I love babies. I have three of my own and I have worked as an L&D nurse for 8 years, helping usher in hundreds more. But no, when you say there is a population replacement problem... I feel relief and not a wrinkle of concern. Relief for earth and relief for the other species that are trying to inhabit this planet that we take for granted. We can not sustain these populations. So an decline just may be due, and maybe that is what most other people also feel. Yes, we will see the repercussions of an aging population and the smaller workforce. Technology may help replace some do these problems, albeit with its own limitations and repercussions - but I think I would rather face that problem than our continued unchecked pillaging of the planet and it’s resources.
Anya, I could go on and on praising you for your commentaries today. It is quite clear to me that someday you will be writing about the collapse of America. Unfortunately, it will be parroted in dime store publications. The lessons that have been learned in the history of humans that you bring to the table, are primarily ignored.
I think that all good civilizations perish because they do not address all the people. Primarily the lower class is ignored. From that class, many are just victims of their parenthood or lack thereof, They are also victims of whatever the government gives them. Most of us are just that. Freedom?
No different that victims of earthquakes, floods, fire etc., that you clearly pointed out. Thank you again for the light you shine.
Anya, first impression was you're subconsciously wanting another child. But then I continued reading.
If we are now anti-human it's because larger numbers of the younger generations are unsure about the state of the world, but more so unsure of themselves. They're soft, not like the survivalist of prior generations of antiquity.
As someone you is raising young adults, I can attest whole-heartedly to *being unsure of one's self* as being an issue. It is quite frightening. It seems like so many young people do not know how to interact with each other in honest and open ways. And I think with everything lasting forever on the internet and the dangers of cancellation (i.e. no forgiveness or charity practiced in most spaces publicly or privately) many people have a right to be scared. To be on the outside of a community feels like death. No wonder anxiety and depression rates are so high.
It's so horrifying. I've spoken to professors who have told me that the kids in their classes are so scared... of each other. That they are worried someone will tweet what they say (no doubt out of context) before they even leave the room...
Interestingly you touch on the causal at the heart of the problem, social media's overexposure as an inclusive community when it's nothing more than mobs crowded into mythical and whimsical town squares, all trying for attention or recognition from the host of strangers. Those are not the types of communities we should strive to join. It should be face-to-face not FaceTime.
Ha ha! I know it's ironic that I'm in the 'one and done' category (though near death during child birth will do that...) but I think you make a very interesting point - because no doubt the situation in Africa is more uncertain than the comforts of many of the developed countries - I think the uncertainty of the individuals is a good insight.
The survivalist of 'Near-Death', of any kind, will change that person's perspectives on lots of things. Doesn't mean we can't dream of what would have been otherwise, that's just being human.
All I know is I’ve had my replacements and 2 is quite enough, thanks!
My $0.02 - I think that advances in medicine and birth control/reproduction that led to drastic reductions in infant and child mortality have enabled cultural shifts whereby far more investment per child is the norm. More expensive kids who tend to survive into adulthood encourages parents to have fewer.
More education for girls and young women is part of the same trend, gives more employment opportunity, lowers incidence of dangerously early and out-of-wedlock pregnancies, and normally results in smaller families with higher incomes. This is why UNICEF prioritizes childhood education especially for girls and the raison d’etre of Boko Harem, trying to keep their girls in the dark.
Completely agree - I wonder also how this focus on only one or two children (with no spares so to speak) changes our parenting style? The helicopter and what not... and what the long term effects of that will be?
I think that parenting styles are changing and expectations of parents are changing... and not really for the better in the US. I know people who have had police called on their children for playing unattended on their non-busy street. If a parent is not *seen* then it is negligence. For those who have resources to travel and give their children excellent educations (by private education or living in well funded districts) their children will be ahead of the game. I think this gap in educational access will cause more economic disparities, as seems to be the trend now. I have heard that more women are getting higher levels of education than men in the West. This is also an interesting phenomenon. Men do not typically like getting married to women who earn more or who are more successful than they are. This may lead to fewer parenting partners (whether married or unmarried). The more single children-families there are in a society could also have some other interesting societal issues as then you have fewer young adults who are used to interacting platonically with the opposite sex. I was reading substack somewhere that talked about the ripple effects of this when it comes to marriage and raising kids. I will have to find it.
