• cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      If you choose to have a child entirely on purpose in 2025, you’re just a piece of shit, or fanatically devoted to ‘The Revolution’ and think its gonna happen any day now, because you’re delusional¹.

      ¹you had better not use that child as an excuse to stand the fuck down. That child is why you belong at the absolute front of every police encounter, risking your life for their future. If you have a child and are not regularly trying to kill police Nd the wealthy, that child should be taken from you, be ause you do not give a shit about them, they only exist for your own self gratifying natalist bullshit.

        • cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          I’m against inflicting the hell world weve made on a living thing.

          By all means, fuck like mormob rabbits once we fix shit, but if you’re breeding on purpose before that, you are not fit to raise a child.

        • cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Narcissistic delusion is not the basis for an entire human life. That person you’re bringing into the world has to exist for decades, and the next few decades¹ are not something I would condemn anyone to. Doing that is sick, its selfish, and its abusive.

          Maybe once we start fixing shit, and there’s a chance of not deliberately putting a child through hell.

          • silasmariner@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            5 hours ago

            I guess you had a pretty unpleasant life so far? Not everybody’s has sucked. But I don’t think I need to form a coherent argument against 'all reproduction is inherently morally bankrupt ’ - it’s such deliberate bait that it rejects good faith discussion off-hand.

            Is there a more coherent argument to be made against hyper-natalists? Yes, I think that could plausibly be upheld. But that would be a more nuanced stance. The world, despite its trajectory, is not a hellscape.

            • cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              I’m not delusional about climate change and fascism. Your children will not have your life, asshole. You cannot promise them that. You cannot comprehend how grim this shit is going to get. I’m not really joking about my plan to die in the water wars.

              Nobody who breeds right now, in 2025, should be allowed to keep them unless they’re going hard on revolution. Like, anything short of the parents from ‘one battle after another’ you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the kid, you are not responsible enough to care for a child.

              This was not the case, arguably, 20 40 60 years ago. This is not anti natalist, this is considering the life that will be available to ypur hypothetical child, the life you are forcing someone to have to live.

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

                Batshit doomerism, you sound like one of those religious nuts expecting the rapture any minute. You don’t have some privileged insight into ‘how bad things are gonna get’ or whatever hypothetical revolution you’ve conjectured, yet you presume to lecture others about it. Please, tell me again about narcissism and what it consists of.