3 ms·

"People still have insane fertility rates in complete - objectively shitholes - like Bangladesh, etc." Here is the fertility rate in Bangladesh: https://www.ma

• Johanx64 8mo ago
  I stand corrected, it doesn't have "insane fertility rate". That's still a high fertility rate for a country with stats like this: https://www.globalhungerindex.org/bangladesh.html https://www.globalhungerindex.org/bangladesh.html > 25.1% of children under five are stunted, 10.7% of children under five are wasted And the country had even higher fertility rates when it had higher frequency of famines, and much higher rates of hunger and malnourishment. The point i was making however, is that parents don't truly - at a deeper level - consider the quality of life they are subjecting their child to. Natural selection doesn't maximize for quality of life (it doesn't care for it), it selects for procreation and survival.
  • dalyons 8mo ago
    i think those stats show the opposite. They had higher fertility rate when things were worse, but women mostly didnt have a choice. Now they're better but still bad, and women do have a choice - so they are choosing not to, judging by the collapsed birth rate.