Filtern
Demographie und Bevölkerungsfragen (3)
Europa und Internationales (3)
Gleichstellungspolitik (3)
Filtern
Anzeige der Dokumente 1-3 von 3
"This paper takes the 'no' side in the debate on the question posed in the title.
The paper assumes that the dual-earner/ dual-carer household model is the most likely
aim of policies that push aggressively for gender equality in order to raise fertility.
Five objections are discussed: the model does not necessarily lead to a fertility
increase; aggressiveness will lead to an imbalance of labor supply and demand, and
is likely to confront slowly changing cultural norms; similar policies will also confront
the issue of innate gender differences; and country idiosyncrasies prevent the application
of a unified policy approach. The paper briefly concludes that compatible gender-neutral
family policies and fertility-neutral gender policies are likely to lead to an increase
in fertility." (author's abstract)|"This paper takes the 'no' side in the debate on the question posed in the title. The paper assumes that the dual-earner/ dual-carer household model is the most likely aim of policies that push aggressively for gender equality in order to raise fertility. Five objections are discussed: the model does not necessarily lead to a fertility increase; aggressiveness will lead to an imbalance of labor supply and demand, and is likely to confront slowly changing cultural norms; similar policies will also confront the issue of innate gender differences; and country idiosyncrasies prevent the application of a unified policy approach. The paper briefly concludes that compatible gender-neutral family policies and fertility-neutral gender policies are likely to lead to an increase in fertility." (author's abstract)"This paper argues against the suggestion that governments should push for gender equality more aggressively in order to raise fertility. The paper presents a threefold 'no' to this proposal. It takes issue with the goal of raising fertility, arguing that the claims that fertility must be increased are based on myths. It rejects a more aggressive pursuit of gender equality for demographic purposes, maintaining that this method preserves inequality. It warns against using gender equality for fertility purposes, stating that this narrows the realm of gender equality. The paper is based on a debate held at the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research in Rostock, at which the author was asked to argue against the gender equality-fertility proposal. The other participants in the debate were Laurent Toulemon ('yes'), Dimiter Philipov ('no'), and Livia Oláh ('yes')." (author's abstract)