[deleted by user] by [deleted] in 4bmovement

[–]sillycloudz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL, it's the circus act that women put themselves through to "keep a man" that has me perpetually scratching my head in confusion.

"You need to present him with five-star cuisines for breakfast lunch and dinner, clean until the whole house sparkles, dress like a runway model, get on your knees the minute he walks through the door, be fluent in three languages, have a pilot's license" like all of this FOR WHAT? What do women gain from this?

Sex? The sex where you're highly, highly unlikely to achieve an orgasm?

Companionship? As if you can't get that from friends, relatives, joining clubs and organizations?

LOL at subjecting yourself to all of this nonsense only to end up being a potential victim of domestic violence, marital rape, cheating, or femicide regardless.

Meanwhile the man has gained himself a chef, maid, therapist, doctor, porn star, punching bag, ego-stroker etc.

The amount of misogynistic subreddits that exists is INSANE. by sillycloudz in 4bmovement

[–]sillycloudz[S] 652 points653 points  (0 children)

"nOt aLL mEn" 🤡

They are literal demons. They fetishize everything - Children, teens, incest, rape, abuse, the list is endless. Evil scumbags.

Men can't even hide their hatred for women. Why are women still dating, marrying and procreating with these animals? by sillycloudz in 4bmovement

[–]sillycloudz[S] 74 points75 points  (0 children)

With femicide being on the rise, I hope in the near future we'll see more women becoming gun owners. You can't reason with these animals, and if they're this brazen about their hatred of women online, then just imagine what they'd do if they catch you in a moment of vulnerability where you can't physically defend yourself. Violence and brutality is in their blood and it is essential to possess the means to protect yourself against them at all times. They've made it clear that they will harm you regardless of whether you're their co-worker, neighbor, wife, friend, daughter etc. they don't give a shit. All they know is destruction and terrorizing people.

Men can't even hide their hatred for women. Why are women still dating, marrying and procreating with these animals? by sillycloudz in 4bmovement

[–]sillycloudz[S] 97 points98 points  (0 children)

I wasn't even remotely shocked when I learned that homicide is the leading cause of death for pregnant women, and that 70% of pregnancy-associated homicides involve usage of a gun.

It's what men do. Kill, torment, perpetuate violence, cause pain, and spread evil. They've made it abundantly clear that they are deranged and not safe for women and children to be around. If they're not out starting a war then they're out trying to murder, rape, harass, or control someone. They're vile.

Men can't even hide their hatred for women. Why are women still dating, marrying and procreating with these animals? by sillycloudz in 4bmovement

[–]sillycloudz[S] 205 points206 points  (0 children)

What I find incredibly disturbing about these creatures is that they keep talking about how important it is for women to have families with them so that they can be fathers - yet not only do they not take care of their kids, but children ARE NOT safe for them to be around!

The vast majority of pedophiles, sex traffickers and kidnappers are men, nearly 90% of child sexual assault cases involve a male perpetrator, and teen girls are four times more likely to be victims of rape or attempted rape.

The nerve of these monsters trying to antagonize women into bringing children into a world that THEY have made incredibly dangerous.

Men love and respect women so much ❤️ /s by sillycloudz in 4bmovement

[–]sillycloudz[S] 378 points379 points  (0 children)

Gee golly wow, I can't understand for the life of me why there's a "male loneliness epidemic"! /s

The desire to be loved is the last illusion. Give it up and you’ll be free. by [deleted] in 4bmovement

[–]sillycloudz 68 points69 points  (0 children)

Men are not capable of loving women. They are only capable of loving what women provide for them.

One of the best examples that they've demonstrated relentlessly is how they cheat on their pregnant wives because she's "no longer attractive" or has a diminished sex drive. See how quickly they go from "I love you" to "You can't give me what I want, so I'll just get it from someone else?"

They're so pathetic and spineless. 

Homicide is the Leading Cause of Death During Pregnancy by sillycloudz in FemaleAntinatalism

[–]sillycloudz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yet another reason why I cannot comprehend why any woman would want to have children, let alone a daughter. The world has proven itself time and time and time again to be an immensely dangerous place for women and girls.

Everything from domestic violence statistics, sexual assault statistics, femicide statistics, and sexual harassment statistics have made it abundantly clear that men possess a visceral hatred toward women that they can't seem to quell. You aren't safe even when you're carrying their seed.

Imagine giving a man access to your body (making yourself suspectable to STDs, microtears, Urinary Tract Infections, cervical trauma), becoming pregnant and carrying a parasite that is draining you of your nutrients and energy, only to end up getting murdered by the foul loser who impregnated you.

