Current Events > Is he suggesting women should basically be baby factories?

(+) Yeah! (+)

The bottom post is the one Im referring to, the top is just a bonus.

https://imgur.com/Y5sqm0d

---

? It seems like it's suggesting that families have more kids and larger families in general. You take that to mean they're suggesting women are baby factories? That's a big leap
---

emblem boy posted...

. You take that to mean they're suggesting women are baby factories? That's a big leap

---

emblem boy posted...

? It seems like it's suggesting that families have more kids and larger families in general. You take that to mean they're suggesting women are baby factories?

He doesnt believe in babysitters/daycare of any kind. With that in consideration,

Is there any circumstance where the mother wouldnt be a factory for 5 years, and then do nothing but raise them/be a housewife for the next 20.


---

This is just saying the benefits of having a big family when you become old.

Edit: it seems like you have an issue with this particular person (that you know in real life?) There is nothing wrong with this statement out of context.

---

the problem is that 4-5 kids is unaffordable nowadays for most people

fohstick posted...

the problem is that 4-5 kids is unaffordable nowadays for most people

And the world is overpopulated as is.

And anyone who thinks having lots of kids means you wont be left all alone in a care home has absolutely no fucking clue about how people are, and theyve sure as shit never been in a care home or known anyone who works in one.

---

lww99 posted...

emblem boy posted...

? It seems like it's suggesting that families have more kids and larger families in general. You take that to mean they're suggesting women are baby factories?

He doesnt believe in babysitters/daycare of any kind. With that in consideration,

Is there any circumstance where the mother wouldnt be a factory for 5 years, and then do nothing but raise them/be a housewife for the next 20.

Ah, ok. Lol at not believing in baby sitting.

Honestly, I'd think for that person, they just wouldn't equate it as the mom being a factory and the negative conatation that comes with that.

For a woman who wants to be a stay at home mom, I doubt she sees herself as a baby factory. She probably sees herself as well... A mother.

But ya, context and intent matters
---

That's why families are important - not just people who are related and live together.

With the mentality in America, for example that that you're supposed to move out at 18 and if you don't you've failed in some way, you could have a lot of relatives and still not really have a "family"

---

Ugh what a cavemen view

---

lww99 posted...

He doesnt believe in babysitters/daycare of any kind. With that in consideration,

Strong family structures is beneficial for everyone. Parents have more time on their hands and are less stressed in taking care of their kids as they can allocate responsibilities to their parents. Grandparents will live healthier and happier as opposed to being taken care of in a nursing home, and children will have more exposure and consequently gain more life experience through constant and consistent interactions with 2 generations of people in their homes. Most importantly, wealth is generated as a familial unit, in other words, you have a stronger chance of creating greater wealth with the support of your family than by yourself.

It is in your best interest to support and stick with your family. If you can support a large family, even better.

---

fohstick posted...

the problem is that 4-5 kids is unaffordable nowadays for most people

Maybe if you have them back to back every other year but over the course of 15-20 years though is another story. I grew up alongside 5 other siblings in low class, my mother had her first in her early 20s, and last by 40.

CanuckCowboy posted...

And the world is overpopulated as is.

Lol

---

fohstick posted...

the problem is that 4-5 kids is unaffordable nowadays for most people

was it ever?

Questionmarktarius posted...

was it ever?

If you are a celebrity with tens of millions or hundred of millions of dollars. But for a regular civilian no you cannot afford 4 or 5 kids. Elon Musk has 7 kids which is sickening, but he's worth 40 billion so they won't ever have to worry about being poor or hungry

Prismsblade posted...

Maybe if you have them back to back every other year but over the course of 15-20 years though is another story. I grew up alongside 5 other siblings in low class, my mother had her first in her early 20s, and last by 40.

Lol

Great post. Super well thought out.

Most experts figure longterm sustainability requires a population of at most 9 billion. Many experts peg that number much lower (ie 4-5 billion) meaning people who know about the shit either feel were already overpopulated or that well be there fairly damn quickly.

The earth couldnt support us very long if everyone and their dog knocked out 4 or 5 kids. Resources are finite.

Christ look at the cost in building materials 20 years ago vs today. Its skyrocketed exponentially. Meanwhile the quality of lumber is shit compared to even 20 years ago.

The earth cant sustain that level of procreation and we lack enough respurces to build 5 bedroom homes all over the place. Not too mention land for all these bug ass single family homes.

But again good post.

---

If everyone had 4-5 kids, there'd be even more need to bulldoze sublime nature and ensure consumption and fluorescent lighting.
---

philsov posted...

If everyone had 4-5 kids, there'd be even more need to bulldoze sublime nature and ensure consumption and fluorescent lighting.

And wed pretty much have to clear cut the earth for building materials. And pollution would fucking skyrocket.

If everyone out there had 4 to 5 kids the earth would be a barren shithole inside of 5 generations. And thats being generous.

---

CanuckCowboy posted...

Most experts figure longterm sustainability requires a population of at most 9 billion. Many experts peg that number much lower (ie 4-5 billion) meaning people who know about the s*** either feel were already overpopulated or that well be there fairly damn quickly.

Where are these signs of overpopulation at in the real world or maybe just the US? Plenty of space all around the country still. Or have you lived in the same packed city with inflated housing your entire life reading doomsday theories and environmentalist shit?

CanuckCowboy posted...

Christ look at the cost in building materials 20 years ago vs today. Its skyrocketed exponentially. Meanwhile the quality of lumber is s*** compared to even 20 years ago.

Interesting, did it have anything to do with the 2008 housing crash? And the inflated housing prices we've suffered since then? A pity we cant just build more on mass and ease up on housing restrictions but greedy folks and environmentalist will reeee.

CanuckCowboy posted...

The earth cant sustain that level of procreation and we lack enough respurces to build 5 bedroom homes all over the place. Not too mention land for all these bug ass single family homes.

No ones arguing it can, that's just your strawman.

---