[honkdaddy]

I don't think anyone's going to argue with you about the points you listed out. People who genuinely want children don't go through exercises like this; the fact you've made this post at all makes it abundantly clear that your decision has already been made.

[agent008t]

I disagree. For example, let us consider someone who has not considered getting a cat or thinks that there are no benefits to living with a cat. They asked people living with cats for advice, just like OP. A reasonable cat housemate would not say "people who genuinely want cats don't go through exercises like this; the fact you've made this post at all makes it abundantly clear that your decision has already been made". What would they say instead?

1. Spend some time with someone who lives with a cat and loves it. Watch them interacting with cats and have them teach you how to communicate with cats, play with them and understand them and be understood by them. Hopefully this will get rid of preconceived notions of what cats are like and teach you, vicariously, the joys of cat companionship.

2. Ask to look after a friend's cat that you are OK with for 2-3 weeks, while they go on holiday etc. Have the cat move in with you for that time period and try to make friends. You will probably have a decent idea then if living with a cat will make your life better or not.

Now, of course, they would also make you aware of the downsides. It is difficult to travel, especially during busy periods like Christmas, as you have to find someone to look after the cat. They make wake you up at night or scratch you at times. Looking after them and playing with them is an additional time commitment. Unfortunately, chances are you will outlive them. But they would also inform you of the benefits (that you would've experienced when living with a cat for 3 weeks) and let you decide if the benefits outweigh the costs for you: cats are funny, furry independent creatures; they warm the soul. Etc. etc.

So why does it not work the same way with children? "Look after a friends' children for 3 weeks while their parents go on holidays, and you will experience the joys and know if they outweigh the negatives" seems to never be mentioned.

[silicon2401]

The OP somewhat hinted at it in his question: lots of people's lives are made worse by having kids, but they wouldn't be able to live life if they accepted that reality. Society would shame them, their family would shame them, their children would be hurt, and they would have to live life knowing they made a mistake. It's easier to believe that it's 100% a good thing without any downsides and everybody should do it. The giveaway is not that they say everyone should try it (which also applies to cats, travel, etc), the giveaway is when they say nobody would be better without kids. That's a ridiculously improbable claim, but it's the basis for most people who say everyone should do it

[honkdaddy]

That's a good analogue, maybe the OP will find some wisdom in what you wrote. Personally though, after reading her responses, I think she's just here to argue. Maybe a cat would be a better option after all :)

[dspillett]

> makes it abundantly clear that your decision has already been made

That doesn't make it wrong to ask why others make a different decision. Should seeking empathy not be applauded?

Yes, the question does imply, almost aggressively so, a certain bias, but perhaps it would be better if you were not to discourage the desire to understand by unnecessarily responding in kind.

[FWIW: I also have no intention of procreating, but I understand at least some of the reasons that many take the opposing view]

[programmarchy]

Why should seeking empathy be applauded? The value of having children and the value of having empathy are grounded in the same traditional morality. In discarding that tradition whether in part or in whole, there’s no reason to value empathy — it’s just another subjective belief some people hold.

[dspillett]

> Why should seeking empathy be applauded?

Because "I don't agree so you point of view is objectively wrong and I don't care to try understand it" is a far worse attitude?

> The value of having children and the value of having empathy are grounded in the same traditional morality

I can't say I agree with that at all. Apart from the superficial (they are both traditional/old ideals) what do you think is their common source?

To say we can't keep one old ideal because we question another seems unhelpfuly dogmatic, unless I'm missing some subtlety, and demonstrably wrong: large parts of society have moved away from some traditional ideals without having to abandon all others.