Reminds me that I need to schedule my vasectomy.

This is likely not a problem pg has, but becoming a parent can provide an ambition to provide for them and have enough success to be able to spend time with them.

&gt; Some of my worries about having kids were right, though. They definitely make you less productive. I know having kids makes some people get their act together, but if your act was already together, you&#x27;re going to have less time to do it in. In particular, you&#x27;re going to have to work to a schedule. Kids have schedules. I&#x27;m not sure if it&#x27;s because that&#x27;s how kids are, or because it&#x27;s the only way to integrate their lives with adults&#x27;, but once you have kids, you tend to have to work on their schedule.&gt; You will have chunks of time to work. But you can&#x27;t let work spill promiscuously through your whole life, like I used to before I had kids. You&#x27;re going to have to work at the same time every day, whether inspiration is flowing or not, and there are going to be times when you have to stop, even if it is.&gt; I hate to say this, because being ambitious has always been a part of my identity, but having kids may make one less ambitious. It hurts to see that sentence written down. I squirm to avoid it. But if there weren&#x27;t something real there, why would I squirm? The fact is, once you have kids, you&#x27;re probably going to care more about them than you do about yourself. And attention is a zero-sum game. Only one idea at a time can be the top idea in your mind. Once you have kids, it will often be your kids, and that means it will less often be some project you&#x27;re working on.

Welcome to the world of being a parent. It can be frustrating, perplexing and mind-bending. Few things compare to those little arms snug around your neck, the head leaning on your shoulder, all in complete trust that you love them and wish them the best.

It&#x27;s good that he thinks about &quot;getting enough done&quot; now. That should be everyone&#x27;s focus in the first place -- if you&#x27;re focusing on only doing what&#x27;s necessary, the quality of your choices is bound to improve (Warren Buffet&#x27;s punch card analogy comes to mind). It&#x27;s depressing to me that with productivity culture we&#x27;ve left this so far behind.

Decades of data suggest parenthood makes people unhappy <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bigthink.com&#x2F;sex-relationships&#x2F;should-you-have-kids" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bigthink.com&#x2F;sex-relationships&#x2F;should-you-have-kids</a>Many Parents Are Happier Than Non-Parents — But Not in the U.S. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;time.com&#x2F;collection&#x2F;guide-to-happiness&#x2F;4370344&#x2F;parents-happiness-children-study&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;time.com&#x2F;collection&#x2F;guide-to-happiness&#x2F;4370344&#x2F;paren...</a>Having kids makes you happier, but only when they move out <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newscientist.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;2213655-having-kids-makes-you-happier-but-only-when-they-move-out&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newscientist.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;2213655-having-kids-mak...</a>The depressing reason why having kids doesn’t actually make you happier <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.marketwatch.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;one-theory-on-why-having-kids-makes-people-unhappy-2019-02-26" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.marketwatch.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;one-theory-on-why-having-k...</a>

The experience of having kids involves a relationship that spans something more than 25 years.I remember seeing research done on people that have had the full experience and the overall ratings of happiness were lower.

Almost everything he says rings true with me after we got a dog.  Especially the moments where I feel present and the joy from doing mundane tasks.  Get a dog if you are childless!

Right , that&#x27;s what I meant by other more &quot;artificial&quot; desires. This one is as natural&#x2F;biological as it gets and that&#x27;s why wanting to have them because you want to have them is a perfectly acceptable answer.

that can be achieved by other means though, through other&#x27;s children or via longevity

Then having one or two should be seen as a huge failure, when you could have dozens.

Or more simply, it’s because having kids is, on average, the meaning of life. We exist to preserve the specie, everything else is a hobby.

Probably one of the more honest and rational takes on this subject that I&#x27;ve seen.Asking people why they want&#x2F;wanted kids usually (but not always) results in a loop of they have kids because they wanted kids. Or they want kids because they want kids.Not that&#x27;s it not a sufficient answer, just that it&#x27;s different from some &quot;artificial&quot; wants which can be justified more easily.My favorite other simple answers were just &quot;I grew up with four siblings and three dogs and I like there to be lots of movement at home&quot; and &quot;I&#x27;m not plotting for world domination only to let it go to waste after I die&quot;

I would slightly rephrase to say you cannot truly take good care of your children unless you take good care of yourself.It’s similar to the phrase “you can’t truly love somebody until you love yourself”

Despite not being a parent I am closely observing many of my friends tread this path. To all I can only say:You are more important than your children - for their sakes!

And the 50 lines of code you hurriedly typed in a flash of inspiration is also likely to not compile. Because it&#x27;s a project that starts off very rough and requires work to shape it into what it needs to be.

I have kids and what I’ve learned and noticed is that kids are, unsurprisingly, just like people, and there are selfish ones, and not so selfish ones. Generalizations don’t really work with people, or kids, because kids are people.

And you&#x27;re playing a game of teaching them about what it means - more general what everything in the world means, how to read the world. You will find it frustraiting and interesting, arguably your task is to shift the balance so it&#x27;s not frustrating for you and your kid, you&#x27;ll learn a lot about humans, yourself and kids along the way (or not).

&gt; from what I know about small children they&#x27;re likely to be a thousand times more selfish than youWait until they are 12.

Kids demand a lot of time but can be remarkably unselfish. My 3 y.o. daughter made my bed this morning and tries to help me if I seem tired. We help each other out, and parenthood opened me up to a way of living that was less self-interested.

All kids are different, but FWIW, my daughter used to take our her pacifier and stick it in her twin brother&#x27;s mouth when he was crying. When she was a bit older (maybe three?) she&#x27;d often give him the last strawberry or whatever from her plate if he finished first. She&#x27;s five now, and she&#x27;s an extremely generous and high empathy kid.Maybe that&#x27;s unusual, and on average kids can be selfish (or maybe self-centered), but it&#x27;s not as black and white as you&#x27;re describing.

I don&#x27;t have kids but from what I know about small children they&#x27;re likely to be a thousand times more selfish than you.

It doesn’t make you a better parent. But you shouldn’t feel guilty about your experience just because someone you respect wrote about their experience and it doesn’t mesh with yours.You’ll make the hard decisions to do what is best for your kid but it isn’t always roses or easy as Paul makes it sound. I’m lucky if I have 3-4 experiences a week where I’m 100% in the moment and enjoying it. That is spending between 3-6 hours a day with my kids during the week.

I have a 2 year old. I enjoy playing with and spending time with him, but after some amount of time I get bored, and the time becomes more tedious. If I spend an entire weekend day only spending time with him, I find myself growing resentful and doing things to just pass the time -- like driving him somewhere reasonably far away, just because driving seems more stimulating for me.But if I carve out a couple of hours for myself and my hobbies, then I&#x27;m able to be more present and engaged and better enjoy the time I spend with my son, which I think makes for a better overall experience for both of us.I also did not feel a sudden transformation when my son is born. It took about seven months for my wife and I to not feel like we had made a major mistake (note that women are also not necessarily transformed immediately, but that it is even less culturally acceptable for them to admit this.) But somewhere around 18 months that warm, protective feeling that pg described kicked in and I don&#x27;t have any regrets now (but sometimes it&#x27;s still boring).

My understanding of what was types is that being a good parent doesn&#x27;t mean you don&#x27;t feel selfish.

I&#x27;ll chime in and say it&#x27;s a balance like everything else in life. If your kids instantly get your attention whenever they want they may have a pretty unrealistic expectation of the real world later when they aren&#x27;t such a special snowflake.It&#x27;s tricky business though and varies by context (age, finances, relationships), and I doubt anyone really knows best. You can easily (and will) err on both sides.

There is a delicate, nebulous balance between modeling independent adult behavior and being a care giver. Every parent has to decide where that line is; it&#x27;s constantly changing and difficult to evaluate. We live in an unprecedented time in humanity&#x27;s history, the longitudinal research is still coming in, and everyone&#x27;s making up the rules as we go along.

To paraphrase Jordan Peterson:&quot;No one ever walked into my psychology practice because their parents made them too emotionally independent.&quot;There are some parents out there who continually martyr themselves because they think it makes them a good person (I get 4 hours of sleep a night to make sure my kids have everything! I&#x27;m awesome!) but are in fact overinvolved and setting a bad example for the kid by not taking care of themselves. Anecdotally I&#x27;ve found most of my married friends who are&#x2F;were hesitant about kids were raised by such parents.It&#x27;s healthy for the kid to see that the parent needs some enforced level of time to themselves, short of neglect of course. The precise balance is up to the individual.

I don&#x27;t know if this is what was implied - but my wife and I have always believed strongly that you have to maintain the &quot;hub&quot; that is your relationship in order for the bigger picture - the family - to thrive.My kids (now 12 and 15, goddamit!) are 100% the entirety of my life: the beginning, middle and end. They&#x27;re the reason my wife and I work for ourselves, the reason we don&#x27;t work all the time, the reason we haven&#x27;t grown our business even though we could have. We want to be here for them in the tiny period of time we have them at home, and who cares if we end up financially poorer because of it - our lives are infinitely richer with this time we have as a family together.But.Some parents become parents and let their kids dominate. And I don&#x27;t mean in a disciplinary way, I mean that the kids - especially when tiny - take over the adults lives too. This was obvious for us in the parents that let their kids stay up until whatever time, had no routine, let their kids sleep in their bed, never got out as a couple, etc etc.The point I&#x27;m making is that having kids is THE single hardest thing you&#x27;ll ever do. It&#x27;s also THE BEST thing you&#x27;ll ever do, but it&#x27;s the hardest. And if you don&#x27;t take care of you and your partner - by making time to be together, making time to be a couple and not parents, making time to be in love and connected and all those things you did before being a parent - then the whole thing is likely to fall apart.Whether this is what the poster meant as &quot;selfish&quot; I don&#x27;t know, but being aware of yourself, your partner, and your relationship in this rollercoaster of a ride seems to me to be an incredibly good thing.

When you&#x27;re on an airplane, the instructions are to put on the mask before assisting others.As a parent, it seems counter intuitive to save yourself first.Self-care and balancing your needs (for whatever definition of balance applies) helps makes sure you are fully present and able to parent--making you a better parent.It may feel like you are being selfish by putting your needs first; but that&#x27;s our culture of shame and not a reflection of parenting skills.

