An “eye-popping” graph.

A comparison of France (top) and Japan (bottom) is appropriate. And check the slope on Italy’s curve. I guess they want to surpass the USA in something besides cool looking sports cars.

If the left wants to march against something, march against this. This is highly destructive. Our ancestors have been around for about six million years (the modern form of humans only evolved about 200,000 years ago). Whichever you choose as the starting date that is exactly how long humans have relied upon the nuclear family which is rightfully regarded as the basic social unit. Liberalism has only been trying to destroy it for a little over half a century – and it appears they are doing a hell-of-a-job at it.

Do the Japanese know something the remainder of the “civilized” world has forgotten?


And thanks to PK for sending this graph to me.

Roy Filly


About Roy Filly

Please read my first blog in which I describe myself and my goals.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to An “eye-popping” graph.

  1. Starchild says:

    If one listens to the anti-sex crusaders on the right, the “destruction of the family” is responsible for all manner of social and economic ills. Which makes the continued low rate of extramarital births in Japan, contrasted with the strong growth in extramarital births in the U.S. and Europe an interesting test of the theory. If the sex-haters on the right are correct, Japan should be doing great compared to the rest of us moral deplor – uh, I mean degenerates. But lo and behold, the Japanese economy has actually been stagnating since the 1990s! Hmm… Maybe it’s actually statist government policies, and not whether people who have children are married or not, that is responsible for bad economic outcomes?

    • Roy Filly says:

      The errors in your comment are manifold:
      1. This is not about “sex-haters,” it is about family lovers.
      2. This is not about “the economy,” it is about the moral fiber of a nation.
      3. The “destruction of the family” is responsible for “all manner of social and economic ills” and if you don’t recognize that you have my sympathy.
      4. You don’t measure the impact of out-of-wedlock-births in GDP numbers. You measure it in high school drop out rates, gang violence, mothers on welfare. etc, etc.
      5. This has nothing to do with “degenerates.” It has everything to do with male children having no father figure and female children subscribing to the name “baby-daddy” instead of DAD!

      • Starchild says:

        Roy, there are multiple causes of changes in family structure. Some of them are caused by statist government policies, and we can agree those are bad. But others have been caused by natural social changes – the Sexual Revolution, and the accompanying decline of the social dogma that said people had to pair up in heterosexual couplings and stay together for life (happily or not).

        While there are individual exceptions and perhaps you are among them, broadly speaking, conservatives have fought against every manifestation of sex and every advance in sexual freedom:

        • They oppose(d) allowing easy divorce
        • They oppose(d) allowing birth control
        • They oppose(d) allowing literature and music that frankly addressed sex
        • They oppose(d) realistic sex education for young people
        • They oppose(d) pornography
        • They oppose(d) polygamy and polyamory
        • They oppose(d) masturbation, via things like bans on the sale of vibrators and dildos (not to mention hounding Jocelyn Elders out of office as surgeon general)
        • They oppose(d) sex out of wedlock – and consider that term, wedLOCK (holding people in by force)
        • They oppose(d) mixed racial sex (see e.g. Loving v. Virginia)
        • They oppose(d) terminating pregnancy, including by non-surgical means such as the “morning after pill”
        • They oppose(d) prostitution
        • They oppose(d) gay rights
        • They oppose(d) transgender rights

        So yeah, I think the “sex-haters” label fits! If you say it doesn’t apply to you, prove it by defending sexual choice and sexual freedom having a proud and public place in society. Because your ideological fellow travelers have a horrible track record and extremely low credibility among the sex-positive.

        Conservatives often posture as “pro-family”, but usually that’s what it is – posturing. In most cases what they actually want is to force everyone into *their* definition of family, while denying/criminalizing alternative family forms and arrangements. That is not being pro-family. Right-wing moralists have often tried to label gays, sex workers, poly families, etc., as bad parents, but the evidence is not there.

        Negative social outcomes such as increasing high school drop-out rates, gang violence, and mothers on welfare, are all mainly the results of statist government policies (interfering in education and doing it badly, prohibiting drugs and causing black markets and violence, criminalizing honest work and destroying job opportunities, etc.)

        “Baby daddy/baby mama” is just contemporary slang, just as “dad” was an earlier slang term.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.