Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: "Unfair twist of nature"?

  1. #1
    Elite member Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation Second ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-09-14
    Posts
    4,578
    Points
    64,082
    Level
    78
    Points: 64,082, Level: 78
    Level completed: 52%, Points required for next Level: 768
    Overall activity: 38.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b
    MtDNA haplogroup
    W6

    Ethnic group
    Polish
    Country: Poland



    Question "Unfair twist of nature"?

    "Motherhood on ice: has the egg-freezing generation of working women been misled?":

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/fa...-women-misled/

    https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/...l-12530929.php

    "(...) Doctors now know that the No. 1 factor affecting a woman's ability to have children as she grows older has to do with eggs. At the moment she is born, a woman has all the eggs she will ever have already in her body. They are finite, and they sit there in the ovaries, aging. Each month, beginning at puberty, a single egg is released. Even in a healthy young woman, the eggs are of varying quality with a certain percentage being flawed in structure or number of chromosomes. That's one reason it can take months or years to get pregnant, and why miscarriage is common.

    Around the age of 35, women confront a "fertility cliff," when the chances of becoming pregnant decline sharply as the eggs decrease in number and quality. By age 40, the average woman has a 5 percent chance of getting pregnant in any given month. By 45, it's 1 percent.

    In an unfortunate and unfair twist of nature, men are believed to replenish their sperm at a rate of 1,500 a second through most of their lives; there are documented cases of men remaining fertile into their 90s. Age also affects the quality of sperm, according to numerous studies. But the effect on fertility is markedly less dramatic than in women.
    (...)"

    "Please don't rely on frozen eggs", says Brigitte Adams, founder of eggsurance.com:

    http://eggsurance.com/pregnant-frozen-eggs/

    "For me, freezing my eggs, and finally owning my own fertility, went hand in hand with telling my story. After six years on ice, I finally decided to stop waiting for Mr. Right and embrace single motherhood. But, I never thought my OWN story would become a nightmare."



    https://nationalpost.com/news/world/...th-frozen-eggs


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    22-07-18
    Posts
    22
    Points
    90
    Level
    1
    Points: 90, Level: 1
    Level completed: 40%, Points required for next Level: 60
    Overall activity: 33.0%


    Country: Serbia



    I don`t believe that statistics about late pregnancy are realistic, because majority of women already gave a birth in their 20`s and 30`s, and they just don`t need more children in their 40`s...
    to prove further, my wife gave a birth in her 44 and 48, so how likely is it to give a birth twice in 40`s?

  3. #3
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,538
    Points
    290,879
    Level
    100
    Points: 290,879, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    The technology isn't there yet, but it will improve. It has to improve, unless society wants only uneducated, lower IQ women to reproduce, with society wide implications.

    As just one example, you graduate from law school at 25 even if you go to professional school right after university, medical school is even later, business school is a bit younger, since you can graduate around 24. Teachers and nurses are 22 when they finish their training, although they have to get a master's degree eventually, in terms of teachers, so maybe 24 again. Then you need a couple of years under your belt before you start asking for maternity leave.

    Those are just the facts. Science is going to have to help out.

    Not, of course, that people can't have a perfectly fulfilling life without children. Also, the world is populated enough, and given how much you have to invest in your children's education alone to prepare them for life in the modern world, I think two or three children are plenty.

    As for men, their fertility declines too, although not the way that women's do, to be sure. However, older men have much higher rates of having children with abnormalities. There are numerous studies on the subject. You can use the search engine here to find them as they've been discussed. I think any twenty-something woman having a child with a man over 45-50 is taking a big risk.


    Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci

  4. #4
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    12-12-16
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    289
    Points
    3,160
    Level
    16
    Points: 3,160, Level: 16
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 290
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b U-152
    MtDNA haplogroup
    J1c8

    Ethnic group
    Italian, Jewish, British
    Country: USA - Massachusetts



    We can teach high school, and women in early 20s to go after men in the late 30s with money, and all their shit together. That way they can go to school, graduate, and go right into motherhood without worrying about loans to pay off. Than, they can work when the kids gets a bit older.

    At the same time, we can stop letting illegal migrants into the United States and creating a situation where they will have 6 or 7 kids they cant afford, and decrease the crime rates.

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    01-11-18
    Posts
    9
    Points
    40
    Level
    1
    Points: 40, Level: 1
    Level completed: 80%, Points required for next Level: 10
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Andorra



    Nature wrath!

  6. #6
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Moi-même's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-16
    Location
    Quebec City
    Posts
    96
    Points
    3,592
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,592, Level: 17
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 258
    Overall activity: 0%

    MtDNA haplogroup
    H2a1

    Ethnic group
    French Canadian
    Country: Canada-Quebec



    New Englander, the problem is men in their 30s don't tend to have much more money than men in their late 20s. At least, not enough to make a difference population wide. And past 25, male fertility decline by 2% every year. After the age of 40, a couple start to have statistically significant trouble to procreate, even if it's the only negative factor. At 60, about 50% are the men are sterile, regardless that some of the other half will be able to procreate for many decades to come.

    Both sexes are currently playing Russian roulette, gambling that they can delay starting a family up to their late 30s, to early 50s. I guess after a few generations like that the population genetic for late pregnancy will improve, if nothing else.

    More closely related to the article, yes, they are mislead. Frozen eggs is at least helping one negative factor of late pregnancy, the quality of said eggs, but there's a lot more things that could go wrong with age on the mother"s side, even more so if her partner isn't a young man any more either.

    In an ideal world, let's say one where robots do all the job and humans live carefree, both parents would be in their 20s.

  7. #7
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,538
    Points
    290,879
    Level
    100
    Points: 290,879, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    ^^I largely agree.

    An additional factor is that they're finding that mutations, particularly in men, increase very quickly with age. Of course, some men will be fine, but most will carry quite a mutational load by the time they're in their forties.

    Our culture is out of sync with our biology.

    South Asian parents used to handle it (I don't know if they still do) by arranging marriages while the children are relatively young, but they live with their parents so they can continue their education, at least the young men can. I can't see that catching on in the west.

    @New Englander,
    Your plan wouldn't work for women either. If a woman gets her degree, immediately gets married and has children, she'll never get a job when she wants to return to work eight or ten years later. The only way you can swing it is just to work regardless, bringing the baby to day care, or, for the lucky ones, have relatives or an au pair care for the children during work hours. That, or you work like a maniac for six years or so after, say, graduate school and then have children and work part time for a while. However, you're in your early thirties by then, and it's not so easy to get pregnant, especially, as Moimeme said, if the husband is even older.

    There's no fool proof solution.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    09-06-18
    Posts
    128
    Points
    4,213
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,213, Level: 18
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 37
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Another solution would be NOT to encourage women to have a professional career. Left-wingers argue that this is "freedom". But in fact, we live in a world of memes. And the meme "study, work, be independent and do not have children ... yet ... or never" is very strong. I am not sure most women in "real freedom" (whatever that means) would prefer the current situation. For sure, some would do, and these women should have absolute freedom to pursue their academic and professional interests.

    But I strongly believe my mother (working at home) is / was happier than the average "super-woman" nowadays studying, working (for others) and having no children. If one wants to "avoid regret" as a guideline in life, clearly the story of the woman above is a nightmare. If only she could go backwards in time, study and work less, and have a lower demand on the "perfect man" ...

  9. #9
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,538
    Points
    290,879
    Level
    100
    Points: 290,879, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    It's probably better to ask women themselves? :)



    It depends on a variety of factors, I'm sure, but I would bet "type" of job matters. Even if you want to get out of the house and meet other people, talk, have a bit of a life away from the demands of children and housework, who would really want to have to juggle those demands with a job in a factory, or working in a school kitchen, or even as a secretary?

    Conversely, how would a woman who has achieved a lot in school all her life be content with never exercising those skills and abilities?

  10. #10
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    09-06-18
    Posts
    128
    Points
    4,213
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,213, Level: 18
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 37
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Sure, as said before, if the woman is a high-achiever, she should have freedom to do what she wants.

    But how many women are really like this? A minority. Society is, IMHO, worse off by employing women in sub-optimal jobs, just because the couple needs extra income to pay for a mortgage. Housing would be cheaper if women worked much less. Women working just increases the price of housing.

    And society is much worse off by having women with no children. In Spain, about a third of 35-year old women have no children. I have seen many cases of women with exceptional genes, not having children. This is a tragedy. The worst possible tragedy that one can imagine, bar a war. And nobody seems to care.

    A second derivative is that since society is trying to increase the amount of women on top jobs, the requirements of top jobs are going down. What matters is if the employee has a penis or a vagina, and not the quality of the work, intelligence, etc. I have seen several cases like this. Men are just left aside, even though they are "better". And men with high intelligence but low social skills are completely destroyed.

  11. #11
    Advisor Achievements:
    VeteranThree Friends50000 Experience PointsRecommendation Second Class
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Angela's Avatar
    Join Date
    02-01-11
    Posts
    15,538
    Points
    290,879
    Level
    100
    Points: 290,879, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.6%


    Ethnic group
    Italian
    Country: USA - New York



    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Employment should be strictly merit based. I don't believe in quotas or affirmative action of any sort.

