childfree vs dogfree...let them fight 
neoliberal
Margaret Thatcher: "there is no such thing as society, there are only individuals and families"
/r/DogFree:
"It's so wholesome to see a family without a pet dog...The whole family is talking with each other and, well, being a family.
The ideal family doesn't need a dog. A dog is a living parasite of a burden.
I notice family units are usually stronger when they don't have a dog.
That’s what it looks like at my house. Peace, quiet, chatting with each other. We can come and go in and out of the house without a "shadow"
Without a shadow? new type of vampire ghoul just dropped
I don't trust people who don't like dogs, let alone the type of dog disliker who posts in places like that. What miserable people.
I wouldn't go that far, because I know some people that had for example bad childhood experiences with aggressive dogs and I kinda get it for them. I assume it's the case for some users of this sub, but there are also clearly some people there that just have weird brainworms.
I empathise with people who have had bad experiences and are fearful as a result, however I also think judging an entire species because of a bad experience or two isn't the right way to go about it. If they don't wish to ever interact with dogs again, that's their prerogative, but every dog is not responsible for those bad experiences. Ideally they would get therapy and/or expose themselves to good experiences with dogs, rather than live in fear for the rest of their life of creatures that scores of people consider their beloved companions.
I also don't think it ever makes sense to be angry with an animal. It doesn't know what it did
Exactly, especially pet behaviour, which so often reflects how their owner trained (or didn't train) them.
Same, I’ve never been let down by trusting my dog if somebody is giving them bad vibes.
These people are bad but i'll take them over anti-natalists. Alot of anti-natalists will actively argue against child welfare and education spending because its public money that isn't being spent on the virtous child-free couples who are trying to go r/leanfire. At least this is partially taking the shit out of these people even if it has it's own anti-social bent to it
the fact that children are part of society is somehow lost on them
I don’t think I’ve ever encountered one outside of doomer stuff here (that usually gets removed) to be honest.
Isn’t their whole thing about reducing suffering via reducing the amount of human reproduction?
Gotta love it when people don’t even clear the lowest hurdle in terms of ideological consistency.
Either way, I’m fairly certain they would give off detectable bad vibes.
I dunno if I’d call myself an antinatalist bc they all kinda suck but I agree with them that you can’t consent to be born and that ripping someone from the void and forcing consciousness on them is taking a huge liberty with someone else’s life.
I do agree that creating a life is a serious matter that doesn’t seem to be treated with the gravity it deserves on a depressingly frequent basis.
Building a better world would solve most of the issues that stem from it though.
I mean, that still doesn’t solve the issue of consent. “Hey baby, I made you a bed of roses and got you a bottle of champagne, we’re going to have a really nice time I promise” doesn’t magically create consent.
Asking consent from the nonexistent is indeed difficult, what with them not being real yet and all.
I get what you're saying and I do agree, if I had a choice I wouldn't have wanted to be born. But when the two options are forcing new life into the world and just stopping breeding I'd probably take the former, because there are some people who are glad to be alive
Adam Lanza was an anti-natalist