Can you explain how being selfish (i.e. wanting to do other things instead of taking care of them) makes you a better parent?It&#x27;s not at all obvious.

I experienced similar. My son is 16 months, and it&#x27;s gotten way more fun.

Yeah.  As babies they&#x27;re not terribly interesting.  Around 1 years old they&#x27;re at about my level.

Yeah I didn&#x27;t have that instant flip. But after about 6-9 months, when they become increasingly interactive I started to enjoy it more. Before then it was more a sense of duty to help this tiny thing survive.

Probably another factor is wealth. He must be, what, at least a hundred-millionaire at this point? That&#x27;s going to afford a lot more options for dealing with the dreary parts, and give him a lot more confidence that he&#x27;ll be able to follow through on those protective urges he describes.

This is very true because yes, kids can be a lot of fun. They can also be exhausting, frustrating, terrifying, and just plain boring at times. That too is ok. It&#x27;s kinda how it&#x27;s supposed to be.I suspect one of the reason Paul Graham views them the way he does is because he has approached them with a genuine sense of curiosity. If you&#x27;re trying to mould them too much (a mistake I&#x27;m sad to say I&#x27;ve made too much) then things are going to be rough for both of you. But if you explore the world with them, placing boundaries only where true danger lies, then things can become really intellectually and emotionally interesting.Also, you know what? Take some time for yourself periodically to recharge! You know what else? Let and encourage your spouse do the same! Also? Take some time together without the kids from time to time. Your kids might complain at the moment but you&#x27;ll all be better for it in the end.

When my 4 year old comes and wakes me up to ask for breakfast, I can&#x27;t just tell him to go away, even if I only went to bed 2 hours ago because I sometimes have trouble sleeping.When he asks me to play with him it breaks my heart when I say no because I&#x27;m working. I work from home, so I need to maintain boundaries otherwise I&#x27;d always be playing with him.I feel terrible that I resent him for waking me up early, and really have to work at reminding myself that I don&#x27;t hold it against him and that I did get up and care for him, even when I didn&#x27;t want to.It breaks my heart to disappoint him, but I need to work or he doesn&#x27;t eat. I also try to actually keep working hours so that I have time to spend with him.Honestly, just meeting your childrens basic needs as well as you can is being a good parent. We can&#x27;t be there all the time to do everything possible. We&#x27;re human; we don&#x27;t have the time or attention.As for the chemical change mentioned, the only difference I&#x27;ve ever felt is I get much more sad when something bad happens to a child, but otherwise, I don&#x27;t think I think I&#x27;ve changed much elsewise. My heart wasn&#x27;t bursting with joy when either was born, not to say I wasn&#x27;t happy.

Never mistake feeling with wanting. This is such a great mistake.Virtue is exactly what allows you to behave further that your feelings.

I&#x27;m in my 30s and much more selfish than I was in my 20s.  Everybody is different.

Out of curiosity, how old are you?  I was much more selfish and &#x27;go go go&#x27; in my 20s.  In my mid thirties now and mellowed a lot.  I find parenting a joy now, but think I would have hated it 10 years ago.

I definitely did. First night home she projectile pooped all over me, and my instinct was to laugh and think it was cute. That brought me up short and i realized my brain had been hacked for the purpose of the species&#x27; survival. I would still rather vegetate than play with her on many occasions, but something flipped a switch and all kids are way less annoying than they were. A friend of mine who has gotten all his out of the nest says it wears off. My father in law says the same until you hit your first grandchild when something similar kicked in.

I also did not experience the chemical changes part. At the time I was wondering if I would, but nope.

Your job is also to love them! Emotional neglect has real and serious consequences.For an introduction to this concept, I recommend:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;23129659-adult-children-of-emotionally-immature-parents" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;23129659-adult-children-...</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;15812553-running-on-empty" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;15812553-running-on-empt...</a>

When I had my first kid in 2009 I was expecting this whole life changing experience, instead it was just...the same, except now there&#x27;s a baby take care of.Three kids later and I definitely have strong feelings around my kids, but it&#x27;s not some kind of revelation. They&#x27;re people just like me, they just have less experience. It&#x27;s my job (legally and ethically) to make sure they have a reasonably well informed, if biased, framework to examine, test and act in the world.

This feels terribly sentimental, but of course it&#x27;s a sentimental topic, so... a poem that I very much appreciate on some of these feelings (<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.colby.edu&#x2F;csc-mcnair&#x2F;rulesnewcar-tcluster&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.colby.edu&#x2F;csc-mcnair&#x2F;rulesnewcar-tcluster&#x2F;</a>):<pre><code> The Rules of the New Car
 by Wesley McNair
 
 After I got married and became
 the stepfather of two children, just before
 we had two more, I bought it, the bright
 blue sorrowful car that slowly turned
 to scratches and the flat black spots
 of gum in the seats and stains impossible
 to remove from the floor mats. “Never again.”
 I said as our kids, four of them by now,
 climbed into the new car. “This time,
 there will be rules.” The first to go
 was the rule I made for myself about
 cleaning it once a week, though why,
 I shouted at the kids in the rearview mirror,
 should I have to clean it if they would just
 remember to fold their hands. Three years
 later, it was the same car I had before,
 except for the dent my wife put in the grille
 when, ignoring the regulation about snacks,
 she reached for a bag of chips on her way
 home from work and hit a tow truck. Oh,
 the ache I felt for the broken rules,
 and the beautiful car that had been lost,
 and the car that we now had, on soft
 shocks in the driveway, still unpaid for.
 Then one day, for no particular reason except
 that the car was loaded down with wood
 for the fireplace at my in-laws’ camp
 and groceries and sheets and clothes
 for the week, my wife in the passenger seat,
 the dog lightly panting beside the kids in the back,
 all innocent anticipation, waiting for me
 to join them, I opened the door to my life.</code></pre>

This is true. Having kids changed my life and outlook, but it didn&#x27;t necessarily subtract from my personal ambitions. I&#x27;ve experienced it more pragmatically than as an epiphany. Some epiphany, for sure, but it didn&#x27;t change my personality.

With the qualifiers (“may”, “probably”) provided I’m not sure I see him as offering any absolutes, at least in your quoted passages.

The words &quot;may&quot; and &quot;probably&quot; seem to indicate these statements are not facts, and may probably not apply to everyone.

What almost always bothers me about Paul&#x27;s essays is that he includes &#x27;facts&#x27; like they apply to everyone. This is why I don&#x27;t like most of his eesays.For example: &quot;..but having kids may make one less ambitious.&quot;.It might apply to Paul but I have never been more ambitious since I had kids.In his next sentences he almost makes us feeling guilty for it because &quot;..you&#x27;re probably going to care more about them than you do about yourself.&quot;Ehm, no. Taking more care about your kids has nothing to do with ambitions. At least not for me. You can have great ambitions which include your whole family.

I highly recommend watching Mike Birbiglia &quot;The New One&quot;. It&#x27;s  on Netflix, which is how I watched it,  but I bet it would be pretty awesome to see in person.

And let&#x27;s be honest, having (essentially) unlimited resources makes having kids a lot less stressful.Many of us stress about college costs, and costs in general. And, getting help can be very expensive, unless you have extensive family support.

My first child was born at 1 AM, on our third night at the hospital that week. All I felt was tired.&gt; over the past 3 years have realized just how selfish I am when it comes to taking care of the munchkins.Ditto. Part of the deal with parenting is to grow out of the selfishness. It&#x27;s never completely gone (at least, not for me), but I&#x27;ve grown to a place where I am (hopefully, at least) less selfish than I was.Children grow their parents, too.

Hi,
Nick, can I ask you about that your 2017&#x2F;2018 HFT project from another thread?

Uhh. Just going to chime in here. It is absolutely OK if you don’t experience the emotions he writes about here.You aren’t broken.I write this because I read and it immediately messaged a few friends who respect Paul as well asking them if I was broken.Everyone experiences parenthood differently.I never had the chemical changes in my brain and often over the past 3 years have realized just how selfish I am when it comes to taking care of the munchkins. There are other things I’d rather be doing, learning, building.That is OK.Just because the HN generally respects Paul doesn’t mean that if your experience as a parent doesn’t match his something is wrong.You are OK and chances are you are a better parent than you think.

It’s not a switch, not in a meaningful way. It’s the time spent together that forms the bond. I don’t love my kid because I had sex to have him, I do because I taught him how to walks and speak, go to the toilet and play with marbles and had all kinds of fun in the process. I love him because every time I show him something new, or I let him have a spoon of my coffee (he loves it) there’s a wide smile appearing on his face followed by “I love you daddy”. Its the most validating, gratifying experience I had in my life, even if it’s a pain in the ass and I’d rather watch tv or tinker in the garage instead of sitting on the bleachers of this gym while he practices somersaults. If I adopted him it would be largely the same thing.

yep<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;publication&#x2F;257612445_The_Sacred_Hour_Uninterrupted_Skin-to-Skin_Contact_Immediately_After_Birth" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;publication&#x2F;257612445_The_Sacre...</a>

If it&#x27;s chemically-based, maybe it can be induced.I wonder - and I&#x27;m being serious here, although this could certainly be a terrible idea for various reasons - what would happen if, say, a low dose of MDMA or similar were administered to new parents when they first began bonding with their child. Surely a spike of serotonin and oxytocin plays a role in the physiology of parental attachment? Perhaps guaranteeing such a spike could have significant long-term effects by helping to cement this bond?

I wonder if the same chemical switch that he talks about gets flipped if you adopt a child, or marry a single parent and thus become a step-parent. If so, I wonder how young the child has to be for that to happen.

My first 7 months with the newborn were exactly that: absolutely unproductive at work (got fired) and no time for anything of my own. And I was OK with it, because my only concern at the time was making sure the baby’s needs are met. After the initial 7 months passed, things went back to “old normal” - baby was much more stable and predictable, and I could get back to work.

