Well, his percentage and accuracy is wrong, but he does speak some truth to it medically. The problem is it DEPENDS on the woman. If she already had prior health problems, have a family history of menopausal issues, cancer, etc, it can effect her ability to have kids in the future. Especially when hoping around with different men sexually, getting an Std or taking birth control pills and other forms of birth control can ALL impact the health of her eggs. In my late mother's case, even though she had conceived me in sexual sin, she was still happy she had me at 19 because of all the miscarriages she had 3 times with my father, I am the only child she has and she had to get her uterus taken because under it was cervical cancer. She already had HPV since 13.
The problem is that so many people talk about financial stability but they not thinking about their own Sexual Health. Let alone their own spiritual and physical health. The reality is is that you can never have too much money to really take care of yourself financially because what's going to happen when you go completely bankrupt? what's going to happen if you become unintentionally sterile? What's going to happen when you end up like my mother who did not know she had cervical cancer and it all could have been avoided had she not had sex at 13 with somebody she was not only unmarried to come with somebody he gave her an STD? At the same time, what if you had a family history of fibroids that cannot only take the energy of you, but can actually kill a baby? The older that we women get, the more we lose our energy, the more we lose proper nutrition as any other person will, and the more difficult it would be to Ashley have children let alone get pregnant. There's a reason why are hormones respond the way it does when we're young and going through puberty. Because those are the times to procreate. Now if they not caring about having children then they don't have to worry about wanting to get pregnant while having a child. But for those who just really want children they have to seriously think about these things while they are still children themselves and teenagers before they had to adulthood. Because you don't know what life is going to throw at you. And You Can't Always Get What You Want. So to tell you the truth he's not lying entirely. But I hardly doubt that 90% of our eggs die. I say that it slowly deteriorates by the time we hit menopause. Now that sounds more logical. One thing is proving to be true, by the time you have your career you may not have anybody to want to marry you or settle down with. Most people over 30 are not marrying. And most widows and divorcee's by 45 are NOT remedying or wanting children.
It's interesting, because there *are* higher birth risks the later people have kids (plus the whole energy thing) but if you do that you really have no desire or stamina to push to start a career then either. I mean, you've been supported, you're (probably) a successful parent who does stuff, unless there's something you're really passionate about there's always something to do with the kids that will keep you busy.
Look, having worked in childcare, it is heartbreaking to see kids start 6am-6pm care from 8 months till they're about 10 & see just how much it messes with them, so it really is worth having someone at home some of the time *if you can*. If you can't, or if you both have to work you just get on and make the best of it. But I'm a big believer that not everyone has to have kids. That people should have them because they can care/provide for them. There's no receipt for those guys. I think some people are better off caring for themselves and their parents. But if you have kids it should always be a team investment, a team agreement.
I think every woman’s situation is different. She should do what she desires most and what her circumstances permit.
Whether to pursue a career before having kids or getting married largely depends on her circumstances.
What are these factors that affect her circumstances?
1. Women come from different economic and socio-cultural backgrounds. We can’t be boxing every woman on the same lane to familyhood and career pursuit.
Some women go through the ‘fast lane’, others through the ‘slow lane’. Some take ‘public transport’ while others take ‘private jet’.
Embrace and cherish your circumstances and make the most of it to be the best person you can be instead of subscribing to social constructs, most of which were relevant in 1919, not 2019 and beyond.
2. Not every woman wants to get married or have kids. Therefore, having kids or getting married has no bearing on her desire to pursue a career.
3. It is pointless to see one’s social life in a linear fashion because life could throw unexpected events on a woman’s life. By linear, I mean the notion that she should do a, b, …x, and then z because her eggs would be dead by (fill in the blank).
She may have accidentally got pregnant in her teens or early 20s, and still could pursue a career after childbirth. She and her husband may only want one or two kids over the course of her career.
Some husbands are stay at home to look after the kids while their wives are at work. Hence, she could still pursue a career.
4. A career is different from a job. Just because a woman is doing x-job doesn’t mean she is pursuing a career. A career is a profession pursued in the long-term, usually for the rest of one’s life. Many women are pursuing familyhood and a job concurrently.
5. Pursuing a career requires some form of formal qualification (though not always). Women do not obtain formal qualification at the same point of their lives: some early while others at a later stage.
Hence, she could pursue her career in her 20s, 30s, 40s, or 50s, although I could see the argument for having an established career path by her 30s.
What he is saying is factually correct, you are BIOLOGICALLY, less able to have children when your older then when you are young. This is why most people married and started their families young. Biology is completely indifferent to your feelings, what you want is not what you get and so if you wish to have a family, the best time to do that is probably early twenties (you also get to see your children grow up, see their children grow up and be in their lives more while if you wait, you may find that your to old to really play with your children (trust me, it gets harder to keep up the older you get and I'm not all that old), to really do things with them etc.). We also know that women statistically are happier in traditional relationships and roles i. e. when they are mothers and wives. We also know that the reason why women don't earn as much as men is because they cut hours and take lower paying jobs for greater flexibility in their schedules so they can be with their family meaning that when they do have those kids they are the most important thing to them (as it should be). The fact is you CANNOT have it all and the people who told you you can lied to you. No man has ever been told he can have it all, because we cannot. Their was an article that just came out about the woman who wrote sex in the city, the whole premise of the story was a woman who chose career over family (autobiographical in this regard). She is now sixty and has admitted she regrets that decision. Charlize Theron chose career over family, now she is herself complaining about being single at her age. Hell their was even a feminist who in the seventies stated how children where a burden and she would never have them just a few years ago came out and admitted she regretted the decision. So yes he is correct in this, based upon statistical data and biological data this is what would make your life better. Obviously its your choice but the fact is you cannot make the right choice if people with alternative agenda's lie to you about the reality of the situation.
Some of those people are celebrities with quite a substantial amount of money. They could have just frozen their eggs and then reserved them for later use. Some celebrities used surrogates and became single parents. It all comes down to money which opens up alternatives and options, so id the traditional method of having a spouse and offspring traditional family life didn't work out or happen then surrogates, using frozen eggs and eventually possibly artificial wombs can still be viable alternatives. It's just better than nothing if somebody start to feel regrets and want to change their minds later about having offspring and being a parent. At least that way they can still have some career, desirable or otherwise and still become a parent at some point later on even if they aren't able to find the right partner or spouse and have that traditional family life.
@JudgmentDay But they are not happy. That's the key, they are not happy with their lives and this is the reason. Being rich doesn't affect biology or time, those two things are immutable.
Still doesn't mean that all people that have kids and family are completely and always "happy" either. Are you implying having kids and family is the one and only way for everybody to be "happy" then or toward happiness? Some of those people are unhappy deep down either way. Having lots of money doesn't exactly guarantee happiness either, but they sure as help have much more resources and options if things don't work out nor go as planned they can try other alternatives simply because they can afford to do so but that's only if they done their homework and made contingency and backup plans and anticipated ahead of time of what they'll do if one they originally intended just don't work out. People are people and they are always gonna be miserable and unhappy in some for or way more than anything else. Rather it's having this or having that or using this or using that to "cope" and help "alleviate" and "tolerate" their miseries and unhappiness issues. The way I see it sometimes one has to make difficult decisions and make sacrifices and choose between one or the other, can't always have both things and expect them to work out and turn out to be favorable and desirable.
@JudgmentDay I never once suggested that. What I did say however is that we have empirical evidence that the majority of people DO find children and having a family makes them happier. Obviously not every single person in the entire planet wants the same thing, that would be a stupid claim to make, which is why I never made it, I stated statistically people are happier with families and that biology and time ensure that their is a limit to when this is able to happen.
Opinion
65Opinion
My opinion is that women should do whatever the fuck they want to do.
However, it’s easier as a young woman to gain more experience within their field. The older you get without having any experience, the less people will take you seriously. So that’s why focusing on your career while you’re young is actually a smarter move.
I also don’t understand why people are freaking out so much over the state of a woman’s eggs. Men’s sperm also has a ”best before” date. Swimmers get slower and the amounts of swimmers lessen too, to the point where they could be completely useless. Yet nobody is crying about how they should sacrifice their careers to make babies while their sperm is still young, active and dense in population. It’s sexist.
Women should do what they want or need to do, and not be shamed for it.
Poverty affects children poorly. Negatively. That does not mean more wealth = better kids at all levels.
Just like no food is a bad thing, there's a point where you have enough food and getting more isn't worth it.
The difference between low middle class and median middle class isn't worth the delay.
Relying on husband to provide in the early years is not equivalent to living in poverty.
You guys are both right you don't even realize it. There truly is a middle ground. Money can provide stability but it cannot buy happiness. Older parents tend to be more patient with kids which is a good thing younger parents have the energy to keep up with rowdy children which is also a good thing. Sometimes it's better to wait but that's also a risk. I've been married for 5 years now we are 32 and can not get pregnant. My parents are in their late 50s and even if I did have kids they probably will never get to know them very well and that hurts my heart. Even though you might do things the right way things might not work out. Sometimes even though you do things the wrong way they work out anyways. That's not something anyone can control past a certain point. Both men and women are not always reliable to take care of each other we should all be able to take care of ourselves. We should not NEED each other we should WANT each other and then be able to work as a team.
No because I’ve been a model, a pageant queen, and now a fire performer. Those things can’t wait wait either. He can rest assured I know what I’m doing.
'Other' because I believe that choice is up to the individual and no one else should have a say. If I were a female, I personally would prefer to pursue a career first so that I could enjoy an improved sense of accomplishment and Independence.
In addition, two aspects:
1) taking the time off after highschool to marry and have a family will inevitably stunt or cause the loss of many options and opportunities for further education and careers.
2) In order to have a family, many women have to either severely reduce their ability to work a job or even have to stay at home depending on the family's income. If she's married to a man of the approximate same age, he will be just starting his career and likely not be making enough to support a family. This can cause a lot of stress on a young couple or even be cause for them to be unable to provide for a child.
The essence of what I'm trying to convey is that the choice should be off the individual with no external pushing by others who aren't going to be involved in supporting them.
Ok I guess my eggs were still perky because I had a baby at 38.
To be honest having kids earlier does mean there are more healthy viable eggs but to postpone one's careers isn't really going to work. The time to show you know what you are doing job wise is to get right into your field and prove yourself after college.
The best thing to do is for a young woman to get her FSH level when she is young in her early 20s. That is the Follicle stimulating Hormone. As a woman ages that level keeps going up until she is done with menopause when the FSH level is high. If a woman can chart that FSH level she can see how big of a window she has. Many times a woman can tell if her mom had a baby later in life how big of a window she has.
There are many good young mothers but sometimes women who wait until their late 20s or early 30s have an added maturity which might make them a better mother than if they had been a mom in their early 20s.
And having kids young means a woman has to find a man mature enough her age to be a good partner. Men's brains don't even finish developing until 26.
My view of it is, you're bringing a life into this world. You want to provide the best possible life for that child, and it's hard to do that if you don't have a career established.
I feel that there's a lot of people these days pushing the idea that you should have a baby just because you can and just rush into it as quickly as possible before your "biological clock" or whatever runs out, and that's a good idea in my opinion. Again, you're bringing a life into this world, not playing house. Babies are expensive and time consuming, and a lot goes into raising and providing for them. Also, plenty of women are still fertile and giving birth well into their 30's.
I've seen and lived the differences growing up of kids who were brought into this world by unprepared parents with no career, no stable income, bouncing from apartment to apartment, etc., and being born into a home with parents in their 30's who both had established careers, a steady home, and were able to provide for me. I would choose the route my parents went any day. That isn't to say that the other parents who made different choices can't make it work, but it's a lot harder.
*That's NOT a good idea, not that's a good idea. Sorry!
Just do whatever you believe is best and right for you. Who gives a fuck what him or others said? It's YOUR life and YOUR body and don't let anybody else tell YOU otherwise. Depends upon how "important" marriage and mis are altogether compared to one's career. Can't always have both turn out exactly the way one wants it to or envision it to. Nothing will always go as planned and result in an absolute favorable or desirable outcome, and sometimes there are no easy answers or choices but ONLY sacrifices. One may have to decide and take risks on what they are willing to sacrifice. No absolute guarantees anywhere that one will get BOTH a desirable and favorable outcome for their career, their marriage and their offspring. Something can and will always turn out to be unexpected, undesirable and unfavorable and that's just how it's always gonna be. Just make the choice and/or sacrifice (s) that one can and be willing to accept and live with for the rest of one's life and not look back one day filled with regrets about it that's all I can say.
In all seriousness, whatever suits your lifestyle and future goals. I personally believe the key is to have kids at such a time period where you can give plenty of time to your children for the first few years. This can mean different things for different women, again, depending on their lifestyle and career choices. It could be before you start a career, it could be when you have already started out and you want to have kids before your career gets to a point that you'll remain busy all day, or maybe even once you have established your career to the point that you don't have to work your ass off as much anymore. It's very personal.
And thanks to the advancement in medical science women CAN have healthy babies in their 30's and even 40's before menopause. So age isn't a big concern for me. Some might argue that a woman at that age might not have as much energy anymore, but many grandmothers help in babysitting their grandchildren, am pretty sure no one ever questions their energy levels!
Do whatever YOU want, depending on what suits YOUR unique lifestyle, needs and aims. There is no one solution for everyone. You could even disagree with the 'key' that I can mentioned about having kids in a time when you can spare more time to raise them for the first few years.
This can be a difficult desicion in a woman's life, specially because we have a time limit for natural maternity. Although the time can be extended if we open our minds to other options like adoption, having pets, a method to preserve our eggs, etc.
Or like men like DaVinci and Dedalus have done, take a disciple, a pupil to keep the knowledge legacy. If we think about it, some people Who have become teachers have seen some of their students as their own children like información Goodbye Mr Chips, Dead Poetry Society, Mona Lisa's Smile, etc.
What I can assure is that women can at some moment do both things, but until the children can be more independent, their needs, well being and development should be over everything else. They need a provider, a caretaker and a teacher, roles filled by one or more people who shouldn't be too selfish.
Unfortunately, there are people, either women or men, who have had the chance to have their own children, but they are so focused in their own careers, business or other personal affairs that they ignore or don't pay attention to them, or in the "Best situation", they left others in total charge of their well being.
It makes more sense to me. In your younger years you're more fertile so you'll have less complications getting pregnant and during pregnancy, and you also have more energy. Kids do best when breastfed also, which requires you to stay home with them. In fact young children do better in the care of a parent rather than being put into daycare. Then once they're old enough for school you have time to work without ever having to take a break from your career again.
Compare that to those who get into a career, wait until their 30s. Many will have no problem getting pregnant/during pregnancy, but a number of them will. Since they don't want to take too long from their career, often they'll formula feed and then put their kids into daycare to rush back into work. That career break can then hold them back.
Some people are saying "everybody is different and should do what's best for them". Of course, that's what this discussion is about. What we're told is that women should go for career first, that's how it's "supposed" to go. This guy is just putting out an alternative idea that many people probably haven't considered because it's not a popular idea.
@sejla
Yeah, it's never 100%. It's really about likelihood. I knew a 38 year old couple who tried for years for a baby, spending thousands on IVF treatment. Eventually she did get pregnant but sadly the baby died while still in the womb, and she gave birth to a still-born. You were fine, as are many others, but statistically that's much more likely to happen to a 38 year old than an 18 year old.
This really depends on the individual woman, her maturity level (and her S/O's) and what she wants out of life. Logically it makes sense because then she would already have kids old enough to go to school and still be young enough to have a good start to a career. For example, if she has kids young, let's say 22 years old, then she would be 27 when her kids start school. During that time she could do college online, take her time and possibly get even up to a Master's degree in that time. She would not have to worry about childcare because the kids would be in school compared to her starting a career and then having to pause to take care of a very young child. her taking courses is a reasonable excuse for not starting work yet that many bosses would respect. This approach does have the potential of her finding better balance, but has a few negatives too. First, she would be barely past childhood herself, which means she would not have a lot of life experience. Also, she might want a career that is physically demanding more so in the beginning, such as military or police. In that case, she needs her youth to give her the best start to the career.
There's so much butthurt over this. Unbelievable.
Listen girls: Like it or not. Biology is a thing. You can like it or not, but scientifically your best age to get children (aka when you are the MOST fertile and the chances are the HIGHEST that you and your child are HEALTHY) is between 21-29.
Now you can say "but women with 40+ can get children". Yes, some do. And many do not. You hear about the exceptions and not the standard. There are countlessof reports of women failing to conceive after a certain age. Stillbirths, not being able to get pregnant to begin with even with a doctors help), etc.
Not to mention the chance that you just die becoming higher before your child is old enough to take care of yourself.
No amount of "but I can wait" will not safe you from the consequences. Yes, you may end up being one of those who get a good partner and pregnant with 40. But neither is it biologically nor statistically likely and chances are you will have to deal with the consequences of these choices. If you are fine with that, be my guest. More power to you. But most of you just talk themselves into "I can always become pregnant". No, you can not.
I think that a woman can go towards her career at any age, sure, she could choose to have kids but, I mean, infertility doesn't just affect women over 30 so there's that.
Then there's the fact that kids, depending on the country you live in, are your responsibility for about 18 years.
So, say you had kids at 18 and then raised them, you're then 36... at least, if you don't work until you've grown up... depending on how many kids you have you may never work until you're in your 40's.
So yeah, not working wouldn't work.
Although, I do think that if people have kids then they should be able to both care for their children and pursue their career at the same time -I mean, if men can do it (granted, they don't have to carry the child to full term) then why can't a woman do it too?
I mean, I feel that both parents should equally parent and care for the child while also being able to pursue their career not just leave the childcare to just one person -since that means that they'll miss out on working opportunities and the other parent will miss out of parenting opportunities.
But yeah, I don't think there should be a limit to how old a woman can be to choose to have kids... I mean, what about adoption?
It's only if she wants her genes to live on that she'll have an issue if she chose to not have kids until an older age.
...
Another thing is the legal working-age -people can do the paper round in the UK at any age, they can work part-time from 13 and work full-time from 16 so you know, people can be building up their career from an early age -especially child-actors who can work from, well, childhood in a career which they may continue into adulthood.
They don't need marriage, just an exclusive long term relationship with someone that cares about them and is compatible.
I think it would actually be better if they had kids earlier, then once all of their kids are school age it would be much easier to start a career. They could even do online college if they wanted before their kids are school age.
It seems much worse to spend years going to college and getting a degree, then only work a couple years and quit to have kids. Then they owe lots of student loan debt during the time they aren't working until their kids are school age.
Of course she can choose to do what she wants, but after she is 30 +, she should know that her prospects for finding a good man will be very limited as compared to her finding one earlier. Her career won't help her attract a better mate. She could work fast food at minimum wage, or have a high paying business career making 10 times the amount and it won't change her prospects much for getting a good SO.
And the older she is when getting pregnant, the more likely there will be health problems with her future offspring.
Not necessarily. If you've found a good man already when you're 17, 18, 19, 20, whatever, then marry him! I've seen too many young women throw away a good relationship just because they're "not ready to settle down yet" or they're "still finding themselves" or some bullshit like that. Look, if you have the kid first and THEN you apply for the job, then you won't have to use your maternity leave. Not saying that that shouldn't be an option, but women do get discriminated against when they do. (Again, I'm not saying that's okay, just that it happens.). So then you start your career and work your way up the ladder. By the time you're in upper management and you're taking on more responsibility and spending more time at work, your kids will be teenagers so they won't need you as much (though I'm not saying they won't need you at all; don't take that the wrong way.). Then in a few years you'll have them out of the house and you just keep on climbing -- maybe even become CEO! At that point there's nothing stopping you and nothing to hold you back.
However, this should not be construed as a suggestion to rush into marriage and just get married to any guy. Make sure he's the right one first. Make sure he truly loves you and cares about you and is committed to you.
I’ve actually experienced the opposite. I threw away the opportunity of a lifetime for a relationship and that guy ended up ripping out my heart, throwing it in a hamburger grinder, and then dumping it in the sewage... I totally thought we were going to get married. Since then, I won’t pass down my future for a guy since I have major trust issues now.
I also don’t want kids that much and if I decide otherwise, I want to adopt. Marriage... meh.
I'm so sorry, @R_Cakes91.
@R_Cakes91 well you aren't supposed to sit around for a guy to marry you. Men will wife you fast if they want you otherwise they string you along for free pussy. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free is so true.
It sounds better in their eyes but in reality, How many 20 year old girls actually know how to find a good man? How many know how to raise another human being? He’ll, how many of them even know how to take care of themselves let alone a baby? Not many. I was a very different person when I was 20. Me now wouldn’t even like me back then. Thank God I didn’t get married or have kids that young. That would have been a big mistake.
Dude, I’m not sitting around and waiting for anyone. I’ve worked in many national parks and joining the Peace Corps.
I wrote a myTake on the situation with this guy. He didn’t get the milk for free. He sexually assaulted me for it, so that’s what I meant by ripping my heart out. That’s why I have horrible trust issues.
@R_Cakes91 im sorry that happened to you but that isn't typical. You chose wrong. Its like crashing your car on your drivers test at 16 and then thinking everyone should wait until they are 25 to get their license when its much better to have it younger so as not to be a hermit and miss out on opportunities.
No, dude that’s not what I’m saying. What I said is “thank god I didn’t get married at 20.” I know I made a mistake by dating him. I’m not telling anyone what to do. I just think people should do what is best for themselves.
If a girl wants to get married at 18 and it’s a good situation, go for it. But I think it’s wrong to pressure people into it.
@R_Cakes91 nobody said just marry any guy at 18 just because. We are saying finding a great relationship that turns to marriage should be the priority not work and school. Instead of taking a full course load at college and working 30 hours girls should be dating and figuring out relationships and not too busy to attract marriageable men. Hows a man supposed to date you if you hide inside studying? Or if all you do is party it up on the weekend? Hint marriageable men dont hang out at parties just like marriageable women dont either.
@bamesjond0069 I disagree with telling women not to study. I think that education should come first whether you are a male or a female.
That's part of why women do not get married and start a family. You say 17 to 20 but you do realize most girls who go to college graduate at about 22 years old. You do realize almost nobody gets married while in college. It sounds good to put education first, everyone says it but you can't have it both ways. You can't put education first and having a family first. Plus why would you get a college degree and rack up debt if you aren't intending to enter the workforce in a meaningful way? If you were to start a family first and have a career later, you would go to college after the kids and family situation is settled. Getting a medical degree just to find out 10 years later much of it is outdated or you forgot it is not very efficient.
Don't take those numbers too literally. I was just throwing out numbers.
Also, you may have valid points and there may be holes in my logic. I am humble enough to admit that.
Well i thought those numbers were right.
Okay
You shouldn't believe everything you read. Your eggs are not dead they haven't matured and you have more than what your body can use in its life time. It's not different from men we over produce sperm and females has a initial overproduction of eggs if one is bad another takes its place in that cycle. Nature is amazing that way. No one should put their careers above their own happiness, guys don't have the same deadline but it is valid for them too. You should start dating as soon as you feel your ready for even if you're not ready for kids yet. It doesn't hurt to have a few years to see what the world is about before settling down. The whole make a career is something companies want more than we personally needs. More status or money can never replace the right partner and finding and growing that relationship can be tougher than any career so start early you never know how long it will take to find mister good enough.
I think it’s something women need to be mindful of when making their life choices. He isn’t necessarily wrong, but reality isn’t as simple as “just have kids first”.
People don’t always meet the person they want to have children with before they start their career, and women can’t live on nothing while they’re trying to find that person. If you meet your one at a pivotal point in your career it can cost you everything you’ve worked for to take time off at that point.
On the other hand, we do have a biological clock and it’s not always easy to fall pregnant. It took me 5 years and I had age on my side.
It all weighs up to what your priorities are... women can have everything, they just can’t have it all at the same time
Women should do what they want. Not everyone has the same priorities. Who is this Steve Molyneux character, anyway. What makes him an expert on what women should do?
What he said about the optimal age for women to have babies is true if you only look at the physical aspect. But young women aren't mentally or emotionally mature enough to raise a child properly. They might not be in a good financial position, either.
Throughout human history, woman bore children at an early age, but they lived in extended families with parents, grandparents and other relatives present who could help to educate and impart wisdom to the child. And the entire family contributed to financial support. That is still the case in some cultures today. It's the way humans evolved and it's why we didn't go extinct.
But if this guy is suggesting that a woman's job in life is to be a baby factory, he's a douche bag. He's living in the past.
It should all depend on what the woman wants for herself. If wants to seek a successful career, then she should focus on making a career before making a family. If she prioritizes family, then she should focus on being a mother and spouse first. It's all about what you value, and in the long run, what will make you the happiest. Each person has to make meaning for their life on their own terms. No one can tell you what the ultimate recipe for happiness, meaning and success is. Only you know what you truly want.
Uh no, women should not only have children when their most financially stable, but should also have children when she feels ready to, even if she's past 30.
Also I think the stigma of having kids past 30 is bullshit. Sure a woman in her 20s is more fertile than a woman in her 30s, but that doesn't mean that women in their 30s aren't fertile at all, and I'm pretty sure lifestyle can play a big role in a woman's fertility as well.
You are not thinking about fertility correctly. Yes there is tons of fertility for women as a whole in their 30s. BUT on an individual basis it doesn't help the specific individual woman who is now unable to conceive at 34 but could have in her 20s. What a heartbreaking situation WHICH DOES HAPPEN! It most likely won't but it will absolutely to some women who wait for sure. The stats show this.
@bamesjond0069 That is why it is so important that women track their FSH levels so they know how fertile they are and when the window is starting to close up.
@bamesjond0069 I'm not 100% educated on female fertility, I'm just tired of women feeling pressured to have children before 30 and rush into it before they're ready. Like what @sejla said, women should keep track of their FSH levels.
@ImJustCurious13 Why are you so tired of it? You are 20. Wait till you are older and want a family. You will be aggravated because the best women to have a family with won't want one and the girls you are least into will be breathing down your neck desperate to have kids. Thats my experience anyways.
@sejla im not sure what fsh levels are but there are many things that can go wrong. Im personally aware of 4 women who wanted to conceive in their late 30s. One did with no problems, one had an issue that ripped her uterus and caused her to be infertile, two were unable to conceive. Its not a scientific study but i sure as hell won't advise any woman i care about to wait into her 30s thats for sure.
The part with eggs is not true actually, you can get pregnant even when your 50 years old, but it's harder to get pregnant and it harder on the body. Now days many do have kids between they are 30 and 40 with little problems. In Norway it's no a problem at all to have a career and a kid. It's universal at all workplaces to get paid parental leave. In total you get 49 weeks 100% paid time off. The mother can choose to go back to work earlier, but then the dad gets the remaining parental leave. The position at work is temporarily taken by a substitute until you are back. It is also normal for kids to start at kindergarten when they are 1 year old. And kindergartens in Norway is different from many others in the world, first of its staff have an education in child care and psychology. So you can have a career and a kid IF the country you live in have made it possible.
No, he is correct about the eggs. A female is born with all the eggs she will ever have, and loses them monthly. Also, eggs are lost in order of viability Meaning the absolute best eggs for creating healthy babies are the earliest to be lost if not impregnated. By age 30 and beyond, what eggs are left are the unhealthiest of the lot and more prone to developing deformed or retarded babies.
It's true they are born with all the eggs yes. But they can still get kids way beyond the age of 30. The "quality" off the egg how ever go down, but not by much. A older woman that get pregnant have more checkups then other for that reason.
I think he is right, but not because of "eggs" but because of how long it takes for your children to grow up.
People who think they can have children at 40 are forgetting that children take some time to grow up.
It's much easier to deal with a teenager when you are 35 as opposed to when you are 55.
Not to mention real factors such as mortality (which goes up mighty quick after 40) and the fact that your children are going to need financial support.
It's not uncommon to die at 50.
I've already suffered two conditions that could have been fatal (at under 30), my aunt has lymphoma, my friend's brother died of a stroke, my ex girlfriend's aunt has already died, and so on and so forth.
The longer you take, the more irresponsible you are.
That is assuming that all 50 year olds are at death door. Many are in better shape physically than the parents who are younger. We don't have any wiggle room so we have to eat right and take care of ourselves. There is no way I would have been nearly as patient at 35 as I am 55. And I didn't sweat the small stuff. My goal was to get her out of high school alive, not addicted to anything and not pregnant. Then I just changed it to alive and not addicted. I figured I could deal with pregnant. While others were stressing about top grades, top athletics, going to top colleges I was working on getting her to a place where she could be in a good place so that she could start taking on adult responsibilities before she left high school.
I selected "other". Well, it definitely depends on what you want to do and let's not forget that things don't always go as planned.
Also it depends heavily on the financial status of the couple. A baby has needs and bills that have to be covered. Times have changed. Where I am from 1 salary is not sufficient to cover a couple's needs, let alone those of a baby... so at least, if you have a well established job and all you get maternity leave and can cover your expenses.
And because in theory everything is perfect it doesn't mean it will work out this way. To have kids you need to find the right guy. Some women are lucky and find a man to be happy with and have family sooner than others. So if you are not one of the lucky ones, what are you supposed to do? You pursue your career...
So you can't make a generalised statement about this...
Last but not least, there are careers that would end with a baby, and there are also women who don't want to have children.
Leaving aside all the social and moral implications about that statement - What planet do these people live on - In my country there are very few women who could afford to take years of work to have kids and they need a steady job to provide for their household.
Although I find it a moot point because of the low percentage that are able to do it, there is obviously a lower percentage who would chose to do it within that group.
Again using my country as an example - I don't have stats to clarify this but I am guessing HERE that most women would be at least in their late 20s, settled down with a fair number of years of their working life behind them. Actually if I heard of a woman having a baby under 25, I would assume unplanned unless they married young which very few do here - None of my married friends got married under 30.
I know women who had kids before career and women who had kids after career. Both are ok and happy. None had problems to have kids. Though the ones who had family before career that I know, are studying all to be kindergarten, primary school or high school teachers, while the career before family are doctors, lawyers or business managers.
Both starting to have kids older and starting to work older have its disadvantages. Some people are too old when the have kids and lack of the necessary energy. On the other side, my mom who had me young and started to work older won't have same advantages some people of her age that started to work younger, she's paid less and she will get retirement later.
When ever thinking about my future, getting a substantial job has always automatically come first for me. I would hate to be absolutely dependant on my partner financially because I see SO MANY ways this could go wrong or not work out. What if you never finished university and instead stared a family instead. for the first few years of your life after having a kid, you won't be able to get a job because you will ideally need to take care of your kid. by this time your probably going to be around 26. Also what if you never got any degree in university and 5 years later you break up? now you are jobless, with zero, or very little money, and probably will have to raise a child part time.
Women should do what they want to do.
In my situation, I'm 22 now so that would be the 'age' I should be married and have kids then right? With who though? I don't have a boyfriend or anything. Also I have to find someone then who earns enough to finance me and the child. Most guys my age are still studying and otherwise probably don't make enough money. Or I have to go with a guy a lot older than me, but sperm also degenerates by age, so that diminishes the purpose of me getting kids at a young age. Other than that, I don't want kids right now? I still want to do a lot of things like traveling, partying and have fun and a kid will prevent me from that and I just don't think I'm ready to have kids mentally. I'm still growing myself and I don't even know if I ever want children tbh.
So there are a lot more factors to be considered taking this statement. I'm watching The Handmaid's Tale right now and this question disturbs me.
I think women have a rather cruel biological clock, and I think that's something that needs to be taken into account for any who desire to have children at some point. Fertility starts to drop considerably at around 30 and especially plummets at around 35.
But I think women have to prioritize being able to be self-sufficient and take care of themselves first and foremost these days. So I lean towards "no" since marriage and children are not guaranteed even for young women who desire it. It takes a willing partner, and it'd be awful if he left her without a child and no career of her own.
Ideally, if a young woman wants both child and career, then I think the best scenario is that she pursues both interests at the same time and puts herself out there in her spare time and socializes and makes the effort to find a partner while simultaneously pursuing her career goals.
[...] and it'd be awful if he left her [with] a child and no career of her own.
But unfortunately that doesn't make her attractive to the right men. Say she does school to get ahead in her career. Now she had $60,000 in debt. Now say a man who is serious about having a family comes around. Why would he choose a woman with a bunch of debt who will not be working significantly for the next 5 years to have kids when he could choose a woman with no debt? Personally I've not dated girls precisely because of this reason and I'd imagine other men think of this too.
So I'm saying its a self fulfilling prophecy. By setting yourself up to care for yourself you ensure you will have to care for yourself. You will attract the wrong men and thus be left at some point.
@bamesjond0069 I tend to have criticisms of the skyrocketing costs of higher education in some places as well (don't think government subsidies for student loans are helping the problem), as well as people of modest means not choosing educational paths that are lucrative (ex: don't think many people are going to make all that much money with a gender studies degree). But the same issue about debt at least applies to men if they can't absolve it.
Sure but men can absolve it because they are permanently entering the workforce. Women who just completed their degree must enter the workforce to absolve it meaning they cannot have kids or else the husband will be the one paying for her debt.
@bamesjond0069 I think that's a very good point. I don't disagree with Molyneux on the need to pay attention to mother nature and the rates at which fertility so drop quickly. It's just that I don't think the nature of society at the present can guarantee that all young women will end up married even if they desire it. And to me a very smart career path these days might even avoid higher education or at least the most costly types.
@bamesjond0069 Well, the way I look at it is like this: let's say we have daughters, both me and you. They're both very bright, academically excellent, and their career interests are aligned to something very practical that pays well in the market and is in high economic demand. Do we really want them to start relying on some guy to marry her, have children together, and hope that works out before they leave the house and pursue the rest of their potential? I can't say I would, as I might risk having some unsatisfied daughter living at home well into her adulthood hoping some guy will finally marry her.
I think they could get married. You honestly think an 18 year old girl is going to be left to the wayside but if she waits around she won't be at 30? That doesn't seem plausible.
I would push her towards marriage. Most women these days marry unmarriagable men because they themselves are also unmarriagable. Its not surprising it doesn't go well for many people. doesn't make it the wrong decision. As a debt free young virgin you know damn well that girl has her pick of men. So i just have to make sure she chooses right. She certainly won't have better options later on after a handful of failed relationships, debt accumulation and with some age on her.
@bamesjond0069 Might vary by culture. I see this a lot here nowadays in Japan with girls living with their parents well into their late 30s hoping to get married while working a part-time job at a convenience store or something like this (or sometimes jobless the whole time). Part of it is exacerbated here by stagnating wages and lots of young men refusing to marry because of the costs and their lack of ability to afford a nice home and so forth. I mean perhaps most girls intent on finding marriage will do so, but there's about a 50/50 ratio of males and females in the populace. I don't think it's necessarily the case that if all females became this way, that all of them, and all males, would end up married while the girl is in her 20s, e. g.
@bamesjond0069 It might be easier if polygamy is practiced, like a well-to-do man late in his career takes multiple wives, e. g. But that's a rather outlandish idea. I just throw it out to illustrate the problem rather than to actually entertain.
@bamesjond0069 There are all kinds of different people as well of all sorts of backgrounds. Imagine a minority girl living in the ghettos. Maybe her brightest hope not only for finding a decent man but being able to take care of herself, either way, might be education and career. I don't know. I just don't want to see women doubly-screwed where they are cheated both out of marriage and career. At least the career choice doesn't require finding a decent partner willing to devote the rest of his life to her. I'd just see it as my duty as a parent to remind her to not forget about building her own family if she gets too absorbed in her pursuits to the point of putting that completely aside (for her own sake, as she might find, after years rolling by, that she missed out on one of life's greatest pleasures).
1. I know nothing of japan or polygamy.
2. Just because it doesn't work for ALL women doesn't mean its wrong. Does finding a career work for all women or do some end up bouncing around unable to keep a job or get stuck as a barista? Not all women need to find husbands in order for it to be generally the right decision.
3. regarding the ghetto girl, she absolutely should marry asap. Women marry up. So from the lowest position in society as a debt free young virgin many many well to do men would consider her for marriage. As a 30 year old with a mediocre career her marriage prospects are still less.
@bamesjond0069 >> Just because it doesn't work for ALL women doesn't mean its wrong.
Ideally, we might account for the individual in that case, like this daughter might be better suited to focus on career, this one marriage, etc. I mean if we're just talking rules of thumbs then it might be better for guys to wait until the 30s+ to marry as well, at least until they've stabilized their career and own a house without a mortgage. That's wise, no, if they want a wife and kids? But the problem I see is that if we apply the latter rule, lots of young women might not be able to find suitable partners.
So it's messy to navigate these things as I see it. I'd just prefer to err on the side of reminding women that they can't wait until 30s to have children and expect high success rates and leave the rest up to them to navigate their individual circumstances lacking much nuanced knowledge as a general guideline.
"it might be better for guys to wait until the 30s+ to marry as well, at least until they've stabilized their career and own a house without a mortgage. That's wise, no, if they want a wife and kids? But the problem I see is that if we apply the latter rule, lots of young women might not be able to find suitable partners"
Men should. And why would that make it hard for women to find suitable husbands? I would think it would make it easier to find suitable husbands as now you would actually have mature and financially stable men around looking for marriage.
@bamesjond0069 I mean if we get super logical about these things, and talking about women marrying up, then there's something wise for every woman seeking marriage absent career to be at least somewhat of a gold-digger, no, to ensure financial security for herself and children regardless of the circumstances? If we get entirely practical about these things, and question what's best for a woman who wants to delay her career interests later into life, then the best thing she can do as I see it is marrying a rich man. He might even be able to afford a maid to take on some of the household duties while she's free to go to university, pursue whatever dream and job she likes. But again, without polygamy, there might not be that many men to marry up to this way and we might find a rather large percentage of women doubly-screwed out of both career and marriage.
