Anons and Femanons, what's the maximum number of kids you'd have and why?

Anons and Femanons, what's the maximum number of kids you'd have and why?

Attached: 1549943713519.jpg (1200x1396, 92K)

I dunno, 10? Id love to have a big family out in the country.

4. I feel like it's a fair amout and having more than that would require a lot of money that my husband and I don't really have.

-6. If you don't get yourself out there and kill at least 6 kids, you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

How expensive are kids really? I mean, do they really all need to go to the most expensive college?

Kids end up hating their siblings, they always have someone to compete against for love, attention, belongings, and inheritance.

It seems unfair to have multiple, why not just have one child who you can properly nurture and put all your care and time into?

if it dies you wont have any more offspring to carry your genes

If you can't keep one alive to adulthood, you aren't a competent parent and shouldn't be having any at all

obviously
but what if it dies from any one million thing out of your control?

realistically 3 or 4 based on my career choice and the means it could afford me balanced with the responsibility to raise them and how my hypothetical wife would be able to make raising them work with her career. Of course if I married a rich girl who had daddybux to pay for her life I'd keep her pregnant until menopause stopped us. I love kids and also love how pregnant women loook, and as an only child want to have a big family but it's just not realistic.

From disease or something? You'll likely still be young enough to have another, so just try again I guess

Extra food, Entire sets of clothing that get replaced within a year, Shoes that need to be replaced constantly, Dentist appointments, Doctor appointments, Babysitters, Fuel, Eventually a car, the things they will eventually accidentally destroy, the shit they might steal from you

That sounds pretty arbitrary, my genes don't matter.

Kids with no siblings generally wish they had siblings.

Is this really true? I have no idea, but I'm an only child I hated the prospect of siblings. I was fully aware it meant I would get less of everything in life.
Can any other anons back this up?

Attached: 7269159026.jpg (720x919, 73K)

I'd like to have 1 or 2 really, put a bunch of effort into them and hope they live a happy life.

No maximum for me. If I get a wife she'd need to be into 4 at least (so we double our white population at least), but as long as she's into it I'd want to continue to have as many children with her as possible.

Attached: chad face.jpg (380x399, 16K)

3 if one fails me the other 2 still have a chance, plus if i have 3 they can all play together and don't bother me so much, while also having fun and creating long-lasting bonds that will become useful in the future so they can count in one and other

zero. kids are dumb parasites.

Attached: vONxgZU.jpg (298x500, 28K)

Well I'm glad you're not continuing your genes.

4. You only pass down so many genes with each child. 4 kids means there's at least a chance you passed down most of both chromosomes.

20. I believe that intelligence is mostly genetic and that most industrialized societies have extremely dangerous trends where the people who have the most kids are the less intelligent. 20 might be completely insane, but I think things are desperate.

Obviously I'm not going to turn back the tide myself. I'm not a genius or anything, but I've been given a professionally administered IQ test and I got 123, so while society wouldn't be enormously benefited by me having lots of kids, it would be benefited. This would obviously only be possible if I was a millionaire and I had a wife that would actually be willing to have that many kids, which is extremely unlikely. Would need a few twins or triplets to beat the clock.

Attached: 1391638251859.gif (500x279, 361K)

me too. my genes will finally be free while your genes will suffer endless torment of cyborg-chad and holo-stacy and end up on /r10k/ getting their neural implants burnt on toad memes.

>femanons
There are no females here.

Stop it.

Also, robots are anti-natalists. If I ever had a gf and she got pregnant I'd force her to get an abortion.

robots don't reddit space, nerd.

Also, it might be possible to have dozens or hundreds more through the advent of artificial wombs, assuming you have the money to support all those children.
>robots are anti-natalists
Anti-natalism is dumb unless you can wipe out all intelligent life in the universe and set up conditions to prevent it from ever emerging again. Otherwise you're just taking yourself out of the gene pool while Cletus with an IQ of 85 has 4 kids. Good going, idiot.

