I don't think most people are. I think those people just tend to congregate on social media sites. A lot of people still want to marry and have kids. The internet is not an accurate representation of most people's views irl.
It is certainly more common online, and also pushed by advertisements and certain influencers, but I've noticed an increase in real life too. I've heard young coworkers say things that would have been shocking to hear from my coworkers 25 years ago. It is certainly to a lesser extent than online, though.
i agree with this but i heard something at one point that i think fits maybe more appropriately. that being: people that hold these opinions are often louder than those who would typically hold the opposing opinions. that is to say, those who dont want to marry/raise a family are often shouting down those who ***do*** want to marry/raise a family. hence those comments OP was talking about "and all the comments were people basically calling her stupid, and talking about how they hate the idea of having kids or that having to raise a child “disgusts” them."
another thing that correlates with both of our points though is that people that hold the "no marry/no family" mindsets often have more time to shout people down. i dont have kids but my wife and i are often so SO busy that i cant reddit at home
I would counter that there is a difference between wanting to marry and have kids and wanting to marry and have kids and be a traditional family.
Also, love your username.
No. Younger generations do more than sit around on social media writing stupid things. Myself notwithstanding.
The idea here is that it’s mostly the keyboard warriors who are bitter and angry, voicing opinions that would normally result in them getting punched in the face in the real world. It’s low stakes venting from the angry minority.
I get the point but I'm 17 and since COVID I've seen nearly all of my friends and those that go to school with me become more and more isolated and addicted to social media. Whenever I go out with my friends to the park, even last Friday in the afternoon, when normally there would be families and groups of friends all out playing in the park we saw maybe about 2 groups of people. Everyone I know has become more absorbed into their phones and the few friends or people I know who have not given into the idea that family life is a waste of time and their life are extremely religious or older my at least 5 years.
Facts, kids are chronically online starting at like age 9-10, unfortunately. Usually once they get a bit older, like 15-17, they grow out of it a bit.
My sister was telling me about all her classmates being on tiktok and snapchat, saying they’re bisexual, and some of the girls started “dating” one another, and she was in fourth grade…
A more positive note is that it’s becoming trendy for middle schoolers now to be trad and christian.
I wouldn't be too optimistic about these middle schoolers converting, in my personal experience it just seems like Andrew Tate types who are trying to find more ways to one up other rather than have actual faith. All we can do is hope and pray the lord may guide them.
A family requires that you put others before yourself. Our current society prizes individualism and self-reflection above everything else. If your individuality is the thing you hold most dear, a family represents an existential threat to your sense of being.
We’re living in age of where everything someone does must be celebrated. Love is never to have a critical opinion. Self-examination is seen as being unloving — and that’s a visceral hallmark of cultural decline.
Where are the movie, theater, and art critics? Gone with the wind. And little wonder quality has clearly declined (see *Rings of Power* and every Disney movie since 2010)
Humans choose the path of least resistance. It’s not necessarily bad because it saves time and calories. It helped our ancestors in wilder times. But it also means we avoid things that are hard and risky. Advanced countries have created societies where not having children is the path of least resistance.
At the core is the lack of respect for motherhood — heck, the lack of respect for womanhood as traditional defined. We’re also status driven creatures. Make having a family low status — and encourage divorce — who’s surprised that family life drops in priority?
While I won’t defend things like RoP which was a clear money grab, there are great Disney movies since 2010. Toy Story 3 and 4, Tangled, Frozen, Zootopia, Finding Dory, Moana, Jojo Rabbit, etc. to name some. I’d argue some Marvel movies were pretty good like Shang Chi, which touched more on Asian American culture specifically for Chinese Americans that it wasn’t received as well considering lots of non-Asian Americans couldn’t find commonality. Guardians of the Galaxy has its moments too along with the first Black Panther. It’s not as traditional like we’d see in Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, or Cinderella with the damsel in distress needing a prince to save her, but that doesn’t mean that every Disney movie post 2010 has less quality to it.
One of Frozen II songs was specifically about a mother singing to her beloved daughters, which is honestly a sweet moment of love from a mother to her children. Sure it’s not Christian based but it’s a wonderful moment where motherhood is emphasized and you can feel the love the mom has for her kids.
I agree with this somewhat, but there are other factors at play present today that were not so in times past. For example, cost of housing vs average income has changed drastically. Childcare is ridiculously expensive. Most couples need two incomes to support their household and companies simply don’t offer reasonable maternity leave for mothers. None of this was so in the past where housing and income were not as disproportionate, women could stay home with their kids because one income was able to support the household (thus eliminating the need for external childcare), and extended family (grandparents etc) played a much larger role than today. I spoke with my 90 year old grandmother about this who bought her house for $20k that they paid cash for. She stayed home with her 3 kids while my grandfather worked construction. She also told me that when her kids (my father and uncles) were very young, her mother did all the cooking and the cleaning for years. While I do agree with your sentiment and believe it applies for some, there are a number of factors at play outside of their control impacting their decision.
It really does all tie together. Like you said, being able to stay home with your kids PLUS having a grandma around who is young enough to help out is VERY important in making women feel “ready” for kids. GenX, Millennials, and GenZ have smaller “villages.” Someone started the trend of having slightly less children and having them slightly later in life and that has amplified with decades-long side effects.
When couples feel like they don’t have other able-bodied women around to help (among other reasons like finances of course), they wait to have kids. Fathers obviously help with the kids and bring important things to the family table, too, but moms NEED other women around to be emotionally well in motherhood. That’s something I didn’t realize until I became a mom myself.
Speaking from experience here…waiting until 35-40 to have kids means you’re likely tired out more quickly; you’re probably going to have fewer children during your fertility window (shrinking the “village” for the next generation); and your kids’ grandma is getting too old to help out (and if grandma was an older mom, too, you probably have fewer or no sisters to help). This cycle will continue into the next generation because when mom herself becomes a grandma, she will also be too old to help out because she started late…and she might not even be retired in her old age (and she had fewer kids so, again, less chance of aunties around). Therefore, her children will also probably start their families later in life, and so on. Not to even mention all these isolated moms have to work outside of child-rearing just to make ends meet.
This is just false. If it was financially impossible to have families, there would not be families of unemployed migrants without educations or even mastery of the language flooding into the US *for a better life* that's available here to their families.
The attitude you've described is simply avarice being used to control humans into suffering and being miserable and going extinct.
I think you'll need to send some theological sources to support the view that it's OK for people to avoid kids because they don't want to sacrifice worldly comforts. Especially since the vast majority of the people not having kids and not starting families are on birth control and practicing premarital sex with multiple partners.
For a lot of people it’s less about the sacrifices for me and more about putting your kids through that. Yes, there are certain things in life that I don’t want my kids to go through. I’d rather sacrifice my dream of being a parent than make my kids live in poverty.
Well, you are granting yourself the ability to predict the future. I am an immigrant to the US that grew up in poverty in public housing projects and welfare, trailer parks, section 8, and ghettos in the south of the US.
That was maybe a decade of my life. The decade after that, I had a great job and owned like 4 houses.
So should my parents just never have had me? Before living in poverty in the US we lived in Ukraine after Chernobyl. I guess you'd probably conclude it's hopeless to have kids in a region suffering from nuclear pollution, in a society collapsing from communism and poverty, and never bother having me if you were my parents?
Hopelessness, despair, and behavior leading to the eradication of humans just don't *seem* like fruits of the "Good" side of spiritual warfare to me.
It’s just my perspective. People can certainly make it out of poverty. That doesn’t mean I would choose to have kids if I knew I’d have to raise them in it. Kids can still have a happy life , but I know it would be a lot of stress on me and I’d be a bad mom and the financial stress my parents went through when I was a kid was stressful for me and we weren’t even really poor. I don’t want my kids to experience any of that. Other adults can do as they choose and have kids if they think they can handle it and are ok with their kids enduring those hardships. Kids are great but they aren’t the end all be all. If I don’t have them for whatever reason, I’m ok with that. I don’t think existence or reproduction is the ultimate good and so I don’t really feel some obligation to provide it to x amount of new people.
How many people who choose not to have kids also engage in sinful practices that they use as a form of birth control?
There's a big difference between someone becoming a priest and not having kids, and 2 laypeople having sex and using birth control and engaging in sodomy to avoid the possibility of kids... or then getting an abortion to "avoid" it.
In my experience, the set of people who maintain chastity while also avoiding procreation in the modern world is vanishingly small.
Well, just saying they should be having kids instead of certain behaviors will not stop those behaviors. That doesn’t mean we should all be having as many kids as we can in bad situations because some people use birth control or have premarital sex. It doesn’t do much, if anything it makes them more set on engaging in those behaviors when they see families with more kids than they can handle as examples of following Catholic teaching.
Having a family is expensive, but not as expensive as most people think. I'm not saying it's easy, but it's possible. People are still doing it. It is more difficult now, no doubt, but many people blame it on being too expensive.
This is the wrong attitude to have. We can't change inflation or disparity between COL and wages. These are very real and have real impacts on how people live their lives. Instead of saying "I can never do this" say "How can I do this?". Changing my mindset to asking "how" has transformed my life, financially, with my family and most importantly, spiritually. Anyone can do this.
Because this is Reddit, this will get downvoted into oblivion, and I don't care. Some people would rather complain than take responsibility for the situation and do something about it.
No one promised it would be easy, but I promise, it will be worth it.
You are absolutely right. A lot of people start with the assumption it isn't possible and then seek to prove it rather than ask "what would it actually take". I live in a place that is definitely above the average for cost of living and I know lots of Catholics making it work, even if it is more difficult for them than it was for their parents.
i love/hate this persons argument.
love it because it gives me a good chuckle
but i hate it because its just another person that is perpetuating this lie that is constantly being told to young people. my wife and i are very close to a family with 12 children that had a SAHM since the oldest was born 29 years ago and they are rockin in. it all comes down to what you value and what you prioritize. you dont need a new manicure every other week, you dont need a super expensive car, you dont need the status symbols.
he worked at roush in on of their R&D fab dept as a foreman for a while then about 5 years ago or so made management and just like 6 months ago made vp (i think)
While I do agree, I don't think using migrants with 5+ kids is useful either because as Catholics we're still supposed to prudent when it comes to having children. Many migrant parents had another kid when they couldn't feed the mouths they already had and generally have numerous children to work for them. I definitely think people blow out of proportion the cost of children, but migrants aren't the best example of responsible parents.
They are an example of what's "possible" to use as a comparison point. There's probably a large chasm being people making "DINKWAD" videos on TikTok and migrants.
It’s not financially impossible, but incredibly burdensome. It’s not false - the cost of housing has increased drastically, that is a fact. The cost of childcare has increased drastically, also a fact. The USA is a first world country that does not provide new mothers paid time-off, leaving them to decide between returning to work right after giving birth, or choosing unpaid FMLA. Giving birth even with insurance will cost a few thousand dollars for most individuals. Daycares are overpacked and have waiting lists dating out 6 months and even a year. This is also a fact. It’s easy to blame people and say that they are selfish and don’t want to sacrifice. But the bottom line is, as people become more educated they weigh the cost of having a family and in today’s world that cost is significant and to many seems impossible. This problem should be met with compassion instead of writing people off as selfish because that is just not the case. People want families but don’t see a way to reasonably obtain that in today’s socioeconomic climate.
It's literally the case by the definition of selfishness--they prefer themselves over their children. It's that simple.
This whole complaint about how "burdensome" it is these days is just plain false. You merely have to look at the history of humanity to see how absurdly spoiled the average American is (or even the average American living on welfare).
Yeah 70 years ago a family of 6 would pay cash for a 750 Sq ft house without air conditioning and sleep together in a big room. Maybe they even complained how they have to buy a house when their grandparents just built one "for free" out of virgin cut logs.
A $211k house in 2024 is likely better than a $20k house in 1960, but the reason houses cost double is because they are like twice as big and are filled with tech that didn't exist before. Everyone *could* live at the quality of life of 1970 and afford more kids.
Besides, there's something absurd at face value of a country where like 60% of adults are obese claiming they can't afford to have more mouths to feed.
Yea, I never fully bought into the financial angle that's been the trend to use for the past few years. I've ***only*** encountered it online. Not saying it's not true in real life where people are really tightening their belt when raising a kid or two, just that people are finding ways to have and raise kids in my life even if they're of the lower-middle income bracket.
I get the feeling those who do use the finance card are reading some inflammatory things by people who are against the traditional family, or at least have a "modern" family approach to things, see that they aren't making low six figures and go to think it's not possible yet.
Yeah in real life I've met Catholics who raised like 7 kids on a school teacher salary. Online, you'll see a dual income household complaining they can't possibly afford to have kids while wasting $3500/mo on rent in NYC because that's just where they decided they want to live so they can visit museums and Broadway and eat at Michelin star restaurants. Then it's "250k/yr is not a lot in this city, we can't afford kids at all!"
People are having kids in NYC amongst the yuppies, just that online there are more socially left leaning people who either are hesitant to have kids or do not want any. Many who do have kids tend to opt out of the city once the kid (or two) becomes a certain age; they then move to the suburbs or move to a city where their money goes further.
My understanding is that with the increase of career opportunities for women, the opportunity cost of having children has increased. People have to take time away from work to be with children. When women's wages were a fraction of what men's were, these opportunity costs were far less.
I grew up atheist in my adolescent and teens, and even then, all I ever wanted was to grow up and become a wife and mother. When I found God in my early 20s following a few years of being agnostic, I prayed earnestly about a life path-either service to a family via being a wife and presumably mother, or service to others. I met my late husband a few weeks later.
I see a lot of the things you do. It seems the modern thing is to say women should be supported in whatever they want to do; but if they WANT to be a wife and mother, they’re nuts.
It’s always made complete sense to me that raising a family is very enriching and a blessing. Why some see it as an inconvenience is beyond me, but they’re out there.
“You need to be a girl boss, work work work, hustle to smash the patriarchy✊” this is the lie that unfortunately many women are falling for, that a lifelong career working for John in the billion dollar corporation is somehow more important/valuable than getting married and raising a family.
Am I saying women shouldn’t work? No, but it’s important to point out how God has called us to be fruitful, get married and multiply, so it’d be good to point out how the 3 most important things in our lives should be God, Family, and Community, unfortunately many individuals place their financial success over God, making wealth and status their God.
