Fortunately for the species, over 95% plan on having unprotected sex
this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
15 points (82.6% liked)
World News
38847 readers
1829 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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 [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I can't imagine a lot of 40-year-olds are still planning to have kids so this number seems a little suspect to me.
Thanks for this, so I redid the math using the two youngest categories (up to 34 years old) and the % goes from 21% to 26% 🤷♂️
The light blue section doesn't count towards either yes or no, right? Because it's the "I don't know" answer.
I was sitting here wondering how they came to 21% at all without only looking at the oldest category, and even then it's only a fourth that would not get children.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't basic biology say that it gets more dangerous for people to have kids the older they are? Let alone the virility of men over 40.
It's a risk to have a child at any age but the risk does raise as you get older scare tactics says it doubles and such after 40 but that doubling is like a 0.5% chance changing to a 1% chance. Adam ruins everything did a piece on this that explains it pretty well.
But, the answers do specify "have or raise" so adoption is also included.
the 35-44 year olds skew the data quite heavily. In that age it's dangerous for women to have kids so over 50% of them saying no makes sense.
Maybe if they created an environment conducive to having kids, more people would have them. Failing and underfunded public education, increasingly expensive cost of childcare, lower standard of living. I could go on about climate and geopolitical uncertainty but you get the idea.
Only a fifth of Canadians younger than 50 plan on having kids
That's sustainable as long as those 1 in 5 Canadians who do have a kid each have on average at least 10 kids.
The poll found 51% say it is “not their responsibility” to fund other people’s childcare, with the most likely group to say this are those who have raised children to the age of 18 or older, where the proportion rises to 59%.
While I've got sympathy for that position, the flip side of that is that it's taxes from those kids who will be paying for pension, medical care, and so forth of people who don't have kids.
So if you don't want to pay for someone else's kids, it does seem a bit unfair that their kids should pay for your old age. I mean, it required a lot of time and work and money on the part of people who did have kids to raise that kid.
The social welfare model in most countries, as things stand, is rather loaded against people who have kids.
That argument only works on people that believe they will live long enough to see those benefits, or experience them regardless of how long they do live.
In the US at least, there is no reason to believe anyone under 50 is going to "retire," if they don't already have the full funds to retire. Canada's right wing parties desperately want to copy the US so they can get paid what US politicians get paid.
In this economy you gotta wait until your 70s before you humour the thought of having children.
Besides, to match the government budgets we probably should hold off until we reach 1830s population numbers.
People PLAN to have kids? ;)
Yeah honestly 20% seems about right, if not a little high.
I never understood how someone gets pregnant accidentally. I have 2 kids and both where very on purpose.
I never understood how someone gets pregnant accidentally.
...seriously?
Yeah you don't want to get the girl pregnant you don't cum in her pussy . It's that easy I did it for many years .
If you see the world that simplistic, maybe you should have refrained from procreating.
Birth control can fail. Pills can be forgotten or interfere with other medications, IUDs can fall out unnoticed, condoms can break or slip off, etc.
If you have sex often enough, the chances of having birth control fail at some point creep up to 100%, and if you're "lucky" that results in a pregnancy, and if the mother either has no access to abortions, or simply doesn't want one, you have a child.
Unplanned doesn't mean unwanted or unloved. Many people in principle would like a child but don't know if now is the right time and this person is the right partner, but if random chance over, they'll take that hint and become parents.
Seriously. Did "the condom broke" stop being an insult about why people exist?
No one said it was difficult, we said it was an accident. As in someone has sex without the express intention of bringing a human into the world.
My brother had 2 unplanned children using the pull out method. First time should have taught him it's not an effective birth control, but it wasn't until the second kid that he really accepted it.
So ummm I guess it's not that easy for everyone lol