• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should we care that smart women aren't having kids?

I sort of do, though I would say that the position applies to couples in general rather than just women in particular.

How is civilization supposed to survive if a majority of people ever arbitrarily decide that their petty day-to-day concerns trump the survival of the species?

What "petty day-to-day concerns" might that be? A job, food, clothing, housing, that kind of thing? Rather judgmental of people about whom you know absolutely nothing. Women are not brood mares. They are not chattel, existing only as birthing stations. They are actual living, breathing people, who have the right to follow their dreams, just like anyone else in this country, including *gasp!* men, for whom those "day-to-day concerns" are apparently not so "petty" in your eyes, since only females who do not procreate to your liking are considered to be "selfish, decadent and stupid... flying in the face of their biological destiny..."

I honestly can't think of anything more insulting and sexist.
 
What "petty day-to-day concerns" might that be? A job, food, clothing, housing, that kind of thing? Rather judgmental of people about whom you know absolutely nothing. Women are not brood mares. They are not chattel, existing only as birthing stations. They are actual living, breathing people, who have the right to follow their dreams, just like anyone else in this country, including *gasp!* men, for whom those "day-to-day concerns" are apparently not so "petty" in your eyes, since only females who do not procreate to your liking are considered to be "selfish, decadent and stupid... flying in the face of their biological destiny..."

I honestly can't think of anything more insulting and sexist.

We could be a society of billionaires living in a perfectly "free" and idyllic utopia, for all I care. It's all for nothing if people cannot be bothered to do something so simple as replace their numbers.

I'm sorry, but hedonistic materialism simply should not be the end all and be all of a given individual, or even society's, existence.

It's exactly these kinds of short-sighted attitudes that are ultimately going to doom the Western World to the trash heap of history.
 
We could be a society of billionaires living in a perfectly "free" and idyllic utopia, for all I care. It's all for nothing if people cannot be bothered to do something so simple as replace their numbers.

I'm sorry, but hedonistic materialism simply should not be the end all and be all of a given individual, or even society's, existence.

It's exactly these kinds of short-sighted attitudes that are ultimately going to doom the Western World to the trash heap of history.


It's okay. Those disinclined to reproduce will breed themselves out of the gene pool within a few generations, then those gene-lines that remain will be more inclined to a healthy desire for reproduction. :)
 
The question I'd have to ask is why would ANYONE want to have a kid in this day and age?

Both my kids swear they're never having children. Never. Which is great considering they are 21 and 17 years old.

I don't want either having a child for at least another 10 years or so.

But they're adamant. I can't blame them either.

The world is a pretty messed up place and it appears to be getting much worse.

So why would anyone with common sense and intelligence want to bring more life into this world at this time?


Because if the smart and good people don't have kids, the dumb and evil will inherit the Earth.
 
We could be a society of billionaires living in a perfectly "free" and idyllic utopia, for all I care. It's all for nothing if people cannot be bothered to do something so simple as replace their numbers.

I'm sorry, but hedonistic materialism simply should not be the end all and be all of a given individual, or even society's, existence.

It's exactly these kinds of short-sighted attitudes that are ultimately going to doom the Western World to the trash heap of history.

If I understand you, it's the absolute responsibility for every individual in this country to procreate, which means every couple must produce at least two children. What should become of individuals who, for whatever reason, are medically unable to procreate? Should they be allowed to exist? If so, should a census of such people be taken, and their procreation responsibilities assigned to other, more fertile individuals, who would then be expected to take up the slack?

Does free will enter into this at all?

BTW, your "hedonistic materialism" may be someone else's "rampant poverty". Sometimes foregoing procreation when unable to properly care for a child is better for society, not worse.
 
If I understand you, it's the absolute responsibility for every individual in this country to procreate, which means every couple must produce at least two children. What should become of individuals who, for whatever reason, are medically unable to procreate? Should they be allowed to exist? If so, should a census of such people be taken, and their procreation responsibilities assigned to other, more fertile individuals, who would then be expected to take up the slack?

Does free will enter into this at all?

