4 ms·

Birth rates would also improve when boys and men are educated. Both genders need education and child support programs. Men/Boys need to understand what responsi

Birth rates would also improve when boys and men are educated. Both genders need education and child support programs. Men/Boys need to understand what responsibilities they have, if they choose to have a child. They also need to understand the effects that having a child has on a woman's body. Governments around the world would benefit their society by investing in family planning, family support (esp. child care) to enable parents to work and provide for their family. An educated and healthy populace (from infant to old age) benefits everyone.

jazz9k 5mo ago
"Men/Boys need to understand what responsibilities they have, if they choose to have a child. They also need to understand the effects that having a child has on a woman's body." This will only reduce birth rates. I have two kids and it's hard. I would still have them if I knew just how hard it would be (especially during winter, when everyone is sick). There are also many men that just don't care if they have a child, what it does to a woman's body. This won't change with more education.
- Take8435 5mo ago
  So, the solution is to... not provide education? The logic doesn't make sense. You say this yourself: "I would still have them if I knew just how hard it would be" If it reduces birth rates, that's not due to education alone. That's due to a lack of investment by governments to support those families. You should know this with two kids. Any help is better than no help. Women want to work. Women want to go to school. That's what this topic is about.
  - giantg2 5mo ago
    "That's due to a lack of investment by governments to support those families." Please show the evidence for this being true. Birthrates are low even in countries that provide a lot of support.
    - acdha 5mo ago
      No country provides a lot of support. Some countries provide more but inevitably if you poll people they’ll mention that they mention significant financial deterrents, not to mention things like climate change, all of which are valid. People only need one of them to be true to decide to have fewer children, while society needs to help address all of them. For example, if your government provides housing and childcare support—and say that’s the unicorn where those are consistently available, high quality, and cover the full cost—but still culturally tends to mommy-track careers into dead ends, despite doing those other things well you are going to have a lot of women decide not to risk multiple decades of lifetime earnings.
      - giantg2 5mo ago
        "No country provides a lot of support." The evidence suggests this is not true. The rest of your comment points to non-financial issues. https://www.newsweek.com/norway-birth-rate-fertility-rate-parental-leave-childcare-2080996 https://www.newsweek.com/norway-birth-rate-fertility-rate-pa...
        acdha 5mo ago
        Yes, support does not have to be financial. If you read the entire article you posted note the experts quoted made the same point: opportunity cost is real. Career impact is real. The shift to getting educated and established in a career is real. Societies have to address many different sources of no because the only reason rates used to be higher in the past was women not having a choice.
  - traderj0e 5mo ago
    You'd be surprised how much people "want" to do something has to do with what they're told or pressured to do growing up. Ask kids why they're going to college and you'll see.
  - liveoneggs 5mo ago
    countries with high birth rates right now have government support for families?
  - filoleg 5mo ago
    > So, the solution is to... not provide education? Where did the parent comment say that? This is about as bad faith of a take as it gets. They said that providing more education is not going to help with increasing birth rates, and is likely to do the opposite. That doesn't mean that more education shouldn't be provided. Those two things are not contradictory. Another example in the same category: increasing quality of life and wealth of the citizens is negatively correlated with birth rates. But it would be extremely silly to suggest that someone stating that actually means "we should not be increasing our quality of life and wealth."
    - Take8435 5mo ago
      > Where did the parent comment say that? This is about as bad faith of a take as it gets. I'm asking a question. It's not a bad faith take. How else should I reply to it? Just accept it and move on? I don't agree and want to know more (from the OP, not from you, by the way) Parent comment talked about having kids. Guess what, I have kids. My opinion matters too.
bhagyeshsp 5mo ago
This is almost the opposite of what happens. The more educated/developed a nation, the lesser their birth rate is going to be. I understand the "shoulds" but that's not what the data suggests. In essence, we can't have the pie and at the same time eat it. The most useful thing education does for children is reduce child-mortality rate.[1] Sources: https://raphael-godefroy.github.io/pdfs/mali_final.pdf https://raphael-godefroy.github.io/pdfs/mali_final.pdf [1] https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503923 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503923
- Take8435 5mo ago
  This is misleading. Education is not the panacea. I am saying it's a "whole of family" approach. Governments need to also provide more support to families. This is clear to any parent.
  - bhagyeshsp 5mo ago
    Let us take your previous comment as the basis > Birth rates would also improve when boys and men are educated. There is no evidence of this being true. This is certainly a narrative peddled by many ideologues. > Both genders need education and child support programs. Poorest of poor and illiterate people happen to have more children than the rest. > Men/Boys need to understand what responsibilities they have, if they choose to have a child. If men are educated on responsibilities of alimony and child support, with almost no rights, they would neither marry nor have legitimate children. > They also need to understand the effects that having a child has on a woman's body. This maybe your personal dream and that's fine. But this has nothing to do with the topic at hand. > Governments around the world would benefit their society by investing in family planning, family support (esp. child care) to enable parents to work and provide for their family. Family-planning is euphemism for reducing children per woman. There's no benefit of having less children -> leading to less economic activity in the future. The family support you keep touting about is moot point. Government does not have their own money. People pay taxes which are used by government. > An educated and healthy populace (from infant to old age) benefits everyone. Agreed on this point. The definition of benefits are subjective but overall, it is agreed that it is a net positive.
