After reading over my original entry on the subject, I decided it best to give it another go and cite some particular antinatalist theorists to try to give a fairer representation of their views.
David Benatar, for example, states that people had no choice in whether or not they are born, and that life is nothing but suffering filled with “occasional moments of fleeting pleasure.” That’s a valid opinion, yes, but I think it’s too pessimistic and ultimately misanthropic, and again my main problem with antinatalism is the movement’s practicality, but now that I think of it antinatalism’s inherent misanthropy is off-putting as well.
I don’t have any specific critique beyond that since it is, after all, a valid and sound conclusion, but I believe there is much more to life than suffering, you do not have a choice in being born, but you do have a choice in how the world is shaped, and if life is inherently cruel and meaningless, you should try to give it meaning, make it less cruel.
How you go about that is up to you, I am not you, dear reader, but you are not powerless, remember that. Nihilism and misanthropy seems to me to be inherently defeatist, ie it’s giving up, and I don’t think that is a positive outlook on life that produces positive results, giving up the fight when there is so much good that can be done in this world is unthinkable to me, but I can see why other people do so and fall into such a view.
There was one particular criticism from someone worth their salt that even though breeding is the “biological imperative” it can be easily overcome, and that antinatalists will accept lower birth rates as a “temporary compromise,” which is true, but it still doesn’t meet the ultimate end goal of antinatalism, voluntary human extinction.
These are just my thoughts on antinatalism, and do feel free to criticize what I have written if you feel something needs to be addressed that I left out or am wrong about. Respectfully, Oxyaena.