|
Saladman posted:Yeah that’s kind of misleading / sensationalized "same rights to remarry as a man," it should be "has the same waiting period between divorce and remarriage as a man." I had a look and I think it's an effect of the data all coming via the world bank's gender surveys. They need simple criteria that wildly different systems can be judged against, so they end up with a lot of different "can do X in the same way as a man" (apply for a passport, travel outside their home etc.). The actual website for accessing the data sucks but they have these annual snapshots which on the second page cite the legal provisions for each criteria, e.g. this one for Qatar: https://wbl.worldbank.org/content/dam/documents/wbl/2022/snapshots/Qatar.pdf Even for the fairly simple text of the laws in question for most of them in Qatar (the 2006 Family Law) you'd have to be both a local legal expert and have a lot of knowledge about the context to fairly evaluate the significance of the various provisions (e.g. the husband can withdraw marital support from his wife if she travels without his permission), so it's much easier to just ask "are the rules symmetrical".
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 11:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Yeah I think every neofash across Europe and America has noticed that the way that you increase birth rates is by rolling back women's lib and rolling forward heteropatriarchy. I was going to let the subject of fertility go, because it feels like we've been discussing it for ages now, but I really don't think this is true at all. East Asian cultures, even today, are more traditional and patriarchal than the West, yet they have far lower fertility rates. Russia for the last two decades has been all about aggressively promoting 'traditional family values', yet their fertility rate has barely budged and is still below that of most of the rest of Europe. Puerto Rico has serious problems with its widespread machismo mentality, yet they have one of the lowest fertility rates of any territory in the world. The list goes on. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the promotion of 'heteropatriarchy' has a positive effect on fertility once the final stages of the demographic transition have already been reached, and I find this to be a dangerous view. We desperately need pro-natal policies that not only do not deny modern realities, but actively lean into them to achieve the desired outcome. As I've said before, it should about choice and taking away any and all obstacles that might exist. I haven't closely been following the discussion on the previous page, but even if 'just' 44% of non-parents are theoretically interested in having children, that is still a huge number. The role of the government should be to think long-term by identifying and eliminating these obstacles as much as possible. It's going to have to be a broad array of measures for it to have a significant impact in the aggregate, but I do believe it's achievable. I'm thinking further legislation to protect pregnant mothers and provide paid leave to new parents, generous subsidies for maternity and child care, applying and expanding laws that protect work-life balance, the subsidizing and promotion of all forms of fertility treatment for infertile couples, single people, non-traditional couples, and anyone else who might otherwise struggle, paying special attention to making public spaces child-friendly, and so on. Would it be enough to reach the replacement rate? Probably not, but I do think it would allow for a more gradual and controlled decline, until the situation 'naturally' balances out a few generations from now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 13:47
|
|
|
The way they're planning on doing it isn't just by beating their chests and being manly, it's by limiting access to birth control and abortion to force a rollback to the pre women's lib/demographic transition era. Which is about the worst way of doing anything, but it does increase birth rates. But it does need to be mentioned, because every single one of these new-right movements keeps openly hinting at it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 14:15
|
|
|
Trying to force people to have unwanted and accidental children seems like tinkering with the deck chairs on the Titanic
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 14:33
|
|
|
Just off hand, iirc, one of these graphs (the UK one maybe) is really skewed at the head because of what might be an outlier result. Not able to find the tweet pointing it out right now though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 14:34
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Trying to force people to have unwanted and accidental children seems like tinkering with the deck chairs on the Titanic What seems to happen in reality is that a bunch of women die or get imprisoned and then (in democracies) people get mad and you get kicked out of power. So trying to return to the pre-demographic transition or women's lib days seems like a stupid idea all round, unless these movements are also going to seriously erode democratic rights (which they also keep hinting at).
