From Marginal Revolution, The Great (Male) Stagnation, with two sobering graphics:
WHY? Economists can’t explain it, it’s still a matter of conjecture. Alex Tabarrok’s thoughts:
- The big difference between female and males as far as jobs, of course, has been labor force participation rates, increasing strongly for the former and decreasing somewhat for the latter. Most of the female change, however, was over by the mid to late 1980s, and the (structural) male change has been gradual.
- Female education levels have increased dramatically and male levels have been relatively flat.
- Females are also more predominant in services and males in manufacturing: plumbers, car mechanics, carpenters, construction workers, electricians, and firefighters, for example are still 95%+ male.
Why should you care? Because you want to marry a man who earns at least as much as you do, if not more. Who reads the same books, enjoys the same movies and craves the same foods. Lifestyle and interests reflect disposable income and education. If you can’t find that, you’re much, much less likely to marry.
{ 574 comments… read them below or add one }
1 2 3 4 »
This is exactly the attitude feminists are trying to fix.
Like I’ve said before, if a woman wants to be a high earner, she should find a beta male who will support her in the role. The same way high earning men have SAHM’s do make their jobs easier.
Add in the fact that males are treated as second class citizens from birth to death. All of these special outreach programs, none of them target males. We always here how more females are needed in X, Y and Z. Males are the reason X, Y and Z even exist.
The graph is misleading if you look at it too fast. The median male income is still higher than the median female income. The graph looks like it says women are earning more, but what it’s actually saying is that the ratio Women2010 to Women1947 is higher than Male2010 to Male 1947.
In other words, female income is rising faster than male income, which is to be expected since women are playing catch up. Men still earn more though.
@Gud Enuf
A high earning woman, e.g. law partner, will only happily marry a lower earner if he’s her intellectual equal, e.g., a history professor at Georgetown (I know this couple). Yes, Tina Fey’s husband takes care of the kids, but he’s a mover and shaker himself. She didn’t marry a guy who never went to college.
We’ll see more and more women “settling” but I think many of those marriages will go belly up. Humans prefer to mate with people of similar “qualifications.”
Feminism is trying to “fix” that which is immutable.
Women are not just “catching up.” Economists, academics, and even policy makers are alarmed by the male stagnation. I’ve even heard the hand-wringing on NPR. (One lefty said we should encourage men to become home health aides, nursing home workers, elementary school teachers, etc. As if women are not celebrating not being limited to those choices anymore.)
Women are surpassing men. Denying this is willful ignorance.
Thank you for addressing this issue Susan.
You’re doing what Kay Hymowitz failed to do – dig deeper.
I have a sneaky suspicion that guys will respond warmly to this post and that the female commentariat will just stick their fingers in their ears and say “la la la!”
I am a man of very modest means and its no co-incidence that my two serious relationships have both been with women whose means were even more modest than my own.
Why?
Because those women would consider going out with me long-term and other women just wouldn’t. Hypergamy isn’t going away.
For the career girls who ask “where are all the single guys?” I’ll tell you:
1. They are dating attractive women with lower socio-economic status than yourself.
2. They are stacking the shelves at Walmart or making your latte in Starbucks.
3. They are unemployed (thank you Central Bankers – you suck!)
I live comfortably paycheck to paycheck. That’s why I’ll probably never get married.
GudEnuf wrote:
Men AT THE TOP are still earning more.
That’s the intent. Women have such significant advantages granted to them in employment, education, and social policy generally that their predominance is all but guaranteed. It’s surprising that men aren’t further behind. If work force participation and work hours were equivalent, the divide would probably be quite dramatic.
I’m a big fan of women, but I do worry that we’ve set up a self driving dynamic between the interests of women and the state. That is, government privileges women and women endorse the ambitions of government. So in any competition between males and females, there is a tendency for women to seek government intermediation knowing that this will benefit their interests.
@ VI:
Actually, college admissions are admitting less-qualified male applicants over more-qualified female applicants because male applicants are rarer and therefore more valued: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/23/opinion/23britz.html
Workshy Joe:
Do you know what “median” means?
adjust income to income/hours worked and the gap closes significantly
additionally, these numbers are from all ages. women from ages 18-30 are making more money than men at the same age range.
Very interesting. I would like to see that data explained, which professions, which numbers, which genders, etc.
And how much of that number goes to alimony / child support
subscribed
GudEnuf didn’t apparently even read her own link.
And the median wage will always depend on the dataset used to calculate it.
Once again: http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/03/us-workplace-women-idUSN0334472920070803
There are a heck of a lot of women living in, or near, large US cities (In the US , “large city” is often defined as 100 thousand or above with Metropolis or “Major” city status being obtained at either 500 thousand or 1 million depending).
Now I might say that hypergamy is a bit misunderstood as well: it doesn’t always have to do with earning more or having a higher status job, but those certainly help. And to the extent that women prefer more successful partners for marriage or ltr’s this is (as the inner cities show) and will be a problem for the larger society.
I’d not seen these stats before Susan, thanks so much for posting. Women in the 20′s – 30′s now out-earn their male contemporaries & the education gap has been widening for decades, as was recently reported:
http://triggeralert.blogspot.com/2011/05/education-gap.html
Im curious what effect the at-home coddling of girls has on this as well. Very rarely do I meet or date a girl who is working her way through school, yet I know (and was one of) many young men who go to school full time and work full time. Most of the girls in their early 20s that I’ve dated all had their schooling paid for by parents, and even the men that I do know who’s parents are paying for their schooling are still required to work full time as part of the deal.
I’ve known a lot of guys who dropped out of higher education because it became to much for them, where females are having schooling handed to them more readily.
Shit jobs will always have to be done, the big issue seems to be the guy changing your oil “needs to step up” while the girl serving your coffee is patted on the back for “being a working woman”
Do you realize how bullshit “median” is when talking about how much people are getting paid?
One million dollar a year executive (Bill Gates) can swing the average heavily. Take one bill gates and 19 $8/hr McDonalds employees and you’d get an average of 65k/yr
median is not the same thing as average (mean)
median lines up all data points and pulls out the middle point
so take a mcdonald’s employee at $8/hour, his manager for $16/hour and bill gates, and the median would be the manager.
but again, the numbers are simply aggregate incomes. they do not account for number of hours worked. more men work full time and overtime than women, and that accounts for more than half of the supposed income gap.
“Do you realize how bullshit “median” is when talking about how much people are getting paid?
One million dollar a year executive (Bill Gates) can swing the average heavily. Take one bill gates and 19 $8/hr McDonalds employees and you’d get an average of 65k/yr”
So you don’t know what median means.
As Workshy Joe says *men at the top* still make more. This is a trend of the lower and middle classes; the people with power aren’t affected very much, so nothing will change.
GudEnuf wrote:
Yes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median
But you still insist on sloppy ambiguous phrasing such as “men earn more”?
I’m still waiting for a female commenter to say something like this:
I think I might have to wait a while for that to happen
Maybe I’m just too malicious, Ms. Walsh, but the vibe I’m often getting from nominally anti-feminist, quasi-conservative women like yourself is
“due to feminist policies, society no longer trains young men to be dutiful, well-earning providers + protectors, so we should do something to remedy this because otherwise we won’t get the the boyfriends and husbands we want and deserve”
instead of
“we should help men thrive in our society because they are our fellow human beings whom we care about, who deserve respect, fairness and opportunities just like everybody else”.
It seems to me your concerns are entirely…self-serving. You only care about the condition of men at all because you want to encourage them to effectively fulfill the roles you want from them.
being a stay at home dad means your ass will be left.
Oh no… this article really hits home. I am a 26 year old recently admitted lawyer and although getting guys is actually pretty easy, finding quality ones that will stick around is unbearably difficult lately. Guys get weird when they find out…most are very surprised.
It seems that guys are either a mismatch (ie not intellectually stimulating for me) or assholes who aren’t looking for a relationship. And I am not looking for a lawyer or doctor! I’n fact, the past two guys i dated worked in entry level sales (earning about 50k) and I was willing to make it work but each one became too intimidated and insecure to make things work.