AdrianB1 5mo ago
> They also need to understand the effects that having a child has on a woman's body. I thought they were built for that. For tens of thousands of years women had on average 7 children or more, it looks like the process is very reliable. These days birth-giving mortality is very close to zero, also post-birth care is quite good, so we are in a better place than ever and still concerned?
- Qem 5mo ago
  > These days birth-giving mortality is very close to zero, also post-birth care is quite good Also reliable and affordable DNA testing makes much easier collecting pensions from fathers that before would just vanish, or outright deny paternity. An underrated breakthrough in women and children rights enforcement.
- stackskipton 5mo ago
  Historically, women started having children around 16-18 years old so that 7 was much easier. Societally, almost everyone would argue we shouldn't encourage women to have kids that young.
  - habinero 5mo ago
    That doesn't seem to be broadly true. For example, in Tudor England, women generally got married in their early 20s and men on their late 20s. People absolutely knew pregnancy was dangerous for girls who weren't full grown.
    - stackskipton 5mo ago
      It's varied throughout history obviously but if you look at average marriage age now, it's still in low 20s in many places.
- lotsofpulp 5mo ago
  Read this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/1t6akt4/idk_where_the_girl_is_with_the_list_but_my_baby/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/1t6akt4/id... Just because women used to birth 7 kids with high morbidity and mortality rates does not mean they wanted to.
traderj0e 5mo ago
More educated men have fewer children on average, but it's less of a difference than with women. It could even just be because they're marrying educated women.
neofrog 5mo ago
If men/boys truly understand the current situation, they wouldn't want to marry nor have children at all. Legal system is essentially rigged against them. Paternal scams, alimony/divorce laws all are essentially designed to protect women at all times with no regard to the concerns of males.
- watwut 5mo ago
  Men do financially better off after divorce. They report higher loneliness, but then tend to find new partner sooner. Women get poorer in divorce. They report higher hapiness after divorce and tend to stay single longer. And also, women file for divorce more often.
  - aetherspawn 5mo ago
    Yeah that’s just because there are more narcissist men than women. Maybe maternal instinct slightly offsets narcissism or something. The narcissist partner never wants to leave, but the victim wants out as soon as they can afford to do it. How do you tackle narcissism as a problem when virtually everything (internet, social media, celebrities, politics) prolifically promotes a narcissistic way of life as a successful one?
    - Take8435 5mo ago
      > How do you tackle narcissism as a problem when virtually everything (internet, social media, celebrities, politics) prolifically promotes a narcissistic way of life as a successful one? This is what a government and/or society need to figure out. But no one really wants to ask or deal with those hard questions which is why the proverbial can keeps getting kicked down the road.
- deleted 5mo ago
  [deleted]
lelanthran 5mo ago
> Birth rates would also improve when boys and men are educated. Both genders need education and child support programs. Men/Boys need to understand what responsibilities they have, if they choose to have a child. How are you defining "improve"? Is it "increase" or "decrease"? I feel that informing males beforehand about the responsibilities of fatherhood would decrease the birth rate. Maybe you consider that an improvement? Many people in this thread consider increasing the birth rate an improvement.
- Take8435 5mo ago
  I want to know, "I feel that informing males beforehand about the responsibilities of fatherhood would decrease the birth rate", why do you feel this way? Increased responsibilities should only fall on the mother? Please explain your rationale. If I misunderstand, please explain.
  - y-curious 5mo ago
    Not the person you’re writing to, but a lot of our birth rate was propped up by unplanned, unmarried pregnancies pre-2000. There is a large subsection of men that simply never want to have children, but will step up and father them due to societal pressure. It’s like the military draft: many people that don’t want to be soldiers end up being adequate soldiers when the rubber meets the road.
  - lelanthran 5mo ago
    > I want to know, "I feel that informing males beforehand about the responsibilities of fatherhood would decrease the birth rate", why do you feel this way? Because telling someone "$FOO comes with all these responsbilities which you did not know about" can only decrease their desire for $FOO, whether $FOO is "becoming a father" or "becoming a beekeeper". > Increased responsibilities should only fall on the mother? Which part of my post addressed allocation of responsibilities? My post deals with awareness of responsibilities, not with the actual allocation of responsibilities. And it's not just with pregnancies, or with men; it's with everything and both sexes - giving people mandatory obligations for anything is going to reduce their desire for that thing.
saltyoldman 5mo ago
Does this increase in birth rate happen before or after the various classes teach you to switch genders? I imagine maybe when you get into your phd level classes, it starts going up again, but definitely a big dip in highschool and undergrad college.

jazz9k 5mo ago

"Men/Boys need to understand what responsibilities they have, if they choose to have a child. They also need to understand the effects that having a child has on a woman's body." This will only reduce birth rates. I have two kids and it's hard. I would still have them if I knew just how hard it would be (especially during winter, when everyone is sick). There are also many men that just don't care if they have a child, what it does to a woman's body. This won't change with more education.

