this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2024
186 points (93.9% liked)

World News

39041 readers
3712 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"Notably, Chang's report claims that biological females develop earlier than males do, so requiring girls to enter school at younger ages will create classes in which the two sexes are of more equal maturity as they age. This, the author posits, makes it more likely that those classmates will be attracted to each other, and marry and have children further down the line."

(...)

"The report does not include evidence of any correlation between female students' early enrollment and the success rate of their romantic relationships with men. The author also does not detail specific mechanisms by which his proposed policy would increase romantic attraction or birthrates."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Stern 135 points 5 months ago (4 children)

"We've got a birthrate crisis, maybe we should make it so a single income of someone working 40 hours a week can support a family of 4?"

"... Or we could explore literally every other option no matter how ridiculous and not do anything which would impact corporate profits even a single penny."

[–] undergroundoverground 9 points 5 months ago

I mean, after all, their problem is that they want more workers, so they can make more money. Letting people work less defeats the point.

It's our fault for ever thing they would try to fix their problem by making their own problem worse.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 129 points 5 months ago (25 children)

Actual answer: stop overworking your fucking population.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] [email protected] 61 points 5 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 79 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It can't possibly be the crushing weight of capitalism that is impacting young people's lifestyles.

[–] aeronmelon 15 points 5 months ago

No. And neither is its education system.

[–] veganpizza69 45 points 5 months ago

check the authors' browser history

[–] logicbomb 34 points 5 months ago (5 children)

This idea is a complete non-starter from a practical standpoint. Parents would complain about it either way. Either they wouldn't want girls in school early or they'd want boys in school early, too.

It's just much easier to treat children all the same.

Also, I personally think this plan would backfire. Girls graduating wouldn't want to have to be adults earlier than boys, so they'd stay in school longer. And from what I've heard, the most reliable way to reduce birth rates is to educate women more.

I think everyone also knows how to ethically increase the birth rate. Make having children easy and affordable. Lots of government assistance. Make sure everybody has access to cheap or free childcare.

And there's also the generational problems. Young adults can see the problems that the previous generations caused. You can't go back in time to fix those. It will be expensive to change this sort of thing.

But quick fixes aren't going to change the underlying problems.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 5 months ago (3 children)

The best way to increase birth rates in advanced countries is: Work life balance. Restore the traditional tax rates on the rich.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Work life balance meaning one parent can stay home and raise the children without needing that second income to put food on the table.

If both parents work, the birth rate is always going to be lower, even with better work life balance.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

For real man. We were so overworked when both of us had a full time job and no kids. Now we have one kid and one full time job. It is easier, hard in another way but somehow easier. Soon I'll have to go back to work and I don't even know how we will survive. We would love to have another kid but we either can't afford it or we will go insane trying to afford it.

The other part is that stupid part time career pit. Ideally we would both work half jobs, but this will mean none of us can have a well paid job (per hour). But this also means that if my husband is laid off while I am at home, were fucked. Job security is a huge factor in work life balance.

But also, we are the "risky" ones. Most of my friends from school wanted to wait until they are "settled" financially. I don't have one mom friend from school/university. They are either still settling in their careers or have given up on feeling settled and now have fertility issues.

Just for context, our kid arrived shortly before I turned 30. My friends are in their 30s and 40s. None of them is really "financially secure" since job security is just not a thing anymore.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

"cheap or free childcare" No

"stay at home parent" Yes

[–] SlopppyEngineer 16 points 5 months ago

Lower the work hours per week with same wage so both parents can be there for their children: inconceivable

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Etterra 30 points 5 months ago (6 children)

It's really easy, and I'll explain it once again for the idiot governments in the back.

GIVE LARGE FINANCIAL INCENTIVES FOR HAVING CHILDREN AND RAISING FAMILIES.

This concludes my Ted Talk.

[–] AA5B 22 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

People don’t need large incentives. They need help with daycare/eldercare, education, and healthcare. They need to be able to afford places to live that can fit a family. These are things that everyone needs, it’s just more critical to having a family

[–] Demdaru 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Doesn't work. My country gave around 15% of minimal pay per kiddo. People who shouldn't have children had lots of them. People who should...had the same amount as before that. Slightly better finances tho, but they still waited till they were able to provide for child.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Fuck that, I'm not paying for breeders to ruin the planet more.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Pacattack57 29 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Being this out of touch with reality is the problem with countries right now. The elites and politicians don’t know what’s going on because they are staying in power long past their usefulness.

[–] TubularTittyFrog 5 points 5 months ago

the elites and politicians never once in their life had the life of a normal person. that's what. they born into their wealth and power and just think the rest of us are lazy for not being born into it.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 months ago

Maybe try dealing with the massive reactionary anti-feminist incel movements that continue to victimize Korean women and girls daily? Just a thought.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 months ago

This report imparts the image of a sweaty old man with steepled fingers tapping against each other panting heavily and grunting "little girls...develop faster..." And then letting that statement hang in the air, festering.

[–] Tinks 23 points 5 months ago

I'm of the opinion we just need to stop focusing so hard on raising the birthrate and focus more on taking care of the people and population we have. We don't need more people on the planet - 8 billion humans is plenty. We need to figure out successful economic strategies that don't require perpetual population growth rather than trying to breed our way into economic security.

[–] SeattleRain 23 points 5 months ago

They do anything before they pay people more.

[–] norimee 22 points 5 months ago (2 children)

They have a problem with patriarchy and not with birth rates. Birth rates are just the symptom.

Seeing that there is a big trend in young Korean women to abstain from men, marriage and family, I'd say starting to treat women like actual people could very well make a difference.

But yeah, getting them into school earlier and probably indoctrinate them earlier into good obedient wives could work too.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] njm1314 15 points 5 months ago (20 children)

Jumping through hoops after Hoops after hoops all to avoid admitting that the problem is capitalism. Classic

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

"My source is I made it the fuck up"

TBF, it's possible this guy knows it's crap, but had to deliver an original idea.

[–] JeeBaiChow 7 points 5 months ago (7 children)

Is there something similar to national service in Korea? Just wondering how the guys keep up in the job market when the girls have a 2 year head start.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago

All South Korean male citizens are required to perform 18-21 months of military service.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Doof 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I would like to see a large scaled research on that statement, like I know women hit puberty sooner but does that really mean mentally they do as well. Is it more of how woman are rear vs men. I do wonder if we thought me about emotions/feelings and teaching them younger how to deal with emotions and to be more if that would even the gap. Does anyone have any good research I could parse?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

Our men need a handicap or they can't succeed

load more comments
view more: next ›