Russians Really Getting Serious About Making More Babies.

[Fiannan]

Remember the mammoths, say the clean-cut organisers at the youth camp's mass wedding. "They became extinct because they did not have enough sex. That must not happen to Russia".

Obediently, couples move to a special section of dormitory tents arranged in a heart-shape and called the Love Oasis, where they can start procreating for the motherland.

With its relentlessly upbeat tone, bizarre ideas and tight control, it sounds like a weird indoctrination session for a phoney religious cult.

But this organisation - known as "Nashi", meaning "Ours" - is youth movement run by Vladimir Putin's Kremlin that has become a central part of Russian political life.

Nashi's annual camp, 200 miles outside Moscow, is attended by 10,000 uniformed youngsters and involves two weeks of lectures and physical fitness.

Attendance is monitored via compulsory electronic badges and anyone who misses three events is expelled. So are drinkers; alcohol is banned. But sex is encouraged, and condoms are nowhere on sale.

Hey, as long as the Russians promote sex and babies within marriage more power to them. It is encouraging to see one nation take an agressive role in trying to preserve its culture. I would not expect this sort of thing in the USA since leaders in both political parties care for nothing but power and money and if the birthrate is too low the solution is just to open up the borders. And most Christian leaders (except Catholics loyal to The Vatican and LDS leaders) seem to have the same philosophical outlook on marriage, divorce and birth control as the people who were labled humanistic materialists by Christian leaders just a couple of generations ago.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770

[Moksha]

Cults of nationalism are rather scary, are they not? Especially in a country with nuclear missles and biological weaponry.

[Dror]

During my mission, the government of France had a big media campaign encouraging people to have babies. Oddly, at the same time, they had government officials campaigning against nudity in public advertising! Makes 'em sound almost Mormon! (Ok, maybe not... ) At least they didn't have creepy youth camps with uniforms and electronic monitoring devices.

Dror

[Fiannan]

During my mission, the government of France had a big media campaign encouraging people to have babies. Oddly, at the same time, they had government officials campaigning against nudity in public advertising! Makes 'em sound almost Mormon! (Ok, maybe not... ) At least they didn't have creepy youth camps with uniforms and electronic monitoring devices.

Dror

Hey, don't give our stake president any ideas!:)

Seriously though, a female politician for the Christian party in Sweden a couple of years ago was worried about the low birthrate in Sweden. She got a lot of attention for proposing that the state TV stations should be made to play nothing but porn movies all day on Saturdays so Swedes (who may have a reputation for being all sexual but in reality generally score very low on surveys of frequency of...well, you know when comparred to other countries) would have more interest in sex and therefore start making more babies.

Proposal never went further than this however.

[pushka]

Although I'm generally a socialist...I have heard that these camps in the USSR are on a par with similar organisations sanctioned by the likes of Stalin, and so am not convinced that they are the sort of organisation that should be encouraged.

(I still see a difference between pure socialism and communism as practised by Stalanists...just included for information only, I don't wish to debate the pros and cons of socialism or communism)

[Fiannan]

Although I'm generally a socialist...I have heard that these camps in the USSR are on a par with similar organisations sanctioned by the likes of Stalin, and so am not convinced that they are the sort of organisation that should be encouraged.

(I still see a difference between pure socialism and communism as practised by Stalanists...just included for information only, I don't wish to debate the pros and cons of socialism or communism)

I am confused -- do you mean that Putin's youth organization is like the ones promoted by Stalin?

[pushka]

I think that's what I'm saying...although to be honest, it isn't what I said but what I heard somebody else say in a recent UK news report about the camps and their purpose. I admit that I may have understood the report incorrectly, however, and am willing to change my opinion of them if found to be nothing like Stalin and his way of governing the USSR. I should really try to find an internet reference to UK reports about this at this point...sorry for not doing so.

[the Ogre]

It is interesting the Russia is trying to do something about what the rest of Europe is struggling with: declining birth rates. Japan is in the same boat. South Korea last year revoked the law restricting the number of kids a family can have in hopes opf jump-starting its birth rate and increasing the number of women there are there with out importing Philipenos and other South-East Asians.

I however do not agree with the methodology. It does sound like Huxley's loveless procreation a little too much for me.

The falling birth rates in most of the industrialized world is a major concern. There is really nothing wrong with having children, but often people who have many are made out to be pariahs of some sort. This has to change. Parents and their many children should not be marginalized in the way they are by society.

[Fiannan]

It is interesting the Russia is trying to do something about what the rest of Europe is struggling with: declining birth rates. Japan is in the same boat. South Korea last year revoked the law restricting the number of kids a family can have in hopes opf jump-starting its birth rate and increasing the number of women there are there with out importing Philipenos and other South-East Asians.

I however do not agree with the methodology. It does sound like Huxley's loveless procreation a little too much for me.

The falling birth rates in most of the industrialized world is a major concern. There is really nothing wrong with having children, but often people who have many are made out to be pariahs of some sort. This has to change. Parents and their many children should not be marginalized in the way they are by society.

The Duma in Russia is considering proposals to lay heavy taxes on people who are at a certain age and don't have kids yet (I think 25 years or so). Russia recently adopted the Swedish-style program of maternity care (80% pay and 1.5 years off at the birth of a child). One would hope that the Russiasn would pump some of that oil money into building larger apartment/housing units for families since most people live in small apartments built during the communist age.

Some in the Duma have called for recognizing polygamy but it is doubtful at this time it will be considered, although it could have a positive impact on childbearing. If nationalism can grow and flourish in Russia within the young then perhaps that will also have a positive impact on births. Let's wish them success.

[FrankJL]

Perhaps Russia should worry more about taking care those it already has. I mean it doesn't make much sense to try create artificial population growth when your country barely caps a 10k per capita GPD (Even less if you factor in PPP).

[Fiannan]

I would disagree. You need a much higher population than Russia has in order to exploit the resources of the country and develop the infrastructure. Also, an aging population will be a disaster for them unless they get more babies being made.

[shanstress70]

Bring on the polygamy in Russia!!! ... so Fiannan can move there and enjoy his harem.

Maybe they'll open some nudist camps as well. At least young Russian women are pretty thin, Fiannan. I know how you hate a little meat on a woman's bones.

Just messin' with you, F. Your posts help make it interesting around here. :)

[Fiannan]

Bring on the polygamy in Russia!!! ... so Fiannan can move there and enjoy his harem.

Maybe they'll open some nudist camps as well. At least young Russian women are pretty thin, Fiannan. I know how you hate a little meat on a woman's bones.

Just messin' with you, F. Your posts help make it interesting around here. :)

Hey, anytime Shanstress -- my friends and I tease each other all the time.:)

I read somewhere that since communism fell Russians are more into nudism than Germans so I guess that would not be a problem and Russian women are generally highly attractive.:)

The Turkish sultans used to send raiding parties into Russia to acquire female concubines because of attractiveness so if the church comes back with polygamy...:)

I know one poster here who is going to really go bonkers if she reads this thread now. Hope the humor level is high today.

[shanstress70]

<div class='quotemain'>

Bring on the polygamy in Russia!!! ... so Fiannan can move there and enjoy his harem.

Maybe they'll open some nudist camps as well. At least young Russian women are pretty thin, Fiannan. I know how you hate a little meat on a woman's bones.

Just messin' with you, F. Your posts help make it interesting around here. :)

Hey, anytime Shanstress -- my friends and I tease each other all the time.:)

I read somewhere that since communism fell Russians are more into nudism than Germans so I guess that would not be a problem and Russian women are generally highly attractive.:)

The Turkish sultans used to send raiding parties into Russia to acquire female concubines because of attractiveness so if the church comes back with polygamy...:)

I know one poster here who is going to really go bonkers if she reads this thread now. Hope the humor level is high today.

Hey, it's Friday... I'm sure everyone will be able to take a joke today! And remember, Russian women age too! They're not thin and attractive forever.

A gift just for you, Fiannan...

BTW, I hope no one takes offense. I would love to talk to this woman, as I'm sure she has some interesting stories. Just saying that they don't all look like the images at hotrussianbabes.com (or whatever)!

[Elphaba]

Some in the Duma have called for recognizing polygamy but it is doubtful at this time it will be considered, although it could have a positive impact on childbearing.

Polygamy actually has a negative impact on childbearing.

The birth rate is higher when a man is married to one wife. He can have relations with her more often than a husband with many wives can, and therefore can impregnate her more often.

A woman can only carry one child at a time, whether she is the only wife or one man or one of many wives.

So it is not true that polygamy creates a higher birth rate.

Shantress wrote: Bring on the polygamy in Russia!!! ... so Fiannan can move there and enjoy his harem.

Maybe they'll open some nudist camps as well. At least young Russian women are pretty thin, Fiannan. I know how you hate a little meat on a woman's bones.

