TLDR: This argument comes up again and again, usually from conservative readers: "I want to have kids in order to spread my genes." No you don't. You want to have kids for whatever other reasons. "Spreading your genes" is not something you consciously want to do - it's something that happens as a result of what you do.
There are three candidates for the level where evolution works:
1) the Genes,
2) the Individual, and
3) the Group.
Out of them, evolution works only on level 1 and 3, i.e. evolution only works on the level of Genes and Groups, not on Individuals.
It's our genes that get propagated by evolution not "our self". Our self dies. A lot of our behavior has been programmed in order for these little bastards to propagate themselves (and that, during the evolutionary period, not today).
So, for instance, even though you might be fully conscious that you don't ever want to have children, even if you have a vasectomy, your lithic-era programming makes you want to fuck women. They, i.e. your genes, think they will propagate, thus making you chase pussy. Their interests might very well be contrary to your interests. It's all subconscious.
Now honestly, the best way to propagate "your" genes today is becoming a sperm donor. But hardly anyone claiming "I want to propagate my genes" turns the world upside down in order to become a sperm donor. Why is that? Is it just hypocrisy?
Well, yes, it is, but they don't even realize it. They want to have "their" children, and "raise them right", etc etc etc. This means, they have internalized societal expectations, mixed them up with their psychological expectations and insecurities (I don't want to die alone, I want to have someones to look up to me, I want to be loved), mixed them up with what their genes wanted them to do back in the primeval era, and produced this haphazard "ideology" of child-making. It is even mainstream.
So,
1) The way to "spread your genes" today is to become a sperm donor. (In case you haven't caught it yet, I'm just saying that ironically, because they are not your genes, you are theirs).
2) If you want family and kids, that's what you want: family and kids. You don't want to "spread your genes". You don't get to want to spread your genes. It makes no sense. You are a vehicle for your genes to spread themselves.
Now, family and kids isn't even the way genes were spread during the evolutionary adaptedness period. Genes are spread with one way: fucking.
The takeaway:
I hope I'm being clear here: I'm not (in this post) arguing against having kids per se. I'm arguing that having kids, even more in today's social setup, is not about spreading your genes. It is something that you, for whatever reasons, legitimate or illegitimate, have been driven to desire.
So this took a bit longer that I planned, so I'm not going to go at length onto how evolution works in the Group level. (Short story: when a groups survives, its gene pool survives. That's because groups do survive. Individuals don't.)
TRP concludes "don't marry" for several good reasons. I hope that by making the issue around reproduction a bit clearer, you can let go of any pressure you might had had about it.
(EDITED for clarity.)

nofappp 5y ago
because i want to interact with my genes as well and guide them
TheGweatandTewwible 5y ago
I've honestly never heard anyone claiming they want to spread their literal "genes". It's like saying you want to buy a $100 steak just to get food into your stomach rather than for the taste and quality of it. If you just want your belly full, go to McDonalds. You don't take a shit to consciously get rid of waste that could poison your system, you just go because you want relief. Humans usually don't focus on the thing itself but rather the benefits you get from it.
When people say "keep their line" alive and stuff like that, they're referring to leaving a legacy and raising the next generation. This whole post sounds like focusing on weird semantics rather than what the argument is itself
chazthundergut 5y ago
I know this is not what your post is about, but MANY men have accepted and even celebrate the end of their bloodline.
I don't have kids yet, but I will.
The universe may snuff out my name and my genes, but not without a fight.
Also a note: women are driven by similar needs (the need to procreate with high value men)... become the prize, and then women chase you for YOUR genes
adam-l Senior Endorsed 5y ago
Men have the option, and some have the capacity, to leave a cultural legacy.
Women and othen animals, only biological.
chazthundergut 5y ago
Yes, that's a good point. I will strive for both
mette13 5y ago
I'm all for impregnating women but not raising children.
Mentoring the youth and living dreams through children, however, is something that would be somewhat fulfilling and is what I think most men confuse with having children of their own.
Starfuckingman 5y ago
I don't know, if you impregnate a woman, you're responsible for the kids. You owe them that. Not raising them is fucking childish and dishonorable.
mette13 5y ago
Every child needs a mom and dad, but they don't have to be biologicial.
Your morals have no place here.
_TheRP 5y ago
OK, but at a much higher level - what do you think life is about? Hedonism? Believe me, when you get to the top of the mountain where you have the money and standing to do what you want and basically fuck who you want - it gets old.
All life exists to make more life. That is the "why" of it all for you, me, grass, shrimp, tigers, bacteria - fucking everything.
sadomasochrist 5y ago
Degeneracy is the top of hedonism mountain.
Please prepare the chocolate for my candy enema Butler boy.
adam-l Senior Endorsed 5y ago
Having kids per se is not bad if it comes from a point of abundance. If you are satiated with everything else, I guess why not.
AutoModerator 5y ago
Why are we quarantined? The admin don't want you to know.
Register on our backup site: https://www.trp.red and reserve your reddit name today.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
zino193 5y ago
Good one, I disagree collective genes are a thing but good reality check.
I would argue that those that can't take care of a woman, don't have a house, are lying to themselves in a massive way. They don't want a kid, they want to make someone that looks up to them, like the spinster that wants to adopt. It's not about the kid, a kdd is more expensive than a house and less controllable than a woman... You ain't got time for that.
Howdoiusesync 5y ago
Sounds a lot like a nice guy paradigm, would even argue a covert contract.
zino193 5y ago
Covert contracts are the norm - That's why Marriage is the standard - and prostitution the counter-market option
jojojijo333 5y ago
Surrogacy is an option, althought not having a maternal figure may mess up the child
adam-l Senior Endorsed 5y ago
I'd say that the child's right to have a mother is superior to your right to have a child.
10211799107 5y ago
Would be interesting if there studies done on single fathers vs single mothers over a child's life span.
No evidence but I think a father can logically solve a problem of the maternal influence with sisters/nieces etc than a woman can because they can't think logically about the father's influence to solve the problem.
TheGweatandTewwible 5y ago
I think there have been studies that say that children that were raised by single fathers are more likely to be mentally healthy or less likely to be criminals
jojojijo333 5y ago
Yes, it's a complicated subject with a lot of ethical issues
arakouzo 5y ago
The deeper question might be what is "self?"
Am I my resources? Am I my current happiness today? Am I my freedom and my lack of accountability to others? Is what's best for me, the individual, whatever maximizes my resources and gets me the most stuff and the most options?
If we follow that too far, I'm wasting my life away buying a beer for a bro. I should only surround myself with friends who buy me beers and let me get away with never buying. But many of my friends are good guys and deserve that beer, and they add to my happiness.
It is not too crazy to think that for some guys, a family as opposed to just spreading genes might seem like it is worth the expense and the exchange of freedom. The problem is that a family usually means marriage, and modern marriage is very broken. Many men go crazy and lose it all chasing the idea of the family but it is never actually worth what they lost.
But going the marriage plus kids route is definitely something guys do over the idea of family and happiness. I agree that "spreading genes" has nothing to do with it. I can spread my genes with some guy's wife. I can also get married and never have children. Family and genes are not the same thing.
SoulRedemption 5y ago
Individuals from two different backgrounds.
So on and so forth.
diejager 5y ago
Yeah. From the genetical point of view, less than half your DNA pass to your children. When they go and reproduce, it is not 1/4, but even less than that (you have to account the crossing over in which parts of two homologous chromossomes are changed which other. Since one chromossome is yours and the other is from mommy's, you get the idea). Also, remember that not a 100% of your children will have a part of your DNA. There is a phenomenom called microchimerism in which cells from both the fetus and mother's uterus are Exchanged.
Now let's put aside all biology and go to the important part of the discussion. We all take the red pill for a reason, it is not to deny the concept of LTR but to free ourselves from the feminine imperative (or feminine matrix, whatever). Of course it is pointless to think: "hum, I'm gonna take the red pill to marry! Stonks". This is goal-state monogamy, you are basicaly inside the matrix.
But also I can relate to the idea of nothing getting married for a couple of reasons:
1) Monogamy is an anti-natural state:
I'm not gonna touch biology again (it by itself proves the point). So let's pick the earliest rational that is actually written in the eastern world: the 9th commandment says "you shall not covet your neighbor's wife". Note that this commandment is directed to men. As of today, we translate to: "I'm gonna get married and shall not think about fucking my neighbor's wife". But if you look back at the hebrew's history, you will see that men could have multiple women and that was a synonym of great affluence.
2) "Intimacy is shit"
These words that are said out loud by my peers to validate why they stop liking their "meaningful one" is actualy true: when the mistery is put aside, women's imagination stop working and they start chasing the "Mr. Interesting Guy". This happens because women's desire is not based in anything external to them, but internal (not only desire, as Rollo states that women tend to think from outside to inside). So your woman will chase other dudes after a couple of months in. Take it for granted.
3) Money not spent on you is money wasted
The normal dude would think: "wow, I'm gonna get married and this will provide me a stable source of intimacy and sex". A couple months in, he regrets this same intimacy discovering that his girlfriend is not what he thought it was. As for sex, it became lackluster because there is no desire anymore. Also with that there are the financial responsabilities that marriage brings and if he wants to have a divorce, well he is fucked. Even if it is just for sex and he is very lazy: there are a lot of sex workers out there that can provide the same lackluster sex he would have while married. If the normal dude spent his money improving his looks, his social status and his game, that would provide him the best sex of his life every single time. Again: genuine desire is not negotiated.
jojojijo333 5y ago
Bonus: https://youtu.be/5YveGDnkVXk
diejager 5y ago
It is both funny and sad. Feminism loves to talk about women's body objetification. And that's true: sex is a very important aspect of masculine life (all the men on the video agree with me). The point is: they don't think about masculine objetification. What was the primary source of trouble in all the stories? Money. Because for women, we are just a sucess object.
There is this anecdote here in my country that says when women gather, they talk about how large is her husband's credit card limit (not their cock sizes). Of course (or not) this is fictional but when I was dating my ex usualy talked about my career plans with every single one of her relatives and closest friends.
jojojijo333 5y ago
Dude I hate women's gossip, they share what you tell them with all their friend. By the way, they talk about dick size too.
_l_u_l_ 5y ago
How is this information helping me get laid?
adam-l Senior Endorsed 5y ago
It's helping you not get burned while trying to secure stable pussy.
wildtimes3 5y ago
If you have to ask you’ll never know.
[deleted]