this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2025
476 points (98.2% liked)

World News

51337 readers
1876 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
lemmyAtom@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
476
China to cover all out-of-pocket childbirth expenses (www.semafor.com)
submitted 3 days ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world
137 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I find it funny to watch these countries having issues with people not wanting to have babies.

There are core reasons behind this, one large one being "raising a child is expensive and all the world's money is being sucked up by billionaires, there is nothing left for children". Another one (for certain countries like Japan and South Korea) is the "work 80 hours a week and never see that family you're supposed to raise"

And governments go like "sooooo, if we cover child birth, you're good, right? What? Still nothing? We tried nothing and we're all out of ideas, how oh how can we solve this?"

Fuck the rich, end the rich. That will get births back to a healthy 2.1

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

officials have already expanded maternity leave benefits and housing subsidies to encourage couples to have more children.

Seems like they’re trying multiple things. Meanwhile we’re over here trying to say middle school kids can be paid less than minimum wage, operate dangerous machinery and work late on school nights. If you can’t afford kids, might as well exploit them

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

And then they help pay the roughly $15,000 usd per yr per child it costs to raise a child right?

Becauae it would be really bad if China helped pay for a ton of kids to be born that can't be provided for.

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

Kids can pull themselves up by the bootstraps... factories are hiring...

/s

[–] PumpkinDrama@reddthat.com 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This seems like overcompensating for the child limit. Are they going to be like a yoyo, swinging from one extreme to the other until they find a balance, like all things should be?

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

No country has increased birth rates sustainably without major coersion. China is still using soft coercion and offering incentives.

[–] tym@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the ROI is they get future foot soldiers

[–] veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They already have a glut of military aged males with no marriage prospects, if they were serious about invading Taiwan, they could only do it now (also aligns with the fact that America has become more isolationist, Japan hasn't a serious standing army yet etc.)

If they are planning for the future, it's not military, it's societal.

[–] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's great, but I had kind of assumed it was already in place.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 29 points 2 days ago (4 children)

China has a far weaker social safety net than a lot of people assume.

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

That also apparently depends a lot on the particular region's policies. Which aren't as centralized as everyone in the West imagines.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Especially considering the pedestal it lives on on Lemmy.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 6 points 1 day ago

with tankies, they salivate over any news of china, but they would never live there themselves.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world 74 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Desperation?

People don't want to have kids. I wonder why. Remember the laying flat movement and the 996 culture.

I wonder why.

If only there was an actual solution to this LOLOL....

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 36 points 3 days ago (14 children)

If I lived under an authoritarian regime, I would not want to bring a child into it.

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

lived under an authoritarian regime

I mean... isn't that just most of history tbh?

Most people aren't antinatalists lol

[–] UltraMagnus@startrek.website 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd quibble that the average medieval peasant faced a lot less surveillance than the average citizen of any country today (Though perhaps that's just a change in methods).

But you are right - and, in fact, I think it's the case that countries/people in worse circumstances tend to have more kids (probably some weird evolutionary thing but I don't want to speculate). As tough as times may seem in "developed" countries, most people don't need to worry about where their next meal is coming from.

(This isn't to say that circumstances are "fine" or that we shouldn't improve things - simply pointing out some biological factors). It's also worth noting that folks in worse economic circumstances tend to having a higher number of people in their "support network" (friends and family - ie, 3 generations living under one roof). Though perhaps this is not the case in the US since it's culturally looked down upon to rely on family like that.

It's an interesting phenomenon that can't be boiled down to 1 or 2 simple factors like government type. Maybe this was too much text and I should've just said "I agree with you DeathByBigSad"

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

having a higher number of people in their “support network” (friends and family - ie, 3 generations living under one roof).

Fun fact: My mom told me that, supposedly, if it weren't for the fact that my maternal grandmother (aka: her mother) agree to help take care of me, she would've never given birth to me, as she already has the trouble of dealing with my older brother. My parents were kinda busy with work.

(I'm from China btw... Currently residing in the US)

I also remember sometimes my older brother was just tasked with the "chore" of having to pick me up. I remember once my mom's close friend picked me up from school at the same time as she picked up her kid, I kinda just spent like an hour at their house being bored... not much entertainment... smartphones didn't exist at the time (not that I would've been allowed to have one anyways, I was like maybe 10 or something).

