[Puffer Fish]

US births continue to decline as nearly half of women under 45 are childless: study (nypost.com), By Allie Griffin January 12, 2023

Nearly half of American women under age 45 are childless, according to a new study.

About 52% of women between the ages of 15 to 44 gave birth between 2015 to 2019 -- a drop from nearly 55% in the prior four-year period, according to the study published by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics.

The number of biological fathers in the same age range also dipped. From 2015 to 2019, about 40% of men had fathered a child -- compared to about 44% during 2011 to 2015.

The number of babies each woman is birthing decreased as well and more and more women are putting off childbearing to later in life.

The drop in birthrate is especially prevalent among white women.

This is going to have big demographic implications for the future.

And what is happening in the U.S. is mirroring what has already begun in Japan. (The U.S. currently about where Japan was 15 years ago)

Part of this is due to many young families not feeling they can afford to have children. Part of that is the high cost of housing in many areas.

[Sandzak]

The detrimental results of feminism and gender ideology. Hole nations are going to disappear.

[Steve_American]

The detrimental results of feminism and gender ideology. Hole nations are going to disappear.

They may, and likely are, part of why this is happening.

IMHO, there are 2 much bigger causes, though.

1] After 40 years of neoliberal policy choices by the Gov. that caused real wages to fall quite a bit since 1976, the mass of couples can't afford a child. In fact, young women want to settle down with a man who excess income to support 2 children, with the woman still supporting herself. So, marriage is way down.

2] The threat of climate change destroying the economy and, at best, likely civilization; and at worst, those effects are on the way to human extinction, means that many people choose not to have children, so they don't have to watch them be killed by climate change or by social unrest from CC.

Peter Zeiham has a 3rd cause, urbanization. He asserts that, worldwide, people who live in cities have fewer kids. He says this is because on farms, even a 4 year old can feed the chickens, so kids are free labor. But, in cities kids are not free labor, they are just a huge cost. Also, small apartments are not good places to raise kids. If the streets outside or even the insides of grade schools are not seen as safe for your kids, how can you raise them?
.

[Robert Urbanek]

all the songs
have been sung
all the scenes
have been seen

extinction
in the air
dinosaurs
everywhere

not wanting
children
childhood’s end
ascension

[Steve_American]

all the songs
have been sung
all the scenes
have been seen

extinction
in the air
dinosaurs
everywhere

not wanting
children
childhood’s end
ascension

What is your point?
In what way do you disagree with what I said?
.

[Tainari88]

They may, and likely are, part of why this is happening.

IMHO, there are 2 much bigger causes, though.

1] After 40 years of neoliberal policy choices by the Gov. that caused real wages to fall quite a bit since 1976, the mass of couples can't afford a child. In fact, young women want to settle down with a man who excess income to support 2 children, with the woman still supporting herself. So, marriage is way down.

2] The threat of climate change destroying the economy and, at best, likely civilization; and at worst, those effects are on the way to human extinction, means that many people choose not to have children, so they don't have to watch them be killed by climate change or by social unrest from CC.

Peter Zeiham has a 3rd cause, urbanization. He asserts that, worldwide, people who live in cities have fewer kids. He says this is because on farms, even a 4 year old can feed the chickens, so kids are free labor. But, in cities kids are not free labor, they are just a huge cost. Also, small apartments are not good places to raise kids. If the streets outside or even the insides of grade schools are not seen as safe for your kids, how can you raise them?
.

Good points. But, people have children in Latin America and in Africa. The future generations will be coming from those continents. Guaranteed.

I wanted more kids. Just did not have the luck. I have bio son and one adopted son. If it was up to me? Would have had at least three children.

[wat0n]

Latín American women are also having less children, particularly in the more developed countries. This is something that happens as societies become richer.

[Robert Urbanek]

What is your point?
In what way do you disagree with what I said?
.

I am suggesting the possibility that people in the First World, through a Borg-like interconnected subconscious, have attained the realization that the story of humanity is coming to an end; having children may be pointless.

[Neo]

Working people want to know, where is the money? If there is no money, there is no children being born. Kids cost a lot of money along with housing. So, the money has got to be there first for working people. Otherwise, you can't have kids because you can't afford to provide a stable life for them.

[Negotiator]

People just cant afford children, plain and simple.

And yes people in third world countries are technically more poor and yet they have children. Thats because they CAN afford it though. They simply dont have the cost of living that people in the west have. At least in the past it also helped that children was the only form of pension one would have in such countries, but I dont know the current situation.

Its not limited to the USA at all, here in Germany for example people also dont have children unless they have a steady job of above average income. Or they are piss poor solo mothers.

[Steve_American]

People just cant afford children, plain and simple.

And yes people in third world countries are technically more poor and yet they have children. Thats because they CAN afford it though. They simply dont have the cost of living that people in the west have. At least in the past it also helped that children was the only form of pension one would have in such countries, but I dont know the current situation.

