Posted on 06/25/2010 3:16:32 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Nearly one in five American women in her early 40s is childless, according to a report that shows a striking increase in women who don't have biological children.
The trend was much less common in the 1970s, when one in 10 women did not have children by 40 to 44, the age bracket researchers use to designate the end of childbearing years.
The report, released Friday by the Pew Research Center, cites social and cultural shifts behind the change, including less pressure to have children, better contraceptive measures and expanded job opportunities for women.
(snip)
Overall, the report found that white women are more likely to be childless, as are women with more education. The analysis, based largely on census data, comes amid changing attitudes about women who do not have children.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Nobody told them that later in life many of them would wind up as empty and unfulfilled cat-farmers with no families.
Oh well. Going along with the wrong crowd has consequences.
“Smart people don’t reproduce like rabbits, stupid people do. That is the basis of what supposedly makes Marxism/Communism/Socialism work. A never-ending supply of idiots”.
Wouldn’t the number of childless American men in their 40’s be correspondingly higher than the 1970’s as well?
A little unrelated, but I often wonder if the sharp increase in autism since the 1970s could be do to older people (both men & women) having more children. My wife and I are in our early 50’s, but all of our children are adults. However, we have plenty of friends in their 40’s who have infants. That was never the case 30-40 years ago.
Men don’t have restrictive child-bearing years...
Careful you don't run out of oxygen up there on that high horse of yours.
White liberal gay women and men in their 40’s.
I liked the “cat farmers” thing, though.
Ann Coulter doesn’t have kids. She seems to be handling it just fine.
Not every woman over 40 who is childless is a libtard or nutcase.
Um....I’m approaching 60 and don’t have children. I never needed children or a man to be fulfilled. As for being lonely and empty, did it ever occur to you that some of us revel in our solitude? Now I happen to have friends and family I can socialize with, but if I don’t — so what? It’s not that important to me. I can be alone and actually enjoy it.
I refuse to marry and have children merely because someone thinks I should. It’s not a matter of being a feminist; it’s that having children would not have been right for me, or for the child for that matter. Far too many people have had children that should never have. I recognized a long time ago that I didn’t want to bring a child into this world. That child would have been unwanted. Lord knows there are enough of those in the world.
Actually, that is exactly NOT what happened.
But carry on with your uninformed prejudice, since it seems to be working for you.
And ladies, FREERIDER ping!
You might want to reconsider that generalization, in light of the sheer volume of FReeper females who don’t have children.
YOU ARE WRONG. And possibly evil. You should have had children. You should go out right now and have some. It’s, like, your conservative obligation, or something. What are you, some selfish feminist lib?
Sheesh, that hurt even to type. Sorry about that!
Since when does choosing not to breed mean your life is “empty” or “miserable,” or that you have failed as a woman or as a human being? Some women are not cut out to be mothers, or simply have no desire, and choose not to, and are much happier for it. Is that so wrong?
I have 40-something female cousin who decided to concentrate on her career instead of a husband & family. She lost her job recently and now wonders if the PhD & career were worth this price.
The main reason for this trend is fear of divorce.
Many of these people have seen parents, siblings, friends, etc. go through nasty divorces and don’t want to live through the experience themselves.
Women often complain that there aren’t many available and suitable men, or that men are afraid of commitment. But it’s not fear of commitment. It’s fear of finding themselves separated from their children and sometimes having to pay for their wife’s second family. And, of course,women are afraid of being deserted, too - being traded in for a younger model. It’s a self-perpetuating trend.
No, it isn’t wrong. Individuals have the right not to have children, but SOCIETIES need babies. And babies need mothers and fathers. The western world is not reproducing itself.
Hey, careful. Some women in that age group mourn daily that they haven't found a man with whom to have children - and that could be related to any number of things including not being attracted to the men that have pursued. It's not always a happy situation and the women and men who celebrate their barreness, intentional or not, cause a lot of pain for those who would gladly have a family if God so wills.
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.