For all those men that think that only women have time limit on having kids

[Greznog]

So all knowing one, why does this biological effect kick in 20 years before hand? Why not 30 years? Why not 10 years? Why not 5? Why not one year? One year is plenty of time to get into gear and have those kids before the ovaries turn off.

 

Because reliably living past 50 is a very recent thing. Why do so many people overeat when there's always plenty of food to go around?

 

Because up until recently humans didn't know when they were going to get their next meal and so they developed a desire to eat whenever food was available, you can't expect something that developed over tens of thousands of years to change within a few generations.

 

Seems awfully coincidental that this "biological" effect kicks in right at the time that society has deemed women as "too old". You might argue that society has formed that opinion based on biology. But women are now fertile into their 50's. So why has the "biological" clock not moved along with biology?

 

Why do people instinctively seek out the most physically capable to have sex with, surely in modern society the sickly accountant would be better suited to provide for a family.

 

Because what developed over the ages won't change overnight.

 

And if it's biological, how do you explain why some women never "hear" it. Being biological, the cause should be attributable to specific genetic factors.

 

Why are some men gay? Why are some men asexual?

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Taking responsibility as far as child welfare goes went out the window decades ago when women decided they could have a career, have children at 40 ( despite the even then well documented risks ) and proceed to raise them on their own despite the fact that children raised by single mothers perform worse on every single indicator imaginable when compared to children from traditional families.

 

But sure, men need to take responsibility.

 

Women began working outside the home when the war happend. They wanted to do their part for their country while their men went off to war. It certainly progressed to women enjoying the freedom working outside the home brought them. They liked the sense of accomplishment they felt for doing something beyond folding laundry and making meals. There isn't anything wrong with just wanting to fold laundry and make meals and take care of your family but it's just not for some women. Alot of men today aren't looking to financially take care of a woman anymore anyway. Women are exercising freedoms men really only had privilage to for generations. If women didn't go to college or get jobs, do you really think men would be lining up to take care of them? Or perhaps we should go back to only men going to college while women go back to low paying jobs and wait around for a man to commit to her?

 

Yes, men need to take responsbility in this regard. I am sorry you find that so egregious that men and taking responsbility would be so offensive to you. .

[Lonely Ronin]

how the hell did this thread go from a discussion on men's fertility to a gender war so fast...

[Lonely Ronin]

O and DY, stop feeding the trolls, we don't want them reproducing remember.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Lonely Ronin

[The Way I Am]

Because reliably living past 50 is a very recent thing. Why do so many people overeat when there's always plenty of food to go around?

 

Because up until recently humans didn't know when they were going to get their next meal and so they developed a desire to eat whenever food was available, you can't expect something that developed over tens of thousands of years to change within a few generations.

 

Um. No. Over-eating is very recent thing, and it doesn't have to do with genetics or being programmed to keep eating what's available. I remember that theory being tossed around some years ago, but it's sort of dropped off the radar as a probable theory for weight gain and overeating.

 

The more recent research suggests our bodies are actually programmed to stop wanting food when we're full.

 

So you're showing an example of a social construct being mistaken for biology, which is an argument against you, not for you.

 

In any case, even if what you say is true, it would be a case of biology not having caught up to society. (The body hasn't adapted to an overwhelming availability of food.) What you're suggesting is that biology hasn't been able to catch up to biology. (Women are fertile at higher ages, but their bodies haven't adjusted to the bodies ability to be fertile at a higher age.) That concept is silly.

 

Why do people instinctively seek out the most physically capable to have sex with, surely in modern society the sickly accountant would be better suited to provide for a family.

 

There are conflicting opinions and studies on whether that applies in current society, so there's not much weight to this point.

 

Why are some men gay? Why are some men asexual?

 

And there are studies that point to genetic causes for homosexuality, such as US researchers find evidence that homosexuality linked to genetics | World news | guardian.co.uk.

 

While it's true that all women, men, plants and animals have a biological clock that tells the body to do things at certain points, like go through puberty, there's no proof that it makes women have an overwhelming urge to pop out babies before the age of 30. I looked and found no studies that aimed to determine whether women's "biological clock" used in the sense it's being used here is a result of nature or nurture.

[Els]

I've rarely met a man who doesn't want children. I can think of 4 in my whole life. Of the men I've had a conversation with -- either friends or boyfriends -- about what they want, most of them mentioned wanting kids. Men may not make it as publicly known as women that they want kids, but in my experience, that's something that is a priority for many.

