Child free communities and businesses what do you think?

[Unholyground]

I understand on some level the difficulty today of raising a child. Especially if both parents work and you must now depend on strangers to educated and basically raise your kids for you. It would be better if one parent could always be home and way more was done at home. Schools aren't parents. As both someone who was until giving birth a teacher and now a parent, I don't think schools should be the places to raise kids. Teachers aren't paid enough to be a surrogate mom or dad to 30+ kids, nor do teachers really have the right to raise these kids.

I think what we use the school for is WAY out of sync with what its purpose should be. School teachers aren't state funded moms and dads.

- - - Updated - - -



r/childfree was r/incels before r/incels was a thing. It was a fucking toxic place, topped only by r/incels in a total cringe-inducing awfulness.

I agree with you, and it is unfortunate that in most developed economies you cannot survive by yourself unless you have one hell of a job let alone a child on top of that. In a lot of ways for a lot of people having kids in modern times it is becoming more and more difficult to pull off even with two parents.

[Doctor Amadeus]

It will be glorious. Peanuts, peace and quiet for everyone!

The odd thing is when I asked one my co workers, who has little ones right now, she was saying she would be all for it. LOL! This was some while back, I asked her why, and she was pretty matter of fact about it, she loves her kids, but she for sure sees everyone else's as little monsters.

[Theodarzna]

I just mean child free communities wouldn't be off limits to children once they become adults was my only point. But I for sure understand your perspective on this, I am neither for or against it per say, I am ok with it, vs say some other kind of biological reality that isn't going to change, but it's very much an interesting trend as society begins to construct these kind of bubble communities.

I'm for actively discouraging antinatalists types but that is my personal conviction. If anything I'd say those whove had children should have their votes count for more than one single vote. XD

[unfilteredJW]

I'm a mother so I'll have to go with a no on that. Considering I've actually made something worthwhile I don't feel I should be restricted whereas the childless could choose to live in either that community or mine.

I'd only be cool with it if there were areas the childfree types could never go as well. Though I guess that unfairly punishes the homosexual community who biologically can't.

"Worthwhile"

We get it. You had a kid. The fact you hop around this forum showing this badge shows how empty an existence you lead.

[Doctor Amadeus]

I'm for actively discouraging antinatalists types but that is my personal conviction. If anything I'd say those whove had children should have their votes count for more than one single vote. XD

Sounds like a New Age type of thing like SJW, or Alt-Right. Anti this or Pro that, I mean I get certainly being a champion for one or the other say as an advocate. I am not exactly sure, I would view everyone who is anti something as particularly for something else.

At least not unless there is some traditionalism and association that warrants it. There could be lots of valid reasons to not like or want children around.

[Theodarzna]

I agree with you, and it is unfortunate that in most developed economies you cannot survive by yourself unless you have one hell of a job let alone a child on top of that. In a lot of ways for a lot of people having kids in modern times it is becoming more and more difficult to pull off even with two parents.

It's a tough trap. For women, we don't have all day to make babies. We have a time limit and the time to build the career necessary to really afford kids basically eats up the best years for making a kid. Men also no longer have stable enough employment to really be those providing work horses anymore. Though part of it is also peoples wealth and lifestyle expectations, very few uses extended family or lives near extended family. Many want a certain lifestyle and aren't willing to sacrifice. I'm lucky to have family (in-laws and blood relatives) to count on and considerably fortunate circumstances. But most people either don't have those or the culture has set people on an impossible path.

[Nihilist74]

I would rather have anti asshole communities and business's.

[Theodarzna]

Sounds like a New Age type of thing like SJW, or Alt-Right. Anti this or Pro that, I mean I get certainly being a champion for one or the other say as an advocate. I am not exactly sure, I would view everyone who is anti something as particularly for something else.

At least not unless there are some traditionalism and association that warrants it. There could be lots of valid reasons to not like or want children around.

I think the reason for it is literally children are the future of the country and those that have them have a very real stake in the future of the country whereas those without really don't care beyond their own horizons, or have no strong biological incentive to care.

