Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

derekthompson.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 927 posts

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#701

Post by coldtea »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #564
mensetmanusman wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s symptoms all the way down. If the system decides it needs more births it will ban abortion, and that’s not a moral failure on the system’s part, it’s an indictment of the symptoms itself.

The system has no morals, but every person operating within it does. If the system demands what it needs from us without regard for morality, it's on us, as moral agents, to refuse compliance. The system can demand what it wants, but no one is obliged to give it anything. If the point is that the system will coerce what it needs from us, then it deserves not merely to perish, but to be destroyed, actively, deliberate…

>The system has no morals, but every person operating within it does.

Most people just have whatever morals the system gives them.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#702

Post by [deleted] »

swat535 wrote: post #338
crtified wrote: post #178

My anecdotal experience, which illustrates how changing societal norms may be contributing. Around 1960, my grandmother scandalously fell pregnant with my mother in her late teens. The child was adopted out - well, not out - in. To her own grandmother, to be raised as a "younger sister" to her own mother. Around 1980, my mother scandalously fell pregnant with me, in her late teens. Despite family disapproval, the chi…

I think the uncomfortable truth that many are reluctant to admit is that religion and societal norms (as you highlighted above) played a major role in this. I'm not discounting other facts such as the housing crisis or cost of living but I fear that while those are important, they are secondary. Women were often forced to carry a child due to outside pressure and had no recourse. However since the introduction of saf…

[deleted]

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#703

Post by npteljes »

coldtea wrote: post #685
npteljes wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There’s a reason biology makes you capable of having children at a young age Biology and evolution doesn't really have a huge baseline. You basically have to survive until you reproduce successfully. Successfully here meaning that the offspring also has to do the same. If this is sustainable - the species is viable. But, us humans like to know better. That's what the entire civilization is all about. And on the path…

> But, us humans like to know better. That's what the entire civilization is all about. You mean the kind of knowing better that led us to destroy the environment, and appears to be removing whole populations from the gene pool with way below subreplacement rates?

Exactly that kind of knowing better.

It's a bit tongue-in-cheek because of the multiple interpretations of "knowing better". On one hand, we "know better" in a way that we, as in all humans, constantly try to control nature and the natural flow of things. Our entire civilization and way of life is a result of that.

On the other hand, I mean it a bit sarcastically, because I'm not convinced on a philosophical level that this kind of living is morally, ethically, humanely superior than that of ancient people's living. Often it looks like that progress is just for the progress' sake, an eternal power struggle, a Prisoner's dilemma. In short, when I ask myself "is progress good", I don't feel strongly toward any answer. I meant to encapsulate this by phrasing it as "knowing better".

But the drive to "know better" is there for sure, even though the results vary. I do believe that good can come from it, and that many efforts actually resulted in lessening human suffering, which I consider a good thing. I mean here efforts like equal rights movements, reproductive health and education, and proper access to medical help (to stay on topic).

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#704

Post by sebmellen »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #446
crtified wrote: post #178

My anecdotal experience, which illustrates how changing societal norms may be contributing. Around 1960, my grandmother scandalously fell pregnant with my mother in her late teens. The child was adopted out - well, not out - in. To her own grandmother, to be raised as a "younger sister" to her own mother. Around 1980, my mother scandalously fell pregnant with me, in her late teens. Despite family disapproval, the chi…

Having kids when you are young and financially not established is just irresponsible, but particularly female bodies don’t do well having kids older when you are established enough to do so responsibly. I’m having this problem right now with my spouse (we have a kid, but are thinking about another), it’s just super hard to get pregnant without medical help.

Why? Can you defend this for me? I'm genuinely asking. Why is it irresponsible to have a child when you're young and financially not established? Why is it any more irresponsible to do that than to have children at a geriatric age?

Children are resilient, and so are parents.

In my opinion, this idea that you have to have everything perfectly set up in life before you can contemplate having a child is ridiculous.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#705

Post by sebmellen »

squigz wrote: post #639
KolibriFly wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a perspective that often gets lost in the macro-level fertility discussions: how many births never happen not because people don’t want kids, but because the only off-ramp they might've taken got paved over by modern expectations, norms and etc

In the past, how many people had kids not because they wanted to but because of social expectations, norms, etc?

