Re: how many siblings?
[email protected] (Sn!pe)
| Newsgroups | alt.checkmate,alt.atheism |
|---|---|
| Organization | Sn!peCo World Wide Wading Birds |
| Message-ID | <1rziz9o.194i3vy1iuqyzrN%[email protected]> |
Attila <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, 08 Aug 2026 10:04:15 GMT, Ordatious > <[email protected]> in alt.atheism with message-id > <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > >My grandmother was the youngest in a family of 15 children, where 13 lived > >to see adulthood. > > > >Yes, more common in the olden days, but not unheard of even today. I > >believe there is a documentary on YouTube somewhere, about a family of ten > >(was it?) children, somewhere in Great Britain, if I'm not mistaken. > > > > Children were considered a financial asset, There was > little education, especially for girls, and children > were expected to start providing labor at a very early age. > With industrialization and population centralization in > cities along with an increased level of education and higher > standard of living children became a financial liability and > as a result birthrates dropped. Child labor along with > uneducated and untrained employment availability largely > disappeared. > > This has been a constant pattern no matter what society was > involved. > The biggest factor driving modern declining birthrates is the 1950's development of reliable contraception (the Pill). Motherhood became a woman's choice and it enabled modern female emancipation so that she could have her own career rather than being "just a homemaker". Sex will always be much more fun than motherhood so this gave rise to "free love" without consequences (other than the risk of STDs) hence subseqent low fertility. -- Sn!pe, birdbrain. My pet rock Gordon just is.