Demographics decline - sustainability or catastrophe?

[RedmondStash]

While it's a bummer reading more casual biological-imperative sexism stated as undisputed fact -- btw, the 1950s wants their belief system back -- it is heartening to see so many of you fine people push back against it.

So at least there's that.

[Kris]

Maybe women are tired?  Like, physically tired?  I hear so many stories of women having health issues and doctors ignoring them.  It's hard to do everything if you are anemic and asthmatic and untreated, like someone I know on another forum.  It only took 20 years and several doctors before she got any medical help.  All sorts of medical conditions get paid attention to if they are in a man's body and ignored if they are in a woman's body.  It's all in our silly lazy little heads, don't you know?  /s

Eh? So? Completely anecdotal. I have a male friend who has had poor health throughout his adult life. At the age of 47 took a controlled blood sugar test being offered and within an hour was identified as a severe diabetic and put into the back of an ambulance. Health services aren't perfect, but I seriously doubt there have materially different outcomes depending on your sex.

Women are tired because? Yes. Probably because they've been conditioned to endlessly and somewhat needlessly compete with men on so many fronts. You think we ain't just a little jaded too...

@vand, before you base your opinions on your own experience, which is limited, as is any one person's experience, please read Invisible Women by Caroline Criado-Perez.  It is an eye-opening book.  As a mustachian here I expect you will check your library first - most libraries have it.  If yours does not, I suggest you recommend your library buy a copy.  It is a book that should be widely accessible.

But basically, so much is just "that is how things are" that people accept inequalities.  And things are so built in to our lives that we don't even realize that there are inequalities until they hit us.  Or things change and we look back and see the inequalities in retrospect.

First, I'm not going to read the whole book, which is asking for a big time commitment that I don't necessarily want to put in.
Second, as a "new wave" mustachian I would just buy the damn thing if I was going to read it.
But, I did read a load of cliff note on it and I get the general gist.

Look, of course the world is shaped by those who have most heavily influenced it, and throughout human history that has tended to be men.  But you have to look at it this way too: it is mostly men who have raised the world from its state of squalid poverty to one where with technological wonder and unparalleled standard of living for even working class people.  If women are complaining about that then maybe they should have had greater contribution into.. discovering electricity, developing the theory of microorganisms, or splitting the atom, or developing a machine that can fly through the air, or developing and driving the mass production of automobiles...
Yes absolutely the world is built by men. It had to be that way because men and women ARE different. Men are the creators, women are the nurturers - those are the roles that have allowed us to thrive as a species, despite what the revisionist liberated women's unions of OF are telling you. So Instead of contrasting it with a world shaped by women, the better comparison is to a world simply without it. Skyscrapers replaced by shanties (how many women work in construction?) etc.
Men, not women, built the modern world we live in today and are still thoroughly unappreciated.

It’s really a shame that you are unwilling to read this book, @vand . I just got it from the library and started reading it. It’s a pretty rigorous and well-researched argument against pretty much everything you are saying here,

[afox]

I spent the weekend doing multiple technical tasks for household while my wife did a lot of cooking and most of the childcare. Most of the work I was doing was dangerous work that requires specialized tools and knowledge that people typically pay "professionals" well in excess of $150 an hour to do and I was thinking in every relationship I have been in and in every relationship I can think of its the men that do this type of work. I cant explain why that is.

I watch a lot of youtube videos about such technical work, HVAC, construction, building, electronics, plumbing, engineering, etc. I watch these videos because they are interesting to me but mainly its so that I can learn skills to better my life by DIY-ing just about everything and saving money. It occurred to me that every single one of these youtube channels is from a male creator/author.

Males have vastly higher rates of suicide, are twice as  likely to be victims of violent crime, suffer from most diseases at much higher rates than females, die younger, etc.

Yeah, I know, so what.

[jeninco]

I spent the weekend doing multiple technical tasks for household while my wife did a lot of cooking and most of the childcare. Most of the work I was doing was dangerous work that requires specialized tools and knowledge that people typically pay "professionals" well in excess of $150 an hour to do and I was thinking in every relationship I have been in and in every relationship I can think of its the men that do this type of work. I cant explain why that is.

I watch a lot of youtube videos about such technical work, HVAC, construction, building, electronics, plumbing, engineering, etc. I watch these videos because they are interesting to me but mainly its so that I can learn skills to better my life by DIY-ing just about everything and saving money. It occurred to me that every single one of these youtube channels is from a male creator/author.

Males have vastly higher rates of suicide, are twice as  likely to be victims of violent crime, suffer from most diseases at much higher rates than females, die younger, etc.

Yeah, I know, so what.

You are missing the main point of feminism, which is that the system sucks for everyone, and we need to adapt so that human people aren't siloed into professions, hobbies, or tasks based on which wobbly parts they have. And that men and boys should learn the skills they need to, you know, be a fully functioning human being, who gets angry sometimes, but can distinguish that from being sad, or hurt, or just upset.. And who has skills to de-escalate situations that can turn violent, and is encouraged to do so, rather than just "fighting it out" or whatever bullshit passes for that now.

Also, I doubt you emerged from the birth canal along with all those tools: you accumulated them over time and learned to use them. Are you teaching those skills to your sons and daughters equally, and with equal patience?

We can also talk about universal healthcare, but this is probably not the place.

[Kris]

I spent the weekend doing multiple technical tasks for household while my wife did a lot of cooking and most of the childcare. Most of the work I was doing was dangerous work that requires specialized tools and knowledge that people typically pay "professionals" well in excess of $150 an hour to do and I was thinking in every relationship I have been in and in every relationship I can think of its the men that do this type of work. I cant explain why that is.

I watch a lot of youtube videos about such technical work, HVAC, construction, building, electronics, plumbing, engineering, etc. I watch these videos because they are interesting to me but mainly its so that I can learn skills to better my life by DIY-ing just about everything and saving money. It occurred to me that every single one of these youtube channels is from a male creator/author.

Males have vastly higher rates of suicide, are twice as  likely to be victims of violent crime, suffer from most diseases at much higher rates than females, die younger, etc.

Yeah, I know, so what.

Yeah, it’s because both men and women have been socialized since birth to teach little boys about that kind of stuff but not little girls.

There’s no reason in the world why women can’t do any and all of those tasks. It’s just that they have to be out-of-the-box thinkers to start doing it.

[GuitarStv]

Yeah, it’s because both men and women have been socialized since birth to teach little boys about that kind of stuff but not little girls.

There’s no reason in the world why women can’t do any and all of those tasks. It’s just that they have to be out-of-the-box thinkers to start doing it.

Yeah, this is a thing I've been thinking about an awful lot while raising my son.  I was always told that men and women could achieve the same things while growing up.  My mom and dad both were really keen to encourage my sister to try out anything at all that she was interested in.  But when someone needed to chop firewood for the wood stove, it was always me.  When mom was doing Christmas baking, it was always my sister who was asked to help.  When dad was fixing stuff around the house, it was always me who held the flashlight.  When the neighbours needed a babysitter, it was my sister who was always volunteered.  And my parents were about as pro-women's rights as you get for the late 80s and early 90s.

