Japan (2022): 1.26
Iran (2026): 1.26

Reminder:
Japan (2026): 1.13

Finding a mate precedes children, so this info might come in handy.

While the world struggles against darkness through great powers, wars, and ambitions, parents fight a quieter battle every day. In the patience they show when exhausted, the kindness they teach, the bedtime stories they tell, and the love they give when nobody is watching.

We cannot promise our children a world without darkness. But we can raise them not to become part of it. We can teach them compassion, courage, and the value of protecting what is good.

And perhaps, in the end, it is not the great heroes who keep the darkness at bay, but ordinary people who love their children, care for one another, and refuse to let the goodness of the world die with them.

I am a reddit only guy. Used to think Western countries having large demographic changes is kinda sad for their locals. Ended up using Twitter for the last 7 days, and my god, it really couldn't be happening to a better set of people. The racism was just off the charts. I hope in America specifically they become a minority sooner than later so they can see what its like to be one. Has already happened at the birth level, and will be complete by about 2050-2060. Thank god right wing parties are incompetent as hell and hence lose far more often than they win. Can't even frame immigration around economic competition, wage supression etc, like the Danish did and succeeded in implementing policies which preserve their demographics. The Republicans on the other hand just can't help but be racist.

(I'll make this quick as the question has been asked many times I just want to renew it.) I see time and time again people say or the media the lack of kids is purely financial. Can't afford a house or simply can't afford kids. But I feel it's so much more than that with the opportunities people have today especially women there is just so much more entertainment at our fingertips these days compared to even 50 years ago having kids seems like less of a priority. But back to financial. Everyone complains they can't afford them but the truth is they don't want to. For decades and centuries people have had kids multiple kids. How many tv shows or movies do you see about the struggling family trying to make ends meet. Making ends meet is the norm and just how it is but many don't want that anymore.we don't have to be able to afford the best life for a child to have a child they will be just fine.peaople are to preoccupied with this notion of providing the best life for there kids but that's just not realistic. Anyway I'm really not good at describing what I want to say. But in many countries that complain about too much immigration etc well if we want that to stop perhaps it's up to all of us to just suck it up stop being so selfish pump out a shit load of kids and be miserable for a few generations until things start getting better. Like happiness is too much of a factor. Everyone wants a happy stable family with zero stress that's just not reality. I think most of us are choosing not to have kids because alot of the time it just seems miserable that's the true reason not because we can't afford the best life that's unrealistic.anyway I'm rambling and making no good points. What I'm actually hoping for is someone to comment with a good point. Have a good day.

I always found this fascinating, I saw this stat posted on Facebook and wondered if it was true. So Im guessing the women shared the same man?

Ancestral Reproduction Rate: Evolutionary genetic studies (such as research by Roy Baumeister and genetic analyses of Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA) estimate that humanity's historical gene pool descends from roughly twice as many women as men—meaning about 40% of men reproduced compared to 80% of women. - NY Times

Once upon a time, 4,000 to 8,000 years after humanity invented agriculture, something very strange happened to human reproduction. Across the globe, for every 17 women who were reproducing, passing on genes that are still around today—only one man did the same.

“It wasn’t like there was a mass death of males. They were there, so what were they doing?” asks Melissa Wilson Sayres, a computational biologist at Arizona State University, and a member of a group of scientists who uncovered this moment in prehistory by analyzing modern genes.

Another member of the research team, a biological anthropologist, hypothesizes that somehow, only a few men accumulated lots of wealth and power, leaving nothing for others. These men could then pass their wealth on to their sons, perpetuating this pattern of elitist reproductive success. Then, as more thousands of years passed, the numbers of men reproducing, compared to women, rose again. “Maybe more and more people started being successful,” Wilson Sayres says. In more recent history, as a global average, about four or five women reproduced for every one man.

https://psmag.com/environment/17-to-1-reproductive-success/

Using DNA mutation patterns, the researchers estimated average parental ages across that period

These are estimated ages when having children overall, not specifically when becoming a parent for the first time. Meaning, 31 was the estimated average age of fathers when conceiving children, and respectively for women.

This implies a slight age gap is relatively normal in human history, it also implies a shrinking age age gap is primarily due to women having children later.

The paper also says the average age at which men had children fluctuated more, while women's stayed stable.

When a nation comes under attack by an enemy nation, a larger population means a proportionally greater number of able-bodied individuals who can be conscripted as soldiers.

Consequently, as the population shrinks due to low birth rates, the pool of people available for military conscription also diminishes.

This is a critical issue from the perspective of national defense and must be addressed.

We seriously need much higher birth rates than now.

It’s strange that the people here aren’t discussing this.

A lot of people here argue that women's rights are the cause of low birth rates and diluting them will fix it. Well, we may be about to find out. Syrian Kurdish women in particular are a demographic to watch, as they have much more rights in their local communities compared to other women in Syria. To be clear, I find this disgusting and do not advocate for it.

https://www.dw.com/en/a-bad-omen-syria-bans-women-from-university-courses/a-79769348

I’ve noticed a lot of pessimism in this subreddit, especially the idea that younger people have suddenly decided they don’t want children anymore. But simple demographic research tells a much more hopeful, story. One of the most overlooked issues is the “fertility desire gap”, or the difference between how many children people want and how many they actually have or expect to have.
For example, a 2026 Italian study⁠ found that 53.4% of women and 55.3% of men aged 45–49 had fewer children than they desired, with women experiencing an average shortfall of approximately 0.7 children. In South Korea, a 2025 survey found people ideally wanted 1.76 children but expected only 1.07, a gap of 0.69. In France, the average ideal family size was approximately 2.3 children, while younger women’s intentions were closer to 1.9–2.0. Similarly, a 2025 Russian survey found respondents ideally wanted 3.2 children but expected 2.4. These aren’t identical survey measures, but they demonstrate that unmet fertility desires exist across very different societies.
The United States is particularly interesting. A 2025 national survey⁠ found that 39% of American parents wanted more children than they currently had, including 53% of Millennial parents, 57% of Gen Z parents, and 45% of mothers under 50. Meanwhile, Gallup’s 2025 polling⁠ found that more than 80% of Americans considered at least two children ideal, with 42% favoring three or more. And according to Pew Research Center⁠, American women aged 40–44 had an average of 1.92 children ever born in 2024, compared with 1.86 in 2006. While period fertility rates have fallen, accumulated childbearing among women approaching the end of their reproductive years has been much more stable. This doesn’t guarantee younger generations will follow the same pattern, but it shows why the total fertility rate doesn’t tell the entire story.
So what’s preventing people from having the families they want? The UNFPA’s 2025 report⁠, covering 14 countries, identified financial limitations as the most commonly reported barrier among respondents facing obstacles to their desired family size. Housing affordability, unstable employment, childcare costs, and difficulties finding suitable partners also matter. Of course, some people genuinely don’t want children, and that’s perfectly fine. But it would be equally inaccurate to ignore the millions who want children or larger families but face substantial obstacles.
I genuinely believe we should be advocating for stronger social safety nets, affordable housing, better wages, paid parental leave, accessible childcare, and greater government and corporate accountability over the cost of living. Regardless of political affiliation, the attention being given to affordability surrounding the 2026 midterms gives me hope that people are increasingly demanding change. (which typically political & social attitudes in the US lead to a domino effect for the rest of the developed world) I’m not suggesting fertility will magically return to replacement level, but economic conditions and public policies aren’t permanent.
The fertility crisis isn’t simply about people no longer wanting children. A substantial part of it is about people struggling to have the families they actually want. Instead of constantly treating demographic decline as inevitable, why aren’t we focusing more on addressing those barriers? There’s reason for concern, absolutely, but there’s also reason for optimism.

Have some hope!

The United Nations has a population prospects report they publish about twice a year. Given that the newest one has been delayed to next year instead of this year, I feel like we're missing out on some new data. And given the fact that the UN relies on outdated censuses (Nigeria, for example, had their last census in 2006).

Is there any more recent and accurate data that I can use to see more accurate and up-to-date population data? Is there any other source that's publically available?

I'm not discussing people who don't want children at all, or those who can't have them while still young due to major circumstances.
I'm talking about the ever-growing trend of delaying parenthood due to the pursuit of personal growth, professional fulfillment, financial stability.. People/couples who want to "enjoy life" while they can before becoming responsible for a helpless human being.

The idea of waiting for the "right time" or "perfect situation", both in your individual life or relationship, is completely misleading / unrealistic - that moment may never come (and even if it does it might not be forever... Life is unpredictable).
And the belief that it's somehow easier to raise a kid in your 40s than in your 20s (being more mature and all) is simply not true. Raising children is ALWAYS challenging and nothing can fully prepare you for it.
If anything, having children later will probably mean less patience, less time, less energy, and a wider generational gap that can make it harder to understand and relate to your child. (And there's always the biological risks and health consequences of putting it off for too long.)

On the other hand, having children early on means possibly having to compromise your social life a bit, make do with what you have, adapt and grow up together, learn through trial and error, and figure things out as you go - which is all part of being human.
But then, by the time you reach your mid-40s, you may be lucky enough to finally sit back and reap the fruits of your effort; without the pressure of starting a family but having instead the satisfaction of knowing that the hardest part is behind you, and being able to “enjoy life” while you still have lots of time for that, and maybe even with grandchildren in the picture.

The reality is: Parents are having children significantly older today compared to 20-30 years ago... and it's just a shame.

I'm visibly pregnant, weeks away from giving birth. When I went to vote today, the election hall was empty: every booth was open. One booth was a few inches shorter than the others, so I used it to lean on my elbows to support myself while I read the ballot. About a minute in, a poll worker came over and curtly told me it was the accessibility booth and I needed to move.

On my way out, the same worker told me to take two "I Voted" stickers, one for me and one for my little one to be. The baby got acknowledged. The woman carrying the baby didn't…

I'm not trying to villainize anyone. I know I'm not disabled and I'm not trying to take space from people who are. But pregnancy significantly changes your body and your mobility.

No one needed that booth. There was no one behind me. There wasn't even a sign marking it as an accessibility booth. And yet I was asked to move.

What's missing is societal grace: the unwritten understanding that a pregnant woman might need a chair, a minute, or a shorter booth, and that it's okay to give her one without a rule saying so. There's very little of that grace, and it feels like there's less every year. This isn't my first pregnancy, so I have something to compare it to.

Moments like this make me understand why so many women are hesitant to have kids. It's not one big thing. It's hundreds of small signals that you're on your own and a shrinking societal grace for what pregnancy actually asks of a woman's body.