Collapse of traditional child-bearing and marriage globally in charts

[MeachTheMonster]

I agree with this

What benefit is there to me getting married? There is none.

What are the pitfalls? There are plenty. People change....situations change....people fall in and out of love....financial crises...the list goes on and on

Difference between now and then is that none of that used to matter in marriage.

Love, Social freedom, etc had nothing to do with marriage.

Now all of that is directly tied in to the institute of marriage, so if you aren’t willing to sacrifice/address those things then you don’t get married.

 

[ogc163]

 

[phcitywarrior]

There is the paradox of choice too. Psychologists reportedly have shown more choices means that on average people are less satisfied even if they make a good choice. 50 years ago, your family/friend/classmate circle probably dictated your marriage partner. Now people living in cities with Tinder have a damn buffet. Why try just one?

And this what a poster above alluded to when he spoke of sexual liberation driving this increase in OOW children. Definitely strong causation.

Cost of raising children:



Cost of children impacting happiness:

" Blanchflower has long sought to resolve this mismatch between research and human behavior, and he recently made some headway. In a new working paper, he and his co-author, Andrew Clark of the Paris School of Economics, detailed the importance of a single factor: parents’ financial strain. Subtract the stress of struggling to pay bills from the equation, and the presence of children tends to bring parents happiness...
It’s not that children make you unhappy,” Blanchflower told me. “It’s the fact that they bring lots of expenses and difficulties. You have to buy the milk and the diapers. And that financial pressure gets muddled up with this.”

It Isn’t the Kids. It’s the Cost of Raising Them.

I don't think this addresses the point OP is bringing up. He's looking at the increase in OOW children, not necessarily the cost of raising children. If cost is a factor, then one would assume you'd actually see an increase in children being born in wedlock or cohabitation, not a decrease like is being witnessed.

 

[Cynic]

Here in the DC Area, man there's so many single women in their 30s.

In the Muslim community its no different either though in sub communities esp South Asian, Arabs, African Americans I feel you'll see people get married earlier... in others its later

Higher standards and emancipation.

The key is investing in embryo clinics as more and more corporate spinsters try to spawn children after devoting their lives to careers.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

And this what a poster above alluded to when he spoke of sexual liberation driving this increase in OOW children. Definitely strong causation.

Problem is, this isn’t true. Even with “sexual liberation” casual sex is way down. Which is why birth rates are down.

That’s why I said these convos are usual off base from the jump.

From our 2020 perspective with social media, sexual liberation etc, it seems society today is more reckless/free with relationships than we were in the past, but that’s just not the case. People are considering when/where/and with whom to have sex/relationships with more than ever in the past.


Also OOW children is a misnomer.

In the past “marriage” was literally “we have a kid together”

What’s most important is do those kids have a community to take care of them. And kids in 2020 have access to much more love and community regardless of if their parents were formally married or not when they were born.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

I don't think this addresses the point OP is bringing up. He's looking at the increase in OOW children, not necessarily the cost of raising children. If cost is a factor, then one would assume you'd actually see an increase in children being born in wedlock or cohabitation, not a decrease like is being witnessed.

With education and wealth comes planning.

Poor people have more kids cause they can’t/don’t plan for the future. To poor people a kid is just another chance at making it out.

With well off people a kid is a drain on resources and freedom so they make the decision to have only one or. Two kids and shower them with privilege.

That’s how it works the world over

 

[phcitywarrior]

Problem is, this isn’t true. Even with “sexual liberation” casual sex is way down. Which is why birth rates are down.

Birth rates going down can largely be attributed to women's access to contraceptives, which gives them greater agency of when/if they have children. There's also cost of living increases and people (at least in the West) waiting longer to "settle" down so to speak. Both due to cost and personal choice (prolonging their single livelihood)

Also OOW children is a misnomer.

In the past “marriage” was literally “we have a kid together”

What’s most important is do those kids have a community to take care of them. And kids in 2020 have access to much more love and community regardless of if their parents were formally married or not when they were born.

On the bolded, I vehemently disagree. Marriage was marriage then and it still is today. Man and woman joining into one family. OOW is exactly what it means, out of wedlock.

To the italicized. I will also disagree here. The nuclear family in marriage is still the strongest foundation for children to be raised in. More so than cohabitation. And the nuclear family is the basic building block in any community.