Cultural momentum is a powerful thing . . . and habits and examples you see when you're younger stick with you for a long time even unconsciously.  I'm sure that these just seemed natural because it's what my parents were exposed to when younger.

[deborah]

I spent the weekend doing multiple technical tasks for household while my wife did a lot of cooking and most of the childcare. Most of the work I was doing was dangerous work that requires specialized tools and knowledge that people typically pay "professionals" well in excess of $150 an hour to do and I was thinking in every relationship I have been in and in every relationship I can think of its the men that do this type of work. I cant explain why that is.

I watch a lot of youtube videos about such technical work, HVAC, construction, building, electronics, plumbing, engineering, etc. I watch these videos because they are interesting to me but mainly its so that I can learn skills to better my life by DIY-ing just about everything and saving money. It occurred to me that every single one of these youtube channels is from a male creator/author.

Males have vastly higher rates of suicide, are twice as  likely to be victims of violent crime, suffer from most diseases at much higher rates than females, die younger, etc.

Yeah, I know, so what.

Goodness gracious!

What would you rather be doing? The stuff that you are, or the stuff that your wife is doing? How competent are you at childcare and cooking - they both need a fair bit of practice to get right. There’s also a bit of danger involved in cooking and childcare. And why should we pay more for what’s seen as men’s work than for things that are seen as women’s work when they require the same amount of training?

And, come to that, how competent are you at doing the stuff that you are doing - it sounds like “not very” if you always need to watch lots of videos about it. If that’s the case, you’re probably taking a lot more time than a professional, and possibly doing a worse job, so your theoretical rate of pay would be much lower than that of a professional.

Let’s go on to the next point. All videos are made by men. I very much doubt that’s the case, but there are bound to be a lot fewer made by women. Off the top of my head, I can think of many reasons why. Firstly, this sort of stuff is usually seen as a man’s job, and there are a lot more men doing it, so there will be more men’s than women’s videos. There’s also a lot of bias in that men tend to think that only men can do such stuff, so if they came across a woman’s video, they probably wouldn’t watch it. The women makers of videos would get less views and be less likely to be at the top of the list, so their videos wouldn’t be in the list the next time someone looked. The women wouldn’t get much feedback, and would have less impetuous to produce more. Also, it’s been shown time and time again that men are more likely to believe that they are great at doing something when they have less skill than a woman does who doesn’t think she can do it well.

There are a fair number of women on this forum who do technical tasks around the home. For instance, I completely renovated my last home. My male partner occasionally did a bit of the work, but under my supervision. He was living in a different city while I did most of it. There’s a lot of this stuff that’s easier with two people, and I’d be surprised if your wife wasn’t roped in as a helper. There’s a woman in Louisiana who completely rebuilt her house after a flood. And there are a lot more of us. Perhaps you haven’t seen the wonderful tractor photo a woman recently posted on the forum either.

Yes, males are more often the victims of violent crime. They are also much more often the perpetrators of violent crime.

[InterfaceLeader]

Males have vastly higher rates of suicide, are twice as  likely to be victims of violent crime, suffer from most diseases at much higher rates than females, die younger, etc.

Yeah, I know, so what.

Like it isn't women turning up for the prison visits, the mental health ward visits, cleaning up the vomit, begging their partners to go to the doctor, begging their sons to go to therapy, and grieving their dead sons, husbands and fathers.

Patriarchy hurts everyone, that's the 101 cliff notes version. Women don't benefit when the only way men know how to deal with their negative emotions is by taking violent action against themselves or others. Women don't benefit when men refuse to take basic preventative health care seriously, because pushing through pain is the only thing they know how to do.

Women were also just as capable of perpetuating patriarchy and negative stereotypes. This isn't... or shouldn't... be a men vs women conversation. This should be an everyone vs patriarchy conversation. How do we build a better, more equitable, and safer world for everybody.

[LightTripper]

@InterfaceLeader I felt the need, despite myself, to add something to this conversation - but you have just said everything I wanted to add very neatly - thank you!

[Metalcat]

This particular community is packed with women who do traditionally "masculine" things.

Why? Because this is a community of people who are generally successful at pushing back against social conditioning.

Also, I have both DIY skills (fancy tools included) AND cooking skills (fancy tools included) and the cooking skills are far more complex and took much longer to learn. They also have far more impact on our overall well being and quality of life than my ability to replace plumbing.

Also, I just want to comment, as someone who has engaged in endless "masculine" skills and tasks, I have always found it hilarious how much of "men's work" is focused on making things pretty: home renovations, working on cars, landscaping.

So much of "practical" men's labour ends up with a huge element of artistic/esthetic self-expression through technical artistry.

So much of women's labour revolves around keeping humans alive and clean.

[mistymoney]

Thanks to those fighting the good fight here.

I can't even really respond to some of the shit being be written here - I mean anyone holding those views in 2024 - they aren't really going to "hear" anything that doesn't correspond with their views anyway. They have obviously been ignoring and discounting anything verging on social progress for decades as they cling to pseudofacts to support this nonsense. Like - I used a hammer and a saw this weekend, therefore women are inferior. I mean.....really?

I see the value in countering sexist bullshit whereever it may rear its ugly self, and I salute all doing so here.

[jrhampt]

Thanks to those fighting the good fight here.

I can't even really respond to some of the shit being be written here - I mean anyone holding those views in 2024 - they aren't really going to "hear" anything that doesn't correspond with their views anyway. They have obviously been ignoring and discounting anything verging on social progress for decades as they cling to pseudofacts to support this nonsense. Like - I used a hammer and a saw this weekend, therefore women are inferior. I mean.....really?

I see the value in countering sexist bullshit whereever it may rear its ugly self, and I salute all doing so here.

Same.  There is some serious bullshit in this thread.

[SuperNintendo Chalmers]

Yes.  I've been silently following this thread through all 11 pages, and the March 5th "world was built by men, and my particular worldview is right despite what anyone else is telling you" post is where it pretty much jumped the shark.  On the plus side, I've appreciated the thoughtful replies with some excellent points, even if will never change those who have already decided their worldview is correct.

On the original topic, as I watch yet another development get approved nearby that will kill hundreds of prairie dogs in horrific ways and encroach even further on the habitats of animals already running out of places to go, I'm on Team Gradual Long-term Reduction In Human Population, with cautious optimism that human ingenuity and adaptation will effectively address the challenges that arise.   

[Posthumane]

It occurred to me that every single one of these youtube channels is from a male creator/author.

There are many technical and interesting youtube channels with female creators. The fact that you're only watching male presented ones is purely your selection bias.

I was thinking in every relationship I have been in and in every relationship I can think of its the men that do this type of work. I cant explain why that is.

In every relationship I've been in the man is approximately the same height and weight, and speaks the same language as me. I can't explain why that is...

[afox]

I used a hammer and a saw this weekend, therefore women are inferior. I mean.....really?

I see the value in countering sexist bullshit wherever it may rear its ugly self, and I salute all doing so here.

Wow, did anyone write that "I used a hammer and a saw this weekend, therefore women are inferior"?

That is some sexist B.S.

[rocketpj]

I'm not going to engage all the absurd sexist stuff because sheesh.  Come on fellow fellows, we can do better.

At to the original post, I suspect that our planet is capable of carrying about 1-2 Billion people sustainably in the long term.  Whatever our opinions and whatever we do, reality will eventually get us there.  How we get there is going to have a very large impact on what it looks like when we arrive.

I also think we need at least about 1 Billion to sustain an economy that can have things like high tech chip fabs.  Those don't happen in villages.

Option 1:  The current model.  Grow grow grow until we break the carrying capacity of the world, then crash hard.  Mass famine, social collapse, war.  Probably end up with some variation of authoritarian governments where a few elites live well and everyone else is miserable (aside from the last 200ish years, the default human governance model).  Think back to about 1000 AD with the added pain of knowing things were once very nice for humans.

Option 2: Alternate model.  Maintain current standards of living by increasing productivity while decreasing total population over time.  Repair current damage to the carrying capacity of the planet, prevent future damage.

This is a good time to point out that Japan's economy has been 'stagnant' for about 30 years in the common economic sense.  However standards of living have continued to rise as the population has shrunk, largely because of continued improvements to productivity through technology.  There is no reason this can't be done everywhere else as well.

[dangbe]

I'm not going to engage all the absurd sexist stuff because sheesh.  Come on fellow fellows, we can do better.

At to the original post, I suspect that our planet is capable of carrying about 1-2 Billion people sustainably in the long term.  Whatever our opinions and whatever we do, reality will eventually get us there.  How we get there is going to have a very large impact on what it looks like when we arrive.

I also think we need at least about 1 Billion to sustain an economy that can have things like high tech chip fabs.  Those don't happen in villages.

Option 1:  The current model.  Grow grow grow until we break the carrying capacity of the world, then crash hard.  Mass famine, social collapse, war.  Probably end up with some variation of authoritarian governments where a few elites live well and everyone else is miserable (aside from the last 200ish years, the default human governance model).  Think back to about 1000 AD with the added pain of knowing things were once very nice for humans.

Option 2: Alternate model.  Maintain current standards of living by increasing productivity while decreasing total population over time.  Repair current damage to the carrying capacity of the planet, prevent future damage.

This is a good time to point out that Japan's economy has been 'stagnant' for about 30 years in the common economic sense.  However standards of living have continued to rise as the population has shrunk, largely because of continued improvements to productivity through technology.  There is no reason this can't be done everywhere else as well.

I'm not sure FIRE is viable with a shrinking population since the economy would stagnate.  Though, I don't think this is a bad thing.  Retiring early may not be possible solely off a stock market index.  But perhaps working wouldn't be so horrible if we had proper welfare systems set up (for everyone including retirees)  or if instead of 40hr weeks the standard was 20-30hrs.  Everyone produces less and lives off less.  A dream world!

[jeninco]

I'm not going to engage all the absurd sexist stuff because sheesh.  Come on fellow fellows, we can do better.

At to the original post, I suspect that our planet is capable of carrying about 1-2 Billion people sustainably in the long term.  Whatever our opinions and whatever we do, reality will eventually get us there.  How we get there is going to have a very large impact on what it looks like when we arrive.

I also think we need at least about 1 Billion to sustain an economy that can have things like high tech chip fabs.  Those don't happen in villages.

Option 1:  The current model.  Grow grow grow until we break the carrying capacity of the world, then crash hard.  Mass famine, social collapse, war.  Probably end up with some variation of authoritarian governments where a few elites live well and everyone else is miserable (aside from the last 200ish years, the default human governance model).  Think back to about 1000 AD with the added pain of knowing things were once very nice for humans.

Option 2: Alternate model.  Maintain current standards of living by increasing productivity while decreasing total population over time.  Repair current damage to the carrying capacity of the planet, prevent future damage.

This is a good time to point out that Japan's economy has been 'stagnant' for about 30 years in the common economic sense.  However standards of living have continued to rise as the population has shrunk, largely because of continued improvements to productivity through technology.  There is no reason this can't be done everywhere else as well.

I'm not sure FIRE is viable with a shrinking population since the economy would stagnate.  Though, I don't think this is a bad thing.  Retiring early may not be possible solely off a stock market index.  But perhaps working wouldn't be so horrible if we had proper welfare systems set up (for everyone including retirees)  or if instead of 40hr weeks the standard was 20-30hrs.  Everyone produces less and lives off less.  A dream world!

Yeah, I think if "work" was less overwhelming, less bullshit, less about building the wealth of a couple of assholes (I'm thinking about C-suite folks here who make good decisions for their own pockets and crappy decisions for the company/environment/most of humanity) and more actual contributing, the urge to quit doing it would be less strong.

[spartana]

I spent the weekend doing multiple technical tasks for household while my wife did a lot of cooking and most of the childcare. Most of the work I was doing was dangerous work that requires specialized tools and knowledge that people typically pay "professionals" well in excess of $150 an hour to do and I was thinking in every relationship I have been in and in every relationship I can think of its the men that do this type of work. I cant explain why that is.

I watch a lot of youtube videos about such technical work, HVAC, construction, building, electronics, plumbing, engineering, etc. I watch these videos because they are interesting to me but mainly its so that I can learn skills to better my life by DIY-ing just about everything and saving money. It occurred to me that every single one of these youtube channels is from a male creator/author.

Males have vastly higher rates of suicide, are twice as  likely to be victims of violent crime, suffer from most diseases at much higher rates than females, die younger, etc.

Yeah, I know, so what.

Yeah, it’s because both men and women have been socialized since birth to teach little boys about that kind of stuff but not little girls.

There’s no reason in the world why women can’t do any and all of those tasks. It’s just that they have to be out-of-the-box thinkers to start doing it.

This. It's always amazing to me that people can't see how different many (most) children are socialized to value and act in certain ways. It's not like girl babies are born knowing how to use a spatula and boy babies a wrench. It's all learned behavior - and in many cases forced learned behavior. It's rare even today (but much much less rare then in the past 40 years) that you can see an equitable upbringing where children aren't directed towards certain activities based on gender rather then interest. Even shamed (often very aggressively) by their parents and family and even society  if they show any interest in pursuing (or not pursuing) certain gender subscribed activities.

[Kris]

I spent the weekend doing multiple technical tasks for household while my wife did a lot of cooking and most of the childcare. Most of the work I was doing was dangerous work that requires specialized tools and knowledge that people typically pay "professionals" well in excess of $150 an hour to do and I was thinking in every relationship I have been in and in every relationship I can think of its the men that do this type of work. I cant explain why that is.

I watch a lot of youtube videos about such technical work, HVAC, construction, building, electronics, plumbing, engineering, etc. I watch these videos because they are interesting to me but mainly its so that I can learn skills to better my life by DIY-ing just about everything and saving money. It occurred to me that every single one of these youtube channels is from a male creator/author.

