Behind the world's falling birth rate(s) lies a fall in the number of people (seemingly) in relationships;
the retreat from coupledom has many causes (from social changes to social media) but looks to be (re)shaping the world.
The big Q. then becomes: if this continues, what does a world dominated by single people look like?
Or will this shift back as the young find the value of companionship again?
Much of our future may depend on these choices.
h/t John Burn-Murdoch/FT
Comments
Displaying 0 of 4 comments
Christine Burns MBE 🏳️⚧️📚⧖
In response to this post@ChrisMayLA6 In a country where coupledom really doesn’t require marriage or civil partnership I’m not sure this claim can be reliably stood up. Yes, we know that the birth rate has declined (thank god) but to see that as a problem feeds a certain far right agenda. To associate it with an alleged decline in measurable coupledom (I.e. conventional hetero marriage) just dives in to the right’s obsession with ‘traditional families’ — an obsession really about the ‘right’ people reproducing
@christineburns
Hmmm.... well as I said in the previous answer on this; its more an issue of how we navigate the associated social changes, and that may (for economics at least) be quite difficult... but equally I take you point about the Right attitude to these shifts
by Emeritus Prof Christopher May ;
Mentions: @ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
David S
In response to this post@ChrisMayLA6 I fear it will breed selfishness, but if coupledom is replaced with platonic friends the opposite might happen as the tribe expands from the typical family of 3 or 4 to much larger social circles. Tl:Dr who knows?
@Pionir
Indeed, that's what makes it interest; its unclear how this will develop.... and what the impact(s) may or may not be
by Emeritus Prof Christopher May ;
Mentions: @ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
h4890
In response to this post@ChrisMayLA6 I think this is a problem of many dimensions. You have the psychological dimension, where we teach our children today that everything should be fun, and to avoid unpleasant or hard situations and sacrifices.
This naturally makes living together very difficult, since it is not always pleasant, not to speak of the time and energy a small human being requires.
Then we have economic concerns with massive inflation, cost of housing etc. which make people hesitate.
Then there's the
@ChrisMayLA6 biological reasons. We have a global fertility crisis. Is it micro plastics or chemicals? Something in our food? Who knows?
Then there's the sociological reasons where the left wants to dismantle families in order to shift loyalty to the state. The left has always hated families since it represents a unit with higher loyalty than the state. In order to do this, they push the LBGTX+ agenda, free sex, and preferably same genders, in order to prevent them having children forming a
by h4890 ;
Mentions: @ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0
Support the Resistance
In response to this post@ChrisMayLA6 I'm 71. I have 3 kids who, between them, have 5 kids, aged 8 to 28. Neither of my grandkids of childbearing age have kids. 1 of my kids has 4, 1 has 1 & 1 has none. My kids ages are 39-47.
I may be different but it never occurred to me to *plan* on 1 or all of my kids caring for me in my old age. In conversations with them, they aren't counting on their own kids to care for them.
Capitalists want more people to become workers. Their interest isn't social.
@PattyHanson
err... I was merely observing that a world made up of more single people might look rather different, yes there may be inter-generational care issues, but also issues of how we work together to ensure the older of us are either cared for or supported.... by all means look at through the lens of capitalism, but the issues will remain as society's demography changes.
If you are receiving a state (or private) pension, the young are supporting you....
by Emeritus Prof Christopher May ;
Mentions: @ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
Likes: 0
Replies: 1
Boosts: 0