Thanks for discussing this. I’m a migrant married to an Australian and privileged on every scale. We had two children in the 1990s. It was phenomenally hard and almost killed me. His family were 8 hours drive away, mine a 24 hour flight. The most wonderful thing was a community crèche with extremely intelligent, caring and creative staff. They were paid a pittance and were being defunded by state and federal governments. The implication is that raising kids is just what happens (it doesn’t, they have developmental needs and loving carers and community is vital). Also that caring for others is not the business of important work and so financial and other support is seen as a safety net for the weak. Decades of neoliberalism has made us believe that money is what matters. Money gives you the power to receive and dominate without being either inclusive or belonging. We do need joy, and play and a deep appreciation for the complexity of life. The economic system, and the emotional underpinnings of extraction and control, have hollowed out our people. The plastic crisis (and all the others) have been made and intensified for decades. To stop them would require a rebuilding of care for the earth and a redistribution of power and wealth. It’s not going to happen while money buys immunity and the ability to ignore or destroy via powerful institutions and beliefs.
I second you Fran, having or not having kids is one thing, but once you have one or two you realise the ridiculous challenge in raising them in western modern society despite great privilege. These days I look at people with more than two kids as if they are ‘bat-shit crazy.’ I honestly don’t know how they do it. That being said I find being a parent one of the most challenging but ultimately positive self-transforming experiences. I’m a better human because of the ongoing experience and it helps me better appreciate humanity. Though to be clear, I’m not dumb enough to think this is an essential human experience.
Yes, society has actually stopped being able to cater for more than two kids...car booster seats, for instance, make it impossible to have 3 kids in a back seat in most cars. I've heard a number of examples like this.
Mom of four checking in here-- honestly it's just SO much fun. I'm thinking back most recently to Easter last week. Our older three (ages 5, 3, 2) came barreling down the stairs to find their Easter baskets. It was excited chaos all morning. Kids can be so much work, but they're so much joy. My husband and I talk about being "done," but as Catholics we're open to life, and I do smile thinking about the idea of a fifth. That all being said, I think it took me until four babies to really chill. There's a certain amount of letting go that has to happen, you simply can't be as neurotic and overprotective like I see parents of smaller families being.
Thanks Fran, a brilliant observation on the trajectory of our culture in recent years. In my lifetime I have witnessed the creep of capitalism into every aspect of our culture. When the focus of (any) care based organisation is usurped by the need to make profit for (faceless/disconnected) shareholders it erodes our core values as a community. We see this in most health care facilities, in schools, child care centres and even in funeral homes. All the the vital community services that should provide compassionate care and support are instead driven by making profit, usually for those that don't even belong to that community.
I wonder what will happen to the care sector as it becomes more vital (and AI takes away a lot of jobs, EXCEPT care jobs)? Will the capitalist system be able to adjust and rise all the ships etc?
Sarah I've been giving your question much thought and I really don't think the capitalist system is compatible with the care sector. I see the rise in AI putting more focus on the sector (being a reliable job source) and I fear that will only increase the "capitalist" interest as reliable profit making opportunities dwindle or change. We are already seeing the long term effect of the pressure on the care workers, especially in nursing, aged care and child care. The "profit makers" are squeezing the life out of so many passionate professionals who are either burning out or leaving their professions for jobs with less responsibility. The (public) health care system is a really good example. Another is our local child care centre was demolished several years ago and a very large modern building has been almost complete for 18 months (not technically "complete" so they can avoid the contract time limit) and I recently heard the proposed childcare organisation can't negotiate a viable lease with the developer. Meanwhile the local community has now been (possibly) 5 years without a childcare centre!! I'm hearing far too many similar stories.
Bring on the community based NFP organisations is my hope. If the community is strong and well organised they can do almost anything!!
I agree Ellen, capitalism as an economic system does not incentivise at all for care, ethics, the environment etc etc. It fails stupendously at any of the things we really regard as valuable to humans that we can't measure in dollars. It incentivises for making money-full stop. Even not for profits and coops long term are difficult to make work where a monetary economy is present. If we want an economic system that cares then we require a non-monetary economy- ie a gift economy. I have many reasons and can cite research on this by Terry Leahy (Brunswick, Melbourne). There are also some living examples starting around rural Victoria in Australia of gift economies starting - Daylesford and around Healesville and Castlemaine. They work. They are hard work and we need more practice at them but capitalism isn't exactly a breeze is it? And it sure ain't working for many many many people!! Gift economies can work using "compacts" instead of money and this eases the difficulties of not using money to meet needs etc.
How long has that gift economy lasted? I heard the other day that intentional communities of any kind have a "life expectancy" of two years....I was shocked to hear it and would love to hear of examples that buck this!
Yes, intentional communities don't seem to work that well unfortunately! I have a good friend who took part in the experimental one out in Gippsland in Victoria. It was documented on film and became a film released and made by Happen Films. There'sa few reasons it didn't work. The one that I have loose connections with is in Daylesford in Victoria. Another friend of mine has done a work exchange stint there. It's sort of embedded in the town and started with people who lived in the town (and surrounds) who made connections with each other and it seems to have grown organically to about 80 families. I think it works because it is an "unintentional community" I've heard that their economy is about 80% non-monetary.
There are others that are starting slowly. It's good to know that there are people practising the skills, it takes time and effort for sure. It's a radical shift in how you even view a gift and reciprocity.
My feeling is that capitalism is incapable of rising anything to do with care. Capitalism is not built to care about people, it's built to make a certain few acquire more $$. And the only reason it is able to function to make money is that care is supplied by the home economy (mostly women) to prop it all up. Anyway, you know all this! Maybe the capitalist system will crumble due to aging population and no one to fund it (due to falling birth rates). Perhaps along with the other crises (take your pick! 🤪) the state of affairs will become so bad for the general population that it boils over into a kind of "turning point"?
AI .... such a wildcard ... anything could happen!!!
As affluence rises, so drops our need of each other. We can just buy things, or connection at the press of a button.
Or at least we perceive it this way. But deep down it is a lie. The moving away is just a protection of our hearts. Or at least I perceive it this way.
What do others see?
Maybe we need to engineer our societies backwards
How much time does a family need ? How much time does an individual need for alone time?
How much time do couples need? How much money is enough?
Set up guardrails for public policy and legislation which protects and develops what we wish to co create.
Like we used to do before after the socialist leaning structures got to fat and corrupt, and Neoliberalism took over.
I would love to hear from women re what they discovered in the past decades? Where is the middle ground with career and purpose in life?
Hi Steve C, It's such an important discussion! How to be human in these changing, dissolving, terrifying times? Where to start? Can we say we are wealthy or even a society or a nation when we have people living in tents in my suburb? When people are hungry and cold and lonely? I'd love to see everyone with the resources/money/choices/autonomy so they can feel secure enough to live without desperation. If we can afford to subsidise fossil fuel companies, buy armaments, pay for vast military structures, allow corporate theft at enormous scale then we can set up housing, food and education for everyone. People are creative when they have the chance to be. I have also noticed immense amounts of trauma in people - some from terrible events as well as from being trapped in ordinary situations that are not conducive to human flourishing. I'm very encouraged to see many people working in numerous ways to address these traumas and control dramas. To not pass on these behaviours and attitudes. They do need to be in situations where they can do this though. I'm also amazed by how little I knew about child development when I started mothering. How did I not know the changes my darlings would bring and how they would grow me up? Where is the discussion of this in our culture? We get trapped in the material measurable details and miss the deep soul movement of terror and joy that is intrinsic to raising children. Everything passes away and what is worthwhile? Love, art, poetry, gratitude and sharing is what works for me.The permaculture ideas of "Care for the Earth, care for the people and share the surplus" seem a good start. Finding others who care is vital. Wishing you all the best at the coal face.
