This is the first of a two-part article on the political and economic forces surrounding marriage trends. Part Two may be found here.
Kate Bolick has ridden her Atlantic November cover article All the Single Ladies all the way to fame and fortune. It’s the most read article in the magazine’s history, was optioned as a TV show in development by Sony, and recently generated a book deal in the high six figures for Bolick. The book is titled Among the Suitors: Single Women I Have Loved. The announcement says “It develops a sly blend of autobiography and literary portraiture to question the conventional marriage trajectory.“
I congratulate Kate on her incredible success. She has clearly struck a nerve, and emancipated single women of a certain age are rushing to join the conversation and celebrate their single status. This is a marked reversal of the spinster lit trend of the last few years, where unhappily single women in their late 30s published memoirs attempting to come to terms with where they went wrong, and reaffirming their vow to continue their search for a life partner.
Ironically, the feminist media that champions Kate’s choice glossed over Kate’s opening in the Atlantic piece:
The decision to end a stable relationship for abstract rather than concrete reasons (“something was missing”), I see now, is in keeping with a post-Boomer ideology that values emotional fulfillment above all else. And the elevation of independence over coupling (“I wasn’t ready to settle down”) is a second-wave feminist idea I’d acquired from my mother, who had embraced it, in part, I suspect, to correct for her own choices.
…I was her first and only recruit, marching off to third grade in tiny green or blue T-shirts declaring: A WOMAN WITHOUT A MAN IS LIKE A FISH WITHOUT A BICYCLE, or: A WOMAN’S PLACE IS IN THE HOUSE—AND THE SENATE.
…What my mother could envision was a future in which I made my own choices. I don’t think either of us could have predicted what happens when you multiply that sense of agency by an entire generation.
Though feminism has brought us here, to a declining marriage rate and a female population more independent and educated than their male would-be partners, Kate Bolick and other women in her shoes are wise to focus on finding their bliss in life without a man. We’re facing at least a generation where a third of college-educated women will not marry college-educated men. This, among other factors, will continue to apply significant pressure to the declining marriage rate. It makes good sense for women to make the best life they can with or without a man, as many will not have the opportunity to marry.
Still, that’s different than championing singlehood over couplehood, which is where the momentum is now. Boston Magazine’s January issue featured an article by Janelle Nanos, Single By Choice, interviewing women (and one man) who prefer to remain single and do not want to be victimized by “singlism,” the social stigmas that unmarried people face. The term singlism was coined by Bella DePaulo, a psych professor at UCSB who is considered “the arbiter of the unmarried agenda.” And that’s the critical point here – there is an agenda that sees much more at stake than personal happiness and fulfillment.
Terri Tespicio, a writer who was interviewed for the article, said:
The idea that I would marry someone I loved has never crossed my mind. At 38, I feel more powerful and sexier and in control than I have ever felt…My life is a best-kept secret, and I wouldn’t trade it. As a single person, the world is my oyster. I’m just sorry that people who are married don’t have that freedom.
Even stronger proof of a political agenda may be found in a statement from Lisa Berkman, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health who states:
Single people who have strong social ties often have fewer health risks than those “greedy” married couples who isolate themselves.
There will be a great deal more shaming of married people in the next 20 years, as women engage in whatever cognitive dissonance (or hamsterwheeling) is necessary to find an escape from singlism and more importantly, a nagging sense of personal disappointment. The Single By Choice movement is described this way:
They come in all shapes and sizes. They’re young men, who are the fastest growing percentage of those living on their own. They’re well-educated women, who are refusing to “marry down” to their less credentialed prospects. They’re gays and lesbians watching their friends in same-sex couples ensconse themselves behind white picket fences. Some have taken up their own distinguishing monikers, calling themselves quirkyalones, singulars, onelies or spinsterellas.
In truth, the population most affected by these trends, and they account for nearly all of those who identify with the movement, are never-married women in their 30s and 40s. It remains to be seen whether 20-something women will get on board before they know whether they will have the opportunity to marry. When Kate Bolick asked the young women at our dinner together whether her single status at the age of 39 freaked them out, they all nodded, awkwardly but truthfully. Each one of them also stated that they planned to prioritize having a family over pursuing a career. I suspect that the up and coming generation of women views these celebrations of singleness as a cautionary tale, and they’re anxious to make sure they won’t be calling themselves onelies or quirkyalones if they can help it.
While I am a supporter of marriage as the bedrock of civilization, I support the right of any individual to choose to remain single, and to find their happiness in life where they will. But let’s not kid ourselves. The Single By Choice movement is political, not personal.
Related posts:
{ 888 comments… read them below or add one }
1 2 3 … 6 »
OCCUPY VALENTINES DAY!!
”The Fox and the Grapes’ is one of the traditional Aesop’s fables and can be held to illustrate the concept of cognitive dissonance. In this view, the premise of the fox that covets inaccessible grapes is taken to stand for a person who attempts to hold incompatible ideas simultaneously. In that case, the disdain the fox expresses for the grapes at the conclusion to the fable serves at least to diminish the dissonance even if the behaviour in fact remains irrational.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes
grerp´s last [type] ..Piece of Advice #101: Pencil “Have kids” into your life schedule
“We’re facing at least a generation where a third of college-educated women will not marry college-educated men.”
Perhaps we will see an evolution of status perceptions such that certifications of dubious real value no longer confer automatic status. As more and more people find that their investment of 16-20 years of seat time pays off with a mediocre administrative position (that once would have been done just fine by someone with a high school diploma) or a starvation-wage adjunct professorship, the higher-ed brand is likely to get tarnished, and people–both prospective mates and prospective employers–are going to have to look beyond the degree at the real person. Those that don’t will loose out.
My most recent post: government lunchbox inspectors in North Carolina
It will be interesting to me how long it will take the MSM to honestly investigate why men aren’t marrying. Instead of, you know, asking women why men aren’t marrying and then patting themselves on the back.
I assume they will stick with their groupthink echo chamber for the most part.
@Davidfoster
Agreed. People need to get a skill…., as in learn to do something that most people cannot do. Marketing/Business/Sociology are NOT skills. Nursing and plumbing are.
“While I am a supporter of marriage as the bedrock of civilization, I support the right of any individual to choose to remain single, and to find their happiness in life where they will. But let’s not kid ourselves. The Single By Choice movement is political, not personal. ”
I agree with you and with grep. I feel sorry for a lot of these women- most people are told what to do by the media and society and just follow the zeitgeist thinking it will all turn out well. It is highly irresponsible behavior on the part of our media/society.
Flavia´s last [type] ..Happy Valentine’s Day: Then and Now
Flavia…”Marketing/Business/Sociology are NOT skills. Nursing and plumbing are”
I think marketing and business are definitely skill; but they are skills mainly learned by doing and by observing masters of the art at work. Formal education can help, but it has been overemphasized and leads people to very dangerously believe that they know more then they actually do.
The overselling of formal education has a great deal to do with many of the problem now plaguing this country. Old American saying: “Never ask a barber if you need a haircut”…should be applied to teachers, professors, and administrators also.
My most recent post: government lunchbox inspectors in North Carolina
Women can marry easily, if marraige is what they want.
Always trust revealed preferences over stated ones.
Well, it’s a good thing most college papers are bloody useless these days. Especially the ones uncomfortably popular with women.
I think the trend inverses as The Degree will inevitably lose it’s value as a status-totem. Not only will it make decent professional men with traditional occupations and means of living more desirable, but the “too good for blue-collar” women will recover from their inflated view of self-worth as well.
Marrying up today means marrying to a person with an income. Youth unemployment is easily around 20% in the western countries.
And I think the change can happen pretty fast as well. Societies always come out of depressions as differently valued entities. Though don’t know whether the hardcore societal negging will help or not…
This issue is divided precisely along generational lines. Gen X is currently in their 30s and 40s whereas Millennials are in the 30 and under crowd. Gen X is the biggest loser of second-wave feminism, whereas its looking like Millennials will go a different and somewhat more traditional route in the next couple decades.
I think ASDF is telling the truth. Also, there’s a lot of social pressure in holding the ideal, if not the practice, of traditional marriage. They want to throw it all away so they can do as they choose without the social pressure of acting like they really want marriage.
The women are obviously not admitting their failures. They are losers. Losers!!! Men write books on winning. Women write books on losing.
The women are don’t admit they make poor wives and are selfish. Marriage lost its meaning from attrition. We used to know what marriage means from its participants. Today, it is all so clear… Kate Bolick is not marriageable. She is unwanted. She rejected a marriage, thus she became what she rejected.
Todd:
> Also, there’s a lot of social pressure in holding the ideal, if not the practice, of traditional marriage.
That’s definitely true. I think a lot of people following this blog and similar expedintures might underestimate how fulfilling and happy the lives of elderly singles, from their own choices or not, can be.
Then again it doesn’t matter if it’s artificial, pressure or malicious forces causing the discomfort. If a marriage is something a person thinks she wants, then it’s pretty sensible to work towards that goal instead of focusing on what she might prefer in an alternate dimension.
