Comment on Poignant post on the state of things
indistincthobby@lemmynsfw.com 7 months agoHelp me understand please, how is it a survival need? Maybe back in the 1800s when you were working a farm and needed to produce extra pairs of hands to help? Nowadays it seems to me that while it might be nice to have a proper family having children is a financial burden that many can’t bear, whether they want to or not
hanekam@lemmy.world 7 months ago
It’s a need in that it’s programmed into your biology, and most people can’t thrive without it. Surveys of middle-aged people find about 1 in 5 are child-free. Out of those, about 1 in 10 are so by choice. That leaves 49 in 50 that either have or wished, but couldn’t have, children.
indistincthobby@lemmynsfw.com 7 months ago
Could you link me to those surveys?
hanekam@lemmy.world 7 months ago
nrk.no/…/dramatisk-okning-i-andelen-barnlose-i-no….
techt@lemmy.world 7 months ago
That is not a link to a survey, and more importantly it doesn’t even say what you claim.
“One in six women and one in four men have not yet had children by the age of 45. One of the reasons is that women do not want to have children with men of lower status,” says the researcher.
In one generation, the proportion of childless women has increased from 9 to 15 percent among 45-year-old women and from 14 to 25 percent among men of the same age. This is far more than the 5 to 10 percent who state that they do not want to have children."
DM_Gold@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 months ago
That ratio seems off? 49 out of 50 people wished they could have children? I highly doubt that. If going by your logic you say that 1/10th of 1/5th of folks are child free not by choice. Say out of 50 people that math equals 1 person per 50 folks regret not being able to have kids.
hanekam@lemmy.world 7 months ago
No. Out of 50 that’s 40 who had kids, 9 who didn’t and regret it, and just 1 who didn’t and are content.
emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 7 months ago
That’s not what survival need means.
Again, this doesn’t make it a survival need.