3 ms·

I won't argue against that, it is certainly true, but I think my point still stands that it was beneficial to have more children even if it was not always a con

by danbruc 11y ago

I won't argue against that, it is certainly true, but I think my point still stands that it was beneficial to have more children even if it was not always a concessions decision because of the lack of birth control.

Mz 11y ago
Everything I have ever read suggests that birth control and limiting the number of children you have improves quality of life. Having scads of kids is generally the mark of a culture that a) either has no means to prevent conception (and people are screwing anyway) or b) has very high child mortality rates because the culture as a whole is poor, uneducated, lacks infrastructure, etc. Across the globe, as child mortality rates go down, birth rates fall following the fall of death rates. From what I have read, this is statistically consistent. If there is anything "selfish" going on, it is "sex feels good, so I am going to get laid, and the consequences be damned." I have met damn few people who were able to have exactly as many kids as they wanted, exactly when they wanted them. The vast majority of the time, kids seem to fall into one of two categories: 1) "Oops" or 2) "We tried for this one forever."
- danbruc 11y ago
  What time frame are we talking about? The last hundred or three hundred years? The last two thousand years? The last million years?
  - Mz 11y ago
    What part of my comment are you asking about? The falling birth rates following falling death rates is a global trend in my lifetime. Limiting kids to keep you out of poverty and keep you middle class is an observation that goes back at least a few hundred years in Europe. The "most kids are a case of Oops or We tried forever" is personal observation of discussions I have had with people: Any time you get the back story, it is typically one of those situations (tbf, my second child was a case of "we skipped birth control 2 or 3 times" -- which almost felt like an Oops because I was surrounded by people talking about how very long it took them to get child 2 or their latest). Does that help clarify any?

by danbruc 11y ago

Mz 11y ago

Everything I have ever read suggests that birth control and limiting the number of children you have improves quality of life. Having scads of kids is generally the mark of a culture that a) either has no means to prevent conception (and people are screwing anyway) or b) has very high child mortality rates because the culture as a whole is poor, uneducated, lacks infrastructure, etc. Across the globe, as child mortality rates go down, birth rates fall following the fall of death rates. From what I have read, this is statistically consistent. If there is anything "selfish" going on, it is "sex feels good, so I am going to get laid, and the consequences be damned." I have met damn few people who were able to have exactly as many kids as they wanted, exactly when they wanted them. The vast majority of the time, kids seem to fall into one of two categories: 1) "Oops" or 2) "We tried for this one forever."

danbruc 11y ago
What time frame are we talking about? The last hundred or three hundred years? The last two thousand years? The last million years?
- Mz 11y ago
  What part of my comment are you asking about? The falling birth rates following falling death rates is a global trend in my lifetime. Limiting kids to keep you out of poverty and keep you middle class is an observation that goes back at least a few hundred years in Europe. The "most kids are a case of Oops or We tried forever" is personal observation of discussions I have had with people: Any time you get the back story, it is typically one of those situations (tbf, my second child was a case of "we skipped birth control 2 or 3 times" -- which almost felt like an Oops because I was surrounded by people talking about how very long it took them to get child 2 or their latest). Does that help clarify any?