Anti-Child Society

[Lilani]

-snip-

I'd put my money on contraception and a change in family dynamics being the biggest contributors, here. See, back in those times, people had lots of kids to support their families and businesses. They'd get kids popping out as soon as possible, so they could get older and get jobs and help raise the even younger kids. This was especially important on farms and with family businesses because the more workers they had who were in the family, the fewer workers they have to pay. All they have to do is feed them. And if they own a business, all the money they would be taking away if they were an outsider working would stay within the family and thus the business. That is why you'll see so many families back then had 5, 9, even 12 and 15 kids. It was all about getting as many workers as you could.

There are plenty of couples and families having babies, still. But due to a decrease in the need for them, and the need for so many, there are now fewer being born. Even if the same number of married couples have children, it would make all the difference in the world if now they're having 1 or 2 instead of 5 or 10.

 

[Zeetchmen]

The less people the better for others, and the enviroment.

So it seems only good things can come of lower birth rates

 

[dystopiaINC]

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.

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.

Teenager here, I love smaller children. But when they get to that age when they learn to make snide comments, and or think they are (for lack of a better term) "The Shit". Usually around the 5th grade, when they feel superior to the other children. After that it all goes down-hill.

18 over here, have an 11 year old sister. i hated her guts the moment she hit that age, (3rd grade) she has this superiority thing where she thinks she better than me for what ever reason. she a slob and doesn't even take care of hygiene, as in daily baths keeping her hair brushed and finger nails clean, jesus it's bad when i take shower more often than her, and take better care of my hair than her and I'm a guy whole barely does those things anyway!

 

[jumjalalabash]

People aren't having children because our generation smarten up and learned that they suck. Simple.

 

[ipitydaf00l]

I'll admit that I didn't read all five pages of comments to this thread, but I have to add my own two cents to this topic. (Should I add that I'm a parent of a 7 year old?)

I have friends that are firmly planted in "child free" beliefs. They don't want kids, they don't understand them, etc. I on the other hand, dislike OTHER people's children in public. I worked with children on a regular basis for many years and loved each of the kids in my class. (Bad behaviors and all.) Why? Because they simply did not know better. They might be rude simply because they have no idea how not to be. Adults are rude because they know better, but choose NOT to be.

I think what the OP and several others are missing from so called "brat bans" is that they are blaming the children when it's not really the child's fault. It's the parent's responsibility to take care of their child. My daughter attended movies with me since she was an infant. I would immediately hear groans upon entering a theater, but she never caused a distraction during those movies. The same can be said for restaurants. People would complain that "a kid" was near them, but she was quite content to talk quietly with me, make artwork with the crayons I've provided, or play with a stuffed animal she brought in with her. However, I would watch as other parents pretended not to see their child causing chaos around them while they 'enjoyed' their time out.

Does that mean all parents should be punished because of a few bad apples in the bunch? Some of us know when our child needs to be removed from the area. Mine knows if she yells, throws a fit, etc we immediately leave anywhere we are at, as quickly as we can. (Hence why she doesn't do it.) Baby cries during a movie? That infant should be taken out where it can't be heard until it calms down in respect for others attending the movie. So yes, I understand being annoyed when your 'fun' time is interrupted by parents who don't pay attention to their kids, but I hate how good parents are lumped in the same boat.

 

[spartan231490]

screaming children are fucking annoying. is this really so hard to understand? admittedly, I want kids, but I wouldn't take them out and let them scream, that's fucking irritating and all parents who allow it should be tortured and sterilized.

 

[Kodachi]

This "kids can end up to be serial killers" argument absolutely puts me into hysterics. "Hmm, we have a 0.0001% chance of a child becoming some sort of societal monster. Clearly our best solution is to A) ensure ALL children know they are not welcomed and isolated within society and B) discourage people from having kids until we live in a utopian paradise free of younger generations. After all, the only way to guarantee safety from our future serial killers is eliminate all children."

Not to sound too over dramatic but I believe I remember reading about similar rhetoric in Germany ca. 1930s.

 

[Agayek]

When education goes up, birth rates go down.

BTW, the minorities are the ones who seem to have the most kids. At least in the US.

Both of those statements are related.

Just saying.

 

[Catie Caraco]

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.

If that is the case, then why not hire a babysitter? When I was a kid that's what my parents did when they went to really nice places. Or is this simply a case of me missing something because I am physical incapable of having children.

Fair enough, you can hire a baby-sitter to go to a classier restaurant, but not if you want to travel with the family. What, a couple who can afford first class and /have/ to take their baby with them can't experience it? And what about people who can't find a trustworthy baby sitter? My parents had both of their mothers in the same home town, one on the same street, but that's an anomaly in this day and age. Besides, how will a child /learn/ to behave in fancy settings if they don't experience them.

It has nothing to do with you being able to have children or not. If that bothers you, then I'm sorry, and if not, why bring it up? It has nothing to do with hiring baby sitters v/s taking children out.

 

[ipitydaf00l]

I only brought it up because usually I am told that my opinion will change (others, not in this thread, say that because I don't have kids my opinion is irrelevant) when I have a kid of my own, except that I can never have one so maybe I am missing something like others have been told (not just in this thread) that those who do not have kids don't understand. I want to understand but I can see logic in both sides of the argument. As long as it doesn't go to any extreme.

I think what the problem is that those who want 'brat bans' are constantly surrounded by parents who don't care of their children properly, therefore they think ALL kids should be banned. I've been to places where I'm appalled at the behavior of the adults around me. (Loud discussions on who they want to have sex with, who's car is better than the other, being rude to the wait staff, having food fights. Yes, I'm not joking, these places were very nice restaurants and some adults acted horrible in them...) Yet for some if they see a child walk in the room they start grumbling about how their 'good time' is about to be ruined.

My daughter has even turned around before in movies and told the adults behind us that it's "impolite to talk during a movie" because that's what I've taught her. Children can be blunt in that sense because while I was willing to suffer through their ranting, she decided they needed to know the 'rules' of the theater.

However, I'll admit that some people tend to have some rather extremist thoughts on the matter.

 

[Wispchamp345]

It's true that the sooner we stop having children the sooner our population will end, however it is also true that if we and the rest of the world keep reproducing and thus expanding the population at such an increased rate, that our population will end. The Earth is big, yes, but there are still limits to what it can sustain. What we really need is not to stop having kids or to keep having so many kids, but, as stated by others, to put a limit on who can have kids and how many.
Why? You claim children are the future, but whether or not these children bring a great future is dependent on WHO raises them, and HOW they are raised. The problem is that the people that tend to have the most kids are the least educated, and least financially stable people. All that usually results from these people having and raising kids is more people who are unable to fend for themselves and thus draining our economic resources. Yes, there are miracles, where extremely bright, enthusiastic, and hard working individuals come out of challenging circumstances and change the world for the better. However, these people are too rare in occurrence to be termed as a consistent and thus useful positive result. I think whether or not you can have kids should be dependent on your income, and there should be a limit of two children per household. How we can convince the rest of the population of the wisdom of these ideas, though, I am unsure of, because largely think only of themselves and their own ego.