Now that I know what you were after please accept the following as constructive criticism:
You might want to start with a title that accurately reflects the op. The op has nothing to do with how big of a generation any of us have created.
A link to the thread that explained what your question was would help.
Relax a bit with your trying to set up rules. This is not a study and has zero value to actually answer anything about intergeneration intervals for any broad population, even as small of one as participants of this board. Asking for decimal point inputs is silly.
Excluding adopted children as part of our individual families’ next generations adds no value. If anything it introduced more selection bias as some of us who are adoptive parents then decline to participate at all.
The importance of father vs mother, very clear in real studies, is completely missed here.
The “natural” bit also is problematic. If this was a real study one very likely impact on intergeneration interval within the higher education and SES sub population would very likely be the result of assisted reproductive technologies, allowing parenthood onset and expansion into age groups previously uncommon. Sometimes with multiple births.
There are interesting questions here. The articles I linked to in your other thread are unable to address changes just over the last several generations especially in particular subgroups. I’d be shocked if there was not major and rapid impact of the wide availability of birth control, better sex education, and higher education achievement and professional employment of women on intergeneration interval in much of the world. China’s period of limited family size likely had impact as well.
To the degree that red blue correlates with educational level?
The correlation of female educational achievement and later first birth (again then likely higher intergeneration interval) is seen in a very divergent context as well: in developing countries.
On a global human history scale these cultural shifts have occurred in the blink of an eye, and their impact on intergeneration intervals likely whiplash inducing!
More like to the degree it correlates with SES, with education, with rural versus urban / suburban / exurban, and with parental culture. All of which break strongly along red / blue political lines nowadays.
Not because politics is causing those differences; rather because the tribes are coalescing politically around messages that resonate with their very different and often mutually incomprehensible lifestyles.
Well I do know the ages of my adopted children’s bio parents, but your premise is so offensive that all I can do is shake my head at your utter cluelessnes. Despite your “no offense intended”.
Why focus on biology? What seems much more relevant to the gap between “generations” is the age at which parents decide to become parents. As in, try to have a child one way or another, or, when pregnant choosing to stay pregnant.
A person who has a biological child and gives them up for adoption is specifically choosing not to become a parent. Parents who adopt, or use reproductive technology are specifically choosing to become parents at that age.
In terms of who will be actively parenting children, spending money on their children, voting as a parent, dealing with schools, kids in their houses, homework, allowances, who will take care of them when they are old, whether they live to meet their grandchildren or great-grandchildren, who they leave their estate to, and all other things associated with being a parent except the act of giving birth, adoptive parents are in the relevant group, and birth parents of adopted children are not (unless they have other children).
Are you in particular interested only in people who give birth to a baby, and nothing else?