Donald Tusk’s frustration may have good grounds, unlike anti-natalist Raphael Samuel
No one seems quite sure whether Raphael Samuel, the anti-natalist from Mumbai who plans to sue his parents for having been born without his consent, is for real or not. My natural cynicism inclines me to believe Raph is a bit of a wind-up merchant, but there are still plenty of people who are taking him seriously. The logic certainly appears somewhat fragile. Unless Raph believes that everyone but him managed, before they existed in any form, to send secret messages giving persons unknown permission to have unprotected sex, he must be baffled that no one else has got round to suing their parents. And indeed bewildered that his own parents haven’t sued their parents for being born against their will. Nor is it entirely clear what Raph hopes to get out of this. Does he want his parents to kill him? Does he want the right to officially be considered not to exist for tax purposes? Or can he just not wait to collect on his inheritance and is looking for an early financial payoff? Whichever it is, I would be encouraging his parents to get their retaliation in early by counter-suing Raph for being an ungrateful miserabilist and not the son for which they had hoped. Though that could be a dangerous precedent. There must have been plenty of times when my parents felt like suing me for damages. Not that I had any money to give them back then. As for me, I’m just looking for someone to sue for the fact that one day I am going to die.