasonCSU

Number 4 is a point I thought about bringing up before, but refrained. For everyone stating their kids will be there to take care of them in the future, are you currently taking care of your own parents or plan on doing so? I don't see how this is guaranteed. Neither of my parents took care of my grandparents when they were no longer able to look after themselves. Assisted living was the best option for everyone for various reasons.

It's been my experience that the people who are the most likely to call you selfish for not having kids are also the people most likely to bring up this point.

Amazing how they cannot see the irony there. Breeding your own nurse that you expect will then be obligated to change your Depends when you are 90 (regardless of whatever else they got going on by then) is not selfish, but choosing to not add another drain on the planet's shrinking resources is ??

[carve]

Originally Posted by Endless619

I would rather have multiple women in terms of dating. Some of us need a different flavor every couple of months. Not a big deal.

Oh man...gotta admit that was kinda awesome. I'd typically date at least three intelligent, active women at a time and would be honest about it. I actually do miss that always-fresh, always competing for my attention aspect...it fucking rocked and I learned a lot about myself. I was a total manslut...sometimes getting with three women in a day...and I thought it was awesome. I was actually proud of myself; it's something most guys can't do, I think, which completely rebuilt my confidence after my divorce (I was worried if other women would even be attracted to me after things my ex led me to believe. Haha- no worries there!). It eventually leads to drama and girls with hurt feelings though, which made me feel bad, it took ALL my free time, and this girl kinda blew the rest away as far as being the "complete package" goes. I do kinda miss that lifestyle sometimes though. Cheers

[KingOfJericho]

lol.

[Benstuck]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

Not to take the wind from your sails, but i really doubt a single fuck will be given by anyone when being lectured by a mid 20's guy who knocked someone up at age 22.

Gotta go, headed out on a vacation, in my new car, but i wanna hit the gym before i leave.

+1. That's great he has kids and all, but no need for him to judge others because they do not.

[Benstuck]

Originally Posted by The_Tuner_Guy

I believe that wanting children is greedy.

Do explain this, I'm curious to the idea

[Benstuck]

Originally Posted by Mr Tonka

My wife, who has no idea this thread exists just sent me an email related to this topic....

+1, I liked that article haha

[TrevorM3]

i approve of post 486.

[ragingpanda]

Spent all day at a daycare center as part of my pediatrics clinical rotation from nursing school and I am not going to lie, I had a LOT of fun interacting with the 4-5 year olds as they were very energetic and had very vivid imaginations. On the other hand, this experience further solidified my opinion of not wanting kids anytime soon. It was a really good birth control experience.

[sterile stork]

Just throwing this out there, freakanomics discussed this very topic about 8 months back. In that episode they cited a study which clearly deduced that people without children were statistically happier. I don't have a hand in the discussion, but the episode was quite informative (like all of their productions are.)

[grimlock]

Originally Posted by sterile stork

Just throwing this out there, freakanomics discussed this very topic about 8 months back. In that episode they cited a study which clearly deduced that people without children were statistically happier. I don't have a hand in the discussion, but the episode was quite informative (like all of their productions are.)

Well this could be true if people who are 'less happy' want kids more to try to become happier.
Like someone who doesn't see the need for kids is someone who is full and so a loaf of bread in front of that person does not make him/her do anything.
But a hungry person -the unsatisfied/unhappy person- will reach for it because he/she has hunger.
This is different from if the person has had a bad experience with bread in the past and so has 2nd thoughts although s/he is hungry.

I'm a person who likes the taste of bread but doesn't want to pay for it.
Yet.

[gatorfast]

I think its safe to say that unless you actually have a kid you will never know if it makes you happier or not. Its one of those things that you cant simply "imagine" happening but have to experience in real life.

[Billup]

Originally Posted by gatorfast

I think its safe to say that unless you actually have a kid you will never know if it makes you happier or not. Its one of those things that you cant simply "imagine" happening but have to experience in real life.

What about being around other peoples kids? I'm not necessarily imagining at that point, but living around it. Grant it, not all kids are the same obviously, but I had done some community work with young kids over the course of a year, and while I seriously enjoyed every waking second of it, I don't think I could do it day in and day out. I don't have that kind of patience, let alone the fact that they get older and more outspoken.
It's a huge gamble, you either have a good one, a mediocre one, or a terrible one that drives you and your own well being into the ground.

Is it selfish to not want to take the chance?

[P1]

Originally Posted by sterile stork

Just throwing this out there, freakanomics discussed this very topic about 8 months back. In that episode they cited a study which clearly deduced that people without children were statistically happier. I don't have a hand in the discussion, but the episode was quite informative (like all of their productions are.)

I cannot remember if it was the same study or not, but I read one recently that said that single mothers with one child were statistically the happiest. Not sure how that works, but that's what I read.