&gt; If you channel that ambition into being a better parent everyone benefits.That&#x27;s begging the question. Your original ambition doesn&#x27;t benefit. What if it was something really good and worthwhile?&gt; for most people their kids will have more overall influence then their work ever will.This can&#x27;t be the case, unless you think the amount of &#x27;influence&#x27; always increases as generation pass (why?)My kids are humans, just like me. If we&#x27;re both selected at random, we should expect equal &#x27;influence&#x27; for both. If I have some reason to think I&#x27;m above average in influence, then I should expect regression to the mean for my kids.

&gt;On the other hand, what kind of wimpy ambition do you have if it won&#x27;t survive having kids? Do you have so little to spare?&quot;It&#x27;s a disingenuous argument. He acknowledges &quot;attention is a zero-sum game&quot; and that having kids has lowered his ambitions. Therefore, it&#x27;s not a question of what is there &quot;to spare&quot; (implying leftover time&#x2F;energy), it is a question of &quot;how much are you willing to give up&quot; to make room for the new priority.It&#x27;s not a question of ambition being strong or wimpy, it&#x27;s a question of your tolerance for lowering your ambition.

I refer you to his later point: &quot;On the other hand, what kind of wimpy ambition do you have if it won&#x27;t survive having kids? Do you have so little to spare?&quot;I&#x27;d argue that your ambition simply shifts upon having kids. If you channel that ambition into being a better parent everyone benefits.And from an &quot;accomplishment&quot; perspective, I&#x27;d ask which of a would-be parent&#x27;s projects are so world-changing that they&#x27;ll be alive or still affecting things 70 years from now? If you&#x27;re Elon Musk maybe you can make that argument, but for most people their kids will have more overall influence then their work ever will. So if you want to make an impact over the long term and aren&#x27;t just satisfying an obsessive workaholic itch, kids can be a great way to do that.

That only matters if you care about what happens to the world after you die to the extent that you&#x27;re willing to allocate many person-years of your life toward raising a child.  If that&#x27;s not the case, and you just aren&#x27;t interested in having kids, then this point doesn&#x27;t really matter.

The interesting thing here is that if you take a long-term holistic view, there is actually more productivity (literally an extra lifetime), more time for ideas, and more ambitions being added to the world. You can choose to instill your values in your children and watch them bring ideas you might&#x27;ve had into a world you will never enter.

My point is not: &quot;it&#x27;s biologically programmed, therefore bad,&quot; as you seem to be suggesting.  My point is: &quot;it&#x27;s biologically programmed, so it&#x27;s silly to say that it isn&#x27;t just because you enjoy it.&quot;

Do you like food? Or sex? Or being at a comfortable temperature? Because those are all programmed into you as an organism, too. Do you enjoy social status? Accomplishing goals? Material prosperity? Same deal. You are an organism and all of your root-level desires and goals are programmed into you by an evolutionary process of self-replicating genes and ideas. You’re not an immaterial ghost of rationality haunting a meat puppet that might hijack your life goals; you are the meat.

&gt; you need to find a partner with the same mind set, which is not easy,That&#x27;s actually not as hard as you probably think it is. More and more people (of both genders) are skeptical of child-rearing than ever before. Certainly any showstopper requirement you place on a romantic partner will reduce the size of the pool, but I think the pool of people who don&#x27;t want children is plenty big enough these days.At any rate, &quot;I want to have kids because otherwise I won&#x27;t find a partner and will be lonely&quot; is a horrifyingly selfish and terrible reason to have kids, and if that&#x27;s your thinking, you absolutely should not.

&gt; If you&#x27;re the type of person for which those points sounds disastrous, don&#x27;t have kids.This is not a great advice. Those points only &quot;sounds disastrous&quot;. It can be totally changed after you have kids.As a developer, I always know I will be less productive etc. after having kids. On the other hand, I know I am not a genius, and I know I will be fulfilled more from my kids than from my lost productivity.And then, you know what? When you get older, you will realize that losing productivity is unavoidable. It is so great to spend time with your family outside of work. Nobody can stay at 20s forever.There is one more important factor: If you want to have a life without kids, you need to find a partner with the same mind set, which is not easy, or just stay alone.

And yet if you look at some of the highest achieving people, many of them have kids. Presidents have kids. CEOs have kids. Billionaires and movie stars have kids. Nobel prize winners have kids. Not all of them, but many. A key part is probably having a spouse who is willing to do a larger share of the childcare, but kids do not seem to be a disqualifying factor for achieving just about anything.

Our biology is what survived billions of years of culling out beings with insufficient skill or will to live.

<pre><code> * less productive
 * less time for your ideas
 * less ambitious
</code></pre>
These points may or may not be true depending over what timeframe you measure.If it’s your own lifetime, sure. If you measure your productivity over the next 300 years as what you plus your transitive offspring accomplish, it’s possible having kids is a huge boost to your aggregated productivity.

I agree your DNA is heavily involved, but I don&#x27;t think he&#x27;s trying to deny that, at least the way I interpreted it.I think &quot;simply&quot; is an important word in that sentence, and when I read &quot;is not ... simply your DNA&quot;, I read &quot;simply&quot; as &quot;merely&quot;. He&#x27;s saying that, sure, there is a biological compulsion involved, but there is also more to it.The kid is a human being you can have a meaningful relationship with. They will do or say things that are interesting or worthwhile or significant in a way that&#x27;s not really connected to the fact that they&#x27;re your kid.(It can be compared to a romantic relationship. Are there hormones making you want to be with a romantic partner because you like their looks, etc.? Absolutely. But on top of that, you can have a real friendship with a romantic partner where you have shared interests you enjoy pursuing together, you have interesting discussions, you support each other, and so on.)On a side note, some parents can only see their kid through the lens of parenting. They rarely or never connect with their kid on the human-to-human level, and every thought and interaction is on the parent-to-child level. Maybe they just haven&#x27;t thought in those terms, or they&#x27;re afraid of undermining parental authority by being too much of a buddy, or their sense of parental duty dominates their thoughts, or maybe they can&#x27;t connect personally to anyone else either.

It depends on what you count as biologically programmed, I think. Certainly there&#x27;s a great deal of cultural programming driving people to reproduce, which is a kind of software programming, even though it&#x27;s much more malleable than a hardwired instinct would be.

&gt; But it is, because your entire biology has evolved for billions of years with the sole purpose of reproducing effectively. No amount of &quot;I feel like I enjoy it&quot; negates that it is programmed into you as an organism. It just re-enforces how integrated the drive is with your psychology and consciousness.I don’t think it’s programmed into me. I am
actively repulsed by children, the thought of reproducing, the concept of adding more humans to society, or increasing the resource consumption of my leaf node’s subtree.The whole thing seems disgusting and self-centered and self-indulgent and selfish and irresponsible to me.That said, I think that myself and others that feel this way stand in contrast to your claim that we are simply programmed to reproduce. We are not—only a subset of us are.

It varies from person to person. For me it was mostly a sacrifice in leisure time. But I spent most of my weekends hanging out with friends and playing games. If you spend 24&#x2F;7 focused on career, then yeah you&#x27;re an extremely ambitious outlier and will have less time towards those things you listed.But in my experience most people actually spend a lot of time hanging out with friends or doing nothing at all. This is where sacrifice of leisure and time management kicks in. I don&#x27;t actually work on side projects any less than before I had kids. But I play games, hang out with friends, and do nothing a lot less.

Just remember that your desire for productivity, for time to think, and your ambitions, all come from that same place that makes you want to have sex and maybe kids.You get to decide what kind of slave to your genes you&#x27;ll be, but no one gets to build themselves free of them.

&gt; If you&#x27;re the type of person for which those points sounds disastrous, don&#x27;t have kids.I agree 100%. But at the same time, I have to appreciate that nearly all Presidents (to use an example) have children, many of them young enough to live in the White House. So maybe it&#x27;s not quite as brtual as &#x27;take a wrecking ball to your productivity&#x27; unless you want it to.Anecdotally, I also observe that I don&#x27;t mean that many folks in senior management and above who don&#x27;t have kids. It&#x27;s clearly possible to remain ambitious and be very successful even with kids in the picture.Now, if your definition of productivity is coding every waking moment, then ... well, that goes away with age regardless :).I&#x27;d also say don&#x27;t get a pet unless you really want one. I&#x27;d much rather have another kid than a dog.

&gt;Having kids is one of those intense types of experience that are hard to imagine unless you&#x27;ve had them. But it is not, as I implicitly believed before having kids, simply your DNA heading for the lifeboats.But it is, because your entire biology has evolved for billions of years with the sole purpose of reproducing effectively. No amount of &quot;I feel like I enjoy it&quot; negates that it is programmed into you as an organism. It just re-enforces how integrated the drive is with your psychology and consciousness.The negative points from the post:<pre><code> * less productive
 * less time for your ideas
 * less ambitious
</code></pre>
If you&#x27;re the type of person for which those points sounds disastrous, don&#x27;t have kids. Get a pet instead. You can still fulfill that nurturing side of you without having it take a wrecking ball to your productivity.

&gt; I mean, it _is_ super awesome, but it also _sucks_ too.Totally.In my experience the inconvenience has changed pretty dramatically (for the better) as they&#x27;ve gotten older. Maybe it&#x27;s just that I don&#x27;t mind the new inconveniences as much as the old ones, but I do _not_ miss the diaper&#x2F;toilet training&#x2F;can&#x27;t talk&#x2F;can&#x27;t get into the car themselves phase.

A bit of this feels like rose coloured glasses. I don&#x27;t regret having kids, and I love them to death, and even at 2 and 4, they really are interesting to talk to and interact with! However, they&#x27;re also at times the worst housemates and worst companions there are. As Graham says, kids take a tremendous amount of time and attention, which can be very frustrating. Kids are possibly the greatest inconvenience one can imagine, maybe even more so.I think it was a ted talk I watched long ago whose basic premise was that with kids the highs are really high and the lows are really low. It goes on to say that a major component of the lows is that we feel like we shouldn&#x27;t feel like this because it&#x27;s not socially acceptable to talk about the negative aides of children. However, if we talked about how frustrating children are, we could help make those lows a bit less low.Like I said, I don&#x27;t regret mine, but it definitely not all flowers. I&#x27;m not really refuting anything in the essay, as he highlights many of the good parts of parenthood, I do think it&#x27;s important that we don&#x27;t look at child rearing with rose coloured glasses. I mean, it _is_ super awesome, but it also _sucks_ too.

It&#x27;s not always delicate and perfect but you&#x27;ll do fine.  Consider how many other humans have done this successfully before you.  Just do what you can without driving yourself and your co-parent(s) crazy and accept that your best might gracefully be a bit different than it used to be.

As someone who&#x27;s two new arrivals recently turned two; it&#x27;s by far the hardest thing I&#x27;ve done. I envy those who have one at a time. Having a startup fail around me was a piece of cake. Singlehandedly building a house (not commissioning a house) was peanuts. Building and shipping products now used by the billions was far less stressful than keeping two little rascals alive.But I&#x27;m managing and I&#x27;m sure you will too. Clichés exist for a reason: as it turns out; I wouldn&#x27;t trade it for anything.

Thanks for this pg. Scheduled to have two new arrivals in about a months time. Positively shitting it as they are our first arrivals.I don&#x27;t think anything will prepare me for what lies ahead, feeling apprehensive, worried but looking forward to it none the less.I&#x27;ve no idea how I&#x27;ll manage time for our team in between diaper changes but I&#x27;m sure it&#x27;ll all just work out for the best. Thinking positively.

Yes, and you&#x27;re getting downvoted, but the whole framework of individualism and enlightenment principles prioritizing individual autonomy above all else often locks people&#x27;s views in such a way they cannot conceive of having children as a fundamental responsibility&#x2F;obligation to continue legacy of their ancestors.There is this enlightenment western philosophy that everyone is an atomized, isolated blank slate acting only in their own self interest, severed from any ties to the past... it goes against long standing views of having inherited legacy, and responsibility to continue this legacy which applied much social pressure to having children, even many children like in more traditional&#x2F;religious cultures, and this has been abandoned in a very short period of time (seen in declining birth rates, marriage rates, increasing age of having children etc.)

&gt; The introduction of birth control and giving people (yes both men and women) too much control over procreation without having to control the impulse for procreation.Why &quot;too much&quot; control? I&#x27;m curious why you think the amount of control is larger than it should be (and to what end).

Agree. In many ways I wonder if we&#x27;re seeing a couple compounding forces at play:* The introduction of birth control and giving people (yes both men and women) too much control over procreation without having to control the impulse for procreation.* Seeing people solely as material beings as a consequence of the Enlightenment. After all, if you&#x27;re just the matter you&#x27;re composed off then you&#x27;re no more special than a rock or your iPhone or a dog. Why sacrifice so much material comfort in exchange for the material discomfort that parenting will inevitably cause if the baby is just matter?

Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes from East of Eden&gt; You have not bought these boys, nor stolen them, nor passed any bit for them. You have them by some strange and lovely dispensation.

Funny how my belief system is basically the contrapositive.&quot;Having kids is not universally good so the survival of the human race might not be that important (but we should still work for the quality of life for the people who are and will be alive.)&quot;

&gt; There is no logical basis for it. Or rather, any latticework of logic you erect to justify this choice is based on a foundation that has nothing to do with reason.Any formal system is going to be based upon some set of axioms. You can&#x27;t apply reason without some foundational choices (ie. your axioms).The bright line you are looking for is a lot fuzzier than it seems at first glance.If you take as axiomatic that &quot;the human race surviving is a good thing we should work towards&quot;. Having kids becomes an exceptionally rational thing for people to do.

To add to everything you said, which I agree with, having children is also a profound act of responsibility, or even obligation.Along with all the logic games people play to justify not having children, they miss the overarching principle that they have a responsibility, to their ancestors, to match the gift of life that was given to them, to the sense of continuing the legacy of their parents, grandparents etc.Or... one should, or even must, think this way to overcome the obsession with seeking a logical or selfish reason to have kids when they might not find one.

The decision to have kids is a lot like the decision to continue living. There is no logical basis for it. Or rather, any latticework of logic you erect to justify this choice is based on a foundation that has nothing to do with reason. It is an emotional and spiritual desire to live and love, and give more life and more love to the world.That&#x27;s why I when see people engage in complex rational calculations about the utility a child may or may not bring into their life, I feel like they are missing the point. Of course people ought to be thoughtful about the decision to have children. And there are very good reasons to abstain. But in a sense they are not grasping that having children is a profound act of hope.

&gt; Everyday I look forward to get home from workI have met people like that who do not even have children!

“ when our first child was born. It was like someone flipped a switch. I suddenly felt protective not just toward our child, but toward all children”This happened to me two months back when I had my first child. Yes having a child has made me less productive with my work but I feel I’m happier now. Everyday I look forward to get home from work

Yeah, does that not seem odd? Sure seems like a very suspicious coincidence.Whatever is doing that to you is a blessing, I suspect, because there are parents out there who do not have that. What must their lives be like?

Other people’s kids can be dull. I can empathize with that...But my own kid, despite statistically being just like all the kids and could be considered just as dull, is most certainly not dull to me.

Kids are dull so dull SO DULL.It&#x27;s not their fault. It&#x27;s not personal. They&#x27;ve never done anything, they&#x27;ve had no experiences, their tastes are bland and repetitive because of their physical state and their limited experience, of course they&#x27;re dull and uninteresting.It&#x27;s not their fault, but it&#x27;s still the case. And they&#x27;re not even like dull adults whom you can choose not to interact with (and even adults are often dull in a different way - some of them are hyper focused on something so niche that in that regard, in that niche, I&#x27;M the child with no experience and no understanding). Children seem to suck up so much of people&#x27;s time and energy.There was a post some time in which someone talked about how their small child got into MineCraft. Great, thought he. We can do this together. So they did. Building the exact same building every night, no deviations, just repetition. I suppose it&#x27;s a more modern version of having to read the exact same storybook every night.

I think that&#x27;s the most succinct way to put it: Give children stake in your interests.It doesn&#x27;t even have to be direct. If I&#x27;m working on a lesson (I teach technology), I can ask the kid to come up with some ideas, help clean the room, decide on what to have for lunch, help me grade assignments, etc...At home it&#x27;s the same. Help clean, ask if they can help me find a mistake I made, ask about food, ask them to comb my hair (funny, but kids 3-10 love doing this for some reason), ask them to put some music on for us, etc...Of course it doesn&#x27;t always stick and the kid wants some other attention, but when it _does_ stick I find it to be as beneficial as the time lost.

Great insight and I agree. I would add that you don&#x27;t need to believe your child have something to contribute to involve him&#x2F;her.They are little brats and don&#x27;t know shit, they get discracted by anything and so clumsy they are dangerous to themselves! I&#x27;m talking about 1 to 3 years old.You have to involve them so they can have a chance to learn and grow. You are the most important, strongest, knowledgeable person in they little world and they want to be part in everything you do. How could one be so heartless to ignore this most basic and pure need and not involve them in everything? :) Part of parenting is dancing on that fine edge where they can excel, want more, able to fail and try again without hurting themselves too much and develop their skills and interest in a safe environment.

&gt; kids love to help [ ... ] Involve them ever so slightly and you can continue your task.I think it can be a mindset or awareness thing, but some people are also resistant to involving anyone else in their stuff.It requires having an attitude where you believe others might have have something worthwhile to contribute, and it requires exercising faith in that person. And thinking through how they might contribute and&#x2F;or what reasonable limits are. Some people aren&#x27;t willing to do that, and they tend to shut people out so they keep control. (This applies to both kids and adults.)IMHO (as a non-parent), it might actually be way better parenting, too, if you can get this right. People often respond well if you give them a stake in things and responsibility for something (assuming it&#x27;s not genuinely more than they can handle). You&#x27;re telling them you believe in them and giving them an opportunity to grow. Many people will take that opportunity. And if you always avoid giving them such opportunities, you&#x27;re implicitly suggesting you don&#x27;t think they can handle it. Developmentally, I think a kid needs to have these experiences where they see that they are trusted with things, learn to step up, see that their contributions fit in somewhere, and see how to do more of that. If they don&#x27;t, they are probably going to go out into the world not really expecting anyone to want their contribution.

Speaking as someone who was raised like that as well, you are doing your kids a great service. I feel pretty comfortable being the handyman in my house all because my dad involved me with his projects from a very young age.

Yes! My kids love me fixing stuff, so I can multiplex minding them, fixing up the house and, in a sense, educate them all at the same time. Obviously it takes longer with them spilling tools everywhere, but chores get done and the kids are happy

There&#x27;s a good npr article talking about how to use this quality to get kids to help with chores:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;sections&#x2F;goatsandsoda&#x2F;2018&#x2F;06&#x2F;09&#x2F;616928895&#x2F;how-to-get-your-kids-to-do-chores-without-resenting-it" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.npr.org&#x2F;sections&#x2F;goatsandsoda&#x2F;2018&#x2F;06&#x2F;09&#x2F;6169288...</a>

That&#x27;s kinda how my parents managed me as well, and it definitely paid off for everyone involved. Holding the flashlight for dad at 5 years old turned into helping build the car port by 10.My parents got free labor they would have otherwise needed a pricey contractor for, and I got practical skills that have helped me to this day.

&gt; The #1 thing I&#x27;ve learned is that kids love to helpThis this this a 1000 times. Feeling needed, learning to help, and being rewarded with happy words and a clear sense of success and achievement is like a hard drug.Every children will lean towards different activities; involving them will need a slightly different approach; and you will need to learn patience while they learn, so it&#x27;s not a trivial task, but IME if you work it out, it works wonders even with the most challenged (or challenging) kids.

I&#x27;ve noticed this when seeing my sister&#x27;s kid at her home.  Cooking is hard for her because her son constantly wants her attention.  For a while (when he was 2ish), he really wanted to help cook.  Obviously giving him a kitchen knife or letting him near a hot stove&#x2F;oven would be a terrible idea, so instead she would give him a big bowl, a spatula, some flour, a used spice shaker that she&#x27;d put flour or something colorful in, and have him sit on the floor in the kitchen and &quot;help cook&quot;.  Sure, he made a bit of a mess, but it wasn&#x27;t hard to clean up, kept him occupied, and made him feel a part of the action.

