this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2024
65 points (62.6% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6354 readers
8 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Continuing to increase the world population is absolutely nuts.

*I'm not interested in gradual natural declines from whatever factors. 2 max implemented now.

(page 2) 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] corroded@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Unlike just about everyone else here, I agree with this 100%. Population does not need to increase. Take either men or women and limit their number of children to 2; that would ensure a 1-to-1 replacement with the exception of early deaths. Once population decreases, maybe increase the limit to 3 if the numbers support it.

I'm not sure where I heard this quote, but it holds true here: "Save the earth; don't give birth."

[–] Lath@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago
[–] Lifecoach5000@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

By default I would normally agree with you, but after reading some people’s responses, now I’m not so sure. The internet is still cool in that regard.

[–] adam_y@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's almost always childless young men saying this.

For a truly contentious opinion I'd love to see a married woman with three kids say it.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 2 points 10 months ago (6 children)

I mean, okay let's break that down.

Young men, okay I'm a man in my late 30s, so throw young out as your argument. Second my wife shares the same thoughts, so, I don't want to speak to her but maybe the gender side isn't as important either.

Childless, well yes, my wife and I are both childless because of the massive problems facing the world today, mostly caused by overpopulation. I'd say being childless is more of a logical conclusion to having these thoughts rather than the other way around. It's also more likely in your assumptions that a married woman with 3 kids would be pro having kids.

I don't know what you thought you were proving, but to me it's very logical why childless people are the people who are in favor of people having less children.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] squiblet@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

No kidding (ha!), I didn't have kids because i think the entire idea is stupid. So yes, I'd suggest that other people have less also.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

you don't have to hard limit it per se, you just have to "convince" people

[–] pixxelkick@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (4 children)

If you wanna end up with billions of dead baby girls, sure, cuz that's what happens.

Instead, best way to curve overpopulation is just improve education.

Also we still have tonnes and tonnes of room for growth if we just stopped being incredibly wasteful. We produce multiple times the food to feed everyone on earth already, but almost all of it ends up thrown out and wasted.

We need a fundamental shift in priorities, and better push on legislation to get food into people's mouths.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] sik0fewl@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago

The world’s population is expected to decline soon anyway.

[–] zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com -2 points 10 months ago

Agreed at least for a time frame. Solutions for today's problems are smaller generations or war and mass death

[–] badbytes@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago

8 think a maximum of ZERO, would maximize the benefit to earth.

[–] Paragone@lemmy.world -4 points 10 months ago

Sorry, but I'm disagreeing with you, in an unpopular way ...

: P

the average reproductive-rate need be managed,

BUT ...

it is much saner to have some couples childfree ( which many, if not the majority, nowadays, want ), & then have total support for the reproducing mothers.

I wouldn't want any genetic child-of-mine to exist, for any reason whatsoever.

However, since your, & my, & everyone's, Soul/CellOfGod/ChildOfGod can ONLY have life-experiencings in a life, and since our Souls/Continuums already competed successfully for conceptions/lives,

then it'd be idiotic to block/deny all other Souls/CellsOfGod to have lives of their own.

( that isn't against your argument, that is against others' arguments, in the reproduction debate )

Since many lives want to NOT reproduce, but to instead have their own lives for adult living, and not for children-family living, isn't that a right, too?

Therefore, to keep the reproductive-rate where it needs to be, to fend-off economic-collapse ( there needs to be sufficient next-generation, or collapse enforces economic hellscape on all of us ), those who do reproduce, need to do-so at the required rate,

and, obviously, social-support, education, etc, needs to be configured to back this reality.

See?

_ /\ _

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›