My Girlfriend Wants Kids – Rant

January 31, 2012
By

My girlfriend has been pressuring me to have children with her.  We both agree that we should at least try living together before doing this, but she wants the kid sooner rather than later.  She is 34 right now and concerned about having kids past the age of 35.  We are currently not living together, but the current plan is to get a place together within 6 months.  I’ve been with her a year.  I have some issues with this that I will discuss below.

She also wants a marriage license.  The marriage license thing bothers me nearly as much as the kid.  It is a violently imposed State contract that allows her to assault me indirectly should our relationship take a turn for the worse.  The kid I view as completely ending my life and the marriage license I view as completely entrapping me within a violently imposed legal control grid of family law courts.  I have no problems with marriage, I have a problem with marriage licenses specifically.  It strikes me as outrageous that I should have to ask permission to marry someone from the State.

My thoughts on the kid issue:

Children are massive resource hogs that will either bankrupt me completely or leave me living in near total poverty.  I make less than 100,000 a year in an expensive California suburb.  If my girlfriend were to leave work to raise a child (I would never subject my own kid to violently funded indoctrination centers operated by State authoritarian control freaks), I would certainly be teetering on the edge of bankruptcy.  There would be no way I could afford to save for the kids future schooling or any other long term large expenses.  I would also totally wipe out any chance of retiring by 70.  I would be forced to work until death with total certainty.  On my own, I barely have anything left over after expenses as it is.  Taking care of two other people on my salary alone would mean a diet of Ramen Noodles and clothing from the thrift store.  I can clearly see why 45 million Americans are on food stamps at the moment.  I wager 99% of them have kids.

Children require constant attention for nearly decade, leaving me with zero personal time.  I’m 35 right now and my energy levels certainly aren’t what they were in my early 20′s.  Not only would I have zero personal time, but I would be run completely ragged.  I would be working my butt off all day and then working my butt off all night.  Forget about vacations, no money or time for that nonsense.  Further, I don’t trust my girlfriend to teach the child the virtues of voluntary contracts and private property rights.  Most of the child’s real education would have to come from me.

Of course, money, energy and time are not the only reasons I view having kids as dangerous.  The State owns me, it owns you, and it will certainly own my children.  They will be forced to live in a society that incarcerates more people than Stalin did at the height of the gulag system.  They will be faced with a 33% chance of being arrested before the age of 23 for peaceful voluntary behaviors.  Of course, there is always the good chance that I will be locked up for simply operating this blog or some other arbitrary peaceful activity I chose to engage in, leaving the kid without a father.  The State will continue to criminalize all activities.  The Economist reports that:

Overall, from the beginning of the Obama Administration to mid-FY 2011, regulators have imposed $38 billion in new costs on the American people, more than any comparable period on record.

The number of pending regulations that cost 100 million or more every year has doubled in under five years.

In 2010, the federal government alone added 80,000 pages of new laws that control every aspect of human behavior.  The total number of pages of federal legal code is currently impossible to even calculate.  The federal tax code alone clocks in at 74,994 pages in length as of 2010.

US schools have become prison zones, where children are arrested for the most innocuous acts.  The list in this article and its associated links will have your head spinning.  You will not believe it to be real, but I assure you, every example provided is quite real.  Children have been arrested, assaulted or fined for using perfume in class, burping in class, leaving crumbs on the floor, drawing on the desk, 6 year old temper tantrums, throwing paper planes, bringing a plastic butter knife to school, yelling at cafeteria workers, kissing, and a whole host of other completely normal childhood behaviors. In 2010 alone, police in Texas issued an astounding 300,000 tickets to school children.

The State will rob them blind through payroll taxes leaving them with no hope of retirement or even saving enough money to afford their own home.  They will grow up in poverty and live a life of fear, warfare and misery.  The State will continue to print money and expand its violent wars until society totally collapses into a smoking heap of ruin as we saw in Wiemar Germany post WWI.  The fact that this will happen is now a mathematical certainty.   They will have no hope of living a comfortable life in the future.  At this stage of the economic collapse, my child would come into the world at the height of the meltdown.

One way to starve the beast into submission is to deprive it of human capital.  By not having children, the State’s violent regime would come to an end that much quicker.  By depriving the State of tax slaves, the socialist security system will implode that much quicker.  By depriving the State of tax slaves, the wars will end that much quicker.  By depriving the State of tax slaves, the dollar will be destroyed that much quicker.  Withholding human capital is definitely a non-violent means by which the destruction of the State can be hastened.

