We'd probably all be a little more at peace, and would live more equally, role-wise, in a hunter-gatherer society:

"Many anthropologists studying tribal communities in Africa, South America, Asia and Australia believe early humans lived fairly equal lives, sharing responsibility for food, shelter and raising children. The Flintstones model, with wife at home and husband bringing back the bacon, just doesn’t stand up. Instead, the evidence shows that women would have done at least the same physical work as men, but with the added burden of bearing children." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/11/the-weaker-sex-science-that-shows-women-are-stronger-than-men

But blaming women's desire for a choice in her own lifestyle (having or not having kids, finding meaning in something other than taking care of her spouse and children) and the work they've / we've done to secure that option for somehow ruining the fabric of society is a little extreme. In the days of the nuclear family ideal, neither men nor women were living happily. Men HAD to be the breadwinners and couldn't necessarily follow dreams beyond that role if they were going to be the expected providers. Women HAD to get pregnant and give birth and rear children, and not only couldn't follow their dreams but couldn't even get a break from home life (men, at least, could go from work to home; women were always always always at "work" since home was the work).

Having choices isn't a bad thing. Not having kids you don't want isn't a bad thing (especially not for the kids who aren't wanted). Not wanting to have kids isn't a bad thing - we can't and don't all want the exact same things out of life. But impressing upon women that having children is expected of them, feeding them propaganda about how only children will "fulfill" them, scaring them into an entire life they should only go into happily and passionately, does unnecessary harm (to them as well as to the children they'll probably resent).