2 ms·

> normalizing divorce Because of progressive/feminist legislative activism. Feminists have been advocating for no-fault divorce since at least the 1950s. The N

> normalizing divorce Because of progressive/feminist legislative activism. Feminists have been advocating for no-fault divorce since at least the 1950s. The National Association of Women Lawyers were advocating for it during that decade [0]. > stripping support to those without means, and not funding childcare and education Because single mothers and people on welfare have been derided as "welfare queens" and similar since the 1980s, when America elected Reagan and went all-in on free trade, deregulation, and defunding government services. It isn't that specific one party or organization is attempting to reduce the birth rate. > Under a rational system the State would [...] In a democracy, the state isn't very rational. Whoever controls the government has different visions for what the interests of the state are. [0]: https://www.jstor.org/stable/26564622?seq=5 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26564622?seq=5

ein0p 3y ago
I agree with your points. Where does that leave the Western societies, though? Maybe a change in the course should be contemplated? There are several particularly insidious factors at play here as well. Unlike after the war, single-income family is downright crazy in 2024 for most people, so both parents have to work. Childcare is shitty and completely unaffordable. It's also multiplicative by the number of kids. 3 kids? That'll be $4500 a month just for childcare where I live, thank you very much. Few "normal" people outside this site can afford such an outlay. With a family, one of the parents can at least stay home and rear the kids, with another maybe also having a part-time job. After divorce? Forget about it. And finally, this bomb is also wired with a hard biological clock - women tend to lose their fertility in their 40s. Instead we just plug our ears and pretend these are not problems that have a long term bearing on society, somehow. Not a very adult position to take, IMO.

ein0p 3y ago

I agree with your points. Where does that leave the Western societies, though? Maybe a change in the course should be contemplated? There are several particularly insidious factors at play here as well. Unlike after the war, single-income family is downright crazy in 2024 for most people, so both parents have to work. Childcare is shitty and completely unaffordable. It's also multiplicative by the number of kids. 3 kids? That'll be $4500 a month just for childcare where I live, thank you very much. Few "normal" people outside this site can afford such an outlay. With a family, one of the parents can at least stay home and rear the kids, with another maybe also having a part-time job. After divorce? Forget about it. And finally, this bomb is also wired with a hard biological clock - women tend to lose their fertility in their 40s. Instead we just plug our ears and pretend these are not problems that have a long term bearing on society, somehow. Not a very adult position to take, IMO.