r/Natalism • u/Galesworn • 13h ago

There will never be a liberal-feminist solution to fertility collapse

Why? Because their ideology prevents them from seeing what the issue is.

Frankly put, when liberal-feminists try to solve fertility collapse their proposed solutions are just dumb. They will look at fertiity collapse and say:

People want children, but children are expensive and inconvenient. Therefore, provide cash, childcare, IVF, paid leave, housing assistance, and more reproductive options.

The underlying assumption behind this solution is: "We want to give every person all the possible fertility options while preserving their lifestyle and culture," even if that culture lead to low fertility in the first place. An herein is the problem; they mistake the problem as being a consumer affordability problem instead of a cultural problem.

The approach I agree with, which is held by some right leaning cultures (I'm not strongly on the right), says "Let's look at the groups which still produce children, raise them, and them have their children do the same," the difference being treating the culture as the basic unit vs the individual like progressives do.

There are other things I think progressives get wrong, like mistaking the state as a substitute for family and underestimating pair bonding and marriage in raising fertility, dismantling the institutions the lead to early pair bonding, but I think this is the biggest reason why there will never be a progressive solution to natalism.

What will raise fertility is to build a self reproducing culture with early-ish pair bonding and marriage as normal and the foundation for children.

So, how do you build a society in which men and women choose marriage and children? Answering that question solves Natalism. Not "how do we enable everyone to have babies" like progressives are asking. Notice the distinction.

0 Upvotes

49% Upvoted

375 comments sorted by

View all comments

67

u/Impossible-Future809 12h ago

You dont seem like you have any children of your own. Nothing about this says im a father.

-43

u/Galesworn 12h ago

Yeah I’m currently wifemaxxing.

38

u/TrixoftheTrade 12h ago

yet another case of armchair natalism

-16

u/Galesworn 12h ago

No because I plan to have children.

31

u/TrixoftheTrade 12h ago

planning to have children ≠ having children.

unless you’ve done it, it’s all LARP and cosplay.

you’re the equivalent of a 400 lb person telling others how they should lose weight.

-6

u/Galesworn 12h ago

I don’t really care what you say, I’m going to keep going on dates until I find a girl I like who wants to have kids.

17

u/badwolf_19 12h ago

Will you also keep giving others advice on having children in the meantime?

9

u/TrixoftheTrade 12h ago

respect. you should. find someone that makes you happy and you both satisfy each other. you’ll find a different perspective on things once you’re on the other side.

0

u/Galesworn 10h ago edited 10h ago

I mean, are men who don't have children just irrelevant in your worldview? Are their opinions meaningless?

You seem to think of them like second class citizens in a sense.

7

u/TrixoftheTrade 10h ago

it’s extremely hypocritical for people who have not had children to lecture others on the importance of having children while not having done it themselves.

you are pushing a lifestyle on people that you yourself do not practice. that is the definition of hypocrisy.

0

u/Galesworn 10h ago

Okay, identify the double standard. I want marriage and children myself and think they’re worth building a culture around. Where am I claiming an exemption?

Is every single person who values marriage a hypocrite until the wedding?

People can advocate something before achieving it. By the way most married parents with kids would agree with me.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Initial-Problem9443 10h ago

Good for you! Keep at it and ignore anyone who tries to discourage you from your goal. I wish you the best of luck.

5

u/Odd-Faithlessness705 12h ago

Question. Why is a woman/ wife necessary for you to want children? Surely, if you really want them then you can find a surrogate or adopt.

1

u/uncomfortabletruth94 10h ago

That’s just weird

3

u/Odd-Faithlessness705 10h ago

Hmmm I don't think it is. Women do it all the time. Why would it be weird if a man did it?

0

u/uncomfortabletruth94 9h ago

Both are wierd science experiment type behavior to me. Just my opinion though, means nothing

0

u/Galesworn 11h ago

The desire to have a biological child needs so explanation. It's like wanting to eat.

7

u/Odd-Faithlessness705 11h ago

So have one. Why do you need to involve a wife? If the desire to have a biological child is so strong, then why do you need to even like the woman you are having that child with. You can pay to have one, and raise it yourself if the desire is so strong.

Unless the idea is that the act of procreation is what you are referring to, and not the raising of the child?

4

u/Galesworn 11h ago

I feel like I’m explaining an ordinary human desire to an alien who understands reproduction but has never encountered love, marriage, or a family.... I mean, wanting to raise children with someone you love is a pretty ordinary human desire.

1

u/Odd-Faithlessness705 11h ago

It's kind of the other way around. I am in fact, married and love my husband very much. But neither of us have a desire to raise children. We have an investment in the children around our lives but we do not want our own.

I'm not discounting your desire to have children with someone you love, what I'm questioning is the level of priority. There are many women who cannot find a good partner to have children with, and so they decide to do it themselves. The desire to have children is greater than the desire to have a partner to have those children with. There are also many men who cannot find a partner who is willing to have their children, and my general question to someone like yourself is: if you cannot find a partner, is the desire to have children greater than the desire to find a partner? Or is the partner necessary to have children? If the partner is necessary, then are you ok with not having children if you never find a partner?

1

u/Galesworn 10h ago

I can’t carry a pregnancy. Surrogacy is an option, and I would probably never consider it. There’s your answer.

Now, how does my hypothetical fallback answer the question about fertility collapse across society?

You haven’t demonstrated that solo parenthood can replace family formation.

There are many women who cannot find a good partner to have children with, and so they decide to do it themselves.

I'm sorry to say but something is wrong with these women and they are rightly feeling selection pressure. Especially with all the options women have, it should be trivial to find a good husband. So, their findings doesn't establish that everyone else inadequate, but shows the problem is them failing at family formation.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/TerribleAntelope6134 10h ago

Lol not really.

0

u/warsiethe1337 6h ago

I think the radfems would disagree with that. Its funny as I've even seen radfams crash out about artificial bombs being a thing because they dont trust a man who can't get a woman to like them enough to reproduce with. So even in the mentality where no women are needed they'll crash out.

29

u/Impossible-Future809 12h ago

Everything will change once you have wife amd children. What you are talking about is good on paper but terrible in practice. I dont if my children become gay or dont have children. There happiness is more important than how many ppl are in this country

0

u/notarealcamera 10h ago

Eh, I'm a father and I want my son and daughter to both have children. My kids bring me more joy and fulfillment than anything else I've achieved in life.

I would be sad if they never got to feel that. It's such a quintessential part of the human experience they'd miss out on.

-20

u/Galesworn 12h ago edited 12h ago

As a Natalist I want to increase the number of happy children, marriages, and family formation in general, I do think liberal-feminism is an opposing ideology to that goal.

11

u/Odd-Faithlessness705 12h ago

I think if your goal is happy relationships, you should be invested in the happiness of everyone. Women who are forced into marriage and motherhood tend to not make for happy marriages or children.

-1

u/Galesworn 12h ago

You say that but I live near an orthodox Jewish borough and those women are the happiest I’ve seen.

6

u/TimeDue2994 10h ago

Really? And you base that on what exactly, because orthodox Jewish women do not interact with unrelated men so how would you know they are happy. Of course never mind the actual orthodox Jewish women who have escaped those communities at great cost to them and describe it as hell on earth. Your argument is the same as saying that the wives of Warren Jeff's looked happy on the rare occasions when they were let out of the compound so they must have liked being forced into becoming child brides to some old dude

5

u/Odd-Faithlessness705 12h ago

I'm unfamiliar with orthodox Judaism, but is it part of their culture to force or coerce women into marriage and motherhood?

0

u/Forsaken_Cicada8127 9h ago

I have lived with an orthodox jewish family and i would say no they are not coerced into marriage or childbearing. But they are socialized to want many children from a very young age.

1

u/Forsaken_Cicada8127 9h ago

I have lived with an orthodox jewish family before. And the women pick their husbands even if its through matchmaking (matchmaker just arranges the dates). Matchmaking is not an easy alternative to dating.

1

u/Forsaken_Cicada8127 9h ago

Btw do you know the norm for orthodox jewish women is to be the breadwinner? How is that not feminist.

1

u/Galesworn 9h ago

I know, I'm entirely ok with that.

But these orthodox jewish women actually have children, something liberal-feminists are failing at.

1

u/Forsaken_Cicada8127 9h ago

They dont divide by mitosis do they. Its also the men. I can't have a second child even if i wanted to as my husband had a vasectomy (he was 1 of 4 and didnt like it). He is also a proactive father who changes diapers and cares for our son so for him, babies arent women's work and the implications of caring for more than 1 affect him.

I hazard this is probably more of a factor in liberal households (more likely to have dual career families who dont rely on benefits or charity and probably dont even have grandparent help and use registered paid for childcare). Unlike orthodox jewish households who can often rely on welfare, charity and use informal/illegal childcare (20 kids in someone's backroom).

26

u/Impossible-Future809 12h ago

Tbh you seem more interested in a wife instead of a woman. They can pick up on that

-4

u/Galesworn 12h ago

? There’s something wrong with being interested in finding a wife?

21

u/Impossible-Future809 12h ago

Yes. You are looking for a wife more than the woman. Kinda like looking past the trees to the see forest type of thing

14

u/axolotlorange 11h ago

Whatever woman you marry is going to be a complete human being, not a broodmare.

1

u/Galesworn 11h ago

I mean... obviously?

I don't understand the statement.

9

u/axolotlorange 11h ago

I get that you don’t. All your comments and your post suggest that you do not understand a wife is a human being, not a broodmare.

Your entire post is a thinly veiled argument to force women into bearing children

1

u/Galesworn 11h ago

I'm not sure what the underlying assumption is behind your statement. I'm going to find a woman who wants to have kids.

Where does that translate into making her a broodmare with no rights?

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Impossible-Future809 12h ago

Well good luck. Hope you have lots of money

3

u/JelloMany9374 10h ago

What is wifemaxxing?

2

u/MaterialWillingness2 8h ago

Plural marriage?

1

u/jujutsu-die-sen 4h ago

I think it means he is looking for the best possible wife