I tell you all this because I am reading your insight and it is right on the money,
But what is the solution? What is someone like me to do?
One of my fellow commenters explained why nothing will be done to remedy this situation:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/05/23/kay%E2%80%99s-man-child-revisited/#comment-92075
This is not a “male stagnation” (streuth). It’s an artificial pedestalizing of women, whose contributions to the economy are largely perfunctory and by no means justify their exorbitant salaries (hence why they flee to the public sector where no market pressures exist to bring them back down to Earth). I’ve witnessed this first hand (the entire managerial staff and every single teacher at a primary school my friend janitors for is female; they also happen to be handsomely remunerated and massively incompetent).
It is not possible to “lift” all men into well-paid service jobs to the same degree women stand. Someone has to do the actual work of transporting, loading, programming and cleaning at the end of the day. If women refuse to marry down, that’s really their problem: to further water down the education system, to shift more cash into the fire (from where?) will do nothing other than drive us head forward into a crisis of inflation. The problem is not that men need more “education”, it’s that women need markedly less.
Anonymous lady@11.49 am wrote:
The first thing you can do is to realise that heterosexual men really don’t care about your level of career achievement.
No man is “intimidated” by your career. It just doesn’t mean anything to them.
I should add that this problem with managerialism has worsened with the degradation of the liberal arts program. The cheap, bland and nigh-useless pablum being passed out like candy at “colleges” across the country has both eclipsed the hard sciences for which college was originally intended and divorced itself from its original purpose: as a class marker, usually taken by WASP elites who were expected to compete internationally as diplomats and literates.
What is it that college is even training for these days? If women are so triumphant on campus, where are all the women scientists and engineers? If they’re being educated in something else (and God only knows what), how are they making a return on that education? Are they writing history books, making a go at ancient linguistics?
Have you ever considered moving to China? It has an enormous surplus of high-earning, dutiful, hardcore beta males just dying to find a reliable wife.
A visualization of the US labor market over the past 150 years. Highly relevant to this discussion.
No offense, but it’s probably you. No one wants to be in a relationship with someone who views them as inferior. And you don’t do a very good job of hiding your disappointment.
Men aren’t typically intimidated by women, regardless of their income. This is a common rationalization, that you’ll notice comes almost exclusively from women trying to explain their lack of success with men, and to fluff themselves in the bargain.
This is one major strike against you. Lawyers have too much negatives. I would certainly hope you’re not argumentative and emotional either. A guy doesn’t need to be actually intimidated after coming home from a long day at work. Don’t do the intellectual junk. He will naturally talk about what interests him, but he won’t gravitate to your stimulus, which he will find boring.
Best advice. Don’t be afraid to suggest you will sacrifice your career if you have children (not that you might actually do it, which will depend upon circumstance). Are you flexible enough to consider it?
I think this is very compelling informaiton, and I don’t think it is entirely that surprising. However, is there anyway to see th breakdown by generation/age cohort? I am curious how much of the declining wages for men are caused by older men who went into manufacturing jobs and no longer have viable skills for today’s economy, vs younger men struggling to get employment…
Both.
Ah…the plight of king midas. Everything he did turned to gold, but alas there was no happiness.
The problem is not that women earn more – but rather so many of them spend their life in the rat race chasing “everything”, instead of introspecting and asking themselves what is it that they want, what is it that makes them happy. It would save them a lot of wasted effort, and lack of regret for choices they make.
I’ve chosen to live a life of voluntary simplicity, and follow my bliss. So many women I meet want to live a joyful contented lifestyle like mine, but somehow choose to compromise their happiness for materialistic pleasures that really don’t enrich their lives in any way. I’m all for working women, if that is truly their passion – but it seems like they have been systematically brainwashed to seek high paying jobs.
Our economy is still changing rapidly. It continues to move away from manufacturing and towards services. Just looking at the industries poised to explode in the next decade, nursing, assisted care and home health services are all in the top 10. Do those industries favor men? Other industries include software development. Go geeks!
It used to be that men would get a trade, work on a farm, or otherwise become a laborer. A small percentage would get professional credentials, such as doctor, lawyer, engineer. Today, GI Bill, student loans, and other financial aid means college is within the reach of most people…which brings down the premium previously paid for “college-educated labor”. Union jobs still pay pretty well and almost exclusively favor men. In fact, most of the traditionally male jobs left are largely union. But anti-union sentiments have eroded much of their bargaining power…and therefore lowered salaries. Perhaps the answer is a more pro-labor agenda? Or maybe it’s an overall cultural shift that we all have to face about gender roles, employment and worth?
I do know that the answer probably isn’t in pointing a finger at the feminists and whining about how they ruined the party.
An economy based on services is a bad idea btw
@Workshy Joe
It should. Having a good-earning partner is a safety net almost required by our chaotic economic times. NYTimes: More Men are Marrying Wealthier Women
@Yohami
What would you base it on?
products, then services
Anon 26-year-old lawyer & Workshy Joe:
Actually, many people ARE intimidated by lawyers, who is our society are viewed as threat/authority figures, kind of like cops would be if cops were free agents rather than state employees.
The U.S. can still go back to manufacturing if we stop exporting them through bad free trade policies. U.S. monetary policy and trade deficits are inflationary, but they will help manufacturing compete against the world. At least we should offer tax breaks and lower corporate tax rates to manufacturing companies. Reduce regulations and stop the global warming nonsense.
Hey Susan. It’s not irritating women want to marry higher income men. It’s annoying women don’t think they’re behaving this way. It’s also annoying that women don’t acknowledge the consequences or accept responsibility for changing this state of affairs.
Hi Aldonza. It doesn’t matter to me if my wife makes more. The issue is women won’t accept a partner that makes less. A woman only feels genuine attraction if the man “chose” her, but a low-income man can’t choose a high income woman.
That’s a pretty simplistic view of how to impact the trade deficit. That might’ve worked more effectively when the global economy was in it’s nascence, but economies are too intertwined now to just shut off the money pipeline.
@OhioStater
That’s not true. Just ask any PUA who is unemployed, sofa-surfs with friends, and still scores majorly. In fact, it’s one of the Game tenets that attraction has nothing to do with how much you make.
a man who makes less sans game = suppressed beta dormat who will either put the girl in a higher pedestal, or will be scared / turned off of even approaching her and will feel “lucky” and “saved” when the girl runs of clock time and needs to settle with someone
a man who makes less with game = a jerk who contributes nothing to society
the jerk will get the girl pregnant and the dormat will pay her bills eventually
nice one.
Yohami – just interested, are you an economist? Interested in how you came to your opinion.
Workshy Joe:
Go back and read my post. It was pretty clear what I meant by “men earn more”.
Men in the middle earn more than women in the middle. That’s what median means.
Actually, many people ARE intimidated by lawyers, who is our society are viewed as threat/authority figures, kind of like cops would be if cops were free agents rather than state employees.
It seems that there’s a fence between Heaven and Hell, which is cared for in alternate aeons by the two sides. It has fallen into disrepair.
St. Peter seeks out Lucifer. “Hey Lou, it’s your turn to fix the fence. The Boss says it looks awful. Get it done.”
“I don’t care how it looks,” says Lucifer. “I’m not doing anything.”
“You have to,” says St. Peter. “It’s your official obligation. We have a contract to that effect. You’re committed.”
“I don’t give a fig for any contract,” says Lucifer, “as you should know by now, I don’t care what it says — I’m not going to do anything.”
“You have to,” insists St. Peter. The law is the law. If you force us to, we’ll have to sue you.”
“Sue me?” cries Lucifer, breaking into that famous nasty laugh, “Where are YOU gonna get a lawyer? all of them are here in hell!”
@Clarence
GudEnuf is our resident male feminist. He’s a very good sport.
In case you are wondering, Rivelino got his cover identity busted http://bit.ly/jnubN9
A simplistic rebuttal. Nice. I’m not talking about shutting down trade. I’m talking about doing more manufacturing at home. Shutting down trade will bring about another depression, but that seems to be happening regardless. We should be manufacturing more goods that we use at home, which including using our natural resources like oil and coal, etc.
