• principalkohoutek [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      9 months ago

      Life: submit to capitalism, you’re powerless to change anything, the planet is baking, sometimes there are treats, two full time incomes required to survive, everything is poison, it’s only going to get worse

      Me: you know who would like this? Children

    • Kaffe@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah those things require revolution to fix

      Do we allow the bourgeoisie to practice eugenics on our classes or do we fight back?

      If you think we can revolution why not have kids? I’m saying this only if such worries are preventing you from having kids that you would want to have otherwise. I understand it’s not for everyone but I want to push back on people who’ve accepted defeat.

      • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Do we allow the bourgeoisie to practice eugenics on our classes or do we fight back?

        we fight, but we don’t have the right to conscript children into that fight.

        • Kaffe@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Easy for you to say when your people aren’t actively subjected to genocide. The people who fight for their children’s futures have little trust in the leadership of people who’ve already given up.

          Our job today is to make sure the children born yesterday are to be fed tomorrow and when they grow into adults their role will be the same.

          • porcupine@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Sorry, are you suggesting that people subjected to genocide have a responsibility to produce new child soldiers for the cause? It’s by no means “easy” for anyone to look at the material conditions of their environment and decide that they don’t want to personally subject new people to those conditions.

            Birth rates declining as education, income, medical care, and women’s equality increase are well documented sociological phenomena across history. There’s no need to reduce the phenomena to idealist anecdotes centering around the political affiliation of individual people you’ve encountered online.

            • Kaffe@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              No I’m saying nations under genocidal conditions are going to have kids because they want their society to continue, it’s nothing about soldiers and I really don’t like that you would reduce the will to survive genocide as “creating soldiers”. Should Palestinians give up children not knowing if they’ll be bombed tomorrow? Do you shame, pity them for having more kids? Why should they let Israel succeed in killing the idea of Palestinians?

              Reproductive labor is necessary labor for society to function. People having less kids because they can focus resources towards fewer children, those conditions only exist for the Imperialist and bourgeois strata. For most of the world having many kids is necessary for the survival of the community.

              • porcupine@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                9 months ago

                I wouldn’t urge Palestinians to avoid having children, nor would I encourage them to try to outbreed their captivity. It’s none of my business. It should be exclusively their business. I’ll tell you if I lived in Palestine, there’s no way in hell I’d personally bring a child into those conditions no matter what anybody else thought about it.

                My point is that whether or not to reproduce is a deeply personal choice that shouldn’t be viewed as a social responsibility or a political act.

                The idea that individuals (by which people always really mean women) have a political responsibility to reproduce and expand their culture is reactionary shit. The only population whose breeding habits I have a political opinion about is white settlers, because I’m a white settler. I’m not having kids, because white genocide is unironically good, Euro-American settler culture is a blight on the world, and our extinction as an artificial racial category is a prerequisite for global decolonization.

              • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                9 months ago

                I’m saying nations under genocidal conditions are going to have kids because they want their society to continue, i

                and those kids grow up where, under what conditions? My childhood wasn’t nearly as shitty as what palestinians are made to endure and decades on I would still have rather been an abortion. it is out of compassion for their suffering that i suggest having kids in dire circumstances is immoral because of what you’re knowingly forcing someone to live through.

                Do you shame, pity them for having more kids?

                i feel bad for the people who have to live that life. i feel bad for parents who didn’t have the right to choose. i endorse the destruction of the oppressor state and the (trial if you have enough stability to have them) execution of the perpetrators of apartheid and genocide.

                Why should they let Israel succeed in killing the idea of Palestinians?

                why is the idea of some cultural group worth the suffering of my children? Oppressed people have a morally righteous fight against our oppressors, but condemning another person to live under that oppression is not righteous.

                people are people and if i can choose not to condemn someone to a life of suffering why should I value a group identity over my child’s quality of life? I wouldn’t subject a child to life here and we even have running water.

                no hedonistic pleasures or satisfaction from achievement could make my torture worthwhile, how the fuck is it OK to subject someone to far worse than what i’ve had?

                • Kaffe@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  This is clearly the words of someone who has no community or culture to cling to, one born nation-less and with a position to lose. For me contributing to my community in what’s necessary of me benefits everyone and all children. For colonized peoples there is a collective worth protecting as it protects ourselves as individuals.

