chat, feelings, and random discussion thread

[Delirious]

hyena:
i get the feeling that either your puzzle doesn't consist of many enough pieces or i should decide whether i prefer nihilist or mystic.

rahvin's emotional aspects are obvious to me, so it's not that i'd recommend anybody aiming for lifelong loneliness or that i get all warm inside at the prospect of dying alone - i just find the whole "leaving your mark on mankind" sort of thing (i hope i'm not too far off assuming that's more or less what you mean with writing an immortal oeuvre) just for the sake of it horribly overrated, let alone having children. i can see why others go for it, but in spite of being only 22 i'm dead serious when i say i for various reasons doubt i'll ever change my mind about at least having children.

i guess what i'm trying to get at is:
what is, in this case, the price of dreadful short-termism?
possibly existential doubts along the lines of "have i lived my life to the fullest?" and such, but that's probably not to be avoided anyway.

if "no commitment = no survival", how does commitment (and its results) equal survival?

 

[hyena]

@delirious: probably i'm too biased by things i've seen in the recent past, but i believe that nobody can seriously ever consider a pattern of choices that exposes them to the risk of remaining loveless in tough times. it's just completely irrational, and the only ground on which i can understand it is the fact that people often confuse the important things with the unimportant things. listen, you do not want to be alone if you ever catch a disease that leads you to the grave in a slow, painful, excruciating process. you REALLY don't want that. and it's not a question of preference, don't think of this "don't want" in the terms of "i don't want to have a burger now", it's more of "i don't want a hot iron to be smashed on my forehead for 10,000 times now".

i know this sounds cynical and quite awful, and i'm not saying that it is the most important thing about relationships, or the reason why they should start; if you build a relationship esclusively based on the need for insurance, then it will fail because there's no motivation and the level of motivation needed for the type of support i was mentioning can come, imo, only from genuine feeling (by more or less the same token, people who believe in god out of a need for comfort are going to stop believing in god when they are in tragic circumstances... but i digress). still, i think that people should factor into the equation that mating and reproducing are, as i said, survival strategies.

(i'll get back to the point on commitment later, now i need to go)

 

[Kovenant84]

still, i think that people should factor into the equation that mating and reproducing are, as i said, survival strategies.

For the most part, I agree with what you said, but I think there's a bit of a generalization here that I take a bit of fault with. I understand the need for companionship, and simply through the nature of humanity as a social species, I feel that it is important for a healthy later life to have at least someone to share it with. Now, I don't necessarily think the other person needs to be a 'mate' persay, for you could have a good friend that you talk with and hang out with. Too keep it short, socialization is necessary, and while I think an intimate partner is better, even a friend is adequate.

However, the part I take exception to is that about reproducing. I truly don't believe that this is a 'must-have' the way many people make it out to be. I personally don't have any plans to have a kid (not that I'm really sure I'd be able to at all) and I don't feel like it would detrimentally affect me in the future. Now, people always say to that "Yeah, but just wait till you're older, and you'll see..." Personally, I don't like the idea that my personality and preferences will be overwritten by overzealous hormones and instinctive programming, and I also don't think it's very likely to occur. I think there are too many people who treat having kids like playing "the Sims" as is, though if its a well thought out decision by both parties, then they have ever right to have a kid. Not to say that 'accidents' are wrong, but I don't see such kids necessarily adding to the fiber of a strong relationship in the way my other example might. (Nothing against the kids themselves, of course, they can't help that they've been brought into the world.)

I'm sorry if that rant was kinda muddled or confusing, it just digs me a little each time I hear something that I feel implies children are necessary to a happy and fulfilling relationship. But again, those are my feelings. It's not really a cut and dry right/wrong type of situation.

~kov.

 

[Dark_Silence]

I dont see the fact of having kids like just reproduction. For me founding a family is more about love and happiness.

 

[Tritonus]

For me kids are something I can take out my aggressions on, like my karatekinder.... Mohhahahaha

 

[plintus]

How many dead babies do you need to paint a house?

 

[Delirious]

hyena: i can say that so far everything, too biased or not, makes perfect sense to me. however, it as far as i'm concerned neatly falls under "rahvin's emotional aspects".

i'll await the continuation before going further, though.