I do this often with my little humans and we&#x27;re doin great. But there are caveats:1. If you cannot priorize having fun and teaching your children over the actual thing you are doing, you gonna have a bad time. Filling the dishwasher with a 2 yr old? You will spend 45 min on it while laughing 10 times, having a heart attack two times and maybe break a chip off a plate or break a cup now and then. Of course you can do it alone in 15 minutes if you could get rid of him&#x2F;her... As soon as you get frustrated by the slowness and just want the task done you&#x27;ve lost. There is no task for you other than to teach them and you need to incorporate your daily chores into this task. This is of course fuckin&#x27; hard and sometimes impossible and a great source of frustration, shouting and regret.2. Kids add a time multiplier for everything you do together and for he first 4 years it&#x27;s gonna be less than one. After that there is an ever incerasing chance for them to be actually useful and reduce the time needed for a task. But the catch is : if you let them empty and fill the dishwasher regularly at 2 yr old and endure the long task they will help later on and you will benefit. If you don&#x27;t they won&#x27;t be interested in helping when they are 6,8,12 years old and their help would actually make a difference.

I don&#x27;t have kids.However, I teach up to 18 hours a day with children of various ages. I&#x27;ve done this for 22 years.I also have been the de facto babysitter for my family since I was 14. Kids in my home almost constantly.The #1 thing I&#x27;ve learned is that kids love to help,
. If you are busy and shush them away then they&#x27;ll cause havoc. Involve them ever so slightly and you can continue your task.Realizing this was the biggest boon to my productivity that I&#x27;ve had in my life. Sometimes the kids can increase your output by utilizing their curious&#x2F;helpful minds or attempting to apply your thoughts in their space.I&#x27;m sure this would be different if it were my children, but I constantly see parents making the mistake of thinking that their thoughts&#x2F;activities and mutually exclusive to their children&#x27;s thoughts&#x2F;activities. They&#x27;re not.It does take time to learn to engage and frame your thoughts&#x2F;activities, but children are only a pure attention sucker if you treat them as a distraction.

Yes, I agree with that; my experiences lead me to strongly believe that 24&#x2F;7 parenting is not for me. Right now, I like kids in small doses.The question I&#x27;m attempting to answer with data is: how likely is it that I would experience the &quot;switch flip&quot; that Paul describes here, and would it be enough to overcome the feelings I have about it now? If the data strongly indicated that most parents experience this kind of &quot;switch flip&quot;, it would make me more inclined.

This might work for some people, but for me it would have been a worthless and tragically misleading signal. I got modest-at-best enjoyment from being around kids before I had one, but the past 10 years with our son has held many of the best experiences of my life. Your own kid is a very different thing than all the other kids you might spend time with.My experience is more like pg describes, where I had a lot of trouble projecting what it would be like, and in retrospect all the rational pro&#x2F;con analysis I did wasn&#x27;t really getting to the core of the matter.

&gt; but I think there is much better way to estimate how kids would affect your happiness: do activities that put you in extensive contact with kids, e.g., volunteer to baby sit for your friends&#x2F;family, offer to tutor&#x2F;advise neighborhood kids, and coach youth sportsI strongly disagree that this gives good evidence whether you&#x27;ll enjoy having kids yourself. I never liked dealing with kids of any age; the experience with my own kids, however, is vastly different, and I really enjoy their company.

I endorse looking at data like this, but I think there is much better way to estimate how kids would affect your happiness: do activities that put you in extensive contact with kids, e.g., volunteer to baby sit for your friends&#x2F;family, offer to tutor&#x2F;advise neighborhood kids, and coach youth sports. (In addition to learning about yourself, you&#x27;re helping out parents and kids when you do this, so win-win.)Obviously these activities do not capture huge things about the 24&#x2F;7 job that being a parent is, but they will probably tell you a lot more about how you relate to children than looking at population self-report data.

Another confounder is that parents with kids know what it&#x27;s like to be single. Most people without children have no idea what it&#x27;s like to have kids of their own. There is a subset that knows exactly what it&#x27;s like, and it&#x27;s those who have lost their children. Ask them if they regret their choice. Or actually don&#x27;t, because people in that situation almost never made it there by choice.

Not having children is assumed not to be a final choice. But in many cases, it is. The more I learn about correlations between genetic disorders and parent age (including the age of the father), the more I feel I have been deceived about this.

One possible confounder is that having children is a pretty much irreversible step. Whereas many people who don&#x27;t have children might choose to have them later. So they regret their choice less, because it&#x27;s a less final choice.

I don&#x27;t think that actually matters, in the &quot;ignorance is bliss&quot; sort of way. If you don&#x27;t know what you&#x27;re missing, you can&#x27;t regret missing it.If the goal is &quot;minimizing regret&quot; (probably it isn&#x27;t, but let&#x27;s say it is for now), then not having kids is a more probably way of getting there.

There&#x27;s bias: people with children were previously people without children and can realistically regret the lifestyle that they&#x27;re leaving behind, but people who&#x27;ve never had children lack that same capacity for regret.And as to who is feeling overwhelmed and regretful, it&#x27;s mostly women who are shoved into a thankless housewife roll and living far away from their family and friends.

Probably many people in the middle of a marathon regret the decision.  But, afterwards they&#x27;ve run a marathon, and those who haven&#x27;t, haven&#x27;t.

1.4% of people globally end up dying by suicide.

Another data point of interest: how many kids regret being had?  I don&#x27;t!

As someone who has wrestled a lot with the question of whether I ever want kids, I&#x27;ve sought out data. One thing I came across was this: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.salon.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;05&#x2F;09&#x2F;google-confessional-your-search-engine-knows-if-you-regret-having-kids&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.salon.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;05&#x2F;09&#x2F;google-confessional-your-se...</a>&gt; Adults with children are 3.6 times more likely to tell Google they regret their decision than are adults without children.I&#x27;d be curious if others have data on this. I&#x27;m especially interested in how many people have a reaction like Paul Graham (a switch flipped, it&#x27;s inconvenient but totally worth it) vs. how many end up feeling overwhelmed and regretful. The latter thought carries far more stigma, so it might be harder to know how many people experience this.

Parent is saying he didn&#x27;t enjoy wasting it. He didn&#x27;t choose to be alone.

Well, as they say, it&#x27;s not wasted time if you enjoyed wasting it.

I think it&#x27;s smart in concept, but it feels like its a little too overarching.Taken literally, it sounds like he&#x27;s dismissing his relationship&#x2F;marriage and saying he was lonely while in it, pre-children. I&#x27;m not going to try and extrapolate if that&#x27;s what he truly meant or what the implications of such a statement would mean.The sentiment, I think, would improve from removing kids and saying &quot;I didn&#x27;t take advantage of my pre-children freedoms and was lonely because of that.&quot;It also raises an interesting question... If he had maximized those freedoms, how would that have affected his decision to have a child?

That statement in the article actually turned me off quite a bit. Loneliness is not the opposite of having kids. Having kids is sort of an &quot;easy mode&quot; for filling your time[0]. So sure, if you don&#x27;t have kids, and don&#x27;t have a romantic partner, and and don&#x27;t have friends, and attempt to go through life expecting that you and only you are necessary for entertaining yourself, yeah, you&#x27;ll be lonely.Earlier in life I often considered loneliness to be my biggest fear, but I eventually realized that loneliness isn&#x27;t something that just happens to you. It&#x27;s a choice. If you don&#x27;t want that choice, then you have to put in effort to find and maintain friendships[1], find a hopefully-lifelong romantic partner, etc.Beyond that, though, there are plenty of elderly people who are profoundly lonely because their children have families and lives of their own and rarely see them. Perhaps if they tried harder to maintain relationships outside their nuclear family, they&#x27;d be better off. Not saying all that is easy (especially with kids in the mix), but I certainly think it&#x27;s worthwhile in the end.[0] &quot;Easy&quot; in that your time will always be filled, with no searching needed on your part; I&#x27;m not suggesting that raising kids is easy.[1] Being friends with parents (when you are not one) is hard, but it&#x27;s worthwhile to make the time, and be flexible with your time since theirs often isn&#x27;t.

...most of the freedom I had before kids, I never used. I paid for it in loneliness, but I never used it.Paul&#x27;s written a lot of smart stuff, but this might be the smartest.I took a lot of steps to protect my freedom before getting engaged to my partner, and I realize now that was a shitty tradeoff. Freedom was an unexercised resource I had, which is to say it was largely wasted on me. I spent a lot of time being lonely - not alone, which implies by choice, but lonely - having no steadfast companionship and with no alternative to that.

Also, some parents do develop those feelings, but over time rather than immediately.

Most people&#x27;s ambitions were created for them and all ambitions live in the context of our lived experiences.Imagine that one adjusts as one&#x27;s life is adjusting around them. Surprise?You discover if you had really seen the possibility space of life and weighed it&#x27;s options.

You&#x27;re right not forcing the issue. But this is something that merits at least a dialogue. You don&#x27;t have the right to force your partner to do what you want on this, but you have the right to be able to speak about your desires, and having them acknowledged.Forget about this idea of burden, this is not for you to decide, and if you are serious about that, you should be clear about sharing the workload. 
And yes, there are also the specific burdens of pregnancy, lactation that you can&#x27;t share, but also for plenty of women, there is also a reward for those activities. A reward that you as a man can also only reap vicariously. So, for every woman there will be a different balance of perspectives, some value more the rewards and will be happy having kids, others will feel more actually the burdens. Not your business to decide that.But, what is your business is to understand what is important to you. To understand that if you feel so strongly about it now, it probably won&#x27;t go away and that you will resent over time, if not right now.And then, if you have such different attitudes about this matter, maybe, just maybe, it would be best for both of you to free yourselves from each other.

