I live in Japan. Married with kids. My wife works though, so we don't have time for this kind of thing. As @HugeJerk said it can be competitive--there are definitely neighborhood housewives who are trying to one-up each other. However, I think a lot of them are just looking for some kind of creative outlet.

As @deathcow and @oritteropo noted, the number of dual income families is much lower compared to many western countries (though with Japan's economic downturn lasting for so long the number has been steadily increasing).

There's always been a social expectation here that women will give up their careers (and basically their lives) to raise kids. To be honest, many women (like my sister-in-law who is getting married this weekend) want to quit their careers--glass ceilings very much exist in many major Japanese companies and you will very rarely find women in high-level positions, so why fight the current, right? Even those that do make it (we have a female family friend who is a CEO) face condescending attitudes from their male peers. The CEO friend, being the only female in the room at a business meeting one time, was expected to make and serve the tea to everyone else.

So on the one hand, I think it's cool that Japanese moms make these cool-looking bentos, but on the other hand I find it really sad that for many women doing things like this is really their only creative outlet because societal demands and pressures limit other possible avenues of expression.

And Japanese government officials wonder why Japan continues to have a decreasing birth rate...

Ask and you shall receive!

You said: "They have no intention of integrating into the society or the laws/practices of the host country."

That right there, sir, is what we call an opinion--by definition not a fact. You have condemned the entire Muslim population of Britain as not wanting to integrate based on the fact that Sharia courts exist. And that, good sir, is what we call "irrational." As in, it doesn't at all reasonably follow from the previously stated fact. Perhaps indeed the entire Muslim community doesn't intend to integrate into British society (doubtful), but the fact you cited doesn't support that claim in any way.

Next, you state: "A birth rate outstripping that of the indigenous populace of countries they have "settled" by so much, that it is estimated the whole of Europe will be muslim in 50-75 years."

Sorry, good sir, that's not a fact--it's a thoroughly well-debunked lie. See: http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2011/01/27/will-pew-muslim-birth-rate-study-finally-silence-the-eurabia-claim/

You go on to say: "As for "moderate" muslims; when was the last time they marched en-masse to denounce the barbaric practices carried out in their name?"

Muslims regularly protest the atrocities that are carried out in Islam's name--it just doesn't ever make the evening news (after all, they're supposed to be the bad guys!). This website will give you more than ample examples of Muslims protesting the atrocities committed in the name of Islam.

http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

So, is Islam to be feared? Perhaps. Not for any of the reasons you stated, though. And I hope you don't feel like I'm picking on you--again, I agree with the video that you're entitled to your opinion. I would just hope you base your opinion on fact and reason and not hearsay and emotion.

48 - and counting - sharia courts in the UK, and muslims recently given the right to conduct their own divorces. They have no intention of integrating into the society or the laws/practices of the host country. A birth rate outstripping that of the indigenous populace of countries they have "settled" by so much, that it is estimated the whole of Europe will be muslim in 50-75 years (Gaddafi himself said; "All we have to do is wait"). Islam is not simply a religion, it is a theocracy, and its followers are intent on inflicting its medieval practices on the world. As for "moderate" muslims; when was the last time they marched en-masse to denounce the barbaric practices carried out in their name? Is islam something to fear? Damn right it is.Christopher Hitchens said, many times, that if we don't wake up soon, it will be too late.

All of Europe also has low birtrates.

Low birthrate is not the main issue as the total population is still growing due to people getting older. If you try to solve the 4-2-1 problem by having more kids, the total population will keep growing at a much stronger rate as we are still getting older and older. Which means you need more kids again, more people again and the issue just keeps getting bigger and bigger.