    While 37% is a minority, it's a substantial one. Plus, I'm sure that among the women who wish to work part-time, there are women who would love to be able to work full time but the burden is just too great.

    It's unfortunately true that more intelligent women have fewer or no children. That isn't good for the society as a whole. A solution has to be found. One might be a work place that permits or encourages flexible hours, or job sharing. My cousin and her husband are both physicians. They both arranged work schedules where they worked 10+ hours a day four days a week, but had three days off, and overlapped the days off so that someone was always home for the children. I had to give up my first specialty because it was virtually a 16-18 hour a day job. So, I settled for a less stimulating job. Still, it was stressful. When my children were young I got very little sleep.

    Of course, there's also the revolutionary idea that maybe husbands and fathers should take on more of the responsibility. :)

  12. #12
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    09-06-18
    Posts
    128
    Points
    4,213
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,213, Level: 18
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 37
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Yes, fathers could take on more responsibility. But if it is true that mothers are genetically predisposed to take care of children (while parents not, or at least differently; and I state "if", maybe I am wrong), this decision would not be natural. The natural decision would be that women take more responsibilities (as said, with the exception if some women really want to study and work).

    Otherwise, women become men, and men, women.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Moi-même's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-03-16
    Location
    Quebec City
    Posts
    96
    Points
    3,592
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,592, Level: 17
    Level completed: 36%, Points required for next Level: 258
    Overall activity: 0%

    MtDNA haplogroup
    H2a1

    Ethnic group
    French Canadian
    Country: Canada-Quebec



    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    "Another solution would be NOT to encourage women to have a professional career. Left-wingers argue that this is "freedom"."

    And it's also basic right wing free market. Or it should be. Some women would be quite happy at home with their husband working outside, others need to see adults and have normal conversations many hour a day, others are high achievers and prefer to earn more and pay someone else to raise their kids rather that waste so many years of their life on menial tasks. Free market should allow them to find the right spouse to fill their needs. Maybe we need good old matchmakers back.

    The funny thing on the subject, among my female friends, one became accidentally pregnant while she was still a student. She continued her studies, under the premise that it's not more complicated to take care of children with working than while studying. And she was right, she works as a IT engineer, has the advantage that she already has her family when applying for a job and by the time she get to the responsibility jobs, her kids will be adult or close to it.

    The problem is still to get the right partner at the right time, though. Having aunts who pretty much married the first man interested just to leave their parents' house, there were horror stories back then too.

    "Housing would be cheaper if women worked much less."

    They would be, but couples earning would be less too, so having a second salary would be a nice way to go ahead of the others couples, which in the end would leave us exactly the same situation as we are today. There's no way out of it, there are the same number of families looking for a house with the same characteristics around the same area. Unless to take a large number of family out, by killing them or deporting them, it's a stalemate. You could also built new, more compact multi-family houses that fit the needs of a family, but it's not always possible. And often, it's not the most profitable demographic to build for.

    "Otherwise, women become men, and men, women."

    Women have always been in the workforce, but back then, families were more like work units. One of the oldest of these is the farm. The family is living on it's farm; men will take the more physical works, but every one will find their use on the farm. Sowing and harvesting will take as much hands as they can, so was butchering, wool processing. Every family was working with the people they had, and if there were too many boys or girls and they found creative way to maximize their still (my grand-mother was working mostly on the farm because there were too many girls, her widower father in law gave her most of her cooking tricks and that was back in the 1930s and 40s).

    Even with late medieval guilds, widows and daughters of fellows were allowed to take after departed relative. Even for black smith. Sure, if the fellow have sons, they were the ones take over the fellow title, but if there was none, widow are daughter was fine. Sure, these women tended to find a husband quickly, as they came with an already established business and a second fellow to help through the rush periods.

    Then, with the industrialisation, women and kids were expected to bring back money. Sure the most physical works were left for men, but women and kids were employed a lot into the textile industry, housework staff, not to mention at home hat makers, seamstress, boutique store manager, etc.

    The 1960s with the majority of women not earning money in one way or another is quite the peculiar one.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience Points1 year registered

    Join Date
    09-06-18
    Posts
    128
    Points
    4,213
    Level
    18
    Points: 4,213, Level: 18
    Level completed: 91%, Points required for next Level: 37
    Overall activity: 3.0%


    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    Quote Originally Posted by Moi-même View Post
    "Another solution would be NOT to encourage women to have a professional career. Left-wingers argue that this is "freedom"."

    And it's also basic right wing free market.
    I am pro market. But: 1) If there are externalities, the free market does not need to be the best solution. And clearly, in demography there are externalities. Memes that favour non- or late- reproduction are similar to global warming, a massive disaster. In my opinion, lack of children is a much more serious problem than global warming. And many people agree that markets are not able to efficiently handle global warming. 2) I am not saying that women should not have freedom. I am saying that media are busy giving propaganda anti-children. Women could be free also, but without all that propaganda.

    The problem is still to get the right partner at the right time, though. Having aunts who pretty much married the first man interested just to leave their parents' house, there were horror stories back then too.
    I am not saying that people should marry the first person they meet. Marrying to leave their parents' house was due to families being horrible environments. One could have good family environments, and having the first kid at say 25.

    "Housing would be cheaper if women worked much less."

    They would be, but couples earning would be less too, so having a second salary would be a nice way to go ahead of the others couples, which in the end would leave us exactly the same situation as we are today.
    No, housing is different. Bread costs the cost of inputs, plus some benefit. Housing costs mostly the price of land. Price of land is just a speculative asset with no value whatsoever in itself (apart from the return of planting potatoes).

    Additionally, housing enjoys a unique advantage: mortgages.

    So, if income increases, housing can spectacularly go up. It is very different from bread or cars.



    The 1960s with the majority of women not earning money in one way or another is quite the peculiar one.
    Maybe the 1960s were the best moment of mankind (at least, in the developed world). I see the generation of my parents, and my generation, and clearly theirs was better (despite having less material things).

  15. #15
    Regular Member Achievements:
    250 Experience Points31 days registered
    Strudel's Avatar
    Join Date
    15-10-18
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    79
    Points
    479
    Level
    5
    Points: 479, Level: 5
    Level completed: 29%, Points required for next Level: 71
    Overall activity: 6.0%

    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4a1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Deutsch
    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Moi-même View Post


    "Another solution would be NOT to encourage women to have a professional career. Left-wingers argue that this is "freedom"."


    And it's also basic right wing free market. Or it should be.



    There is no “should” about it, aside from where one stands on non-interference. I do agree with Moi-même on this, as I read her.


    Not encouraging (in any direction) is free market and has nothing to do with left or right.


    Quote Originally Posted by Moi-même View Post


    Some women would be quite happy at home with their husband working outside, others need to see adults and have normal conversations many hour a day, others are high achievers and prefer to earn more and pay someone else to raise their kids rather that waste so many years of their life on menial tasks. Free market should allow them to find the right spouse to fill their needs. Maybe we need good old matchmakers back.



    The stats say a majority of women are happier at home with less or minimal to no outside work hours especially in the early years if they have children.


    The dichotomy of lack of intellectual/career stimulation vs zero satisfaction for women does not pan out as a viable argument for “encouraging women to work” because it is a false dichotomy. Women are perfectly capable of finding ways to satisfy themselves outside of the office or workshop.


    High achieving or high aspiration career-driven women are in the minority as per Statistical reports.




    Quote Originally Posted by Moi-même View Post
    The funny thing on the subject, among my female friends, one became accidentally pregnant while she was still a student. She continued her studies, under the premise that it's not more complicated to take care of children with working than while studying. And she was right, she works as a IT engineer, has the advantage that she already has her family when applying for a job and by the time she get to the responsibility jobs, her kids will be adult or close to it.


    The problem is still to get the right partner at the right time, though. Having aunts who pretty much married the first man interested just to leave their parents' house, there were horror stories back then too.



    She, well more importantly her kid still has a problem with no partner. This is the kick to higher achieving women who put the cart before the horse. A new kind of horror story, perhaps.






  16. #16
    Regular Member Achievements:
    250 Experience Points31 days registered
    Strudel's Avatar
    Join Date
    15-10-18
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    79
    Points
    479
    Level
    5
    Points: 479, Level: 5
    Level completed: 29%, Points required for next Level: 71
    Overall activity: 6.0%

    MtDNA haplogroup
    H4a1a1a

    Ethnic group
    Deutsch
    Country: Canada



    "In an unfortunate and unfair twist of nature, men are believed to replenish their sperm at a rate of 1,500 a second through most of their lives; there are documented cases of men remaining fertile into their 90s."


    Unfortunate and unfair? Who ever said life is fair?

  17. #17
    Junior Member Achievements:
    7 days registered

    Join Date
    12-12-18
    Posts
    4
    Points
    78
    Level
    1
    Points: 78, Level: 1
    Level completed: 28%, Points required for next Level: 72
    Overall activity: 0%


    Country: Australia



    The innovation isn't there yet, yet it will progress, it needs to enhance, except if society needs just uneducated, bring down IQ ladies to repeat, with society wide ramifications...





















    Not how long, but how well you have lived is the main thing

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •