Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Emasculation = Population Collapse
When men stop being men, and women, women, people stop procreating. Civilizational collapse ensues. We are seeing both the cause and the effect across the “Civilized” World.
Is this merely correlation?
I am pretty sure the association is causal. After all, men are attracted to conventionally feminine women. And women are attracted to conventionally masculine men. Less attraction = less nooky. Which in turn leads to fewer babies.
I am aware, of course, of the other factors — societal acceptance of the uncoupling of sex from committed relationships; all forms of birth control; the wealth effect; the narcissism that leads to an unwillingness to invest in a spouse or children, etc. Yet I posit that the ungendering of people remains a leading cause of the accelerating population freefall. Ungendered people are simply not attractive.
Published in General
Maybe none of us alive now will see it, but if you have a total fertility rate of less than 2, that means a declining population eventually, inevitably. And it can get to a point where most women are past their childbearing years without having children, leaving it to the much fewer who still can have children to have a lot of them if there’s a hope to correct the problem. If they don’t/won’t/can’t, that’s when the “all at once” really kicks in.
The population of the United States is projected to increase, not decrease, over the next 80 years because the United States is among the top destinations for immigrants.
This will happen even as the world population increases from just under 8 billion people to just over 11 billion people by 2100.
Japan is in a much more difficult position not only because the birth rate in Japan is lower than in the USA, but also because Japan does not allow much immigration to offset its low birth rate.
I’m not sure how much confidence in those projections is justified. Do they take into account what appears to be a falling birthate over the past several years, and perhaps getting even worse?
Birth rates, immigration and life expectancy would be the key inputs into any population projection.
The United States naturalizes about 500,000 to 1 million people each year. So, over a 10 year period the United States likely adds about 5 to 10 million people just through immigration.
Good thing those people are inherently fungible.
Some, I assume, are good people.
You know how many there are going to be in fifty years time, how many are going to be good people?
We haven’t had a great percentage of people born here being “good people” over the past few decades. Why assume the immigrants will be worse?
It is interesting how people can be so sure that they know the future.
The average age of women in many countries is at or above the end of child-bearing years. Japan and Korea and much of Western Europe are imploding.
Here is a study that says the peak will be in 2064, followed by very steep declines.
If anything these trends are accelerating:
None of these are part of the UN projections.
If current trends continue stats are cool looking, but, generally speaking, current trends don’t.
Also, what’s up with the guy in Karen pose in the graphic? And will anyone still want to talk to the manager in the next century?
My point exactly. This graphic comes to radically different conclusions than the UN. But neither is likely to be actually RIGHT, because both are extrapolations.
One additional thought. Venture capitalist Katherine Boyle has suggested that remote work can make a real difference in family life; see her essays Can Zoom Save the American Family? and Can Starlink Save the American Mother?
I was reminded of Katherine’s essays by something that just showed up at LinkedIn: Remote work easing family planning?
For some reason that reminds me of a story – actually two stories, I suppose – about family medical leave or something.
When Obama was president, the NYT or some-such, was very excited about “family medical leave critical to working mothers” or the like.
Once Trump actually did it, the NYT (or whoever) was all breathless about “family medical leave harmful to working mothers.”
Reminds me that . . .
There are simple extrapolations based just on current lines, and better extrapolations based on changing trends.
I’d expect no less from Nigeria.
I expected more from the Muslims.
Not the point. I’m not trying to keep the foreigners from taking my job (they’d have to find me one first). I’m trying to say that we focus on counting noses as a question of population because we can’t measure the more important things. I don’t like assuming that if we find enough noses somewhere then everything will work out.
She neglected to mention that the game warden she had in mind is 58.
A well-presented, etc, 58-year-old can get someone younger than 35 too. Especially if she has kids from other men.
She’s very pretty.
The part that troubles me is how many of my friends’ daughters —now 30 something, like my own—are in the same boat: finally admitting to themselves (and, with increasing desperation to others) that yes, they actually do want a husband and children and a home and whatnot.
Even my own daughters felt that they had to explain themselves when they (fortunately sooner) came to the same realization, as if there was something odd about desiring that which has defined and sustained human life for millennia. As if a heterosexual, procreative pair bond was an odd and eccentric lifestyle choice rather than…you know…life.
I’ve said this before, but when my mother was sick and then when she was dying, the notion that childlessness is a perfectly reasonable choice revealed itself as kind of…nuts. The conceit (dominant in Scandinavia) is that in a generous welfare state, the aging person need not have children to ensure a comfortable and dignified senescence. The state will provide! Which is to say, the state will pay people to look after you.
Well, mom had enough money to pay people to look after her. But no one would or could have taken care of my mother in her last years/weeks/days the way my siblings and I did. Even her grandchildren provided loving assistance. We were the difference between a lonely end…and a really good, really gentle, loving death.
Yeah. I feel pretty darned good about having had
foursix (counting steps) kids now!You funny.
On more serious notes, do you think an accomplished man is going to want to move into HER house?
Would she be willing to move into HIS?
Is there a chance a man might think she’s basically looking for another accessory for her life, sort of a decoration or a fixture for the house/life she’s building on her own? Women already do that often with children, too.
Does she want to be someone’s wife, or does she want a husband?
All good questions! No idea about the answers. I do know that my own daughters seem to be very devoted to their husbands, who deserve it. And my sons adore their wives. And I get grandkids out of the deal (another one born last night! Hurrah!) so I’m very happy.
Kind of buried the lead there, GrannyDude.
Congrats!
Overnight delivery usually costs extra.
It’s a girl!
Zee already told you zir’s pronouns? That was fast.
Not only is it a girl, it’s a girl who already knows it wants to be a boy!