You mention absurdism, but based on what you've written, it doesn't sound like you've read Albert Camus's Sisyphus. The book starts with your premise and discusses suicide at length. He spends a quarter of the work making the argument against suicide. He ultimately concludes that while life has no meaning, suicide is not a viable option, so we must each find our own meaning in life.

In practical terms, a philosophy of life that concludes that we should either commit suicide or stop procreating is not going to spread very far because those who come to believe it either die or fail to have offspring to spread the Word. Even if you are correct, embracing your view of reality isn't very helpful. What value is correctness in the grave?

You posit the idea that nihilism is an accurate picture of reality. How can you know that? Camus pursuasively argues that we can have no proof that life has any meaning, but that does not make the antithesis true. We can't have proof that life does not have meaning. You can't be certain your picture of reality is any more accurate than anyone else's. Your belief in your own worldview doesn't make it right.

Personally, I can't consider myself a nihilist because I could never be certain that life has no meaning. I believe life has no intrinsic meaning, and each of us makes up our own, which makes me an absurdist, but I would argue that is the "accurate picture of reality". I think your certainty in your nihilism is a bias with no foundation. In short, your nihilism is based on faith.

BTW, this post was very well written with simple language and compelling arguments. Well done.