Love and reproduction is how to win at life.
There are two fundamental aspects to humanity which are really the only way to fulfill life. The first is Love, the second is reproduction. The desire for a partner to reproduce is hard coded into all of us, as it is hard coded into most other animals on this planet. The reason for this is for the survival of the species, and the growth of the species. People may pretend to be happy whilst single. But the sheer fact is, they aren't. They will always notice other people, and wish they had a partner. Whoever made us, made us to be paired. 2 eyes, 2 ears, 2 arms, 2 legs, 2 genders. Its all about being paired up.

Everybodies ambition, or thing to do before they die should be to reproduce. If you die without having a baby, then your life has been pointless and you are dead. With a child you're passing on your DNA and have the opportunity to pass on your teachings, your ethics and your way of life to your offspring. Who will develop that and also pass it down to their off spring. To win at life, is to not die. By doing this, part of you will live on forever.

Love is a huge part of this, and is a human emotion which seperates us from animals. Its the most powerful emotion in the world and has the ability to change ones course in life. You can only ever experience what its like to be human unless you have fallen in love with another. Many people see it as the key to happiness.

Those that take an alternative life style, such as going out doing huge challenges, mountain climbs etc are obviously incapable of achieving what life is really all about and therefore mask over it by achieving other mere challenges. Challenges such as rowing the atlantic for instance. Whereas its impressive, it is true that anybody can do it. You just set your mind to it, want to do it and then go and do it. Lifes biggest challenge is for acceptance of a partner in love and to reproduce. Not everyone is capable of doing that due to personality, looks, behavioural issues. You cant change who you are, but you can change what you can do. Lifes biggest test is on who you are. Because it is who you are, that a partner will connect with.

If you have kids and a wife, a full time job, and a house to support that. Then you should pat yourself on the back, because you have won at life. You have done better than those that walked on the moon, you have done better than those that have sailed across the planet. You have reproduced, you've help to guarantee the survival of the species. Its easy to look at the single freerangers who are jetting about everywhere and wish you were free. But its natural to wish we had something that we do not. Just be assured that you have won at life. Because you have found someone to love, someone who loves you and have had children to continue your legacy way beyond your own grave.
(Miggyman, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 13:47, 46 replies)

Sobered up now, eh?

( shinyshinyscalp less a man, more a way of life, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 13:53, closed)

^ this

(Skeuomorph, Thu 21 Oct 2010, 10:49, closed)

Fuck all that
If you're baby-obsessed, knock yourself out (and knock out some shit-machines while you're at it), but don't tell me the only way to succeed is to spew out kids - for fuck's sake it's the easiest thing in the world to reproduce, the planet's population is exploding and "success" would presumably involve a stable population, one capable of supporting itself, which ours certainly isn't.

I'd rather have a good idea - a meme - that outlived me than a clutch of children that are no more than a drain on the planet's resources and whose only purpose in life is to produce more pointless progeny. At this stage in my life I could have knocked up a litter of literally hundreds by now, yet there's nothing big or clever in that.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:00, closed)

You're determined to get this across aren't you?
Bear in mind that anybody can have kids, but not everybody can bring them up properly so they are not little shits who make other people's life a misery.

Also, a correction or two:
"as it is hard coded into most all other animals living things on this planet."

"Everybodie's ambition"
( sandettie light vessel automatic New Twitter - @bollocksreally, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:01, closed)

no he was right the first time
not every living thing reproduces - in colonies of bees, ants or even naked mole rats if you want a mammalian example, only the queen will reproduce and her brothers and sisters work to bring up offspring that are not their own
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:03, closed)

Error noted
ok then, what about:

"as it is hard coded into most all other animals species on this planet."
( sandettie light vessel automatic New Twitter - @bollocksreally, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:23, closed)

I guess
Though I'd say the giant panda (for example) is a borderline case
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:28, closed)

I'm offsetting my massive carbon emissions by not having kids
..and i don't feel my life is pointless for not having kids thanks.

If you want to spend the first 18 years of their life pandering to their every whim, and the rest of their life worrying about their increasing crack habit, carry on.
( Another_tragic_case wished he hadn't eaten all the cake, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:04, closed)

I think you've had your 5 minutes in the spotlight...
You aint gonna pull it back now.
( The magic of chutney Shakes it like an Instagram filter!, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:08, closed)

wasnt intending to
Just proving that what people write as a QOTW isnt necerssraly what they truely feel, believe or to be the truth. Having now written a strong case of either side of the coin. Maybe I truthfully sit somewhere in the middle of both.

Some people on this site seem to believe that what people write is the gospel truth. When in reality, what we write is for entertainment. This is an entertsinment site afterall.
(Miggyman, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:59, closed)

I'm not sure that either of them are "a strong case"
seeing as you've made two diametrically opposed posts and have been heckled to fuck for both of them.
( Wet-chinned bag shanker Cannot parse Wogan, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:17, closed)

gah, mindpiss

( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:20, closed)

Yes that was also on purpose
I expected to be hackled for this one as much as the other. As I said above. Just proving a point that I can write a side for each. It doesnt mean I personally stand by what I write, as I was accused of on the other post.

