I don't think most child-free adults are forgoing children to perform works of mercy. Perhaps some do, but it's not the majority.

The term "child-free" implies relieving oneself of a disease, the way one describes himself as "cancer-free" or "drug-free". As in caring for children is on par with imprisonment.

Now I don't mind mind people opting out of having children to live a hedonistic life, my only issue is describing it as a noble cause.

▲

happytoexplain 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

>The term "child-free" implies relieving oneself of a disease, the way one describes himself as "cancer-free" or "drug-free".

Wow, this is an eyebrow-raising degree of uncharitability. There's no reason to attack straightforward words like this.

Also, the parent did not make this implication. They implied it's irresponsible to have children unintentionally or flippantly.

▲

swat535 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> 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 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> 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.

▲

macNchz 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

My impression was that the term arose out of a desire to communicate it as more of a chosen state of being, where "childless" may imply or at least allow some sense of undesired absence.