6 ms·

Considering Japan has a huge birth rate collapse problem, it doesn't surprise me that they are leading the way for test tube babies.

woah 3y ago
Why would that solve anything? I don’t think that anyone has any complaints about the process of conceiving a baby naturally, it’s what happens in the 18 years following
- esafak 3y ago
  I read that the Japanese aren't even having much recreational sex. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-j...
  - lo_zamoyski 3y ago
    Sex isn't recreational. But having said that, this is true of the West as well. So-called "casual sex" (again, does not exist), sleeping around, etc. is occurring at lower rates today than in the past. People are instead becoming porn-addicted shut-ins unable to have any sexual relations, let alone a healthy sexual relationship.
    - esafak 3y ago
      What do you mean? A lot of people use contraception so they can have sex without procreating. Most sex today is of this type.
    - shwaj 3y ago
      Of course sex is (also) recreational. I’m guessing you’re coming from a religious angle, so I’ll ask: is it a sin for a married woman to have sex after menopause?
    - the_af 3y ago
      > Sex isn't recreational It is, if done well. Otherwise I suppose it's just a chore or a duty?
      - bee_rider 3y ago
        Maybe there’s a competitive league but it is invite-only and they haven’t told us :(
        the_af 3y ago
        Ah, the competitive sex tournament scene! I forgot about that. It's a very challenging contact sport, for a few gifted people.
        bee_rider 3y ago
        In my head, this post was read in the voice of Matt Berry (Lazlow from What We Do in the Shadows) and it was great.
    - slothtrop 3y ago
      It's obtuse to conflate biological/gene-driven purpose with human motive.
    - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
      Is that trolling? Or did a time machine from the 1800's get invented while I wasn't looking? No, really, almost all sex today is both those things, like it or not. Semantic struggling notwithstanding.
- almatabata 3y ago
  It depends on the reasons why people do not have kids. This technique would allow gay couples to have kids for example which currently they cannot without adoption in the male case. I wonder as well how many people do not have kids because they simply cannot find a suitable partner. Maybe this will cause a further drop in the rate of marriages and partnerships. Of course the above solutions will only create a marginal increase but an increase none the same. I also think that if things get bad enough the government will intervene and create institutions where these kids would get born and educated. A very brave new world scenario but if the technology allows it, i would not put it past governments to solve their problems.
  - anon291 3y ago
    > . A very brave new world scenario but if the technology allows it, i would not put it past governments to solve their problems. This is incredibly dangerous. From an American perspective, a government exists to serve its people. That is to say... government exists at the pleasure of its citizenry. If the government started actually making the babies (i.e., its population), then this is creating a whole other entity, one which we've not really considered before. What does it mean to be a government of the people when the government is creating the people? How can a government derive its power from the people, if the people only exist because the government created them. This would be a great inversion of the liberal democracies that have been the source of our immense progress over the last few decades.
    - almatabata 3y ago
      I did not actually think that far. It would pose the question of education with the government potentially brainwashing the new born to keep the current government in power. Is it still a democracy if people have free vote but the government mass produces electorate fodder? And let us say if the old generation starts seeing the truth they might turn the production slightly higher to compensate. You can go even darker and speculate that the government might keep the life expectancy low genetically to avoid this kind of issue. Obviously it presupposes that the technology will reach that stage. I hope we will never reach the industrial scale. As long as you need a woman's body to carry the child to term you will not scale it.
- jackbravo 3y ago
  Government babies? Raised by the state, to serve the state.
yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
Is their birth rate a function of biological fertility problems?
- rawgabbit 3y ago
  It is a result of a proud tradition bound culture that is at odds with their economic reality. Most couples are barely scraping by economically. Those who want children are faced with employers who expect their employees ass in seat 12 hours a day six days a week. Childcare is difficult. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/09/10/business/japan-working-mothers-pay-gap/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/09/10/business/japan-...
  - JamesLeonis 3y ago
    To add to this, Japan is increasingly viewed as a harbinger for much of the Western world. Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34486824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34486824
  - slothtrop 3y ago
    They must not care that much, since policy changes (if not cultural shift) are barely on the table. Better work-life balance is one factor that would improve the fertility rate.
  - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
    Further, an attitude among Japanese women that their traditional role is bs and they want nothing to do with it. So, no marriage, no children. It's reasonable to say, half of Japan wants their culture to continue - the men. But they need the cooperation of the women to achieve that. But they can't achieve that, without changing their culture. So deadlock.
- dmoy 3y ago
  No, it is not really the main cause. But, GP's point could still be true - even if it's not the real underlying cause, it may be still enough to accelerate research in this area.
Barrin92 3y ago
for the overwhelming majority the issue is raising a kid, not conceiving one. And given Japan's fairly unique aversion for kids outside marriage (I think it's like 2% compared to 40% in the US or Europe), this is almost completely cultural. If you're facing the choice of not having kids or being delegated to married housewife a lot of women across East-Asia just choose to not want one. Understandable, really.
- throwawayfear 3y ago
  Nothing wrong with being a married housewife. It’s callous to write with a connotation that suggests there is. In fact the best argument is that children need and should have their mother around as much as possible especially in their formative years. Children aren’t a status symbol or a car or a pet.
  - bryanlarsen 3y ago
    Some women want to be housewives, some don't. You're reading a very strange connotation into the OP's comment.
  - iteria 3y ago
    There is something wrong with being forced to live any kind of life you don't want. If you don't want to be a housewife then being forced to be one if you have a child is objectively awful. Japanese women have spoken, they'd rather work than have children if it means being chained to a home. Honestly even Japanese men are spoken. The gender expectations around having children aren't pleasing for them either. No one likes being forced into a life they don't want. If all it takes to avoid that is not having kids it appears many in Japan can overcome biological drives and do that.
  - tenebrisalietum 3y ago
    This is from the children's point of view, and people-who-want-more-people point of view, but doesn't consider at all the person's point of view who would be making most of the sacrifices, which is the "married housewife."
  - 3y ago
throwawayfear 3y ago
If they as a culture are no longer willing or able to reproduce, this means they have had their time under the sun. This technology is evil and will lead to immense evil. It is an abomination.
- freitzkriesler2 3y ago
  Agreed
lionelholt 3y ago
Considering the gigantic problems of dwindling global resources, climate change, etc, birth rate collapse isn't a problem. It's a solution.

