15 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 41.9 ms ] thread
SINK is more interesting than DINK. In a SINK household, the individual who doesn’t earn money can make an impact in the world of art, community service, research, the possibilities are endless. Without the tethers of employment.
Employed people can do that too. I suspect that people who are employed have higher impact on their non-work goals because they've learned to structure their time and prioritize more ruthlessly than people who don't have that pressure.
(comment deleted)
[flagged]
No mention of pets in the article, beyond the photo, so your comment is unnecessarily spiteful. I'm not a pet owner, nor a DINK for the record.
I think it's pathetic that you can't find meaning in your own individual life without creating a new human to live vicariously through.

Doubly pathetic that you can't envision any other way of thinking and experiencing life. Have you actually thought out and considered your position or is this simply a lazy knee-jerk opinion that you've had fed to you?

Awfully small minded and pathetic to think that your chosen way of life is the One True and Acceptable Way. It's a very immature mind that can't accept differing opinions and perspectives.

I have found meaning in my life without kids and I have found even more meaning in my life with them. What I would never have done is getting a pet to serve as a replacement for kids. That‘s pathetic. Owning pets is generally fine. However, many pet owners have an unhealthy relationship with their child-replacing pets.
Your post covers a lot of ground, but I'd like to respond to one part of it:

IMHO: except in pathological situations, dogs truly love their owners.

You sound like someone who regrets having kids tbh

(coming from a happy parent and dog caretaker)

Wait... So because I chose a life of not struggling to raise a child and I love my dog; I'm pathetic? What a warped-ass world-view. Maybe I just have no desire to have kids and am enjoying the life not having children warrants me - including pathetically loving my dog. Eff off with your judgements of what I chose the path of my life to be. And, hey, godspeed on your struggle-bus. Apparently it warrants you some entitlements and status, or something...
Seeing pets as a replacement for kids is pathetic. I don‘t hold owning a pet against people. They should just have a healthy relationship with them.
If the best you can do with your life is have kids, that’s a choice. Struggle is optional, misery loves company. Plenty of folks have meaningful lives and happiness without kids.
There‘s an awful lot of self-explaining happening here by childless pet-lovers. Facades getting cracks?!
> DINKs are also more likely than dual-income couples with kids to be college graduates...

This is the premise of Idiocracy.