u/5random7513

I mean, you can be against it and thought it's okay to have children but there are so many people saying it's illogical when it clearly isn't. I remember being a young teen and already understanding that the only thing garanteed by life was suffering and happinesss was not. The most common argument natalist have against antinatalism is that "it's natural to have children" and yeah sure, it's biologically natural to have a child when you have a sexual relationship with someone but children used to be born because people didn't have access to contraception but they liked sex, that doesn't mean it's natural for your rational brain to want children. When you look at interviews of women from the time contraception was illegal, they often complain about having that many children. And I would like to add that it is very natural to have selfish wants and that not a reason to follow them. And still, I can understand that they decide to take the risk of having children in certain environnement because the chance their children would be happy are high but never 100% while the chance of suffering are always 100% but I don't understand how they can pretend that antinatalism isn't the most rational response to end human suffering.

Today, I asked myself if people who were attracted to women or men and also non-binary people were bisexual and from what I understood yes. But this makes me ask myself even more questions. Is there a term for non-binary people who are only attracted to men or women (one gender) but not non-binary people ? Because technically that doesn't fit into the homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual categories. Is there also a term for men and women who are only attracted to non-binary people ? Are non-binary people who are only attracted to non-binary people considered gay ? Shouldn't we use a term like trisexual or polysexual for people who like men, women and non-binary people ? Because bisexual implies two genders but there is more.