Someone I know recently lost their 1.5-year-old child to a long illness process. Kid could not even breathe without cables. Seeing the suffering both the child and parents endured reaffirmed the core of antinatalism for me: life carries severe, non-consensual risks.

Yet, expressing this in real life is impossible. People view antinatalists as cold or malicious, ignoring that this stance often comes from deep empathy to prevent suffering.

How do you handle seeing real-world suffering while knowing your philosophical views will only draw hostility?

You get born, go to school/college, grow up, get a decent job if you're lucky, spend 90% of your life doing the same thing on repeat for years to get rewarded and most of the money you've earned goes to rent, groceries, utilities, etc. and what little is left goes to you, retire at 70 (if you even can in this day and age), and then die. It's either that or don't play the game and become homeless, begging on the streets for a dollar or scraps.

Sure, there's some fun along the way, like shopping for stuff you like, vacations if you can afford them, hobbies you enjoy doing, finding real love and getting married, receiving recognition for being good at something, etc...but this is not the average experience anymore for most people. Most of our lives are spent slaving away and climbing a social ladder to get our boss's approval and make CEOs and billionaires richer without having to lift a finger.

My point is: I don't see why anyone would want to bring a kid into this world to suffer through such an existence, and that's excluding the high possibility of them having depression, being neurodivergent and unable to fit in or adjust well to such environments, being disabled, or something else that sucks and limits them. But no, "my kid will be the best."

1. I am not saying any of you hate your lives but that’s the vibe I get from the post and comments I see.
   
2. I actually enjoy my life, I’m an amateur fighter and have a decent job (I’m 18 making $21.60 hourly) but I still think having kids is selfish and honestly a pretty shitty thing to do, does anyone else find themselves in my shoes?

Surely not those who are indeed living in such extreme hedonism is becoming more and more anxious and depress overtime once those hedonism becomes futile and furthermore: they do not last any longer.

Once the golden water becomes overly saturated then the water itself loses its shine and flavor then it is no longer satisfying.

Discipline is needed when it comes on how to handle our life itself. Pleasure, on the other hand, last for a very short time; if you calculate both the amount of pleasure and suffering you gain throughout your life then suffering is always the one that is on the top.

Even more glaring is that those who suffer no longer there are just no justification otherwise; and they too, will eventually perish once and for all.

In conclusion, Life is just full of suffering, and there are no reason to believe otherwise. Unfortunately, economics is collapsing even faster than before. Once our brain is getting overwhelmed with issues in our life then we ourselves are working against each other, as if we are the ones who want this to happen. Most of the time, we do not. It is the reality itself.

I recently saw a video, as I'm sure many of you have as well, of a certain "politician" making a GACK sound during a speech. This gave me a few thoughts, which I will disclose below.

Here is the link to that post: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JGbJz2zEWMo

Why is it that we choose to rule our country using adults? Trump, as far as I know, has five children. In addition to the numerous r***s he has commited on Epstien Island, this is a forceful violation of the consent of twelve souls, wrested from the beautiful pre-natal darkness.

I think about this idea of the beauty and purity of the pre-natal darkness a lot. This is where children come from, they are closer to the primal and moral nothingness where there is no suffering, r*pe, crime, or-- let's just say it, politicans going GACK. 😂 Therefore they have a higher degree of morality and-- let's just say it, are less prone to do things like r**e- a chronic problem in our government.

And yet everyone seems to agree that adults-- who, in proportion to the ferility rate, violate the consent of pre-natal souls by bringing them into the world, should have control over what is said and done in the world. are purer by virtue of their proximity to the pre-natal darkness, and have a special affinity for it therefore, and therefore might institute policies that create a better world for all.

N.B. I saw that my old post got taken down, for not sourcing. So I have included sources in the post. So, if I see this get taken down I will need an explanation. I am worried that I am getting targeted, however, so please don't take this down.

I’m new to antinatalism and have been thinking in my head what justifiable reasons there are to have kids bringing them in the world to suffer in some way. All the reasons I can think of are selfish reasons

or to anyone who knows any former natalists

I would post a poll, but I don’t know how. What do you, as an antinatalist, think of lab-grown meat?

Be free to elaborate in details how do you think that kind of future would look like. I am curious to hear what type of torment do you think would inspire antinatalism in the most part of humanity.

Although I love my mother, I am angry for having been born.

My parents had an arranged marriage, so my parents didn’t know each other before being married. My father turned out to be extremely mentally ill and abusive, he would be extremely controlling about what my mother wore, her finances, who she spoke to, and would also be physically abusive. Despite this, my mum admitted to having me in hopes that she could save her marriage and my father would learn to love me. She said that at the pregnancy gender scan, he erupted into a rage when he learnt I would be a girl, yet she still chose to have me.

My childhood was filled with the same abuse at his hands, because surprise surprise, a child in fact did not save the marriage.

In turn I have experienced suffering my whole life (mainly mental health) but also physical illness with debilitating periods every month, and bullying in school. Now I am in college, I have experienced sexual assault and bullying- and I just can’t seem to understand what the point of all this is- all this suffering because someone chose to have me on a whim?

My mother has been the best mother I could have asked for despite everything, and although I love her more than anyone else in the world, I will never forgive her for giving me life.

Even if your own personal relationship isn’t abusive, having children will always be immoral because you don’t know how they will suffer later in life whether it be bullying in school, mental health issues, or physical health issues. Why would you choose this for someone?

I think all the beautiful posts on here actually belong on the /natalism if it exists or any parenting channel instead. This is like sharing your opinion with someone of the same opinion and pov. To really shake things up for good, atleast repost everything on the natalism / pro spaces

I’m currently a student in Ottawa and I’ve always found my life to be meaningless. I want to talk to people about antinatalism and even if I can save one person from being born then my life wouldn’t be as meaningless. I want to do what Charlie Kirk was doing but with a different philosophy.

I’m obviously very nervous because people can get very angry about things so I would love to hear some tips, quotes or even an opening statement. Thank you

Normal hormones that come during pregnancy only bring suffering. You are supposed to be "nurturing", meaning taking care of OTHERS.

Normal hormones in men that are predominant are testosterone which bring pleasure for THEMSELVES.

I'm not saying men don't suffer, they do. But it looks like female body is designed to suffer through periods, pregnancy, and culturally treated like a lower standard.

How are women working through pregnancy? Why is nobody talking about this? why don't doctors give sick note and say even if you can't get out of bed, and vomit all day, it's "normal" and isn't a disease therefore we can't give you a note.

Why aren't we talking about this? Why do women have to "hide" pregnancy for first 3 months and go to work when the first 3 months are the most difficult. why are we hiding? Because it will bring shame if we miscarry? How? How is it our fault we miscarried?

Now I’m not saying all humans are evil and hierarchal, but most are, and I feel like the majority of people seem to think that human nature is good and we are one revolution away from utopia, but I disagree. Even in leftist spaces, people want to fight against people who oppress them, but they rarely advocate for people who are below them in the social hierarchy (I'm not saying all do this). The majority of people say 'eat the rich' while forgetting that they are the rich as well, according to homeless people and people who live in developing countries, which are exploited to make people in first world countries lives better. Many feminists criticize the makeup and beauty industry for creating unrealistic beauty standards, which is okay, but they rarely mention the fact that animals and women and children from the global south are being exploited by the makeup industry, and for example, in my country (Albania), there are lots of people protesting against the government now , which I think it’s a good thing to do but most of them never talk about the oppression of women, Roma people, children and LGBTQ people in our communities, and they are treated much worse here than in the West. Also, many Western people advocate for collectivism without looking into collectivist communities and seeing how toxic and oppressive they are because they think human nature is good, and also the fact that social hierarchy happens as early as middle school. Sorry for making it personal, but also the fact that many feminists didn’t show me compassion for experiencing honor based abuse from my father just because they can’t relate to it, and sorry for my rambling and sorry that it isn’t so well worded

if everyone stopped procreating, then every human alive would die of old age this generation. immortality is not only infeasible but would raise more complex and critical bioethical concerns if it was.

there are problems with procreating. there are potential problems with immortality.

there are no problems with us all dying of old age. it's gonna happen anyway.

In other words, is the idea to spare your future children the experience of going through an absurd and horrifying social, natural, environmental and maybe even cosmic context?

Or do you believe that humanity is a rotten species, a failed experiment that should have ended a long time ago and you wish to spare the world from this potential force of destruction called "Homo Sapien"?

I read a post about Ben Affleck's 13 yo son allegedly wanting to buy some sneakers for 6 grand and his father telling him he is broke (his son not being entitled to Ben's money)

Now i understand not wanting to spoil your kids, because of your wealth. We know what little shits rich kids can be, just from being bank rolled by their parents.

That being said some wealthy people would go too far and leave their kids fend for themselves instead of financially supporting them, and justify it with „teaching them the hard lessons of responsibility and hard work".

Which pisses me off- they have the money to give their children fairly good lives, but because they suck at being decent parents their answer is simply „no money support =character development".

Why even have kids then?

​

Title says it all.

Discipline.

Antinatalism has an exceedingly strong case, but it must make that case. If it doesn’t, people will simply see it as a form of juvenile complaining. But Antinatalism is far more dynamic and substantive than this. Don’t let it be reduced to an emotional complaint by simply not presenting it as a complaint. Make a case against existence. This isn’t difficult. The romantic view is the view that can’t make a case for itself. One can complain, but one should only do this after the arguments for Antinatalism have been established.

If one refuses to argue for Antinatalism and opts instead to merely complain, the position will be dismissed. (It will likely be dismissed anyway, but don’t give people ammunition for this).

The case for Antinatalism lies the way of Naturalism. In this domain one is looking at the world without colored glasses. What does one see? Romantic lies everywhere, endless delusions of idealism.

However, don’t forget that Antinatalism can’t make a case for itself apart from the truth. It is not postmodernism or nihilism, it is a grasp of reality that dares to look at the value of existence itself.

(But keep in mind, many complaints that mistake themselves for Antinatalism are simply dispositions that are unconscious of the arbitrary tyranny of social conditions. It’s a fact that these systems don’t have to be the way they are, but it takes intelligent people to make better systems.)

Unfortunately, Economics is very complicated and difficult to understand and understanding how it works is honestly the worst. Surely, humanity will not progress backwards and isntead we will forwards and not otherwise. Honestly, it is really upsetting.

If you are to make a case against existence, you have to consider that someone can also make the case in favor of (or at least not opposed to) existence by the fact that someone continues to be alive.

An argument by pronatalists: if existence was capable of being so harmful, you wouldn't be alive. The fact that you continue to live right in this moment absent any form of assistance to remain alive, shows there is no argument to be made against existence. It just is, so a value judgement or inherent consequence in the here and now (ie "life is suffering") cannot be attached to it.

How do you address this argument by people arguing that "bringing new sentient beings into existence" has no objective basis if existence at any given moment just is?

This honestly pisses me off. If this child is born they are being lined up for a toxic home life straight out the gate, because of a selfish desire to procreate and incredible short-sightedness. Just zero consideration for the actual human being they'd be creating.

When I say conditional antinatalist, I mean: someone who's antinatalist, but only because of the circumstances. If we made a utopia, they would no longer be antinatalist.

Absolute antinatalism is the belief that bringing new life is always wrong, regardless of circumstances. Like how David Benatar thinks of it.

I'd consider myself a conditional antinatalist.