Female users with 'mommy' or 'wifey' in name
Replies
-
I clearly have body image issues and believe that my breasts are my only redeeming quality and without them I'd be worthless to a man and therefore generally worthless. Once I overcome this I'll be sure to change my name to something less demeaning.
0 -
maybe for some low level social science degree but for degrees in science/math etc....an average person has little chance. but like i said before an average person has a much greater chance of being able to raise a child.
But is that really greater achievement if based on innate intelligence? Of course it's an achievement. It may make the person smarter. But the average person isn't going to land a magazine cover or have elite sports level abilities. Those people have gifts and have to put the effort in. A role that's more common and accessible doesn't make it less of an achievement. I know I worked for my education and career, but I know my friends that are parents work way harder than I did.
then obviously your education wasnt that challenging. im talking about advanced degrees in science.
This is a stupid argument. I understand the perspective as it's kind of a norm in our society to see science/math as harder and more important degrees than humanities/social science, but not really. It depends on aptitude. And i think the valuing of hard science over those fields may have something to do with the fact that it's male dominated...but that's another conversation.0 -
As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.0 -
maybe for some low level social science degree but for degrees in science/math etc....an average person has little chance. but like i said before an average person has a much greater chance of being able to raise a child.
But is that really greater achievement if based on innate intelligence? Of course it's an achievement. It may make the person smarter. But the average person isn't going to land a magazine cover or have elite sports level abilities. Those people have gifts and have to put the effort in. A role that's more common and accessible doesn't make it less of an achievement. I know I worked for my education and career, but I know my friends that are parents work way harder than I did.
then obviously your education wasnt that challenging. im talking about advanced degrees in science.
Thinking of some of the people I know who have advanced degrees in science and math, they'd suck at being parents and would probably find it harder. (Others in my program found it more challenging. The point is that you can't be brave without fear. Is the naturally gifted Olympic athlete more awe inspiring or honorable than the person who surfs with one arm?)
the olympic athlete.0 -
maybe for some low level social science degree but for degrees in science/math etc....an average person has little chance. but like i said before an average person has a much greater chance of being able to raise a child.
But is that really greater achievement if based on innate intelligence? Of course it's an achievement. It may make the person smarter. But the average person isn't going to land a magazine cover or have elite sports level abilities. Those people have gifts and have to put the effort in. A role that's more common and accessible doesn't make it less of an achievement. I know I worked for my education and career, but I know my friends that are parents work way harder than I did.
then obviously your education wasnt that challenging. im talking about advanced degrees in science.
This is a stupid argument. I understand the perspective as it's kind of a norm in our society to see science/math as harder and more important degrees than humanities/social science, but not really. It depends on aptitude. And i think the valuing of hard science over those fields may have something to do with the fact that it's male dominated...but that's another conversation.
social science degrees are a dime a dozen and way easier to obtain than the hard sciences.0 -
As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.
Oh lawrd0 -
I'm going to go hug my mom tomorrow0
-
Slut shaming was implied in saying that I shouldn't judge other people lest I be judged myself. While you didn't specifically call me a slut, you implied that my picture was something I needed to worry about being judged over.
While I understand your point, you can't simply replace the context.
The difference is that my breasts are part of my body. There is legitimately no man involved in whether I do or do not show my breasts. They are part of me. A person's role as a mother involves someone else that they are placing in their identity before themselves. My boobs are part of my body, but they are not an entity separate from me.
And while I can showcase my boobs in my profile picture, I have a feeling it would be different if they were in my username. It's a valid point if my username was Emma'sBoobs. But it's not. A username is more of a show of identity than a picture and I switch mine around often.
So yes, while I see your point and trying to find it as hypocrisy they aren't a role or relation to another person. My identity cannot be defined by them and I don't refer to myself in relation to them. It's simply a picture showcasing my boobs.
No. I'm not focusing on judging. I'm pointing out to you how the logic you are using to evaluate how a random woman identifies herself is based on a fallacy.
Since your user picture was only your breasts, someone could claim that the picture you choose to represent yourself with is overidentification with your sexuality or with pleasing men. *They would be wrong.* People who assume that a name used to represent oneself is an overidentification with gender roles or pleasing men would also be wrong.
I would imagine a lot of parents would see their children as somewhat of their bodies or an extension of their bodies. I don't know anything about you from your user picture except that you really do have lovely breasts. I don't know anything about another user with "mom" in their username except that they are probably a mom.
