Why do we bear children and rear them?

Jumped in after reading FreeDuck's post that I quoted without seeing Tico's -- yes, those are the societal pressures I speak of, but that's an excellent point about why they exist.

0 Replies

Definitely about higher infant mortality and just mortality in general. It is incredibly easy to die in other parts of the world.

0 Replies

To answer your question....worker bees and worker ants are female.

Drones (male) live long enough to mate with a female that was chosen from inception to be queen, then they die. Those who do not get to mate with her, die also.

This leaves, for all intents and purposes, and entirely female society.

As mentioned before, in a wolf pack, only the alpha male and female breed. I'm sure if I have it a minutes thought, there'd be others.

P - Are you a man or a woman?

0 Replies

Tico wrote:

Another reason why third world societies have large families is the higher infant mortality. When the survival of your family and community depends on many hands helping out, but most of the children will not live to adulthood, then large families are the best insurance. This becomes codified in culture and religion over thousands of years. It takes huge government interference (China) or long periods of technological plenty (Western nations) to overcome these factors. It is not that far behind us.

When I asked my own mother why she had 5 children (when she and we freely admit that she doesn't have a maternal instinct), she answered, "So that someone will take care of me in my old age."

What a hoot!

You made me think tico, I'm pretty sure I inherited my non-maternal genes from my mother, who also had 5 of us. I often wondered why she bothered. Unlike your mother, I don't think she would have thought forward enough to come up with that answer. I believe she had children because "they just happened"

Anyway, the point about having kids to take care of you in old age.....I worked for a number of years in a nursing home setting. Sure, many of the people there had caring children who visited often, but just weren't able to take care of their parents needs at home. Other children just lived to far away, but visited regularly. Both groups absolutely wanted the best for their parents.

Then again, there was many people there who had children, but for whichever of a million reasons, they just weren't there.....

On several occassions, I'd be out at the nurses station, charting in my departments notes, and one of the aides, during conversation, would ask me if I had kids.

When I said "no" they invariably wanted to know "who's going to take care of you when you get old?"

Well, apparantly, YOU.......

Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

Ha ha ha.

Yeah, in this society, having children is no guarantee of personalized care late in life. Being a good parent and raising children who will eventually love and respect you ups the odds a bit, but no guarantees at all.

My mother had seven. None of us can stand to be anywhere near her.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

My mother had seven. None of us can stand to be anywhere near her.

It's a relief to read things like this. I can only take my mother in small doses, preferably at the end of a telephone line. She and I have had an ambivalent relationship all my life. (She gave the toddler me away to foster parents, took me back, gave me away again -- and yes I resented it. It's very difficult finding a Mother's Day card that expresses that!) But we've never had the courage to completely sever ties.

Like Chai Tea, I suspect that I inherited her non-maternal instincts. That, and concern that I'd be as poor a mother as she, convinced me that having children would be a huge mistake, in my own case.

C'est la vie.

0 Replies

Yeah, the mother thing is way more common than I thought, too. I found that out when I started to vent about it here. Your upbringing sounds a lot harsher than mine, though.

I think I've said this before, but it is ironic that the very qualities that allow us to know that we would not be good parents are the qualities that make good parents. I've done the introspection, know my limits and weaknesses, know what the worst outcome is, and still I closed my eyes, held my breath and jumped into the pool of parenthood with both feet. Ok, it was more like a canonball. Of course I don't regret it. But I don't know if I would have regretted not doing it either. I think, for me, it's a source of personal growth and with any luck I'll contribute two emotionally healthy, smart, free-spirited adults to society. But not everyone needs an adventure like this to grow and to contribute to society. I have four siblings who have no intention of having children and I completely understand why and support their choices (really, how could I not). We are so lucky to live in a time and a place where it IS an option. And where we can spend our energy and resources raising children well rather than just keeping ourselves and them alive. There is a lot more to human life than flesh and blood and a beating heart.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

There is a lot more to human life than flesh and blood and a beating heart.

Thumbs up, FreeDuck, thumbs up. That's worthy of becoming a sig line. Smile

0 Replies

Thank you. I'm flattered.

0 Replies

Chai Tea wrote:

To answer your question....worker bees and worker ants are female.

P - Are you a man or a woman?

Worker bees and worker ants haven't the freedon of choise,they are designed to be pure slaves of their society,they just obey nature's instruction not to breed.
In modern human society,a lot of (mey be more and more)educated women choose to be worker bee or worker ant in human society and boast of saying they are emancipated from the burden of motherhood.

I'm a man.

0 Replies

That is not true....and frankly, I was expecting that exact argument.

In fact, if the queen dies, in at least species worker ants will actually attempt to produce young, with some success. Although they are sterile, they will produce some eggs that are clones.

Pardon me, but you're talking out of both sides of your ass...in one post you say

Worker bees and worker ants haven't the freedon of choise,they are designed to be pure slaves of their society,they just obey nature's instruction not to breed

then....

we'll never be wrong to obey nature's instruction.
In the case of reproduction,I don't know why we won't be wrong if we totally ignore nature's instruction.

The affirmation of life is to obey what nature tells you to do.

So make up your mind, does nature tell us to breed or not?

As a matter of fact...at this point in the thread, I wondering what your point is anyway.

What are you saying exactly?

If a woman doesn't have children, she's going against nature?

If it is, well super duper...I hope you have or find a woman who feels the same way.

The world is not black and white p. and you're making ascertains before doing your homework. I always find sweeping generalizations suspect.

Variety pleases.

0 Replies

This is my thinking on this, if you bear children and don't rear them, they will become unbearable. Sure it takes some work and money and patience, but they are family....most of us like family....and if you do have children, they will be picking out your nursing home, so rear them well.

If anybody thinks children are too costly, then by all means, stick that money in the bank and when you get really old (factoring in that you don't get hit by a Mack Truck when you are 30) you will be able to fill your tub with the money you saved and wallow in it. That might actually be enjoyable, not that I will ever be able to do that, I was actually a breeder at one time and blew all my money on my son's education and food. You know what's odd, he actually grew up and moved away. I still have money, we paid off the house and I can't say I am feeling any sense of deprivation over the whole child-raising thing. Maybe I didn't do it correctly.

0 Replies

Quote:

I was actually a breeder at one time

Where was your farm located?

0 Replies

The "farm" was located in my womb. I think that this might be true for most females engaged in the process of breeding offspring. I can't offer you coordinates, since my womb was always with me, where ever I happened to be. I never loaned it out, never had any interest in sub-contracting. As it happens, my womb is still with me, and I can tell you that at this moment it (womb/farm) is in Annapolis, sitting in front of a computer. In a little while, it will accompany me to the sleeping quarters because it's after midnight and I feel weary.

0 Replies

pangheping wrote:

Chai Tea wrote:
In modern human society,a lot of (mey be more and more)educated women choose to be worker bee or worker ant in human society and boast of saying they are emancipated from the burden of motherhood.

Even in my most rabidly feminist days, I never claimed to be "emancipated from the burden of motherhood", nor want such. Nor do I recall any other feminist saying so. I was and am happy to be emancipated enough to have a choice.

0 Replies

Chai Tea wrote:

Pardon me, but you're talking out of both sides of your ass...in one post you say

Worker bees and worker ants haven't the freedon of choise,they are designed to be pure slaves of their society,they just obey nature's instruction not to breed

then....

we'll never be wrong to obey nature's instruction.
In the case of reproduction,I don't know why we won't be wrong if we totally ignore nature's instruction.

The affirmation of life is to obey what nature tells you to do.

So make up your mind, does nature tell us to breed or not?

I can't see any contradiction here.Nature make different instructions to different organisms,she tells worker bee and woker ant not to breed in order to fully fullfill their roles as pure slaves in their society,and she tells women of humans to reproduce in order to affirm the existence of mankind.what's the wrong of nature's instructions in this cases?and what's the wrong of humans women to obey nature to reproduce?what's the wrong of worker bee and worker ant to obey nature's instruction not to breed just to be pure slaves?According to your logic,nature instructs mammals to breast-feed their young, then fish or birds should breast-feed their young too?
The greatest potential of a woman is to be a mother.Do not to strive to be worker bee or worker ant in order to be a pure modern slave in modern human society at the expence of forsake her greatest potential of being a mother.
Pardon me,I just say the truth,whether it affirms your philosoghic opinion or not.If you are under the age of 50 and still have no kid,to change your mind to bear a child before it's too late is the best advice one can give you on your behalf.

0 Replies

Well if you are still paying off your student loans, now might not be the best time to have children. But if you think that there is some magical special exact right time, you probably WILL wind up 50 plus with no offspring. I would recommend waiting at least until you are capable of taking care of yourself without assistance from parents, other than that, there is no such thing as the right time. Oh, I almost forgot, that 50 plus thing is only applied to women, men still have plenty of time. Don't blame me, I didn't make the rules. If I did, girls wouldn't get pregnant at 11, and they would be protected instead of exploited, but thats just me.

0 Replies

pangheping wrote:

....Pardon me,I just say the truth,whether it affirms your philosoghic opinion or not.If you are under the age of 50 and still have no kid,to change your mind to bear a child before it's too late is the best advice one can give you on your behalf.

Ha. I don't think so.

You don't make the reproductive decisions for me or my husband, or for Chai and hers, or for anyone else, other than yourself and your spouse, if you have one. There's nothing unnatural about not having or wanting children. My adding to the gene pool -- or not -- is none of your concern. I don't become any less of a woman because I don't use my uterus. I don't use my appendix, either, and I don't see anyone getting all huffy about that.

People have all manner of reasons for reproducing or not. Economics, religion, possible genetic issues, family pressures, personal desires, tastes and goals, etc. One of the most amazing things about being human is that we can go against instincts and form new pathways. You may think it's unnatural. That is not gospel truth, that is opinion. There is a difference. Until you start volunteering to gestate, birth, change, discipline, raise and pay for other people's children, I suggest you discontinue telling them to have them.

0 Replies

pangheping wrote:

The greatest potential of a woman is to be a mother.Do not to strive to be worker bee or worker ant in order to be a pure modern slave in modern human society at the expence of forsake her greatest potential of being a mother.
Pardon me,I just say the truth,whether it affirms your philosoghic opinion or not.If you are under the age of 50 and still have no kid,to change your mind to bear a child before it's too late is the best advice one can give you on your behalf.

OK, here we go....finally the true agenda comes out.

Say goodnight Gracie.

0 Replies

Quote:

Me :No. Name one animal that elects not to have kids - excepting us humans who have invented contraception.

Wolf: Worker bee, worker ant etc.

We also find animals that do not have kids within packs, where only the dominant male and female breed.

What the heck was that Wolf? You never cease to suprise me.
Last time I saw ants on a documentary I saw no signs of pills or condoms. Perhaps I was mistaken.
Also, you mean the dominant male only. There is no 'dominant female' that I know of (def. not in packs), as one male can have young with many females but generally not vice versa. This is not contraception, this is one big mean male telling other males to get stuffed.
Ants really aren't a good analogy, people. Humans are not segregated into castes (and no quick snipes about Hindus thanks Very Happy

).

0 Replies

Why do we bear children and rear them?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know