Shan, you forgot to mention lesbians. You know how Fiannin is obssessed with lesbians. (J/K Fiannin)

Elphaba

[Fiannan]

<div class='quotemain'>Some in the Duma have called for recognizing polygamy but it is doubtful at this time it will be considered, although it could have a positive impact on childbearing.

Polygamy actually has a negative impact on childbearing.

The birth rate is higher when a man is married to one wife. He can have relations with her more often than a husband with many wives can, and therefore can impregnate her more often.

A woman can only carry one child at a time, whether she is the only wife or one man or one of many wives.

So it is not true that polygamy creates a higher birth rate.

Shantress wrote: Bring on the polygamy in Russia!!! ... so Fiannan can move there and enjoy his harem.

Maybe they'll open some nudist camps as well. At least young Russian women are pretty thin, Fiannan. I know how you hate a little meat on a woman's bones.

Shan, you forgot to mention lesbians. You know how Fiannin is obssessed with lesbians. (J/K Fiannin)

Elphaba

Yeah right! I'll discuss the issues first though.

Polygamy in a society that had an equal number of men and women desiring marriage and family would have zero impact on births. But in a society that has many single women and few statistical prospects for marriage then polygamy would have a positive impact. In my observations on the mini and macro societal aspects of childbearing it seems that there are more women out there wanting to settle down and have kids than there are men (especially desirable males). Then if you consider that about 3 - 4 percent of males are either homosexual or predominantly homosexual (and that only 1 - 2% of the female population is lesbian) then while that doesn't seem much it leaves millions of surplus women of fertile age in America and probably more in Europe.

Also, the people who would become polygamist would probably be kinda out of the main cultural norms anyway, probably more intelligent and probably more religious. Might do good for the overall genetic quality of the population of any nation if these people produced a higher percentage of the next gene pool.

As for the lesbian thing, sorry...I don't even listen to Howard Stern nor do I even watch The L Word series. But hey, just remember, polygamy would certainly help out all the bi women in this society who have a hard time choosing which way to go (why bother choosing?).

[john doe]

Also, the people who would become polygamist would probably be kinda out of the main cultural norms anyway, probably more intelligent and probably more religious. Might do good for the overall genetic quality of the population of any nation if these people produced a higher percentage of the next gene pool.

Let's get this straight. You actually think that people more inclined to be polygamist are more intelligent than the rest of the general population? How do you arrive at that conclusion? Do you have any scientific studies to back this up?

As for more religious, I would disagree. I would restate it to 'they are more fanatical about certain religious concepts'. They use religion to justify their nuttiness.

And believe me, the gene pool in Colorado City has not been good. I have never heard anyone point to them and declare how impressed they are with their intelligence or genitic purity.

I can see how polygamy might be used as a short-term solution to a long-term problem, but I don't see its benefits past 2-3 generations, and if it were to work, the polygamists would necessarily need to be part of a larger, non-polygamist society which accepts the practice.

I believe the Lord instituted polygamy among the Saints and then removed it from the earth again for a multitude of reasons, all of which were for our own good and for the good of His church. And while we may not know or understand all those reasons, it is good enough for me to have faith that He knew what He was doing when he commanded it.

[Elphaba]

Polygamy in a society that had an equal number of men and women desiring marriage and family would have zero impact on births. But in a society that has many single women and few statistical prospects for marriage then polygamy would have a positive impact.

There are enough men for women of childbearing age to find and mate with. The time when there are significantly more women than men comes when she is in peri-menopause (she still can get pregnant, but most women ensure they don’t), menopause, and on through the rest of her life. So the birthrate would remain stable.

In my observations on the mini and macro societal aspects of childbearing it seems that there are more women out there wanting to settle down and have kids than there are men (especially desirable males).

Actually, studies show men want to marry and have children more than women do. For example, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention‘s National Center for Health Statistics, 12,000 men and women were asked to respond to the following statement:

"It is better to get married than go through life single."

The results: 66 percent of men agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, compared with only 51 percent of women.

So obviously, your statement is wrong and the birthrate would remain unaffected.

Then if you consider that about 3 - 4 percent of males are either homosexual or predominantly homosexual (and that only 1 - 2% of the female population is lesbian) then while that doesn't seem much it leaves millions of surplus women of fertile age in America and probably more in Europe.

There was a time when this would be true, but no longer. Today if a woman wants a baby she does not need a man. So most of your alleged millions of surplus women would still have a baby if she wanted one and she would raise it by herself. Again, no affect on the birthrate.