Also just proves that people on here just don't have a clue what they want. Hackled by those that have kids and family on the other post and hackled by those that done have kids and family on this one!!
(Miggyman, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:25, closed)

I think the point is more that people do know what they want
They just object to you telling them what it is
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:27, closed)

No, the point is:
He's a wanker, mentally masturbating thinking he is so full of knowledge to impart to us with his two opposing comments that are both poorly written and do not begin to teach is the lesson he so brilliantly is able to expound upon (in his own self view anyway).
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 16:01, closed)

I think it really shows what people DON'T want
which is deliberately obtuse, faux-enigmatic bullshit designed purely to irritate whilst granting the author a totally unwarranted sense of righteousness.

This is the first time I've ever been mean to someone here. Congratulations, you twat.
( Wet-chinned bag shanker Cannot parse Wogan, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:29, closed)

oh, please.
write a borderline-obsessive post, get flamed for it, write the complete opposite, get flamed for it?

simple! just pretend you MEANT to do that all along. is that whizzing noise i can hear the sound of you frantically backpedalling?
( janet aylia y'all motherfuckers need jesus, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 16:42, closed)

at least you have company in the brain-trust of people who can't tell the difference between 'heckles' and 'hackles'...
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 16:52, closed)

I think "strong case" is stretching it a bit for either of them

( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:20, closed)

This is hands-down the most ham-fisted and transparent attempt at a cover/recovery I've seen in a long, long time.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 16:36, closed)

What a load of crap.

( girlinthehole, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:15, closed)

i think he's being sarcastic now
(augsav forgot about B3ta, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:17, closed)

Nah, he can't manage sarcasm.
He's just too much of a wanker to be able to pull it off (although he likes to pull himself off as much as possible).
(MichaelS wasn't picked again, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 16:06, closed)

yes this is sarcasm
As the other post was actually.

I aint back peddling at all. Just because some people from /talk came onto /questions to call me names, isnt going to change my view on life. I also dont care if people on this forum dont like me.

If people want to judge me based on crap I write on forums to pass time then thats up to them. But quite frankly I live in the real world and only care what real people who are part of my life actualy think about me.

Though Phantom, having done so much research on my past answers to find more insults, is obviously in love with me and craving my attention.
(Miggyman, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 12:18, closed)

No way...In order to win you need to be loveless and off your tit on massive drugs..

screw those peeps who get biddied up and sprout sprogs at the age of 21..
(wankymcwankwank Eels, tobacconists, hovercraft and bouncy bouncy., Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:25, closed)

This is fundamentally wrong anyway.
The desire for a partner, and the desire to reproduce are pretty much incompatible.

The former is just conditioning. The second is the only real natural instinct we have. Without conditioning, the natural inclination of a man is to fuck everything that moves. The more the merrier.

Women require stability, good genetics and resources to guarantee the survival of their offspring, but again it's only conditioning that stops them moving on to bigger / better if the current parner fails to provide these necessities.

So, if you're married with kids, you are fighting nature. A man that is happily married and doesn't check out womens tits and arses in Sainsbury's is almost certainly quietly checking out other mens arses instead.

So, congratulations on your Victorian inspired domestic bliss.
( Not Pineapple anymore, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:26, closed)

Really?
Our whole society is "fighting nature". The way we live together in cities, the way we travel in cars, the way we communicate on the internet could all be interpreted as "fighting nature". Long gone are the days when you could forcibly drag the woman of your choice back to your cave for shagging, and many people see stable relationships as beneficial to their children (and so advantageous to their own genetic legacy). As such, monogamy could be considered an entirely natural response to the "nature" of our current social situation.

Also, just because you stare at other women's tits and arses, it doesn't mean that you have to do anything about it.

So congratulations on your poorly thought out suite of sweeping generalisations.
(flimflam_machine, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:23, closed)

You could also argue
that it is in our nature, as humans, to create physical and social structures that confound or complicate basic biological urges. So, it is entirely natural for us to create cities and mating conventions (without suggesting that any particular model of marriage/cohabiting/promiscuity is any more natural than any other).

We are part of nature; nothing we do is unnatural*

* With the obvious exception of "Keeping Up With The Kardashians"
(moon monkey is busy making memories worth repressing, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 16:21, closed)

.
You could never drag a woman back to your cave. That's not human nature. Where it did happen, it would have been the same reason as it is in modern times - dominance and control.

That's not part of our breeding strategy.

On the other hand, I wouldn't dispute those are generalisations. Doesn't mean they're wrong.
( Not Pineapple anymore, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 14:00, closed)

i really think you should start taking your meds again.

