The passionate hunger to do something significant and meaningful with my life was a major reason I took care never to have any children. Having grown up in a large family within a religious subculture full of other large families, the amount of time and attention children consume was crystal clear from a young age, and I knew that I was going to need every scrap of energy I could spare for the work I wanted to do.
Years later, after I had to accept the failure of my ambitions, there was an opportunity to become the dad of a kid who needed one. So here I am being a dad after all, and it's been a good experience. Difficult, of course, and often frustrating, but worthwhile; I have no regrets - neither about this choice, nor the one I made when I was young.
Agreed. I'm well travelled. Have had a very fun and satisfying dating life. A great career. Accomplished many life goals. Nothing comes close to fatherhood.
Which frustrates me immensely, because I feel that society at large did everything it could to convince me that parenthood is terrible. Movies and TV shows portrayed only the bad. Teachers told me that becoming a parent was the worst thing in the whole world. A wide range of celebrities spend their days posting about how amazing it is to be without children.
I accept that there are some parents out there who regret their decision, but research shows them to be a vanishingly small minority. The VAST majority of parents report greater meaning, more love, personal growth, enjoyment, fulfillment, etc. Something has become quite sick in modern society when we provide such an imbalanced and untrue message to young people.
I've thought about this and while I agree with you completely, I think the reason why is not just society at large. Externally what most people see is the time suck, money suck, and frustration with teaching behavior, fixing bad behavior etc.
What's so easy to miss is the immense feeling of love, of being needed, of being loved, that words can't describe. I frequently tell people I feel like the grinch after he discovers Xmas - my heart is three times bigger. But you can't really see that it's just a feeling I carry with me.
how do i explain that my child running into my arms after his first day of daycare is a high ill be chasing for the rest of my life?
or the irrational pride when you see your kid flip over for the first time?
it's so many mundane moments that punch 100000x above their weight when its your kid having them.
the good parts of parenting sound like fake news (unless youre talking to other parents)
Agree 100%. I often tell expecting parents "All the hard stuff they tell you about; the sleep loss, the stress, the cost... All that stuff is true. But there's also all this amazing stuff they don't tell you about, which is also true."
I think that people probably tried to tell me about the amazing stuff, but I couldn't take it in. This created a very pleasant surprise for me when I found out about the good feels after the dread of just expecting everything I know to be upended with no reward.
You don’t need children to have these sorts of feelings, unless you can only get them from some small people who don’t have any choice but to love you.
There‘s a lot of ancient biology at play in raising kids. You won’t get exactly this kind of feeling elsewhere. Doesn’t mean it has to be your kids though. You just need to be an important part of their life.
This is a fallacy. You don't need to live a situation to be able to comment about it.
Especially if we try to rationalize the choice. If you talk about "feelings", then fine. But be aware that "feelings" could simply be your hormone levels changing after having kids.
Sure. But if you want a rationale discussion about what matters in life as this blog post and parent commenter suggest you probably don't want to get influenced by feelings.
There is a ton of philosophy written around this. Feelings are a very self-centric view of the world. The goal of rationalization is to take a wider systemic view without being self-centered.
Because if you push feelings and chemistry to the max you could also make an argument that taking meth and heroin is the most important thing in the world, as the feelings coming out of it are very real.
This discussion is many level deeps based on a blog post that claims having kids is the most meaningful thing you can do with your life. And other grand similar statements.
>>> Raising kids is probably the most meaningful and significant thing I have done with my life.
I don't think so. You specifically replied to a comment by calling it a "fallacy", when it was discussing feelings of parenthood. That's very specific and cannot be excused as arguing it was addressing the broader context of TFA. And the whole sub-thread was about feelings.
Also, nobody here -- the people you're debating with, I mean -- is arguing that having kids is universally the most meaningful thing anyone can do with their life; they are instead offering their personal perspectives. For example, in the sentence you quote:
> Raising kids is probably the most meaningful and significant thing I have done with my life
The operating words are "I have done with my life"; it's not telling you what you should do with yours.
In fact, the whole debate in this sub-thread was sparked by a very aggressive comment (not yours), but which you chose to implicitly defend:
> You don’t need children to have these sorts of feelings, unless you can only get them from some small people who don’t have any choice but to love you.
Well, whether the person saying the above has or doesn't have children is entirely relevant. It's not a "fallacy". We're discussing feelings, even the above comment acknowledges it; and in relation to parenthood the fact remains: these feelings must be experienced, you cannot truly comment on them otherwise. I mean, you can, but your opinion wouldn't be of much value.
Read again the comment that prompted the above comment:
> What's so easy to miss is the immense feeling of love, of being needed, of being loved, that words can't describe. I frequently tell people I feel like the grinch after he discovers Xmas - my heart is three times bigger. But you can't really see that it's just a feeling I carry with me.
Really, it's all about subjective feelings. Which, essentially, is all that matters in the context of this conversation. If you don't have children, you won't have felt like this. You simply cannot. So it's not a fallacy to ask if you have them.
edit:
> a blog post that claims having kids is the most meaningful thing you can do with your life
You don’t need to be a parent to be allowed to comment on or speculate about being a parent, but this is definitely one of those things you can’t guess at or estimate.
Until it is your kid in front of you you can’t know what you’ll feel as a parent. Maybe it’s all hormones and monkey brain, but that doesn’t make it any different.
Many people do not have that Hollywood Magic moment where “everything changed.” Some of my friends experienced this, some of them did not. None of us experienced what we thought we would.
Again, feeling should not matter that much in this discussion.
We are talking past each other because some/most parents in those discussion cannot get out of their self-centered view of the worlds based on "feelings". But if you make a claim that having a kid is the most important thing in the world, you should be able to substantiate that claim without going back to "feelings" that only you can feel.
> Again, feeling should not matter that much in this discussion.
Yes, they should. We are, after all, replying to the initial assertion that (and I quote) "you don’t need children to have these sorts of feelings [love, being needed, needing someone]".
> But if you make a claim that having a kid is the most important thing in the world
That wasn't a claim anybody made in this thread, and specifically everyone was talking from a personal perspective about parenthood, not making universal claims. Certainly not the person who wrote this (and to whom you indirectly replied):
> What's so easy to miss is the immense feeling of love, of being needed, of being loved, that words can't describe. I frequently tell people I feel like the grinch after he discovers Xmas - my heart is three times bigger. But you can't really see that it's just a feeling I carry with me.
If you don't like talking about feelings, fine. But this discussion was about feelings, not about some universal "most important thing in the world".
Remember that once you have kids you are stuck in that situation forever. There is a lot of coping and trying to persuade yourself that this is the best thing in the world. It might as well be as there is no escape anyways!
I can honestly say, I think there was a chemical change in my brain or a biological equivalent when my kids were born. That is to say, something more primal than the "love" you can get from a spouse/SO; you feel it in your bones, deep down, always on and changed forever.
I think it could be possible to replicate this without children, but it is extremely uncommon. Ask any parent if they could accomplish the same before they had kids. I have never met a parent yet who thinks it's possible.
This is a very snarky, flippant, uninformed take that serves no purpose other than to tear others down in an effort to validate your decision.
Have kids or don’t, live your life the way you want. But taking unsolicited dumps on other people’s decisions is a pretty lame way to live.
