Anyone NOT want to get married and have kids?

[Batya33]

Yes but that's there right to view it as that - even if we don't agree with it.

 

Once again I wasn't talking about rights although you continue to -which to me has nothing to do with what I wrote. Of course it's her right - once again, we agree that it is her right -my suggestion to her is to make sure she's not making some sort of generalized presumption to avoid what the real basis for her decision is -because if she is generalizing about all husbands and kids being baggage she's probably not going to feel good about her decision in the future especially if she indirectly experiences that it doesn't need to be that way.

[OptomisticGirl]

Once again I wasn't talking about rights although you continue to -which to me has nothing to do with what I wrote. Of course it's her right - once again, we agree that it is her right -my suggestion to her is to make sure she's not making some sort of generalized presumption to avoid what the real basis for her decision is -because if she is generalizing about all husbands and kids being baggage she's probably not going to feel good about her decision in the future especially if she indirectly experiences that it doesn't need to be that way.

 

yes but your implying that in the future she will change her mind or will 'regret' this decision. You're placing how she will react based on how YOU feel about the subject of marriage/kids. To you having this mindset will one day cause to regret it because you hold marriage/kids of high value and not baggage. It doesn't matter how she views it or in one generalized term she views it - I'd actually be MORE concerned if one day she woke up and was like, 'oh my God! I want a baby!" I don't buy into the whole you just wake up one day and want kids. It either has to a) be a life long thing or b) a gradual wakening to the subject.

[Fudgie]

I honestly don't see anything wrong with it. I see all kids as "baggage" regardless of what the kid is like. Am I generalizing? Probably. In the dating world, I also see kids as "baggage" if they are under the age of 25 so I don't date a guy with kids. Again, I'm generalizing.

 

Just my opinion, but I think you're more hurt about what she said rather than the fact that this "may not be good for her."

[Fudgie]

yes but your implying that in the future she will change her mind or will 'regret' this decision. You're placing how she will react based on how YOU feel about the subject of marriage/kids. To you having this mindset will one day cause to regret it because you hold marriage/kids of high value and not baggage. It doesn't matter how she views it or in one generalized term she views it - I'd actually be MORE concerned if one day she woke up and was like, 'oh my God! I want a baby!" I don't buy into the whole you just wake up one day and want kids. It either has to a) be a life long thing or b) a gradual wakening to the subject.

 

This is very true.

 

Generalizing or not, I don't see people regret not having kids if they have been that way for most of their life. They just aren't in the cards.

On the flipside, I've seen people regret having kids but that was because they had them for the wrong reasons "it's what everyone else is doing". But you'll never hear them admit it.

[OptomisticGirl]

This is very true.

 

Generalizing or not, I don't see people regret not having kids if they have been that way for most of their life. They just aren't in the cards.

On the flipside, I've seen people regret having kids but that was because they had them for the wrong reasons "it's what everyone else is doing". But you'll never hear them admit it.

 

And the same goes for getting married. No one regrets getting married if they get married for the right reasons - but to get married only because you are pregnant and no other bases - yeah, most people that do that regret it.

[Fudgie]

Yeah I agree. Not good reasons at all.

[Batya33]

I honestly don't see anything wrong with it. I see all kids as "baggage" regardless of what the kid is like. Am I generalizing? Probably. In the dating world, I also see kids as "baggage" if they are under the age of 25 so I don't date a guy with kids. Again, I'm generalizing.

 

Just my opinion, but I think you're more hurt about what she said rather than the fact that this "may not be good for her."

 

No- I only care because it raises a flag for me as to what really might be going on here. I look forward to her continued sharing of her opinions and views! I don't feel defensive at all about my decisions and getting married and having a baby underscored for me even more -I always was like this-that it is certainly not for everyone -both or either one. We can agree to disagree as to whether a child should be referred to as baggage in general.

[Fudgie]

To some people, yeah, they will refer to a child as baggage in general.

 

In my mind/world, a child is baggage. When I date, I see guys with children as guys who have baggage. That's it for me.

