Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

I Want To Be Alone: The Rise And Rise Of Solo Living


Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
  • Replies 241
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1
HOLA442
2
HOLA443
3
HOLA444

No, YOU don't get it. CheckMATE!

It's just as well argued. If he can say that, I can say this :)

Seriously, your logic was little better than thod's who seemed to be saying that if you went to a restaurant and had a steak that you declared to be the best steak you'd ever had, you couldn't go back the following week and order fish. To do so would render your steak opinion worthless and make pescatarians rulers of the universe.

The irony of course was that some people are happy to be alone but whilst I'm here I'll get my social fill of strangers on the internet with people who should be looking after their co-habitees rather than what they're doing. The 'argument' has transcended into some black vs white scrap, bludgeoning each other with hypocritical wrongness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445
5
HOLA446

Seriously, your logic was little better than thod's who seemed to be saying that if you went to a restaurant and had a steak that you declared to be the best steak you'd ever had, you couldn't go back the following week and order fish. To do so would render your steak opinion worthless and make pescatarians rulers of the universe.

The irony of course was that some people are happy to be alone but whilst I'm here I'll get my social fill of strangers on the internet with people who should be looking after their co-habitees rather than what they're doing. The 'argument' has transcended into some black vs white scrap, bludgeoning each other with hypocritical wrongness.

I think you must have mixed up me with someone else on the previous page. I disagreed with the notion that having children was the high point of human existence. I didn't say anything at all about companionship or being alone or any of that.

I still don't see the irony. I'll double check.

The irony of course was that some people are happy to be alone but whilst I'm here I'll get my social fill of strangers on the internet with people who should be looking after their co-habitees rather than what they're doing.

Some people are happy to be alone... but you'll get your social fill of strangers on the internet. That's not ironic. That's just a difference in preference.

Edited by JJJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447

It isn't selfless to look after children - they are as much a part of you as your leg. It's extended selfishness - and as natural and normal as unextended selfishness.

(Now if you spent all day caring for flesh-eating viruses that were desperate to get airborne and wipe you out, that would be selfless - and stupid.)

Do you consider yourself to be a part of your parents?

I don't think so - you are in independent person with your own thoughts, desires, and needs.

You always have been.

Put it another way - is it selfless to look after your infirm and elderly parent?

By your argument, no, it isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448

Breeders eh, having the cheek to mock those with the courage, strength and imagination to take the road less travelled.

Speaking of which, I have some things to do. Things I WANT to do and CHOOSE to do, right now. Because I can. :D

Off to the pub then?

How brave.

How strong.

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449

Do you consider yourself to be a part of your parents?

I don't think so - you are in independent person with your own thoughts, desires, and needs.

You always have been.

Put it another way - is it selfless to look after your infirm and elderly parent?

By your argument, no, it isn't.

Nope, I don't think that's true. The time a person is influenced most is during their childhood...it can and does effect someone's thoughts and behaviours (especially from their parents) for the rest of their lives...

Edited by Dave Beans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410

Nope, I don't think that's true. The time a person is influenced most is during their childhood...it can and does effect someone's thoughts and behaviours (especially from their parents) for the rest of their lives...

Of course. All interaction affects thought. By reading your post, you have affected my thoughts.

Children learn from their parents. They also constantly challenge them. But they are not an extension of them.

Looking after them requires a parent to prioritise their children's needs, which do not conincide with their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411

Of course. All interaction affects thought. By reading your post, you have affected my thoughts.

Children learn from their parents. They also constantly challenge them. But they are not an extension of them.

Looking after them requires a parent to prioritise their children's needs, which do not conincide with their own.

How many parents "live their kids lives for them" ie..not allowing them to "make the same mistakes they did".....kids often resent their parents later in life because of their constant interference during their early life..

Edited by Dave Beans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412

Yes. You're making my points far better than me.

The world would be a poorer place had the great thinkers popped sprogs and spent the day playing peek-a-boo instead of valuable work. But according to some that would have been time better spent. Differences of opinion there that I think cannot be resolved.

A large proportion of women go off sex (except to have more kids ..) or get permanently overweight after having their first child so of course your going to need some pretty strong back rationalisation to stick that situation out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12
HOLA4413

I thought that having kids ( I am lucky both healthy and great company) would be the best thing that I could do with my wife and they have brought streams of unbridled joy to me for over twenty years.

So if some quack author says its all about self confirmation I have to say that's ****** rather like people on here saying all childless people are selfish or self centred.

Read a little more than seeking the evidence you want and you will find the selfless/selfish debate is far from over.

But if you live by your first sentence I can understand why you don't have children.

Very good,

I've never been called an author, even if a quack one.....it'll do. :D

How many parents have thought 'The world would be a much better place if we add the product of our combined genes to it as, through our excellent parenting skills, we will produce a trully worthy contribution to the human race. A child that will have a happy and fullfilled life'

Or....

Our relationship is going stale, let's have a kid.

We could do with the benefits, let's have a kid.

Fred & Wilma have had a kid, let's have a kid.

We've been together for 'x' years, we should be having kids.

I am not a complete woman if I don't use my womb, let's have a kid.

I need something that will love me unconditionally, let's have a kid.

I have a hankering after my onw childhood, let's have a kid.

He wont commit, B) let's have a kid.

Tick, tick, tick - I WANT A KID

My life can't be this empty, let's have a kid.

My balls feel like millstones, opps - we've had a kid.

I could go on but there are some really horrible reasons that people have children.

Reading books is a good source of learning but not the be all. Observation of those around you is much better, especially for things such as this.

Many people kid themselves about their initial reason for having children so as not to sully the person they have created. You repeat a lie enough times and you start to believe it.

The fact is ALL the decisions you take in life are for your benefit even if you want to kid yourself they are born of philanthropy. Even throwing youself under a bus to save a child is one last gung ho blast at proving to the world what a worthy individual you once were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13
HOLA4414

Not quite how I would term it but I sympathise with the sentiment. It actually puts me off parenthood, the fact that it takes so much of your potential to achieve other things from you. Animals do it, it's the default, it's not an impressive feat or something to be admired. There are so many other things to do, see the world, invent something, build a business, do something for your local community, so much more to do. Kids take 20 years+ from you, there's frankly so many better ways to spend your precious time that just being yet another parent.

I read this quote from JG Ballard the other day, which made me think of this thread, particularly your posts -

"Cyril Connolly, the Fifties critic and writer, said that the greatest enemy of creativity is the pram in the hall, but I think that was completely wrong. It was the enemy of a certain kind of dilettante life that he aspired to, the man of letters, but for the real novelist the pram in the hall is the greatest ally - it brings you up sharp and you realise what reality is all about".

Ballard wrote some of the greatest modern fiction while bringing up his kids as a single parent. Perhaps you could say that this is just self-justification, but then you might have to weigh Ballard's achievements against your own...

The idea that most art, thinking, creativity, invention and so on are done by the childless is, after a moment's thought, revealed as a bit silly.

All this debate tells us is that marriage and kids are for some people, not for others. Hardly a surprise, yet still plenty of self-justification in evidence on both sides.

Edited by shipbuilder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415

the article is nonsense:

(1) even if people do live alone these days, they tend to go to work with many people; living alone could be a balanning-response to the hyper-stimulation we receive at work, but poeple still spend more time with others during waking hours....

+1,

I spend all day with people, great to get home where I don't miss people one bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15
HOLA4416

The idea that most art, thinking, creativity, invention and so on are done by the childless is, after a moment's thought, revealed as a bit silly.

This is really true - the responsibility of a child is actually highly motivating and inspirational.

The idea that you expend all of your efforts on child-raising, and so achieve nothing else, is based on the fallacious assumption that you are operating at full capacity prior to that, which is almost always not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417

All this debate tells us is that marriage and kids are for some people, not for others. Hardly a surprise, yet still plenty of self-justification in evidence on both sides.

You are right but this thread started out quite open and frank until this was posted....

BS. Having children is hard-wired into us and transgresses all of the modern preoccupations which arise from our current 21st century mindset and culture. Having children "validates someone's existence" just as much as being born or dying does. In fact I would say it is the most significant thing someone can do in their life and that until you have had them you do not fully exist.

...then tshtf but that's what makes things fun. :D

Edited by GBdamo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information