• Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    “Did you ever find Bugs Bunny attractive when he put on a dress and played a girl bunny?” - Garth Algar

  • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 day ago

    Problems with this theory:

    • Japan is even more affected by this phenomenon of low birth rates.
    • Not even normies are reproducing.
    • The real problem is more complicated.
    • OP is a f…
    • lugal@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Not to argue about the other points but:

      • Japan is even more affected by this phenomenon of low birth rates.

      Isn’t that where anime girls come from? So who ever wants to lower birth rates worldwide, started in Japan and now reaches other countries.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      20 hours ago

      I think anime girls predate Japan’s current demographic problems. There was concerns in the past in Japan about overcrowding and anime girls may have appeared around that time.

      So this theory is still plausible.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      everyone is becoming femboys with animal tails. and they are so sexy that normie men have lost interest in normie women.

      that’s the problem.

  • darthelmet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 day ago

    People in this thread talking about population issues and I ‘m just here wondering how they knew how to make more sexually attractive rabbit sex toys.

  • wander1236@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yes, the ruling class wants to reduce the global population, which is why the ruling class is also constantly talking about how we need to increase birthrates.

    • ikt@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 days ago

      i mean ruling class // basic economics

      lots of old people + more pensions + more healthcare costs + less young people working = young people pay more taxes + work harder for less = a bad thing

      outside of some techno fantasy solution where robots care for the elderly (how dystopian in itself) having more old people than young people is never a good thing

      • feannag@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        But it’s good for the current old people that can exploit the labor of a larger young population and then die before they have to deal with the fallout.

    • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Who is the “ruling class” in this context? Governments, billionaires, someone entirely different? Because I think you’ll find it might not be the same people doing each of these things…

    • quarkquasar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      Cost is like, towards the end of the list of why I wouldn’t have kids. It’s certainly there, but number 1 would probably be something like “I would never forgive myself for bringing another life into this shitty world unsolicited”.

      • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        if you have so much money why do you think the world is so shit? legit question.

        like, just go spend it and enjoy it.

        • quarkquasar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 day ago

          Well, if you could point out to me where I said I “have so much money”, that’d be great.

          Otherwise one of us is going to look like an idiot.

          • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            if you can afford a child with minimal impact to your lifestyle, you are quite wealthy.

            childcare is like 2-3K a month, for that to not substantailly impact you, i would assume your take home is northwards of 10K+ a month, which means you’re making close to 200K+. which is often the income bracket at which having children is not a life-style altering choice.

            for most folks, having a kid is so expensive it completely alters their lifestyle because it removes like 30-50% of their income.

              • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                implying children aren’t a financial burden implies you’re wealthy.

                the original post says ‘cost’ and the other person goes ‘cost isn’t a reason for me’.

                so i go ‘ok how much do you make that cost isn’t a reason for you?’ because the legit reason for the vast majority of folks, is the cost. they can’t afford kids, so they don’t have them.

                • alternategait@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  No, the other person said cost is not the highest on the list.

                  You’re the one crusading for it to be “not a reason”.

            • quarkquasar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 day ago

              Nah, that’s crazy, I said cost would be towards the bottom of my list. Because there are a lot more, better reasons.

              And then I said “number 1 would probably be something like “I would never forgive myself for bringing another life into this shitty world unsolicited”.”

                • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  12 hours ago

                  “Having to clean the fork would be pretty far down the list of reasons why I don’t want to stab myself with a fork”

                  “Oh, you enjoy doing the dishes?”

                • quarkquasar@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  Naw.

                  But even if I did, it wouldn’t move the needle much, because cost would be toward the bottom of my list of reasons not to have kids.

        • jnod4@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          You can enjoy life if you abandon empathy. I’m enjoying the best nightclubs but I walking past a bunch of malnourished and un housed individuals does bring something to think about the whole night

          • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 day ago

            feeling bad for homeless people isn’t empathy. it’s pity.

            it’s really more about you stoking your own ego.

              • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 day ago

                I don’t, because I don’t like being around people who jerk themselves off about how empathic they are for feeling bad for poor people on the street. Just like I don’t like folks who jerk themselves off about how amazing they are and who talk in absolute and hyperbole.

                which is, a large percentage of the userbase here, for sure. according to like 40% of the users here, nobody has ever suffered as they have, and nobody is more empathic to the plight of the unfortunate as they are. and yeah, why the fuck would anyone want to be friends with those people… well probably other people like them so they can jerk each other off about how they use Linux and they’re saving the world from billionaires by doing so.

                weirdly enough, my friends and I in the real world, volunteer in our communities and do shit that helps homeless folks. I’ve literally helped homeless people apply for jobs. But apparently that means i have no empathy, because I’d rather help folks directly than walk home from the bar drunk and feel bad for them… weird!

                almost as if the cure to feeling sorry for yourself and that the world is shit… is going out there and improving it, and not being a whiny miserable cunt of a person who jerks themselves off about how great they are online, or at the bar. because there are plenty of folks like that at the bar too.

    • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s also a personal choice. No, I’m not talking about a person being gay, but a lot of people don’t mind being single. Or if they are partnered, they choose not to have any children. I personally fall in the former category.

      • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m single and pretty much every single woman I met doesn’t want kids. They just want to spend their money on travel and restaurants and they think kids, or even pets, will take away from that.

