Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:But then a family could live on one salary and women weren't suppose to have careers outside their homes. We can't live on one salary anymore.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous[b wrote:]I hope you support paid family leave and universal affordable childcare, and candidates that push for those policies.[/b]
I do, but in the past, everyone started having kids in their early 20's and none of these things existed.
You could, you just don’t want to.
Sure, we could. Buy an inexpensive house in a neighborhood with poorly rated schools, pinch pennies, have all the basic needs met (food, shelter) but not be able to save for things like trips and college. And then our kids would be at a disadvantage when trying to find their way in this increasingly competitive society. Everyone wants to give their family the best possible start in life and for most, it's not possible on one income.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It seems like there has always been a progression based on the technology/invention/economics - in colonial times people had kids at like, what, 16 yrs old, then with the introduction of "modern" conveniences it was more like 18 yrs iat the turn of the century, and then by the 20th it was in the early 20s.
Here we are into the 21st century and people are having their first kids at 40 yrs old.
That's not true. In 1890, the average age of a first marriage for men was 26 years, and the average age of marriage for women was 22 years. That wasn't far off from what it was in colonial America. People assume that teens were routinely having babies in the past, but men had to be able to support a wife before they could marry. Probably more men and women never married at all because they couldn't afford to. Also, effective birth control wasn't widely available, so women had little control over how early and how many kids they had. And since life expectancy was shorter, people didn't necessarily know their grandparents for any longer.
Now, a high school degree is the bare minimum to be able to get a job, and college or professional training is almost always required to get a job that pays decently. When people need more education, they delay marriage. When raising kids is more expensive (people tend to frown on making your kids work, and child labor is mostly prohibited), people delay having kids and have fewer of them.
If people really cared about encouraging couples to have children, they'd support a stronger safety net, affordable quality child care, universal health care, free college, etc. Mostly, the people lamenting that women aren't having enough babies don't support those things. And listen to anyone crying about how they shouldn't have to pay for someone else's choice to have kids, or bitching about welfare for teen mothers. You want to treat it like a purely individual choice that you are responsible for, but then the rational choice is to have fewer children later. Want different outcomes? Create different incentives.
Anonymous wrote:OP, why do you assume everyone is married by 22 but then just chooses to goof off for the next 10 years and not have kids? Are you so ignornant to not understand that most people in metropolitan areas do not get married until they are late 20s/30s? Why do you think women are the only ones in control of when they get married?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:LOL at the idea that 20+ year old people are not mature enough for marriage and children. They are, but they need to be in a society and a family that supports them. White American society unfortunately does not have that.
This is not a white problem or an American problem. It’s global. And humanae vitae predicted it all 50 years ago.
Anonymous wrote:"I am 42. My daughter is 16 and was an accident. I was absolutely NOT mature enough to have her when I did. I wish I could have waited until around 38 or so. That's when I felt like I really had a handle on being an adult I felt good about, not just faking it by doing adult things. Never mind that I was on welfare and food stamps and DD has food insecurity."
Anonymous wrote:LOL at the idea that 20+ year old people are not mature enough for marriage and children. They are, but they need to be in a society and a family that supports them. White American society unfortunately does not have that.
Anonymous wrote:The statistics for the longevity of early marriages are not good. I saw lots of classmates and family members marry young, have kids young, divorce and struggle to have the careers that they hoped for. Having kids outside of marriage is no better. Some people make it work, and that’s great, but not the norm.
As a woman, I chose to take my chances with future fertility in exchange for a solid, mature marriage/child raising partnership and and well established careers with good, reliable incomes.
When I think about what my life would be like if I had kids early I feel like I dodged a bullet.
Anonymous wrote:"I am 42. My daughter is 16 and was an accident. I was absolutely NOT mature enough to have her when I did. I wish I could have waited until around 38 or so. That's when I felt like I really had a handle on being an adult I felt good about, not just faking it by doing adult things. Never mind that I was on welfare and food stamps and DD has food insecurity."
Sorry, I don't intend to pick on you, just want to clarify something that occurred to me.
If you didn't have your daughter at 26, I don't think you would have felt like you had a handle on being an adult at 38.
It took 12 years of life experience with your daughter to figure things out and get your handle. It may never have happened without her.
To generalize, kids change everything and so seeing the other side is almost impossible. That is one of the problems with this type of debate.
Anonymous wrote:Just pointing out that having women start having children in their 30s in not uncharted territory. My mom, like OP's, was in her early 20s when she had her first, but my Grandmother was 31, because she was too busy working through the Depression and defeating Hitler and all that to settle down. There were a lot of women who didn't have kids until after the war, and if that meant they were older, then they were older. I'm not sure what my point is, other than that we shouldn't think all the women of the past had babies young.
Also, if you wanted to settle down in your 20s and have kids, you could have probably accomplished that. You got to choose to wait for the right partner, the right career/educational path, etc. Don't forget the stifling effect that pressure to settle down and have kids can have on society.