Children with friends - CLASSIC or DYSTOPIAN NIGHTMARE?

It pisses me off that the only people breeding in our society are those too stupid, too ignorant or too psychologically damaged to use birth control. It is devolution that the average Springer guest has 4 children by the age of 22, but I, being reasonably intelligent, being reasonably middle class, can't have a child.

At least she's thought about *why* she wants to have a child.

Call me a eugenicist or a fascist or a classist if you like, but do you really want those people taking over the earth? While everyone I know who is intelligent, creative, or just plain good is refusing to bring children into this world on the grounds that they wouldn't want to bring up kids in a world like this?

Stupid People Shouldn't Breed.

Kate's not being eugenicist! People should just look before they leap. There are six billion people on the planet and ZPG is a good thing.

As a sperm donor in my time the small sense of satisfaction that there are wee tykes (quite possibly 8 or 9 now) running round the Oxfordshire area with my face on. I understand that this thought may completely terrify any of you who equally live in the Oxfordshire area - or indeed the UK.

The friends thing is fine, but what kind of responsibility do they have towards the child. Are we looking at My Five Dads here?

I should probably keep my mouth shut on this topic, because it's an emotional topic, and yes, I am pretty much an elitist, and a misanthrope. I just really think that more people would *think* - about the effect on themselves, on their progeny, on their communities, and the world at large - before they bred. That's all I'm asking.

Dunno, Pete. I heard about her plan second hand, so I'm not sure of the ins and outs.

But talking of ins and outs, at first I assumed she was intending some kind of wanking and syringe free for all, but it turned out she actually wanted to have proper sex with all of them.

I would guess she doesn't expect the father to commit in any formal way. But maybe friends all hanging out, sleeping with each other and having some kind of loose-knit commune thing going on is the way of the future. More of a 'my five uncles' thing. I have a deep nostalgic attraction to the Victorian nuclear family model, but I really think it's on the way out. Not that I really think we're all going to be in communes in the future, but some kind of new arrangement is surely on the way. I don't know. Maybe I'm getting caught up in some kind of unwarranted 'woo' factor for the future, but flying cars are finally on the way*, so maybe I'm not so far wide of the mark.

* they cost $750000 at the moment, but hey, economies of scale and all that.

I remember at university attempting to identify the perfect father for my children on genetic grounds, i.e pick someone who complements my own 'special' gifts to produce the Uber Child. However I could not find anyone tall, scrawny, sporty, scientific and musical so gave up.

That disturbs me on an even more fundamental level than Springer guests. Communal living or multi-parter relationships being successful are on the level of fantasy along with pure christianity and pure communism. Jealousy exists for physiological reasons, you know.

Can you give birth to kids with eyeliner.

Kate, do not be so afeard of the thick breading thick. Remember we still live in a vaguely Darwinian world, if the thick didn't bread the thick then there would be no-one to be fitter than when you survive. (Does that make sense?)

If you can add a spelling and typing gene into all of this I would be for it.

There are loads of legal issues to having children with a friend, by the way. It's harder than you might think to avoid legal responsibility...

Still, any child of mine would be too thick to read an address.

Have LOTS of babies, people.

(Kate, I really don't think the Thick are taking over, living in Crouch End you can't move on a Saturday morning for posh parents pushing their Gap kids round in 3 wheel buggies).

Emma, so non-Thick = 'posh' and/or Gap shoppers? Not in my experience....

I'm not a classist, I'm an elitist. Posh does not neccessarily = intelligent, educated, creative or good. Especially if they're shopping at the fucking Gap.

I have clothes from the Gap (not many but some). Does that mean I am not creative,educated, good or intelligent?

Do you really think that just cos they live in Crouch End this makes them smart? Dominic Mohan lives in Crouch End. Smart? Smug middle class couples can afford housing for various reasons, often due to smugger middle class parents. To be fair an equally amount of hellishness in upbrings occurs across the class boundaries. Anyone who would buy those three wheel range rover buggies are BAD PARENTS in my book (and anti-social to boot).

Only if you dress your kids in baby clothes that cost more than my entire food budget for the first year of my life... There is a difference between owning things of a certain brand and BEING THAT BRAND. You wouldn't have said, "Gap babies" if you didn't know what I was talking about, you would have said Babies dressed in Gap.