 

[Dark_Silence]

How many dead babies do you need to paint a house?

i have heard that one before, but i have forgotten the answer

 

[plintus]

i have heard that one before, but i have forgotten the answer

depends on how hard you throw them

 

[fireangel]

Delirious and Kovenant, your similar avatar makes it difficult to distinguish your posts I actually always think everything looking yellow like that is a post from Delirious because he used to have that for ages...

However, the part I take exception to is that about reproducing. I truly don't believe that this is a 'must-have' the way many people make it out to be. I personally don't have any plans to have a kid (not that I'm really sure I'd be able to at all) and I don't feel like it would detrimentally affect me in the future. Now, people always say to that "Yeah, but just wait till you're older, and you'll see..." Personally, I don't like the idea that my personality and preferences will be overwritten by overzealous hormones and instinctive programming, and I also don't think it's very likely to occur. I think there are too many people who treat having kids like playing "the Sims" as is, though if its a well thought out decision by both parties, then they have ever right to have a kid. Not to say that 'accidents' are wrong, but I don't see such kids necessarily adding to the fiber of a strong relationship in the way my other example might.

~kov.

It´s especially weird when people have children just so their line doesn´t die out. If that was the main reason, and the parents go through all the trouble, and then it might happen that the next or second-next generation ceases to exist for one reason or another, then it was all in vain.

About the company in old age, people shouldn´t count on their children either. There are so many elder folks in solitude or living in a home for the elder, where no-one comes to visit them, either because their children have moved extremely far away, or have no interest to visit - maybe sometimes because their parents haven´t treated them very good, the relations between the generations are bad, or, what also happens, the children died before their parents. You can never know.

People have to come to terms with their lives on their own. Company, of a partner, or friends, and/or children, is just additional luck.

 

[hyena]

@fireangel: it's easier said than done. and unrealistic, too. for example, you can't expect people who have AIDS to be happy living on their own. and you cannot label them as immature or maladjusted because most of them would rather kill themselves than venture into that. you mentioned elderly or sick people being abandoned... well, for me this makes the 'crimes against humanity' list way quicker than any military operation, it's really one of the most disgusting facts of life, right up there with child porn (but of course many more people find it convenient to act that way, so it's not socially condemned). the fact that some, or many people, act in an abhorrent way is enough to make me say that one should take precautions, but not enough to make me say that it's ok. you're right in saying that some parents are abandoned by their children because they were unfair, violent, outright evil. now, the bible says that even if your father is blind drunk and strips in public you should be compassionate and cover his body while looking the other way, and i guess that's a metaphor for coming to the aid of a weak, ill or old parent no matter what. i don't expect people to do this, and i'm not even sure i agree that it should be done (the old 'getting what you deserve' vs 'getting a second chance' story which will never leave me alone, even in 50 years). but i believe that violence, abuse etc. are not the case for many people who decide to leave their parents to rot in some old people's home. i also believe that in most cases it's not even a life-or-death issue such as 'if i ask mum to come live with us, my husband/wife will leave me' - these cases are probably the hardest, because one can be wise and not choose an idiot for a partner, but we don't get to decide how idiotic our parents are. anyway, the majority of circumstances are just 'i don't have time' or 'i can't be bothered'. to which i answer 'rot in hell', where possible.

 

[plintus]

I love white pizza.

 

[hyena]

you're a fucking imbecile.

 

[fireangel]

for example, you can't expect people who have AIDS to be happy living on their own. and you cannot label them as immature or maladjusted because most of them would rather kill themselves than venture into that.

okay,this is an exception I haven´t included in my statement. I was speaking about the "normal" kind of people. But I anyhow didn´t mean that you have to be able to live independently in any case in the material way, I was rather talking about the emotional/mental side of being on one´s own (again, I see that also that wouldn´t be nice to persons being deadly ill).


As for elderly people who are not visited by their children anymore, I agree that often it is neglect on the children´s side, and it´s not a good thing to do, but I aimed at the pro-argument of having children for later company. Fair or not, it´s obvious if you check in at any home for the elder, that the visits are not always a standard thing to be expected.

For the cases you mention, that the parents behaved just too bad in their parents´ role, not everyone shares your view on forgiveness. Some children just can´t do that, and you might have to understand their point of view, too.

 

[plintus]

you're a fucking imbecile.

I don't know such kinky words, so I refer to myself as "dumb as wood"

 

[hyena]

@fireangel: i was actually saying that i don't have a strong view on forgiveness. i'm not convinced it's right.

on the other hand, you mention 'normal' people as opposed to people affected with AIDS. but are there really 'normal' deaths? i never checked the figures on that, but i would say that the percentage of people who die in their sleep peacefully and with no prior illness are a small minority (i might be wrong). from what i understand, the large majority has to go through a period of awful suffering before they die, although the extent varies - eg living for 10 years with AIDS is going to make you way worse than living for 1 year with cardio-vascular insufficiency. so is there really a situation that doesn't warrant assistance of some kind, besides the heart attack that takes you away in 15 minutes when you're at the peak of your life?

 

[Villain]

Not surprisingly, I disagree with Hyena pretty much 100%. First of all, I believe that the vast majority of people in this world should never have children - they are simply not skilled enough to take care of them. In my mind, the single worst crime a human can commit is giving birth to a child and not taking care of him/her.

My parents are now around 55 years old. When I'm their age, I hope I have lived good enough a life to be able to die alone. I'm in good terms with my parents, but I know I'm not going to spend much of my time with them in their last years, and neither will my brother. They are not expecting it, either.

My grandmother was around 70 years old when she divorced my grandfather (because he smoked inside, which was not good for her health). When my father tried to offer her some help, she told us a story that went something along these lines:

A mother-crow gave birth to five little crows. She fed them and took good care of them, but she realised she was getting old. Thus, one day she picked up one of her not yet flight-capable children, flew over a lake and asked her child:

"When I'm old and weak, will you take care of me?"

"No", the child replied, and the mother let her fall to the lake.

One by one she picked up each child of hers and asked them the same question. Every one of them denied her request, and she let them all drown, until it was the time for the last little crow. She brought him over the lake and asked him the same question:

"When I'm old and weak, will you take care of me?"

"No" the small crow replied, just like the ones before him - but then he continued: "Because by then, I will have my own children to take care."

The mother-crow flew back to her nest and let her last child live.

My grandmother is now about 80 years old and lives in solitude. I see her about twice a year, even though she lives in the same city. In the past it made me feel bad for not visiting her more often, but nowadays it doesn't bother me - I know she wouldn't want me to visit her just because of my feeling of responsibility.

If I somehow live to be 80 years old, I certainly won't expect anyone to come see me. If I get sick, I trust I will be taken to a hospital, where I can either be treated or die. I certainly don't want any non-professional people around me at my deathbed. I'd truly hate to be a burden to any relative or friend of mine.

-Villain

 

[Kovenant84]

Well, on the theme of 'old', I have some opinions too.

My mother's mother died in her sleep laying next to me on the couch when I was 5. My father's father died a painful death from a ruptured esophagus, a result of a botched operation to help him recover from decades of smoking, on my 10th birthday. I miss them both terribly to this day, and it still brings tears to my eyes to remember them. Not because I was there, or wasn't there, but because I felt I never got to actually know them.

My still living grandparents live far away now, and I see my grandmother about twice a year, my grandfather about once every three years. If they were to die tomorrow, I would not mourn them to the same degree as my other grandparents, because I've spent a good portion of my life getting to know them and spending time with them.

I guess it's a roundabout way of saying that growing old does not necessarily require other people around you at all times. Obviously you can't really be a well-adjusted hermit, but I don't think one would need the same amount of social exposure as someone younger. Of course, I don't want to wind up all depressed and old like the guy in the Sentenced video, but then again, he had that really cute dog. I think a dog could really replace people at that age. Hell, at this age too.

~kov.

 

[plintus]

I wish there were like 12 more hours in a day. Cuz I would be able to get some sleep then... cuz I'm hallucinating :S

Sunny day at the Atlantic shore tomorrow... whatever the fuck

 

[rahvin]

I believe that the vast majority of people in this world should never have children - they are simply not skilled enough to take care of them.

I used to believe something along these lines, but I realized at some point that kids are pretty much all skilled enough to take care of themselves and overcome the effects of bad parenting somehow.