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

  • Pili [any, any]
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months 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]
      ·
      8 months 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
        8 months 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.