SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
posted by
mrpg
on Friday November 16 2018, @02:15AM
from the not-so-many-men-are-having-children-either dept.
from the not-so-many-men-are-having-children-either dept.
'Remarkable' decline in fertility rates
There has been a remarkable global decline in the number of children women are having, say researchers.
Their report found fertility rate falls meant nearly half of countries were now facing a "baby bust" - meaning there are insufficient children to maintain their population size.
The researchers said the findings were a "huge surprise".
And there would be profound consequences for societies with "more grandparents than grandchildren".
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
'Remarkable' Decline in Fertility Rates
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 146 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The last time I saw him he was walking down Lover's Lane holding his own hand.
-- Fred Allen
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 16 2018, @09:28AM (3 children)
Filial duty to raise the next generation? Aren't you Asian? Even if you're playing lefty on the wrong team, shouldn't this still pop to mind as soon as fertility and duty are used in the same sentence?
Sounds like what jmorris been saying to defend police officers shooting down black men by pointing out it's gang violence taking most black lives while conveniently ignoring the drug prohibition, racial discrimination and economic conditions (and who is behind them).
Look, obviously women aren't to blame here. But there's little denying when you don't spread benefits equally between genders, the social economic disparity prevents the creation of families since no one wants to marry beneath themselves. And when you look at who championed those discriminatory benefits, you'll find female feminists behind each one. Of course, that's as valuable as saying you can find humans behind each murder... That is, it's not a valuable distinction. But it's not a wrong one either.
Setting blame aside, someone fucked up their social experiment and produced an unsustainable economic model where males work in low-income jobs full time + over time while women part/full time at medium income jobs while raising the kids. It works on paper. But human nature just doesn't work like that. Women feel they're losing out so they work harder to earn more and climb up the social ladder, only to discover there are no men waiting for them in the mid-high income grades. So they end up alone. Possibly with a couple of cats and an expired gym card membership. And now the low-income jobs are being automated out of existence leaving many men unemployed and many women even more unwilling to marry low-income workers since they fear for their economic prospects.
This doesn't work for women. This doesn't work for men. It definitely doesn't work for the next generation. You can't change human nature. You can't lower women's income or raise male's income since that's market forces. We don't want polygamy since that will hurt everyone. That only leaves benefits and family court rights. Specifically the traditional affirmative actions favoring women in matters of alimony, and yes, children custodies. And honestly even that won't be enough.
Feel free to interject with something constructive. Just avoid the "it's actually a good thing since we have too many people on the globe already" point. While I happen to agree, most folks do seem to need companionship of the opposite sex and when two people of similar status pair up, children almost always follow. And yes. It's almost always women who push for them. Don't ask me why... That's your department.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 16 2018, @02:46PM (2 children)
I don't have any such duty, and nor do I have a desire to have children. I enjoy my time, money, freedom, hobbies, and property, thank you. Same goes for a lot of other people who realized that breeding isn't all it is cracked up to be.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Phoenix666 on Friday November 16 2018, @06:28PM (1 child)
Neither are money, hobbies, and property all they're cracked up to be. None of those things loves you back.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 17 2018, @12:26PM
Maybe not to some people, but it is nice to achieve financial independence and not have to slave away for corporations until old age. That is a lot easier to do without children. Surely, not having to stress about being able to pay bills has a positive effect on one's happiness.
Some people don't desire that anyway. Not only that, but if you have a significant other, they can love you back. And, of course, children aren't guaranteed to love you back or take care of you when you get older, as the massive amount of old people in nursing homes whose children almost never visit them demonstrates.
Oh, and by the way, having children places more stress on a relationship and thus makes it more likely to break down. Not to mention that there's a very long list of negative side effects that a woman can encounter during pregnancy and childbirth, some of which cause permanent health problems.
If someone knows all of this and wants to do it anyway, then fine. But even now, people are too often pressured into having children when they don't fully understand all the downsides and exaggerate the positives, and childfree people are looked down upon.