Quotes About Procreation

I don't want a little Oliver/Olivia parasite running about eating my biscuits. My friends, on the other hand, are procreating like humanity depends on it, and it doesn't.

For my parents' generation, the idea was not that marriage was about some kind of idealized, romantic love; it was a partnership. It's about creating family; it's about creating offspring. Indian culture is essentially much more of a 'we' culture. It's a communal culture where you do what's best for the community - you procreate.

We spent today sending men to hell. What's more natural than to pass the night dreaming of procreating a few more to take their place?

crunching. The amount of introgression from Neanderthals is proportionally lower on the modern X than on the rest of the chromosomes. X chromosomes are only passed on by males half of the time because we also have a Y, but all of the time by women, who have two Xs. The observation that there is less Neanderthal DNA on our Xs implies that the first encounters we had with them that resulted in procreation were male Neanderthals with female Homo sapiens.

Procreative choice is for women an equivalent of the demand for the legally limited working day which Marx saw as the great watershed for factory workers in the nineteenth century. The struggles for that "modest Magna Carta," as Marx calls it… did not end capitalism, but they changed the relation of the workers to their own lives.

Note that in normal cases of procreation, parents risk bringing a child into a lot of suffering; even the most fortunate of human lives is accompanied by seasons of serious suffering. Even more than that, parents procreate knowing full well that one day the child will suffer death.

Historically, feminism and pornography have been fellow travelers on the rocky road of unorthodoxy. This partnership was natural, perhaps inevitable. After all, both feminism and pornography flout the conventional notion that sex is necessarily connected to marriage or procreation. Both view women as sexual beings who should pursue their sexuality for pleasure and self-fulfillment.

Our presence is not inherently evil and undesirable; it just has to be at the right scale, speed, and design. We can be an expression of biodiversity as worthy as any other species with whom we have co-evolved; we have a place and a vibrant role to play in ecosystems. It is our wild excess of procreation, ill-considered consumption priorities, and unbridled frenzy of activity that drowns the possibilities and existence of individuals from other species. That is where we have gone wrong.

Notice, by extension, that in a democracy those committed to non-procreation could never, in the long run, prevail politically against those committed to procreation.

Those who do indeed decide to have a child might do so for any number of reasons, but among these reasons cannot be the interests of the potential child. One can never have a child for that child's sake. That much should be apparent to everybody, even those who reject the stronger view for which I argue in this book-that not only does one not benefit people by bringing them into existence, but one always harms them.

There is one kind of exception: those who believe that the world is too horrible a place into which to bring children. Such people believe that there happens to be too much bad in the world to make procreation acceptable. That belief must be right. I disagree only in one way with those who advance it. Unlike (most of) them, I think that there could be much less suffering and yet procreation would remain unacceptable.

No one conceives a child; a child is conceived in the conjunction of sperm and ovum. The mother does not give birth to a child; the mother is where the birth occurs.

I'm very much against the arrangement of procreation, at least for humans. If I could have designed it, it would be a toss-up who gets pregnant, the man or woman. Boy, that would end rape for one thing. And 'woman artist'? Disgusting.

This lesser world is all about reproduction, as you might well know. Those who cease to duplicate simply die.

gs, inquit, bonae ex mals mribus procreantur. (Macrobius

So, the question is: If greenflies and elm trees don't do it, why do the rest of us go to such lengths to mix our genes up with somebody else's before we make a baby? It does seem an odd way to proceed. Why did sex, that bizarre perversion of straightforward replication, ever arise in the first place? What is the good of sex?*

We should not seek immortality in reproduction.

To produce music is also in a sense to produce children.

Anybody can make a baby without any checking, without thinking. This type of parenting can be tragic because one of the greatest actions a human being can do is to create another life.

Nietzsche put the idea this way: "Man shall be trained for war and woman for the procreation of the warrior. All else is folly." He went further. In Thus Spake Zarathustra he exclaims: "Thou goest to woman? Do not forget thy whip!"—which

A vegetarian is a person who won't eat anything that can have children.

Elves are extremely long-lived -- the passing years are but a blink of an eye to them. What also sets them apart from us is the very narrow window during which they can procreate, and, as a natural consequence, their very low fertility. The Aen Seidhe believe this to be the main reason for their decline. As one of my elven friends put it, "Even though we fought like wolves, we lost to a race which fucks like rabbits.

The power of procreation is not an incidental part of the plan; it is the plan of happiness.

If men were necessary in the procreation process, they'd have gone the way of the dodo bird long ago.