Declining birth rate

[Optimized Life]

36 minutes ago, enchanted said:

Oh I see . I totally misunderstood you. That's awesome dude!

Yeah but its not "awesome", it's tragic and desperate. 

I'm having 40-400 children and pushing them all to start incubating by age 16, engineering a spiralling domino of rabid human genesis 

I'm an extrovert at heart anyway, I dont mind a big mansion with 400 family members

You all need to start having 5+ children NOW and save me from becoming this autistic baby batman 

[Ramasta9]

12 minutes ago, Optimized Life said:

Yeah but its not "awesome", it's tragic and desperate. 

I'm having 40-400 children and pushing them all to start incubating by age 16, engineering a spiralling domino of rabid human genesis 

I'm an extrovert at heart anyway, I dont mind a big mansion with 400 family members

You all need to start having 5+ children NOW and save me from becoming this autistic baby batman 

GM Children  

[Basman]

On 3/10/2026 at 3:27 AM, Natasha Tori Maru said:

At the heart of it I think there needs to be some form of incentive to have kids. Whether an external incentive structure is good solution is up for debate. It just so happens external incentive structures are usually the most effective at facilitating behaviour change.

Yes, but it needs to be more structural than just money. Just money is compensating for structural disincentives.

[Jordan of the Shire]

On 3/8/2026 at 10:01 AM, Lila9 said:

Patriarchy values hierarchy and dominance, which fuels the corrupted spirit you are talking about. People with those traits, like narcissists and psychopaths, are rewarded in such a system- unsustainable for life.

Maybe when patriarchy was “young,” about 10,000 years ago, during the transition from a more matriarchal structure to a patriarchal structure, it was more sustainable for life. There are still cultures with traces of this era that preserved some matriarchal values.

But as the dark ages came and it evolved into what we know today as neo-liberalism, it is no longer sustainable for life.

We can create something hybrid, something unique, but it requires more “stage yellow and above” individuals in positions of power.

As of today, however, we need more matriarchy.

I have idealistic and visionary qualities, so I can imagine a better world vividly. My goal is not to go to extremes for the sake of it, but to think about systems that are beneficial for all and practically resolve the problems we are dealing with, like declining birth rates.

I understand that you, like many men, may have some rejection of the word “matriarchy” because of unresolved misogyny.

But I would like to clarify that this does not mean women rule. Often, men are just afraid that women will treat them the way men have treated women for the last thousands of years. However, please refer to the work of the woman I posted earlier, and you will see that matriarchy is not about women ruling. It is simply an acknowledgment that mothers are the beginning, and that building a community around raising healthy, strong, and educated children creates a stronger and better society.

This also includes wise women and men in positions of leadership who are pro-communal and true leaders, not anti-social. It does not force women or men to conform to strict gender roles. It does not force women into motherhood but provides all the conditions necessary for those who do choose to become mothers.

It also may work better in small communities of up to 100 people rather than in bigger numbers. 

 

 

 

 

Hey Lila,

I hope you're well.

Thanks for your response.

 

When it comes to governing, I'm not sure what is "right way"

I know it helps if everyone is elevated in their knowledge, capacity for awareness, and ability to release. As in, release as a cultivated ability, taught, and shared amongst peoples, and practiced all day everyday, with relationship to all things. Being careful to watch where we are intensely identified, and to release best we can.

I've recently been thinking about the times saints and mystics came to the world and made a big difference. They are still out and about. 

Like I said, I don't look at it in terms of one or the other. I look at it as individual personal self actualization accumulating as a collective. Every system is imperfect.

On a spectrum of development, i think people start to behave with what the Taoist call "De" - natural virtue. Not contrived by law or moral systems, but a result of knowing correct action as a result of wisdom.

I think before we are there, we need systems to keep things in check. But i'm not an expert in what those systems got to be. Matriarchal or Patriarchal. Who knows. But my view is, like yours, agrees with education, love and adds release. 

And I was thinking about this yesterday. Nature is not egalitarian. I think it is our attempt to measure and categorize and control. Which has its excesses, deficiencies, and balances. 

There is no perfect answer to this question.

[Infinity16]

I think declining fertilit rates are a sign that a country's society is heading into orange. You see, that is the stage at which women start to think about career prospects as opposed to just childbearing. Surely some couples will still have children but others will not have any, dragging down the fertility rate. You will notice that for the US, the baby boom ended with the second wave of feminism.

[Hayato]

One of the reasons for infertility is the increasingly toxic environment that we live in as per the article below.

 

https://www.medicalmedium.com/blog/infertility

[Lila9]

14 hours ago, Jordan of the Shire said:

And I was thinking about this yesterday. Nature is not egalitarian. I think it is our attempt to measure and categorize and control. Which has its excesses, deficiencies, and balances. 

There is no perfect answer to this question.

Nature is many things, including egalitarian.

People say that nature is cruel and violent, but this is a myopic view of nature.

It is far more complex and diverse. Human nature is also more complex and diverse.

An egalitarian society is a society in which leadership is truly earned through wisdom, skills, and abilities (rather than taken by force) and is also situational. Humans did live that way for millions of years, so this is not impossible.

If I had to build a society from scratch now and select the shared values, I would build it with a more matriarchal leaning. I'd keep the healthy masculine values and balance it with more feminine values like community rituals, beauty, spirituality, motherhood, and children, because from my perspective this is the right thing to do and can benefit everyone, as it is more aligned with our human needs.

But I am biased because I do not benefit much from this system, which is heavily leaning on masculine values while repressing the feminine. It actually contradicts most of my values. For some, especially those who have privilege in this society and are in a convenient position, my view can be threatening.

[Jordan of the Shire]

4 hours ago, Lila9 said:

Nature is many things, including egalitarian.

People say that nature is cruel and violent, but this is a myopic view of nature.

It is far more complex and diverse. Human nature is also more complex and diverse.

An egalitarian society is a society in which leadership is truly earned through wisdom, skills, and abilities (rather than taken by force) and is also situational. Humans did live that way for millions of years, so this is not impossible.

If I had to build a society from scratch now and select the shared values, I would build it with a more matriarchal leaning. I'd keep the healthy masculine values and balance it with more feminine values like community rituals, beauty, spirituality, motherhood, and children, because from my perspective this is the right thing to do and can benefit everyone, as it is more aligned with our human needs.

But I am biased because I do not benefit much from this system, which is heavily leaning on masculine values while repressing the feminine. It actually contradicts most of my values. For some, especially those who have privilege in this society and are in a convenient position, my view can be threatening.

Hey Lila,

 

Yea actually thanks for pointing that out. It's funny how i can say "nature is not egalitarian" yet some forms of life organize in an egalitarian way. So its a blanket statement which doesn't reflect how things actually are. Its funny how that happens. It is a myopic view. 

I would also like to see more community beauty motherhood and children and spirituality. I was having a talk with a friend today and she was saying she would have more children but she needs to work, she already has a full schedule. So I think, like you said, small groups of trust-worthy people working together to raise families. This could help the birth rate. I think women need the space and comfort and resources to raise children. If they have to work and do everything on their own, then it is hard to raise kids.

On cruel nature. I don't personally see nature as cruel and violent. I want to say that, it is natural for there to be non-equality in terms of manifestation, and that nature is manifesting in many different forms, and those forms have different functions, that don't always serve a preference we might ideally want. Many forms of nature have a give and take, consume and provide, have parasitic and symbiotic functions. Our attempt to control these aspects of nature, even in ourselves, seems to meet different forms of excess and deficiency because it is difficult to balance a very complex system via control.

This makes me think of a tangled form. I find that I can untangle a cord. I don't think about how to do it however. Some function of my mind sees it, and i untangle it, however i didn't run any calculations. I think that there is a part of us that has a self organizing principal when it is allowed to function, when we can get out of the way and let it work, it works. 

I think one of our valiant efforts in humanity is our attempt to understand. Is our attempt to seek and know. And I am learning that the mind is a great tool. And intelligence or intellect is not the antithesis of spirituality or release, which is a belief I have held for sometime. So learning 3rd dimensional laws of physics, and understanding engineering concepts, and studying ecology, and you know, the intellectual rigor of science.. i am finding myself gravitating to it now, to some degree.

But I am finding for myself, that the activities of the mind need to be balanced with release. Because Ideas about the way things function or ought to function can become intensely identified with, and energy goes where attention is. So if you empower a direction, then you might end up off in some excess or deficiency, which is fine, thats the beauty of life, but if release is a daily practice, one doesn't need to go on a tangent for too long. 

 A knowing that the mind is separate from awareness. Then the minds functions can begin to function in a unique way. This is something of a study for me, and i'm exploring, pointed at it by different teachers. So in part I am speaking of something I am experiencing, and also, exploring as a clue or hint by people who have pointed in this direction. 

One of the issues I have is that the physics of the universe includes things, like siddhi and miracles, that defy current widely accepted physics, and so many of these laws are relative to the context of consciousness. They work within certain conditions, but not in others. Accepting this is difficult for me, it makes me not want to learn anything haha because its so fucking contextual. I'd rather live with the mind that untangles naturally. But i AM curious about how people are coming together and solving problems... and this idea... that many different people, expressing themselves in different ways, they are parts of a truth, and so I personally am starting to see humanity in a much different light. 

 

..... yea... 

[Lila9]

@Jordan of the Shire Thank you for taking the time to respond.
I don't understand how the second part of your post is related to the first part, but it seems that you wrote your stream of consciousness reflecting some deep thinking, which is beautiful.

[ici]

4 pages of posts and not a single mention of the movie Idiocracy.

[Shermaningeorgia]

something pushed by US conservatives who think merely having kids is some moral good. 

these people neglect to realise that rising living standards and healthcare have contrbuted to this.

[ZenAlex]

On 06/03/2026 at 3:54 PM, Lila9 said:

In those areas, like the Middle East and Africa, women are forced to marry and have children. If not by physical force, then by social pressure. Singlehood is seen as a threat. It is also more difficult and dangerous to survive as a single woman in those areas.

Iceland, despite having more equality, still has a patriarchal framework. There is not country in the world without a patriarchal framework. 

In the West, women have the choice and they choose not to, especially since men are more likely to believe in oppressing gender roles, while women are more likely to reject them and believe in gender equality. This is why conservatives in countries like America would like to take reproductive rights away from women and do not support welfare for single mothers with children.

They want to force women back into oppressive gender roles, where they are reliant on men for survival and expected to have children.

Many people don't understand that patriarchy is built like a pyramid scheme. Those on top are dependent on the unpaid labor of those at the bottom.

The motherhood and care labor women do is the most important labor there is, without this labor, society would crumble.

However, this is the most underpaid labor.

If the patriarchal system were to start paying women what they deserve for their care labor, the patriarchy would crumble, and the economy as we know it would no longer exist, which is exactly why motherhood and women's labor are underpaid. This is not a bug, this is a feature.

This is patriarchy trying to preserve itself.

Women and mothers can only be properly supported and appreciated in a non-patriarchal society, which is built more like a sphere than a pyramid. Everyone gets enough for their survival. There is no need to hoard at the expense of anyone.

 

This, of course, can't be achieved in a red-blue-orange society. It can only happen in green and above.

Now, we are at a crossroads. Patriarchy is crumbling and killing itself because it was never a sustainable structure to begin with.

And so, all the ideas related to patriarchy like capitalism, dominance, control, and materialism can't sustain a healthy society for humans.

This is why the birth rate will continue to declain until radical change happens, such as gradually moving towards a more matriarchal structure.

You may refer to the work of this woman on matriarchy. This is very likely the future of humanity if we are to survive these dark ages.

The true foundation of society is children, not captial:

https://substack.com/@nergiz/p-170760646

Humans are matriarchal species:

https://lettersfromayoungmatriarch.substack.com/p/humans-are-a-matriarchal-species?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2

Patriarchy created the conditions for epshtein:

https://substack.com/@nergiz/p-187509057

Why a system of "father rule" can never be caring:

https://substack.com/@nergiz/p-165541193

It almost feels like a huge false dichotomy 

[Willy Phallicus]

Matriarchy is just as tyrannical and unbalanced as patriarchy.  Both are an imbalance.  

The solution to patriarchy is not matriarchy.  The solution to extremism is never the polar opposite extreme.  The solution is always balance and equity. 

As for declining birth rates and possible extinction there's really nothing to be done for it.  Its just screwed up and this is as good as it gets.  There's been 30 species of bipedal upright walking apes on this planet - 29 are extinct and number 30 is on its way out.  Can't say that's really a big deal to me.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

9 minutes ago, Willy Phallicus said:

Matriarchy is just as tyrannical and unbalanced as patriarchy.  Both are an imbalance.  

The solution to patriarchy is not matriarchy.  The solution to extremism is never the polar opposite extreme.  The solution is always balance and equity. 

As for declining birth rates and possible extinction there's really nothing to be done for it.  Its just screwed up and this is as good as it gets.  There's been 30 species of bipedal upright walking apes on this planet - 29 are extinct and number 30 is on its way out.  Can't say that's really a big deal to me.

Matriarchy will always remain just some sad feminist fantasy lol. It is much more likely that technological progress and more general human development will make all these categories absolete (including patriarchy which is already pretty much absolete) within the next few centuries, rather than having another form of scarcity system that would have to be enforced by men anyway

[Lila9]

When I think that I have seen everything in this forum, it never disappoints me with its myopic ignorance and stupidity. It delivers it every time.

 

[Willy Phallicus]

29 minutes ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

Matriarchy will always remain just some sad feminist fantasy lol

Any rational person who has spent any time examining the plight of women through history would arrive at the conclusion that women have been pretty much universally exploited and abused in just about every society that has ever existed - a women's liberation from the patriarchy was desperately needed.  However, the current method is to appeal to the anger and outrage of women, radicalize them into militancy and then install the most radicalized among them in positions of power and influence within the construct - because the most ardent and extreme elements of the movement are given the reigns of the movement they will inevitably turn the movement into a war and push the agenda of liberation towards one of conquest and subjugation....and the modern day third wave feminist doesn't try to hide this at all.

18 minutes ago, Lila9 said:

When I think that I have seen everything in this forum, it never disappoints me with its myopic ignorance and stupidity. It delivers it every time.

Yeah okay.  Tell yourself whatever you need too.  Myopic ignorance and stupidity is to continue to take your cues from the social engineers.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

23 minutes ago, Willy Phallicus said:

Any rational person who has spent any time examining the plight of women through history would arrive at the conclusion that women have been pretty much universally exploited and abused in just about every society that has ever existed - a women's liberation from the patriarchy was desperately needed.  However, the current method is to appeal to the anger and outrage of women, radicalize them into militancy and then install the most radicalized among them in positions of power and influence within the construct - because the most ardent and extreme elements of the movement are given the reigns of the movement they will inevitably turn the movement into a war and push the agenda of liberation towards one of conquest and subjugation....and the modern day third wave feminist doesn't try to hide this at all.

The way I look at it now, patriarchy is just one of those things in history that simply happened. There's this thing called "power" (loosely defined in this context as influence over other human beings) which exists whether you want it to exist or not, whether you like it or not. Men simply took over because they were in a position to do so, and it happened all over the world in all emergent "civilized" cultures, isolated and independent from each other. That couldn't be an accident, but simply a consequence of our design. It's not necessarilly fair or unfair, just or unjust, it just happened that way. And notice; the moment technology started to take over human labour, is the moment our society began to slowly liberalize. Currently, patriarchy still exists but it's on life support

[Basman]

An exclusionary system isn't going to solve anything unless you are planning on making women slaves again.

Edited 3 hours ago by Basman