r/Natalism

I for one, though I am young right now, do want a family someday. The problem is, in this new modern hellscape of dating, I’m not sure I’ll be able to find a woman that’ll take me, given my shorter height and being an average dude and not exceptional.

I guess my question is, is this a wider trend, or is it just me. Is there a sizable chunk of men out there who genuinely want kids and to help birth the next generation, but can’t find women to do so with.

Similar question to the one about antinatalists.

This time about religious fundementalists, people who just want to stir up gender wars and people who are not true natalists, just nationalist.

From me, it's a big resounding yes.

Just asking about your opinions on it

I’m a man, and I bring in 80 percent of my family’s income. I absolutely hate working, and I find it completely absurd that this is seen as a privilege. Endless boring meetings, useless reports.

Because I work much more, my girlfriend has to do a bit more around the house. She, in turn, absolutely hates doing laundry, cooking, and cleaning. She definitely doesn’t see that as a privilege either.

See where we meet each other? If men admit that housework sucks, and women admit that a full-time job sucks, then aren’t we basically there?

I'm female 24 and I've always been childfree but having doubts since meeting my partner two years ago and joined r/Natalism very recently and y'all...from not giving good reasons to have a kid to straight up white replacement theory y'all a so gross. Even the most normal of you kinda disgust me, you really think you're doing the world a favor by breeding like livestock and I have to like block this sub after I post. I just want y'all to understand that birthing children can be deadly to women and I've seen one too many posts blaming them instead of corrupt politicians who don't want you to have proper lives that would allow you to live your natalist lifestyles.

Every post on this subreddit is radioed to oblivion. What happened to this community, it’s devolved into troll posting , vague posting , bait posting garbage.

Can we get some moderation or something to raise the quality of posts around here. Just spit balling but there has to be something we can do. Every post I just see people farting and shooting spitballs at OP, and often justifiably so

Do you think it's a desirability factor or something else? Less children because less desirable?

I've been wondering whether increasing height preferences in dating could be contributing, even in a small way, to lower birth rates.

It seems that among older generations such as Gen X and Baby Boomers, height may have mattered but didn't appear to dominate partner selection to the same extent. There were still many short male celebrities back then. Today, especially through online dating and social media, height seems much more visible and emphasized. People often see discussions around ' 6 feet or taller' as a preference or even a requirement.

One thing I wonder is whether this creates a mismatch in the dating market. If many younger women strongly prefer taller men, but only a relatively small percentage of men meet those preferences, does that reduce the number of successful matches and long-term relationships which leads to less births overall?

Another thing I find interesting is that it feels like the male height obsession really took off around the mid 2010s, when social media and online dating became much more central to dating culture. Around that same period up until now, birth rates in many countries also continued declining sharply. Coincidence, or could there be some connection? I'm not saying one caused the other, but it's interesting that the timing appears to overlap.

Some statistics:

• The average American man is around 5'9. The average man worldwide is around 5'7.

• Only around 14–15% of American men are 6 feet or taller.

• Men who listed themselves as 6'0" on some dating platforms reportedly received significantly more attention than men listed at average height.

• Dating apps also allow filtering by height, which can make preferences more rigid than in face to face dating.

So if a large number of users are competing for a relatively small percentage of men, could stricter filtering lead some people to stay single longer and indirectly affect marriage and birth rates? Or is the effect tiny compared to bigger factors such as housing costs, economic pressures, delayed parenthood and changing social values?

Of course, shorter men still date, marry and have families, exceptions and anecdotes always exist. The question is whether preferences affect overall odds across a population rather than individual cases.

I'm someone that dont want to have kids in the future, so I'm kinda confused about natalism. What exactly is it? Do you guys think everyone should have kids, even people who don't want them? is it more encouraging people to have more children in general? What's the main idea behind it? I'm genuinely curious, can someone explain?

I’m not sure why we should be concerned about the birth rate when businesses plan on replacing everything with AI and robots anyways

From my understanding there is zero incentive to have children when people are worried about being fired just to be replaced by AI systems and have nothing to feed their children because they got replaced by the AI automation system by their employers

It seems like the ai crisis and the population collapse crisis have a way of canceling each other out

Where is the best place for an American citizen to move to in order to afford having 6+ kids without living in a backwards country or lower my standard of living?

I'm open to Eastern Europe and parts of Asia.

One thing that often gets overlooked in discussions about "white replacement" is that "white" has never been a fixed category.

Throughout history, groups like the Irish, Italians, Jews, and many Eastern and Southern Europeans weren't always considered fully "white" by the mainstream. Over time, those boundaries changed. The definition of "white" expanded because social attitudes changed, not because people's genetics did.

Modern genetics also doesn't support the idea of neat, biologically distinct races. Human genetic variation exists on a continuum, while broad racial labels are social categories whose boundaries have shifted over time.

I'm mixed-race, which is one reason I find the replacement theory confusing. Who am I supposed to identify as? If one of my parents is white and the other isn't, am I replacing someone, or am I part of the group supposedly being replaced? The theory doesn't really have an answer because it assumes everyone fits into rigid racial boxes.

