...

[spider04]

..........

 

[PugofCrydee]

Thats great for you!

Meeting someone online isn't every ones ideal, but it's becoming more and more common.
So long as you use safety and common sense it CAN be possible. Good luck, I hope things go well for you and your new friend.

 

[planemo]

That takes a lot of courage. Glad it went well. I wouldn't travel to another city (in my country) to meet my relatives.

 

[Requiescat]

I find it remarkable that there is an actual account of two people exchanging words here, lol! Glad it worked out so well for you, it's very uplifting to read accounts like these

 

[fate12321]

Wow that's awesome. Personally, I wound never do such a thing.

 

[lucifersam]

I've met quite a few people from the internet, around 10. Two of them were individuals (one of those from SPW), the rest I met as a big group.

Humans are bad at estimating risk. The risk of getting killed meeting someone from the internet isn't higher than meeting someone from anywhere else - unless it's off a forum for serial killers, or there is some other factor serves to concentrate those type of people there. Every internet-person is also walking around IRL... you could run into a killer walking your dog just as easily as in a chat room.

 

[w*n*c*a*m]

I dunno... the first thing that came into my mind when 2 SPW member meets or clicks together is.....THeir children will have SP too and it's never a good idea.... AT ALL.

 

[Requiescat]

Well, that depends. It's not guaranteed that they will unless they shelter them or are in some other way damaging during those developmental years. Alot of SA sufferers have extrovert families with dominant personalities. I'd say that two SA sufferers who are aware of how other people might feel stand a better chance of raising a child than many extroverts that live for themselves first and foremost. We all know how common that is! Just my thoughts.

 

[w*n*c*a*m]

Maybe I'm just a pessimist but I know genes play a big part in a person's development (Most importantly the brain). Come to think of it, we're all just brains with bodies. Forget all the health trends and stuffs... at the end of the day, it's our brain that controls us and makes us who we are now.

I'm not saying two SP people being together is entirely bad. Just don't multiply. You're kids will hate him/herself too.
Get married and have kids to someone who has a more decent mental state than us.

 

[Megaten]

I remember quite a few people meeting from on here. Two got married. I cant say I have myself though.

 

[w*n*c*a*m]

Not everyone thinks so, it's okay if that is how you think but if I ever get married to someone with SA, I would be totally fine with having kids.

I wish luck to your offspring/s.

 

[Megaten]

I wish luck to your offspring/s.

Someone having a social phobia isnt 100% dependant on their genes. Some people have SA because of emotional abuse. My dad is introverted but by no means a shy person and my mother is obnoxiously extroverted. It more likely a combination of multiple things that you really cant take complete account for unless you map out a persons whole genome and get the ability to see into the future.

 

[lucifersam]

Well, I'll just add that as one more item on the list of things I don't have to worry about, by not having kids.

 

[Odo]

I'm not saying two SP people being together is entirely bad. Just don't multiply. You're kids will hate him/herself too.
Get married and have kids to someone who has a more decent mental state than us.

I really don't think people who want kids should not do it just because they have SA.

I mean, it's not the end of the world.

 

[Sacrament]

I dunno... the first thing that came into my mind when 2 SPW member meets or clicks together is.....THeir children will have SP too and it's never a good idea.... AT ALL.

Depends on the way you raise the kids. If you raise them to be social from an early age, it'll become their standard. Same way, you can change how social you are by daring to make that change, even if it's harder than most people.

 

[w*n*c*a*m]

Someone having a social phobia isnt 100% dependant on their genes. Some people have SA because of emotional abuse. My dad is introverted but by no means a shy person and my mother is obnoxiously extroverted. It more likely a combination of multiple things that you really cant take complete account for unless you map out a persons whole genome and get the ability to see into the future.

I didnt say about 100 genes dependent. I just said that a large part of it comes from the genes. But looking at the probability of having 2 parents with SA makes a high percentage of having kids with SA too. You see your dad is an introvert and your mum's an extrovert yet your dad's introverted trait was strong enough to pass it to you. Maybe your experience made it worse and developed it into SA we dont know for sure. But as you can see the potential was already there. Now imagine 2 parents with SA.

You're saying maybe it's because of abuse. But it cant be entirely the reason coz some people have been abused yet they didnt develop SA. Some people were just born to be tough and some were born fragile. However having the SA potential makes you vulnerable to things like that. You cant say that having loving parents can prevent it from happening coz kids will go to school, they will experience bullying whether you like it or not, you cannot protect them all the time. At some time in their lives there will alwaybe be those triggers.

 

[w*n*c*a*m]

If Im married to a person with SA, yes we have the right to have kids. But then knowing the high probability of my kids getting that trait.... having experienced how miserable it is to live in that condition.... I will think twice before bearing an offspring.

You see, it's not because I dont want to have kids. It's more of -I'll find it cruel for that kid to exist knowing that he/she is doomed to have a life similar to his parents. I can say I'll do my best for him not to get it but genes is very strong (especially if you have 2 parents with SA), the potential will be there, I couldnt always protect my child and prevent him/her to experience any abuse from the outside world.

I wouldnt want it to be like 'Sweet pea, sorry you've got no choice, your mum and dad both have the condition. Don't worry darling we love you, we really want to bear a child so we made you exist. We'll both endure it together.'

It would've been better to have kids with autism or Down's sydrome coz most of them have a world of their own. But having SA --- you experience it, you're entirely aware of what's happening. And that sucks.

 

[w*n*c*a*m]

I think wncam raises an interesting point. But the question is, what is the actual benchmark for someone to reproduce. Now I’m more of a stickler than wncam, because I think people with freckles should be banned outright from even thinking about procreating. Because the impact of two people with freckles, who then go on to reproduce, will in all likelihood go on to have children with even more freckles than their parents. It would be like a giant freckfest of freckleness that their poor offspring would have to contend with. Although saying that, I here there are some effective remedies that help to reduce freckles these days. So on reflection, I’m now fine with the whole freckle speckle thing.

But let’s get down to the main event. Should two people with SA go on to make copies of themselves. Now coming at this from wncam point of view, I sort of get the whole “I don’t think it would be fair for children that have parents with SA” thing, but I also think it’s important to be more specific about who should or should not reproduce as well. For instance, would it be ok if potential SA parents only had a mild form of SA, where they only get slightly anxious during their annual swim in the piranha infested Amazon river. Because otherwise, making a blanket statement that says two people with SA shouldn’t spawn, seems a tad confusing to me. Which is why I would prefer a more detailed guideline in which to consult from. Otherwise, I might as well look into buying one of those 3D printers, because I hear they do a great job in making lifelike copies of things. But before I do make a copy of myself, I might make a detailed 3D copy of Angelina Jolie first, just to make sure the printer is working properly of course…….

Well, I'm just stating the obvious risk... which is a great one. Now if you want to take the risk, no one's stopping you. But you can't deny my perspective coz these things do happen.

 

[S_Spartan]

I will go one step further and advise *everyone* not to reproduce. And not because of some movie-like, apocalyptic, dystopian future but because technology is slowly making human beings obsolete.

I predict that in the next 20 years automation will really begin to pop but humans won't be able to mentally catch up. There will still be this idea that people should "earn their keep" but there won't be much for them to do.

People will have a lot of free time but very little money or leverage in the world.

This will all happen very slowly as we transition into this new state of automation but people will not readily let go of the other branch known as "work", even though they will be forced to as the economy changes.



Hell, we are already seeing a drop in marriage and birth rates because, due to technology, people do not need each other as they did in the past.

To be honest, if I had any interest in procreating, SA infected genes would be near the bottom of my list of concerns.

 

[Megaten]

Well its too late. I already reproduced a miniature version of myself after my earlier post. Im gonna name him Buckscruggs Alvaroon.