And yes, you do have to have kids in order to understand what it feels like to have kids. You do not know what it’s like, as evidenced by your thinking having kids entitles a parent to their love. Let me tell you clearly and unequivocally: it does not. Love is earned. A family is a big lesson in that.
To use a less charged example: I can’t claim to know what strawberries taste like if I never try a strawberry.
TL;DR: I understand anti-natalism is in vogue right now, but some of y’all are really shitty about it.
Other people’s choices have externalities that harm society. I don’t need validation for not doing something that benefits no one and harms everyone. It’s already obvious that abstaining from this selfish and self-indulgent activity is the only intelligent choice.
Furthermore I don’t need to shoot heroin to know that shooting heroin feels extremely good and that the people
that do it really enjoy the feeling. I also don’t need to shoot heroin to see the harms it causes to the people that do it, and those around them.
You are trying to make a logical argument for the observed preferences of an evolved system that only evolved to perpetuate itself, not to benefit anyone or anything outside of a sequence of DNA. It’s a shame that so many people are blinded to that by instinct and emotion.
If I were developing nanotech grey goo in my basement, everyone would rightly point out that it’s a risk to society. Yet, humans doing the exact same thing (just more slowly) are praised.
People get unreasonably defensive when confronted with these facts, as you have demonstrated.
Can you name one thing that benefits from people creating more selfish and self-replicating creatures other than the emotional state of people who share some of their DNA?
PS: No mother “earns” the love of a one or two year old. It’s automatic and meritless. To assert otherwise to bolster your argument is obviously silly and should clue you in to how shaky the logical foundation for your claims is.
Forgeties79 is talking about understanding parenthood at the experiential level. You can read as much as you want about how heroin makes people feel extremely good, you will never understand at the experiential level how it actually feels until you use it yourself. Not that I recommend...
Also you seem to be saying that not having children is the "only intelligent choice". Intelligent for what? Then you state that we are "an evolved system that only evolved to perpetuate itself, not to benefit anyone or anything outside of a sequence of DNA." while in the same breath excluding yourself from being said system, calling yourself logical and calling your preference superior to others.
And "harms everyone" assumes the damages of the life you create outweigh the goods. That's your value judgment, not a measurement, and plenty of the people actually created have thought it through and disagree...
As for one benefit? Existing people benefit, including you. Everything keeping you alive was built by people who had to be born.
> You don’t need children to have these sorts of feelings, unless you can only get them from some small people who don’t have any choice but to love you.
Peak HN comment.
Technically you don't "need" anything in life besides food and shelter. You don't need to have children, or loved ones, or friends, or ambitions, or projects, or goals... but life is very sad if you miss all of them.
As much as I sometimes wonder what life would have been like as DINKs, the feeling of my 7 year old girl sneaking up behind me to give me a cuddle outweighs all of the fast cars and long walks on the beach I personally could ever have.
Interesting perspective. Your first paragraph also describes my experience, perfectly.
However, even though I also think nothing comes even close to parenthood for me, my perspective is that society strongly encourages —I'd even say strongly pressures— people to have kids, to feel that if you don't, it's almost like something is wrong with you. Maybe we're just different generations? :-)
I never felt that pressure to have kids. In fact, even though I waited until I was in my mid 30's, I was the first in my social circle to have kids (I guess I hung around with younger people?).
I knew since I was a kid myself that I wanted to someday be a father. If society pushed me, it would have been when I was still in elementary school.
After I had kids though… It was strange to scroll through coworkers social media feeds and see the same photos of groups of 30-somethings holding up wine glasses while the waiter (I assume) takes their photo at some fancy restaurant in the Bay Area. It all seemed so… hedonistic? Or maybe just kind of empty.
Becoming a father gave me purpose that was (finally) not about me any longer.
And now, the nest empty, I still am unable to go back to that person I was before. (Whoever that was.)
I live in a neighborhood of older retired folks and I get this vibe from them as well when walking my younger kids. Their faces light up with joy. Just another season in life I suppose. Let's enjoy it while we can.
Yeah, speaking as a female-bodied person here - undoubtedly a minority on this site - I absolutely feel the pressure to have children in society, pretty much every day.
Look at the "birth rate" discourse that's been going on. There's tremendous pressure on women to have more babies. There's also a lot of pendulum-swinging in the opposite direction with your edgy "antinatalists", in some sort of weird "overcorrection" or some such, but ultimately those voices are much louder online than in real life.
Fewer people are reproducing, but that doesn't mean the pressures to do so aren't still there. "It's complicated."
This onslaught of birth rate articles laying the blame at women's feet drives me up a wall. Many of my female peers have frozen their eggs to preserve their ability to have children to the best of their abilities or have undergone fertility evaluations proactively, other female friends in their 30s/40s have pursued the single-mom-by-choice route once they had the financial security to do so. I do not see my male peers pursuing sperm testing / freezing or pursuing single-fatherhood-by-choice. Of my married friends with kids, if there is a second kid it has been because the wife advocated for it. All that said, I don't blame men either the husbands that were talked into the second kid were all concerned about their ability to pay for school / daycare and/or to afford another bedroom even with the help of their working wives / breadwinner wives. For men talked into their first kid, their hesitation was that after undergraduate and masters they felt they'd barely had time to financially establish themselves or live their own lives.
Not to mention the evidence coming out about advanced paternal age and adverse outcomes on offspring. The pressures are definitely lopsided. If anything, the pressures should be on society and institutions to provide more support for parents, people who want to become parents, and people who just want to be part of "the village". So... support for people, I suppose. A rising tide lifts all boats. Something like that. I dunno. There's a lot of factors at play here; I'm just spitballing.
Does the birth rate discourse put pressure on you as an individual? I had expected that to also be more of an online than real life push.
There is more pressure on women to have kids than on men. That is not new. What is new is a more negative attitude to children and parenting in society in general. Do you feel there are conflicting pressures now?
>Does the birth rate discourse put pressure on you as an individual?
Implicitly, I think, yes. It builds on all of the other social pressures, big and small. I'm sure an entire humanities thesis could be written about how it all adds up over time.
I wrote another comment elsewhere in the thread talking about polarized opinions broadcasted on social media and how that also adds to the stress of it all. Nobody ever wants to talk about the "it was/is... fine, actually. kind of whatever. not great, but not horrible." possibility of pregnancy (and parenthood). It's always either the most wonderful, miraculous thing ever and you're insane for not wanting it, or it's the most horrible, irreversibly damaging thing ever and you're insane for wanting it.
And the thing is... it COULD be any of those outcomes! It could ruin your life. It could also make your life so much more fulfilling. There's simply no way to know for sure what it will be like for you without doing it. It is an enormous gamble, especially when you are the person who has to endure the pregnancy, and it is a gamble that you can't really walk away from. (Of course, you can give a child up for adoption, but there's a lot of social shame involved in that, especially if it is a wanted child that you're quite literally giving up on rearing.)
I think the other comment was in answer to me too.
I think you are right about the polarised opinions. I think in real life (at least for people I know) pregnancy is generally fine, with maybe a few horrible bits (i.e. if there are any medical problems/something goes wrong). It has lots of positives but its difficult.
Parenthood is usually wonderful. I am afraid men have it easier as we get the parenthood without the pregnancy!
It also depends on your social and professional background. If you are an orthodox jew, you will likely have the maximum pressure.
On the other hand, my wife, who was a lawyer, was fired from from a Big4 when they suspected that she was pregnant.
