Posted on 08/19/2008 6:54:24 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Women are waiting longer to have children, and more women than ever are choosing not to have children at all, according to a new Census Bureau report.
Twenty percent of women ages 40 to 44 have no children, double the level of 30 years ago, the report said; and women in that age bracket who do have children have fewer than ever — an average of 1.9 children, compared with the median of 3.1 children in 1976.
“A lot of women are not having any children,” said Jane Lawler Dye, a Census Bureau researcher who did the report, which looked at women of childbearing age in 2006. “It used to be sort of expected that there was a phase of life where you had children, and a lot of women aren’t doing that now,” Ms. Dye said.
Women with advanced degrees are more likely to be childless, the study found. Of women 40 to 44 with graduate or professional degrees, 27 percent are childless, compared with 18 percent of women who did not continue their education beyond high school, the data show.
The numbers are consistent with a 2006 report Ms. Dye issued on the same subject. While year-by-year change is slow, Ms. Dye said, the data show that women of the baby boom generation are continuing to transform the American family.
Hispanic women are the only group bucking the trends found in the study, averaging 2.3 children each by their 40s. The number of children a Hispanic woman has decreases sharply, however, depending on how many generations her family has lived in the United States, the data show.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
More myth than truth. As today, it only occurred in significant numbers with the wealthy.
I checked, and the average age for marriage in Europe in the 16th century was 23 for men, and 20 for women. It's only slightly younger in the 17th, with no particular changes in the 18th and 19th. You don't see a significant number until you go all the way back to the 14th century where the average age for females was 16 and a whopping 24 for males. At no time in history was a 20 year spread common.
She's still rockin' at 49.
May I point out that KNOWLEDGE <> INTELLIGENCE. Generally, all that “college degrees”, etc., prove are that the person is capable of sucking in some knowledge. Manipulation of that knowledge is a different thing - THAT is intelligence, not simply being an encyclopedia.
However, generally again, it probably is true there is a bit more genuine intelligence in college grads than the general population.
I used to be an engineer. But I just quit to be a “housewife” with my new baby. I was an engineer for 15 years.
Sometimes, it just takes time to find a good person to marry who is also available.
In some ways I have had it really good - solid education and career, then I’m starting to be “just a mom”. Maybe I’ll go back later, I don’t know. But in any case, now, I’ve had it all, in a way.
Of course its a fair statement. Its just as arbitrary and fair as the suposition that they are intelligent for NOT having children.
Additionally women have been having children for millions of years, and only recently have they been oopting out as a matter of choice. There is a very good evolutionary argument to be made that those who have not had children are indeed disintelligent. They have not passed on their genes, nor contributed toi the gene pool, self selecting their disentelligence out of the human genome.
Biologically speaking, that is extremely disintelligent!
As women have gotten more liberal, they’ve become uglier. Nips baby-making in the bud.
Except, these groups successfully assimilated. The longest/largest study ever refutes your comparison.
Despite sixty years of political and legal battles to improve the education of Mexican Americans, they continue to have the lowest average education levels and the highest high school dropout rates among major ethnic and racial groups in the United States. ... However, leading analysts, apparently believing in the universality of assimilation, argue that this is the result of a large first and second generation population still adjusting to American society. ... These and other scholars predict that Mexican Americans will have the same levels of education and socioeconomic status as the dominant non-Hispanic white population by the fourth generation.... Sadly and directly in contradistinction to assimilation theory,the fourth generation differs the most from whites,
with a college completion rate of only 6 percent [compared to 35 percent for whites of that era]"
Well, Varyouga, don't give up hope. And maybe my experience is even more relevant. My last name is Hernandez, a typical Mexican name! And my lovely bride is as WASPish as they come.
Consider going down one income class where the gal will be happy with a man of good character regardless of his ethnicity.
If you're a practicing Jew, then my advice is worthless and maybe you need to hang around some synagogues, because I could understand why it might be harder to find someone. Or, if you're non-practicing or open to being a Christian man, I expect that your ethnicity would be irrelevant.
"And just where would a man find one of these women? Law offices and accounting firms."
"Thank you, I’ll begin the hunt."
If you're looking for a fun companion, happy hunting and look forward to fun weekends.
If you're looking for a spouse, I fear that few will be the type you want to take to meet Mom. I expect they're all ball-busting Maureen Dowd types. Bitter. Attracted to you but angry at men. Can't admit that they are responsible for the reason they're still single 20 years after college.
Bashed? I'd be disappointed if you were a biker chick WITHOUT tattoos.
She's still rockin' at 49."
Mrs. Tom is 50 and has put on a few pounds but is as cute as ever down below. My standards might have changed ... but my desire for her has not. Gravity shmavity.
My sister has chosen not to have children because she has no desire to be a mother...and you're telling me that's selfish?
How absurd.
“If you’re looking for a fun companion, happy hunting and look forward to fun weekends.”
Thanks for the good wishes.
“If you’re looking for a spouse...”
Had one. Not looking to repeat THAT anytime soon.
She's not particularly fond of babies or children, and her husband feels the same way. That being the case, she doesn't think it would be a very good idea to have any of her own.
If she doesn’t like babies or children, I’d say she wouldn’t be doing a baby any favors by having one. Good on her for recognizing it.
Don't get me started on the women who weren't picky enough, ended up settling for the wrong guy, and are now either (1) miserable or (2) divorced. Better to be picky than to settle for less.
Exactly. She's not being selfish.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.