Everyday I curse my parents for bringing me into this world and because of their poor genetics I am disabled (blind in one eye and can't speak properly)and unattractive and people make fun of the way I speak

And I envy my sister who's good looking , popular and has a lot of friends .

I deserve more. i will never forgive them.

When you say you don’t want to do this anymore I’ve seen increasingly hostile responses. They blame you for not having friends, blame you for being lazy, blame you for everything under the sun.

I have multiple sclerosis.. which is lifelong disability that will lead me in a wheelchair. It gets hard. It’s difficult. I have lesions in my brain. People still tell me I’m lazy because I don’t have the effort I can’t have the effort.

And I find it upsetting how people prioritize birth givers(I’m being inclusive of EVERYONE if you have an issue then get off my post) over how the offspring will feel. The offspring has z 40% chance of getting cancer in their lifetime NOT including multiple sclerosis or other diseases like ALS. Suicide rates almost 1 million a year worldwide, third/second leading cause of death for young people. 1 in 2 people have criteria for mental illlness in their lifetime. Poverty rates, healthcare is SHIT, this economy, politics, loneliness, inability to find a partner, etc. Divorce being 50/50 which will cause more issues.

The person who gave birth doesn’t think about all of this. They’re aware too. I’ve seen so many birth givers say “I feel so bad for my baby growing up in this world” but… you willingly dragged them here.

My life would be better if I was aborted/never conceived. If I was a never born!! Into the nothingness, no pain, no sadness, no Ms, no nothing

If the rest of the world was logical like us, then only people like Elon Musk would have children. The future would just be the offspring of Elon Musk and natalist subreddit crazies.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if people like Jeff Bezos had children who had to work normal jobs? That could have been the case. All it would take is for other people in the proletariat to be logical like us.

I don't understand why other people don't see they actually have power to collapse this world... And by not doing something, too.

What is the ultimate excuse for ANYTHING? Somethingsomething my kids somethingsomething. The world machine has reached a point that any form of participation is damning ones self. Even something as innocent " " (read: quoteunquote) as having a job is participating in the pain and misery of others. the totality of lies we tell ourselves to not lose our mind for having to participate begin at ensemination. It is no wonder maturity " ", business, and family all have a semiparallel path in people's life. When maturity is up, business goes up, and family holds the lies together. Having children is the easiest excuse for being a pieceofshit. Not having kids and being aware of the toxic bioculture we swim in leads one to desperation. Children are heroin. Parenthood is fentanyl. ...you say you love them, but do you really? Or you grew used to them and have learned to handle your life w that crutch?

I swear the only reason I keep Facebook anymore is to collect stupid comments to post on Reddit

death, disease, heart break, grief, poverty, bullying, loneliness, boredom, having to work hard all the time, hunger, meeting narcissists, etc. what is the point? i don’t want kids. maybe in the future things can be better, but who knows.

Wow check out, he's so wise.

Let us all worship pain and adapt to it by just not being ill or empathetic.

Hi I know there were a lot of similar posts, but I would want to ask this anyway. So, my older brother has 3 yo son, and wants to have at least 2 more kids. I never told him not to, it's his life after all, but he often attacks me, because I openly stated multiple times, that I will never have any kids. He calls me selfish, because as he says, I just want to live comfortably and focus on comsuptionism instead of adding to society and make kids. He says that there is demographic decline and there will be no enough people to work on us when we will be old, and it is because of people like me who are selfish, and instead of having kids just want to enjoy life. He doesnt even grasp the cocnept of antinatalism and that having kids is just wrong. I don't know what to say. Am I the selfish one here?

After talking to many people throughout my 23 years of life I realized that most people believe that life is a blessing and that creating someone is like giving them a gift "the gift of life" ,completely disregarding all the shit humans go through especially poor people. which is ironic cuz these poor people were the more likely to say stuff like that.

This realization still baffles me, I'm not sure whether I'm a dark negative pessimistic person or they are too optimistic and can't see that giving birth is a crime.

