Fathers for Life
Fatherlessness, the lack of natural fathers in children's lives
| Home | In The News | Our Blog | Contact Us | Share

Fathers for Life Site-Search

Site Map (very large file)
Table of Contents
Children—Our most valued assets?
Educating Our Children for the Global Gynarchia
Child Support
Civil Rights & Social Issues
Family Law
Destruction of Families
Divorce Issues
Domestic Violence
Gay Issues
Hate, Hoaxes and Propaganda
Help Lines for Men
Law, Justice and The Judiciary
Mail to F4L
Men's Issues
The Politics of "Sex"
Our Most Popular Pages
Email List
References - Bibliography

You are visitor

since June 19, 2001


UN World Demographics and the costs of disregarding the value of men's lives

As you saw at the page commenting on world demographics, it is quite apparent that births of male children are more frequent than those of female children.  Maybe that is God's way to make sure that there'll be still enough males around when they leave boyhood and face the dangers they must then face, often involuntarily, throughout their lives.  Boys and men are at a considerably higher risk to die than girls are.  That becomes even more pronounced once they come to be of working age and enter the work force.
    Without fail, dangerous, dirty, and unhealthy work is being done by men, not by women.  About 92 percent of all U.S. job fatalities are male. (See also: The 1989 Montreal Massacre in the context of menís sacrifices, 2008 12 07, by Professor Jeffrey Asher.)

In general, although for a number of reasons boys are more likely do die than girls and do so in large numbers, they keep their numerical advantage until the end of early adulthood, at age 34, at which time their numbers fall below those of women their age.  From then on men begin to die in ever increasing numbers, due to the various reasons mention in the page on world demographics.

The next graph shows in greater detail the numbers at which boys and men die off.

Notice in the preceding graph that men are far more likely to die while of working age, while women, leading far more sheltered and far less risky lives, die primarily of old age.  For men old age comes much sooner than for women.  By age 85 and over, there are quite simply not that many men around anymore to die.
    A good portion of the male population dies when working or – burned out and generally neglected by the health care system and health research throughout their working lives – shortly after they retire to enjoy, if they can, the few years of life during which they may still be able to live off their pension income, if they make it that far.
    However, the preceding graph doesn't tell the whole story. The costs to society of the premature deaths of boys and men are enormous.  With the demise of the large numbers of boys and men who die each year, millions of productive life years are removed from the economy forever.
    The men in the age range 20 to 54 will hardly have had enough opportunity to accumulate equity to secure their orphaned familys' welfare.  They are removed as income earners from the cashflow of their families as effectively as if by any divorce court.  All of that doesn't even begin to describe the enormous emotional costs to their families, in which their widows must now struggle to raise their children by themselves, unless, of course, they feel inclined to chose another life companion and provider from the leavings.
    Most ironic of all, the early deaths of millions of men virtually ensures that there are millions of single or widowed women who'll have to try during their ripe old age that they very likely attain to survive on the meager pension income resulting from their often secure and comfortable working lives that earned them far less than the higher risk jobs that their deceased husbands held with the intention to make life comfortable for their families.

Common sense tells any farmer who uses animals or machinery to till his fields, or any wagoner or trucker who does so, to treat with great respect and care his machinery and his animals that do the work for him.  Our society, in its new-found wisdom, treats its own men – beasts of burden since time immemorial – with a lack of respect and care that would bring any farmer, any carrier, any wagoner, anyone who must rely on hired power, to the point of bankruptcy.
    That is not a wise way by which to run a society.

We may learn to live without sufficient numbers of  men – beasts of burden – or we may pretend that we may do so without having to face any consequences, if only the demands on men were not to change as time goes by.  However, we are approaching times that will require all of the work output our society can produce, and there better be enough men around to carry, as for many thousands of years before, the major share of the hard and dangerous work that needs to be done by them.

Consider the population projections produced by the US Bureau of the Census that are reflected in the following set of graphs showing the distribution of the US population for the year 1997, and projections for what the distributions will be in the years 2025 and 2050.

The preceding graphs were derived  from data made available at The International Database of  the U.S. Bureau of the Census.
   See also the corresponding graphs for the two most populous nations on Earth, China and India.

