this post was submitted on 02 Jan 2024
530 points (95.7% liked)

World News

38583 readers
1824 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Chinese women have had it. Their response to Beijing’s demands for more children? No. 

Fed up with government harassment and wary of the sacrifices of child-rearing, many young women are putting themselves ahead of what Beijing and their families want. Their refusal has set off a crisis for the Communist Party, which desperately needs more babies to rejuvenate China’s aging population.

With the number of babies in free fall—fewer than 10 million were born in 2022, compared with around 16 million in 2012—China is headed toward a demographic collapse. China’s population, now around 1.4 billion, is likely to drop to just around half a billion by 2100, according to some projections. Women are taking the blame.

In October, Chinese Leader Xi Jinping urged the state-backed All-China Women’s Federation to “prevent and resolve risks in the women’s field,” according to an official account of the speech.

“It’s clear that he was not talking about risks faced by women but considering women as a major threat to social stability,” said Clyde Yicheng Wang, an assistant professor of politics at Washington and Lee University who studies Chinese government propaganda.

The State Council, China’s top government body, didn’t respond to questions about Beijing’s population policies.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 131 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (7 children)

Governments and companies have gotten by in the past with a combination of factors:

  • Religion pressuring people into marrying and having children.

  • Poverty and poor education causing people to have children they weren’t prepared for. Includes lack of access to birth control and discouraging its use.

  • One income households made it feasible to raise large families when times were good. The rich have since siphoned off all economic growth while real wages have stagnated.

Having children is an unpaid job. If the government wants people to have children, it should start paying for it. Or, the wealthy will need to stop hoarding all the wealth and let regular people earn enough to support a family on one income again.

In the meantime, people should feel justified and good about not reproducing. The planet is already pushed to its breaking point. More humans will consume more resources and emit more CO2.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.world 47 points 8 months ago (10 children)

I never thought about it like that before. Having children is an unpaid job. So true.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 55 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

You’re basically expected to produce new workers all at your own expense. And, who benefits? The children you raise become workers and contributors to the economy. So, it’s the capitalists that benefit from increased productivity and growth.

I realize there are other abstract and noble reasons to have children. But, capitalists don’t see it in those terms and there is this economic dimension to childrearing. You should be able to have children if you want them, but you should also be paid for doing so to the extent that it benefits society. I would argue that people were once paid, albeit indirectly through a spouse’s salary that was high enough to support a non-salaried adult to raise the children. Why are people now expected to both work and raise children? Why are they expected to fit this productive activity into their non-working hours as if raising children was a hobby.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 15 points 8 months ago

In Russia, people with children get benefits that scale really quickly with the number of kids you have. This is, of course, balanced by the fact that Russia is miserable and people seldom wish to stay.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

My wife and I are thinking about babies, she would love to stay at home and take care of them but it's just not that easy to make ends meet.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

it should start paying for it.

How much whiny shit I have seen on the internet over the years about the child income tax credit. Oh yes that tiny reduction that comes no where near the actual cost of raising a child. I can't see people who bitch and moan about this voting for even more money. Then you got the other side that cries about having to pay for schools.

Sorry I can't see any situation where we roll out something like this. We are way too short thinking and "fuck you I got mine". Which is fine since global warming is going to kill us one day and we will deserve it.

[–] Theharpyeagle@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

It feels so backwards, I see people admonishing the younger, more liberal generations for not having children while turning around and bragging that their wife only needed two weeks of maternity leave. Why want more children in the world if you dont want to actually take care of them?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] chitak166@lemmy.world 65 points 8 months ago (2 children)

From the 1 child policy to this?

[–] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 48 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'd imagine a lot of people who were affected negatively by 1 child policy being absolutely pissed at seeing the government suddenly go "we miscalculated, pls start breeding like rabbits"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rammer@sopuli.xyz 32 points 8 months ago (4 children)

There's a lot of crazy things in China that are related to this. Not just one child policy. There's a whole crisis of sexuality in China.

[–] storcholus@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do you have an article on that? I always think of Japan with that issue, or do I have that mixed up?

[–] Timecircleline@sh.itjust.works 15 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think a lot of countries are having similar issues. I think South Korea is another one.

[–] Shialac@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Hell, even most western countries have the same issues

[–] Chriswild@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago

But many of those same western countries level out the population decay with immigration. To my knowledge South Korea, Japan, and China don't have as much immigration.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] doctorcrimson@lemmy.world 61 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Honestly kind of happy for China for a change, this is a pretty big indication of women's rights that they're able to say No to begin with. I hope they continue to resist and eventually cause a larger change for the better across the region.

[–] Icaria@lemmy.world 29 points 8 months ago (7 children)

I hope they continue to resist and eventually cause a larger change for the better across the region.

Except that's not what's happening if you read the article, on either count.

Women aren't resisting childbirth as an act of rebellion or as an exercise of their rights, there's just too many competing pressures in their lives to table in having kids. Coupled with declining rates of attachment and a distraction-based economy, this isn't a 'win' for anyone.

And population decline is a crisis we don't know how to deal with. Old people have little economic output, but use up a lot of resources. It means the kids who are still born end up carrying a huge burden paying for and caring for older generations, they end up tax serfs in an aged care-based economy, and if older generations aren't cared for you end up with human atrocities on a massive scale.

...

Most of these comments are problematic. You don't have to have children, but for most people it has been a pretty consistent and natural inclination. Now a whole generation are convincing themselves they don't want children when they really just can't, and rather than holding those responsible to account and improving all our circumstances, they're treating it as some personal victory.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Toes@ani.social 33 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think low birth rates are a product of a demanding system. In many cases it's economic suicide to even entertain the idea of having children.

[–] buzz86us@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

There is also the fact that the economy is collapsing in on itself since companies are pulling out of China in droves. It is a toxic business environment, ever since Trump's presidency has ignited this whole nationalism tend among world politics things have been going downhill for younger generations it is like being a US citizen, and graduating in 2008 Imagine graduating with a degree, and there are no jobs available.

[–] fne8w2ah@lemmy.world 30 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The allure of DINKs and solo living is too strong even when developed countries started to get really developed earlier on.

[–] ohlaph@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago (3 children)
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 14 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

DINK?

Edit: Ah, Dual Income No Kids!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 5 points 8 months ago

Yeah, it's really no wonder many are choosing not to have kids these days. It's insanely expensive and inconvenient and governments do very little to make it financially attractive. At least in the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 26 points 8 months ago (4 children)

It says a lot about where we're at in humanity. Child-bearing-aged humans the world over want children less than ever before.

Something's fucking wrong.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 50 points 8 months ago (6 children)

Wrong? I see people deciding not to have kids as fundamentally a good thing. Coercion into having kids due to government pressure or social norms seems a whole lot more wrong to me. It's ok to not want kids, it's not some sort of disorder that needs fixing.

I would absolutely love to see the population go down, even for like a single day, within my lifetime. But considering we've added over 2 billion people to the population since I was a kid...I don't have high hopes.

[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 14 points 8 months ago

Yes, I think the person you replied to meant exactly what you put in words- they just left it vague to accommodate for all the other factors involved not only in the Chinese case at hand, but worldwide. I don't think they meant to say it's not ok to not want to have kids.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Humanity has always taken an idea and ran with it to the breaking point and beyond, having it fall apart, take the pieces that worked and cobble together a few new idea to run with usually accompanied with a new batch of religions and cultures. But living in that falling apart time isn't the greatest experience.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] penquin@lemm.ee 24 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Why would anyone want kids while they can't afford anything with no kids? If they want people to have kids, they better help them financially. You can't have a child and leave them for strangers to raise them at daycares. Or have the mother sit home and the dad works 3 jobs to put food on the table. Fuck that.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 22 points 8 months ago

Ah yes, "a threat to be eliminated" is surely a stance that will get women on board with child-bearing.

[–] jaschen@lemmynsfw.com 20 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I hate to do this, but I feel like Taiwan(numba 1) is doing this better than China(numba 4).

The Taiwan government is literally giving money to have kids. The more kids you have, the more monthly cash they give you. I think our president said something along the lines of "it's up to our country to take care of all children of Taiwan". I'm paraphrasing.

Not just cash, we also have infrastructure setup. Most malls, government buildings and public places have breastfeeding rooms. There is almost always a bathroom designated for people with children. There are even bathrooms set up with small tiny toilets. There is a designated area for kids to sit on the train. There are designated elevators for kids.

Plus healthcare is free/cheap so that helps.

If China wants more babies, it needs to start giving the people things that promote having kids. Unless you force them to have kids.... I guess because you can. Fuck the CCP.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (4 children)

The Taiwan government is literally giving money to have kids. The more kids you have, the more monthly cash they give you.

South Korea has a similar strategy, although I think it comes as housing benefit and paid time-off.

The problem is that these economic incentives are relatively small. And they all come with the caveat that you have to... get married and take up a subservient role in child care and produce babies (the last bit in particular being extremely unpleasant and not something you can easily pay people to do).

By contrast, private employment in the professional sector offers a significantly better deal. Get more money than the miserly state stipend. Keep your independence. Don't tear your vagina in half producing a new baby. Enjoy your fucking life in an economy that is built to produce luxury consumerist experiences.

If China wants more babies, it needs to start giving the people things that promote having kids.

The article is paywalled, so its hard to say exactly what Chinese social policy isn't doing. But the country worked very hard to curb its population towards sustainability and to improve the outlaying regions of the country that was shedding peasant farmers in droves. Compare the population distribution of China to neighboring Japan, where a full 12% of the population lives in the capital city. Tapei is nearly as bad.

At some point, people are responding entirely to social pressures. I'm not going to try and have kids if I'm living in a closet on a peasant wage. Neither are folks in Europe or North America. We're all in the same boat in this regard. Post-industrial countries are all seeing a population shortfall, in no small part because they've compressed populations into these tiny spaces and given them barely enough to live on.

Add in the cultural shaming of "teen pregnancy" and what you're left with is asking a bunch of career-professional thirty-somethings to get off the career elevator so they can fuck like horny adolescents.

That's not going to work anywhere you try it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] bg10k@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 8 months ago

China could probably stand to spend some time not having an extremely strong stance on babies.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

China’s population, now around 1.4 billion, is likely to drop to just around half a billion by 2100, according to some projections. Women are taking the blame.

It does take two to tango.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Russia is the same. Nobody wants to immigrate to those countries. Wonder why.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Arthur_Leywin@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

Loving this child free wave

[–] MSgtRedFox@infosec.pub 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (10 children)

I've seen a bunch of comments expressing interest in the population declining. Since I don't really want the Thanos approach, lowering the birth rate is great.

I propose sterilization for cash, like cash for clunkers. You get a bunch of free money if you decide you want fixed.

Think of the amount of people who'd take that deal. Long term, lower population, less social program spending, hopefully less people's wanting abortions, win win. It goes against the rich people need for more workers, but you can dangle the lower welfare receipts, they'll be all about that. 😋

Sorry, morbid humor among actual socioeconomic conversation.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 9 points 8 months ago

Increase education rates, reduce poverty, and give women more rights = fertility goes down. This is a good thing in theory, but society has to change its approach to designing the economy to handle a declining population.

[–] 0Xero0@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

China probably wants to make more military reserves so they can have more manpower to invade Taiwan in the future after seeing their friend ruZZia flopped in Ukraine.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›