Yes - please do! I think it is an interesting and important topic... It's incredible to see so many changes happening so rapidly... I think even of the breakdown of community within a few generations is astonishing. (Putnam's Bowling Alone was such a good summary of that and it is already dated 20 years!)
Please look up the research on rats that are put into an environment where they are given everything a rat could possibly want with no effort. No struggle. They all, in every experiment, invariably self destructed as a group. Homosexuality ran rampant. Birth rates decreased exponentially. Laziness, lack of purpose, ennui, depression ruled. Even suicide, aggression, violations of “polite rat society’s norms” increased.
Sound familiar?
I know, I know, “We’re not rats”. Is being from primate stock so much superior? Look into experiments with them. You’ll find much the same.
Humans throughout history have had to struggle and pursue a sometimes impossible dream.
When they are controlled, given things with no effort, seldom forced to face the consequences of their actions, never forced to cooperate for a common goal, allowed and encouraged to self-isolate, etc: you get a predictable result. Population reduction, without bloodshed or force. A self correcting system of cause and effect that will continue until times get hard enough that people really WANT to live and propagate. Or not.
From a sociologist, psychologist, engineer, programmer “polymath “.
Yes, I have seen those experiments - and it is interesting since the birth rate is falling fastest in richer countries. Makes me think of Nietzsche's Last Man...
By the natural slowing of reproduction (historically, it was unheard of for humans to choose not to give birth), by war (competition for space and resources), and disease (nature’s way of culling), humanity’s expansion seems to be slowing, possibly stopping even now, and maybe it will reverse.
It’s the way of nature. We shouldn’t worry about it.
The downgrading of women’s role as bearer of children seems to have been seeping into our culture for some time. There must be a pregnant revelation in the inability of a clever Supreme Court aspirant to be unable to define what a woman is.
The Prince of this World has 2 defining characteristics: It is anti-God and therefore anti-human. The fertility gods did not exist to promote the nuclear family and a healthy society. Quite the contrary. Read Jonathan Cahn’s The Return of the Gods.
A very good question that I have been contemplating lately. We are social animals as per Aristotle. And the family is the first social order. The fabric includes man, woman and children. We have been given an alternative ever since the acceptance of contraception and the ensuing emancipation of women. Early in the debate regarding contraception, it seemed only sensible to give freedom to women. In fact it was the men who gained freedom. Now we had freedom to separate sex from affection, for both sexes. Sure there have always been womanizers, but, as you have shown, there has mostly been a respect, if not adoration, of women.
The separation of sex from its natural place as family maker has separated the natural man/woman relationship. And now, the evolution seems to have generalized to full and contradictory individual rights at the expense of the all natural interpersonal relationships, particularly the family. We, with alittle defiance of nature through contraception, have come to a point where we think we can defy our own human nature. Am I wrong?
I commented before that I think the answer lies in a revival of the Classics. Thank you for your efforts and those of schools like St. Jeromes Academy and Institute in Hyattsville MD for helping the cause.
I have tracked these trends for decades, and I have contributed three (adult) children to the 8 billion on the planet, but the fact is that there is too much humanity, I believe. The Earth can't survive the exponential growth of any species, particularly one as destructive as Homo Sapiens. Reduced populations will eventually lead to balance in the natural and (one would hope) economic and moral worlds.
