What's your point? Countries with LGBT and woman's rights aren't sustainable demographically?

I think you're severely overstating the effect of LGBT people on this matter - western countries struggle with demographics, but it's not because more gay people are able to live their lives without being forced into straight relationships.

There is substantial research showing a negative correlation between female empowerment and fertility rates.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230554993_4 https://bmcwomenshealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s...

Children are power when you have limited alternatives.

No. I'm saying this is how elite Russian and Chinese party policy makers view their own demographic situation. Although they don't really talk about modern Russia or China, Helene Carre and Walter Scheidel probably have the most readable books about how demographic imbalances relate to empire collapses. And if you read them, it's very easy to see why China and Russia are far more reason to be concerned than the West does. Russia already fell off one in 1991, and both nations really are close to another.

(Also, American elites don't really see themselves as struggling demographically.)

Personally, I think they also like being able to blackmail powerful LGBT within their countries/satellites. Historically, when their targets realized that America's fairly tolerant towards foreigners, leftover women, <i>and</i> LGBT people, their targets tended to defect.

I'd say it's because LGBT rights are seen by conservatives as generally coming with more freedom in society and that correlates with higher child-bearing age, fewer children being born in general, higher abortion rates, and more promiscuous society.

Not my views, what I see as the reasons traditional conservatives want to keep LGBT acceptance to a minimum.

> The judgement is still out if new type of society developed in the west with modern gender norms, women’s rights and sexual freedoms is viable long term and from demographic perspective it’s frankly probably not.

LGBTQ rights are a sub-set of human rights, in which individuals have self-autonomy/integrity. This may be antithetical to more traditionally collectivist cultures.

An independent judiciary and due process also has a noted history in the West as compared to how things were run in (say) Imperial China:

* https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3624887-the-medieval-ori...

LGBTQ folks probably have fewer children than the average. The demographic challenges we face are in scaling services to support the global population. So wouldn't freedom of gender expression, if anything, make things easier?

Assuming that queer people will somehow take over the world and cause an unsustainable birth rate sounds a bit like the right-wing "gay agenda" conspiracy theory. Not to mention that people born with a vagina can have a male gender identity and still get pregnant, and some trans women can get others pregnant. Sex != gender. Also because gender identity isn't just a lifestyle choice, it's not like all the straight people will somehow get converted.

That's not what they're worried about. At all. Forget PR talking points for a minute and think about the very real relationship between macroeconomics and empires. THAT is party elite care about here.

The Party forced the population to HAVE fewer children in 1980. They did this primarily to jump start their economic modernization plans. Moreover, they figured everyone would start having kids at replacement rates second they lifted the rules. If that happened, they'd be able to consolidate their economic gains.

Economic modernization worked. The kids part...not so much. In fact, there's reason to believe (e.g., maternity store receipts) that their birth rates will look like Japan's or Korea's.

To put it another way, not only are people having fewer kids, they're having far fewer kids than Westerners with equivalent per capital wealth/income are. If that happens, China may not be able to consolidate their economic or international political gains. THAT is what Chinese elites are really worried about.

I, personally, am interested in the elephants in the room. For starters, my lesbian friends and I really wonder if the Chinese censorship machine are responsible for erasing lesbians from Western media spaces -- and especially LGBT spaces. Everyone hears plenty about bi and trans women, but lesbians? Nope. But we're still here.

While I'm not the only one who's noticed this erasure, I think I may be the only one who's also noticed how China's quietly been rolling out aspects of its online censorship system in the West over the past ten years -- and how it's REALLY intensified over the past five (i.e., doxxing, career ruining for anyone with political opinions threatening to the current leaders, sex pic leaks against political opponents, etc.). Guess too many of the Chinese kids studying abroad decided to stay abroad, so it's time to make the English internet feel exactly the Chinese one. Sadly, now the air sucks just as much here. Thanks guys.

More substantively, I find it interesting that absolutely no one will discuss how women in fully economically developed Confucian societies have FAR fewer children than equally economically developed non-Confucian societies (e.g., South Korea and Japan vs. Italy and France).

My friend's wife is South Korean (she was an orphan) and I hear about this all the time.