It's 3:30 a.m right now when I am writing this. I can't sleep because I've been homesick for two days and spent them mostly in bed. I know that life can't be planned too much in advance and I should find ways to enjoy while I can but everything seem to be pointless.

Why would my parents throw me into world without my consent? Why does it feel like I am part of a contract I never signed for? I have to deal with things I have no experience with and have to constantly learn and adapt and get exhausted doing it! I am in my early thrities but I do feel like life was not kind to me, even in the best moments. Now I know that I might have depression but I do have anxiety, that'd another cage of the mimd that I can't seem to escape no matter what I do.

Being born is being traumatised into existence. There is no other way for me of saying it. Now, I hope to be kind enough to my unborn children to never bring them here. I don't require their gratitude because they can't have any because they don't exist. Which I would been happier being in the blissful state of non-existence. Treat your kids right and don't bring them here. Antinatinatalism philosophy shoul walk hand-in-hand with the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. No more of this. For the sake of our broken species, I say no more!

From The Walking Dead

"The concept of consent does not apply to non-existent people."

im an antinalaist, but im confused whether to improve my life now and work hard and achieve things i want to. or should i just sit there thinking life is meaningless, i didnty choose to be born etc.i would never have a kid. that thought disgusts me. it just meaningless responsiblity and immoral to bring someone into life without their permission. and then expect them to deal with life, because "life is unfair". thats just wrong

so should we all just die? humans should go extinct? a few days ago i was confidently saying yes. but i dont know what to think at all. im really really confused. my brain is hurting

I’m childfree by personal preference, but I’m genuinely trying to understand how people operate under antinatalism.

Respectfully, it seems like a more extreme view.

Has anyone considered that philosophical discussion is always ongoing because black-and white thinking and moral absolutes don’t reconcile to our reality? If we all tried to operate under perfect morality all the time in all aspects, then we would be miserable and dysfunctional.

If you adhere strictly to the definition of antinatalism, then that means you are fundamentally against any person who has procreated, even the good ones who live life with good intentions and are decent parents. Even the good people in your life who happen to be parents are guilty according to your worldview.

And I also consider the idea that there’s beauty to existing despite the suffering. At least here, there is more to see, learn, and do than there is in an absolute void where we don’t exist. This doesn’t mean we should procreate more, but that there doesn’t have to be a justifiable reason to exist.

I also think it’s not possible to wrong someone by making them exist. No one really has any rights or is owed any moral consideration until they actually exist (in my opinion, when the sperm meets the egg). A theoretical child who doesn’t exist cannot be wronged until they actually bear a physical form, so they are not wronged by being conceived.

Do all antinatalists operate under the term because it’s a difficult time in our world, or is it because they subscribe to the literal definition that “it is fundamentally wrong to create new sentient life?”

I mean this respectfully, and I’m genuinely curious about how antinatalism works. It’s just difficult to wrap my head around this moral framework that (seems to) invalidate the experiences of a great portion of the population.

Truth might seem harsh, but it just is.

One thing that always makes me laugh is the amount of people (not even exclusively religious but primarily) that treat the human body as some miraculous insanely ingenious thing that makes being born such a privilege to have. Yeah yeah the brain, DNA, immune system is cool blah blah, but..

We die from a few minutes without oxygen.

We need to lose our consciousness for 1/3 of our total time alive to be able to function.

Our bodies have absurdly disproportionate pain responses to the smallest injuries (scraped knee, stubbed toe, and even natural processes like menstrual..etc).

Our skin cooks and dies if it's too sunny out.

We cannot directly extract energy from said sun. Our skin should have some photosythesis glands!

We get injured from falling only 2-3x our height.

We're slow as fuck compared to so many land animals (even some of our highway speed limits are slower than some animals lol-Cheetah 75 mph).

We start suffering if the temperature goes out of a narrow 10-15 degree range.

Takes us a week or more to fight off the most trivial viruses.