                  It’s honestly sounding like you have internalized individualism. Like I said it’s fine to not want children and to not have them, but know that people having children is necessary for your survival, and you have a role to play in the survival of their children.

                  Everyone has a role to play as we are social beings. Our society as structured alienates us from the benefits of socialized production but these conditions are definite and mutable. Have some revolutionary optimism.

                  • porcupine@lemmygrad.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    I’ll put it bluntly because there’s a lot of assumptions that are easy to make when you’re talking in English on a primarily American platform, and maybe there’s some misunderstanding about the conditions people in this conversation are actually living in:

                    If you’re a white American, you have no culture or nation worth reproducing or clinging to. If you’re a white American and you believe that you, your children, and your fellow enlightened settler whites will usher in a revolution in the United States of America in your lifetime: that’s not revolutionary optimism, it’s delusional cosplay. The only revolutionary role that a white settler can play on colonized land is to betray his fellow settlers and work toward the destruction of their empire. Communism will be built on the grave of this empire by those who come after.

                  • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    It’s honestly sounding like you have internalized individualism. Like I said it’s fine to not want children and to not have them, but know that people having children is necessary for your survival, and you have a role to play in the survival of their children.

                    if other people putting children in harm’s way is necessary for my survival then i would prefer not to survive and for the cycle of suffering to end with me. there’s no social unit worth damning generations of children to lifetimes of suffering and bitter struggle.

                    Have some revolutionary optimism.

                    fight now and maybe having a kid later won’t be equivalent to putting them through hell, but in the meantime we have no moral standing for conscription.

      • lemat_87@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        I thought in such a way when my kid was before his first year. Now I love to spend time with him.

      • porcupine@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        This is true of course, because kids are people, and people are annoying as hell. When you choose to be responsible for the life of another person, you sure as hell better be prepared for a little irritation.

          • porcupine@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I guess I can only envy your life being so utterly free of irritating personal interactions that the mere thought of someone else experiencing one compels you to seek them out to personally scold them

              • porcupine@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                9 months ago

                I don’t have a blanket negative opinion of humanity. I have a blanket neutral opinion of humanity. Many individual people are irritating. Many individual people are wonderful. Some are both. Kids have these same attributes because they’re people that are, by definition, learning everything for the first time.

                I promise I’m not trying to smuggle in some secret “those people/kids are bad” rhetoric, if that’s what you’re inferring. I’m irritated at myself for mistakes I made yesterday. Kids are literally making mistakes constantly, because that’s how humans learn. It’s extremely easy to be irritated by tiny people that fuck up constantly. Kids require patience and empathy all day every day. Perhaps it’s fine to let people that recognize they’re not well suited to provide that self-select out of a lifelong responsibility for childcare?

          • ComradeLuz [none/use name]@hexbear.netOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I was not stating agreement. I was just mentioning that is another reason that I have been given. But, everyone has the right to find annoying whatever they want though 🤣

          • Addfwyn@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Because they are, and people can find different things annoying? I love snakes, but if somebody dislikes snakes and chooses not to keep them as a pet (most people) I am not going to think negatively of them as long as they aren’t going out of their way to harm snakes.

            It’s fairly bizarre to think everyone has to find the same things annoying as you.

              • Addfwyn@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                I will assume you are legitimately asking in good faith as this is a fairly common bingo we hear a lot.

                Someone’s age and the way they act is not the same as their sexuality. That should go without saying, but you would be surprised.

                People tend to find children annoying because of…the behaviour of children, unsurprisingly. Whether that is the crying, the demand for attention, the manipulation, the risk of damage (to themselves, me or my possessions, or others). Those are regardless of race, gender, sexuality, etc.

                Doesn’t mean I actively wish ill on them; quite the contrary, I respect them as much as I would the life and livelihood of any other human. I just made the choice to have nothing to do with them. My partner is the same, so it’s never been a particularly big issue for us. We just don’t go to places where there are likely to be kids, and everyone is happy. Do I expect that in some public places there will probably be children sometimes? If it’s an appropriate venue, yeah I just have to deal with it.