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 14:39
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:The way they're planning on doing it isn't just by beating their chests and being manly, it's by limiting access to birth control and abortion to force a rollback to the pre women's lib/demographic transition era. That is true, restricting abortion specifically will probably at least have some effect, compared to the general 'family values' blathering. I still don't think it's that effective, though. Russia has been slowly rolling back abortion rights since Putin came to power, and fertility has stayed about the same. Apparently they restricted it even further in late 2023, so we will see if that does anything (although it would be difficult to tell since correlation is not causation). My main point is that you can't turn back the clock, for it to have a significant effect on fertility you would have to roll back women's rights until you're at Afghanistan levels. I suppose you could do it by heavily restricting their access to the labor market and higher education, but almost no one wants that, even on the right. Even if they did want it, it's not politically or practically feasible in the slightest. So I absolutely don't think we should allow social conservatives to monopolize the pro-natal space, especially since with the possible exception of outlawing abortion, which is obviously morally reprehensible, there is no evidence to suggest that any of their proposed policies actually boost fertility. In the case of countries like South Korea, their clinging to outdated notions seems to be causing conflict and depressing fertility, if anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 14:42
|
|
|
I think to do that you'd have to stick strictly to a sort of social-liberal framework of "we should have a society that helps people have the family that they want" and hope that works for your demographics, because the minute "shrinking native population" or "we can't rely on 'importing' immigrants" rhetoric creeps in then those guys always seem to pop up and go "no wait I've got a far simpler solution to your problem!" And even when their solution is trash it gets a lot of attention, because it has a bunch of loud voices behind it. There's far less way for them to hijack "family planning and family services at every size" though, and no need to mention migration at all. Although on the topic, the vast majority of migration in most places in internal, and the rhetoric we always hear about in that case is 'levelling up' or 'supporting left behind regions'. Talk of internal passports is unthinkable in the West, so that's an interesting comparison. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 15:03
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I think to do that you'd have to stick strictly to a sort of social-liberal framework of "we should have a society that helps people have the family that they want" I think that is exactly what we should be doing, as being both the most morally correct and effective approach. If there are people on the left that don't like the idea of 'promoting natalism', or people on the right that don't like the idea of gay people raising children, then gently caress 'em. I strongly believe that, along with climate change, population aging is far too important an issue for it to become entangled in today's dumbass culture war.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 15:12
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:That is true, restricting abortion specifically will probably at least have some effect, compared to the general 'family values' blathering. I still don't think it's that effective, though. Russia has been slowly rolling back abortion rights since Putin came to power, and fertility has stayed about the same. Apparently they restricted it even further in late 2023, so we will see if that does anything (although it would be difficult to tell since correlation is not causation). Russia’s fertility is an example of misogynist policies failing to overcome the material reasons people don’t want to have kids. Kinda weird they only now came up as an example of a demographic crisis. Double crisis even, it was already among the oldest and least fertile countries in 2019, and then Stuff happened between 2020 and now that lead to millions of extra people leaving or dying. They ain’t making it up with immigration either. The net migration is still slightly positive but it’s mostly migrant workers from poorer soviet countries, not people who want to stay permanently.  For reference Kazakhstan is at 3+ kids per woman and significantly more optimistic, both in facts and in vibes. The migrant worker flow will dry up and then it’ll be no one going to Russia as it is expect sex tourists and western nazi personalities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 15:37
|
|
|
I agree, it's a shame calling out birth rates falling being bad kind of feels like a right wing talking point. Absolutely no judgement for people that don't personally want kids, especially in our present climate/culture, but I do feel like there's something sad about it. Not to single whoever it was out, but I keep thinking back to that comment someone made here about how "nobody likes looking after other people's children" -- like, I admit I don't love it either, but isn't there something terribly broken about that attitude? Why are we in this horrible atomized society where looking after the young became such a terrible burden? Where we can just wall off a major part of the human life cycle -- that every one of us went through -- and never have to interact with it, and have that just be okay? Not saying everyone has to absolutely love kids and obviously there are valid sources for a lot of the hostility towards notions around having to raise them, at least for some women, but... it's something society can't get by without fixing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 15:48
|
|
|
e: nvm, not the place for this discussion
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 15:50
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I agree, it's a shame calling out birth rates falling being bad kind of feels like a right wing talking point. Silver Lining: There's going to be a lot of good deals on used cars and houses in the United States, Korea, Russia, and Japan around 2048.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 15:53
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I agree, it's a shame calling out birth rates falling being bad kind of feels like a right wing talking point. I personally am not interested in having children, mostly because I just don't think I would make a very good father due to various goony brain problems. That is my choice, and obviously everyone should have that choice, in either direction. At the same time, I agree with the sentiment you're expressing here. I absolutely despise the 'childfree' movement, or those childless people who always complain they're not getting as many tax breaks. gently caress you, parents should be getting far more tax breaks and a bunch of other things as well, their kids are going to be paying for my retirement.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 15:55
|
|
|
Maps! (no claim is made towards the accuracy of any of these)   e: the level of variation in these first two is way higher than I would have guessed before seeing them.  this one's just sad. distortion park fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Feb 6, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:22
|
|
|
Possibly related and very accurate:
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:30
|
|
|
You are all really weird about this topic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:31
|
|
|
Minenfeld! posted:You are all really weird about this topic. wow someone really has some insecurity when it comes to penis sizes
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:32