Also, the people who would become polygamist would probably be kinda out of the main cultural norms anyway, probably more intelligent and probably more religious. Might do good for the overall genetic quality of the population of any nation if these people produced a higher percentage of the next gene pool.

Why in the world would they be more intelligent? I don’t doubt they’d be more religious, but intelligent? There‘s no reason to believe this; rather, they‘d be of average intelligence. You're also trying to sneak your eugenics in again.

And again, fewer children are born in polygamous cultures than in monogamous ones. I explained this in my last post. Did you not understand what I meant?

Therefore, polygamy would have a negative impact on the birthrate.

As for the lesbian thing, sorry...I don't even listen to Howard Stern nor do I even watch The L Word series. But hey, just remember, polygamy would certainly help out all the bi women in this society who have a hard time choosing which way to go (why bother choosing?).

Can’t argue with that.

Elphaba

[Fiannan]

Also, the people who would become polygamist would probably be kinda out of the main cultural norms anyway, probably more intelligent and probably more religious. Might do good for the overall genetic quality of the population of any nation if these people produced a higher percentage of the next gene pool.

Let's get this straight. You actually think that people more inclined to be polygamist are more intelligent than the rest of the general population? How do you arrive at that conclusion? Do you have any scientific studies to back this up?

As for more religious, I would disagree. I would restate it to 'they are more fanatical about certain religious concepts'. They use religion to justify their nuttiness.

And believe me, the gene pool in Colorado City has not been good. I have never heard anyone point to them and declare how impressed they are with their intelligence or genitic purity.

I can see how polygamy might be used as a short-term solution to a long-term problem, but I don't see its benefits past 2-3 generations, and if it were to work, the polygamists would necessarily need to be part of a larger, non-polygamist society which accepts the practice.

I believe the Lord instituted polygamy among the Saints and then removed it from the earth again for a multitude of reasons, all of which were for our own good and for the good of His church. And while we may not know or understand all those reasons, it is good enough for me to have faith that He knew what He was doing when he commanded it.

Actually yes. I have generally found people who buck the mainstream and attack conventional norms are more intelligent than the average Joe. Yes, they may possess certain personality traits (more introspective in the Jungian sense) and may even appear somewhat weird but nevertheless those who have the trait of following the norms of a society just because they are the norms are usually far less bright than people who question the norms. That's why I suspect that the majority of polygamists would come from a more intellectual stock and, due to the fact that most would probably not be rich they would have to possess traits such as charisma and intellect that would attract women to also break from the norm.

No, perhaps some communities are not rocket scientists but it is my suspicion that this is more due to environment than genetic potential. The people in places like Colorado city are probably (from a gynotype perspective) as bright or brighter than the surrounding population. Also, from what I have understood from reading about what I call freelance polygamists, those who may be LDS but later form their own family group, these guys were research freaks who just feel that the mainstream church has gone astray. I don't agree with them but I can see where it takes a certain type of person to go that route -- and they aren't inactives or gullible morons.

[Fiannan]

There are enough men for women of childbearing age to find and mate with. The time when there are significantly more women than men comes when she is in peri-menopause (she still can get pregnant, but most women ensure they don’t), menopause, and on through the rest of her life. So the birthrate would remain stable.

I did not say numerical differences were the issue -- the issue is desire to marry and have kids.

Actually, studies show men want to marry and have children more than women do. For example, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention‘s National Center for Health Statistics, 12,000 men and women were asked to respond to the following statement:

"It is better to get married than go through life single."

The results: 66 percent of men agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, compared with only 51 percent of women.

So obviously, your statement is wrong and the birthrate would remain unaffected.

I think I'd like to see the methodology used for this as well as the contect of the study.

There was a time when this would be true, but no longer. Today if a woman wants a baby she does not need a man. So most of your alleged millions of surplus women would still have a baby if she wanted one and she would raise it by herself. Again, no affect on the birthrate.

Ah, but many women do not feel comfortable with cruising singles bars for a baby maker (kinda brings up images of the movie "Species") nor wanting to go to a sperm bank for a baby. Most want someone with them to raise children.

Also, I dealt with the genetics thing when responding to John Doe. I do see one problem though. I watched a documentary about a Mormon doctor who was one of the foremost genetics experts who, unknown to his patients requesting sperm, used his own rather than unknown doners (making about 70 babies). Now the guy was a genius but maybe some people didn't like the idea that he was overweight or had bad eyesight. So let's say one man with some bad characteristics does take 10 wives -- those traits are greatly amplified in a small community. Then again, there is nothing to say that these ten women would marry anyone any better off genetically. So...