[Medusa Cascade]

Child free flights too please

[Deleted]

Basically a community of bitter sourpusses

[Doctor Amadeus]

It's a tough trap. For women, we don't have all day to make babies. We have a time limit and the time to build the career necessary to really afford kids basically eats up the best years for making a kid. Men also no longer have stable enough employment to really be those providing work horses anymore. Though part of it is also peoples wealth and lifestyle expectations, very few uses extended family or lives near extended family. Many want a certain lifestyle and aren't willing to sacrifice. I'm lucky to have family (in-laws and blood relatives) to count on and considerably fortunate circumstances. But most people either don't have those or the culture has set people on an impossible path.

I would somewhat disagree with this.

I think in a traditionalist sense what you are saying is true, but not so much anymore, as we develop new medical science, women have been able to have children as old as I think what 50?

And as far as men are concerned, outside of this Alpha-Male Nonsense, the truth of the matter is the men that breed also have a pretty limited window. I mean just because you can have children, doesn't mean you'll want to. I always believed you have to have enough resources and a stable home to have children, I have that, but that doesn't mean there aren't extreme complications as an older adult.

The Truth is as most people I know especially couples who are away from one another for a length of time, constantly, forget cheating, it isn't uncommon for both to simply develop completely apart.

Things like sharing the covers, or stocking the pantry just the way you like it.

So ideally yes, in the traditional sense you are right, but we are hardly at that convention anymore.

[Unholyground]

It's a tough trap. For women, we don't have all day to make babies. We have a time limit and the time to build the career necessary to really afford kids basically eats up the best years for making a kid. Men also no longer have stable enough employment to really be those providing work horses anymore. Though part of it is also peoples wealth and lifestyle expectations, very few uses extended family or lives near extended family. Many want a certain lifestyle and aren't willing to sacrifice. I'm lucky to have family (in-laws and blood relatives) to count on and considerably fortunate circumstances. But most people either don't have those or the culture has set people on an impossible path.

Ya, social safety netting is almost non existent in families now which is also a big part of why things can be hard. For me I was lucky and was able to stay with my parents until I was 24 then I went right into a house I saved up for with my wife.

At a higher level I think a lot of the problem also exists with the lack of self sufficiency we have in our day to day lives, having to work full time to survive is a ridiculous and sad thing considering how much wealth there is to go around and that there are road blocks to even making our lives easier by eliminating costs like electricity which is easily doable in all countries and climates with wind or solar. Just simple things we took for granted now cost an arm an a leg.

[Deleted]

Sort of already exist in Florida, you just have to be 55+. :P



I'm childfree, but you lost me with no pets. No way I'm living out the rest of my days without my furry companions. Frankly, the vast majority of rentals don't allow pets as it is (or make it prohibitively expensive). If you want to live somewhere pet free that's very easy to do, not so much when it comes to children.

In England there's some mumers from Parliament of banning landlord's from banning pet's.

[Puri]

I see no big issue here, those businesses just fulfill a demand of the current society.

Even people having and loving children might want to go sometimes where they are not bothered by any children.

And if somehow you absolutely despise the idea you are still free to not go there. If enough people follow that example it's no business worth having, but if enough people want such places then it's just following their wishes.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Basically a community of bitter sourpusses

Or a community that know their limits, and or what they want and don't. Not everyone views children and sweet precious little angels, some view them as gross germ receptacles, who are needy, and always want something.

It's like when I asked the same Co-Worker about weight restrictions and dress codes for those going out into business's. I think the funniest experience I had was I had an older Truck that was a little dirty, it was parked outside the house of this girl I was dating, who lived in a very rich neighborhood.

Someone called and reported my truck to the police and my girlfriends homeowners associations because it was "dirty!"

[Theodarzna]

I would somewhat disagree with this.

I think in a traditionalist sense what you are saying is true, but not so much anymore, as we develop new medical science, women have been able to have children as old as I think what 50?

And as far as men are concerned, outside of this Alpha-Male Nonsense, the truth of the matter is the men that breed also have a pretty limited window. I mean just because you can have children, doesn't mean you'll want to. I always believed you have to have enough resources and a stable home to have children, I have that, but that doesn't mean there aren't extreme complications as an older adult.

The Truth is as most people I know especially couples who are away from one another for a length of time, constantly, forget cheating, it isn't uncommon for both to simply develop completely apart.

Things like sharing the covers, or stocking the pantry just the way you like it.

So ideally yes, in the traditional sense you are right, but we are hardly at that convention anymore.

Women have been able to, with expensive medical technology and the higher than normal risk of birth defects, have children past 50. But think about that. Say I have a kid at 50, I will be 68 at least before that kid is 18, and then who knows how old when that kid actually can strike out on their own. Raising kids is hard, and requires IMHO a youthful vitality that once you are pushing 50 and 60 you really just don't have.

Biologically men can get a woman pregnant from 12 to the freaking grave, without medical science and just a good diet. I don't have that option. I can, with radically expensive and risky technology push the window an extra 5 years to 50, but there is still a closing window.

As for traditionalism, yes, a lot of countries are different, but also those countries happen to have sub-replacement rate fertility which most of those governments are very worried about.

[Doctor Amadeus]

I see no big issue here, those businesses just fulfill a demand of the current society.

Even people having and loving children might want to go sometimes where they are not bothered by any children.

And if somehow you absolutely despise the idea you are still free to not go there. If enough people follow that example it's no business worth having, but if enough people want such places then it's just following their wishes.

Yep, that's the surprising bit, a lot of people developing these ideas, are very much people who have kids of their own.

[Theodarzna]

Ya, social safety netting is almost non-existent in families now which is also a big part of why things can be hard. For me I was lucky and was able to stay with my parents until I was 24 then I went right into a house I saved up for with my wife.

At a higher level I think a lot of the problem also exists with the lack of self-sufficiency we have in our day to day lives, having to work full time to survive is a ridiculous and sad thing considering how much wealth there is to go around and that there are road blocks to even making our lives easier by eliminating costs like electricity which is easily doable in all countries and climates with wind or solar. Just simple things we took for granted now cost an arm an a leg.

True. I'd even say Wealth/Income Inequality is letting to the empty cradles in many cases. I'd say Housing, Food, Electricity. All are ridiculous in most of the US.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Women have been able to, with expensive medical technology and the higher than normal risk of birth defects, have children past 50. But think about that. Say I have a kid at 50, I will be 68 at least before that kid is 18, and then who knows how old when that kid actually can strike out on their own. Raising kids is hard, and requires IMHO a youthful vitality that once you are pushing 50 and 60 you really just don't have.

Biologically men can get a woman pregnant from 12 to the freaking grave, without medical science and just a good diet. I don't have that option. I can, with radically expensive and risky technology push the window an extra 5 years to 50, but there is still a closing window.

As for traditionalism, yes, a lot of countries are different, but also those countries happen to have sub-replacement rate fertility which most of those governments are very worried about.

True, and what about reverse aging, or hormone treatments, you'll look at 70, what someone 50 years ago would look like at 40?

And with CISPR, birth defects of any kind might be a thing of the past too.


As far as men being able to have children, well there is a girl who gave birth at the age of 9, I believe was the philippines, so honestly a 12 year old boy is probably going to make as great of a parent as a 9 year old. Meaning just because you can doesn't mean you would.

Even as far as for traditionalism, like back in the 50's, not even that was as cut and dry, you might have kids, but you would do it when the time was right, keep in mind general over all societies ideas about marriage bordered along the line of two married people sleeping in separate beds.

Having children wasn't so much need or want, it was seen as an obligation for Women and Men, not every guy would, just because they could, which is why abortion rights became a thing.

[Unholyground]

True. I'd even say Wealth/Income Inequality is letting to the empty cradles in many cases. I'd say Housing, Food, Electricity. All are ridiculous in most of the US.

Even in Canada it is getting ridiculous more and more, not quite to that level yet. I for one am going to be growing veggies this summer by building long potters on my deck railings to reduce food costs in the summer, and I will have enough space to grow some to give a ton away to family and friends. I also plan on getting a home power solution in the next few years, those two things alone would net me thousands of extra dollars a year that I can put towards paying things off.