u/scribblyskiesstudios

I am not "childfree."

I am not "abstaining" from reproduction purely because I don't want kids, or want to end *my* bloodline specifically.

I am not reproducing because i believe the human race should come to an end, and animals should retake the earth, and nature retake it's course to hopefully rectify all the damage humans have done.

This will only happen after all human kind has died off.

I am also *not* vegan, nor do i have plans to change that. But that doesn't lessen my antinatalist viewpoint. Animals will always breed whether or not you have any hand in it. Plus, the kicker is that most of the vegan arguments I've heard are also directly conflicting with their views of antinatalism.

So, many here claim that any life brought into this world is one of suffering, regardless of species. In the same breath, they also advocate for somehow preventing animals from reproduction (even when they are not pets). Do you not realize this also leads to a direct conflict with Vegan Ideals? Do you not go vegan to save animal lives?? Like, I'm confused here how you can be both Antinatalist, and vegan, when the goals you preach towards are directly going to lead to the death of so many animal species?

If some sentiments I've seen in this subreddit come to fruition, the following will happen.

1.All animals will end up "fixed", unable to reproduce by their own will or otherwise.

2. Because they cannot reproduce, those species will die.

3. Humans will ideally also die (likely due to dietary malnutrition, disease, ect), leaving no one to bring back these species.

4. The whole planet will die, leaving only plants.

5.(And i admit this one may be a stretch, but I've seen what damage plants can do when left unchecked, so this is an assumption based on personal experience.) Said plants will very likely grow out of control and potentially destroy the planet without herbivore "predation" to regulate them.

To be clear here, I'm not encouraging being non-vegan, so the mods and bots don't get pissy about it. I'm simply asking how one can claim to be both, when they very clearly are *NOT* synonymous or compatible.

As the title says, but I'll elaborate.

I'm a creative person myself, so I make ocs and such, as well as fictional worlds for them to live in. When i play games like The Sims, I treat it as an ideal world where there is no real suffering, except maybe emotional drama. (No health issues or things like that, usually just relationship drama at most.)

So,my question is, if you could create your own fictional world where characters only endure what you want them to, within the confines of that world, would you then support them procreating?

I myself tend to play with families in Sims, because as i said before, I think of it as an ideal world with no disease, no suffering. Especially because unmodded Sims 4 especially, is effectively that. The only suffering that effectively exists, is what you allow.

I would never, ever have a kid IRL, for a multitude of reasons, the top two being that the world we live in is far too cruel for any kid to be born into, and the fact that I'm a trans man with no desire to utilize these stupid parts i was born with, that i never asked for.

Just trying to gauge who here is entirely against kids, period, and who actually just considers the state of the world as their reasoning for not reproducing. I ask,only because some people here read as the former, and some as the latter.