It seems to me your concerns are entirely…self-serving. You only care about the condition of men at all because you want to encourage them to effectively fulfill the roles you want from them.
I think you are missing the point. You cannot fight feminism with “be nice to men because is a nice thing to do” without concrete outcomes the hamsters are free to run in circles as the speed of light. That is how feminism won so much acceptance “if you reject your femininity you will have money and sex like men do” Had you even been to war with only arguments? Or you bring weapons to get a clear goal? Same principle.
One of my fellow commenters explained why nothing will be done to remedy this situation:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/05/23/kay%E2%80%99s-man-child-revisited/#comment-92075
I clicked on the link thinking it will be more BS. But he is totally right. I agree 100% but what Susan is doing is trying to show the glimpse of the future so things don’t need 40 years to get women to wake up to this reality. Sadly like a modern Cassandra maybe no one will hear her…I’m hoping some women do. Miracles do happen…sometimes. Of course the resident feminists are pretty much going la la la la so is a fat chance, but there is a phrase I love that says “Whatever you do in life will be insignificant, but it’s very important that you do it because nobody else will.”, YMMV.
Clarence:
If you just look at the introduction it compares median male earnings to median female earnings. What, did you not read it?
Yep, that’s how science works. If the conclusions you draw do not depend on the data you find, you’re doing it wrong.
You could all do what I plan on doing (if you are young that is). I am 19, a male, highly intelligent, ambitious, tall and good looking to boot.
My plan is to work my ass off in college, get some internships, have a decent amount of promiscuous sex with good looking, easy to fuck women (thank you American college hook-up scene, thank you) and then move to Germany to pursue a career in engineering for solar energy.
I get to fuck a high number of attractive women in the U.S. and then enjoy a loyal wife in Germany as I laugh while reading the papers about the U.S.’s stagnation in commerce and deterioration of the family.
I recently checked Roosh’s blog to see how he rated the German women and I have to say, I am relieved. http://www.rooshv.com/adjusting-a-girls-rating-based-on-her-nationality
“German. Add 0.5 points. Submissive girls who aim to please and value strong men. This is how American girls should have turned out.”
You know, I never imagined, planning on finding a way the hell out of the U.S. until I realized that my gender was being marginalized here. For one, hasn’t anyone noticed that engineering (a career area dominated by men) has barely any jobs while insurance (a career area filled with women) is booming?
Aldonza wrote:
In my single days, I slept with some women who made more money than me, but how many of them would want anything long-term with a man in a lower socio-economic bracket?
Men who aren’t looking for anything long-term wouldn’t care about that, but guys who would like a steady girlfriend will just find life much easier if they only approach women who aren’t viscerally repelled by their job title.
I once went out with a girl who had quite a high-powered government job and she just wanted to fix me in the career department. Next!
The bottom line is that due to hypergamy, women will still want men of higher status (not just good Game or good looks) for anything long term.
Here are some suggestions for any women who feel they might be affected by these bleak demographic changes.
1. If you just want to settle down with a man-of-greater-status and have his babies then please just own up to that.
2. The only men who actually care about your job title, education or net worth are guys like Clint Webb.
3. Doctoral dissertations don’t inspire boners.
GudEnuf:
“Science”? Oh my, I’m afraid you really don’t know much about how this figure is calculated. Perhaps you meant “Math” ?
That’s a clue. I’ll be back later for more. And I urge you to fully read and understand the Wikipedia article.
Ah, you hit the key here. It’s not a matter of income, but of class. As per Susan’s example of the lawyer + professor couple, women will have no problem marrying a man who pulls in less income than she does, as long as he is her intellectual and/or socioeconomic equal.
well, duh?
and that assuming he makes moolah, and that he is as driven / ambitious as she is or – preferably – more
which is just a paraphrasing of what the guys are saying about these charts
@Chad Daring
Our society has been coddling girls for a full generation. The whole “Reviving Ophelia” movement sought to redress perceived inequalities between girls and boys in school, so they threw all the ballast to the other side of the boat, and whooops a bunch of boys fell out. Girl Power is so robust the girls themselves can’t even handle it. We now have the “sex as empowerment” scheme, girl on girl bullying like never before, every girl born after 1985 believing that she is a “unique and special person destined for great things.”
I wouldn’t count on a miracle on a societal scale. Even Jesus fed only 5,000 at a time.
(Disclaimer: I am not Christian.)
“destined” as entitled to / deserving of? or “destiny” as the result of hard work and character?
@Hollenhund
Yes, you are too malicious. Please give that some more thought. And I’d appreciate your losing the shaming language: nominally, quasi, etc.
Here’s what you need to understand: I am in the persuasion business. I am selling a vision. What Would Jesus Do? is not an effective sales strategy. I hope that I regularly represent the principle that all human beings deserve respect, fairness and opportunities. However, none of those things come to us magically. Respect must be earned. Fairness is often lacking throughout society, and we are required to stand up and shout when we see injustice – even then we will differ in terms of what we believe is fair. Opportunities are a function of timing, luck, hard work and natural talent.
I am appealing to women with an argument that offers an incentive to overturn feminism – to vote against it, to deny funding to it, to say bad things about it at dinner parties. “Be good” will not catch the ear of my audience. They’ve most of them heard it every week from ministers, priests and rabbis.
Appealing to other concerns strikes me as more likely to provoke real thought.
1. Personal fulfillment – if you don’t care about what’s happening to men, there won’t be any for you to marry. This is analagous to – if you don’t care about the planet, it won’t be here for your descendants. If you don’t fund breast cancer research, you will regret it when you are the 1 in 7 who gets it. Etc.
2. Society’s welfare – This includes the economy, the institution of marriage, the family. All are at risk if our men do not thrive. I’ve implied that society might even collapse if we continue on this same path.
For the record, I also tell women that if they slut it up they won’t find men to marry. My goal is to promote understanding between the sexes, in hopes of bridging the gap between your precious male 80% and the corresponding female 80%. Yeah, yeah, I know. You’ve told me many times I’m pissing in the wind. I guess I’ll keep at it until the wind shifts and sends the piss right back into my face.
An American 26 yo female lawyer and a Chinese farmer with no education and no English. Now there’s a brilliant suggestion!
Well then, you must be pleased I didn’t do that.
No thanks. The teacher’s union is largely responsible for destroying standards in American education.
Indeed it is. We need to face the fact that the Women’s Movement produced gender equity a long time ago. It has fulfilled all of Betty Friedan’s dreams. Now it serves primarily to promote a female agenda without regard to balance or fairness in society. Because so few feminist activists reproduce, they do not have the perspective that comes from parenting a son, or in many cases even living with a man. I see no empathy for men among feminists.
As time passes, modern feminists and the Women’s Movement become more and more estranged. The infighting among feminist factions continues. The sexual promiscuity agenda is losing steam. Tried and true sluts are attempting to reinvent themselves. New ones take their place, marching through the streets of cities all over the U.S., but their numbers are small and they elicit little sympathy from the population.
@OhioStater
Women don’t know. Hell, even economists are just noticing, and they can’t explain it. This data was put together by one guy recently. One reason I wrote this post is to heighten awareness, among both women and men.
That’s only true for “getting beautiful women into bed.” It’s not true for long-term mating, which Game does not concern itself with in its original form.
I fully expect that we will see this trend continue and that feminists will continue to simply encourage “a shift in gender roles”: i.e., that men become the “new women” –> subordinate, less accomplished and educated, economically dependent, and evaluated on the basis of pleasing the woman, and nothing else. A great future for men, really, but I do think it’s what feminists want.
“destined” as something or someone should deliver them on a silver platter because she is just so naturally fabulous. Actually, kidding here. Society tells every young girl this. Parents can and do fight it. I have fought hard to make sure my daughter did not adopt this attitude, and we made her very invested in pleasing us by reflecting our values. I know other parents who have done the same thing. But not enough.