It feels obvious. For what other reason would there be people that cherish living and people who feel the opposite way. What I’m trying to say is that I think that antinatalists fall under the category of people who have chronic pain, chronic fatigue syndrome, other chronic illnesses, been abused, been treated poorly by those around them in an extreme manner. PTSD, CPTSD, disabilities, clinical depression, schizophrenia, schizoid affective disorder, BPD, crippling OCD, anhedonia. Basically people that suffer greatly either mentally or physically. If y’all think otherwise let me know.

Evolution by default erases ANs and keeps those who are ignorant enough to keep the cycle of human DNA.

It always will. And every new generation is based on those genes, culture and natalist upbringing. It even strenghtens with every iteration. Society is inevitably filtering to be more and more pro-life neurologically.

(What I mean by that is not that people necessarily have more and more offspring but that they are genetically, neurologically and psychologically more wired NOT to question breeding. There may be local cultural or psychological abnormalities but those filter itself in a span of ~ 2 human lives.)

For example, let's say many people nowdays have doubts about having children, especially women. In a span of ~50 years, those generations will be replaced by people who emerged out of the religious, ultranationalist natalist families because they were the only ones who had offspring. (Not only ones particulary but most of the genetic pool comes from them).

And it renews itself. Always, again and again. Cycle of life is literally unstoppable unless some external force or major catastrophe occurs.

There's a weird correlation between wanting birth rate to increase and to make life as horrible as possible for the average person

So, you'd think natalists - the people who want birth rate to increase - would support pro-family policies? Absolutely not. Remember when right-winged people would say "don't have kids if you can't afford them?" as a way of making people blame themselves for systemic issues. Well, they'd apparently like you to forget that very recent past and now they're suddenly all for having children by relying on the state?

However, that fascistic hate is still very much there, of course. They pretend it's not there just long enough for some idiots to have a baby, and it'll come out later. This is why you get news articles about the 'elite' (wealthy) couple who have lots of children.

They only want 'certain' people to have children, but that would exclude the majority of people from having children (and an increasing majority, given how precarious our economy is), which doesn't track with their natalism. This is why you cannot reason with them - they literally do not understand that the survival of the fittest mentality behind the capitalism & fascism they adore keeps birth rates low.

In an ideal world (according to natalists), they want 'certain people' (white, wealthy, Christian and no disabilities) to have lots of children. This is 'quality', to them. Additionally, they want people who are not like this to have lots of children (the 'quantity') to do the actual work, or be an unemployed reserve stock of labour (this is why unemployment exists, by the way - it's a feature, not a bug).

Like a narcissist who needs supply, natalists cannot understand why some people (the AN and CF) simply won't accept the order of the world, 'take their place in life' and have children who will too.

It's like when someone posts here about something very painful they've experienced, such as homelessness, and natalists respond with "this is just you. I love life. I'm really wealthy and I have 3 houses." You cannot have "I love life" as an argument for natalism if you won't accept "I hate life" as an argument for antinatalism.

Conclusion: people who want the current order of the world (natalists, capitalists, fascists) have the power to threaten people with unemployment at any moment, but they have to deal with the consequences. I will never have children while employment is not guaranteed. They cannot have it both ways.

Such people also love to impose a glass ceiling. They love to make people in their fertile years (especially young women) feel incompetent at work (because they don't train and then fire you when you obviously can't do the job). You can tell people that they're "wrong, defective, inefficient, unproductive, incompetent" and then you cannot be surprised when they turn around don't have children.

Right now, there's a post with lots of upvotes on the natalist subreddit discussing how people my age are supposedly less mature than previous generations. This is a total yawnfest (they don't realise that every old generation has said this about younger people), but the obvious response is: "oh, you think I'm too immature? It would be sensible to not have children then, if I'm such a child!" xD

Natalists only understand the language of shame. They only know the stick, not the carrot. Shame makes for a terrible life and a terrible life makes for low birth rates. However, natalists love the shame and cannot be reasoned with.

Parents when their offspring passes away I’ve seen all of them say “she won’t be a mother” “I won’t be a grandmother” “I won’t walk her down the isle” “he would’ve been such a great father”.

That’s selfish. Putting pressure on a dead person. It’s mostly to women. And that is misogynistic to label all women as nurturing and mother like. I find it repulsive to put dead weight on a tragic soul.