So many sides covered so well here, Sarah. And I agree with your conclusion. It's kind of all moot. Fertility is going to be the least of our problems in the coming years. And I also feel (know?) that the universe/God/a higher intelligence is really at play here. We can philosophize and opine about it, but births are just going to continue to decline. The real scary part, I feel, is how society is treating the scapegoat -- primarily women and girls. How will that continue to play out as collapse continues?
I have the same concern re scapegoating. It's already happening. We need to remain alert now to the fact we will be blamed/targeted/corralled. So we safeguard NOW!
Thank you Sarah, a thought-provoking article as ever. A few musings:
#1 - Men's sperm count is on such a steep decline yet I see little in the media about them cutting out drinking or adapting to fertility-boosting behaviours. Why do we keep absolving them of responsibility?
#2 - In the US we see young adults' belief systems start to veer with age, women to the left and men to the right. But this has been challenged in Australia with a stemming of the conservative veer for the first time in recorded history. Does this mean our young folk are staying politically aligned? Or, is there a general alignment in the middle with steeper minorities veering extreme left and right? I would love to dig deeper on this.
#3 - In all the chatter concerning the above, there seems to be only A or B solutions presented. A: Women marry less, have less children, stay single for longer or forever. B: Women sacrifice their belief system and marry into misalignment for the greater good. Alternately, I am again drawn to the uncomfortable third option. C: Mens blissful trajectory and unhealthy social norms are challenged, they take better accountability (as in thought #1), and they put in the work to evolve their social structures and belief systems in order to find healthy relationships and continue civilisation. It's sad that such thinking is utopic.
Option C....hmmmm. I don't think the trajectory will be interrupted until it's forced. Re the Aust statistics - The Conversation AU did a break down and I covered it in a post a few weeks back. The swing differential is still there, but not as wild.
Besides the larger questions as to why, how many, and if we should have kids?
This whole situation seems to stem back to a lack of joy in people’s lives.
Sex comes easy when people are truly happy, it is a natural end point of connection and joy.
And then if you are lucky to be able to, then come children.
Strip away capitalism, feminism, natalists and pie graphs.
The fact that we can’t even talk to each other anymore is the biggest concern. That men and women do not have a shared vision in mind. That truly brings meaning to their life.
I feel that what Brooks and others are hinting at is this sad fact. The choices we are making as individuals and couples are not making us happy.
Society has structured itself so that joy is elusive.
Does a career making widgets or moving numbers make us happy?
Or does coming home to a safe environment, making good food, and nurturing each other and those souls we are lucky enough to bring into the world bring us true joy and meaning?
And in order to be able to do this, the society we would need to create, can only bring us joy. Through connection, and a pace of life which supports us and the planet.
(Ps France did the right thing, the handmaidens tale is a distinct possibility, and there are some dodgy bros out there 😅✌🏼)
The world is becoming more inhospitable, both socially and environmentally. So many factors are contributing to this phenomenon but these are a few observations of my own.
I’ve spent the last six years working in the policy space on plastics and PFAs. There’s tentative steps to tackle these two issues, and I mean very tentative. But there’s total denial at a gov level when it comes to other endocrine disrupters, like glyphosate. Maybe they’re more worried about what banning things like glyphosate will do to food supply? Don’t want that to sound conspiratorial haha.
Another thing I’ve seen is many friends who’ve chosen to have kids have kids with developmental issues, many more than previous generations. And it’s not a diagnostic phenomenon, these kids are obviously challenged. It’s heart breaking.
Those of us without children are already talking about how we’re noticing our hormones change in our mid 30s (not sure if this is happening to my friends with kids, they don’t talk about how they’re feeling hormonally, some are still trying for more kids). But we think that maybe endocrine disruption many mean an earlier menopause for us. Only time will tell.
Oh and one thing that isn’t being discussed is the fall in population of all wild animals. This isn’t just a human thing.
The problem with fertility collapse is that many structures are built on the presumption that the following generations will support the preceding generations. To do that, those generations must be born. Therefore, we could say that generations with fewer children have caused their own problems, which are already being felt in pensions and the number of people employed in less attractive professions.
However, you have given many reasons for fertility collapse, but one reason that springs to mind is that we do not consider the future when it comes to family planning. In fact, very few people seem to have considered the future when marrying or starting a relationship. It seems to be a danger of prosperity that we all assume that it is self-evident that things will continue without our contribution. After all, how can we think pragmatically about having children when the earth is overpopulated?
It seems, and this is a recurring theme, that we lack balance in our decisions. We choose a course of action without considering its implications; we get into situations without considering how to get out of them; and we focus too much on short-term solutions. This hasn't just caused the collapse in fertility. It has been the cause of most of our problems throughout history, and increasingly so in the twentieth century when the results came much sooner than ever before.
It has also come with an increasing detachment from nature and the assumption that we can manipulate nature, even down to creating a super-race via eugenics. We are blissfully ignorant of the working conditions of those who make our shirts, the pittance that people are paid for providing our coffee and tea, or the price that people in “third world” countries have paid for our global economy. Blissfully ignorant, that is, until we feel the crunch.
A danger of prosperity... I agree. Which is kind of what Spengler is alluding to. And you're right, this danger (and the blind belief that growth will always happen, and be a good thing), lulls us to our demise in a number of different ways. In fact, all the ways!
Then I watch a comedian years ago who joked about the futility of trying to save the planet while volcanoes continue to change landscapes as usual,earthquakes constant, He was not saying that we were not stupid by inventing plastic but…..nature ..planet will reform after us Millions of species will continue to disappear while new ones may arrive and generally that takes away that drive I had when younger to wake up people to our behaviour and the futility I guess I would rather not live with this knowledge as depressing 😩Anyone want to cheer up a 75 yr old who felt angry when my kids announced pregnancies proudly especially our new son in law who has 3 grown up children and wonder if he wanted to go through this exciting journey of new family while loving my daughter and pleasing her by reversing vasectomy SUCCESSFULLY 🤯
I think we need to still see beauty and wonder in kids and our (others') desire to have kids. At the same the planet/life seems to be doing some rebalancing around us...
Be glad about the new grandchild! Our own population replacement is falling like a rock. It is only being replaced by hundreds of thousands of immigrants, many of whom are illiterate and unskilled or military aged young men. This amazing planet of ours is totally perfect for all life, which includes human life. Our oceans have unplumbed depths, the lands still have wonderful possibilities, and climate does what climate does! We humans and other animals are carbon based life forms which totally depend on oxygen to live. And! Guess what! All green plant life depends on
carbon dioxide and sunshine to live and thrive! Perfect design. Forget the MSMedia!
This is a really incredible post Sarah. Thankyou. So well researched and easy to follow as you pull the various threads together.