My girlfriend refuses to recognize any of these issues as being problems.  She wants a kid, end of story.   Further, my girlfriend has internal cystitis and fibromyalgia, which means she is occasionally in so much pain that she becomes nearly incapacitated.  This means I would be the one who would have to pick up the slack with the kid.  Her condition has left her with an aversion to food, which also means I would be the one who does most of the cooking.

On top of this, my family is halfway across the continent.  The only direct support I could get would have to come from her family.  Her family is large, but still, my own mother and aunts would not be available to me as a resource.

After all my ranting, I really want to know one simple thing.

WHY IN THE HELL DO WOMEN WANT TO HAVE KIDS!?

What the hell is so great about kids?  I just can’t figure it out.  I know what kind of a terrorist I was as a child.  I destroyed more property and got into more trouble than I can even remember.  I nearly gave my mother a nervous breakdown.  Playing with fire in the woods, blowing up paper boxes with soda bombs, stealing the car and crashing it in the middle of the night halfway across the state, ruining my dad’s ceiling tiles, refusing to do my homework or cooperate with authoritarians in school, sucking down enough food to feed an army, breaking numerous windows, making homemade firearms in the garage with fireworks and metal tubing, etc.. etc.. etc..  - and now I’m supposed to inflict all that upon myself?  why?

I remember my mom actually dragged me down to the local fire department when I was a kid and she had the fire marshal yell at me LOL.  (It didn’t do any good).  Once I was even arrested for sticking a flashing police light on her car so I could speed through stop lights HAHAHA!  I was TERRIBLE!   Frankly, it’s a miracle of Christ that I managed to get a degree and become a respectable contributing professional.

I feel that I should emphasize that my mother and father had nothing to do with my behavior.  They were very caring and loving parents.  I just chose to be a rebellious obnoxious little shit because I was born that way.  They did everything they could to raise me right.   There just comes a point where the kid is going to do what he wants regardless of the parenting involved.

Someone help me out here and explain to me why I should have kids.  Why should I add another slave to the system?  What am I missing here?  Where are the rewards?  What is my kid going to provide me that a good dog will not?  I love dogs.  They are always happy to see you.  They are easy to take care of.  They don’t require constant attention.  They don’t take a lot of resources to maintain. They are fun to play with.  etc.. etc..

And heaven forbid our relationship should end in divorce like 50% of all marriages do. Child support, alimony for forever, legal fees resulting in bankruptcy, total butt rape for forever.  Of course I would continue to support my child voluntarily, but the State certainly isn’t going to allow me to negotiate equitable support/custody, women always get the better end of the deal.

  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Current
  • NewsVine
  • Wikio
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • Tumblr
  • PDF
  • Print
  • Joshua Connelly

    Explain to her that governments didn’t issue marriage certificates or licenses until the 1920′s and they were used as a way to prevent whites from marrying blacks. Explain to her the institution of marriage pre-existed the states role in the industry and isn’t needed to this day. Tell her government should divorce itself from the marriage industry. 

    If she still insists, maybe find some common ground and sign some type of unionizing contract through a 3rd party lawyer. This might be better than a marriage certificate issued by the state because you could preemptively put in in clauses in the case of divorce. If its mutual split, perhaps visitation rights and bank funds go 50/50. If one of you terminates the contract through unfaithfulness, maybe the terminating agent receives no funds, alimony, or child visitation. The contract could hold a prenuptial agreement clause. 

    In any case, the free market holds a better solution than any government decree. 

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      I have.

      Women do not listen to logic and reason when it comes to kids and marriage.

      • Soy El Negro Gato

        I find that statement a little sexist. My partner has no interest in marriage and I am probably more interested in having my own kids than she is.

  • Akagaga

    Unless you’re holding back some information, I strongly recommend that you do not father her child and you do not marry her.  The only thing that makes it all worthwhile is love, and you never mentioned the word.  You also never mentioned the idea of trying to please her, further reinforcing your lack of love for her.

    I, too, have fibromyalgia, along with a couple other issues, and you’re right.  When I’m having a flare, my husband does everything.  He cooks, he cleans, he does laundry.  He even empties the cat box.  You’ll be doing her no favors by resenting everything you do for her.  Set her free and let her find someone who will actually love her.

    As much as I admire some of your thought processes on other issues, you really seem to be a very selfish person.  You don’t care what she thinks or what she wants.  You’re only interested in bending her to your will.  Any real relationship requires willing compromise, and I don’t think you have it in you.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      Well I appreciate your candor, but I don’t think the issue of loving her has anything to do with it.  I have love for my unborn child.  I am very leery about bringing a child into this world only to have him grow up in a Stalinist police state dystopia.  It is my love for my unborn child that dictates my actions.  While you may view me as selfish, I view the act of having children in this dystopia an act of selfishness.  If I thought I had financial security and the kid could grow up in a reasonably free society I would be all in favor of having kids.