I'm not advocating making anyone breed who does not wish to. I'm honestly not even convinced that our current society is worth saving in the first place, so I am more than happy to let the Western World sink or swim on its own initiative.

I was simply pointing out that voluntarily choosing not to reproduce can be seen to be a monumentally stupid decision for a wide variety of practical and societal reasons. Not only is anyone who decides to take such a route essentially committing genetic suicide by excluding themselves from the gene pool, but they are hurting society as a whole by robbing us all of any number of potential future laborers, thinkers, and leaders.

The occasional couple making this decision might not be anything especially damning, but the widespread cultural phenomena it has become in the modern Western World is simply completely unsustainable.

BTW, your "hedonistic materialism" may be someone else's "rampant poverty". Sometimes foregoing procreation when unable to properly care for a child is better for society, not worse.

To the contrary, the poor in this country are breeding like rabbits. It is the well-to-do Middle and Upper classes who are slacking.

How is our society supposed to survive if those who consume come to outnumber those who produce?
 
Last edited:
We could be a society of billionaires living in a perfectly "free" and idyllic utopia, for all I care. It's all for nothing if people cannot be bothered to do something so simple as replace their numbers.

I'm sorry, but hedonistic materialism simply should not be the end all and be all of a given individual, or even society's, existence.

It's exactly these kinds of short-sighted attitudes that are ultimately going to doom the Western World to the trash heap of history.

That's illogical in my estimation. I mean seriously. How many families have the Duggans got covered.
 
It's nature's way of telling us that, after a certain level is achieved, intelligence doesn't necessarilly help with survival.
 
...I was simply pointing out that voluntarily choosing not to reproduce can be seen to be a monumentally stupid decision for a wide variety of practical and societal reasons. Not only is anyone who decides to take such a route essentially committing genetic suicide by excluding themselves from the gene pool, but they are hurting society as a whole by robbing us all of any number of potential future laborers, thinkers, and leaders.....

The world as a whole in reproducing is huge numbers. Any population reduction in one specific geographic area is not significant because people will migrate fairly quickly to the places where necessary resources are most available, which will be the most potentially productive areas with low population density.
 
Should we care that smart women aren't having kids? | Sadhbh Walshe | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Part of the reason I put this here is that the argument of the article appears to be totally ass-backwards.



Frankly, I don't understand why anybody cares who does or doesn't choose to have children. As long as you can provide for however many children you have, that's your business.

But the whole IQ vs momhood thing is lame.

Well, I get where he's coming from. I'm childless by choice. I'm also a biological failure. *shrug*

Edit: I'm fulfilled. I've influenced many people's lives in a good way -- changed the lives of some for the better, I'd venture. But nothing I've done in my life compares to the fulfillment of wanting and having children that you parent into happy and successful adults. At least that's my thought...
 
The world as a whole in reproducing is huge numbers. Any population reduction in one specific geographic area is not significant because people will migrate fairly quickly to the places where necessary resources are most available, which will be the most potentially productive areas with low population density.

Which essentially means that Western Civilization, as a distinct entity, is doomed. If current population growth and immigration patterns hold, it is basically a mathematical certainty that ethnic Westerners will inevitably become marginalized minorities within their own nations.

This is fine, I suppose. Everyone ultimately "reaps what they sow." However, I wouldn't say that this really does much of anything to validate current Western cultural attitudes regarding reproduction.

It basically just proves my point. Western couples making the widespread decision not to reproduce is an intrinsically short-sighted and self-destructive strategy that subsidizes the present at the expense of the future. It will ultimately result in the downfall of the very culture which makes such behavior possible in the first place.

Additionally, your argument here fails to account for the rise of developing world. The way things are now, it might not be too terribly long before nations like India and China actually surpass the Western World in terms of economic opportunity and desirable living conditions.

On a long term basis, people might actually start migrating away from the stagnant economic backwaters of the Western World in favor of East Asian nations instead.

I'm not seeing that as a bad thing. People shouldn't be having babies they can't afford.

Most of the people having children in the United States these days cannot afford them.

