All of ikajaste's Comments + Replies

Historically at least, I would expect that sentiment to be gender-biased.

Oh, historically sure! But I think these days in western culture, especially(1) among the group being discussed (people interested in this site), I wouldn't expect to see a large gender bias to that sentiment.

(1) [possible projection fallacy going on here, hard to know]

-2Locaha
Explicitly, if you ask people in this site how the burden of raising children should be divided between partners, most people of both genders will say it should be divided equally. But when musing about grand strategies, I think the males are still more likely to propose bullshit like "we the smart people totally should out-breed the stupid people" without giving it a second thought.

It goes beyond that. The idea that children should be made as means for a cause is equally disgusting.

Yes, but I woudn't expect that sentiment to really be all that gender-biased, though.

0Locaha
Historically at least, I would expect that sentiment to be gender-biased. It's easier to think of children as objects when you aren't the one who spends your whole day with them.

Valid point. Thanks for the clarification.

Though to my experience, even women seem to think the the part that comes after is in fact more laborous that the carrying part - and that part can be equally shared between genders. Of course, it usually/traditionally isn't, so I guess that's a point towards male bias too.

-1Locaha
And pregnancy itself is a personal existential risk.

[children are] the lowest-hanging-fruit contribution one could make towards a better future

Lowest-hanging? I consider having children to be quite a huge investment of my personal resources. How is that a low-hanging fruit?

Everyone who doesn't want to have kids (as many as they can, within reason) is both missing a major point of life and complicit in creating a dysgenic society -- which, btw, should be included on the list of existential risks.

^ See this? This is one of the reasons this forum is 90% male.

Hmm. Why does a comment like that lead to a preference to males?

-2Locaha
A comment like that comes from a person who isn't even trying to imagine himself in a place of someone who is actually going to conceive and carry to term all those as many as they can children. A woman who reads this will correctly conclude that this isn't a place where she is considered a person. It goes beyond that. The idea that children should be made as means for a cause is equally disgusting.

I wonder how many people cooperated only (or in part) because they knew the results would be correlated with their (political) views, and they wanted their "tribe"/community/group/etc. to look good.

I don't think the responses of people here would be so much affected by directly wanting to present their own social group as good. However (false) correlation between those two could happen just because of framing by other questions.

E.g. the answer to prisoner's dilemma question might be affected by whether you've just answered "I'm associated... (read more)

I wonder what would be the possible indications about entry barriers? I would think they'd be much easier to address by direct survey query to lurkers about that specific issue.

While of course very interesting, I'm afarid trying to find any such specific and interpretation-inclined results from a general survey will probably just lead to false paths.

... which, I guess, is rather suitable as a first comment of a lurker. :)