      • Akagaga

        Michael, you’re hopeless.  Even in your response, you don’t say you love this woman.  If you did really love her, you would WANT to do things to please her.  You would feel good about putting her desires before your own.  There would be a deep satisfaction in your soul at the thought of sacrificing on her behalf.

        You obviously don’t feel any of that.  And all the rest of your response is smoke & mirrors trying to hide this fact, probably from yourself as much as anyone else.

        • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

          You want me to say I love her for your own reasons.  I do love her.  If I didn’t love her I wouldn’t even be considering the idea of having children with her.  If I was going to pick a mother to my children, she would be top of the list. She’s great with kids.  But like I said, this isn’t about my love for her, this is about my love for my unborn child.

        • klaeyz

          Seriously, Akagaga… you are entirely missing Michael’s point. This guy is more level headed than so many people that jump into marriage and have children these days. I respect that this guy looks at the bigger picture and doesn’t just jump into such a thing because of “love”. This world has changed for the worse and isn’t getting better any time soon, so I think its so ass-backwards of you to call him selfish because he’s concerned about the well being of his unborn child, his wife, and him self living happily and healthily in these times.

    • klaeyz

      I think its absurd that you’ll call him selfish because he isn’t bending to the will of another person. Loving someone doesn’t mean you give up all of yourself, it means you find a compromise. Having kids is one of the hugest life changing events in ones life, and not something you just “do” because you love someone. And yes, the majority of women have an innate desire to have children because its biologically ingrained in them. Not so with men, even though many men do want to have kids they don’t have the biological clock ticking.

  • A Country Farmer

    You should definitely read “Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids: Why Being a Great Parent is Less Work and More Fun Than You Think, Bryan Caplan, 2011″ which covers some of your angst about children through statistical research on twins and adoptees.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      I have some serious problems with Caplan, but I thank you for the info.  I’ll check it out.  Caplan makes me especially mad because he is a violent statist who masquerades as a libertarian. The ultimate subversive jerk.

      • zirb

        Caplan is not so bad, see his anarchy FAQ: http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/anarfaq.htm. His blog at EconLog also recently pointed to http://spot.colorado.edu/~huemer/Contents.pdf which is a great forthcoming anarcho-capitalism book by a good philosopher, so it’s not clear to me that Bryan Caplan is not an anarcho-capitalist, just trying to achieve it through gradualism (see his great, nearly anarcho-capitalist talks on Youtube by the title of rethinking the night watchman state

        • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

          He had this to say about Austrian theory:

          “While the substantive contributions of Austrian economists to economics are significant, their sum from Human Action on is small compared to the progress that neoclassical economics has made over the same time period. ”

          So yeah, he’s that bad. His rejections of what Rothbard and Mises had to say isn’t so bad as his acceptance of what neo-classical economics has to say. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_52ST3LGP5JC7D7AHGJYG7HYFTE Hossein

    Grow balls, stop whining, be a man and learn to make some sacrifices.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      How does making sacrifices make me a man? This seems like a superficial argument that is not grounded in any rational logic.

      • A Country Farmer

        Fair enough, I’m also not a huge fan of Caplan, but this book is very evidence-based and goes against the common wisdom, particularly about cost and negative sides of children.

        Also, I’m sure you’ve watched Stephan Molyneux about children and I think he makes a very good argument that the only real way to change this statist world is by bringing up good, loving children in a non-violent way. As more and more people do that, the world slowly changes as it stops accepting its ridiculous and violent premises.

        • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

          Yeah I fully agree with Molyneux’s premise that non-violent child rearing is key to raising good productive children, but that premise does not say why people should have kids in the first place.  I’ll definitely look into Caplan’s book because I really am trying to convince myself having kids is a good idea.  I just need some serious heavy weight arguments that show where my present rationale is wrong.

          It’s not fair to the kid to have him grow up in this shit hole. If I had the choice of not being born into this dump I would have chosen not to come here. 99% of the people are violent statists, endless war, endless looting, endless suffering, etc..

          • A Country Farmer

             It seems your primary question is what is the value of kids given their costs. First, I think you inflate the costs [see Caplan], and I think the value is clear, purely economically speaking: The world gets better because of ideas (despite the pillage of governments). Ideas come from people. More people means more ideas.

          • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

            Value vs. cost is one half of the calculation.  If Caplan’s book can show me I’m wrong on that part of it, great.

            The other part is bringing a kid into a violent dystopia.  I have serious moral problems with this.

