3 ms·
It's also the optimal age to have children. Fertility is highest, the woman is likely healthy and strong, lowest risk of complications.
by SoftTalker 8mo ago
It's also the optimal age to have children. Fertility is highest, the woman is likely healthy and strong, lowest risk of complications.
- stavros 8mo agoIt's also the optimal age to not have children! You're still figuring out your life, probably no stable partner or job, time to do some stuff you'll regret later, etc.
- delfinom 8mo agoBiological optimal vs societal optimal.
- umeshunni 8mo agoI would reframe it from > Biological optimal vs societal optimal to > Biological optimal vs personal optimal
- like_any_other 8mo ago"Societal optimal" should really include consideration of whether that society can sustain itself.
- vintermann 8mo agoSure, but should "societal optimal" be a concern for the individual? I think not. Government economists, maybe.
- like_any_other 8mo agoRejecting any care or duty towards one's own society is a very modern, very extreme viewpoint. And I don't think it bodes well for societies where it prevails.
- vintermann 8mo agoJust like every person dies, so does every society (no matter where you draw the lines around it). We can't justify what we do solely based on survival. What's worth doing has to be worth doing for its own sake, here and now. That we are around to do things in the future, doesn't matter if nothing is worth doing. Put in a catchier way, if nothing is worth dying for, then nothing is worth living for either. I think you'll find this is a very old viewpoint. As is the smear that we reject any care or duty for society. "This may seem harsh and stubborn and unconciliatory; but it is to treat with the utmost kindness and consideration the only spirit that can appreciate or deserves it."
- SoftTalker 8mo agoYes, I was only speaking biologically. "Figuring out your life" was not a thing when humans evolved.
- ml-anon 8mo agonah you're only speaking out of your ass
- wredcoll 8mo agoAside from the part where you have to raise them, sure.
- jliptzin 8mo agoIf everyone had kids at 18-20, then the grandparents could take care of the grandkids while in their 40s while the parents build their careers from 20-40, then start taking care of the grandkids as the cycle repeats
- bad_haircut72 8mo agoPeoples 40s and 50s are their most productive years. We would be better off just letting people take 10 years off in their twenties - but most people would just party party party (what they do anyway)
- znpy 8mo agoGiven two parents, there are four grandparents. Sharing the load across six people is much better than sharing between two.
- bad_haircut72 8mo agoThose four grandparents could end up with anywhere from 1-8+ grandkids though, depending on how many children they had, and how many grandchildren come along
- ml-anon 8mo agohave you heard of people not surviving into old age, or not being present or not being able to take care of kids? What the fuck is wrong with people in this comment section?
- znpy 8mo ago> have you heard of people not surviving into old age not really, overall the life expectancy is growing well over 80 years old. unless you live, like, in the woods and feed off berries and hunting or something like that. and yeah sure there might be somebody that loses their parents at 15, absolutely. i'm sorry for them, but they are not statistically representative in any way.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]