No, likely would have to apply to both sexes. But practically, yes
Not ideal but I don't see a solution unless it were for men to take on half of the childcare & flexible, reduced hours etc.
-
-
That might make women with intellectual passions & ambition more willing to have more children. If it didn't have to prevent them doing that
-
Yes, but you are assuming men want that. Two way street. Both 'independent' now.
-
No, I'm not. I'm floating hypotheticals. Men or women who want to stabilise the population could sacrifice their career goals.
-
But I think in reality, most won't. They'll pursue their own goals anyway. But sometimes think it's only women who shld sacrifice goals.
-
Assuming women's goals line up with men's. Women have more options in the mating game. Not about sacrifice but reality
-
Yes, you've said you don't want to discuss whether anything can or should be done abt it, just point out the issue so not much more to say.
-
Well, that would be a long discussion...and it's bedtime soon!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Won't happen. Plus, female hypergamy means educated women less likely to find a mate (for children). Irony: independence = fewer options
-
Probably not, no. But women can choose this if they want kids badly enough. I've way more qualifications/earning power than my husband.
-
That's fine but unless something changes, the trends are clear: educated women less likely to pass on genes. Can't be good
-
It would be good if they passed on more but, of course, always more unskilled jobs that vitally need doing so opposite would also be prob
-
means a 'dumbing down' of society. Plus unskilled job might be disappearing.
-
OK, well, I am going to go to bed because there's not really anything to discuss here.
-
Yeah, me too!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.