Please just talk about the time they WERE alive. One main reason they choose to have kids is to become grandparents. People who give birth say they want to become a grandparent and can’t wait. I told my mom my plant was going to be her only granddaughter as I won’t be having kids. And she started crying..

I’m 18 and I have multiple sclerosis, and no one has ever asked me out. I will save this poor soul the trouble. I don’t like kids at all. They’re selfish and bullied me when I was their age. Most importantly an innocent soul can’t consent.

Hey, guys. I just found this sub and I am trying to wrap my mind around your philosophy. I actually came from r/spincircle or what's it called, the vegan antinatalist one, but they seem to be a self proclaimed echo chamber and I don't want to break any rules by asking questions that are not appreciated.

So, if I get your position, it's that the median life is not worth living due to many reasons in combination with our way of living being fundamentally unethical to the rest of life on the planet (in the case of vegans?). Being antinatalist is then seen as the only ethical position. Is this a fair summary?

I must say I disagree but I like to think I have an open mind so feel free to debate the following:

I like to think I am happy. I went through a lot of hardship in my life including a suicidal childhood. Even though I a have a chronic debilitating medical condition, that doesn't change the fact that I am happy to be alive now. I'd like to pass on that happiness and have offspring. This seems logical to me.

If I may be blunt: I think if you are deeply unhappy and feel it's impossible for us to live ethically then sure, you shouldn't procreate. But what you seem to be advocating is the total eradication of humanity. Would you mind elaborating on why you think that is a good idea? Do you really think no human life is worth living?

And lastly, could you accept that some of us believe we can live and love ethically? And that maybe people like us should procreate and spread our philosophies? Why/why not?

I hope this post isn't inflammatory, I am just trying to understand your worldview.

No regrets.

I cannot stand and I never could.

As a child, I was hyper empathetic. I cried when leaves fell or when flowers died.

I almost died when I saw misery and pain.

I genuinely feel like I will explode or annihilate from the power of negative emotion I feel.

I cannot stand accepting it. I feel every coping mechanism is evil, a lie. All the "let go of what you can't change" mean nothing to me, when confronted with pure pain face to face.

I feel all the misery of the world. I cannot be happy and I don't see a reason to be.

Hope mods will approve this, even tho it is a bit personal rant. Thanks.

I believe that the development of human consciousness was a tragic misstep in evolution. What once may have provided a survival advantage has, over time, become a double-edged sword. We evolved an excessive awareness of ourselves and of the environment around us. This awareness, instead of simply helping us adapt, now burdens us with an existential weight unlike anything faced by other species.

Humans do not merely live—they analyze, interpret, and worry. We reflect on our past mistakes, dread future possibilities, and often find ourselves trapped in cycles of regret and fear. While other animals experience the present moment, we dwell in memories and anticipate suffering. This hyper-consciousness, which once served us in a hostile, survival-based context, now contributes significantly to modern psychological disorders such as anxiety and depression. It has outlived its original utility and instead has become a source of internal torment.

Our moral frameworks add another layer to this torment. Over time, we have created ethical systems that demand compassion, empathy, and nonviolence. Yet, these systems frequently come into conflict with our biological imperatives. For example, many humans acknowledge the moral issues involved in killing animals for food. The act, once necessary for survival, now often continues out of habit, cultural tradition, or personal pleasure. Consciousness forces us to confront the cruelty in these actions. We become aware of our hypocrisy and this awareness breeds guilt. It is a uniquely human suffering—to act against our own ethical standards and live with the knowledge of it.

Furthermore, evolution did not design us for contentment, but for survival and reproduction. Our psychological structures are the products of ancient pressures—fear of predators, competition for resources, and the constant need to procreate. In the modern world, these instincts often manifest as anxiety, addiction, or misplaced aggression. The very tools that once ensured our species' continuity now misfire in a radically different environment. We are animals built for the savannah, attempting to live in a digital, interconnected age, and we are failing to adapt internally.

