In news that will shock precisely no-one, fewer women than ever are having babies – and we now know it’s not simply down to choosing to be child-free, but because of “immature men” who delay In news that will shock precisely no one, fewer women than ever are having babies – and we now know it’s not simply down to choosing to be child-free, but because of “immature men” who delay major life milestones such as settling down and getting married.
Some three million women aged 16 to 45 are at risk of missing out on motherhood, according to the Centre for Social Justice, due to several factors, including not being able to find the right partner. But even when we do find one, men’s “extended adolescence” (including not leaving home until they’re 25) means they are dithering too long over having kids – to our detriment.
Well, blow me down. As a woman who has been in the dating pool for the past five years, I’m not surprised by the findings, or by the fairly bleak outlook for today’s “Peter Pan generation”. In fact, the only part of the research that made me raise a sceptical eyebrow was that the numbers weren’t higher. Because anecdotally, the situation is truly dire.
I can offer a raft of sobering stories, from friends dating 54-year-old f***bois who “can’t commit”, to sexagenarian “situationships”, to my own experiences with the kinds of men the report is talking about. It says the drop is due to a “delay” in the maturation of young men, who take up responsibilities later in life than previous generations. This has a knock-on effect on both the age at which they get married and when they feel ready to have a child.
I relate. I have dated men in the past who – even at 50 – state on their Hinge profiles that they’re “not sure” whether they want kids; who have no qualms about admitting they’re “still on the fence”. One man, who had just turned 41, told me he “didn’t want to date anyone with children”, despite knowing that I had two. When I asked him why, he said he was ambivalent about having kids but wanted to “keep his options open”.
The real problem is: men are kidding themselves. Because a biological clock exists for men, too – we just don’t hear enough about it. In fact, a 2020 study found conception is 30 per cent less likely for men over 40 than it is for men under 30… and while you get the odd anomaly (like Robert De Niro having yet another baby at 79), the truth is that a lot of men are leaving it far too late to get their act together when deciding on their life choices. And it’s not fair on women. It’s leading to a cohort of “missing mothers” and Britain’s birth rate is continuing to fall as a result.
Now, men aren’t the only problem (other factors for childlessness include the cost of living crisis, career goals, the tremulous housing market and finances) but men’s failure to grow up and leave the nest, while some simultaneously buy into the kind of incel nonsense proliferating online in the “manosphere”, is proving a toxic – and infertile 0 combination.
It’s also a catch-22, as our plummeting national birth rate clashes with a rise in “trad wife” ideals, pushed by certain politicians. Danny Kruger MP dropped bombshell in February when he said that should his party come to power, they would “reset Britain’s sexual culture”, undo the sexual revolution of the 1960s (the very one that emancipated women by introducing the contraceptive pill) and would reverse the 2022 arrival of no fault divorces, which would adversely impact women – it would mean we would have to go back to “proving” or “justifying” a reason for divorce. This is the party that has been leading the opinion polls for the best part of a year.
Meanwhile, last month, Baroness Valerie Ann Amos’s damning preliminary report into England’s maternity services was published, revealing deeply entrenched issues affecting women and babies and their care. We also know that pregnancy and maternity discrimination is still rife, with the campaign group Pregnant Then Screwed reporting pervasive issues with childcare, flexible working and parental leave.
It’s not a pretty picture for prospective parents, is it? And when we take all of these factors into consideration and also look at the costs (parents in the UK are still likely to spend more of their wages on childcare than in countries such as Germany and France, with the average cost of full-time nursery care for a child under two in England coming in at an extortionate £12,425), then it should be no surprise at all that fewer women than ever are choosing to become mothers.
We’ve been sold “the motherhood lie” for far too long, thanks to overly-romantic (and Disney-esque) ideals of marriage and dual parental responsibility, when the stark reality is that women are being told to breed more (but they struggle to get abortions); to give up their careers and be “trad wives” (and we know that women consistently do the lion’s share of the domestic labour, even when they work full-time themselves) – all against the backdrop of influencer Andrew Tate – while the men we’re told to marry are stuck in their childhood bedrooms beneath a Batman duvet cover at the age of 25.
With all that as a halcyon “vision” of the future, I wouldn’t exactly be rushing into marriage or motherhood either – would you?
Hence then, the article about britain s not having babies and there s a three letter reason why was published today ( ) and is available on inews ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Britain’s not having babies and there’s a three letter reason why )
Also on site :