Thing is, most women would probably not go for polygamy (as our opossite sex parent is our focal point in development of wanting a mate we generally don't like to share). However, there are many who would either settle for it if they fell for a guy who was already married or would actually be attracted to the lifestyle. So even if these women were occupied in marriages (and they only were like 5% of the fertile female population) the supply of women would drop and the competition would go up for the available women. So just like some have speculated that the oversupply of men in China will allow women more freedom and status, and allow them to choose the best and ignore the rest, and that the general IQ of the population will also go up. So maybe polygamy would not only serve to increase lagging birthrates but benefit even women not wanting to share a husband -- and improve genetic health.

[Elphaba]

I did not say numerical differences were the issue -- the issue is desire to marry and have kids.

Fine. I answered that in the next item, which says that men desire to marry and have children more than women do.

I think I'd like to see the methodology used for this as well as the contect of the study.

Vital and Health Statistics, May 2006t

Ah, but many women do not feel comfortable with cruising singles bars for a baby maker (kinda brings up images of the movie "Species") nor wanting to go to a sperm bank for a baby. Most want someone with them to raise children.

I agree that most want someone with them to raise the child. But they also realize that there may not be anyone there, and once the clock is ticking down they don’t have a choice. Remember, I’m speaking of your alleged millions of surplus women. This also refers to women close to peri-menopause who will soon be too old to have children who don’t have a male partner who can get her pregnant.

Therefore, she will either ask a friend to donate sperm or will go to a sperm bank. Or perhaps she will ask a surrogate mother to carry a child for her. I’m sure there are a number of options.

I also believe technological advances will give women new choices, whether she is married or not.

But the point is, if a woman wants a baby, married, partnered, supported or not, she will have a baby.

Also, I dealt with the genetics thing when responding to John Doe.

Yes, I read it. This is typical Fiannin speculation based on no evidence. The Colorado City population actually has a large number of retarded people in it because of a damaged enzyme* that is rampant in the community. Were the originators especially bright? I don't know. They're very tenacious. But I don't think they're the exemplary example you seem to think they are.

Additionally, you continue to apply Freudian/Jung psychology when nobody in the profession considers using it anymore. You really need to take another psychology class--perhaps Psych 102?

Having said that, I do agree that some “free spirits,” who live a polygamous lifestyle if it becomes legal probably will have a higher IQ. But we’re only talking about a few people. Every person who decides to live a polygamous lifestyle is not going to have a significantly high IQ.

Thing is, most women would probably not go for polygamy (as our opossite sex parent is our focal point in development of wanting a mate we generally don't like to share). <snip> serve to increase lagging birthrates but benefit even women not wanting to share a husband -- and improve genetic health.

Your comments about polygamy are nonsense. The only way they would apply is if polygamy became a significant lifestyle choice in the country. That is not going to happen. There is no way five percent of the fertile female population of the country is going to enter into polygamy. So that discredits your whole paragraph.

Elphaba

*I believe it's a damaged enzyme. I could be wrong, but I'm too tired to look it up. Later edit: It's called Fumarase Deficiency. Fumarase deficiency is an enzyme irregularity that causes severe mental retardation, unusual facial features, brain malformation, and epileptic seizures due to an abnormally low amount of fumarase in cells. The condition is congenital and is the result of receiving two defective recessive genes on the first chromosome that influence the functioning of the Krebs Cycle. Fumarase/Polygamists

[Snow]

But the point is, if a woman wants a baby, married, partnered, supported or not, she will have a baby.

Not if she is ethical/moral.

[the Ogre]

<div class='quotemain'>

But the point is, if a woman wants a baby, married, partnered, supported or not, she will have a baby.

Not if she is ethical/moral.

Or just plain intelligent/practical.

[Elphaba]

<div class='quotemain'>

But the point is, if a woman wants a baby, married, partnered, supported or not, she will have a baby.

Not if she is ethical/moral.Etical or moral according to whom?

Elphaba

Note: My posts are being moderated, so my response may not be posted immediately after I write it. E

[Snow]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

But the point is, if a woman wants a baby, married, partnered, supported or not, she will have a baby.

Not if she is ethical/moral.Etical or moral according to whom?

Me, prophets and apostles, society, the scriptures, those with common sense... take your pick.