Attached: 1441225954188.jpg (600x801, 77K)

>newfaggot reddit spacing meme
Of course you'd think females are here.

Old people with shit vision prefer line breaks.

Fuck off normalfaggot. I bet you vote too, you hiveminded sheep.

you're only digging yourself deeper, redditor

To elaborate, sex cells are diploid cells produced by fission. They only have half your chromosomes, and a whole set requires a sex cell from both your mom and dad.
One kid? For males, that means you passed down either your X or your Y. Either your mom's or your dad's. For females, that means either your mom's your your dad's X chromosome made it in. One didn't.
Two kids, a brother and a sister, means you at least passed down a chromosome from both your parents. Solid evolutionary success there. But remember, full siblings actually only share around 25% of genes by volume, give or take. With some leeway for recombination, mutation, viruses, telegony, and random splicing, that means one set of a brother and sister passed down around half of mom and dad's genes. You can do better than that.
So let's skip straight past 3 because it's obviously got 0 shot at representing a full inheritance just because it has an unequal number of boys and girls. At 4, if you had two boys and two girls, then ignoring random variables there's theoretically a chance of passing down basically all of both your parents' genes.
(CONT)

If there were no monetary concerns, with one woman, I'd keep her pregnant until menopause. If I was a conqueror, I'd surpass Temujin's record.

Attached: 1541494857273.jpg (600x431, 53K)

Anti-natalism is the redditor's position. It's the most normalfag thing in the world to say "lol i dont want kids they're so gross". Have you been outside? Most young normalfags don't want kids. Dumb people are going to have kids and everything is going to become even more incomprehensibly shit unless smart people have more kids than the dumb people. Even though you believe dumb things, you're probably above-average intelligence, so you should have a few kids.

Attached: 1408567354343.png (364x354, 125K)

(CONT)
Of course, males are weird because they often have a predisposition for producing either sons or daughters. Their sperm can just be mostly X or Y. If you have one kid, or two kids, or three, and you're geared towards X or Y, you might only be passing down one chromsome. Three brothers or three sisters.
That's where 4 comes in. That's a 4th reroll on getting that rare chromosome in your sperm in and fathering kids with both your X and your Y.

As many as physically possible. Not realistic but I'd love to just be nonstop pregnant till I couldn't anymore.

>tfw my grandparents had 3 sons and no daughters and looking through my family tree it's mostly men
Fuck yeah, if I ever have kids they're mostly going to be men

Attached: 1411582259209.jpg (447x447, 111K)

6 or so, that's all I could reasonably afford.

It's skipped generations with mine. My grandparents had 3 brothers and a sister. 3/4 boys. But as for me, I'm the only boy in basically a whole generation.
This is why I say 4. Get at least one brother/sister in.

What would you do if you walked in on your kids having sex?

With each other? Or some other kid that isn't related? Or with a child molester?

WIth eachother, its one of my greatest fears as a parent

Well, if they're past like 7 then they're in trouble. That's when I got the sex talk and by then I knew that sex with family members was incest and a sin.

3 is max. Ideal is 2. $$ and effort

I'd probably have to act super incensed to keep up appearances with my wife. In reality I'd be fine so long as they used protection and it didn't turn into a real relationship

I'm a degenerate, what do you expect?

2. Just two babies is perfect its not too many and its an even number so they have each others company and learn social skills from one another. Theyd be close in age of course too, within a year I'd hope or best would be twins.

Attached: 1549837223652.jpg (1200x676, 88K)

>nothing to do with reddit
>newfag brings up reddit constantly
Spot the redditor so says simple logic.

I'm white trash and will refuse to pass that on, shit genes.

probably 2. I think if you have more than 4 kids you wont be able to love them all equally

Not realistic. 3 kids means one is always singled out, 2 v 1 always even if they switch up who they're in league with. One is always left out.