Women do take it too far with losing their identities as wives or mothers, but the same can be said about breasts. Women will get cosmetic surgery for the sake of their breasts. Women will spend lots of money to make them higher, or perkier, or whatever. There is someone in this very thread with a username including boobs. Having breasts, having children, neither of those is enough information for us to know if someone has lost her identity.0 -
On a Mom/baby forum, totally makes sense! On a fitness forum I would go with something more your own. Like bunbusterbetty or something original. I went with Blah. 1) because I couldnt decide. 2) already had an email account w that name 3) how I feel most of time- as in my brain is blah, tired, wornout LOL Okay not really most of the time, but I have days lol. Thats my opinion, what i want for myself. I think its up to everyone else and who are we to judge an sn?0
-
As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.
Of course it isn't hard to GET pregnant, but to carry a child it takes a lot of work, I'm assuming you have never carried a child. Anyone can spread their legs.0 -
As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.
The parents of surrogate carried babies may agree to differ with you on the notion of "there is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9mths later"...0 -
the olympic athlete.
And this is where it comes down to opinion. I consider it a greater accomplishment to surf with one arm and work hard at it than to be naturally gifted and work hard at it.0 -
I clearly have body image issues and believe that my breasts are my only redeeming quality and without them I'd be worthless to a man and therefore generally worthless. Once I overcome this I'll be sure to change my name to something less demeaning.
I hope that you get over calling yourself chubby and eventually learn to love your body the way I have without needing to tear down other people's self-love as low self-esteem. Good luck to you.0 -
This thread. :noway:0
-
As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.
The parents of surrogate carried babies may agree to differ with you on the notion of "there is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9mths later"...
Couldn't agree more, I almost became one but my husband objected to it, now I'm glad I didn't do it, after my 2 pregnancies, don't think I wanna ever go through it again.0 -
As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.
The parents of surrogate carried babies may agree to differ with you on the notion of "there is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9mths later"...
nm0 -
Why would you even say something this ugly? Unbelievable.As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
/quote]
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.0 -
As I said before, having a child is easy, being a parent is not. So let us not compare a PhD to having a kid, cuz PhD wins. But when we compare PhD to being a parent, its a different comparison.
Really? Try having a very complicated pregnancy, that isn't hard? Try being on bed rest through the entire pregnancy because one wrong move could kill your child. Trust me, not all the time, having a child is really hard and very emotional. Try going through PPD after having a child that you've longed for. Neither of my pregnancies were easy, my first birth was hard my 2nd was easier because I scheduled a c-section. Yes parenting is a major job, but so is carrying a child.
Yes, sorry but just having a baby is no heroism. There is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9 months later. Nothing! The problem with the world is we dont require people to have licenses to have babies.
The parents of surrogate carried babies may agree to differ with you on the notion of "there is nothing noble about getting knocked up and producing a little one 9mths later"...
yes because of their very own narrow, selfish focus. in the grand scheme of things, nothing heroic about getting a baby either naturally or by other means.
here is the issue: we have too many babies in the world and too many mothers and fathers. what we need are parents for these kids. their moms and dads are not parents. require people to have a license to make a baby. lets make Ayn Rand proud!
So what is your real story? Who hurt you? Or who peed in your cheerios? Maybe your blood sugar is low, need a cookie?
Seriously, why does it bother you so much what other people do? Maybe you should turn that negativity around and focus on yourself instead of worry about what others are doing. Not all mommies and daddies are bad people, not all of us treat our kids poorly, there are a lot of wonderful parents out there, sure their are some who should be cut off and not allowed to ever have kids but lets not make all parents feel like you have it out for them because you sound pretty awful.0 -
Slut shaming was implied in saying that I shouldn't judge other people lest I be judged myself. While you didn't specifically call me a slut, you implied that my picture was something I needed to worry about being judged over.
While I understand your point, you can't simply replace the context.
The difference is that my breasts are part of my body. There is legitimately no man involved in whether I do or do not show my breasts. They are part of me. A person's role as a mother involves someone else that they are placing in their identity before themselves. My boobs are part of my body, but they are not an entity separate from me.
And while I can showcase my boobs in my profile picture, I have a feeling it would be different if they were in my username. It's a valid point if my username was Emma'sBoobs. But it's not. A username is more of a show of identity than a picture and I switch mine around often.
So yes, while I see your point and trying to find it as hypocrisy they aren't a role or relation to another person. My identity cannot be defined by them and I don't refer to myself in relation to them. It's simply a picture showcasing my boobs.
No. I'm not focusing on judging. I'm pointing out to you how the logic you are using to evaluate how a random woman identifies herself is based on a fallacy.
