dont_log_me_out
No bio...
User ID: 686
; the bulk of the damage was done by developing the norm of both parents working in families.
Which ideology actively supports such a state of existence?
Why does that matter when native born women are french by nationality and birth? Wouldn't that result in their children being fully assimilated into french culture as they are 3rd generation french citizens by this point and generally 3rd to 4th gen is when the complete cultural assimilation period is complete?
However in Israel there is an extreme poverty rate which would explain the high fertility rate. The rich israeli's aren't the ones reproducing a lot, its the majority poor ones.
Could be. I like your reasoning.
Makes sense. I am just saying that eh, my life is more valuable anyways is a free get out of jail card from any guilt for any action you will ever take.
No what I am trying to say is that for life to continue from its personal individual reference point it should value itself more than any other life around it. The moment that is not the case the likelihood of death increases.
I said it. Independent thought.
The work culture of these territories has eased year on year though, yet the fertility rate has continued to decline, one possible answer may be that they simply haven't gone past the filter of ease of work that results in a population rebound.
My personal hypothesis based on living in the East is that for the longest time sexual mating pairings were based on family/ community approval, so in a more modernized society where children are no longer interested in their families selecting sexual mates for them, they have no reference point or experience of directly initiating sexual relations or long term interactions with the opposite sex on their own. Add on to this the fact that their moral claims of how the opposite gender is supposed to be appears to be almost childlike in its purity, most people when interacting with the other gender would be finding something far more repulsive than whatever ideal standard they have in their head, a problem that is becoming apparent even in western mating settings.
Mormons are a minority outlier similar to the Amish though. Haredi jews are poor or deeply religious groups within their communities.
In group out group bias could explain it although I do not suggest that is the definite answer.
You are an outsider and conservative in another country. You see your community spread and grow. Feels good.
You are in your own country, you are already surrounded at all times by your own. You will be fine with the natural decline in fertility rate within your own country.
Other alternative would be that you primarily see that population boom among refugee groups not the wealthy immigrants from those countries which matches income relation to fertility.
In their own country with a larger population those conservative groups are a minority of the population as part of total, in a rich country with a far smaller population, they have a larger impact over the total.
3rd theory would seem more realistic as per my experience. In India there is a concept about how people who went abroad in the 70's or 80's appear to be more conservative than those that stayed in India from that time period. This is theorized to be primarily due to people retaining the culture they left with to another country, so they never had any natural changes in their cultural practices that they would have otherwise had over the years if they had remained in their own country.
So you have a cultural divergence. The Middle Eastern immigrant in the middle east is living according to the cultural values of the middle east now. The middle easterner in Europe is living according to the middle eastern values of whatever point in time they left which is their last true reference point.
Again, all hypothesis, it could be any of these or none of these or a combination.
But even in western societies that bear equal responsibility for children, the total fertility rate tends to be below replacement. Which suggest again that it is not a solution, just something that slows down population decline to acceptable levels. So maybe yeah it is a solution.
May I ask how long you would enjoy living in a society where year on year the economic decline from population loss is a net negative?
Would you be willing to support depopulation policies if you were informed 20 years from now it would see your income halve?
I ask this as a hypothetical ofcourse but I would be interested in your final response.
Same for East European states.
You know I just had a thought bubble. Perhaps the reason societies used to seem far more stable in the past is because anyone who acted outside the system or had such tendencies used to die out, but in modern times for the first time we are keeping all personality types alive and functional in a society.
So we have extreme traditionalists and futurists existing within the same system to extremes that wouldn't have been possible in the past.
Nice. I look forward to perfected body replacements for every single part of the body.
Liver replacement business would boom.
If feminism misguided then why South Korea collapsing first?
My thoughts are that feminism began as a misguided quest to treat women like men
Disagree unless you mean be given the same basic rights as men. Then the same financial and social freedoms as men. Acting like men was a very 2010's thing.
then was adopted by bitter harridans and predatory men who realized the sexual revolution and increasing destruction of traditional mindsets would secure them steady supplies of consequence-free young pussy
Disagree. 1960's feminism had a whimsical quality to it which would have genuinely attracted many followers who wanted to see the world be a nicer place.
at the expense of the stability and health of our previous culture (a boon for the former).
There weren't enough harridans in that time period. Most incels actually came to be in recent decades only.
The goal of feminism is to let women be the type of men they've always hated. It's no surprise this suffocates fertility.
That appears to have been the trend of only the newest wave of feminism.
I believe you are making the mistake of taking current day attitudes and extending them through previous historical time periods to come to conclusions as to what they were about.
Why would skin color make people have less children?
Why would collectivist ideals create less children when under collectivist ideals people work for society?
The legacy of communism never reached India or Singapore.
The Arab states were barely a few decades later than Europe, yet their fertility rate remained very high for a long time and only began to start declining to near replacement rates around the same point in time where they started attempting to culturally modernize.
Mexico is the most overworked country in the world and has a far higher fertility rate than the developed Asian nations.
Among commentaries by Japanese women, South Korean women, one of the primary reasons listed appears to be that they are required to focus both on their careers but also expected to live by very old traditionalist gender norms once they get married. This fits within my statement that modern industrialized and developed societies with traditionalist gender roles would see the greatest decline in fertility rates.
As far as I can tell the shoe I claim fits is fitting better than any of the shoes you have stated as alternatives.
I would argue that it would still be higher than other developed nations rich ethnically white populations, as France does retain a higher fertility rate than any other white nation, including other white nations with a higher foreign born populace.
Let me add on where I am coming from to enhance understanding.
I do not see a problem with population decline itself.
The problem is that a population decline above a certain rate would always result in a socio-economic collapse.
Add on to this the fact that after a certain point a country ends up being too small in numbers to be able to compete well with it's competitors if those other countries maintain long term higher numbers.
Now, as you said different countries have different sexual norms and fertility baselines. However, far as I can tell, any country that starts to align its laws with western women's rights ideals tends to see it's fertility rate drop faster than countries that have no to little contact with such ideologies.
This itself is again not the problem, the issue is that by the end of the day fertility decline beyond a certain threshold results in national instability and decay risks increasing.
Plus on a more personal note, I have never been a fan of death cults, not even those that actively speak of freedoms and liberty.
Adding on to this the fact that modern day feminism appears to me as one of the rare ideologies which place motherhood on the back burner as a worthwhile or celebratory value. Going as far as to not only deny it's value but to actively celebrate single independent livelihoods as the sole aspiration.
I could be wrong in my interpretation however and would like to hear your thoughts on that.
I don't think the incels are necessarily wrong, I just think they came to the wrong conclusions with the data available.
The Night lords trilogy - set in the 40k universe it is a series written from the perspective of the bad guys. I think it is a good study in seeing how you end up rooting for the bad guy if you see the story from their perspective even though they are doing terrible things. Makes ya think about human nature and how strong in-group out-group bias honestly is.
Made me realize if you were born in a tribe of torturers or cannibals 9/10 you would end up okay with torture or cannibalism as another aspect of life.
I think the decline in fertility below 2.1 (replacement rate) can be directly linked to modern day feminism and women's rights. However, what I have noticed is that rich female friendly nations do far better in terms of birth rate than rich conservative strict gender role societies.
For example - France has a fertility rate around 1.8. 1.7 for the US. Germany 1.4.
In the east with more strict gender norms the rich societies however have far more abysmal fertility rates - Japan 1.3, South Korea 0.8, Taiwan 1.1, Singapore 1.2.
Now one may argue that the decline in fertility rate is not due to feminism and women's emancipation but rather due to improvements in wealth of society. However, a counterpoint to this is that faster modernizing societies; in terms of becoming more feminist, tend to have declining fertility rates even when not wealthy nations.
Example- Nepal - 1.8, India - 2.0-2.1.
Based on the above data I would posit that feminist societies result in fertility rates declining to below replacement rates, but once a country is wealthy it is far worse for the population to remain conservative than for it to be a feminist nation due to the fact that conservative rich nations do far worse on population growth than feminist nations.
Conclusion - modern feminism doomed/ saved human civilization to constant steady population decline and that's the best case scenario for population demographics from all the options currently available.
Thoughts?
Any community I see with that as a mascot I would get an automatic instinct to bully.
I mostly jest but I think we need something more.....less cartoony.
Have we figured out robot hearts or lab grown hearts yet?
You could try to invite the intellectual userbase of rdrama. That's how I ended up here. Some guy messaged me and told me I would be more appreciated here.
I expect less new fields getting revolutionized and more currently AI friendly fields getting huge upgrades.
Imagine call center AI that actually sounds fully human or AI assistants that sound fully human.
However, sticking to the spirit of your question, my answer would be mathematics. With Mathematicians only existing to reevaluate the solutions given by AI to confirm they would work. Mathematics would become far more an engineering field than a person coming up with a solution on their own field.
but Japanese and South Koreans are fit still they do not reproduce more. They have worse wage stagnation in Japan.
Atomization makes sense to a degree.
More options
Context Copy link