The problem is that legitimately productive people who actually can afford to have children are choosing not to because they view it as being inconvenient.
 
Last edited:
Most of the people having children in the United States these days cannot afford them.

The problem is that legitimately productive people who actually can afford to have children are choosing not to because they view it as being inconvenient.

I can't wrap my brain around having kids for any reason other than wanting to. If you don't want to, why would you?
 
I can't wrap my brain around having kids for any reason other than wanting to. If you don't want to, why would you?

If you don't want children, you shouldn't have them. I'm not telling anyone otherwise.

I simply think it's very telling that our society's values have become so perversely warped and narcissistic in recent decades that it is now the case that most "well off" people either don't want children, or only have one or two, often begrudgingly, even if their financial circumstances easily allow for the raising of a decent sized family.

I'd almost describe the situation as being akin to something like anorexia. People have become so obsessed with the superficial aspects of the accumulation of material wealth and creature comforts that they have almost completely forgotten why our forbearers worked to make these things so readily available in the first place. The health of our society as a whole is suffering for this fact.

People aren't meant to live only for themselves and then die afterwards, leaving naught for a legacy behind but a vacant job posting. They're meant to drive society forward; to replace themselves, and give the next generation something to aspire towards.

The way people seem to think these days, it's getting harder and harder to even have a meaningful "next generation" in the first place.

Take a moment just to let our current predicament sink in. Western culture is slowly but surely being supplanted (and possibly even dying out) because people are too fundamentally lazy and self-centered to breed, and there is a significant portion of our population who actually thinks that this is a good thing.

Honest to God, this premise could easily be the subject of a Twilight Zone episode. I'm frankly still kind of baffled as to how we could possibly be living in a world where most people fail to realize this.

Are we really that far gone?

If we are, so be it. The world will be better off without us anyway.
 
Last edited:
If you don't want children, you shouldn't have them. I'm not telling anyone otherwise.

I simply think it's very telling that our society's values have become so perversely warped and narcissistic in recent decades that it is now the case that most "well off" people either don't want children, or only have one or two, often begrudgingly, even if their financial circumstances easily allow for the raising of a decent sized family.

I'd almost describe the situation as being akin to something like anorexia. People have become so obsessed with the superficial aspects of the accumulation of material wealth and creature comforts that they have almost completely forgotten why our forbearers worked to make these things so readily available in the first place. The health of our society as a whole is suffering for this fact.

People aren't meant to live only for themselves and then die afterwards, leaving naught for a legacy behind but a vacant job posting. They're meant to drive society forward; to replace themselves, and give the next generation something to aspire towards.

The way people seem to think these days, it's getting harder and harder to even have a meaningful "next generation" in the first place.

Take a moment just to let our current predicament sink in. Western culture is slowly but surely being supplanted (and possibly even dying out) because people are too fundamentally lazy and self-centered to breed, and there is a significant portion of our population who actually thinks that this is a good thing.

Honest to God, this premise could easily be the subject of a Twilight Zone episode. I'm frankly still kind of baffled as to how we could possibly be living in a world where most people fail to realize this.

Are we really that far gone?

If we are, so be it. The world will be better off without us anyway.

I'm sorry; I just don't get it. First because you are ascribing a whole lot of thoughts and behaviors to people which may or may not fit, and second, even if you are right, it still comes down to - I don't see why it matters.
 
I'm sorry; I just don't get it. First because you are ascribing a whole lot of thoughts and behaviors to people which may or may not fit, and second, even if you are right, it still comes down to - I don't see why it matters.

First off, according to the statistics available on the matter, and the viewpoints expressed by several people on the other side of the fence in this very thread, the thoughts and behaviors I elaborated upon above more or less perfectly describe the common Western mindset towards parenthood in our current era.

i.e.

"Children and parental responsibility are icky! It's more fun to be foot loose and fancy free!"

Secondly, if you still don't "get it" after all I've posted so far, it's not going to magically come together for you all of the sudden now if I start repeating myself.

