Althouse: "The summer I turned 39, my husband and I moved from Brooklyn to a darling little village in upstate New York. Our parents were thrilled..."

July 6, 2026

"The summer I turned 39, my husband and I moved from Brooklyn to a darling little village in upstate New York. Our parents were thrilled..."

"... their unspoken hope that leaving the big city might be a sign that we were settling down—that as my fertility began to sunset, we’d turn one of our house’s three bedrooms into a nursery. And we were having that conversation, too. We owned a home with ample space and an affordable mortgage. I worked for myself and had maximal flexibility. He had good health insurance and a great if demanding job. Did we want to have a baby? As late summer melted into a vibrant fall and then into the cold of upstate winter, I knew my answer: No...."

Writes Jill Filipovic in "We Need More Good Men/Conservatives often lay the blame for declining fertility at women’s feet. They’re wrong" (Slate).

174 comments:

Leland said...: I’ll take “Bullshit Headlines” for $200, Ken.; 7/6/26, 8:00 AM
imTay said...: I was never happier in my marriage than when we were living on my salary alone, and she stayed home with the children. Even if I was riding my bike to the bus stop, taking the bus to the train, and the train to work. I can't read the article, but I am guessing that the "delightful town" in Upstate New York was one of those very expensive towns along the Hudson that we true Upstaters called "Downstate," like Rheinbeck, or Kingston. Upstate doesn't start until you are north of the Catskills. It's similar to how southerners think that the South stops at Orlando.; 7/6/26, 8:02 AM
Lazarus said...: Is it just a coincidence that feminism took off in the 70s when divorce rates were soaring and more and more men were trading in their wives for newer models? Still, I wonder about the ideologization in the headline. The conservative commentariat may lay stress on liberated women's avoidance of childbearing, but read through conservative sites and you'll find much concern about men retreating from procreation.; 7/6/26, 8:09 AM
Oso Negro said...: So, woman doesn’t want baby, man to blame? They are probably casting their seed idly at massage parlors and lingerie modeling studios. And doubtless, under tipping! To the barricades sisters! Bitch into submission!; 7/6/26, 8:09 AM
Enigma said...: Conservatives lay the blame at the nihilistic doom-and-gloom hedonistic left's feet, be they male or female.

When abortion is lionized to teens, when Hollywood applauds sex predators, when global warming/overpopulation prompts avoidance of children, when whites are blamed for overconsumption vs. the global south, when same-sex relationships and transgender self-sterilization are praised, and when intersectionality is a core focus, the left avoids having babies.

Slate is a left-wing publication. Projection once again.; 7/6/26, 8:09 AM
Spiros said...: It is so strange that women (women!) make work their main source of happiness and meaning.; 7/6/26, 8:13 AM
chickelit said...: Blame the men!!; 7/6/26, 8:14 AM
Justabill said...: Sounds like an interesting topic, too bad about the paywall.; 7/6/26, 8:15 AM
boatbuilder said...: "Life is so unfair! I need the government to take care of everything, so that I can live my wonderful life until I'm forty, when it's too late to have the baby that I now think I want! And it's all the conservatives fault! Those icky women in Utah are cranking out babies, but that's because they are religious nuts who don't know any better, and think that raising babies is fun even though it's hard! Not like Japanese and Swedish women, who get everything free and don't even have to take care of their babies, because the government somehow is able to provide women to take care of their babies for them (but aren't having babies, for some reason)! And there aren't any good men! What is to be done? I don't know, but we need to make sure that abortion remains sacred and we women get paid big money whether we have babies or do the career thing or both at the same time (which is really, really stressful and stuff)!"

Good Lord.; 7/6/26, 8:22 AM
Leland said...: I listen to a lot of criticism of declining birth rates, and much of it is about a culture that has stressed bleak futures, financial insecurity, as well as division (or sometimes blurring) of men and women identities for such declines. Yeah, conservatives often point out the small window of time in which women can conceive safely, but that’s just noting the biological fact. I hear much more about male maturation taking far too long these days to match the window of finding a woman and raising a family.; 7/6/26, 8:25 AM
Mr. D said...: Lazarus said:

**but read through conservative sites and you'll find much concern about men retreating from procreation.**

Why do that when you can have Jill Filipovic or Heather Cox Richardson or Robert Reich tell you what conservatives think?; 7/6/26, 8:27 AM
chickelit said...: @boatbuilder: Thank you for your concise summary of the paywall protected screed.; 7/6/26, 8:30 AM
JK Brown said...: We need more stable employment for men, and starting at an earlier age, if you want more children. Instead, as far back as late Boomer (1957-1964) only 41% of men were able to establish and maintain continuous high employment from ages 27-49.

"Over the past several decades, U.S. men’s paid work has transformed from a state of high stability and continuity to a state of increased instability and precarity. Despite this, full-time employment throughout adulthood remains the presumed standard for modern American men. The authors investigated the diversity of men’s workforce experiences using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth “National Longitudinal Survey of Youth - 1979 cohort” and identified six multitrajectories of men’s time spent employed, unemployed, and out of the labor force from ages 27 to 49. The authors identified one multitrajectory of steady work, three of increasing unemployment or time out of work, one of increasing steady work, and one of intermittent work. Contrary to conventional assumptions, only 41 percent of men followed a trajectory of continuous, high employment over the duration of their prime earning years. This suggests that most men do not achieve the “ideal worker norm,” raising implications for how research and policy conceptualize men’s work experiences."

---The Myth of Men’s Stable, Continuous Labor Force Attachment: Multitrajectories of U.S. Baby Boomer Men’s Employment, 2023, PMCID: PMC11219017

On the "upside", a husband's unemployment only increases the risk of divorce by 30 to 70 percent.

Husband's Unemployment: Remains a strong predictor of divorce. Studies indicate that a husband's job loss increases divorce risk by 30% to 70%, driven by the violation of traditional "male breadwinner" norms and the resulting identity crisis.

Wife's Unemployment: Generally does not significantly increase the risk of divorce. Some large-scale studies analyzing OECD countries found that increases in female unemployment levels correlated with a decrease in the divorce rate in the long run. This suggests that when wives are unemployed, couples may stay together due to financial necessity (the "cost of divorce" barrier) or because the loss of a secondary income does not threaten the family's survival as acutely as the loss of a primary male income.; 7/6/26, 8:31 AM
Aggie said...: "...I pictured my haggard self, pacing our living room begging a wailing infant to please calm down, alone in our big house...I also saw a life, a career, and a marriage I treasured, and imagined all of the ways in which having a child would compromise what I had spent decades building. ....But the sacrifices it would take to make parenting possible simply didn’t feel worth it....As I wandered through the reproductive wilderness ...'

And whose fault is it? All together now: Men ! And who is the worst? All together now: Conservative Men !

Archived here: https://archive.ph/cx27A#selection-1081.283-1081.372

Bring a puke bucket.; 7/6/26, 8:35 AM
Big Mike said...: The article is behind a paywall, like so many of the facile writers Althouse enjoys reading. It’s been a long time since I read Slate, and the thought of sending money to them so I can read the likes of Jill Filipovic makes me physically ill.; 7/6/26, 8:39 AM
Saint Croix said...: Slate's still around?