          • Anonymous

            Please understand that I mean this rhetorically only, with no hostile intent, but…as a logical extension of your argument, isn’t it immoral for you to even continue living as a slave, rather than self-immolating in protest? By even surviving, you are perpetuating the current state of injustice!

          • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

            Clearly it is not immoral for me to continue living because I didn’t have a choice in coming here.  I’m a hostage on this prison planet. However, I do have a choice if I want to create another tax slave for the beast.

          • Anonymous

            Not to push the issue (I don’t really want you dead, I enjoy your website!), but you do have a choice as to whether to continue living…

          • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

            Choice has nothing to do with morality.  Clearly I have a choice to keep living, but that has nothing to do with the morality of bringing another slave into the system.

          • klaeyz

            More people means more over-population at this point unfortunately… although I do see what you’re saying.

  • adrivebycomment

    Oh man, I feel you bro. The ONLY reason I would consider having a child is the fact that there isn’t going to be any kind pension scheme in place when I would reach old age. Basically for pure selfish reasons. When your diapers need to be changed again at the twilight of your life, kids would mean an extra security blanket.

    OTHERWISE STAY THE FUCK AWAY! Seriously, you anglos have the most fucked up marriage/divorce laws in the world. Women initiate over 70% of all divorces, 50% of marriages end with separation. You are risking financial and emotional rape of epic proportions as the system is heavily biased towards your partner.

    Go lurk r/mensrights on reddit a bit, especially the sidebar, before reaching an informed decision.

  • Scott

    1- maybe a prenup might protect you from some state imposed obligations, idk
    2- don’t save for the kids college, let the kid work/borrow/figure it out. not having money to study sociology might be the best thing that after happened to the kid, learning to weld or write software.
    3- working till 70 is not the end of your life or that crazy. many people do it. sitting around in retirement is overrated. when you’re working you’re a benefit to society, producing goods people want. even if you retire at 70 there’s a decent chance you’ll still have 15-25 more years to sit around, and they’ll be much more enjoyable when you can spend them with your grandkids.
    4- maybe you should find a way to earn more money or cut some expenses. 100k, or 80 or 70k is still a decent salary. Now if you were saying “less than 100k” and meant 30k, that’s a different story. Maybe move to a less expensive suburb, or downsize. It’s about priorities. There are tons of people who raise 5+ kids on ~40k with both parents working and with good parenting the kids often turn out just fine.
    5- if your gf/wife doesn’t share your respect for liberty, that’s pretty serious, but even without a kid I’d look elsewhere.
    6- kids are demanding, but they don’t take every waking minute, especially if both parents work together on parenting. I know tons of guys who are writing code on side projects in the evening after their kids go to bed. Kids don’t stay 2 forever.
    7- You find ways to do inexpensive vacations. plus one or two kids is not like 5 kids. you sound like if you had a kid you could never go on a vacation ever again. Uh, a hotel costs the same whether you have 4 people or one in it. Sure, maybe you can’t fly the whole family to hawaii or europe every summer, but sheesh, you don’t need a huge vacation every year, and in case you didn’t know, they don’t decrease your vacation days if you have kids.
    8- maybe your kid will help change the system/convince others of the value of liberty.
    9- Even with how destructive the state is, I personally think overall life is good and I’m glad I’m alive. I’m not an anti-natalist or whatever they call themselves. If you are then it’s not much of a discussion.
    10- so you were a punk as a kid. Lots of kids are sweat, endearing, amusing, and grow up to love their parents and spend time playing sports with them, camping, going on adventures, building sheds, going on bike rides, standing behind you when you’re running for president, etc :)

    Anyway, if you don’t want a kid I don’t think you should have one with her, and I think you should be totally open about how you feel and let her know how likely you think it is to (not) change.

    • klaeyz

      well said Scott.

  • Scott

    Couple more thoughts:

    First, Why do women want to have kids? Not sure all the reasons, but they’ve probably heard one woman after another say that the most important thing in their life are their kids and how much they love them and couldn’t live without them and how much of a blessing they’ve been etc.

    I’ve heard one man after another say that the best moment in their life was when their child was born. Now I’m not sure this goes for women, but it says something about children.

    Second, if you want to wait to have a kid until the world is stateless, then think about what happens in the meantime. Statists and ignorants have kids and anarcho-capitalists don’t. The film Idiocracy comes to mind.