And as for finacial support. My mom borrowed a lot of money from relatives and friends... so yeah... that how she managed to buy a house (she eventually paid them back).

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 63 points 2 days ago (7 children)

The truth is that the strength of a democracy has little relation to the birth rate. If you live in the US, for example, you only live in a democracy if your income is in the top 10%. This has actually been studied. The opinions of the poorest 90% of the population have absolutely zero bearing on what government policy is implemented.

The US and China actually have similar levels of democracy. China forms all its policies from the CCP, an organization of about 100 million people. The share of the population in China that has any impact on policy is actually quite similar to the share that does the same in the US.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 15 points 2 days ago

I live in a democracy and don't want to bring children into this.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

Ehh, the character of the regime doesn't seem to affect birth rates a whole lot. Brutal dictatorships that make China seem like a gentle puppy could have perfectly ok birth rates. E.g. Nazi Germany had 2.5 fertility rate in 1939 and 1940, it was their highest since 1922: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Germany

I really don't think the average Chinese cares too much about how authoritarian their govt is when it comes to deciding on whether to have kids. The consequences of one-child policy, economic prospects, stability, general cultural optimism/pessimism, social habits (and the effects of technology on them), etc. are all likely to be much more important factors.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Good. Can’t wait to beat this drum to hopefully shame the less than useless US congress to do ANYTHING.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 38 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I mean, shaming America's greatness against other countries has worked in the past. That's how we got:

  • Universal healthcare
  • Mandated paid maternity/parental leave
  • More than two dominant political parties
  • Cheaper or free college education
  • High-speed passenger rail
  • Mandated annual paid vacation time

Oh wait.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 25 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

From Bars, Pride and dating apps: How China is closing down its LGBT+ spaces

At the same time, China’s population growth and economy are slowing. “The current population growth couldn't support economic growth,” explains Hongwei, meaning there has been a push to encourage heterosexual couples to have larger families to ensure an abundant future workforce.

China: be less homo and breed more

The ban on Grindr could be put down to China’s wider dislike of Western apps, which are often accused of being vehicles for foreign influence. But removing Blued and Finka, which were both developed in China, represents a “seismic change in government attitudes towards homegrown LGBT apps”, says Hongwei.

Before targeting Blued and Finka, the Chinese authorities led a campaign against authors of the “Boy's Love”, or Danmei, same-sex romance stories, some of which feature explicit love scenes between men.

Several Danmei writers, most of whom are female, have reported being arrested and questioned by the authorities, and in recent months two major Danmei sites have either shut down, or drastically reduced and toned down their content.

Today, “officially, those Three No’s are still in place, but we are seeing evidence that the space for LGBT+ communities is starting to shrink”, says Marc Lanteigne, associate professor of political science at the Arctic University of Norway.

Shanghai Pride shut down in 2020, and one year later the government shut down student LGBT+ accounts for “violating internet regulations”. Grindr disappeared in 2022, and in 2023 the Beijing LGBT Centre closed its doors after 15 years.

In June 2024, the Roxie, Shanghai's last officially lesbian bar, was forced to close “under pressure from the authorities".

“The authorities have been slowly chipping away at those spaces that were open previously,” says Hildebrandt.

With the closure of so many physical spaces, online networks had become “really the only places in which many members of the LGBT+ community could express their sexuality openly” he adds.

But in contemporary Chinese politics, “the Maoist principles about equality have more to do with uniformity,” says Hildebrandt. “You gain equality by being more like everybody else. You don't gain equality by being diverse.”

In a bid to create greater conformity within the population, “there has been a push in China to reinforce traditional family values and, in some cases, traditional masculine values,” adds Lanteigne.

Since the Covid pandemic, “the Chinese government has endorsed nationalist discourse and LGBT culture is seen as very politicised siding with Western ideologies”, says Hongwei.

“There's the impression that LGBTQ communities are by default connected to the West and could be seen as destabilising forces,” adds Lanteigne.

Broader political and social forces may be at work, but the result is a real loss of liberty for gay and queer people in China. Hildebrandt says: “There is a real sense that it’s become a more difficult environment to be openly gay."

older discussion

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If we close gay bars, gay people will be straight right?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago (10 children)

BUT.

AT.

WHAT.

COST!

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›