        I don’t get it, but I’m also not on social media hours a day watching influencers who glorify traveling and michelin star restaurants as the pinnacle of human achievement.

          • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            In all fairness, if you have money, health care has never been better, women’s or otherwise. The “if you have money” is an issue, though.

          • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            they aren’t poor. they are rich. they have the best healthcare and the best hospitals in the friggin’ world. literally, the best hospital for maternity in the entire USA is about a 15m drive from my home.

            your point would only make sense if it was in a rural area with poor incomes, which indeed, have awful healthcare outcomes and is the majority of america, sadly.

            their issue is not healthcare access. it’s that they spend 50K a year traveling and think it’s unfair and awful and they want to spend closer to 500K a year traveling, and the idea of having to like, only travel twice a year and have a kid is unfathomable awful to them. even the richest mofos in USA basically think kids are too expensive even thought they can easily afford them.

            meanwhile all my friends who have kids, don’t travel at all and don’t go out to expensive restaurants. funny that.

      • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        The world is only doomed if you’re poor.

        If you have a few million in the bank, it’s great and going to get even better.

        • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          A few million? Nah, that is not being rich. A few billions, and then we’re talking. Then we are starting to get into private island and bunker in New Zealand money. A few millions is just a successful lawyer, not-so-small business owner or someone who inherited a house in a good part of the town. They may be more than a cancer diagnosis away from poverty, but not by much.

          • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            it’s not, but keep telling yourself that because it makes you feel smart and important, no doubt.

            we will invent better crops dude. humans are incredibly successful at adapting to changing climate conditions, it’s the reason our species is all over the fucking planet, even in the harshest environments.

  • missingno@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    People turn to escapism because they are struggling to make connections in the outside world, not the other way around.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      What if I don’t turn to escapism, but also don’t make connections… because both are really weird and boring?

      And I just kinda chill out with my dog and cook a lot and learn shit. folks ask me what I’m up to lately and i’m like ‘oh I’m taking professional cooking classes and getting yelled at by chefs and making awesome food!’ and they slowly back away.

      sometimes i wonder if being a weeb would be more socially acceptable.

    • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, it’s more like people making anime girl body pillows saw a market of desperate lonely people they could exploit than a plot to prevent anon from finding their true love.

  • wrinkle2409@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think humanity should go extinct anyway and avoiding having children seems to be a peaceful way to do so. The more we breed the more we perpetuate the agony of existence.

  • TheSlad@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    I already had two kids and let me tell you 7 years with their mother really took a toll on me. I happily fap to anime chicks now with a clean conscience I am done with real women.

      • TheSlad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        Gonna egde myself to anime chicks for a few hours tonight. Hoping to go at least four hours, but will definitely go more than two. Gonna blast ropes over my shoulder and splatter the cum-wall behind me.

        Want to know even more?

        • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          No, I want to edge to your ex wife abusing you. Nothing gets me hotter than a miserable middle aged woman resenting the men in her life as worthless pieces of shit.

  • EmilieEasie@fedinsfw.app
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I don’t think that’s why people aren’t reproducing. I also think it’s probably okay if maybe Earth just wasn’t meant to have 9 billion people on it.

      • BlaestEgnen@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Food isn’t everything, we’re overusing resources in other spaces too; People don’t really want to slow down on electrical consumption, travel or general waste/plastics

        • Leon@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 day ago

          It’s not so much overusing as wasting. Capitalism has lead to an overproduction of low quality garbage that ultimately ends up in landfills. Fast fashion brands that produce more low quality clothing than they can sell, just for unbought good to end up in landfills. Food that is thrown away because there’s a surplus that can’t be sold because it doesn’t meet particular standards despite being perfectly edible.

          We could optimise processes, make waste and overproduction the more expensive alternative. We don’t, however, because it’d lead to lower profits and we hold up profits above all else.

          The average person doesn’t really need to travel less. A family of 2-4 people commuting by jet with another ~100 passengers once or twice a year is going to have way lower emissions than say, Elon Musk, Taylor Swift, or fucking Linus Techtips.

          Sure, individuals can change their habits, and in large swathes it will make things better. But it won’t fix anything, because the problem was never the average person. The problem lies with corporations and the mega rich. They’re the ones that need to go.

          • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Nice find with the LTT jet :)

            But I agree and disagree. One Elon is “worth” 1000s of people in terms of consumption, but also, there is only one Elon and there are millions of people for every Elon who cannot afford shit.

        • JayDee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          We actually had hit a peak on water consupmtion per houshold. I think it wouldn’t be farfetched to see we would have hit an energy consumption peak had the internet not been invented, and that we would have hit a cap even then if LLMs and crypto hadn’t become widespread. We just keep coming up with stupid reasons to burn electricity!

      • EmilieEasie@fedinsfw.app
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I’m not totally sure why people are talking about food availability to me. The fact that there’s enough food means the earth IS meant to have 9 + billion people on it?

        There will be some painful short-term consequences of population contraction, but no one has really convinced me we need to try to force people to have children yet, and “we could totally feed them” isn’t a compelling reason for forced reproduction either. Let the population decline if it’s going to!

    • Telemachus93@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      9-10 billion wouldn’t be a problem if our food was mostly vegan… We’d even still have space left that we could rewild.