As a father in the tech/startup industry, it's sometimes quite hard to get people to understand what having children implies for instance, my ex-boss couldn't understand that I wasn't available at 21:30 everyday to answer his questions, as I was bedding the kids.
I mean, humans are made to comply to social pressure, so if they stop collectively having children, it more likely means that the social and economic pressure is overall rather against having them.
I think it's social pressure in some cultures, but even in those (sub)cultures which don't have the explicit pressure to have kids, people have a drive to procreate. I cannot tell you how many couples I know who decided they would not have kids, or would only have one, and at a certain point one partner (usually a woman in their late 30s or early 40s if I am being honest) decided this was the most important thing and no amount of money or career setbacks or relationship turmoil wouldn stand in the way.
Different generations, different places, exactly where you are in your society, religious influences, your immediate social circle, how much time you spend on social media....
Certainly in the UK there is a group of people who have become very negative about having kids, partly because they are scared of the expense, and partly because society makes it look so hard, and partly because they genuinely have less support.
Pregnancy is also a really scary prospect for a lot of people (myself included), and there doesn't seem to be much work done in trying to make it, well, less shitty of an experience. "It's just how it is," but... is it really? Does it really need to be so bad?
Not to mention that "it takes a village", but in many places the village has been basically stolen from us.
Pregnancy is never going to be easy (and its one part of parenting I am glad I did not have to do!) but it can definitely be made easier and more pleasant. it varies a lot though. We were quite lucky in many ways.
However, why is pregnancy scarier than it used to be when it is safer than it has ever been? It seems to be more scary in developed countries than in poor ones too.
I wonder whether the loss of the "village" might be part of the reason for this. it certainly is for a lot of other things around having kids.
I wonder how much of it has to do with the fact that birth control offers us a choice in the matter. Pregnancy used to be something You Just Did, because, well, most people enjoy having sex, and pregnancy is the intended consequence of unprotected sex. It's scary, it's stressful, it's risky, and it's sometimes even fatal... but it's "part of life". It's how we ended up here, after all.
Now we have a choice. Which is GREAT, amazing, even. Absolutely necessary. I'll never argue that anyone's right to choose if they want to be a parent is a bad thing.
I wonder if social media is also contributing, with its polarizing nature. It's rare you see any opinions or even anecdotes about pregnancy being "fine" or "whatever". It's always a big deal, and it's always a big deal (horrible) or a big deal (wonderful). There's not a lot of in between. The negative end of the spectrum scares people, while the positive end of the spectrum is met with skepticism since it's too-often (for me at least) correlated with right-wing religious people trying to push women to be what're effectively baby factories, so the "it's the most wonderful experience ever!" just comes off as disingenuous and manipulative.
Combined with the fact that women's healthcare is rife with challenges, and women's pain is often dismissed (not looking to start any "gender wars" arguments; just stating things that can be backed up https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10937548/), the prospect of becoming pregnant is a scary one, when you have the option to not do that.
"What if it's nine months of constant nausea, being bedbound, gaining weight I'll never be able to lose? My body will change, in many ways irreversibly. Will my partner still find me attractive? Will they support me during? Will they support me after? Will I feel supported? Will I feel resentment that they'll be able to enjoy things like alcohol while I'll have to stay completely sober for a very long time? Will I feel resentment if the majority of childcare falls on me, which is statistically actually quite likely? What about my career? Will I regret it? What if my child is born with a disability? What if I'm bad at being a mom? What if I hate it? What if I'm trapped in a life I don't want? What if there's no way out?"
Of course, the above thought process could also be one with thoughts like "what if it's wonderful?" but it's a lot easier to worry about the negative, and put weight on the negative, than it is to fantasize and put weight on the positive what-ifs.
This is just my perspective, though. Some people love being pregnant and find parenthood really wonderful (or so they tell me about those things), and I love that for them. Truly. I'm just not sure if I have it in me to ever find out what it would be like for me, and I know I'm not alone. Fun Auntie is a better role for me I think. But maybe I would feel differently if pregnancy were easier and a less destructive process on the female body, and there was more social support for parents.
Birth control has been around for a long time now. The oral contraceptive pill was invented 70 years ago. Fear of pregnancy to the level of putting people off having kids is much newer.
I think its very likely that social media plays apart.
I think people glossing pregnancy over as wonderful are optimistic. I think a more honest take is "its hard but worth it".
> What if it's nine months of constant nausea, being bedbound, gaining weight I'll never be able to lose?
Its not nine months of nausea or being bedbound though. Most women I know lived normal lives for most of their pregnancies.
> Will my partner still find me attractive? Will they support me during? Will they support me after? Will I feel supported
Absolutely do not have kids with a partner whose support you cannot rely on!
None of us are going to keep our looks all our lives anyway.
> Will I feel resentment that they'll be able to enjoy things like alcohol while I'll have to stay completely sober for a very long time?
When i had my kids the NHS advice was to drink in moderation. Changes since then have been politically driven (and by increased American influence on attitudes) rather than being the rest of any new science. My ex went off alcohol before she knew she was pregnant (which is the most critical time) and then drank moderately thereafter.
> Will I feel resentment if the majority of childcare falls on me, which is statistically actually quite likely?
That is understandable. Again it partly comes down to having the right partner. Some men do end up doing the majority of childcare - I am one, and I have come across a few others. This is something that is improving too (I hope!).
> What about my career? Will I regret it? What if my child is born with a disability?
Careers get into perspective when you have kids. Very few people regret having their kids, whatever goes wrong. They are so much more important than having a career. I have a lot less money than I would have had without kids, but there is no way I would want to have the money instead.
> What if I'm bad at being a mom? What if I hate it? What if I'm trapped in a life I don't want?
IMO it is extremely rare for the sort of person who worries about being a good parent to be a bad parent. The problem is that people want to be perfect parents, and society encourages anxiety instead of reassuring them that it is OK not to be perfect.
> Fun Auntie is a better role for me I think
Its not a bad role to have! I would point out that being a fun auntie requires someone to have kids!
> and there was more social support for parents.
I think this is critical. I am not sure to what extent pregnancy can be made easier in a direct physical sense, but many women could be better supported through it.
All valid responses/pushback to the anxiety! It's still a lot of unknowns and what-ifs; I was more trying to make the point that for some people, it's overwhelming, and some may conclude it's not worth the risk in finding out. Which brings me to another important point, which is that parenthood isn't for everybody. Some people really shouldn't be parents, and there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that. (Not saying I'm necessarily one of those people; just speaking more generally.)
Unfortunately - and this is kinda related to your comment about it being rare for the kind of person who worries about being a good parent to be a really bad parent - we often see opposite patterns play out... people that would probably make good parents seem less likely to reproduce, and vice versa. I know "Idiocracy" is a bit of a meme these days and is arguably classist, but I can't help but think about it. It's probably a far larger socioeconomic issue than can be feasibly hashed out in an internet forum, and I certainly can't solve it.
Ultimately, I think where I'm at these days, is that we need the village back, and I would love to be a part of it. How? Well, currently, it's that "Fun Auntie" role, as I've no kids of my own, nor do I plan to change that. I've long "wanted to want" bio-children, but so far, I don't. I'm mid-30s now, so there is still time, especially thanks to fertility technology continuing to improve. I'm probably not gonna change my mind, but I'm far too autistic to speak in absolutes, so I cant 100% rule anything out.
