Hi folks, I thought I'd create some content and share some experience and learning around any concerns I had about being childfree in my first 10 years after my tubal. I hope this can help those that are at this stage now.
I will say that 35 years after my tubal, I realized in retrospect, somewhere during that time, that I knew in my teens I didn't want kids. I did go through a period, soon after my tubal at 24, of about 10 years where a lot of my friends tried to pressure me into either spending a ton of time with their kids or even adopt, where I wondered if I really wanted kids cuz I liked babies under 6 months of age. It wasn't until I got close to someone and her newborn, where I spent plenty of time with her kid over the next 3 years and she was TOTALLY accepting of my decision and NEVER pushed an agenda. I finally realized I truly lost interest in the kid after about 6 months of age and knew I wasn't interested, not because I was pushing back against acquaintances who were pushing their own agenda in opposition to mine, but because I JUST LOST INTEREST. It took a good, secure in their parenthood, friend to let me understand there was zero interest on my part.
As it turns out what I like about babies was the oxytocin hit from carrying them around, which I learned I could get from cats and small dogs, of which I have 2 now, and they stay small forever instead of just 6 months!
OP is saying that in their experience, holding a baby gives them the same hit of oxytocin as holding a cat or dog. OP has experienced holding both babies and cats and dogs. OP is talking about experiences that they have had. Your uncles was talking about taking a shit, an experience that he had, and giving birth, an experience that he has not had. That is the difference. OP is allowed to talk about their experiences. They're not talking about other people's experiences with children or claiming that their individual experiences are universal.
Holding someone else's child is completely different from holding your own child that you created and gave life to. OP has never held their own child, and therefore cannot possibly say that pet ownership gives them the same satisfaction.
Op is talking about holding their pet, an experience they have had, and holding their child, an experience they have not had. Therefore they absolutely cannot try to compare the two.
All OP can say is that having pets gives them the same enjoyment as holding someone else's baby, which is most likely absolutely true. But that's not what was said. They tried to equate pet ownership to bringing and nurturing a life into this world and I'm sorry but that's fucking ridiculous, period.
If someone feels the same about children and animals, and then decides to not become a parent as a result, that is a responsible choice. Not all parents like their children. Some parents develop a special bond but not all. Better for a person to have a few pets than create a human being they may end up losing interest in after a few months.
I agree with every word of that, except the first line. My point is that OP cannot possibly know if owning pets will provide them the same satisfaction as having children because they've never had children.
No one here is actually disputing what I actually said, because what I actually said is correct. I made a statement, and everyone threw their strawman arguments at me.
And you can't possibly know how amazing it is to be without children then. Also you sound like someone who thinks forcing a lesbian to be with a man would correct her because she doesn't know what she's missing.
I'm sorry did you mistype? I can't know what it's like to not have children? Everyone knows what it's like to not have children, no one is brought into this world already having children. What the fuck are you even trying to say?
And your sexuality comparison is stupid because sexuality is something you're born with, and you can try the other side without permanently changing yourself, unlike parenthood.
Everything you said is objectively wrong.
If you're saying parenthood doesn't change you permanently, you're deluded.
So you're saying an adoptive parent will never get the oxytocin experience that a biological parent would? How about my colleague of 7 years that had a surrogate give birth to her twins created by fertilization of her egg with her husband's sperm. She had hemolytic anemia during her first pregnancy and almost died, so she couldn't safely get pregnant again. Would she not get the oxytocin experience as well? She couldn't breast feed but could bottle feed and do everything else.
And then there's me raising my 3 youngest sisters from birth (less so with the eldest of the 3 that is 7 years younger than me, and 100% so with the youngest of the 3 that is 11 years younger than me). The babies (especially the youngest) slept in my bedroom while my mother slept on another floor of the house (narcissist mother with mental health issues). I was the one up in the middle of the night changing their diapers and feeding them. Do I not get that oxy hit bottle feeding my younger sisters, exhausted as an 11 year old changing diapers and rocking a crying baby to sleep at 3:30am, and experiencing the blissful joy of a sleeping baby that had just woken me up at a very dark hour? I got REALLY REALLY good at getting my younger sibs to go down for a nap to get some peace.
Another strawman argument. I never said anything about biology. Adoptive parents are still parents. Your siblings are still your siblings.
It's still different than a child someone considers as "not theirs".
And btw you were a child, you weren't ready for that kind of responsibility and shouldn't have had to do those things, and I'm genuinely sorry that you had to experience that, and I'm glad your siblings had someone in their life to look out for them. I'm sure that made all the difference to them.