The Difference Between Breeders and Parents
One dating-site, that focuses on serious long term relationships, once in a while offers 'Free Communication Weekends'. They claim to match people on 26 factors, but while there is a matching criteria for not having children under 18, there is no matching for not having any children at all.
I had 4 new matches yesterday, of whom 2 mentioned their progeny in the text. I got very frustrated, wondering how many of the other matches also are breeders.
Therefore I started a discussion on their advice forum suggesting to add 'no children at all' to the criteria. In a moment of frustration of half my matches being worthless, I used the word brats. The following discussion ended with me being censored from further posting.
But it made me aware of my unreflected and arbitrary use of words like breeders, brats, progeny, parents, children. I was asked in the discussion thread, what I considered to be the difference between breeders and parents, but then it was not possible to post my reply.
Parents and children are social roles to teachers, social workers, politicians or whoever is dealing with existing members of society.
Using the words breeding and progeny means seeing the species homo sapiens from the perspective of psycho-biology and evolutionary psychology, concerning the question, what is uniquely human, and where is homo sapiens just an animal.
A breeder having progeny is the animal homo sapiens, driven by instinct to procreate and sacrifice the individual wellbeing in favor of the survival of the genes and the species.
Whenever someone is defined mainly by the fact of having procreated, I call that person a breeder. When the question is more about the person's role in society and about how to deal with the situation as a consequence of being a breeder, then I call the person a parent.
Most people think, that parents had a choice. I disagree. Breeders had no choice, they followed their instinct as all animals do. Only non-breeders had a choice to become consciously childfree and progenyfree and bratfree.
Brats are beings, that are by their stage of brain development onesidedly receiving benefits and advantages without being able to give back anything of real value to a rational adult human. Children, the younger the more, and pets are brats in my definition. Brats require from their caretakers investment of money and time to keep them fed, sheltered, health taken care of. In return, the brats make noise and dirt, they annoy, disturb, but cannot be hold responsible due to their mental limitations.
Brats are not suitable and apt to have a rational and intelligent conversation with them. There is no reciprocity, no balance of giving and receiving.
Brats are worthless to a person, who values the company of other human beings as partners for interesting exchanges of ideas in a museum, about a book, a movie or human interactions, who value other humans predominantly because of their intellectual capacities.
The word brat in my definition above can be understood as derived from BRood And peT.
One dating-site, that focuses on serious long term relationships, once in a while offers 'Free Communication Weekends'. They claim to match people on 26 factors, but while there is a matching criteria for not having children under 18, there is no matching for not having any children at all.
I had 4 new matches yesterday, of whom 2 mentioned their progeny in the text. I got very frustrated, wondering how many of the other matches also are breeders.
Therefore I started a discussion on their advice forum suggesting to add 'no children at all' to the criteria. In a moment of frustration of half my matches being worthless, I used the word brats. The following discussion ended with me being censored from further posting.
But it made me aware of my unreflected and arbitrary use of words like breeders, brats, progeny, parents, children. I was asked in the discussion thread, what I considered to be the difference between breeders and parents, but then it was not possible to post my reply.
Parents and children are social roles to teachers, social workers, politicians or whoever is dealing with existing members of society.
Using the words breeding and progeny means seeing the species homo sapiens from the perspective of psycho-biology and evolutionary psychology, concerning the question, what is uniquely human, and where is homo sapiens just an animal.
A breeder having progeny is the animal homo sapiens, driven by instinct to procreate and sacrifice the individual wellbeing in favor of the survival of the genes and the species.
Whenever someone is defined mainly by the fact of having procreated, I call that person a breeder. When the question is more about the person's role in society and about how to deal with the situation as a consequence of being a breeder, then I call the person a parent.
Most people think, that parents had a choice. I disagree. Breeders had no choice, they followed their instinct as all animals do. Only non-breeders had a choice to become consciously childfree and progenyfree and bratfree.
Brats are beings, that are by their stage of brain development onesidedly receiving benefits and advantages without being able to give back anything of real value to a rational adult human. Children, the younger the more, and pets are brats in my definition. Brats require from their caretakers investment of money and time to keep them fed, sheltered, health taken care of. In return, the brats make noise and dirt, they annoy, disturb, but cannot be hold responsible due to their mental limitations.
Brats are not suitable and apt to have a rational and intelligent conversation with them. There is no reciprocity, no balance of giving and receiving.
Brats are worthless to a person, who values the company of other human beings as partners for interesting exchanges of ideas in a museum, about a book, a movie or human interactions, who value other humans predominantly because of their intellectual capacities.
The word brat in my definition above can be understood as derived from BRood And peT.