Marrying up or looking for a man with financial security is not being a gold digger. A man with a normal decent job and a house is not rich. That is just normal. I mean tough titty but if you dont have a stable job and living arraignment as a man you shouldn't expect to have a wife and family. Lol.
@bamesjond0069 I agree. But I think it'd be wise to not just favor financial security but someone who can even afford maids, for example. That would be the best choice, no? Shifting to economy, I do agree a lot with favoring economic freedom. For example, I lived in Singapore for a few years and that is one of the most economically free nations in the entire world (although personal freedom is somewhat lacking). And now they have almost 200,000 millionaires and it's growing rapidly in a population of 5.6 million. That's about 3% of the population as millionaires and growing which is quite awesome to see from a nation so small and lacking in natural resources. But that still doesn't leave all that many millionaires for women to marry, e. g.
@bamesjond0069 It's difficult for me to entertain monogamy and the idea that every woman can marry and have kids when combined with hypergamous sexual selection, for every such woman to find a suitable, let alone ideal, partner. It's easier in like a feudal society absent social mobility: peasants marry peasants, nobles marry nobles, royalty marry royalty. But if there's an upward trend in a capitalistic society that values freedom, and in this day and age post-feminism, post-sexual revolution, then I think to ensure that certain women don't get left out, it's important that both men and women are encouraged to be self-sufficient while simultaneously accounting for these biological differences.
Like i said. Why would they marry a millionaire? A guy with a decent job and stable living arrangements would make for a good pick. I believe women have other considerations besides simply money. Sure millionaires might be at an advantage but so would a super attractive girl or one who was really funny or one who didn't sleep around a lot. Just because a really fat boring girl who slept around town probably couldnt find a millionaire to marry is irrelevant. I dont know why you keep getting hung up on this. Women aren't entitled to men and vice versa. You are carefully considering what happens to the undesirables. Yeah my hypothetical girl better get a damn job or learn to be satisfied with a very unattractive man. Lol.
@bamesjond0069 I'm talking best pick: the ideal. But I mean, how many random guys out there are going to be supportive, and capable, of providing for a wife who wants to pursue a career post-marriage and kids, and won't abandon her no matter what? I don't have such huge trust in your average guy to do that, let alone marrying in the first place. My father failed this way (the reason my parents divorced is that my mother actually did what Molyneux suggested here, and my father didn't like this idea of his wife going to uni and pursuing a career, and it was awful dealing with their divorce with me and my sister caught in the middle).
I'm not such an optimist about guys or girls. I think most stumble their way through life, and many end up unhappy, some outright miserable. So I don't want to gamble on weak guys with their MGTOW thing or whatever to suddenly change their minds and turn into great fathers and husbands. If I have a daughter, I'd remind her that if she wants children, her body is not going to stay fertile for a very long time. But I don't want her to rely on guys to be happy.
@bamesjond0069 And likewise for a son. I don't want him to rely on girls to be happy. I'm no feminist type but I mean in this day and age, I don't think it's optimal to suggest a woman put these things off until after marriage and kids. I just think they need to be reminded that their biological clock is ticking, that the ability to physiologically have children is not the slightest between equal between males and females. That's the only observation I'd make, and try to persuade, from a libertarian standpoint that respects individual freedom and individual choice.
Tbh your mom sounds like an asshole. She would get divorced in order to go to college and work. Why do women have such a hard on for working. The day my girl wants a career is the day i sit home and eat bon bons. Lol.
@bamesjond0069 >> The day my girl wants a career is the day i sit home and eat bon bons. Lol.
So we're agreed then? Since unless you're rich sitting home and eating bonbons, the woman isn't going to be able to afford to go to university and taking care of children and so forth. I mean if you're talking about students debts that aren't paid off entirely, going to uni from scratch is way more expensive. So it sounds to me like we're both against women pursuing their careers after marriage. LOL.
Women working is stupid but if they are going to do it better after kids not before. Most fail at having careers anyways. Women typically work jobs where there is little or no advancement.
@bamesjond0069 And I do agree that my wife was quite selfish pursuing a career and higher education post-marriage while my father worked. But now we have a stalemate of sorts. Because we can't have it both ways. We can't have husbands and fathers willing to bear the extra costs in time and money to send their wives to school unless they can afford it. So that comes back to the idea that it's probably better for women to pursue these things before marriage if they're going to pursue them at all.
And I do agree that my [mother, sorry] was quite selfish pursuing a career and higher education post-marriage while my father worked.
>> Women working is stupid but if they are going to do it better after kids not before. Most fail at having careers anyways. Women typically work jobs where there is little or no advancement.
Isn't that leaning towards an argument though in favor of housewives without jobs? Would you prefer a woman suddenly deciding to pursue a career dream post-marriage (in my mother's case, to become an architect), and pay for everything and have to deal with the kids somehow (yourself or hire nanny), or get that shit out of the way, maybe even possibly fail, pre-marriage?
I mean at the end of the day either put your career first or family first. All the best men who want to have a family will choose women who make a commitment to family. So like i said its a self fulfilling prophecy. Any girl who puts career first will also have less marriage prospects for if she does want a family later. Women who make family the priority will have more marriage prospects and get better husbands but many will never actually end up working either by choice because they realize they dont want to or because the family pressures do not allow them to. But i know people on their deathbeds regret not having a family way more than not working a job. Lol so in terms of a happy life id suggest women prioritize family instead of risk having no family due to silly career aspirations to be a CEO doctor or lawyer (which the majority never have that awesome career anyways)
@bamesjond0069 It's like do you want to marry a girl, have kids, then suddenly after, she wants to become an astronaut while saying like, "Honey, can you pay for my education and take care of the kids in the meantime? Oh and make sure you cook dinner before 7 PM. KTHX." Cause I figure that sort of scenario is going to be a lot more common if women follow this advice.
No because men dont want to marry a girl with debt and little or no income who is now 6 8 10 years older. Their attempt has made them unattractive to men now.
Hmmm 20 year old girl with no debt vs 28 year old girl with 50k debt. Its obvious all else equal which one will have the most interest from men.
But it will never happen. Most women once they have kids realize careers are stupid and want to stay home. My friend for example bitched and moaned about not wanting kids because her career. She was 34. Finally her husband convinced her to have a kid after all these years and guess what? She never went back to work and is now trying for a 4th child at age i think she's 40 now. Lmao. Career my ass.
@bamesjond0069 What about a 20-year old girl who suddenly wants to be a neurosurgeon after marrying and having kids? Then with kids running around, she requires 7 years of schooling and $280,000 for her education?
@bamesjond0069 >> Lmao. Career my ass.
I actually see more merit in abandoning career than suggesting to pursue careers post-marriage and post-kids. If you're arguing from the standpoint that women shouldn't pursue careers in general in favor of such marriage and children, I'd see that as a very different point from waiting until after marriage and kids to start pursuing careers.
Its not realistic to become a neurosurgeon or astronaut right after you have a couple of kids. You are worrying too much about the exceptions and not the general population. As a percentage of the population both careers combined make up less than 1% of women. Most women will have a family and then never begin meaningful employment because they don't want to leave their kids and many will want more kids. Thats going to be the typical situation for a large majority of women. Whether they want to pursue a career after family or not. And good. That makes the most sense. What makes no sense is working and most likely failing and then having little or no family. Id call that the worst case scenario and right now its the most common.
@bamesjond0069 It's common for both sexes in my experience. If we don't talk about exceptions though, and you're talking about $60k in student debt like it's a common case and not also exceptional, was that debt not at least partially paid off? You'd rather the girl transfer the full costs to you post-marriage of not only a student loan but also all those years spent in education while kids are running around?
If you marry right after school its not paid off. And if you need a masters from a private school that could be a reasonable amount. Either way a girl with 0 debt is better for marriage prospects than one with 10k in community college debt. However you look at it debt and age are big factors in dating and they both take a hit if you go to school before marriage.
@bamesjond0069 A girl that insists on pursuing a career post-marriage has more practical debt than one with some paid off pre-marriage, not to mention a "time debt" (4+ years in school, e. g.). At least the 4+ years of schooling, and possibly some of the debt, is paid off if she spends these resources prior to marriage. If we're talking about costs potentially imposed on husbands, it should be rather obvious that the costs are far greater if she starts pursuing these things after marriage and kids, not before.
Yes but she's not paying them off. You dont pay your loans off while in school. So if she gets a 4 year then 2 year masters then you marry her she didn't pay anything off over the 6 years. Alternatively do you think the same man would want her 10 years after that when maybe its all paid off? No because he wants kids and can get someone both young and with little or no debt.
@bamesjond0069 I realize you're probably balancing lots of things in your mind, but if we're just talking about costs, $60k is rather dirt cheap if the girl transfers the costs to her husband, no? My sister (over in the US) majored in English literature with an M. A. and her student loans were in the range of $200k. In her case, she paid it all off before she became a professor and married and had kids, but imagine if she expected her husband to pay the full cost (including the extra time spent looking after kids) post-marriage and kids.
But how old is she? That was a gamble but it sounds like she made it through. More people than not do not have that experience.
@bamesjond0069 She is two years younger than me and got married I think at around 28 or so. It is a gamble but I'm thinking it's a bigger one, and more costly for everyone, if she waited for post-marriage. That's assuming she wasn't willing to give up her dream of becoming an English teacher.
The 90% dead eggs thing doesn’t tell you anything useful, assuming it’s true.
We do know that all sort of risks really start to pick up around 30-35 and it’s not a good age to have kids, you’re inviting complications.
Another thing to think about is while you may be able to handle an infant in your 30s, you might have a hard time managing a teenager in your late 40s or 50s.
Lastly, having a kid gets in the way of a career. It interrupts and you don’t get experience and opportunities the same of you have to insert a kid into the middle of a career. The thing I hear recommended is to have a family first get that all settled then you can plan a career around it and not have any interruptions.
You are right but looking at adults in their 20s and 30s compared to young adults in the 1970s they don't all look as healthy. Eating lifestyles have changed drastically for many and many are carrying much more weight than we ever did. The average woman weighed 140 in the U. S. now it is in the 160s.
@sejla I agree that there can be other problems involved, but that just means people should being responsible about nutrition and health as well as about the timing of their family. We shouldn't be telling people that fat is beautiful or saying that a girl can become a 40yo career woman and have a guy still want to start a family with her and the everything will be fine when she decides to settled down.
What a dumbass. What kind of mother gives birth first before establishing financial stability in order to feed herself AND the kids?
There's no setup, that she even will get a job in the first place.
According to common sense and real life practicality *YOU* make sure, that *YOU* have your provision FIRST - THEN think about whatever you want - including marriage or kids or both or neither.
Or else the child will end up like I used to be - Broke, starved, depressed and generally blooming late in life (and graduating from a low ranked university instead from the top university of the city).
It’s assuming that every all these young women are going to marry some rich old fart who can provide for the whole family, but: 1) a young attractive woman wants a young attractive man, not an old dude. At least not if she’s got any damn sense. 2) How many men can actually afford to be the only earner? Not many.
@MzAsh precisely! This just reeks of the desire to control women. I'm no fan of it.
I'm a product (child) of such a failure (it posed countless of challenges for me past and present still) and I'm going through great extends, am doing literally 200% effort to get out of being a product of failure towards normal human life. I am an example of what happens if women follow his advise. I'm not intending to repeat the same mistake and i will guarantee that 100% for myself.
This is provided that the father of the children, or even the mother's family, fulfill their financial needs. That IS what most people do around the world when women have kids before they decide to have a career.
@CubsterShura that failed terribly in my family. Like Ash said, there are not many men earning enough money to support an entire family only by himself. The economy is currently still collapsing
Ain't talking about where it fails and where it doesn't. Just talking about why many women start career after having kids. And it works for most women around the world. 🤷
Of course a man said that bull... 🙄
A woman can have a career, school first, THEN have a marriage and kids. It's called having priorities.
Who's to say a woman will want to go work after she's been at home with her kids for x amount of time? Or have the time, finances, and ability to...
Yes, plenty of women do return to work or school after having kids. That doesn't mean it works for everyone.
My Sister-in-Law left a corporate career when she and my brother started having children, then promptly started a contract baking business out of her home, which was VERY successful. She and my brother talked long and hard about their goals as a family, and what she would do when the children started coming (she had four children all together), and her contract baking business held on for at least a decade, and was very profitable for her and for my brother. And yet, she was still able to have an raise four children. I think it is a decision that needs to be discussed before marriage even happens, and if the right balance is struck, success in both the home and the career can take place.
I dunno if what he says is true. There have been many woman to have kids after 30. So to say most of your eggs are gone. Might be outlandish and crazy.
Also the risk for birth defects or pregnancy complications is only raised by a minimum chance 1-2% at most. For woman over 30. And give or take 3-5% woman over 40.
However ideally anywhere between 20-35 is your best bet. I would think.
Keep in mind I am not a doctor and have minimum understanding this all. Only going on what I have been told or read.
Yes I do think that is ideal. The women In my family that had kids early are now better of than those that didn't, both family wise and career wise. My mom for example had me at 22 and now she probably one of the best in her field. The same is true for a few cousins the oldest is unmarried and has no children, fucked around her 20s and doesn't have much of a "career". Her sister Is married had a kid at 24 and now runs her own business.
The "career first" indoctrination of women was not at all meant to empower women. it was meant to help corporations and keep entry level wages down. If they really wanted to help women they would have facilitated early family formation and facilitated slightly delayed job market entry for women.
HAVE. KIDS. EARLIER. The likelyhood for birth defects goes up with the age of the mother. Beyond that, it's hard on the kids. My mom had me at an older age and I now see her struggling with many health issues common to older people. I'm worried for her. That's hard to have weighing on me while in college.
The happiest women I know put kids before career, or started both at the same time.
There's nothing wrong with being a full time mom either. People keep shaming full time mothers and it's disgusting. Just because you think that money is more important than family doesn't make being a full time mom wrong.
I think yes and no...
Good reason is that when u young ur health is good, u not easily get tired and full of energy, whic is god think to raise kids who full of energy.
The earlier u have kids the sooner they will grow up...
Like, i had my 1st at age 27, when some of my classmates had babies at 18-20...
Now i am 30 and have 2 years old baby and my classmates r 30 and have 12-10 years old kids... NOT BABIES any more and they r only 30.. and almost free people... while i feel myself chained taking care of a little 2 y. o baby...
Also good u can go to work early when ur kids will be at day care and start a career and u ll be inly 20-22 y. o.
But the bad part is... when u young u stuid. not enough expiriance in everything, many early marriges fall apart.
And everyone should have kids when they r ready emotionally for it... and not be fprced by society or family or friends...
Most women in my family married in their early 30s once they finished their studies (sometimes PhD) and they got their children in their early 30s to mid 30s.
They're doing fine and have nice happy healthy families with good money from their career.
Wouldn't take advice from Stefan Moulinyeux.
It makes sense to only consider a career after family life is all settled. As a woman you are never going to be more attractive to men than you are right... now. Every second that passes you are losing your ability to land the man of your dreams.
You will also never have a super successful career if you get into it for 5 or 10 or 15 years only to quit for a few years and go back. You basically waste the whole first half of time.
So if you bang out kids fast with the husband of your dreams then you will also have the best chance of having a successful career.
Human biology cannot be negotiated. Find a guy who can provide financial stability in the home so that you can have children -- I believe, the longer you wait, the less likely you will be able to procreate (e. g., lets say there are two women -- the one who chose to have children in their 20s are more likely to be able to continue their reproductive success into their 30s than women who chose to wait). I think it is naive to think biology should not dictate what kind of decisions a woman chooses to make in terms of reproduction.
Pretty risky to assume you’ll get married in the first place. So in my 20s I shouldn’t go to school or work on a career but instead just go on dates all the time and hope I find someone who will be able to pay my bills and keep me alive?
There's no one answer for everone. If you wanna get married and have your kids before 30 and then pursue a career, that's fine. If you wanna get your career going first and have kids later, that's fine. Wanna have kids while in college or while working? That's cool too. Never want kids? Also totally fine. Do what works for you and makes you happy
It's a trade-off. The incidence of Down Syndrome and several other congenital disorders skyrockets starting at age 35. The age of 35 is generally very early in a "career". Biology is biology. A woman will have to weigh matters carefully and decide on an individual basis. One thing that would help is if men stop letting themselves be slaves to corporations for the sake of the "career". One thing I have noticed is that if it's a small business owned by the woman or by the couple, they very often get BOTH, because they are the bosses and they make accommodations as a matter of course.
Children are not a priority to every woman. I want to have kids one day but I believe I should accomplish my goals before raising other people who will live out their lives too. Plus how would a person who is barely not still a child, if we’re saying 20 years old, be able to take care of children when she has no career. Making sure your financially stable enough to even afford kids is the most important.
Kids are cheaper the poorer you are.
I think women should do what they want. Yes, it does suck that we don’t have a big window for healthy child baring but I would NEVER get married young. I couldn’t even take care of myself at 20, let alone another person. I’m spending my 20s traveling, having fun jobs, and discovering what I want to do with my life. Children MAY come later but if they do, I will probably adopt.
I doubt you have the problem of many men going down on their knees asking you to marry them so you definitely don't have to worry about getting married young.
And you're 27, your twenties are long gone.
I don't really care. Women should do what they want. Even if they wait to long there is always adoption. I really dont see the problem with it.
Personally, as long as the couple can afford having a kid I dont care when they have it. If they can't afford it then they should hold off.
Adoption does not equal having children. Its an equal replacement in that a sports car is equal to a pickup truck. Yes its kinda the same in that it gets you from A to B but one is useless when you need to drive through the mud and the other isn't going to help you race around corners. Its just not the same.
How is it cold? Its true. Why don't you get a vasectomy right now and just adopt if you truly believe its exactly the same? Smh.
I think ladies should do whatever is best for them. As someone that wanted kids young, I see it from a biological perspective. But you can absolutely have kids and a career. It's not a one OR the other thing. That's why there are two parents.
There are way too many factors to be simplistic here. Depends on the size of the family you want, when you meet the right person, how their job pans out, what your career interests actually are, the cost of living where you live, if you have extended family near, etc.
Trying to parse down huge decisions into one sentence rarely captures the truth.
Also, what is this bizarre notion that so-called “having it all” means having the extreme measure of everything. So many people live normal, average, happy lives without having to have THE BEST family and children’s belonging & biggest house & most adventurous vacations & most powerful job.
I want someone who loves me for me and for some reason that’s hard to find. I just don’t want to marry the wrong person, have kids with them and then have them leave me. I also want to work on my career and that’s harder to do once you have kids. Some family friends of ours had a baby last year. The husband is in his 40’s and the wife is in her mid 30’s and they are doing just fine.
By the time you have a baby, you won't have a career left. Nobody will hire you after spending 2-5 years taking care of your baby and have a curfew.
Well, you can find jobs but they aren't going to be great career jobs.
So either choose to be a mother or choose to be a career woman. Once you get enough money to hire people to take care of your kids while you work then you can try to have a baby. You aren't going to be the perfect mother but you can be a good one.
That person has a political agenda. 90% of eggs being "dead" by age 30 is simply not true. The average age to have the first child is currently 34 in Stockholm for instance. The number of 40+ aged women having their first child has also increased greatly.
You need a stable career BEFORE you have kids. Besides, an uneducated mother has nothing to offer a child. If you´re worried about your fertility, have your eggs frozen.
Well, i suppose my mum had me, when she was 40 years old, and i have aspergers, so i agree with the birth defects thing. But overall, I'd say, do what feels right. Because i wouldn't want to have a kid with the wrong man or someone who isn't right for me etc. So if i dont have a decent boyfriend / husband, then i wouldn't want to have any kids until i find one, if that makes sense. Right now, im pursuing a career and my education, because i dont want to rely on a man for money.
I hate Stefan Molyneux, but I agree you should have kids young whether that's before or after a career.
In general, it's better nobody listen to him. He's obsessed with race science. His rant about why Germany has a lower crime rate... Chilling.
That makes zero sense! Once you have kids you can’t just jump into a career, they take lots of time to care for and rear. Studies demonstrate that older parents with established careers are far more likely to have more intelligent and well formed children. Also, many people that settle young end up divorced.
If she wants a career and a stable income to provide for the kids - then career comes first. Once you have children it's not like you can pop them out and go work on your career, no, thay require constant care until at least age 10 and even after that you have to have time to be a mother rather than just a career woman.
My mindset was always get my degrees and career before kids. For me personally, I can have my degrees and working in my desired field by 25-26. That gives me time to have a baby before 30. My mother didn't have my oldest sibling until 31, the last 34.
Uh, he’s right but for the wrong reason in my opinion. Plenty of women over 30 have kids. The bigger issue is that time works against women in finding a high value guy for serious relationships which is ideal for making a family. Not to mention that her career would be less affected by any time off for kids early on vs later in her life.
How the fuck are you supposed to make money for your children with no career? Get your career, see if you could have kids and have your career at the same time, if not figure which one you want to sacrifice.
Children are expensive as hell. Paying for 3 people takes a lot of money.
@Adam_INTJ there are plenty of men who can afford it. Women are so empowered they would rather date a sexy excon homeless man over just a normal attractive man who can support a family.
A girl i know literally married a felon pill addict because he is the hottest man she's ever seen. Everyone told her no dont do it. Its not going well fyi surprise. But I've seen her blow off some decent guys who tried with her and they were good looking too.
Well, her loss. She really had 3 options: put career before family and suffer a midlife crisis from the baby rabies, marry the hot addict and live in poverty, or marry a husband who can provide (not her addict pal).
Just because an irresponsible few would suffer poverty from the best solution for most doesn't mean I'm going to give crappy advise to the whole crowd that delay irresponsibility from manifesting its natural symptoms.
@Adam_INTJ agreed. You know what you're talking about
I've talked to a few mothers and ideally, the earlier (around early 20's) you can get a child, whether by marriage or not, the better. The main reason isn't because of birth defects, instead, it is because raising a baby takes a lot of energy and disturbed sleep, something that's difficult to deal with when you're 30 and older.
It's entirely situational. I do think having kids younger is better. But I also think stability for children is of paramount importance. Most 15 to 30 year olds are not stable at all, at least not in ways kids need.
Really, it's a catch 22. Damned if you do. Damned if you don't. So it turns into something that you just have to figure out as you go.
I agree with @hahahmm, for the reason he stated.
Having said that, every women is different and I believe women should do what they believe is right for them. The problem is that I think women get a lot of unrealistic messages today about "having it all", and I think they need to see both sides of the issue and understand the potential pitfalls of postponing getting married and having kids, which is something that is generally downplayed today.
You can also add your opinion below!
Holidays 
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions