this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2025
354 points (92.3% liked)

childfree

2419 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zloubida@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

You have the inalienable right not to have children, if you don't want to, but if the reason is money, it's sad. On more than one level.

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Not wanting to have kids because of money is a perfectly fine reason and isn't sad at all. Not sure what your problem is.

[–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 22 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I think parent's comment (no pun intended) is that if you want to, all things being equal, but you don't solely because of money, then that's a sad statement about the state of the world, not about you as a person.

[–] errer@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It’s kind of inescapable to spend SOME extra money on kids even if the government is really generous. Paying for babysitters, nice clothes/toys for them they don’t need, etc. Some people may decide they don’t want to spend their extra money that way, that’s their prerogative.

[–] jaycifer@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I think they're talking about people who don't have that extra money to begin with.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

It could also be interpreted as being a sad statement about them as a person. That they are chasing dollars over something fulfilling in life. "I really want to have kids, but then I won't reach my F.I.R.E. financial goals as quickly!" would be sad, imho.

Saw an interview of one unmarried, childless dude who wants to have a loving family with 8 kids. I think he was nearing 60 years-old. His explanation was that he "never really felt financially ready", yet he was an IT consultant for over 30 years and didn't discuss any lengths of unemployment or other real financial struggles. And he grew up in a modest income family.

It's a sad reality that he's likely missed his chance, all because he prioritized his financial goals (or whatever the heck he was spending his excess money on) over aiming for what he actually wanted out of life.

For me, I don't want a life with children. So prioritizing other goals is not sad for me. But if I wanted children, it'd be sad if I kept allocating my money and time to things that don't help me achieve my goal.

[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Thank you for your opinion in calling my choices sad. Money is not the only reason why I dont want kids, its just one of many. Them being ugly is another reason.

[–] MML@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Them being ugly is another reason.

Did you mean to burn yourself or?

[–] zloubida@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you wrote that and reposted this image at face value, it's even sadder.

But again, it's your life, I wasn't judging it but I was judging the meme.

[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Anyone can choose to not have children for any reason whatsoever, "because theyre expensive" is a valid and just reason. You dont get to sit atop a moral pedestal because you think the reason is dumb.

[–] zloubida@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I never said that this reason was dumb. I said it was sad. Having children shouldn't be expensive.

[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Idk if youre not American but in America "thats sad" can mean the exact same as "thats dumb" so im sorry if theres a culture barrier

[–] klemptor@startrek.website 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Uh, no. I'm American too and I call bullshit. Since when does "that's sad" mean the same as "that's dumb"? Even contextually you can tell what they meant.

[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago

Ok so as an American you know that our language changes dramatically every 10 years or even region to region, right? You may not have interpreted what he said the same way that I interpreted it

[–] zloubida@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm French so it's not the first time my bad English led to misunderstandings. I apologize too.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

"that's sad" usually means literally, "that's sad".

How the other person interpreted it ("that's dumb") is more of a slang usage.

It's like, "It's sad that you would be the kind of person who'd do that". It's heard as a personal judgment, and not a judgment about the world or the situation.

One of those...backhanded statements that passive-aggressive people would use to make it sound like they're judging a situation when they're actually judging a person.

I don't think you did anything wrong. If you want to avoid that misunderstanding in the future, you could clarify what about it is sad.

"It's sad that raising children is seen as prohibitively expensive where you live". Tons of words, I know. That's why I'm not blaming you for what you said, lol

[–] Bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

But your english is good! I couldnt tell that you didnt speak the language, learning a language just doesnt help people understand cultural nuances. Im trying to learn Japanese and I know im going to get minute details wrong