To think the term 'childfree' is as bad as 'childless'

Child free implies a choice
Childless implies no choice

People who are not white are in the majority throughout the world.

Gay people are in a very small minority in all cultures and as such, yes, they are abnormal.

I wouldn't use the word abnormal to describe them though as it comes with other connotations and to some ears means "problematic".

But strictly speaking they are indeed part of a small, abnormal pattern in humanity.

Abnormal: : deviating from the normal or average person.

I've known two women who transitioned from thinking of themselves as childless to childfree as a way to come to turns with nature/circumstances not turning out as they had hoped and moving on. I really can't understand why anyone would think they have a say in this, or want to take a way a term that brings comfort but making it something it isn't. And non-parent is a shit alternative.

If taking on any of the above groups was a societal norm, and oftentimes expectation, in the way that having children is, and ‘do you have any disabled?’ was a question commonly asked, then I imagine ‘disabledfree’ would find its way into the vernacular ( to differentiate from the disabledless, presumably) as a perfectly acceptable way to describe oneself.

They aren't, they are people and no one should have to hear people talking about them as if the existence of that group of people is undesirable

Those who describe themselves as childfree are giving a name to themselves. They may or may not see children as a group or as individuals as undesirable. It's no-one's business but theirs.

That's not what I said at all. It's nothing to do with people wanting or not wanting children. It's about what the words mean.

Why do those other terms sound bad? It's because that's not how you talk about people. Even people who are a burden, like your elderly mum with heart failure, or your disabled sister.

There are a lot of people who think of children as possessions or a commodity. They aren't, they are people and no one should have to hear people talking about them as if the existence of that group of people is undesirable.

All you have to do is say "I don't have kids," instead.

The -free seems to imply liberation from the idea of children, as if that's some obligation or burden, or as if they're something to be escaped from at all costs.

That's exactly what it is intended to imply though for those of us who have chosen that path. I've chosen, proactively, to be childfree. For me it is something to be escaped at all costs as for me it would be a way of life I'd hate. It comes with no judgement about parents though - they just made a different choice to me, same as people who live in the country, eat licorice or who enjoy skydiving have.

I love kids. My niblings are excellent, my friends kids are hilarious company, but it's definitely not something I want personally.

@Waterboatlass has hit the nail on the thread here and very succinct too. It is that simple

I mean, I am immigrant-free, Jamaican-free and disabled-free as well as being childfree, because I haven’t given birth to any immigrants, Jamaicans, disabled people, or children. People saying they are childfree is a self-descriptor, not an ideological mantra for the country, it’s a daft comparison.

Or people can continue to use whatever terms they want to about themselves.

So people who don’t want children of their own are effectively discriminating against children as a whole if they call themselves childfree? That is just howlingly bonkers.

Let me put it this way - if you wouldn't be happy to say "immigrant-free" or "Jamaican-free" or "disabled-free" you probably shouldn't be using that construction for any other group of people either. Including the group of people who are dependent because they are not yet adults.

I tend to mind my own business unless someone out right asks "do they have kids?"

Being a parent is not for everyone. I'm pleased people are finally starting to grasp that.

It’s not a joy for everyone though, and having children is akin to having a ball and chain for those that don’t want them.

Children would be an unwanted burden to me. That doesn’t mean I believe they are for those that want them 🤷🏻‍♀️

You are the one who brought bedbugs into it.

You can use any word as a slur if you want to treat it as if it's a problem.

So what?

Children aren't things to be owned.

They are people.

So we should not be referring to them as if they were bedbugs.

There should be a term that is "work-free"!

Not unemployed and not yet retired. One could work but doesn't as don't need to financially.

Pets and kids are both binds or burdens.

To be free of something permanently like ‘mortgage free’, suggests the thing is a real bind and a burden, that’s why you might want to crow about it. Having children isn’t a bind and a burden in the way that having work, family, pets, isn’t a bind or burden - it’s a joy that sometimes you have short breaks from. It’s not a ball and chain like debt - which is what calling it ‘child free’ suggests.

If you’d gone another 10 years, perhaps you’d have felt differently. Many people say “child free” to shut down conversation. I always get asked more questions if I say “I don’t have any children”. I lie and say child free because I don’t owe anyone an explanation on my emotional devastation about being childless.

Many MNers (who are parents) take personal offence at those who have chosen to be “child free”. Most people aren’t saying that parenting is a terrible burden and that don’t value the worth of children, they are saying they do not want to parent and raise and be responsible for their own human beings. I know a couple who are both teachers and they are childfree by choice. They think children are amazing, respect them and work hard for them but they have decided - for various reasons- that they don’t feel fit to parent themselves.

Some people choose to be “childfree” when it’s not really a choice, they may have not met the right person or they may not be financially stable. They may have health issues or maybe they didn’t have a good upbringing and don’t feel able to parent.

I think only someone who is not happy with their choice to have children would feel that someone without kids who uses the term child free is “crowing” about it.

The term child free for those choosing not to have children has been around since the 70s. I don’t think it’s people without kids who have appropriated it.

Isn't it an age thing?

At mid 20s one wouldn't really state childless or childfree.

At 40 you do want to clarify which it is. As you don't want someone to feel sorry that you don't have something (or you want to make it clear you would have like that)

I always used to say "fortunately no" to the question do you have kids. But that's probably tactless if the person asking desperately wants them. But it's rare people ask me and I was shocked at a university open day when someone assumed I was another students mum, it never occurred to me anyone would consider me a mum.

This ^^.

People without kids have appropriated the term ‘child free’, because if they haven’t got kids, they don’t know what it is like to have time ‘free’ of needing to parent.

It’s like saying someone is ‘work free’ or ‘pet free’ or ‘family free’ - if it’s a permanent lifestyle choice, not a temporary thing, it doesn’t seem right to be crowing about it.

It was definitely first invented as a "fuck you" to people who used childfree as a derogatory term.

It does grate a bit because it sounds a bit like something a teenager would say. NO mum! I'm going to be CHILDFREE!"

But I just ignore it grating a bit, as I can't think of a better term and childless is a bit unpleasant.

But to be honest I have never heard anyone use the term childless or childfree in speech, just "has kids" or "they don't have kids" sometimes followed by "by choice".