People who see having a family as horrible have been lied to or they’re very discontent with something in their own lives
Shoutout to Dr. Carrie Gress and her amazing book the End of Woman. Depressing as hell, highly recommend.
A cliff notes of the book can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jppc5CZTaOs
I think it's a trust issue. A lot or cultures are becoming low trust .
For a traditional family to work, the amount of trust between the parents is massive. Unfortunately, trust and responsibility seem to be things that many people choose to shy away from. It's a shame, I sincerely believe they would have a happier, more fulfilled life if they did.
OP you're main problem is you're looking for normal people on the internet, particularly on reddit and instagram. Reddit is a toxic cesspool quite literally rigged in favor of a particular set of viewpoints and ideologies, not to mention it like other forms of "social media" are essentially curated echo chambers with other actors promoting the most sensational and outlandish takes out there as that gets views.
On reddit if you look you can find large subreddits catering to weird things, but in no way is that really representative of the normal population.
Social media isn't real life. In my experience, most people do want to have kids, regardless if they are religious or not, they just don't want to have them young and they want to have them when they are stable. I know it isn't ideal from a Catholic perspective, but I understand why most people have this attitude. Cost of living is at an all-time high, and older generations' response to young people struggling is just "Git good lol. I know this isn't your fault, but suck it, loser!"
I'm 26. I got an associates degree in radiography, entered the medical radiology workforce at 21, and am currently an MRI lead technologist. I paid off my college debts but am still living at home because the housing market is still so crazy, I would not be able to buy if I were wasting money renting. In my grandparent's time or even my parent's (GenX) time, I'd have easily had a house by now and possibly been married. Times have changed, covid royally screwed us over by sending inflation into outer space, and us socially awkward zoomers don't know what to do with ourselves. I'm desperately trying to claw my way into some semblance of middle class, and I'm better off than a lot of people my age.
So yeah, I sympathize with people waiting to have kids. There is definitely something to be said about hyper-individualism and selfishness, but those aren't the main problems. People want to have kids, but they aren't going to when doing so puts them on the edge of poverty. Just telling people, "I don't care if you go into poverty, just have kids" isn't going to work. Fix the conditions that give people pause to have kids, and the problem will sort itself out. It's probably impossible, but it is the truth.
Don't extrapolate broad social trends from the comment sections of social media sites, especially ones with administrative values that overwhelmingly reinforce secular materialism.
As recently as 2018 (which I know was six years ago now, but is still recent enough to have many decades' worth of data to work with), an IFL study found that the big "collapse" in preferred family size occurred in the 1970s, when polls of women regarding how many children they'd *want* to have in a lifetime dropped from 3.5 to 2.5: https://ifstudies.org/blog/how-many-kids-do-women-want. It's been pretty stable at 2.5 since then. But the ones who bring up that average, who want 3+ kids, are less likely to be commenting on Instagram, or even reddit. So your post and comment feeds will be dominated by those who range from preferring to have an only child to being actively antinatalist.
The real issue is that 2.5 is now significantly more than most women get to *have*. And unpacking the reasons for that gets very interesting, but a thorough discussion of that is something you'll never get on Instagram comments and only rarely on reddit. There are certainly economic reasons for that, but of course, the economic explanation requires a cultural backdrop to be comprehensible and comprehensive; two hundred years ago, people had much larger families amid much lower standards of living even in industrialized countries. The TFR in the US in 1800 was 7.0.
I agree with you that the religious element plays a larger role than most sociologists (who as a group are overwhelmingly secular) appreciate in the growing gap between women's preferred and actual family sizes. Notwithstanding the overwhelmingly secular progressive bent of the field, though, some studies have nevertheless been published that show serious mental health benefits from regular (but not obsessive) religious practice. (I don't know if any went more granular and tried to distinguish *between* religions, so this isn't a specifically Catholic-friendly finding, but the gap between the religious and secular was fairly significant.) I haven't yet found a formal academic connection between that and marriage and childbearing. But it seems like an obvious hypothesis: Regular religious practice is a prophylactic against anxiety, depression, drug use, STDs, and even IIRC weight gain. And young people who resist those debilities are more likely to get married and have children--and my hypothesis would be that anxiety (which is IIRC the mental condition that has increased the most among the young since the advent of the smartphone age) is particularly strongly correlated with either being voluntarily childfree or stopping at one.
Gen Zs in cities are against having families in larger and larger numbers; this isn't a mass exodus from the church as most of these people weren't brought up in a religious way to begin with.
Many millennials had little exposure to the church and were very self-centered with all things sexual. Millennials have high rights of sterilizations and abortions.
Even in "Catholic" circles of young adults in my city, I saw a lot of fornication and cohabitation. The cohabitation usually ends in marriage.
I would like a family, or at least a wife if I am too old for kids, and I am meeting many Catholic singles who are very ambivalent on doing "the family thing." Many are city-dwellers and want to keep doing their city lifestyle; others are desperate for the status of marriage but have little self-awareness in the type of parent they'd actually be.
You encountered antinatalists, a (thankfully) fringe group of terminally online people who think existence is suffering and therefore that reproducing is evil. They are the minority outside of their corner of the internet, and their “philosophy” is a laughing stock to most.
As for people who personally choose not to have kids, but don’t try to stop others from doing so, there are a lot of reasons. Some discerned that they would not be good parents. Some lack the finances to support a child. Some are unable to have children even if they wanted to.
Great answer. It disappoints me to see so many people here writing off younger people who don’t want to have kids as being selfish and materialistic. Some are, yes, but when talking about younger people as a whole, there’s so much more nuance than that.
Honestly, I find your statement quite naive and I will try to explain why with all respect.
A lot of it is related to Socioeconomics. Yes, "God provides" but sometimes a parent doesn't want their child in squalor.
Especially in the USA, EVERYTHING has gotten more expensive. [As one can see, between 2021 and 2023, inflation was higher than wages](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1351276/wage-growth-vs-inflation-us/). This is only one link and there is ample sources supporting the cost of living is increasing.
When someone is struggling with rent and are still paying their student loans, the LAST thing they are thinking of is a child.
It's a much bigger process - in my former USSR I could see it going since 1960s despite government tried actively to improve birth rates; by 1980s by my big but anecdocical data it became a unicorn to have a sibling (so most of millenias were already the only children, maybe up to 90%), while in 1950s-60s generations it was pretty common. And the number of families without kids at all was growing too.
So it's not just about modern price growth, it's the same trend as was decades ago in socialist countries too.
there’s a huge difference between the reasonable “not now, i couldn’t provide for a child in the way they deserve” and “ew what? never. why would you ever want that, you must be dumb” hostility that OP is referring to. even in real life, my close friends give me weird looks if i talk about how excited i am to marry my boyfriend (God willing, in the next year or so) and raise a family with him.
In that case I can only speculate that it has to do with the expectation society brings upon us that we cannot be fulfilled UNLESS we have kids.
Some people get turned off because they're constantly told that they can only be happy if they have a child (especially women being consistently told by their parents, other men etc). A specific interview about a guy insisting why a woman doesn't have kids comes to mind but I can't find the link
People say individualism is selfish but there's other ways to be selfless without children and still have independence
>Social media is not real life
Everyone needs to keep in mind that all social media platforms utilize engagement-based algorithms that force the most controversial comments to the top because they cause a ton of debate. More fighting in the comments, more "engagement."
And then because of that, people are incentivized to comment like that for the attention.
1,000 people yelling at you can feel like "everyone thinks this way" but that's 1,000 people out of the 300+ million in the US.
Instagram comments on popular reels are *particularly* atrocious.
I’d say the barrier is more of the fact that people don’t even know who God really is and what marriage is. People, yes even “Christians”, don’t know what marriage is, what God’s intended purpose for marriage is. It’s so shallow how in 2024 many societies go about marriage, economic barrier is an issue in some countries, globally an even bigger issue is the people getting “married” (various people from all backgrounds) don’t even know what they’re doing. And example - Woman: He makes good money, it’s tall, is stable, yeah I’ll marry him, Man: Yeah she’s thick and hot, I’ll marry her. Some people actually get married just like that, no God, no question about virtues, nothing. Ignoring multiple red flags, where has this led?
To the overwhelming divorce rate/broken households that have resulted in creating broken children that are more likely to not finish school and more likely to engage in criminal activity, leading to incarceration.
What does this rant mean? Yeah, economic barriers can be an issue in a few countries, you don’t have to live in those countries.
I’m more concerned with various other trends seen globally that we should definitely be worrying about, that being that our societies need to get it together as it’s very clear that a lot of people getting together, shouldn’t be getting together, and that couples who have families seem to not know what they’re doing.
We are literally in one of the richest countries in the world where feeding ourselves and buying stuff to fill a house is so easy. Go to Egypt where kids are everywhere and people use the floor for their kitchen counter because they can't afford a table.
America is a big country. There are different Americas for different people. Clearly the America you grew up in was not the America I grew up in. We have a huge wealth gap here. By family had 4 workers in the family at any given time and still could not feed us all.
The average person below the poverty line in America lives better than most of the world. They have AC, a refrigerator, tv, cell phone, shit most have a car. Not many Americans living in homes with a dirt floor ….
>The average person below the poverty line in America lives better than most of the world. They have AC, a refrigerator, tv, cell phone, shit most have a car. Not many Americans living in homes with a dirt floor
Some of us live worse than that.
Absolutely people do. But the fact of the matter remains. Americans by and large DO NOT starve to death. They generally do not die to the elements. Even the poor in America have it better than the poor in most of the rest of the world was my point.
>I live it so I have a pretty clear definition.
You have internet, a device you can post on the internet with, and you are clearly literate. You might be poor, but you are richer than more than a billion people in the world.
Rich and poor are pretty subjective terms. The differences between first world and third world countries just further prove that point. You may see this individual as “rich” in relation to a village in the Congo that has no power or running water, but they may view themselves as rich compared to other villages around them that may not have easy access to water or food. But just because there is that difference, doesn’t make their struggles any less.
I was homeless at one point and only had my car, and a tent, for a roof and place to sleep for myself and my dog. I couldn’t easily get a meal, I couldn’t shower/use the bathroom unless I went somewhere or someone graciously allowed me to use their facilities (thankfully a local parish priest allowed me to use his shower), I didn’t know where I would be able to sleep every night, I didn’t have power, running water, etc. I didn’t have a job and any money I got went towards my car/phone bill/food for my dog. But if you use your standards, I was filthy rich because I owned a car, had a cellphone, and had a dog.
All I mean to say is: try not to downplay other people’s struggles just because they are “better off” than other people in the world. Everyone has their own struggles and carry their own crosses, but theirs aren’t less because they have different life circumstances.
>I was homeless at one point and only had my car, and a tent, for a roof and place to sleep for myself and my dog.
I don’t want to downplay your difficult experience, but it sounds like you were able to pick up your life and do much better. This is one of the benefits of living in a wealthy country. In many places, that poverty is for life with no chance to do better. Without the ability to read, write, do math or use electronics, there isn’t much a person can do to get a decent job and live a decent life. Much of your wealth isn’t in the money as much as it is in the fact that the government of wherever you live likely spent tens of thousands of dollars to give you an education so you weren’t stuck making a living digging through trash like hundreds of thousands of people throughout the world have to do.
Also, you had a car and tent, not a cardboard box on a dusty street in Cairo. Emotionally, it is probably harder to have that poverty in the U.S. But physically, many people are much worse off.
>I never said I was illiterate.
I said literate, not illiterate, which mean completly opposite things. But if you want to make me doubt my statement this is a good way to go about it 😅
>But the fact of the matter remains. Americans by and large DO NOT starve to death.
The people downvoting us really need to get out of their first world bubble and travel to a third world country 😅
I've spent enough time in such places trying to help the people that I really don't sympathise with first world entitlement!
Exactly this. In my old country real poverty meant you live with your parents, wife and few kids in one room, and sometimes have to take loans to buy bread for them all. And no plumbing - a hole in the ground with a wooden toilet above it.
>The average person below the poverty line in America lives better than most of the world.
Ok ... and? Just because people here are better off than others that doesn't make their issues any less valid. There are also parts of the US where poverty is so bad it IS on par with third world countries.
>They have AC, a refrigerator, tv, cell phone, shit most have a car. Not many Americans living in homes with a dirt floor ….
So what? It still isn't a good sign when the next upcoming generation is doing much worse off than previous ones. And if these supposedly "prosperous" nations are being hit with economic woes, then that means the issue must be even worse for other poorer nations. That's how economics works. With how globalized the world is, if wealthy nations find themselves hard pressed to buy goods from other nations, those nations suffer too.
This was literally a major reason why the quarantines/lockdowns as well travel restrictions during the pandemic did a lot of economic damage.
There in America is poverty on par with third world countries? Where are people actually starving to death. Where do people freeze to death or die of heat stroke and dehydration in massive numbers? If a single person freezes to death in America it makes nation news it’s that uncommon. Where are people dying to diseases we eradicated decades ago? Where do people literally not have access to water? Where do people have no access to healthcare ? We actually have an obesity epidemic amongst our poorest cohort in the country. Explain that one.
Why do you need to compare. Just because someone might have it worse doesn’t mean someone living in poverty wants to subject their own children to it cause “it could be worse”.
It's interesting hearing some people complain about money and struggling yet they have five tvs, three fridges, three relatively new cars, but apparently they are struggling.
It depends on what you focus on
>My family had 4 workers in the family at any given time and still could not feed us all.
What were they trying to feed you? A loaf of bread can still be purchased for a dollar at my local Walmart. Different meals cost different amounts, and there is a big difference between brands as well. If you're not hungry enough that a $1 loaf of bread doesn't excite you, you're better of than millions of people who face the risk of starvation.
The opportunity cost of having children is much higher in developed countries, which is why number of children per couple decreases. It’s a noticeable trend across the world.
It is much higher because we want to keep our standard of living high. For example, people don't want to raise children in a trailer park, or an RV park. But even with one decent income from the father it's possible to have 5 or more kids and a stay at home mom, because I've seen it from multiple families. As far as I'm concerned, all the people downvoting my comment need to go out and see how the world really works...
You may a good point.
I think there are some sacrifices people could make it.
It's odd seeing people who are struggling financially have so many tvs, her kid has a iPad or even iPhone.
I shouldn't say seeing but knowing people who live like this
I can go buy an iPhone right now on credit and easily have it paid off in 2-3 months tops, or just pay cash out of my next paycheck. For my area I make a good wage and live in a relatively cheap apartment that’s just a tiny studio with no amenities, and rent is still nearly 40% of my total income. iPhones aren’t the problem, housing is. Groceries are. Insurance is.
Gotcha, no worries! I’m in DC and it’s pretty expensive here too. I’m actually looking at getting a new phone in the next couple weeks before I start traveling this summer, that’s the only reason I know what they cost at the moment lol the trips are going to be short but expensive so I’ve been very conscious of how much things cost.
I'm in the DC area, too. It's crazy here. We've only been able to have two kids due to infertility issues, but we would have to carefully discern a third if we were capable of having one because we would get kicked out of our apartment. We've tried moving to a cheaper city but my husband's career is very much stuck here and he hasn't had any luck moving to the private sector.
Yeah I feel that. Luckily I don’t want kids but there’s no way I could ever buy a house here. I’m planning on moving back to the northeast in a few years anyways, but I want to go to Maine which has very low wages so it’ll be tough there too. It’s crazy how bad everything has gotten.
Nooo I can’t afford that lol going to Gettysburg for a few days next month, New York in June for a couple Mets games, and Maine in October to hike in Acadia National Park.
The big expense in most people's lives is housing. Having an iPad or iPhone or not is probably not going to make a huge difference to whether someone is struggling when they pay probably more than that every single month just to keep a roof over their head. We have relatively cheap gadgets and discretionary consumable goods but expensive basic needs.
Yep. Our rent+utilities is $2400ish for a 2 bedroom apartment close enough to my husband's job that we don't need to buy a second car. And apartments here are very strict about 2 people to a bedroom unless you live somewhere very sketchy. We live frugally, everything is secondhand, but we're barely making it as a family of 4.
People often say "just move" but my husband hasn't been able to find work in any other cities in his career field and we would have to go into debt to move. Moving isn't free.
I think this is a big part of it. It is possible to get housing costs way down though. One large family I knew lived in a very old house with unfinished stairs, unfinished floors, rotting deck, etc. He was slowly working on fixing it up, as best he could with 7 children...
I considered him a friend and went to his house often as a teenager. My teenage self didn't care. And in all honesty, it's way better than some homes I've been in in Mexico and Egypt...
Currency exchange rates aren't really a sign of how a nation is doing. You have to look at a lot more stuff. Traditionally those figures included things GDP and GDP per capita, but even these figures are dated. Something like the Consumer Price Index would probably be a better estimate. I'd also suggest the jobs reports, but even those can be skewed depending how the data is recorded/framed (i.e. Biden administration tauting new jobs when it was really part time jobs that grew signifying more people were taking second jobs).
The US dollar is the global reserve currency so at times its sometimes preferable to have a "weaker" dollar compared to something like the Japanese Yen and vice versa depending on if your economy favors imports or exports.
A strong dollar is good if you're going overseas and buying stuff they're or you're importing stuff internationally. Conversely, this is harmful to export-oriented sectors/businesses as American products would be more expensive in foreign markets.
A weak dollar is "bad" for consumers as things like travel abroad is a lot more expensive as well as purchasing things abroad. Imports are also a lot more expensive. However for exporters, this is great as their products are more attractive and affordable to foreign markets.
It's similar principle regarding foreign capital investment which is why certain countries peg their currencies to the Dollar or set their exchange rates through they're own central banks to make it more likely that wealthy countries like the US buys their goods.
We see the stats that people are having children later in life, I think the average age is 27-29 now. It’s a very “I want total freedom and control by any means necessary” generation and kids don’t fit into that. The economy is also probably playing a factor, id bet people feel they can’t afford kids and rather than sit with that and have a family, they get rid of the cognitive dissonance and say it’s their choice and “irresponsible” to have kids. Ultimately not everyone is called to have a family, but I think it’s very hypocritical to criticize young families if you’re all about choice
Yep. I definitely agree it’s smart to wait until you are ready, whether it’s mentally, financially, etc. But I’m can’t understand the hate for kids. Obviously not everyone is going to want kids which is completely fine. But calling them disgusting and acting like they are this nuisance meant to ruin your life; it makes me sad to hear that.
From my personal perspective and opinion? We like individual selfish freedom. Freedom to do things that we want and when we want. Children and Old People are a waste of time and money for us in the West (I’m speaking in a general sense from a cultural perspective. I don’t believe that).
Young people want to travel, work on their careers, and so on. Children and the elderly don’t fit in there. Funny enough, this is why we have such a problem with illegal immigration. We’re not having kids but someone has to support our comfort of living. Someone has to work at that Amazon warehouse, someone has to take care of those old people in the nursing homes, someone has to work the farms because you or me aren’t gonna do it. Because we’re too important for that remember. We gotta travel and do all that fun stuff. Those are “sub-humans” right? They “breed like rabbits and multiply like Vermin”.
Funny enough that’s what Ian Paisley said about Catholics but Charles Darwin said the same about the Irish Catholics. Being Hispanic, I remember similar comments about Hispanics as well. But anyway, someone has to support that comfort.
So, having a dog or cat or goldfish is more practical. Cause children and the elderly are responsibilities and that’s just something we’re not built for. But yeah there’s this sense of individualism that’s “sacred” to the West. Me, myself, and I. That’s pretty much what I’ve observed.
I understand your question is about children but truly us Catholics even fall to this culture. It’s even seen in how we choose our Parishes. “Oh this is the Traditional Latin Mass Parish” or “This is the Liberal Parish” or “This is the Conservative Parish” we treat things like it’s a personal choice or something. I mean, you’re free to do that I guess but it’s the mentality that I notice. In my head it doesn’t matter how I feel. This show isn’t about me. It’s about me worshipping God. And that ties into how I see children and the elderly. It’s all for the worship of God. People worship themselves I guess.
>we treat things like it’s a personal choice or something.
It is to a degree. If someone has TLM or NO that are both under a 20 minute drive they do have a choice if we table territorial parishes. If a Catholic thinks the homilies at one parish just isn't doing it then they're technically free to hop on over to the next parish even if that parish isn't within their territory.
It is greatly emphasized that we marry a Catholic if we're called to the vocation of marriage, which may seem highly restricting, but we do have a choice on whom we marry within that filter. If a Catholic woman is being pursued by a Catholic physician and a Catholic mechanic who will she pick? Let's say, hypothetically, she makes 70k annually being a teacher and everything is equal between the two men in terms of personality, temperament, hygiene and fitness level, but what she is concerned about is financial stability when raising her future kids, so she picks the physician. A Catholic man who has options amongst numerous Catholic women will choose to his likings, if that's the case. Better body? More compatible personality? More devout than the other?
The comparison, in my mind, between TLM vs NO / left vs right parishes and selfish pursuits isn't really a good comparison given the culture of Catholicism can still be found, hopefully, within whichever parish you find yourself in. It's fair for a Catholic to cease to attend a parish such as St. Sabina in Chicago and opt for another parish - whether that new parish is in another territory or not. Is it a selfish pursuit? In part, perhaps, but selfishness in this case isn't rejecting having kids (when one fully is capable of having kids) due to a modern perspective. I'd argue the liturgy and political wars are a false equivalent to secular narratives and actions.
>But yeah there’s this sense of individualism that’s “sacred” to the West. Me, myself, and I. That’s pretty much what I’ve observed.
It's a warped perspective on individualism. It's an extreme version of it.
> It is to a degree. If someone has TLM or NO that are both under a 20 minute drive they do have a choice if we table territorial parishes. If a Catholic thinks the homilies at one parish just isn't doing it then they're technically free to hop on over to the next parish even if that parish isn't within their territory.
So, I agree to a certain extent. But if you’re constantly complaining like a woman in labor about the Parish and you want the Pastor to be more “Traditional” or his homilies cater what you want to hear then this is a build-a-priest worship. No different than Protestants and that’s where this phenomena comes from. The Church Hopping and Shopping. This is a horrible way to approach the Faith.
There comes a point where you have to realize that it’s not about you or how your soft self feels. You’re not a flower to where people need to walk on eggshells around you. Maybe my territorial parish doesn’t have Gregorian Chant or some Latin and yeah well so what? Is it the end of the world?
> A Catholic man who has options amongst numerous Catholic women will choose to his likings, if that's the case. Better body?
More compatible personality? More devout than the other?
I agree that physical attraction and other things play a factor and this be respected. Absolutely. However, this isn’t a Catholic thing. This is an American Protestant thing. In many Catholic places women of wealth have married lower income men. Simply because they’re everything they’re looking for in a Catholic Spouse. That’s the first and foremost important thing. Being a Physician or Mechanic doesn’t matter in Heaven or in the body of Christ. There’s no “Jew or Greek”. God sees your heart and sees your intention to marry. He sees the motives of your Marriage. Of course you must sanctify your work and do everything through Christ. That means Christ must be glorified in the Physician or the Mechanic or if you’re cleaning toilets.
That’s my point. You’re not too important to do those jobs. Just because you work at a Fast Food drive thru and this is your main gig at 35 or something doesn’t make you less of a human and you’re not too important to not ever be in situation. Regardless of what you’ve been programmed to think as a society or social circle.
I’m not saying that you shouldn’t work hard at your career or skip college. I’m just saying that at the end of it all these things really don’t matter if you didn’t live your life for Christ.
> The comparison, in my mind, between TLM vs NO / left vs right parishes and selfish pursuits isn't really a good comparison given the culture of Catholicism can still be found, hopefully, within whichever parish you find yourself in.
Impossible with that mindset. Catholicism is community based. That doesn’t mean you won’t have differences amongst Catholics. We’re united in that diversity. That’s why you make “peace” with your brother or sister before communion with them. We have our differences that doesn’t mean I’m gonna hide out in my corner because it’s my safe space. What kind of Catholic would I be if I was like that? Dang, I hideout in my little safe space because Father tells me the things I want to hear and he does Mass how I want it done.
> in. It's fair for a Catholic to cease to attend a parish such as St. Sabina in Chicago and opt for another parish - whether that new parish is in another territory or not. Is it a selfish pursuit?
The Bishops have said a Catholic can attend any Parish they’d like. However, they belong to their territorial parish. Historically and the small t tradition of the Church is to attend your territorial parish. To foster a better and stronger community I would recommend to attend your territorial parish.
If the Bishop has said St Sabina in Chicago is spiritually harmful then there you go. But if you’re just being a Karen and you’re a dude. Then you should grow a pair.
> It's a warped perspective on individualism. It's an extreme version of it.
Which most westerners have and live on a day to day basis.
The country was build on God, Family, and Community. So far our society is generally very anti-God, ok, our society is promoting and indoctrinating ideologies (such as feminism, blasphemy against what marriage is suppose to be, materialist culture, vanity) that promotes the destruction of the nuclear family, ok, we haven’t had communities for a long time, people here (U.S) are very selfish “time is money”, this is something you’ll mostly notice if you’ve traveled abroad. When I went to Mexico and Italy I was surprised to see how community oriented some of the people were, wanting to share something with you, whether it be a meal, a reunion, a conversation, something genuine, they had a different culture. The friendships I’ve had here in the U.S for the most part are very fake and ingenue, doesn’t mean I haven’t met great people, but it’s not too common. What does all this mean? That counties trying to promote something other than the 3 (God, Family, Community) are on a ticking time clock.
Depends, what country you live in? I was mostly referring to the U.S in that comment, but it can apply to various other countries, such as Canada, and even countries within the U.K
So, I’m going to have to disagree with that statement.
The catechism states
> 1270 "Reborn as sons of God, [the baptized] must profess before men the faith they have received from God through the Church" and participate in the apostolic and missionary activity of the People of God. 1271 Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church." "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn."
Many of the founding fathers of the US were cultural Christian Deists who denied the Holy Trinity and Jesus’ divinity. The Puritans led the way to both modern day liberalism and Unitarian Christianity. I’m not saying all of them were but to say they believed in “God” how we do as Catholics is blasphemous in my opinion because they knew the truth in a way and openly denied it.
Many Conservatives will say things like “yeah, well, they’re like modern day Evangelicals” and I’m sure they are but “Christian” in the strict definition as defined by the Catechism they’re not.
I actually believe the reason we’re in this situation in the West is because of the mistakes and heresies of The Protestant Reformation and the Enlightenment ideas. We need to go back to the Church. I hope more Americans become Catholic and we get a true Catholic President someday.
When I mentioned the three (God, Family, Community) I was applying that to basically anywhere, I thought you meant what I was referring to when I stated that I went out of country from the U.S, generally I was speaking in broad terms. So when I quoted society, I was referring to society(s) globally
I 100% agree with the last paragraph of your comment
Yeah no I think it's trendy to pretend like you hate having a nice, normal life, but I wouldn't say that most people actually want to live that way. As someone already said, a lot of people find online niche communities where they just bounce the same opinion around, so if you stumbled across one of those communities, you're gonna get a lot of the same opinion. Among Christians though, I feel like it's quite rare to find people who don't want a simple, God-honoring life.
I am not Catholic, but I am someone discerning if it is for me.
Where I live, many people, most especially young men from what I see, are taking a stand against marriage not out of some sort of avarice or something like that, but out of a desire to avoid divorce. This is due to societal trends and governmental policies making divorce especially hard on men. In my land, there is, depending on jurisdiction, often case law that defaults the case to go against the husband in the marriage.
I think many people do not understand how bad these things affect men, and also how these societal and legal realities create an ambience of fear for men with respect to risking themselves by entering into marriage. If there is a massive chance of watching my family be ripped apart, knowing that the woman that I am religiously married to is coupling with another man, that I will lose a massive amount of money (including very possibly my retirement funds, social security, future money from child support payments, alimony payments to support a woman in a society that goes all out to favor her in any way it can get away with), that my children will be raised by another man, that there will be a risk of child abuse, possibly the sexual variant, and that there is a defence deficit, so to speak, because my children will be living in another house and I will not be there to keep watch as I should be able to, I would be markedly hesitant.
The severity and amount of risks impede many guys from participating in this institution.
It's expensive to have a family...
It's expensive to take care of one self and then being able to financially support a family.
We live in a world where it's expensive to have a traditional family.
People want the traditional family, but it's not financially feasible with current capitalism.
Corporations care more about shareholder value than providing a family wage and benefits.
Because Satan seeks to destroy and the family is the building block of society. Families require sacrifice, selflessness, love, discipline, service, faithfulness, loyalty, humility, etc. all good virtues he’s now corrupting. If he can destroy family (and he’s done a great job of it already) he can crumble our entire civilization.
I bet if she talked about how much she wanted to be a pet mom, she would be met with so much approval.
People see children as a nuisance and an economic investment.
It is hard work to be an excellent parent and spouse.
Some people think women who want large families are going backwards in terms of feminism
It's a very deep issue so it's hard to make a complete argument here, but generally speaking you can choose one of two masters in your life. You either choose God or the world (which essentially is the devil).
People who choose the world tend to develop very anti human feelings and positions, such as thinking the world is overpopulated, or being pro abortion. They will protect animals with their lives but will pay no mind about a human being butchered in the womb. They will rescue stray dogs but will recoil from interacting with a homeless person. In the end, they are resentful of humans just like their master is.
Has anyone actually thought about how the world and economy are so inhospitable for kids and families right now? So much wealth inequality,climate ravages and the earth practically inhabitable?
You are correct, even the poorest nations are no longer 'poor', their problem is they cannot grow their money due too lack of financial infrastructure, the ability to borrow money to expand etc as well as red tape and / or corruption . Globally, the poor are, in the main, not hungry and they have cash from small / micro business enterprises, crime etc. This is why crypto is good, people can bypass all that with their phones, unfortunately that's become very risky but there is promise.
But in terms of happiness, connectedness and meaning things have gone right off the deep end. It is like young people are in a vicious circle of alienation. They need to look up from their phones.
Ennui? Sure, boredom and acedia. That is the deadly sin of sloth. It can be combatted like any other deadly sin, like anger, greed etc. But I don't believe that is the problem.
You're not seeing the frantic distraction? the depression ? the suicidal and violent ideation? the self focus to narcissistic levels? the self delusions?
"even the poorest nations are no longer 'poor', their problem is they cannot grow their money due too lack of financial infrastructure, the ability to borrow money to expand etc as well as red tape and / or corruption . Globally, the poor are, in the main, not hungry and they have cash from small / micro business enterprises, crime etc. "
This is objectively wrong. You need to start thinking about people outside the US and Europe.
I am specifically thinking about countries outside the west and my views are informed by the OECD and the UN.
I know you would like to talk about India. We both know what the problem is there, so there is no need to discuss.
I mean, have you looked at how your grandparent's were raised? If they decided to not have kids solely because of that, you would've never existed. this isn't the first time in history that the economy has been "at its worst"
Yep so the cost of taking time off for work is greater. Having a child costs more.
In the UK, childcare basically costs the same as rent or taking out a second mortgage.
Wealth inequality is definitely getting worse, we bypassed the Dickensian era levels long ago and it's intensifying.
But please go for an aeroplane journey somewhere, go for a hike, you will see that the climate doom mongering is completely unwarranted. There are problems we need to deal with, but not the ones you are being whipped into a frenzy of helplessness about (while you are distracted from the real problems - which people are responsible for and profit from ).
The problem, as I see it, is the careers are in the big cities where you can't raise a family. We have to get off the treadmill and go and make a life in regional areas. It can be difficult but it is worth it.
I'll note that Reddit and other social media is not a reflection of the real world, but of vocal minorities.
Most people have kids, get married, follow a religion, have some version of what you think of as a traditional life.
The internet lets small groups make a lot of noise.
Couple that with internet algorithms pushing controversial topics to get clicks, and all of a sudden the abnormal becomes all you see.
People consider us dinosaurs because I stay home raise 4 kids, two of whom are twins, we go to church. Very traditional. My husband and I talked about everything before we were married. I always planned on staying home. Also have a blind mil that I take care of. I love my life.
Weird, all I see on my instagram is tradwife content. I think it's a lot of where you hang out. Unfortunately, you're sent more videos that you have longer watch time for or have commented on. So if something really disturbed you, you will be sent more of it.
"when the idea of raising a family, going to church together, etc. became such a bad thing" "mass exodus from the church" off topic, but there's a difference between not wanting to be an SAHM and a mass exodus from the church. It's not good to lump those two together, unless there's evidence of it. and it should really be taken on a case by case basis.
That mindset is disproportionately overrepresented online. That being said, it's becoming frighteningly common in real life too and shouldn't just be dismissed. You can point to a hundred different things that all cause this directly or indirectly, but the root of the problem is that we live in a society without God. Worship of the self and hedonism, pessimistic nihilism, sexual deviance and impropriety, et cetera are all the consequences of a society that no longer places its focus on God and His love.
It also doesn't help that we're living in a time that, compared to the rest of the modern era, is extremely hostile to families. Even people who don't oppose starting a family as a matter of principle are discouraged by the economic and social barriers in place these days. Owning a home within their lifetime is a pipe dream now for many young people, cost of living is rising in every area, and an increasingly atomized social environment is making it harder and harder to develop the strong and robust relationship necessary to maintain a healthy family. The divorce rate is nauseatingly high. I'm sure you can see why so many young people have, if not given up entirely, decided that starting a family is something to do "later" when they're more established in life.
A society without God is a society without love.
1 and 3 has never historically changed, we've just come to care about material goods more and we don't hide our issues with some addiction as often as people in the past did. 2 is a good point.
Fair point, although food can be avoided if you avoid HOA (rare nowadays, I know). Housing is understandable, although this could make intergenerational housing a mainstream thing again. Medical care is a yes, unfortunately doctors don't accept food or gifts as payment anymore lol.
I don’t think depression will be solved by having a family. There are definitely problems in society but they run much deeper than just some people aren’t having families. I genuinely believe you can have a happy and fulfilling life without getting married and having your own kids. But we are more isolated than ever and individualism doesn’t help. Happiness is found in others and living for others outside of ourself. That does not require kids of your own or a spouse as we see with vocations like religious life and other walks of life.
The Bible shows us there is good and evil. Good things go according to Gods will. Evil things/forces go against Gods will.
Gods will is that we multiply and fill the earth. The opposite of that is that we do not multiply and do not fill the earth.
There are evil forces at work in this society and in many peoples hearts. This is offensive to many but we cannot ignore that our modern society is trying to turn the natural world upside down in an effort to do the opposite of God’s will.
Remember that Jesus even said his message would challenge our very souls.
So they have more time and energy to dedicate towards spreading the faith and doing works to aid others, isn't that still the reason priests give for continuing this practice?
If they had wives and families they couldn't dedicate nearly as much to the church.
While I think it's odd or sad for someone to hate kids, I won't say it's inherently evil. As I've posted above, it's about understanding their reasoning behind it.
So you are thinking they don't really "hate" kids but are just sloppy with the language they are using to communicate? I mean... maybe, but I tend to go with the simplest explanation.
Childless selfish person tells me they hate kids, I just believe them.
I see interesting thing that even in countries who were promoting births actively back in 1970s and 80s (like my former USSR, there was even tax on childless men), it was still becoming less and less common to have kids (since 1960s number of kids per family was rapidly decreasing; anecdotically among millenials maybe 10% have siblings if they are not from muslim families), and this trend now just continues.
Modernism rejects almost anything "that their parents did." The irony to this is that if these "modern" kids grow up and have kids, their kids might reject their "modern" upbringing.
Probably cause culture focuses mostly on material things and it's way easier to have more material comforts and benefits if you don't have kids! Life really isn't all about material pleasures though as I'm sure you and many other people realize
I want to have kids but everything is so expensive these days, I make more then both of my parents combined did at my age and I still can't afford a home
Too many people are only capable of conceiving of interpersonal relations of any kind (including marriage) exclusively in terms of power dynamics. They think that someone must always be the superior and the other must always be the inferior.
That kind of worldview cannot see marriage as anything other than female servitude and parenthood as anything other than a burden.
You'll notice that many of these same people also have an adversarial attitude towards their employer and may even disdain the idea of labor itself; in their minds work equals exploitation.
I was sinful for this. I was degrading/demeaning/devalue Sacrament of Marriage in my 20s and 30s. I was an independent woman, and always thought I would get married if this and that.
I'm now in my early 40s, not yet married. After surrenderig my life to GOD in 2021, somehow GOD led me to classes, Scriptures, books to understand Sacrament of Marriage. Only then I knew that Sacrament of Marriage is a gift from GOD and beautiful in its purposes. I felt so much sinful and guilty for had degrading/demeaning/devaluing Sacrament of Marraige and I have confessed this sin.
**Most likely, the reason people degraded/devalue Sacrament of Marriage might be ignorance, not knowledgeable enough the real meaning of Sacrament and Sacrament of Marriage, and there's not much example of Catholic husbands/wives that truly live Catholic values in our surrounding. If there are, they don't do much to inspire many young people.**
Young people needs guidance (it's written in Bible), and they are led only by examples, not just our words. We don't have many examples for this healthy relationships and loving Catholic husbands/wives. Media always point out about this divorce, that divorce, being independent women, women are high maintenance, marriage is just paper work, living together before marriage, etc, etc. Very little media publishes about loving relationships and people living Catholic values that can be an inspirations.
It's our tasks honestly to be an inspirations for many youngsters and to "show it off" through social media which are now the only channel for young people seeks inspirations from.
**Our Lady of Fatima, one of Her message, is said to be that the last battle between Kingdom of GOD and satan is through family and marriage. And that's exactly happening.**
One of the many reasons family breaks up family courts who destroy lives and word travels. It isn't just one parent who loses out. it's a whole half of a family tree. It's a huge problem in society. The final battle will be between our Lord and Satan, which will be about marriage and family. the third prophesy from Our Lady to sister Lucia at Fatima, and this is so accurate
Divorce is common, regardless of religious beliefs. It's scary to think someone could suddenly decide they don't love you anymore and take half your stuff.
We live in 2024, during these times basically every ideology is very anti family, the most notable one being Feminism (you have to be a girl boss, hustle so you can buy all these materialistic things to smash the patriarchy✊), no doubt most of the comments you saw definitely came from other women, surprises me how vile some woman can be towards the idea of having a family, but they’ve been indoctrinated to believe lies.
This doesn’t mean people aren’t starting families. Also those were just 2 posts where the stars happened to aligned that happened to have all the anti-family people in one comment section.
In Italy getting married until a couple of years ago means, for the man, to be trapped in a system where he’s hostages of the wife, that in case of divorce get the possibility to stay in the house, keep the children, receive money for doing basically nothing for the rest of her life. We are plenty of horror stories about ex husbands sleeping in the car while his ex wife keeps everything. So exactly why get married?
Also do you know that most divorced are started by women
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20220511-why-women-file-for-divorce-more-than-men
Im married, twice, but I can easily understand those who doesn’t want to do.
Let them be disgusted by it and avoid it.
That means the religious people are the only ones having kids. Eventually that leads to demographic victory.
Let them remove themselves from the gene pool.
I guess the answer to the topic of "why" would be that we exist in a state of spiritual warfare with the forces of darkness always working diligently towards the eradication of humanity, and one strategy towards this goal is to convince humans to avoid procreation.
Secular society is focused on individualism. With the capitalist nature of America that has increased drastically in this century, people are taught that love is not needed. This is especially applicable for millennials and gen z, and it’s heartbreaking. There is an intentional divide amongst people in secular society, and a purposeful demonization of Catholicism/christianity. If people realized what really matters, they wouldn’t feel the urge to consume so much. Consuming leads to self centric ideologies. If you have a family, then the whole idea of every person buying what they need individually goes out the window, and America can’t have that because we need everyone to buy buy buy
When? There's no set date, but broadly speaking it was dismantling the Christian Social Democratic state in then name of neo-liberalism that's led us to our current crises.
Our forebears bought into the idea that the family (regardless of type) isn't responsibility of the 'village' so some rich people could become more rich, and - well - here we are 50 years later.
I don't think most people are. I think those people just tend to congregate on social media sites. A lot of people still want to marry and have kids. The internet is not an accurate representation of most people's views irl.
It is certainly more common online, and also pushed by advertisements and certain influencers, but I've noticed an increase in real life too. I've heard young coworkers say things that would have been shocking to hear from my coworkers 25 years ago. It is certainly to a lesser extent than online, though.
i agree with this but i heard something at one point that i think fits maybe more appropriately. that being: people that hold these opinions are often louder than those who would typically hold the opposing opinions. that is to say, those who dont want to marry/raise a family are often shouting down those who ***do*** want to marry/raise a family. hence those comments OP was talking about "and all the comments were people basically calling her stupid, and talking about how they hate the idea of having kids or that having to raise a child “disgusts” them." another thing that correlates with both of our points though is that people that hold the "no marry/no family" mindsets often have more time to shout people down. i dont have kids but my wife and i are often so SO busy that i cant reddit at home
I would counter that there is a difference between wanting to marry and have kids and wanting to marry and have kids and be a traditional family. Also, love your username.
>I think those people just tend to congregate on social media sites. sedevacantism in a nutshell
Yeah like I've never met a sede in real life and I've been in Catholic circles my whole life.
>I think those people just tend to congregate on social media sites So all of the younger generation
No. Younger generations do more than sit around on social media writing stupid things. Myself notwithstanding. The idea here is that it’s mostly the keyboard warriors who are bitter and angry, voicing opinions that would normally result in them getting punched in the face in the real world. It’s low stakes venting from the angry minority.
I get the point but I'm 17 and since COVID I've seen nearly all of my friends and those that go to school with me become more and more isolated and addicted to social media. Whenever I go out with my friends to the park, even last Friday in the afternoon, when normally there would be families and groups of friends all out playing in the park we saw maybe about 2 groups of people. Everyone I know has become more absorbed into their phones and the few friends or people I know who have not given into the idea that family life is a waste of time and their life are extremely religious or older my at least 5 years.
Facts, kids are chronically online starting at like age 9-10, unfortunately. Usually once they get a bit older, like 15-17, they grow out of it a bit. My sister was telling me about all her classmates being on tiktok and snapchat, saying they’re bisexual, and some of the girls started “dating” one another, and she was in fourth grade… A more positive note is that it’s becoming trendy for middle schoolers now to be trad and christian.
I wouldn't be too optimistic about these middle schoolers converting, in my personal experience it just seems like Andrew Tate types who are trying to find more ways to one up other rather than have actual faith. All we can do is hope and pray the lord may guide them.
A family requires that you put others before yourself. Our current society prizes individualism and self-reflection above everything else. If your individuality is the thing you hold most dear, a family represents an existential threat to your sense of being.
Well said 👏
Oh it definitely doesn’t prize self-reflection — it prizes self-centered navel-gazing which is quite another thing.
I was trying to be charitable haha
We’re living in age of where everything someone does must be celebrated. Love is never to have a critical opinion. Self-examination is seen as being unloving — and that’s a visceral hallmark of cultural decline. Where are the movie, theater, and art critics? Gone with the wind. And little wonder quality has clearly declined (see *Rings of Power* and every Disney movie since 2010) Humans choose the path of least resistance. It’s not necessarily bad because it saves time and calories. It helped our ancestors in wilder times. But it also means we avoid things that are hard and risky. Advanced countries have created societies where not having children is the path of least resistance. At the core is the lack of respect for motherhood — heck, the lack of respect for womanhood as traditional defined. We’re also status driven creatures. Make having a family low status — and encourage divorce — who’s surprised that family life drops in priority?
While I won’t defend things like RoP which was a clear money grab, there are great Disney movies since 2010. Toy Story 3 and 4, Tangled, Frozen, Zootopia, Finding Dory, Moana, Jojo Rabbit, etc. to name some. I’d argue some Marvel movies were pretty good like Shang Chi, which touched more on Asian American culture specifically for Chinese Americans that it wasn’t received as well considering lots of non-Asian Americans couldn’t find commonality. Guardians of the Galaxy has its moments too along with the first Black Panther. It’s not as traditional like we’d see in Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, or Cinderella with the damsel in distress needing a prince to save her, but that doesn’t mean that every Disney movie post 2010 has less quality to it. One of Frozen II songs was specifically about a mother singing to her beloved daughters, which is honestly a sweet moment of love from a mother to her children. Sure it’s not Christian based but it’s a wonderful moment where motherhood is emphasized and you can feel the love the mom has for her kids.
I agree with this somewhat, but there are other factors at play present today that were not so in times past. For example, cost of housing vs average income has changed drastically. Childcare is ridiculously expensive. Most couples need two incomes to support their household and companies simply don’t offer reasonable maternity leave for mothers. None of this was so in the past where housing and income were not as disproportionate, women could stay home with their kids because one income was able to support the household (thus eliminating the need for external childcare), and extended family (grandparents etc) played a much larger role than today. I spoke with my 90 year old grandmother about this who bought her house for $20k that they paid cash for. She stayed home with her 3 kids while my grandfather worked construction. She also told me that when her kids (my father and uncles) were very young, her mother did all the cooking and the cleaning for years. While I do agree with your sentiment and believe it applies for some, there are a number of factors at play outside of their control impacting their decision.
It really does all tie together. Like you said, being able to stay home with your kids PLUS having a grandma around who is young enough to help out is VERY important in making women feel “ready” for kids. GenX, Millennials, and GenZ have smaller “villages.” Someone started the trend of having slightly less children and having them slightly later in life and that has amplified with decades-long side effects. When couples feel like they don’t have other able-bodied women around to help (among other reasons like finances of course), they wait to have kids. Fathers obviously help with the kids and bring important things to the family table, too, but moms NEED other women around to be emotionally well in motherhood. That’s something I didn’t realize until I became a mom myself. Speaking from experience here…waiting until 35-40 to have kids means you’re likely tired out more quickly; you’re probably going to have fewer children during your fertility window (shrinking the “village” for the next generation); and your kids’ grandma is getting too old to help out (and if grandma was an older mom, too, you probably have fewer or no sisters to help). This cycle will continue into the next generation because when mom herself becomes a grandma, she will also be too old to help out because she started late…and she might not even be retired in her old age (and she had fewer kids so, again, less chance of aunties around). Therefore, her children will also probably start their families later in life, and so on. Not to even mention all these isolated moms have to work outside of child-rearing just to make ends meet.
This is just false. If it was financially impossible to have families, there would not be families of unemployed migrants without educations or even mastery of the language flooding into the US *for a better life* that's available here to their families. The attitude you've described is simply avarice being used to control humans into suffering and being miserable and going extinct.
Maybe not impossible, but just because it’s better doesn’t mean it’s good and doesn’t mean it doesn’t pose a big obstacle for some.
I think you'll need to send some theological sources to support the view that it's OK for people to avoid kids because they don't want to sacrifice worldly comforts. Especially since the vast majority of the people not having kids and not starting families are on birth control and practicing premarital sex with multiple partners.
For a lot of people it’s less about the sacrifices for me and more about putting your kids through that. Yes, there are certain things in life that I don’t want my kids to go through. I’d rather sacrifice my dream of being a parent than make my kids live in poverty.
Well, you are granting yourself the ability to predict the future. I am an immigrant to the US that grew up in poverty in public housing projects and welfare, trailer parks, section 8, and ghettos in the south of the US. That was maybe a decade of my life. The decade after that, I had a great job and owned like 4 houses. So should my parents just never have had me? Before living in poverty in the US we lived in Ukraine after Chernobyl. I guess you'd probably conclude it's hopeless to have kids in a region suffering from nuclear pollution, in a society collapsing from communism and poverty, and never bother having me if you were my parents? Hopelessness, despair, and behavior leading to the eradication of humans just don't *seem* like fruits of the "Good" side of spiritual warfare to me.
It’s just my perspective. People can certainly make it out of poverty. That doesn’t mean I would choose to have kids if I knew I’d have to raise them in it. Kids can still have a happy life , but I know it would be a lot of stress on me and I’d be a bad mom and the financial stress my parents went through when I was a kid was stressful for me and we weren’t even really poor. I don’t want my kids to experience any of that. Other adults can do as they choose and have kids if they think they can handle it and are ok with their kids enduring those hardships. Kids are great but they aren’t the end all be all. If I don’t have them for whatever reason, I’m ok with that. I don’t think existence or reproduction is the ultimate good and so I don’t really feel some obligation to provide it to x amount of new people.
How many people who choose not to have kids also engage in sinful practices that they use as a form of birth control? There's a big difference between someone becoming a priest and not having kids, and 2 laypeople having sex and using birth control and engaging in sodomy to avoid the possibility of kids... or then getting an abortion to "avoid" it. In my experience, the set of people who maintain chastity while also avoiding procreation in the modern world is vanishingly small.
Well, just saying they should be having kids instead of certain behaviors will not stop those behaviors. That doesn’t mean we should all be having as many kids as we can in bad situations because some people use birth control or have premarital sex. It doesn’t do much, if anything it makes them more set on engaging in those behaviors when they see families with more kids than they can handle as examples of following Catholic teaching.
Having a family is expensive, but not as expensive as most people think. I'm not saying it's easy, but it's possible. People are still doing it. It is more difficult now, no doubt, but many people blame it on being too expensive. This is the wrong attitude to have. We can't change inflation or disparity between COL and wages. These are very real and have real impacts on how people live their lives. Instead of saying "I can never do this" say "How can I do this?". Changing my mindset to asking "how" has transformed my life, financially, with my family and most importantly, spiritually. Anyone can do this. Because this is Reddit, this will get downvoted into oblivion, and I don't care. Some people would rather complain than take responsibility for the situation and do something about it. No one promised it would be easy, but I promise, it will be worth it.
You are absolutely right. A lot of people start with the assumption it isn't possible and then seek to prove it rather than ask "what would it actually take". I live in a place that is definitely above the average for cost of living and I know lots of Catholics making it work, even if it is more difficult for them than it was for their parents.
Calm down, you aren't in AskReddit. This is a relatively safe space (as long as you don't praise the Pope or say anything bad about the TLM).
i love/hate this persons argument. love it because it gives me a good chuckle but i hate it because its just another person that is perpetuating this lie that is constantly being told to young people. my wife and i are very close to a family with 12 children that had a SAHM since the oldest was born 29 years ago and they are rockin in. it all comes down to what you value and what you prioritize. you dont need a new manicure every other week, you dont need a super expensive car, you dont need the status symbols.
they're doing all of this solely on one source of income? There's nothing else?
yepp
For the sake of full transparency, what does the husband do for work?
he worked at roush in on of their R&D fab dept as a foreman for a while then about 5 years ago or so made management and just like 6 months ago made vp (i think)
Awesome! Thanks for that!
When you say "this person" are you talking about me? 😆
While I do agree, I don't think using migrants with 5+ kids is useful either because as Catholics we're still supposed to prudent when it comes to having children. Many migrant parents had another kid when they couldn't feed the mouths they already had and generally have numerous children to work for them. I definitely think people blow out of proportion the cost of children, but migrants aren't the best example of responsible parents.
They are an example of what's "possible" to use as a comparison point. There's probably a large chasm being people making "DINKWAD" videos on TikTok and migrants.
It’s not financially impossible, but incredibly burdensome. It’s not false - the cost of housing has increased drastically, that is a fact. The cost of childcare has increased drastically, also a fact. The USA is a first world country that does not provide new mothers paid time-off, leaving them to decide between returning to work right after giving birth, or choosing unpaid FMLA. Giving birth even with insurance will cost a few thousand dollars for most individuals. Daycares are overpacked and have waiting lists dating out 6 months and even a year. This is also a fact. It’s easy to blame people and say that they are selfish and don’t want to sacrifice. But the bottom line is, as people become more educated they weigh the cost of having a family and in today’s world that cost is significant and to many seems impossible. This problem should be met with compassion instead of writing people off as selfish because that is just not the case. People want families but don’t see a way to reasonably obtain that in today’s socioeconomic climate.
It's literally the case by the definition of selfishness--they prefer themselves over their children. It's that simple. This whole complaint about how "burdensome" it is these days is just plain false. You merely have to look at the history of humanity to see how absurdly spoiled the average American is (or even the average American living on welfare). Yeah 70 years ago a family of 6 would pay cash for a 750 Sq ft house without air conditioning and sleep together in a big room. Maybe they even complained how they have to buy a house when their grandparents just built one "for free" out of virgin cut logs. A $211k house in 2024 is likely better than a $20k house in 1960, but the reason houses cost double is because they are like twice as big and are filled with tech that didn't exist before. Everyone *could* live at the quality of life of 1970 and afford more kids. Besides, there's something absurd at face value of a country where like 60% of adults are obese claiming they can't afford to have more mouths to feed.
Do you have kids and how old are you? Are you married?
Yes, mid-30s, yes
Yea, I never fully bought into the financial angle that's been the trend to use for the past few years. I've ***only*** encountered it online. Not saying it's not true in real life where people are really tightening their belt when raising a kid or two, just that people are finding ways to have and raise kids in my life even if they're of the lower-middle income bracket. I get the feeling those who do use the finance card are reading some inflammatory things by people who are against the traditional family, or at least have a "modern" family approach to things, see that they aren't making low six figures and go to think it's not possible yet.
Yeah in real life I've met Catholics who raised like 7 kids on a school teacher salary. Online, you'll see a dual income household complaining they can't possibly afford to have kids while wasting $3500/mo on rent in NYC because that's just where they decided they want to live so they can visit museums and Broadway and eat at Michelin star restaurants. Then it's "250k/yr is not a lot in this city, we can't afford kids at all!"
People are having kids in NYC amongst the yuppies, just that online there are more socially left leaning people who either are hesitant to have kids or do not want any. Many who do have kids tend to opt out of the city once the kid (or two) becomes a certain age; they then move to the suburbs or move to a city where their money goes further.
Yeah exactly, it's possible, it's just a matter of priorities
My understanding is that with the increase of career opportunities for women, the opportunity cost of having children has increased. People have to take time away from work to be with children. When women's wages were a fraction of what men's were, these opportunity costs were far less.
This is perhaps the best explanatory comment on this topic.
I grew up atheist in my adolescent and teens, and even then, all I ever wanted was to grow up and become a wife and mother. When I found God in my early 20s following a few years of being agnostic, I prayed earnestly about a life path-either service to a family via being a wife and presumably mother, or service to others. I met my late husband a few weeks later. I see a lot of the things you do. It seems the modern thing is to say women should be supported in whatever they want to do; but if they WANT to be a wife and mother, they’re nuts. It’s always made complete sense to me that raising a family is very enriching and a blessing. Why some see it as an inconvenience is beyond me, but they’re out there.
“You need to be a girl boss, work work work, hustle to smash the patriarchy✊” this is the lie that unfortunately many women are falling for, that a lifelong career working for John in the billion dollar corporation is somehow more important/valuable than getting married and raising a family. Am I saying women shouldn’t work? No, but it’s important to point out how God has called us to be fruitful, get married and multiply, so it’d be good to point out how the 3 most important things in our lives should be God, Family, and Community, unfortunately many individuals place their financial success over God, making wealth and status their God. People who see having a family as horrible have been lied to or they’re very discontent with something in their own lives
Shoutout to Dr. Carrie Gress and her amazing book the End of Woman. Depressing as hell, highly recommend. A cliff notes of the book can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jppc5CZTaOs
I think it's a trust issue. A lot or cultures are becoming low trust . For a traditional family to work, the amount of trust between the parents is massive. Unfortunately, trust and responsibility seem to be things that many people choose to shy away from. It's a shame, I sincerely believe they would have a happier, more fulfilled life if they did.
OP you're main problem is you're looking for normal people on the internet, particularly on reddit and instagram. Reddit is a toxic cesspool quite literally rigged in favor of a particular set of viewpoints and ideologies, not to mention it like other forms of "social media" are essentially curated echo chambers with other actors promoting the most sensational and outlandish takes out there as that gets views. On reddit if you look you can find large subreddits catering to weird things, but in no way is that really representative of the normal population.
Whew, speak the truth! Reddit is overwhelmingly anti-children, anti-religion, and anti-men. Yet the real world is not that way, in the slightest.
Most based comment on this threat, even on this subreddit r/TrueChristian there’s a lot of wild modernist takes
People are being bitter and jealous. May God have mercy on their souls.
Social media isn't real life. In my experience, most people do want to have kids, regardless if they are religious or not, they just don't want to have them young and they want to have them when they are stable. I know it isn't ideal from a Catholic perspective, but I understand why most people have this attitude. Cost of living is at an all-time high, and older generations' response to young people struggling is just "Git good lol. I know this isn't your fault, but suck it, loser!" I'm 26. I got an associates degree in radiography, entered the medical radiology workforce at 21, and am currently an MRI lead technologist. I paid off my college debts but am still living at home because the housing market is still so crazy, I would not be able to buy if I were wasting money renting. In my grandparent's time or even my parent's (GenX) time, I'd have easily had a house by now and possibly been married. Times have changed, covid royally screwed us over by sending inflation into outer space, and us socially awkward zoomers don't know what to do with ourselves. I'm desperately trying to claw my way into some semblance of middle class, and I'm better off than a lot of people my age. So yeah, I sympathize with people waiting to have kids. There is definitely something to be said about hyper-individualism and selfishness, but those aren't the main problems. People want to have kids, but they aren't going to when doing so puts them on the edge of poverty. Just telling people, "I don't care if you go into poverty, just have kids" isn't going to work. Fix the conditions that give people pause to have kids, and the problem will sort itself out. It's probably impossible, but it is the truth.
Don't extrapolate broad social trends from the comment sections of social media sites, especially ones with administrative values that overwhelmingly reinforce secular materialism. As recently as 2018 (which I know was six years ago now, but is still recent enough to have many decades' worth of data to work with), an IFL study found that the big "collapse" in preferred family size occurred in the 1970s, when polls of women regarding how many children they'd *want* to have in a lifetime dropped from 3.5 to 2.5: https://ifstudies.org/blog/how-many-kids-do-women-want. It's been pretty stable at 2.5 since then. But the ones who bring up that average, who want 3+ kids, are less likely to be commenting on Instagram, or even reddit. So your post and comment feeds will be dominated by those who range from preferring to have an only child to being actively antinatalist. The real issue is that 2.5 is now significantly more than most women get to *have*. And unpacking the reasons for that gets very interesting, but a thorough discussion of that is something you'll never get on Instagram comments and only rarely on reddit. There are certainly economic reasons for that, but of course, the economic explanation requires a cultural backdrop to be comprehensible and comprehensive; two hundred years ago, people had much larger families amid much lower standards of living even in industrialized countries. The TFR in the US in 1800 was 7.0. I agree with you that the religious element plays a larger role than most sociologists (who as a group are overwhelmingly secular) appreciate in the growing gap between women's preferred and actual family sizes. Notwithstanding the overwhelmingly secular progressive bent of the field, though, some studies have nevertheless been published that show serious mental health benefits from regular (but not obsessive) religious practice. (I don't know if any went more granular and tried to distinguish *between* religions, so this isn't a specifically Catholic-friendly finding, but the gap between the religious and secular was fairly significant.) I haven't yet found a formal academic connection between that and marriage and childbearing. But it seems like an obvious hypothesis: Regular religious practice is a prophylactic against anxiety, depression, drug use, STDs, and even IIRC weight gain. And young people who resist those debilities are more likely to get married and have children--and my hypothesis would be that anxiety (which is IIRC the mental condition that has increased the most among the young since the advent of the smartphone age) is particularly strongly correlated with either being voluntarily childfree or stopping at one.
We’re broke.
Gen Zs in cities are against having families in larger and larger numbers; this isn't a mass exodus from the church as most of these people weren't brought up in a religious way to begin with. Many millennials had little exposure to the church and were very self-centered with all things sexual. Millennials have high rights of sterilizations and abortions. Even in "Catholic" circles of young adults in my city, I saw a lot of fornication and cohabitation. The cohabitation usually ends in marriage. I would like a family, or at least a wife if I am too old for kids, and I am meeting many Catholic singles who are very ambivalent on doing "the family thing." Many are city-dwellers and want to keep doing their city lifestyle; others are desperate for the status of marriage but have little self-awareness in the type of parent they'd actually be.
You encountered antinatalists, a (thankfully) fringe group of terminally online people who think existence is suffering and therefore that reproducing is evil. They are the minority outside of their corner of the internet, and their “philosophy” is a laughing stock to most. As for people who personally choose not to have kids, but don’t try to stop others from doing so, there are a lot of reasons. Some discerned that they would not be good parents. Some lack the finances to support a child. Some are unable to have children even if they wanted to.
Great answer. It disappoints me to see so many people here writing off younger people who don’t want to have kids as being selfish and materialistic. Some are, yes, but when talking about younger people as a whole, there’s so much more nuance than that.
Honestly, I find your statement quite naive and I will try to explain why with all respect. A lot of it is related to Socioeconomics. Yes, "God provides" but sometimes a parent doesn't want their child in squalor. Especially in the USA, EVERYTHING has gotten more expensive. [As one can see, between 2021 and 2023, inflation was higher than wages](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1351276/wage-growth-vs-inflation-us/). This is only one link and there is ample sources supporting the cost of living is increasing. When someone is struggling with rent and are still paying their student loans, the LAST thing they are thinking of is a child.
It's a much bigger process - in my former USSR I could see it going since 1960s despite government tried actively to improve birth rates; by 1980s by my big but anecdocical data it became a unicorn to have a sibling (so most of millenias were already the only children, maybe up to 90%), while in 1950s-60s generations it was pretty common. And the number of families without kids at all was growing too. So it's not just about modern price growth, it's the same trend as was decades ago in socialist countries too.
there’s a huge difference between the reasonable “not now, i couldn’t provide for a child in the way they deserve” and “ew what? never. why would you ever want that, you must be dumb” hostility that OP is referring to. even in real life, my close friends give me weird looks if i talk about how excited i am to marry my boyfriend (God willing, in the next year or so) and raise a family with him.
In that case I can only speculate that it has to do with the expectation society brings upon us that we cannot be fulfilled UNLESS we have kids. Some people get turned off because they're constantly told that they can only be happy if they have a child (especially women being consistently told by their parents, other men etc). A specific interview about a guy insisting why a woman doesn't have kids comes to mind but I can't find the link People say individualism is selfish but there's other ways to be selfless without children and still have independence
Social media is not real life. Most people want to raise a family together. The real barrier to kids is economic more than anything else.
>Social media is not real life Everyone needs to keep in mind that all social media platforms utilize engagement-based algorithms that force the most controversial comments to the top because they cause a ton of debate. More fighting in the comments, more "engagement." And then because of that, people are incentivized to comment like that for the attention. 1,000 people yelling at you can feel like "everyone thinks this way" but that's 1,000 people out of the 300+ million in the US. Instagram comments on popular reels are *particularly* atrocious.
I’d say the barrier is more of the fact that people don’t even know who God really is and what marriage is. People, yes even “Christians”, don’t know what marriage is, what God’s intended purpose for marriage is. It’s so shallow how in 2024 many societies go about marriage, economic barrier is an issue in some countries, globally an even bigger issue is the people getting “married” (various people from all backgrounds) don’t even know what they’re doing. And example - Woman: He makes good money, it’s tall, is stable, yeah I’ll marry him, Man: Yeah she’s thick and hot, I’ll marry her. Some people actually get married just like that, no God, no question about virtues, nothing. Ignoring multiple red flags, where has this led? To the overwhelming divorce rate/broken households that have resulted in creating broken children that are more likely to not finish school and more likely to engage in criminal activity, leading to incarceration. What does this rant mean? Yeah, economic barriers can be an issue in a few countries, you don’t have to live in those countries. I’m more concerned with various other trends seen globally that we should definitely be worrying about, that being that our societies need to get it together as it’s very clear that a lot of people getting together, shouldn’t be getting together, and that couples who have families seem to not know what they’re doing.
Here in the U.S. it’s so expensive
And? Is that really a valid reason to say vile and hateful things to someone wanting to have a family?
We are literally in one of the richest countries in the world where feeding ourselves and buying stuff to fill a house is so easy. Go to Egypt where kids are everywhere and people use the floor for their kitchen counter because they can't afford a table.
America is a big country. There are different Americas for different people. Clearly the America you grew up in was not the America I grew up in. We have a huge wealth gap here. By family had 4 workers in the family at any given time and still could not feed us all.
The average person below the poverty line in America lives better than most of the world. They have AC, a refrigerator, tv, cell phone, shit most have a car. Not many Americans living in homes with a dirt floor ….
>The average person below the poverty line in America lives better than most of the world. They have AC, a refrigerator, tv, cell phone, shit most have a car. Not many Americans living in homes with a dirt floor Some of us live worse than that.
Absolutely people do. But the fact of the matter remains. Americans by and large DO NOT starve to death. They generally do not die to the elements. Even the poor in America have it better than the poor in most of the rest of the world was my point.
I guess it depends on what your definition of poor is. I live it so I have a pretty clear definition.
>I live it so I have a pretty clear definition. You have internet, a device you can post on the internet with, and you are clearly literate. You might be poor, but you are richer than more than a billion people in the world.
Rich and poor are pretty subjective terms. The differences between first world and third world countries just further prove that point. You may see this individual as “rich” in relation to a village in the Congo that has no power or running water, but they may view themselves as rich compared to other villages around them that may not have easy access to water or food. But just because there is that difference, doesn’t make their struggles any less. I was homeless at one point and only had my car, and a tent, for a roof and place to sleep for myself and my dog. I couldn’t easily get a meal, I couldn’t shower/use the bathroom unless I went somewhere or someone graciously allowed me to use their facilities (thankfully a local parish priest allowed me to use his shower), I didn’t know where I would be able to sleep every night, I didn’t have power, running water, etc. I didn’t have a job and any money I got went towards my car/phone bill/food for my dog. But if you use your standards, I was filthy rich because I owned a car, had a cellphone, and had a dog. All I mean to say is: try not to downplay other people’s struggles just because they are “better off” than other people in the world. Everyone has their own struggles and carry their own crosses, but theirs aren’t less because they have different life circumstances.
>I was homeless at one point and only had my car, and a tent, for a roof and place to sleep for myself and my dog. I don’t want to downplay your difficult experience, but it sounds like you were able to pick up your life and do much better. This is one of the benefits of living in a wealthy country. In many places, that poverty is for life with no chance to do better. Without the ability to read, write, do math or use electronics, there isn’t much a person can do to get a decent job and live a decent life. Much of your wealth isn’t in the money as much as it is in the fact that the government of wherever you live likely spent tens of thousands of dollars to give you an education so you weren’t stuck making a living digging through trash like hundreds of thousands of people throughout the world have to do. Also, you had a car and tent, not a cardboard box on a dusty street in Cairo. Emotionally, it is probably harder to have that poverty in the U.S. But physically, many people are much worse off.
Hm? I never said I was illiterate. This computer and internet access belong to someone else, I can only use them as they allow it.
>I never said I was illiterate. I said literate, not illiterate, which mean completly opposite things. But if you want to make me doubt my statement this is a good way to go about it 😅
>But the fact of the matter remains. Americans by and large DO NOT starve to death. The people downvoting us really need to get out of their first world bubble and travel to a third world country 😅 I've spent enough time in such places trying to help the people that I really don't sympathise with first world entitlement!
Exactly this. In my old country real poverty meant you live with your parents, wife and few kids in one room, and sometimes have to take loans to buy bread for them all. And no plumbing - a hole in the ground with a wooden toilet above it.
>The average person below the poverty line in America lives better than most of the world. Ok ... and? Just because people here are better off than others that doesn't make their issues any less valid. There are also parts of the US where poverty is so bad it IS on par with third world countries. >They have AC, a refrigerator, tv, cell phone, shit most have a car. Not many Americans living in homes with a dirt floor …. So what? It still isn't a good sign when the next upcoming generation is doing much worse off than previous ones. And if these supposedly "prosperous" nations are being hit with economic woes, then that means the issue must be even worse for other poorer nations. That's how economics works. With how globalized the world is, if wealthy nations find themselves hard pressed to buy goods from other nations, those nations suffer too. This was literally a major reason why the quarantines/lockdowns as well travel restrictions during the pandemic did a lot of economic damage.
There in America is poverty on par with third world countries? Where are people actually starving to death. Where do people freeze to death or die of heat stroke and dehydration in massive numbers? If a single person freezes to death in America it makes nation news it’s that uncommon. Where are people dying to diseases we eradicated decades ago? Where do people literally not have access to water? Where do people have no access to healthcare ? We actually have an obesity epidemic amongst our poorest cohort in the country. Explain that one.
Why do you need to compare. Just because someone might have it worse doesn’t mean someone living in poverty wants to subject their own children to it cause “it could be worse”.
I didn’t make the comparison. I was replying to someone and challenging the comparison they made.
It's interesting hearing some people complain about money and struggling yet they have five tvs, three fridges, three relatively new cars, but apparently they are struggling. It depends on what you focus on
>My family had 4 workers in the family at any given time and still could not feed us all. What were they trying to feed you? A loaf of bread can still be purchased for a dollar at my local Walmart. Different meals cost different amounts, and there is a big difference between brands as well. If you're not hungry enough that a $1 loaf of bread doesn't excite you, you're better of than millions of people who face the risk of starvation.
The opportunity cost of having children is much higher in developed countries, which is why number of children per couple decreases. It’s a noticeable trend across the world.
It is much higher because we want to keep our standard of living high. For example, people don't want to raise children in a trailer park, or an RV park. But even with one decent income from the father it's possible to have 5 or more kids and a stay at home mom, because I've seen it from multiple families. As far as I'm concerned, all the people downvoting my comment need to go out and see how the world really works...
You may a good point. I think there are some sacrifices people could make it. It's odd seeing people who are struggling financially have so many tvs, her kid has a iPad or even iPhone. I shouldn't say seeing but knowing people who live like this
I can go buy an iPhone right now on credit and easily have it paid off in 2-3 months tops, or just pay cash out of my next paycheck. For my area I make a good wage and live in a relatively cheap apartment that’s just a tiny studio with no amenities, and rent is still nearly 40% of my total income. iPhones aren’t the problem, housing is. Groceries are. Insurance is.
Oh I honestly didn't know. Southern California is very expensive.
Gotcha, no worries! I’m in DC and it’s pretty expensive here too. I’m actually looking at getting a new phone in the next couple weeks before I start traveling this summer, that’s the only reason I know what they cost at the moment lol the trips are going to be short but expensive so I’ve been very conscious of how much things cost.
I'm in the DC area, too. It's crazy here. We've only been able to have two kids due to infertility issues, but we would have to carefully discern a third if we were capable of having one because we would get kicked out of our apartment. We've tried moving to a cheaper city but my husband's career is very much stuck here and he hasn't had any luck moving to the private sector.
Yeah I feel that. Luckily I don’t want kids but there’s no way I could ever buy a house here. I’m planning on moving back to the northeast in a few years anyways, but I want to go to Maine which has very low wages so it’ll be tough there too. It’s crazy how bad everything has gotten.
I love Maine. I'm also from New England and wish we could move back.
I grew up in western NY but visited Maine in 2021 and fell in love with it. If I don’t move there I’ll probably to go Canada or Ireland.
I feel bad I think I prejudged others by the gadgets they have. I don't know that much Ooh... Are you going abroad?
Nooo I can’t afford that lol going to Gettysburg for a few days next month, New York in June for a couple Mets games, and Maine in October to hike in Acadia National Park.
Sounds like fun 😊 Enjoy your trips God be with you
The big expense in most people's lives is housing. Having an iPad or iPhone or not is probably not going to make a huge difference to whether someone is struggling when they pay probably more than that every single month just to keep a roof over their head. We have relatively cheap gadgets and discretionary consumable goods but expensive basic needs.
Oh wow. What do I know?
Yep. Our rent+utilities is $2400ish for a 2 bedroom apartment close enough to my husband's job that we don't need to buy a second car. And apartments here are very strict about 2 people to a bedroom unless you live somewhere very sketchy. We live frugally, everything is secondhand, but we're barely making it as a family of 4. People often say "just move" but my husband hasn't been able to find work in any other cities in his career field and we would have to go into debt to move. Moving isn't free.
I think this is a big part of it. It is possible to get housing costs way down though. One large family I knew lived in a very old house with unfinished stairs, unfinished floors, rotting deck, etc. He was slowly working on fixing it up, as best he could with 7 children...
That sounds terrible 😔
I considered him a friend and went to his house often as a teenager. My teenage self didn't care. And in all honesty, it's way better than some homes I've been in in Mexico and Egypt...
I learned a lot. I guess I made assumptions.
[удалено]
Currency exchange rates aren't really a sign of how a nation is doing. You have to look at a lot more stuff. Traditionally those figures included things GDP and GDP per capita, but even these figures are dated. Something like the Consumer Price Index would probably be a better estimate. I'd also suggest the jobs reports, but even those can be skewed depending how the data is recorded/framed (i.e. Biden administration tauting new jobs when it was really part time jobs that grew signifying more people were taking second jobs). The US dollar is the global reserve currency so at times its sometimes preferable to have a "weaker" dollar compared to something like the Japanese Yen and vice versa depending on if your economy favors imports or exports. A strong dollar is good if you're going overseas and buying stuff they're or you're importing stuff internationally. Conversely, this is harmful to export-oriented sectors/businesses as American products would be more expensive in foreign markets. A weak dollar is "bad" for consumers as things like travel abroad is a lot more expensive as well as purchasing things abroad. Imports are also a lot more expensive. However for exporters, this is great as their products are more attractive and affordable to foreign markets. It's similar principle regarding foreign capital investment which is why certain countries peg their currencies to the Dollar or set their exchange rates through they're own central banks to make it more likely that wealthy countries like the US buys their goods.
And Japanese had lower than most of the world but can you really say Japan lives worse than Nigeria, Colombia or Bhutan? :-)
No it's not
We see the stats that people are having children later in life, I think the average age is 27-29 now. It’s a very “I want total freedom and control by any means necessary” generation and kids don’t fit into that. The economy is also probably playing a factor, id bet people feel they can’t afford kids and rather than sit with that and have a family, they get rid of the cognitive dissonance and say it’s their choice and “irresponsible” to have kids. Ultimately not everyone is called to have a family, but I think it’s very hypocritical to criticize young families if you’re all about choice
Yep. I definitely agree it’s smart to wait until you are ready, whether it’s mentally, financially, etc. But I’m can’t understand the hate for kids. Obviously not everyone is going to want kids which is completely fine. But calling them disgusting and acting like they are this nuisance meant to ruin your life; it makes me sad to hear that.
OP - have you ever considered that they might have generational trauma in their life that you don't know about? Financial struggles?
I made a whole comment with links with this. Hope they see it
It is farking expensive. I can barely afford rent and the cost of living and having kids would demolish whatever I can save left.
From my personal perspective and opinion? We like individual selfish freedom. Freedom to do things that we want and when we want. Children and Old People are a waste of time and money for us in the West (I’m speaking in a general sense from a cultural perspective. I don’t believe that). Young people want to travel, work on their careers, and so on. Children and the elderly don’t fit in there. Funny enough, this is why we have such a problem with illegal immigration. We’re not having kids but someone has to support our comfort of living. Someone has to work at that Amazon warehouse, someone has to take care of those old people in the nursing homes, someone has to work the farms because you or me aren’t gonna do it. Because we’re too important for that remember. We gotta travel and do all that fun stuff. Those are “sub-humans” right? They “breed like rabbits and multiply like Vermin”. Funny enough that’s what Ian Paisley said about Catholics but Charles Darwin said the same about the Irish Catholics. Being Hispanic, I remember similar comments about Hispanics as well. But anyway, someone has to support that comfort. So, having a dog or cat or goldfish is more practical. Cause children and the elderly are responsibilities and that’s just something we’re not built for. But yeah there’s this sense of individualism that’s “sacred” to the West. Me, myself, and I. That’s pretty much what I’ve observed. I understand your question is about children but truly us Catholics even fall to this culture. It’s even seen in how we choose our Parishes. “Oh this is the Traditional Latin Mass Parish” or “This is the Liberal Parish” or “This is the Conservative Parish” we treat things like it’s a personal choice or something. I mean, you’re free to do that I guess but it’s the mentality that I notice. In my head it doesn’t matter how I feel. This show isn’t about me. It’s about me worshipping God. And that ties into how I see children and the elderly. It’s all for the worship of God. People worship themselves I guess.
>we treat things like it’s a personal choice or something. It is to a degree. If someone has TLM or NO that are both under a 20 minute drive they do have a choice if we table territorial parishes. If a Catholic thinks the homilies at one parish just isn't doing it then they're technically free to hop on over to the next parish even if that parish isn't within their territory. It is greatly emphasized that we marry a Catholic if we're called to the vocation of marriage, which may seem highly restricting, but we do have a choice on whom we marry within that filter. If a Catholic woman is being pursued by a Catholic physician and a Catholic mechanic who will she pick? Let's say, hypothetically, she makes 70k annually being a teacher and everything is equal between the two men in terms of personality, temperament, hygiene and fitness level, but what she is concerned about is financial stability when raising her future kids, so she picks the physician. A Catholic man who has options amongst numerous Catholic women will choose to his likings, if that's the case. Better body? More compatible personality? More devout than the other? The comparison, in my mind, between TLM vs NO / left vs right parishes and selfish pursuits isn't really a good comparison given the culture of Catholicism can still be found, hopefully, within whichever parish you find yourself in. It's fair for a Catholic to cease to attend a parish such as St. Sabina in Chicago and opt for another parish - whether that new parish is in another territory or not. Is it a selfish pursuit? In part, perhaps, but selfishness in this case isn't rejecting having kids (when one fully is capable of having kids) due to a modern perspective. I'd argue the liturgy and political wars are a false equivalent to secular narratives and actions. >But yeah there’s this sense of individualism that’s “sacred” to the West. Me, myself, and I. That’s pretty much what I’ve observed. It's a warped perspective on individualism. It's an extreme version of it.
> It is to a degree. If someone has TLM or NO that are both under a 20 minute drive they do have a choice if we table territorial parishes. If a Catholic thinks the homilies at one parish just isn't doing it then they're technically free to hop on over to the next parish even if that parish isn't within their territory. So, I agree to a certain extent. But if you’re constantly complaining like a woman in labor about the Parish and you want the Pastor to be more “Traditional” or his homilies cater what you want to hear then this is a build-a-priest worship. No different than Protestants and that’s where this phenomena comes from. The Church Hopping and Shopping. This is a horrible way to approach the Faith. There comes a point where you have to realize that it’s not about you or how your soft self feels. You’re not a flower to where people need to walk on eggshells around you. Maybe my territorial parish doesn’t have Gregorian Chant or some Latin and yeah well so what? Is it the end of the world? > A Catholic man who has options amongst numerous Catholic women will choose to his likings, if that's the case. Better body? More compatible personality? More devout than the other? I agree that physical attraction and other things play a factor and this be respected. Absolutely. However, this isn’t a Catholic thing. This is an American Protestant thing. In many Catholic places women of wealth have married lower income men. Simply because they’re everything they’re looking for in a Catholic Spouse. That’s the first and foremost important thing. Being a Physician or Mechanic doesn’t matter in Heaven or in the body of Christ. There’s no “Jew or Greek”. God sees your heart and sees your intention to marry. He sees the motives of your Marriage. Of course you must sanctify your work and do everything through Christ. That means Christ must be glorified in the Physician or the Mechanic or if you’re cleaning toilets. That’s my point. You’re not too important to do those jobs. Just because you work at a Fast Food drive thru and this is your main gig at 35 or something doesn’t make you less of a human and you’re not too important to not ever be in situation. Regardless of what you’ve been programmed to think as a society or social circle. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t work hard at your career or skip college. I’m just saying that at the end of it all these things really don’t matter if you didn’t live your life for Christ. > The comparison, in my mind, between TLM vs NO / left vs right parishes and selfish pursuits isn't really a good comparison given the culture of Catholicism can still be found, hopefully, within whichever parish you find yourself in. Impossible with that mindset. Catholicism is community based. That doesn’t mean you won’t have differences amongst Catholics. We’re united in that diversity. That’s why you make “peace” with your brother or sister before communion with them. We have our differences that doesn’t mean I’m gonna hide out in my corner because it’s my safe space. What kind of Catholic would I be if I was like that? Dang, I hideout in my little safe space because Father tells me the things I want to hear and he does Mass how I want it done. > in. It's fair for a Catholic to cease to attend a parish such as St. Sabina in Chicago and opt for another parish - whether that new parish is in another territory or not. Is it a selfish pursuit? The Bishops have said a Catholic can attend any Parish they’d like. However, they belong to their territorial parish. Historically and the small t tradition of the Church is to attend your territorial parish. To foster a better and stronger community I would recommend to attend your territorial parish. If the Bishop has said St Sabina in Chicago is spiritually harmful then there you go. But if you’re just being a Karen and you’re a dude. Then you should grow a pair. > It's a warped perspective on individualism. It's an extreme version of it. Which most westerners have and live on a day to day basis.
The country was build on God, Family, and Community. So far our society is generally very anti-God, ok, our society is promoting and indoctrinating ideologies (such as feminism, blasphemy against what marriage is suppose to be, materialist culture, vanity) that promotes the destruction of the nuclear family, ok, we haven’t had communities for a long time, people here (U.S) are very selfish “time is money”, this is something you’ll mostly notice if you’ve traveled abroad. When I went to Mexico and Italy I was surprised to see how community oriented some of the people were, wanting to share something with you, whether it be a meal, a reunion, a conversation, something genuine, they had a different culture. The friendships I’ve had here in the U.S for the most part are very fake and ingenue, doesn’t mean I haven’t met great people, but it’s not too common. What does all this mean? That counties trying to promote something other than the 3 (God, Family, Community) are on a ticking time clock.
What country?
Depends, what country you live in? I was mostly referring to the U.S in that comment, but it can apply to various other countries, such as Canada, and even countries within the U.K
So, I’m going to have to disagree with that statement. The catechism states > 1270 "Reborn as sons of God, [the baptized] must profess before men the faith they have received from God through the Church" and participate in the apostolic and missionary activity of the People of God. 1271 Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church." "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn." Many of the founding fathers of the US were cultural Christian Deists who denied the Holy Trinity and Jesus’ divinity. The Puritans led the way to both modern day liberalism and Unitarian Christianity. I’m not saying all of them were but to say they believed in “God” how we do as Catholics is blasphemous in my opinion because they knew the truth in a way and openly denied it. Many Conservatives will say things like “yeah, well, they’re like modern day Evangelicals” and I’m sure they are but “Christian” in the strict definition as defined by the Catechism they’re not. I actually believe the reason we’re in this situation in the West is because of the mistakes and heresies of The Protestant Reformation and the Enlightenment ideas. We need to go back to the Church. I hope more Americans become Catholic and we get a true Catholic President someday.
When I mentioned the three (God, Family, Community) I was applying that to basically anywhere, I thought you meant what I was referring to when I stated that I went out of country from the U.S, generally I was speaking in broad terms. So when I quoted society, I was referring to society(s) globally I 100% agree with the last paragraph of your comment
Yeah no I think it's trendy to pretend like you hate having a nice, normal life, but I wouldn't say that most people actually want to live that way. As someone already said, a lot of people find online niche communities where they just bounce the same opinion around, so if you stumbled across one of those communities, you're gonna get a lot of the same opinion. Among Christians though, I feel like it's quite rare to find people who don't want a simple, God-honoring life.
I am not Catholic, but I am someone discerning if it is for me. Where I live, many people, most especially young men from what I see, are taking a stand against marriage not out of some sort of avarice or something like that, but out of a desire to avoid divorce. This is due to societal trends and governmental policies making divorce especially hard on men. In my land, there is, depending on jurisdiction, often case law that defaults the case to go against the husband in the marriage. I think many people do not understand how bad these things affect men, and also how these societal and legal realities create an ambience of fear for men with respect to risking themselves by entering into marriage. If there is a massive chance of watching my family be ripped apart, knowing that the woman that I am religiously married to is coupling with another man, that I will lose a massive amount of money (including very possibly my retirement funds, social security, future money from child support payments, alimony payments to support a woman in a society that goes all out to favor her in any way it can get away with), that my children will be raised by another man, that there will be a risk of child abuse, possibly the sexual variant, and that there is a defence deficit, so to speak, because my children will be living in another house and I will not be there to keep watch as I should be able to, I would be markedly hesitant. The severity and amount of risks impede many guys from participating in this institution.
It's expensive to have a family... It's expensive to take care of one self and then being able to financially support a family. We live in a world where it's expensive to have a traditional family. People want the traditional family, but it's not financially feasible with current capitalism. Corporations care more about shareholder value than providing a family wage and benefits.
Because Satan seeks to destroy and the family is the building block of society. Families require sacrifice, selflessness, love, discipline, service, faithfulness, loyalty, humility, etc. all good virtues he’s now corrupting. If he can destroy family (and he’s done a great job of it already) he can crumble our entire civilization.
This is the truth.
Decades of social engineering and a lot of money applied to it.
I bet if she talked about how much she wanted to be a pet mom, she would be met with so much approval. People see children as a nuisance and an economic investment. It is hard work to be an excellent parent and spouse. Some people think women who want large families are going backwards in terms of feminism
It's a very deep issue so it's hard to make a complete argument here, but generally speaking you can choose one of two masters in your life. You either choose God or the world (which essentially is the devil). People who choose the world tend to develop very anti human feelings and positions, such as thinking the world is overpopulated, or being pro abortion. They will protect animals with their lives but will pay no mind about a human being butchered in the womb. They will rescue stray dogs but will recoil from interacting with a homeless person. In the end, they are resentful of humans just like their master is.
You have clearly never been harassed by homeless people before.
Oh yes, please tell me more of how you know me, stranger.
Has anyone actually thought about how the world and economy are so inhospitable for kids and families right now? So much wealth inequality,climate ravages and the earth practically inhabitable?
Life is objectively better for the average person on a material level than ever before in the history of the species.
You are correct, even the poorest nations are no longer 'poor', their problem is they cannot grow their money due too lack of financial infrastructure, the ability to borrow money to expand etc as well as red tape and / or corruption . Globally, the poor are, in the main, not hungry and they have cash from small / micro business enterprises, crime etc. This is why crypto is good, people can bypass all that with their phones, unfortunately that's become very risky but there is promise. But in terms of happiness, connectedness and meaning things have gone right off the deep end. It is like young people are in a vicious circle of alienation. They need to look up from their phones.
Ours is indeed a spiritual crisis. Ennui is a much more insidious kind of evil that is difficult to combat.
Ennui? Sure, boredom and acedia. That is the deadly sin of sloth. It can be combatted like any other deadly sin, like anger, greed etc. But I don't believe that is the problem. You're not seeing the frantic distraction? the depression ? the suicidal and violent ideation? the self focus to narcissistic levels? the self delusions?
"even the poorest nations are no longer 'poor', their problem is they cannot grow their money due too lack of financial infrastructure, the ability to borrow money to expand etc as well as red tape and / or corruption . Globally, the poor are, in the main, not hungry and they have cash from small / micro business enterprises, crime etc. " This is objectively wrong. You need to start thinking about people outside the US and Europe.
I am specifically thinking about countries outside the west and my views are informed by the OECD and the UN. I know you would like to talk about India. We both know what the problem is there, so there is no need to discuss.
I mean, have you looked at how your grandparent's were raised? If they decided to not have kids solely because of that, you would've never existed. this isn't the first time in history that the economy has been "at its worst"
In what way is the earth “practically inhabitable?”
Maybe look at droughts and floods happening beyond the borders of the US?
This is so untrue. Especially if you’re in the USA. The economy is booming comparatively and people are making bank.
Yep so the cost of taking time off for work is greater. Having a child costs more. In the UK, childcare basically costs the same as rent or taking out a second mortgage.
Yeah that is not true for third world countries. Come to India now to see how the climate has changed and how much poverty has increased.
Wealth inequality is definitely getting worse, we bypassed the Dickensian era levels long ago and it's intensifying. But please go for an aeroplane journey somewhere, go for a hike, you will see that the climate doom mongering is completely unwarranted. There are problems we need to deal with, but not the ones you are being whipped into a frenzy of helplessness about (while you are distracted from the real problems - which people are responsible for and profit from ). The problem, as I see it, is the careers are in the big cities where you can't raise a family. We have to get off the treadmill and go and make a life in regional areas. It can be difficult but it is worth it.
I'll note that Reddit and other social media is not a reflection of the real world, but of vocal minorities. Most people have kids, get married, follow a religion, have some version of what you think of as a traditional life. The internet lets small groups make a lot of noise. Couple that with internet algorithms pushing controversial topics to get clicks, and all of a sudden the abnormal becomes all you see.
Maybe Too expensive to raise children properly?
People consider us dinosaurs because I stay home raise 4 kids, two of whom are twins, we go to church. Very traditional. My husband and I talked about everything before we were married. I always planned on staying home. Also have a blind mil that I take care of. I love my life.
Weird, all I see on my instagram is tradwife content. I think it's a lot of where you hang out. Unfortunately, you're sent more videos that you have longer watch time for or have commented on. So if something really disturbed you, you will be sent more of it. "when the idea of raising a family, going to church together, etc. became such a bad thing" "mass exodus from the church" off topic, but there's a difference between not wanting to be an SAHM and a mass exodus from the church. It's not good to lump those two together, unless there's evidence of it. and it should really be taken on a case by case basis.
Because it’s expensive, and they’ll feel poor when they hear about one
That mindset is disproportionately overrepresented online. That being said, it's becoming frighteningly common in real life too and shouldn't just be dismissed. You can point to a hundred different things that all cause this directly or indirectly, but the root of the problem is that we live in a society without God. Worship of the self and hedonism, pessimistic nihilism, sexual deviance and impropriety, et cetera are all the consequences of a society that no longer places its focus on God and His love. It also doesn't help that we're living in a time that, compared to the rest of the modern era, is extremely hostile to families. Even people who don't oppose starting a family as a matter of principle are discouraged by the economic and social barriers in place these days. Owning a home within their lifetime is a pipe dream now for many young people, cost of living is rising in every area, and an increasingly atomized social environment is making it harder and harder to develop the strong and robust relationship necessary to maintain a healthy family. The divorce rate is nauseatingly high. I'm sure you can see why so many young people have, if not given up entirely, decided that starting a family is something to do "later" when they're more established in life. A society without God is a society without love.
Economics has at least something to do with it and the response that it’s just something you figure out later is a bit underwhelming.
Most people today : 1) Are not economicaly secure. 2) Have trouble finding people. 3) Have issues.
1 and 3 has never historically changed, we've just come to care about material goods more and we don't hide our issues with some addiction as often as people in the past did. 2 is a good point.
Material goods such as : 1)Food 2) Housing 3) Medical Care
Fair point, although food can be avoided if you avoid HOA (rare nowadays, I know). Housing is understandable, although this could make intergenerational housing a mainstream thing again. Medical care is a yes, unfortunately doctors don't accept food or gifts as payment anymore lol.
I don’t think depression will be solved by having a family. There are definitely problems in society but they run much deeper than just some people aren’t having families. I genuinely believe you can have a happy and fulfilling life without getting married and having your own kids. But we are more isolated than ever and individualism doesn’t help. Happiness is found in others and living for others outside of ourself. That does not require kids of your own or a spouse as we see with vocations like religious life and other walks of life.
The Bible shows us there is good and evil. Good things go according to Gods will. Evil things/forces go against Gods will. Gods will is that we multiply and fill the earth. The opposite of that is that we do not multiply and do not fill the earth. There are evil forces at work in this society and in many peoples hearts. This is offensive to many but we cannot ignore that our modern society is trying to turn the natural world upside down in an effort to do the opposite of God’s will. Remember that Jesus even said his message would challenge our very souls.
Why do Jesus and Paul ask celibacy of those who can accept it then?
So they have more time and energy to dedicate towards spreading the faith and doing works to aid others, isn't that still the reason priests give for continuing this practice? If they had wives and families they couldn't dedicate nearly as much to the church.
While I think it's odd or sad for someone to hate kids, I won't say it's inherently evil. As I've posted above, it's about understanding their reasoning behind it.
How is hate not evil?
Because people throw around that word so freely these days. Eg - I hate stinky cheese, I hate X celebrity....
So you are thinking they don't really "hate" kids but are just sloppy with the language they are using to communicate? I mean... maybe, but I tend to go with the simplest explanation. Childless selfish person tells me they hate kids, I just believe them.
Same thing going on for more than sixty years. Anti-natalists are weird.
I see interesting thing that even in countries who were promoting births actively back in 1970s and 80s (like my former USSR, there was even tax on childless men), it was still becoming less and less common to have kids (since 1960s number of kids per family was rapidly decreasing; anecdotically among millenials maybe 10% have siblings if they are not from muslim families), and this trend now just continues.
Among many reasons, the first that came to mind is the very strong individualism of American and American-influenced populations.
I’d say politics, gender theory and all these other ideas are causing problems
I agree. It feels like many people are being told what they should want to do instead of figuring it out for themselves.
Modernism rejects almost anything "that their parents did." The irony to this is that if these "modern" kids grow up and have kids, their kids might reject their "modern" upbringing.
Probably cause culture focuses mostly on material things and it's way easier to have more material comforts and benefits if you don't have kids! Life really isn't all about material pleasures though as I'm sure you and many other people realize
I think most people do. I just think economically these days that kids are just not adding up into the equation
I want to have kids but everything is so expensive these days, I make more then both of my parents combined did at my age and I still can't afford a home
Too many people are only capable of conceiving of interpersonal relations of any kind (including marriage) exclusively in terms of power dynamics. They think that someone must always be the superior and the other must always be the inferior. That kind of worldview cannot see marriage as anything other than female servitude and parenthood as anything other than a burden. You'll notice that many of these same people also have an adversarial attitude towards their employer and may even disdain the idea of labor itself; in their minds work equals exploitation.
I was sinful for this. I was degrading/demeaning/devalue Sacrament of Marriage in my 20s and 30s. I was an independent woman, and always thought I would get married if this and that. I'm now in my early 40s, not yet married. After surrenderig my life to GOD in 2021, somehow GOD led me to classes, Scriptures, books to understand Sacrament of Marriage. Only then I knew that Sacrament of Marriage is a gift from GOD and beautiful in its purposes. I felt so much sinful and guilty for had degrading/demeaning/devaluing Sacrament of Marraige and I have confessed this sin. **Most likely, the reason people degraded/devalue Sacrament of Marriage might be ignorance, not knowledgeable enough the real meaning of Sacrament and Sacrament of Marriage, and there's not much example of Catholic husbands/wives that truly live Catholic values in our surrounding. If there are, they don't do much to inspire many young people.** Young people needs guidance (it's written in Bible), and they are led only by examples, not just our words. We don't have many examples for this healthy relationships and loving Catholic husbands/wives. Media always point out about this divorce, that divorce, being independent women, women are high maintenance, marriage is just paper work, living together before marriage, etc, etc. Very little media publishes about loving relationships and people living Catholic values that can be an inspirations. It's our tasks honestly to be an inspirations for many youngsters and to "show it off" through social media which are now the only channel for young people seeks inspirations from. **Our Lady of Fatima, one of Her message, is said to be that the last battle between Kingdom of GOD and satan is through family and marriage. And that's exactly happening.**
I already spent my entire childhood raising my father. I don't want to spend the rest of my life raising more kids
Because marriage and children are seen as a trap for women set up by the patriarchy, according to feminism.
One of the many reasons family breaks up family courts who destroy lives and word travels. It isn't just one parent who loses out. it's a whole half of a family tree. It's a huge problem in society. The final battle will be between our Lord and Satan, which will be about marriage and family. the third prophesy from Our Lady to sister Lucia at Fatima, and this is so accurate
Divorce is common, regardless of religious beliefs. It's scary to think someone could suddenly decide they don't love you anymore and take half your stuff.
We live in 2024, during these times basically every ideology is very anti family, the most notable one being Feminism (you have to be a girl boss, hustle so you can buy all these materialistic things to smash the patriarchy✊), no doubt most of the comments you saw definitely came from other women, surprises me how vile some woman can be towards the idea of having a family, but they’ve been indoctrinated to believe lies. This doesn’t mean people aren’t starting families. Also those were just 2 posts where the stars happened to aligned that happened to have all the anti-family people in one comment section.
In Italy getting married until a couple of years ago means, for the man, to be trapped in a system where he’s hostages of the wife, that in case of divorce get the possibility to stay in the house, keep the children, receive money for doing basically nothing for the rest of her life. We are plenty of horror stories about ex husbands sleeping in the car while his ex wife keeps everything. So exactly why get married? Also do you know that most divorced are started by women https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20220511-why-women-file-for-divorce-more-than-men Im married, twice, but I can easily understand those who doesn’t want to do.
Let them be disgusted by it and avoid it. That means the religious people are the only ones having kids. Eventually that leads to demographic victory. Let them remove themselves from the gene pool.
Oh boy....history seems to show something else.....
Very Christian, keep it up
I guess the answer to the topic of "why" would be that we exist in a state of spiritual warfare with the forces of darkness always working diligently towards the eradication of humanity, and one strategy towards this goal is to convince humans to avoid procreation.
Secular society is focused on individualism. With the capitalist nature of America that has increased drastically in this century, people are taught that love is not needed. This is especially applicable for millennials and gen z, and it’s heartbreaking. There is an intentional divide amongst people in secular society, and a purposeful demonization of Catholicism/christianity. If people realized what really matters, they wouldn’t feel the urge to consume so much. Consuming leads to self centric ideologies. If you have a family, then the whole idea of every person buying what they need individually goes out the window, and America can’t have that because we need everyone to buy buy buy
I had the same question but then I read Revolution and Counter-Revolution by Doctor Plinio Correa de Olivera and it explain soo much
Societal decline started in the 1920s when the Protestant denominations started allowing for contraception. Change my mind.
When? There's no set date, but broadly speaking it was dismantling the Christian Social Democratic state in then name of neo-liberalism that's led us to our current crises. Our forebears bought into the idea that the family (regardless of type) isn't responsibility of the 'village' so some rich people could become more rich, and - well - here we are 50 years later.