More single women are having babies

[SaviorSix]

lol. That's along the lines of lamenting the move away from pushrod engines and leaf springs on cars to turbo charged boxer engines and coilover springs

People want progress, things get better and people adapt.

You can't use regressive sentiments to qualify progress.

You at least have to see the good side of the push towards comfort, convenience and women becoming financially independent because we all benefit from it, unless you want to live like a luddite

Women becoming financially independent and the importance of the nuclear family do not have to be mutually exclusive, as you seem to think.

The importance of family is NOT regressive. What we have NOW is regressive - a **** load of baby mamas and kids growing up without a father figure.

Things do NOT get better as we move away from strong family units. They get WORSE.

[Skettch]

SK, you must love watching the west fall apart.

I know I would, if I wasn't part of it.

[anonymous]

Women having children with a partner they're not married to, but live with is fine.

Because there is a free-money, free housing, free ****ty low quality life with no incentive support system for kids who get pregnant, and fathers who don't work can't have their wages garnished for child support.

Some ethnic groups believe that a guy fathering multiple kids to be a good thing, and they don't use protection (hence their sky high rate of STDs compared to the mainstream)

Stupid, fat teenage girls 'want someone to love me' so they have a kid.

roll back the clock to the 1950's when there was a huge shame in being a single mom, the only support system was the immediate family and there were no hand outs it's obvious why the stats have changed so much..

[YUL]

Women becoming financially independent and the importance of the nuclear family do not have to be mutually exclusive, as you seem to think.

The importance of family is NOT regressive. What we have NOW is regressive - a **** load of baby mamas and kids growing up without a father figure.

Things do NOT get better as we move away from strong family units. They get WORSE.

no. the notion and the importance of family changes throughout time, depending on the reality of the day. like way back when in the middle age, folks would get married @ 11 or 12 since life was shorter

Why is co-habitation and reconstituted family structures inhenritaly bad? Is it all bad, or are certain facets of it considered less optimal than others? remember, family isn't static. it can change from year to year also.

I'm not sure what you mean by "getting worse"? you a anthro/sociology PhD or is just what you feel?

[YUL]

roll back the clock to the 1950's when there was a huge shame in being a single mom, the only support system was the immediate family and there were no hand outs it's obvious why the stats have changed so much..

yes, stuff like institutionalization, depression, shame, poverty, making the kid suffer for his parents decision. just generally being miserable I guess.

Since secular society likes to focus on the more positive aspects of life and individual self actualization, I can understand why these support systems were created and still exist to this day. Because people want them

[ripper6]

so what's wrong with that? Why not complain about fathers becoming less family oriented then?

That's the other side of the coin. "Men" are really/fully men anymore. They have become perpetual adolescents.

Rent/buy this video - about a REAL MAN - and see the difference between what a man was, and was expected to be - until things changed in the 1960s and after.



http://www.amazon.com/Cinderella-Man.../dp/B000ARTN3I

[1devil]

Why do you think that's happening?

It happened plenty in the past. Girls were just sent off to convents and "encouraged" into marriages. The behavior has not changed that much, just the responses to the behavior

[niospecv]

This is an interesting thread. Rep me people! lulz

[SYRIANKID]

SK, you must love watching the west fall apart.

I know I would, if I wasn't part of it.

What makes someone part of the "west" or "east"? You are either part of the solution or part of the problem - that's a better way to think about the world.

I live in the west, it doesn't please me to see society crumble behind its tinseled technological facade especially when I understand the root causes and the solutions to stopping the decline.

The real problem is that people are being programmed to hate the medicine to their own diseases. They are being forbidden the freedom to talk about the elephant in the room and are told to blame external enemies. Human civilization has worked for a few thousand years based on certain indelible and nascent principles. These are systematically being attacked and socially re-engineered. The result is socio-moral meltdown - something no amount of technology can save.

I think one of the most ironic effects of amoral freedom is that one becomes enslaved to the basest human desires. This type of slavery is invisible and grips you until it kills you.

[ZenBowman]

What makes someone part of the "west" or "east"? You are either part of the solution or part of the problem - that's a better way to think about the world.

I live in the west, it doesn't please me to see society crumble behind its tinseled technological facade especially when I understand the root causes and the solutions to stopping the decline.

The real problem is that people are being programmed to hate the medicine to their own diseases. They are being forbidden the freedom to talk about the elephant in the room and are told to blame external enemies. Human civilization has worked for a few thousand years based on certain indelible and nascent principles. These are systematically being attacked and socially re-engineered. The result is socio-moral meltdown - something no amount of technology can save.

Destruction must come before creation.

If we had kept the same principles of 200 years ago, you and I would be lynched. I'm pretty happy with the progress we're making, despite pitfalls such as these.

LOL WUT?

[SYRIANKID]

Destruction must come before creation.

If we had kept the same principles of 200 years ago, you and I would be lynched. I'm pretty happy with the progress we're making, despite pitfalls such as these.

LOL WUT?

The problem is that while some people were lynched when they didn't deserve to be lynched, the people who deserved to be lynched were not going free either. That's one extreme.

The problem is society has migrated too dramatically away from that, to a condition where people who deserve to be lynched are not being lynched. Being too soft on social diseases is just as poisonous as being too strict, but at least over-strictness was able to sustain itself in the past. Moral laxity is not sustainable, it allows the dregs to surface and foul up the entire establishment.

[ZenBowman]

The problem is that while some people were lynched when they didn't deserve to be lynched, the people who deserved to be lynched were not going free either. That's one extreme.

The problem is society has migrated too dramatically away from that, to a condition where people who deserve to be lynched are not being lynched. Being too soft on social diseases is just as poisonous as being too strict, but at least over-strictness was able to sustain itself in the past. Moral laxity is not sustainable, it allows the dregs to surface and foul up the entire establishment.

A balance needs to be struck. What that balance is can only be known when the pendulum first swings in both directions. Morality legislation FTL. What we need is cultural reeducation, not enforcement of morality.

[ZenBowman]

Also keep in mind that some people's ideas of morality are radically different from others. For example, some orthodox Brahmins in India believe it is immoral for certain other castes to touch them or enter their cities. This is in fact immoral and barbaric to me.

According to ripper6's moral code, Islam would be banned. Similarly, you may hold some things to be moral that I deem immoral. So who will be the great morality bringer and what morality will he/she bring to enforce upon us all?

[Melkor]

People have stopped worshiping God and started worshiping sex and money. End result? Unhappiness.

You may be aware that recently quality of life in the U.S. declined for the first time in many many decades. I think you can expect more of the same until people return to God. That's just my opinion, based on study of history and teachings of wise men.

[SYRIANKID]

A balance needs to be struck. What that balance is can only be known when the pendulum first swings in both directions. Morality legislation FTL. What we need is cultural reeducation, not enforcement of morality.

Cultural re-education is what brought you today's world. It's fangless and effective only for already enlightened and moral individuals who weren't planning on contributing to the problems to begin with.

The real imbalance is that social harms are not only not being identified, they are not being materially curtailed in any way - and in the history of human civilization the people who unconsciously sabotage society are not affected by good, logical advice alone. In fact, it is taboo to even point them out or even suggest they should be mitigated.

Every society should have a meta-conscience, especially when it reaches the tipping point where people have no internal compasses.

[ZenBowman]

Cultural re-education is what brought you today's world. It's fangless and effective only for already enlightened and moral individuals who weren't planning on contributing to the problems to begin with.

The real imbalance is that social harms are not only not being identified, they are not being materially curtailed in any way - and in the history of human civilization the people who unconsciously sabotage society are not affected by good, logical advice alone. In fact, it is taboo to even point them out or even suggest they should be mitigated.

Every society should have a meta-conscience, especially when it reaches the tipping point where people have no internal compasses.

.

Also keep in mind that some people's ideas of morality are radically different from others. For example, some orthodox Brahmins in India believe it is immoral for certain other castes to touch them or enter their cities. This is in fact immoral and barbaric to me.

According to ripper6's moral code, Islam would be banned. Similarly, you may hold some things to be moral that I deem immoral. So who will be the great morality bringer and what morality will he/she bring to enforce upon us all?

Key question: who is going to decide in which direction this societal meta-compass points?

[SYRIANKID]

According to ripper6's moral code, Islam would be banned. Similarly, you may hold some things to be moral that I deem immoral. So who will be the great morality bringer and what morality will he/she bring to enforce upon us all?

While I think ripper6 would ban Islam in name, if he restructured society he would end up adopting an Islamic social and legal model dressed in Christian theological terms. There's no escaping the fact that societies that are spiralling towards a crash have hallmark symptoms with simple, almost intuitive remedies. Humans produce complex thoughts and ideas, but they are susceptible to very mundane diseases and are recalibrated with practically universal and simple therapies.

[ZenBowman]

While I think ripper6 would ban Islam in name, if he restructured society he would end up adopting an Islamic social and legal model dressed in Christian theological terms. There's no escaping the fact that societies that are spiralling towards a crash have hallmark symptoms with simple, almost intuitive remedies. Humans produce complex thoughts and ideas, but they are susceptible to very mundane diseases and are recalibrated with practically universal and simple therapies.

Such as?

[frankenstein]

I respectfully disagree

Things are obviously changing these days and marriage just isn't what it used to be. Just look at the divorce rate! People are getting married for all the wrong reasons. Women are becoming more career oriented and less family oriented. When women entered the work force that drove the cost of living sky high where now it almost requires a working spouse to support a household with kids.

Also, you have to look at the "independent woman" craze. Many women do not want to be in relationships any more. They're quick to say "I don't need a man!!". The problem is, they're still going to have sex. Now if they have an unexpected preganancy, it's not with a boyfriend or a guy who she actually cares about, it's with a random guy she thought was cute.

All these things contribute to the rise is single mothers.

Some good points there. The amusing thing is how many woman declare their independence but are only more independent than women 100 years ago with finances, being able to pay for things. What's truly amazing is the difference in races. Clearly religious fervor and taking care of a kid you are the father of in the USA are disconnected.

[Skettch]

What makes someone part of the "west" or "east"? You are either part of the solution or part of the problem - that's a better way to think about the world.

I agree, although sometimes out of spite I wish I could watch from afar as it all falls apart.

I live in the west, it doesn't please me to see society crumble behind its tinseled technological facade especially when I understand the root causes and the solutions to stopping the decline.

The real problem is that people are being programmed to hate the medicine to their own diseases. They are being forbidden the freedom to talk about the elephant in the room and are told to blame external enemies. Human civilization has worked for a few thousand years based on certain indelible and nascent principles. These are systematically being attacked and socially re-engineered. The result is socio-moral meltdown - something no amount of technology can save.

I think one of the most ironic effects of amoral freedom is that one becomes enslaved to the basest human desires. This type of slavery is invisible and grips you until it kills you.

Your posts are excellent, the part I bolded sums up whats occuring.

[saloman]

http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/story.as...menu368_2_15_1

Other findings in the report include:

Countries with a higher percentage of births to unwed mothers than recorded in the United States include Iceland (66 percent), Sweden (55 percent), Norway (54 percent), France (50 percent), Denmark (46 percent) and the U.K. (44 percent).

Countries with lower rates of out-of-wedlock births than the United States include Ireland (33 percent), Germany (30 percent), Canada (30 percent), Spain (28 percent), Italy (21 percent) and Japan (2 percent).

In the United States, out-of-wedlock births are highest among women in their early 20s and lowest among girls younger than 18 and women older than 35.

The majority of births to teens are to unmarried teens. For those aged 15 to 17, 93 percent of births are out-of-wedlock, as are 84 percent of births to teens 18 to 19 years old.

Among women in their 20s, 45 percent of births are to those who are not married. In 2007, among women 20 to 24 years old, 60 percent of births were out-of-wedlock, up from 52 percent in 2002. Almost 33 percent of births to women 25 to 29 years old were out-of-wedlock in 2007, up from 25 percent in 2002.

Hispanic women have the highest out-of-wedlock birth rate (106 births per 1,000). The rate for black women is 72 per 1,000 births; for white women, it's 32 per 1,000.

What do the stats look like in Muslim countries?

btw, I can see your naval

[voltio8836]

Easy explanation:

-More single women are having babies because there are higher divorce rates


-There are higher divorce rates because of many factors: women have more financial independence, feminism, globalization etc

Financial independence -> women don't have to take **** from guys anymore and can divorce and be ok. Honestly, if my mother knew how to speak english, she would probably divorce my dad 10 years ago.

Feminism-> no explanation

Globalization-> People have easier access to media and pictures of hot girls. Thus people's standards for mates might be abit skewed.

[Lloyd Braun]

Many societies, especially here in the US, are becoming rapidly more narcissistic. Children are coddled and impressed upon how "special" they really are. People grow up with an overinflated sense of self-entitlement and the feeling that they are "the most important one." In a marriage, which requires a humble nature and compromise, this is not an ideal trait and thus people seem to find it harder to maintain relationships when they are more in love with themselves and the thought of the "ideal relationship".......aka.......one where their partner fulfills ALL their need as they have been raised to believe is necessary.

People are also more likely to "play the field" as we have this near-obsessive desire for MORE AND MORE. No matter how good your partner might be, its hard to shake the feeling that just around the corner there exists someone who is better, someone who is sexier, smarter, wealthier, who will serve YOU better.....etc......etc. It seems to me that people often fail to appreciate what they have and have a nagging sense of needing something else to satisfy themselves. Just some of my thoughts.

Post of the Year.

[Bujumbles]

so what's wrong with that? Why not complain about fathers becoming less family oriented then?

.............women valueing their careers over traditional family values brought on by the feminist movement. orrrrrrr in other words, marriage is no longer valued.

[CloudSurfer]

I don't even want to get started on this subject cuz I got waaaaaay too much to say about it hehe...carry on

[Dave22reborn]

I disagree with the other poster who said these days people are less marriage material. That's BS. That's like saying "oh kids these days," something adults have been saying for thousands of years. I would say even though people live more in cities than ever before, we are more disconnected than ever before. Technology plays a role. There are a lot more Travis Bickle's out there.

Also we're living alot longer nowadays. Not that long ago life expectancy was very low.

[SYRIANKID]

What do the stats look like in Muslim countries?

These issues don't even register on the radar in Muslim countries. Even in countries that don't whip or stone you for sexual degeneracy, the Middle East still has STRONG family values and enough big brothers and cousins to straighten out trouble makers in the old fashioned way.

We're not politically correct at all in the Middle East. We have no problem calling immorality as "immorality" and taking matters into our own hands when infractions occur.

btw, I can see your naval

I've since fired my photographer.

[codhead]

Not a very religious person, so it doesn't bother me, at face value. But there is overwhelming evidence that supports the intact family unit. Encarceration, drug use, poverty rates, high-school dropout etc. rates are greatly increased when no father is present. I think it is neither a good progression nor a natural one.

I don't exactly think this is a direct biproduct of our culture being more accepting of single mother homes. I think the single mother phenomenon sprang up as a response to the development of the welfare state in the '60's. Blacks were actually more likely to get married than whites were before then. There is a very good video on youtube that has Thomas Sowell debating a Pennsylvania welfare bureaucrat. The video was made in the late '70's and a lot of Sowell's arguements against the welfare state and its consequences were pretty spot on, especially today.

[SYRIANKID]

Such as?

Such as it's time to enshrine some moral principles into the legal system.

[frankenstein]

These issues don't even register on the radar in Muslim countries. Even in countries that don't whip or stone you for sexual degeneracy, the Middle East still has STRONG family values and enough big brothers and cousins to straighten out trouble makers in the old fashioned way.

We're not politically correct at all in the Middle East. We have no problem calling immorality as "immorality" and taking matters into our own hands when infractions occur.

That does sound like an appealing aspect to be around.