I find this oddly reassuring for many of the environmental reasons you mentioned. Although I feel guilty about that as I know many people who are trying very hard to get pregnant.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with the most worrying aspects of this about the growing divide between men and women.
thank you RR. I don't think we should or have to opine on individuals' decisions to have kids. There is an urge within many/most of us to have kids. Kids are gorgeous and new life is required. This phenomenon is happening at a systemic level and is almost beyond our control...
Holding these two notions at the same time is hard, but fascinating.
Agree. I myself am pregnant :) I meant more that I feel guilty in finding some consolation in the low fertility rate to take the pressure off the earth when I know this translates to heartache worry and stress for many people I know who are trying to get pregnant and I wish it was easier for them. Strange indeed to have two conflicting feelings on the one topic at once!
Thanks Sarah for the effort and detail your discussion goes into.. I am 26, and although this conversation is mostly about the fertility rate issues and so on, I am deeply concerned as well about the divide between men and women in my generation. Sometimes I feel that the women I am surrounded by are such fierce and ruthless fighters and that I struggle to connect on a similar level with any men, which makes me concerned for how unconcerned they are. I have been thinking a lot lately about how our political views or views in general are becoming more polarised and about where this divide will take us. In following the me too movement and teach us consent campaign, or the rise in womens rights in general, it seems like more men feeling more threatened by competition. How can we still fight this battle but maintain allies and how can we (we as in society and structural systems) also support men so they don't conform to radical anti feminist ideas like the andrew tates, whilst also encouraging them to recognise that they are not being oppressed or being discriminated against? My brother in law told me that at his place of employment (in a mine), in some positions they are only hiring women and men see this is discrimination and are complaining. I don't really know how to think about that...
Thanks Claire for sharing all that. I'm not sure what the answer is either. Except for older men to really step up and be role models. I don't think young men listen to women of any age. Men need to be leading this charge. But men are just not doing it. It's unlike women to dump a role like this onto men...but I'm not sure there is another solution. I say to men, "Every woman I know will be there to back you when you put in this work...we are gagging for it, we want to support you". I wonder if another solution is for men to actually feel left out. If women get on with living well and "fired up" and fighting for the right things, men will eventually join cos we look like we're having more fun....
Sarah - thank you so much for this piece, and for pulling together so much data with such cognecy and calmness - a rare gift in the often hysterical and polarised 'fertility' space.
As a psychotherapist, thought-leader and speaker who has been an advocate for childless not by choice women for 13 years through my organisation 'Gateway Women', my TEDx talks, my book, etc, this essay pulls together much that I've been seeing. And echoes my concerns for how conservative forces are weaponising the data around population decline as a way to roll back reproductive rights...
However, what this essay perhaps misses out is that at least 50% of those women who don't have kids wanted them (data is extremely patchy, but between 6%-50% of midlife women without children identify as childfree by choice). For those for whom it wasn't a choice (childless) the biggest reason I'm seeing, amongst the tens of thousands of women I've been in contact with, is that of being childless due to not having a willing or suitable partner during a woman's potentially fertile years... This is a doubly-shamed position for heterosexual women in our pronatalist, patriarchal society, as it positions the woman as 'not being chosen' as either a partner or mother by a man.
Many women choose not to have a child on their own as they know they do not have the resources to bring up a child alone. Those women that do try to have a child on their own through fertility treatments often discover that fertility treatments mostly fail, (something I know that Sarah has personal experience of...) Childrearing was never meant to be a two-person job (the nuclear family) and it's almost impossible as a one-person job (something that many women who have grown up with single mothers not by choice know through personal experience...)
A decade ago, I was one of the 4 original founders of AWOC (Ageing without Children) in the UK and, cusping 60 myself, my Substack 'Gateway Elderwomen' focuses on the issues of those of us who, for whatever reason, find ourselves facing old age without the potential or fantasy of children to care for us as we age. There is often the idea that 'care' is just about intimate care, but it's about so much more - it's about having someone from a younger generation to help you to continue living independently - to help out when your tablet updates and you struggle to get the online banking to work (and there's no phone helpline), it's about someone to give you a lift back from a medical procedure when you're not allowed to drive. The answer to this is COMMUNITY, something I know many of us here are hungry for... but how do we create that in our local areas when so many of us have lost our roots? How do we express our vulnerability when we are so scared of being taken advantage of? There are many of us around the world hungry for this, and some of us who are working out how to make it happen.
Ageing without children is scary, but it's also a fierce opportunity to regenerate the commons and create communities of care around us, ones that will benefit ALL of us, parents + non-parents, and people of all ages. As we move deeper into collapse, community is what we'll all need... and will be drawn to create - the muscle memory of it runs deeper than our current civilisation... Capitalism has, in many places, eviscerated community and has attempted to monetize each aspect of it and sell it back to us - including caring for the vulnerable. It's time to take it back.
Read my Substack essay: "It's not like she's got anything else to do, is it? -
Wonderful to read this discussion and as a 75 yr old who predicted that we might reach a point at which interference with nature willl ensure our demise as a species .Men do appear to have reached their useful role and women seek out babies from gays who exhibit kinder tendencies even though amongst themselves they can be aggressive and bitchy!
I question if the plastic age is upon us when we see a neurodivergence in people who may not have previously been labelled yet needing understanding that it is now a normal part of our survival 🥴
Thanks Liz, your point about the new needs of people affected by our changed nature is one I'd not thought about. Will more and new requirements for understanding and adapting to different neural set-ups see us become or more human, or will it overtax us?
I'm hearing you, Matt. I wish culture could get its collective messaging more accurate. I think culture/life is calling out to all of us (all humans) to do better, stop being so destructive, stop blocking other human potential, to adjust, to stop conquering and dominating (nature and other humans). Those who've benefited most from the status quo in recent centuries are being most resistant to this call to adjust etc. This happens to be men. The issue is - men do need to adjust, grow, etc. I'd love the message that comes from culture to be - "Blokes, find your way to do it... but do it and fast".
Sarah, I love your writing but please don’t use the term TERF. From what I can understand this is a term that is being directed at women who are fighting to maintain hard won women’s rights which are under serious threat in many western countries. This is something that should concern us all and we shouldn’t be accused of bigotry and hatefulness if we express that concern. Keep on being brave and curious and thoughtful though, in sharing your thoughts you are often inspiring, thank you!
I hear your concern, however, the women calling themselves TERFs or are widely regarded as TERFs are extremists and I don't agree with how they present their fight. I don't place sound arguments against putting trans women convicted of rape into women's prisons in this category, however. I did a podcast on this with Hannah Barnes and have one coming up with Helen Lewis next week on this subject.
Thanks for your reply Sarah, but I would argue that it is being thrown at women as a slur if they dare to speak out about biological reality, not even necessarily from an extremist position. For that reason I feel it is important that we not buy into the terminology at all.
oooooh ... this is s tricky line to tread I feel. 'Biological reality' - does that assume that all biologically XX chromosome or XY chromosome "women" share the same experience biologically and socially? Very curious to know how the absolute biological female experience plays out in the real world where realistically there are many types of women with different chromosomes and bodies who all have different experiences.
but I am all for female only spaces for sure, it's a matter of how one defines a biological female experience and.... can a line be drawn? If so how? Where?
And biological sex is far from a set binary thing, contrary to popular belief. Evening in non human complex life we see many forms of nature mixing it up! But i hear you on the way the life trajectory of having an F on your birth certificate definitely puts one in a disadvantageous position in society for so many bloody reasons. There is soo much nuance that gets missed in many of these discussions and I see some of the trans movement being very militant against the ideas that you speak about - a lot of which i disagree with in sone ways. I also think it is important for there to be female only spaces.
I hear you on all these points...the point is there is NO concrete line we can take on this subject. We have to be morally firm and contextually agile. Female-only prisons, for instance, make a lot of sense.
Yes please don't. These are predominantly women who want to protect women and girls single-sex spaces, womens refuges, women's prisons, women's sports and women who want to speak up for the reality and importance of biological sex.
Though the piece may or may not be a gentle right nudge on the subject
The journalist did do a great job of speaking to all involved
And approaching the subject of hysteria, mob mentality and the right for all to have a voice without fear of being persecuted. But instead properly debated.
I think that podcast has been criticised for not being balanced. Produced by the Free Press. I did listen to it though and learned a lot. I don't disagree with the bases of JKs points
Yes, it was definitely designed in a certain manner to allow other conversations to slip through the net.
It was very interesting hearing about Counterpoints experiences and her thoughts on the matter
And yes, based on her testimony here, I do not believe JK had or has any malicious intent. And the points which she raised needed to be discussed.
Even if an answer is not found.There is something up with young people, especially young women. And we need to be listening to them rather than screaming at each other.
I am going to exit stage left on this subject Sarah ✌🏼 ,not my lane, but then again, 🤔 it is as a dad.
I will listen intently to your chat with Helen, might even run it past the young one, she is concerned about her friends also. Looking forward to it.
I have a tendency to open my mouth or tap my thumbs without first getting all of the facts. 😅
Mainly out of curiosity , but felt like I was speaking on something which is a discussion for women to have.
I get passionate about this one , because I hate it when people are shouting others down, or when the stress of a situation does not allow the emotions to be felt. And good communication to be achieved.
I have no idea about what is right in the trans or TERF world. As they are not my world.
I just see the heat , and the stress in the conversation, which suggests that something else is not being addressed. Something underneath the distracting fight wants to be heard.
And that the people who are living these lives, and those who are confused are not being properly listened to.
Yeah, a podcast I listened to about a decade ago went into the history of this term. From what I gather it was developed as a slur against women in a particular feminist group in the 70s on the West Coast of the US who kicked out a transwoman after some internal falling out. The woman was then really angry and started calling them TERFs, got a bit famous and it took off from there. The falling out had nothing to do with the fact she was trans. I wish I could remember the podcast episode, it was great. The interviewee met with everyone involved and got their take on the story.
Hi Sally - idk exactly which Western countries you’re referring to but it wasn’t the trans community who overturned Roe v Wade. We’re all very concerned about the erosion of women’s rights in the Western and non-Western world. IMO it’d be enormously helpful if the women you’re talking about focused on the real culprits and left trans people alone.
The important distinction exists around laws that are not thought through...eg the example above that I use was a real case in Scotland - a man rapes/murders several women and then transitions before being sentenced. By the time his sentencing came up the law required the she was id'd as a woman and be sent to a women's jail.
Wow, Sarah, yet again we are en sync, just last week I was watching some video essays about the dire birth rates in South Korea. Several women were interviewed about their thoughts on the issue. Most if not all mentioned that the crazy work culture is too stressful - long work hours, many years of studies, lack of support to raise children. The self-actualisation aspect was also important to women, who knew that once they have kids, they have no time for themselves, as traditionally, women deal with all the domestic tasks. Also, the Korean men are problematic in so many ways - see up skirting issues, bathroom cameras, sex "tape" black mailing, rape culture. Japan has similar issues, I remember reading about the incredible high rate of virgins - they don't even want to have sex, how are they supposed to reproduce.
Apparently, the gen Z have less sex than all other generations, which doesn't make much sense given the freedoms they have these days.
So not only we have physiological fertility decline, we also have women and men opting out of having children or enough children.
In theory, fewer people should be good for the planet. From a social/economic point of view, having fewer children/young adults causes all kinds of problems.
Now, show me a mother who's not overwhelmed. Having, raising children is the hardest thing one can, will do. It takes a toll on one's body and mental wellbeing. That is if you have healthy children, a half-decent partner and have somewhere decent to live. When people can't even afford to rent, when two incomes are needed to have a roof over one's head, when there's an environmental collapse, pandemics and as you well put it, a greater divide between men and women, I don't blame any woman for thinking, knowing that it's too hard and not an enticing prospect. As much as the first world has progressed when it comes to gender roles, the burden/privilege of raising children is still greatly on women, who now don't have a village to support them.
--------------------------
BTW, I was born in Romania in the 70s, my poor mum had to contend with those "interesting times". Interestingly enough, I only have 1 sibling, most of the kids I knew, went to school with came from 2 kid families, on rare occasions, you came across a family with 3 kids. - the oopsies. The largest generation of kids was in the first few years after the abortion ban - 66-69, but in the 70s, the birth rate dropped again. Women were working as many hrs as men (inc on Saturdays), if you were lucky, you lived in a 2 or 3 bedroom apartment (under 60m2). So what the abortion ban accomplished in short: the highest rate of female mortality, a great rate of abandoned children, including lots with birth defects, malnourished children etc. and after a few years of higher birth rate, women/people found a way to have only two offsprings, despite the authoritarian efforts.
I’m baffled that anyone is surprised that people are having fewer kids, given the cost of living and crises surrounding us? Who is in the mood? Seems so obvious that it’s women delivering a natural corrective. Let it correct!
Thanks for discussing this. I’m a migrant married to an Australian and privileged on every scale. We had two children in the 1990s. It was phenomenally hard and almost killed me. His family were 8 hours drive away, mine a 24 hour flight. The most wonderful thing was a community crèche with extremely intelligent, caring and creative staff. They were paid a pittance and were being defunded by state and federal governments. The implication is that raising kids is just what happens (it doesn’t, they have developmental needs and loving carers and community is vital). Also that caring for others is not the business of important work and so financial and other support is seen as a safety net for the weak. Decades of neoliberalism has made us believe that money is what matters. Money gives you the power to receive and dominate without being either inclusive or belonging. We do need joy, and play and a deep appreciation for the complexity of life. The economic system, and the emotional underpinnings of extraction and control, have hollowed out our people. The plastic crisis (and all the others) have been made and intensified for decades. To stop them would require a rebuilding of care for the earth and a redistribution of power and wealth. It’s not going to happen while money buys immunity and the ability to ignore or destroy via powerful institutions and beliefs.
I second you Fran, having or not having kids is one thing, but once you have one or two you realise the ridiculous challenge in raising them in western modern society despite great privilege. These days I look at people with more than two kids as if they are ‘bat-shit crazy.’ I honestly don’t know how they do it. That being said I find being a parent one of the most challenging but ultimately positive self-transforming experiences. I’m a better human because of the ongoing experience and it helps me better appreciate humanity. Though to be clear, I’m not dumb enough to think this is an essential human experience.
Yes, society has actually stopped being able to cater for more than two kids...car booster seats, for instance, make it impossible to have 3 kids in a back seat in most cars. I've heard a number of examples like this.
I agree Michel. I adore my kids. I loathe the culture we have become.
Mom of four checking in here-- honestly it's just SO much fun. I'm thinking back most recently to Easter last week. Our older three (ages 5, 3, 2) came barreling down the stairs to find their Easter baskets. It was excited chaos all morning. Kids can be so much work, but they're so much joy. My husband and I talk about being "done," but as Catholics we're open to life, and I do smile thinking about the idea of a fifth. That all being said, I think it took me until four babies to really chill. There's a certain amount of letting go that has to happen, you simply can't be as neurotic and overprotective like I see parents of smaller families being.
Thanks Fran, a brilliant observation on the trajectory of our culture in recent years. In my lifetime I have witnessed the creep of capitalism into every aspect of our culture. When the focus of (any) care based organisation is usurped by the need to make profit for (faceless/disconnected) shareholders it erodes our core values as a community. We see this in most health care facilities, in schools, child care centres and even in funeral homes. All the the vital community services that should provide compassionate care and support are instead driven by making profit, usually for those that don't even belong to that community.
Like you, I loathe what we have become.
I wonder what will happen to the care sector as it becomes more vital (and AI takes away a lot of jobs, EXCEPT care jobs)? Will the capitalist system be able to adjust and rise all the ships etc?
Sarah I've been giving your question much thought and I really don't think the capitalist system is compatible with the care sector. I see the rise in AI putting more focus on the sector (being a reliable job source) and I fear that will only increase the "capitalist" interest as reliable profit making opportunities dwindle or change. We are already seeing the long term effect of the pressure on the care workers, especially in nursing, aged care and child care. The "profit makers" are squeezing the life out of so many passionate professionals who are either burning out or leaving their professions for jobs with less responsibility. The (public) health care system is a really good example. Another is our local child care centre was demolished several years ago and a very large modern building has been almost complete for 18 months (not technically "complete" so they can avoid the contract time limit) and I recently heard the proposed childcare organisation can't negotiate a viable lease with the developer. Meanwhile the local community has now been (possibly) 5 years without a childcare centre!! I'm hearing far too many similar stories.
Bring on the community based NFP organisations is my hope. If the community is strong and well organised they can do almost anything!!
I agree Ellen, capitalism as an economic system does not incentivise at all for care, ethics, the environment etc etc. It fails stupendously at any of the things we really regard as valuable to humans that we can't measure in dollars. It incentivises for making money-full stop. Even not for profits and coops long term are difficult to make work where a monetary economy is present. If we want an economic system that cares then we require a non-monetary economy- ie a gift economy. I have many reasons and can cite research on this by Terry Leahy (Brunswick, Melbourne). There are also some living examples starting around rural Victoria in Australia of gift economies starting - Daylesford and around Healesville and Castlemaine. They work. They are hard work and we need more practice at them but capitalism isn't exactly a breeze is it? And it sure ain't working for many many many people!! Gift economies can work using "compacts" instead of money and this eases the difficulties of not using money to meet needs etc.
How long has that gift economy lasted? I heard the other day that intentional communities of any kind have a "life expectancy" of two years....I was shocked to hear it and would love to hear of examples that buck this!
Yes, intentional communities don't seem to work that well unfortunately! I have a good friend who took part in the experimental one out in Gippsland in Victoria. It was documented on film and became a film released and made by Happen Films. There'sa few reasons it didn't work. The one that I have loose connections with is in Daylesford in Victoria. Another friend of mine has done a work exchange stint there. It's sort of embedded in the town and started with people who lived in the town (and surrounds) who made connections with each other and it seems to have grown organically to about 80 families. I think it works because it is an "unintentional community" I've heard that their economy is about 80% non-monetary.
There are others that are starting slowly. It's good to know that there are people practising the skills, it takes time and effort for sure. It's a radical shift in how you even view a gift and reciprocity.
Wow, that's a crazy perspective! About as sensible as learning massage therapy online.
I hear you Anna. I believe (appropriate) human touch is highly underrated.
I’m hoping we get rid of extractive capitalism and organise society so we can flourish. I’m sure we can manage it!
Here's how we can do it Fran:
abc.net.au/news/2024-04-06/local-economic-trading-scheme-allows-woman-to-build-house/103673444
Crikey, that's a scary thought Sarah 😳
My feeling is that capitalism is incapable of rising anything to do with care. Capitalism is not built to care about people, it's built to make a certain few acquire more $$. And the only reason it is able to function to make money is that care is supplied by the home economy (mostly women) to prop it all up. Anyway, you know all this! Maybe the capitalist system will crumble due to aging population and no one to fund it (due to falling birth rates). Perhaps along with the other crises (take your pick! 🤪) the state of affairs will become so bad for the general population that it boils over into a kind of "turning point"?
AI .... such a wildcard ... anything could happen!!!
Speaking from the coal face Fran ☺️ 🙏🏼
As affluence rises, so drops our need of each other. We can just buy things, or connection at the press of a button.
Or at least we perceive it this way. But deep down it is a lie. The moving away is just a protection of our hearts. Or at least I perceive it this way.
What do others see?
Maybe we need to engineer our societies backwards
How much time does a family need ? How much time does an individual need for alone time?
How much time do couples need? How much money is enough?
Set up guardrails for public policy and legislation which protects and develops what we wish to co create.
Like we used to do before after the socialist leaning structures got to fat and corrupt, and Neoliberalism took over.
I would love to hear from women re what they discovered in the past decades? Where is the middle ground with career and purpose in life?
Can we create a template here for a way forward?
Hi Steve C, It's such an important discussion! How to be human in these changing, dissolving, terrifying times? Where to start? Can we say we are wealthy or even a society or a nation when we have people living in tents in my suburb? When people are hungry and cold and lonely? I'd love to see everyone with the resources/money/choices/autonomy so they can feel secure enough to live without desperation. If we can afford to subsidise fossil fuel companies, buy armaments, pay for vast military structures, allow corporate theft at enormous scale then we can set up housing, food and education for everyone. People are creative when they have the chance to be. I have also noticed immense amounts of trauma in people - some from terrible events as well as from being trapped in ordinary situations that are not conducive to human flourishing. I'm very encouraged to see many people working in numerous ways to address these traumas and control dramas. To not pass on these behaviours and attitudes. They do need to be in situations where they can do this though. I'm also amazed by how little I knew about child development when I started mothering. How did I not know the changes my darlings would bring and how they would grow me up? Where is the discussion of this in our culture? We get trapped in the material measurable details and miss the deep soul movement of terror and joy that is intrinsic to raising children. Everything passes away and what is worthwhile? Love, art, poetry, gratitude and sharing is what works for me.The permaculture ideas of "Care for the Earth, care for the people and share the surplus" seem a good start. Finding others who care is vital. Wishing you all the best at the coal face.
Keep chipping away 😝
Thanks Fran, It is incredible how little we are taught, and how little support is available for this particular task.
I am always grateful for the idea that as long as we get things right 30% of the time, and always model accountability, they will work out okay ☺️.
So many sides covered so well here, Sarah. And I agree with your conclusion. It's kind of all moot. Fertility is going to be the least of our problems in the coming years. And I also feel (know?) that the universe/God/a higher intelligence is really at play here. We can philosophize and opine about it, but births are just going to continue to decline. The real scary part, I feel, is how society is treating the scapegoat -- primarily women and girls. How will that continue to play out as collapse continues?
I have the same concern re scapegoating. It's already happening. We need to remain alert now to the fact we will be blamed/targeted/corralled. So we safeguard NOW!
Perfectly put - you read my mind - hard to ignore the bias going on in a lot of the MSM articles making this a woman/girl problem.
Thank you Sarah, a thought-provoking article as ever. A few musings:
#1 - Men's sperm count is on such a steep decline yet I see little in the media about them cutting out drinking or adapting to fertility-boosting behaviours. Why do we keep absolving them of responsibility?
#2 - In the US we see young adults' belief systems start to veer with age, women to the left and men to the right. But this has been challenged in Australia with a stemming of the conservative veer for the first time in recorded history. Does this mean our young folk are staying politically aligned? Or, is there a general alignment in the middle with steeper minorities veering extreme left and right? I would love to dig deeper on this.
#3 - In all the chatter concerning the above, there seems to be only A or B solutions presented. A: Women marry less, have less children, stay single for longer or forever. B: Women sacrifice their belief system and marry into misalignment for the greater good. Alternately, I am again drawn to the uncomfortable third option. C: Mens blissful trajectory and unhealthy social norms are challenged, they take better accountability (as in thought #1), and they put in the work to evolve their social structures and belief systems in order to find healthy relationships and continue civilisation. It's sad that such thinking is utopic.
Option C....hmmmm. I don't think the trajectory will be interrupted until it's forced. Re the Aust statistics - The Conversation AU did a break down and I covered it in a post a few weeks back. The swing differential is still there, but not as wild.
Yep. C. I’m not interested in any discussion around fertility decline that isn’t focused on C.
Great points. I hope for C, too (for so many reasons)
Jeeze Sarah, I love your brain - I get mental whiplash following you! - in the best way :-). All food for thought. xo
The first word that comes to mind is
Joy
Where has it gone to?
Besides the larger questions as to why, how many, and if we should have kids?
This whole situation seems to stem back to a lack of joy in people’s lives.
Sex comes easy when people are truly happy, it is a natural end point of connection and joy.
And then if you are lucky to be able to, then come children.
Strip away capitalism, feminism, natalists and pie graphs.
The fact that we can’t even talk to each other anymore is the biggest concern. That men and women do not have a shared vision in mind. That truly brings meaning to their life.
I feel that what Brooks and others are hinting at is this sad fact. The choices we are making as individuals and couples are not making us happy.
Society has structured itself so that joy is elusive.
Does a career making widgets or moving numbers make us happy?
Or does coming home to a safe environment, making good food, and nurturing each other and those souls we are lucky enough to bring into the world bring us true joy and meaning?
And in order to be able to do this, the society we would need to create, can only bring us joy. Through connection, and a pace of life which supports us and the planet.
(Ps France did the right thing, the handmaidens tale is a distinct possibility, and there are some dodgy bros out there 😅✌🏼)
Let’s keep prioritising joy, love and creating with pleasure, whether that is procreating or not.
I wanted to add
Maybe your joy does come from your work
One of the lucky ones who’s vocation sits in their heart
And their work nurtures all around them
What I would wish for men and women is that they have the choice
To choose that which makes them truly happy
Without the need to sacrifice their time, bodies, lives or ideals
Yes to joy!
The world is becoming more inhospitable, both socially and environmentally. So many factors are contributing to this phenomenon but these are a few observations of my own.
I’ve spent the last six years working in the policy space on plastics and PFAs. There’s tentative steps to tackle these two issues, and I mean very tentative. But there’s total denial at a gov level when it comes to other endocrine disrupters, like glyphosate. Maybe they’re more worried about what banning things like glyphosate will do to food supply? Don’t want that to sound conspiratorial haha.
Another thing I’ve seen is many friends who’ve chosen to have kids have kids with developmental issues, many more than previous generations. And it’s not a diagnostic phenomenon, these kids are obviously challenged. It’s heart breaking.
Those of us without children are already talking about how we’re noticing our hormones change in our mid 30s (not sure if this is happening to my friends with kids, they don’t talk about how they’re feeling hormonally, some are still trying for more kids). But we think that maybe endocrine disruption many mean an earlier menopause for us. Only time will tell.
Oh and one thing that isn’t being discussed is the fall in population of all wild animals. This isn’t just a human thing.
The problem with fertility collapse is that many structures are built on the presumption that the following generations will support the preceding generations. To do that, those generations must be born. Therefore, we could say that generations with fewer children have caused their own problems, which are already being felt in pensions and the number of people employed in less attractive professions.
However, you have given many reasons for fertility collapse, but one reason that springs to mind is that we do not consider the future when it comes to family planning. In fact, very few people seem to have considered the future when marrying or starting a relationship. It seems to be a danger of prosperity that we all assume that it is self-evident that things will continue without our contribution. After all, how can we think pragmatically about having children when the earth is overpopulated?
It seems, and this is a recurring theme, that we lack balance in our decisions. We choose a course of action without considering its implications; we get into situations without considering how to get out of them; and we focus too much on short-term solutions. This hasn't just caused the collapse in fertility. It has been the cause of most of our problems throughout history, and increasingly so in the twentieth century when the results came much sooner than ever before.
It has also come with an increasing detachment from nature and the assumption that we can manipulate nature, even down to creating a super-race via eugenics. We are blissfully ignorant of the working conditions of those who make our shirts, the pittance that people are paid for providing our coffee and tea, or the price that people in “third world” countries have paid for our global economy. Blissfully ignorant, that is, until we feel the crunch.
A danger of prosperity... I agree. Which is kind of what Spengler is alluding to. And you're right, this danger (and the blind belief that growth will always happen, and be a good thing), lulls us to our demise in a number of different ways. In fact, all the ways!
This was a fab read and I love your positive spin on it. Is this just the world correcting itself? I'd like to think so.
Like I say, I don't know. I smile at at it all, though.
Then I watch a comedian years ago who joked about the futility of trying to save the planet while volcanoes continue to change landscapes as usual,earthquakes constant, He was not saying that we were not stupid by inventing plastic but…..nature ..planet will reform after us Millions of species will continue to disappear while new ones may arrive and generally that takes away that drive I had when younger to wake up people to our behaviour and the futility I guess I would rather not live with this knowledge as depressing 😩Anyone want to cheer up a 75 yr old who felt angry when my kids announced pregnancies proudly especially our new son in law who has 3 grown up children and wonder if he wanted to go through this exciting journey of new family while loving my daughter and pleasing her by reversing vasectomy SUCCESSFULLY 🤯
I think we need to still see beauty and wonder in kids and our (others') desire to have kids. At the same the planet/life seems to be doing some rebalancing around us...
Be glad about the new grandchild! Our own population replacement is falling like a rock. It is only being replaced by hundreds of thousands of immigrants, many of whom are illiterate and unskilled or military aged young men. This amazing planet of ours is totally perfect for all life, which includes human life. Our oceans have unplumbed depths, the lands still have wonderful possibilities, and climate does what climate does! We humans and other animals are carbon based life forms which totally depend on oxygen to live. And! Guess what! All green plant life depends on
carbon dioxide and sunshine to live and thrive! Perfect design. Forget the MSMedia!
This is a really incredible post Sarah. Thankyou. So well researched and easy to follow as you pull the various threads together.
I find this oddly reassuring for many of the environmental reasons you mentioned. Although I feel guilty about that as I know many people who are trying very hard to get pregnant.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with the most worrying aspects of this about the growing divide between men and women.
The Trad Wife thing blows my mind!
thank you RR. I don't think we should or have to opine on individuals' decisions to have kids. There is an urge within many/most of us to have kids. Kids are gorgeous and new life is required. This phenomenon is happening at a systemic level and is almost beyond our control...
Holding these two notions at the same time is hard, but fascinating.
Agree. I myself am pregnant :) I meant more that I feel guilty in finding some consolation in the low fertility rate to take the pressure off the earth when I know this translates to heartache worry and stress for many people I know who are trying to get pregnant and I wish it was easier for them. Strange indeed to have two conflicting feelings on the one topic at once!
Thanks Sarah for the effort and detail your discussion goes into.. I am 26, and although this conversation is mostly about the fertility rate issues and so on, I am deeply concerned as well about the divide between men and women in my generation. Sometimes I feel that the women I am surrounded by are such fierce and ruthless fighters and that I struggle to connect on a similar level with any men, which makes me concerned for how unconcerned they are. I have been thinking a lot lately about how our political views or views in general are becoming more polarised and about where this divide will take us. In following the me too movement and teach us consent campaign, or the rise in womens rights in general, it seems like more men feeling more threatened by competition. How can we still fight this battle but maintain allies and how can we (we as in society and structural systems) also support men so they don't conform to radical anti feminist ideas like the andrew tates, whilst also encouraging them to recognise that they are not being oppressed or being discriminated against? My brother in law told me that at his place of employment (in a mine), in some positions they are only hiring women and men see this is discrimination and are complaining. I don't really know how to think about that...
Thanks Claire for sharing all that. I'm not sure what the answer is either. Except for older men to really step up and be role models. I don't think young men listen to women of any age. Men need to be leading this charge. But men are just not doing it. It's unlike women to dump a role like this onto men...but I'm not sure there is another solution. I say to men, "Every woman I know will be there to back you when you put in this work...we are gagging for it, we want to support you". I wonder if another solution is for men to actually feel left out. If women get on with living well and "fired up" and fighting for the right things, men will eventually join cos we look like we're having more fun....
Sarah - thank you so much for this piece, and for pulling together so much data with such cognecy and calmness - a rare gift in the often hysterical and polarised 'fertility' space.
As a psychotherapist, thought-leader and speaker who has been an advocate for childless not by choice women for 13 years through my organisation 'Gateway Women', my TEDx talks, my book, etc, this essay pulls together much that I've been seeing. And echoes my concerns for how conservative forces are weaponising the data around population decline as a way to roll back reproductive rights...
However, what this essay perhaps misses out is that at least 50% of those women who don't have kids wanted them (data is extremely patchy, but between 6%-50% of midlife women without children identify as childfree by choice). For those for whom it wasn't a choice (childless) the biggest reason I'm seeing, amongst the tens of thousands of women I've been in contact with, is that of being childless due to not having a willing or suitable partner during a woman's potentially fertile years... This is a doubly-shamed position for heterosexual women in our pronatalist, patriarchal society, as it positions the woman as 'not being chosen' as either a partner or mother by a man.
Many women choose not to have a child on their own as they know they do not have the resources to bring up a child alone. Those women that do try to have a child on their own through fertility treatments often discover that fertility treatments mostly fail, (something I know that Sarah has personal experience of...) Childrearing was never meant to be a two-person job (the nuclear family) and it's almost impossible as a one-person job (something that many women who have grown up with single mothers not by choice know through personal experience...)
A decade ago, I was one of the 4 original founders of AWOC (Ageing without Children) in the UK and, cusping 60 myself, my Substack 'Gateway Elderwomen' focuses on the issues of those of us who, for whatever reason, find ourselves facing old age without the potential or fantasy of children to care for us as we age. There is often the idea that 'care' is just about intimate care, but it's about so much more - it's about having someone from a younger generation to help you to continue living independently - to help out when your tablet updates and you struggle to get the online banking to work (and there's no phone helpline), it's about someone to give you a lift back from a medical procedure when you're not allowed to drive. The answer to this is COMMUNITY, something I know many of us here are hungry for... but how do we create that in our local areas when so many of us have lost our roots? How do we express our vulnerability when we are so scared of being taken advantage of? There are many of us around the world hungry for this, and some of us who are working out how to make it happen.
Ageing without children is scary, but it's also a fierce opportunity to regenerate the commons and create communities of care around us, ones that will benefit ALL of us, parents + non-parents, and people of all ages. As we move deeper into collapse, community is what we'll all need... and will be drawn to create - the muscle memory of it runs deeper than our current civilisation... Capitalism has, in many places, eviscerated community and has attempted to monetize each aspect of it and sell it back to us - including caring for the vulnerable. It's time to take it back.
Read my Substack essay: "It's not like she's got anything else to do, is it? -
Childless daughters and caregiving":
https://jodyday.substack.com/p/its-not-like-shes-got-anything-else
Watch webinar: Fireside Wisdom with Childless Elderwomen 'Caring for the Caregiver': https://bit.ly/gwe-fwc
Wonderful to read this discussion and as a 75 yr old who predicted that we might reach a point at which interference with nature willl ensure our demise as a species .Men do appear to have reached their useful role and women seek out babies from gays who exhibit kinder tendencies even though amongst themselves they can be aggressive and bitchy!
I question if the plastic age is upon us when we see a neurodivergence in people who may not have previously been labelled yet needing understanding that it is now a normal part of our survival 🥴
Thanks Liz, your point about the new needs of people affected by our changed nature is one I'd not thought about. Will more and new requirements for understanding and adapting to different neural set-ups see us become or more human, or will it overtax us?
Men do appear to reach their useful role?
Who built your house, roads? Who are the first ones sent to war?
99 percent of bricklayers are men. If they have reached their peak, we can leave it all with you then
These such comments are contributing more to such issues than you care to realise
Not so sure.
The problem is men don’t know what they are supposed to be
Culture is pushing them to be more feminine but this is also not a win. We are different and different for a reason
I'm hearing you, Matt. I wish culture could get its collective messaging more accurate. I think culture/life is calling out to all of us (all humans) to do better, stop being so destructive, stop blocking other human potential, to adjust, to stop conquering and dominating (nature and other humans). Those who've benefited most from the status quo in recent centuries are being most resistant to this call to adjust etc. This happens to be men. The issue is - men do need to adjust, grow, etc. I'd love the message that comes from culture to be - "Blokes, find your way to do it... but do it and fast".
Hope that makes sense?
Sarah, I love your writing but please don’t use the term TERF. From what I can understand this is a term that is being directed at women who are fighting to maintain hard won women’s rights which are under serious threat in many western countries. This is something that should concern us all and we shouldn’t be accused of bigotry and hatefulness if we express that concern. Keep on being brave and curious and thoughtful though, in sharing your thoughts you are often inspiring, thank you!
I hear your concern, however, the women calling themselves TERFs or are widely regarded as TERFs are extremists and I don't agree with how they present their fight. I don't place sound arguments against putting trans women convicted of rape into women's prisons in this category, however. I did a podcast on this with Hannah Barnes and have one coming up with Helen Lewis next week on this subject.
Thanks for your reply Sarah, but I would argue that it is being thrown at women as a slur if they dare to speak out about biological reality, not even necessarily from an extremist position. For that reason I feel it is important that we not buy into the terminology at all.
I take your point and will be more careful how/when I use the term.
oooooh ... this is s tricky line to tread I feel. 'Biological reality' - does that assume that all biologically XX chromosome or XY chromosome "women" share the same experience biologically and socially? Very curious to know how the absolute biological female experience plays out in the real world where realistically there are many types of women with different chromosomes and bodies who all have different experiences.
but I am all for female only spaces for sure, it's a matter of how one defines a biological female experience and.... can a line be drawn? If so how? Where?
And biological sex is far from a set binary thing, contrary to popular belief. Evening in non human complex life we see many forms of nature mixing it up! But i hear you on the way the life trajectory of having an F on your birth certificate definitely puts one in a disadvantageous position in society for so many bloody reasons. There is soo much nuance that gets missed in many of these discussions and I see some of the trans movement being very militant against the ideas that you speak about - a lot of which i disagree with in sone ways. I also think it is important for there to be female only spaces.
I hear you on all these points...the point is there is NO concrete line we can take on this subject. We have to be morally firm and contextually agile. Female-only prisons, for instance, make a lot of sense.
Yes please don't. These are predominantly women who want to protect women and girls single-sex spaces, womens refuges, women's prisons, women's sports and women who want to speak up for the reality and importance of biological sex.
Here is a great podcast the looks at what happened to JK Rowling and the TERF label
Gives a little insight into the motivations, thoughts and fears
This debate amongst women seems to be driven by the same algorithms and desire for attention as other distracting issues.
But I should keep my nose out of it 😅
https://open.spotify.com/show/2K186zrvRgeE2w0wQjbaw7?si=qaVoeKYFQ-ajm5lOa5YwcA
Though the piece may or may not be a gentle right nudge on the subject
The journalist did do a great job of speaking to all involved
And approaching the subject of hysteria, mob mentality and the right for all to have a voice without fear of being persecuted. But instead properly debated.
I think that podcast has been criticised for not being balanced. Produced by the Free Press. I did listen to it though and learned a lot. I don't disagree with the bases of JKs points
Yes, it was definitely designed in a certain manner to allow other conversations to slip through the net.
It was very interesting hearing about Counterpoints experiences and her thoughts on the matter
And yes, based on her testimony here, I do not believe JK had or has any malicious intent. And the points which she raised needed to be discussed.
Even if an answer is not found.There is something up with young people, especially young women. And we need to be listening to them rather than screaming at each other.
I am going to exit stage left on this subject Sarah ✌🏼 ,not my lane, but then again, 🤔 it is as a dad.
I will listen intently to your chat with Helen, might even run it past the young one, she is concerned about her friends also. Looking forward to it.
Nah, it's everyone's lane and blokes should be taking part in the conversation! Don't feel you have to apologise.
Thanks Sarah,
I have a tendency to open my mouth or tap my thumbs without first getting all of the facts. 😅
Mainly out of curiosity , but felt like I was speaking on something which is a discussion for women to have.
I get passionate about this one , because I hate it when people are shouting others down, or when the stress of a situation does not allow the emotions to be felt. And good communication to be achieved.
I have no idea about what is right in the trans or TERF world. As they are not my world.
I just see the heat , and the stress in the conversation, which suggests that something else is not being addressed. Something underneath the distracting fight wants to be heard.
And that the people who are living these lives, and those who are confused are not being properly listened to.
Looking forward to the next episode
Yeah, a podcast I listened to about a decade ago went into the history of this term. From what I gather it was developed as a slur against women in a particular feminist group in the 70s on the West Coast of the US who kicked out a transwoman after some internal falling out. The woman was then really angry and started calling them TERFs, got a bit famous and it took off from there. The falling out had nothing to do with the fact she was trans. I wish I could remember the podcast episode, it was great. The interviewee met with everyone involved and got their take on the story.
It was actually only about 15 yrs ago that that happened, but, yes, that's roughly the story.
Hi Sally - idk exactly which Western countries you’re referring to but it wasn’t the trans community who overturned Roe v Wade. We’re all very concerned about the erosion of women’s rights in the Western and non-Western world. IMO it’d be enormously helpful if the women you’re talking about focused on the real culprits and left trans people alone.
The important distinction exists around laws that are not thought through...eg the example above that I use was a real case in Scotland - a man rapes/murders several women and then transitions before being sentenced. By the time his sentencing came up the law required the she was id'd as a woman and be sent to a women's jail.
Wow, Sarah, yet again we are en sync, just last week I was watching some video essays about the dire birth rates in South Korea. Several women were interviewed about their thoughts on the issue. Most if not all mentioned that the crazy work culture is too stressful - long work hours, many years of studies, lack of support to raise children. The self-actualisation aspect was also important to women, who knew that once they have kids, they have no time for themselves, as traditionally, women deal with all the domestic tasks. Also, the Korean men are problematic in so many ways - see up skirting issues, bathroom cameras, sex "tape" black mailing, rape culture. Japan has similar issues, I remember reading about the incredible high rate of virgins - they don't even want to have sex, how are they supposed to reproduce.
Apparently, the gen Z have less sex than all other generations, which doesn't make much sense given the freedoms they have these days.
So not only we have physiological fertility decline, we also have women and men opting out of having children or enough children.
In theory, fewer people should be good for the planet. From a social/economic point of view, having fewer children/young adults causes all kinds of problems.
Now, show me a mother who's not overwhelmed. Having, raising children is the hardest thing one can, will do. It takes a toll on one's body and mental wellbeing. That is if you have healthy children, a half-decent partner and have somewhere decent to live. When people can't even afford to rent, when two incomes are needed to have a roof over one's head, when there's an environmental collapse, pandemics and as you well put it, a greater divide between men and women, I don't blame any woman for thinking, knowing that it's too hard and not an enticing prospect. As much as the first world has progressed when it comes to gender roles, the burden/privilege of raising children is still greatly on women, who now don't have a village to support them.
--------------------------
BTW, I was born in Romania in the 70s, my poor mum had to contend with those "interesting times". Interestingly enough, I only have 1 sibling, most of the kids I knew, went to school with came from 2 kid families, on rare occasions, you came across a family with 3 kids. - the oopsies. The largest generation of kids was in the first few years after the abortion ban - 66-69, but in the 70s, the birth rate dropped again. Women were working as many hrs as men (inc on Saturdays), if you were lucky, you lived in a 2 or 3 bedroom apartment (under 60m2). So what the abortion ban accomplished in short: the highest rate of female mortality, a great rate of abandoned children, including lots with birth defects, malnourished children etc. and after a few years of higher birth rate, women/people found a way to have only two offsprings, despite the authoritarian efforts.
I think there is a typo :
Demographers at the U.N. expect population to peak at roughly 10 million in 2080. I'm assuming you mean 10 *billion* ?
ah shit. thanks
I’m baffled that anyone is surprised that people are having fewer kids, given the cost of living and crises surrounding us? Who is in the mood? Seems so obvious that it’s women delivering a natural corrective. Let it correct!
🥳🫶🏼