The OP overstated things somewhat - the peoople interviewed are not blaming feminism for the current crisis. They're saying that economies will contract because we're having fewer children.
They ask, why are we having fewer babies? The reasons:
1.
Urbanization: When people move to cities, they have fewer children. People in rich countries are a lot more likely to live in cities than a century ago.
2.
The End of Patriarchy:
2a.
Fornication: People now do not need to get married to have sex.
2b.
Females Entrance into the Workforce: Women start working and put off marriage and childbirth.
2c.
Contraception: Women in sexually active relationships, even while married, use contraceptives and lower their divorce rate.
2d.
Weakening of Marriage: Divorces are now no-fault, and thus easier to get. This raises the rate of divorce.
I'd add a third factor:
3.
The Reduction in Venereal Disease Risk: Venereal diseases are nowhere near as dangerous as they were 100 years ago, when say, syphilis killed hundreds of thousands of people. Between contraceptives, low disease prevalence, and lack of whore-shaming, there's little cost to having sex with strangers now.
Great documentary. I was floored by Phil Longman's mention of patriarchy as an option. He's very mainstream, and I don't think he considers himself conservative. Much respect.
If the goal is to revive fertility, then people must be persuaded to marry earlier and stay married. Marriage and child-bearing must be made more attractive to the man, and the difficulty of securing divorce must be increased, especially for women who file most divorce. (The documentary misleadingly showed a man leaving his family, but the opposite is far more accurate, especially in college educated couples where the woman files 90% of the time). The traditional privileges of marriage must be restored. Elements of patriarchy must return. As the poster
Dalrock says, those are:
■Being the legally and socially recognized head of the household.
■An expectation of regular sex.
■Legal rights to children.
■Lifetime commitment.
A complementary approach is to make women's alternatives to marriage less appealing. Currently, women often benefit from preferential treatment enshrined by law. An employer may not rationally discriminate against women, when there is a real risk that they will drop out of the workforce to raise a family. Employers should be allowed to hire without privileging women, and reduce their salaries by an amount commensurate with the financial risk they pose.
The problem is not so much population decline as it is old people living long, unproductive retirements. If old people died the day they retired, would we be having this problem?
I'm not proposing killing old people, but saying that our treatment of them can't continue on in this way. We have to spend less on healthcare, and stop burdening the young so that some sickly 80 year old can live another two weeks in an ICU unit.