I don't want children - Am I selfish?

zagfles

kboss2010 wrote: »

I agree wholeheartedly. It's interesting to hear what most men actually think of babies and children, I've found that once they know you're not a 'fawning over babies' kind of woman how much they'll wax lyrical about how little interest they have in their own children beyond 'but I can pass my DIY/football skills onto my son'. Sorry but that's nowhere near a good enough reason to have kids in my book!

It was an education for me when we had our first but you get to know who isn't interested in talking about their kids, same as anything really, football, travel etc.

Couple of work colleagues had babies about the same time as me and me and one of them would spend every lunchtime talking about the babies while the other one said hardly anything, and the ones without kids were bored rigid! Eventually they ate their lunch on another table!

Lol, if you think it's bad as a bloke, being a woman in a situation where you're expected to coo over a new baby is worse! My friends know I don't like babies/children but if I ignore them I'm regarded as barely human and if I put on an interested smile I'm apparently lying about my dislike of them because how could I possibly be nice to them if I don't like them? Just because I'd prefer not to be around most children doesn't mean I have to be mean to them. I remember adults like that when I was a kid and they were horrible.

I have noticed a lot of women put on a feined interest in when you can tell they're not really interested. I suppose it's like a bloke not being interested in football...

It's not a problem, it's just when something so massive and exciting has just happened you just don't get people who want to talk about (what to me is) trivia.

Sooki

Haven't read through the posts, but you are not selfish.

People ask questions that are simply none of their business and expect answers.

If someone does ask an impertinent questions about children, just smile nicely and say not everyone can have children. Stand back and observe them squirming wanting the ground to swallow them up. You have then not answered their question and also stopped them asking you again, works for me every time .

It is no one else's business but yours!

zagfles

kboss2010 wrote: »

Lol, I went to visit a relative recently who had just had her first. I was infinitely more interested in her dog than the baby. On the way home my boyfriend admitted that he'd been disappointed that she'd put the dog in the other room and kept the baby with us!

Ha, yes with me it would have been the opposite, I hate dogs!

Biologically speaking, I think that means we're defective lol

Darwin would agree

Jagraf

I was with a friend the other day, we met at NCT and our kids have now just left school. We don't keep in touch with any of the others, most of us only had being pregnant in common. Once our kids were out of nappies discussion about babies disappeared, so I can see why it's not of interest.

Lily-Rose_3

Coming in late here, but I have to say that people should just do whatever makes them happy.

However, I agree that it's just daft to say that people who choose not to have children are happier all round than those who do have them. What a bizarre generalisation.

I do think there is a lot of selective believing on this thread, with people (on both sides) pulling out 'facts' and statistics to suit their argument.

I know some married people with kids who are as miserable as sin, and who stay in their marriage for the kids, and some people who are blissfully happy single. I also know some married people with kids, with great relationships, who have great family holidays, a great bond with their kids, and a pretty good life, and then some single people with no children who are desperately unhappy and trail the newspapers and the internet daily, looking for a partner, as their biological clock ticks away.

So to suggest that people with kids will be more miserable and stressed with a crap life while singletons are as happy as a pig in muck, or singletons are lonely saddoes, while married people with kids have the perfect life is just stupid.

Jagraf

I don't think anyone should have to justify anything. Others people's lives shouldn't hold that great an interest to someone else really.

zagfles

Lily-Rose wrote: »

Coming in late here, but I have to say that people should just do whatever makes them happy.

However, I agree that it's just daft to say that people who choose not to have children are happier all round than those who do have them. What a bizarre generalisation.

I do think there is a lot of selective believing on this thread, with people (on both sides) pulling out 'facts' and statistics to suit their argument.

I know some married people with kids who are as miserable as sin, and who stay in their marriage for the kids, and some people who are blissfully happy single. I also know some married people with kids, with great relationships, who have great family holidays, a great bond with their kids, and a pretty good life, and then some single people with no children who are desperately unhappy and trail the newspapers and the internet daily, looking for a partner, as their biological clock ticks away.

So to suggest that people with kids will be more miserable and stressed with a crap life while singletons are as happy as a pig in muck, or singletons are lonely saddoes, while married people with kids have the perfect life is just stupid.

Of course. Like I've been trying to say - the most unhappy people will be those who don't get what they want. For instance my neighbour with no interest in kids who had one. Or a couple who desperately want kids but can't have them.

kboss2010

zagfles wrote: »

Didn't you say you were a scientist? These sort of studies lack any sort of scientific credibility. They're not randomised control studies where they take 1000 people, split them into 2 groups of 500, and say to group A - you lot go and procreate, and to group B - you lot get sterilised, and then monitor their "happiness" levels over 30 years.

The groups are self-selected!! People chose which group they're in mainly based on their own desires and needs. A comparison of "happiness" between the two groups is as meaningless as a comparison between those who knit and those who bungee jump. Someone who bungee jumps is not likely to be happier if they took up knitting instead, and someone who knits is not likely to be happier if they took up bungee jumping!

Because their choice of hobby fitted their personality and desires, and virtually all of them would be unhappier if they were forced to change hobby.

It would be same as doing a survey of pet happiness and coming to the conclusion that pets who eat meat are happier than pets who eat vegetables. And then assuming your pet rabbit would therefore be happier if you gave it steak!
That's you. Those who knit will come up for hundreds of perfectly logical and rational reasons not to bungee jump. But that doesn't mean those who bungee jump aren't happier bungee jumping than they would be knitting.

That's why it would be good to see some better studies. I once knew of a guy who got funding to conduct a 25 year study into what makes people happy and he travelled the globe asking different groups of people questions... what I want to know the most is who the heck funded this study and how do I get paid to go on a jolly asking people if they're happy for the next 25 years lol!

catkins

Lily-Rose wrote: »

Coming in late here, but I have to say that people should just do whatever makes them happy.

However, I agree that it's just daft to say that people who choose not to have children are happier all round than those who do have them. What a bizarre generalisation.

I do think there is a lot of selective believing on this thread, with people (on both sides) pulling out 'facts' and statistics to suit their argument.

I know some married people with kids who are as miserable as sin, and who stay in their marriage for the kids, and some people who are blissfully happy single. I also know some married people with kids, with great relationships, who have great family holidays, a great bond with their kids, and a pretty good life, and then some single people with no children who are desperately unhappy and trail the newspapers and the internet daily, looking for a partner, as their biological clock ticks away.

So to suggest that people with kids will be more miserable and stressed with a crap life while singletons are as happy as a pig in muck, or singletons are lonely saddoes, while married people with kids have the perfect life is just stupid.

I thought surveys were meant to show that childfree couples were, on the whole, happier than those with children and more likely to stay together? I don't recall it being about people who remain single.


I am not saying for one second that it is true as I know couples with children that seem happy and have been married for over 20 years BUT I doubt most people would disagree that children put a strain on a relationship, no matter how happy.


Quite a few of my divorced friends say their marriage started to go wrong when they had children. Often they argued about the children - how to bring them up etc, there was often money problems because of the money needed for a child etc etc. I know that is why a few people have said if they could go back they would choose not to have children - because they feel the children effectively ended their marriage

LameWolf

bugslet wrote: »

I've held one once. Briefly. It cried, I nearly did:p.

Give me a puppy though and you can barely prise it out of my hands and so what if it widdles on me.:o

Pretty much sums up that human beings are totally illogical!:)

Are you my long-lost twin?:D
I'm a host for a dog-sitting service, and I can't wait for my next guest to arrive (tomorrow morning). One of my most time-consuming charges had some form of doggy dementia, and (to put it nicely) had to be cleaned up after quite a bit. (I resorted to putting a "carpet" of newspaper throughout the bungalow).
I absolutely loved that little dog to bits and was heartbroken when I heard that she'd died.
But the very idea of changing a poopy nappy makes me feel nauseous.
I guess it's horses for courses.:o