Happy Atheist Forum

Community => Social Issues and Causes => Topic started by: Bad Penny II on June 29, 2019, 10:31:02 AM

Title: Child Free
Post by: Bad Penny II on June 29, 2019, 10:31:02 AM
Does the term "child free" sound a bit odd?
They could be considered a burden I suppose and choosing no kids seems a reasonable choice.
There's salt free, fat free, sugar free, bpa free, these things are recognised as harmful.

Childless connotes something is lacking and isn't an attractive appellation.

Is "child free" fine, is there a better term?
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: Tank on June 29, 2019, 10:37:52 AM
I assume you're talking about women/couples that choose not to have kids rather than women/couples who can't have kids for medical reasons? Which raises the further question should there be different terms for the different circumstances?
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: Bad Penny II on June 29, 2019, 02:54:32 PM
Quote from: Tank on June 29, 2019, 10:37:52 AM
I assume you're talking about women/couples that choose not to have kids rather than women/couples who can't have kids for medical reasons?

I'm inclusive of all.

Quote from: Tank on June 29, 2019, 10:37:52 AM
Which raises the further question should there be different terms for the different circumstances?

Can't haves and won't haves?  I'm not going there.
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: xSilverPhinx on June 29, 2019, 05:12:09 PM
That's a funny way of putting it. ;D

I prefer 'one who committed genetic suicide' myself...but I understand some people might not like the characterisation.
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: Tank on June 29, 2019, 07:37:37 PM
Quote from: Bad Penny II on June 29, 2019, 02:54:32 PM
Quote from: Tank on June 29, 2019, 10:37:52 AM
I assume you're talking about women/couples that choose not to have kids rather than women/couples who can't have kids for medical reasons?

I'm inclusive of all.

Quote from: Tank on June 29, 2019, 10:37:52 AM
Which raises the further question should there be different terms for the different circumstances?

Can't haves and won't haves?  I'm not going there.

Just clarifying.
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: Sandra Craft on June 29, 2019, 11:10:23 PM
Child free and childless are both fine as far as I'm concerned.  "Child free" does sound weird, but that may be just because it's a newer expression, and anyway I can't think of anything else to use that's equally pithy.  Personally, I find it more accurate to say I'm letting other people do the hard work, but that's a bit of a mouthful.
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: joeactor on July 01, 2019, 01:37:50 AM
"Childless" does sound like you're missing something to me.

I prefer "Child Free" - it gives a better sense of how I feel about choosing not to have children.
(Ah!!! The Freedom!!!)
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: Davin on July 01, 2019, 03:12:30 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 29, 2019, 05:12:09 PM
That's a funny way of putting it. ;D

I prefer 'one who committed genetic suicide' myself...but I understand some people might not like the characterisation.
Depends on how many child bearing siblings you have, because if you have enough nieces/nephews, then they'll contribute about as much genetics as you could.
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on July 01, 2019, 06:32:42 PM
I'm about to go on a "child-free" river cruise.  It's for older people, so that's self-explanatory. 
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: xSilverPhinx on July 03, 2019, 03:32:13 PM
Quote from: Davin on July 01, 2019, 03:12:30 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on June 29, 2019, 05:12:09 PM
That's a funny way of putting it. ;D

I prefer 'one who committed genetic suicide' myself...but I understand some people might not like the characterisation.
Depends on how many child bearing siblings you have, because if you have enough nieces/nephews, then they'll contribute about as much genetics as you could.

That is true, but large families nowadays are more the exception than the rule.
Title: Re: Child Free
Post by: Icarus on July 08, 2019, 05:30:03 AM
I have no patience with the Duggars or any of the others misguided couples who produce large numbers of offspring.  The Catholic church has been responsible for part of that concept.  Yet Planned Parenthood is condemned as the embodiment of evil.  I think that our US society is a bit fucked up. Well alright so are the ones in the Sudan or the Congo.

The problem concerns the ultimate capacity of the landfill and the availability of potable water and available food and the Pacific gyres that have so much plastic floating around, and the availability of housing, and the pollution of the atmospheric air and a whole lot more reasons that ZPG is a matter of utmost urgency.

Copulation is not going away. As the Hippies used to say; If it feels good  do it.   So do it already but take some heed about the end results if the participants are not mindful of the possible result.