woah 3y ago

Why would that solve anything? I don’t think that anyone has any complaints about the process of conceiving a baby naturally, it’s what happens in the 18 years following

esafak 3y ago
I read that the Japanese aren't even having much recreational sex. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-j...
- lo_zamoyski 3y ago
  Sex isn't recreational. But having said that, this is true of the West as well. So-called "casual sex" (again, does not exist), sleeping around, etc. is occurring at lower rates today than in the past. People are instead becoming porn-addicted shut-ins unable to have any sexual relations, let alone a healthy sexual relationship.
  - esafak 3y ago
    What do you mean? A lot of people use contraception so they can have sex without procreating. Most sex today is of this type.
  - shwaj 3y ago
    Of course sex is (also) recreational. I’m guessing you’re coming from a religious angle, so I’ll ask: is it a sin for a married woman to have sex after menopause?
  - the_af 3y ago
    > Sex isn't recreational It is, if done well. Otherwise I suppose it's just a chore or a duty?
    - bee_rider 3y ago
      Maybe there’s a competitive league but it is invite-only and they haven’t told us :(
      - the_af 3y ago
        Ah, the competitive sex tournament scene! I forgot about that. It's a very challenging contact sport, for a few gifted people.
        bee_rider 3y ago
        In my head, this post was read in the voice of Matt Berry (Lazlow from What We Do in the Shadows) and it was great.
  - slothtrop 3y ago
    It's obtuse to conflate biological/gene-driven purpose with human motive.
  - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
    Is that trolling? Or did a time machine from the 1800's get invented while I wasn't looking? No, really, almost all sex today is both those things, like it or not. Semantic struggling notwithstanding.
almatabata 3y ago
It depends on the reasons why people do not have kids. This technique would allow gay couples to have kids for example which currently they cannot without adoption in the male case. I wonder as well how many people do not have kids because they simply cannot find a suitable partner. Maybe this will cause a further drop in the rate of marriages and partnerships. Of course the above solutions will only create a marginal increase but an increase none the same. I also think that if things get bad enough the government will intervene and create institutions where these kids would get born and educated. A very brave new world scenario but if the technology allows it, i would not put it past governments to solve their problems.
- anon291 3y ago
  > . A very brave new world scenario but if the technology allows it, i would not put it past governments to solve their problems. This is incredibly dangerous. From an American perspective, a government exists to serve its people. That is to say... government exists at the pleasure of its citizenry. If the government started actually making the babies (i.e., its population), then this is creating a whole other entity, one which we've not really considered before. What does it mean to be a government of the people when the government is creating the people? How can a government derive its power from the people, if the people only exist because the government created them. This would be a great inversion of the liberal democracies that have been the source of our immense progress over the last few decades.
  - almatabata 3y ago
    I did not actually think that far. It would pose the question of education with the government potentially brainwashing the new born to keep the current government in power. Is it still a democracy if people have free vote but the government mass produces electorate fodder? And let us say if the old generation starts seeing the truth they might turn the production slightly higher to compensate. You can go even darker and speculate that the government might keep the life expectancy low genetically to avoid this kind of issue. Obviously it presupposes that the technology will reach that stage. I hope we will never reach the industrial scale. As long as you need a woman's body to carry the child to term you will not scale it.
jackbravo 3y ago
Government babies? Raised by the state, to serve the state.

yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago

Is their birth rate a function of biological fertility problems?

rawgabbit 3y ago
It is a result of a proud tradition bound culture that is at odds with their economic reality. Most couples are barely scraping by economically. Those who want children are faced with employers who expect their employees ass in seat 12 hours a day six days a week. Childcare is difficult. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/09/10/business/japan-working-mothers-pay-gap/ https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/09/10/business/japan-...
- JamesLeonis 3y ago
  To add to this, Japan is increasingly viewed as a harbinger for much of the Western world. Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34486824 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34486824
- slothtrop 3y ago
  They must not care that much, since policy changes (if not cultural shift) are barely on the table. Better work-life balance is one factor that would improve the fertility rate.
- JoeAltmaier 3y ago
  Further, an attitude among Japanese women that their traditional role is bs and they want nothing to do with it. So, no marriage, no children. It's reasonable to say, half of Japan wants their culture to continue - the men. But they need the cooperation of the women to achieve that. But they can't achieve that, without changing their culture. So deadlock.
dmoy 3y ago
No, it is not really the main cause. But, GP's point could still be true - even if it's not the real underlying cause, it may be still enough to accelerate research in this area.

Barrin92 3y ago

for the overwhelming majority the issue is raising a kid, not conceiving one. And given Japan's fairly unique aversion for kids outside marriage (I think it's like 2% compared to 40% in the US or Europe), this is almost completely cultural. If you're facing the choice of not having kids or being delegated to married housewife a lot of women across East-Asia just choose to not want one. Understandable, really.

throwawayfear 3y ago
Nothing wrong with being a married housewife. It’s callous to write with a connotation that suggests there is. In fact the best argument is that children need and should have their mother around as much as possible especially in their formative years. Children aren’t a status symbol or a car or a pet.
- bryanlarsen 3y ago
  Some women want to be housewives, some don't. You're reading a very strange connotation into the OP's comment.
- iteria 3y ago
  There is something wrong with being forced to live any kind of life you don't want. If you don't want to be a housewife then being forced to be one if you have a child is objectively awful. Japanese women have spoken, they'd rather work than have children if it means being chained to a home. Honestly even Japanese men are spoken. The gender expectations around having children aren't pleasing for them either. No one likes being forced into a life they don't want. If all it takes to avoid that is not having kids it appears many in Japan can overcome biological drives and do that.
- tenebrisalietum 3y ago
  This is from the children's point of view, and people-who-want-more-people point of view, but doesn't consider at all the person's point of view who would be making most of the sacrifices, which is the "married housewife."
- 3y ago

throwawayfear 3y ago

If they as a culture are no longer willing or able to reproduce, this means they have had their time under the sun. This technology is evil and will lead to immense evil. It is an abomination.

freitzkriesler2 3y ago
Agreed

lionelholt 3y ago

Considering the gigantic problems of dwindling global resources, climate change, etc, birth rate collapse isn't a problem. It's a solution.