There is a crisis among women that very few have taken notice of [perhaps because the currently accepted narrative won't allow it]. It is a crisis of what is being referred to as "unplanned childlessness" and it describes women [and men] who are reaching an age where they are being shut out of having the opportunity to have a family. One cannot underestimate the psychological effect this is especially having on women who have pursued careers with the hope that eventually they could make room for a family [but have found it difficult to find an acceptable mate and/or the biological clock has run short]. The prospect of moving into one's later years [alone] is working for many of these women. Much of this has stemmed from several sources, perhaps the most important being that young women have been counseled by leadership [for six decades now] that the pursuit of a viable career is paramount to a woman's success in life. And while certainly nobody is going to argue that women should abstain from pursuing their professional goals, a balance must be struck between career and family aspirations, lest great disappointment result. Additionally, the Malthusians [see Paul Erlich's 60's classic, "The Population Bomb"] convinced everybody that there were/are too many people on the planet [making the case that it just might be an immoral choice to procreate], that we were going run out of everything by the year 2000. Another major factor has been the incredible changes that have befallen young men in the West over the past decades. Young men have been told all kinds of untruths which rendered many incapable of developing the necessary skills and assuming the proper roles to carry out the responsibilities of successfully having and sustaining a family [everything from the patriarchy non-sense to instilling fear in young men when dating young women (because of their natural "toxic masculinity")]. The result of the above [and more] is that many Western [and Eastern] countries are considerably below replacement level [2.1 per couple] in their populations [which is a demographic catastrophe]. Although the folks running around the globe with their hair on fire because everything in the world happening is an existential crisis [e.g. climate change], the demographic time bomb getting ready to go off is baked-in-the-cake and there's not much to do about the short to medium terms effects. Essentially having many less young people and many more older people is a formula for economic and social disaster [especially the way that contemporary societies are designed]. China [alone] is forecast to lose half of their population by 2050-2070. You are going to have a country of older folks with few to support them, few to produce, few to consume, etc. Again, this spells total disaster economically and socially and is affecting almost every developed country in the world. Why do you think the U.S. southern border is wide open? I would be interested in particularly hearing from some folks in their 30's who might be able to relate to this crisis [or those who know others who are dealing with this now].
It's interesting how most of the real problems are rarely commented on [such as the demographic collapse] but the fictitious ones [ e.g., climate change] everybody is ready to sacrifice their first born [except they don't have one]. It seems like everybody has an opinion on matters that don't matter. OTOH, on matters that matter, few wish to confront such that they would even have an opinion to offer.
This is a wonderful thread and a very important topic. There is another older thread some may be interested in: Here's one reason white women are not having kids Three other additional threads about possible economic factors: Homeless Millennials shortage of affordable housing for young adults New York Times complains about lack of affordable "starter homes" Although I don't mean to hijack your thread, and suspect it has as much to do with cultural factors as economic. One policy idea, I think a very effective way to get women to start having more babies, is to ban young women from being able to have small dogs, which often serve as a replacement for children in their lives.
Well I'm way past my 30's, which was the age group you are interested in to respond. Frankly this is mostly an old man's forum. However I'll give my two cents... Unlike men, women's view of what they find attractive in a mate includes status. So as women rose up the corporate ranks and competed with men career wise, they found themselves with fewer men who they could find attractive. So they ended up waiting for mister right who checks all the boxes, he never shows, and the next thing you know, she's in her 40's, unmarried, and the window for a child is either closing or has closed. It's not a solvable issue in our current culture. Modernity extinguishes fertility.
I have four kids of my own and two step-children, so I get it. Although it might be interesting to try life without kids, I imagine for most people [especially the female variety] not having kids as you get older is probably not so wonderful.
I don't want kids. I would be a horrible parent and as messed up as the future is looking, it would be kind of cruel to bring more people into a collapsing society.
That's one way of looking at it, but the other way is that after this period of turmoil, there should be another really prosperous era. I don't know you and not everybody should be a parent, but I don't know anybody who believes they were a "good parent." It's the hardest job in the world but you do the best you can. The good news is it makes you a much better person because you place another as being more important than yourself.
I think a big component of this is security. Traditionally women became mother's in their late teens and early 20s. Motherhood interrupted this time when people would be gaining skills or education this makes them dependent on the man they chose to be a mother with. It used to be that these two people were obligated to one another by a social force. That social Force has completely evaporated. So people can marry and divorce as much as they want and there is no strong obligation to the partner. So women forgo motherhood in their youth to pursue careers so they aren't left to fend for themselves should the relationship be ended. Obligation to one another goes both ways and there are couples that stay together but I think the majority of them do so because they are part of a religion. I think much of the political commentary about this is mostly just trying to excuse the idea that we are not obligated to one another anymore. Mostly because people don't want to go back.
Hate to sound cliche, but in other words... social liberalism and the decline of the family. So ditching conservative values led to a decline in fertility rates, due to new trade-offs. Perhaps true, but I suspect high immigration levels pushing up housing prices have played a role in this too. (especially when we consider how younger adults are more at the mercy of housing prices, family formation is very concentrated into this particular age demographic, and lack of affordable housing delays family formation) It's hard to be able to know for sure or predict exactly how much immigration has displaced / replaced births of children from families who already live in the country. I do know a lot of young women are delaying having children and marrying because the price of rent in the areas where they live is so high. They feel coerced to have to focus on their careers first, due to high costs of living. Probably no coincidence the rates of mental distress of women in the young adult generation these days is off the charts.
It's not about what you want to do, it's about what you have to do. This is the difference between being a child and being an adult.
Success is typically what people wish to do you aren't successful because you have to be it's because you want to be. Also you have to spend a lot of time being unsuccessful in order to learn how to succeed.