 

It's fine if other people don't see them as I do, but in my life as it pertains to me, yes, it's baggage.

 

By saying that someone can't refer to something as baggage because it makes people upset sort of stifles their free speech, IMO.

 

One could argue that people shouldn't refer to children as the "GREATEST GIFTS FROM GOD" in general because that's not true for everyone (either those who don't have children or who aren't religious) and therefore, people would find it offensive.

[rocio]

I kind of do see kids as baggage. I mean, being a parent ties down your finances, your free time, your flexibility in making choices for yourself. Anything that does that sounds like baggage to me. Baggage can be roughly equated to obligations.

 

Then by your definition, almost anything in life worth doing is baggage.

 

A university degree would be baggage. Home ownership would be baggage. Religion and faith would be baggage.

 

Tell me anything in life that's wouldn't affect your finances, your free time and your flexibity.

 

Some people don't want children. That's fine. But I do find it disrespectful to refer to other humans as baggage. They're people, not warts.

[OptomisticGirl]

Yes but if you don't like kids then you don't like them. They are baggage then. They can refer to them however they want. If they were to refer to a specific person's child as baggage that is over stepping a line, most def.. but unless it's specifically aimed at someone, it's only their viewpoint.

[Fudgie]

Yes but if you don't like kids then you don't like them. They are baggage then. They can refer to them however they want. If they were to refer to a specific person's child as baggage that is over stepping a line, most def.. but unless it's specifically aimed at someone, it's only their viewpoint.

 

Yes Yes Yes Yes. Thank you OG.

[90_hour_sleep]

honestly...this thread is like a broken record. the intent of the word baggage is speculative, any way you look at it. the question to me is why one would feel so threatened by the use of a word. if you are truly secure in the choice you have made in your own life...surely there is no need to rigorously defend your point of view.

[rocio]

Sure, people are free to say what they like, and I'm free to find it disrespectful and disturbing.

[Fudgie]

And that's fine.

 

As long as I'm not getting beat down about "how come you don't love CHILDREN" and "how can you THINK That?" then I don't care.

 

You don't hear me badgering anyone. it's hard enough being in the minority.

[shes2smart]

honestly...this thread is like a broken record. the intent of the word baggage is speculative, any way you look at it. the question to me is why one would feel so threatened by the use of a word. if you are truly secure in the choice you have made in your own life...surely there is no need to rigorously defend your point of view.

 

I have yet to see the word "baggage" being used to describe (sincerely...not sarcastically) something in a positive way. Unless you're working in the airline industry and/or talking about actual baggage - suitcases and the like.

 

It's very much like the use of the word "issues"....which is sanitized-speak for "wow, that person/situation has problems/is kinda f'd up."

 

For the record - yeah, I think kids are "baggage." Because I think the little knee biters are more trouble than they're worth, I was always extra careful to make sure I never had any. IMO, if you think kids are "baggage" there isn't a damn thing wrong with that, but if you think that way, you should probably take note and not have any....both you and any (potential) progeny will probably be better off in the long run.

[Batya33]

Agree with this - what I found more concerning was her reference to husbands as "baggage" - and I'd like to know if she meant that speciifcally the way it would feel in her life or whether she has a negative view generally of "husbands" - that's what informs my opinion.

 

I agree that people are entitled to view kids generally as baggage (with the negative connotation of the term) but I don't think all people who don't want children view kids that way.

[Lonewing]

It isn't about prolonging "The Species."

 

It is about prolonging your Ant Hill.

 

Having children is your way of ensuring that your Ant Hill remains a culture and a way of life for people to enjoy. Without youth, cultures die out.

 

If the other Ant Hill could take 10% of it's population and make an army, and that army would be bigger than every ant in your anthill, or if they could take 10% of their ants and send them to the science and engineering programs throughout the world and have more scientists and engineers than your anthill has ants, which anthill will win the next great race to cure diseases, control patents, develop emerging cultures, or preserve past history? What anthill will be able to stand up to them if they decide freedom like we enjoy it here is not a "valid" way of life?