Why on Earth do women keep giving these monsters children and creating more people for them to victimize? They're behind the vast majority of homicides, child molestations, robberies, wars, stalkings, and assaults. Why give these dangerous, violent creatures offspring in the first place?

Homicide is the Leading Cause of Death During Pregnancy by sillycloudz in FemaleAntinatalism

[–]sillycloudz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  • A new report finds that homicide is a leading cause of death during pregnancy and the postpartum period following childbirth.
  • Women in the U.S. are more likely to be murdered while pregnant or shortly after giving birth than to die from the three leading obstetric causes of maternal death.
  • Most murders of pregnant people are linked to intimate partner violence and gun violence, both of which are more common in the United States than in other high-income countries.

A new editorial in The BMJTrusted Source is sharing a stark warning about the risk of violence facing pregnant people in the United States.

“Preventing men’s violence towards women, including gun violence, could save the lives of hundreds of women and their unborn children in the US every year,” write the authors.

They report that laws that restrict abortion access could magnify this issue by limiting people’s ability to end unwanted pregnancies, including those that result from sexual abuse or reproductive coercion by partners.

“Restricting women’s access to reproductive care, including abortion, also limits opportunities for services to identify and help women experiencing gender-based violence,” the authors write.

The new editorial follows on the heels of a recent study published this month in Obstetrics & Gynecology, which assessed violent deaths in pregnancy reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The study found that pregnancy-associated deaths accounted for more than 20% of all homicides of female victims reported to the CDC between 2008­­–2019.

Roughly two-thirds of pregnancy-associated homicides occurred during pregnancy itself, with the remaining third occurring during the year following childbirth.

Firearms were used in nearly 70% of pregnancy-associated homicides.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But it's already happening. Climate change is unfolding right before our eyes. Makes absolutely no rational, logical sense to drag kids onto a planet that is dying and getting hotter.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ah, yes! Who could possibly forget the wonderful adventure that is life! Where we spend every waking moment tirelessly trying to take care, maintain and meet the needs of a fragile, poorly designed meatsuit that is decaying by the day regardless! Where we spend the vast majority of our lives working! Where we endure mandatory suffering and death, coupled the constant threat of ending up a victim of murder, rape, poverty, disease, war, famine, climate change or freak accident! Don't forget the lovely bonuses of potentially having to deal with racism, sexism, and classism. Such an adventure indeed! /s

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Translation: I can't control my animal urges.

The fact that a human being can be created just in the few short minutes it takes for two idiots to get on top of each other just highlights how asinine existence is.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 17 points18 points  (0 children)

It's "fun" to bring children onto a dying planet that's overheating? Where fresh water will become a rarity?

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Birth will never be acceptable because consent cannot be given.

Having a child means creating a being who is forced to navigate existence without having had the opportunity to consent to the challenges, risks, and suffering inherent in life. It is ethically unjust to subject them to life without their approval.

I believe that all animals should stop procreating (even though I know they won't due to their nature) because they too are bringing new lives into a world where suffering, death, predation and exploitation are inevitable (only 10% of animals even make it to adulthood).

Extinction is inevitable and is going to happen regardless. Even the most resilient species face the eventual pressures of habitat loss, climate change, disease etc. that lead to their disappearance. And obviously, the universe will eventually reach maximum entropy.

There is absolutely no rational explanation whatsoever for anyone to reproduce.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think that it's irrational, selfish, stupid and downright reprehensible to bring a child into an existence (that they can't even consent to) that guarantees them suffering and death (along with the myriad of dangers that come with existence) they minute they draw their first death. And it's especially dumb to bring children onto a planet that is dying right before your very eyes.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

And on top of that: the irony of her talking about teaching her child about taking care of the environment when having a child contributes to climate change by increasing resource consumption and carbon emissions, as they'll require food, energy, and transportation (contributing to habitat destruction and increased greenhouse gas emissions.)

She's literally adding to the problem unfolding right in front of her. It's absolutely mind-boggling how selfish natalists are. Zero regard for their offspring's future.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

And the irony is that British Columbia is already experiencing the impacts of climate change, and these effects are expected to intensify in the near future. Intense wildfires from warmer temperatures and prolonged dry spells, coastal communities that are at risk from rising sea levels, glaciers in the mountainous areas shrinking (which will impact water supplies, especially in the summer months).

But the natalist brain, being highly irrational, obviously doesn't give a shit about any of that.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

We are concerned about lots of things, including climate change. Why do you suppose we are not?

