π•―π–”π–”π–’π–˜π–ˆπ–—π–”π–‘π–‘β„’

Article kinda misses the bigger picture and treats it like ideology vs contraception, but doesn’t really dig into the real drivers. Skips male fertility, dating/culture shifts, and big stuff like housing, childcare, debt. Also assumes birth control is the main lever but doesn’t say what would actually raise birth rates. Feels like the problem’s structural, not medical, and no one’s really addressing that. Yet.

https://undark.org/2026/04/28/birth-rates-title-x/ #Fertility

Apr 28 at 6:41pmWeb
Show threadCyApr 29
People are having children at age 45? Even if that were true, it's a recipe for disaster. Kids never see their grandparents. 45 year old gonads are failing, notorious for fertility issues and birth defects. Especially men. Speaking from personal experience, it is almost impossible to reproduce after age 40, and I don't think I'm a statistical outlier.

If you're "postponing births rather than forgoing them" all the way to age 45, you are doing something wrong. Peak fertility of human beings is age 16, and it starts declining as early as 25. having kids at 45 isn't "more contingent and more planned" it's sick, antisocial, and dumb. It's the worst time to reproduce.

I dunno about Title X, something something, rely on local systems not gigantic nations mumble.
Show threadπ•―π–”π–”π–’π–˜π–ˆπ–—π–”π–‘π–‘β„’6d ago
@cy The whole thing is absurd. Boost fertility rates to we can strip mine the planet to support an enormous population? Raise children in a toxic environment? Make it a crippling economic burden to have children? It’s a real humdinger.