Can you explain the logic behind that question, because I can't see any.

What my original comment said was that we have a global fertility crisis, not due to social changes (although these also play a role), but because biologically a lot of people simply can not have children any more (or it's a lot more difficult than it used to be).

Responding that women's emancipation is the cause for very real global health issues was the non-sequitur here.

	▲	peanut-walrus a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I am well aware that this is not a mainstream view (yet), but the rate of decline in fertility in the past 20 years is not something that can be explained through social changes alone.
	▲	lotsofpulp a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Your claim that total fertility rate being sub replacement rate mostly due to biological inability to have children is not seen in any data I have seen. All the trends correspond directly to women’s emancipation (although men also probably want fewer children).