Might want to work on that paywall.

The article is hard to read. So long, so boring, it doesn't match the headline. She's talking about her own marriage and her own choices.

Did we want to have a baby?

I knew my answer: No.

So, in her specific case, the non-baby-making was her choice, her decision (and if you want to be negative), her fault.

She and the feminist movement claim all the power of human reproduction. And she herself said, no baby. And she also says her husband is a good man, and would be a good father. So the non-breeding is on you.

It's weird for feminists to claim all power over human reproduction, and then when there's a failure to reproduce, it takes no look in the mirror, no wondering if feminism might be to blame for a lack of babies.; 7/6/26, 8:43 AM
Scott M said...: Don't let a torrent of migrants into the country. Don't let the housing rates skyrocket as a result. Don't screw young families out of potential housing. Don't wait until your mid-thirties to start having kids. Plenty of blame to go around.; 7/6/26, 8:44 AM
JK Brown said...: We are going to have a lot of parents lamenting still having an underage child in the house as they face not only the looming retirement but job loss after age 50. (56% are forced out of their job involuntarily); 7/6/26, 8:46 AM
Saint Croix said...: You have to dig down through 19 paragraphs before you get to her thesis. Is she getting paid by the word? This is so bloated. Does Slate still pay for editors?

19th paragraph:

But speaking of visibility—even though so much of the handwringing around fertility rates has been about how women’s lives have changed in the past few decades, there’s a more obvious target. Of all the conditions that make childbearing seem possible, one is the most deceptively simple: increasing the number of men who would make good fathers.

She goes on to write

The “missing men of the American marriage market,” as one NPR story recently put it, is driven by the scores of men who lack well-paid work or have fallen into addiction or criminality. Women have long outnumbered men on college campuses and earned a much larger share of degrees

Stop! That's where you say, "The men's rights movement has some strong points to make." Or, "Meryl Streep was right, feminists ought to declare victory, and move us all to the next stage, of being good humanists."

Nah.; 7/6/26, 8:50 AM
Saint Croix said...: This howler...

Democrats have long searched for a model of positive masculinity

Oh, bullshit. Democrats don't even know what a woman is. Or a man. Or a baby. You want to pretend that Democrats are pro-reproduction?; 7/6/26, 8:53 AM
Saint Croix said...: Democrats teach sex education by putting condoms on bananas. Their entire worldview is based on stopping reproduction. We have too many people, the earth is overheating, we need to depopulate. Remember?; 7/6/26, 8:54 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: As if Jill knows where to look for a good man or could even define “man.”; 7/6/26, 8:57 AM
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...: Jill is actually illustrating how the birth dearth is almost exclusively a far left wing phenomenon.; 7/6/26, 8:58 AM
chickelit said...: "It's weird for feminists to claim all power over human reproduction, and then when there's a failure to reproduce, it takes no look in the mirror, no wondering if feminism might be to blame for a lack of babies."

There is plenty of reflection: selfies & mirror-gazing on the part of modern women, but much less introspection, i.e., seeing past and through their own reflections. Men do much less such reflection--selfies etc., but spend more time screen gazing and doom scrolling.; 7/6/26, 9:01 AM
tim maguire said...: It's remarkable how many of these arguments against parenthood boil down to "having a baby will interfere with my selfish narcissistic lifestyle." They seemingly can't even imagine that they may find fulfillment in doing something for someone else.

When they get old, they will rely on other people's children to fund their pension and change their bedpan because they are unwilling to contribute to the society they take so much from.

But they are good people because they believe the right liberal things.; 7/6/26, 9:03 AM
Shouting Thomas said...: Marc Andreessen has been writing for some time about the therapeutic brain lock that has set in among the eggheads. “Don’t think. Act,” is what Andreessen says. I don’t even want to read this filibuster. It’s boring. I’m fed up with this kind of babbling from women writers.; 7/6/26, 9:04 AM
Peachy+2 said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/6/26, 9:05 AM
n.n said...: College is a poor investment for many productive people. A couple will find their own level, including a healthy Posterity, when they reach a degree of empathetic maturity. Tick tock.; 7/6/26, 9:05 AM
Peachy+2 said...: White leftist females who assume the mind-reading role.
oh this again. Lame.; 7/6/26, 9:05 AM
Peachy+2 said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/6/26, 9:07 AM
Indefinitely Extended Excursion™️ said...: The Issue is cultural, not economic, children and families aren't prioritized over personal career and comfort anymore. Decades of intellectual and institutional promotion of individualism has shifted cultural values away from building families.

Any policies to shift this trend will take time, due to cultural inertia.; 7/6/26, 9:08 AM
Peachy+2 said...: boatbuilder - I think ya nailed it.; 7/6/26, 9:08 AM
Kai Akker said...: --- But the sacrifices it would take to make parenting possible simply didn’t feel worth it. [Jill]

Of this are gene pools made.; 7/6/26, 9:08 AM
Peachy+2 said...: White leftist women read "handmaid's tale' and think it's real.
fixed; 7/6/26, 9:09 AM
bagoh20 said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/6/26, 9:11 AM
Shouting Thomas said...: This is what will cure Filipovic’s brain lock:

Toss the pills. Fuck your husband every night. Get knocked up. Stop blabbing about why. Chuck the idiot feminism. Once you’re knocked up, you’ll forget the college rhetoric bullshit. When the baby comes out, you’ll forget you ever bought that shit. Do stuff. Stop the thumb sucking and navel gazing.; 7/6/26, 9:11 AM
imTay said...: The obvious reply, hinted at here, from the conservative man, is "the future belongs to those who show up, so go ahead and have it your way.; 7/6/26, 9:13 AM
Iman said...: Thank God… another soulless Commie has chosen not to reproduce!; 7/6/26, 9:14 AM
chickelit said...: "Of this are gene pools made."

Drain the reflecting gene pool. Fill the introspective gene pool.; 7/6/26, 9:14 AM
Peachy+2 said...: White leftist women are never happy.
They demand abortion on demand - and have it. Even in the post Roe era. Colorado codified abortion until birth in the CO constitution.
White leftist women trash men, and the democrats have done all they can to push men down with all of their DEI crap.
One of my close friends had a 20 something son - he is unusually good looking and he is terrified of most women.
Remains single on purpose. (no not gay)
That is sad commentary.; 7/6/26, 9:15 AM
Eva Marie said...: If an article is behind a paywall, go to your favorite AI and ask for a summary. Most of the time you’ll get a very good summary which saves you time as well as money.; 7/6/26, 9:15 AM
Mary Beth said...: Her friends with children were having a hard time finding babysitters in their small town (which was also not diverse*). I don't know her friends. Maybe they really wanted to meet up and couldn't find child care, but I think it's also a real possibility that the ones with kids had outgrown the ones without and used the lack of childcare as an excuse.

