More than 1 child………….selfish??

Depends whether you believe that the change in environment will be so quick and catastrophic as to wipe out the entire human race a la the dinosaurs.

Not really. 99.9% of all species that have ever lived are extinct.

Look around the world and you will species that are on the verge of extinction due to changes in their environments.
Over population is one common cause

It seems somewhat unlikely that the human species will fair better.

Society determines deviancy.
It just seems that you are deliberately misinterpreting my posts and taking them to ridiculous extremes.

well if society determines deviancy and a large part of that society believe in limiting population then how is that deviant?

And are repressed societys, like say the Victorian era Britain (blush at an uncovered ladies ankle), more deviant than less repressed ones, like say the Romans (regularly bugger young boys, kill people for amusement, have sex with animals)??

people change when they have offspring and it certainly isn't for the better, they become even more blinkered, self centered and ignorant of the world around them.

a gross generalisation – it can happen but need not

they think their children are wonderful but the reality is they are often little shites.

the kind of people who dislike their children tend to die out…

well if society determines deviancy and a large part of that society believe in limiting population then how is that deviant?

What large part of society? Are they a majority? Majority rules in a democratic society.

Deviancy is a subjective concept depending on the norms of the time.

Although it wasn't deviance that I was bringing to the debate, I was merely using it as an example of behaviour that results from repression of innate natural needs (in this case procreation).

@jackson pollock

"am basing my arguments on well established theory."

What theory? You did suggest that only having one or two children was repressing your urges, and that would lead to consequences similar to that of "priests"? I can only assume that you meant PEADOPHILIA!

I suppose if you meant something else you will let us know.

the kind of people who dislike their children tend to die out…

and the little shites prosper.

[/quote]What theory?

Behaviourist Theroy

You did suggest that only having one or two children was repressing your urges

Where?

"the kind of people who dislike their children tend to die out… "

?

Everybody, and their children die in the end. And their children's children. It's horrible. It doesn't matter if the parents like the children or not.

What large part of society? Are they a majority? Majority rules in a democratic society.

So if you don't agree with the majority then you are "deviant"??

That's a pretty broad definition of deviancy and democracy!

"You did suggest that only having one or two children was repressing your urges

Where? "

Do you remember your post suggesting that repressing what you call natural urges would lead to priestly behaviour?

That one.

"the kind of people who dislike their children tend to die out… "
Everybody, and their children die in the end. And their children's children. It's horrible. It doesn't matter if the parents like the children or not.

I mean it's not a genotypic survival trait, so parents are highly selected to favour their children

But why is death horrible beyond its immediate actuality – would you prefer everyone to hang around forever? Were it not for death and aging decrepitude, the accumulation of experience and ruthlessness would give the old unlimited wealth and power over the rest of us. The thought of death doesn't bother me apart from its temporary inconvenience.

This is going way off beam! Deviancy is contrary to social norms. Social norms are decided by the majority. It follows therefore that deviancy is against the norms of the majority. Deviancy is not necessarily 'bad' or crime merely a 'deviation' from social norms.

Not really relevant to the thread though, probably a little abstract on my behalf. 🙂

"But why is death horrible beyond its immediate actuality – would you prefer everyone to hang around forever?"

Sorry Simon, I was being sarcastic. The thought of death doesn't bother me either, apart from the pain felt by the multitudes when I move on.

Do you remember your post suggesting that repressing what you call natural urges would lead to priestly behaviour?

Generally as a species. It is you that has applied it to yourself. I've made no mention of amount of children. My point was reaction to some people on here who say that we shouldn't be allowed to 'breed' in order to save the world, as they see it.

Deviancy is not necessarily 'bad' or crime merely a 'deviation' from social norms

ahh but see you're changing tact now and going for the very broad definition of "deviancy" just being something outside the norm, but you suggested earlier that repressing "the need to procreate" caused deviancy, which is quite a different statement from simply saying that not procreating means you are in a minority.

Night all, don't think Im gonna be successful in the procreation stakes tonight. Repression won't wash with her neither! 😆

Sorry Simon, I was being sarcastic. The thought of death doesn't bother me either, apart from the pain felt by the multitudes when I move on.

Ooops, I didn't get that! I imagine a street party in my case 🙂

My point was reaction to some people on here who say that we shouldn't be allowed to 'breed' in order to save the world, as they see it.

well, pardon me for homocentricity, but I couldn't give a flying **** for the planet without us on it – how many billion planets are there in the galaxy ?

outside the norm, but you suggested earlier that repressing "the need to procreate" caused deviancy

It does cause deviation from the norm. Norm being the innate need for the species to procreate! Not changing tack at all. You're just picking holes in my wording.