I love babies. I have three of my own and I have worked as an L&D nurse for 8 years, helping usher in hundreds more. But no, when you say there is a population replacement problem... I feel relief and not a wrinkle of concern. Relief for earth and relief for the other species that are trying to inhabit this planet that we take for granted. We can not sustain these populations. So an decline just may be due, and maybe that is what most other people also feel. Yes, we will see the repercussions of an aging population and the smaller workforce. Technology may help replace some do these problems, albeit with its own limitations and repercussions - but I think I would rather face that problem than our continued unchecked pillaging of the planet and it’s resources.
Anya, I could go on and on praising you for your commentaries today. It is quite clear to me that someday you will be writing about the collapse of America. Unfortunately, it will be parroted in dime store publications. The lessons that have been learned in the history of humans that you bring to the table, are primarily ignored.
I think that all good civilizations perish because they do not address all the people. Primarily the lower class is ignored. From that class, many are just victims of their parenthood or lack thereof, They are also victims of whatever the government gives them. Most of us are just that. Freedom?
No different that victims of earthquakes, floods, fire etc., that you clearly pointed out. Thank you again for the light you shine.
Anya, first impression was you're subconsciously wanting another child. But then I continued reading.
If we are now anti-human it's because larger numbers of the younger generations are unsure about the state of the world, but more so unsure of themselves. They're soft, not like the survivalist of prior generations of antiquity.
As someone you is raising young adults, I can attest whole-heartedly to *being unsure of one's self* as being an issue. It is quite frightening. It seems like so many young people do not know how to interact with each other in honest and open ways. And I think with everything lasting forever on the internet and the dangers of cancellation (i.e. no forgiveness or charity practiced in most spaces publicly or privately) many people have a right to be scared. To be on the outside of a community feels like death. No wonder anxiety and depression rates are so high.
It's so horrifying. I've spoken to professors who have told me that the kids in their classes are so scared... of each other. That they are worried someone will tweet what they say (no doubt out of context) before they even leave the room...
Interestingly you touch on the causal at the heart of the problem, social media's overexposure as an inclusive community when it's nothing more than mobs crowded into mythical and whimsical town squares, all trying for attention or recognition from the host of strangers. Those are not the types of communities we should strive to join. It should be face-to-face not FaceTime.
Ha ha! I know it's ironic that I'm in the 'one and done' category (though near death during child birth will do that...) but I think you make a very interesting point - because no doubt the situation in Africa is more uncertain than the comforts of many of the developed countries - I think the uncertainty of the individuals is a good insight.
The survivalist of 'Near-Death', of any kind, will change that person's perspectives on lots of things. Doesn't mean we can't dream of what would have been otherwise, that's just being human.
Very true! Personally, I'm just extremely grateful for what I have!
All I know is I’ve had my replacements and 2 is quite enough, thanks!
My $0.02 - I think that advances in medicine and birth control/reproduction that led to drastic reductions in infant and child mortality have enabled cultural shifts whereby far more investment per child is the norm. More expensive kids who tend to survive into adulthood encourages parents to have fewer.
More education for girls and young women is part of the same trend, gives more employment opportunity, lowers incidence of dangerously early and out-of-wedlock pregnancies, and normally results in smaller families with higher incomes. This is why UNICEF prioritizes childhood education especially for girls and the raison d’etre of Boko Harem, trying to keep their girls in the dark.
Completely agree - I wonder also how this focus on only one or two children (with no spares so to speak) changes our parenting style? The helicopter and what not... and what the long term effects of that will be?
I think that parenting styles are changing and expectations of parents are changing... and not really for the better in the US. I know people who have had police called on their children for playing unattended on their non-busy street. If a parent is not *seen* then it is negligence. For those who have resources to travel and give their children excellent educations (by private education or living in well funded districts) their children will be ahead of the game. I think this gap in educational access will cause more economic disparities, as seems to be the trend now. I have heard that more women are getting higher levels of education than men in the West. This is also an interesting phenomenon. Men do not typically like getting married to women who earn more or who are more successful than they are. This may lead to fewer parenting partners (whether married or unmarried). The more single children-families there are in a society could also have some other interesting societal issues as then you have fewer young adults who are used to interacting platonically with the opposite sex. I was reading substack somewhere that talked about the ripple effects of this when it comes to marriage and raising kids. I will have to find it.