Its not limited to the USA at all, here in Germany for example people also dont have children unless they have a steady job of above average income. Or they are piss poor solo mothers.

IMO, this is a result of neo-liberal policy choices by the Govs.
The EU has it worse. Neo-liberalism is enshrined in its "constitution" the treaties. And, they can't be amended, functionally.

Kids are much cheaper to raise in 3rd world nations, and in rural areas, they're free labor.
.

[Saeko]

Having children is an absolute SHIT deal for women (regardless of economic circumstances) and more and more of us are figuring it out. The list of reasons NOT to have kids is almost endless. Your move, boys.

[Neo]

@Saeko

The US will have to bring in more immigrants to ensure we have a work force so the economy stays strong. But that means no bitching about immigrants moving in. They will want the right to vote eventually too and who could blame them?

[Tainari88]

Having children is an absolute SHIT deal for women (regardless of economic circumstances) and more and more of us are figuring it out. The list of reasons NOT to have kids is almost endless. Your move, boys.

I must disagree with you Saeko. I loved having my son. I only wish I could have had him younger. I had him at age 45 after believing I could never have any of my own biological children. That is why I adopted the older son. I thought I could not have kids.

Being a mother is a great thing. But you are correct about various realities regarding raising kids. You lose your personal freedoms. That is true. You have to work hard and spend a lot of your take home pay on that child. You will be mentally, physically and emotionally exhausted. In the US you will have almost zero real supports to help you. Not so in Latin America at all Saeko. Here? If you are raised here? Your extended family, the government and churches, and community will have a lot of help for you. And people share a lot of the burdens of raising children.

I hired a tutor for my son during the pandemic. A woman of humble means who was a certified elementary school teacher. She told me a couple of months ago that if something happened to me and I died, and my husband died, she would be willing to raise my little son. She was serious. Here in Latin America you're not alone in an island of expenses and grinding work. You do have real relationships and family does get a high priority in this culture. Even friends become family fairly quickly here.

Raising kids here is a lot easier.

But, the part about losing freedoms, hard work, and all your own ambitions are just burnt toast is CORRECT. Your life is over once you have kids. You will have to subjugate it all for the kid or kids. That is true. So, it is a very very serious decision. At the same time? The joy the babies bring is immeasurable. They are hard work, but they love you back a lot. A lot. And they care about you. You get what you give with kids. Even the tough ones like my older son.

[Saeko]

The joy the babies bring is immeasurable. They are hard work, but they love you back a lot. A lot. And they care about you. You get what you give with kids. Even the tough ones like my older son.

Eh... I don't agree. Babies and small children are not capable of loving their parents, in my opinion. Their "love" is shallow and self-serving. It's not at all something I would be interested in.

A child might grow up to become an adult who truly does love their parent(s) in a mutually reciprocal, selfless manner, but they won't necessarily, and have no obligation to do so either. Also, it wouldn't be easy for them to develop that kind of relationship with their parents, given the vast difference in age and life-experience between parent and child.

Furthermore, having a child would inevitably get in the way of building and deepening my relationship with my SO. So why would I risk destroying or damaging such a great relationship for someone who may or may not return that type of love for another 20-30 years? It makes no sense.

[Godstud]

No, @Neo, the USA needs to tighter up immigration, so that wages can rise and Americans can benefit from a smaller labour pool. Let the people who are already there, become citizens. The rich and elites will rail against this, however, as they are the people benefitting from it.

Enforce laws pertaining to illegal employment of illegal immigrants. It will hurt the economy in the short term.

Voters should have to show ID. Everyone is capable of obtaining ID. Most countries already have this in place(eg. Canada). Illegal immigrants should not be allowed to vote. I think we can all agree with that, right?

Want more citizens? Open up the military for foreigners to serve in order to gain citizenship. This is will solve two problems: Get the right kind of citizens, and help out the military's recruitment problems.

@Saeko Having children is only a shit deal if you do it while you are single. Take the benefits out of divorce and it will help lower the divorce rate. "No Fault" divorce should be abolished. There should have to be legitimate reasons for a divorce, and affix child support/alimony accordingly.

The list of reasons not to have kids are only valid if you're a selfish person, and don't care about family. Endless? That's fine. To each their own. The less kids we have from those people, the better. How can having children be a shit deal, if the person who you are having children with supports, provides, and protects you and your child?

Women control access to sex, so the onus is on them. Your move, girls. Men control access to relationships and marriage. Marriage benefits women, more than men. Divorce is incentivized in the West.

Eh... I don't agree. Babies and small children are not capable of loving their parents, in my opinion. Their "love" is shallow and self-serving. It's not at all something I would be interested in.

Are you a sociopath? I can sure tell that you are childless and have no clue about small children. Your opinion is not valid.

As for love... well in most cases all love is conditional, to a certain extent. Most men, however, would lay down their lives for their family. If self sacrifice is not love, then I don't know what is.

Feminism has sold the lie to a generation of women. They are told and trained from a young age to think that a career can replace a family. They'll soon discover the lie that this is.

[Saeko]

No, [usermention=78111]

@Saeko Having children is only a shit deal if you do it while you are single. Take the benefits out of divorce and it will help lower the divorce rate. "No Fault" divorce should be abolished. There should have to be legitimate reasons for a divorce, and affix child support/alimony accordingly.

The list of reasons not to have kids are only valid if you're a selfish person, and don't care about family. Endless? That's fine. To each their own. The less kids we have from those people, the better. How can having children be a shit deal, if the person who you are having children with supports, provides, and protects you and your child?

Women control access to sex, so the onus is on them. Your move, girls. Men control access to relationships and marriage. Marriage benefits women, more than men. Divorce is incentivized in the West.

Alright, @Godstud, imagine that you are a woman who wants children more than anything and you are married to the absolute most perfect man who has ever lived. Now seriously consider the risks of giving birth to a child. Here are some of them:

1. Medical complications before birth. The effects of pregnancy on your body are devastating and, in some cases, fatal. Any time you get pregnant, you are risking dying for a child that you may A) never know if the child somehow survives or B) never know because both you and your child die.

2. Medical complications after birth for the mother. All kinds of awful things to think about here. Giving birth to a child is extremely painful, it can kill you, it can leave you with severe tearing from clit to anus that will make pissing, shitting, sneezing, coughing, and laughing painful or dangerous for the rest of your life. It can also leave you incontinent or with vaginal prolapse. Child birth can also cause permanent damage in other areas of the body such as blindness and stroke (i.e. paralysis). All of these things also greatly hinder your ability to care for the child you just gave birth to.

3. Medical complications after birth for the child. The child can be born with serious congenital diseases or severe disabilities. In the most extreme cases, you are either stuck with taking care of a vegetable for the rest of your life or a child whose life consists of immense daily suffering. The child can also suffer birth injuries that have many of the same effects as above.

4. Either you or your partner (or both) can become disabled or dead before your kids are fully grown. Anti-Divorce laws and devotion don't make parents invincible or immortal.

5. Economic downturns. It doesn't really matter how much money you and your spouse make. Unless you are very wealthy, you are always subject to the worry that the economy will suddenly shit itself and you find yourself being unable to feed your children.

6. Terrible shit can still happen to your children. They can be murdered, raped, abused, etc. I've heard one woman say that having a child is like having your soul live outside of your body for the rest of your life. The stress of worrying about these kinds of things alone should be enough to dissuade anyone from having children.

7. Even if you're the best parent ever, your kids can grow up to be terrible people. They can become murderers, rapists, abusers, etc. They may even abuse their parents in some cases.

The list goes on...

I don't understand how anyone can look at this list and still think that having kids is at all a good idea.

Are you a sociopath? I can sure tell that you are childless and have no clue about small children. Your opinion is not valid.

Explain. What is it that I don't know about small children?

Feminism has sold the lie to a generation of women. They are told and trained from a young age to think that a career can replace a family. They'll soon discover the lie that this is.

No, it's patriarchy that lies to women and trains them from a young age to think that raising a family is all they are good for and is something that they must do.

The idea that feminism has sold the lie to women that a career can replace a family is itself a multi-layered lie. There is no need to "replace" something you never wanted in the first place. It is a good thing for a woman to be in charge of her own destiny.

[Godstud]

Medical problems are the exception. Most people don't have them with pregnancies as our medical system makes having kids very safe.

I was not talking about anti-divorce laws. I was simply talking about making it so there has to be legitimate reasons for a divorce, and not simply doing it for economic incentives(as it is now).

Life is hard. Anything can happen to anyone. That's not an argument. Children are safer now, than at any other time in the history of mankind.

Children from two parent homes are less likely to grow up and be terrible people. That's a statistical fact.

These are no good arguments or reasons not to have children. The reasons to have children far outweigh the reasons not to, for most people.

It's your choice not to have children, though. Life your best life. If you are a woman who doesn't want children, then that's up to you, but don't try to sell the lie of self-gratification and selfishness to women who do.

That you, essentially, call children sociopaths shows your ignorance. You know nothing about small children, as anyone who read your post, can see.

The majority of women DO want families, however. They are lied to by Feminism, which tells them that a career will give them the same sense of worth that a family will. Women have ALWAYS been in charge of their own destiny. The lie is that they haven't been(at least in the last 100 years). Pretending that men haven't had the same challenges is another lie.

Note: Men only got the right to vote a few generations before women, and that came with military service as a requirement(the draft). I am sure some men would give up their right to vote, if it didn't make them eligeble for the draft.

There is no patriarchy telling women what they can or cannot do, in the West(and indeed most other countries, as well). That's a Feminist lie. In fact, you could argue that in many countries(where there was a Queen for centuries), that it's been a matriarchy.

[Saeko]

Medical problems are the exception. Most people don't have them with pregnancies as our medical system makes having kids very safe.

I was not talking about anti-divorce laws. I was simply talking about making it so there has to be legitimate reasons for a divorce, and not simply doing it for economic incentives(as it is now).

Life is hard. Anything can happen to anyone. That's not an argument. Children are safer now, than at any other time in the history of mankind.

Children from two parent homes are less likely to grow up and be terrible people. That's a statistical fact.

Serious pregnancy complications are not rare. About 8% of pregnancies come with serious complications for either mother or baby.

These are no good arguments or reasons not to have children. The reasons to have children far outweigh the reasons not to, for most people.

Really? You don't think you or your kids dying is a good reason not to do something?

It's your choice not to have children, though. Life your best life. If you are a woman who doesn't want children, then that's up to you, but don't try to sell the lie of self-gratification and selfishness to women who do.

This is the patriarchy talking. Not having kids is not a form of selfishness, and informing women of the risks of having children is not a lie.

That you, essentially, call children sociopaths shows your ignorance. You know nothing about small children, as anyone who read your post, can see.

They aren't sociopaths, they are just immature. That's just how it is. There is simply no way that any child can love you in the same complex and deep way that an adult can. You haven't really countered this point except to re-iterate that it is somehow incorrect.

The majority of women DO want families, however.

They wouldn't if they truly understood what that meant.

They are lied to by Feminism, which tells them that a career will give them the same sense of worth that a family will.

How do you know what women truly want, @Godstud? Do you read minds now?

Women have ALWAYS been in charge of their own destiny. The lie is that they haven't been(at least in the last 100 years). Pretending that men haven't had the same challenges is another lie.

Note: Men only got the right to vote a few generations before women, and that came with military service as a requirement(the draft). I am sure some men would give up their right to vote, if it didn't make them eligeble for the draft.

There is no patriarchy telling women what they can or cannot do, in the West(and indeed most other countries, as well). That's a Feminist lie. In fact, you could argue that in many countries(where there was a Queen for centuries), that it's been a matriarchy.

[Godstud]

Serious pregnancy complications are not rare. About 8% of pregnancies come with serious complications for either mother or baby.

So what? We have the best medical systems in history, so these are very rarely dangerous. it's safert than at any other time in history.

Really? You don't think you or your kids dying is a good reason not to do something?

People die all the time. No, that's a good reason not to have kids. That's a ridiculous reason.

This is the patriarchy talking. Not having kids is not a form of selfishness, and informing women of the risks of having children is not a lie.

There are risks in everything we do. When you have sex, you are taking a risk. When you walk down the street you are taking a risk. This is not the patriarchy. It's reality.

Not wanting kids and to spend everything on yourself is selfish, even if MEN choose to do this. It's not limited simply to women.

They aren't sociopaths, they are just immature. That's just how it is. There is simply no way that any child can love you in the same complex and deep way that an adult can. You haven't really countered this point except to re-iterate that it is somehow incorrect.

Please provide a source showing that they can detect levels of love. Is there a study? Which loves is better? Which is more fulfilling? Is there a scale?

They wouldn't if they truly understood what that meant.

They do know. It's not a secret. Why are you pretending that women don't know they can get pregnant, and the risks associated with it? Do you really see women as lacking agency in even their own self control?

How do you know what women truly want, @Godstud? Do you read minds now?

Men make sacrifices regarding family, so they can provide FOR their family. Men work FOR the family, and not for self-gratification. I know of few men who would choose career over family if they had a realistic choice, and the family wouldn't suffer financially for it.

4 Feminist Lies That Are Making Women Miserable
Of all the lies feminists tell, the idea that career success is more fulfilling than marriage and family is by far the greatest. It is almost impossible to convey the depth of this lie, for it too began in the 1960s, this time with Betty Friedan's insistence that being a wife and mother is akin to being in a "comfortable concentration camp."

Since that time, American women have been walloped with a steady diet of words and images that drive Friedan's argument home. Humans are pack animals: we need to feel part of the group to feel good about ourselves. Some of us are content to stand apart from the crowd, but most are not.

Cultural messages matter. Since mothering is no longer revered or encouraged, women are surprised to discover how heart-wrenching it is to leave their babies and return to work. They're surprised to discover that work isn't nearly as satisfying as they were led to believe. This same sense of unease is felt by single women who can't find a man with whom to settle down.
https://www.drjamesdobson.org/blogs/4-f ... -miserable

I reject your childish rebuttal. You cannot argue against it, so you don't.