Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Ping!
Between this kind of thinking and abortion, liberals will be eventually become an insignificant minority.
Depressing.
Funny how what goes around comes around.
Of my survey I know a woman doctor and dentist who are almost begging to marry. No luck. They went for the income, passing on guys. Now guys are passing on them.
I can't wait to read all the posts about how horrible a person I am. They always make me laugh.
Drop in at any large store, walk around and observe kids in or near the toy department or in the checkout lanes screaming, demanding, whining...
What you see might well cause you to take an oath never to procreate! I think people today are flat SCARED of kids.
What a view of adulthood.
Interesting and relevant story. I think an important point that they left out was the impact on fertility rates of children whose parents were divorced.
Ultimately, I think it's going to be a lot more difficult for parents and children in the coming years. Our society in general is anti-child, and the infrastructure that would otherwise support young families is not doing so well. The government schools are a scandal, and with smaller families over generations there are fewer resources for young families to rely upon.
(Full disclosure: I'm married and childless.)
Hmmmmmm....I don't know if that's true. Seems to me like the feminist marching orders are being rejected wholesale.
The second article was about the declining numbers of children in San Francisco schools. Once again, the question of why there aren't children in San Francisco wasn't addressed. The problem that the article discussed was how to avoid laying off teachers when they weren't needed anymore. According to what I can find, demographically, around 15% of San Francisco residents are 19 or under, whereas a sampling of other cities shows a 25-30% 19 or under demographic. The solution for the San Francisco Unified District was to close schools, but absorb all the faculty and staff into other facilities, so they wouldn't lose their jobs. In neither of the articles was there an indication that the absence of children itself was a matter for concern.
Interesting that things began to change after the 70's. It wasn't called the "ME" generation for nothing.
The bottom line is that a LOT of people just are not appropriate for having and raising children. Many reasons.
However, society needs "concepts" for people like that. Labels that people can wear proudly that say they are not part of the child and family part of society--that they have another role that does not involve marriage and children.
Not "old maid" or "otaku", but something respectful.
As example in China is the old tradition of the "Amah", a woman who is not going to get married and have children, who instead lives with a non-related family as a combination assistant and nursemaid. They pay her room, board and a stipend, and treat her like a "maiden aunt" living with them. Only some were lesbians, most were just "extra females" whose families could not afford dowry, but were not debased, like prostitutes.
People who are not part of marriage and children can then get out of the way of those that want marriage and children, instead of competing with them because they don't know what to do otherwise. It is frustrating for men and women who want to get married to date someone who doesn't, waiting for weeks or months before they mention it.
On top of everything else, a LOT of people who shouldn't get married with intent to have children want to, anyway. Often times they just can't stand the *stigma* of not being on the marriage/children track. And yet this programming often leads to disaster both for them, those they marry then divorce, and any children they make but didn't want.
Social systems like family, churches, doctors and counselors need to step in and encourage people they don't think should marry, *not* to. Such advice has been condemned for many years in our culture, and it shouldn't be. Romantic notions such as "love conquers all" have caused immense pain and suffering. Especially when you are young and dumb, you need advice on what works and what doesn't.
In past, even arranged marriages offered more stability than just "leaving it up to the kids." At least you would have *something* in common with your spouse, not just mutual lust.
We should be amazed that *anybody* can meet a mate and get happily married at all, just on their own. Would you tell a teenager to just take all his money, and spend some of it on a car without asking anybody, even a mechanic, about it?
In the US, except maybe in Utah run by the LDS church, are there any chaperoned social events where polite young men and women can meet, converse, socialize, and practice their manners with each other? Say from ages 16-25, if not all together.
And if they do get together, get married and want to have children, look how hard it is. Two entry level jobs and an apartment, it could take 10 years to get to the combined salary of $40k they would need to pay a mortgage on a house.
So there are social changes that are need both for non-children people and child-bearing people. Not more government, but new societal paradigms. To teach children that not everybody will or should have children themselves, and that there are other things to do in their lives if they don't have children. And also to make things as easy as possible for people who want children to have them, even to the point of subsidizing those that are really good at it.
*8-- In addition, a growing number of women are not having any children. In 2004, almost one out of five women in their early forties was childless. In 1976, it was only one out of ten.**
A good trend.
Will some copy-editor please tell this writer the difference between "less" and fewer"...?
Increased harassment of families with children by social services plays its role too.
"Families" without children? Hmmm... I could buy "couples" sans offspring, but it was the child that made the couple a "family".
The headline writer is illiterate.
No wonder the left is terrified of homeschooling. No indoctrination = few liberals. Guess they better pull out the stops on immigration amnesty, because that is their only shot at being a political force forty years from now.