"I will cling to this mantra forever to avoid having to ever take responsibility for my own life and to justify remaining dependent on my 'narcissistic abusive' parents."

That's unsustainable. It would encourage massive entitlement and narcissism on the part of the child. And the child would most likely be unable to cope with life once the parents did die, since they essentially would be pandered to for their entire lives.

Yes, i did mention that its unsustainable. i just said that i thought that someone that creates a life against their will, would be morally obligated it. i do agree 100% that its unsustainable lol.

But the thing is...it isn't. Don't generalize your experience of life to everyone else. Existence is generally seen as a positive thing by most people. The vast majority of people are happy to be alive, and don't see it as a selfish act on the part of their parents that they were born. So what's the alternative, nobody has kids and the species dies out because nobody can live up to the impossible and largely unnecessary standards of perfection you have created as a requirement for becoming a parent?

"but if I want to die then I get institutionalized" --> well THERE'S your problem! The problem is that in most places, there are no laws protecting the rights of the suicidal. If people want to kill themselves, they absolutely should be allowed to. But that doesn't mean hardly anybody should ever be born because of the chance that they might not enjoy life.

And you know what? Even if some parents DID somehow live up to your impossible standards and do everything perfectly, you just know some kids would be outliers and end up being suicidal anyway! You simply can't control everything in life.

Not to be like, patronizing or anything, but I honestly think this antinatalist sentiment on your part is a reaction to the abuse you experienced, which has caused you to see the concept of parents in extremely black and white terms. I think you really need to reconsider where this is coming from.

well yes, if the species died out theres no suffering, as for the rights of suicidal - its still scary to kill yourself even with assisted suicide, why would i have to put myself through that if i could just...not exist in the first place? :p and yes. i agree that it is probably a reaction to my experiences at least to some degree, but it also does have some value regardless of it - you cannot suffer if you do not exist, thus if no one exists, no one can suffer - entire problem of suffering solved forever.

No offense, but that seems like a really entitled and completely non-productive way to view the world. This gets back to my original point. This sounds like the RBN "blame the parents for everything" philosophy taken to extremes. At a certain point you have to take ownership of your own life instead of always pinning everything on somebody else.

well yeah iguess it isnt productive, as its not like i can actually make my ideal world a reality where no one exists and no one suffers because of it. and yes it does have some similarity with the RBN "blame parents everywhere" thing, and while it does reach that point, IMO it does also hold "some" value due to points i talked of earlier - also to be perfectly clear, i do not blame my parents for literally everything, i only blame them for things i mentioned that they did earlier. this whole point about parents being resposnbile for suffering is just a counterpoint ( i really like debating things if you cant tell) that i thought of.

No it isn't. Having a few negative events happen in a great life is not a "net negative." Even having a lot of negative events happen in an okay life is not necessarily a "net negative." I have been abused by my mom, socially isolated for the majority of my life, some of my loved ones have died, and I suffer from several crippling mental illnesses. But I still consider my life to be a net positive and I am happy and grateful every day to be alive.

i think thats just a highly subjective thing, as proven by both of us having significantly different view of this. it is lovely that you're happy though.

I'm a consequentalist, and this does not add up in consequentialist terms. If that person doesn't want to exist, they should be allowed to stop existing. But that doesn't mean the 99 other people should never have gotten the chance to exist just because of the one dissatisfied person. You could even argue it's a selfish thought on the part of the dissatisfied person that everyone else doesn't get the right to exist just because THEY are upset.

but you do realise that even if you allow someone to stop existing, the process of doing so - is emotionally very scary. so effectively to stop existing you have to put them through some more suffering. and i do see your logic behind that argument about being selfish - but on the other hand its not like life is that great (again this is my view lol) but yeah thats just antinatalism in general, suffering overshadows happiness as a more strong emotion, thus suffering is valued more - if some of us are unhappy, then none of us should exist so none of us are unhappy. i can definitely see how you would reach a conclusion that its selfish. its definitely an interesting thing you pointed out, i'll be thinking about it for a while

/r/Pussified Thread Parent Link - np.reddit.com