Fake videos show frustrated, unmarried, childless middle-aged women crying and venting in hospital hallways about their life choices.
Absolutely unhinged lol
What ghouls. Let people live the lives they want.
Maybe work on fixing that 16% youth unemployment rate, think that’ll work a lot better then showing them slop
no improve living conditions, only birth!
Seems more likely to cause some suicides.
Humanity priced itself out of the market.
Nice to know the ungodly toxic, overbearing and boundryless parent is a universal phenomenon.
Childless, child free.This is such an important distinction, tbh
They’re each trying to put their own spin on it, there is no actual distinction in the words, just in the subtext/implication.
The former implies it’s a lacking of a necessary thing, the latter implies it’s the avoidance of an unnecessary burden. It’s completely subjective whether a child is one or the other to someone.
It’s a broadcast of one’s own biases to consider either of these terms more ‘valid’ than the other.
I am dubious of your intermediate and final claims. For something to be necessary, it means that one cannot go without it. Is procreation a biological imperative, with strong positive reinforcement from the individual’s biological feedbacks? Sure. But is it necessary? Strictly, no.
I don’t think you can make the claim that someone saying it is not necessary is inherently biased. To claim that procreation is not strictly necessary is a neutral, objectively true position. The bias in the perspective of “child-free” is the implied framing of the lack of procreation as a personal or moral good. Procreation is, again, unnecessary, and is (in many ways literally) a burden. Whether one frames that unnecessary burden as positive or negative is at issue here.
I don’t appreciate the claim that people must be biased in order to observe simple facts, denuded of emotion.
It’s a broadcast of one’s own biases to consider either of these terms more ‘valid’ than the other.
You seem to misunderstand. No one is saying one term is more valid than the other. They are different words meant to describe different people.
A person that doesn’t want children, and doesn’t have any, is considered childfree.
A person that wants children, but doesn’t have any, is considered childless.
Since these parents are trying to convince their children to have kids, said children are clearly childfree, not childless. A childless person that wants children wouldn’t need convincing
Why pay though?
Why do people pay for anything? So they don’t have to make it themselves.
It’s AI generated, it takes two seconds
Most people don’t realize how easy it is. Then it’s also hardware intensive to do locally. So, they end up going to some service online that does it and they charge.
Hopefully this is about as effective as the war on drugs, because the world needs less children.
I would lose so much respect for my parents if they used an AI generated video to try and convince me of something.
Would you respect your parents more of they paid actors and a cameraman to create the video instead?
Or Photoshop.
At least then they put some effort into it
Parents (not being able to tell the videos are AI-generated): “See this? This will be you in 30 years if you don’t get married and have kids very soon!”
Kids (able to see the videos are visit AI-generated): “Suuuuure!”
The fact that it’s AI generated tells the kids that it doesn’t happen in real life.
Shaming people into having kids works so well
They rush to have children who are then cherished and not resented
/s
The one child policy really gonna be up there with killing all the sparrows long term…
It was in place 45 years and only gone a decade.
You can’t just flip a cultural switch and expect them to become bunnies overnight. And that’s not even getting into the economic part.
Kids are fucking expensive.
When workers aren’t paid well, people stop having kids. That shrinks labor supply in a generation, workers can command enough pay to have kids, and population will stabilize.
The wealthy hate populations dropping, because they have the luxury to plan ahead and know eventually it leads to more powerful workers.
It’s why it’s a constant boogeyman and reproduction has been prioritized thru virtually all of recorded human history.
The one child policy really gonna be up there with killing all the sparrows long term…
Except that killing the sparrows was a bad idea.
Getting rid of pests was the problem, and it was a real one…
Killing all the sparrows was a legitimate attempt to help that backfired.
Overpopulation was and still is a problem.
One child would have theoretically been managed, but ignored how people act individually and the desire to have a son. An honest and legitimate attempt to mitigate a real problem backfired.
I feel it’s an apt comparison, even if I didn’t explain enough at first
overpopulation is not a problem, that’s a fascist talking point
We have an abundance of space and resources, they just have to be distributed equally.
My parents and extended family: “why don’t you find a nice girl to [blah blah blah]”
Me: “haha yes I’ll get right on that”
Me: having mega gay sex in addition to actively not wanting children, even if I was medically a good candidate to father them
Parents/extended: “I just don’t understand”
Me: upgrades to ultra mega gay sex
Out of curiosity, what is the second level upgrade or evolution?
asking for a friend
it goes gay, gayra, gayraga, gayraja
me? gaygaga