I was just bothered by the reverse snobbery of assuming people are uncreative, unintelligent etc. just because they have a baby and it is in a three wheel buggy and dressed in Gap clothes. Just cos your baby isn't slung round your back in an authentic Peruvian blanket and dressed in a matinee jacket knitted from your pet Afghan's hair doesn't mean you are a bad person. Does it?

No. Didn't think so.

Of course good parenting has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence at all, possibly the opposite. Just as intelligence has nothing to do with IQ, degrees, A-Level result or whether you agree with me or not. Well, if you agree with me I grant you there may be some intelligence there.

I always thought I didn't like people much but Kate I think you have made me realise that the opposite is true. Unfortunately this means abandoning my random murderous fantasies. Bugger. Though I still don't like other people standing on me.

How have I changed your views of misanthropy, Emma? Because I'm so lovely and nice that you have decided that you hate all of humanity except MEEEE, or because I'm so horrible in my misanthropy that I've scared you out of it for good, for fear you wind up a gibbering wreck afraid to come out of your flat and venting your spleen on the interweb?

Emma doesn't really hate all people anyway. She merely hates me. Especially when I am in the bath.

Isn't a Death Wish being suicidal rather than wanting to kill other people anyway?

Anyway, in terms of having children, I believe that one of the premises of the controversial book "The Bell Curve" was that intelligent people were breeding with intelligent people and not-so-intelligent people were breeding with not-so-intelligent people and thereby creating a gap in the bell curve. Not sure what point that makes...

But surely if you want to say that no-so-intelligent people are going to take over the world, you're assuming that power of the world is controlled by a representational percentage of the worlds castes/classes/races/professions/etc. Which it isn't.

Then you go an make assumptions about levels of intelligence and money. Maybe the assumption of education levels is more accurate? Poor education, or not enough access to family planning resources, or culture, influence birth rates. So who's to say that a child born into poverty with 8 brothers and sisters, 2 of whom make it to the age of 20, with the same opportunities as Kate, wouldn't be a hell of lot more intelligent, and probably a bit more sane than she is as well?

I'm all for people having kids. I'm all for people having education and having control over their lives. I like people. I have to go to the bathroom.

Just back to report that think my friend's plan was misrepresented to me by a go-between. Turn's out they'll be no shagathon in 2006.

Assumptions about intelligence and values based on class are no better than ones based on race or ethnicity. I would say I can't believe some of the comments on this thread but that would be a lie.

MARRIAGES - FIT AND UNFIT
1. Pure + Pure: Children NORMAL
2. Abnormal + Abnormal: Children ABNORMAL
3. Pure + Abnormal: Children NORMAL but TAINTED; some grandchildren ABNORMAL
4. Tainted + Abnormal: Children 1/2 NORMAL but TAINTED; 1/2 ABNORMAL
5. Tainted + Pure: Children 1/2 PURE NORMAL; 1/2 NORMAL but TAINTED
6. Tainted + Tainted: Of every four children -- 1 ABNORMAL, 1 PURE NORMAL, and 2 TAINTED

HOW LONG ARE WE AMERICANS TO BE SO CAREFUL FOR THE PEDIGREE FOR OUT PIGS AND CHICKENS AND CATTLE, AND THEN LEAVE THE ANCESTRY OF OUR CHILDREN TO CHANCE, OR TO "BLIND" SENTIMENT?

UNFIT HUMAN TRAITS SUCH AS FEEBLEMINDEDNESS, EPILEPSY, CRIMINALITY, INSANITY, ALCOHOLISM, PAUPERISM, AND MANY OTHERS, RUN IN FAMILIES AND ARE INHERITED IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY AS COLOR IN GUINEA PIGS. IF ALL MARRIAGES WERE EUGENIC WE COULD BREED OUT MOST OF THIS UNFITNESS IN THREE GENERATIONS.

YOU CAN IMPROVE YOUR EDUCATION, AND EVEN CHANGE YOUR ENVIRONMENT, BUT WHAT YOU REALLY ARE WAS ALL SETTLED WHEN YOUR PARENTS WERE BORN.

SELECTED PARENTS WILL HAVE BETTER CHILDREN.

God, this thread makes me feel physically sick. On so many levels.

(Though I have now successfully moved to avoid EVER having to use the tube.)

I think I need to go and take a walk now.