Needless to say, I've basically just told you that Western Civilization is going down the tubes due to self-centered and counter-productive hedonistic attitudes, and most people can't even be bothered to care. Your basic reaction to this argument seems to be: "LOL, so? It doesn't bother me!"

Ummm... Thanks for proving my point, I guess? wtf.gif

Honestly, what else am I supposed to say to that? :shrug:
 
Last edited:
First off, according to the statistics, and the viewpoints expressed by several people on the other side of the fence in this very thread, the thoughts and behaviors I elaborated upon above more or less perfectly describe the common Western mindset towards parenthood in our current era.

i.e.

"Kids and responsibility are icky! It's more fun to be foot loose and fancy free!"

Secondly, if you still don't "get it" after all I've posted so far, it's not going to magically come together now all of the sudden if I start repeating myself.

Needless to say, I've basically just told you that Western Civilization is going down the tubes due to self-centered hedonistic attitudes, and most people can't even be bothered to care. Your basic reaction to this argument seems to be: "LOL, so? It doesn't bother me!"

Ummm... Thanks for proving my point, I guess? View attachment 67151947

Honestly, what else am I supposed to say to that? :shug:

You could try explaining why less children equals, in your mind, the decline and fall of western civilization.
 
You could try explaining why less children equals, in your mind, the decline and fall of western civilization.

The fact that we aren't producing enough children to replace our current population levels?

How do you expect Social Security to support you in your old age if there are more seniors drawing government benefits than there are young people working and paying taxes? After all, people are living longer these days than ever before, which is driving medical costs through the roof.

In case you haven't noticed, our government is already more or less broke. I really fail to see how you can believe that a shrinking worforce, and theretofore, shrinking tax base, could do anything but exacerbate this problem.

How about the fact roughly 60% of all children born in the United States are now being born to unwed welfare queens?

Not only are there not enough children being born to replace the current workforce and tax base, but more than half of those that are being born at present are being brought up in an environment that is unlikely to lead them towards becoming productive working or tax paying members of our society anyway.

I'm sure that'll help. :roll:

What about the fact that native whites are expected to become minorities in many of their own nations before the turn of the century?

Projections Put Whites in Minority in U.S. by 2050

White Britons 'will be minority' before 2070, says professor

What possible incentive will non-Western immigrants have to conform to Western cultural values when they outnumber the native populations of the nations they inhabit?

It is much more likely that they will begin to assimilate us under such circumstances, rather than the other way around.

As a matter of fact, such circumstances have pretty much always proven to be a major cause for civil unrest in the past.

Lebanese Civil War

And on top of all of that, how about the fact that China, which has staggeringly high population growth rates in comparison to the any nation in the Western World, is set to leave the United States and Western World in general in the dust in terms of economic output in just a few years?

OECD Report Says China's Economy Will Overtake US Economy By 2016

What about the fact that India is expected to overtake the Chinese soon afterwards?

Why India Will Displace China as Global Growth Engine

How do you expect the West to remain relevant or competitive on the international stage when it so is so thoroughly outclassed by the rest of the developing world?

I'm sorry, but I really can't help but think that you haven't really thought things through here. :screwy
 
Last edited:
The fact that we aren't producing enough children to replace our current population levels?

How do you expect Social Security to support you in your old age if there are more seniors drawing government benefits than there are young people working and paying taxes? After all, people are living longer these days than ever before, which is driving medical costs through the roof.

In case you haven't noticed, our government is already more or less broke. I really fail to see how you can believe that a shrinking worforce, and theretofore, shrinking tax base, could do anything but exacerbate this problem.

How about the fact roughly 60% of all children born in the United States are now being born to unwed welfare queens?

Not only are there not enough children being born to replace the current workforce and tax base, but more than half of those that are being born at present are being brought up in an environment that is unlikely to lead them towards becoming productive working or tax paying members of our society anyway.

I'm sure that'll help. :roll:

What about the fact that native whites are expected to become minorities in many of their own nations before the turn of the century?

