this post was submitted on 21 May 2025
316 points (95.7% liked)

World News

35986 readers
675 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Imagine my surprise reading this on the LA Times this morning (emphasis mine):

“I would not acknowledge reproduction as a human right, but instead as a form of rape,” IndictEvolution wrote on Lemmy.World in July 2023. “I am also not bothered by infanticide as long as it is done humanely...”

Here is an archive of the article.

Here is his account.

It looks like he only stayed on Lemmy for about a month, most likely a temporary Reddit exile with the earliest exodus on June 2023. The article mentions threads on Reddit but doesn't provide any quotes from there. User IndictEvolution on Reddit deleted their account, and the article makes it sound like they are referring to a different username that they don't specify.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yesman@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

These people are like the photo-negitive of Eugenicists.

anti-natalists present with reactionary ideology since they're obsessed with what other people are doing with their bodies. And they advocate for a totalitarian state to regulate that. But then they're also obsessed with environmentalism?

Maybe their lefty misanthropes? I don't get it.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 day ago

Maybe the term is being taken over by eco-fascists, but I've considered myself an anti-natalist for many years and I'm only playfully misanthropic.

I don't go in for the Malthusian claptrap. I just think it's more ethical to adopt an existing, actual real child rather than make a brand new one. I think this is a really really compelling point, and I wish more parents would seriously consider it before choosing to follow their biological imperative.

It's like with nihilism, where everyone agrees life is ultimately meaningless, but some people are real babies about it (pun intended).

[–] turtle@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If you read some of the other comments here, it's more like they're the two sides of the same coin. Eugenicists want to kill poor and other disadvantaged people and antinatalists (at least going by the bomber's comments) want primarily poor people not to have kids, although they seem to try to dress it up as not wanting anyone to have kids. Who knows, this is all pretty fringe stuff.

[–] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Who knows, this is all pretty fringe stuff.

He personally was the fringe, but antinatalism is product and offshoot of neomalthusianism and eugenicism which are in the core of imperialism. Just the big scale ones do not bomb a clinic, they bomb and starve entire nonwhite countries.