The decline in the number of births should be seen in connection with the ‘gender divergence’ between increasingly progressive young women and increasingly conservative young men, observes economist Pauline Grosjean in her column.

The number of births has continued to decline in France in 2025. The fertility rate, at 1.56 children per woman, reached its lowest level since 1918. It is true that most of France’s neighbors are faring even worse, and France still holds its – rather relative – status as a champion of birth rates. This decline is a universal and long-term phenomenon, with explanations that have shifted over time.

The initial phase, which has been the most studied, is that of the demographic transition, marked by the shift from a regime of high mortality and fertility to one of low mortality and fertility. France was already an exception, having started its demographic transition in the 18th century, before other countries. Without this early transition, some economists estimate, France’s population would today stand at 250 million.

  • BeatTakeshi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    The demographic reality will hit hard, then all those western countries will compete to attract immigrants, to wipe their old asses and contribute to pension funds. Those who accept immigrants today will rule the world tomorrow.

  • Prancingpotato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Something to keep in mind while talking about birth rate in France, is that we have a retirement system that is centered around growth. We do not have individual retirement plans, we pay each month for the currently retired people, and the workers will pay for ours when we retire. This creates a problem when the population of retired ppl is in augmentation and the active population ( working and paying taxes) is declining.

    For a long time there was way more active pop than retired so we have a safety net, but it will slowly erode. And currently the political “solution” being pushed is not growing the active population (immigration for instance), but shifting the system towards a capitalisation (ie. Simililar to 401k)

  • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Okay, I spent all of my late teenage years to early adulthood in France so I feel I can chime in: French people, like most Westerners I’ve met, don’t know what they should do with their lives and the burden of responsibility of having children is simply not that appealing compared to having fun, either partying and doing coke or collecting figurines and dakimakuras. Even romance and love is fucked because marriage is seen as outdated and so serious so life long monogamy, for many, is just meh or scary. People don’t date for any objective, they just get together cause they’re lonely or sexually starved. And if they do understand what they should be doing, they’ll be old and weary, and either the psychological scars will stop them from fully commiting to something or biology will have done its thing and now you’re 42 trying to have your first kid, of course it’s gonna be difficult.

    Now, whilst I have my value judgement on it, I’m not making any right now, I’m just describing what I’m seeing. Hedonism, consumerism, and an ideological vacuum, means that people won’t be making big commitments like having children. Of course the Muslims will, that makes sense, no surprise over there.

    PS: and no, it’s not a financial thing. The immigrants with no support or family money that goes back several generations, working shitty min wage jobs, have and want to have children. It’s an ideological difference.

    PS2: oh yeah and the current wave of redpill and casual misogyny on one side and “sexual liberation” and casual pornography on the other isn’t helping either. It just makes both sexes less interested and more cautious, even when there’s always good people in the bunch. That’s gonna have to be addressed as well.

    • Taldan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Hedonism, consumerism, and an ideological vacuum

      If that’s causing the declining birthrate, why is the birthrate in North Korea dropping so rapidly?

    • Akasazh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’m not going to debate you on your moral stance, nor on your conclusions.

      But your own experience is a pretty narrow sample size and your generalization is pretty substantial. I don’t think you do justice to the diversity of people out there.

      My personal experience with people in France is different, for example, I won’t tell you your argument is invalid over that, but it’s a sample size as big as your own, so it should be weighed.

        • Akasazh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          23 hours ago

          In my perspective there are two aspects: social security and secularisation.

          People that are uncertain about their being able to support themselves and afford a house are less likely to procreate.

          There’s less influence of the Catholic church, whose message was to procreate.

          Both lead to a more solitary life style and lessen faith in the general direction of society.

          • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            22 hours ago

            Mmm, a very reasonable answer. Secularisation definitely plays a part in the larger ideological differences between this population and others. There’s certainly been a very real and drastic economic decline in France since the 70s or something, and my friends’ parents have made it very clear several times, lol. But again, the fact that immigrants, which are arguably the poorest group, are perhaps the most fertile of the bunch points toward yet another ideological/psychological difference (maybe not having as much makes them panic more than others that simply think “God will provide”? Idk) that is deeper and more impactful than financials, IMO.

            • Danquebec@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              20 hours ago

              Perhaps the native thinks of their own childhood as the baseline, and feels like they would be unable to provide, while the immigrant came from comparable economic conditions they have now, or even worse, so they don’t see issues with it.

              There’s also the fact that the immigrant is often religious and believes he must have children.

              • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                20 hours ago

                Maybe you’re right, but that’s a mistaken view by the locals, as seen by the immigrants having kids and not just starving on the streets but surviving and even thriving, perhaps not super comfortably, but still doing so. And yes, belief, ideology, they’re at the core of this situation, I agree with you there. 👍