( janet aylia y'all motherfuckers need jesus, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:28, closed)

Why do you keep saying 'won' like it's a competition?
So some people decide to have children / house / dog etc
It doesn't make you any better than them or vice versa.
just different

Your (frankly quite childish) boasts about how much better your life is than other peoples makes me think you aren't really happy at all.
It feels a bit sad and desparate.


*EDIT: For the record I am female, 35, have no children and am not married - yet (I am engaged)
(Nanny Pat vote for me, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:36, closed)

You make me want to be a bully.
Please stop.
( Wet-chinned bag shanker Cannot parse Wogan, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:37, closed)

I'm bored of you.

(sabre-tooth monkey, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:40, closed)

if you want kids, you have them
but don't try to tell me that i should. fuck that, i'm not having children i don't want, simply to live up to what other people believe is winning at life.
( Smash Monkey lowering the tone of the whole internet, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:45, closed)

haha!
I'm not sure i've got any "teachings".
(benito vaselini no not that one, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 14:52, closed)

This is remarkably stupid.
There're plenty of people who're happy without a partner, or who're happy without kids. So that undermines one claim. There're plenty who're gay, and plenty who're asexual. That undermines you (in any case) ludicrous parallel between there being two sexes and two eyes.

You say that "Everybod[y's] ambition... should be to reproduce." Should in what sense? That there's some moral imperative to do so? But that's nonsense. That there's a teleological imperative to do so? That's nonsense as well.

What about people who aren't interested by leaving a legacy? And why should children be the only way of doing so anyway? Plenty of major historical and cultural figures have never had kids - and yet, ex hypothesi, their legacy continues perfectly well.
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:09, closed)

You're only breeding to save yourself to effort of finding underagers to fuck.
b3ta.com/questions/cougars/post319848
( Amorous Badger NAKED BEA ARTHUR PHOTOS 4U, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 15:42, closed)

LOL you fail so bad
Youre so stupid to believe what everyone writes on forums. Had this with Phantom. Why would anybody truthfully admit to being with a 15 year old in their 20s and post it on a public forum? That would be dumb!

But this is QOTW. And no where in QOTW rules does it say that it has to be 100% truthful. This is an entertainment forum. Like on drama programs and documentaries on the TV. To keep the audience interested with a bit of gasp, bit of controversy, bit of happiness, bit of sadness. They make stuff up, or exagerate!
I posted that answer all that time ago to create a debate and a controversy.

I'm a good b3tan.. I keep the site interesting!

I mean look at most posts on this answer "Before I die, I want to go into space" Yes, you and everyone else! What an exciting post. My posts this week have generated the most interest by far. Therefore I win. I dont expect any of my posts will have won, because people havnt liked my posts. But thats besides the point. Its created interest and thus entertained you. Thats what its all about!
(Miggyman, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 12:24, closed)

Alright, that's it.
*Rolls up sleeves*
*Dons Robin Williams mask*

It's not your fault
It's not your fault
It's not your fault
It's not your fault
It's not your fault
It's not your fault
It's not your fault
It's not your fault
( Wet-chinned bag shanker Cannot parse Wogan, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 12:34, closed)

So, you're saying that you're a fibber as well as a nonce?

( Amorous Badger NAKED BEA ARTHUR PHOTOS 4U, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 19:13, closed)

Neither of your posts say anything.
I think most know we are "tools of DNA" meaning we feel (in general) some reproductive urge.
I think most know we are, in some way, slaves to our upbringing.
I would also like to point out that, in some modern theory at least, the urge to reproduce can extend to ideas also -- I think it's something like the memetic theory.
So, on reading both your posts I want to know what _you_ want to do? That would apear to be the question.
(Me, I'm not... in any way intoxicated, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 18:23, closed)

Why have kids?
In their teens they'll hate you, 20's they'll ignore you, 30's they'll feel sorry for you, 40's they'll be hoping you've left them some money. Kids are shit.
( JamTallons, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 22:07, closed)

What are you on about?

( Herb Alpert's Taxi Driver I have very beautiful lips, Tue 19 Oct 2010, 23:08, closed)

I think you kind of ruined it a bit towards the end there
Perhaps it may help if you can explain what it is about this that makes you feel like you've 'won' at life?

It sounds awfull to me to be as trapped as that seems, but perhaps things will change with age and that will be how I eventually get my 'win' in life.

I'm going to carry on enjoying my life how I want it to be for the time being, however selfish that probably is.
(Fluffy Face is blaming your picture for breaking my commode, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 2:23, closed)

Once Again!
I point at you with my fingers.
But this time, I am using the other hand!

Oh yes.
( DukeEuphoria Comes highly reccomended, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 12:52, closed)

LOL fag

(brutal stack Raided the beeves of Apollo on, Wed 20 Oct 2010, 17:45, closed)