Take8435 5mo ago
So, the solution is to... not provide education? The logic doesn't make sense. You say this yourself: "I would still have them if I knew just how hard it would be" If it reduces birth rates, that's not due to education alone. That's due to a lack of investment by governments to support those families. You should know this with two kids. Any help is better than no help. Women want to work. Women want to go to school. That's what this topic is about.
- giantg2 5mo ago
  "That's due to a lack of investment by governments to support those families." Please show the evidence for this being true. Birthrates are low even in countries that provide a lot of support.
  - acdha 5mo ago
    No country provides a lot of support. Some countries provide more but inevitably if you poll people they’ll mention that they mention significant financial deterrents, not to mention things like climate change, all of which are valid. People only need one of them to be true to decide to have fewer children, while society needs to help address all of them. For example, if your government provides housing and childcare support—and say that’s the unicorn where those are consistently available, high quality, and cover the full cost—but still culturally tends to mommy-track careers into dead ends, despite doing those other things well you are going to have a lot of women decide not to risk multiple decades of lifetime earnings.
    - giantg2 5mo ago
      "No country provides a lot of support." The evidence suggests this is not true. The rest of your comment points to non-financial issues. https://www.newsweek.com/norway-birth-rate-fertility-rate-parental-leave-childcare-2080996 https://www.newsweek.com/norway-birth-rate-fertility-rate-pa...
      - acdha 5mo ago
        Yes, support does not have to be financial. If you read the entire article you posted note the experts quoted made the same point: opportunity cost is real. Career impact is real. The shift to getting educated and established in a career is real. Societies have to address many different sources of no because the only reason rates used to be higher in the past was women not having a choice.
- traderj0e 5mo ago
  You'd be surprised how much people "want" to do something has to do with what they're told or pressured to do growing up. Ask kids why they're going to college and you'll see.
- liveoneggs 5mo ago
  countries with high birth rates right now have government support for families?
- filoleg 5mo ago
  > So, the solution is to... not provide education? Where did the parent comment say that? This is about as bad faith of a take as it gets. They said that providing more education is not going to help with increasing birth rates, and is likely to do the opposite. That doesn't mean that more education shouldn't be provided. Those two things are not contradictory. Another example in the same category: increasing quality of life and wealth of the citizens is negatively correlated with birth rates. But it would be extremely silly to suggest that someone stating that actually means "we should not be increasing our quality of life and wealth."
  - Take8435 5mo ago
    > Where did the parent comment say that? This is about as bad faith of a take as it gets. I'm asking a question. It's not a bad faith take. How else should I reply to it? Just accept it and move on? I don't agree and want to know more (from the OP, not from you, by the way) Parent comment talked about having kids. Guess what, I have kids. My opinion matters too.

bhagyeshsp 5mo ago

This is almost the opposite of what happens. The more educated/developed a nation, the lesser their birth rate is going to be. I understand the "shoulds" but that's not what the data suggests. In essence, we can't have the pie and at the same time eat it. The most useful thing education does for children is reduce child-mortality rate.[1] Sources: https://raphael-godefroy.github.io/pdfs/mali_final.pdf https://raphael-godefroy.github.io/pdfs/mali_final.pdf [1] https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503923 https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503923

Take8435 5mo ago
This is misleading. Education is not the panacea. I am saying it's a "whole of family" approach. Governments need to also provide more support to families. This is clear to any parent.
- bhagyeshsp 5mo ago
  Let us take your previous comment as the basis > Birth rates would also improve when boys and men are educated. There is no evidence of this being true. This is certainly a narrative peddled by many ideologues. > Both genders need education and child support programs. Poorest of poor and illiterate people happen to have more children than the rest. > Men/Boys need to understand what responsibilities they have, if they choose to have a child. If men are educated on responsibilities of alimony and child support, with almost no rights, they would neither marry nor have legitimate children. > They also need to understand the effects that having a child has on a woman's body. This maybe your personal dream and that's fine. But this has nothing to do with the topic at hand. > Governments around the world would benefit their society by investing in family planning, family support (esp. child care) to enable parents to work and provide for their family. Family-planning is euphemism for reducing children per woman. There's no benefit of having less children -> leading to less economic activity in the future. The family support you keep touting about is moot point. Government does not have their own money. People pay taxes which are used by government. > An educated and healthy populace (from infant to old age) benefits everyone. Agreed on this point. The definition of benefits are subjective but overall, it is agreed that it is a net positive.