@Brendan
Yes, I’ve heard feminists suggesting that men eagerly sign up for the jobs that they are no longer willing to do. Refusing to acknowledge bio differences helps them deny the reality of what kinds of work men enjoy doing. One woman on NPR suggested that men are needed in preschools. But there’s not a long line of males trying to qualify in early education. And of course, there’s no acknowledgement of the dangerous jobs that women cannot do. Not too many women trying to get into oil rig drilling or mining.
@ Yohami:
I’m just making the distinction between a man who has a lower income but is still attractive on the hypergamy scale and a man who has a lower income due to his lower social standing. The previous assertion was that a man who has a lower income won’t be attractive, period, which is not the case.
“For one, hasn’t anyone noticed that engineering (a career area dominated by men) has barely any jobs while insurance (a career area filled with women) is booming?”
Interesting.
SayWhaat,
Maybe its crazy, but in men, self esteem, swagger, confidence and a lot of other attractive traits are linked to the men´s position on the men´s ladder. This means when a man is a loser, feels like a loser and tries even less.
Men have this “let the best man win”, which also means when you are the loser one, you dont claim a piece of the cake, you let the winners, the alpha dudes take it.
The exception are the badboys / jerks, the males that for whatever reason, dont feel like playing by a code and want the rewards without putting the effort nor “earning” the prizes. The badboys can display all the attractive traits with nothing to back that behavior = void attractiveness. You can complain about such men all you want and you´ll be right.
Game = an attempt to teach betas to act and feel beyond their real ladder value. Very anti-nature, if you ask men.
So, in a society that pushes men down, money wise or labor wise or whatever, all the good men will go down and behave in a way that matches their reality: losers, betadom, depression, not trying, etc. and they will think they are doing the right thing while they are at it.
So in such society, how do you expect to find low-income men (losers) that display attractive traits and behave like they belong to your class?
Chances are they will feel you are above of them, and the instinct is to let the women that are out of your reach, go. And when you deal with them, you wont feel any spark: you wont see them as men.
Then you might meet a bad boy and yada yada.
This stuff is simple. Men have to come back. The rules have to be fair for everyone, so good men can be men.
“This is exactly the attitude feminists are trying to fix.”
Ah the fixing. How does that go along with their “it’s about choices for women”?
“Actually, college admissions are admitting less-qualified male applicants over more-qualified female applicants”
Have you had a look at how qualification criteria has changed? Or the noise over the STEM issue?
“What are the consequences of young men discovering that even if they do less, they have more options? ”
They will have an inkling of how these women feel:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2008/mar/06/women.discriminationatwork
cmon even a feminist can’t argue that women are that damn good(look at scholarships):
http://www.academia.org/title-ix-conquers-science/
considering the fact that they preach(or used to?) the equality of sexes.
anyway the wages thing is kinda old news, vox has many good posts regarding it:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2007/11/workforce-and-wages.html
I though for years that the feminist premise: women are unhappy with traditional gender roles and the world will be a better place for both men and women without them.
Now 40 years later are feminists happy?
NO! I had seen war diaries written by men happier than most of the humorless, ranting feminists that have power over media and the law, have.
Are men happy?
No it looks like the men that supported the movement were thinking about the promise of getting laid easier without courtship, but they were more than okay with the rest of their “gender roles”, so now that getting laid is even harder and that this easy laid is reserved to a privileged men only plus all the obstacles on their education and perspective of raising higher on their social ranks thanks to feminism things are looking grim for them.
Is the western world a better place?
Nope the promise that women needs for better and stronger = hipergamy could be fulfilled by themselves acting like men was empty, women are more likely to be selfish and self serving and break their promise because they didn’t felt like honoring them anymore, again 40 years later the results show that like communism, feminism only brings equality and a better world on paper, hence time for a Feminist Perestroika.
I’m surprised by these results. After becoming aware of Warren Farrell’s work, I knew there wasn’t widespread discrimination against women with regard to pay. However, my own master’s degree got me no where (Sociology) as it is now a female dominated profession. I’ve only now become successful working in an engineering field.
Gotta be honest, thanks to Matt’s link, Brazil and Germany are now starting to look real good right now.
Steph,
Well everyone strives for happiness and satisfaction within their own context.
If you live in a starving country a mouldy potato is a wonderful gift.
.
if you live in a western country we take presents back to the store cos because they have the wrong brand badge on them.
.
Are feminists happier than 40 years ago? well of course! Surely nobody would argue women should lose the vote or not be able to stand for election.
.
But does that mean there are no issues left to protest or debate about? Hell no!!
There is plenty.
.
Frankly, after reading some post responses here and listening to a few media slip ups recently the feminist movement has plenty on its plate in the western world let alone in the 3rd world.
Jess,
Sure, there is plenty of stuff to complain and protest against and there will ever be. But what are the PROBLEMS that need solving first?
Feminism was / is about enabling women as a person? if so it succeeded. Bravo. Its time to really bring equality, it shouldnt be about gender but about people. Feminism keeps the gender wars open, but who are you fighting? what problem are you SOLVING? whos the enemy right now?
Someone correct me if this is out-of-date but last I checked female students were doing “better” only in relation to the males who had as a group lost proficiency. Girls/women were not performing better than earlier cohorts of their sisters. Consonant with this, look up the history of attempts to improve the performance of boys in ways that could not impair girls progress (like more yard time for boys). The feminist educational gulag masters have labelled these attempts “divisive”.
This is all, imho, an extreme form of hypergamy in action. By putting up ever harsher filters for the guys, fewer will get thru and become worthy, thus reducing the likelihood that any woman might end up having her womb invaded by the sperm of less worthy men.
The evidence keeps accumulating that gina tingles are more valued than the survival of civilized life.
Are feminists happier than 40 years ago? well of course! Surely nobody would argue women should lose the vote or not be able to stand for election.
No one is arguing that here, can you please read before typing. Also all this blogs of women that can vote and stand for election complaining about not having men to marry really don’t show the picture of the happy empowered women that needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.
Frankly, after reading some post responses here and listening to a few media slip ups recently the feminist movement has plenty on its plate in the western world let alone in the 3rd world.
By your won admission women on the third world are more than capable of being happy without feminism, so you want them to become the type of woman that will return a present if it has the wrong brand on it?
What will that accomplish if I might know?
I think my earliest male teacher was in 4th and 5th grade. Until then, it was 100% female. Which is a shame, since they were excellent teachers. Today, I don’t think you’ll find a single male in an elementary school around here, let alone a preschool. Preschools are outright hostile to fathers, I couldn’t imagine actually trying to *work* there.
No sane guy would go into early childhood education these days unless he likes being sued.
Steph,
You are asking me why we should support the promotion of female rights in the 3rd world? Are you joking? Ask the average 3rd world woman and ask if she would like a 1st world standard of living, a vote, protection from spousal abuse and the right to own land, stand for election and an education.
.
If she says no, you win, if she says yes please, I hope you would accept that you may be mistaken.
.
My point was people can put up with awful injustices and penury if that what they have always been used to. For us to sit here in our air conditioned homes and human rights protections to say “ah, bless their primitive ways- how I envy their simple life” is revolting.
.
You wouldnt want their life any more than I would. Somebody had to fight for your right to vote Steph- that person would have been a feminist. I think women of all nations should have the right to vote, free association, all the usual human rights stuff. Privileged peoples like you and i can apply pressure to achieve this.
.
And why not- after all somebody did it for you and I?
Well, feminist groups did take a good chuck from Obama’s stimulus plan that was originally aimed at the troubled construction and manufacturing industries (a mostly male dominated field) and diverted it to unaffected female dominated professions under no better reason than “go feminism!”.
Yohami,
Its not so much about enemies Yohmai- its about issues and fairness.
There is some obvious stuff like islamic stoning of women and basic human rights violations of women abroad- but i suspect you are talking about home issues.
.
And there are plenty- but rather than me blather on here- why not read through some mainstream feminist blogs. Not the trendy ones that do gossip and sex but the 100′s of others out there. I am not gonna provide links- you can google away just as well as me.