The issue is the amount of people in total is exploding. The solution should be sought in finding a balance. Not more kids, but the right amount of kids vs the amount we are growing older. That means getting less kids then we have today, even in Western countries. On top of that we need to look at the world, not just at isolated regions. Economic prosperity can help those regions find more sustainable birth rates as well. So us helping them economically will help us in the end not overpopulating this planet.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

The carrying capacity for Earth is at least 10 billion humans.
We just broke 7 billion and only 1 billion of us are starving.
And that's only cause greedy wasteful societies like The United States.
Add to that the knowledge that as a country develops, its birth rate tends to level off or decline even.
Human population will level off as well. 12 billion maybe?
Add to that, sustainable technologies and philosophies like vertical indoor farms, thorium reactors and permaculture.
7 billion+ humans really doesn't seems that dangerous for Earth or ourselves.
>> ^Ryjkyj:
This has nothing to do with overpopulation... move along.



That's exactly my point. Why are people so goddamn defensive about overpopulation? What use could we possibly have for filling the earth to "carrying capacity?"

The carrying capacity for Earth is at least 10 billion humans.

We just broke 7 billion and only 1 billion of us are starving.
And that's only cause greedy wasteful societies like The United States.

Add to that the knowledge that as a country develops, its birth rate tends to level off or decline even.

Human population will level off as well. 12 billion maybe?

Add to that, sustainable technologies and philosophies like vertical indoor farms, thorium reactors and permaculture.

7 billion+ humans really doesn't seem that dangerous for Earth or ourselves.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

This has nothing to do with overpopulation... move along.

>> ^entr0py:

>> ^kceaton1:
Utah, used to be the old number one, for insight. BTW, we are also a VERY heavily abstinence leaning state--outside of Salt Lake City, Park City, and Ogden. Some adults I know personally didn't truly know what sex was--fully and all its implications until they were 25 years old, almost seniors in COLLEGE...
Utah. Utah is almost all low to high middle income Caucasian urbanites... It's incredibly homogeneous. But, you could say due to the LDS church's influence this is a special scenario. Yet, in other states religion tends to be one of the highest reasons this subject comes up.
Luckily, my parents taught me early and I had Sex Ed in my health class and knew by 14 the full implications. Utah (our idiotic political carpetbaggers that have carved the state up so they can get these things into the pasture and passed easily due to the higher numbers of their types in office; that are all affiliated with the Tea Party strangely enough--and like Glenn beck...), this year, tried to BAN Sex Ed in its legislature. But the governor was forced to veto the bill due to public outrage (strangely enough, it pissed off a lot of people here). Basically they passed a bill that would have forced abstinence ONLY education even though (I believe) we are number two behind Mississippi.

I'm dubious about that. In fact, here's the first data I came across with a google search. Check out page 15. Utah is way below average and among the lowest in the country for every year they have data, going back to the 80s. In 2005 we were number 45 out of 50 in teen pregnancies.
But then again we're not an abstinence only state. If republicans manage to change that, as they nearly did, I guess we'll have a good case study.


Strange I'll have to check that out. Of course, I'm COMPLETELY basing everything I'm saying off of what a KSL report said pre-veto (of the 2012 Utah legislature's "Abstinence Only" Bill). Perhaps they had their data misconstrued and presented it the wrong way. I'll post the KSL story if I can find it in their history; then look at our information and statistics and then see what they may have possible misread and thought it was us, for some reason--they specifically said the previous cycle year to this study; so I'm confused to.

Thanks for catching that for me @entr0py, I appreciate that sort of thing.

So I admit I may be wrong, sorry if I am! I'll release another, "I'm sorry", later when I have better detail of why I got bad reporting.