Poor people have more kids cause they can’t/don’t plan for the future. To poor people a kid is just another chance at making it out.

With well off people a kid is a drain on resources and freedom so they make the decision to have only one or. Two kids and shower them with privilege.

That’s how it works the world over

But see, that doesn't still address the increase in OOW children being born as OP posted. People were poor then and still were having children in wedlock. There's been a cultural shift that has allowed the trend flourish. Some point to women's increased financial independence as being a possible driver in that women can now rear children by themselves with less dependence on a husband, especially in countries with generous parental care/social welfare e.g. Norway, Sweden etc. There's also the cultural buck against marriage and exploration of different type of relationships e.g. partnerships et. al.

 

[BillBanneker]

I don't think this addresses the point OP is bringing up. He's looking at the increase in OOW children, not necessarily the cost of raising children. If cost is a factor, then one would assume you'd actually see an increase in children being born in wedlock or cohabitation, not a decrease like is being witnessed.

It actually partially does. The percentage increase of OOW children of overall birth reflect that the birth rate in western countries is trending downward. More people are either delaying or not having children at all due to the current high economic and social costs of raising children. Also, why get married when you can just co-cohabitation? Which is considered OOW for these stats anyway.

 

[ogc163]

And this what a poster above alluded to when he spoke of sexual liberation driving this increase in OOW children. Definitely strong causation.



I don't think this addresses the point OP is bringing up. He's looking at the increase in OOW children, not necessarily the cost of raising children. If cost is a factor, then one would assume you'd actually see an increase in children being born in wedlock or cohabitation, not a decrease like is being witnessed.

His posts and charts cover several points, but I'll leave it up to him to further clarify.

I disagree with the assumption that costs being a factor should equal an increase in children being born in wedlock, cost being a factor may influence married couples to have less kids or no children leading to their kids being a smaller % of the overall child population. But that doesn't mean costs are the only factor.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Birth rates going down can largely be attributed to women's access to contraceptives, which gives them greater agency of when/if they have children. There's also cost of living increases and people (at least in the West) waiting longer to "settle" down so to speak. Both due to cost and personal choice (prolonging their single livelihood)

No. People are having less casual sex in 2020 than in the past.
Why Are Young People Having So Little Sex?
Marriage being “one man and woman to join a family” is literally a new concept

To the italicized. I will also disagree here. The nuclear family in marriage is still the strongest foundation for children to be raised in. More so than cohabitation. And the nuclear family is the basic building block in any community.

That’s a fact.

We have this romanticized view of the past as if those people were just beacons of morality (The reason why MAGA exists). But in reality those people were more reckless/less thoughtful than we can even fathom in today’s society.

On the bolded, I vehemently disagree. Marriage was marriage then and it still is today. Man and woman joining into one family. OOW is exactly what it means, out of wedlock.

To the italicized. I will also disagree here. The nuclear family in marriage is still the strongest foundation for children to be raised in. More so than cohabitation. And the nuclear family is the basic building block in any community.

Can’t disagree with facts.

Man + Woman =one family is a new concept in human history.

An OOW father today can and usually does spend more time with his kid and mate than a married father would in the past.

The “nuclear family” has only existed for the last 60 years or so.

What the hell was humanity doing before then?

But see, that doesn't still address the increase in OOW children being born as OP posted. People were poor then and still were having children in wedlock. There's been a cultural shift that has allowed the trend flourish. Some point to women's increased financial independence as being a possible driver in that women can now rear children by themselves with less dependence on a husband, especially in countries with generous parental care/social welfare e.g. Norway, Sweden etc. There's also the cultural buck against marriage and exploration of different type of relationships e.g. partnerships et. al.

Again

“in wedlock” in 1920 is a very different thing than “in wedlock” in 2020.

Apples to oranges. Individual behavior hasn’t changed much. How society views that behavior is what has changed.

 

[Starman]

This is a very interesting conversation. I'd just like to add the proliferation of pornography has contributed to the lack of sex on recent generations. And thus, I would say, to fewer marriages.

 

[Kenny West]

Problem is, this isn’t true. Even with “sexual liberation” casual sex is way down. Which is why birth rates are down.

That’s why I said these convos are usual off base from the jump.

From our 2020 perspective with social media, sexual liberation etc, it seems society today is more reckless/free with relationships than we were in the past, but that’s just not the case. People are considering when/where/and with whom to have sex/relationships with more than ever in the past.

WOAT being WOAT

"By analyzing biennial survey data between 2000 and 2018 from nearly 10,000 men and women aged 18 to 44 years, researchers found that 16.5% of respondents reported less sexual activity in 2016-2018 versus 9.5% in 2000-2002, mostly among unmarried, heterosexual men.

Sexual activity was largely unchanged among unmarried women, along with no notable decline among gay men, researchers reported."


Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows
We are discussing facts here sir, save the narratives.

Women are having sex. Its men who arent having casual sex because most dont have the option to pursue it nor a marriage.
Dramatic increase in the proportion of births outside of marriage in the United States from 1990 to 2016 - Child Trends

Furthermore the out of wedlock birthrate outpaces the in wedlock births in most communities (by race). If the average American child is being concived within unsteady partnerships how can you say they're being smarter or more careful and discerning? These women cant even be sure if their rasing their children alone by the time its born. And dont get me started on the soaring STD rates in this generation.

Also OOW children is a misnomer.

In the past “marriage” was literally “we have a kid together”

Ignoring the whole oath in front of god, ignoring the amount of time marriage before sex was a tradition in the majority of the developed and non developed world.

This moron's perception of the "the past" and "history" Is a span of like 50 years tops

What’s most important is do those kids have a community to take care of them. And kids in 2020 have access to much more love and community regardless of if their parents were formally married or not when they were born.

This nikka must be talking about Facebook likes

In the real world:
Children spend only half as much time playing outside as their parents did | Environment | The Guardian

A growing number of American teenagers – particularly girls – are facing depression


Don't bother replying to my posts, im just gonna debunk your bullshyt for the integrity of the thread.

 

[ogc163]

 

[MeachTheMonster]

WOAT being WOAT

"By analyzing biennial survey data between 2000 and 2018 from nearly 10,000 men and women aged 18 to 44 years, researchers found that 16.5% of respondents reported less sexual activity in 2016-2018 versus 9.5% in 2000-2002, mostly among unmarried, heterosexual men.

Sexual activity was largely unchanged among unmarried women, along with no notable decline among gay men, researchers reported."


Young U.S. men having a lot less sex in the 21st century, study shows
We are discussing facts here sir, save the narratives.

Women are having sex. Its men who arent having casual sex because most dont have the option to pursue it nor a marriage.
Dramatic increase in the proportion of births outside of marriage in the United States from 1990 to 2016 - Child Trends

Furthermore the out of wedlock birthrate outpaces the in wedlock births in most communities (by race). If the average American child is being concived within unsteady partnerships how can you say they're being smarter or more careful and discerning? These women cant even be sure if their rasing their children alone by the time its born. And dont get me started on the soaring STD rates in this generation.





Ignoring the whole oath in front of god, ignoring the amount of time marriage before sex was a tradition in the majority of the developed and non developed world.

This moron's perception of the "the past" and "history" Is a span of like 50 years tops



This nikka must be talking about Facebook likes

In the real world:
Children spend only half as much time playing outside as their parents did | Environment | The Guardian

A growing number of American teenagers – particularly girls – are facing depression


Don't bother replying to my posts, im just gonna debunk your bullshyt for the integrity of the thread.

Nothing you posted debunked anything I said.

Like I said before you lack the maturity and level of knowledge to engage in this convo.

Go read and come back

 

[phcitywarrior]

It actually partially does. The percentage increase of OOW children of overall birth reflect that the birth rate in western countries is trending downward. More people are either delaying or not having children at all due to the current high economic and social costs of raising children. Also, why get married when you can just co-cohabitation? Which is considered OOW for these stats anyway.

I disagree with the assumption that costs being a factor should equal an increase in children being born in wedlock, cost being a factor may influence married couples to have less kids or no children leading to their kids being a smaller % of the overall child population. But that doesn't mean costs are the only factor.

This is a good point. I should have clarified. My assumption is, if the cost of raising a child has gone up, then I'd expect a greater share of the children being born (whether that rate is increasing or decreasing is irrelevant) to be born in either wedlock and/co-habitation. But the reverse seems to be the case. However, if this chart equates OOW as literally not married then yes, the charts make sense. The chart is essentially saying people having children in cohabitation vs. marriage, which speaks to the decline of marriage in much of the developed world.