*Included because she included it although I doubt it became less diverse after they bought the house. I guess it was diverse enough for adults but not for children - which makes me think that maybe she was upset there weren't immigrant women willing to do childcare for below market rate.; 7/6/26, 9:16 AM
n.n said...: Filipovic is either a victim or advocate for the women's RAAT race.; 7/6/26, 9:17 AM
Iman said...: Narcissistic people should remain childless, as there’s no room for anyone else in their self-possessed world.; 7/6/26, 9:17 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Talk about overthinking an issue. Yes...children are hard because you have to adjust your comfortable lifestyle and make some sacrifices. Face the fact that you can't have it all and stop trying to blame everyone else. It is your and your partner's decision to make.

About the paywall... Use Firefox browser....go into "reader view" mode. Then refresh the browser page....tada! just text to read and no ads or photos.; 7/6/26, 9:18 AM
n.n said...: Diverse in color and class (e.g. racism, sexism)? Or diverse as individuals, minority of one? #HateLovesAbortion; 7/6/26, 9:19 AM
Kai Akker said...: BTW: Jill Filipovic "earned a Bachelor of Arts in journalism and politics and a minor in gender and sexuality studies from New York University." source, Wikipedia

Lots of room in those syllabi for critical thinking and analysis, right?; 7/6/26, 9:20 AM
gilbar said...: "The summer I turned 39..
..as my fertility began to sunset..

NOPE!
39 is NOT the begining if the sunset.
39 is NOT the begining of dusk..
39 is the last glimmers of the gloaming

39 is too late to wonder if you "want" to have a baby;
if you WANTED to have a baby, you SHOULD have started 10 (20!) years earlier.

ps. my twin sister had her 3rd baby at 40; so i'm NOT saying that it doesn't happen. I'm saying that waiting 'til your thirties to consider starting is NOT the way to have children; 7/6/26, 9:22 AM
n.n said...: Men and women can have it all, but rarely all at once, and with immature preference. Reconcile and set priorities based on reality, not handmade tales with gay prejudice.; 7/6/26, 9:23 AM
Saint Croix said...: As perhaps counterintuitive as it sounds, restoring abortion rights and contraception access is crucial here, too—majority-male legislatures intruding on women’s reproductive choices is all part of the same swamp of misogynist contempt for women’s autonomy and humanity.

Wow. Right to kill babies = more babies. Are you sure you're a natalist?

I can't believe she got paid to write this. Feminists paying feminists to write feminism. I guess.; 7/6/26, 9:23 AM
Ampersand said...: JK Brown's observation about the lack of stable employment opportunities for young men of fathering age is right on. Did anyone actually think that that the reorganization of talented women into competitive work drones would not dramatically reduce fertility? And all of this in a legal framework in which fatherhood has become a form of indentured servitude. When your baby mama goes nutso, you still have to pay. As tens of thousands of female Taylor Swift fans scream during her concerts: F___ the Patriarchy! They might as well be screaming F___ Our Fertility!; 7/6/26, 9:25 AM
Assistant Village Idiot said...: The statistic is kept as births per female because we are certain of that, while the father is unsure. This biases how we look at the problem as a purely female one. No cultural bias needed.; 7/6/26, 9:31 AM
Saint Croix said...: I use webpage archive to look up old versions of articles.; 7/6/26, 9:32 AM
Money Manger said...: Like one of those experimental novels, say, written without using the letter "E", I think her real goal was to write a long, whiney, selfish and politically shaded essay without once using the word "Trump".; 7/6/26, 9:33 AM
Jamie said...: "Conservatives lay the blame at the nihilistic doom-and-gloom hedonistic left's feet, be they male or female."

I can't here to say this. Why do these lefty writers insist on batting at straw conservatives of their own invention? She could have, instead, made a real argument that addressed this point about the "nihilistic doom-and-gloom hedonistic left" of which she's a part - such as persuading the reader that she isn't nihilistic, she's rationally opportunistic, and that choices must be made in this world, and that the people whose choices include elite university degrees, elite careers, and lives of elite curation and sophistication, such as herself, are being both rational and prosocial (somebody has to run things, after all, and shouldn't it be people like this? Like her?) when they choose not to compromise any of these choices by adding dependents to the mix (who can't be left with a Rover.com boarder, I mean).

I mean, she would risk sounding elitist, but at least she'd be telling the truth. And Slate's audience would probably have gone along, nodding ruefully at the burden they share of being the people who run things and therefore make the rational choice not to distract themselves with family life. Some of them might have felt a little uneasy at the dropping of the mask of concern for the downtrodden... but I'll bet they would then have reconsidered, and added to themselves, "But she's right - it has to be we who keep this world spinning. No other choice makes sense."

Side note: I wonder how her husband feels about the headline, since by implication he's not a "good man" - else she would have chosen to reproduce with him. Apparently (thanks for the quotes from the piece, those who adventured into the Land of Slate on our behalf!) she at least felt that she needed to throw him the bone of saying she "treasured" their marriage... but again, the implication is that she didn't think it was solid enough to survive the addition of another, highly dependent person.; 7/6/26, 9:35 AM
Ampersand said...: Note, incidentally, that billionaire role model Taylor Swift has the extraordinay luxury of putting her emotional baggaga in the rearview mirror, and start reproducing with an alpha male as her biological clock approaches the two minute warning. The young women who paid for those expensive concert seats won't have a comparable luxury.
Emotional commitment and reproduction are (post birth control) always difficult choices. They are made more difficult by our feckless foolish culture.; 7/6/26, 9:36 AM
gilbar said...: serious question:
where is the next generation of lefties going to come from?
it WON'T be from the current gen, they're not having kids..
the current gen was trained in school, because the last gen didn't have kids Either..
but WHERE is the next gen going to come from?
the west's schools are empty, or partially filled.. With Moslems.
so; WHERE is the next gen of lefties going to come from?
HOW are school teachers going to convert today's students?
how about tomorrows? seems like the kids will be in a Madrasa; 7/6/26, 9:38 AM
n.n said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/6/26, 9:40 AM
RCOCEAN II said...: Does summer melt into fall? Spring can melt into summer. Summer cools into fall.; 7/6/26, 9:42 AM
n.n said...: There is no mystery in sex and conception, which takes two sexes: a male and a female, equal in rights and complementary in Nature. [Elective] Abortion rights, human rites are transhumane and misogynistic practices performed under RAAT doctrine. Planned parenthood is a homicidal umbrella incorporation and a murderous Choice around six weeks upon reaching viability. #HateLovesAbortion; 7/6/26, 9:43 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: A "darling little village".

I guess she wanted to move to a "darling little village" to wait for Godot? "The play, a cornerstone of the Theatre of the Absurd..."

Her chairs must be quaint.; 7/6/26, 9:43 AM
Peachy+2 said...: It "can't find a babysitter" is first thing on your mind - perhaps you should not be having any babies.
Again - if leftist fems do not want to pro-create, is this really so bad?

btw- I sperate leftists from regular old fashioned liberal.; 7/6/26, 9:45 AM
Eva Marie said...: Small note about circumventing the pay wall:
I would much rather pay for the article but don’t want another subscription - so I cheat Salon instead. (But I feel bad about it.) I wish there was an on line wallet you could pay into and then pay per article as needed; 7/6/26, 9:47 AM
Peachy+2 said...: Interesting we never read about the compassion of adopting an unwanted child - or adopting an older child from the foster care system.

White leftist females: *me me me me me - *blame blame blame blame blame. ***

Run.; 7/6/26, 9:47 AM
Fred Drinkwater said...: Thanks aggie for the archive link.; 7/6/26, 9:50 AM
Saint Croix said...: Pregnant women in the spotlight.; 7/6/26, 9:51 AM
Saint Croix said...: Jill Filipovic is quoted in that crazy NYT story.

“It almost feels like a memo went out,” said Jill Filipovic, the host of the “Week in Women” podcast. “They have quite intentionally opted to present themselves as, ‘I am really pregnant, and this is what women were chosen to do,’ and they are happy to say that both with their looks and their mouths.”

How are pregnant women supposed to present themselves? They're pregnant! It's a reality! Are they supposed to hide?

From natalist conspiracy theories to this slop in Slate. Wow.; 7/6/26, 9:57 AM
rrsafety said...: I am certain that Jill literally never speaks to conservatives.; 7/6/26, 9:59 AM
Freder Frederson said...: "We need more stable employment for men, and starting at an earlier age, if you want more children. Instead, as far back as late Boomer (1957-1964) only 41% of men were able to establish and maintain continuous high employment from ages 27-49."

Good point. How exactly are you going to fix this problem? Stronger labor laws and union representation. Paid maternity/paternity leave (for a lot longer than six weeks)? Employee representation and full voting rights on corporate boards? End at will employment? Government funded universal day care?

All good ideas, but I'm sure I will be called a commie for suggesting any of these things.; 7/6/26, 9:59 AM
Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...: “WHERE is the next gen of lefties going to come from?”

South America snd the Middle East appear to be the current plan.; 7/6/26, 10:00 AM
Saint Croix said...: Here's the crazy NYT story.; 7/6/26, 10:02 AM
Fred Drinkwater said...: "Darling little village" but with "little diversity".

Just like my relative who found a nice old town with all kinds of nice architecture and traditional small town features, then imagined moving there and bringing improvements in the form of their own progressive ideas.; 7/6/26, 10:02 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Thanks for the tip DBQ. I had Firefox already installed but never thought i needed it. I'm listening to the article though.; 7/6/26, 10:02 AM
Freder Frederson said...: "Toss the pills. Fuck your husband every night. Get knocked up. Stop blabbing about why. Chuck the idiot feminism. Once you’re knocked up, you’ll forget the college rhetoric bullshit. When the baby comes out, you’ll forget you ever bought that shit. Do stuff. Stop the thumb sucking and navel gazing."

Says the man who was boasting about his mail-order Filipina wife. I bet the day her green card came was the day she initiated divorce proceedings.; 7/6/26, 10:03 AM
RCOCEAN II said...: It needs to be remembered that Fillipovic is in favor of open borders and mass immigration. She'd love for white people to not have kids and be replaced by immigrants.

And she's cheering that on by putting out "Dont have a kid" propaganda. Its obvious that anyone who gets to 39 without having a child, despite being married, having a lots of $$ and coming from a middle class family - never wanted to have a child. So listening to her on the subject is a waste of time.

Whats really neccessary, and wont be done, is to make getting married and having kids fashionable, and being a lonely spinster unfashionable. Even more than men, the average woman is driven by external propaganda.; 7/6/26, 10:04 AM
Saint Croix said...: Here's the hilarious Cheers bit about a happy pregnant mom.; 7/6/26, 10:05 AM
Known Unknown said...: Can you still navel gaze if you are pregnant?; 7/6/26, 10:05 AM
RCOCEAN II said...: reading the article its weird how women like Fillipovic regard abortion as some weird substitute Religion.

Given the availablity of cheap and effective birth control, why should any woman get pregnant unless they want to. But she seems to regard it as the height of oppression for women to use birth control and not have unwanted pregnancies. In fact, abortion seems to be the most important thing in the world.

And given the demand for adoptions, how many young women get stuck with raising a kid they want? Very few, I'd assume. So you really have to wonder what's at the bottom of this obsession over abortion that drives so many well-to-do women.; 7/6/26, 10:09 AM
Anthony said...: Helen Smith (aka, Mrs. Instapundit) has been writing about this for years. Also see Cassie Jaye's "The Red Pill". A lot of men are checking out because they've had it beaten into them since kindergarten that The Future Is Female, Believe All women, etc.; 7/6/26, 10:10 AM
Peachy+2 said...: Conservatives/ men/ make life so miserable for these leftist females. Every corner of their lives - even private decisions are ruined by conservative men.

Perhaps you leftists should start assassinating everyone you hate. oh right - doing it.
Firebomb Tesla, your religion killed Charlie Kirk, blood lust for killing Trump...; 7/6/26, 10:11 AM
Saint Croix said...: That Cheers bit is funny because it's so over-the-top.

The NYT article is crazy because it assumes Republicans think that way. And, furthermore, the NYT apparently sees pregnancy as a nefarious scheme to subjugate women.

So stupid. You know your mom was pregnant with you, right?; 7/6/26, 10:15 AM
boatbuilder said...: Freder:
""We need more stable employment for men, and starting at an earlier age, if you want more children. Instead, as far back as late Boomer (1957-1964) only 41% of men were able to establish and maintain continuous high employment from ages 27-49."

Good point. How exactly are you going to fix this problem? Stronger labor laws and union representation. Paid maternity/paternity leave (for a lot longer than six weeks)? Employee representation and full voting rights on corporate boards? End at will employment? Government funded universal day care?

All good ideas, but I'm sure I will be called a commie for suggesting any of these things."

Sweden seems to have been the model for that sort of thing. How has that worked out?

https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/swe/sweden/fertility-rate; 7/6/26, 10:18 AM
bagoh20 said...: I've never had any kids of my own, but I've raised more than my share. It's a real challenge, hard work, expensive, but rewarding. I've had the luxury of both lifestyles, and they both have their good and bad, but I think in the end, being childless, especially for women will disappoint more, at least a little. Not necessarily devastating, and maybe worth it to you in hindsight. There is no magical right answer. We don't all want the same things, or value them equally, and that should be OK.; 7/6/26, 10:21 AM
Hassayamper said...: the NYT apparently sees pregnancy as a nefarious scheme to subjugate women.

Yes, we want to make women serve their husband and children in a happy home, instead of serving a boss making spreadsheets in a windowless cubicle. We are evil that way.; 7/6/26, 10:22 AM
Hassayamper said...: reading the article its weird how women like Fillipovic regard abortion as some weird substitute Religion.

Abortion is one of the three great sacraments of the Church of the Left, along with buggery and collective punishment.; 7/6/26, 10:23 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: She uses the word "sacrifice" a couple of times. I don't think it means what she thinks it means.

"an act of slaughtering an animal or person or surrendering a possession as an offering to a deity".