    Third, by spending your money and time you are allocating scarce resources. Right now you’ve chosen to allocate your 100k to expensive suburban residential real estate, to government (in the amount of children deductions), to hotels and tourism in the bahamas, and to plush furniture and fancy hardware. You’re allocating your time to whatever, watching Lost on Netflix and reading Conceived in Liberty. Those are real resources that you’ve allocated. The alternative is you allocate some scarce resources to creating and developing a new human, to educating that human to understand the world around him/her, to love liberty, love other humans, and to improve the world. While the benefit of vacations and consumption is short indeed, a new human with the proper parenting can improve the world and peoples lives in all sorts of positive ways for a very long time.

    Fourth, selfish is good. Having a kid in part because you think it will be fun to hike up in the mountains and chat about philosophy or the NBA or Jane Austen is good. Most kids enjoy hiking up in the mountains with their dad to do that, so it’s a win-win selfishness.

    Finally, a response to your comment: “If I had a choice not to be here, but instead be somewhere else in some other form, I would chose to be somewhere else.” Yeah, but perhaps the alternative is not some alternate world/dimension/universe, but to not be born at all. Or perhaps all intelligences meant to be born in this world are going to be, so the alternative to being born to an educated libertarian in California is to be born to a poor drunk in fill-in-the-blank.

    It seems to me that anti-natalists are choosing inaction (not having a child) to avoid a negative possibility (a life with net suffering) that they would have some control over (parenting, love, protection, positive circumstances) while ignoring a negative possibility  (that either the sphere where the intelligence is left is worse or that the intelligence is born into a worse circumstance) whose probability they have no clue about and could for all they know be close to 1. If you’re skilled, I think the best investment is the one you can have a role in impacting. I think parenting is similar.

    Anyway, hope you figure out what to do. Best wishes.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      See that whole “hiking up the mountain” part is actually a negative for me.  I’m a physically lazy SOB that likes to blog, read articles/journals/books, and watch adult movies.  The vast majority of my spare time is spent sitting in front of my computer consuming information and sharing it with others.  I get great pleasure from this.  I view sports and other physically exhausting activities as boring, mundane, and tiring.

      My favorite shows to watch are Mises Institute economics lectures on YouTube. I’m entirely serious. If I could only chose one thing to watch in my life, it would be those videos.

      If my kid turns out to be a sports freak, I wouldn’t relate at all. I dislike playing sports, I dislike watching sports, and I dislike hearing about sports. I find sports to be mind numbing.

    • klaeyz

      Very well said, Scott. a refreshing, rational, and helpful comment for Michael. Much needed after some of the other nonsense responses on here about him not loving his wife and being selfish.

  • CarlPfenig

    The ball is in your court kid,
    I’d say this sounds like a decision you’ll regret.  My recomendation would be to end the realationship and start dating women in their early twenties.  Your sexual market value will be much higher than when you began this relationship, so I say you should use that to your advantage. /end this relationship and you can be in a new one with one of the younger editions within a few months. 

    Women hold the keys to sex. Men hold the Keys to commitment. Don’t let her force you into this, I would rather drown in the sea of cock-hungry women than haul myself into the life boat of modern marriage (which all too often is more comparable to a viking funeral barge)

  • Nymphofbearcreek

    As a women who is 30, something happens in your brain and it takes over everything.

    Obviuosly, you are not ready. Tell her to move on before its too late OR man up and get over your lame ass reasons. Having kids was always hard and will always be hard.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      Yeah, but why do people want kids if it is hard work raising them?

      Ever hear of the disutility of labor?

      That’s like taking a second job, without pay, for no reason. I want THE REASON why people want kids. It’s just not computing in my pea brain.

    • klaeyz

      His reasons aren’t lame. Get over yourself.

  • Anonymous

    If the basic issue is that you don’t want kids and never will, and she does, then you guys have a serious problem to resolve. She is correct to worry about the biological clock at 34! Really $100,000 (or slightly less) sounds like a pretty darn nice salary to me (I have 4 kids and make less than that), though it’s true that they are expensive and will require compromises. It’s worth considering that having a kid MIGHT actually be a good thing when you’re old and your savings have long become worthless (you never know). Welcome to the real world!
    Incidentally, this demonstrates why marriage is a socially meaningful institution for heterosexual couples (you gotta make a commitment to have kids) – but NOT for homosexuals (who don’t have these problems).

  • Reallysparky

    Disclaimer: 45 Year old Women with two sons, married twice.

    First of all, this woman sounds needy/self absorbed.  Her biological/marriage clock is not your problem.  If she wants children, let her find a donor that can provide her one without the strings of the state imposed punitive system forced on men.  There is nothing stopping her from having a child and bearing all the responsibility for her decision financially and emotionally and physically.  My advice is for you to wear a condom to protect yourself from a potential trap.

