this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
454 points (98.5% liked)

Not The Onion

21204 readers
2178 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/45445434

Fox News Senior Medical Analyst Marc Siegel made some eyebrow-raising comments lamenting that birth rates are down among teenagers aged 15 to 19.

On Thursday, the National Center for Health Statistics reported that the U.S. fertility rate fell to another record low. The agency reported that the number of births per 1,000 women of childbearing age declined from 53.8 in 2024 to 53.1 last year. The latest figure represents a continuation of a decades-long decline in fertility rates.

Siegel joined Friday’s edition of America’s Newsroom, where Dana Perino said that while the continuing trend is not surprising, “the numbers might feel a little shocking.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] forkDestroyer@infosec.pub 4 points 1 day ago

When I was born, the human population was around half of what it is now. If there ever was a time to organically decrease our population size, imo, it would be now.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

Brace yourselves for the pedophile parasite class campaign to justify their crimes

[–] dipcart@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Aren't these the people who freaked out about teenage pregnancies?

[–] Rooster326@programming.dev 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They're Republicans. Of course they are concerned about teen pregnancies.

Who do you think is making them pragernet?

[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

They were angry about “single mothers” for decades, but that was a racist dog whistle.

If you’re all white, it’s all right.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

In a normal country, a doctor endorsing teen pregnancy would get their licence suspended.

[–] BenjiRenji@feddit.org 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This just reminds me of a US coworker of mine who just became a great grandmother. It's teen pregrancies all the way down. Mother at 16, grandmother in her 30s, great grandmother at 50.

[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] BenjiRenji@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

She’s either super cool or super annoying. Former teen moms don’t really have an in-between. since she's in tech i'm assuming super cool.

[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How many times do conservatives have to prove that they're all pedophiles before the rest of us will learn?

[–] Jhex@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

not a matter of "learning", it's a matter of "caring"

everyone knows by now this regime is full of pedophiles… but nobody gives enough of a fuck to do anything about it

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I'm not talking about the regime. I mean every last one of them.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Abstinence education is working! How are they not happy at their success?

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 21 points 2 days ago (2 children)

15-19 yr olds aren’t supposed to be having kids.

[–] PhoenixDog@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

In a regular society? Yes. But this is America we're talking about.

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

Hell some of them ARE kids

[–] Soggy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

From my perspective, everyone under about 24 is still a kid.

[–] pelespirit@sh.itjust.works 104 points 2 days ago (4 children)

They're saying the quiet part out loud and why they're anti-abortion. The younger the better for a quick turnaround:

They need the poors to fight their wars and work on their factory floors.

[–] lectricleopard@lemmy.world 46 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I frequently just stand outside and look at the sky and think, yep, we weren't meant to work all day. We were meant to pick berries and mushrooms and take naps. I feel better about my station in life, knowing those oligarchs can never be satisfied, and all I have to do to feel right is take a walk outside.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com 34 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Fucking lemongrab grade screeching of purity and abstinence for decades and then suddenly this

[–] mika_mika@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Now, now, let's not pretend these people are encouraging sex, those young whores are still to be shamed.

They're just supposed to have kids and be loyal to husbando. No pleasure involved.

(Also, they always supported teen pregnancy because they have always been anti-sex education and anti-contraceptive which allows the process of teenage parents to happen without them having to condone it).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 49 points 2 days ago (4 children)

I remember when teen pregnancy was considered bad and a sign of a decaying morality across the country. Now the same right wing moralizers are saying they need those teen moms again. But this time it's about money so they are noticeably quiet about morality.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 10 points 2 days ago

I remember when teen pregnancy was considered bad and a sign of a decaying morality across the country.

before that it was commonplace though. I'm 61, my grandmother started having her kids at 16, she had 8, one of them my mother, the youngest of her kids. Many of her friends were similarly 15-19 having thier first kid. My mother was 19 with me, I was born when she turned 20. She had 3 kids, i have none, my sister none and my brother 2, so family dynamics have changed.

This is Australia though, you can read books of some of the early convict ships coming over and they arrived with all the 13-16yr old girls pregnant, or having had their kid on board and being married etc

You can see some of the effect in The Philippines, pregnant teen mothers are everywhere. Religious indoctrination in regards anti contraception doesn't stop teens fucking (and this in a nation with no divorce)

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] crunchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 76 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I distinctly remember a time when boomers and talking heads would automatically respond to concerns about issues with the cost of having kids with:

"Don't have kids if you can't afford them."

"If you couldn't afford kids then you should've kept your legs closed."

"Don't expect a handout, nobody forced you to have kids."

"Healthcare and child care are too expensive? Tough shit snowflake, that's the free market! Work harder!"

"Why are my taxes paying for a public school when I don't even have any kids that go there?"

So nope, no sympathies. And no, you can't have your child sex brides, either.

[–] Soleos@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago

They are still saying this when it's convenient for them. The only consistent thing for such people is their cowardice in the face of responsibility.

[–] LilRed@lemmy.org 65 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Who the fuck wants to be having kids in this day and age anyway. Also why is it up to the underage teens to push out babies to keep the population up. Yeah let's put pressure on them to ruin their entire lives before they even get to live it. Love the American standards.

[–] Steve@communick.news 24 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

The dude was conflating a number of things.
Teen birth rate is down the most, at 7% in 2025. 70% since 2005. Overall births are down slightly last year.
Overall we have a sub replacement birth rate of 1.53 per woman.

The last one is a societal problem. But just saying we need women to have more kids isn't a solution. You need to find out why people don't want to have as many kids. Which I would bet is almost entirely economic. Kids are a large long term expense. And if you're living paycheck to paycheck, with an uncertain financial future, a kid is a scary prospect.

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 19 points 2 days ago (12 children)

The problem is the sub replacement birth rate of 1.53 per woman.

This is not actually a problem, except we want to keep the completely unsustainable economic system unchanged.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] garbage_world@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I mean, they're right.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 31 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Maybe if you just imprison fertile women and give them to rich couples to fuck and impregnate, that will solve the problem? You could call them handmaid's to distract from what they really are!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Dionysus@leminal.space 31 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Matt Gatez says 'I'm doing my part'

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] drdalek@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Fertility rates are an issue for capitalism not humanity

Logistics at a certain point does not care what economic model you follow. Someone has to plant the crops and do all the other work that leads to people being fed, clothed, and housed under any system.

If your demographics are such that there are not enough people of working age to take care of those too old to work, you're going to have the kind of problems that led other human societies to kill their elders.

It'd be great if we could automate our way out of this, but I don't see that happening soon enough.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

just what the world needs, more americans

[–] Hegar@fedia.io 33 points 2 days ago

I wonder how much breaking up the trump-epstein ring lowered the fertility rate of 15-19 year olds.

[–] Beebabe@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

And guess who the fathers to those teen pregnancies are? It’s men over 20. Adding a layer of ick to what he’s lamenting.

[–] TheDoctorDonna@piefed.ca 16 points 2 days ago

They want every woman to be a Michelle Duggar - get married as a minor, start popping them out ASAP, and keep the Xerox machine running until someone dies.

[–] The_v@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (15 children)

Fixing the birthrate is pretty simple in theory. The government needs to meet the needs of people having kids. The details are a little more complicated.

In order to have more kids in their 20's people need:

A higher income in their 20's. If they work full time they deserve to be able to afford a 3 bedroom place, food, etc..

A place to live - Build affordable housing that people can own and build a life. These need to be 3-4 bedroom places that one income can cover.

Medical care: free quality medical care to cover little things like birth cost and the doctor visits a child needs.

Time: Hard to make babies when you are working 60+ hours a week. Mandatory 40 or less work week. 2 months of vacation every year.

Childcare - Free or heavily subsidized childcare for working parents. Currently childcare for 2 children is more than the net average income for one person in many areas. Earlier retirement programs are also highly effective.

Quality schools and education: ban private schools, invest heavily in public schools increasing teacher wages and requirements, reducing classroom sizes, and providing quality educational material. Free college and trade schooling as well.

Hope: Stop fucking up the planet for temporary gains. If we started to reverse our environmental damaging behaviors more people would be willing to have kids

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Quilotoa@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago

Interestingly, Canada, which has free health care has a lower birth rate than the U.S. where births can cost between $3000 and $70 000.

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 17 points 2 days ago

COSTS ARE TOO HIGH, THE FUTURE LOOKS BLEAK, AND NOBODY WHO CAN FIX THOSE THINGS SEEMS TO GIVE A SHIT.

Go ahead and spend a bunch of money on analysts, though. Ignore the root causes. We’re used to it.

load more comments
view more: next ›