Posted on 08/19/2008 6:54:24 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Women are waiting longer to have children, and more women than ever are choosing not to have children at all, according to a new Census Bureau report.
Twenty percent of women ages 40 to 44 have no children, double the level of 30 years ago, the report said; and women in that age bracket who do have children have fewer than ever — an average of 1.9 children, compared with the median of 3.1 children in 1976.
“A lot of women are not having any children,” said Jane Lawler Dye, a Census Bureau researcher who did the report, which looked at women of childbearing age in 2006. “It used to be sort of expected that there was a phase of life where you had children, and a lot of women aren’t doing that now,” Ms. Dye said.
Women with advanced degrees are more likely to be childless, the study found. Of women 40 to 44 with graduate or professional degrees, 27 percent are childless, compared with 18 percent of women who did not continue their education beyond high school, the data show.
The numbers are consistent with a 2006 report Ms. Dye issued on the same subject. While year-by-year change is slow, Ms. Dye said, the data show that women of the baby boom generation are continuing to transform the American family.
Hispanic women are the only group bucking the trends found in the study, averaging 2.3 children each by their 40s. The number of children a Hispanic woman has decreases sharply, however, depending on how many generations her family has lived in the United States, the data show.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Since intelligence, like other human traits, has a strong hereditary components, intelligent women having fewer children reduces the average level of intelligence. It would be better to have social policies that encourage them to have more kids than to throw money at public schools in vain efforts to close achievement "gaps".
FREERIDERS!
the u.s. birth rate reached 1.7 in the late 1970’s due to the feminist movement. boomer women who came of child-bearing age in the mid-sixties didn’t have kids.
then, in the early 1980’s the burger flippers, maids and landscapers arrived from across the border.
“More Women Are Childless”
Not if they have husbands!! LOLOL
Social policies today are intentionally anti-family.
The commies intend to dissolve the traditional family in order to inspire more loyalty to the state, ala “1984”.
See the “Communist Goals for America” written into the Congressional Record in 1963.
Anti-family culture is all around us.
Every issue that the left promotes, and has infiltrated into our society, has the effect, AND THE INTENT, of destroying the family:
easy divorce
denigration of the role of fathers
welfare (replacing fathers with the state as provider)
denigration of respect for tradition and the wisdom of the aged
erosion of parental authority
emphasis on state education and raising of children
promotion of materialism and high taxes, forcing mothers to work
promotion of women’s “fulfillment” in the career fields instead of motherhood
abortion
alleviation of other consequences for (ie, promoting) sexual promiscuity
normalization of homosexuality, and soon “adult-child” sex
pornography
promotion of obscenity as “free speech”
feminism and gender blending
discrediting and “socializing” of religion/Christianity
discrediting Biblical authority in favor of “intellectual maturity” (Man wiser than God)
It could’nt mean that MEN are waiting longer to get married, now could it.
Waiter, can I please have some dime store eugenics with my coffee?
If it is mainly liberal women who are less likely to have children, then I think this should be a trend to encourage, not discourage.
Why get married?
The “sexual revolution” removed women’s requirements of men for marriage, stability, and character in order to have access to sex.
You are spot on.
Also, taxes are so much higher that it is harder for one parent to stay home and watch the children.
Policies and courts seemed to be against the fathers - and the presence of a father is a great influence on a child’s success and likelihood of staying in school.
And schools seem to be pushing propaganda instead of teaching the basics. It’s quite a hostile environment to raise kids these days.
The left has openly stated, however, that they intend to be child”free” and let conservatives take on the challenges of raising children.
They intend to “procreate” their ideology by indoctrination in public schools - an openly stated goal.
Maybe I should change my tagline to “Having all the kids & grandkids that liberals won’t have”
100% correct BUMP.
Where is the error in my reasoning? Are you denying that intelligence is partly inherited?
While I and others do not disagree with you, your thesis above assumes that women with M.S. degrees are more intelligent than those without. There I differ to a degree.
Yes, a woman with an advanced degree in computer science or physics is of superior intelligence, and not having offspring would be a loss.
But a woman with a M.S. in sociology or women's studies is probably of average or lower-than-average intellect. No loss there.
We also live in a society that promotes the instant gratification of any whim or desire over self-denial and self-sacrifice — both of which are required to raise children. Children are promoted/seen as a drag or an anchor, rather than a labor of love and a joy.
FREERIDER PING!!!!
Did this study include ILLEGAL ALIENS?
1) Intelligent women make better choices, and logically conclude that children are more of a burden than a blessing, confirming years of leftist thinking.
2) Intelligent women are more concerned with income and career than children, and by choosing the former they just end up childless as a consequence.
3) Women with advanced degrees are less intelligent, and therefore make a bad choice by not having children.
4) Women with advanced degrees have been brainwashed by 8-10 years of Government schools, and deliberately decide to remain childless because children are a burden.
I think we all know that the most likely explanations are 2) and 4).
“If it is mainly liberal women who are less likely to have children, then I think this should be a trend to encourage, not discourage.”
I think the causation goes both ways, though. It’s possible that Maureen Dowd, for example, would not be such a bitter liberal if she had gotten married and become a mother. A funny thread about her hating Christmas, unlike her more traditional female relatives, is at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1294490/posts .
Immigrants will replace natural-born citizens. The whole 'melting pot' ideal that America was, is changing to segregated cultures that don't want to be "Americans" but maintain the identity of whatever country they came from with their own 'cultural identity' and language and dress and food...and on and on...
Completely true. We need leaders who will declare this war and identify the enemy clearly.
And Islam will inherit the earth...
If we need a phrase to describe these people I would suggest
EDs - Evolutionary Dead ends.
I didn’t think I missed those -
see “normalization of homosexuality”
and “promotion of promiscuity”
and denigration of the traditional family (anti-marriage)
Note how the study doesn't look deeper into cultural phenomena like religious faith and political leanings. Another brilliant NYT reporter who never had an original thought in her head.
We all know that:
Christian women have more children than tatooed, pierced babes on the West and left coasts. In surburban San Diego, where we live, there are huge numbers of college-educated white women having three and four children (Mrs Tom H and I have three). Ditto for the Mormons.
Conservative women have more children than liberals.
So this conclusion that "smarter" women correlates with few children is pure cr-p. Look a little deeper and learn why it really is happening.
Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
RAISE those leaders.
1 Chron 12:32
Of the sons of Issachar, men who understood the times, with knowledge of what Israel should do, their chiefs were two hundred; and all their kinsmen were at their command.
How much does infertility factor into these numbers? It isn’t always a choice.
Now, don't turn them over to liberals it indoctrinate (educate).
And they're getting plenty of help from abortion providers too!
Odd that the study doesn't mention fewer women getting pregnant.
Is this the "change" The One is always talking about?
If anything, she understated the magnitude of the apocalyptic catastrophe which is racing towards us at light speed.
Prepare for the worst folks - things are about to get very, very bad.
Circa 2020, the USA will crumble beneath the weight of the demographic imperative, and there's no telling what will emerge to replace it [or even if anything will emerge at all].
Adopt.
In the present culture war, it is far more important to pass on your values than your genes.
At least one married a man (who's wife had died) with young children already.
You have listed a good chunk. Add in the increase of homosexuality and the whole ‘living together’ rather than marriage and we can see the beginnings of the downfall of the U.S. as if it were a repeat of Rome.
Did Rome REALLY fall because of homosexuality???? I think that is a myth.
I agree with you totally. I knew some charming young ladies in college (we’re all 51 now) who were as traditional as any gal back then. They fell for the women’s movement expectation of career before men or children, and today they are accomplished but are childless, loveless, and basically lonely. Only very few will admit they made a mistake. I’ll see how they are at the 30th reunion later this year.
Mo Dowd is probably another casualty.
She makes me laugh. Only today has she finally realized that men don’t want to marry ball-busting women.
It couldn’t be that women are giving away what used to be precious and MEN see no need to marry. Sex is free, cheap and easy and viewed as a means only of physical satisfaction, rather than life.
How many women are childless because they had early abortions, STDs, or waited too long?
But, so many of my college friends have either one child or none at all. I do feel sorry for them, especially the gals that waited until they were 40 to “try.”
Gals my age got the impression through the 1980s that due to infertility treatments we didn't have to worry about our age so much.
We were sold a bill of goods.
Many of my kids’ friends’ moms are about 10 years younger and in our community the younger families are getting bigger. Three and four children are common with a few of five or six. These are good people. One of my cousins, mom of five, was told that families like hers ought to have bigger families b/c they would raise the children right.
Yes, many gals my age missed out, but our younger sisters and cousins seem to have learned from our mistakes.
We’re doing our best with 4 homeschooled kids.
They then focus their energy on “getting” YOUR kids.
That way, they can pass on their values while still living a narcissistic lifestyle.
hurrah, kudos, and GOD BLESS!
After 45 million abortions since Roe v. Wade, a huge number. And don't forget that abortion increases the risk of breast cancer and the incidence of endometriosis.
And, with STD infection rates at 50% or higher among sexually promiscuous young adults, many women are or will be sterile, also.
Which is why we homeschool. ;) (see my borrowed tagline)
Social policies today are intentionally anti-family.
************************************************************************************
I really don’t think that is the case.
I went to college for ten years. I have two degrees. I knew a lot of women in college like me. The more they went to college, the more degrees they earned, the less they wanted a husband and family, and the more they wanted a career. In fact a lot of them wanted to get more education even after they got their careers. Now mind you this was at WV Tech, and a lot of these women were Engineers, that may or may not have something to do with it, I do not know.
I find it interesting that the % of childless women is about the same percentage of women with STDs.
NAH! You miss the point.
If they were intelligent , they WOULD be having children.
These women are less intelligent, and their genes deserve to enter the Darwinian scrap pile.
And on top of all that they likely have been so disintelligent as to create the very gurly men that they are loath to marry.
(I mean, Maureen O'Dowd went to Australia looking for a lumberjack type, she would have no truck with the panseys that feminist culture had created.)
Darwin Award in Order!
I wish I had children. I have never been married so no kids for me.
The reason is that when they become divorced, single parents, they want the government to be their husband and take care of them and to be the father and raise their children.
I don't know if this is true, but it sounded cool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.