Since your user picture was only your breasts, someone could claim that the picture you choose to represent yourself with is overidentification with your sexuality or with pleasing men. *They would be wrong.* People who assume that a name used to represent oneself is an overidentification with gender roles or pleasing men would also be wrong.
I would imagine a lot of parents would see their children as somewhat of their bodies or an extension of their bodies. I don't know anything about you from your user picture except that you really do have lovely breasts. I don't know anything about another user with "mom" in their username except that they are probably a mom.
Women do take it too far with losing their identities as wives or mothers, but the same can be said about breasts. Women will get cosmetic surgery for the sake of their breasts. Women will spend lots of money to make them higher, or perkier, or whatever. There is someone in this very thread with a username including boobs. Having breasts, having children, neither of those is enough information for us to know if someone has lost her identity.
I think your issue with my opinion is based on something I never said. I never said that I thought all women with things relating to motherhood or being a wife had completely lost their identity. That's an extreme view. If you look back I said that it shows underlying patriarchy. The fact that women often identify with the parental role as their identity or with their husband does show underlying patriarchy.
I haven't said anything specific about how particular women identify themselves only that they are identifying themselves through another person which is something that socially women are expected to do- taking the name of their spouse, quitting their jobs to become a SAHM, etc.
I think you're reaching with the extension of their bodies bit, but OK.
I do admit that I see as giving up a bit of their independent identity but not that it shows a complete loss of self.
Oh and I also admit that I do have a bit of privilege. It happens. You have some too. Perhaps I should have said "go checkout a sociology book from the library"? I think knowing basic tenants of sociology/anthropology/psychology is essential to knowing the world around us.
But then again, I'm obviously a social scientist.0 -
Lmao this thread went to the flies.
To the original poster, why can't they just enjoy being mommas or wives? Just because you do not view placing yourself in that position as strong or unique does not mean they arein agreeance with you.
0 -
There is legitimately no man involved in whether I do or do not show my breasts.
Depends on how many drinks are had IMO. 0 -
yes because of their very own narrow, selfish focus. in the grand scheme of things, nothing heroic about getting a baby either naturally or by other means.
here is the issue: we have too many babies in the world and too many mothers and fathers. what we need are parents for these kids. their moms and dads are not parents. require people to have a license to make a baby. lets make Ayn Rand proud!
So what is your real story? Who hurt you? Or who peed in your cheerios? Maybe your blood sugar is low, need a cookie?
Seriously, why does it bother you so much what other people do? Maybe you should turn that negativity around and focus on yourself instead of worry about what others are doing. Not all mommies and daddies are bad people, not all of us treat our kids poorly, there are a lot of wonderful parents out there, sure their are some who should be cut off and not allowed to ever have kids but lets not make all parents feel like you have it out for them because you sound pretty awful.
It's a very logical and rational argument. It lacks the emotional aspect of having kids but it's true. Having kids is inherently selfish and there are lots of children who need homes.
And it does bother those of us who are concerned with things like overconsumption of natural resources, increasing class sizes in public schools, emotional trauma/mental illness among unadopted kids in foster homes, etc. That's why people care what individuals do. It affects everyone.
But I do understand why people have kids. Heck, sometimes I really want kids of my own. My boyfriend has 3 and I don't think he's a terrible awful human being.
Just from a rather cold and rational perspective, yeah. He's right.
Just clarifying the argument.0 -
I think your issue with my opinion is based on something I never said. I never said that I thought all women with things relating to motherhood or being a wife had completely lost their identity. That's an extreme view. If you look back I said that it shows underlying patriarchy.
I haven't said anything specific about how particular women identify themselves only that they are identifying themselves through another person which is something that socially women are expected to do- taking the name of their spouse, quitting their jobs to become a SAHM, etc.
Working backward: I absolutely have privilege. I'm a white, heterosexual, cis woman from a middle-class family who was able to get the education I needed for the career I've always wanted. Having privilege is inevitable for many of us. I worked for what I have, but I also know that given other circumstances, I literally may not have been able to achieve it. There have been other factors in my life that count against me. Also inevitable.
I think the argument we are having comes down to this sentence: The fact that women often identify with the parental role as their identity or with their husband does show underlying patriarchy. I would write it as *can* rather than *often does*. That is also what I was getting at by referencing the 1990's, as the role of motherhood has evolved quite a bit. Non-heterosexual couples not only can (sometimes) adopt children, they can also create children without having coitus. A single person can decide to become a parent through a sperm bank. Obviously the sperm comes from a man, but I wouldn't say the role of mother for that person has much to do with men. A woman who wants to be a mom can become one by finding a willing stranger in a bar.
