[swat535]

> Also, the parent did not make this implication

You're arguing a straw man, I didn't mention that the parent made the implication.

I simply refuted a portion of parent's claim that people are forgoing children to foster a care of their community or performing acts of service as they implied here:

"a child-free adult gets fulfillment out of nurturing and caring for others, mentoring, caring for themselves and their community"

> There's no reason to attack straightforward words like this.

If you feel like my interpretation of the term is an attack, that's on you. I simply voiced what the term communicates to me.

As an example, there's a reason Anti Abortionists rebranded the term to "Pro Life" because of the connotation.

Terms do have an intention behind them.

[mekdoonggi]

> refuted a portion of parent's claim that people are forgoing children to foster a care of their community or performing acts of service

You didn't refute, you just said you didn't think that's what people are doing. In any case it doesn't matter what they do with their time, because it's theirs.

> If you feel like my interpretation of the term is an attack, that's on you.

> Terms do have an intention behind them.

I don't know how you square that circle. You made some claims about the term child-free which are strictly your interpretation and then used it to describe their choice as ignoble.

In both cases you're just ascribing a nobility and morality to having children which just isn't there.

[swat535]

I’m not the one claiming having children is noble, parent was claiming that people are forgoing having children as a noble act.

Secondly, I’m allowed to express my opinion about a term. You can disagree and think the term child-free doesn’t have negative connotation but in my read it does. So im not sure what you’re trying to argue.