Fake videos show frustrated, unmarried, childless middle-aged women crying and venting in hospital hallways about their life choices.
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
Yeah… the difference is that one (sparrows) was just a bad idea due to a total misunderstanding of the problem. The sparrows weren’t the pests, the bugs they eat were.
The other (one child) is a good idea that was poorly managed due to unexpected cultural mores. Even so it would still be effective once people are “incentivized” to give up on the foolishness of prioritizing one sex over the other.
Well, you might not understand it, but you learned how to repeat it at least
We’ll call it a win I guess.
Well, you might not understand it
Pretty strong words considering what they were meaning to say with their original comment completely flew over your head
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.
Good thing the government, led by the vanguard and guided by the Immortal Science, wisely choose to implement a one child policy for so long.
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
You know my straight ass is spamming that button to prevent it from evolving into gayraga
me? gaygaga
Ultra Mega Gay Sex Pro Max FE Special Edition+
💦
Featuring Dante from the Devil May Cry™ series
I imagine that Xi probably doesn’t care all that much whether you’re having mega gay sex, but I expect that he is very interested in whether you are also employing that dingus in ways more-conducive to sustaining future state output.
deleted by creator
I don’t think that means what you think it means, but I won’t tell anyone… 🤫
(DA require someone to end themselves or their ability to carry on their bloodline though blatant stupidity of some fashion; merely not reproducing does not count)
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.
At the very least, if you’re trying to persuade to have kids, people who have chosen to not have kids, those people are not childless, they are child free. Their will is to be without child. They are not failing at having kids, they are succeeding at not having them.
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
I also always note how these discussions seem to utterly forget about the ability to raise kids communally, it’s perfectly possible to just want to raise kids part time, e.g. by having a friend or sibling’s kids over for the weekends so their parents get some time to themselves.
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.
Fight fire with fire. Time for the Chinese Kids to start spamming their parents with AI-gen’d videos of Men and Women regretting getting married.
Cheaper to just interview random couples.
Or old people crying that their kids don’t talk to them anymore because they were not kind to their kids.
What ghouls. Let people live the lives they want.
what if being shitty to their kids is how they want to live ?
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.
Nice to know the ungodly toxic, overbearing and boundryless parent is a universal phenomenon.
Why would anyone in their right mind bring a child into this chaos right now? Humans probably need a good ole fashioned hard reset. First we need to fix oil dependency and the climate. That’s a start.
Chinese Nationalists are probably feeling more powerful than ever before. Imagine MAGA but worse, because their supreme leader has been around for longer and their party has been around for lifetimes.
Humanity priced itself out of the market.
AI is a shit show.
Absolutely unhinged lol
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!
Worst than going to the hospital alone and spending old age alone is doing that after doing all the work of having kids. I will be alone and I’m taking care of that but I know people relying on children that don’t give a fuck about them.
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?
At least then they put some effort into it
Or Photoshop.
china’s long history of controlling their
citizens’prisoners’ reproduction