Regardless: the village is a beautiful thing. It's an honor to be a part of it in the ways that I am and have been throughout my life. More people should be a part of it. We should all (within reason) be a part of it. It should be celebrated and supported each and every day, to the point where parenthood isn't so much of a burden on the individual family unit, and is instead a shared responsibility of the local community. How do we best go about doing that? Obviously governmental and institutional support is critical, but we also need societal/cultural support, and that will be a lengthier project... we owe it to ourselves to try, though.
I appreciate the conversation and insights in this conversation; thanks for the well-thought out responses in these threads.
I really appreciate how well you have explained a perspective very different from my own. Not only am I a man who has had children, my younger daughter turned 18 today, and will be off to university in less than two months so my children are no longer children and worries about parenting etc. are behind me.
Its interesting how much we agree about the social and political problems and the loss of the village.
I agree parenthood is underappreciated and undersold. Nothing in life beats seeing kids grow up from helpless infants to well-adjusted, passionate young adults.
Lately I frequently find myself wondering if every philosopher who pondered the meaning of life was childless, because it feels to me like the answer must be pretty obvious to any parent.
> Agreed. I'm well travelled. Have had a very fun and satisfying dating life. A great career. Accomplished many life goals. Nothing comes close to fatherhood.
I completely agree with you. But I can't say around me, people, movies, society ever sent the message that parenthood is terrible. The way I interpret the message was always "this was hard, this was grueling, but I wouldn't change it for the world". I didn't get this apparent contradiction until it was my turn.
I think the people who miss almost all of these "tickboxes" and can somehow link it to the kids become unhappy with parenthood. If they ever feel their personal time, romance, career, success suffered because of the focus on the children, they will end up in the "disappointment" camp.
I never personally met anyone who was willing to admit regret of having children but I did meet people who were disappointed and put a veiled blame for their failure on the children.
I feel a lot of regret having had children. Not 100%, but it's always going to be more than 0%. I adore my kids but it's too much for my brain and it makes me miserable a lot of the time. I don't bring it up except to counsellors (or anonymous internet bros, apparently) because (a) it's not actionable - there is no going back (b) it's a bummer and no one has anything to say about it.
This is one of the things I think about when considering kids++, when does the regret start (if at all)? Or as posted in other comments, will the health lottery have me regret having +1? Time will tell.
How old are they? I honestly felt like that sometimes for the first few years but no longer now that they are somewhat capable of not dying without constant supervision and are becoming their own new persons
This is arguably the toughest it will ever get. It's very normal to feel all kinds of tough emotions right now. If this were climbing Mount Everest, you'd be near the top.
You are probably right! But you might be assuming I wanted kids before I realized it wasn't all I'd hoped. I never really wanted them but said ok to my partner. I figured that most of the nicer and more fulfilled older people I knew had kids. Then again now I wonder if that's because there are plenty of older fulfilled people without kids off doing their thing and not interacting with the likes of me.
85% of women eventually have at least one child. So there are older folks out there without kids, but it's a relatively small group.
I'm sorry to hear you never wanted kids. I guess it's more complicated if you were sure beforehand that it's not for you. I hope you're able to balance the love with the effort.
You'd never hear me say it in person, but I'll admit it here. I'm sure it's great for most people, but it's not for me.
I agree with your assessment of society at large. The prevailing attitude is, having children is the best thing you'll ever do, that you ever could do. The most you'll get is, it's the hardest job in the world but also the best, and totally worth it. I have no idea what the other person is talking about when they say everything conveyed the message that parenthood is terrible. This sort of thing almost makes me wonder if the internet actually connects parallel universes and we just haven't realized it, because that's not how it is in mine.
I was on the fence, but had no support for it. All the media said do it. Everybody around me said do it. There was literally not a single dissenting voice in my life saying, "don't do it if you're not sure." Or even just "if you feel that way then maybe it's worth considering not having kids as an option, or at least waiting until you become more certain."
I think they were trying to scare us into not having sex. Or at least having protected sex. Either way, they made all the kids watch videos about teen pregnancy and how it would ruin our lives. They also repeated it frequently in sex education. They focused on how terrible it was to have children. The struggles, etc. I suppose it is difficult for teens to understand nuance, but it certainly left a fairly grim impression of parenthood on all of us. Was it different for you?
In my experince we got that, but it was all focused on having a kid while being a teenager will ruin your life not that having a kid at all will ruin your life. Which is fair, a teenager having a child is in a lot of ways ending their lifes or making at a minimum way more difficult( if they family support that is, otherwise good luck )
Oh this is when you were a student? I thought this was as a parent with kids in school.
Getting pregnant (especially in the wrong state) in the US as a high schooler can absolutely ruin your life. In some states it can even get you killed due to the legal chaos still happening in hospitals.
>> Which frustrates me immensely, because I feel that society at large did everything it could to convince me that parenthood is terrible
Uh? I feel it's the opposite. Society constantly judges people that don't have kids. Having kids has always been the norm. It projects you as a grown up mature adult. In fact I think a ton of people have kids simply because they want to give that image of being a well established mature person.
> Which frustrates me immensely, because I feel that society at large did everything it could to convince me that parenthood is terrible. Movies and TV shows portrayed only the bad. Teachers told me that becoming a parent was the worst thing in the whole world. A wide range of celebrities spend their days posting about how amazing it is to be without children.
Maybe I just wasn't paying attention, but this isn't at all what I remember. I frankly can't think of a single movie or TV show that paints parenting as bad, let alone the worst thing in the world. I can think of only one celebrity who I can recall extolled his child-free life. That was within the past year-- and I think the guy is a total dipshit man-child.
And I have no idea where you grew up, or whether that's actually a factor, but my teachers, when they had kids, seemed like loving parents. When they didn't have kids, I don't think they ever spoke badly or parenting.
I love my kids and would do anything for them. But at the same time, I really don't feel it is a big deal. Humans and animals been having kids for millions of years. It is just basic animal instinct to procreate and raise your offspring.
It is like basic human instinct is to consume and store calories. And there is nothing wrong with it. But to become athlete and win a gold medal, that requires going against these basic instincts. That means eating healthier and working out instead of preserving calories.
Having kids is great but to achieve something great in life, does require going against your basic instincts and not procreate. Or if you do have kids, then not be a good parent.
I had my startup dreams but after having kids, biology kicked in and startup dreams got deprioritized. But I made peace with it and I enjoy my quiet basic life with my kids. I just know I will not do anything significant and that is totally okay.
I feel like when young people think they want to do significant and meaningful things, they think about things that will make them famous in one way or another. Most of such things are neither significant nor meaningful.
I used to think this way, and then I realised that I actually want to be famous and respected. After some time, I realised that I just wanted the approval of people. And finally I realised all I wanted was to feel loved and cared for.
That's unnecessarily pessimistic. I think it's much more common for drive people to want to make a significant positive impact on the world, rather than becoming famous.
Doesn't matter either way, though, once you realize you're just a blip like the other 8,000,000,000 people on this earth.
Is it really? How much of that is a "feeling" that evolution made you feel in order to protect your kid from issues?
having kids is the baseline normal for millions of years. As much as you "feel" that this is the most important thing you ever did, it is worth taking a step back and think rationally about this. Is it really? What about it makes it SO important? Because we for sure are not going extinct at all. Having a lot of kids has always been the default. If you don't have kids the world will be absolutely fine, in fact nothing will change at all.