You might want to balance PG&#x27;s essay with some other viewpoints as well:Decades of data suggest parenthood makes people unhappy <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bigthink.com&#x2F;sex-relationships&#x2F;should-you-have-kids" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bigthink.com&#x2F;sex-relationships&#x2F;should-you-have-kids</a>Google confessional: Your search engine knows if you regret having kids <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.salon.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;05&#x2F;09&#x2F;google-confessional-your-search-engine-knows-if-you-regret-having-kids&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.salon.com&#x2F;2017&#x2F;05&#x2F;09&#x2F;google-confessional-your-se...</a>Many Parents Are Happier Than Non-Parents — But Not in the U.S. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;time.com&#x2F;collection&#x2F;guide-to-happiness&#x2F;4370344&#x2F;parents-happiness-children-study&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;time.com&#x2F;collection&#x2F;guide-to-happiness&#x2F;4370344&#x2F;paren...</a>Having kids makes you happier, but only when they move out <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newscientist.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;2213655-having-kids-makes-you-happier-but-only-when-they-move-out&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newscientist.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;2213655-having-kids-mak...</a>The depressing reason why having kids doesn’t actually make you happier <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.marketwatch.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;one-theory-on-why-having-kids-makes-people-unhappy-2019-02-26" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.marketwatch.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;one-theory-on-why-having-k...</a>

Is there a way to make them more burden for you then her outside of pregnancy? If no, why not?

I regret reading this essay because now the discouragement is back. I have wanted children; my wife has not. I am determined not to force the issue as she would be the one undertaking most of the burden, and why should I cause her to resent me? So I made peace with it, but every time something like this comes up I am torn again.

&gt; Can you elaborate? What exactly is wrong with parents talking to you about their kids?I&#x27;m not sure I can, but let me try. Some of my coworkers will chat to me for five minutes about watching that new Scorsese movie, and maybe make plans to hang out after work. Let&#x27;s call this Group A. Some other ones will talk to me for twenty minutes about how their kids are really into Frozen 2, and how they dressed up as Elsa for Halloween. They also never have time to hang out. Let&#x27;s call this Group B.It so happens that none of the people in Group A have children, and that&#x27;s really my problem with it. It&#x27;s not really that I care whether or not anyone has kids (none of my business, really) -- but it seems like the people I overwhelmingly have no interest in listening to or talking with always end up being the ones that have kids. And so I end up wondering if this divide is inevitable, like of your (hah) sibling comments seems to say.

Can you elaborate? What exactly is wrong with parents talking to you about their kids? Kids are a big part of our lives. We&#x27;re telling you about our life.I think what you&#x27;re saying is that you want us to be interested in different stuff, more along the lines of what you&#x27;re interested in, because you&#x27;re not interested in kids. That doesn&#x27;t sound so much like a social problem to me as a simple personality mismatch.

&gt; I keep distances from people with kids when the kids are around, because very possible they will leave their kids to me to gain a couple of hours to themselves.I recognize that you certainly have your unique circle of acquaintances, but in general I find the above statement to be extremely improbable. Not only would I never leave my kids with an unwilling babysitter, it&#x27;s actually the opposite -- you have to convince me that you are a safe choice.

It&#x27;s basically two worlds:People who have kids (and people who really want kids) and people who don&#x27;t (and people who don&#x27;t want). They can&#x27;t understand each other and most of one camp think the other camp dull and crazy.It&#x27;s just pov, and yeah, I keep distances from people with kids when the kids are around, because very possible they will leave their kids to me to gain a couple of hours to themselves.

This is a fair point. Taking it further, I also think it may just be that people with kids find &quot;kid talk&quot; to be a good default, safe topic of conversation with other people who have kids, so 50% or more of cases it actually makes them more interesting to those other kid-having people they can bond and empathize with.Whereas I, who am not interested in that stuff, end up mentally putting them all into a single &quot;boring&quot; bucket, while the guy who can&#x27;t stop talking about his 24-pack of Soylent gets his own separate &quot;boring&quot; bucket.

I don&#x27;t have kids, but am involved in the lives of young relatives and am generally interested in questions about how to raise a child in ways that lead to them being competent, well adjusted humans. To me, parent talk seems to fall into two broad categories: discussions about raising children in general, and anecdotes about some supposedly funny thing that a particular child did last week. The former I find interesting, and I can engage in these conversations for hours. The latter bores me to death (and when the child being described is present I actively try to derail the conversation, as I hated listening to embarrassing stories about myself as a child and imagine most children feel the same way even if they lack the courage to voice that opinion to their parents). This is the difference between discussing the mechanics of a blockchain and discussing some anecdote about Coinye West rebranding as Coinye. I&#x27;m not too knowledgeable about or even particularly interested in cars, but I can listen to a mechanic talk about different types of engines and be genuinely engaged. I can&#x27;t be genuinely engaged by somebody talking about the new paint job they put on their muscle car last week. I can recognise that others seem more engaged by anecdotal narratives than discussions of underlying systems, but I still think this distinction is different than simply being interested in one broad topic like &quot;children&quot; or &quot;blockchains&quot; over another.

It&#x27;s hard not to talk about the most dominant thing in your life, and only a few people have the skill of being genuinely interested in the priorities of other people.Some people are boring about their hobbies, some are boring about people, some are boring about work, some are boring about their kids.If you find the conversation boring just remember they are probably just as bored at you droning on about blockchain or whatever it is you are keen to talk about.

I agree what you’re saying is a problem, but it isn’t universal. Anecdotally the trend seems to match living preferences: parents in central cities tend to be less myopic about their kids, parents in the suburbs more so.For my wife and I, the book “Bringing Up Bebe” was really influential in how we thought about kids before and after we had them. It’s a perspective shift kind of like this: your newborn human can’t talk, can’t move, doesn’t have any hobbies, interests, or friends. Rather than bend your life around that, why not invite this child into your life, to join in your hobbies, meet your friends, etc.That may sound silly but it’s actually a pretty influential idea to latch on to. We don’t have a schedule wrapped around our kids, or weekends wrapped around our kids. We go places we want to go, and do things we want to do, and include the kids and tell them what we’re doing and why and invite them to join the fun. The great thing about kids is they’re pretty much up for anything, so they usually love this and jump in :)I think, as an adult, you also have to make a conscious choice to keep up your independent life.Losing your independence is something that happens to people for various reasons - you see it sometimes when people get married, and then they withdraw from all their old social life and kind of retreat into each other. It’s a lot of pressure to be someone’s entire world... I haven’t seen many of those couples stay happy.I think that’s the part of having kids that’s hardest. Because they do have needs and do have to be accommodated, it can be easy to just worry about taking care of them and give up on everything else because it’s not as easy as it used to be to maintain your independent life. But it’s a choice you make, and in my experience it’s deeply worthwhile.

&gt; Most single people are just as annoying though.I don&#x27;t know if that&#x27;s fair. I talk about my kids too much, no doubt, but only one of my (not single, but childless) friends is annoying that way. He likes to smugly point out what he did this weekend that had nothing to do with kids. I make a point of not discussing my kids or family life with him, and he still makes it a discussion point. Most other friends in my circle are pretty relaxed about the kid thing, either because they have kids, or because they know that kids are just people and therefore part of our larger social group, so discussing them is okay.

I had a coworker once who was a pickup artist. Talking to him was a LOT more annoying than talking to the parents I worked with.

While I agree with your later point about having larger families leading to a healthier mix of time spent, I cant agree with your first point.Yes, most parents talk a lot about their kids and that can be annoying if you don&#x27;t have kids. Most single people are just as annoying though. You can talk about your kids or you can talk about your vacation, or your job... for the most part people will find it interesting if they relate and boring if they don&#x27;t. I don&#x27;t think there&#x27;s a qualitative difference there between parents and single people, just different audiences that will be receptive to what they&#x27;re talking about.

I didn&#x27;t even know Paul Graham had kids. I don&#x27;t recall them playing much of a part in his business, his essays, his creations, etc.So how exactly does that show the biggest problem you have with kids?Alternately, for some reason you laser-focus on the topic for some reason and you can&#x27;t help but let it fill the entirety of your perception. This appears in Facebook a lot where people complain about baby pictures or anecdotes and somehow ignore the 99.99% of absolutely irrelevant inanity that the rest of their feed is (&quot;Oh you ate at a restaurant...wowwweeeee&quot;). It happens in loud restaurants when people filter out enormous volumes of ambient sound to focus on the sounds of a child sixty feet away. When someone has some sort of hangup about children, it&#x27;s amazing how large it can appear in their perspective.

&gt;Not having children well into adulthood is a modern privilege—one could even characterize modern childless adulthood as merely an extension of our own childhoods.this.&gt;Logistically, extended families are a good idea.My fiancée and I have discussed buying a duplex, and moving her parents or mine (or both) into the other half. Looking into the future of what elder care will look like for them ... it&#x27;s not pretty. A nursing home in a city I don&#x27;t live in, staffed mostly with people that aren&#x27;t even from this country (nothing wrong with that, generally, but it&#x27;s something to be considered). For them it would be the best option, moving in with us. They get to see their grandkids, and we get to see them as they sunset their lives.

There&#x27;s a difference between using kid-talk as a way to find common ground and bond with other people, and being literally unable to talk about anything but your kids. That latter bit actually does happen with a disturbingly-significant number of my friends who are parents.The main commonality among parents I know who are afflicted with this problem is that they have no or few relatives living nearby. Those who have relatives (especially their own parents) nearby seem to be more well adjusted. While they still talk about their kids a lot, they can at least speak about other interests and events unrelated to the kids.One of my friends who also is able to talk about other things is a freelancer and is not a workaholic. I suspect number of hours worked to be correlated here too.

I think it’s the other way around: somehow we tried to build ourselves a civilization without children at all. I think in most human cultures, children are considered an important if not primary concern. Not having children well into adulthood is a modern privilege—one could even characterize modern childless adulthood as merely an extension of our own childhoods. But by starting to normalize childless adulthood, we’ve made the most normal and natural thing human beings do come across as a weird cultish type of social deviancy.Logistically, extended families are a good idea. But I don’t think they stop people from putting their children first in terms of life priorities. On the contrary, a culture where parenthood rather than childless adulthood is normal is one where talking about your kids is a universal common ground you can share with other adults. (People need to have lots of kids for extended families to be normal—everyone will have grandparents but not necessarily aunts and uncles). Maybe you’re just observing one of these (sub)cultures from the outside.

We&#x27;re American but live outside the US. Honestly our  parent friends in the US seem sad and exhausted by comparison- the cult of workaholism is terrible for families, and the (guaranteed month of real pto&#x2F;decent parental leave&#x2F;shorter commutes&#x2F;million other little things that make life less precarious) add up.