    With repsect to Marriage, would you really question marrying the right person that you trusted if her word was better than the “state”?  You have expressed fear that in the event that a marriage to her would not work out, she would impose the law of the land which would punish you.  Why not marry someone that shares your same values and has the integrity to back up those values, example if things change and the two of you decide to no longer be legally wed, then she/he would hold to a mutually binding agreement/covenant between you two regardless of law.  Why even get married to someone who you question does not hold your same values?  Marriage is a legal contract for rights of property and so forth, gay people have been able to get around this with contracts, deeds of trust, and estate planning, so can you.

    If this was the right woman/relationship you would not have penned this rant/quest for advice.  If this was the right woman she would not be pressuring you.  You would know that this is the right relationship.  Throw this one back, and find the one that does not suck all the energy out of you.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      She’s not sucking the energy out of me lol.  As a girlfriend she’s great.  I’m sure she would make an excellent mother.  I’m on the fence about having kids and I’m looking for some rational arguments about why I should have them.

      I am not totally opposed to the idea, I just want to see where the benefits are first. Why do people have kids?  I talk to people that have kids and they often tell me that if they had to do it over again they wouldn’t have kids.  This disturbs me.

      • Reallysparky

        Michael, 
             People like you understand about kids after they have them.  There are no financial benefits, they are a bad business decision.  Children are a time waster.  Children are a general pain in the ass all the way around.  I remember thinking way back about my two boys and how I was going to buy a Mercedes Benz once I got them out of my pocket book payroll.  Now I don’t want a Benz, I am saving for my future grandchildren.  When you have children you will understand, if you have a daughter she will be the only woman on the planet that will love you no matter what you do.  Forever.  If you have a boy, you will have years of a little buddy that will never question you, (until the testosterone kicks in).  My boys are grown and out of the house, but when they call, I stop everything to talk to them.  I would have been a much more judgemental selfish person, had I not had children.  I think the person that you mention that wouldn’t do it again, evidently didn’t get it right.  My goal with my children was to raise happy, well adjusted adults that would only need a very modest amount of counseling. I also raised them to question everything and too maintain the ideas of personal accountability and liberty.  You should not fear raising them in this society, because you can have a monemental influence on them to think differently than others and also help them to spread your right minded ideas.
             I still think that woman is wrong for you, but only you can decide that.

        • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

          Thanks for the reply sparky.

    • klaeyz

      Awesome point-

  • MJ

     
    Women on kids and marriage:
    It’s a conforming to society thing.  Women have been bombarded their whole life with the idea that they have to get engaged, have a fairytale wedding, and then have kids.  Seriously, it’s everywhere when they are growing up.
     
    Psychologically, women, especially those aging, will see their peers go through the process and wonder why they haven’t yet (and thus question their worth, which eats at their self esteem).  Women are always in competition with one another, and when society has dictated what a successful life is for a women they get agitated and frustrated when their friends are ‘winning’ and they aren’t. 
     
    My experience:
    Late twenty’s in NY.  Dating my fiancé off and on for over 10 years, living together 1.5 years, engaged for 6 months.  A constant argument over getting engaged lead to a ‘separation’ a couple years ago.  I didn’t believe that paying stupid amounts of money for a rock symbolizes how much I loved her, societal conditioning told her different.  But a deal was worked out.  I told her that I had no interest in getting married under the state’s law, nor would I be spending half-a-years after tax income on a one day party.  She finally accepted both as she started to realize the burden that the state and society impose on our lives.  Luckily enough, I have so far escaped child fever…but it’s sure to be coming at some point.

    I also struggle with the idea of having children which are only fodder for the state.  Currently our discussions have revolved around becoming expats.  I feel that it’s the most likely way I will feel secure in my future and in having a child.  Obviously the destination will have much less state intervention.  I’m actually hoping to find an agorist type economic system (flourishing grey and black market).
     
    My advice:  Don’t compromise unless you want to.  You already understand the risks and benefits, most likely better than her since women are mainly emotional creatures.  I also don’t understand the comments about your selfishness, but not your girlfriends.  Apparently people think its ok for her to force you to compromise, but not the other way around.  There are solutions to your problems; it just requires finding the right ones.  I don’t know your job situation but maybe your solution lay in doing what I plan on doing, and moving should you decide to agree with her.  Maybe the solution is parting ways.  I wish you luck in your decsion.

    • Akagaga

      A conforming to society thing?  Perhaps in your case, but please don’t generalize.  It weakens your argument.

      Why is no one considering simple biology?  The male and female of most species are designed to produce offspring.  Male robins make several nests, in the hope that the female will choose one for her eggs.

      I would think male humans could be at least that accomodating.

      • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

        No one is considering simple biological instinct as a reason to have kids because humans have logical brains that can engage in reason.  Reason is supposed to override instinct and act as a buffer against bad instinctual decisions.

        • Anonymous

          The fact is that instinct beats reason every time. If not, why would you even want a girlfriend in the first place? It’s much easier and cheaper not to have one.

      • MJ

        I can concede on there being a biological urge to bear children, not so much on marriage and the fluff that surrounds it.  Are we biologically driven to find one partner for life?  Most ‘experts’ say no. 

        • klaeyz

          I’ll drink to that

      • klaeyz

        Akagaga, each comment you leave is more bizarre than the last.

  • CarlPfenig

    “man up”  “get over your lame ass reasons”

    Shaming language. Invoking the patriarchy. You go girl.

    Fact is, he has perfectly sound reasons. It makes more sense for him to age and accrue more wealth and then start a family with a much younger woman. The woman he is with has already hit the wall in terms of appearance and frankly, Mr Suede has everything it takes to put several women into rotation.

    If he has kids now, it won’t be on his terms.  He could hold off until fifty and still see the kid graduate university before dying, and of it exists then he’ll probably have enough wealth to have his brain transferred into some new body or storage medium – or perhaps replace lost organs with grown ones. I’m serious.

    A man has to keep his options open. That is what real men do. They certainly aren’t swayed by shaming language from an angry whinevag.

    “Man up”… Love it. 

    P.S.Suede, you make sure to flush your condoms, a bunch of women will impregnate themselves/stop taking pills without telling you. They’ll take your sperm from the trash and use it to get pregnant.

    • klaeyz

      thanks for pointing out that joke of a comment about manning up.
      the condoms things is crazy. I would hope he knows his woman well enough to be sure she would never pull that one.

  • Lee

    Yes, having a child is a major “hog”, as you put it, and since you put it that way I would say you’re one of those people who just shouldn’t have children. Not everyone has what it takes, and it sounds like you don’t. Be honest with your girlfriend about children and the marriage liscence, let her read this article even, and if she’s still pushing you, obviously she’s living in la-la land and it’s all fun and games until someone breaks a fingernail. In that case, you two may want to seek couples therapy. Good luck, and always use protection dude – you need it!

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      It’s not a matter of “having what it takes”, it is a matter of logic and reason in the course of making an informed choice.

      Most people who have kids do not have “what it takes,” as is evidenced by our violent statist society.

      • Anonymous

        Part of “what it takes” is the ability to compromise and accept reality as less than ideal.

        • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

          What if your wife wants to blow up your house because she doesn’t like the color.  Should you compromise and only blow up the garage?

          Compromise over taste is one thing, compromise over something as important and permanent as a child is quite another.  I need some clear logical reasons for having a kid.

      • klaeyz

        I give you props on the respectful tone you’ve managed to keep with some of these characters.

    • klaeyz

      it really has nothing to do with “having what it takes”. Some of you people have this situation so ass-backwards its scary. Does “Joe Shmo” have what it takes when he marries his girlfriend out of “love” and then has kids? Only to realize down the road that it wasn’t the right time in his life to do that and their feelings towards one another have changed? Or his current salary makes it near impossible to provide for his family and the economy keeps getting worse?
      Love is real. Yes. You know what else is real? Change. People fall in love, and people fall out of love. “Having what it takes” is such a locker room mentality. But aside from people changing, Michael is concerned about the world we live in and being able to provide for a family in it. Among other things, his values are true and he has reservations about raising a child in a world that is becoming less and less pretty.

  • http://celebrity-smack.com Celebrity Smack

    How can you be anything but absolutely correct? For you to propagate, for you to not allow your genes to die with you, would be pointless if you say it will. I on the other hand am also correct, 5 and still counting. Nothing better than a house full of kids. If I didn’t have so many kids I may spend more of my time ranting to strangers in blogs on the internet.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      Yeah that’s great, but you aren’t giving me reasons to have a kid.  I’d like to see some logical economic reasons for having a kid.

      • http://celebrity-smack.com Celebrity Smack

        there are none, unless you suspect that the government won’t be wiping your rear when you’re too old to do it yourself. then, you may want to make the gamble that your kids might do that. this decision is entirely subjective. hence my opinion that we are both correct. plenty of kids hit the road and don’t look back, others go on to support their parents for decades, paying back the investment + interest and then some. That’s entirely a gamble.

        I personally think every one is a gift and a treasure, but sentiment is again subjective. Maybe you like hedgehogs, or sports cars. If you’re looking for a return on investment you probably shouldn’t even consider it. Go buy some Greek stocks.

