At present, only poor countries have reasonable fertility. The fertile age white population is everywhere declining, and the most intelligent and educated women reproduce the least. But quite recently affluent countries such as pre Weimar Germany had high fertility, and many poor countries have fertility as low as the worst of the west.
Conversely, Rome in its decline, and Sparta in its decline, had terribly low fertility, though their only methods of birth control were vice, abortion, and infanticide, and their living standards were relatively low compared to modern standards.
The demographic transition is nothing to do with whiteness, nor with wealth and economic development. Nothing to do with having a Malthusian system. It is not poverty that makes the difference.
Nepal is a good example of a very poor third world country with low fertility comparable to that of the advanced west – but its low fertility is a mix of very high fertility women and very low fertility women, which should make it easy to see what causes the difference.
in Nepal, which is as third world and poverty stricken as you can get outside Africa, females that have been exposed to western schooling to age twelve or older have a fertility rate similar to that of the most infertile wealthy advanced white western nations,
|Islamic Schooling, no Western Schooling||7.78|
|Western Schooling to ages 7 to 11||4.5|
|Western Schooling to ages 12 to 13||1.44|
|Western Schooling to ages 15 to 16||1.57|
|Western Schooling to age 17 and above||1.50|
If they don’t get that class at age 12, because they went to a Muslim school, or because they did not go to school, their expected number of children is six or seven, even if they went to a high class ladies Muslim school. If they got western education at age twelve, then they have western fertility levels, far below replacement.
There is something taught to twelve year old girls in Nepal in Western schools, but not in Muslim schools, that drops fertility from six or seven children per female to less than 1.5 children per female.
This is what Boko Haram is complaining about. They view it, reasonably enough, as genocidal.
This Nepalese data is consistent with the high fertility of the Amish: The Amish absolutely insist on controlling their kids schooling. They also ban television. They allow their adolescent kids out into the world to visit the fleshpots, but not, however, the classrooms. They fear both the classrooms and the televisions, but primarily the classrooms.
I would say that it is memetic infection, the same memeplex, propagated both by soap operas and the education system, each reinforcing the other, but primarily by the education system.
And that memeplex is exemplified by “Sex and the City”, and the nine year old learning to put a condom on a banana, but not learning that a woman’s fertility window is a lot shorter than that of a man, and a lot shorter than her career window – learning that normal everyday behavior for women is to follow the same life plan as men – and not learning that that life plan, naturally enough, is consistent with men producing children, but not really consistent with women producing children.
Here is my theory explaining this observation:
If women are emancipated, fertility collapses. But merely legal emancipation has limited effect, because females are extremely vulnerable to social pressure and conformity, so that peer pressure, social pressure and parental pressure, can and routinely does prevent emancipation from being effective, and thus prevents fertility from collapsing.
So the Cathedral has to reach into society through propaganda in school and television, and remake society to emancipate women, then fertility collapses because the girls spend their hottest and most fertile years fucking bad boys.
If women are low status relative to males, all males look attractive to them.
If women are restrained from screwing outside of marriage, if they cannot get their hands on males and males cannot get their hands on them (except in parentally supervised dancing with parentally selected partners) they want to get married. If all males look attractive to them, they can get married, and will love their husbands.
If women get married young, love their husbands, and submit to their husband’s authority, they will have a reasonable number of children – around six or seven, if the husband can afford it.
If, on the other hand they perceive themselves as equal to males, they will look around for males that are somehow higher status – typically convicted felons and such, for example Jeremy Meeks. They spend their fertile years fucking those guys, and only when the booty calls stop, only then do they condescend to reluctantly notice someone who is inclined to support and father children. And many of them, particularly the most intelligent, the most highly educated, the most wealthy and successful, for example the infamous lawyer pussy, when they are too old to get booty calls from Jeremy Meeks any more, will find all males that might return their interest beneath their notice, and wind up as cat ladies.
Another factor inculcated in western schooling is the false life plan, the female equivalent of the blue pill.
Girls are told that the normal respectable thing, the thing that all girls do, is put their career first. Marriage and family will just happen by itself, with no need to make it happen. Presumably it will happen while they are fucking Jeremy Meeks. They are told that teenage pregnancy is a terribly bad thing, cause it destroys your career.
Of course pregnancy will have the same effect on a woman’s career at any age – and since her fertility window is a lot shorter than her career window, and a lot shorter than a male’s fertility window, it would make a lot more sense to worry about marriage and family first, career late. She will never be as hot as she was when young, but she will probably be a lot more competent at making money when somewhat older.
Girls are not told that women are hypergamous while men are polygynous, and thus the most attractive man who is interested in them is likely to be a lot more attractive than the most attractive man who is interested in marrying them and having children with them. They are told that men and women are just alike in the sexual natures, and so are not told that they can score a much more attractive man for a one night stand than they can score as a boyfriend, and much more attractive man as boyfriend than as a husband – and that every additional boyfriend and one night stand means the quality of husband that they can attract is correspondingly less. In consequence the large majority of women spend their hot years having sex with the small minority of the most attractive men – who of course are in no position to father their children and have no intention of doing so.
The false life plan, the female equivalent of the blue pill, is that a girl can focus on her career, and spend her youth, her beauty, and her fertile years fucking Jeremy Meeks, and marriage and family will just spontaneously happen without her having to do anything about it or think about it or sacrifice anything for it.
Female emancipation enables women to indulge in the false life plan, and they are also falsely told that it is a good idea. Probably around age twelve in school.
To have eugenic population growth: Abolish welfare and put female sexuality and reproduction under parental control, until they get married whereupon their sexuality and reproduction comes under their husband’s control.
Parents will delay their daughters reproduction until their daughters get married. Parents will only allow males able and willing to support a wife and children to court their daughters, and only allow them to court their daughters for marriage, not sex.
Wealthy people will marry young, poor people will marry late.
In order to reproduce successfully, reproduce biologically and culturally, men and women have to behave in different and complementary ways.
For the family unit to function, it has to have a single head, and that head has to be the man, because women will not endure sex if they are the head. And it has to be legally and socially binding.
If, on the other hand, women are free, their natural inclination is to engage their hypergamy with a minority of males outside the family unit, which natural inclination is reinforced as the normal life course, normal behavior, by school and television, which results in non reproductive sex. Successful societies repress this, frequently employing alarmingly drastic means, but the ordinary pressures of social conformity and adverse economic and life outcomes suffice to reduce it to quite manageable levels. Adulteresses in Timor Leste are punished only by social stigma and divorce without property, rights to children, or alimony. Stoning is not required to reduce the problem to acceptable levels.
Tags: Jeremy Meeks