The family model is changing.

[Jalpha]

So recently Australia made a huge drama about gay marriage. They spent emergency funds on what was essentially a voluntary census which revealed that a majority of 61% agreed that gays should be allowed to marry. Surprise

So this got me thinking. If a man and a woman is no longer the only acceptable family model then what other possibilities might there be. Well, it turns out that the family model has been changing for a lot longer than the advent of permissible homosexual relations.

Single mothering is a growing trend. This is not about women being taken advantage of and ending up unwillingly pregnant, at least not entirely. Many women have realised they no longer require a man in their lives and that they are quite capable (or at least so they claim) of raising children on their own. Men have been slow to adapt.

There is a waiting line for quality sperm...

Moving on.

~84% of single parents are female. Their barrier of entry into parenthood is very low however that isn't the point. What about the other 16%? Well presumably they are men. How does this happen? There are men who take up the slack for basket case women that's a certainty. The rest though forked out an extrardinary amount of money to pay to have child/ren in their lives without commiting to a woman.

Now this brings up some interesting concepts regarding the development of out species in the future and also about equality.

Should the barrier of entry for women be raised of should it be lowered for men?

[Potjeh]

Get rid of alimony and you'll see divorce rates plummet.

[Jalpha]

That's true but it's also a step backward. Society tried that family model and it doesn't work anymore here in the west.

It's not supposed to be about taking things away from women as much as it should be about giving things to men, in the broader sense of sexual equality.

Again I reiterate that men have been very slow to adapt to the underlying societal changes in the last few generations. The rules have changed. If alimony is an inevitability, and certainly for anyone with money it should be of great concern, then bend with the breeze, sway and find a different way around.

[shubla]

~84% of single parents are female.

Men cant get pregnant and have children must be a part of the reason.
I dont know about other countries. But at least in Finland if two happen to divorce, woman automatically gets the children, (almost)no matter what. Even though their dad would want to take the children and would be better option for them ( for example not having mental illnesses or being financially more stable )

Having children or a woman is pointless In 2017. Children are expensive. Women are traitorous, and expensive.

Its too liberal these days.
Not so long ago you had to get married and stay married, or you would be economically screwed and treated as a loser and such. These days people in many countries think its OK not to be married, or have kids, like ever. Which is unnatural, and causes the degeneration of human species. Not that there would be any point in preserving humans.

Equality this equality that.
Oh come on.

[Potjeh]

How is removal of alimony a step backwards? There is no good reason for it exist. It's like if you quit your job your employer has to keep paying you wages.

[Jalpha]

Men can't get pregnant and there are not vats of embryonic fluid like from Final Fantasy 7 yet... But there is IVF and surrogacy, its just expensive. Arguably this is a good thing from a hitleresque mindset because it exchanges survival of the fittest for survival of the most financially successful, which seems to be the only trait that matters in society today so...

It is ruined by just every trailerpark skank having twelve children though.

I agree with your misanthropic view, and in most circumstances people are reproducing for the wrong reasons like hurr durr passing on my genetics is lifes true meaning. I argue that children are much less valuable a contribution to society than are ideas.

If as a man you have managed to build a legacy though, if you have oportunities to provide and the finances and maturity to raise them well then it might be nice to hqve someone to leave it all behind to.

Otherwise I agree, people don't need to have children, the world doesn't need more people and people are too selfish and lacking of the insignt to realise this.

Okay Potjeh, not saying it's a good thing but I am saying you aren't getting rid of it so you're pissing in the wind. It's a step backwards because it takes us back to where we were, a place where a woman could be trapped in a relationship and helpless about it. It may not be working as intended but it was implemented for a reason.

[shubla]

Men can't get pregnant and there are not vats of embryonic fluid like from Final Fantasy 7 yet... But there is IVF and surrogacy, its just expensive. Arguably this is a good thing from a hitleresque mindset because it exchanges survival of the fittest for survival of the most financially successful, which seems to be the only trait that matters in society today so...

It is ruined by just every trailerpark skank having twelve children though.

I agree with your misanthropic view, and in most circumstances people are reproducing for the wrong reasons like hurr durr passing on my genetics is lifes true meaning. I argue that children are much less valuable a contribution to society than are ideas.

If as a man you have managed to build a legacy though, if you have oportunities to provide and the finances and maturity to raise them well then it might be nice to hqve someone to leave it all behind to.

Otherwise I agree, people don't need to have children, the world doesn't need more people and people are too selfish and lacking of the insignt to realise this.

Okay Potjeh, not saying it's a good thing but I am saying you aren't getting rid of it so you're pissing in the wind. It's a step backwards because it takes us back to where we were, a place where a woman could be trapped in a relationship and helpless about it. It may not be working as intended but it was implemented for a reason.

I think that modern medicine is ruining human genetics because even the most pathetic ones survive enough to reproduce, leading to further worsening of genepool.

Children are valuable contribution to society, you have to contribute a bit more than 2 children to keep society afloat.

"There are so many people in earth anyway" is a stupid argument. Theres a lot of people in earth for sure, but they are not equally divided around the world. Think about your own country, not the world. The reason why population is rising is caused by some few countries in Africa and such, like nigeria. Although population in many many other countries is decreasing, which is worrying.

I also think that if you decide to have children with somebody, you do not have the right to divorce. Too bad if you made a bad decision back then. Maybe try not to have children in your next life.

[sMartins]

We are too many and we are destroying the planet and ourself, and we deserve that, but ..... Life finds a Way!

[Jalpha]

Ahh yes, I remember you now. I can say that being raised in a family where the parents are not at peace is a very bad thing. Situations such as the one you're a proponent of create exactly the types of people you despise.

As for population distribution and economic growth through population growth immigration has a much more immediate and ongoing effect than children alone. Also to say that the planet wouldn't be better off without so many of us just seems like arguing for the sake of it.

On genetics Steven Hawking and genetic randomness etc.

I'd be much more interested in your opinion on the capabilities of single mothers versus gay couples and single men.

[shubla]

The capabilities of single mothers versus gay couples and single men.

If the other dies, nothing can be done.
Same-sex relationships should be not publicly allowed. No children to them either.