r/childfree - Where child-haters congregate

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Shitted Scaredless said:
Just imagine being someone who doesn't want kids. Doesn't hate them, mind you, just doesn't want any. And, as family can sometimes do, they start hounding them about it so they seek the modern age comfort of looking for internet strangers to bitch too. And to their horror, all communities that should hypothetically feel their pain are just full of freaks who specifically want to hurt kids. And attempt to vent is responded to with people talking about violence upon children.
Click to expand...
I hate what the Reddit mindset does to communities that were made with good intentions. The groupthink and echo chamber effect always end up making those communities get more extreme over time until eventually it’s just a flanderized parody of itself. Old forums were like this too at times, but it seems way more extreme on Reddit.
 
Palantir said:
With vet bills and pet food costs these days I'd say that pets might even cost more than children
Click to expand...
I would be surprised if I spent more than 2k on my cat over the course of a year. A bag of food costs 50 bucks and lasts months, litter is similar but slightly more expensive. I only take him to the vet when he's sick, which is never, because he's a good boy and doesn't eat random shit(despite being a full blown sperg on all other accounts).

In short, no, pets do not cost as much as children to maintain.
 
Kujo Jotaro said:
I would be surprised if I spent more than 2k on my cat over the course of a year. A bag of food costs 50 bucks and lasts months, litter is similar but slightly more expensive. I only take him to the vet when he's sick, which is never, because he's a good boy and doesn't eat random shit(despite being a full blown sperg on all other accounts).

In short, no, pets do not cost as much as children to maintain.
Click to expand...
I think cats are a bit cheaper than dogs and it definitely depends on the style of owner.

My parents for example would put our cats down if they had a serious injury so we never got a big bill. Some owners I personally know have spent more on buying their dog and training it than my parents contributed towards helping me buy my first home.

Maybe I'm being too OTT, but at the very least I think a great number of people underestimate the cost of pets and overestimate the cost of children.
 
Something I find hilarious about r/childfree nutjobs is that they call children and babies "poop factories."

Hey guys what do you think pets, specifically dogs and cats, are?

With human children you're only going to be dealing with diapers/pullups for 2-3 years. Once potty training is complete, you're only dealing directly with waste if they've had an accident or are sick. The frequency of accidents decreases with age.

With animals you will be dealing with this their entire existence. Depending on the animal, this existence could span a decade or two. Cats are relatively simple: you have to scoop and change litterboxes. With dogs you have different choices, such as puppy pads (waste exposed indoors), having a poopy yard (you may choose to scoop your yard), or scooping poop on walks every day. This is not counting accidents or sickness for either pet.

I love my cat dearly but litterboxes, vomit, and hairballs are not fun at all.
 
IMG_6481.jpeg
 
I tried looking for something funny there, but this morning it's all just sad, to the tune of inconveniences and annoyances. I know redditors can be histrionic and ridiculous about things like, "I can't make peace with my body and I'm going to kill myself" or "I think orange man is going to send cops to kill me right now," but even if those are unjustified concerns based in silliness, they're still fears of existential threats.
But the childfree threads are just about being annoyed, with no self-awareness of how small the problem really is. Without the understanding that being annoyed by loud strangers and personal questions is a universal experience in spite of which the world keeps turning, you get people who don't understand that caring for another human who is totally dependent on you is a responsibility unlike any other:
Screenshot_20260212-070623_Opera.jpg
It's not really about the timeline, though it's not technically about kids, either. Finances and caring for older relatives, this actually is all just about having the unconditional network called a family, so it is, in fact, about who has kids, who has what resources, who is looking after someone else and who is only responsible for themselves. If OP can mention the difference between themselves and the sibling who has kids, but can't at that point understand the material difference in their responsibilities, they're hopeless.
 
Agares said:
I hate what the Reddit mindset does to communities that were made with good intentions. The groupthink and echo chamber effect always end up making those communities get more extreme over time until eventually it’s just a flanderized parody of itself. Old forums were like this too at times, but it seems way more extreme on Reddit.
Click to expand...
At least the childfree ones mostly stick to being a bit whiny, whatever random tantruming toddler they glared at that morning will live.
The alternative comminity of redditors who did end up becoming parents that gathers on the regretful parents sub is the real sad case, imagine being a kid and your parent posts on reddit about how much they wish you were never born and could get away from you...

I say let them be a bit annoying to avoid the far worse alternative. Yes only a small % of people overall actually regrets their kids but these are people who are already stereotypical redditors we are talking about, the echochamber luring them into removing themselves from the gene pool is probably for the better.
 
Kujo Jotaro said:
I would be surprised if I spent more than 2k on my cat over the course of a year. A bag of food costs 50 bucks and lasts months, litter is similar but slightly more expensive. I only take him to the vet when he's sick, which is never, because he's a good boy and doesn't eat random shit(despite being a full blown sperg on all other accounts).

In short, no, pets do not cost as much as children to maintain.
Click to expand...
People with chronically ill pets who are determined to treat them can absolutely spend more than parents with healthy children, but then parents with equivalently sick kids are probably going to spend quite a bit more than that, depending on insurance and everything.
 
PyrrhicRustle said:
People with chronically ill pets who are determined to treat them can absolutely spend more than parents with healthy children, but then parents with equivalently sick kids are probably going to spend quite a bit more than that, depending on insurance and everything.
Click to expand...
Yes if you're emotionally unable to let a dog die a natural death you can spend a lot keeping it alive, with a very low quality of life, for awhile.
 