Yes - please do! I think it is an interesting and important topic... It's incredible to see so many changes happening so rapidly... I think even of the breakdown of community within a few generations is astonishing. (Putnam's Bowling Alone was such a good summary of that and it is already dated 20 years!)
I think this is what I was thinking of, but I think there are other posts that I have read here with other angles:
https://jamesrichardson.substack.com/p/how-the-rise-of-small-families-set
That was a very fascinating article! I hadn't considered the issue of siblings... but it makes A LOT of sense..
Anya,
Please look up the research on rats that are put into an environment where they are given everything a rat could possibly want with no effort. No struggle. They all, in every experiment, invariably self destructed as a group. Homosexuality ran rampant. Birth rates decreased exponentially. Laziness, lack of purpose, ennui, depression ruled. Even suicide, aggression, violations of “polite rat society’s norms” increased.
Sound familiar?
I know, I know, “We’re not rats”. Is being from primate stock so much superior? Look into experiments with them. You’ll find much the same.
Humans throughout history have had to struggle and pursue a sometimes impossible dream.
When they are controlled, given things with no effort, seldom forced to face the consequences of their actions, never forced to cooperate for a common goal, allowed and encouraged to self-isolate, etc: you get a predictable result. Population reduction, without bloodshed or force. A self correcting system of cause and effect that will continue until times get hard enough that people really WANT to live and propagate. Or not.
From a sociologist, psychologist, engineer, programmer “polymath “.
Yes, I have seen those experiments - and it is interesting since the birth rate is falling fastest in richer countries. Makes me think of Nietzsche's Last Man...
“Are we now anti-human?” No! Are we approaching “peak people”? Probably. Nothing grows and grows for ever.
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY
By the natural slowing of reproduction (historically, it was unheard of for humans to choose not to give birth), by war (competition for space and resources), and disease (nature’s way of culling), humanity’s expansion seems to be slowing, possibly stopping even now, and maybe it will reverse.
It’s the way of nature. We shouldn’t worry about it.
The downgrading of women’s role as bearer of children seems to have been seeping into our culture for some time. There must be a pregnant revelation in the inability of a clever Supreme Court aspirant to be unable to define what a woman is.
The Prince of this World has 2 defining characteristics: It is anti-God and therefore anti-human. The fertility gods did not exist to promote the nuclear family and a healthy society. Quite the contrary. Read Jonathan Cahn’s The Return of the Gods.
A very good question that I have been contemplating lately. We are social animals as per Aristotle. And the family is the first social order. The fabric includes man, woman and children. We have been given an alternative ever since the acceptance of contraception and the ensuing emancipation of women. Early in the debate regarding contraception, it seemed only sensible to give freedom to women. In fact it was the men who gained freedom. Now we had freedom to separate sex from affection, for both sexes. Sure there have always been womanizers, but, as you have shown, there has mostly been a respect, if not adoration, of women.
The separation of sex from its natural place as family maker has separated the natural man/woman relationship. And now, the evolution seems to have generalized to full and contradictory individual rights at the expense of the all natural interpersonal relationships, particularly the family. We, with alittle defiance of nature through contraception, have come to a point where we think we can defy our own human nature. Am I wrong?
I commented before that I think the answer lies in a revival of the Classics. Thank you for your efforts and those of schools like St. Jeromes Academy and Institute in Hyattsville MD for helping the cause.
I have tracked these trends for decades, and I have contributed three (adult) children to the 8 billion on the planet, but the fact is that there is too much humanity, I believe. The Earth can't survive the exponential growth of any species, particularly one as destructive as Homo Sapiens. Reduced populations will eventually lead to balance in the natural and (one would hope) economic and moral worlds.