Unless, she secretly abhors the idea of turning over her child to the state... as sacrifice. She hides her reasoning behind convoluted socialist gobbledygook.; 7/6/26, 10:24 AM
Peachy+2 said...: Labor laws - LOL. Labor laws are very strong.

In CO - when the left took over, they banned white male run companies from any work out at DIA. Really.; 7/6/26, 10:25 AM
bagoh20 said...: Financial security or strength does not seem to be important to the decision to have kids. It wasn't for my family, which grew faster in poverty than in stability, and I think that's the norm. Wealth and security may more often turn off the desire for kids. You have something to lose.; 7/6/26, 10:26 AM
Peachy+2 said...: choosing to have children or not is a personal choice.
the left turn it into a blame game. Like they do everything.; 7/6/26, 10:26 AM
Mason G said...: "Women have long outnumbered men on college campuses and earned a much larger share of degrees"

Women expect to find high-value mates while earning a larger share of degrees than men.

Those degrees must not have included any math classes.; 7/6/26, 10:26 AM
grimson said...: "The 'missing men of the American marriage market,' as one NPR story recently put it, is driven by the scores of men who lack well-paid work or have fallen into addiction or criminality.

Except that's not the case for Filipovic. It's also conflating the issue of marriage with having children.

Melissa Kearney, in her book "The Two-Parent Privilege," notes that she did a study in North Dakota on the social impact of the fracking boom in North Dakota. It found that while the explosion in good-paying jobs did lead to more births, there was not an increase in marriages.

"Though fracking activity led to an increase in employment and earnings for men, which in turn led to an increase in births, it did not have any effect on the percent of adults ages 18 to 34 who were newly married, never married, or currently married. Nor was there any change in divorce or cohabitation rates."; 7/6/26, 10:27 AM
bagoh20 said...: Wait a minute if increased fracking activity increased birth rates but not marriages, could it be that they just misspelled "fucking"?; 7/6/26, 10:35 AM
Mason G said...: How many college credentialed women are looking to marry oilfield workers?; 7/6/26, 10:37 AM
Tom Locker said...: It's a well known fact that men are responsible for women making bad choices.; 7/6/26, 10:38 AM
hombre said...: If the consequences of declining fertility are to be avoided, men must stop having abortions.; 7/6/26, 10:40 AM
Freder Frederson said...: Sweden seems to have been the model for that sort of thing. How has that worked out?

Which while still low, it is still higher than the U.S. birthrate. So, what is your point?; 7/6/26, 10:46 AM
bagoh20 said...: " Stronger labor laws and union representation. Paid maternity/paternity leave (for a lot longer than six weeks)? Employee representation and full voting rights on corporate boards? End at will employment? Government funded universal day care?"

These lead to lower employment as they greatly increase the cost of employees. Employees are less economical and essential today than ever, and it going that direction fast enough already.; 7/6/26, 10:47 AM
Aggie said...: She is more to be pitied, then censored,
She is more to be helped, than despised.
She is only a lassie who ventured,
Down life's stormy path, ill-advised.

Do not scorn her with words fierce and bitter.
Do not laugh at her shame and downfall.
For a moment, just stop and consider,
That a man was the cause of it all.

...and that song was written before the advent of feminism.; 7/6/26, 10:49 AM
Freder Frederson said...: "These lead to lower employment as they greatly increase the cost of employees. Employees are less economical and essential today than ever, and it going that direction fast enough already."

So we are damned if we do and damned if we don't?; 7/6/26, 10:49 AM
bagoh20 said...: "So we are damned if we do and damned if we don't?"

I would say saved, because I thought nobody really wanted to work for anyone anyway. It's oppression after all.; 7/6/26, 11:02 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: Jill fights the power by depriving future generations of the numbers necessary to bring about the...
Then again, force doesn't need big numbers to bring about the revolution. #Unsaid Things.; 7/6/26, 11:02 AM
imTay said...: Some Nobel Prize winning poet wrote "You're gonna hafta server somebody." Better a boss who won't care about you the minute you part company for whatever reason, if he or she ever did at all, than a child who will care about you your whole life, and the provide you, if you are lucky, with the gift of grandchildren.

But honestly, this is one more story about women dreaming about a world where all of the men are above average. Female hypergamy is the achilles heel of feminism.; 7/6/26, 11:02 AM
imTay said...: I asked Grok, and this is what I got.

Roughly 25-35% of recent births in Sweden are to foreign-born mothers, who have somewhat higher fertility rates (around 1.6-1.9 TFR) than native-born Swedish women (around 1.4-1.6 TFR), with the gap largely driven by subgroups from high-fertility, traditional-value backgrounds (e.g., certain Middle Eastern, North African, and Sub-Saharan African origins). However, this overstates the long-term contribution because immigrant fertility converges toward Swedish norms over time and generations, and "traditional values" groups are a subset of immigrants.

So basically, once they adopt Swedish values, the birth rate in immigrant comminity drops.; 7/6/26, 11:07 AM
Joe Bar said...: Archived article, if you want to read it: https://archive.is/cx27A
It's a laundry list of why conservatives are bad.; 7/6/26, 11:09 AM
imTay said...: The US TFR [Total Fertiiity Rate] for non-immigrant Americans is higher than that of Swedish born Swedes, at 1.7+; 7/6/26, 11:11 AM
imTay said...: So I guess the evidence is in, based on actual implementation of her policies in Sweden, that her solution not only will not work, but would actively exacerbate the problem.; 7/6/26, 11:13 AM
boatbuilder said...: I seem to recall that the male-to-female ratio in South Dakota during the fracking boom was something like 10 to 1. So there was a lot of fracking going on but not a whole lot of marriage.; 7/6/26, 11:13 AM
boatbuilder said...: "Which while still low, it is still higher than the U.S. birthrate. So, what is your point?"

I'm going to assume that you are in good faith and really don't understand my point. So I will spell it out.

YOUR PROPOSED SOLUTIONS DIDN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

That was my point.; 7/6/26, 11:18 AM
Rustygrommet said...: Perhaps if our whole public education structure and popular media didn't spend all it's time demonizing men and our place in society then women would be more welcome to procreation.
Women are taught that we are un-necessary to the enjoyment of a full life. Men have gotten the message and no longer participate.; 7/6/26, 11:26 AM
JK Brown said...: Freder Frederson,

Well the only proven way to increase birth rates is to replicate the childhoods of women born in the 1920s and 1930s. These women are the only ones in the history of the US to get near "universal motherhood".

Though it might have been the change in dating for these girls to "going steady", i.e., practice marriage during the war and afterwards. But had to be impacted by the fact of the steady income growth from 1948-1973 for the bottom 90% of earners. Though the birth rated did peak and rapidly decline after 1960, dropping back to the 1940 level of 2 in 1973 as the daughters of those women took up the fertility habits of their grandmothers.

Many seem to be moving toward socialism, which depends on increasing workers, and had the power of the state to force women to bear children. So give it 20 or so years for socialism to come to dictatorial power.; 7/6/26, 11:27 AM
RNB said...: The central tenet of modern feminism: "Some way, somehow, it's some goddamn man's fault!"; 7/6/26, 11:40 AM
Freder Frederson said...: Well the only proven way to increase birth rates is to replicate the childhoods of women born in the 1920s and 1930s.

That is simply not going to happen.

Rather than try and figure out how to increase birth rates (and I assume encouraging legal immigration, which has always been the main driver of U.S. population growth, is a nonstarter for you), perhaps we should think about ways to restructure society to prosper with negative population growth.

Isn't a smaller worldwide population better for everyone and the earth in general? Fantasies about settling Mars (so Elon Musk can have his own planet) are impossible for the forseeable future. We simply do not have the technology and unless you can solve the problems of reduced gravity on the human body, any emigration to Mars is a one-way trip.; 7/6/26, 11:51 AM
chickelit said...: An aging cohort of childless feminists might serve as a cautionary tale to the next generation. I believe this is already starting to happen. The aged-out cohort can run crèches where might indoctrinate the young to satisfy their feminist leanings. But eventually they will die out like the Shakers.; 7/6/26, 11:55 AM
rehajm said...: I'm gonna guess her 'darling little village in upstate New York' is somewhere south of Poughkeepsie...; 7/6/26, 11:55 AM
rehajm said...: "perhaps we should think about ways to restructure society to prosper with negative population growth."

...holy carp I agree with Federer...; 7/6/26, 11:56 AM
bagoh20 said...: "restructure society to prosper with negative population growth."

Balanced budget, end Social Security and Medicare. Only way to do it.; 7/6/26, 12:01 PM
Rabel said...: "The couple met in December 2013 on a press trip to Malawi organized by the United Nations Foundation, where the groom impressed the bride by changing a blown-out tire on the way to interview then-president Joyce Banda."

I don't know, that sounds pretty based.

But the lack of a diverse servant class in her darling little village like the one in Hong Kong that made life so cheap and easy is a show stopper as far as reproduction.

Send her some Haitians.

The article is a study in blind entitlement.

I pity the tire changer.; 7/6/26, 12:03 PM
chickelit said...: “Fantasies about settling Mars (so Elon Musk can have his own planet) are impossible for the forseeable future.”

And yet Musk is showing the way forward with harem building and children. This seems inevitable given women’s hardwired hypergamy.; 7/6/26, 12:05 PM
chickelit said...: Harem building and polygamy are on the rise at the lower socioeconomic end thanks to resurgent Islam.; 7/6/26, 12:07 PM
Saint Croix said...: Isn't a smaller worldwide population better for everyone and the earth in general?

Too many humans, get rid of them.

Social security is a ponzi scheme. One day in the future, when we have too few workers, and too many retirees, I suspect the whole damn thing is going to blow up.

The nice thing about parents -- and children -- is when catastrophe happens, your family will help you get back on your feet.

The left is destroying our families, while it simultaneously wants to depopulate the earth.

What happens when social security blows up? And the bureaucrats can't afford to help you out?

My hope and prayer is that everybody finds a happy family.; 7/6/26, 12:13 PM
Rabel said...: "Isn't a smaller worldwide population better for everyone and the earth in general?"

No.The Earth doesn't care and the key for "everyone" is the distribution of that population.

Africa's going to have an overpopulation problem in a few decades while other areas will struggle with low to negative growth.; 7/6/26, 12:15 PM
imTay said...: Society will collapse because the enormous Ponzi scheme that we are using to fund our lifestyle will collapse, no other reason. And we will blame our kids for not having children to pay for the money we are spending right now.; 7/6/26, 12:18 PM
John henry said...: Imtay,

Some of us think that upstate begins north of Albany. Hague seems like a good dividing line.

John Henry; 7/6/26, 12:23 PM
John henry said...: Naval station Roosevelt Roads used to have about 1000 families living on base housing. A lot of women didn't work and were happy to take care of some kids either by the week or for a few hours for someone who just wanted to go get her hair done.

Hundreds of high school kinds were happy to make a few bucks babysitting while the parents went to a movie or dinner.

Then in the 90s, the govt decided in its infinite wisdom this was no good. Teens had to take classes and be certified to babysit. Women wanting to take care of kids had to take classes, be certified and have their homes inspected.

It became a bunch of burocratic BS that nobody wanted to deal with.

And all of a sudden it became impossible to find someone to take care of your kids.

John Henry; 7/6/26, 12:30 PM
Yancey Ward said...: Looks like the husband/tire changer failed at life's most fundamental task- dodging that big bullet in Malawi.; 7/6/26, 12:35 PM
Freder Frederson said...: Balanced budget, end Social Security and Medicare. Only way to do it.

And now who is arguing for depopulation. Your solution is for any but rich old people (who will not be able to afford healthcare or food) to die more quickly.; 7/6/26, 12:35 PM
John henry said...: St Croix,

Social Security is not a Ponzi Scheme. No more than SNAP or the US Navy. It is a welfare payment out of the general fund.

It can no more go broke than the Army or SNAP can go broke. Congress can fund them or not but it is up to Congress.

You have no more right to the money you put into SS than you do to SNAP benefits. If you meet the requirements, you get a check that sorta, kinda, almost, has an actuarial relation to what was paid in. But if the govt decides, it can means test SS. Oh, you have a pension of $60m/yr? We'll cut your SS in half. Oh, your house is worth $2mm? No SS for you.

It is this way to meet the Constitution. Justice Stone told Labor Secty Perkins at a 1934 tea party how to do it. Payments in are a tax, explicitly permitted under 16A. Payments out are "welfare" explicitly permitted under the provide for general welfare clause.

It is welfare, plain and simple.

John Henry; 7/6/26, 12:38 PM
bagoh20 said...: "What happens when social security blows up? And the bureaucrats can't afford to help you out?"

I love those movies: Mad Max, The Postman, I Am Legend, 28 Weeks Later, Escape From Democrat Cities". As I get older my character in the movie fares less well.; 7/6/26, 12:40 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: "How many college credentialed women are looking to marry oilfield workers? "

I wasn't searching to marry anyone...but I did... I married the plumber. Best decision of my life; 7/6/26, 12:42 PM
Rabel said...: Social Security is not going to "blow up" for two reasons:

1. The changes required to put it back on solid footing are difficult but not extreme.

2. When push comes to shove the largest voting bloc in the country will not allow it.

I'm on SS and I vote.; 7/6/26, 12:42 PM
Yancey Ward said...: I have written it many, many times in these forums- it all comes down to dependency ratios- your dependants come in three groups- children, other relatives/parents, and the people you pay to support through mandated government programs. The last of those is a cancer eating away at the first two.; 7/6/26, 12:44 PM
Kevin said...: The Feminist's Anthem:

Yes, no, maybe.
I don't know.
Can you repeat the question?
You're not the boss of me now.
You're not the boss of me now.
You're not the boss of me now and you're not so big.
You're not the boss of me now.
You're not the boss of me now.
You're not the boss of me now and you're not so big.
Life is unfair.; 7/6/26, 1:06 PM
Howard said...: So a fish actually does need a bicycle.; 7/6/26, 1:18 PM
Mason G said...: Writes Jill Filipovic in "We Need More Good Men...