I think that feminism has gotten so used to ensuring that women not over identify as mothers and lose their identities that the notion that one reason women identify so strongly with being mothers has nothing to do with men but the unbelievable amount of love and attachment that comes with creating, birthing, and nurturing a dependent being. That's not the patriarchy. That's humanity, and that's how we (people) are meant to work. That's why we have oxytocin. Oxytocin is functional and its from our bodies, not from society. We need bonds and attachments for society to hold up. Parenting is a powerful experience for someone who wants to be a parent.
I strongly disagree with society's expectations for women-not all women want children or want to stop working when they have them. Women shouldn't be expected to give up their names simply because they are the female. You'll never get an argument from me on those. A man who stays at home and parents shouldn't be seen as a lazy bum mooching. He should be seen as a committed father. Gender expectations are pretty silly. But we can't assume actions are due to gender expectations, either. We *should* keep ensuring that people not feel confined by them and realize all the many options out there. (I'm all for people not wanting to be parents not being them. The idea that people must grow up and reproduce is not necessary for survival and often causes misery. Those who do want to reproduce though find joy. They do give up some independence. They must, by choosing to nurture a dependent. But fathers should as much as mothers.)0 -
yes because of their very own narrow, selfish focus. in the grand scheme of things, nothing heroic about getting a baby either naturally or by other means.
here is the issue: we have too many babies in the world and too many mothers and fathers. what we need are parents for these kids. their moms and dads are not parents. require people to have a license to make a baby. lets make Ayn Rand proud!
So what is your real story? Who hurt you? Or who peed in your cheerios? Maybe your blood sugar is low, need a cookie?
Seriously, why does it bother you so much what other people do? Maybe you should turn that negativity around and focus on yourself instead of worry about what others are doing. Not all mommies and daddies are bad people, not all of us treat our kids poorly, there are a lot of wonderful parents out there, sure their are some who should be cut off and not allowed to ever have kids but lets not make all parents feel like you have it out for them because you sound pretty awful.
It's a very logical and rational argument. It lacks the emotional aspect of having kids but it's true. Having kids is inherently selfish and there are lots of children who need homes.
And it does bother those of us who are concerned with things like overconsumption of natural resources, increasing class sizes in public schools, emotional trauma/mental illness among unadopted kids in foster homes, etc. That's why people care what individuals do. It affects everyone.
But I do understand why people have kids. Heck, sometimes I really want kids of my own. My boyfriend has 3 and I don't think he's a terrible awful human being.
Just from a rather cold and rational perspective, yeah. He's right.
Just clarifying the argument.
Not to turn this into a political debate, but we have plenty of resources, but our government is harvesting a lot of things, why? Their is a guide stone that wants to depopulate the earth, but yet there is plenty of land and plenty of resources. I think having kids when you can take care of them without relying on the government is very selfish, but I don't agree that having kids is all that selfish but then again I'm a believer in God and his word and he tells us to go and populate.0 -
PS: I hated my anthropology courses. I can't lie. I worked way harder in those courses.0
-
yes because of their very own narrow, selfish focus. in the grand scheme of things, nothing heroic about getting a baby either naturally or by other means.
here is the issue: we have too many babies in the world and too many mothers and fathers. what we need are parents for these kids. their moms and dads are not parents. require people to have a license to make a baby. lets make Ayn Rand proud!
So what is your real story? Who hurt you? Or who peed in your cheerios? Maybe your blood sugar is low, need a cookie?
Seriously, why does it bother you so much what other people do? Maybe you should turn that negativity around and focus on yourself instead of worry about what others are doing. Not all mommies and daddies are bad people, not all of us treat our kids poorly, there are a lot of wonderful parents out there, sure their are some who should be cut off and not allowed to ever have kids but lets not make all parents feel like you have it out for them because you sound pretty awful.
It's a very logical and rational argument. It lacks the emotional aspect of having kids but it's true. Having kids is inherently selfish and there are lots of children who need homes.
And it does bother those of us who are concerned with things like overconsumption of natural resources, increasing class sizes in public schools, emotional trauma/mental illness among unadopted kids in foster homes, etc. That's why people care what individuals do. It affects everyone.
But I do understand why people have kids. Heck, sometimes I really want kids of my own. My boyfriend has 3 and I don't think he's a terrible awful human being.
Just from a rather cold and rational perspective, yeah. He's right.
Just clarifying the argument.