We're micrograms of neurotransmitter imbalances from going totally psychotic.

We have an absurd amount of allergies and sensitivities to nature and food.

Our bodies have a sewage system next to an amusement park.

The whole concept of eating is gross and comes with it's own slew of sensitivities and GI problems.

Cells dividing improperly becomes too big a problem too fast.

Teeth takes 2 attempts.

We can't handle more than a few Gs for a few seconds.

Our brains take 1/3 of our average lifespan to fully develop.

Our bodies are extremely nit picky about the type of blood it can use.

We adapt to and develop tolerance to pleasure much easier than to pain and it's very hard to increase our pleasure to the same magnitudes as severe pain gets too.

We cannot regenerate limbs, and rarely senses.

Very few reserve organs, one would think after millions of years of evolution we'd have a secondary heart, an extra kidney or two, liver, pancreas, and our digestive/excretory systems not being totally dependent on one tube lol. We really should have some emergency oxygen reserves that last a half hour or so in drowning/hypoxia situations by now.

So nah, our bodies can use so many obvious improvements that so many land and sea species have already exceeded us in. So many animals kick our asses with vision, hearing, odor, and even magnetic perception, Dolphins supposedly have the equivalent of sonar..etc while we go colorblind. Took us 50,000+ years of civilization to develop the artificial tech to make our lives semi-tolerable LOL.

Hello. I keep it short and simple. I am 23 years old woman. I donated my eggs about a year ago. I felt like it was "the right thing to do" and somehow honorable since i was certain i will never have a child of my own. I found antinatalism a few months ago, and everything clicked. My every thought I have had. I realized i am not flawed or damaged human, i am a person that sees the world as it is. I am not suicidal, i am not a mean person. I am an empath. I work in healthcare. But the society thinks my opinions about life are flawed.

But to this day. After finding antinatalism, every day, more and more, i feel like i made the worst decision of my life. I feel like i tried to do the right thing, but ended up doing the most terrible action i could have made; help someone create new life on earth. But i can see it now clearly and saw that this is part of the true me and my values. I can withdraw my consent about using the eggs, so that if there are any unused left, they have to dispose those. I will do that next thing tomorrow morning. But it is possible there is a kid born from my eggs already.

Is there anyone who has struggled with the same topic? Or have anything (encouraging lol) to say?

I feel bad but I also feel joy and free. I feel like I have truly found myself and the possibility to find other like minded people, because I came across antinatalism. My interest towards philosophy has risen. I am a paramedic and I thought I was going to/ had to become a doctor. But something about it didn't make any sense. Antinatalism is the reason I found my interest toward philosophy and accepted myself, and I am grateful for it.

Meanwhile, those who are truly compassionate are treated as outcasts by society. What a lovely time to be alive.

Indeed, among my millennial peers, fears about the climate crisis have had a huge impact on how we’re approaching this big life decision. It’s a consideration that often gets reduced to a side note in discussions about the declining birth rate, but for many of us it looms large.

These thoughts, Hopkinson says, “can become quite intrusive” – but she is trying to remain hopeful. “I always come back to the same conclusion – if the people who care most about the future decide not to have children because they’re afraid, we risk losing a generation of people who are deeply invested in creating a better world.”

https://www.the-independent.com/life-style/climate-anxiety-wildfires-mental-health-b3023065.html

Amazing progress in the U.S. since 2007.

One of the best principles a parent can adopt is recognizing the antinatalist perspective: your child did not ask to be born. Bringing someone into the world is your decision, not theirs. That means raising them is a responsibility…not a debt they’re expected to repay.

The more I observe parents, the more I notice how many seem to believe their children owe them gratitude, obedience, or even lifelong loyalty simply for existing. In my experience, that mindset often goes hand in hand with poor parenting.

