The Rise and Fall of double income no kids: Whose Interests Have Been Damaged?

In recent years, the phenomenon of population aging has become more and more serious, and the opening of the second child policy has not increased the birth rate of newborns too much. People can't help but think of the "double income without children" that once set off a small upsurge, but now it is in a state of relative decline.

Dink, the comment on Baidu Encyclopedia is: Dink's name comes from the combination of the initials D, I, N and K of English Double Income No Kids-the homonym of Dink. China people's explanation refers to those who have fertility and choose not to have children actively or passively. Double income no kids originated in the United States in 1950s, when many young people were reluctant to have children. Later, this trend of thought entered China and influenced many young people in China in the 1990s. But just like every "new concept" that goes against people's traditional cognition, "Dink" quickly caused an uproar in China.

The anti-Dink craze in society has never subsided. They think it is extremely selfish not to have children with double income. I'm really curious, whose interests have been harmed by double income no kids, and why are they so unacceptable to the world? I mainly analyzed the following reasons:

First, it is closely related to China's national conditions and China's traditional culture. China people are the most favorite and easily bound group. The concept of "there are three unfilial things, and no posterity is great" is deeply rooted in the hearts of Chinese people. People used to regard "you childless thing" as a curse to others, which is why. For them, the existence of double income without children is contrary to ethics. You see, the world is like this, and there is no room for different voices, so there were few successful political reforms in ancient times. ? The people who eat melons are holding "selfless" signs and doing selfish things. They demand that "freaks" who advocate nature and freedom abandon themselves and live according to their own preferences. Come on, PUA people, don't hypnotize yourself with "I'm perfect for you".

Second, the "bane" of double income without children-parents. Parents are the people most directly affected. Although I don't think that having two incomes without children will hinder parents' interests and affect their filial piety to their parents. In their parents' generation, if they don't have children, they will be drowned by others' spit. Their educational background and age gap make them unable to accept this "new trend". It is as difficult for a person who has no children in a two-income family to persuade his parents to agree as it is for his parents to persuade a two-income family not to have children. And many parents are eager for their children and grandchildren to have fun, and this family card is the most difficult to play.

? Thirdly, I regret the appearance of the Ding Shi family. Undeniably, some children from double-income families choose Dink because they follow the trend or evade their responsibilities. When they can't bear the pressure of society and life, when they are sick and in financial difficulties, they begin to regret not having children and adopting one when they were young. Because from a realistic point of view, not every couple with double income and no children has enough financial resources to pay for the expensive old-age care, and there is no chance to go to a better nursing home. And when you are sick, even if you spend money to hire a care worker, you may not be properly taken care of. Their endless practice is tantamount to slapping themselves in the face of society. After all, they represent the whole of double income no kids. Therefore, anti-double-income no kids has something to say: Well, you see, I told them that they were wrong and could not make a big deal, and now they regret it.

Yes, it is really impossible for a child with double income to become the mainstream of society and change the general direction of society. This is a good thing. So there is no need to worry that all mankind will become a dink and the earth will perish. In fact, without humans, the earth doesn't know how good it is.

Mr. and Mrs. Dinks just want to spend more time with each other. The birth of a child may make parents happy. But at the other end of the scale, it is the freedom of two people to live. In Dink's eyes, freedom at this end is more important than happiness at the other end, that's all.

Don't worry that if you don't have children with double income, you will regret it when you get old, and you will be "No Country for Old Men"? . According to the survey, the distribution law of the Dink clan is: more cities than rural areas, more high-income people and less low-income people. So no child has the ability to support himself and his parents. Even if you regret it in the future, you can go to an orphanage to adopt a child, which is also a contribution to society.

Great men make history, ordinary people prosper, sinners rest the biological chain, and double income no kids is also a social development? The embodiment of existence has its relative rationality. A progressive society tolerates everyone's different choices and values under the premise of legality. As a kind of "harmless" life values to others, Dink has no reason to look at it with different eyes or even ridicule or exclude it.

Because "double income and no children"? We might as well adopt a tolerant attitude. Anyway, people's life is so long, round or flat, and it is good to have a good time.