> I simply cannot understand how anyone
> could think that childbearing and childrearing are
> selfish at any level.
I should clarify what I meant by "selfish". I'm not
talking about a mother sacrificing for her child (it's
what she SHOULD do, and, after all, it is perpetuating
her own alleles).
People who (choose to) have babies do so because they
want to, so they are serving their own self interest.
Similarly, people who don't (choose to) have babies
are also serving their own self interest.
So is there any difference? Maybe not much, but the
reproducers are creating more consumers simply because
they want the satisfaction of having children. This
could be considered a problem given our present
planetary predicament. Furthermore, "educated" people
who understand this are also a bit arrogant to think
that they should reproduce, while understanding that
overall reproduction needs to decline.
Then there's the tendency of quite a few reproducers
to assume that everybody else should cut them slack
(e.g. in the workplace) or consider their
child-rearing a noble sacrifice.
So, no, I don't accept that I am being preposterous.
Joe
> To be selfish is to be 1) concerned excessively or
> exclusively with =
> oneself : seeking or concentrating on one's own
> advantage, pleasure, or =
> well-being without regard for others; and 2: arising
> from concern with =
> one's own welfare or advantage in disregard of
> others*. The mother of a =
> child sacrifices her personal comfort, risks her
> life, changes her =
> social involvement, yields her will to her child,
> incurs additional and =
> substantial healthcare costs, and this all before
> she gives birth! You =
> may say it is selfish at a society level (how dare
> we have children to =
> compete for resources with other's?), but
> perpetuation of society =
> requires perpetuation of the species. You may say
> it is selfish at the =
> biosphere level; we should cease reproducing
> altogether, for the good of =
> all other lifeforms? No, self-preservation is not
> selfishness. =20
>
> Much more selfish than a mother is a woman who
> engages in sexual =
> activity for her pleasure alone (don't misread this
> please), desires her =
> comfort above anything else, maintains her social
> involvement for the =
> sake of her ego, leeches personal benefit from the
> societal structure =
> consequent from others having children, travels off
> to fur-flung exotica =
> because she has no children to cramp her style, etc.
> Not that we =
> shouldn't respect those who make those choices...the
> choices are just =
> more selfish.
>
> As long as we are pointing fingers preposterously,
> consider the elderly. =
> They have expendable income and have time to travel
> (expending fossil =
> fuel!). They are living longer than ever before
> (taking up precious =
> food and shelter resources). They are the primary
> beneficiaries of =
> Social Security. Yes, they contributed, but how
> selfish of them to not =
> donate it to the greater cause! They require more
> health intervention =
> and medication and increase the costs for the rest
> of us, and increase =
> the synthetic chemical load in our groundwater. And
> what benefit do =
> they give to the population? They are not necessary
> for any biological =
> population, other than fodder for the predators,
> allowing the young to =
> reach reproductive age. Geronticide is more
> sustainable than =
> spermicide. Like I said, preposterous!
>
> *Merriam-Webster
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