 

It's harder now since we no longer have anything to struggle against - Nations, communities, families are stronger when there's reason and purpose to exist - in the western world, we've sort of lost this. We reached the top - and now, well, what do we do now?

 

This is why people get upset when you tell them you have decided not to propagate. In short, you are ensuring your local colture, thought, wisdom, etc will not pass on directly to another person, but rather, become lost once you've passed out of relevance. I ahte to say this, but after so much time, we all pass out of relevance except within our little sphere of influence, within the lives of those people who look up to us - and when we are older, those people who give us relevance are our families - as created by our children and children's children.

 

If any of this makes sense...

[Batya33]

I would be very upset if someone decided to have children for the reasons you cited but didn't really want children or want to care for children - that's certainly not in the best interests of the child (or the family/marriage) and certainly not a way to enhance the health of our culture. I would also think those women are less likely to take good care of themselves during pregnancy - not that they would want to hurt the baby just not at the level of care for someone who really wants the child (but that's speculation on my part!).

[Tezza]

Oh wow. I come back to this thread and there is a debate on my use of the word "baggage". I was really inferring to it in the sense that being married with kids would restrict my lifestyle and career. I mean I love kids but I don't think they are a number one priority for me, nor is getting married. I am more than happy to cruise through life and focus on travelling and my career without the restriction "baggage" of a husband and kids. I love that I do not have to consult with anyone in regards to my life decisions or think about the needs of another person. I feel that there would be a loss of that freedom if I were to get married and have kids.

 

Seriously though, if later on I really wanted to look after and care for something or someone, I will get myself a dog. Lol.

[Batya33]

Yes -if to you sharing life's decisions or caring for someone else seems restrictive - or at least the positives don't outweigh the negatives in your lifestyle I totally agree you should not commit to someone else - and to do so would be unfair to the other person/child.

[OptomisticGirl]

Animals can be just like children - only, not as MUCH attention as a baby. I tell everyone I have a 3 year old - my cat is 3 - and he really is like a child.

[rocio]

I know several young couples who weren't ready for the commitment of having a child so they got a dog instead. It seems that the dog is even more restrictive than a child! They can't travel because it's too much trouble to find someone to watch the dog, they make comments like, "I can't afford expensive clothes like you, I have a beagle", when I ask what they did on the weekend it always revolves around the dog.

 

That's cool because I know a dog can almost feel like a family member and they give you peace and love. But in the end, the dog isn't going to care for and protect you when you're old. A dog isn't going to give you grandchildren. A dog isn't going to comfort you when you lose your spouse, have you over for Christmas dinners, make you proud when they graduate from med school...

 

Sure, kids are a lot of work for a few short years when they're small, but a decade passes by before you know it, and then you reap the benefits of raising your kids properly for the rest of your life. I think a lot of people fail to realise how short of a time you actually have to be tied down by your children, and the ways in which they can benefit and protect you for much longer.

[OptomisticGirl]

I know a lot of couples who wanted children but at the time couldn't afford them got a kitten or puppy to pass that time from no children to children, especially if the mom was like me and baby crazy.

[Fudgie]

Kids are not insurance policies. The vast majority of people end up in homes. This is coming from someone who works with the elderly. Everyone in the home has kids...EVERYONE.

 

If you're going to have them, do so because you simply want to, not because you'll have someone to care for you later in life, because it's not going to happen.

 

It's a sad fact but I can guarantee most of all of you (including myself) will be in a home someday...kids or not.

[OptomisticGirl]

Kids are not insurance policies. The vast majority of people end up in homes. This is coming from someone who works with the elderly. Everyone in the home has kids...EVERYONE.

 

If you're going to have them, do so because you simply want to, not because you'll have someone to care for you later in life, because it's not going to happen.

 

It's a sad fact but I can guarantee most of all of you (including myself) will be in a home someday...kids or not.

 

I told L he better never put me in a home for me to flash my old boobs at some unsuspecting person.