Not to turn this into a political debate, but we have plenty of resources, but our government is harvesting a lot of things, why? Their is a guide stone that wants to depopulate the earth, but yet there is plenty of land and plenty of resources. I think having kids when you can take care of them without relying on the government is very selfish, but I don't agree that having kids is all that selfish but then again I'm a believer in God and his word and he tells us to go and populate.
No, there are not plenty of resources or land. At our current rate we may hit critical population levels in a century. And having kids is inherently selfish because we do it, biologically, to pass on our genetics.0 -
yes because of their very own narrow, selfish focus. in the grand scheme of things, nothing heroic about getting a baby either naturally or by other means.
here is the issue: we have too many babies in the world and too many mothers and fathers. what we need are parents for these kids. their moms and dads are not parents. require people to have a license to make a baby. lets make Ayn Rand proud!
So what is your real story? Who hurt you? Or who peed in your cheerios? Maybe your blood sugar is low, need a cookie?
Seriously, why does it bother you so much what other people do? Maybe you should turn that negativity around and focus on yourself instead of worry about what others are doing. Not all mommies and daddies are bad people, not all of us treat our kids poorly, there are a lot of wonderful parents out there, sure their are some who should be cut off and not allowed to ever have kids but lets not make all parents feel like you have it out for them because you sound pretty awful.
It's a very logical and rational argument. It lacks the emotional aspect of having kids but it's true. Having kids is inherently selfish and there are lots of children who need homes.
And it does bother those of us who are concerned with things like overconsumption of natural resources, increasing class sizes in public schools, emotional trauma/mental illness among unadopted kids in foster homes, etc. That's why people care what individuals do. It affects everyone.
But I do understand why people have kids. Heck, sometimes I really want kids of my own. My boyfriend has 3 and I don't think he's a terrible awful human being.
Just from a rather cold and rational perspective, yeah. He's right.
Just clarifying the argument.
All I can say is from my personal perspective as an adoptee I can honestly say I'm thrilled no-one made the judgement call on if my birth mother had a inherent right to have me or not. When I was a teenage single parent at the time of my daughter's birth I can say I'm glad that no-one had the right to tell me if I could have her or not. Furthermore, as the holder of a social work degree I'm glad that no-one had the right to state if I was allowed to be both a parent & earn an education. :drinker:0 -
How do you feel about that? I am not sure how I feel. Why cant a woman be her own person on a fitness website? Why does she have to define herself as a mommy or a wifey? I dont see any daddios or hubbies!
Maybe their children are such a gigantic part of their life that they feel NO reason to separate being a Mom from themselves for a fitness website....or any other website for that matter.0 -
moms love their children so much they would give their lives 100x if it meant saving their child. it is a human bond, no matter culture, race, creed...it is innate, human experience.
if you were a mother, you would understand. to identify with the strongest bond a human can feel, sounds natural to me.0 -
It's a very logical and rational argument. It lacks the emotional aspect of having kids but it's true. Having kids is inherently selfish and there are lots of children who need homes.
And it does bother those of us who are concerned with things like overconsumption of natural resources, increasing class sizes in public schools, emotional trauma/mental illness among unadopted kids in foster homes, etc. That's why people care what individuals do. It affects everyone.
But I do understand why people have kids. Heck, sometimes I really want kids of my own. My boyfriend has 3 and I don't think he's a terrible awful human being.
Just from a rather cold and rational perspective, yeah. He's right.
Just clarifying the argument.
Not to turn this into a political debate, but we have plenty of resources, but our government is harvesting a lot of things, why? Their is a guide stone that wants to depopulate the earth, but yet there is plenty of land and plenty of resources. I think having kids when you can take care of them without relying on the government is very selfish, but I don't agree that having kids is all that selfish but then again I'm a believer in God and his word and he tells us to go and populate.
I simply can't see blindly following your religion as a valid argument to have children without respect and understand of the context in which you're having them. I simply can't.
But um....it's not a political debate. There are NOT plenty of resources. Food you mean? Yeah. Ok. And problems with food are based on structural system issues. Starvation doesn't occur because there is not enough food in the world. But non-renewable resources are quickly being eaten up and let's think about where all of your garbage goes after you put in in the bin. There is definitely not plenty of land, unless you want to destroy lots of ecosystems in the process.
Simply deciding to have your own children rather than adopt is in some sense selfish. Choosing to replicate your DNA rather than give a home to a child who is suffering is selfish. But there are lots of complications to that idea that I understand. Just saying that you can't say that having children is completely unselfish.
Oh and they aren't trying to depopulate the earth. FYI. They are trying to decrease the population growth rate so that it isn't absolutely insane.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions