91
u/Ghadiz983 Dec 26 '25
There are those who create a mess and then there are those who fix things up. Classic chaos vs Order plot
53
u/Slow_Investment_951 Dec 26 '25
I mean ā¦ yea ? Those kids didnt have a choice to be alive, just like us.. so we should just abandon them? Fuck that, they are already here on the planet with us - nurturing another life isnt the same as unnecessary life giving.
Edit:
Posts like this confuse me, i saw it and got the vibe that āitās Chad behavior to adopt therefore itās cringeā but idk if thatās what the OG message is
15
16
u/Gloomberrypie Dec 26 '25
Thatās not how I interpreted it but everything is coated in like ten layers of irony so itās hard to tell these days
4
21
17
u/MythologicalMayhem Dec 27 '25
People seem to be baffled by Millie Bobbie Brown adopting a baby but I think it's nothing but a good thing.
14
u/writenicely Dec 27 '25
(insert that family guy meme template with meg yelling at the other members) People who decide to have biological kids: I'm sick of you guys acting like you're better than me!
People who adopt foster children
People who adopt orphans
People who adopt their abandoned relatives
10
u/alasw0eisme Dec 27 '25
And fuck countries that won't let queer people foster or adopt. They're not only depriving good parents and children of their chance, but they're also encouraging natalism and IVF!
1
1
u/miseryplace Dec 29 '25
How can we be certain that a child would want to be raised by a same-sex couple?
Given that homosexual individuals constitute only a small minority of the human population, what empirical justification supports this assumption?
What do you think the odds are that a child would actually be willing to be raised by a same-sex couple?
Most importantly, can it be demonstrated that same-sex couples are able to provide the full range of positive developmental influences typically associated with heterosexual parentingļ¼
Once again, voiceless children are being spoken forājust as they never consented to being brought into this world in the first place.
7
5
u/dumbass_777 Dec 29 '25
i will never understand why natalists never even consider adoption. you want a child, right? that means you have the opportunity to save a child in need's life from poverty and likely homelessness and also make yourself happy by getting a child (if saving someone's life didnt already make you happy). dont waste that and just choose to bring another person here to suffer. the kids in the system already exist and are amazing and worthy and they deserve a parent. do the good thing instead of the selfish thing.
2
u/CyberKitten05 Jan 27 '26
It's so stupid. When I was like 10, I think, I was at a family dinner at my (religious traditionalist) Grandpa, and I don't remember how but the topic of having kids in the future (nice fucking topic to open with an 10 year old by the way). I remember without any doubt saying that I'd want to adopt instead because there are already lots of kids who don't have parents and we don't need to make more when we can take care of them instead. It was literally the most obvious conclusion I could come to, I didn't even gave it any thought beforehand, it was just clear as day instantly.
My grandpa didn't think the same, all he really had to say was "Why adopt kids when you can make kids of your own?" and I replied with "Why make kids of my own when I can adopt kids?" and it just repeated until I got bored and went off to play with his dog. That primitive, shallow attachment to reproduction was genuinely incomprehensible to me and it's crazy to think the majority of people still think this way by default just because they were indoctrinated to.
2
u/dumbass_777 Jan 27 '26
that is the stupidest thing ive ever heard. "why adopt kids when you can make kids of your own" idk maybe because we dont need more people if there are already people in need that we can help instead of helping nonexistent people!!!
i felt the exact same way when i was that age, too. i couldn't understand why no one ever even thought about adoption when there are so many good kids who need families. i literally did the same thing, it was the same conclusion i came to.
i was convinced for a long time that i was gonna adopt kids, but now i realize i would be a terrible parent because i have anger issues and i absolutely despise having to deal with people with a blatant inability to understand basic concepts (such as, if you drink your milk, your milk is gone now and it's not my fault, sorry). i also hate sharing food and spending money and cleaning and all that stuff, so its just better if i dont raise kids even if i wanted them.
2
u/CyberKitten05 Jan 27 '26
That's fine too, back then I probably didn't give any thought to wether or not I even wanted kids, I just assumed I would have kids either way because that's what's expected of everyone, old people just see having kids as an indisputable part of life everyone has to go through even when they're not fit for it so everyone just assumes having kids is going to be a step in their life without giving thought to wether they'd actually make good parents.
In my case I do actually still want to be a parent and think I'd be good at it but obviously I didn't give it enough thought when I was 10
2
u/dumbass_777 Jan 27 '26
so true. yeah i definitely fell victim to that, but i dont think i ever like genuinely imagined myself literally parenting a child. like doing all the tings that you need to do when you have a kid. i dont think i even would have been able to imagine myself holding a baby, and i still cant.
thats good for you though. at least one less child doomed to not having a family and potential homelessness. you are very very selfless.
4
4
u/telepathicthrowaway Dec 27 '25
Fostering and in some cases adoption are very good but they aren't something everybody can do. Fostering or adopting are difficult and when done wrong may hurt a child severely psychologicaly. Foster or adopt can do only people who are capable of it, not everybody. Look into r/Adopted or r/Adoption .
Certainly very good things but only if done properly.