Women initiate 70% of the divorces in the country. Maybe what's needed is women who are able to make better choices when it comes to who they marry?; 7/6/26, 1:26 PM
Saint Croix said...: John Henry, I hope you are right.

Rabel, I hope you are right, too.

I hope young people are investing for their future. I'm way more confident about my stocks than I am about future welfare payments.

You'd think that Marxists would notice, and applaud, that many workers in our society own shares in their companies. A lot of secretaries and janitors for Dell corporation became very wealthy. Owning shares of a corporation is smart business, because it makes the employees focus on doing best for the business.

You'd think Marxists and leftists would notice this and applaud it. But they don't.; 7/6/26, 1:57 PM
Saint Croix said...: Taylor and Travis: a Pre-Nup Won't Protect Your Marriage; 7/6/26, 2:04 PM
Hassayamper said...: the groom impressed the bride by changing a blown-out tire

That seems on-brand for the left-wing Manhattanite lotophagi.

Out here in flyover country, my teenage daughter had to demonstrate that she could safely change a tire completely unassisted, as well as top up the radiator, engine oil, and washer fluid, before she received the keys to the old Volkswagen I bought her for her 16th birthday.; 7/6/26, 2:10 PM
James K said...: I remember when Slate was a pretty good magazine, back when Michael Kinsley was editor. Like the New Republic and the New Yorker, it has gone both far left and downhill in quality. This article is incoherent mishmash.; 7/6/26, 2:54 PM
Gospace said...: Why my youngest son isn't married. Started dating a young lady in college. A year after graduating proposed. Mutual decision to wait until he got of active duty. Which he did. A month later while planning when the wedding would be, she announced- "I don't want any children!" Period, end of discussion. He didn't need any, his genetic legacy (she used different words) was already ensured- he's got 10 nephew's and nieces! I don't know where she got that idea from. And it didn't fly with him

So here it is 6 months later. He's got that low 6 figure job. A girl he's now been on a dozen or so dates and get togethers with- and- she wants children. They've had that discussion. Like he did with his ex-fiancé before he came off active duty and she changed her mind.

What caused her to change her mind? Climate change! Excess population! Starving children in the world! From the liberal mantra the people she hung around with the last 4 years kept reciting. Made children into a burden, not a blessing. 10 grandchildren now, more to come in the future. Not just from him, his older siblings aren't done yet.; 7/6/26, 3:06 PM
rehajm said...: Social Security is not a Ponzi Scheme

…Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme…; 7/6/26, 3:08 PM
Mr. T. said...: Who in the world would listen to anything Jill Fillopvic says?!

She made false, bogus claims about the Duke rape hoax.

She made false, bogus claims about the Rolling Stone UVA rape hoax.

She made bogus, false claims about Brett Kavanaugh.

Is there anybody outside of Moiria Donnegan, and Amanda Marcotte, and Melissa Harris-Perry that have been so throughly discredited and debunked as Jill Fillopovic???; 7/6/26, 3:08 PM
James K said...: Social Security is certainly structured as a Ponzi scheme. What makes it different is that it's run by the government. Ponzi schemes break down when people stop putting new money into them. With SS the government can both force people to continue to put money in, and can arbitrarily change what previous investors can take out, and/or take money from other sources. Madoff would have been fine if he could have done those things.; 7/6/26, 3:21 PM
Leland said...: "I married the plumber"
The oil patch calls them pipe fitters, and they are paid a fortune to provide their services.; 7/6/26, 3:31 PM
Saint Croix said...: The Life of Julia; 7/6/26, 3:38 PM
Quaestor said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/6/26, 3:40 PM
Quaestor said...: Imagine how those darling little villagers feel about have Scylla and Charybdis take up residence in their formerly idyllic hamlet.; 7/6/26, 3:42 PM
Jim at said...: *All good ideas, but I'm sure I will be called a commie for suggesting any of these things.

No. You're a lazy collectivist who's obviously never signed the front of a paycheck.; 7/6/26, 3:43 PM
Quaestor said...: She waited until she moved to a "darling little village" to attempt pregnancy? Doesn't that notion make you want to vomit? It gave me the tummy tremors like nothing short a dose of ptomain. Little Jill waits until her remaining eggs are beginning to rot, and blames everyone but her loathsome self for her selfish stupidity. But then, she's relying on the core shibboleth of feminist mythology: You can have it all, baby: the corner office with the big swivel chair that you can ride like a carnival attraction for six out of eight hours per work day, a nightlife like Hell's idea of Heaven, a loving, supportive husband, a loving, supportive pool man, and 2.5 loving, supportive non-binary offspring with 4-oh GPAs. Of course, no one but institutionalized moron would believe any of that, though Jill isn't even an institutionalized moron's idea mental competency.; 7/6/26, 3:48 PM
Saint Croix said...: The Life of Julia on Steroids

I was like, oh shit, somebody tried to turn Julia into a man. But no. No actual steroids were used in this cartoon display. Welfare state on steroids. Not cancer-causing steroids.; 7/6/26, 3:54 PM
bagoh20 said...: I wish I could marry a plumber. I'm a sucker for low riding jeans.; 7/6/26, 3:57 PM
Tina Trent said...: I simply can't get past the fact that Slate still exists or ever existed. An intentionally blank and intellectually infertile place.; 7/6/26, 4:07 PM
n.n said...: Social Security is based on fixed outlaws commensurate to costs. Medicare etc., on the other hand, are floating platforms in danger of capsizing and the resulting undertow will pull the rest of the economy down with them.; 7/6/26, 4:14 PM
Skeptical Voter said...: So it 's all men's fault. Check. Got the message. But sister, I did my part long ago. And I've got the grandkids to prove it.; 7/6/26, 4:19 PM
Mason G said...: "You're a lazy collectivist who's obviously never signed the front of a paycheck."

It's easy to be generous with other people's money. Same as it ever was.; 7/6/26, 4:21 PM
chickelit said...: Shorter "Life of Julia" under Obama:
Ask not what you can do for your country--ask what your country can do for you.; 7/6/26, 4:25 PM
Mason G said...: And under Biden:

Ask what someone else's country can do for you.; 7/6/26, 4:38 PM
Marcus Bressler said...: Labor laws are fine as they are and unions are a thing of the past.; 7/6/26, 5:14 PM
gilbar said...: FF said...
"..Employee representation and full voting rights on corporate boards..
..End at will employment.."

SO, a couple of questions Fredo..
these full voting rights.. will the workers need to show ID?
you know.. their Union Cards?

this ending at willemployment?
I'm assuming that you're advocating that Both Ways?
that is; you're stating that according to YOU; workers could not quit there jobs without consent of their employers??
That sounds like something that the 13th amendment would have a problem with..
But i'm SURE that YOU do NOT agree with those Republican ideas?; 7/6/26, 5:41 PM
Valentine Smith said...: Old Jill is Is full of shit. She never pondered having children. This article is a nod at her husband for meekly bringing up the possibility of having a child at the advanced age of 39.; 7/6/26, 5:58 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: @Leland "The oil patch calls them pipe fitters, and they are paid a fortune to provide their services."

We married 33 years ago. He doesn't do domestic plumbing anymore though. We have one of only two water well, pump, tank, water systems companies in our rural area. Domestic and small agricultural only. Waiting list for services and a large amount of snowbird and repeat clients. Life is good.; 7/6/26, 6:09 PM
Gospace said...: "Leland said...
"I married the plumber"
The oil patch calls them pipe fitters, and they are paid a fortune to provide their services."

Pipe fitters and plumbers are two similar but entirely different occupations. The similarity is- they both work with pipes. And it pretty much ends there.; 7/6/26, 6:11 PM
Not Illinois Resident said...: Don't know if we're allowed to recommend other bloggers. But here I go: I've been reading Jim Kunstler's excellent upstate NY based blog for years. He writes about politics, urban design, energy policy issues, and general hubris within our American cultural context. He also writes about how economically hollowed-out much of upstate and western NY state has become, the physical abandonment, the social and economic problems, and the holdouts who stay.; 7/6/26, 6:21 PM
Not Illinois Resident said...: Recently read feminist poet Adrienne Rich's biography. Child prodigy poet. Married mother of three sons. Belated lesbian who had a very difficult time getting into the lady-loving groove.; 7/6/26, 6:23 PM
wildswan said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 7/6/26, 6:25 PM
wildswan said...: Hong Kong has a fertility rate of .82 children per women. And looking at families world-wide it's all the same. Benefits mean nothing in terms of keeping up the birthrate. What does matter? Believing members of the Abrahamic religions or traidtion keepers in traditional Asian or African cultures (or any culture really) are having children. Meanwhile, the birth-winter has closed in on the secularized. Nothing, absolutely nothing, will keep up the birthrate among them. Each generation of secularization within a family and the birth rate falls further. Whatever may be true in individual cases the trend world-wide is clear and consistent. And the danger is, as commenters noted above, that, if each generation is smaller than the last, then social security and other welfare benefits cannot be sustained. Yet if each geneartion has fewer family members, then each individual is more likely to need government assistance to replace the family. This is unsustainable.
But, right now in 2026, those women voters who had 0 or 1 child (35%) outnumber the women voters who had three or more children (25%). And they are of voting age. So the women with children are outvoted right now and we have voters demanding socialism. That will change when the children from larger families become the voters. There will be 15 voters from those who had zero (20%) or 1 child (15%) and there will be at least 75 voters from those who had three or more children. They will not agree to lavishly support those like Miss Jill there, who spent her money having a good time while their own mother is not entitled to as much support from them because she did not have as good a career or work for as long. Miss Jill may think the law will make things happen in her favor but the voters of her old age will say otherwise. They'll support the mother who gave them life and looked after them, not elderly, selfish brats who wrote for Slate.; 7/6/26, 6:29 PM
Oso Negro said...: Wow. A lot going on in these comments! Two themes of interest that have emerged: 1) population decline; 2) Social Security. Regarding the first, I have given it much thought lately - the planet had about 2.8 billion people when I showed up and it was a fine place. Now we have about three times that many. So what happens when the population drifts downward? So much economic growth has been the simple result of more people. How does the economy function in a sustained period of declining population? What happens to technological progress with fewer geniuses to go along with fewer idiots? 500 years out, will our progeny be better or worse off? I dunno.

Regarding Social Security, and the “it’s welfare, no it’s not”, unlike anything the Federal government took from my earnings, this was billed as “for my old age benefit” and blah blah blah calculated based on what I paid. Medicare, and anything else is not, as far as I am aware. So I figure if it is decided to end it, right now, cut me a check for my cumulative contributions plus compound interest at stock market index fund rate, less what I have received so far. Otherwise, the 2nd American Revolution gets hot; 7/6/26, 7:44 PM
DINKY DAU 45 said...: Yup days of Ward and June Cleaver are way gone. As stated here,culture has changed, as a wagering man I can bet the people whining about it live with their parents or on their own and have nothing to offer or too old and just like to hear themselves talk/ It aint ever going back, it brave new world Women got the taste of big earning and LOVE IT! Want a kid ,adopt one there are thousands of them and if you want get the ones already potty changed so you continue earning! Paternal households are out of date.Its a culture issue..; 7/6/26, 8:45 PM
CarrieA said...: I know too many women who were convinced by their male partners that they did not want to have children. Then when the couple reached their late forties, the man changed his mind and wanted kids but it was too late for the woman. The man then dumped his wife/ partner and found a younger woman to bear his kids while the first wife/partner found herself alone and stuck with the no child decision.; 7/6/26, 9:27 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: Right now the birthrates for whites is 1.5 but for Hispanics its 1.9. Asians 1.3. Culture most be making a difference.; 7/6/26, 10:03 PM
RCOCEAN II said...: When women in a country decide to have 1 kid each, its stops being a "personal choice", because that means in 20 years your population is going to crater.

It could be it will turn out to not matter. Maybe automation, AI and robots will pick up the slack and we will even better off than before. But ultimately you cant go on at a 1.0 birthrate for too long, because your country will disappear. LOL.; 7/6/26, 10:07 PM
Hassayamper said...: But ultimately you cant go on at a 1.0 birthrate for too long, because your country will disappear.

An average is different from a median, and both are different from a mode. A nation will only disappear if every woman in the country insists on having no children, or only one.

But we know that there are subgroups in our culture that are extraordinarily fecund and are likely to remain so, no matter what everyone else does. The Amish, Mormons, Orthodox Jews, certain "Quiver-Full" evangelicals, traditionalist Catholics, and unfortunately the Muslims are going to continue breeding like rabbits. They are unlikely ever to fall below replacement rates.; 7/6/26, 11:35 PM
Saint Croix said...: If you ever wonder how Rome fell, the Christians had some success with conversion.

But the big difference was reproduction. Christians married and had huge families. No birth control. So the reproduction was off the charts.

The Romans were often gay, and big fans of sodomy in general. So their reproduction rates were a lot lower. They also had the ugly practice of killing unwanted children. They abandoned their babies to die, rather than reduce their standard of living.

Harry Blackmun actually refers to this in his notorious abortion opinion, Roe v. Wade. He adopts his imaginary checkpoint "viability," based on the ancient pagan practice of abandoning babies to die. It wasn't murder, because you had no obligation to feed other human beings. Everybody was out for himself. It was the Jews, and then the Christians, who said men ought to marry women and happily reproduce, and love your babies.; 7/7/26, 3:56 AM
HoodlumDoodlum said...: Wait, you're telling me there's a problem and it's *men's* fault? No way!; 7/7/26, 7:38 AM
Fred Drinkwater said...: Many remark that it's silly to have kids and expect them to help you in your own old age struggles. That "society" or the "government" will provide care.
OK, it's a risk, because your own kids may not like you enough, or be able to deliver such care.
But speaking as one who has shepherded five elderly relatives into the next life: If you don't have someone (better: several someones) who loves you personally helping during that time of your life, it's going to SUCK BIGLY.; 7/7/26, 2:33 PM