The ’60s is often held up as a time of dramatic upheaval in American life. It brought us civil rights victories, the sexual revolution, the women’s movement, the gay liberation movement, and anti-war activism. It was, in short, antiestablishmentarian.
What were the concrete impacts of these changes? One is the birth rate, as illustrated in a post by Made in America‘s Claude S. Fischer. Far from introducing a new normal, the ’60s reversed what was a relatively recent a rise in the ideal number of children and actual fertility rate.
While data not shown suggest that the ideal number of children in the ’30s was under three, the ideal had risen to 3.6 by 1962. This dropped quickly across the rest of the decade.
Likewise, the actual number of children born to the average woman in the 1930s was about two, but this started shooting up in the late ’30s and ’40s. Then, just as quickly as it had risen, it plummeted again:
This data reminds us of how unusual the ’50s really was. It was an especially pro-natal family-centered time. As historian Stephanie Coontz puts it:
At the end of the 1940s, all the trends characterizing the rest of the twentieth century suddenly reversed themselves. For the first time in more than one hundred years, the age for marriage and motherhood fell, fertility increased, divorce rates declined, and women’s degree of educational parity with men dropped sharply. In a period of less than ten years, the proportion of never-married persons declined by as much as it had during the entire previous half century.
So, while in some ways the 1960s dramatically changed American culture, in other ways it simply put us back on track.
Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.
Comments 9
Gman E Willikers — March 14, 2013
It would be interesting to look at this from a longer perspective. Did technological change, two long wars (which sent away for years a large percentage of the population during their peak reproductive years) and a Great Depression have a big impact on the period that preceded the 40s?
Synger — March 14, 2013
I'd also be interested to see how the infant and childhood death rates changed during those early years. If health care was getting better between the 30s and the 50s, wouldn't it coincide with an increase in family size because more children survived childhood? And then the advent of the Pill allowed families to control their fertility, which shows the lowering numbers.
Elena — March 14, 2013
There's also the effect of the contraceptive pill.
Skalchemist — March 14, 2013
The table in this article...
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/haines.demography
illustrates the long term trend pretty well. The period from 1940 to 1960 stands out clearly as a bump in the long term decline since the early 1800's.
THE POWER OF CULTURE: PLUMMETING BIRTH RATES IN THE 1960S | Welcome to the Doctor's Office — March 18, 2013
[...] from SocImages [...]
Veronica Wilson — June 4, 2015
Now, social scientists embarking on brand-new research into these types of relationships are finding that they may challenge the ways we think of jealousy, commitment and love. They may even change monogamy for the better.
Ming Merciless — August 25, 2018
You mean Asians aborting babies because they were born in the Chinese year of the Fire Horse (1966) put us back on track? Japan avoided over 400,000 births alone! Basically you're covertly normalizing genocide of a specific group without reporting all of the data, which is impossible unless China wants to be nice and tell us how many babies they murdered in 1966.
barry — February 12, 2019
awesome! great work and data, keep up the amaze balls work