SpiderBitch said:
At least the childfree ones mostly stick to being a bit whiny, whatever random tantruming toddler they glared at that morning will live.
The alternative comminity of redditors who did end up becoming parents that gathers on the regretful parents sub is the real sad case, imagine being a kid and your parent posts on reddit about how much they wish you were never born and could get away from you...
Click to expand...
r/regretful parents is a whole different can of worms. That echo chamber can't be good for your mental health when you're already going through the stress of raising kids. Honestly those people should go to a parents' support group instead.
SpiderBitch said:
I say let them be a bit annoying to avoid the far worse alternative. Yes only a small % of people overall actually regrets their kids but these are people who are already stereotypical redditors we are talking about, the echochamber luring them into removing themselves from the gene pool is probably for the better.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with that sub's existence as cringeworthy as it is. The real nutjobs you have to look out for are the full blown antinatalists, who literally hate life and think it would be better for humanity and life to go extinct in order to prevent suffering. These people have actually tried to blow up fertility clinics in the recent past.
 
SpiderBitch said:
At least the childfree ones mostly stick to being a bit whiny, whatever random tantruming toddler they glared at that morning will live.
The alternative comminity of redditors who did end up becoming parents that gathers on the regretful parents sub is the real sad case, imagine being a kid and your parent posts on reddit about how much they wish you were never born and could get away from you...

I say let them be a bit annoying to avoid the far worse alternative. Yes only a small % of people overall actually regrets their kids but these are people who are already stereotypical redditors we are talking about, the echochamber luring them into removing themselves from the gene pool is probably for the better.
Click to expand...
I agree the same way I agree about abortion rights. Shitty people should not be parents.

I work with an old bitch who gets on her high horse that her and her husband made the ethical choice not to have children because of climate change. She made this announcement while a coworker and I were cooing over our other coworker's brand new baby pics. Read the room lady.

Word has it even her parents are happy she didn't have children, she's that much of a bitch.
 
Agares said:
There is nothing wrong with that sub's existence as cringeworthy as it is. The real nutjobs you have to look out for are the full blown antinatalists, who literally hate life and think it would be better for humanity and life to go extinct in order to prevent suffering. These people have actually tried to blow up fertility clinics in the recent past.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between antinatalism as an actual philosophical position and what I would call "reddit antinatalism." It's much like the difference between atheism as a philosophical position and reddit atheism or that Atheism+ bullshit.

Reddit corrupts and permeates whatever philosophy it adopts and turns it into mindless knee-jerk lunacy.

Say what you like about Schopenhauer but he at least had some consistency in his philosophical outlooks.
 
biggnigghog said:
Yet another post on Childfree and the zoo. Someone made a post about how a child threw a rock at a tiger at the zoo. The poster's wife had to restrain the poster from throwing a rock at the child. Some commentors hoped that the child gets eaten by the tiger.
Click to expand...
If someone threw a rock at my kid. Not that I have kit it's. Any of my nephews, because they're a child and they don't know that you're not opposed to throw rocks at animals because they're stupid kids. You would get your ass beat to a bloody pulp.
General Patton said:
You know the same people who rant this way on childfree are the same motherfuckers who talk the same way about their damn pets.
Click to expand...
If you have the words dog mommy or dog daddy. Ever said any of that you deserve to be publicly executed by firing squad. And then fed to your dogs.
 
Hey, I found a shitty childfree movie review.

Stepford Wives.png


Yes, the mother in the original Stepford Wives movie should have just abandoned her two children and left them with the murderer father all to save her own ass. LOL, how are these people for real and how would that make that character look good?
 
General Patton said:
Hey, I found a shitty childfree movie review.

View attachment 8798217

Yes, the mother in the original Stepford Wives movie should have just abandoned her two children and left them with the murderer father all to save her own ass. LOL, how are these people for real and how would that make that character look good?
Click to expand...
Some of these people seem completely foreign to basic human emotions.

On another post I saw them talking about how if a wife doesn't want a kid and the husband really wants one and she ends up going along with it she should get a contract that in case of divorce he should be automatically forced to take 100% custody while she leaves and lives her life (with not having to pay child support presumably idk its been a while since I saw it).

Even though that would not actually help most women, because even if they dont want or even like kids, at that point they would have raised and bonded with these specific kids for at least a few years, and would most likely still care about them enough to not want to completely give them up even if they regretted their decision to have kids in the first place???

With how many dads fight for custody for the sole purpose of hurting their partners something like that would only end up biting them in the ass.

Especially if their partner isnt a great dad, ive seen plenty of women who lost majority custody thanks to not having a good lawyer and now every weekend have to deal with receiving their poor babies in raggedy clothes after theyve been fed nothing but fries the whole week. Even if you don't like being a parent at all a normal person would still like the option to be able to save their kids from that kind of neglect at the very least even if they have to make sacrifices for it.
 
Last edited:
SpiderBitch said:
Even though that would not actually help most women, because even if they dont want or even like kids, at that point they would have raised and bonded with these specific kids for at least a few years,
Click to expand...
Exactly. They don't get that a lot of mothers bond with the child, especially when they're pregnant.
 
General Patton said:
Exactly. They don't get that a lot of mothers bond with the child, especially when they're pregnant.
Click to expand...
Honestly, even if you take out of the equation the fact that theyre her kids, they would still be her helpess relatives that she spent a few years around. Even if it was a brother with downs syndrome instead or her granny, her character probably wouldve not left them to probably die because that is how basic familial love works, something redditors seem to just not understand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom