Happiest women: no kids

[stillafool]

 

Looking at this another way, could you imagine a study that found that childless women tend to die alone and miserable would be promoted with similar fanfare? I personally would think that that sort of message would be buried alive under a mountain of feel good cat memes.

 

Do childless men die alone?

 

 

While I decided not to have kids decades ago I was an outlier back then. Now that so many women have decided not to have kids even I'm starting to wonder - Wah?

While I don't have kids I have the utmost respect for women and men who want children and raise them well. Someone has to do it or the world would end. I just never thought so many women would feel like this in 2019. Women have always excepted the old "men don't want to get married and start a family but just decide to tow it on in and settle down" or the "I got caught" when referring to marriage. Now it seems that men feel threatened because a lot of women have decided to stay childless. Somehow I thought this would be a positive for men but instead it isn't.

Edited June 11, 2019 by stillafool

[thefooloftheyear]

Now it seems that men feel threatened because a lot of women have decided to stay childless. Somehow I thought this would be a positive for men but instead it isn't.

 

Nah.....Its got nothing to do with being "threatened", IMO

 

Men(and women) are biologically programmed to place the opposite sex in 'tiers" based upon certain cues or behaviors they ascribe to....When a man sees a woman that flat out doesn't want kids, its not that she is undesirable per se or the guys feel threatened, but that part of her(her fertility) is a major draw factor for most men, even if they don't necessarily want kids due to whatever reason...IME, all things equal, it certainly seems like more men are drawn to women that have had kids vs those that haven't....Ive even read posts by middle aged childless women on here that struggle mightily and complain that their friends and colleagues that are divorced with kids do better with men than they do...

 

I could also use your same thought process by saying that its great now how men are more free to exhibit their feminine side and show emotion, yet most women are still drawn to choose the more confident, self assured and more masculine types, that aren't showing their emotional/feminine side....Its the same concept...

 

So that's not to say that anyone should make personal life decisions like you did, based on these ideals...And who knows? Maybe we are just in a transition period at this point in evolution, and these base "needs" will eventually fade....I dunno..

 

TFY

[CautiouslyOptimistic]

Maybe we are just in a transition period at this point in evolution, and these base "needs" will eventually fade....I dunno..

 

TFY

 

Interesting to ponder....

[some_username1]

Do childless men die alone?

 

 

While I decided not to have kids decades ago I was an outlier back then. Now that so many women have decided not to have kids even I'm starting to wonder - Wah?

While I don't have kids I have the utmost respect for women and men who want children and raise them well. Someone has to do it or the world would end. I just never thought so many women would feel like this in 2019. Women have always excepted the old "men don't want to get married and start a family but just decide to tow it on in and settle down" or the "I got caught" when referring to marriage. Now it seems that men feel threatened because a lot of women have decided to stay childless. Somehow I thought this would be a positive for men but instead it isn't.

 

Re: the bolded - Absolutely! Emphasis on the raise them well aspect because there are so many who have them when they do not have the means to raise them in relative comfort. People see it a right to have kids no matter their circumstances, is it morally right to have a 3rd child when you are already living in poverty for example?

 

But I'm digressing...I don't think it's being threatened so much, of course there will be the individual's agenda, it must be concerning for a man who wants to have a family that his dating options are limited because of the increasing numbers of women who are not maternal/don't want kids but it really should be something concerning for *everyone* because it will have a massive effect on the equillibrium of society.

 

Parenthood is an important rite of passage for the species because of the ancillary benefits it gives to the parents and thus society in general. Particularly in men it calms them down and forces them to transition from being a destructive influence on the world to a responsible one and gives their life direction and meaning, if increasing numbers of men do not have kids some of them will spend their lives never properly growing up and this could be devastating for society- opting out of employment, becoming a dead weight, causing conflict for entertainment etc. To be honest women could be just as destructive too in a different way, I have already alluded to the 30+ year old childless party girls I have met through online dating- doesn't care about STD's, hooked on coke, drinking and driving, they have no reason to take their lives seriously apart from making sure they sober up enough to make it into work on time.

 

Last but not least there is the declining birth rates, I believe the UK in particular is in such a situation. Who is going to look after a population that is living longer and heavier at the top end?

 

So on the micro level one or two more women feeling empowered enough not to have kids is fair enough, but widespread encouragement that eventually could turn into a political movement is very very harmful to the balance of nature itself. We need to be having kids...and at a steady rate. So imo the message should not be "Hey girls, look how awful marriage and kids is to your happiness!" but rather "What can we do to make your marriage and having kids easier so that is is a better option than being childless?". In it's own way it could be the most pressing issue after climate change, the problem is that feminism would rather promote the former message than the latter because the former is far more empowering even though long term it is threatening to the survival of our species.

Edited June 11, 2019 by some_username1

[lana-banana]

If people want folks to have more kids, maybe we as a society should do more to make childcare more affordable? Much of the "happiness gap" can actually be explained by stress over the new financial strain children impose, especially in the United States. In countries where childcare is much less expensive, the gap between parents and non-parents is significantly smaller, even though it still exists.

 

Empowering women is not the problem. The problem is that if you run the numbers and discover you can't afford to have a kid, then that "choice" is already made for you. Giving birth in a hospital, even with insurance, is anywhere between two and seven thousand dollars. In America, more than a third of people don't have the cash on hand for a $400 emergency. How are they supposed to afford a child, much less college?

 

My husband and I are lucky enough in that we could afford a kid but we would be nowhere near as comfortable financially. We wouldn't be interested anyway - I'm not about to bring a child into a climate change hellscape - but if it wasn't a matter of $20-$40k per year to raise a child, and if the world was a better place in general, we'd consider it. As it is we're both really happy with our lives right now. I know I'm substantially less stressed and unhappy than my colleagues who are mothers.

[basil67]

username, where is this encouragement for women to not have kids? I see loads of support for individual choice, but I've never seen women actively encouraged not to have them.

 

You say that we should ask "What can we do to make your marriage and having kids easier.....?" I don't know where you've been for the last 20 years, but this is already an ongoing discussion. We have the answers but many aren't getting the help they need. It's partners who help carry the load, flexible workplaces, government subsidising of childcare costs, ease of childcare availability, tax concessions, pay above the poverty line, discrimination laws and cost of living.... just to name a few.

 

It's important to remember that for every person who thinks a parent should get a pension to care for their child while young, you'll have another who says "if you can't afford to take time off work, then don't have kids". Members of society make decisions with their votes on whether women's mothering is easier.

 

Lana mentioned above about the cost of having a baby. I'd forgotten that cost because here in Australia, I had mine for free under Medicare. There are just so many different things which make it difficult in different countries.

Edited June 11, 2019 by basil67

[thefooloftheyear]

If affordability was the reason why its no longer possible or feasible to have kids, the species would have died off eons ago....

 

Let's get real here, folks....sheesh...

 

TFY

[basil67]

TFY, educated women from reasonably affluent socio economic backgrounds are the ones who draw the line at not having kids which can't be afforded. None of the reasons I gave are 100% across every country and every woman.

[elaine567]

Big long term picture we NEED birth rates to fall. Climate change will mean a lot of hungry mouths to feed.

 

ATM we are chasing and chasing economic growth, so more workers, more growth.

We already tapped into the "unemployed" female workforce and now we are using all sort of flexible strategies to produce a cheap workforce.

Technology will eventually wipe out a lot of jobs, we can thus maintain and increase productivity without the need to keep producing more and more kids.

 

Dumbing down the population, into people who only work and play is not a bad idea long term. They don't need to grow up. Grown ups with kids cost money.

 

A reduced core population is thus not a bad thing in the long run and may even become a necessity, we will make up the economic shortfall with technological solutions and immigrants.

[lana-banana]

TFY, educated women from reasonably affluent socio economic backgrounds are the ones who draw the line at not having kids which can't be afforded.

 

This is correct. In the US, birth rates are lowest in cities and suburbs amongst relatively affluent, educated couples. (This is true elsewhere in the world, but it's not as strong as it is in the US.) Birth rates are generally inversely correlated to education level. In the US, people with the fewest financial resources are having the most children. The disparity in families in America can be traced directly to income inequality and Reagan-era cuts to the social safety net. It's not applicable in other countries.

 

Either way, I appreciate all the women sharing their experience about children and thr lack thereof, and speaking up for so many different perspectives and backgrounds. Believe it or not, women might actually know more about whether they're happy than men.

[some_username1]

username, where is this encouragement for women to not have kids? I see loads of support for individual choice, but I've never seen women actively encouraged not to have them.

 

You say that we should ask "What can we do to make your marriage and having kids easier.....?" I don't know where you've been for the last 20 years, but this is already an ongoing discussion. We have the answers but many aren't getting the help they need. It's partners who help carry the load, flexible workplaces, government subsidising of childcare costs, ease of childcare availability, tax concessions, pay above the poverty line, discrimination laws and cost of living.... just to name a few.

 

It's important to remember that for every person who thinks a parent should get a pension to care for their child while young, you'll have another who says "if you can't afford to take time off work, then don't have kids". Members of society make decisions with their votes on whether women's mothering is easier.

 

Lana mentioned above about the cost of having a baby. I'd forgotten that cost because here in Australia, I had mine for free under Medicare. There are just so many different things which make it difficult in different countries.

 

It's the sub-text of trying free women from their responsibility to themselves. In the current era it is down to men to police how much a woman has had to drink, whether she gets home safely, whether she is using contraception etc. A woman is metaphorically encouraged to walk down the middle of the freeway and it is the cars who are expected to get out of her way. Not having kids is just the logical conclusion of an absence of responsibility and a rejection of typical gender roles and what is expected of them by society. As I said earlier, women are just the new Peter Pans. It isn't that obvious now, but give it 10 years and then have a look around you at female demographics- my prediction (based on what I see and experience right now in the dating scene for my age bracket) is that childless women who have maturity issues will be the new normal...

 

...that is if climate change hasn't done for us by then, of course

[basil67]

I see quite a few feminist posts on my FB and never have I seen one saying that men need to make decisions for them and care for them. What you’re describing is the antithesis of feminism. I’m not buying it.

[JuneL]

Some_username1: Would you say Mother Teresa was a Peter Pan, since she never had kids (and was never married, for that matter)?

 

There’re so many different ways one, man or woman, can contribute to the future generations without passing his/her own genes. Would you say Isaac Newton (another person who died a virgin) contributed less to many generations after him, compared to other men with dozens of children?

 

Personally I’m grateful for having my nephew for giving me somewhat of a parent experience; without him, I would have had kid(s) myself.

[some_username1]

I see quite a few feminist posts on my FB and never have I seen one saying that men need to make decisions for them and care for them. What you’re describing is the antithesis of feminism. I’m not buying it.

 

This gets near what I am describing- an interesting take on victimhood vs responsibility to the self: https://quillette.com/2017/01/30/feminism-needs-to-talk-about-responsibility-not-just-rights/

 

This particular quote is the crux of what I am getting at:

 

"For many feminists, simply expecting women to prevent pregnancies instead of terminating them is an affront to our collective freedom."

 

In other words you can't give feminists sensible solutions that require them to take responsibility for something because they will complain that it impacts on their freedom and society should find an alternative that doesn't inconvenience them.

Edited June 11, 2019 by some_username1

[lana-banana]

Quillette is as much an authority on feminism as I am on sports. Do you have perspectives from sources that don't hire neo-Nazis and white supremacists?

[thefooloftheyear]

TFY, educated women from reasonably affluent socio economic backgrounds are the ones who draw the line at not having kids which can't be afforded. None of the reasons I gave are 100% across every country and every woman.

 

 

Then they sound like complete jackasses for using that train of logic...

 

Just admit then that kids are less important than the new Audi or the shore house...Or that they are unwilling to devote the time or effort needed...Its OK, that's a completely valid reason for them...I know it doesn't sound good, but at least its more authentic than saying kids are "unaffordable"...

 

The bottom line is this...

 

Just like these flawed polls. there just seems to be a push to legitimize that mindset....And I don't know why...Just be happy with your(not you personally) life choices and quit trying to make people feel better about it by Mickey Mouse logic and skewed polling data..

 

TFY

[some_username1]

Quillette is as much an authority on feminism as I am on sports. Do you have perspectives from sources that don't hire neo-Nazis and white supremacists?

 

Hahaha! You could always, y'know, take some responsibility () and critique the article instead of demanding a new one because you don't like the platform...although that would be in-keeping with the point I'm trying to make, I guess

[Leigh 87]

I may not be able to have children. Let me tell you, the childless not by choice ladies in all the support forums are some of the least happy women I have ever known. They are utterly miserable; they were wired to be mums. Some even dreamt of being a mother from the time they could first talk.

 

Could you imagine mourning the loss of an entire lifetime that you had wished so hard for? Imagine playing with dolls from a young age, yearning to be a mum and knowing that being a mother was the number one driving influence in live that you most looked forward to.

 

Imagine that dream being taken away from a woman. Child free, on the other hand, CHOSE not to have children. Yes, I agree that a happy child free woman would be equally as happy as a happy couple with kids.

 

But a miserable or run of the mill average relationship is not exactly that amazing. Most people are not in wonderful, loving and mutually fulfilling relationships with a lot of laughter and joy...So sure, of course child free single women who are truly happy people - will be feeling happier than the average couple who popped out a few kids.

 

A happy person is happy. Period. Kids or not. Relationship or no relationship. I think that the results reflect the fact that most relationships are average, become stale and rather than evolving and moving onto a new/more suitable partner, people tend to be averse to change and stick the marriage out --- those people with kids are generally not as happy as say, a free spirited single lady who has no kids yet is a truly happy person.

 

Personally, I believe being a parent is a calling. A need. I have that pull myself, and while I believe I will live a happy life and be as happy as the majority of parents out there - I will NEVER believe that any amount of travel, financial freedom or sleep ins would compare to the joy of seeing my baby/toddler/child.

 

Parents experience higher highs, typically. The joy of a child, for the most part, is unmatched by anything; the level of intensity of that joy makes any other experience in life diluted in my opinion. But babies and toddlers grow up, and most parents are not in a constant state of joy.

 

The reality is, most people are parents. And they aint all magically "happier" than all single child free women. Sadly, if a women truly yearned to be a mother yet couldn't have kids or adopt and or/ was wired towards having a meaningful connected relationship with a spouse yet could also not manage to swing that either --- she will probably struggle with her level of happiness since she was wired one way yet ended up with a life that was her worst nightmare.

 

Actually, the happiest people I know are just plain happy. Does not seem to be a trend as to whether they could breed or not.

 

I believe that, as a happy person (I do acupuncture, and do a lot of self/spiritual work and relaxation work and I am seldom ever stressed) that I will end up as happy as most parents - but I also know that I would have been happier as a parent myself. Most parents just are not super happy people in general; not many people are tbh.... But parents who truly cherish their children and are in a fulfilling relationship are truly the happiest people I think --- the joy of their children and partner... that to me, would be the winning combo.

 

But yeah. Most people are parents and a lot of people are very run of the mill in terms of just how happy they are, and their kids and partners just do not seem to raise that bar.

[Leigh 87]

Nah.....Its got nothing to do with being "threatened", IMO

 

Men(and women) are biologically programmed to place the opposite sex in 'tiers" based upon certain cues or behaviors they ascribe to....When a man sees a woman that flat out doesn't want kids, its not that she is undesirable per se or the guys feel threatened, but that part of her(her fertility) is a major draw factor for most men, even if they don't necessarily want kids due to whatever reason...IME, all things equal, it certainly seems like more men are drawn to women that have had kids vs those that haven't....Ive even read posts by middle aged childless women on here that struggle mightily and complain that their friends and colleagues that are divorced with kids do better with men than they do...

 

I could also use your same thought process by saying that its great now how men are more free to exhibit their feminine side and show emotion, yet most women are still drawn to choose the more confident, self assured and more masculine types, that aren't showing their emotional/feminine side....Its the same concept...

 

So that's not to say that anyone should make personal life decisions like you did, based on these ideals...And who knows? Maybe we are just in a transition period at this point in evolution, and these base "needs" will eventually fade....I dunno..

 

TFY

 

Wtf.

 

Okay I know you are pro kid. I want kids so damn much myself and know that no joy would compare to the love of my own child. And I am someone who always preferred the hedonistic selfish lifestyle and who didn't even want kids until my 30s.

 

But I lack fertility. I may not have kids. And well, I have never had problems finding men to date. I have every option my fertile friends had.

 

Men cannot sniff out infertile women/ women with sh*t fertility:lmao:

[littleblackheart]

Premise of the thread: long overdue social evolution in accepting that women as individuals are free to decide what 'being happy' (read fully functioning members of society making deliberate choices that are fit in with their preferences or stage in life ) means to them.

 

A woman can now be single and childfree by choice and provide for herself without having to endure baseless stereotypes or narrow judgement (she's not 'a real woman', 'she's closeted', 'she's mentally / emotionally / physically deficient', etc.).

 

Choice is a good thing., regardless of climate change, childcare costs, parental leave, promotion issues at work and work / life balance. Some women don't want to be in relationships or be mothers, and that is totally fine, same way as some men don't want to be in a relationships.

 

Besides, there is a lot of talk on these boards of heterosexual men who don't want to be shackled by marriage for fear of losing it all in a divorce - well, some working women, rightly or wrongly, don't want to take the risk of becoming a single parent. I am one of the lucky ones - self-reliant, with a sound support system, self-sufficiant, a good job with social status and 2 academically bright, gorgeous kids. I was able to afford the luxury of being a single parent, ie leave an abusive marriage, because I am educated and have gainful employment. The truth is, not all women can. If they prefer to avoid the risk altogether by being single and childfree, that's their call.

 

Things may well change again when women (and men, as far as some parts of family law) get to have equal opportunities across the board; until then, let us all be happy at the fact that more of us (though nowhere near enough) get a level of choice in the lifestyles we want to lead, and let us help even more people on the way to getting there.

 

A Nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but it's lowest ones

Nelson Mandela. Edited June 11, 2019 by littleblackheart

[Leigh 87]

If people want folks to have more kids, maybe we as a society should do more to make childcare more affordable? Much of the "happiness gap" can actually be explained by stress over the new financial strain children impose, especially in the United States. In countries where childcare is much less expensive, the gap between parents and non-parents is significantly smaller, even though it still exists.

 

Empowering women is not the problem. The problem is that if you run the numbers and discover you can't afford to have a kid, then that "choice" is already made for you. Giving birth in a hospital, even with insurance, is anywhere between two and seven thousand dollars. In America, more than a third of people don't have the cash on hand for a $400 emergency. How are they supposed to afford a child, much less college?

 

My husband and I are lucky enough in that we could afford a kid but we would be nowhere near as comfortable financially. We wouldn't be interested anyway - I'm not about to bring a child into a climate change hellscape - but if it wasn't a matter of $20-$40k per year to raise a child, and if the world was a better place in general, we'd consider it. As it is we're both really happy with our lives right now. I know I'm substantially less stressed and unhappy than my colleagues who are mothers.

 

 

Some women just have the pull. The drive to be pregnant and raise a child. It just... is. The being financially "optimal" thing is not a factor for women like me. Like sure, it is crucial I have a degree/ at least one of us has a decent job... I mean I am not into the idea of bringing a child into abject poverty where they cannot receive proper medical care or food!

 

But adding all the numbers up and being ready on paper rarely factors in for women who just know they need to be mums. Such women tend to derive so much joy from merely being a mum that they are much happier than they would have been childless and rich.

 

Totally agree that most average couples are not all that happy with their marriages or children though. But then again, I do not think many people are blessed with wonderfully happy relationships to begin with, and the couples who are tend to stay too long with the wrong partner rather than evolving and growing with a new, more suitable partner. I think the partnership plays a key role as does the innate desire for kids - most people just have them cos they worry about "missing out" due to societal pressure.

 

The mums I know who truly yearned to be mums for the right reasons AND who have loving marriages - even the ones who co parent and are now onto second marriages -- they tend to be the happiest people -- but then again, so are people like you who are in a happy and healthy marriage and have a comfortable life!

 

During my darkest hours/days when I realise I may never be able to have kids I do remind myself that even just as I am NOW I am a lot happier than most parents I know.... Who sort of coasted along and just did things they felt they had to do, rather than act with conviction and truly ache to be a parent on all levels/and with a decent partner.

 

It is actually couples like you who get me through the darker times as I know that even though I will always likely have a void within me if I cannot have a child, that I can still be just as happy as most parents. I see a lot of happy couples like you and they are DEFINITELY happier than the parents I know.

 

I think I only ever met one lady who was truly glowing/happy with being a mother. She also had a great partner though too and truly wanted to be a mum and isn't under too much financial stress.

[thefooloftheyear]

Wtf.

 

Men cannot sniff out infertile women/ women with sh*t fertility:lmao:

 

 

Of course they can't, just like women cant see how many zeros a guys bank account or that he has a 2" dick by looking at him either...People "sniff out" others based on a variety of logical assumptions based on observations...Its no more complex than that...

 

And FTR. I am not "Pro" anything....Do whatever the hell you want, its your life...Just don't expect society at large to fall in line with it....That's all...

 

TFY

Edited June 13, 2019 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
rude

[amaysngrace]

Nothing makes me happier than spending time with my children. Even the furry ones rate pretty high on the happiness scale.

 

Now that my oldest son got married grandchildren are a real possibility. My heart smiles at the mere thought of having a grandchild.

 

I’m gonna be great at it!

[littleblackheart]

I think I only ever met one lady who was truly glowing/happy with being a mother

 

What??? This is very, very difficult to believe.

[basil67]

Then they sound like complete jackasses for using that train of logic...

 

Just admit then that kids are less important than the new Audi or the shore house...Or that they are unwilling to devote the time or effort needed...Its OK, that's a completely valid reason for them...I know it doesn't sound good, but at least its more authentic than saying kids are "unaffordable"...

 

TFY, perhaps my choice of wording was wrong. I was trying to differentiate between those who grow up in poverty with large families - but failed. In my mind is an educated couple who come from a middle class background where a strong work ethic has been instilled. I'm also talking about a cost of housing which is eye wateringly expensive. (Here in Oz, affordable areas have little employment).

 

If a woman can't find a child care place (or an affordable child care place) and can't afford to give up work because of the cost of housing, what does she do?