>> ^kceaton1:

Utah, used to be the old number one, for insight. BTW, we are also a VERY heavily abstinence leaning state--outside of Salt Lake City, Park City, and Ogden. Some adults I know personally didn't truly know what sex was--fully and all its implications until they were 25 years old, almost seniors in COLLEGE...
Utah. Utah is almost all low to high middle income Caucasian urbanites... It's incredibly homogeneous. But, you could say due to the LDS church's influence this is a special scenario. Yet, in other states religion tends to be one of the highest reasons this subject comes up.
Luckily, my parents taught me early and I had Sex Ed in my health class and knew by 14 the full implications. Utah (our idiotic political carpetbaggers that have carved the state up so they can get these things into the pasture and passed easily due to the higher numbers of their types in office; that are all affiliated with the Tea Party strangely enough--and like Glenn beck...), this year, tried to BAN Sex Ed in its legislature. But the governor was forced to veto the bill due to public outrage (strangely enough, it pissed off a lot of people here). Basically they passed a bill that would have forced abstinence ONLY education even though (I believe) we are number two behind Mississippi.


I'm dubious about that. In fact, here's the first data I came across with a google search. Check out page 15. Utah is way below average and among the lowest in the country for every year they have data, going back to the 80s. In 2005 we were number 45 out of 50 in teen pregnancies.

But then again we're not an abstinence only state. If republicans manage to change that, as they nearly did, I guess we'll have a good case study.

>> ^dag:

I'm all for sex ed, but correlation is not causation - as is quickly skimmed over by Cenk, ethnicity, income etc would play a much larger role than just a few crppy high school health classes.



Utah, used to be the old number one, for insight. BTW, we are also a VERY heavily abstinence leaning state--outside of Salt Lake City, Park City, and Ogden. Some adults I know personally didn't truly know what sex was--fully and all its implications until they were 25 years old, almost seniors in COLLEGE...

Utah. Utah is almost all low to high middle income Caucasian urbanites... It's incredibly homogeneous. But, you could say due to the LDS church's influence this is a special scenario. Yet, in other states religion tends to be one of the highest reasons this subject comes up.

Luckily, my parents taught me early and I had Sex Ed in my health class and knew by 14 the full implications. Utah (our idiotic political carpetbaggers that have carved the state up so they can get these things into the pasture and passed easily due to the higher numbers of their types in office; that are all affiliated with the Tea Party strangely enough--and like Glenn beck...), this year, tried to BAN Sex Ed in its legislature. But the governor was forced to veto the bill due to *public* outrage (strangely enough, it pissed off a lot of people here). Basically they passed a bill that would have forced abstinence ONLY education even though (I believe) we are number two behind Mississippi.

Wait, abstinence only education makes you poor?
>> ^Barseps:

Hmmmm...... Coincidence perhaps?
Wikipedia confirms. (Scroll down)

Your video, Abstinence Fail: State With Highest Teen Birth Rate -- TYT, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^dag:

I'm all for sex ed, but correlation is not causation - as is quickly skimmed over by Cenk, ethnicity, income etc would play a much larger role than just a few crppy high school health classes.


It would be better to see birthrates before and after abstinence only education in just Mississippi. It would still be a correlation, but at least you're comparing two similar populations.

>> ^dag:

I'm all for sex ed, but correlation is not causation - as is quickly skimmed over by Cenk, ethnicity, income etc would play a much larger role than just a few crppy high school health classes.


Yep screwing is the default pastime of those with nothing..

>> ^radx:

Some intern did a sloppy job shortening the last sentence of the excerpt taken from TP.


He's been fired.

>> ^bobknight33:

Islam is such a bad false pathetic murderous religion. Its bad enough they want to kill everyone who is not one of them but also treat their women like shit and kill them for what ever reason. The dog gets better treatment.
When will the world wake up and ban this religion in their countries?

It may be too late. A muslim once said; "Why are my muslim brothers blowing themselves up? All they need to do is wait". He was, of course, referring to their higher birth rate. Ironically they will be, sooner or later, in a position to bring down democracy with the self same tools of the democracy that they so detest. Selfishly, I can only say that I am glad I will be gone, and will not have to witness a theocracy dragging humanity back to the dark ages. However, maybe there is a slim chance that, as you say, the world will wake up and not sleep walk into a tyrannical, nightmarish, future.