I agree and love this take (great answer to Peter’s fave question btw) but why older men? Shouldn’t this apply to both men and women? If I had to do it again, I would have had kids at 18 or 22.
-
-
- 12 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
As opposed to...? Not sure what point you thought I was making
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Having kids is a luxury in SF/NYC. Rent gobbles up biggest part of budget, childcare is $$$. Easy to put off having kids for another 5 years while you work hard to strike it rich to be able to buy a house and have kids :)
-
Yep, but a lot of women have been fed unrealistic expectations about aging + fertility. It's not always as easy to get pregnant after 35 — or even 30 — as we were told, even with treatments. It seems very likely that the delay is suppressing family sizespic.twitter.com/1BbSjkDQjw
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
SF is peak city, walking through 'grooming' phase in behavioral sink. Its systemic, you cannot make parenting attractive for productivity oriented ppl (*scale!). What are arguments for upping quantity in place of quality? Tax base? Reminder: Black death started renaissance.pic.twitter.com/wSHrLgCR6l
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The place sounds like Children Of Men.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I don't want to state the obvious here but it's because it has the highest density of gays besides prob Manhattan
-
Haven't seen a lot of evidence that SF has *that* many more LGBT folks than other major metro areas. Considering that those figures include bi people in m/f relationships & that women of any orientation can pretty easily have children, I wouldn't expect a super strong effect
- 1 more reply
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.
US fertility rate is at a 30-year low
last