    • klaeyz

      I don’t think Michael is “ranting”. But I do think that unless you have anything unbiased and helpful to contribute that maybe you should go make a bunch of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.

      • http://celebrity-smack.com Celebrity Smack

        He said he was ranting. Hence the word “rant” at the end of his headline.

        Secondly, my point was that bias is entirely relevant to such a decision. There is no “right” answer, however I can see how confusing that would be for someone who can’t remember the headline, more less the rest of the thought.

  • Anonymous

    Raise your children as Enemies of the State. Churn out as many of them as you can. This fight will probably last longer than you will, but there will be fighters to take your place. I’m serious: There’s no better opportunity to influence people than to give them your genes and then raise them from infancy.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      Yeah it would be nice to turn out a bunch of anarchists, but I ultimately have no control over what they believe.  They are individuals and could very well turn out to be statist control freak tyrant adult-babies-for-life.

      • Anonymous

        It’s true that results are not guaranteed (that’s the problem with free will: other people have it too). But your odds of positively influencing people are better here than in almost any other situation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christian-McMahon/100001059763051 Christian McMahon

    First thing is woman don’t like to be talked about. If you can’t be faithful I would say don’t get married. I love my kids and don’t regret at all having a family. I figure god’s got my back so I have nothing to be worried about. I am very blessed.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      I’m not sure where you get the idea that I’m unfaithful.  It’s nice to hear that you don’t have any regrets about having kids.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christian-McMahon/100001059763051 Christian McMahon

         You have no idea how many women have propositioned me. My friend tells me some women are attracted to rings. Anyway don’t fall into that trap.

  • Peter Surda

    Family is one of the strongest weapons against the state. Even if your kids don’t end up being anarchists. If they do, only better: maybe they will be the next Rothbard or Satoshi.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1483421029 Jason Howard

    Join the Free State Project and move to NH. The cost of living is far less here and there are good jobs to be had. We have a very libertarian culture, good gun laws, low unemployment, no income tax, no sales tax, among other things. When the welfare checks stop going out in California it will burn. http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20120202-NEWS-202020396

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      Yeah, part of me is worried about the day California incinerates itself, but the other part of me wants to be here at ground zero when it does.  It will be quite the fireworks show when the largest welfare state in the US implodes.

  • Grinless

    My god. I have been lurking for a while and I appreciate your work on this site but you really sound like a college grad who have not seen much of life on this one…

    Im 37, I have a 3 years old (bordering on 4) son and nothing I ever did in my selfish 34 years before today really matter much compared to the bright light that is my kid.

    Raising a kid is the single most important task someone can do and is the very essence of your legacy on this earth.

    And what is missing from this philosipical mumbo-jumbo, is that it is also probably the most FUN part of your lives. Damn, the sheer fun I have with my kid is almost obscene. As a father you will have to great of teaching him to enjoy life finest moment, to enjoy great discussion and great movie together and to teach him/her your very own take on life. Every single of his questions make me a better man, a better libertarian.

    Kid is the ultimate “growing up” opportunity for a man, this might be the right time or not – your decision - but  do not miss this experience, a life is simply not complete without it.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      We all have different things we enjoy.  I enjoy using my free time to write this blog and consume vast amounts of political and economic information. You enjoy playing with kids – which is great for you, but I’m not sure how much I would enjoy doing that.  

      As for growing up, I don’t feel like I need to have a kid in order to make me into a complete adult.  I’ve experienced more in my life than most people ever will and I don’t feel like I’m lacking any kind of “adult” defining experience.

      I thank you for sharing though. It’s nice to hear from other people who enjoy their kids. I just know what I did to my parents, and it wasn’t pretty.

    • klaeyz

      well said, Grinless. But I don’t think its fair to call this conversation philosophical mumbo-jumbo. If and when you are going to have a child is an enormous decision. And if anything else, I think it’s so important that ones situation is accommodating to the task at hand before moving forward.

  • Libertarian Natalist

    I’m not sure do you read old comments but I put this still. My question is, do you want liberarianism and free market to prosper some day, even if that day comes after your death? This is the most important question that should be considered with having kids. That’s because high fertility and high retention rates are most stable way for it. Only major negative thing is that the process is going to be slow, but because political opinions and interests of the parents(political activism) are very often inherited, it will work. Religions have used this for many millenias, and it work for political ideologies too but in smaller amount, because religions have belife systems which are supporting “revenge of the cradle”-plan much more and fullfill your life much more. But, I suggest to jump to the libertarian natalism-wagon.

    • http://www.libertariannews.org/ Michael Suede

      Thanks for your reply, I do read virtually every comment that is posted here.