Projections Put Whites in Minority in U.S. by 2050

White Britons 'will be minority' before 2070, says professor

What possible incentive will non-Western immigrants have to conform to Western cultural values when they outnumber the native populations of the nations they inhabit?

It is much more likely that they will begin to assimilate us under such circumstances, rather than the other way around.

As a matter of fact, such circumstances have pretty much always proven to be a major cause for civil unrest in the past.

Lebanese Civil War

And on top of all of that, how about the fact that China, which has staggeringly high population growth rates in comparison to the any nation in the Western World, is set to leave the United States and Western World in general in the dust in terms of economic output in just a few years?

OECD Report Says China's Economy Will Overtake US Economy By 2016

What about the fact that India is expected to overtake the Chinese soon afterwards?

Why India Will Displace China as Global Growth Engine

How do you expect the West to remain relevant or competitive on the international stage when it so is so thoroughly outclassed by the rest of the developing world?

I'm sorry, but I really can't help but think that you haven't really thought things through here. :screwy
China's population growth rate is right around zero. Remember the one child policy.

China along with Japan and south Korea are among the fastest aging populations on earth, I believe only Italy is ahead of them.


As for India, it will never have the standard of living of the west. It does not have the natural resources like water or space to allow for that to occur.


Overall given that the western world has a population of nearly one billion, the chance if it dieing out is very minimal.
 
.. and this was the whole basis of the movie Idiocracy, which is looking more and more realistic...

Yeah, but IQ is not genetic. Well, that's not true actually. Genetics doesn't have the lions' share of the task when it comes to IQ.
 
Should we care that smart women aren't having kids? | Sadhbh Walshe | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Part of the reason I put this here is that the argument of the article appears to be totally ass-backwards.

Frankly, I don't understand why anybody cares who does or doesn't choose to have children. As long as you can provide for however many children you have, that's your business.

But the whole IQ vs momhood thing is lame.

The entire premise of this is... totally backwards. As a childfree woman, this kind of stuff always makes me laugh.

Someone who has opted to not to reproduce has "signed off" from the game, as far as the future of civilization goes. So ethically, they're the ones who have absolutely no responsibility to care about it, because they aren't the ones who created more people to live in the future to begin with. The childed are simply trying to foist their own responsibility to raise their children well onto someone else, who in reality is completely ethically clear from any responsibility for what happens to humanity.

Second of all, the childfree are consistently maligned and isolated by society. This article basically reduces said women to nothing but incubators, and then tells them off for not accepting their role as a spawning beetle laid out on their back. So why on earth should they throw away their dreams and "do favors" for a society that routinely tries to objectify and castigate them? The larger reproducing population doesn't want the childfree to have employment rights, tax rights, or reproductive health care rights. So I completely fail to understand why the childfree should feel any obligation to such a society.

Thirdly, intelligent childfree women tend to be doing things with their lives that benefit, you know, other people's children. I think it shows a lot of hubris for people to badger them so vociferously to stop doing things to help their children, and simply make more instead.

And finally, Kanazawa, who did this "research," is a known crack-pot who's been banned by the university from publishing his "research" if it doesn't make the muster for a real scientific journal, which is probably why he's getting some other idiot to publish it on his behalf, more or less. So I don't take anything he says seriously.

I wish natalists and those who get the sweats around career women would just worry about themselves and stop trying to find reasons to dump their problems and failures on the childfree.
 
Last edited:
What "petty day-to-day concerns" might that be? A job, food, clothing, housing, that kind of thing? Rather judgmental of people about whom you know absolutely nothing. Women are not brood mares. They are not chattel, existing only as birthing stations. They are actual living, breathing people, who have the right to follow their dreams, just like anyone else in this country, including *gasp!* men, for whom those "day-to-day concerns" are apparently not so "petty" in your eyes, since only females who do not procreate to your liking are considered to be "selfish, decadent and stupid... flying in the face of their biological destiny..."

I honestly can't think of anything more insulting and sexist.

When it comes to matters involving females, or femininity, his opinions are only slightly more enlightened than Tiggers
 
Back
Top Bottom