.
A couple of issues that spring to mind in the uk are:
.
1. Education- many women find peer pressure puts them off maths, physics and engineering. The figures for these a levels in mixed schools are many times lower than all girls schools leading to some suggesting all schools should be single sex. This is of interest to feminists and is own the whole a good natured debate.
2. SexAssualt- London has had a big rise in serious rape attacks and feminsts beleive the sexualistion of the media and mysogistic attitudes is partially repsonsible. You can imagine how happy we are to learn Playboy is opening again London.
.
So yeah, there are issues still ‘live’ even on our own doorstep.
“If she says no, you win, if she says yes please, I hope you would accept that you may be mistaken.”
but there’s no free lunch.
http://www.aei.org/article/103674
“You are asking me why we should support the promotion of female rights in the 3rd world? Are you joking? Ask the average 3rd world woman and ask if she would like a 1st world standard of living, a vote, protection from spousal abuse and the right to own land, stand for election and an education.”
Women’s rights didn’t get you all those things. White women’s burden sheesh! realize that your men gave that to you. Yes, even the vote, and about a decade or two later than when they got it. You have no reason to play elder sister to 3rd world women than to satisfy your own vanity, and the stupidity and mendacity that you have been fed for all your life.
“There is some obvious stuff like islamic stoning of women”
and men. You are hopeless.
You are asking me why we should support the promotion of female rights in the 3rd world? Are you joking? Ask the average 3rd world woman and ask if she would like a 1st world standard of living, a vote, protection from spousal abuse and the right to own land, stand for election and an education.
Jess are you high? I was born and raised on the third world, I’m not privileged whatsoever and no there is not need to fight for those because men are not trying to take those rights away. The standard of living is bad for both males and females of the working class in our countries and good for the males and females of the upper class, like it has been through history. The problem we have with cheating is unrelated to education or income, a man will cheat because society supports his right to be happy sticking his dick in any willing woman and women can sent abusive men to jail.
You seen to be under the false impression that feminism is the only way women can have constitutional freedoms, and men will want to take those freedoms back for the lolz, did you know that many countries gave the right to vote to women before the USA?
Also read this list of many women owning property and earning income before any feminist movement. http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/05/25/its-time-to-acknowledge-notable-women-in-american-history/
Also Jess modern feminism only fight for the right to slut it up, abort and divorce at will with no social consequences, but this not laws.
What right is there left for a woman to be constitutionally achievable? Really tell me what law exactly forbid a woman to do anything?
For one, hasn’t anyone noticed that engineering (a career area dominated by men) has barely any jobs while insurance (a career area filled with women) is booming?
Mmm any links to any article talking about this? This is just personal curiosity not related to this topic.
@Susan
“The “Great Male Stagnation” is an enormous threat to our way of life. Relationships and marriage will suffer if we do not remedy it. No society can thrive if its men fail. Obviously.”
Susan, i could propose to you when you’re like this! do you see this folks? civilization comes first, second and third. your petty nonsense lives come 20th. this is why the current way needs to be reconsidered. not “oppression” but civilization. most of you have grown up in comfort and won’t see what’s it like to have it collapse until it happens.
Today’s Maureen Dowd column about famous men cheating is semi-relevant. She seems most angry about and bewildered by men who are “marrying up and dating down”–with “up” and “down” determined by career status in most cases. I’d be interested to hear people here tear apart her theories about why they do it
@ Workshy Joe: I’m not entirely convinced that men don’t care even a little bit about a woman’s career status when thinking about a LTR. What I’ve heard from guys in real life (I’m a college student at a “prestigious” school, so skewed sample) is that you want to go for someone similarly educated who will fit in with your friends and colleagues, etc. My theory is that the mistake women make is thinking of it as something that causes pure attraction (like looks, so more = better) rather than as a compatibility issue (like a shared desire to travel or something). What do you think?
Here is more information on gender and income:
Sociological Images in general has a variety of interesting discussions.
Poor men, how do we get by here in the United States, the richest country in the history of the world, a place where even the poor are relatively well off.
http://www.globalrichlist.com/
The two major things people have truly legitimate complaints about is a lack of a universal health-care system and (in many districts) a failing education system. Otherwise, boohoo, you “only” make 30 thousand dollars a year.
Women who want more — more, more, more — are stuck-up narcissists who will never have enough. The pill inexorably changed the dynamics of mating. This talk about how society has gained up against men sounds like a lot of whining.
A large service sector is a symptom of an advanced economy; a post-industrial economy. Yes, it generally means the rich get richer, but shipping manufacturing jobs overseas also means the world’s poorest get richer. Utilitarianism for the win.
Guess I need to put things into perspective: whirlwind romances in rich countries versus more people having enough to eat. If global capitalism is inevitable, we might as well cheer its better qualities.
feminist movement has plenty on its plate in the western world let alone in the 3rd world.
.
For some odd reason, the so-called “movement” in interpreted as a bunch of sign carrying screeching self entitled spoiled brat sluts on whine walks, in the western world and especially in the 3rd world. Nice going. A group of you should go take one of those walks in a 3rd world country. Go ahead. Dare ya
To nanka,
.
Putting aside your hopeless insults and possible trolldom, the sources I have seen suggest that whilst stoning of both sexes exist there are no prizes for guessing which gender gets it the most, and by a large margin.
.
Amnesty international have some figures if you are interested.
Jess,
During the stonings, do women also throw stones? or just men? – honest question, I have no clue. But I get the feeling the women in such cultures are participant / collaborative / moms raise their girls to be like that and not rebel (fucked up if you ask me)
Anyway, Im in the third world myself. I wonder whats this about women not owning properties not voting not working? wtf really?
Re: Land “ownership”. Land must be physically defended to “own” it. Land cannot be hidden or carried around in a purse.
Giving the chore of land protection solely to the daughter in the olde days = family loses land. End of story.
In the anglosphere, all women got the vote within just a few years after all men got it. For the past in general, voting rights derived from land ownership which derived from land defense.
Abbot,
I don’t think a female protest march on any issue in the 3rd world would do a huge amount of good unless there was a media response elsewhere. In any case in many countries they would be beaten half to death.
.
As to the slut walk in the USA- not my cup of tea and in my view not likely to do anything for their cause. I am completely with SW on this one.
Are you sure its not that they suck at it? or that they are not interested? there are very, very few women in many areas that are dominated by men, and when theres a woman everyone treats her like a little princess and has it way easier than the regular male – my experience.
Playboy has no effect on rape, sorry. How much of the increase of the serious rape attacks are due to lowering the standars to whats considered rape? or are you saying there are more criminals = guys that jump on inocent women and rape them because they “hate women” or something?
Im always curious about this notion that the sexualized woman promotes “rape”
How about the sexualized man? he´s on the advertising as well.
“Our society has been coddling girls for a full generation. The whole “Reviving Ophelia” movement sought to redress perceived inequalities between girls and boys in school, so they threw all the ballast to the other side of the boat, and whooops a bunch of boys fell out. Girl Power is so robust the girls themselves can’t even handle it. We now have the “sex as empowerment” scheme, girl on girl bullying like never before, every girl born after 1985 believing that she is a “unique and special person destined for great things.””
.
There’s occasional hand-wringing on this very blog about the dearth of female comments (if not female readers). The debate in fact sounds exactly like the “Reviving Ophelia” argument – that despite equal numbers, rambunctious boys in class shout down girls waiting and raising their hands. Thus the boys make themselves overrepresented in the discussion and must be silenced.
.
Camille Paglia (no doubt a shouter) mocked this outlook as ridiculously petty and prim. I noticed this myself in school – as you can imagine from my online writing, I was never one to leave my opinion on the table, and smart girls in school would get resentful of me for driving my points home in class. I didn’t have any sympathy – the world does not have to reorient itself to any particular communication style to keep feelings from being hurt, and it didn’t have to orient itself towards me either, the teachers would have been totally justified toning down the theater-in-the-round discussion style that favored my academic personality. It had limited impact in any case – that I was a dominant voice in classroom discussion helped me in the future in some ways, and hurt me in others.
