![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Mar. 10th, 2002 04:42 pmHere is an exchange. A friend's husband has suddenly decided that they should become foster parents- she is horrified and dismayed and has no interest in being any kind of parent. She considers herself childfree (one who has no kids and doesn't want any) and thought hub was too- he at least knew where she stood on it. She's half-way to being a nurse, and knows if hub did this she's end up being the one to do most of the work, all to fulfill hub's misplaced paternal whim (he apparently ignores neighbor children and his own god-children) which would blow her chance at finishing school. Another person brought up Erikson's stages of development, and how one is this:
"... A psycho-social crisis of generativity vs. stagnation. Between the ages of 35 to 60, people will find themselves "responsible for maintaining the world." (Neuman and Neuman, 1991, p. 554) Their world has settled into a permanent career, life partner, family etc.
They are expected to give of themselves to maintain this and the larger world. This is a new and often times daunting task. Like all psycho-social crises, flexibility and adaptation are essential in successful resolution. When this happens, the person is seen as generative or giving.
Stagnation occurs when they are overwhelmed by the responsibilities of the world and lack the flexibility to adapt. "
The poster then said she agreed with this, and explained how she was sorry if she offended people who believe the highest pursuit is pleasure- nope, she says we have a need beyond that to be "bigger than ourselves." Parents may solve this (or try to) by having kids. What's a child-free person left with? My response:
I don't find this at all at odds with my beliefs. I do believe life is about experiencing pleasure, and learning. There is a point past which I am only concerned about my own pleasure, and that's when I start being concerned about the ability of others to have access to the same pleasures I have- and if they're being starved, abused, choked by pollution and/or overcrowding, then I feel it is to some extent my duty to lend a hand. A friend of mine [![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
todfox] feels the same way- he calls it 'ethical hedonism.'
When I got fixed, I held a ritual where I symbolically exchanged my ability to be physically fertile for the ability to be fertile in other areas of my life- spiritual, mental, emotional. Not to mention financial. :) Not that these are exclusive, but they would have been for me to a large extent. So I have this generative thing covered when I teach, for instance- I help shape attitudes and create a situation where people will go out in the world and make it a better place for their fellows (people and non-people alike). Too bad [friend]'s hub can't seem to 'think outside the womb' as it were.
So in a sense, the pursuit of pleasure is congruent with, as Daniel Quinn would say, my earnest desire to save the world. :)
"... A psycho-social crisis of generativity vs. stagnation. Between the ages of 35 to 60, people will find themselves "responsible for maintaining the world." (Neuman and Neuman, 1991, p. 554) Their world has settled into a permanent career, life partner, family etc.
They are expected to give of themselves to maintain this and the larger world. This is a new and often times daunting task. Like all psycho-social crises, flexibility and adaptation are essential in successful resolution. When this happens, the person is seen as generative or giving.
Stagnation occurs when they are overwhelmed by the responsibilities of the world and lack the flexibility to adapt. "
The poster then said she agreed with this, and explained how she was sorry if she offended people who believe the highest pursuit is pleasure- nope, she says we have a need beyond that to be "bigger than ourselves." Parents may solve this (or try to) by having kids. What's a child-free person left with? My response:
I don't find this at all at odds with my beliefs. I do believe life is about experiencing pleasure, and learning. There is a point past which I am only concerned about my own pleasure, and that's when I start being concerned about the ability of others to have access to the same pleasures I have- and if they're being starved, abused, choked by pollution and/or overcrowding, then I feel it is to some extent my duty to lend a hand. A friend of mine [
todfox] feels the same way- he calls it 'ethical hedonism.' When I got fixed, I held a ritual where I symbolically exchanged my ability to be physically fertile for the ability to be fertile in other areas of my life- spiritual, mental, emotional. Not to mention financial. :) Not that these are exclusive, but they would have been for me to a large extent. So I have this generative thing covered when I teach, for instance- I help shape attitudes and create a situation where people will go out in the world and make it a better place for their fellows (people and non-people alike). Too bad [friend]'s hub can't seem to 'think outside the womb' as it were.
So in a sense, the pursuit of pleasure is congruent with, as Daniel Quinn would say, my earnest desire to save the world. :)