In the present, how many of your daily actions and decisions are made not because you want to but because of social expectations or norms?

Is there any utility to having social expectations or norms that push you to do things that you may not “want” to?

In the past, people had kids because that's just what happened between people. Pregnancy was a natural consequence of human life.

Making childbearing a choice means that you need some social framework to encourage it, otherwise it becomes completely gauche and impractical. In the absence of this supportive social framework, fertility rates will drop, and in many cases precipitously. The long-term consequence of that drop in fertility is, at its most extreme, the collapse of modern civilization.

Compare Israel with South Korea, for example. Both are mostly developed economies. In one of these societies, kids are a status symbol; in the other, they are generally considered a nuisance (e.g. kids will often be banned from restaurants or other social watering holes). Can you guess which one of these societies will survive longer?

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#706

Post by teitoklien »

intended wrote: post #694
teitoklien wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is heavily politicized, atleast for the forseable future, until society reaches a conclusion, people will lie with statistics, smear their opponents in discussion as bigots, sexists, whatever. But sooner or later it needs to be asked and acted upon. Should society structure itself to penalise abortions, and reward births of children. Did our old religious and conservative societies where parents and grandparents h…

Why use a bot to write this?

not a single line from it is written by a bot

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#707

Post by intended »

epicureanideal wrote: post #317
UncleMeat wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many men advocate for an equitable household. But the stats are clear. Women still perform substantially more labor at home than men do across the US population.

The stats are rigged and biased by not counting the types of work men do, and if they did count it they wouldn’t reach the “right” conclusions so wouldn’t be published. This is written about quite a bit.

This is bunk - as in not even wrong territory.

Measures of productivity didn’t count domestic labor at all for the longest time. That correction occurred in this life time.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#708

Post by [deleted] »

paradox460 wrote: post #445
like_any_other wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget the parenting of extended family and neighbors - it takes a village.. But we're moving further and further from local, village-like lives.

We're also seeing baby boomers, who were raised partially by their grandparents, neglecting the role of grandparent. They live vicariously, through Facebook and video calls, and when the parents ask for them to get more involved, they're met with "I raised you, so I've done my part" Both my wife and my parents maybe see our kids twice a year, thrice if they have some other reason to come to town. And it's not an issu…

[deleted]

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#709

Post by sebmellen »

paradox460 wrote: post #445
like_any_other wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget the parenting of extended family and neighbors - it takes a village.. But we're moving further and further from local, village-like lives.

We're also seeing baby boomers, who were raised partially by their grandparents, neglecting the role of grandparent. They live vicariously, through Facebook and video calls, and when the parents ask for them to get more involved, they're met with "I raised you, so I've done my part" Both my wife and my parents maybe see our kids twice a year, thrice if they have some other reason to come to town. And it's not an issu…

I'm hoping you mean your wife's parents and not your wife haha. But I’m sorry to hear that… my wife and I got blessed with very involved grandparents.

Re: What caused the 'baby boom'? What would it take to have another?

#710

Post by Aeolun »

npteljes wrote: post #620
Aeolun wrote: post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> actually teen pregnancy wasn't so bad I mean, it was a thing for most of human history. There’s a reason biology makes you capable of having children at a young age. Isn’t it kinda bizarre that we think it’s weird?

>There’s a reason biology makes you capable of having children at a young age Biology and evolution doesn't really have a huge baseline. You basically have to survive until you reproduce successfully. Successfully here meaning that the offspring also has to do the same. If this is sustainable - the species is viable. But, us humans like to know better. That's what the entire civilization is all about. And on the path…

> we found that getting pregnant early actually is a detriment to the individual, their immediate surroundings, and society as a whole

You are citing a source that talks about unintended pregnancies (often as a result of sexual abuse) in developing nations. With nearly half of those being prematurely aborted in some (medically safe or not) way.

I’m inclined to believe that the support system throughout most of history was better than what these girls get.

Post reply on HN