Jess,
I guess you´re saying islamic countries? or which countries are you talking about were women are less than persons?
Rum,
In a country where laws are policed land stealing should be something from 100s of years ago. According to you if a 60 yo man cannot defend his land against a 14 yo intruder he should meekly give up his home.
.
In some countries you can only leave land to men and in others women are not allowed to purchase land.
.
So the history isn’t the issue- it’s the current laws that are in some countries.
.
As regards voting, do you think globally women should be able to vote or not?
.
Oh I wonder if Pankhurst would agree with you that the female vote was a given.
“Have we had enough feminism yet?”
To take the question seriously, the response might depend on what each person considers to be feminism. Also, the amount of privilege a person has could affect his/her view of feminism. Perhaps there’s a correlation between someone’s status in society and the impact the forms of feminism would have on him/her if the goals are achieved.
Okay Jess here is an article that shows that most of the “poor third country women that you worry so much” have the right to vote: http://www.wisegeek.com/in-which-countries-are-women-not-allowed-to-vote.htm
Here is about owning property:
http://islam-faq.blogspot.com/2009/06/hy-is-womans-share-of-inherited-wealth.html
I will also advice to talk and join some real Muslim women that I’m sure are around UK, so you stop seeing them as victims that need to be rescued by “white empowered feminists” and you can see that many of them are educated and happy and that agree with many of the precepts their religion preaches.
@Susan
Thank you so much for paying attention to my comments.
There is allot of corruption in government, but the influence is coming from the the richest 1% (in the private sector).
It really feels like nobody cares about even listening to people who are telling us what is wrong, with our government and country (they don’t want to understand about how this will affect them, why should I care, if others don’t care).
If men protest, it like your un-american and a potential terrorist (CIA is profiling people who protest).
I really hope feminists and women care about eliminating corruption and putting our country back in the right direction (this isn’t about small or big government this is about good government).
Because I cannot afford to care, I need to worry about my economic future (I want to get laid, lol).
I have a degree and I’m preparing for a totally different type of work, that pays well and is completely recession proof, its like starting all over, just for financial security (in fact recessions are good, for business). I already understand where we are headed and I’m preparing for a prosperous future.
One of the things that I do that is good way to lose friends is joke about benefiting from others misfortune, its dark comedy, because its funny and its ruthless (but not unethical). But allot are making a good living off of other peoples misfortune and they don’t even know it. Where’s my compassion? Where’s yours?
Bottom line: People pay me to fix their troubles. More troubles = more money. Who’s going to pay me to fix my troubles? Is love free? Is sex free? Is healthcare affordable? Is rent free? How about the plumber?
If others are individualists, then I have to follow their lead, if I want to survive (and most of all get laid, lol).
Women and feminists are going to have to fix our country. You don’t need muscle and guns, you need brains. Remember what they said about the holocaust and Anna Frank, good people said nothing.
Want to know more(Reliable Sources):
Money Talks: Profits Before Patient Safety (PBS)
The Corporation (2003)
Dark Comedy Documentaries (Reliable sources):
Capitalism: A love story (2009) [Funny as hell, I like Condo Vultures]
Sicko (2007)
Bowling for Columbine (2002)
fahrenheit 911 (2004) [Less relevant today]
[The citibank plutocracy pdf]
More extreme (unreliable sources sometimes)
Alex Jones on youtube – http://www.prisonplanet.com/
One last black comedy:
More free sex as incarcerations rates skyrocket. Thanks Bill Clinton. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
This is the last time I’ll say anything because I can’t afford to care, anymore. My opinions are not up for discussion. If you care then do something, about it. I’m on mute from now on.
i think i’ve said this before on another post but in the UK both men & women as groups were granted the vote in 1918, (women over 30 at first, then in 1928 over 18, for what should be obvious reasons). Before that, as Rum pointed it out, the right to vote was had by a tiny percentage of the population & was much more to do with wealth & class than sex. 90% of the men who died in world war one didn’t have the vote.
@tito
Ha, as opposed to when I am shit testing! I’m afraid you’ll have to take the bad with the good.
Yohami,
Of the sources I read stoning was only done by men. But if it turns out that it was a mixed gender participant murder what difference would that make? Its still wrong isn’t it?
.
As to which countries suppress local protests it’s not limited to Islamic countries at all. Please google away- you can get that info yourself.
.
Education- you only read half my post. In single sex schools girls DO select physics and engineering. In mixed schools they don’t (possibly/probably) due to male peer pressure. I forgot to mention that in all male schools a similar, though not as prounced, effect is found for the humanities and arts.
You wouldnt want their life any more than I would.
.
Nonsense. More and more, Western men are embracing “their life” as the focus is on large safe extended families. The word “feminism” is never even uttered and a man can choose among thousands, all with just about the same attitude, demeanor and expectations. The warm tropical weather serves to round out this stellar feminist-free paradise.
.
feminsts beleive the sexualistion of the media and mysogistic attitudes is partially repsonsible.
.
Oh no, it could not be that women in London have lost all control over men by providing them, their self proclaimed oppressors. with abundant casual sexual satisfaction. Feminists, by virtue of their demeanor, will never get what they want from men. Men will NOT respond positively to feminists or to sluts. Men take their commitment marching orders from disciplined patient sober pussy. Only.
.
realize that your men gave that to you.
.
and if feminists play nice, men might give them some more. And no, tantrum walks are not nice.
Yohami,
Sex attack- I meant the ones where taxi drivers had raped young girls, the ones where girls where ambushed on the streets etc. There is a campaign about safety on home journey after nights out where girls are very vulnerable. The stats on this particular type of rape are terrible.
.
There are some academics that do link playboy and/or porn to rape. I know there are some academics that say it does otherwise or does nothing at all. I’m not sure myself about the issue, but it’s certainly stimulated some debate here.
.
Susan, would you happy if your local macdonalds turned into a playboy bar? Happy if your daughter worked in one?
.
I’m not having a go at sex workers or playboy bunnies- just stimulating debate.
Clearly the equalization of men and women in the workplace demographics is going
1. If men are not going to have an economic bulwark that gives them a hypergamous advantage, they are going to have to learn game so they can be tactically dominant. I’m not talking PUA, I’m talking the Athol/Yohami “be a man and be good at it” type of game. This is not really “learning” as much as re-learning the male gender roles that were the unquestioned norm until the 60′s.
.
2. Women can’t be de-programmed from hypergamy, but they can be deprogrammed from be spoiled and demanding everything on their checklist, and they can also ease off on the intense demand for a guy with “conventional” social status (this means toning down the intrasexual competition and “look at me!!”).
.
I believe these to be personal choices as much as immutable traits, but curing them involves something akin to spinster shaming…from a young age girls would have to hear “don’t act like that, guys don’t want to marry that kind of attitude.” I doubt most young women today are comfortable raising their daughters that way, the ironic thing being that the very reason they will HAVE daughters is if they learn to do this themselves so they can get husbands.
On the justification on why feminism still needs to exist #1
.
Abbott- “Men take their commitment marching orders from disciplined patient sober pussy. Only.” (isn’t he a peach?)
.
“realize that your men gave that (votes) to you and if feminists play nice, men might give them some more.”. (why thank you kind sir, thanks ever so)
.
I have said it before, ladies please make an orderly queue, this ones a keeper. No pushing at the back there!
.
Can you see why I thought he might be jezabel plant? He makes such a strong case for feminism. Susan, have you checked his ISP thingy?
Jess,
It would still be wrong, but it wouldnt be “violence against women” if the women are doing it. Again, this is just me wondering how involved are these women in their own defense and if they want things to be like that or not.
No, this wasnt about countries supressing “protests” but countries stoning women, specifically, if they raised their voice. In a country that supresses all protests, includen men protests, we would have to work to free the population, not just “free the women”
So, which countries silence women specifically when they protest? you mentioned third world. Where is this happening?