Our society presently has problems looking after our elderly.  Increasingly, single and lonely, without children to care for many of them, they must rely on whatever assets they managed to scrounge together for a rainy day – to hire someone to look after them in their old age.  The vast majority are elderly women, weak and fragile, who will very likely not be able to fend for themselves.  They are for the reasons mentioned above very likely to have insufficient funds to ensure their comfort.
    The population sector containing the elderly grows at an unprecedented rate in absolute terms and especially in relative terms with respect to the size of the younger productive population sector that has to bear the increasingly unbearably large responsibility to care and provide for those who can't produce anything any longer for themselves.  One of the consequences of that is an enormous increase (150% in the US from 1986 to 1996) in elderly abuse, predominantly cases of neglect of the elderly. (Trends in Elder Abuse in Domestic Settings, NATIONAL CENTER ON ELDER ABUSE, Elder Abuse Information Series No. 2 (PDF 42kB).   The St. Louis Post-Dispatch produced an excellent series of articles on the topic of fatal elder abuse and neglect in US nursing homes (it is estimated that tens of tousands of cases happen each year), Neglected to Death (Oct. 12 - 19, 2002).  See abstract and commentary relating to the articles and to the problem of elder abuse and neglect in nursing home and hospitals.)
    How much greater will those problems be when the proportion of the elderly – largely women – grows to the enormous size shown in the second and third of the preceding graphs.
    Certainly, the last of the three graphs shows that the younger sector of the population will grow miraculously to a size far larger than the size possible according the size of the age groups that were born 25 years earlier.  How is such a miracle possible?

Take the age group 0 - 4 in 1997.  It is comprised of about 19 million children.  According to the graph for 2025, that age group will have grown to about 24 million in 2025, when it will be part of the age groups 25 - 29 and 30 - 34, and in 2050, when it will be in the range of the age group 50 - 54, it will be a little bit larger yet.
    That is miraculous, isn't it?  Well, not quite.  The additional bodies are born already – although not in the US.  Those additional bodies will be comprised of immigrants.
    Whether the US culture can assimilate such a massive influx of immigrants is another story.  It should be an interesting one.  Never in US history was there immigration on such a massive scale.

All of the developed nations are in a similar position.  Some are in a quandary that is far, far worse than that facing the US.   Japan, Germany and Italy are losing population at the rate of 30 percent with every successive generation.  Those countries are not very likely to be capable or willing to accept immigrants on the massive scale required to ensure their continuance and to prevent their collapse.  Yet, their own citizens are due to the punitive taxation on families increasingly unwilling to produce children of their own.

The solution is simple for all of the countries that are rapidly approaching a serious population crisis due to their declining populations.  All it would take is to have one generation of family-friendly policies and a slight bit of a tax advantage for families who make the enormous sacrifices required to raise children.
    Alas, those decisions are not being made any longer within any given nation.  The UN is fully aware of the looming population calamity and that many countries are approaching a population crisis – a population calamity that the UN created and still pursues with all its might.
    However, the solution promoted by the UN and that it imposes on its member nations is still to promote abortions and to redistribute the world population.  The UN's population planning solution, issued just recently, announces even the immigration quotas that will be required annually for specific countries.  The plan goes so far as to prescribe specific volumes of immigrants to ensure varying levels of comfort for the citizens of a given nation.
    I guess, if we don't want to produce our own children in sufficient numbers any longer, then there are only two alternatives: either a country dies out, or it purchases ready-made children and people from elsewhere.  Well, purchase may be too harsh a word, but many countries must provide incentives to cajole prospective immigrants to enter their xenophobic and often hostile domains.
    Let's hope that all can find the heart to do what is necessary.  It will be the immigrants who'll bear the larger burden.  They will most certainly not be welcomed by all of their new compatriots.  However, those problems will eventually resolve themselves as the hostile resident populations will ultimately fade into oblivion due to their extremely low birth rates that are now far below the level required to maintain their numbers.

* Is the world overpopulated?

If all of the world's people were located in the Province of Alberta (just a touch smaller in area than the State of Texas) and each were to have an equal share of all of the land in Alberta, then each of the world's people would have 98.6m2 of land to live on.

Assuming that the average household consists of three people, a family of three would have enough space (3,184 ft2) for a moderately-sized house and a garden large enough to grow some of the food consumed by the family.

  • Alberta land area: 661,565 km2, 255,541 miles2
  • World population: 6,706,993,152 (Source: CIA World Factbook, July 2008 est.)


If you have concerns about these and other issues related to the condition of seniors, visit, contact and perhaps even join:

SUN ó Seniors United Now

The up- and coming, rapidly-growing advocacy organization for seniors (55 years and over) in Alberta

There are in the order of about half a million or more people of age 55 and over in Alberta. If all of them were to join SUN, they would become the most powerful advocacy organization in Alberta; and seniors would no longer be robbed of their comforts and otherwise ignored.
   At the price of one package of cigarettes seniors will be able to gain a voice that will be heard by a government that otherwise can and will take from seniors what they worked for all their life to enjoy in their old age.

If you are concerned about how seniors are affected by the planned, systematic destruction of our families and society, a search at google.com (for elderly OR seniors OR grandparent OR grandfather OR grandmother site:https://fathersforlife.org) will provide you with the links to about 80 web pages at Fathers for Life that will be of interest to you.

Posted 2000 04 28
2001 02 11 (format changes)
2001 12 29 (insert comment about Ederly Abuse)
2002 10 20 (inserted reference to St. Louis Post-Dispatch series of articles on the killing of elderly in US nursing homes.)
2004 06 24 (added entry for SUN — Seniors United Now)