&gt; When I go to visit family and family friends outside the US...I was raised outside the US, and this has been my experience as well. My friends&#x2F;family outside the US with kids do talk about them sometimes, but it&#x27;s usually blended with other anecdotes, like &quot;We were going on a trip to this place, and Timmy was well behaved for a change (eyeroll)&quot;.In the US these conversations tend to be more along the lines of &quot;Timmy had underwater basket weaving practice, so we had to drive 5 hours to take him, and he threw in the car on the way there and back. Did I mention he&#x27;s getting really good with those baskets?&quot;Agree with CalRobert that this could very well be because of stingy PTO and parental leave policies in the US which seem to have been designed with hard-driving male car salesmen in the 1960s as the target group.

Agreed. I do remember reading somewhere that the average current full time working mother spends more time with her children than a housewife in the 50s. Children used to go outside and play and have more unstructured time. I feel like there is this whole odd child-centric culture in the US. It is bizarre how many young adults I meet nowadays who have not been left without adult supervision for more than 15 minutes their entire childhood.Most of my friends are from childhood. For the ones who have children, about half of them have turned into uninteresting people who are incapable of carrying a conversation about anything other than their children. And some of them were extremely interesting beforehand. A few have snapped out of it when their kids have turned 3-5, but most seem stuck forever.When I go to visit family and family friends outside the US, they all have a bunch of kids but none of them have this disease where they can only talk about the kids. But there&#x27;s also much more family support nearby and societal norms allow the children to be more independent.

Despite not having children, I like hearing about my coworker&#x27;s and friend&#x27;s kids. Complaining about them can get old, but funny stories and things they are proud of are great to hear. I don&#x27;t think I&#x27;m unique in this.

I try to avoid telling unsolicited stories about my kids, but what else am I supposed to answer when people ask about my weekend? It&#x27;s not that I&#x27;m mistaken about how exciting my kids are, it&#x27;s that other people are mistaken about how exciting (for them) my weekend could possibly be!

Eh, you’re thinking way too hard about this imo. It’s a biological thing. Having a kid takes you back to a level of animality that probably only sex gets close to—you’re tapping into a bilogical instinct and you’re ruled by instinct—that’s why people talk so much about their kids—there’s really not too many experiences in everyday life that have such a fundamental psychological and biological effect—as soon as you have a kid nature has wired you up to put that kid before everything else —just look at how a mama bear will react when you get between her and her cubs, human parents are not so different, so obviously their intense focus on their kids seep into their social life.It’s probably not something varianece in social structure will change since it comes from a fundamentally biological place.

This is offensive. People talk about what they’re passionate about, and who are you to judge someone who is passionate about parenthood? It’s condescending. You could apply that same logic to anyone who talks about anything to a degree more than you deem it to be worthy of. I hope you someday get some perspective on life and learn how to appreciate people who are different than you are

Ironically, this essay shows the biggest problem I have with having kids -- especially in the US, people with kids seem to single-mindedly focus on them and can&#x27;t stop telling you about their kids. What remains of their social lives and all their holidays seem to revolve around the kids. I think pg echoes a bit of this sentiment himself when he says:&gt; To some extent I&#x27;m like a religious cultist telling you that you&#x27;ll be happy if you join the cult too — but only because joining the cult will alter your mind in a way that will make you happy to be a cult member.My offhand guess is that this general situation is due to dual-earning families that live separately from the grandparents. This seems to be social experiment started after World War II, and from the point of view of an observer I can tell you it&#x27;s not going great. I suspect that the traditional large joint family approach is probably best in case you do want to have kids and not have it completely upend your life.

TBH I think it&#x27;s just the chemical change. Basically you are happy in one way or another, and once you made decision most people tend to regret a bit&#x2F;lot afterwards.

Have you heard of Culdesac? It&#x27;s a YC company building the first 100% car-free neighbourhood in Temple, Arizona.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;culdesac.com" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;culdesac.com</a>

Actually a pretty old project, but take a look at the Park la Brea development in LA. It&#x27;s a gated community in the middle of the town taking up two city blocks. They are extending the subway there as we speak.There&#x27;s also the village green, where the interior of the development is completely pedestrian only. That place isn&#x27;t far from the expo light rail and the upcoming lax light rail.LA has a lot of small bungalow courts that face inward to a courtyard rather than the street, but they aren&#x27;t nearly to the scale as the above developments.

The car-is-anti-human sentiment is one I can deeply empathize with. Just like oxygen and water, cars and their perils were with our generation since birth, and therefore for most are subconsciously taken for granted in life. But once you spend enough time in urban areas that have consciously rooted them out, you realize that their super loud noises, toxic smelly fumes, and omnipresent fear of death from them are indeed crushing to the human spirit. I’m also looking for cities in the U.S. that really do put “walkability” (and biking, e.g.) first. But the damage is so bad from the 20th century, thanks to the invention and explosive proliferation of the car, and socially the psychology of their existence so deeply rooted in most of our minds (“There could be no other way...”), that I don’t see enough strength to this movement. I’m typing from South Beach in Miami, e.g., which I think would be a perfect home were it not for the (probably, on average by land use in many cities) ~40% ownership by cars. I’ve lived in e.g. Amsterdam where the entire transport system was built around biking, and that from experience was such a liberating mindset to have every day, being able to bike across the city in 15 minutes. Alternatively I do wonder about e.g. Barcelona’s superblocks, about how the livability in small car-less or minimal car neighborhoods may improve (i.e. what small-scale neighborhoods without cars but also with sufficient amenities could be fantastic to live in?). Living on lush college campuses is typically a good example of where a much smaller percent of the land use goes to car transport, and it is expected that people walk and bike more - generally across landscapes with a lot more green than dead concrete.I’m wondering if there any new urban projects, ideally in the U.S, potentially on the scale of the superblocks or e.g. NYC’s High Line &#x2F; Atlanta’s Beltline &#x2F; Miami’s Underline, where ecosystems are emerging beyond the reach of cars?

Especially the SUV. Virtually unsurvivable.

&gt; Cars, in particular, are terrible for kidsThey&#x27;re the number 1 killer of children in the US. They are objectively terrible for kids.

North America is too big. And many decisions we made in the 40s and 50s put the car at the center of life. Car ownership was an expression of freedom and a growing middle class. The Eisenhower highway system ensured we could drive coast to coast.In NYC, Robert Moses put the car at the center of his infrastructure build out. That&#x27;s why Manhattan has two highways up and down it&#x27;s waterfront... A squandered opportunity to have created a city that was more attune with it&#x27;s surroundings.Ultimately you might need to move to Europe to go car free. But most of the cities I&#x27;m thinking of were planned a millennia ago.

I agree with this a lot. I was pretty anti-kid, not in the sense that I didn’t want them ever, but that I didn’t want them “any time soon.” My wife was this way too, until one day she wasn’t. I still felt pretty ambivalent about the whole thing until our first was born.Children really are interesting, and really do fill life with all kinds of quietly wonderful moments.We live in San Francisco, which is very hilly. When we drive up and down steep hills, my daughters get so excited. They squeal with glee like they’re riding a roller coaster, and beg us to drive up and down the hills again.That may sound mundane, but when you’re there, sharing the sheer joy of life with fellow humans, it’s anything but.Now looking back, the thing that I regret is that the modern world is pretty anti-kid, and makes things harder than they need to be. Cars, in particular, are terrible for kids. The roads are deadly, my number one fear is that they’ll run into the street and get hit. Car seats are also the worst. Long road trips are physically painful for the kids, I’m sure, so we’ve cut back on those. I wish, very much, that I could find a car-free city in North America to move to, but this doesn’t seem to exist.

&quot;Partly, and I won&#x27;t deny it, this is because of serious chemical changes that happened almost instantly when our first child was born. It was like someone flipped a switch. I suddenly felt protective not just toward our child, but toward all children.&quot;This, almost exactly, happened to me. I wasn&#x27;t interested in babies, and then suddenly my newborn baby in particular and babies in general were amazing and precious.

Definitely top 0.01% in the world though. Quick google search estimates lower end of net worth around $250m, and top 0.01% in 2012 was about $111m. So he&#x27;s up there, but yea, not the tippy top I guess.

I don&#x27;t think he&#x27;s anywhere near one of the absolute wealthiest people out there, but these facts are certainly true.Money doesn&#x27;t buy you happiness, but it sure doesn&#x27;t hurt, and takes away so many of the stresses many of us face.

No one is saying it&#x27;s not possible or not worthwhile; just that it&#x27;s a very different experience in some ways.

As a counterpoint, this essay resonated with me very deeply, and I earn a low salary for an engineer in NYC.We do fine as a family and have to make compromises I couldn’t have imagined making prior to having kids, but it’s totally worth it.This type of experience isn’t universal but doesn’t require massive wealth.

Agreed. I&#x27;m in my early 30s and don&#x27;t have kids because I don&#x27;t think I can provide for them unless I spend all my income and free time&#x2F;ambitions on them. I make a good income as a programmer but I still live paycheck to paycheck because of cost of living in the Bay Area.

I met a person in a similar situation via a mountain bike group where I live. Kids are out of the house and now he has time for bike riding, date nights and, being in his 40ies is still fit, healthy and very active.

I had kids very young. They are nearly grown now.I watched the people I went to high school with have kids very late allowing more structured time to complete their education as early as possible and excel to vice president positions in the corporate world. They excelled far more quickly and far more early in their careers than I.In contrast my children will be out of the house and on their own while I am barely middle aged. Since I have never entered management in the corporate world but have grown two simultaneous careers, corporate software developer and military security analyst and network operations chief, I have a combination of skills I would not have developed otherwise.In a bit when the children are out I can pursue all the career and startup dreams that young people dream of but without regrets or challenges of raising kids. Perhaps I am still naive, but I am certainly not rich.

I work for a non-profit, make about a fifth of what I could make on the free market, live in a developing country and still agree with him.

Poorer people also worry about that. And that&#x27;s even worse for us with a lower wage. If I die, who will be able to provide for my children? I&#x27;m sure Paul is able to make arrangements so his kids can still have a finatially stable living if he dies prematurely.It is a fact that life is easier for him now. Just as much life is easier for me than probably around 99% of the people in the planet. Even though I&#x27;m nowhere near to even be considered rich.

