Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
China's Male Leaders Signal to Women That Their Place Is in the Home (nytimes.com)
4 points by rawgabbit 7 months ago | hide | past | favorite | 8 comments



For all of Mr. Xi’s calls on women to take up the cause of having babies, the party’s efforts are unlikely to bolster the birthrate enough to reverse the country’s population decline. That is, unless it is willing to resort to more punitive measures to disadvantage or marginalize women who choose not to have children.

While unlikely, it is something that Fubing Su, a political science professor at Vassar College, said was not completely out of the question. During the “one-child” policy, the party resorted to fines, forced abortions and sterilizations in an attempt to slow population growth for decades until it ended the restrictions in 2015.


Here's an idea: if babies are so important, then pay women more to compensate for having them.


I think that's missing the point. If people don't reproduce, society dies out. That said there are enough people to allow for this to be an option... except in totalitarian societies which have more interest in power than in progress.


How is it missing the point? It's recognizing that having babies is a valuable service to society. Why are you expecting women to run a charity via their wombs? Pay any pregnant women the base rate for a new army recruit, and increase the pay annually or per milestone reached till a child is legally an adult. Do this for every child raised as an adult on top of a woman's own income from her job (maybe prorate based on her earned income). Actually, maybe there should be separate pays for child rearing as well so this benefit doesn't just help women, exclusively. We do this already via taxes and credits, this is just making things more proactive via month to month salary structure.


The point of having a child is not just for society, it's for your own personal benefit of passing on your genes. If you don't want to pass on your genes then don't reproduce. Also, if society pays people for their children, society also owns them (to the extent they pay for them), which at least in my opinion, I'd rather not have my children be property of the government.


> I think that's missing the point. If people don't reproduce, society dies out.

All the more reason to compensate women for carrying babies to term.


If women hold the entire species hostage, we can imagine what men could do to prevent that. Having a child is basically making a copy of your genes which is its own reward.


A lot of Asia is trying to deal with this fertility problem, and their solutions often seem ham fisted and ineffective




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: