This is just a chain of events that I predict.
Situation 1. If birth rates are far below replacement rates, we can see populations very quickly fall in a few centuries, in western countries.
This will mean that western countries will get outnumbered by non Western countries. Be vulnerable to war, possibly lose those wars and women's rights will be changed with it. High chance defeated nations become Muslim countries as a result.
Situation 2. Western countries "fix" their declining birth rate through immigration. Instead of producing people internally, outsource people produced externally. This would mean importing people from countries with less rights for women. This could easily change the politics of these countries to a direction which reduces women's rights, both through cultural change and voting. A majority of immigrants will probably be single men looking for work which makes me think it would tend to go that way. Remember think centuries from now
Situation 3 Western countries force fix their birth rate. The force of government is used to apply carrots or sticks to increase the birthrate. This could likely involve forcing people to have children, or else go to jail. This is very plausible to happen in China (a non Western country). This will be enacted as governments realize how vulnerable the country is becoming because of its low population. In such a case women's rights as we know them are changed significantly.
Situation 4. Western countries fix birth rate voluntarily. This could happen in a variety of ways, a new wave of feminism that emphasizes responsibility as a citizen which includes raising children. Political and economic chance that makes it more appealing to have kids. Social change which results in most men and women respecting each other again. Etc. This is the only one which can preserve women's rights / freedoms as we know the today.
This is just a prediction of possible futures. And just an observation that unless women in western countries can somehow solve this and create situation 4 (and I think women are the main deciders of how many kids a country has). Then one of the other situations is probably going to happen, and women's rights will be lost.
So, it kind of comes down to the responsibility of women. Women now have more freedom over their lives. But it has resulted in a major population decline. And I don't think that can continue indefinitely without one of these scenarios occuring which result in a change to women's rights or choosing to have more children.
WDYT?
You forgot to mention the most important factor: economic. Women are expected to work like they aren’t mothers, and mother like they don’t have to work a job for money. Unless we fix income levels to single breadwinner status, fertility rates won’t increase. Women are not made to be both women AND men. Women should have the security of mind to work at home (domestically) without worrying about income and men should be able to work with the peace of mind that their dollar can sustain their entire family. Homes should also be affordable as well.
Someone once said it's like we are making everyone dual class in a videogame.
Instead of having a main class and synergy. Like DPS and Support.
Re #4: "new wave of feminism." Do you mean "traditional sex roles?" Because that's what I hear. I believe that's coming. Despite the propaganda, many women are waking up to the fact that it's an empty promise. Feminism is a loaded term, and implies an adversarial relationship with men.
I think #1 & #2 were the cabal's plan, and both have been stopped. #3 is a very anti-western concept depending on the "force" used. It sounds like the handmaid's tale when you talk about forcing, but economic incentives like Victor Orban has done in Hungary does not appear forceful and yet seems to be effective.
Despite a lot of philosophy, current feminism has been economically subsidized very heavily. Economic policy has heavily incentivized divorce and disincentivized marriage for men, directly resulting in fewer children. Although they work hand in hand, I think the economic policies have had a much more significant impact than the MSM's ideological pushes and the propaganda.
Yes some cultural shift. But perhaps not more feminism, but a rejection of parts of it. Traditionalism may take over after many generations. We do know that traditional families have more kids and people who opposite it have few. So over time, if people maintain the culture of their parents they would be replaced with traditionalists. However, I am not sure people will maintain the culture of their parents, that's how we got into this.
So then for traditionalism to take over it would be a soft power war. Who can influence the most people. Which is a challenge because most people are influenced first through government schools.
There's definitely a movement towards traditionalism amd a rejection of feminism. Measuring how successful it is isn't my thing, but you might want to track things like "Girls Gone Bible" as an indicator.
We also might just collapse our society internally through bad policies. Like the accumulating of debt and debasing currency. Which means we go to some sort of anarchy. It's like the wild west again. Similar gender roles to that most likely.
Exactly. The problem is firstly economic, more than culture or philosophy
It’s an engineered economic problem. Politicians tell us there is no money to support native having children, but a bottomless pit when it comes to supporting turd world immigrants.
The illusion is rapidly breaking. In Ireland a huge pushback has begun. I can see it getting violent pretty soon as the civil service are not reading the room.
Maybe due to them being compromised, maybe it’s because they are communist leaning nation haters. Who knows. All that matters is people are laughing at being called racist or far right.
I think we stopped some of the mass illegal immigration. But we may still have high rates of immigrantion and the local birth rate is still well below replacement. So I am not sure if #1 or #2 have been dropped
That's because islam sets down rules for treating women.
And all those ragheads are rabid religious folk.
Realistically the birth rate stuff is kind of a lie in most places. Does anyone ever actually look at how its calculated? They typically take the number of births per 1000 "birth age women". Which depending on the country is anywhere from 12-15 on the low end and 45-50 on the high end with IVF.
Why is this manipulative and not accurate you may ask? Well simple, in most civilized modern societies, we've actively discouraged and done everything possible to end teenage and preteen minor births. For most of history, it wasn't uncommon to get married at 14-15 and immediately start having kids. In the modern world, that's generally considered socially unacceptable everywhere civilized. So why are they still included in the data when we've more or less achieved this goal (in the US for example, minor births are down 90-something percent from what they were in the 90s), knowing this would create a massive outlier in the data set and that it would swing the data in a negative direction, all while we actively DO NOT want this specific subset of people having kids anyway?
If you take out that specific subset of people, the US birth rate is closer to 1.9-2.0. Almost replacement rate, which means all it would take is a few minor economic changes (IE better living conditions) and we'd be at or higher than replacement rate.
Now a caveat, there are some countries that're truly screwed if something doesn't change soon even if you use this more accurate method of calculating birth rate. South Korea for example, has a birth rate of 0.75 with the normal method and like 1.2 with the more accurate version I've laid out. So if they don't change something drastically they WILL end up in a bad place, but for the majority of countries, the birth rate thing is either an outright lie, or greatly overexaggerated because the methodology is flawed and incompatible with modern societal standards.
Wow that's really interesting. So we aren't that far below replacement rate
1.9 is an estimated number I have heard for a "cultural replacement rate". That is you will likely be able to assimilate enough of the new people who come into the culture to maintain it.
So I feel less concerned about this now.
Aside. Another stats that's misleading is China's birth rate being births per woman, when their country is like 40 percent females, 60 male. You need more than 2.1. to replace that because of the skewed gender ratio
If you start looking into methodology you'll often find that "official statistics" are heavily manipulated to push a specific narrative. For example, you'll often hear that the US is only 57-60% white today, BUT if you look at the methodology you'll find that the way they determine this has been manipulated since the 50s. Pre, I think it was 1950 or 1960 census, the "White" category, included everyone who was of European decent, regardless of origin. This included, Mexicans and other hispanics (who're 86-90% Spanish genetically depending on origin), as well as certain middle eastern groups who were of greek descent (most egyptians are actually of greek descent for the example). They only really changed this in order to push a narrative that white people are slowly becoming a minority. If you use the old, more accurate methodology, the US is something like 80-85% white, which is roughly on par with what it was 70+ years ago.
This applies to everything, race, religion, birth rates, political affiliation, etc.
They try to say the Christianity is dying and that women are overwhelmingly liberal, but in reality Christianity is growing due to a combination of higher birth rates among more religious people, and more people converting to Christianity from other religions. Likewise, women aren't nearly as liberal as they'd have you believe, the overwhelming majority fall into the "apolitical" category. IE, they don't care about politics or have strong opinions about any political topic, including abortion, and all the other "women's rights" crap you hear. For the majority of people, economic stuff is FAR more important to them, since it affects their daily life.
And of course, like I mentioned in my original comment, birth rate data is just outright inaccurate, because they're using a methodology incompatible with modern societal standards. It'd work for third world crapholes in Africa where 12 year olds still marry and give birth, but in the modern western world it makes no sense. It's like doing a study on meat consumption and then intentionally including vegans.
It just doesn't make sense to include an entire group that make up roughly 10-20% of the data set (depending on country) that you're actively TRYING to prevent from doing the thing the study is about. Anyone who's taken a basic primary school science class knows that violates the basic tenant of the scientific method in that you have to have no outside forces acting on the observed data in order to maintain accuracy.
Very interesting. I knew how some statistics are manipulated but didn't know specifically about these demographics stats.
And Yes, I do think a lot of women are apolitical. I think a lot of immigrants fall into this category, like the large number of international students in the US don't know much about US politics at least.
Consider the following: How many cultures around the world have given women liberty at a higher or equal level than the USA or most other western nations?
Well I think the current age is completely uncharted territory. Never before have women had so much liberty and options and opportunities.
And look what happened.
Indeed. I guess my whole post is just pointing out that it's an unsustainable system as it is now. The system we live under a as a whole. And it needs to change to get birth rates back up or it will slowly change the system to an extreme over time
Agreed. Either way, women need to go back to God’s original purpose for them. Making babies.
Interesting hypotheses, NullIsUndefined. My guess is that birth rates will not only stay low but drop precipitously, thanks in large part the the huge percentage of humans who have been injected with the COVID-19 "vaccines" -- regardless of anything societies might do to change that outcome.
I hope I'm wrong, but the evidence DOES seem to point in that direction. And no, I don't see anything good coming from that.
Outside the topic of birthrates, there's an interesting hypothesis regarding women's rights and natures of the left- and right- brain hemispheres -- more specifically, about what happens when the Left hemisphere becomes dominant, as opposed to acting as an important but subservient tool for the Right hemisphere.
Each hemisphere experiences the world differently, with its own values and expectations and reasons for doing things, and both of these different streams of consciousness are seamlessly woven together into the single over-all consciousness that makes up a person's sense of self.
The left hemisphere is the tool-using, tightly focused, grasping/hunting, detached, utility-seeking side, which re-presents reality in a condensed, artificial model that provides clarity and works (if all goes right) for the current situation. The left hemisphere sees everything, including humans and other life, as things to be manipulated, obtained, worked with, and so on. It is certain of what it thinks it knows, and (in split-brain or certain right-hemisphere stroke patients) will confabulate when challenged, despite clear evidence to the contrary of what it is saying.
The right hemisphere is the wide-angle, open-to-whatever-is, alert-for-what-is-new, connected-to all it sees, hemisphere, with empathy for life and without an agenda but rather an openness to and participation in the flow of things. The right hemisphere is never completely certain about things, because it sees the ever-changing, never-the-same real world as it is presented by the senses -- different and unique from moment to moment.
Those ideas (but not that text) are from Iain McGilchrist, author of The Master and His Emissary and The Divided Brain and the Search for Meaning. I highly recommend his work; it's the sort of thing that you'll probably keep reading for life.
Dr. Leonard Shlain used the differences in brain-hemisphere consciousness (and much else) in The Alphabet Versus the Goddess to document the rise and fall of women's rights, and changes in society's treatment of women generally, over the centuries. It's a fascinating, if often disturbing, look at an unexpected but clearly powerful element in how societies have viewed and treated women, and more than that: when left hemisphere influence becomes strong enough to be unhealthy, society suffers in other ways as well.
Interesting connecting of dogs there. Those look like some interesting reads. I'll try to follow up and read them.
Thanks for the links and detail
I wish .
Here's a data point from today's NY Post, and yikes! I don't know how this compares to the past, but I suspect the percentage of young adults who don't want or expect to have children is significantly lower than even in, say, 1980.
https://nypost.com/2025/05/10/lifestyle/harvard-youth-poll-reveals-how-many-young-americans-want-to-get-married-have-kids-in-spring-of-2025/
(more)
What I've seen of current western women, they'll happily walk the path of ruin if it means they can be degenerate hedonists and avoid accountability for a little longer.
Agreed. It's all about them, and what they want. Their hedonism and lack of accountability has resulted in an insatiable thirst for terminating their pregnancies - which has the effect of lowering the birth rate.
They could dramatically increase birth rate if they put tax incentives in.
No, not dramatically. Low birth rate goes hand in hand with female empowerment. The UN knows this and it's literally one of their strategies to combat "overpopulation." This has been done deliberately and can't be fixed until society accepts the average woman has no business going into higher education. They're propped up at every turn from grade school until they graduate college and get some adult daycare job where they send emails and talk on Zoom all day. Then they think they're special and think the average man making average pay isn't good enough for them.
It's a problem literally anywhere in the world where they do it. In China, rural families were sending their daughters to the city for college to help the family only for them to come home and refuse to help and didn't want to marry anyone from the village because they felt above that now.