So you should ask yourself. Why is it the most meaningful thing you ever did? Because it is YOUR DNA? Isn't that then a completely self-centered pursuit?
They should absolutely all be discussed. I just don't see a lot of rationale that supports that having kids is the "biggest accomplishment of a lifetime" though.
There is inherently nothing very special, unique or difficult about it. It has always been the normal things that happen to most humans and animals since the dawns of time.
If you respond to this, please use rationale and not feelings to describe why having kids is the "biggest achievement from your lifetime".
It's said by lots of people every time this subject comes up, it's obviously true, but IMO it's also a little tautological. I read it as essentially: "I created a massive problem to solve, and here I am successfully solving it." Of course it's meaningful. Of course it's significant.
Because any fault of theirs feels like a fault of yours, but you learn that you cannot fix faults of theirs like you can (try to) fix faults of yours. You learn to become a parent, a teacher, a guide, a kind of friend, in the most deeply connected relationship you’ll ever have. A relationship that exposes you to every fault of yourself, while you feel the deepest love for and connection with your children. A connection that’s not even always reciprocated. Parenting is the true Aristotelian politeia.
It is kinda weird, because you feel so much more tired all the time. Yet at the same time you have so much more motivation to do _everything_. It is like I feel 50% more tired, yet 200% more engaged with everything I do. It really makes your life a lot more meaningful.
Before I would waste so much time engaging on video games / internet-browsing / TV-youtube / etc and just not enjoying the time I spent. It felt very meaningless, like why even bother working? I have (had) savings to go take several years of sabbatical if I wanted.
When I actually boot up a video game today I actually enjoy it. And that is all on top of normal stuff you hear about having kids.
I’m surprised this hasn’t come up yet: Because by being a parent, you become responsible for someone else’s life besides your own, permanently and beyond the transactional or contractual sense of a job or a passion project. It is a life experience unmatched by anything else (though I think that being a teacher or the caretaker of children in an orphanage come close). You get free reign over the shaping of a person who will touch the lives of others, and the good or the bad that becomes of it is the consequence of your own values and way of existence.
Not disputing you either—I once said I will never have children, too—but indeed and as with other life decisions, you should stay childless while you find the meaning of it incomprehensible. It’s not for people who are not ready to stop thinking about themselves.
Because it's evolutionarily favourable - the same reason sex feels good. One is instantaneous pleasure, and the other is sustained doses of feelings of satisfaction, because they optimise for different things; but ultimately you can understand them easily if you think about how core they are to what evolution favours.
Ever built something and felt proud of it? Like 'that was cool' or 'that was neat'. It's like a never ending source of that feeling. Most things you do in life just don't last that long, but raising kids lasts a really long time.
Yes. I keep getting that feeling everyday with my work as of now. And I also got a PhD after fighting a lot of hardship including huge opposition from my parents to the effect of having lost contact with them. But what you said does ring a bell in that, I need to be constantly doing my work in getting that feeling. (apart from my PhD which every once in a while makes me go wheeeee).
I guess with kids, its like my PhD but a constant source instead of static fading in time?
Agree with the sibling comment. As a new father, nothing - and I mean absolutely nothing - can describe the love, adoration and reverence that parents feel for their children. To be understood, it must be experienced. There is simply no other way.
Thanks for the answer. And I understand that. But for me, that answer is potentially a very biased answer. Is it a feeling that comes naturally or is it forced in the sense that you realise you are everything for the kid and the kid is everything for you and both you the kid have no other choice.
Talking to a lot of people (bit you) i felt it was more the latter.
Let me paraphrase a scene from “Lessons in Chemistry”.
The main character confesses that twice she has wanted to give up her child for adoption. Another mom laughs... "Twenty times would still make you an amateur."
It didn't come naturally for me. Babies aren't much fun. There were plenty of times I wondered why everybody else finds being a parent fulfilling and here I am trying not to swear at a crying six month old at 1 am.
Toddlers though... toddlers are fun. Not always, but a lot of the time. Once both of my kids cleared the baby stage I finally would describe myself as a proud parent, mostly happy.
Now we are empty nesters and both of my kids live far away and are doing great. With the space that leaves I've spent some time thinking about myself as a dad and boy do I have a lot of regrets. I don't think I was very good at it.
I understand now why so many people who weren't the greatest parents get very excited about grandchildren. I know if that happens for me, I'm going to be a much better grandparent than I ever was parent.
Babies have no guile or instinct to deceive; they literally can't even conceive of doing so because their worldview just isn't developed enough. So when your baby cries, you can have absolute faith that it's because there's some problem that needs solving or need that is unmet, and then you can go and solve the problem, fill the need, and the baby is happy. And when the baby's happy, you have absolute faith that it's because you were there doing the thing. There's no pretense to the relationship at all, and it's a sort of unusual honesty that can be really hard to find in relationships where both parties understand basic facts like "there is a world of people outside myself" and "people don't have special insight into my interior being and I can give them information that doesn't fully reflect the state of the world".
So that kind of honest exchange does a lot to foster love and adoration from you to the child, and the fact that you're there providing food, shelter, comfort et all to the baby fosters love and adoration from them to you.
My kid is just under 18 months old now. He's old enough to have distinct ideas about what he wants to do, and when he wants to do it, and he's old enough to understand that not getting to do the thing that he wants is really upsetting, so he cries. That's hard sometimes. But if I'm relaxing on the couch and he brings a book over to me, I can know with absolute faith that it's because right now, what he wants more than anything in the world is to sit in my lap and have me read a book to him, and that feels amazing. When he goes and hides behind the kitchen island and then jumps out, it's because the thing he wants to do more than anything else is play peekaboo with me, and that feels amazing too.
+1. I also felt this huge gap between knowing (intellectually) what parenting is and actually experiencing it. It really changes you, to the point that now, when I talk to childless people my age, I feel like we're fundamentally differently. I think I can perceive fairly accurately whether someone my age is a parent after just a few minutes of general conversation (obviously, without having to visit adjacent topics).
I experienced this so strongly I spent some time actually writing a poem (in Spanish) about it: https://alejo.ch/39l
> It really changes you, to the point that now, when I talk to childless people my age, I feel like we're fundamentally differently.
As a childless person, the inverse is equally true. I have wildly different levels of obligation and constraint - and that difference typically becomes obvious very very quickly. I don't say that as a better/worse, just different.
Once you have kids you quickly discover that you get forced into it. You have to engage. If you don't, they scream. They get in trouble at school. They are unhappy and it breaks your heart. Once you have no choice but to do something, you will find it's better to find meaning in it. Meaning is ultimately something you create for yourself.
You can ask that question about a lot of things whether it's one entrepeneurial baby or their nature conservation effort which reveals it to be somewhat meaningless question.
Also as a parent, I still don't understand. I have two kids and regret it. They suck all the time and energy from my life. I give my all to be a great parent to them, and I would never let them know that I regret having kids, but if I could wind the clock back I almost certainly would. I feel like I'm throwing the most valuable years of my life in a wood chipper.
I'd modify that to once you have kids, you might understand. It's for sure not a given and there are a lot of really terrible people out there who probably shouldn't have the kids they do.
I'd like to object to this hopefully unintentional suggestion that failing to understand it means you're a terrible person.
I don't think I'm a terrible person. My kids are healthy, mostly happy, seem to be well adjusted. I support their physical needs, do my best to support their emotional needs. I read to them, changed their diapers, taught them how to ride a bicycle, help them with their homework, kiss them goodnight. But I still don't understand. I know most parents have this whatever it is, but I'm still wondering.
It's difficult to explain ... an intensely personal experience. Every child is different. Every parent is different. Every culture has their own way of doing things ... yet children are the one universally shared thing that binds our giant collective together ...
When I am holding Henry and I tickle him, I can feel him laughing all the way to his toes. And I realize, my God, I had forgotten ... how unbelievably wonderful it is that any of us exist at all.
Here I am with this tiny, warm body so close to me, breathing so fast he can barely catch up, sharing his newfound joy of simply being alive with me. The sublime joy of this moment, and all the other milestones – the first smile, the first laugh, the first 'dada' or 'mama' ... The highs are so incredibly high that you'll get vertigo and wonder if you can ever reach that feeling again. But you peak ever higher and higher, with dizzying regularity ... a constant rollercoaster of extreme highs and lows.
Except... a million reasons where they will either not understand, or they should have not become a parent.
The problem with the "The Most Infuriating Answer" is that it entirely neglects facts, and only those say it who do have a good experience with it.
Happy for you, internet stranger. Just like I am happy for all of those around me: you all are the ones who do good parenting.
In case you also want to become a better person in general, I recommend to stop being condescending, and not to say this ever again to anyone. You hurt more than you think you are wise.
The irony of this fact should be front and center to everyone and thus people saying it should have this forced to be capitalized with exclamation points.
Similar, all invocations of "calm down" should be in all caps with exclamation points. Never in history has telling someone whose upset to "calm down" actually led to them calming down.
I don't see OP's comment as condescending but I'm also not in these "should have not become a parent" shoes to tell, for sure. Insensitive? Perhaps. On a discussion board, it is hard to know who you're talking to. OP likely assumed some "persona" (different to those that might find it hurtful) before they wrote the comment.
> You hurt more than you think you are wise
We are all fighting some demon or the other. I appreciate you for bringing forth the kind most of us are (fortunate enough to be) oblivious to. Ignorance is bliss.
I mean, ok, they might just understand or they might hate their children with a fiery passion and never miss and opportunity to vocalize it and ruin innocent lives like my parents did?
> I cannot think why bringing up a kid would be significant or meaningful.
I don't think it's something to think or reason about. You feel it (or don't, in some cases). As an atheist, I suppose this is how truly religious people feel about their religion: it brings them joy and meaning. (And much like in some religions, you sometimes feel you're beholden to a demanding, whimsical god!).
>Why? Noy disputing you but I am childless yet primarily I cannot think why bringing up a kid would be significant or meaningful.
Its because they are more important than anything else to a parent. You are invested in their outcome more than anything else. I don’t see how this isn’t obvious.
When I hear people say this with all the morale high ground that comes with it I’m always wondering if it’s partially because of some hormonal changes. It has been proven recently that the human brain changes after having kids.
I know you didn’t intend it that way but there are so many people that are extremely judgmental about having kids (or rather judging people that don’t have kids).
I also understand that it’s such a hard task that there must be some level of self convincing needed to make it work.
All that to say, i tend to dismiss those opinions.
I feel that physical change the moment I saw my son first time. Something snapped/connected in my brain. I will do anything for that little thing. The feeling is visceral. It is very hard not to preach your best experience to others
That added some intensity behind my motivation to avoid parenthood: so many people describe having their brains hijacked in this way that I could not be sure I would be immune. Best steer far clear, I thought.
I mean the obvious retort to this is that until you become a parent all of your behaviour is probably driven by some deep evolutionary desire to demonstrate your suitability as a mate.
So we can dismiss opinions of non-parents as well.
Ideally we should discuss all those behaviour (becoming parents, becoming successful) logically without the hormones and feelings that makes you think they are the most important thing in the world.
Essentially discussing facts versus emotions.
Almost every parent in this discussion uses emotions to justify why they are doing the grandest accomplishment in the world by being a parent.
Would that be true if your child turned out to be a new Hitler or a burden on society?
Personally, I'm with the OP. Raising children, and to do a good job at it, is waaaay too much of a burden for me, and would seriously negatively affect most areas of my life.
I find it much more meaningful to focus on creating jobs, companies, products and services people need, than to raise a child with unknown outcome. I see way too many parents who try and appear as if they are happy and say they don't regret the decision, but deep down it is clear they do.
That is why, many of them, once the children are somewhat grown up, split up from their partner, and then try to re-live their lives and all that they missed.
Thanks for sharing! I remember thinking pre-kids mostly about how much work they would be but not really considering the joy they bring too. Like I knew they would, but vastly underestimated what effect that would have on my life.
I don't particularly regret any of my choices either, but knowing what I do now, would have chosen to have kids earlier in my life.
I find it funny that I spent my 20s and 30s doing everything in my power to avoid having kids and at this stage in my life I’m doing everything to have kids.
I do feel that 30 year old me would definitely be in better shape to chase kids around.
There’s never a right time to have kids. But having them older has its perks. You are much more calmed, patient, you are wiser and likely financially stable. Throwing money at problems definitely makes life 10X easier when you have kids, something most people can’t do in their 20s or even 30s.
I disagree. As a father of nine children, I submit that the best time to have children is when you’re young. The next best time is now.
Sure, you’ll be poor, and you’ll make lots of mistakes. But how do you know you’ll be able to have children later? And what’s so important now that makes it worth putting off children?
I don't know if you are joking, but being poor is something big for most people. Specially people who don't make as much as SWEs did in USA in the last decade
Yes. Had one kid mid thirties. And now I realize I want nine of them too. Or four maybe. We started too late and I doubt we will make it. Biggest mistake of my life. In my environment I see people delaying kids because they think 33, 34 is still alright to start. And it is. If you want to have 1 or 2...
We will go for the third one next year and that would be it for us. I come from a family of 8 children and my wife is a single child. I don’t think I had a better childhood, just different. She has a lot of good memories of traveling with her parents and does not regret not having siblings. I saw my dad a few days a week for a good portion of my early childhood and regret that a bit. My wife and I are equally social, I’m actually more of an introvert in some circumstances. We are both considered of others, and like to share. I would say the one skill I developed that she lacks is the ability to focus and concentrate in public spaces with noise. Because that’s how I did homework and studied all the way from elementary school to college, always around a bunch of loud people, no place in the house where I could close a door and be alone.
In my experience having room in the house, not having to cook dinner, not having to go grocery shopping, never have to clean the house, travel comfortably and have a full time nanny, makes a lot of a difference. You save a lot of time that you can then invest in yourself, your partner and your kids.
Not to discount that it’s great when you play with your kids, but it’s different when your kids play together, and in particular when you can’t play that they have someone to interact with.
Yeah, the group dynamics of, say, a family with two children:
1. Kid A plays with Kid B
2. Kid A plays alone and Kid B plays alone
As compared to a three-child household:
1. Kids A, B and C play together
2. Kid A plays with Kid B, Kid C plays alone
3. Kid A plays with Kid C, Kid B plays alone
4. Kid B plays with Kid C, Kid A plays alone
5. Kid A, Kid B and Kid C all play alone
So, in a bigger family, many more communication patterns between children can arise, which, among other things, might develop the child's empathy etc.
Adding mom and dad as "players" would give us many more possible scenarios here (Kid A playing with mom, Kid B alone or with dad, etc).
I'm a father of two with a low income, and I would like to have a third child for precisely the above described reason. As a sociologist in my country put it -- somewhat harsh words maybe, but probably largely true: a single child might get spoiled, two children may start competing too heavily, but three children and above is company.
There's very few humans that have enough time, energy, skills, wherewithal, and money to devote to 3+ kids to make these sorts of positive "three's company" interactions happen in the modern world. I am not saying that it's impossible, just that it's difficult and doesn't happen naturally like you're implying.
On a personal note, I never had much positive interactions with either of my siblings, certainly not as children as not now that we're in our 40s either. Lots of fighting, absolutely zero closeness or positive feelings.
I disagree, when looking at 3-kids setup out there in the world. Ie my wife comes from such, she is the oldest and all 3 follow the typical 3 kids pattern - oldest was pushed into most responsibility to the point of trauma, middle one feels unappreciated and has inferiority complex as middle ones often do, and youngest is by huge margin the most spoiled one. This is the default for 3 kids that many parents end up with, unless fighting hard against this natural direction.
And yes a lot of interaction, but it doesn't guarantee anything further down the line - when long time adults youngest is still spoiled and selfish and not really a pleasant person to be around with for anybody, including siblings and their own mom. Middle one is scared to have kids, a decision that she may end up regretting later easily. And my wife is also carrying her part of the burden, won't bother you with details.
The grass is always greener behind the fence and all that.
There are so many stereotypes involved in this that it may be hard to believe but at least I know I have caught myself repeating the stereotype almost to a T (especially with regard to the oldest being worked so hard or, as I would put it, constantly on the hardest jobs).
That said it does help that it’s a stereotype/generalization/trope that I’m aware of because I get to take that as part of my feedback loop to make the attempt to iterate around the negative aspects you’ve pointed out.
I think I’m doing better - I’ll know if my kids still talk to me after they move out.
Insightful comment, got me thinking, thanks for sharing. I suppose, in the end, there isn't all that much logic in human relations, or there are always far too many "unknown unknowns".
Not only do they play but they also learn to care for each other. Parental effort doesn't increase uniformly with each child – if you're lucky and have done a good job parenting them, children create a society and help with raising each other.
This is the take I pursue in my home, everyone is doing a see one, do one, teach one. There are still struggles around it but consistency makes the conversations shorter and more effective.
I'd offer a contrasting view, as a father of many fewer. If I'd had children young it would have been an utter disaster. It's difficult enough when you're financially and romantically stable and have more emotional maturity. To ask a contrasting question, what's so important about having children that you need to rush into it on the off chance you'll be unable to later?
im in the "wish i had em earlier" camp assuming the same partner.
i was not prepared for how much a kid would change me - so i spent more of my time and effort on priorities i would one day drop.
another thing i think about is grandparents. having kids earlier would mean longer time with grandparents! (heck, maybe one day my time with potential grandkids)
off topic - i understand my parents so much more now that im a parent. i think being a parent has helped heal my relationship with them. grandparents are awesome and i wish i had more time with mine.
100% on this. In my life I have 0 regrets except not having kids younger. I was never especially fond of kids, but it turns I out love my own more than I imagined possible, and have more fun with them I ever thought I would! I only wish we could have many more but given when we started, the odds of having more than 2 are very low. The amount of joy and life they bring to you and to your house is something you can't really appreciate until you've had them. To say nothing of the sort of fulfillment and life satisfaction they bring.
My parent's goal was to get me to go to college. My goal for my kids is to teach them the importance of having kids early. The fact it might help in having a grandkid or two before I kick the bucket is just a wee bit of icing on that cake. I think the ideal time to start is probably in your 20s. This also maximizes the amount of time you'll get to spend with your kids. I'm quite 'jealous' (sans the negative connotations) of those who will get to see their kids live til retirement, but hey - they made wiser decisions, so hopefully I can help encourage my children to do the same.
> I was never especially fond of kids, but it turns I out love my own more than I imagined possible, and have more fun with them I ever thought I would!
I for a change am happy I had my kids in late 30s / 40. I am certainly wiser, way more experienced with world, humans, got to be successful and in much better financial position which also helped my parents to have better retirement.
I wasn't a full adult in my 20s, too naive, too trusting, undefined for the lack of better words, not experienced with various types of women (laugh all you want, this was probably the most important experience from all for me, it afterwards formed my choice of wife which is often the most important choice in one's life).
Plus I've managed in a decade before having kids to travel the world backpacking, various experiences that changed me for the better and basically reinvented myself, on my own. I don't come from competitive or nurturing environment, nobody expected anything from me. I've found my passions in various mountain/extreme sports. None of that would happen if I had kids earlier, thats very clear when looking at peers who took the other trajectory.
If my kids will have their kids young or older is completely up to them, I find it selfish to push any expectations on them, they (will) live vastly different life compared to me, I can just respect their choices and love them regardless.
I think your example of e.g. being able to provide a better retirement harken back to what times were like in the past. My parents and theirs on back had children quite young. It gave me a life where I was able to know my great grandparents. I didn't really appreciate it, or anything, at the time - but I hold those memories dearly now, in hindsight. And it also created an environment where social security, so to speak, was never any concern - you have about 20 relatives who are mostly all working together to make a better life for themselves, and always there for each other. Everybody was dirt poor, but you would never know it from what we were able to have.
If people start having children in their 40s then statistically grandparents will simply no longer be a thing, let alone great grandparents. And people's family sizes will substantially decline. I think that's quite sad from all perspectives, and also significantly detrimental. For instance there is so much I want to pass onto my children about having children (and I'm sure much I've yet to learn myself) but none of it will really 'stick' until they themselves have children. If they wait until their 40s then I'll most likely be dead by then.
And what we do we get in exchange in this sort of world? Slightly greater liberty to pursue self indulgence? And I think "slightly" is correct because you're right that self indulgences do become more difficult with children, but far from impossible, and even less difficult with large families. Want to head off to the mountains on the weekend? Sure, that's what grandparents are for!
This. I’m an old dad. I realized two years ago that to keep up with my pre-teens I had to change my lifestyle. For me that meant cutting out alcohol, not eating processed foods, avoiding sugar, reduced caffeine, way more protein and doing calisthenics. I sleep well and I have energy. I just have to keep this up for 10 more years when my youngest will be 21, then I can die. ;-)
Same here in almost all ways, except the caffeine. What was the benefit there? My hot pots keep me going. Once my wife hits menopause I might also consider TRT. I'm almost certainly not low by the standards of the average American, let alone for my age, but it's gonna keep falling as I age and wouldn't mind that extra oomph.
Previously, when my head touched the pillow I was asleep. Two years ago I noticed that wasn’t happening and I would wake frequently through the night. I cut back my caffeine intake and my restored my sleep. Without knowing the physiological reason I assume my metabolism is slowing down and I had to alter my lifestyle to fit to it, hence my strict diet now. The calisthenics has been awesome for me. I love the progression moves to unlock skills and levelling up. Pushing weights just to stack more plates wasn’t motivation for me - cali is. It replaces my caffeine.
As for menopause, or more accurately, perimenopause, my wife has been in that for years. (She’s an old mom) She started HRT about 6 months ago and it has been amazing. She no longer wants to murder me or anyone else that irritates her.
Yip peri is also where we're at right now. Still trying and hoping for another kiddo. Glad to hear it can last for years at least there's a bit more chance.
> I do feel that 30 year old me would definitely be in better shape to chase kids around.
Can confirm that starting at 30 makes it relatively easy to keep up. Still not early enough though. Wish I’d started at 25.
It’s mostly a matter of effort though. You’ll become very good at it out of sheer need if you genuinely want to keep up. In far better shape now than I was at 30, mentally and physically.
My dad was 42 when I was born, and he was keeping up with me on hikes in my early 20s (his mid 60s). I haven't done much hiking with him lately, but he's going on 50 mile bike rides at 70.
I think having kids late can help people stay young longer, if you let it.
> Having grown up in a large family within a religious subculture full of other large families, the amount of time and attention children consume was crystal clear
Similar experience here growing up Mennonite (they’re sorta like the Amish but more moderate).
I’m one of the only remaining men in my family without kids, but those that do have kids (and there’s a lot of them) are super busy. This is at least partially offset by their wives who are more on the traditional side.
I got sort of lucky early in my career because I had a talent that was discovered in a national network. Which meant I found myself writing national strategies for IT in our public sector (Denmark) at my late 20ies. It felt great for a year, or maybe two. When it stopped being fun though, it sort of hit me hard. I did enjoy writing and working on the strategies with other people. All the "glamour" around it, advicing politicians, going to conferences, networking with all sorts of "important" people. That got to me on one of the many train rides I had to take. I know a 3 hour commute might not be a lot to Americans or people in larger countries in general, but here it's a life time. Eventually I didn't know why I was going on them, so I quit and went back to being a nerd in a basement. Having my first child was the kick I needed to push me to where I was already heading though. I would've likely ridden the career ladder for a lot longer if I hadn't become a dad.
I rarely speak about it but something about reading you accepting the failure of your ambitions made me want to do it. Are you sure it's a failure? For me family life turned out to be what I wanted and work is just a fun place which makes me money, but I totally get why people want to do it the opposite way. In some ways you could say that I did something significant, but it made me misserable. So I failed just as much as you, if not more.
I don't regret any of it either though. It's what made me who I am.
I'd also agree with this. Children don't make you give up your ambitions in the least. However they will almost certainly make you rethink what is important in life. It's not even conscious like an 'ok I give this up, in order to get that' but rather they just make you feel very differently, in a way that you can't really explain. But it's good, very good.
100% agree with this. But its not uniform for everybody, mothers generally change and throw away previous life after having kids in ways that most men don't. Some fathers are similar (and few mothers are similar to average guy) but difference is pretty big when you dig deeper.
That's mostly due to social pressures and expectations - women are expected/demanded/forced to perform most of the child care duties. Which is why when a man does child care (in the US at least), he is seen as "helping out", even if he is the full-time caretaker/househusband.
I don't find these sort of critical theory takes to make much practical sense. Most/all mammalian species are similar in this regard, and there are very practical reasons. For instance most don't seem to understand that early on breastfeeding is literally a 24 hour job. That forms a special bond between a mother and child that a father could never match.
Even the most involved father's role there is basically to give the mother some downtime and this will, in turn, shape how the child responds to parents. We often joke that daddy's for fun, mommy's for comfort - but it's not really a joke. Your children's earliest months will have food literally coming out of mommy while daddy is just there to keep you happy when mama's trying to get some elusive sleep. And that carries forward even as the child ages.
There are also other instinctual issues in play. For instance most mothers experience vivid and highly unpleasant nightmares involving just about every possible awful thing happening to their children. It's quite horrific, but likely an instinctual thing to help the mother be wary, form a deeper bond, and so on. I'm not sure the rate for fathers, but I never had anything like that - and so the bond formed is again, just very different than for a mother.
Finally, there's also the realistic timelines involved. Having a child takes about a year, and you want around a year between each child. For a sustainable society every single woman needs to have a bit more than 2 children. So that's like 5-6 years, at the minimum, solely dedicated to having your children. And then of course the show is just beginning at that point. The reality is that advancing a career in this context is simply not realistic, and trying to build societies that reject this isn't going to do anything but ensure those societies are unsustainable, which is exactly what has happened.
I think one of the reasons that a lot of successful founders are in their mid-40s is because they combine 20ish years of experience with an empty nest after kids are out on their own.
That just tells us the person wasn’t a good parent either. Your comment assumes the only way to parent is to manipulate, patronize, etc. That’s just one perspective though.
There are other ways to parent that are actually fantastic management training - figuring out how to think from another human’s POV, acknowledge their frustrations, help them build the skills to handle their feelings, etc.
It turns out great parenting is to a first degree about great relationship skills.
You can achieve that trivially with such young kids by simply leading by example, not having snacks and junkfood at home and so on. We eat a lot of healthy stuff, so our kids do. You are still their world and define many patterns they will follow later subconsciously.
That doesn't translate that much into say teens but it lays a solid foundation.
May I ask you what significant and meaningful thing you tried to do, and why you think you failed at it?
I've spent my 30s doing something similar and it's still unclear whether it will work out or not. And I've foregone essentially all else, including family.
and yet most nobel prize laureates seem to be family people. I found that adult responsibilities have a way of making me very very intentional about how i spend my time.
I always find it funny the genetics argument or the "I'm a dopamine addict!" just how they are framed with fairly modern scientific language.
Personally, legacy is but another grasping of the ego. It is meaningless and is most used as a justification to be selfish. I think kids are beyond that, it isn't something that is rationalized, it is just a means of life. And that is cool. I'm not pro or anti natalism, it all just seems to be a case of some people clinging to concepts and ideas just a little too strongly. But ultimately it has the same amount of meaning as a single ant that died a million years ago.
Meaning, when applied broadly like that is rather… meaningless. In “what is the meaning of life?” the word meaning in that sentence is completely nonsensical. That being said, most people would prefer the world to be shaped in a particular way and a large part of how the world is shaped comes down to normalized cultural and societal expectations. If you don’t voice your opinions on how you want the world to be shaped or agree to be silenced, then the world will probably not be shaped the way you want it to. I want the world to be shaped a particular way and every interaction I have including this minor comment thread is one step in that direction just like everyone else.
Within my world view, if you cannot create a genetic legacy, you have failed at a key aspect of life.
It's a biological drive, at least until you're past the age of fertility. Whether you consciously think about carrying on your genetic line, it's baked into the hardware.
It was interesting of you to make the remark considering it’d clearly be unpopular, but agree with others, don’t really care about my genetic legacy. Am going to be dead so it’s meaningless to me.
And actually, a non-genetic child might be nice, especially if you get one at the right age. You don’t have the intense burden of raising a baby or when they’re a young child, but still get to the joy of raising a child (as long as they like you, which is of course the biggest downside. Probably less of a tendency for them to attach strongly to you).
International adoption is actually extremely controversial and full of abuse. Many countries have straight up banned it and basically declared that the folks who want to adopt outside of their borders are by-in-large "creepy weirdos"
It’s funny. Normally saying that something is wrong because it got downvoted and flagged would be a fallacy. You’ve managed to make it a valid argument.
Years later, after I had to accept the failure of my ambitions, there was an opportunity to become the dad of a kid who needed one. So here I am being a dad after all, and it's been a good experience. Difficult, of course, and often frustrating, but worthwhile; I have no regrets - neither about this choice, nor the one I made when I was young.