No not you SFB, I'm agreeing with you!

No not you SFB, I'm agreeing with you!

yes I know – I was just using your remark to provide context 🙂

Oh 😳 😆

Yep, I have a strong natural urge to go to sleep…

I'll leave with a quote from some old nutter who knows a thing or two about nature:

"There are three times as many people in the world as when I started making television programmes only a mere 56 years ago.
…
The human population can no longer be allowed to grow in the same old uncontrolled way. If we do not take charge of our population size, then nature will do it for us and it is the poor people of the world who will suffer most.
…
I’ve never seen a problem that wouldn’t be easier to solve with fewer people, or harder, and ultimately impossible, with more. Population is reaching its optimum and the world cannot hold an infinite number of people"

— Sir David Attenborough, father of two and patron of The Optimum Population Trust[/URL]

Me
"Do you remember your post suggesting that repressing what you call natural urges would lead to priestly behaviour?"

Jackson pollock
"Generally as a species. It is you that has applied it to yourself"

Now you have suggested that repressing ones breeding urges may lead to "priestly behavior".

And now you are saying I'm applying that suggestion to myself…

So, which would you prefer, PEADOPHILE! rapist, or someone prepared to limit his inate urges to procreate in order to correspond with an understanding of the situation the human species may well be facing as regards global overpopulation?

There is another option, that of feckless breeding, but it generally only invites contempt here on STW when it involves poor people.

Go on, say sorry.

Apologise for what? – your ignorance… oh go on then, I'm sorry you're an ignorant konb!

Go on Jacko, say sorry. There's no need for insults.

The thing about curbing procreation is that we think other people should be doing it, but it's observable that in the rich countries, it has already dropped near or below replacement level – so instead of trying to get poorer people to not have so many children, it would make more sense to share the wealth and then they'd do it by choice 🙂

For what? Playful banter thats all 😉

"The thing about curbing procreation is that we think other people should be doing it, but it's observable that in the rich countries, it has already dropped near or below replacement level – so instead of trying to get poorer people to not have so many children, it would make more sense to share the wealth and then they'd do it by choice "

An approach to curbing global overpopulation suggested by..sodafarls on the previous page. Damn, that boy is good.

"For what? Playful banter thats all"

Apologise for your playful banter and tell me why you are sorry.

**** me, you guys take things so so seriously.
lighten up…………….. 😉

I am not reading the rest of the post's but on this guys basis I have twins so at birth I should have decided which one lives and which one will have to be smoked to save the planet. But smoking one will add to global warming as well to dispose of child which is not allowed to live. Perhaps said person should be smoked slowly which removes an annoying boil off the face of the planet.

**** me, you guys take things so so seriously.
lighten up……………..

says the bloke who said anyone not wanting kids was a "sad f*ck" who should kill themself?

..at birth I should have decided which one lives..

Hyperbole much?

Using up all the earths resorces = poor argument!

Does anyone really think there is any chance of saving the planet….its just a matter of time. I often wonder whether there is any point to all the recycling I do and attepts to reduce the energy I use 😥

Have as many children as you want, just make sure they're well looked after, loved and do your best to make them turn out decent human beings!

I often wonder whether there is any point to all the recycling I do and attepts to reduce the energy I use

well there definitely isn't if you decide to have 15 kids 🙄

amazing…

But smoking one will add to global warming as well to dispose of child which is not allowed to live. But smoking one will add to global warming as well to dispose of child which is not allowed to live.

Children are actually a large percentage fat, given a decent wick they'll burn nicely under their own steam, wasting very little in the way of non-renewable fuels…. 😆

3:25 onwards….

Good vid cofeeking!

Children are actually a large percentage fat, given a decent wick they'll burn nicely under their own steam, wasting very little in the way of non-renewable fuels…

Also, unless your wife had cravings for coal during pregnancy, babies are carbon neutral when burnt (perhaps ignoring any tertiary carbon spent during "extraction") 😉

😀 that whole series (of 8 ) vids is well worth the watching!

I've got 4 kids, I love them all to bits, and you know what? I dont give a fiddler's **** whether or not anybody thinks I'm being selfish!

Blimey is this still going?

People are selfish and care nothing for the planet. Thread closed.

Yoshimi – we don't have to "save the planet", it will take care of itself. What we're actually talking about is "saving" humankind (from itself largely!). Just another example of grandiose human thinking! 🙂

Lets all save the planet. And slowly wipe out the human race in the process. So why did we save the planet?