You first said male pressure was the cause and now its a maybe? which one? Seriously, I studied engineering for a while and been running companies for years. I dont see this happening but Im interested on doing something about it IF this is happening. So is it happening, or not?
Thats REALLY fucked up and criminal. Whats the relationship between these attacks and PlayBoy?
So you dont have your own ideas about it? these academics are not here to refute when I say rape has nothing to do with PlayBoy. Too bad.
How about if macdonalds turned into a gay bar? a male stripper bar? a lesbian bar? a tattoo house? a cannabis cafe? a Starbucks? damn! the horror!
Jess
A frail 60 year old man would normally have had allies in the form of other warriors/clans he had fought beside while in his prime.
A hopelessly non-warrior woman? Not so much.
Go ahead and tell us that families of old should have allowed (or forced) their fertile young women into getting slaughtered in fighting for which they were very ill suited. Families that did would go extinct in a heart beat, to be replaced on the land by families that were not insane.
This is about abortion, but its really about the beginning of a trend where men call women out on whatever behavior is deemed unacceptable. Yeah, arrest him and a martyr he will be. Go Greg!
.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/abortion-billboard-lands-mexico-man-court-girlfriend/story?id=13783668
“Females are also more predominant in services and males in manufacturing: plumbers, car mechanics, carpenters, construction workers, electricians, and firefighters, for example are still 95%+ male.”
Huh? Plumbers, mechanics, electricians, etc ARE in services, except for the small number of them that work for manufacturing businesses. Both parts of his sentence are true, but the second one is hardly an example of the point he is making in the first one.
@ Nell,
.
Today’s Maureen Dowd column about famous men cheating is semi-relevant. She seems most angry about and bewildered by men who are “marrying up and dating down”–with “up” and “down” determined by career status in most cases. I’d be interested to hear people here tear apart her theories about why they do it
.
Read this:
.
http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2011/06/03/ladder-theory-for-men/
.
I’m not entirely convinced that men don’t care even a little bit about a woman’s career status when thinking about a LTR. What I’ve heard from guys in real life (I’m a college student at a “prestigious” school, so skewed sample) is that you want to go for someone similarly educated who will fit in with your friends and colleagues, etc. My theory is that the mistake women make is thinking of it as something that causes pure attraction (like looks, so more = better) rather than as a compatibility issue (like a shared desire to travel or something). What do you think?
.
Yes, exactly. Career status and socioeconomic status are a compatibility issue, NOT an attraction trigger. In other words, if attraction is there it may make the difference between Ladder 1 and Ladder 2 per Badger’s post. When men say they “don’t care about status” what they are really saying is it doesn’t affect attraction.
M Dowd has spent the last 30 years wailing about how guys make choices that mystify her. That must be because she is so smart. She won a Pulitzer so that means she is so very wise and insightful that if she cannot understand anything about guys then no one can, not even guys. It must be wonderful to be so smart!!!
Regarding “feminism” and if we have had enough, to tell you the truth, I really have no idea what feminism is currently. It seems to encompass a variety of people who actually don’t have much in common philosophically.
.
Most “isms”…communism, libertarianism, fascism have some core philosophy. With feminism, Jenna Jameson can be a feminist and so can Andrea Dworkin. How does that make any sense?
.
I think the primary objectives…right to vote, equal access to career and education, were accomplished long ago, and now it has become a beast in search of “issues” to feed itself and justify its existance which is why a common sense comment sparks marches. In some sense, some of the extreme parts almost seem like a caricature. Honestly, I think Susan B. Anthony would probably roll over in her grave with some of today’s feminists.
Badger,
Consider the implications of this statement:
and this statement:
Why are girls waiting for their turn to speak? Because we have been taught to do so. We have been taught to passively wait our turn to speak before others because this is proper. This is the feminine communication style. This is feminine behavior.
Men and women have different communication styles – fact. So by saying that the world does not have to reorient itself towards certain communication styles (a point which I kind of agree with, by the way – I’ve never had a problem speaking up or being the dominant voice in an academic discussion), you are saying that girls in school should learn to be more rambunctious and assertive when trying to speak. However, this would be going against what is decidedly appealing to men, because by being loud and rambunctious, these girls would be behaving decidedly unfeminine. And according to you (and many of the men here), no guy wants to marry that attitude.
So what do we do? I want to say that women should be assertive in their career lives and more…*ahem*…feminine for their husbands, but the problem is that these behaviors are established in school, where academic and social goals intersect. Girls want to be assertive and make their opinons heard, but they also want a boyfriend. What you seem to be saying is that girls shouldn’t be afraid to be dominant voices in the classroom, but at the same time, men don’t find that attitude appealing, so these girls are basically screwed for any shot of a relationship anyway. Do you see the catch-22?
This is what women have to grow up with. We have the ambition and drive for a successful career, but we also want families. Unlike men, we have to make a choice between the two. This is what feminism originally aimed to resolve. And personally, while I think it has been successful in certain fields, it most certainly hasn’t in others. If you want equalization in the workplace, the solution isn’t to scale back the advancement of women in favor of men, it’s to offer the same incentives that women get to step off the Mommy track in the workplace to ALL parents: mandatory paid parental leave for both Mom and Dad, and no penalization for either parent in promotions.
Sweden is already doing this.
Er, what feminism aims* to resolve today. (The relevant branches, in any case.)
Hey men,
feminists are not your problem, they want a world that is fair, for more people. Bad women are your problem. Remember this United we stand, Divided we fall. You need to put some of your differences aside with feminists and focus on solving the root causes of the problems we face as a people. Like healthcare, economy, wars, and especially corruption it is everywhere, etc.
We are broke, because of a plutocracy (government works for rich), not women’s success.
SayWhaat,
Being assertive is different than having an “attitude”. The attitude men complain about is usually about being spoiled ilogical and demanding, its not about speaking your mind, its about imposing and “being a bitch”.
Men also complain that women dont communicate and act like everyone should read their minds. Ask men around, you´ll find men actually like when women are clear and speak their minds about issues.
Do you see any man here complaining that women talk? anyone saying a woman who talks her mind is unattractive? the opposite, really.
Ah, but the “attitude” is something different. Entitlement is a bitch.
When you say this:
Do you mean men and women have different biological communication intelligences? or you mean that both genders have different culturally imposed communications? I find both to be true, but wondering about what you mean.
Thing is, this is not realistic. The corporations, the ones employing people, are not an endless pool of money. People do have to choose what they want with their lives, no one can “have it all” because time and resources are limited and everyone has to carry with the repercussions of their choices. You cant spend your life raising children AND compete with someone who´s using that same time to play the clarinete. When the live gig comes, the clarinete player will kick your ass.
By forcing corporations to pay for these decisions they lose money. Where is that money going to come? nobody pays me when my employees dont work.
In other words my company is not a freaking kindergarten. I offer jobs for people who want a career and want to make money and get really good at it. If everyone (men and women) just get pregnant and decide get off and I still have to pay them, I go broke.
In any case in many countries they would be beaten half to death.
,
Nonsense. A slut…walk event in many countries would only cause feminists to be despised for upsetting the tranquil and normal human way of life, rather than just mocked as in the West
Collegeboy
If that was the aim, we could all jump in the bandwagon.
Feminism wants a world that is fair to women and keeps portraiting men as the enemy. And it happens to have enough power and influence to be a problem. The anti-mysoginy implementation turned into misandry, and they “dont realize it”.
Too busy finding new stuff to complain about to take care of the new messes and injustices they are creating.
Google and Pixar are just two examples of companies that are making this work by fusing the workplace into a 24/7 living center. (Google also offers a child care center and back-up child care just 5 minutes from their headquarters.) I don’t think anyone is saying that these companies are on the brink of bankruptcy for their offered parental benefits.
mandatory paid parental leave
.
The ultimate feminists fantasy – get inside the male-female dynamic on the home front via the social engineering of the workplace. How about this – women leave the workforce, raise men’s wages as there will less labor supply and that additional income can support a stay at home wife and mother. That is, stop subsidizing a womans desire to be a mother and have a career and making entire families suffer all in the name of the dismantling-the-patriarchy fantasy.