 

I think the "biological clock" is a social construct rather than actually biological. Women are taught to place their value on whether or not they can reel in a man and have kids much more so than men are. What they're actually "hearing" is the the sound of their families, tv, and movies telling them that they need to land a man and have kids before they're considered an old maid.

 

At 30, I'm still waiting to "hear" this siren call that everyone told me would start going off in my late 20's.

 

It could certainly be a social construct, yes. That doesn't make it any less valid, though. 'Wanting kids' is different from them being the top or close to the top of one's life priorities. I'm sure it all depends on culture, age, demographic, etc, but in general I have observed that more women have a family and kids as their #1 life goal or thereabouts, than men. We will have to agree to disagree on this.

[aj22one]

First of all I think too many people decide to have kids for entirely selfish reasons (to live vicariously through their children's accomplishments or such things). As you get older you really have to think about whether or not you really want to have kids. Man or woman, do you really want to be pushing 60 when they graduate HS? haha ridiculous.

[lino]

I've rarely met a man who doesn't want children. I can think of 4 in my whole life. Of the men I've had a conversation with -- either friends or boyfriends -- about what they want, most of them mentioned wanting kids. Men may not make it as publicly known as women that they want kids, but in my experience, that's something that is a priority for many.

 

I think the "biological clock" is a social construct rather than actually biological. Women are taught to place their value on whether or not they can reel in a man and have kids much more so than men are. What they're actually "hearing" is the the sound of their families, tv, and movies telling them that they need to land a man and have kids before they're considered an old maid.

 

At 30, I'm still waiting to "hear" this siren call that everyone told me would start going off in my late 20's.

 

 

I've also never met many blokes who don't hold having kids as a top priority. It certainly is one for me!

Don't know where she pulled that from.

[SJC2008]

I could care less about health reasons. You are still more likely to have a healthy kid than not regarless of how old either party is. BUT for age reasons I don't want to be a 40 year old first time father. I think if I don't have kids by 35 I'm not going to.

[Els]

I've also never met many blokes who don't hold having kids as a top priority. It certainly is one for me!

Don't know where she pulled that from.

 

You must have missed the part where I said 'it all depends on age, culture, demographic, etc'. At any rate, I think it's fairly amusing that you immediately jump to the conclusion that anyone with different experiences or social groups from your own must be 'pulling it from somewhere'.

[The Way I Am]

At any rate, I think it's fairly amusing that you immediately jump to the conclusion that anyone with different experiences or social groups from your own must be 'pulling it from somewhere'.

 

Hah! It didn't even occur to me that he might mean it like that. I'm not sure how lino meant it, but I read it in the sense that a person pulls data from a source.

[threebyfate]

Autism spectrum is the new ADHD. It impacts approximately 1.1% of live births with higher incidents in boys than girls and appears to be impacted by biological age of both/either parents, as well as possible genetic factors.

 

People freak out over the stupidest things. EOM.

[Radu]

 

While it's true that all women, men, plants and animals have a biological clock that tells the body to do things at certain points, like go through puberty, there's no proof that it makes women have an overwhelming urge to pop out babies before the age of 30. I looked and found no studies that aimed to determine whether women's "biological clock" used in the sense it's being used here is a result of nature or nurture.

 

Just because you didn't hear the siren call doesn't mean that it's not there.

[manup]

If any of you bothered doing any research you'd know that the risk for giving your kid autism is extremely low. I really don't care when a woman has kids but it's extremely sad seeing women who wanted kids and can't have them because they waited too long. I know women in their 40's who really want kids but can't have them now. No gender war crap, just sad facts of life.

[Mrlonelyone]

The other thing to consider is how old you will be when your kid is 25 to 35 years old. I say that if your going to be over 60 or 65 when your kid is 25 then it's too late to have kids. The child has to have some time to build them self up, before taking on more and more responsibility for elderly parents. So, if your 40 or over, or even close to 40 just forget about children.

 

Think about what kind of life you want for your children. Think about how hard caregivers for elderly people have it, and consider adopting an older child. Or find a single parent for a spouse and become a fatherly or motherly figure to them. (Caregiving: Sharing the Responsibilities Among Family Members)

 

Don't wait so long that your 20 something child has to be, or pay for,an in home nurse for you.

[Art_Critic]

I say that if your going to be over 60 or 65 when your kid is 25 then it's too late to have kids. The child has to have some time to build them self up, before taking on more and more responsibility for elderly parents. So, if your 40 or over, or even close to 40 just forget about children.

 

I'm going to be 70 when my son is 25... I don't think that is bad at all..

I have things to show him and teach him that no 21 year old will be able to and in truth he will be just fine..

 

Here is something to think about..

 

My father was 27 when I was born.. he died when I was 23 and he was 50..

I think I did pretty good for myself and have a caring and wonderful family.. and did as I was growing up..

 

There are no guarantees in life.. take life as it shows up at your door and all will be fine.

[thatone]

Yep, it's true, brothers... our sperm has an expiration date. You can argue and say it's BS, but then hey, don't blame me if you're still bangin' away in your 70s and you father a kid that has the IQ of a fencepost...

 

Of course, if the kid grows up in the US, he'll probably join some Stupid People's Pride movement or something...

 

people without genetic deformity join a Stupid People's Pride movement all the time. it's called the republican party.

[Untouchable_Fire]

Read this

Older dads more likely to produce autistic children through genetic mutations

 

Those same gene mutations are what causes variance in human beings.

 

Sure it could produce autism... but it's also likely to produce a super genius or an amazing athlete.

[The Way I Am]

[quote name='Radu' post='4126094']Just because you didn't hear the siren call doesn't mean that it's not there.[/QUOTE] Doesn't mean it's a real biological affect rather than a societal construct either. I didn't say that some women don't "hear" it, but I do question whether women only "hear" it because of societal pressure to have children and the knowledge that they have a limited time to do it successfully. As the article in the OP states, men's ability to have healthy children decreases as they age. I found another that found men's fertility starts to decline at age 25 as well. [URL="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=118101&page=1"]Study: Men Have Biological Clocks - ABC News[/URL] So why don't they "hear" a biological clock? Is the reason because society was not previously aware of men's reduced fertility since many men are able to have children into old age? Do you have scientific evidence rather than conjecture to support the idea that a woman "hears" her biological clock as a result solely of nature rather than nurture? If not, your idea is no more factual than mine. I looked for studies but found none. The closest I could find was that a hormone that could predict menopause called anti-Müllerian hormon exists, but absolutely no evidence that the lack of it causes women to "hear" a biological clock. [URL="http://www.sciencecodex.com/womens_biological_clock_revealed_hormone_may_predict_age_at_menopause"]Women's biological clock revealed: Hormone may predict age at menopause | Science Codex[/URL]

[FitChick]

Most older men don't want kids because they are too tired -- less testosterone. Less money, too, in this economy. They need to think about how they will be able to afford to retire, if ever.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Those same gene mutations are what causes variance in human beings.

 

Sure it could produce autism... but it's also likely to produce a super genius or an amazing athlete.

 

 

And yet, it's autism that is on the rise and not super geniuses.....go figure.

[TheBigQuestion]

I don't think anyone on this board ever denied that men's sperm deteriorates as they age, so I fail to see the need for anyone to furnish that argument in support of OP's point. Most men who are literate do acknowledge this fact.

 

On the other hand, although I concede that I don't recall any specific instances, I'm pretty sure that some males on this board have in other threads disputed the validity of the comparison OP makes. Simply put, and for reasons already explained in this thread, the comparison between male and female fertility deteriorating with aging fails because they are not sufficiently similar. You can argue over whether the origin of the "biological alarm" or "baby fever" that women experience around age 30 is a social construct, biology, or both until you're blue in the face, but it does not change the fact that a substantial portion of women DO hear said alarm. On the other hand, very, very few men experience something analogous.

 

This is so for valid reasons. Women understand that the longer they wait to get pregnant, the more they risk harm to their children AND to themselves. While the man undoubtedly contributes to poor genetics in the child, it is the woman who has to push that little bundle of joy out of her body. As women age, the risk of something bad happening during childbirth increases precipitously regardless of the age of the man who impregnated her. Men really do not risk life and limb for their children to be born, so it's more than understandable why a woman would be more concerned about waiting to have a child than a man.

[ThaWholigan]

And yet, it's autism that is on the rise and not super geniuses.....go figure.

Vaccines??

 

Or maybe autism was always around.......

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Vaccines??

 

Or maybe autism was always around.......

 

Or maybe older fathers' sperm detoriates like the rest of any aging living organism. What is so hard about guys being honest about this?

[ThaWholigan]

Or maybe older fathers' sperm detoriates like the rest of any aging living organism. What is so hard about guys being honest about this?

It might be true, but all I'm saying is that my own father had me before he was even 30 and I still came out autistic. All of his subsequent children are fine. Why is that?

 

I am proof that this isn't an ironclad theory, and while older father's sperm likely does deteriorate, I don't personally understand what that has to do with autism.