Anti-Child Society

Recommended Videos

WanderingFool

New member
Apr 9, 2009
3,991
0
0
In regards to the declining birth rate, its called equalibrium.

In regards to the brat ban, some of the stupidest shit I ever heard...
 

Kuroneko97

New member
Aug 1, 2010
831
0
0
Honestly, at first I thought this "Child Ban" thing wouldn't go too far.

Oh, my ignorance.

I'd love to use this opportunity to describe my niece, who's about 5 months old.. She only cries really when she's hungry or uncomfortable. The rest of the time she's making cute noises in an attempt to talk. She's not a brat, so why should she be banned?

The thing is, we're doing the same to kids that we've done to minorities in the past: we're banning them for the comfort of the rest. Not all kids are brats, and as someone pointed out the brats come from bad parents.

That doesn't mean all bad parents raise brats. My poor second cousin is being raised by some careless mother who tried to drop her kid on my sister-in-law and brother THE DAY OF THEIR BABY SHOWER. And my second cousin is so shy and well-behaved. Poor thing.

The problem isn't kids. It's the parents. It's all these complaining parents who want to be rid of their kids. If you don't want them, you should have decided that before you had them.
 

ckam

Make America Great For Who?
Oct 8, 2008
1,618
0
0
MovieBob talked about this in his overthinker episodes. But personally speaking, I don't really think we should discriminate against children on such things like plane rides, but I do support the decreasing birth rate of people. Overpopulation and all that.
 

Kodachi

New member
Jun 6, 2011
103
0
0
To all these "overpopulation" arguments, I hope you understand that even a noticeable reversal in birth rates will have an enormous negative impact on things you're going to rely on. Government pensions, social security, health care... All these things cost money which we rely on a later generation to help pay for. If our current generation has way more people than our next, a lot of those things are going to be ineffective when we need them if not gone completely.

You want brat bans, fine but you better be ready to to die upon retirement.
 

Zakarath

New member
Mar 23, 2009
1,244
0
0
Good. There's already way too many people in the world. (No, I don't mean overpopulation in the traditional sense, that the Earth can't sustain the human population. It can. I just don't think it should need to. The global human population is approaching 7 billion, and why? Our survival is already practically ensured unless we have a nuclear war. They're isn't really any reason to continue expanding our population, and several reasons not to.)

"Growth for the sake of growth is the mentality of a cancer cell."

And personally, it irritates me that every time I look out on the landscape from a mountain or whatever, there's always roads and buildings everywhere, cutting across the Earth's face like scars.

Also, kids annoy me. So there's that, too.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
Go build your own perfect society where people don't have children. Then watch me laugh deeply from the sideline as it dies after one generation and so do your ideas.

So long as the average birth rate per couple floats around 2 and thus the population is relatively stable I don't care. Children may be annoying but we were all annoying kids once. You were that annoying baby and yet nobody complained about you. As for this Stigma nonesense, I can only imagine that this is either regional or a hold out from the 1950s since I have never really seen this kind of stigma. On top of that, not wanting kinds is not a universal thing, some people actually do want kids (I know crazy, not every kid was an accident).
 

Kopikatsu

New member
May 27, 2010
4,924
0
0
TheDarkEricDraven said:
I thought overpopulation was a problem? I mean, I could do with less people around. Gods know most people around me are idiots.
Like literally 98-ish% of the world's births happen in third world countries where disease and malnutrition are rampant. The reason given was, 'No contraceptives, lack of education, and having more children means more hands to help out, which means more money/resources/whatever.'

Not sure if I agree with that though.

1. Don't have sex unless you want children. PROBLEM SOLVED.

2. Not sure why being more educated means less births. I think it just ties back to the contraceptive thing. Just have less sex. Jesus. Third world countries are usually flooded with STDs and crap, too. It's just not a good idea.

3. Children are a drain on sanity and resources for a long while until they're capable of 'giving back', so I'm not sure why that's a reason.

But I got off topic. Point is, it doesn't matter of all developed nations had their birth rates drop to nothing. Overpopulation will still remain a major issue until the third world countries have something done with them.
 

excentric22

New member
Sep 8, 2011
23
0
0
People who support brat bans are the type of narcissistic douche bags I usually deplore. My issue isnt with the kids who dont know any better, but the parents who cant parent them.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Nov 25, 2007
17,491
10,275
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
I'm seeing a lot of bad thinking from both sides of this argument. On one side, you have the "I hate kids and nobody should have them, or at least make sure they never come near me" argument; this is selfish in the extreme- wanting an entire soceity to change its ways simply because the byproducts annoy you. On the other hand, there's the "You're selfish if you don't have a child" and "You'll understand when you get older" types. Yeah, I'm 35 and still not looking to have a child. This makes me selfish? How selfish would I have to be to bring a life into this world when I truly don't want to? "Oh, you'll change your mind once you see your baby." And if I don't? I can't put the kid back where it came from. Damning a child to a suboptimal childhood just to fulfill your self-righteous busybody impulses... who's the selfish one?

When I worked in a pet store, I very often had to deal with kids and their... let's politely call it "uninformed" views. But one day, a kid who couldn't have been a day over twelve asked me a surprisingly complex question about pet adoption that expressed a view I didn't agree with. I gave him my heartfelt opinion, to which he replied: "Oh... I guess that makes sense if you look at it that way." Then he thanked me for talking to him.

Proof that children are not inherently "monsters". The problem is parenting. Between the fall of coporal punishment (say what you will about it, but I know my mother did not shy from beating my ass when it needed it, and I'm not a quivering wreck), the advent of "touchy-feely" parenting and "let's reward everyone" interaction, and an entire legion of parents who are too busy indulging their own inner children to keep track of their actual offspring, there are unforunately a lot of kids out there who haven't been shown how to act. (And this is a social liberal saying this.) "Brat bans" and outright ostracizing children is not the answer- how is this going to help children understand the world as they grow? Instead, society needs to ridicule and disparage lazy parents who won't keep their kids on the "straight and narrow". It's not always easy and there are some kids that will just be hellions no matter what... but if you're not going to put in your best efforts, then maybe you should just keep your pants on.
 

Kolby Jack

Come at me scrublord, I'm ripped
Apr 29, 2011
2,519
0
0
The7Sins said:
Jack the Potato said:
The Lesbian Flower said:
Jack the Potato said:
I love kids (awaiting the FBI now), and don't see how anyone could truly hate them. Kids are the most important people on the planet and it's our responsibility to see to it that the world they inherit is worthwhile and make sure they grow up to be happy. But American families not having as many kids is nothing to worry about. Back in the day, people died a lot more so having more kids was necessary. Today, not so much, and society's attitude towards having kids reflects that.
Do you mean that it is "our" responsibility meaning parents' responsibility? Or "our" responsibility meaning society's burden? I would agree with the first one but not the second one. Someone else's kid is not my problem and I consider no child to be my obligation. And I'd hardly call kids the most important people. I don't think there truly is a most important people.

(I really don't mean this to sound nasty towards you. Those are just my feelings.)
Of course it is not your responsibility to raise someone else's child (unless you want to), but as they say: Children are the future. They absorb information like a sponge and everything they see you do is reflected in the way they behave as adults. You don't know if this kid will be the next president or the guy who gives you your medicine when you're old and feeble. It's just something I hope you keep in mind when you interact with kids.
Or that kid could become the next Jeffrey Dahmer or Ed Gein or Mao Zedong. Just because you hope and think the brats will become good helpful members of society does not mean they will.

Personally I am glad the country is seeing less and less kids. They are a nuisance and I personally can not express in words the amount of loathing I have towards kids and the people that have more than 1.
How do you think they got that way? Bad parenting and abusive people around them. They probably wouldn't have done those things if they had good role models and people who actually cared for them. They at least would have been noticed by someone and put away to get help. Hoping and thinking won't solve anything, you are right about that, but I never said that, or anything close to it.

And it's totally fine that you don't like spending time with kids too. That's your choice. Though the amount of hate you expressed towards them is disconcerting. What happened? Did children kill your dog or something?
 

BlueMage

New member
Jan 22, 2008
715
0
0
The Rogue Wolf said:
I'm seeing a lot of bad thinking from both sides of this argument. On one side, you have the "I hate kids and nobody should have them, or at least make sure they never come near me" argument; this is selfish in the extreme- wanting an entire soceity to change its ways simply because the byproducts annoy you. On the other hand, there's the "You're selfish if you don't have a child" and "You'll understand when you get older" types. Yeah, I'm 35 and still not looking to have a child. This makes me selfish? How selfish would I have to be to bring a life into this world when I truly don't want to? "Oh, you'll change your mind once you see your baby." And if I don't? I can't put the kid back where it came from. Damning a child to a suboptimal childhood just to fulfill your self-righteous busybody impulses... who's the selfish one?

When I worked in a pet store, I very often had to deal with kids and their... let's politely call it "uninformed" views. But one day, a kid who couldn't have been a day over twelve asked me a surprisingly complex question about pet adoption that expressed a view I didn't agree with. I gave him my heartfelt opinion, to which he replied: "Oh... I guess that makes sense if you look at it that way." Then he thanked me for talking to him.

Proof that children are not inherently "monsters". The problem is parenting. Between the fall of coporal punishment (say what you will about it, but I know my mother did not shy from beating my ass when it needed it, and I'm not a quivering wreck), the advent of "touchy-feely" parenting and "let's reward everyone" interaction, and an entire legion of parents who are too busy indulging their own inner children to keep track of their actual offspring, there are unforunately a lot of kids out there who haven't been shown how to act. (And this is a social liberal saying this.) "Brat bans" and outright ostracizing children is not the answer- how is this going to help children understand the world as they grow? Instead, society needs to ridicule and disparage lazy parents who won't keep their kids on the "straight and narrow". It's not always easy and there are some kids that will just be hellions no matter what... but if you're not going to put in your best efforts, then maybe you should just keep your pants on.
I love you. Someone who finally made sense.
 

The Lesbian Flower

New member
May 25, 2011
154
0
0
BiscuitTrouser said:
And people like you who told them they were a leech onto others and should be banned and discouraged.
That sentiment was thrust onto me when I was very young, that children are leeches and parasites. It is the one thing I've learned growing up in my household and from observing other families.
 

Catie Caraco

New member
Jun 27, 2011
253
0
0
Vanguard_Ex said:
I think helping my kids have a good upbringing is a nice way to revisit my childhood but with purpose.
That's one of the most poignant and beautiful things I've ever heard anyone say about having children. It's how I felt without knowing how to put words to it. Thank you.
 

Vanguard_Ex

New member
Mar 19, 2008
4,687
0
0
Catie Caraco said:
Vanguard_Ex said:
I think helping my kids have a good upbringing is a nice way to revisit my childhood but with purpose.
That's one of the most poignant and beautiful things I've ever heard anyone say about having children. It's how I felt without knowing how to put words to it. Thank you.
Aww why thank you! Funnily enough I was afraid that I hadn't quite put it into the right words. I'm glad that one person found some nice meaning in it though. :)
 

Periodic

New member
Jun 18, 2008
47
0
0
I find it extremely unnerving that so many teenagers and young adults have such hatred and lack of empathy for something that they themselves were only a decade or so ago.

From a societal standpoint, lower birthrates isn't a good thing at all. "Overpopulation" is a juvenile way of looking at the issue. An aging population, where a minority of young people are forced to support a majority of retirees, is a bad thing.

The7Sins said:
2. I hate everyone who bugs the fuck out of me with a very very strong urge to kill what annoys me (to the point I have to be on welfare due to being a danger to society if out in public to much like for a regular job). One thing that makes my blood boil to a froth and get me a strong killing intent are things that are loud and annoying or things that are happy for no damned explained reason. Kids especially infants fall into both categories.[/color]
Guy, not for nothing but somebody who has to be supported by society because he's too much of a danger to it really shouldn't be calling anything a nuisance.
 

Nuuu

Senior Member
Jan 28, 2011
530
0
21
Pfff, children, who needs them, what have they ever done to us? I'm glad i never was one.
 

Catie Caraco

New member
Jun 27, 2011
253
0
0
brandon237 said:
I only want them out of Classy, expensive areas. I fully understand the noise at a family restaurant or second class seating, but DO NOT bring that screaming baby near people who are paying larger amounts of money for a quality experience, because you are then ruining that for them, which is selfish and bad for business. With first class et cetera, you are paying partly for the luxury and experience, not just the trip. A crying baby in your cabin / restaurant completely ruins said luxury and experience. I can handle them as distant background noise, or if I am having a quick, cheap meal / trip et cetera, but in the same restaurant that charges double for service and and luxury, will lead to explosively bad results.
So, parents aren't allowed to experience that sort of luxury? Children aren't allowed try classier things and learn how to behave in that sort of situation? Your logic seems really flawed, you're creating a class system that puts the people who are in charge of raising the future in the lower class. That's just stupid.
 

Andrew_Waltfeld

New member
Jan 7, 2011
151
0
0
Catie Caraco said:
brandon237 said:
I only want them out of Classy, expensive areas. I fully understand the noise at a family restaurant or second class seating, but DO NOT bring that screaming baby near people who are paying larger amounts of money for a quality experience, because you are then ruining that for them, which is selfish and bad for business. With first class etc, you are paying partly for the luxury and experience, not just the trip. A crying baby in your cabin / restaurant completely ruins said luxury and experience. I can handle them as distant background noise, or if I am having a quick, cheap meal / trip etc, but in the same restaurant that charges double for service and and luxury, will lead to explosively bad results.
So, parents aren't allowed to experience that sort of luxury? Children aren't allowed try classier things and learn how to behave in that sort of situation? Your logic seems really flawed, you're creating a class system that puts the people who are in charge of raising the future in the lower class. That's just stupid.
it's more idiotic than that. It would mean that future children would hate his "first" class restaurants and they go bankrupt. Then when he is 80; he can rail about the good old days about how there was something other than fast food and denny's.

Really, the population is declining for several reasons.

1) Women are getting more educated. We no longer have as many high-school babies being born at such a young age which usually shoots both the women and the man from ever pursuing a higher education.

2) Women are getting educated. They are getting smarter. So are men. Children are getting smarter too. Education system (believe it or not) is better than it was years ago. Things like sex ed is handled better. Thus less women are having babies. We're also having children later in our lifetimes than before as well.

3) we are also feeling the press of a job market which is constraining our growth. No jobs = no lots of money. It will mean that women are less likely willingly to get pregnant and have kids because they simply can't afford to have a child.

Women won't feel secure with their income with their mates because they probably have barely enough to pay the bills, let alone support more members in the family. Even if they do, the average family size has shrink to 2 children per family.

Women are also getting to make more and more choices in their lives that before they didn't have. Not talking about the United states here, talking like Africa, those 3rd world nations etc where women rights are starting to emerge.

4) Humans will always have slow or fast progression. We will slow down when we need to and speed up when we want to. Right now, I see a down trend of slowing down happening. Our food supply is overstretched, hell if one of our food suppliers got knocked out (country wise), the rest of the world would suffer heavily.

As people get older, we're going to see way more older people than we are used to. like 2-3 generations of old people and less younger people. At least with the stat rates provided from the United Nations. Most of Europe is on a downturn for population. hell even china is looking at reducing it's population by 60% within a few generations. China has about a billion people.