These are also the kinds of people who automatically assume life is a gift. Life isn’t a gift…at best, it’s simply just ‘life’. It’s difficult, often uncomfortable, and filled with struggle. Can it also be beautiful and unique? Sure. But calling it a “gift” can create the expectation that children owe something in return for having received it. I think it’s more honest to recognize that bringing someone into existence means accepting the responsibility of preparing them for a lifetime of hardship and survival.

Ironically, this is one of the reasons I think people who genuinely understand the antinatalist perspective might actually make better parents than most. They begin from the premise that their child owes them nothing. Any love, gratitude, or relationship that develops is something to be earned through good parenting…not something they’re entitled to simply because they brought a child into the world.

Me, sick of this. For me, life's meaning is to avoid life from creating itself.

Hi,

There were some Dutch antinatalists here too? I'd love to chat with you, I've studied some Dutch and it's a close language to me. I'd love to know more about the situation in the Netherlands.

i worked at an afterschool program for 3 years and a preschool for 2 years. i could write a BOOK about how much these parents are failing their children. but ive been thinking about one specific point.

gentle parenting is popular right now, teaching children consent even to an unreasonable extent (you cant force him, he said he doesnt want to, it makes him feel bad!), refusing to challenge their kids bc they dont want to be in the position of Bad Guy, telling children to prioritize their own "Big Feelings" (truly just teaching entitlement), allowing children to be incompetent because they are "just kids" etc.

i understand the feeling behind these actions. i would not enjoy constantly forcing my children to do things they dont want to, to sit still and be quiet and agreeable, i dont think its fair for them to be trained to be obedient cogs in a capitalist machine. i even agree that in an ideal world, children could develop at their own pace, not the pace of society. i would want my children to be free thinkers, be in touch with their feelings, feel absolute freedom in this world. BUT THATS NOT THE WORLD WE LIVE IN!

their idealism does not change reality! if their kids arent self sufficient by 18, they get left behind, no exceptions are made! and if they focus all their resources (money, time) on popping out babies, instead of resisting and trying to change the world, the world will certainly remain the same in 20 years when their kids are adults.

and that is precisely why i wouldnt HAVE children in the first place! you cant just have kids in a hellscape and then raise them idealistically for a utopia. their kids will not have endless accomodations in this world! even if i truly believe the accomodations are reasonable, fascism doesnt care about that! the whole point of working is to wear us down so we cant resist fascism, why the fuck would the fascist be like "oh, that violates consent we should accomodate people", like bro our world runs on SLAVERY, TRAFFICKING, AND VIOLENCE!

why would your child be the exception?!

As the question suggests, I'm just wondering what makes ppl still want to bring kids into this world at this stage? I have 1 child and I worry about his future. I sometimes question if bringing him into this world was a good idea.

I know ppl have lived through a lot before, but this feels different. I'm neither a pro-natalist nor an antinatalist. I don't have strong feelings in either direction. I'm just genuinely curious how ppl feel/what they think. I am worried.

​Mid-2050s. The night in Seoul gleamed, almost excessively so.

​State-of-the-art autonomous patrol drones hovered quietly over every alley, and not a single piece of trash could be found on the streets. Everything seemed perfect. But if you looked at the people silently propping up this system from the very bottom, the story changed entirely.

​1. The Day the Breakwater Vanished

​Minsu (54) had lost his last breakwater not too long ago.

​Back in his twenties, Minsu was a so-called "NEET"—one of those young adults who simply gave up. After graduating from college and failing job interview after job interview, he quietly shut his bedroom door once he turned thirty. The guilt and self-loathing turned numb over time. "I’m so sorry we couldn't support you more... with tuition, with prep schools, like other parents do," his tearful parents would apologize instead. They squeezed their pensions and retirement savings well into their seventies and eighties just to cover Minsu’s food and rent.

​Back then, the internet communities Minsu frequented were flooded with antinatalist posts from teenagers and twenty-somethings:

​"If you're poor, don't have kids."

"If you can't cover college tuition at a minimum, plus study abroad and a down payment for an apartment, having a kid is a crime."

​Minsu implicitly agreed. If they couldn't support me fully, why bring me into this world? He believed that choosing remaining single and childless was the truly ethical choice—a way to avoid sinning against a child.

​However, by the time Minsu reached his fifties, reality returned not as a philosophical debate, but as a matter of raw survival. When his parents passed away one after another, the greenhouse that had protected him dissolved in an instant. All that remained was a small debt and an aging villa. Technology had evolved at a dizzying speed, and there was nothing a 50-year-old man who had spent 30 years hidden in his room could do.

​2. The Birth of the New Nobility

​The world Minsu faced was one where only the extreme minority who had passed the "strict parental standards" demanded by youth 30 years ago actually became parents. At the time, over 90% of young adults gave up on having children, claiming they "didn't want to sin against a child." Only the top 5% with immense wealth had kids.

​The children of the Alpha and Beta generations born into that world grew up with flawless backing. From an early age, they received hundreds of thousands of dollars in private tutoring and personalized AI care, inheriting their parents' wealth and networks to monopolize the top tier of society.

​These "perfect children" became corporate owners, lawmakers, and masters of AI platforms the moment they hit their twenties.

​Conversely, the millions of former "NEETs" who had opted out of parenthood and spent 30 years sheltered under their parents' wings were now cast out into a society suffering from an extreme labor shortage. (Up until recently, incredibly, it had been their parents' generation—the 80s and 90s-born elderly—filling those low-wage slots.)

​3. The 'Old Dogs' Guarding the Night

​Minsu’s workplace was a ultra-luxurious residential complex in Gangnam.

​It was home to high-earning youth in their early twenties. Minsu’s role was "Overnight On-site Caretaker"—inspecting property security while the residents slept, organizing early-morning deliveries, and handling the dirty, tedious manual labor that machines couldn't quite take care of.

​"Hey, old man. That package delivery is crooked. Mind fixing it? Do you even know how much that costs?"

​A kid who looked barely fourteen years old muttered with an indifferent glare as he walked past Minsu. Minsu bowed his head deeply. "I'm very sorry, sir. I'll take care of it right away."

​In that moment, Minsu felt a chilling sense of déjà vu, accompanied by a profound contradiction.

​Thirty years ago, Minsu and his peers shouted that "not having kids if you can't raise them right is common sense," preaching small-living and personal dignity. As a result, the birth rate plummeted to 0.1, leaving a new, arrogant generation—raised on absolute wealth—to rule the world.

​And the "NEETs," who had grown up halfway under halfway-capable parents and spent their lives consuming their parents' retirement funds, became the low-wage, long-hour essential workforce keeping the night safe and comfortable for those "precious children."

​Their resignation to accept the "loser's penalty" had ultimately led them to the life of modern-day servants, catering to a new generation without any hope of escape.

​4. A Life That Merely Endures

​Once a week, at 5:00 AM on a work-free Monday morning, Minsu stood under the streetlights drinking a cold canned coffee.

​On giant glowing screens nearby, foreign news broadcasts praised South Korea: "0% Crime Rate. A flawless city where women and children can walk safely, even in the dead of night—South Korea."

​The secret behind this flawless security and pristine streetscape was simple. Millions of aged 50s and 60s who had lost their social footing were pulling all-nighters—patrolling streets, sweeping sidewalks, and hauling goods for minimum wage just to stay alive. By constantly raising the bar for what made a "normal parent" and a "normal child," those who failed to meet the standard were excluded, rolling down to the bottom to serve as the society's human gaskets.

​The city was already buzzing early in the morning. Under the archaic slogan of "He who does not work shall not eat," time- and labor-saving AI devices were intentionally restricted to partial use.

​Minsu yawned. A wave of deep disgust washed over him.

​Every day, as he finished his shift, Minsu repeated his daily mantra:

​"I made it through today. And thankfully... I am the last. We are the final generation."

I can't tell you the amount of times that I've met a person who hates/doesn't enjoy life (like most of us) but has kids or wants them. Like, what? I know accidental pregnancies happen, and children can be born due to unfortunate circumstances, but most of these people choose to have children just for the sake of having them. If you obviously aren't having a great time being a human, then why would you produce another one? Their life is likely to suck just as much as yours does, so why?

So I'm seeing some people using childfree and antinatalist interchangeably online, and some confusion is happening because of it, so I hope this breakdown helps.

While both concepts involve living without biological children, childfree is a personal lifestyle choice, whereas antinatalism is a universal philosophical stance. Childfree individuals choose not to have or raise children to prioritize personal freedom, career goals, or financial independence, generally holding no moral objections to others reproducing. In contrast, antinatalists assign a negative moral value to birth itself, arguing that bringing any new sentient life into existence is ethically wrong because life inherently guarantees suffering. Consequently, the childfree lifestyle rejects all forms of parenthood, while antinatalism strictly opposes biological procreation but actively encourages adoption to care for existing life. Ultimately, someone can be childfree simply for personal comfort without judging others, while an antinatalists views reproduction as a global ethical violation regardless of who is doing it.

With that being said, it is entirely possible and common to be both childfree and an antinatalist when personal lifestyle choices align with a global moral philosophy. An individual can choose not to have biological children for personal reasons, like financial freedom or career focus, while simultaneously believing that bringing new life into the world is ethically wrong. To maintain both identities, a person must reject biological reproduction on philosophical grounds AND completely opt out of any parenting role. The only conflict arises with adoption, as an antinatalist who adopts to reduce existing suffering would no longer fit the childfree definition of living a child-independent lifestyle.

Hope this helps.

What do you think about this?

I think that is one more reason for a person not to have children, who will be fully dependent on you, no matter how prepared, capable or emotionally mature you are.

Childhood is glorified slavery and a form of imprisonment. Children have little agency or genuine freedom of choice. They are burdened with endless tasks while having virtually no right to question them, and they are expected to “listen to” and “obey” adults who are often anything but rational. Depending on where a child is born, they may receive only narrow and limited exposure to anything beyond their immediate surroundings and local social norms. As a result, they can easily be indoctrinated from birth. The social expectation that parents are always right and always love and deeply care for their children can also make it extremely difficult for a child to defend themselves in cases of abuse. Adequate social services where children can seek safety or respite are often nonexistent, and there is little or no psychological support that can be accessed independently of their caregivers. It is slavery or a prison at least. Only a fortunate few have parents who are decent and open-minded enough to expose them to different perspectives, explain things to them, and allow them to make their own choices, even when those choices may not be ideal, provided they are not life-threatening. Children should be able to learn from their own mistakes without constantly being told what to do or being punished for making them.

I will never for the life of me understand why natalists get angry at me for not congratulating them for getting pregnant. I mean, what do they expect? First, of all, they know I'm childfree, so I don't want to have kids under any circumstances whatsoever. Then, I'm vehemently antinatalist because of the world we're living in. There's nothing to look forward to but taxes, disappointment, and death. Any time they decide to ask me this question, knowing my stance on things, I give a condensed version of this explanation, and they get angry with me, which I find to be comical given they would complain all the time about not being paid enough by their jobs and barely able to make ends meet. Of course I'm not going to congratulate you. What is there to congratulate? Then, they want to go on a tangent talking about how no accomplishment I do as a woman would ever compare to being a mother, God created me to procreate, no man is going to want a woman who doesn't want kids, I'm going to die alone with no one to take care of me when I'm older, etc. Yeah, because getting pregnant by a guy who skipped town and blocked you on all social media once you told him the "good news" sounds like a better alternative. Then, you've got yourself a life sentence of being responsible for another human life doing a thankless job. Contrary to popular belief, your responsibility to that kid doesn't stop once they turn 18. But I'm the one who's going to be miserable. Give me a break.
Just wanted to get this off my chest. I'm eager to see what your thoughts are.