Problem-posing education does not and cannot serve the interests of the oppressor. No oppressive order could permit the oppressed to begin to question: Why?

Indeed, the interests of the oppressors lie in “changing the consciousness of the oppressed, not the situation which oppresses them”; for the more the oppressed can be led to adapt to that situation, the more easily they can be dominated.

Implicit in the banking concept [of education] is the assumption of a dichotomy between human beings and the world: a person is merely in the world, not with the world or with others…In this view, the person is not a conscious being (corpo consciente); he or she is rather the possessor of a consciousness: an empty “mind” passively open to the reception of deposits of reality from the world outside.

https://envs.ucsc.edu/internships/internship-readings/freire-pedagogy-of-the-oppressed.pdf

  • VILenin [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    If antinatalists were sincere you would not be hearing from them owing to their permanent inability to post. Or do anything.

    • UlyssesT
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      deleted by creator

      • VILenin [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean that they coat their mundane hatred of children in philosophical dress-up about how life itself is suffering.

        • UlyssesT
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          deleted by creator

        • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]
          ·
          1 year ago

          i'm fucking begging you people to understand the difference between never beginning and stopping something that already started.

          • VILenin [he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m fucking begging you to understand that random chodes on reddit don’t hate kids out of a deep philosophical commitment

            • robot_dog_with_gun [they/them]
              ·
              1 year ago

              reddit is big enough and old enough to have users with multiple distinct positions and motivations and you shouldn't paint with so broad a brush.

          • VILenin [he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            In this case yes, but it can be more widespread.

            I would use the analogy of redditors addicted to gore. They’ll write entire essays waxing poetic about how they like to watch gore because it philosophically reminds them of the fragility of the human condition or some other bullshit to cover for the fact that they’re just sad basement dwellers who’ve substituted cartel torture videos for porn.

            And with the whole “men’s rights” circlejerk, hatred of children is almost always a proxy for their hatred of the evil seductress women entrapping them with an anchor baby. Just like with their gore addiction, they must pretend that their positions are something deeply philosophical instead of impotent MRA rage.

    • Pili [any, any]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We can be anti-natalist without being anti-living. We see preventing a birth as something different than

      (CW: self harm)

      killing someone or oneself. It's like saying pro-choice people should kill themselves because they would have liked to be aborted anyway.

      • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        pro choice means pro women having the ability to get abortions it doesn't mean pro abortion in the general case

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Lots of anti-natalist men. No small number of them are obsessed with "anchor babies" and getting "trapped" by an SO and other nasty theories about how children are some inherent threat to their entitled existence.

          I see far fewer anti-natalist women, by comparison.