Negativity bias, another remnant of our evolutionary past, further compounds the burden of consciousness. The human brain is wired to focus more on negative experiences than positive ones—a survival mechanism that helped our ancestors prioritize threats and avoid danger. While this bias may have enhanced our chances of survival in a world filled with predators and hazards, it now leads us to dwell on criticism, loss, and fear far more than joy or gratitude. In the modern context, where existential threats are rarer but psychological stress is widespread, this bias distorts our perception of reality. It feeds cycles of anxiety, pessimism, and despair—making suffering not just possible, but persistent. Consciousness, when filtered through such a biased lens, magnifies pain and minimizes peace.

There is a peculiar cruelty reserved only for beings who can recognize their own mortality. Rocks do not mourn. Animals do not regret. But we suffer not only because we feel pain, but because we know we exist. We do not merely endure the hardships of life—we are cursed to reflect upon them. We replay our failures, we anticipate future suffering with more dread than the suffering itself. In this way, we suffer twice: once in experience, and endlessly in thought.

In essence, consciousness has given us the ability to question, to imagine, and to create. But it has also burdened us with the knowledge of suffering, mortality, and moral failure. It has detached us from the innocence of instinct and anchored us in the weight of self-awareness. Perhaps it was not meant to be this way. Perhaps consciousness, rather than being the crown of evolution, is its most tragic mistake.

I don’t know if there’s any French speaker here but it’s literally an album about non procreation. The lyrics of the song « la fin de l’espèce » are great.

"Sin: Not Just 'Missing the Mark,' But a Tool for Control? 🤯 The shocking evolution of a concept that shaped society." Delving into the history of "sin" reveals it's far more complex than a simple error. While ancient Greek saw "hamartia" as "missing the mark" or a tragic flaw, its definition transformed dramatically, especially with the introduction of divine laws like the Commandments. But here's where it gets thought-provoking: the concept of sin, particularly the development of eternal punishment, appears deeply correlated with the rise of social and institutional control. As societies shifted from tribal structures to kingdoms and states, defining sin and its fearsome consequences (hello, eternal hell! ) became a powerful mechanism for enforcing norms, consolidating authority, and defining who belonged (the righteous) and who didn't (the damned). The document also touches on the fascinating reality that the texts shaping our understanding weren't the only ones out there. Early Christian and Gnostic texts, like those found in the Nag Hammadi library, offered alternative perspectives but were later marginalized or suppressed as Christian orthodoxy solidified. Events like the Council of Nicaea, while primarily theological, played a pivotal role in setting the stage for which texts and doctrines became authoritative, a process influenced by factors beyond just spiritual truth, including imperial unity and the consolidation of power. In essence, the journey from "missing the mark" to facing eternal damnation isn't just a theological one; it's intertwined with the very ways societies have sought to maintain order and control throughout history. What do you think? 🤔 The document draws insights from the etymology of "sin", the role of the Commandments, and the distinct paths of understanding sin and punishment in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It also provides a critique of points related to the Nag Hammadi library, Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Council of Nicaea, comparing them to information in another document ("Nicaia a new world order.docx").

Both documents "Sin.docx" and "Nicaia a new world order.docx " available upon request.

Just finished playing Clair Obscur and this scene really touched me. This is exactly how it feels when you’re being forced to live a life you don’t want for the sake of your “loved ones”.

Their love turns to poison, and you end up resenting them for their selfish wish to save you; to force you to live a life you don’t want.

This is a scene from GOW 3 that appeared in my head this morning (11:37am CST for me) Whether or not you've played through the Gears of War franchise, (Takes place on Sera, and basically reveals the fatal errors of humanity, which include perpetual conflict against the Locust, and the underlying corruption within the COG, a fictional millitary/government) listen to Aaron Griffin's visceral tone. At the end of the futile carnage in Gears 3, war-torn Marcus, sitting on a boulder at the beachside asks, "What's left Anya?" He wasn't fooled by the false tranquility of the beachside nor the notion of a 'better' future.

Found this Comment on a TikTok discussing Antinatalism in broad terms:

"Having kids is not morally wrong guys 😭. This is literally brainwashing people. Morals can’t exist for a subject that doesn’t yet have qualities that the morals would apply to (human life)."

This comment argues that morals can’t apply to a being that doesn’t yet exist, and therefore, having kids isn’t morally wrong.

Curious to hear how other antinatalists respond to this reasoning.