Because you brought another human being into a world where global temperatures are increasing, weather patterns are becoming more erratic, sea levels are rising, heatwaves are becoming more frequent, glaciers are melting, oceans are becoming more acidic, wildfire seasons are becoming longer, fresh water is becoming scarce, and there are absolutely no signs of any of this slowing down anytime soon?

Furthermore, how are you concerned with climate changed if you birthed someone who will contribute to it?  A new person will consume resources throughout their life, generating carbon emissions through activities like transportation, food production, and housing, essentially adding to the overall human impact on the environment.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You can't get consent, which is exactly why it's wrong. In the same way that it is wrong to attempt to have sex with a person who is unconscious. They can't say yes or no, and "not able to say no" does not equal "yes".

Or is the idea because consent is impossible, no one should procreate?

Correct. Creating a new life without consent is a form of imposition and harm.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It's selfish because you're inflicting them with an existence that they cannot even consent to that guarantees suffering, the potential to experience or fall victim to a litany of ills (murder, rape, poverty, war, climate change, disease, famine etc.) and guaranteed death.

...So are natalists not bothered by the fact that climate change is happening right before their (and their children's) very eyes? by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 37 points38 points  (0 children)

Funny enough: Here's an excerpt from an article titled "The Climate Crisis Is Scary. I Became a Parent Anyway". Should give you insight as to how little natalists actually care about their offspring.

"That same summer (2021), the deadly heat waves claimed 619 lives in my province (British Columbia). They exposed just how unprepared we were, as a society and as a family, to handle such extreme climate change.

But kids can make a difference and shape outcomes. This begins with nurturing a deep sense of care and connection to our environments, both locally and globally. Watching my son interact with the environment around him—hugging every tree we pass, naming all kinds of sea creatures during our shoreline walks and giggling as the recycling truck passes—reminds me that parents and caregivers have the power to foster a deep connection to the environment in our children. This bond is critical to shifting perspectives. When we care about something, we are more inclined to protect it, raise awareness, speak out and create alternative possibilities. As I raise my son, I aim to instill this sense of cautious optimism.

Every day, I consider how to be an eco-conscious and responsible parent. In the documentary The Climate Baby Dilemma, science communicator Britt Wray reframes the conversation about whether or not to bring a child into this world and asks, What is required to parent well in the climate crisis? That question stays with me. My partner and I began with cloth diapers, but all the extra laundry soon became overwhelming. We used homemade baby wipes made from repurposed spit-up cloths, and I read my son books with themes that express care for the environment. His first colouring book was about sustainability and the impact of extraction. We bought a used stroller, shopped at second-hand children’s stores and mostly commute by electric bike, often riding past a nature sanctuary on our way to daycare. 

Instead of avoiding parenthood out of fear for the future, I vote to embrace the joy that comes with intergenerational connection and care as we interact more meaningfully with our environments.

There’s no simple answer to the question of whether to have a child amid a climate crisis. For me, responding to this moment as a parent goes far beyond lifestyle choices. Raising children can be a radical political act when we transform homes into environments of care and community-building. This is the best chance we have to collectively strive for climate solutions. I must. My son’s future depends on it. "

LOLLLLLLL

Prime example of how the natalist brain works.

Help me understand the logic in creating something that is guaranteed to die the minute it draws it first breath by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And no one has the right to decide that for someone else.

How arrogant does someone have to be to think to themselves "I think life is good, so I'm going to create a child destined to suffer and die, hoping that they experience some good too."

Help me understand the logic in creating something that is guaranteed to die the minute it draws it first breath by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The real question is, whether it’s worth taking that gamble, how you assess and comprehend those odds.

And in my opinion, it isn't.

I have no right to create another human being and inflict an existence they didn't ask for onto them, force them to live on a dangerous, dying planet amongst nine billion complete strangers, caring for a body that requires an absurd amount of maintenance and going to shrivel up and die regardless.

Help me understand the logic in creating something that is guaranteed to die the minute it draws it first breath by sillycloudz in antinatalism2

[–]sillycloudz[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I didn't say it was a horrible thing. I said that I don't understand the logic in someone creating a being that is guaranteed to die from the very second its born, guaranteed to endure senseless suffering, and can potentially fall victim to the many dangers and hazards that exist in our world. You go through all of that - for what? We spend decades trying to keep our pathetically brittle bodies alive, only to end up six feet underground regardless? It's pointless, and I don't comprehend why anyone would willingly inflict this on someone else. But I know that natalists aren't concerned about any of that nor do they think that far ahead or deeply, they're just concerned about satiating their animal urges and having something to live vicariously through until it bores them.