Males have vastly higher rates of suicide, are twice as  likely to be victims of violent crime, suffer from most diseases at much higher rates than females, die younger, etc.

Yeah, I know, so what.

Yeah, it’s because both men and women have been socialized since birth to teach little boys about that kind of stuff but not little girls.

There’s no reason in the world why women can’t do any and all of those tasks. It’s just that they have to be out-of-the-box thinkers to start doing it.

This. It's always amazing to me that people can't see how different many (most) children are socialized to value and act in certain ways. It's not like girl babies are born knowing how to use a spatula and boy babies a wrench. It's all learned behavior - and in many cases forced learned behavior. It's rare even today (but much much less rare then in the past 40 years) that you can see an equitable upbringing where children aren't directed towards certain activities based on gender rather then interest. Even shamed (often very aggressively) by their parents and family and even society  if they show any interest in pursuing (or not pursuing) certain gender subscribed activities.

Yep. And now we’re right back to “patriarchy harms men/boys, too,” afox.

[partgypsy]

Yep, women are tired of being shit on and we are opting out.  I know I did.  Stop shitting on women and we might decide to have kids.  But we are rational human beings, not crazy people at the whims of some biological clock.  We see the deck is stacked against us and say no thanks.

in addition to birthing and childcare women are by far the biggest percentage of unpaid family/elder care as well. Fir spouses, parents etc at end of life. It's a lot. And not recognized, appreciated or compensated.

[partgypsy]

the birthrate for the entire planet is declining, and as of yet, we're not accepting immigrants from other planets. So any insight I got from my immigrationless US thought experiment, was applicable to the planet in the abstract.

Declining birth rate, but still a rapidly increasing population. The birth rate is around 2.3 right now and expected to stay above the replacement rate for a few more decades. Predictions about human behavior further out than that are pretty meaningless.

Right now, I'd take the under on whatever the prediction is for hitting global replacement level.

Re: rapidly increasing population. We're under 1% a year now, which to your point, is still a lot of people. But as I alluded to above, that net growth is as much about people not dying as it is about new babies being born. And there's an imbalance. The places with the highest life expectancies are also the places having the fewest kids. Some of that gets fixed with immigration. But I don't think that's a solve-all. It's also a tricky subject to navigate, politically.

And that's just the big picture stuff. All this matters on a personal level, too.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/511238/americans-preference-larger-families-highest-1971.aspx

Most Americans still view a family with 2 or 3 kids as ideal. And most childless 50+ year olds wish they would have had kids. But millennials and gen Z aren't having kids or really even taking the steps towards having kids (dating and having sex).

Having kids is by no means necessary for a fulfilling life. But when stated preferences and revealed preferences are off by that much, it's worth looking at pretty closely. And we need to separate out the good reasons (birth control, delaying having kids until you're ready) from the bad (smartphones offer a low-risk alternative to the high-risk activity of facing rejection).

Me and my two sisters, bucking the trends.  I always wonder about this, if my social circle and family are abnormal or not. About a third to half of them don't have kids, and I only know 1 of the childless couples who really wanted them/regret not having them. I believe the stats, but I sure have not seen that in my personal life.

I've had the opposite experience. People I know who did not have kids having no regrets.

[partgypsy]

Maybe women are tired?  Like, physically tired?  I hear so many stories of women having health issues and doctors ignoring them.  It's hard to do everything if you are anemic and asthmatic and untreated, like someone I know on another forum.  It only took 20 years and several doctors before she got any medical help.  All sorts of medical conditions get paid attention to if they are in a man's body and ignored if they are in a woman's body.  It's all in our silly lazy little heads, don't you know?  /s

Eh? So? Completely anecdotal. I have a male friend who has had poor health throughout his adult life. At the age of 47 took a controlled blood sugar test being offered and within an hour was identified as a severe diabetic and put into the back of an ambulance. Health services aren't perfect, but I seriously doubt there have materially different outcomes depending on your sex.

Women are tired because? Yes. Probably because they've been conditioned to endlessly and somewhat needlessly compete with men on so many fronts. You think we ain't just a little jaded too...

@vand, before you base your opinions on your own experience, which is limited, as is any one person's experience, please read Invisible Women by Caroline Criado-Perez.  It is an eye-opening book.  As a mustachian here I expect you will check your library first - most libraries have it.  If yours does not, I suggest you recommend your library buy a copy.  It is a book that should be widely accessible.

But basically, so much is just "that is how things are" that people accept inequalities.  And things are so built in to our lives that we don't even realize that there are inequalities until they hit us.  Or things change and we look back and see the inequalities in retrospect.

First, I'm not going to read the whole book, which is asking for a big time commitment that I don't necessarily want to put in.
Second, as a "new wave" mustachian I would just buy the damn thing if I was going to read it.
But, I did read a load of cliff note on it and I get the general gist.

Look, of course the world is shaped by those who have most heavily influenced it, and throughout human history that has tended to be men.  But you have to look at it this way too: it is mostly men who have raised the world from its state of squalid poverty to one where with technological wonder and unparalleled standard of living for even working class people.  If women are complaining about that then maybe they should have had greater contribution into.. discovering electricity, developing the theory of microorganisms, or splitting the atom, or developing a machine that can fly through the air, or developing and driving the mass production of automobiles...
Yes absolutely the world is built by men. It had to be that way because men and women ARE different. Men are the creators, women are the nurturers - those are the roles that have allowed us to thrive as a species, despite what the revisionist liberated women's unions of OF are telling you. So Instead of contrasting it with a world shaped by women, the better comparison is to a world simply without it. Skyscrapers replaced by shanties (how many women work in construction?) etc.
Men, not women, built the modern world we live in today and are still thoroughly unappreciated.

can I just have a huge eye roll of this? First of all going back far in time things like cave painting, weaving, pottery, and agriculture, the evidence there is indicates women were the: potterers, weavers, farmers, etc. Farming and collecting and food processing and planting are complex activities that were the first technological revolution. 2nd, women fir long periods of history, were kept illiterate. They were not allowed to be part of these technological and other advancements. Despite that, please read up on all the female scientists who did contribute to these advancements despite huge adversity,  some only being recognized today. Some in the extreme disguised as a man (Margaret bulkey) to do their work. So I'm sorry that argument is bunk. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/4-women-whose-work-won-the-nobel-prize-for-their-male-supervisors

[partgypsy]

A few more: Ada Lovelace,  eunice foote, Nettie Stevens, Hedy Lamarr, grace Murray hopper, vera Rubin, Jocelyn bell burnell.

[vand]

Joshua Sheets talk in length about his thoughts on South Korea and their population decline after his recent visit

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lessons-i-learned-from-6-countries-in-asia/id896153632?i=1000672538776

(also, Indonesia.. as a stark contrast).

I picked it out earlier in the discussion too https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/demographics-decline-sustainability-or-catastrophe/msg3233233/#msg3233233

[Posthumane]

Joshua Sheets talk in length about his thoughts on South Korea and their population decline after his recent visit

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lessons-i-learned-from-6-countries-in-asia/id896153632?i=1000672538776

(also, Indonesia.. as a stark contrast).

I picked it out earlier in the discussion too https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/demographics-decline-sustainability-or-catastrophe/msg3233233/#msg3233233

So this guy visited S Korean for a bit on vacation and concluded that the reasons people are not having kids are "dumb" and easily solvable. Nothing like dismissing women's concerns in order to "solve" their problems.

Btw, this lecture that I recently watched may be relevant to the discussion.
https://youtu.be/ahjdeDhP09o?si=NmayFYSx7oPoi7gB

[mistymoney]

the birthrate for the entire planet is declining, and as of yet, we're not accepting immigrants from other planets. So any insight I got from my immigrationless US thought experiment, was applicable to the planet in the abstract.

Declining birth rate, but still a rapidly increasing population. The birth rate is around 2.3 right now and expected to stay above the replacement rate for a few more decades. Predictions about human behavior further out than that are pretty meaningless.

Right now, I'd take the under on whatever the prediction is for hitting global replacement level.

Re: rapidly increasing population. We're under 1% a year now, which to your point, is still a lot of people. But as I alluded to above, that net growth is as much about people not dying as it is about new babies being born. And there's an imbalance. The places with the highest life expectancies are also the places having the fewest kids. Some of that gets fixed with immigration. But I don't think that's a solve-all. It's also a tricky subject to navigate, politically.

And that's just the big picture stuff. All this matters on a personal level, too.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/511238/americans-preference-larger-families-highest-1971.aspx

Most Americans still view a family with 2 or 3 kids as ideal. And most childless 50+ year olds wish they would have had kids. But millennials and gen Z aren't having kids or really even taking the steps towards having kids (dating and having sex).

Having kids is by no means necessary for a fulfilling life. But when stated preferences and revealed preferences are off by that much, it's worth looking at pretty closely. And we need to separate out the good reasons (birth control, delaying having kids until you're ready) from the bad (smartphones offer a low-risk alternative to the high-risk activity of facing rejection).

Me and my two sisters, bucking the trends.  I always wonder about this, if my social circle and family are abnormal or not. About a third to half of them don't have kids, and I only know 1 of the childless couples who really wanted them/regret not having them. I believe the stats, but I sure have not seen that in my personal life.

I've had the opposite experience. People I know who did not have kids having no regrets.

Since this thread has been resurrected, one point I would like to add is:

Why should anyone care who regrets what?

Many people will regret not having children, at many different points in their life. Maybe if they had had children - they would have regretted that too. I'm sure many people who had children regret that they did. But why should anyone care?

I really, deeply regret what I ate for dinner last night. I came home from work, after work drinks, tired and drained and just ate an assortment of snacks and treats because I was too tired. I regretted it pretty quickly - a bit queasy, heartburn, sluggish today. Only had one drink to be social so it is more likely the food situation.

Does anyone care? I sincerely hope not!

If the population is halved in the next few centuries - maybe our little portfolios will suffer. But the planet will thrive. At some point communities will thrive. Maybe after some turmoil, maybe not.

[GuitarStv]

I'm sure many people who had children regret that they did.

At some point for some amount of time, every parent regrets having children.  Doesn't mean you don't love your kids . . . but there are times in their lives where they're an awful lot to deal with.

[Metalcat]

I'm sure many people who had children regret that they did.

At some point for some amount of time, every parent regrets having children.  Doesn't mean you don't love your kids . . . but there are times in their lives where they're an awful lot to deal with.

Yes, this is many parents' experience. But there are also a substantial number who overall regret having children/having some of their children. It's just not really talked about openly because it's so taboo to not want your own children.

[ChpBstrd]

I'm sure many people who had children regret that they did.

At some point for some amount of time, every parent regrets having children.  Doesn't mean you don't love your kids . . . but there are times in their lives where they're an awful lot to deal with.

Yes, this is many parents' experience. But there are also a substantial number who overall regret having children/having some of their children. It's just not really talked about openly because it's so taboo to not want your own children.

Then there are the people whose children died. Their regrets could be complicated, including efforts to limit the regret to only the part where their kid died to counterfactual thinking about if the kid had never been born and how they wouldn't have to feel this way.

[spartana]

the birthrate for the entire planet is declining, and as of yet, we're not accepting immigrants from other planets. So any insight I got from my immigrationless US thought experiment, was applicable to the planet in the abstract.

Declining birth rate, but still a rapidly increasing population. The birth rate is around 2.3 right now and expected to stay above the replacement rate for a few more decades. Predictions about human behavior further out than that are pretty meaningless.

Right now, I'd take the under on whatever the prediction is for hitting global replacement level.

Re: rapidly increasing population. We're under 1% a year now, which to your point, is still a lot of people. But as I alluded to above, that net growth is as much about people not dying as it is about new babies being born. And there's an imbalance. The places with the highest life expectancies are also the places having the fewest kids. Some of that gets fixed with immigration. But I don't think that's a solve-all. It's also a tricky subject to navigate, politically.

And that's just the big picture stuff. All this matters on a personal level, too.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/511238/americans-preference-larger-families-highest-1971.aspx

Most Americans still view a family with 2 or 3 kids as ideal. And most childless 50+ year olds wish they would have had kids. But millennials and gen Z aren't having kids or really even taking the steps towards having kids (dating and having sex).

Having kids is by no means necessary for a fulfilling life. But when stated preferences and revealed preferences are off by that much, it's worth looking at pretty closely. And we need to separate out the good reasons (birth control, delaying having kids until you're ready) from the bad (smartphones offer a low-risk alternative to the high-risk activity of facing rejection).

Me and my two sisters, bucking the trends.  I always wonder about this, if my social circle and family are abnormal or not. About a third to half of them don't have kids, and I only know 1 of the childless couples who really wanted them/regret not having them. I believe the stats, but I sure have not seen that in my personal life.

I've had the opposite experience. People I know who did not have kids having no regrets.

Since this thread has been resurrected, one point I would like to add is:

Why should anyone care who regrets what?

Many people will regret not having children, at many different points in their life. Maybe if they had had children - they would have regretted that too. I'm sure many people who had children regret that they did. But why should anyone care?

I really, deeply regret what I ate for dinner last night. I came home from work, after work drinks, tired and drained and just ate an assortment of snacks and treats because I was too tired. I regretted it pretty quickly - a bit queasy, heartburn, sluggish today. Only had one drink to be social so it is more likely the food situation.

Does anyone care? I sincerely hope not!

If the population is halved in the next few centuries - maybe our little portfolios will suffer. But the planet will thrive. At some point communities will thrive. Maybe after some turmoil, maybe not.

I think people care about regret or not when people are constantly saying "you'll regret not having kids" when you say you don't plan to have any or are on the fence about it. This is usually something women of child bearing age hear from...well nearly everyone. So it makes you curious and you wonder, and perhaps doubt, if being childless is something you will regret down the line once you can no longer have them. So I think people do care - at least people we know and often our parents and other family.

[mistymoney]

the birthrate for the entire planet is declining, and as of yet, we're not accepting immigrants from other planets. So any insight I got from my immigrationless US thought experiment, was applicable to the planet in the abstract.

Declining birth rate, but still a rapidly increasing population. The birth rate is around 2.3 right now and expected to stay above the replacement rate for a few more decades. Predictions about human behavior further out than that are pretty meaningless.

Right now, I'd take the under on whatever the prediction is for hitting global replacement level.

Re: rapidly increasing population. We're under 1% a year now, which to your point, is still a lot of people. But as I alluded to above, that net growth is as much about people not dying as it is about new babies being born. And there's an imbalance. The places with the highest life expectancies are also the places having the fewest kids. Some of that gets fixed with immigration. But I don't think that's a solve-all. It's also a tricky subject to navigate, politically.

And that's just the big picture stuff. All this matters on a personal level, too.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/511238/americans-preference-larger-families-highest-1971.aspx

Most Americans still view a family with 2 or 3 kids as ideal. And most childless 50+ year olds wish they would have had kids. But millennials and gen Z aren't having kids or really even taking the steps towards having kids (dating and having sex).

Having kids is by no means necessary for a fulfilling life. But when stated preferences and revealed preferences are off by that much, it's worth looking at pretty closely. And we need to separate out the good reasons (birth control, delaying having kids until you're ready) from the bad (smartphones offer a low-risk alternative to the high-risk activity of facing rejection).

Me and my two sisters, bucking the trends.  I always wonder about this, if my social circle and family are abnormal or not. About a third to half of them don't have kids, and I only know 1 of the childless couples who really wanted them/regret not having them. I believe the stats, but I sure have not seen that in my personal life.

I've had the opposite experience. People I know who did not have kids having no regrets.

Since this thread has been resurrected, one point I would like to add is:

Why should anyone care who regrets what?

Many people will regret not having children, at many different points in their life. Maybe if they had had children - they would have regretted that too. I'm sure many people who had children regret that they did. But why should anyone care?

I really, deeply regret what I ate for dinner last night. I came home from work, after work drinks, tired and drained and just ate an assortment of snacks and treats because I was too tired. I regretted it pretty quickly - a bit queasy, heartburn, sluggish today. Only had one drink to be social so it is more likely the food situation.

Does anyone care? I sincerely hope not!

If the population is halved in the next few centuries - maybe our little portfolios will suffer. But the planet will thrive. At some point communities will thrive. Maybe after some turmoil, maybe not.

I think people care about regret or not when people are constantly saying "you'll regret not having kids" when you say you don't plan to have any or are on the fence about it. This is usually something women of child bearing age hear from...well nearly everyone. So it makes you curious and you wonder, and perhaps doubt, if being childless is something you will regret down the line once you can no longer have them. So I think people do care - at least people we know and often our parents and other family.

But that's what I'm saying - everyone gets to make their own choices, and should be left alone about the decision or any regret down the line. People regret a lot of things, no one knows what any person may or may not regret, and should stick to thier own decisions if they want to avoid regrets.

[spartana]

^^^I agree. And besides being left alone to make your own decisions it would be nice if people would actually support whatever decision you made instead of telling you you'll regret it. But people are people and for some strange societal reason feel it's OK to overstep boundaries and tell you that if you don't have kids you'll be full of regrets. Sigh....

[Ichabod]

Aren't people more likely to regret things they didn't do, then things they did. Surely, there's a paper that gives this cognitive bias a catchy name?

For kids, sure, there's societal pressure, but also kids are a massive investment of time, energy, and resources, and there's no acceptable way to end the relationship. So it's not super useful to regret them, and our brains oblige by inventing post hoc reasoning for why it was a great decision.

Speaking as a father of 2 with a vasectomy, I have no regrets. :)

[jeninco]

Aren't people more likely to regret things they didn't do, then things they did. Surely, there's a paper that gives this cognitive bias a catchy name?

For kids, sure, there's societal pressure, but also kids are a massive investment of time, energy, and resources, and there's no acceptable way to end the relationship. So it's not super useful to regret them, and our brains oblige by inventing post hoc reasoning for why it was a great decision.

Speaking as a father of 2 with a vasectomy, I have no regrets. :)

"Confirmation Bias" -- you don't want to admit that a thing you did was a poor idea, so you're more likely to revise your opinion. But I didn't do squat for research, and this is just off the top of my head, so I could be wrong!

[dandarc]

Aren't people more likely to regret things they didn't do, then things they did. Surely, there's a paper that gives this cognitive bias a catchy name?

For kids, sure, there's societal pressure, but also kids are a massive investment of time, energy, and resources, and there's no acceptable way to end the relationship. So it's not super useful to regret them, and our brains oblige by inventing post hoc reasoning for why it was a great decision.

Speaking as a father of 2 with a vasectomy, I have no regrets. :)

Speaking as a father of 0 with a vasectomy, I also have no regrets. Maybe in 20 years I'll feel differently, but certainly no regrets yet.

[Metalcat]

Aren't people more likely to regret things they didn't do, then things they did. Surely, there's a paper that gives this cognitive bias a catchy name?

For kids, sure, there's societal pressure, but also kids are a massive investment of time, energy, and resources, and there's no acceptable way to end the relationship. So it's not super useful to regret them, and our brains oblige by inventing post hoc reasoning for why it was a great decision.

Speaking as a father of 2 with a vasectomy, I have no regrets. :)

Speaking as a father of 0 with a vasectomy, I also have no regrets. Maybe in 20 years I'll feel differently, but certainly no regrets yet.

Yes, there are plenty of parents who legitimately don't regret their kids. But speaking as a medical professional who talks to people about exactly this kind of thing, when people are assured of confidentiality, they're quite a bit more honest about their regrets.

There are plenty of folks out there, especially women, who feel like their children have ruined their lives, and they wish they had never had them.

[Ichabod]

Yes, there are plenty of parents who legitimately don't regret their kids. But speaking as a medical professional who talks to people about exactly this kind of thing, when people are assured of confidentiality, they're quite a bit more honest about their regrets.

There are plenty of folks out there, especially women, who feel like their children have ruined their lives, and they wish they had never had them.

Right, I was trying to say we shouldn't trust parents like me who sincerely claim to have no regrets. We have motivated reasoning.

[GuitarStv]

[Ichabod]

In my mind, demographic decline shares a lot of similarities with climate change. These problems have really long feedback loops, which makes it hard for humans to deal with. Both are serious, but not directly extinction-level problems. Both involve a lot of value judgments (future beings vs current beings, what beings have value). Both are intractable at the individual level and require collective action to tackle. Both will require multi-pronged approaches to solve. I.e. There is no silver bullet.

Capitalism and socialism require economic growth, and demographic growth is a factor of economic growth. Maybe someday technology will decouple that relationship, but it's not today. Other economic systems may not be dependent on economic growth, but are they equipped to handle economic decline? Basically, my chief worry is elderly poverty worse than the Great Depression.

