- Joined
- Feb 2, 2023
As a great man once stated,
But why? Why did Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of the nation of Japan, demand that the Japanese people commence the act of copulation on a more common basis?
Well, as we all know, Japan is going to fucking die in the next hundred years.
It's got a population pyramid that looks like this
and a record-low birthrate that's lending to such a stat quite heavily*.
*worth noting that this birthrate is actually increasing at the moment and is currently the highest in all of developed East Asia.
Not only that- Japan is not alone. Across civilized society, birthrates are plummeting and childbirth decreasing as more and more nations stray away from a surplus of sex. South Korea, most of Europe, America from Canada to Mexico- almost all these countries have replacement rates in the negative, and even countries like China and India- some of the most populated in the world- go lower and lower each year!
-
Despite this, there is a counterargument to such a statement- one that states such a progression is not only natural and welcome, but actively good for the environment and a blessing in disguise.
This counterargument is known as anti-natalism: a position that states having children is not only a disservice to the children, but a disservice to Earth itself by way of harming its environment through aggregate consumption and excess waste. To be an anti-natalist often means to give up childbirth yourself and disapprove of those who do not.
The core of this position centers around the idea that human beings- especially those living in capitalist countries- would harm the planet by continuing to exist and expand in perpetuity-- forever. Many argue that 8 billion people is too many, and that the world would be better off with fewer of them. Not only the world, but the children they gave up on having.
They argue that, by not being born, these children have been spared of suffering a cruel world in which we may face total collapse or environmental breakdown due to our species not having enough resources to feed its expansive numbers.
There are different variations on anti-natalism- some as extreme as Kaczynski's creed (those who advocate for Total Human Death) and some as moderate as people simply choosing not to have children due to concerns about the planet's/their future- and I am not very well-versed in any of them, so I'll leave this brief summary there.
-
Instead, I shall question how the fuck this thread doesn't exist yet. Anti-natalism has shot up in popularity as of late and I'm genuinely surprised that boost didn't come with its own dedicated screeching quarantine. Maybe it's just not as prevalent as politics? Or someone else just didn't bother to make it?
Regardless, now it exists. You can fight people over whether you should have kids or not here. Hopefully my write-up isn't too biased in one direction or another- I try not to touch this topic with a 7-foot-pole, but my position on the matter is pretty staunch regardless so I hope that didn't bleed into any information.
Anyways, yeah. Let the tantrums commence.
Sorry if this isn't the right place for this thread, I'm not entirely sure how the board works. Feel free to move it if necessary.
But why? Why did Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of the nation of Japan, demand that the Japanese people commence the act of copulation on a more common basis?
Well, as we all know, Japan is going to fucking die in the next hundred years.
It's got a population pyramid that looks like this
and a record-low birthrate that's lending to such a stat quite heavily*.
*worth noting that this birthrate is actually increasing at the moment and is currently the highest in all of developed East Asia.
Not only that- Japan is not alone. Across civilized society, birthrates are plummeting and childbirth decreasing as more and more nations stray away from a surplus of sex. South Korea, most of Europe, America from Canada to Mexico- almost all these countries have replacement rates in the negative, and even countries like China and India- some of the most populated in the world- go lower and lower each year!
-
Despite this, there is a counterargument to such a statement- one that states such a progression is not only natural and welcome, but actively good for the environment and a blessing in disguise.
This counterargument is known as anti-natalism: a position that states having children is not only a disservice to the children, but a disservice to Earth itself by way of harming its environment through aggregate consumption and excess waste. To be an anti-natalist often means to give up childbirth yourself and disapprove of those who do not.
The core of this position centers around the idea that human beings- especially those living in capitalist countries- would harm the planet by continuing to exist and expand in perpetuity-- forever. Many argue that 8 billion people is too many, and that the world would be better off with fewer of them. Not only the world, but the children they gave up on having.
They argue that, by not being born, these children have been spared of suffering a cruel world in which we may face total collapse or environmental breakdown due to our species not having enough resources to feed its expansive numbers.
There are different variations on anti-natalism- some as extreme as Kaczynski's creed (those who advocate for Total Human Death) and some as moderate as people simply choosing not to have children due to concerns about the planet's/their future- and I am not very well-versed in any of them, so I'll leave this brief summary there.
-
Instead, I shall question how the fuck this thread doesn't exist yet. Anti-natalism has shot up in popularity as of late and I'm genuinely surprised that boost didn't come with its own dedicated screeching quarantine. Maybe it's just not as prevalent as politics? Or someone else just didn't bother to make it?
Regardless, now it exists. You can fight people over whether you should have kids or not here. Hopefully my write-up isn't too biased in one direction or another- I try not to touch this topic with a 7-foot-pole, but my position on the matter is pretty staunch regardless so I hope that didn't bleed into any information.
Anyways, yeah. Let the tantrums commence.
Sorry if this isn't the right place for this thread, I'm not entirely sure how the board works. Feel free to move it if necessary.