[carve]

Originally Posted by gatorfast

I think its safe to say that unless you actually have a kid you will never know if it makes you happier or not. Its one of those things that you cant simply "imagine" happening but have to experience in real life.

Perhaps...and that was effective in the days before birth control with sex-drive unchanged. Today though it leads back to the title of this thread, where having kids must be a conscious decision made in advance (assuming responsible people who use birth control before making that decision). Once you have a kid it's kinda a mute point as to whether it makes you happier. There's no going back

Grimlock: Good analogy. Why do you suppose unhappy people think kids would make them happier? I think being unhappy would make me even less likely to have kids as I now have fewer options and more responsibility, which tends to decrease happiness, and I wouldn't want to inflict that on a kid

[carve]

Originally Posted by P1et

I cannot remember if it was the same study or not, but I read one recently that said that single mothers with one child were statistically the happiest. Not sure how that works, but that's what I read.

I never heard that. Perhaps there's a biological component to that. I'd totally be a sperm donor to some of my more successful ex's

[Billup]

Originally Posted by carve

I never heard that. Perhaps there's a biological component to that. I'd totally be a sperm donor to some of my more successful ex's

I'm sure single mothers with a single child would be happier than if they stayed with the man that got them pregnant for various reasons. They would be able to focus on themselves as a mother, parent as they feel fitting without having to negotiate with a "husband", and having that sense of even more closeness with the child since it is only the two.

However, I feel that would go more for those mothers who are financially able to move on (with child support or without), because lets face it, money is usually a huge bag of stress for a lot since now you'd need to provide for another mouth and body.

[grimlock]

Originally Posted by P1et

I cannot remember if it was the same study or not, but I read one recently that said that single mothers with one child were statistically the happiest. Not sure how that works, but that's what I read.

I believe this because there is this local actress who CHOSE to be a single mom which is quite rare for a public person in this society - and she is (or appears, or deludes herself, or whatever) happy as fuck
But then retards are the happiest people.. I think this is a sign to not use happiness across different people as a measure of what to do.. but I do think it's a good measure if you have done something right/wrong happiness is a good signal.

Originally Posted by carve

Grimlock: Good analogy. Why do you suppose unhappy people think kids would make them happier? I think being unhappy would make me even less likely to have kids as I now have fewer options and more responsibility, which tends to decrease happiness, and I wouldn't want to inflict that on a kid

I'm not saying that - perhaps I inadvertently was pandering to your bias

I think the 'inflicting' vs 'gift of life' viewpoint is a good indicator of whether you should do it.
Because behind it is your good estimation of your ability to provide/ability to 'make it work'.
Some people have lower standards, so long as the kid is healthy, you don't have to live rich lifestyles etc., and some are perferctionists or some can't forget the pain of their own childhood and would not accept a repeat of it.
Something must be "corrected" first if it is ever to be done.

[gatorfast]

Originally Posted by Billup

What about being around other peoples kids? I'm not necessarily imagining at that point, but living around it. Grant it, not all kids are the same obviously, but I had done some community work with young kids over the course of a year, and while I seriously enjoyed every waking second of it, I don't think I could do it day in and day out. I don't have that kind of patience, let alone the fact that they get older and more outspoken.
It's a huge gamble, you either have a good one, a mediocre one, or a terrible one that drives you and your own well being into the ground.

Is it selfish to not want to take the chance?

Because you will never care about someone elses kid like you would your own.

To give an example (as people who dont have kids like to compare it to having a dog) - when someone shows you a picture/vid of their dog doing something cute you just smile and say aww cute dog but dont give a crap. But when your dog does something cute you think it is the most awesome thing in the world.

[grimlock]

Originally Posted by Billup

Is it selfish to not want to take the chance?

We need to breakdown 'selfishness' into two components: self-interest, and social/reciprical -"altruistic"- behavior.
Everyone thinks they are not selfish and everyone else is, more or less.
人不為己 天誅地滅
he who not for himself, heavens kill earth extinct
serious, this is a saying.. it sounds cruel and totally selfish/immoral, but I have come to have an appreciation of it.

A person cannot completely be selfish because it would be against his best interest. Why? Because of society - where reciprical behavior dictates interaction between people.
An asshole would be left alone, and if you're a hermit you can't be an asshole because there is no one to be an asshole to!
The hermit shows clearily complete selfishness is not immoral, wrong, or suboptimal... unless you think the hermit cares about the environment and CO2 or whatever.

Sorry, a long-winded way of saying you can't accuse someone of selfishness without saying exactly how and where he is being selfish in the societal sense - and that is an imposible task.
All you have is the flimsy notion that children=human's responsibility to continue hereto unbroken continuation of dna, or children=blight on Gaia's pristine beauty, or perpetuation of eternal Buddhist suffering.