Like climate change, this is a spectrum thing. If we maintained current temperatures or our current population, most people won't notice. If we go from 8 billion to 1 billion people in a few generations, that will create a lot of human suffering.

Good policy on issues seemingly unrelated to fertility can help. Improving housing policy will improve household formation which will improve fertility. Healthcare is a huge concern for parents and prospective parents, so improving this will help too. Abundant clean energy will ease our worries about our children's future and likely improve fertility.

For demographic specific policies, immigration is zero-sum at a global level. For the US, it's a lever that will remain available as long as we're a desired immigration destination. I hope we maximize it. Political support for immigration depends on the rates of immigration. So higher fertility rates should support more immigration. Also, people of an age to have children in the US are already majority non-white. Those who want a specific ethnic majority in the US have already lost.

Industrialization, feminism, and liberalism have all impacted fertility rates. Industrialization has removed the internal economic benefit of children (cheap agricultural labor). Feminism has raised the opportunity costs of having children (the impact of children on women's careers). Liberalism has externalized the economic benefit of children (now even unrelated younger people will care for in your old age if you or your government can afford it). I remain a big fan of all three of these ideas. You'll have to tear my smart phone, the economic contributions of women, and social security out of my cold, dead hands.

But it does provide a blueprint forward. To improve fertility, we need to promote the non-economic values of children, reduce the opportunity cost of having children, and otherwise make sure that having children is not a losing proposition in society, so we can maintain society going forward.

At the individual level, I have no judgment. We all live in the context of our time. If you decide that having children is not worth it (whether financial cost, personal freedom, environmental cost, or something else), I get it. I struggle with those too, and it doesn't take much imagination for me to see how someone could forgo children.
At a societal level at a bare minimum, I think we should strive to enable people to meet their personal fertility goals. If that's 0, cool. If that's more than 0, we should be trying to provide economic opportunity, non-toxic mates, and everything else people need to meet those goals.

I firmly believe that for me raising my children is the most significant thing I'll do in my life. It's an 18+ year project that will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Selfishly, I wish society made it easier for me. I definitely wish society made it easier for my wife.

[Metalcat]

Yes, there are plenty of parents who legitimately don't regret their kids. But speaking as a medical professional who talks to people about exactly this kind of thing, when people are assured of confidentiality, they're quite a bit more honest about their regrets.

There are plenty of folks out there, especially women, who feel like their children have ruined their lives, and they wish they had never had them.

Right, I was trying to say we shouldn't trust parents like me who sincerely claim to have no regrets. We have motivated reasoning.

Ah gotcha, but there are truly many folks who even with that motivated reasoning will still admit full-on regret if they feel safe to do so, which they generally don't.

Even filled with overwhelming guilt about it, they fully regret their children. So yeah, the regret can even be strong enough to overcome enormous pressure to just find a way to feel good about it.

[Ichabod]

Ah gotcha, but there are truly many folks who even with that motivated reasoning will still admit full-on regret if they feel safe to do so, which they generally don't.

Even filled with overwhelming guilt about it, they fully regret their children. So yeah, the regret can even be strong enough to overcome enormous pressure to just find a way to feel good about it.

That's not a point that I would consciously contradict. The human experience is a wide one.

I suspect your earlier point about a possible gender disparity in regret covers a lot of this. Men are more likely to abandon their children, but those men might not regret it because they left, while the single mothers stuck caring for those children likely experience more regret. Societal pressure to value being a mom means moms bear a higher cost with less opportunity to voice those costs.

There were a couple of threads about regret in here. A. Do people regret having or not having children, and B. How do we weight others' regret or lack of it in our own decisions. And I think we may have gotten our wires crossed here? I have a strong opinion about B that we shouldn't weight it too heavily, which means I'm not really invested in A. I suspect a lot of regret is tied to societal norms, and the regrets are subject to changing when the norms change.

[mistymoney]

Ah gotcha, but there are truly many folks who even with that motivated reasoning will still admit full-on regret if they feel safe to do so, which they generally don't.

Even filled with overwhelming guilt about it, they fully regret their children. So yeah, the regret can even be strong enough to overcome enormous pressure to just find a way to feel good about it.

That's not a point that I would consciously contradict. The human experience is a wide one.

I suspect your earlier point about a possible gender disparity in regret covers a lot of this. Men are more likely to abandon their children, but those men might not regret it because they left, while the single mothers stuck caring for those children likely experience more regret. Societal pressure to value being a mom means moms bear a higher cost with less opportunity to voice those costs.

There were a couple of threads about regret in here. A. Do people regret having or not having children, and B. How do we weight others' regret or lack of it in our own decisions. And I think we may have gotten our wires crossed here? I have a strong opinion about B that we shouldn't weight it too heavily, which means I'm not really invested in A. I suspect a lot of regret is tied to societal norms, and the regrets are subject to changing when the norms change.

Interesting. Adds a bit of a layered effect. I'd like to add some more! temporal and situational.

Not to get too philosophical, but what is this regret, really? Or rather, how much subjective regret is required to make someone truly regret having children. Was it just that 3rd night of round the clock barfing preschoolers when you were sleep deprived? Was it only during the teenage years where the kid/s were petulant smart-asses, after all you'd done for them! Cleaning up all that toddler barfing, and now this!

Do you regret it when you are in the thick of it, or only afterwards, in retrospect? Thinking you could have made it as a rock start or movie star without those troublesome kids?

Does it have to be constant, consistent regret to count? Do random or intrusive flashes count? 

Do these regrets have to do with financial troubles, lack of sleep, lack of free time, having children with disabilities or behavioral problems? Maybe the kid takes after a relative you don't like! Or for some other reason - you don't like your kid?

Is regret a personal failing, such that some individuals just wallow in regret about a whole lot of things? Do people who regret having or not having children also regret their choice of spouse, alma mater, college or career fields?

Are we saying that people who say they regret having children are taken at face value and those who say glad I had them are discounted? Not sure how we can come to any conclusions about it at all.

[Ichabod]

Interesting. Adds a bit of a layered effect. I'd like to add some more! temporal and situational.

Not to get too philosophical, but what is this regret, really? Or rather, how much subjective regret is required to make someone truly regret having children. Was it just that 3rd night of round the clock barfing preschoolers when you were sleep deprived? Was it only during the teenage years where the kid/s were petulant smart-asses, after all you'd done for them! Cleaning up all that toddler barfing, and now this!

Do you regret it when you are in the thick of it, or only afterwards, in retrospect? Thinking you could have made it as a rock start or movie star without those troublesome kids?

Does it have to be constant, consistent regret to count? Do random or intrusive flashes count? 

Do these regrets have to do with financial troubles, lack of sleep, lack of free time, having children with disabilities or behavioral problems? Maybe the kid takes after a relative you don't like! Or for some other reason - you don't like your kid?

Is regret a personal failing, such that some individuals just wallow in regret about a whole lot of things? Do people who regret having or not having children also regret their choice of spouse, alma mater, college or career fields?

Are we saying that people who say they regret having children are taken at face value and those who say glad I had them are discounted? Not sure how we can come to any conclusions about it at all.

Provoking questions. So I categorize regret as a feeling, so it's neither good nor bad on its own, but just a reaction. True regret for me would be if more often than not, I'd change the decision if I could.

Regret is often imagining alternative outcomes. I have a single friend without kids who travels multiple weeks a year to hike national parks. I'm sometimes jealous of that and think what if. So regret happens when I'm dissatisfied in my own life, and I assume it's normal to suffer intermittent periods of dissatisfaction regardless of how well we live.

I also categorize my own regrets as true when I genuinely would be better off if I could go back and change it. E.g. Each of my children were born shortly after I started a new job, and I only took a week of paternity leave. And I feel shitty about that. That time off would've had a negligible effect on my career, and it was motivated by fear. I try not to dwell on it, but it's healthy for me to recognize I messed up.

Most of my regrets are more fantastical. What would've happened if I had gone to a different university or chosen a different career or dated someone else? Well, I probably would've made similar mistakes to the ones I actually did, because I'm me. I don't judge myself for having these as fleeting thoughts, but there's not much to be gained either.

I'd say regrets about having kids or not can fall into either of these silos. Is having kids the only reason I'm not hiking multiple national parks a year? No, I wasn't doing that before kids. I can also easily imagine sincere regrets about having kids at the wrong time or for the wrong reasons or with the wrong person.

Same for childfree people. If they regret having kids because they're lonely, I have doubts whether children would help. If they regret passing on kids because they ended a great relationship when they weren't "ready" and "ready" was always one step away on the career ladder, then yeah, maybe they messed up.

I think this philosophical discussion is why other people's regrets aren't that informative to us. If a survey or random acquaintance tells us they have regrets, what does that even mean? If a close friend or family member walked me through their own regrets, that could be helpful. But of course, that's not what people complain about it. It's Aunt Sally who you see once a year at Thanksgiving making an off-hand comment about dying alone, or Jim at the office claiming you'll never have fun again now that you have a baby.

PS. My "regret subject to social to societal norms" relates to how easy it is to imagine alternatives. If everyone we know has children, it's harder to imagine a better life without them. If no one we know has children, it's harder to imagine a better life with them. So as childlessness rises, I suspect we'll see more parents with regrets, and fewer childfree people with regrets. I still don't think that tells us what any specific individual should do because of the ambiguity around regret. I could be wrong on this. It's only my intuition.

[deborah]

In my circle of friends, I know several elderly parents who have expressed, and continue to express deep regret about having one child who has, over the years, broken most of their values, taken no responsibility for his/her own actions, and has done, and is continuing to do much to destroy the mental health of their dearly loved grandchildren. I’m sure there are a reasonable number of them.

[SuperNintendo Chalmers]

I’ve always viewed regret as, in a moment of calm reflection, would I change the decision?  We chose not to have kids, and I’ve had profound, sometimes soul-shattering feelings at times as to whether we’ve made a terrible mistake.  Seeing my siblings with my nieces/nephews, or my friends bonding with their son or daughter, thinking about a future without children to walk through life with, and maybe without someone to be there with me at the end, I have strong moments of doubt.  But if I was offered the option to change the decision, it is easy -- 100% I would not.  So I do not regret it, even if sometimes I wonder. 

The temporal question mistymoney raises is interesting, but I wonder how much difference it would make when talking about the decision of whether to have kids or not.  Even in a very stressed out, agonizing moment, I would guess that most parents wouldn’t want to change their decision if they wouldn’t want to in a “calm” moment.  And vice versa.  But obviously I could be wrong on that as I’ve never walked in a parent’s shoes. 

[jeninco]

I’ve always viewed regret as, in a moment of calm reflection, would I change the decision?  We chose not to have kids, and I’ve had profound, sometimes soul-shattering feelings at times as to whether we’ve made a terrible mistake.  Seeing my siblings with my nieces/nephews, or my friends bonding with their son or daughter, thinking about a future without children to walk through life with, and maybe without someone to be there with me at the end, I have strong moments of doubt.  But if I was offered the option to change the decision, it is easy -- 100% I would not.  So I do not regret it, even if sometimes I wonder. 

The temporal question mistymoney raises is interesting, but I wonder how much difference it would make when talking about the decision of whether to have kids or not.  Even in a very stressed out, agonizing moment, I would guess that most parents wouldn’t want to change their decision if they wouldn’t want to in a “calm” moment.  And vice versa.  But obviously I could be wrong on that as I’ve never walked in a parent’s shoes.

You can have meaningful, deep relationships with kids who are not yours (or not biologically yours). In fact, sometimes I think it's better to be an auntie (regardless of gender, that's the language we use) -- you get to be another responsible adult in someone's life with a primary obligation to think that they're awesome (or potentially awesome)!

[mistymoney]

In my circle of friends, I know several elderly parents who have expressed, and continue to express deep regret about having one child who has, over the years, broken most of their values, taken no responsibility for his/her own actions, and has done, and is continuing to do much to destroy the mental health of their dearly loved grandchildren. I’m sure there are a reasonable number of them.

I think if your kid is kind of a terrible person, that's like a different level thing.

Is the regret having a kid - or having a terrible one? Would a different child with same parents have turned out differently?

Or was it just the parents' regretted having kids at all.....and then that is why kid grew up terribly?

[Metalcat]

I’ve always viewed regret as, in a moment of calm reflection, would I change the decision?  We chose not to have kids, and I’ve had profound, sometimes soul-shattering feelings at times as to whether we’ve made a terrible mistake.  Seeing my siblings with my nieces/nephews, or my friends bonding with their son or daughter, thinking about a future without children to walk through life with, and maybe without someone to be there with me at the end, I have strong moments of doubt.  But if I was offered the option to change the decision, it is easy -- 100% I would not.  So I do not regret it, even if sometimes I wonder. 

The temporal question mistymoney raises is interesting, but I wonder how much difference it would make when talking about the decision of whether to have kids or not.  Even in a very stressed out, agonizing moment, I would guess that most parents wouldn’t want to change their decision if they wouldn’t want to in a “calm” moment.  And vice versa.  But obviously I could be wrong on that as I’ve never walked in a parent’s shoes.

You can have meaningful, deep relationships with kids who are not yours (or not biologically yours). In fact, sometimes I think it's better to be an auntie (regardless of gender, that's the language we use) -- you get to be another responsible adult in someone's life with a primary obligation to think that they're awesome (or potentially awesome)!

I was just posting in my journal recently how weighty it is being sometimes the *only* healthy, supportive adult in some of my very young client's lives.

Not everyone gets good parents/family, and that's where non-parents wield an extraordinary amount of impact and influence.

[LaineyAZ]

Regarding helpful, childfree adults: 
I read somewhere that that's a theory of a biological reason why some members of the population are gay - that (obviously before surrogacy, etc.) they would not have a child of their own and therefore would be available to help with child rearing of others in their extended family.