It also raises a broader question about how people think about family and identity. Should personal decisions like who to have children with be judged based on whether they change population statistics or “upset” demographic balances? By that logic, people like me would essentially be framed as a problem simply for existing. That’s a strange way to think about something as personal as family.

It also seems odd to imply that people should only date and have children within their own race to preserve demographics. Shouldn't people be free to choose their partners based on love and compatibility? If two people from different backgrounds have children, that's not evidence of a conspiracy or "replacement"—it's simply the outcome of people making their own personal choices.

History shows that "white" is a social category whose boundaries have changed over time. That's why the idea of a fixed "white race" being "replaced" doesn't make much sense to me.

Our ancestors weren't a single, unchanging group with one ideology. Human history is full of people who challenged tradition, questioned authority, crossed social boundaries, and fought for greater personal freedom.

Individualism isn't a modern invention. Philosophers from ancient Greece, thinkers in ancient India, religious reformers, poets, and countless ordinary people have defended the right to think independently and live according to conscience.

Liberal values such as freedom of speech, equality before the law, freedom of religion, women's rights, and individual liberty didn't appear out of nowhere—they evolved over centuries through debate, reform, and resistance to unjust traditions. Many of these rights were won because people challenged long-standing customs rather than accepting them simply because they were old.

If conservatives can claim ancestry for preserving customs, liberals can equally point to a long tradition of questioning customs, expanding rights, and pushing society toward greater equality.

And even if one religion becomes the majority in a country, that doesn't make liberalism, individualism, or women's rights any less legitimate. A majority can determine who wins elections, but it doesn't determine whether principles like freedom of conscience, equal rights, or personal liberty are valid. Those principles protect everyone, regardless of which religion is most numerous.

Our ancestors gave us both tradition and progress. Civilization advanced because some people preserved what worked while others challenged what didn't.

Appealing to "our ancestors" doesn't settle a political debate. History belongs to everyone, not just conservatives.

The more I think about it, the more I feel natalism is tied to identity rather than humanity as a whole. In practice, many people appear to be motivated primarily by the continuation of 'their' own community, culture, religion, nation, or ethnicity. And not by a desire for global population growth.

On a global platform like Reddit, where people from every background can participate, these different priorities inevitably come into contact. Discussions that begin with birth rates or family policy can quickly turn into arguments about demographics, identity, or whose community is growing or declining.

Because of that, I sometimes wonder whether separate natalism communities focused on different cultural, religious, ethnic, or national perspectives would lead to more productive discussions than trying to fit every perspective into one subreddit. Each community could discuss its own concerns without constantly running into disagreements over competing demographic goals.

When people bring strong in-group preferences into a shared global forum, conversations can become polarized and sometimes descend into xenophobia or conflict. Acknowledging that different groups have different motivations might make for more honest and potentially more constructive discussions.

Edit: I tried posting this on r/antinatalism but it got removed. I guess this subreddit is my only option now.

| 24F have had an extremely traumatic life for as long as I can remember. I'm obviously not gonna sit here and tell you my whole life story because that's not really practical, however I had a very traumatic childhood and first began experiencing depression and suicidal thoughts when I was around 12 years old.
I'm not currently suicidal however and have never attempted suicide. I'm also on the autism spectrum which makes my life harder for me in countless ways.
I'm technically high functioning, however living with autism has made it extremely hard for me to talk to people, make friends and fit in socially. For most of my life l've been a social outcast and I haven't had any friends in about 12 years.

Furthermore living with depression and autism also greatly limits my job opportunities. I'm currently unemployed and have a B.S. in childhood education, however my last job was as an assistant teacher at a preschool making $18 an hour. I probably should have chosen a different major but I didn’t anticipate that my disability would make being a teacher so hard for me when I started college so now I’m just screwed. On top of all that, I live in one of the most expensive cities in the U.S. so my salary didn’t get me very far and I was basically living in poverty. I pretty much can’t do any job that requires good mental health or social skills and I often worry that despite having a bachelor’s degree, I may end up working low skill jobs and living in poverty for the rest of my life due to my disability.

My experience of life so far has been overwhelmingly negative, if I could go back in time and force my mom to get an abortion I would and I don’t think any of the rare moments of temporary joy I get once every few years have made any of this worth it. It’s ridiculous that most people think it was totally fine for my parents to force the burden of having to live in such a cruel fucked up world on me, entirely without my consent, but if I happen to decide that I’ve had enough of suffering here for the past 24 years and want to leave, I belong in a mental hospital? It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society and the world we live in is undeniably sick.

This is why I believe assisted suicide should be legal worldwide. As a society if we’re going to allow people to bring more innocent souls into such a cruel fucked up world without their consent, we should at least offer them a way out that doesn’t involve further suffering. For obvious reasons, I will never be having any children, no force on this Earth could ever compel me to put another person through this hell and I genuinely believe that people who choose to procreate are evil. Any person that would knowingly and willing bring an innocent child into a world filled with so much suffering and evil is a selfish piece of shit.

Edit: For more info on why a teaching career will not work for me and why I chose to pursue a B.S in childhood education please read this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/autism/s/y3QPgwVpOb