as one of the *last* people that I knew when I was 14-30 that remains without children, as I spend time with and around children, there's another side to the story. I won't try to argue that it's logical, or rational, or that it's anything other than selfish. It's primal, but it's there.
Just because it's there inside you does not mean it's there inside everyone. I think this is what most people came here to say.
I think when we realise something about ourselves, there is a tendency to assume what we've discovered is a universal truth. For instance, when I realised I was bisexual, it seemed obvious and logical to me that everyone should have the innate capability to find people of all genders attractive and enjoy sex no matter what equipment their partner had. That seemed so self-evident... but it's wrong. As is the assumption that, because you discovered, to your surprise, a primal desire for kids, that means everyone has one.
As a self-described "farm boy" your friends cohort is quite different from my urban group of friends. My friends mostly live in homes that have no room for children, and can't afford to buy larger ones. Perhaps child-free people are more likely to enjoy urban life and move to large cities.
As for "social pressures", tell me, do binobos have "social pressures"? Rats? Sheep? And yet *all* of them reproduce, almost without exception.
THAT'S BECAUSE THEIR BRAINS AREN'T DEVELOPED ENOUGH TO DEVISE BIRTH CONTROL. DUH. From the point in time when humans realised sex was tied to reproduction, humans have been taking steps to try to keep the sex but eliminate the reproduction.
Maybe there's a shorthand in the biology, that, rather than the urge to have children, the invisible hand of Darwin substituted making sex REALLY pleasurable.
Yes. See several comments ago about why women evolved to be orgasmic. If sex weren't enjoyable, why would we let men do something to us that would potentially result in a baby?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2015-06-22 10:22 am (UTC)Just because it's there inside you does not mean it's there inside everyone. I think this is what most people came here to say.
I think when we realise something about ourselves, there is a tendency to assume what we've discovered is a universal truth. For instance, when I realised I was bisexual, it seemed obvious and logical to me that everyone should have the innate capability to find people of all genders attractive and enjoy sex no matter what equipment their partner had. That seemed so self-evident... but it's wrong. As is the assumption that, because you discovered, to your surprise, a primal desire for kids, that means everyone has one.
As a self-described "farm boy" your friends cohort is quite different from my urban group of friends. My friends mostly live in homes that have no room for children, and can't afford to buy larger ones. Perhaps child-free people are more likely to enjoy urban life and move to large cities.
As for "social pressures", tell me, do binobos have "social pressures"? Rats? Sheep? And yet *all* of them reproduce, almost without exception.
THAT'S BECAUSE THEIR BRAINS AREN'T DEVELOPED ENOUGH TO DEVISE BIRTH CONTROL. DUH.
From the point in time when humans realised sex was tied to reproduction, humans have been taking steps to try to keep the sex but eliminate the reproduction.
Maybe there's a shorthand in the biology, that, rather than the urge to have children, the invisible hand of Darwin substituted making sex REALLY pleasurable.
Yes. See several comments ago about why women evolved to be orgasmic. If sex weren't enjoyable, why would we let men do something to us that would potentially result in a baby?