This claim is intended to distract from the fundamental claims against reproduction through an irrelevant focus on the speakers instead of the content. Like any claim, claims against reproduction should be judged on their own merits and not according to the image people have of the claimers. What’s more, this image is not true. We are not depressed people and not even particularly pessimistic. If we were so pessimistic we would have a hard time being activists. We are activists because we are at least somewhat optimistic about the possibility of changing the perceptions regarding reproduction of at least some people.
We are not against reproduction because we ourselves are depressed, but if anything because we are afraid that the one who is born will suffer from depression. And that depression is only part of a whole system of risks that accompany a person’s life, each of which needs to be considered before creating a person. It is the risk-taking without the consent of those who are put in danger, and of course the risks themselves, that are at the center of our attention. And these risks are factual, not a projection we make of our private lives on the lives of others. The only connection between depression and anti-natalism is our fear that the created people will suffer from depression.
The simplest and at the same time the most devious way to make a claim illegitimate is to try to paint its claimant as illegitimate. But this is not serious. Opponents should try to find flaws in the arguments, not the arguers.
Where in our arguments is there anything related to our personal experience? Our own life stories? Any personal anecdote? No, and not by chance. There is none of that because we understand that it is not about us.
People who focus on us personally indicate that they don’t have much to say about the claims themselves. We are not coming from a personal place. We personally didn’t have a particularly difficult life or a difficult parenting experience or anything like that. And even if any of us had, it’s really not the basis for any of our claims, so it’s irrelevant.
In fact most of us are mostly positive, happy and optimistic. And there is no contradiction between this and anti-natalism since this is a position that expresses moral opposition to the creation of new life, not opposition to enjoying life that already exists. The problem is that people are choosing to make new lives, not that they are having the time of their lives.
Anti-natalism in no way requires a one-dimensional and negative view of life. It is certainly possible to perceive it in a multidimensional and complex way, and to see good things in it as well. One should not think that there is nothing good in life in order to oppose the creation of a new life, it is enough to recognize that there is also a lot of bad in life alongside the good, and that with every creation of a new life the possibility of exposing someone to the bad parts of live is renewed. The main problem with creating a new life is not that there is nothing good in it, but that there is a lot of bad in it, and we can never know or guarantee in advance that the life we will create will be good. The main problem with creating a new life is that unhappiness is an option for anyone, anywhere, anytime. It is possible to recognize that there are good things in life alongside recognizing that it is also very dangerous, fragile and vulnerable. People don’t have to be negative and depressed in order to recognize that creating a new life is a bet on someone else’s life, without consent, and without it being necessary. And people of all kinds should recognize that this is always morally wrong.
If we were not positive people, we would have difficulty taking an active part in an organization that is definitely positive. We see our movement as very positive. One of our key messages is to focus on problems that already exist instead of creating new ones. The concept of focusing on solving existing problems is not negative at all, but very positive. The main motivation of all of us is undoubtedly to reduce suffering in the world, how is the reduction of negative things negative?