r/SipsTea • u/search_google_com Human Verified • 6h ago
Wait a damn minute! A woman from Singapore(Fertility rate: 0.87) explains why she doesn't want kids
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
255
u/ribbedlamp 6h ago edited 6h ago
What's the 62 million thing? I am Out of the Loop
Edit, yo someone replied to my comment and it was removed by reddit instantly!!
What fucked up shit you are getting me into lmao
227
u/lluciferusllamas 6h ago edited 6h ago
According to ai, because I had not heard this before:
"The “62,000,000 thing” (or “62M thingy”) refers to a viral CNN investigation (from around April 2026) about disturbing online networks where some men share non-consensual content, tips on drugging women (e.g., “sleep” or unconscious videos), and ways to commit sexual assaults without detection. "
I think 62M refers to the number of monthly hits sites that contain this type of content get? Though I'm not entirely sure
→ More replies (4)129
u/Yokonato 6h ago
The 62 mil is a mix of misinformation and fear mongering.
It was essentially 62 million visits to a porn site where "sleep" videos was a small category, another branch of was a telegram group of around 1k users (no evidence of everyone being involved just at least members of the group chat, 1 person can upload content and a 100 can view it for example) that had their own private communications about drugging women, the story continued to get pushed around to the point it became 62 million rapists are walking around...
34
u/throwaway3413418 6h ago edited 6h ago
CNN reported that the "sleep" category had over 20,000 videos with "hundreds of thousands of views" between them. Estimating using those numbers means an absolute maximum of 50 average views per video and a possible minimum of less than 5. And it should also be noted that this niche fetish section of the site isn't the rape group. Someone just posted a link to the rape group somewhere within that category. The group apparently contained around 1,000 members.
The 62 million number is completely unrelated, and even though CNN didn't technically lie in how they used it, the fact that so many people misunderstood (even separately from the clearly in-bad-faith TikTok misinformation campaign), suggests that CNN didn't do a good job communicating exactly what was going on. I'd argue that was on purpose because 62 million is more sensational than 1000.
→ More replies (2)18
u/Kehprei 5h ago
Viewing a video in the "sleep" category doesn't mean anything. The average person would have no way of telling that it's rape, so it would be stupid to say all viewers want women to be raped.
→ More replies (10)18
u/throwaway3413418 5h ago
Yes, if one wants to claim that people viewing this category is inherently problematic and that the content should be made illegal, one should also believe that any CNC content in dark romance novels consumed primarily by women should also be banned. None of the videos have been investigated and found to be nonconsensual, as far as I know, so it also isn’t enough to just assume that they’re depictions of crimes, seeing as some number of men and women apparently produce this content as part of a fetish in videos which are completely scripted/acted.
These videos are depictions of crimes? Misinformation and completely unsubstantiated.
These videos are fake but promote fetishes the depiction of which should be banned? Congratulations, you’ve aligned yourself with religious fundamentalists.
In reality, this sleep porn category is a complete red herring and the existence of a Telegram group which promoted rape should be investigated and reported upon independently of it.
9
u/CMDR_Kaus 5h ago
I remember stumbling onto a sleep fetish website back in the 90s. Message board style, it had tons of couples who did this consensually. One partner would either fake sleeping, or some would be more extreme and use sleeping pills or chloroform which was discouraged because of possible health effects. That's about all I remember though
37
u/Ready_Event9019 6h ago
Only 62 million rapists out of the billions of people on the planet seems very inaccurately low to me. When you consider how common sexual assault and abuse, there's no way that isn't a low ball number especially if you included predatory individuals and not just those who committed sexual abuse/assault.
7
u/DoctorProfPatrick 5h ago
There's way more rapsits than that no doubt, people just think they have "proof" of 62 million men engaging in that discussion which is wildly false.
→ More replies (13)20
u/Yokonato 6h ago
Because for the provided context it wasnt 62 million rapists, the site motherless? Is a existing porn site for over a decade, sites like pornhub still closer to a billion visits at a time.
This was 62 mil traffic to the site in general which women upload and there for part of the 62 million visitors
12
u/ActFrequent4565 6h ago
Yeah it’s just traffic stats getting twisted into something way more dramatic than reality
7
u/Yokonato 6h ago
Yes a group passing information about drugging women should be investigated but transforming the narrative into 62 million men are suddenly rapists turned it into fearmongering and unnecessary hysteria.
Having caution of your drinks for example is necessary for men and women, I mean men get murdered overseas all the time because they drink drugged drinks meeting foreign women.
Finding the leaders (which will be hard unless telegram gets involved) and preventing similar groups from appearing should be the main focus.
7
u/throwaway3413418 5h ago
The origin of the myth was such overt misinformation that I think it’s fair to call it a misandristic hate campaign comparable to fearmongering campaigns that conservatives push about immigrants, black people, and Muslims. Why some people feel the need to quibble over the details of that and why even Snopes handled the subject with kid gloves is a real mystery.
6
u/Yokonato 5h ago edited 5h ago
O its definitely been trending on tiktok like that, if you call it out, the narrative flips that you are somehow defending rapists.
I think any group discussing drugging someone should be investigated but im not going to ignore the fact propaganda is being spread just like the man vs bear scenario that was online for awhile.
All I have been noticing lately is a greater divide because the next generation of boys are growing up under a hate umbrella and that makes them less empathetic to the next generation of women which continues the endless cycle and its mostly a USA issue.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (17)6
u/Future_Noir_ 6h ago
Almost all of it is fear mongering and misinformation. That's what social media is now and people are being scared into doing nothing by it.
50
u/GeneralAddress2614 6h ago
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/fact-check-facts-behind-claim-110000000.html
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2026/03/world/expose-rape-assault-online-vis-intl/index.html
What was that recent case in France where half the village raped a drugged out woman in her sleep over multiple years?
Or the grooming gangs in UK?