No, worries never go away no matter where you’re at in life. It boils down to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.He doesn’t have to worry about financial stuff and instead gets to focus his worries on getting sick, dying prematurely, and not giving his children the awesome life he can with his unique personality.You didn’t mention that anywhere in your list, but I guarantee you it’s on his.

Because of increased volatility, or at least the perception.

Most of us have rich lives compared to the average parent in 1950. I was struck by how Bryan Caplan put it in perspective [1]:&gt; If you asked parents in the Fifties to imagine raising their four children with the help of the technology and wealth that we take for granted, they probably would have cheered. Why are so few couples taking advantage of this historic opportunity?[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;books&#x2F;edition&#x2F;Selfish_Reasons_to_Have_More_Kids&#x2F;FdZtnRcVq3sC" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;books&#x2F;edition&#x2F;Selfish_Reasons_to_Have...</a>

I&#x27;m not knocking Paul Graham or anyone who did well for themselves. But comparing your experience with that of Paul Graham, one of the richest people on the planet, is pointless. The wealthy live on a completely different PLANET than you or me.Of course he enjoys having kids, he has NONE of the stress of supporting himself and his family.His kids are going to have private tutors and house cleaners.He won&#x27;t sweat the cost of daycare. He will never have to worry about paying for college.He is going to have a nanny whenever he needs someone to watch the kids.He will never have to worry about making rent for the rest of his life.He will still be able to pursue whatever he dreams of with basically 0 risk.

I didn&#x27;t have a desire either. Life can be great with or without having kids :)

That&#x27;s a valid view.Sadly many women with this view are discriminated against.

At least sometime in your 40s, people stop saying &quot;Oh, you&#x27;ll change your mind. You&#x27;ll want kids.&quot;

I don&#x27;t like kids. I don&#x27;t want kids. I&#x27;m 46 and single and I don&#x27;t want to date someone with kids. It drastically reduces my dating pool but I&#x27;m willing to live with that.There are enough people on earth as it is. I don&#x27;t feel like I need to increase that number.

Having kids don&#x27;t automatically make you a better person. Anecdotally, most of the people I know are the same after having kids as they were before having kids. The only difference is that they&#x27;re working an extra job.The ones who coo and cuddle with their kids are those who would coo and cuddle any child they come into contact with. Those who are patient with their kids were patient before having children.The chemical high from having a child doesn&#x27;t necessarily change who you are. If anything, it simply amplifies existing traits by putting you through a high pressure, long-term project.The biggest (positive) child-related change I&#x27;ve noticed? The sudden and prolonged surge of happiness when those children are out of the house. Everything else tends to be the effects of time blunting the worst of the negatives.As a point of reference, I have no children of my own, but I had two teenage girls adopt me as their father. I spend several days a week tutoring and helping them. I get the high of watching them grow into themselves without having to live with them.

So it is a cult!... just kidding. I think.

I could say a lot about having kids, but I&#x27;ll keep it to this:The fundamentally most powerful thing I feel about having kids is faith. I have faith now. An unwavering, unquestionable understanding of my purpose and direction on this planet. It makes so many questions so easy to answer.

&gt; To some extent I&#x27;m like a religious cultist telling you that you&#x27;ll be happy if you join the cult too — but only because joining the cult will alter your mind in a way that will make you happy to be a cult member.There are strong parallels here to my feelings about Burning Man.

I don&#x27;t follow start ups, but the one I am familiar with: SendGrid. One of the founders had several kids.

True. Have you seen a super hero with a wife and kids?

&gt; I hate to say this, because being ambitious has always been a part of my identity, but having kids may make one less ambitious.Of course this is true. Can someone think of a single $10B+ founded by someone who already had a kid? Now a single $100B+ company?

I would ask yourself how likely this nightmare scenario really is, since you seem to be planning your life around it. Seems super unlikely. I&#x27;d invest in selling you insurance at like 4:1 odds that it won&#x27;t come true that you would ever resent your kids because you were forced to stay in a job that you hated.

So you consider your life so far has been only pain, nothing of worth or fulfillment because you&#x27;ve not had a nest of millions-of-dollars to lie in?You&#x27;d rather not have lived? Do you resent your parents having you?[Questions, not rhetorical statements, genuine curiosity.]It&#x27;s certainly an issue for many when considering parenthood - is it fair to raise a child in this situation - but I&#x27;ve not seen it expressed so extremely as you have.

There are a lot of fulfilled people with jobs. Having someone leave the work force can cause more stress and harm to them, even if economically it is “fine”, so I don’t think a lifetime of working a job your children like is that bad.Quality of life is also improving generation after generation, so someone working an average job will “have” a lot more now than 50 years ago.Anyway, your post raises a lot of good points. Thank you for sharing.

Why do you think your kids will have to toil more than you? Achieving financial independence is more about prioritizing your wants than having a huge income, and that&#x27;s definitely something you can pass on to your children.I think it would be a lot healthier to grow up like that than as a child who could have whatever they wanted (monetarily.) Sending the signal to your children that things in life just come for free seems like a great way to ensure they aren&#x27;t adapted to face adversity.

100% this for me, but I would go a step further. I don&#x27;t want to birth kids into this exact situation.If I have kids now, I&#x27;ll have to work into old age, and so will my kids. That&#x27;s a very sad situation in my view.If I achieve financial independence personally, but I have kids who will have to toil their whole lives, then I&#x27;d feel I&#x27;m making a selfish choice. How could I explain to my kids, who would see nothing but a relaxed and happy life at home, that they now owe our system 40+ years of labor?If I can achieve a level of wealth that would ensure my children could follow their dreams, then I&#x27;d love to have kids.It&#x27;s very hard to find a partner that would be able to say &quot;Well, if we don&#x27;t have $5M+ by age 40, we&#x27;ll be childless, and that&#x27;s fine. If we do make a lot of money, we&#x27;d love to have a big family.&quot;I know lots of people here are doing it, but how can you ethically commit your unborn children to a lifetime of work?And god forbid you have a child with disabilities and don&#x27;t have a sizable financial buffer...

Social pressure tends to push parents toward perfection. In fact as income goes up, expenses go up.A kid in the Bay Area will realistically cost a professional (upper middle class), dual working couple over $1m through college; that certainly is expensive.

Having kids is not that expensive if you have at least a middle class income. You can still advance in your career while having a good work life balance.Very few are in their ideal situation when having kids and yet they still have positive experiences being a parent.Those without kids and new parents think they need to be perfect, but in reality, there is no difference between being perfect and being good enough when it comes to raising kids.

Also don’t forget that he has a carefully cultivated brand to maintain. You think he’s going to be like, “hate my kids.”

The &quot;stuff&quot; thing really resonated with me. I value not having a lot of stuff. I prefer less clutter, fewer things to maintain or care about. I hate that our society is often centered around the acquisition of material things, most of which have no practical use, and even dubious aesthetic use. I&#x27;m certainly not completely spartan, and do have stuff, but I try to be careful about what I let into my home (and admittedly have a few boxes of things that I really need to go through and probably get rid of). My sister and her husband own more kid-related stuff than I own stuff in total. If I do have kids, I don&#x27;t want that, but struggle to see how it&#x27;s possible. The necessities alone are pretty numerous, and I find it hard to believe it&#x27;s possible to raise a kid without at least some books, toys, etc.

&gt;...I decided that I would not do so unless I achieved financial independence.This, right here, encapsulates what is so wrong with this present iteration of society. Having kids is now something that you do if you&#x27;re wealthy and can afford it, or if you&#x27;re extremely poor and cannot afford birth control (or just don&#x27;t know about it ... before the downvotes come, yes I know there are a lot of factors that influence high birth rates among poorer demographics).This isn&#x27;t a sustainable situation, at all. We need a complete realigning of what society - and indeed Civilization - is supposed to be about. Family formation is used as an economic marker today, for a ton of policy proposals. More families means more purchases of stuff. Fewer families means less buying of stuff, and leads to policies that might be tuned to address the economic &quot;problem&quot; but don&#x27;t really address the societal one.

I have been a huge fan of PG for 15 years. But early on I realized his advice about starting a company is similarly for people in a different situation. If I had rich supportive parents and no student debt I would certainly have started a company right out of school.

Life decisions and outcomes go through a big calculation engine. Every life scenario has pros and cons, associated probabilities and timeframes.So, financial independence: obvious pros. Cons: low probability event in short time frame.Kids: pros: they&#x27;re awesome. They make you very happy on balance. (I would assign a high probability to that). Obviously a subjective point of view. They are also way lower maintenance (cost) than you think. Cons: they take up a lot of your time.Also there are interaction effects. Getting kids will reduce your available time needed to work to get financial independence.So you need to weigh these things out. Point is, money (or lack of it) shouldn&#x27;t be too much of a deciding factor in the kids decision. IMHO

Note that PG has two incredibly important positive factors that make his experience of parenthood much better: he has a great partner, and he is very wealthy. People who don&#x27;t have these power-ups might have much more mixed feelings about the experience.I would actually like to have kids, but from a young age I decided that I would not do so unless I achieved financial independence. The reason is that if I were forced to stay in a job (or other life situation) that I hated for the sake of the kids, I would start to resent them.

I don&#x27;t understand. Was the guy angry because the kid was using a loud&#x2F;bright (?) phone during a movie? Was he angry just because he was drunk? Like some people get booze-happy, and some booze-sad?

&gt; Partly, and I won&#x27;t deny it, this is because of serious chemical changes that happened almost instantly when our first child was born. It was like someone flipped a switch.I have a step-daughter. It&#x27;s amazing how protective I am over here. I&#x27;m not violent or confrontational by any means.One time this drunk guy didn&#x27;t like that she was on her phone (she wasn&#x27;t doing anything wrong).This guy was basically yelling at her... my adrenaline spiked and I was immediately in this guys face protecting her.I mean you&#x27;d think this was the natural thing to do right? Of course it is... but what&#x27;s interesting is that I don&#x27;t have any recollection of actually making a conscious decision to take this action.It was almost done and over with before I realized what happened.The guy was actually arrested for public intoxication and taken away. He had been drinking in the movie theater and came out drunk.

Having Kids