AdrianB1 5mo ago

> They also need to understand the effects that having a child has on a woman's body. I thought they were built for that. For tens of thousands of years women had on average 7 children or more, it looks like the process is very reliable. These days birth-giving mortality is very close to zero, also post-birth care is quite good, so we are in a better place than ever and still concerned?

Qem 5mo ago
> These days birth-giving mortality is very close to zero, also post-birth care is quite good Also reliable and affordable DNA testing makes much easier collecting pensions from fathers that before would just vanish, or outright deny paternity. An underrated breakthrough in women and children rights enforcement.
stackskipton 5mo ago
Historically, women started having children around 16-18 years old so that 7 was much easier. Societally, almost everyone would argue we shouldn't encourage women to have kids that young.
- habinero 5mo ago
  That doesn't seem to be broadly true. For example, in Tudor England, women generally got married in their early 20s and men on their late 20s. People absolutely knew pregnancy was dangerous for girls who weren't full grown.
  - stackskipton 5mo ago
    It's varied throughout history obviously but if you look at average marriage age now, it's still in low 20s in many places.
lotsofpulp 5mo ago
Read this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/1t6akt4/idk_where_the_girl_is_with_the_list_but_my_baby/ https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/1t6akt4/id... Just because women used to birth 7 kids with high morbidity and mortality rates does not mean they wanted to.

traderj0e 5mo ago

More educated men have fewer children on average, but it's less of a difference than with women. It could even just be because they're marrying educated women.

neofrog 5mo ago

If men/boys truly understand the current situation, they wouldn't want to marry nor have children at all. Legal system is essentially rigged against them. Paternal scams, alimony/divorce laws all are essentially designed to protect women at all times with no regard to the concerns of males.

watwut 5mo ago
Men do financially better off after divorce. They report higher loneliness, but then tend to find new partner sooner. Women get poorer in divorce. They report higher hapiness after divorce and tend to stay single longer. And also, women file for divorce more often.
- aetherspawn 5mo ago
  Yeah that’s just because there are more narcissist men than women. Maybe maternal instinct slightly offsets narcissism or something. The narcissist partner never wants to leave, but the victim wants out as soon as they can afford to do it. How do you tackle narcissism as a problem when virtually everything (internet, social media, celebrities, politics) prolifically promotes a narcissistic way of life as a successful one?
  - Take8435 5mo ago
    > How do you tackle narcissism as a problem when virtually everything (internet, social media, celebrities, politics) prolifically promotes a narcissistic way of life as a successful one? This is what a government and/or society need to figure out. But no one really wants to ask or deal with those hard questions which is why the proverbial can keeps getting kicked down the road.
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]

lelanthran 5mo ago

> Birth rates would also improve when boys and men are educated. Both genders need education and child support programs. Men/Boys need to understand what responsibilities they have, if they choose to have a child. How are you defining "improve"? Is it "increase" or "decrease"? I feel that informing males beforehand about the responsibilities of fatherhood would decrease the birth rate. Maybe you consider that an improvement? Many people in this thread consider increasing the birth rate an improvement.

Take8435 5mo ago
I want to know, "I feel that informing males beforehand about the responsibilities of fatherhood would decrease the birth rate", why do you feel this way? Increased responsibilities should only fall on the mother? Please explain your rationale. If I misunderstand, please explain.
- y-curious 5mo ago
  Not the person you’re writing to, but a lot of our birth rate was propped up by unplanned, unmarried pregnancies pre-2000. There is a large subsection of men that simply never want to have children, but will step up and father them due to societal pressure. It’s like the military draft: many people that don’t want to be soldiers end up being adequate soldiers when the rubber meets the road.
- lelanthran 5mo ago
  > I want to know, "I feel that informing males beforehand about the responsibilities of fatherhood would decrease the birth rate", why do you feel this way? Because telling someone "$FOO comes with all these responsbilities which you did not know about" can only decrease their desire for $FOO, whether $FOO is "becoming a father" or "becoming a beekeeper". > Increased responsibilities should only fall on the mother? Which part of my post addressed allocation of responsibilities? My post deals with awareness of responsibilities, not with the actual allocation of responsibilities. And it's not just with pregnancies, or with men; it's with everything and both sexes - giving people mandatory obligations for anything is going to reduce their desire for that thing.

saltyoldman 5mo ago

Does this increase in birth rate happen before or after the various classes teach you to switch genders? I imagine maybe when you get into your phd level classes, it starts going up again, but definitely a big dip in highschool and undergrad college.