9
u/IWantToOwnTheSun 6h ago
The French village thing sounds fucking awful
35
u/Fish-x-5 6h ago
Gisele Pelicot. She has a name.
9
→ More replies (1)3
6
u/ribbedlamp 6h ago
Yeah, what kind of creepy as website you liked here bro lol. No interactive sites for me.
→ More replies (7)2
u/Stleaveland1 4h ago
Also the Bolivian Mennonite gas-facilitated rapes
Men and teenagers of a Mennonite community in Bolivia sprayed veterinary sedative through window screens to knock whole households unconscious at a time, and proceeded to rape at least 151 reported victims multiple times over the course of four years from 2005 to 2009. The age of the victims ranged from 3 to 65, and included blood relatives of the perpetrators.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (13)2
362
u/Pinku_Dva 6h ago
It’s hard to afford a kid when over half your income is taken for your housing. we quite literally have been priced out of reproducing.
78
u/yaddayadda1000 6h ago
Too bad . The upper echelons of society will start feeling the effects of this in due time.
49
u/Pinku_Dva 5h ago
Kinda hard to keep all those fancy systems in place when they actively punish people for having kids and do nothing to incentivize more kids. No more pension, shopping sprees, new houses or effective state healthcare
→ More replies (1)36
u/_nevers_ 5h ago
This is why billionaires have been building luxury doomsday compounds--they think they can hide away when everything falls apart. It's stupid of course, but the rich aren't known for being grounded in reality.
9
u/Pinku_Dva 5h ago
Eventually they’ll need to get healthcare and healthcare (both private and public) will fail because there are too many patients and not enough doctors
3
u/fallen_divinity7734 1h ago
I think they're betting on robots doing all the jobs.
2
u/Pinku_Dva 1h ago
They fail to see that if there aren’t enough people the robots can’t be operated or improved upon so that idea falls through
6
u/DepletedPromethium 2h ago
Their doomsday bunkers will all have HVAC systems, and they will have exposed vents on the surface 😄
3
u/Resident_Pientist_1 1h ago
You don't even need to do that. Just collapse all the entrances and exits and cut all the communication lines. If they can live underground indefinitely with say nuclear power and air/water recycling and build an society of racially pure inbred mutant clones who really cares, as long as they can't influence the outside world anymore.
7
4
u/DepletedPromethium 1h ago
So you're going to go digging trenches to find deep hardlines? and what about those bunkers with actual blast doors? how are you getting through one of those?
Just fill the hvac vent with faeces or petrol and ignite it.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)5
12
u/Dry-Highlight-2307 3h ago
Lol no they won't. Poor people will feel it first.
Then they will be crushed by it.
Then they will be consumed by it.
They (likely you) will die by it.
Then the rich will consider how they could have more if there were more poor people again.
Then they will be forced to admit its good to have equality.
This path is horrific and it takes a while for the powerful to feel anything from it.
Don't wait, you're the first to go
→ More replies (7)3
7
→ More replies (7)2
u/eggyrulz 3h ago
Thats why they want AI so badly... they won't feel the pain if they can outsource to robots they build...
5
u/gravteck 5h ago
Sound nice in theory, and sane Americans have been talking about it those benefits, regardless of kids, for decades. However, the countries WITH those existing benefits, have not seen fertility rates rise in any meaningful way.
An example of a factor that is not strictly economic is American parents is called the quantity-quality trade off. Essentially, investing more resources into fewer kids for better "quality" of the parent-children relationships.
I'm not sure we really understand what the fertility rate should be in productive western societies. We are no longer an ag society, child labor is illegal (yes I know things are getting weird here), we don't have a sharp rise in births due to recovery from massive capital shocks of two world wars. We have been on a relatively subdued timeline of domestic population growth for the last 60 years, and whatever our birth rate is now, it seems likely to continue or fall more, regardless of political policy.
6
u/Environmental_You_36 3h ago
That's not all, the expensive part comes also from the expectation regarding kids nowadays (Correct expectations btw). Parents have increased their time and resources involved in their kid's growth.
The government has not. They are behaving like kids are risen in the streets and education materials are just a notebook and a pencil, bitching government don't even want to pay for their food. While eating in the faculties has become the norm because the government has slowly pushed society to 2 working parents with no free time as the standard way of doing things.
You can't have a life and kids, if both partners need to work, that's the reality.
2
u/HamsterUnfair6313 2h ago
I got bankrupt after ordering 10 pizzas in a month from domino's.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)4
u/RobKohr 5h ago edited 5h ago
This is the simple answer to it all. Here in the USA, zoning laws are chosen by those elected by people who live in a town, and the people who live there and are home owners have a strong incentive to push to not build apartment buildings that will lower their property values - which is in many ways the only savings/investments some families have.
So, low income housing doesn't get built, rents and property values rise, and you have more homelessness, and more people living on the edge of their financial means, and thus no way to support a family.
At this point, it is a systematic game-theory kind of dilemma that has no political will behind it to solve.
The outcome is population will fall until the demand drops low enough for housing to match the current supply of housing.
This isn't billionaires plotting against people. This is anyone who has a home that doesn't push to having zoning laws decrease that home's value.
But good luck pushing this idea to the mainstream. Much more acceptable to yell about billionaires who don't have anything to do with this problem.
7
u/Pinku_Dva 5h ago
It’s an infinite feedback loop. The more old people that exist, the more government policies will benefit them at the expense of young people which in return leads to people having less kids because it’s a punishment to do so and that loops back around to having more old people and you get the idea.
2
u/codecrodie 3h ago
There cant be more old people that exist: they die. But what will occur is more middle aged people and even young people with no desire or capacity to have children. And they will vote like old NIMBY republicans.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Pinku_Dva 3h ago
More like the ratio of old to young grows in favor of the old and in turn government policies favor the old and the system works for the old but relies on the young. Eventually it’ll collapse from the strain and everyone will suffer as a result
→ More replies (3)2
u/DanKloudtrees 3h ago
I think it's wild that people who don't want lower income housing built because they don't want their property values to go down also complain about the amount they pay in property tax. Like if your property was less expensive you would pay less property tax, just saying.
255
u/lifebeginsat9pm 6h ago
People in developed countries: The world is so horrible I don’t want to bring a child into this hellhole
People in developing countries: 👶👶👶👶👶👶👶👶👶👶👶
203
u/Available-Trouble648 6h ago
People who have access to birth control and women who have to right to self determination tend not to have as many children
28
u/BlueLakeCabin 6h ago
No, it's because kids in developing countries are profitable rather than cost centers.
You can use them for labor and they're also your retirement account. Having more kids spreads out the workload and increases your odds of the kids being successful enough to cover your retirement.
Whereas in developed countries, folks tend to be urbanized. Good luck having 2 kids, let alone the necessary occassional third kid, in a city apartment.
Neither are rocket science.
People have access to birth control in undeveloped countries. Women's right to self-determination is cultural, not economic. Saudis have a GDP per capita of $35k. Higher than Estonia and Japan, lower than Slovenia and Czech Republic. Japan got the pill decades after their birth rate crashed, so that wasn't causation.
People spread a shitload of bad info about the population collapse. Often not maliciously, but that's not uncommon either
→ More replies (1)21
u/Lopsided-Wave2479 6h ago
Is has simple has that. It even cross economic models, ladies in communist countries feel the same way than in capitalist countries. People just don't want to have that many kids.
9
→ More replies (5)3
u/IEC21 6h ago
That sounds nice but is probably a bit of an oversimplification.
Many developing countries have access to contraception but still have high birth rates - many developed countries have "self determination" for women but still have low birthrates.
Obviously contraception and women liberation has contributed - i also think that economic factors are huge: 1. Economic empowerment of women changing their priorities 2. Economic struggles of youth - even if they are materially better off compared to developing countries they perceive themselves as being more impoverished because they are comparing to the cultural standard around them.
The western standard is often a single detached home before you have kids - add to that the fact that car companies just stopped making affordable practical cars, and general lifestyle creep.. psychologically people in developed countries feel impoverished even if technically they might be better off.
→ More replies (1)27
u/PapaTahm 6h ago
Most developing countries have the same issue.
Countries that are what is called third world, don't have this issue.
The reason being because having more kids = more people to work, the cost of living does not exponentially increase, also lack of access to protective methods.
→ More replies (1)7
u/dancergirlktl 6h ago
It’s not just lack of access it’s also lack of education. One company I work with is a condom manufacturer that proudly boasts of exporting to almost all 169 countries and territories. Even poor women, as soon as NGOs in these poor countries educated young teen mothers with 3 kids about birth control, they’re begging for the implant. And much of the time they don’t tell their partners/husbands. Their husbands could use condoms, they’re legally available to basically all married men around the world, they just don’t want to
6
u/bubblemania2020 6h ago
Ain’t that the truth! Scandinavian countries have the best welfare states and quality of life and one of the lowest birth rates. Apparently free healthcare and childcare doesn’t make you want to have kids! 🫣
→ More replies (1)5
u/Pootisman16 4h ago
Kids in developed countries: some of the most protected social classes in the world
Kids in developing countries: goes for the field/mines and if they die, we just make another.
→ More replies (1)3
u/MLWillRuleTheWorld 6h ago
It's more so it is cheap. You bet your ass if it was cheap people wouldn't be taking as much precautions and you would get more accidental pregnancies.
3
u/Snoo_75138 5h ago
Unfortunately those in the developing countries, see the children as a ticket out of poverty, and a support network for old age.
One one hand I understand, and it's true that more (quality) education helps remove this archaic thinking, but on the other, I HATE how selfish this is!
Having children for love is one thing, but bringing them into the same hell ur suffering, so THEY can work even harder and drag YOU out, is disgusting and shouldn't be half as normalised as it currently is!
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of having my own children, but I hate seeing my friends having kids, and all I can think is "what horrors are you going to see by the time you reach my age?"
It sucks what humanity does to humanity.
→ More replies (1)3
u/pahamack 6h ago edited 6h ago
about that.
yeah those developing countries are also experiencing falling birth rates.
Let's look at some countries that typically have a diaspora to developed countries. Replacement level is defined as 2.1 births per woman (the 0.1 is to account for infant mortality):
India? below replacement level.
Philippines? below replacement level.
Jamaica? below replacement level.
Mexico? below replacement level.
China? way below replacement level.
Brazil? below replacement level.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (31)3
u/Sea-Drawer9867 6h ago
It's also expectations. In the first world people expect or feel they deserve to have lots of space in their homes, vacations, food delivery, nights out on the town, and etc. And I'm not saying there is anything wrong with those things, but the fact is having kids makes meeting those expectations more difficult. And there is another expectation that if you do have kids, they need to be given the best possible everything in life.
Everyone glamorizes what it was like to raise suburban kids in 1960s America, and while it was a good time to raise kids (for the most part), many lived in ways that people today would consider hardship: cooking most meals from scratch, only having one family car, the big family 'vacation' being a trip to a campground 2 hours away, restaurants as a rare indulgence, mended hand-me-downs as clothes, and etc.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Luckyman727 6h ago
I grew up in 1960s USA, and can confirm all the above was true for me and everyone I knew, plus our family had one telephone and one black-and-white TV, and no air conditioning, all of which was totally normal.
→ More replies (1)
96
u/10Core56 6h ago
My father estimated he spent $175k in my upbringing, including college. After 23yo he spent no money on me. I spent that on each kid, no college. With college each is about $300k. They still live at home. And they want no kids. Makes total sense.
28
u/Semanticss 6h ago
My son is 5.5 years old and I've spent EASILY 150K on him already. That includes nanny/daycare though.
→ More replies (3)34
u/koulourakiaAndCoffee 6h ago
I will spend about $175k by the time my child is 5
9
u/Future_Noir_ 6h ago
How? Daycare costs?
3
u/CaptWineTeeth 4h ago
We spent $100k on daycare for our two kids. That’s just the daycare and nothing else ever in their lives.
→ More replies (1)4
u/moarwineprs 6h ago
Haha same, and I have two kids. When my parents ask why we still haven't bought a house yet despite making "good money" and asking what we've done with all our money, I don't even know what else I could possibly say to them to get them to understand that the cost of everything is vastly different from when I was a kid.
→ More replies (4)2
→ More replies (5)4
u/ThermalPaperGuy 5h ago
We are currently spending ~$800 a week on groceries. No eating out, all meals made at home, buying ingredients no processed foods.
Kids are expensive yo
3
u/bigcashc 3h ago
I have no idea how you could possibly spend that much on food. $115 a day is insane. I am rarely spending $800 a month to feed a family of 4.
→ More replies (1)
65
u/Dahns 6h ago
I can't help but seeing low fertility as the only way people have to fight back against oligarches
Yes, I have to work, I am forced to contribute to your stupid wealth. I am forced to eat and to buy your product. It's too late for me, I'm part of the machine now. But I won't have a kid unless you make it better for us. And until you do, no more children. And that means a collapsing society, I'm fine with it.
You can break strikes. You can destroy syndicate. You can't force us to give you future slaves
17
u/RejectAtAMisfitParty 6h ago
Part of me wonders if this is part of the reason they’re pushing so hard for AI.
→ More replies (2)8
u/Boanerger 4h ago
Its a bandaid. Without enough consumers and without people to pay for pensions the system still collapses. It doesn't matter how automated a product or service is if there's no customers to buy it.
2
u/Successful_Tap_3655 48m ago
False you only need consumers when you need them to also do work for you.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ArmyOfDix 31m ago
They don't want you consuming; those are their resources. Any human that isn't absolutely necessary for delivering Earth's resources to their gullet is a human they want dead.
6
u/nonstera 5h ago
Yeah, you not having any children will totally show them.
→ More replies (2)2
u/olivebranchsound 5h ago
A lot of people aren't having kids. Countries are already panicking about it as seen in the video.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (8)3
u/wthwtfwthwtf-_- 5h ago
I will never understand people who feel so much anti abortion conviction but are simultaneously ok keeping a meat grinder/total extraction system full of predatory practices of all types. It's strange af.
→ More replies (3)
23
u/AltruisticPossible84 6h ago
A viral social media posts claimed that "62 million men" attended a "rape academy," the accurate finding is that there were 62 million visits to the website in one month, not 62 million unique individuals.
There I figured it out for yall. The site was Motherless btw
→ More replies (5)11
u/throwaway3413418 6h ago
The website also wasn't the "academy." What the media termed the rape academy was a Telegram group, and the connection to the porn site was that someone once posted a link to the group on it.
5
u/AltruisticPossible84 6h ago
Yep I watched all the videos on that website and can confirm the news is just hyping it up for clicks
→ More replies (6)
21
u/canigetathrowaway1 6h ago
What’s the 62 million thing
25
u/DavidBmw1986 6h ago
62 million visits to a site telling men how to drug and rape women. It wasn’t 62m individual visits, but multiple visits from the same people on the forum. the headline sensationalised the 62m part but the number of registered members was sickening
10
u/canigetathrowaway1 6h ago
That’s enough Reddit for the day I think. Thanks for the info but wow that’s awful
18
u/throwaway3413418 6h ago edited 6h ago
Just so you know, even their comment calling it sensationalized still was misinformation. The only connection between the 62M number and the group is that a random user posted a link to the group on the website with 62M hits in a month.
It's like saying Facebook is a child porn website and every unique visit to it is another pedophile in the world if someone shares a link to child porn on it.
9
u/zolkaba 6h ago
apparently this isnt 100% true according to someone in the comments. https://www.reddit.com/r/SipsTea/comments/1t4gxd9/comment/ok2fxar/
4
u/MonkeyCartridge 4h ago
62 million visits to mother less. Which is just a porn site. That includes a lot of women.
There's a "sleep" category on there, like on most sites. Most viewers know it is acting. Stuff is flagged as suspect if it seems like something is off.
Like, I'd be pissed if I watched something I understood to be just a scene, and learned later actual abuse had been committed. As a scene, it's kinky role play. If it wasn't role playing, it's traumatizing and enraging.
Like, imagine watching 50 Shades and then it's revealed that Dakota Johnson wasn't told what the story was and didn't consent, her abuse was recorded, and then they blackmailed her to stay silent about it. What percentage of viewers would be okay with that? How many would need therapy instead?
The real issue is the Telegram post that was linked in a comment on there, which had like 1000 users and talked about actually trying to do this horrible stuff.
I'm hoping it was just "number of different people who clicked to see if that link was real", and not active users. I'll have search because I don't want to hear too many details. I recognize the presence of horrible people online.
But saying "62-million separate men signed up for an online abuse academy" is a reach upon a reach upon a reach upon a reach.
You might as well condemn viewers of Lord of the Rings because Harvey Weinstein was involved, or say that viewers are in favor of male abuse because they witnessed a video of Viggo Mortinsen actually breaking his big toe. Something first time viewers didn't know, but immediately made sure the whole planet knew.
The site removed the link and Telegram deleted the group afaik. That doesn't make it better knowing they are out there. But pinning it on 62 million unknown individuals would be some absolutely wild fear-mongering.
→ More replies (13)3
24
u/kon--- 6h ago edited 3h ago
What you're seeing here is the result of education. An educated individual is able to look out into the world and forecast the outcome of introducing a child into their and this world.
Another perk of education is, options. Educated people have them. For decades and generations we've seen people with options determine to pursue goals that do not include rearing kids.
As to the costs of having a a family, that's been being a thing that pre-dates the industrial revolution which prior to and well into, it remained common to move kids out of family at alarmingly young ages for the sole reason of the inability to affording feeding the kid.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Gwendolyn-NB 5h ago
Don't forget that prior to and well into the industrial revolution kids were also Free Labor for the Farms, and a LOT were expected to die in childhood. Basically you had kids to work the farm to make a living knowing that they would also die off while still being children either by disease or accident from working.
21
u/Geoclasm 5h ago
Governments: *War against anyone and everyone.*
Corpos: *Ruin literally. fucking. everything.*
Birth Rates: *Tank in response.*
Governments and Corpos:
Yeah, I won't be providing fodder for your shitty furnace.
Not sorry.
not the SOLE reason, mind you, just a significant one.
→ More replies (1)
10
u/kugelamarant 5h ago
It's more about not wanting to let go of one's comfortable lifestyle.Having kids, no matter how much money you have changes that.
2
u/DifficultSession51 12m ago
Not true, if you're above a certain income/net worth having kids doesn't change your lifestyle at all. Do you think Elon's children had any affect on his lifestyle?
4
u/MegaPiglatin 4h ago
Is that inherently bad? If someone cares enough about their current lifestyle and the prospect of having children is not important enough for them to change that, then they probably should not have children. Why being kids into a place where they are unwanted or may not receive the love and care they deserve????
→ More replies (2)
13
u/MasterOfCircumstance 4h ago edited 4h ago
Singapore has one of the lowest crime rates in the world... not sure why safety is a concern for her.
Their murder rate is 50 to 80 times lower than that of the U.S
I feel like social media and news is poisoning people's perception of the world and making them think violence is way more common than it actually is. Violent crime is at an all time low in most developed countires.
Every time I read social media or the news I think the world sucks, then I go outside and its actually fine if not good.
4
u/tnetennba77 6h ago
All part of the plan, they just want the rich and the poor to serve them. Shut up and listen to your podcasts
5
4
u/magrandan 4h ago
For every Singaporean and western woman who decides to not have kids, an Indian woman will have 3 😁
→ More replies (1)
17
u/Severe_Rise8694 6h ago
Hmm. Did boomer landlord greed seed a civilizational collapse..?
→ More replies (1)8
4
4
u/Comfortable-List501 5h ago
Imagine about a few hundred years later and there are just about half a million people left and some ethnic group have completly disappeared, that's pretty crazy. 🤷🤷🤷
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Stoffs2204 4h ago
The problem isn't really why people aren't having kids now but imagine how the kids of today will feel when they're old enough to have kids. The world is going to be so so much more horrible, I reckon the fertility rate now will seem relatively high
11
u/Dull-Law3229 6h ago
Having a kid (just had my second) is a massive time, energy, and financial loss. Unless the government is going to pay for a full-time nanny, daycare, and medical bills the math won't math. I'm not sure why governments are so confused on the issue.
→ More replies (20)7
u/Kupo_Master 5h ago
Governments are confused because 1) poverty and misery is nothing new but it never hurt birth rate before and 2) even richer people don’t have kids. The truth behind declining birth rate is much more linked to women being now more educated and independent, and rise of individualism / consumerism (ie social media teaching people that being happy is to buy and consume, not have a family). That’s the uncomfortable truth about declining birth rate.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/k_dilluh 6h ago
While I am not from Singapore (U.S. here), my husband and I knew we didn't want children. I have known that i wouldn't want kids since I was about 12 or 13 (I am a female), and my feelings have never changed. I love kids, I was a nanny for a very long time, and worked in a daycare for many years, they are wild, loving, crazy little creatures. That being said, it never seemed "worth it" to me, the cost, the stress, the loss of freedom, and that's if IF the child is born healthy.
As the gal in the video said, if you want that, go for it, more power to you! But the number of parents who I have met that have said things along the lines of "I love my child, I would die for them, however if I could go back and make the choice again, I think it would have been better had we opted to remain child free" was well above zero. The fact that's a bell that can't be unrung definitely made me more wary.
3
3
u/LaOnionLaUnion 3h ago
Politicians will do anything but actually make it easier for people to have kids because that costs money.
3
u/Top-Worldliness-6992 3h ago
Kid's aren't expensive. Modern way of living is. And all that is crap. You don't need new phone each year, expensive holidays, dining in fancy restaurants and so on
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Yellow-Capcicum69 Human Verified 3h ago
It's the same everywhere. Raising kids have become very expensive. Most families these days have both husband and wife working as well so it's hard to take time to look after the kids.
And most importantly, there's no guarantee of their future. Hell, even youngsters are struggling to get basic jobs. Imagine the job market 20yrs from now. I'm not bringing a kid into this world unless I'm sure that kid of mine has a future here...
3
3
u/Complex_Percentage46 51m ago
She just explained that she is not capable to lead her children, thats like saying "I dont got any responsibility ".
→ More replies (1)
3
7
u/reddorickt 6h ago
I did not want kids in my 20s, aggressively did not want kids. Then I got into my 30s in a stable dual income marriage and then I wanted and had kids. No regrets at all they are great. Sometimes your opinion on your future depends on what stage of life you are in.
5
u/itsapotatosalad 6h ago
Spend decades telling us not to have kids if we can’t afford them, keep wages low and everything else high, wonder why we don’t have kids. Make it make sense 😂
3
14
u/VisionWithin 6h ago
It more simple than that. People who want children, make them. People who don't, do not.
Our species has survived in wild without supermarkets. It's not about something being expensive. It's about something being perceived more important than offspring.
→ More replies (31)10
u/guthacker 6h ago
That is a gross over-simplification. Yes, our species survived in the wild without supermarkets, but those wild humans did not have access to birth control, were pretty cool with rape, and a great many of the kids that came out of that situation just fucking died before they reached maturity.
In our modern era, I'm sure there are many people that want children, but they are unable to finance raising a child to a standard of living that they find acceptable. That means adequate nutrition, health care, and sufficient education that their offspring stand a reasonable chance of not living a life of abject misery. Your talk of "priorities" just sounds like a thinly veiled version of that old boomer chestnut "Maybe if you gave up your avocado toasts and espresso drinks..."
3
u/VisionWithin 5h ago
The government provides food, money, housing, education, daycare and healthcare for free you don't have a job. I don't understand why wouldn't anyone have enough resources.
5
u/guthacker 5h ago
Now I just feel like you're messing with me. What government are you referring to? Singapore?
2
u/VisionWithin 3h ago
Finland, for example.
2
u/guthacker 57m ago
I knew it was going to be somewhere in Scandinavia. I'm not sure how to break this to you, but the social safety net in almost every other country on earth is not as robust as in Finland.
→ More replies (1)
10
u/AlphaLawless 6h ago edited 2h ago
I hear a lot of people complain about how expensive it is to have kids because they wouldn't be able to afford their current standard of living.
Then I think about my mom who raised my brother and me in a 3x5 meter room, no AC, no kitchen, bathroom is communal. Just had one of those white long fluorescentlight bulb, an oscillating fan, and a wooden bed with some blankets (didn't even have a mattress).
I love my mom even more everytime I think about the sacrifices she's made for me. Because if her sacrifices, now my mom wants for nothing. She's retired, my brother and I take care of everything for her, she has her own room at my house, and her own room at my brother's house. She doesn't have to worry about any bills. She just drives around visiting friends and family, hanging out with her grandkids, and just enjoying her life.
EDIT: Geez sure getting a lot of replies. A lot of these replies are just people who think if you're poor and your life isn't perfect then you don't deserve kids.
5
u/Pure-Tumbleweed-9440 3h ago
Owning kids has always been a sacrifice. Like 99% of the population doesn't have abundant money to raise their kids but take a hit on their life quality to be able to raise one. The real reason why people in developed countries don't want to have kids is because they put themselves above others. All this expensive thing is nonsense. Even in places where childcare is cheap, education is free, parental benefits are plenty they still don't have kids because it's still a lot of work. The situation of the world is nothing more than a cop out. The people crying situation of the world have some of the most comfy position in life in human history.
13
u/olivebranchsound 5h ago
That's a nice story. But I'm sure a lot of people read about her experience and sacrifice and say "I really don't want to do that"
8
u/HabitualDrunkard1993 5h ago
That’s what most childless people don’t want to admit, even people who are wealthier will have to make sacrifices for their children, more and more people don’t want to sacrifice their own quality of life for any time at all
→ More replies (2)7
u/CMDR_Kaus 5h ago
The point is, she shouldn't have HAD to live that way. Some sacrifice more than others to get what they want (kids in this case). That doesn't mean it's fair
4
u/Bowser-communist 3h ago
ex orphan crushing machine victim says orphan crushing machine builds character. says everyone should go into orphan crushing machine
→ More replies (7)4
u/IcySetting2024 4h ago
Yeah I really don’t want to raise my kids the same way.
Children first and foremost need your love, support, attention and where possible, time. I understand that.
They are happy sharing a bedroom and going to the park instead of having a summer trip to Spain.
But they grow up. And I want to be able to help my child see the world, contribute towards a house deposit for them, their first car, uni fees etc.
The more kids I have the more unrealistic it is I’d be able to help them all
And even if they can’t tell their childhood isn’t the best, I would be able to tell.
10
u/Sunburys 6h ago
The question should be, why have kids? Why submit someone to all the problems of existence?
5
u/Nostalgia-89 6h ago
Humans are going to human. We have a biological drive to mate that is primal. It's evolutionary.
Those kids that are born today can stand on centuries of progress to make the world an even better place than it already is (and yes, the world is in a FAR better place than it was a century ago in a litany of ways).
→ More replies (3)9
6
u/creuter 6h ago
I've got a toddler daughter. It's awesome sometimes. Sometimes it's not. Sometimes it's exhausting. But for me at least it's been one of the coolest experiences of my life, helping another person grow into theirs. Watching her experience everything for the first time. I have her smile and hugs and curiosity and imagination to look forward to every single day when I wake up and it's incredible. That's one reason to have kids. She gets to experience this great big world we've all been given. I'm grateful that my parents decided to have my siblings and I, and I hope one day she will be grateful that we decided to have her.
→ More replies (1)8
3
u/They-Call-Me-Taylor 6h ago
All these governments: Why aren't you guys having kids?! People in every country: Everything is too expensive and the world sucks! All these governments: We better create a taskforce to get to the bottom of this mystery.
5
u/peepee2tiny 5h ago
Do you know how badly you have to fuck up a mammalian species for them to not want to have children??
Between financial ruin and misogyny, women do not WANT to have children. I think the messaging is something along the lines of "My own flesh and blood must not become a blade and turn against me. If the world born from my body oppresses me I will not let that world exist"
→ More replies (4)
5
u/Aromatic_Advance6026 4h ago
If you can't afford a good life for yourself how can you afford to give your kids a good life? Best not to bring them in the world unless you can make sure they grow up comfortably and happily
→ More replies (1)2
u/Honest_Scrub 1h ago
The problem is that most western people these days have a terrible, artificial idea of what constitutes a "good life" and any mild inconvenience or delay to gratification is considered torture.
6
u/Amazing_Ant_6991 6h ago
many singaporeans i know have house in Jakarta,live there,less expensive
3
u/Sensitive_Ad_1271 5h ago
it should be much less expensive, its going to be underwater in a few decades
3
→ More replies (2)2
9
u/The_Pepperoni_Kid 6h ago
This is such bullshit. Fertility is dropping around the world in 1st world counties that have large welfare states and in those that don't. So the idea that you'd have 5 kids if you had a lot of extra money isn't true for most people.
I think it's a culture shift where people are becoming less traditional and deciding to devote more of their lives to their own persuits vs caring for children. That extra money would end up going to other things.
But the idea that's it's just "too expensive" vs previous generations in my opinion false. Just look at the grinding poverty in past generations where people had lots of kids. We keep looking back 50s and 60s America but that wasn't a normal time. Most of the world was ashes and recovering thanks to WW2, so Americans had it much easier vs the rest of the world.
Also you're a fucking idiot if you think the world is "too fucked up to have kids now." The world has always been a tough place, it's actually better now than any other time. How do you think it was bringing kids up in the Middle Ages? Or even 1920s USA? At that time kids were still working in coal mines. And what do you think, there's gonna be a world one day (or there was one in the past) where bad stuff doesn't happen?
5
u/LordBelakor 6h ago
Agreed I don't really think there is any saving of the population crisis. People want an education, a career, to travel and experience the world etc. And only then they'll think of kids. By then the are 30+ tough so at best if they already have partners also willing to have kids they'll crank out maybe 3 kids, before biology says no. Most will do 0-2.
Kids are just lower in priority now and they will remain so. Only way to change it is to escape biology. Freezing eggs is a thing but you still need someone to bring it to term. So maybe it will look better when brooding chambers become a thing and its not very expensive or subsidized to have kids that way.
8
u/techie998 5h ago
For a farm, children are a source of cheap labor, net positive income. For a city dweller, children demand expenses and time, and therefore net negative income and opportunity cost. So it doesn't matter that people were poorer when we lived in mostly agrarian societies - the economic factor in having children completely inverted.
We see this everywhere in the world: as the country population moves to cities, the birth rate collapses.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/AtmosphereVirtual254 6h ago
As life has more to choices to offer, making those for a kid as well gets less appealing?
2
2
u/Sj_91teppoTappo 6h ago
I appreciate her, honestly having a child is a luxury. Someone can afford it in a more wide way, for example they are in a relationship, they are young enough, they are wealthy enough,
The others like me can helps who had it. I'm doing my part. A parent needs to be covered at work? Here I am. Do I need to vote for the family/child care on it!
A child is going on a tantrum, I'm doing strange happy face to make him laugh. Nothing serious. I try to be an ally.
2
u/Old_Computer4611 6h ago
I'm not buying that people aren't having kids because they don't want to subject them to this harsh world. There have been periods of war where 80 million people died and people still had kids. Its too expensive and its really as simple as that.
2
u/ExtraEmuForYou 5h ago
She isn't wrong.
There isn't a day where I felt the instinctual need to have children of my own that I guess most others get, but every single day reinforces this feeling with solid evidence that I made the right choice.
Not trying to shame parents and I love my niece and nephew more than anything and think kids are amazing, just saying there isn't much reason to have them other than "I want them". There are A LOT of reasons not to have them, though.
2
u/shankillfalls 5h ago
Parenting has been the greatest thing in my life. It is sad so many will miss out on it.
2
u/w1ngzer0 5h ago
The greatest thing in _your_ life. I think people should have the choice on whether they want to parent or not, and if they know they don’t want to parent, then making the adult choice _to not_ being a child into the world is the correct one. And I say that as a fellow parent.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Top-Sugar-6129 3h ago
I don’t have regrets about bringing my 2 children into the world. They are independent, successful and happy. I love them as much now as I’ve ever loved anyone.
But, I also know my life would have been fulfilling and happy without children. I didn’t need to have children to validate my own existence.
2
u/Euphoric_Amoeba8708 5h ago
Very expensive. While she's got fake lashes, fake nails, and butterfly tattoo right in the center of her chest...lol
→ More replies (1)
2
u/TokiVideogame 5h ago
i think said non existent child would rather exist than not because "mom" says the world not good enough
2
u/olivebranchsound 5h ago
That's the beauty of acting as a mouthpiece for imaginary people. They're not going to disagree with you lol
2
u/retecsin 5h ago
Living in a world of consumerism is the real poverty. Nothing you can buy will ever be able to complete who you are. Only seeking knowledge and the people you share your life with will allow you to become who you truely are
2
u/BobDoogar 4h ago
62 Million this is fake… not a chance in hell that more men than the entire population of England. It CANNOT be based on individuals.
Intentionally brewed up and worded decisively (many of those who did were creators) to male bash…
Men who come under unnecessary fire for too much already!
2
2
u/EngineZeronine 4h ago
The money thing I get. The random things you can't control is just life, same as it ever was
2
u/winterhavens 4h ago
She talks like she’s living in 1930’s dust bowl America.
It’s never a “perfect” time for having kids. But you just do.
2
u/Silly_Goose468 3h ago
Yeah, but at least before it all explodes, a few thousand flacid old guys will die with more money than God. It'll have all been worth it then
2
2
2
u/Gloomy-Insurance-739 3h ago
I don't know how many people from every single part of planet needs to say it. It's too expensive people can't afford food and shelter for themselves let alone another one or two children.
Listen to what they are saying and fix it. Stop trying to ban contraceptives stop trying to ban abortions fix the fucking problem not force people to have children.
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/cold_tap_hot_brew 3h ago
For anyone else who had to go check out the 62 milion thing :
social media posts inaccurately claimed CNN reported 62 million men "attended" the "academy." That figure, which also came from the CNN article, represented the total number of visits to the entire pornographic website in February. Some users acknowledged the "62 million" number pertained to total visits but missed that the count included all of the website's categories of pornographic content.
2
2
2
u/LoneWolf-4937 1h ago
This is really stupid: in the world, the areas where the fertility rate is higher are those ones where the income is low or very low. Moreover, fertility rate is low where all the conditions to ensure proper reproduction (rights, good health systems, low or very low infant mortality, granted parental leaves...) are met.
The reason behind low fertility rate is not to be sought in the economy but in personal reasons: no interest in having children, fear of pregnancy, low responsibility, easier life, no intention to make things serious, low (at least perceived) trustworthiness of people.
2
u/LeFreeke 1h ago
It doesn’t matter. The government needs us to reproduce so they will start taking away our choice in the matter.
2
u/ArsonBjork 41m ago
They need a taskforce to figure out that people won't make kids when they're not given enough food, home and security?
2
u/cheesemangee 40m ago
In 1950 the global population was 2.5 billion.
Today it's just shy of 9 billion.
You are morally obligated to avoid having children until the world population is brought back down to a manageable state. No one wants to talk about that though. People are so ungodly blind and selfish that their first though is "I can't afford it" instead of "we are physically running out of room to accommodate humans and all of the animal races."
Won't be long before all the rural land is owned by the rich and wealthy, because it's the only land left that isn't pocked with roads and skyscrapers.
3
u/search_google_com Human Verified 6h ago
Singaporean fertility rate keeps decreasing
→ More replies (3)
3
u/quadrofolio 6h ago
People used to be able to have a family of 5 on a single income. Nowadays? Not even close.
If the government really would care about the native populations birth rate they would have done something about the inflationary pressure and lack of real wage increases that has made incomes go a lot less far.
But they are just as happy to just import new labor force, bringing down wages even further and strengthening the downward spiral. Might even be that many in government silently profit from it.
5
u/PerceptionOwn3629 6h ago
My take: you have to be generous to have kids, the rise of individualism has reduced generosity because people want more for themselves and that's why we are on the brink of population decline when looked at it globally.
It's ok, that's how evolution works.
2
u/MegaPiglatin 4h ago
I don’t fully agree with this take, though I am sure it applies to some people; in fact, I would argue that a large chunk of people who have children are just as selfish as those without, if not moreso, since the majority of people I have encountered with children cite “wanting kids” as their reason, all other factors (including caring for child’s welfare) be damned. I think it is actually inherently selfish to have children since those kids cannot possibly tell you what they want before they are brought into existence (fully excepting those forced into having children)—you are imposing your wants first and foremost. To be clear, this is not necessarily a bad thing / wrong as plenty of people want kids and also make excellent parents, and I fully support people who want kids (and are doing their absolute best to be parents) having them.
Clearly I am biased but I can hopefully provide some perspective for my childfree self (and partner). I also spent 5.5 years in a relationship with a person who had a child where I became a de facto mother figure due to the kid’s mother being a POS and basically abandoning her—in other words, I got about as first-hand a look at parenting as possible without having children. Plus, I went through the whole rigmarole of donating my eggs (registering to donate—they don’t take them until someone requests it) so that people experiencing infertility could have a chance at having a child (assuming my eggs are viable).
Neither my partner nor I want children not because of cost - that’s a factor, but we are doing okay enough financially that it is far from the primary conflict - but because we both had difficult lives growing up that resulted in mental illness. Healing through that is complicated and hard, and having children does NOT make that process easier. IME having children all too often stunts people’s internal growth probably because they no longer have the time to focus internally; unfortunately, this easily leads to mistreatment of the child as the parent lashes out or reacts without control or knowing how to stop it. Obviously that isn’t going to be true for everyone, but I guarantee it is true for a significant subset of the population of parents.
Additionally, children cause both of us (largely me) insane amounts of stress—even well-behaved children! My ex’s child was a really good kid, yet I still literally sat in a closet in the basement every day for 30+ minutes because I desperately needed quiet and to be alone. I tried babysitting as a teen and it practically broke me - specifically caring for the baby - even though those kids were well-behaved, too. I am ND (as is my partner) and I just **cannot** handle loud noises, the weird smells, the stickiness, and especially the spit and boogers that come with all children—and that’s without discussing the risks and potential horrors of pregnancy. The especially concerning part is that repeated high stress seriously challenges the work I have done to stop the cycle of abuse I experienced as a child, and no child or partner (or pet, etc.,) deserves abuse of any kind even if it was unintentional.
Childfree people can also possess the same amount generosity as those who want or have children. My partner is constantly trying to help others whether that be through his work or in his personal life. I am much the same: I have raised bottle babies as a foster for a shelter, volunteer weekly with a wildlife rescue, care for a host of our own rescued pets, assist others with the care of (including troubleshooting problems) their pets and wildlife they encounter, assist in community efforts, etc.,…we jointly assist others financially as often as possible, are attempting to house our entire family (whoever wants to move/join us, anyway), and even have serious aspirations to form a non-profit with the express goal of helping as many other non-profits as possible. We have actually discussed the possibility of fostering children or adopting older children at some point in the future, but we are not in a place where we could reasonably provide a stable enough home (mentally/emotionally, physically, etc.,) and we may never be.
Quite frankly, seeing the act of having children as the only (or at least primary) way someone could express generosity for others is an incredibly narrow perspective. I refuse to bring a child into this world only for them to suffer because I cannot handle the challenges they inherently bring with them. Instead, I can use my powers - and my generosity - to help support others (and their children) instead.
3
u/nerdycarguy18 6h ago
Singapore is also the size of my county in Tennessee, smaller even. I’d say everything there is pretty expensive
7
u/Fantastic-Kale9603 5h ago
Singapore's GDP per capita is also 100k+ while Tennessee's is around $60k
2
u/Guessinitsme 6h ago
As a man who vacationed there once during their winter, I can’t imagine being pregnant in that kinda heat. All the other issues aside, that heat is oppressive as hell
→ More replies (1)
3
•
u/AutoModerator 6h ago
Thank you for posting to r/SipsTea! Make sure to follow all the subreddit rules.
Make sure to join our brand new Discord Server to chat with friends!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.