Both. Men are more taciturn than women when it comes to certain things like purely social interaction, but they’re taught to compete when there is a goal in mind (debating a point in class, for instance).
By the way, this is a great lecture from Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg on why more men than women reach the top of their professions (and what women can do to aim just as high).
Gahh, vid didn’t embed.
Link here! http://www.ted.com/talks/sheryl_sandberg_why_we_have_too_few_women_leaders.html
Lol. I can’t wait for you to marry a stay-at-home Tiger Mother. She will castrate you.
think more positive guys. Free health care = more Free sex.
SayWhaat,
Facepalm. And Diddy has his own jet and Madonna bought an entire isle. How does this relate to a social implementation where people gets fair deals and the economy can thrive?
Fortune 500 companies have more money than I do. Are you saying every company should follow Google/Pixar? if I wanted to, where do I get the money to do so?
Women are very afraid of STD’s (more than unintended pregnancies). White women with better access to health care, are more open to intercourse. That’s where I’m getting my statement.
Free health care = more Free sex.
But the plutocracy, isn’t so bad when it comes to “just” sex. Its everything else that will be missing.
@YOHAMI
I know. Feminists are idealists not realists.
Allot of attractive women are ruthless and brutal. I actually had some no bull shit conversations with a couple of women (told me about other women) and one very attractive woman. I know what they do and how they think about who they chose for sex and what they do to their boyfriends/husbands, that’s why I want love, and will avoid those type of women. (you think I want love, instead of sexual variety, nooo way, I want both, but I must settle for love, if I can find it)
Having children is masochistic whether it be men or women. Especially under corruption.
collegeboy,
Yeah. In my experience the hotter the woman the more rotten she is inside. Thats SO sad. Women usually use and manipulate men. The hotter the woman, the more normal she thinks that is, the more she gets away with it. The more the endless carousel of men orbiting around her asking to be used. Sad stuff.
Good luck finding love (nothing sarcastic about it). You dont have to settle for love OR sexual variety though, there are plenty of variants for that game.
I think having children is a delight – when you want them. And usually women want them more, so I guess its not “masochist” for them but a biological assertion.
@YOHAMI
That’s what just killed my motivation, just after graduating from college with honors, published author,etc. (I’m seeking a meaning and a strategy in life)
It is very hard to find a very sexually attractive woman, that won’t cause you harm.
So I know that I will just have to settle, for something else (intelligence maybe). Its an unobtainable goal for me, at least.
@collegeboy: Its an unobtainable goal for me, at least.
I meant too risky, not unobtainable. I don’t want to be a masochists, Its like slowing and painfully being killed. I just not up for that kind of risk (I have seen some pretty humiliating stuff that government does to fathers). Basically, I want very little risk, of that kind of situation. So yes government, influenced by feminism is causing harm, because they lack fairness.
This is based on the assumption that the good-earning woman will divert some of her income to her partner just because he’s her partner. There are zero guarantees for this. This is anything but a safety net.
In other words, women find it rather difficult to muster up any sympathy for men.
Heh, I used those words for a reason. You decided to oppose feminism because you concluded that roughly 10% of its consequences are harmful to (mainly) women. I’m sure you have no problem with 90% of feminism’s accomplishments. Hence calling you an anti-feminist would be partially inaccurate. You also espouse some conservative views (the Sexual Revolution should never have happened, sluttishness is bad for everyone etc.) even though you never call yourself a conservative, do you?
No, they never have. And I never said you should adopt their religious arguments. My question was this: why don’t you and other women like you ever put forth the following argument?
“The currently declining condition of American men is largely the result of deliberate feminist policies. Men are being systematically marginalized and unjustly victimized by the feminist establishment through anti-male economic policies and laws. We find this unacceptable because American men are our fellow citizens who don’t deserve such discrimination and injustice.”
I never hear a single woman say this. I certainly never hear priests or rabbis ever say anything like this. The anti-feminist female argument I hear instead is “let’s treat men better so that they will give us what we want from them”. It seems men don’t even exist as fully equal human beings in many female minds, only as accessories in life (dutiful providers, protectors, lovers, sex partners). As if men only have any value in society as long as they do stuff for – and give stuff to – women.
The funny thing is that many men simply don’t think in such selfish ways. Many men have supported feminists throughout history because they genuinely cared about women’s lot and believed that giving them equal rights will be a good idea in itself. Not all feminist men thought “yeah great, we will turn all women into empowered sluts so that we can pump and dump them without all that courting and other shit”.
The US economy is in a huge hole, and that is a serious problem. (I left the US for Australia, and am probably not coming back. One of the things that really alarmed me about my last visit home was the sheer number of people sleeping in subway stations.) However, I really don’t see why it’s helpful to frame it as though men and women are two separate teams, and men lose whenever women win. (And to head off objections, I don’t really care if some feminist framed it that way first. Even if they did, why compound their errors?)
I don’t, actually. But I want to live in a society where everybody is making enough money to have a decent quality of life. I don’t want to be poor, and I also don’t want to be rich in a country full of poor people who resent me.
I believe that feminism supports things that are good for everybody in the end. For example, making sure everybody has access to reproductive health care is a piece of basic social infrastructure. Ditto maternity and paternity leave. I am deeply horrified to see the US destroying its basic social infrastructure.
I have heard stories about strange creatures called “feminists”–beautiful rich white women who eat yogurt, do yoga, use their sex appeal to extort money and drinks from men, believe themselves to be precious princesses, and drink the blood of puppies as a refreshing aperitif–but I have never actually seen any of these so-called “feminists” except maybe on TV commercials, so I am not really convinced they exist.
It’s helpful for the simple reason that Western laws and norms treat men and women as two separate teams with wholly different entitlements, economic interests, rights, obligations and goals. Women are propped up economically, men aren’t. Women have all the reproductive and parental rights, men none. Rape is persecuted, cuckoldry (its female equivalent) goes unpunished and is in fact encouraged. The Pill exists, the male birth control pill doesn’t. The male desire for sexual variety is regulated, female hypergamy isn’t. The list goes on.
All in all, neither men nor women have any objective reason to consider both genders to be one team with united goals and interests. The simple reason is that due to feminist influence, Western societies decided that male-female relations should be based on power and competition instead of reciprocity and cooperation, as in the old days. We can complain about it if we want, but it’s a reality which isn’t going away soon.
Seriously, what the fuck?! The male equivalent of raping a woman is… raping a man. The female equivalent of cheating on a man is… cheating on a woman. Both genders can be raped, and both genders can be cheated on. And while having a cheating partner does suck, it is really not comparable to being physically assaulted.
Damn. I was having nice thoughts about Dylan Moran and his sexy voice, and then I stupidly clicked back over to this thread.
@Höllenhund
People are inherently selfish. If you want to persuade others you should show them how your way will benefit them more then your oppenants way. That is simply called being practical.
@Rae
Actually, from a evolutionary biological/psychological perspective, cuckoldry of men is the equivalent of the rape of a women. Both entail the procurement of the other’s reproductive resources against their wishes and to their detriment.
see Trivers, R. L. (1972) Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.) Sexual selection and the descent of man, 1871-1971 (pp 136–179). Chicago, Aldine.
see Buss, D. M., R. J. Larsen, D. Westen and J. Semmelroth (1992). Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psychology. Psychological Science 3:251–255.
or indeed anything in the evolutionary biology field related to paternal investment theory or anything in the evolutionary psychological field related to jealousy. Significant sex differences are observed as would be expected from evolutionary theory.
Furthermore, if your a women, your inability to understand the severity of the emotional reaction to cuckoldry by men, and hence perhaps it’s equivalence in men’s minds, could most likely be the result of a feminised brain structure.
see http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886911001413
Sex differences are real, and equality does not necessarily equal equity.
Real justice would entail taking into consideration what we now know about human behavioral biology and the implications that this would have for society and individuals.
1 2 3 4 »
{ 2 trackbacks }