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Possibly related and very accurate: My penis size is roughly 100% of my penis. Does that mean, according to this chart, I am roughly 50x bigger than the average Swede? What are they measuring with that percentage?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:32
|
|
|
distortion park posted:
China's is the result of the one-child policy combined with lingering patriarchal norms, of course. What is going on in the Caucasus, differential migration? mobby_6kl posted:Possibly related and very accurate: My penis is 20% at the very least
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:33
|
|
|
Archduke Frantz Fanon posted:wow someone really has some insecurity when it comes to penis sizes 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:34
|
|
|
perhaps it is pct of height? by volume vs their other head?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:35
|
|
|
I think it's just approximating.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:36
|
|
|
distortion park posted:perhaps it is pct of height? by volume vs their other head? The average Swede has a 1.37 inch penis? Gotta be rough to be in the bottom 50%.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:37
|
|
|
distortion park posted:I had a look and I think it's an effect of the data all coming via the world bank's gender surveys. They need simple criteria that wildly different systems can be judged against, so they end up with a lot of different "can do X in the same way as a man" (apply for a passport, travel outside their home etc.). The actual website for accessing the data sucks but they have these annual snapshots which on the second page cite the legal provisions for each criteria, e.g. this one for Qatar: https://wbl.worldbank.org/content/dam/documents/wbl/2022/snapshots/Qatar.pdf Thanks! Yeah even besides the marriage-wait-time-after-divorce delays there are lots of inequalities that will affect people more severely. The waiting time seems like a comparatively tertiary issue... unless you're Imran Khan, who just got a multi-year prison sentence for not waiting sufficiently long (not sure what sentence his wife got). For instance, Tunisia is the only Arab country where muslim women can marry non-muslim men, while men from those countries can all marry Jewish and Christian women without issue. Lebanon is equal in that light in that no one can marry outside of their faith, although they do recognize marriages performed abroad, unlike most (all?) of the others. In most (all?) of those countries though, even men can't marry e.g. Hindu women. Then there are also tons of related issues, e.g. default inheritance is halved for daughters as compared to sons in non-Tunisian Arab countries. But yeah also for birth rates, even Saudi Arabia has a pretty low-and declining-birth rate (2.18), and while it's no longer the worst, it's still not exactly a paragon of women's rights.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:38
|
|
|
Up to 5% more person, per person. The only solution to population concerns I will hear is recursive approximation until you get the number you want.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:39
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:My penis size is roughly 100% of my penis. I assume it's % above baseline. Presumably, they baselined it on the USA?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:40
|
|
|
head to shaft ratio
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:46
|
|
|
IMO it's the angle of the dangle, in percent. Like slope of a road, rise over run.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 16:49
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Trying to force people to have unwanted and accidental children seems like tinkering with the deck chairs on the Titanic I mean, if you assumed people wouldn't change their behavior at all under that regime...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 17:10
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:If you ended abortions in the US, the birthrate would increase by 25%, equivalent to about 0.4 births/woman, which would put the US very close to replacement level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
I posted a map showing the fertility rate per U.S. state a few pages ago, but it's one of those cases where you have to be careful distinguishing correlation from causation. The states that are most likely to restrict abortion will often have higher fertility to begin with, for the same reasons - they have a more rural, conservative, non-coastal culture compared to the national average. However, if it turns out that these states experience a higher increase (or lower decrease) in the fertility and/or birth rates after the striking down of Roe vs. Wade, the restriction of abortion could well be playing a part. I personally think the effect will be rather limited, since there are so many ways to circumvent the restrictions, from traveling to neighboring states to having abortions performed 'illegally'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 17:27
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I agree, it's a shame calling out birth rates falling being bad kind of feels like a right wing talking point. I would really like to be able to discuss things without immediately being stereotyped. I know this isn't the world we live in now, but this thread at least is pretty good about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 19:01
|
|
|
Phlegmish posted:I was going to let the subject of fertility go, because it feels like we've been discussing it for ages now, but I really don't think this is true at all. East Asian cultures, even today, are more traditional and patriarchal than the West, yet they have far lower fertility rates. Whether East Asian cultures are more patriarchal or not, they still have high female labor participation rates, which means women are given freedom from economic coercion. Promoting trad values, or even limiting things like birth control and abortion access, still weigh far less than women having to freedom to manage their own lives, because they have financial independence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 19:23
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I think it's just approximating. I feel like a real capita per capita map could maybe say something deep about the nature of how a lot of areas are full of people who don't get properly documented or are in various states of non-citizen resident.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 20:18
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I feel like a real capita per capita map could maybe say something deep about the nature of how a lot of areas are full of people who don't get properly documented or are in various states of non-citizen resident.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 20:56
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:My penis size is roughly 100% of my penis. If you have to ask, you are telling on yourself
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 21:17
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 21:53
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Trying to force people to have unwanted and accidental children seems like tinkering with the deck chairs on the Titanic I don't know how many of these women (and probably a lot of them are better described as girls) would have had an abortion, but there's about 26,000 people who have gotten pregnant from a rape and can't get an abortion in Texas since they basically outlawed abortion a year ago. That doesn't include consensual sex where whatever birth control they were using didn't work or dumb teenagers. Air Skwirl fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Feb 6, 2024 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 22:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:19 |
|
|
These days you can't get a job conducting the dick census.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2024 22:13
|
|