There are highs and lows in life. While you consume, work, play, and sleep, you also have to cope with discomfort. You have personal problems that make life more difficult than you would want, regardless of who you are or what circumstances you find yourself in. However, if you had never been born, none of this would be taking place. Raphael Samuel, a 27-year-old anti-natalist from Mumbai, India, believes that having your own parents is a reason to sue them.
Samuel’s divisive comments are causing quite a commotion on his Facebook page, “Nihilanand.” He frequently shares memes and videos supporting his belief that it’s unfair that your parents opted to bring you into this dysfunctional world and that you were born without their consent.
Some perceive him as being humorous. Some believe he lacks empathy. There are those who genuinely enjoy him. One thing, nevertheless, never goes away: people are still interested in him.
Even though Raphael Samuel might appear a little ludicrous in his disguise—especially when combined with his flamboyant remarks—he nevertheless stands up for the common guy while sporting his trademark false black beard and dark sunglasses. He never stops preaching that parents who give their children a life they didn’t ask for are self-centered and should not be respected.
He usually makes memes to draw attention to his concepts. He poses in front of vividly colored phrases in these pictures. “A good parent puts the child above its desires and needs, but the child itself is a desire of the parent,” reads one of his most recent quotes. #ParentsAreEmpathetic
Samuel oddly enough says he gets along well with his dad (DailyMail). He feels that he is not required to thank them for bringing him here, even if he doesn’t treat them disrespectfully.
Raphael Samuel claims in a video titled “Why am I suing my parents?” that although his father hasn’t accepted it, his mother has accepted his beliefs. “He’s getting used to the idea,” He deals with some really decent parents, for someone who says you don’t have to respect them.
Samuel approaches the possibility of suing his parents more and more as “Nihilanand” gains popularity and amusing online remarks. Through Facebook photographs that assert, “Your parents had you instead of a toy or a dog,” people are endorsing his beliefs and letting him know that he is making a “good point.” You have no debt to them. Their amusement comes from you.
Samuel has even gone so far as to liken having children to slavery (for the owner’s/parent’s gain) and kidnapping (because of the lack of permission). His main objective is to ensure that people are aware that having children is a choice, even though many of his ideas seem to veer more toward sensationalism and internet trolling. In a society where having children is practically a given, he wants to defy convention and show that there are valid reasons not to.
How do you feel? Is he trying to make a point, or is he just making fun of us all?
Can You Spot the Mistake in This Puzzle?
Over the years, many people have made solving puzzles their favorite leisure time. They range in difficulty from ones that appear to take an eternity to ones that can be finished in a matter of seconds. The mystery and attractiveness of certain puzzles are increased by their unsolved nature
Views on puzzles are divided; some people adore them, while others don’t. Regardless of your enjoyment level, solving puzzles is an excellent mental workout. They inspire us to think creatively and unconventionally in order to solve issues.
A certain conundrum that has been circulating on the internet lately has many people perplexed. It doesn’t even appear to be a puzzle at first glance. The image consists only of the digits 1 through 15 arranged side by side, along with a statement requesting that viewers repost the image if they discover any errors.
At first glance, everything appears to be in order. There are no errors in the sequence of numbers one through fifteen; they are all present and accounted for. You could go over the figures a few times to make sure there are no discrepancies, but everything seems to be in order.
You might think beyond the box as a result of this. Is the missing zero the cause of the error? Or should the number sixteen be a part of the puzzle? Perhaps there’s a problem with the spacing? It’s flawless when you inspect the spacing. Is it possible that a 1 is misinterpreted for an I? No, they’re all unmistakably 1. Is the six not quite right? No, it’s also flawless. Where is the mistake, then?
You may eventually notice that they’re asking you to locate the “mitsake” rather than the error and turn your attention from the numbers to the instructions. That’s correct: the term
.
Leave a Reply