Wait a minute, wait, 29, stop with the insults, I'm not an obscurantist. I'm just saying that there are some people who are incompetent to look after a child, do not take into account their financial capabilities and do not have a parental instinct by nature, and therefore doom their children to poverty and misery all their lives. Would it be better to give birth to 10, and not be able to feed them later and throw them on the social to look after them, than to give birth to 1, but to raise him well, without depriving him of money for textbooks, food , water, clothes, shoes, essentials ?? Quality, not quantity, people! When will you find out? These people, you call that they take benefits and don't work, but look at the gypsies, they do EXACTLY like that - they tickle 10 of them, just for the sole purpose of sucking children out of them, without having to work for life - well, it is the parasite of society. They live on the back of the state and do not move their ass, but complain that they do not have enough money for the Chaavets ... Here for them there should be a ban for the 3rd child, and without them they will not become professors or astrophysicists or chemists, and it is not up to them to change the world with an invention - it's just their mentality. I am not going against humanity and I am not against the birth rate in principle, has it not led to such progressive technological progress in the world ?? But my thought is that not quantity, but quality is important, I say again, an intelligent, educated man, raised with good manners and manners, and with a high general culture, is valued by society 1000 times more than 10 braziers, which grow up , will take to steal rails and other melting irons and will also give birth to even more, in order to have someone to get children from and not to work - tell me, what is the point of all this money that we earn with hard work and sweat on our foreheads, instead of remaining for us, to go for those miserable people who do not can they use them, or start their own business, or invest them in their children's college, but only invest them in picking seeds in the park and drinking brandy? Lots of logic error, №29. But you're clearly on the principle of Winnie the Pooh: "The more, the better." So much the better for you. And no, I'm not talking about coffee. and they will only invest them in picking seeds in the park and in drinking brandy? Lots of logic error, №29. But you're clearly on the principle of Winnie the Pooh: "The more, the better." So much the better for you. And no, I'm not talking about coffee. and they will only invest them in picking seeds in the park and in drinking brandy? Lots of logic error, №29. But you're clearly on the principle of Winnie the Pooh: "The more, the better." So much the better for you. And no, I'm not talking about coffee.
1 southern_sparkle answered
Look, there are women who also don't have motherly feelings, but you'll find few - mostly women in science, careers, or women with a health problem. For us women, it is clear that the clock is ticking and a woman in her 30s knows that she has 5 years to make that decision. You are now 30 years old, but after 30 you can still have children if you feel like it. With us women, the decision is very final and do not rush to judge women your age that they insist on children, because we have 5 more years, and you have 25 years for this decision. But yes, I personally know a woman who she has no children and is happy without children. My brother-in-law's second wife has no children and never wanted to, but notice - she reached a serious relationship and marriage at the age of 50 with a man who has children and now grandchildren. Even she, who is a very smart, beautiful woman, a nice woman, has not been able to keep a man by her side, because sooner or later everyone abandoned her to have a normal family with children. Your destiny will be more or less similar. If you do not start a family or find a wife in your mind by the age of 40-45, you will eventually marry a divorced woman or widow with large children, and so in practice you will still have a wife for the second half of your life, but not for now. I myself am 30 years old and although my husband has 2 children from his first marriage, he is determined to have at least 2 more children because of me. To love means to make compromises, not to insist on your own. Why people want children is clear - it's a part of life. I do not agree that they are the meaning of life, but they are part of it and without children you are deprived of one aspect of life. It's like saying you won't have sex, you won't travel, you won't swim or anything. Having decided to give up this part of your life is your problem, but you can't ask the same of your partner - it's like amputating someone's arm because you're armless. Yes, the meaning of your life is not to have a hand, but life with a hand is better and fuller than life without a hand. Do you remember?