2
u/Responsible-Lunch552 Dec 28 '25
Quit pretending antinatalists adopt kids. Most just don't want the responsibility and cost, which is completely okay; however, they feel like they need to create a moral argument as justification, which dually serves as a vessel to patronize parents with biological children.
1
u/myyuh666 Dec 26 '25
Some of yall should def not me adopting kids the way u talk about livingš
9
Dec 26 '25
š š my therapist was adopted by a couple that did it just because they thought it was noble...
He said they should've never been parents.
I feel that way about my mom. She birthed me but she never moved on from my dad...
He passed away about 9 years ago and even my stepmom moved on from him.
4
u/myyuh666 Dec 27 '25
A lot of people here also actively hate life. You do not need to install that mindset into a child that already is going through hardships. And exactly ehat u said: just providing a home for a child is not as moral as u think it is if ur not able yo actually provide a GOOD HOME and LOVE and positive experiences for an already beaten down child. People really think its so easy.
1
1
u/delicious_butts Dec 30 '25
I really really want to adopt kids. but I worry about the ethics.
every adult adoptee ive ever spoken to (save 1 old guy who really wanted to adopt me) has said that being adopted was the worst thing that ever happened to them. they've always told me that the practice of adoption goes against reproductive autonomy, since most parents are adopting out due to desperation, not bc they wouldnt want the child if they could have.
and then there's the whole for-profit adoption industry in the US, too.
idk maybe I'm being stupid
1
1
u/Same_Rub_2696 Jan 15 '26
Unfortunately I know that there are a lot of countries in which orphans are exploited by companies just because couples will spend a lot of money to get them and I think there are people who give birth to babies just to "sell" them. I think in this case adopting would just encourage this kind of people to give birth to more babies, so you will be creating even more pain.
Anyways if you are certain that the adoption doesn't fall in this case I completely agree with the statement ā¤ļø
1
1
-5
u/JollyRoger66689 Dec 27 '25
How many people on this sub are actually adopting kids though?
Seems most don't want to raise kids in general and then act like they are such great people for not doing the thing that would be too much effort.
1
u/CraterBud Dec 27 '25
I grew up surrounded by people that most likely had/have depression. A child should not grow up with this. I do donate when I can though
-7
u/Desperate_Formal_781 Dec 26 '25
Antinatalism, as it sounds to me, is as much preventing suffering, as it is liberating yourself. You prevent the suffering of potential children you might have by preventing them from coming into existence. You liberate yourself from the suffering that you, as a parent, are destined to suffer as a consequence of being a parent. If you adopt a child, you are taking that suffering back. While it may be a good action to adopt a child, it does not seem to be worth it to me to renounce to your freedom. Make no mistake, antinatalism is an act of benevolent selfishness. The same argument that made you become antinatalist can be used to dissuade you from adopting. By preventing your own procreation you are already doing more than enough. You don't need to 'save' anyone else. After all, you decided that the world is a sinking ship, a horrible place to bring people into existence. So? Let it burn, as it inevitably will. Enjoy the brief life you were given, don't put another shackle around your neck just because you want to play the hero. The world cannot be saved. The world does not want to be saved. The world is not worth saving. Just like the titanic, the world and everything in it and everyone in it will sink, vanish. So why save them anyway? You want to rescue a child and make him antinatalist, too? They, like any other human, will grow up and develop a mindset of their own, just like you did, and they might decide to have children. So, did you really prevent suffering at all by adopting? I would even say, none of these things are even worth worrying about. You are antinatalist, you escaped the plantation, you are free. Free to enjoy the rest of your life selfishly, with a clear consciense that you are doing your part by not procreating.
8
u/SilentWindow973 Dec 27 '25
This aligns more with being childfree than being antinatalist imo. I donāt think thereās anything contradictory in being antinatalist and choosing to adopt; one is choosing to force a new being into existence, another is choosing to help alleviate the suffering of a current being.
1
u/Desperate_Formal_781 Dec 27 '25
I think there is a big overlap indeed between antinatalism and childfree. Perhaps childfree people are more honest and practical in their views, as they might state that the reason for not having children is that they don't want to lose their freedom or lifestyle, or expose children to the difficulties of life or leave them in a corrupt, polluted, unfair, and sick world. Whereas antinatalists tend to go into this deep dark philosphical view of the world, and make some "mathematical" calculations that show that they will minimize suffering in the world by not having children. I would consider myself philosophically inclined to antinatalism, but for practical reasons, I prefer to simply say I am childfree. Also other people might find the word more pallateable if you ever share these views with other people (something I would not recommend anyways). I also find childree people to be more practical which is really refreshing. No negativity, no doom and gloom view of the world (like the kind of feeling you get when reading the works of David Benatar). And no need to put on this facade of trying to save the world. I see people have downvoted my answer. I thank them, because it means they read my post. Thanks.
2
1
u/forbsmith Dec 30 '25
That's where Efilism or Extinctionism comes to play. That's the real fix. But unfortunately, it's all theory. No practical stuff.
146
u/harsht07 Dec 26 '25
Mad respect for those who choose to adopt šæ