3 ms·

Two girls. 2.1 is replacement rate. Some do manage to have 2-3 kids! But many do not. And the cultures that do not push women into careers are more able to grow

Two girls. 2.1 is replacement rate. Some do manage to have 2-3 kids! But many do not. And the cultures that do not push women into careers are more able to grow their population. Is there any country on earth with a neutral or positive population growth where women are encouraged to pursue careers? As far as I know, not a single country that has a significant female career participation rate has a 2.1+ child rate per family outside of immigration.

crazydoggers 3y ago
Okay, well I did a little googling and came across this data.. it does seem having 3 or more children equates with negative effects on women being able to have a career. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517/amp https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517... But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. So takeaway should be, support our population by better supporting working mothers.
- flextheruler 3y ago
  I’d love to live in a world where I can take years off from work without consequences to my career. Let me know if you find one.
- Rapzid 3y ago
  That's a very sexist take. We should support working fathers allow them to take years off work with no consequences.
- Jensson 3y ago
  > But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. Countries that did all of those things as much as possible still fall below replacement rates, so no that isn't a sexist take that is just reality. I'm not saying we should force women to not have careers, just that the women who have careers will eventually go extinct, which is their choice and I fully support that. I don't see a reason to force people to spread their genes. Instead of forcing career women to be unhappy at home with children, the women who are happy at home with children will eventually replace them.
- giantg2 3y ago
  "So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc." A lot of these have been implemented in some European countries. They don't seem to be that effective on fertility rate given they are still below replacement.

crazydoggers 3y ago

Okay, well I did a little googling and came across this data.. it does seem having 3 or more children equates with negative effects on women being able to have a career. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517/amp https://www.huffpost.com/entry/women-three-children_n_895517... But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. So takeaway should be, support our population by better supporting working mothers.

flextheruler 3y ago
I’d love to live in a world where I can take years off from work without consequences to my career. Let me know if you find one.
Rapzid 3y ago
That's a very sexist take. We should support working fathers allow them to take years off work with no consequences.
Jensson 3y ago
> But it seems to me the issue is not that women are choosing to have careers, but that the work/career culture is not supporting women choosing to have children. So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc. Countries that did all of those things as much as possible still fall below replacement rates, so no that isn't a sexist take that is just reality. I'm not saying we should force women to not have careers, just that the women who have careers will eventually go extinct, which is their choice and I fully support that. I don't see a reason to force people to spread their genes. Instead of forcing career women to be unhappy at home with children, the women who are happy at home with children will eventually replace them.
giantg2 3y ago
"So things like better maternity and paternity leave, allowing women to take years off, or part time without consequence to career, etc." A lot of these have been implemented in some European countries. They don't seem to be that effective on fertility rate given they are still below replacement.