A good article – two points:
1) intelligence & wisdom are not equivalent to “credentialed.” (and I say that, having a doctorate in science.) The women who are assuming that their degrees (largely in liberal arts and social studies) denotes greater intelligence, wisdom, or even knowledge are deluding themselves. I know guys with only a high-school education who have encyclopedic knowledge of sports, technology, and applied-engineering, aka skilled trades: woodworking, electricity worker, machinist, etc. In certain technical specialties, a credential denotes a certain level of knowledge, but in non-technical areas, it doesn’t denote much other than the ability to afford school.
2) The result of feminist women staying single and childless is a guaranteed demographic shift toward people who have male/female (or m/f/f) marriages. Those people are more religious, less tolerant, less capitalist, far less feminist, and for that matter, less wedded to liberal democracy entirely. The end result is that theocracy will dominate western cultures within a few generations, and liberal democracy/western civilization will fade away, leaving little but oppressive theocratic regimes, as we see throughout most of the world already. Feminists, in their insane delusions about “while male privilege and patriarchy” will be the death of the Western Culture that brought humanity out of the dark ages.
I predict the ‘Single By Choice’ movement will have the same long-term vitality of that other movement famous for not growing through procreation but only through living such an amazingly awesome life that other people were jealous & decided to follow in their footsteps: the Shakers.
Fun fact: after dwindling in numbers for years, the last of the Shakers died in 1992.
Interesting parallel: the Shakers were possibly the first group to institute full equality between the sexes.
“Single by choice” is nonsense! I’m not saying there aren’t some rare exceptions among women out there who really don’t want and children and really do not want to spend their lives with someone, but for most “fabulous” single women it’s about adjusting to an unfortunate situation, rather than preferring it that way.
Even if you think you can fill that social gap with friends rather than a partner, will it always stay that way? I know a woman, 38 and single, who raves about her fabulous life and (horror of horrors) refers to her best friend as “wifey”. Now even her best friend is engaged, the rest are getting or just married, and she is running out of options of girlfriends to take on “casual sex” holidays around Europe. I cannot under any circumstances see that as a preferable lifestyle. Your friends have their own lives and maybe their own husbands, the men you sleep with see you as an easy, last resort (especially as a woman enters her late thirties). You are not first choice to anyone.
I had a bit of this single propaganda during Valentine’s Day. I’m 21 and I’ve never had a serious LTR, but I’ve had shorter things, flings etc, you know… I really wish I had a boyfriend right now. (I’ve just recently started taking interest in new guys). I don’t want a boyfriend because society tells me to, I want one because being in love is a great thing. Also, I do have sexual needs and I’m not planning to sleep around casually (doesn’t give me anything and doesn’t help to end up a slut). So it is a simply equation – good sex with a regular, exclusive partner = boyfriend. I don’t understand how single women do this long term – sleeping around is a poor option (which damages reputation as well) and very few are 100% content with a FWB. Are they asexual or something?
Nah I miss the body contact, the intimacy, the sex and all that. I can buy as many expensive shoes I want, watch as many episodes of Sex and the City I want, drink so many Cosmos or scream “I’m fabulous!”, but it really has an expiration date. Studies and getting a career is great, but no, it is not enough.
blighter – Wow, that was an interesting read on Wikipedia! Lol.
Indeed I suspect this was a big reason why their movement was unsustainable:
When Shaker youngsters, girls and boys, reached the age of twenty-one, they were free to leave or to remain with the Shakers. Unwilling to remain celibate, many chose to leave; today there are thousands of descendants of Shaker-raised seceders.
blighter: Unfortunately, the “single-by-choice” movement will include a significant subset of “single mothers by choice.”
Expect increased pedestaling and championing of “strong and independent single mothers” who “don’t need no man.” Subsidized by numerous government cheese programs provided by Democrats, and conspicuously overlooked by chivalrous Republicans.
“Single by choice” is nonsense! I’m not saying there aren’t some rare exceptions among women out there who really don’t want and children and really do not want to spend their lives with someone, but for most “fabulous” single women it’s about adjusting to an unfortunate situation, rather than preferring it that way.
———
ITA
Choice is always part of a phrase that really means one choice. Single because I’m ugly or old or think too highly of self.
Some have taken up their own distinguishing monikers, calling themselves quirkyalones, singulars, onelies or spinsterellas.
Sure they have. Sure they have. I would gamble a considerable amount of money that no woman, in the entire history of the planet, has ever seriously called herself a “quirkyalone”. The entire Bolick thing has the distinct aroma of overcompensation… it’s not so much Bolick’s success as a hundred thousand aging hamsters spinning Bolick along for the ride. The ironic thing is that the entire thing is based on a fundamental misreading, as Bolick isn’t single by intentional choice. Her single status is merely the result of her choices and she’s now attempting to make the best of the reality in which she finds herself. Sensible tactic, but distinctly sub-optimal strategy.
The irony is that her fame and success may propel her into moneyed circles where she’ll meet a 60+ alpha male that she’ll feel comfortable marrying.
Susan,
Great post. True and uncomfortable at the same time
The only part I took on board was the last sentence.
Grerp and a few others also make the point I am about to make.
Cognitive dissonance is a badly tolerated phenomenon, especially by women.
One cannot lie to oneself and not feel the bad after-effects.
There is a better solution than what these ‘single by choice’ women are offering to themselves. But they won’t take it (the better soultion) even if it were offered free on a plate.
JT´s last [type] ..Is God Gaming Me?
” Gen X is the biggest loser of second-wave feminism, whereas its looking like Millennials will go a different and somewhat more traditional route in the next couple decades.”
I think it will rather diverge between two segments going in different directions. One will go a more traditional route and one will strongly increase current trends.
Somewhat off topic but I’ve always liked this response to Kay S. Hymowitz’s article by Nick Savoy.
Society has changed. Women have more power over their own life, and there is less pressure to conform to expectations from family, religion, society at large, etc. So now with more choice on how to life their lives, many women are deciding to do something with their lives other than be the traditional housewife of 50 years ago. It sucks to be a guy today who wants the housewife of 50 years ago, since there are less of them, but people have more choice on how to live their lives now, and that’s a good thing.
Many women fought hard for this. Some would even call it “feminism”.
But guess what? Men also have more power over their own life, and there is less pressure to conform to expectations from family, religion, society at large, etc. So now with more choice on how to life their lives, many men are deciding to do something with their lives other than be the traditional husband of 50 years ago. It sucks to be a women today who wants the husband of 50 years ago, since there are less of them, but people have more choice on how to live their lives now, and that’s a good thing.
@Johnny
You said:
“Kate Bolick is not marriageable. She is unwanted.”
I don’t think so. Her options for marriage are greatly reduced but she is not not marriageable.
She does not seemingly have any serious impediment to marriage like being a nun or having a serious drug problem or mental illness that impedes her free will.
She may be past the normal child baring age, and children is what marriage is for, but that doesn’t make her unmarriagble, just disqualified from marrying the suitors who want a wife with a high probability of bearing children.
If, of course, they marry at all. Those best educated are in the best position to make an independent go of it. This is doubly true in my limited experience (sample size three) for women who go into engineering, and I suspect other technically oriented fields–the more male dominated the better. Two are in nationally prestigious engineering PhD programs and the third has avoided the recession handily.
I also found the percentage of singles in Boston (stats from the linked Boston Magazine article) to be quite eye opening. That’s a huge number of potential partnerships. While I am not from the land of Trapper John, given the six degrees of Kevin Bacon principle (IIRC, Facebook has noted the average between any two of their members is four to five), says that Boston should be a prime place to find a spouse. There have been at least three times in the last year when I’ve met or had pitched to me female dating prospects via/by my married friends (all of whom would have been LDR’s, but you don’t pitch your sister unless you mean it).
Fortunately for the millenial girls, most of us guys will happily fall right in line with their newfound desire to cry, “No harm, no foul,” and take them up on that whole relationship thing when they finally decide to do so. Even if it took them until their age and sexual-partner count were both over 30.
Not all of us, but most.
I don’t think men beyond the limited confines of the manosphere are really going to learn anything from the last forty years. We’ll just keep chugging along, quietly murmuring whatever the new party line is ten or twenty years from now while continuing to believe in our hearts, as we always have, that it’s a bunch of nonsense. This singlism rationalization won’t take off because it won’t have to. But at least when it hastens the inevitable collapse of social security, we can finally crawl out from under that rock. Silver lining to every cloud.
The only question left is whether the Great Lowering of Female Standards of 2020 is going to be heartfelt enough (out of legitimate wisdom or mere desperation) that they will be content (not happy, as that’s not in their nature), or whether an entire generation of women will feel like they’ve settled.
Good stuff.
Interesting. So the new tactic is to make coupled people shameful, so singles look better. This fits the same agenda of destroying marriage etc.
Who wins / profits from that? whats the political angle.
YOHAMI´s last [type] ..Take it apart for relationships and make it about jobs.
Interesting! It definitely is a political movement, the single by choice movement.
A response to social trends, without question, and definitely a response to the traditional perspective of pitying single people, especially single unmarried women, definitely something positive, as you mention: “This is a marked reversal of the spinster lit trend of the last few years, where unhappily single women in their late 30s published memoirs attempting to come to terms with where they went wrong, and reaffirming their vow to continue their search for a life partner.”
I certainly like this aspect of the trend…I don’t believe single women “of a certain age” are pitiful failures. What is more important in terms of their “success” in my view is their quality of life and the contributions they make to their communities, extended families and so forth.
Susan,
More independent how?
YOHAMI´s last [type] ..Take it apart for relationships and make it about jobs.
@blargh
That Kate Bolick has not married yet or have received any proposals when she dumped her previously LTR says a lot.
Women at her age isn’t unmarriageable by definition. Anyone could be married if one creates the conditions to look for a husband.
“She does not seemingly have any serious impediment to marriage like being a nun or having a serious drug problem or mental illness that impedes her free will.”
Yawn. You didn’t state the obvious. She is not a nun, but she is not discerning either. There is a middle that hasn’t been reached. Her drug of choice is probably contraceptives as that has contributed to mental blocks of what a marriage consists of. Her free will has demonstrated she is not marriagable (she will not marry).
I was her first and only recruit, marching off to third grade in tiny green or blue T-shirts declaring: A WOMAN WITHOUT A MAN IS LIKE A FISH WITHOUT A BICYCLE, or: A WOMAN’S PLACE IS IN THE HOUSE—AND THE SENATE.
I have to say that even when I was actively campaigning for the latter sentiment, the former confused me.
I recall the first time I read it on another woman’s T-shirt. She noticed my confused expression and asked what my problem was. I responded, “I don’t understand your shirt; why would a fish need a bicycle?” She replied, “Exactly.” A naive, college-aged J then realized that she had met her first real live lesbian. Memories…………..
Nearly any woman (or man) can marry, but it depends on how much they’re willing to lower their standards.
Lowering standards is what most men have to do just to find a date. I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but women generally perceive their “equals” in sexual market value as inferior and only want to go with the men far above them. And society currently celebrates and financially subsidizes women who “never settle.” This leaves solid and reasonably attractive men with very few options. Far fewer than they would have had in decades past.
It is good for men and women to have a positive sense of self. But they also need to be willing to engage in rational self-analysis. Identify the people you feel you deserve to marry. Find out what they are looking for. Ask yourself whether you have those characteristics. If not, improve on yourself or lower your standards.
In the end, I celebrate the cheerleading of spinsterhood, because the more men that avoid the divorce meat grinder the better. Social conservatives, traditionalists, and others who want to preserve marriage need to work on reducing the horrendously lopsided risks that men face. I’m not holding my breath.
@PVW
“I don’t believe single women “of a certain age” are pitiful failures. What is more important in terms of their “success” in my view is their quality of life and the contributions they make to their communities, extended families and so forth.”
Hi PVW!
I really liked your comment– especially in regards to success!
I know both men and women of that “certain age” who are single and don’t consider any of them “pitiful failures.”
Very often, they have been terribly wounded by someone in their past. If any man or woman wants to go their own way, people should let them go in peace.
I was taught this “ranking” of relationships:
Devoted, awesome relationship (usually marriage)
)
Single, for whatever reason
Bad relationship where one/both of the parties is causing damage
Abusive relationship (not restricted to gender– men can be abused, too
I wouldn’t promote singlehood, but it is definitely the superior option to being in a bad relationship.
The irony is that her fame and success may propel her into moneyed circles where she’ll meet a 60+ alpha male that she’ll feel comfortable marrying.
I see her as marrying a reasonably well-off, divorced man, 45-50 with kids, and writing about being a stepmother.
We’re facing at least a generation where a third of college-educated women will not marry college-educated men.
Considering that college now guarantees you for virtually nothing, I’m not so sure this is a bad thing. Most of us push college on our kids because it used to guarantee a middle class life. It’s time to look for the next good stepping stone. I myself will not be financing any degrees in basket weaving just so my sons can say they have a degree.
As these fabulous singles will be paying for their own education, they’d be best advised to pick the right degrees. If you’re going to run up 50-100k for a “Master’s”, better make sure that you’ll get value for money.
Luckily “Captain Capitalism” has got a new book out (it’s climbing the Amazon charts as we speak), details are to be found here:
http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2012/02/well-i-better-inform-you-guys.html
or go direct to Amazon, if you wish
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1467978302/ref=as_li_qf_sp_asin_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=wwwviolentkicom&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1467978302
He’s an amusing guy too.
A sample of one of the reviews:
“He brilliantly dissects those college degrees that have worth and those that are worthless, based on the simple yet staggering truth of Supply and Demand. Further, he helps the college-bound student recognize how spineless parents, teachers, guidance counselors and the like have failed in giving students the truth about a valuable education and going into debt for a worthless one.
If you plan on going to college to party, follow your bliss, and thinking any degree is a good degree, you are setting yourself up for failure and a low-income job.
Clarey also argues strongly that you have a moral responsibility to obtain a worthwhile degree. His final “Parting Advice” chapter emphasizes both actually working while schooling and getting a B.S. rather than a B.A. He also demonstrates the value of some 2-year degrees.
The key is building skills that are in demand. And thus he focuses on STEM: Science, Techonology, Engineering and Math.”
@Just1X, true. Most STEM degrees will pay a stipend for TAing, or at least not charge anything. It’s degrees like law and MBAs that charge tons.
The trend now is get an undergraduate degree cheaply, get a decent job at a company that provides tuition reimbursement, and then get your advanced degree.
@J (#34)
“I myself will not be financing any degrees in basket weaving just so my sons can say they have a degree.”
This sounds like my folks’ attitude.
I know they valued education but the idea of them “bankrolling” us was unthinkable. My dad said, I respect your abilities enough to let you try for yourself.
I was a full-scholarship student.
I remember my ex-fiance being adamant that we pay for our children’s college education so they wouldn’t have to work. They were entitled to it, just like his parents had done for him. In my opinion, entitlement didn’t do him any favors…
@J
I agree on college education, although this usually depends on where you live. The US is still not doing well financially, same goes for South Europe. Britain has high unemployment, but this is not in the “upper” classes of society, the problem is really that England has a very large working class, and it’s getting bigger. For most middle or upper middle females, marrying someone from the working class was never an option, degree or not.
I’m from Northern Europe, and the unemployment is very low. In Norway, if you have a degree in engineering, business or anything along those lines, you’ll be employed while still studying. Those with a Master in business or economics have a starting salary of about $90,000 (when they’re 25). A degree means everything. Doesn’t have to be Ivy League, just has to be somewhat recognized.
For a lot of people, myself included, it is actually just a matter of having a degree. It was never an option for me to not study. Didn’t have to be medicine or law, just academical. A lot of families feel this way – in the UK and France it’s sort of given that education is necessary to shape your character, teach self discipline, improve language and manners, and not so much about the subject. A man having a degree does not guarantee he’ll always be employed or having a good salary (or back home it does, not in the US), but if he’s from a good family with the kind of upbringing you want, he will always go to college. I don’t think that mindset is going to change in a while.
Jackie:
I really liked your comment– especially in regards to success! I know both men and women of that “certain age” who are single and don’t consider any of them “pitiful failures.”
Very often, they have been terribly wounded by someone in their past.
I wouldn’t promote singlehood, but it is definitely the superior option to being in a bad relationship.
My reply:
Or things “just happened that way,” ie., they were in the market, they were dating, things didn’t work out, incompatible, didn’t meet the right person, etc. Not all single women “of a certain age” were Kate Bolick types when they were younger, and I refuse to see all of them as losers when I know women in that category, I know about their lives and see how they contribute in so many ways to their families and communities, in ways that many people who are married don’t because they “don’t have the time!…”
Oh, and the NYT had an article about this too in the past few days, that in Western societies, it is becoming more and more common, Eric Klinenburg(?) wrote it, for people to live alone.
Odds:
+1. There will never be a wholesale marriage strike. Women will still either ride or watch the carousel, men will still marry them, and women will still account for 80%+ of divorces in the US. Some will wise up and stay with the man they married even though they know their men are hopelessly beneath them and in spite of the incessant “you can do better, grrrl!” cries they hear from their BFFs. Some will marry out of desperation and stay with their men because they have no economic alternative as the economy craters.
@ VD: “The irony is that her fame and success may propel her into moneyed circles where she’ll meet a 60+ alpha male that she’ll feel comfortable marrying.”
Yep. Kate Bolick is an extraordinary 40 year old single woman. She has opportunities that will be out of reach for nearly all women. No single woman should try to model her life after Bolick’s because it’s a very, very poor strategy. She has an elite education. She writes for top notch MSM outlets. She is attractive, well off, famous, articulate, intelligent, and moves in elite social and professional circles.
Contrast this with your average 40 year old single never married woman. She has a partner count somewhere between 3 and 15. She has average looks, a short Dutch boy haircut, and 30 extra pounds. She takes Zoloft to relax, and maybe a little high blood pressure. She is a 5/10, maybe a 6 at best.
She has a master’s degree in social work and slaves away at some state paperpusher job dispensing welfare checks to single mothers at about $45K a year. Or she’s a sixth grade teacher in the public schools, sending snotty brat assholes to the principal’s office for $50K a year. Or she has a high school education and works as a secretary at the local law firm for $25K.
Her life consists of work, religious services (if she goes), maybe a little volunteering at Goodwill or Planned Parenthood or the Red Cross, and girls nights out at the local night spots. She is worn out at the end of the day. Once in a great while, she treats herself to a massage at the local spa, when she can afford it.
She goes on a few dates a year, even maybe has sex with one or two of them. But none of the men she knows want to marry her. They are all lonely heart GAMMA bachelors who never could find the right woman; divorced, impoverished men who have sworn off marriage forever; or confirmed bachelors reveling in their SMVs (she is the 56th date he has had this year and it’s only April).
So the average woman will not look forward to the Kate Bolick lifestyle. It is the drudgery of work, loneliness and spinsterhood. Hope it was worth it, feminists.
I think post-sec education is going to change drastically within the next 10-15 years.
Liberal arts will probably be removed entirely. Its on par with basket weaving in most cases.
The system as it stands right now is simply not feasible. Too many schools, prices that are too high with costs through the roof. Uni’s need to be streamlined to be both profitable and affordable.
I’ll take a look at this from a basic B.Sc undergrad degree (cause thats what I know) and say what I think will happen.
Going to class will be non-existent. You have to pay the guy to stand up there instead of doing his research. Bad for business.
Improvement: Make all classes online. Attendance can either be mandatory or voluntary, irrelavant really. This way the prof. can give the lecture once, record it and set it out. AND NEVER REDO IT. (Atleast for certain subjects, intro calculus being an example.)
Cost saved, tons on wasted time and salary.
Now theres gonna need to be in-class tutorials to help the kids figure stuff out. Thank god for TAs.
Also, most unis don’t give a shit if you flunk out. It will be good to weed out those who want to party and those who want to study.
Also, it will expand the pool of applicants. Certain classes could be exclusively online. You can literally have tons of people taking a class with only one lecture per lesson. (For example, my first year bio class was 1000 kids. There were 3 sections. Twice a week. That was 6 hours of some poor profs time every week saved.) Instead 3000 kids who can watch the lecture whenever they want.
And finally the good bit, people can manage school into their own schedule allowing them to work/drink/slut it up or do whatever the hell it is they want and do school on their time.
Online schools have a bad rep right now, but within 20 years I think they might be the norm. Low cost, high capacity.
Continuing from my previous post:
Or, if she’s lucky, she’s a partner at the law firm, pulling down $200K a year. But she works all the time and has very little time for a social life. She doesn’t just have heart trouble, she has panic attacks and is on two antidepressants.
She has short term relationships that never work out, for whatever reason. Most men are beneath her and she refuses even to consider them for dating. Of the men she has dated, they just never worked out or she never made time for them. This one was separated but went back to his wife. This one wanted to marry her, but he was only a high school teacher and not good enough for her.
That one was a Brad Pitt lookalike, but he was her neighbor’s gardener and so she had to settle for hot, illicit sex with him on the downlow. (What would her partners think if she brought him to the charity balls and the bar association functions?) She slept with him for a few months only because he was so hot, his di*k was so big, and he looked so good in her bed. She had to move on when she found out he was also banging her neighbor and the neighbor’s 20 year old daughter home from college for the summer.
This one was hot, but cheated on her. That one is a lawyer too and they really loved each other, but neither made the time for a real lasting relationship. That one was her Mr. Big, but his work and hobbies were more important. (She’s so, so attracted to that last one even though he treats her like shit. She cannot figure out why she is so attracted to him.)
Anyway, that’s her life. Hope it was all worth it.
I got the distinct impression that Bolick’s article was a web of rationalization. She is not really happy, did not want this to happen, and now need to build an edifice to convince herself that everything is great.
Susan, you actually met her, so you would know better, but it just rang false to me.
Two words here. Confirmation bias.
Nothing complex here. Once a person realizes they probably are not going to get something, the the next logical step in the process is to convince themselves they didn’t really want it in the first place, and that in fact what they have is really superior. Its just a mental self-defense mechanism.
Could it be that some of the women who are claiming that they are happy to be single are really using a bit of reverse psychology? If they say that they want to get married, they sound desperate. If they say they don’t want to get married they are just playing very hard to get.
Stuart Schneiderman´s last [type] ..Should You Confess to Adultery?
@ Stuart
That is DEFINITELY the strategy. I know a woman whom uses this angle: when a friend says she’s got a great guy to fix her up with, she says “let’s see, I’m not easy to catch!”. She is 38 and single, a party girl. If you want a family and don’t have it at 38, you have failed. There are limits to how ‘picky’ a person can be before they are plain unrealistic or are just overestimating their value. It is sensible to target high quality men/women if you have options, but I am so tired of hearing people say they are “just picky” when I know for a fact that they aim too high and have no self-awareness.
Putting aside the “sour grapes” aspect of this “movement” there is an even more basic consideration: whether or not any society has a vested interest in its constituent members reproducing.
Singles don’t face social shaming because people are mean, frumpy, old-fashioned, or because society hates fun and can’t handle the girl-power of a take charge no-nonsense women totally aware of her intelligence and sexiness. No, singles face a degree of social shaming because it’s in every civilization’s interest that its men and women come together to make babies in sufficiently large numbers. The day this doesn’t happen, is the day your civilization begins to die—just check Japan which is projected to lose a third of it’s population by 2060. Social shaming alone won’t solve the problem, clearly, but shame has always been a part of the equation throughout human history.
As usual, the best solution is compromise. As a 28-yr old single man, I understand and accept the—fairly mild, in the grand scheme of things—social shaming directed my way because I realize that society has an interest in my reproduction. However, it is not in my best interests or desire to reproduce at this time, and so I respond by developing thicker skin, enjoying my life and doing whatever the hell I want. What I don’t do is gin up a social movement to get the society in which I live to adopt anti-civilizational attitudes.
Massive kudos to Bolick by the way. One of the great opportunities in America is the ability to monetize just about anything including a heaping steaming pile of horse manure. Ring that register baby and laugh all the way to the bank. Should buy one hell of a shoe collection.
Mike C:
Yup. It’s too bad that single women in their 30s and 40s across the US will look at Bolick and say “I can do that too! Maybe I won’t get a book deal or a TV show, but I too can live the glamorous life and make lots of money! And I don’t need a man to do it!”
@Deti (#42)
Deti, I am not disagreeing with any of your examples (hypothethicals, composites, people you’ve known?). But would they be any happier in marriage? Or perhaps even UNhappier? Is the problem truly their singleness? If not, what is it?
From my perspective, I have seen people happy and unhappy, single and married. With kids or childfree. I agree with Lincoln,
“Most people are about as happy as they make up their minds to be.”
PS: I responded to your post on the earlier thread, re:raising children. Kindest regards to you & your family–
@Lokland, on paper and in theory that sounds great. We could start kids young and get them all in front of a computer screen to watch lectures.
In practice that is not the best way for learning to happen. My husband is an amazing and gifted teacher, and in another time and place if such talent was appreciated he would be a teacher. He was able to get people to understand complex math concepts because of that gift. I can’t wait until he gets to tutor our kids.
There is research that shows babies learn a foreign language rapidly from a live person talking to them, but show no signs of learning when the same language is simply shown on TV. The human connection, knowing that another person cares about your progress and knows who you are, the subtle back-and-forth and interactions all facilitate learning.
I’m a big fan of technology, taught myself how to code and use a variety of computer applications over 10 years ago, before the dot-com boom and before Google got started in a garage. But I’m not going to have our kids sit in front of a computer all day and be happy with just that. You just can’t replace learning from another human being.
I’m 61, been married almost 15 years now, so I have quite a bit of experience being single much longer than usual, with insight into both sides of this issue.
Our 13-year old son is low-functioning autistic. He resists toilet-training and well . . . let’s just say our clothes washer runs almost continuously and we spend a good chunk of our income on laundry detergent and bleach cleaner for the walls and the floors.
Still, if I compare what I had before to what I have now, I can only say I wish I had what I have now back then. This is a far better life and I wouldn’t wish Part I on anyone.
Jackie:
I get your point. But my point is the poor decisions that often lead to a woman reaching age 40 without marrying. Usually it’s because she believed she could wait and assumed wrongly that a man of her liking would simply appear when she was ready to marry. Or she broke up with or simply never pursued men who were interested in her years ago.
The second point is that Kate Bolick presents the female apex fallacy. Many single women will look at Bolick and conclude incorrectly that their lives are fabulous and that they, too, will lead the oh so glamorous life. The problem is that Bolick and her situation are a rarity. Only the most prestigious, beautiful, and financially successful 40 YO single women can live a life like Bolick. She will have opportunities that the vast majority of single women will never have. For most women, it is a life of work and drudgery.
How do I know this? I’ve read scads upon scads of articles by women in their late 30s and early 40s who desperately want husbands and children. They approach it from two angles: either (1) they know it is too late, and they are wailing and gnashing their teeth; or (2) they cling to small slivers of hope that one day their princes will come and they will have their first babies at age 42 because after all they know some friend’s cousin who had a baby at that age and so they can too.
They bemoan that they have to hold down jobs and work like men, because they have no husbands to help and support them. They bemoan the dearth of people in their lives. They go years without the touch of another human being.
This is what feminism fought for? A nation of spinsters and players?
Japan is one of the least gender equal developed countries. Feminism is not big there. Yet they have incredibly low birth rates, as dragnet pointed out. I think urbanization, high population densities, high living expenses and other cultural factors contribute to this.
It may be worthwhile to mention here that Kate Bolick is an urban woman who likely has lived in big cities for most of her life. It may be the urban effect at work, too. People in large cities tend to marry much later, have kids much later if at all, and generally have higher living expenses.
The sole exception, I’m guessing, would be Salt Lake City.
Though even here, people in the surrounding suburb and rural areas get married earlier and have more kids.
@Deti
Hey again Deti,
I think we are both on the same side: I am no fan of feminism and am probably one of the most religious/morally conservative people here. I would *love* for people who long to be married to find true love and create strong families!
I truly feel for those women you write of who wish they had children and don’t. Really. And I despise the idea of glamorizing things for “regular folks.” (To me, this is the equivalent of the opening rounds in ‘American Idol’: the delusion of the brilliant singing career is punctures in the face of reality — and the televised audience
)
So maybe it’s because of my experiences that I feel differently: There have *always* been spinsters. (I was re-reading a passage about them in _Little Women_ by Louisa M. Alcott– a spinster herself!) Work will *always* be hard. I would say it will be even harder with kids, esp. if you are trying to balance a job to pay the family’s bills.
But there are all kinds of possibilities for love, community and family, even if you don’t get married. I have seen it.
I hope I *do* get married. I’ve been preparing for it for quite some time. But after a broken engagement behind me, I am *much* more amenable to a person being by themselves than being with the wrong person. (And potentially damaging their children.) Does this make any sense, Deti? Thanks for considering my view–
@DW
That is my sense of it as well. How that plays out in the SMP – whether female hypergamy decreases with different goals, remains to be seen. I’m afraid that women will want to prioritize marriage and family, but will not know how to get it, or at least not know how to avoid making the worst mistakes.
Jackie:
I hope you get married too. The spinster phenomenon is an enormous tragedy, personally for the women who live it, and societally for all of us. The consequences are legion: Childless, spouseless women having no one to care for them will look to the government for care in their old age. She might have had her kids care for her, or be able to live on a husband’s pension or life insurance, but she can’t do that because she never married.
The mental health costs will be huge. The medical care costs will be huge. Women are by far the largest consumers and recipients of medical services.
that’s just what I can think of off the top of my head.
The one thing legitimate “Single By Choice” people have in common is that they almost *never* mention their relationship status, never talk about marriage, never talk about exes and never disparage the opposite sex.
A lot of women fake the funk and claim “oh, I’m single by choice because I don’t believe in marriage/have a great life/etc.” but by their even mentioning their marriage status they betray themselves as seeing their life choices in relation to coupledom.
I have a true blue single-by-choice friend (who, incidentally, has an awesome life and is very happy) and I finally asked her about not being married/coupled with her after knowing her a few months. She approached it kind of like if someone had asked me why I’ve never visited Croatia: quizzically and with “Well, I’ve just never thought about it much. If I wanted to, I would. But I don’t, so I won’t.”
I think older single women can live a “fabulous” lifestyle up to a certain point. It’s basically what SATC is built upon! Although Carrie’s lifestyle is really not realistic for her income (her apartment would have had a high rent, designer wardrobe etc), the principle is the same. In a way it is more expensive to be single, but the advantage is that you only have yourself to worry about and have complete freedom on how you spend your money. A single 30-something woman doesn’t have the costs you are forced to have when married – she can have noodles for dinner for 4 nights and get a designer item later. She can live in a studio apartment, have no mortgage. She doesn’t build up anything and she doesn’t save, but she can very well award herself certain luxuries. Jimmy Choos are expensive for being shoes, but the price is relatively low to a total income – I know plenty of women who buys lots of designer, even if they are not well off (and without using credit cards). This kind of lifestyle has become very popular, especially with Facebook – you book a holiday in South of France, get a super cheap hotel, bring your designer clothes, spend your money on drinks and a rented yacht, take the photos and upload = super glamorous lifestyle. If you take care of yourself, you can pull rich men in nightclubs still at 35, you leave your studio flat in a short dress and heels and have Cosmos at the local hotspot. Even keep the guys as FWBs, and your interactions with them (even if it’s only their comments on your FB photos) increase your friends’ impressions that you are glamorous and popular. It’s a fun life for sure, but past 40, I think most find it sad. When you can’t even pull those guys anymore, it’s just you and the girls and the shoes.
I’m just realizing how many friends I have like this and how many I know of.
I just hope this doesn’t turn into another Politically Correct law.
An earlier poster said something about Millennials not being as bad about this. I sure hope they’re right, speaking as a Millennial myself.
@Mark Trueblood
+1.
@Hope
Have you heard of the ‘herbivore/grass-eating’ movement? I think feminism is bigger in Japan than you realize…
I’m glad that Anna brought up Sex and the City. Perhaps I’m showing my age but, to me the women on the show act like 40 year old teenagers. They say that they are thrilled and happy being single because they have followed the feminist life plan and because that life plan did not just promise great career success… it also promised that a woman who was independent and autonomous would find a perfect man, a soul mate, who would love her for her true greatness and would not be turned off by having to support her or overly obsessed with her sexual attractiveness.
If they act like teenagers they are not just suffering from the female equivalent of the Peter Pan complex. They are also nostalgic for a time when they had a far better selection of available men.
Stuart Schneiderman´s last [type] ..Should You Confess to Adultery?
None of those names sound the least bit pleasant to be called. I’d rather give my left foot than to be called a “spinsterella”.
Aside from that, I definitely have no aspirations to be single for the rest of my life. Life without someone to love seems rather bleak to me.
@dragnet
“Singles face a degree of social shaming because it’s in every civilization’s interest that its men and women come together to make babies in sufficiently large numbers.”
+1
Social customs which favor coupling between the sexes don’t reflect some kind of normative judgment that married people are necessarily happier or better-off. They exist to incentivize procreation and investment in child-rearing, something society needs to survive. Why more people don’t grasp this is beyond me.
Heh, this is about equal parts amusing, sad and impressive. The feminist movement won, found out that the award was just a big pile of lemons, yet proceed to make lemonade anyway, never questioning the base assumptions that led them here. On some level, you just have to admire that.
I don’t know what to think the movement will be strong because is based on lies. Had you ever seen a movie/book/series in which a single woman that choose career over love regrets that choice and is miserable placing a facade while she fills her life with material goods to ease the pain? The only women’s choices allowed to show unhappiness and regret are motherhood or marriage. So of course women will support everything that makes the single life valid and perfect and the married life as oppressive and limiting. Thus we are going to be divided in two camps. The question would be who wins? Single vs Married….any takers?
Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Listen to the sound of silence.
@Anna ” It’s a fun life for sure, but past 40, I think most find it sad. When you can’t even pull those guys anymore, it’s just you and the girls and the shoes. I’m just realizing how many friends I have like this and how many I know of.”
Doesn’t the fun wear off at 35? By 35, the girls done this for 15 years.
Women’s looks start deteriorating at 35. Some start showing wrinkles unlike men who have thicker skins. I still look youthful at 45. For myself, partying doesn’t work anymore. It’s more work than fun. Drinking, dressing up, and dancing is so immature. It seems so silly, yet that’s what educated and fully employed women do on a weekend. It’s an adult princess coming out party.
@VD
Exactly right. I cannot tell you how surprised I was to see her on the talk shows – already spinning such a different story than she shared at my house. The girls were amazed too. They were saying, “But she wants to get married! She’s really bummed it hasn’t worked out!” I thought that regret was front and center in the piece, but the feminists looked the other way, and Bolick saw where the money was. I don’t blame her for going with the flow. As you say, she will probably make out pretty well in the end, all around. But I’m sure it must irk her to be a tool for the feminists, whom she clearly has no use for.
@Susan
I will add that in the recent climate the consequences of her going against the stream would be worse for her. The sisters would do everything within their power to destroy her career and she doesn’t have enough things in common with conservatives. Liberals can be pretty heartless to a traitor to the cause, IME.
Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Listen to the sound of silence.
@ CrisisEraDynamo:
Me too
I’m also a Millennial. I’m a child of divorce, but I’m not anti-marriage. On the contrary, I want to get married and have kids in the not too distant future.
@JQ
I wonder if there will be women who don’t care about marrying one way or the other, and will happily go with the Single by Choice folks, as there is support in numbers. I believe that most young women still say they want to marry (85% or so IIRC), around 40% of Americans say that marriage is an outmoded institution, and the cohabitation numbers are climbing sharply.
“There will be a great deal more shaming of married people in the next 20 years”
Susan, you are the first I’ve seen to mention this.
I’m glad to see we’re are getting away from the old stereotype of the pitiful spinster with her 20 cats. However, I can see a “singlism” movement coming because single people feel they are discriminated against in the workplace and penalized by the government when it comes to things such as taxes and social security.
Society benefits when children are brought up in two-parent homes with a married couple. Study after study shows a family headed by a married couple is better for children than a single family home and unwed couple home. As the percentage of singles rise they could become an important voting bloc that could bring about some big policy changes in the government.
And what’s this sneering about “greedy” married couples?
@Yohami
Feminism is the angle. The fish bicycle thing. If women don’t marry those losers who can no longer keep up with them (feminist words, not mine) then female supremacy continues to move forward. Without the encumbrance of husbands and children, women can finally crack all the glass ceilings, including President.
@Yohami
More easily able to support themselves, for one thing. Women in their 20s make 117% of what men the same age make. Now we’ve got the imbalance in education, which will perpetuate and increase this gap over time. If women don’t marry, they won’t be stepping off the career ladder onto the mommy track, so they’ll keep competing with males through their 30s and 40s in the workplace.
I read yesterday that 14% of young men live at home with their parents after graduation, compared to 8% of young women. The trend is pretty clear.
@Mark Trueblood
Yes, that’s HUS in a nutshell! And it applies to both sexes, though the criteria are different.
@Just1X
I owe the Captain a book review. Seems like this might be the right time to do it. I read his book and liked it a lot, btw.
Susan,
Got it. Feminism = no marriages. Independence = more money. Both right.
YOHAMI´s last [type] ..Take it apart for relationships and make it about jobs.
@PVW
I have read that single people give a great deal more to their communities than married people do. I suspect this is what led to the term “greedy marrieds.”
@deti
When did it go up from 2/3?
@Lokland
The college experience, including the social piece, is something that all American kids want. Four years, on campus, away from home. Party on. I don’t think it’s going away soon, if ever.
@ Hope
I disagree its started already. Legitimate unis giving classes online.
Not uncommon, I agree however himan contact is required. Its simpler to give the lesson online and then have one/two tutorial sessions for Q&A delivered via TAs.
Labs (science) would also need to be done in class because they are more skill building oriented than anything else. That would require a professional giving direct instruction with TA assistance.
The other big advantage is that your not limited to researchers/professors to give lectures. Professionals who have worked in the field for a certain amount of time would be able to lecture online, from different cities. (Had one of those from a biotech. consultant in the states in my thrid year, not the full course just a segment.)
@ Susan
I didn’t say remove the campus, I said toss the classroom.
@Escoffier
She and I spent several hours talking on the phone, and then she spent 6 hours at my house. The dinner went very late. I heard a lot of regret, and some real sadness. She would like to marry and have children, if possible.She spoke in detail about her previous relationships after she dumped Allan at 28, and why they didn’t work out. She moved to LA for the most recent one, and when she got there, he told her he just didn’t feel happy to see her there. She has maintained two residences since then, one in NY and one in LA. By the way, she had planned to be a “fly on the wall” and not participate, but she got talking with the girls, and she shared a lot of very personal information as well.
At the same time, though, she was intrigued by some of the ideas she explored in the piece, like “friend families” and communities of single women like the one she visited in the Netherlands. She was actively trying to plan a life that would not require a man to find contentment. She said that her life was only half over, and she didn’t want to feel depressed about the rest of it. That’s why I support any woman who finds herself in this situation and refuses to give up on living a full, productive and rewarding life.
When these women couldn’t or wouldn’t marry the men available to them, the media celebrates these Single by Choice singletons.
When a man goes MGTOW he’s a bitter loser who couldn’t get laid.
@Stuart
Welcome, that’s a very interesting question. I bet some of them do. I’ve heard that Kate B has gotten a bunch of marriage proposals. I’m sure most of them are from strangers on the internet, but I imagine that Lori Gottleib got zero proposals after writing Marry Him. I can’t imagine this tactic would work for the average woman though – can you?
Did anyone else think it was totally bizarre, and not believable, that a 38 year-old woman has “never in her life” imagined finding a partner? And that she feels sorry for married people?
People should be free to live in a manner that best pleases them as long as it harms no one else. For some reason various segments of the population want to force others to conform to their idea of what suits them best. Living their truth is not enough for them they crave validation of that choice from others and are willing to force their view on others to get it.
Congratulations to the author of the book and magazine article for what she has accomplished. It however seems forced; as though people writ large and trying too hard to be happy or at least appear that way.
People who are honestly happy or content with the choices they make and the state in which they find themselves. They tend not to be concerned about others actions unless those actions threaten their happiness; or others are in distress or in need of help.
Social shaming of singles…
My reply:
It is a normative judgment that single people are pathetic regardless of the circumstances of their singleness….It puts single people on the defensive as though they have to justify their status….This movement is a political one to remove the stigma…
Interesting piece by James Taranto here.
My most recent post: government lunchbox inspectors in North Carolina
It is a normative judgment that single people are pathetic regardless of the circumstances of their singleness….It puts single people on the defensive as though they have to justify their status….This movement is a political one to remove the stigma…
Mmm no is to place the stigma into married and procreating couples. if the movement was pro single and not anti marriage they won’t be talking about married people as greedy neither call people with children breeders or bad environmentalists. The whole shaming of single is perceived aside from the manosphere sites no one shames single women, of course everyone shames single men and ask them to man up. But given that this is a movement led by women I’m not unsurprised of that.
Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Listen to the sound of silence.
I lived there for a couple years after college for work and have many expat friends who married Japanese women. The GOJ offers large subsidies to families with children, so money isn’t really an issue. I remember my friends saying the deal they got from the GOJ because of their kid’s dual citizenship was better than the benefits they got from work (namely, heath care plus cash).
My impression is that the Japanese situation is a confluence of very unique factors, including a hesitancy to express romantic feelings because to do so when they are nonreciprocal would be considered near the height of rude in a culture where politeness is king.
@ Susan in re 74
There is probably a percentage, but there has always been one. I have female peers who have expressed a desire to get married but also needing it to fit into their overall plans for their lives with career taking the number one spot and only stepping down if and when they find a man and they only want kids, again, if it can fit well into where they are in their careers.
IIRC one of the female engineers I mentioned while in college actively rebuked a suitor she reported as “very interested” because she wanted to focus on her education and not become distracted. I don’t know to what extent this is typical behavior. It could be very easy for “not in undergrad” to turn into “not until my career is launched” to turn into “not until I become middle management” /“not until I have a nest egg”, etc.
@sestamibi
Thank you for sharing that lovely sentiment about your family life. I find it very moving.
I think the negative social implications of being single as we get older is going to phase out more and more as time passes. With divorce rates being as high as they are, younger people are starting to view being single at 28-45 as normal. I personally hate it when people feel pressure socially to do anything with their lives, I’m glad you touched on this topic.
@HUS
CH has a very interesting post indicating that educated women are more into Hypergamy. The study was designed from good universities in the country. Looks like academia is really zoned in on this issue.
@ Susan:
“She was actively trying to plan a life that would not require a man to find contentment. She said that her life was only half over, and she didn’t want to feel depressed about the rest of it. That’s why I support any woman who finds herself in this situation and refuses to give up on living a full, productive and rewarding life.”
Perhaps I’m missing something but doesn’t this statement fly in the face of HUS’s core mission? I thought the point of this site was to help people (young women especially) navigate the path to happy marriage? Kate Bolick is a prime example of what NOT to do if marriage is the goal. She could get hitched tomorrow but chooses not to because a) she thinks none of her potential mates are good enough, and b) she refuses to sacrifice any of the independence that comes with being single. Yet, she’s also lonely/unhappy, and the entire Atlantic piece was 11 pages of word vomit attempting to rationalize her past decisions and current unwillingness to change course.
It bears emphasizing: today’s young women are only resigned to Bolick’s fate if they choose it. The college enrollment statistics are alarming, but men haven’t disappeared. If women are outpacing men in educational attainment but still wish to marry, they can marry men of lower educational status. This might not be ideal, but in the long run it’s a lot better than settling for “friend families” (or cats). What it will require is a change of perspective in the short-term, something that (I thought) HUS existed to provide.
Mmm no is to place the stigma into married and procreating couples. if the movement was pro single and not anti marriage they won’t be talking about married people as greedy neither call people with children breeders or bad environmentalists. The whole shaming of single is perceived aside from the manosphere sites no one shames single women, of course everyone shames single men and ask them to man up. But given that this is a movement led by women I’m not unsurprised of that.
My reply:
I meant the general social perception outside of this movement; without question, women are judged in general society based upon whether or not they are married. I can recall, from being as a young teenager into young adulthood, when chatting with other girls, relatives or friends of the family, the question would come up, do you have a boyfriend, are you dating? And the same applied when I got older and before I married, “are you married,” there is a general expectation that if a woman is of a certain age she should have checked off “the marriage box.” And if she hasn’t, eyebrows will be raised. Or even in the “getting-to-know-you” among other women, often the questions will follow, are you married, do you have children?
JQ:
@ Susan in re 74
There is probably a percentage, but there has always been one. I have female peers who have expressed a desire to get married but also needing it to fit into their overall plans for their lives with career taking the number one spot and only stepping down if and when they find a man and they only want kids, again, if it can fit well into where they are in their careers.
My reply:
I have seen it as well. They see what can happen to women who make the sacrifices, marriage and then divorce, etc., after having children, they figure the best gamble they can make is on themselves.
@Tony Stark, @dragnet
Agree 100%. I’m a believer in social sanctions, aka shame, as a means of preserving civilization. This is one of the primary purposes of organized religion, and it is found in our legal system as well. Every culture uses shame to control the behavior of its citizens to benefit the whole clan.
I get a lot of resistance, mostly from women, when I say that I favor slut shaming. But that’s an aspect of female intrasexual competition we could use a lot more of.
@Anacaona
True, I hadn’t thought of that. There’s no question she made the sensible choice. I would probably have done the same.
@Lokland
But if classes were all online, and could be taken remotely, who could justify the 50K a year to send a kid to a campus?
@david foster
Thanks, I’ll be featuring the Taranto piece in Part 2!
@Tony Stark
Yes! I’m glad you said that. Let me be clear. I do not wish Kate Bolick’s life for anyone who wishes to marry. I’m simply saying that giving what has already happened, and the very real possibility that she may not find a life partner, I don’t begrudge her the positivity she’s deploying in trying to plan out the remainder of her life as a single woman.
Kate Bolick is indeed a cautionary tale from a HUS perspective.
As a father, I wonder why these ‘great singles’ expect my children to take care of them once they turn 67? If they take care of anyone, it will be my wife and me. And one can raise taxes on young people only so much before it hits a wall.
True, I hadn’t thought of that. There’s no question she made the sensible choice. I would probably have done the same.
Yeah I still hope she will manage to get the message at some point in her series. Maybe having one of the happy single being actually miserable and unhappy about it. Employing a minor character to actually say what she meant is the best we can hope to actually get her point across.
Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Listen to the sound of silence.
People should be free to live in a manner that best pleases them as long as it harms no one else. For some reason various segments of the population want to force others to conform to their idea of what suits them best. Living their truth is not enough for them they crave validation of that choice from others and are willing to force their view on others to get it.
This. As long as the hypothetical person doesn’t gab ad nauseum about their singledom – same goes for their MBA, IQ, or pecs – it doesn’t seem like a big deal. When people talk constantly about how relationships are so overrated, and that’s pretty much all they talk about, they doth protest too much, methinks.
Regarding the state of college education today, there is a documentary called “Declining by Degrees: Higher Education at Risk” which can be accessed on YouTube. While it was not the highlight of my weekend video-watching – that honor belongs to that infamous debate @ Notre Dame between D’Souza and Hitchens – it was pretty absorbing at times. It’s about 2 hrs. long, broken up into 11 10.5-minute segments.
I don’t like the idea of shaming because it wasn’t too long ago that it was used as a silencing tactic against minorities, the poor, gays, etc.
I have a lot of programming homework to do now, so sayonara ’till next time.
I meant the general social perception outside of this movement; without question, women are judged in general society based upon whether or not they are married. I can recall, from being as a young teenager into young adulthood, when chatting with other girls, relatives or friends of the family, the question would come up, do you have a boyfriend, are you dating? And the same applied when I got older and before I married, “are you married,” there is a general expectation that if a woman is of a certain age she should have checked off “the marriage box.” And if she hasn’t, eyebrows will be raised. Or even in the “getting-to-know-you” among other women, often the questions will follow, are you married, do you have children?
Doesn’t, most people assume people of certain age is married because statistically speaking most of those people will be married? Since when asking that became a judgment and not a way to make conversation?
Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Listen to the sound of silence.
Doesn’t, most people assume people of certain age is married because statistically speaking most of those people will be married? Since when asking that became a judgment and not a way to make conversation?
My reply:
Yes it is true, that most people by a certain age will be married. Merely asking is making conversation, but it can become a matter of judgment, depending on the response! Is it a matter-of-fact recognition or is it something else? That is why I mentioned, “the eyebrows raised.”
That is where the inappropriate shaming comes in.
I don’t get it. Those single women are all fabulous, quirky and full of life. There’s no problem, right?
Female herd mentality at work: Kate Bollick wrote a shitty article and all the spinsters jumped on board the bandwagon to celebrate their unique selves.
Several posters have referred to single female engineers. A scarce commodity. Very scarce, as they operate in a target-rich environment.
The problem is getting other women to realize what a catch an engineer is.
@ Susan
“I do not wish Kate Bolick’s life for anyone who wishes to marry. I’m simply saying that giving what has already happened, and the very real possibility that she may not find a life partner, I don’t begrudge her the positivity she’s deploying in trying to plan out the remainder of her life as a single woman.”
Understood, but I think this misses a crucial point. If more marriage is the goal, it’s not enough for women to “wish to marry.” They must wish to marry the men available to them, an increasingly unattractive pool based on rates of educational attainment and resultant earning capacity. As such, the best way to encourage more women to desire marriage is a combination of a) shaming singles, and b) convincing young women that marriage to a blue collar beta, while imperfect, will yield greater long-term happiness than permanent singledom.
Normalizing “friend families” as an alternative to marriage invites young women to indulge in that all too familiar hamster-fueled refrain: “Well, I’d like to get married, but I owe it to myself not to settle. Therefore, I’ll just stay single and fabulous until Mr. Right comes along.” As the number of Mr. Rights dwindles, such attitude, if too widespread, guarantees the complete breakdown of marriage as a social institution. As a strong proponent of marriage and its benefits (a stance with which I agree), you’d be wise to zealously oppose this line of thinking.
I understand your reluctance to be too harsh with Bolick. But it’s important to call a spade a spade. She’s not 39 and single because of complex social forces over which she has no control. She’s 39 and single BECAUSE SHE CHOOSES TO BE 39 AND SINGLE. She’s a smart, attractive woman who could be married tomorrow if that were her desire. If she chooses not to marry, she deserves whatever unhappiness such choice inevitably yields.
@Ad*m
I’m sure they would say it’s payback for the government’s subsidizing marriage, which it should do as the economy will tank without a healthy childbirth rate.
My husband just read the book 2030 by Albert Brooks. In it, cancer has been cured and the Boomers look better at 65 than they did at 50. And the younger generations despise them, because they are a huge drain on economic resources.
@Tony Stark
It’s true. Her last serious relationships were both with men 11 years her junior. They eventually felt the pressure of her ticking bio clock and bailed. She has made some very risky bets.
@ Anna, regarding the new trend of young women calling their BFFs “wifey”
The single girls in my social circle do this a lot! Pretty lame, really. That plus the endless Facebook-whoring on what a “fabulous” time they’ve had on their recent GNOs. Apparently a good time is not really a good time unless everyone knows – whether they want to or not – you’ve had a good time.
Work sucks.
If you have followed inflation trends properly, then you would ascertain that it was inflation, not feminism that drove women into the marketplace. Feminism just took the credit. Women work because they have to, not because they want to feel “empowered” or “sassy” or whatever platitude is being thrown out these days.
This Bolick lady is encouraging women to give up finding a potential lifetime of happiness in order to file more papers, answer more phones, or go into more meetings where they talk about “synergy” and you want to jump out of the window. I despise privileged women who dupe the lower classes into a less rewarding life in order to justify their own bad choices. It’s quite immoral.
Flavia´s last [type] ..Happy Valentine’s Day: Then and Now
@Candide
LOL. I get a lot of “Sangria with my bestie. I LOVE MY LIFE!!!” updates and it makes me wonder who they are trying to convince.
I always imagine them screaming it at the top of their lungs while their laughter slowly turns into crying.
Flavia´s last [type] ..Happy Valentine’s Day: Then and Now
This story is yet more evidence for how much more women need a sense of group approval if not “permission” to act in certain ways than men. Single men who have chosen that state and are enjoying it have not been seen to write articles about how their situation should be celebrated or admired: they just enjoy it.
I understand that Bolick makes her living by writing stuff to sell to women readers and we all do what we have to do to get by. But why are so many women buying what she is selling? Why do they need it so much?
Susan, you mentioned that a focused single woman will one day perhaps be elected President. Why is the career of M. Thatcher so invisible to the feminist inspired world? She was among the most influential British PMs of the last century. She bent the course of history the way she wanted more than most male politicians ever do. She also liked men and by all accounts like being attractive to them. And she had kids. For some reason, the example she created does not count in the Gynosphere.
The single girls in my social circle do this a lot! Pretty lame, really. That plus the endless Facebook-whoring on what a “fabulous” time they’ve had on their recent GNOs. Apparently a good time is not really a good time unless everyone knows – whether they want to or not – you’ve had a good time.
If they ever do a Fight Club sequel this should be Tyler Durdan’s new targets. Destroying facebook with a great monologue about how artificial happiness has replaced real happiness with updated status of nonexistent fabulous lives.
Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Listen to the sound of silence.
@rum
“But why are so many women buying what she is selling? ”
Because they also want to justify bad choices that led them to sucky unfulfilled lonely lives.
Wooohooo! Love my life! Martinis with the girls! <3
Flavia´s last [type] ..Happy Valentine’s Day: Then and Now
Work sucks unless you’re on top. Like one of my vice presidents said once: “I don’t suffer from stress. I cause it.” If you’re lucky enough to get a gig writing about elite sex for an elite magazine read primarily by elite readers, who are so behind the curve that they think that something that has been discussed in the back rooms of the Internet for a decade is “fresh” and “groundbreaking”, hell, you can fart and someone will think it’s ‘The Star Spangled Banner’ and they’ll salute.
Kate Bolick is exactly who feminism was crafted to benefit; elite, articulate, well-educated women.
PS – Kate Bolick missed her calling. Her article read like she wanted to submit it to Architectural Digest. She had your house code-worded for race and class before she even got around to explaining what she did with you.
@ Anacaona:
Now that I would love to see!
M. Chewing Bars
The thing is, no one is always on top. Even the President of the US can be fired. Ordinary corporate VPs have their own yearly performance reviews.
The ultimate W. Street Firm of Goldman Sachs regularly demotes under-performing Partners to associates. Regularly.
“It is hard to make it to the Top if you want to rock and roll.”
Hey guys any of you know how to erase a post in the forums?
Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Listen to the sound of silence.
Speaking of Tyler Durden, y’all would be wise to pay closer attention to the state of the economy when reflecting on relationship trends of the future. We’ll see how unwilling to settle the “independent” cupcakes of future decades will be when (not if) the US defaults on its debt, the dollar collapses, and the “fabulous” western way of life comes crashing down (taking all worthless “higher education” degrees and no-value-added jobs with it) like the flimsy house of cards that it is.
Gender issues is a topic that brings a lot of passionate responses out of a lot of people (myself included), but in the end, boring old economics (with technology coming a close second) will play the biggest role, as always. People don’t change until they start getting hungry.
@Flavia
I get a lot of “Sangria with my bestie. I LOVE MY LIFE!!!” updates and it makes me wonder who they are trying to convince.
The first and last time any of my friends did an “I Love My Life” chant (yes, a chant) was when her father was forcing her to finish Law school. She did it to remind herself that she had a really good life compared to the rest of the world and at least her father wasn’t forcing her into prostitution.
Since then, she has graduated, passed the Bar exam, and found a job in a completely different field. She likes her life a lot better these days.
Bellita´s last [type] ..Read Along: Middlemarch, Chapters 48 to 55
Quoting Susan quoting Bolick:
This quote sums up the feminist problem as far as I’m concerned. more specifically, it describes the precise nature of feminisms fatal flaw. Men routinely do what Bolick and her mother were utterly incapable of doing: predicting the consequences of their personal actions.
Call it sexist if you like but an incoherent civilisation is exactly what happens when women are given too much freedom and choice. They behave like sheep without a sheepdog; either scattering and dying of loneliness or tumbling over the precipice together. This tendency in women is self-evident to men as a class…why is it such a surprise to women when it proves true time and again, ad nauseum?
Rum,
“This story is yet more evidence for how much more women need a sense of group approval if not “permission” to act in certain ways than men. ”
Yes indeed. I keep wanting to go more deeply into this phenomena but no one seems to think it worthy of much discussion.
“Why is the career of M. Thatcher so invisible to the feminist inspired world?”
There’s a few different reasons, one because she was serving an extremely right wing agenda rather than left wing feminism, so I think she was something of an embarrassment to the feminists, that a woman who got into such a position of power could behave in that way, especially while people at the time were still saying (with straight faces) ‘if women ruled the world there’d be no war’.
It’s also because Thatcher was hated – truly hated – to such a degree in the 1980s its actually hard, if not impossible, to express to people who weren’t there what it was like. There’s a song about her at the time that went “the hate that she inspired/had to be seen to be believed”, & that is so true. The closest thing America has is, I guess, Nixon, but at the time she was more regularly compared to Hitler, & that actually wasn’t hyperbole in this instance. I’m old enough to remember her being in power when I was a child, & most of my friends of a similar age have vowed to literally piss on her grave when she dies. In a more hot-blooded country I’m sure the people would unearth her body & put her head on a spike as a warning to future dictators. The recent ‘Iron Lady’ biopic is an atrocious whitewash which gives no clue to how genuinely scary & evil she was seen to be at the time by practically everyone I’ve ever met.
A better reading of the mood of the times, of the way people actually thought about her, & talked about her, can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-BZIWSI5UQ
Byron´s last [type] ..28,000,000 Africans To Be Genitally Mutilated By UN
@ Flavia @ 116 and 117,
+1
JT´s last [type] ..Gods and Goddesses
I am curious to see how my generation will turn out, whether we will try to go back to marriage or whether divorce rates and the number of single people increases. I think it’s a matter of figuring out priorities and keeping expectations in check. I have always wanted to be with someone. This isn’t the same as needing to be with someone. I just know I want to spend my life with one person (and have friends as well of course). Someone to travel with, someone to cook with, someone to raise children with, someone to go to the movies and theatre and symphony with, someone to read in coffeeshops with, someone who will be there first thing in the morning and last thing at night, someone who I can talk to anytime about anything. And sometimes, it’s not about FINDING someone who already does these things, but it’s about working together to create moments like these.
Stories such as Bolick’s have caused me to reflect on my priorities. I am sure she is happy with her life and I’m sure many single women are, but I know that’s not what I’m looking for. I remained single throughout most of university (after a 3 year high school/university relationship) and met my current boyfriend during my last semester of university while studying abroad. I didn’t think we were going to work out initially because I didn’t feel the same level of interest that he did. But I thought more rationally and realized his best qualities included honesty, kindness, intelligence, stability, etc. Over time, I’ve come to value him more and more and now he is my best friend and I love him. In the long term, I assume that these qualities can provide the foundation for a strong, lasting relationship. For me, going through life together with someone is more important than doing it alone and finding myself at the age 80 looking back at my career accomplishments with no special person to share it with. So at the age of 23, while many of my friends are enjoying their single lives, I’ve decided that I’ve stopped ‘looking for someone better’ and will work on making this the best.
@Rum
While I do think there’s a large element of “sisterhood” at play here, it’s also true that traditionally a man who does not wish to marry is viewed differently than a woman who did not have the opportunity to marry. It reflects commitment as something that men bestow.
Or Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto, Corazon Aquino. Personally, I don’t think a qualified woman has run for President in the U.S., I don’t think it has anything to do with sexism.
@Susan
Actually, I wouldn’t be too surprised if this did work for the average woman. It’s the non-purient version of the old saw that any woman can get laid by just going to a bar, getting up on a table and making an announcement. Women refuse to believe it; men always buy it.
What happens next is more telling. My imagination says that Kate B. et. al. assume that most of the proposals are bogus and the rest come from objectionable people. That may or may not be true, but I have a hard time seeing any difference that way between that scenario and the results of Kate B.’s preferred fantasy proposal scenario. The men still propose, she still disposes.
Joe´s last [type] ..Past Is Prologue … and Epilogue
@Mule
Yeah, I was offended by that. I fought it with the fact checker. For one thing, it was just wrong. There is no hedge, the dining room is not wood-panelled. I was surprised those details made it in after I specifically refuted them. It happened with some other stuff too. I learned in this process that the fact-checking is a negotiation.
@Anon
Agreed. And I would just add that technology and the economy are becoming ever more intricately linked.
@Stargirl
I congratulate you on your maturity and insight. I’m glad you grew to love such a good man. At 23, you’re better positioned to avoid Single By Default than most women.
Byron….my perception is that one major reason Margaret Thatcher (the “grocer’s daughter”) was so hated by many was **class prejudice**, plain and simple.
I’m not seeing much resemblance to Nixon, who was far from a classic free-marketer in his beliefs (viz wage and price controls).
Stargirl gets it.
HUS: Winning them over, one girl at a time.
@Susan
Or Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto, Corazon Aquino. Personally, I don’t think a qualified woman has run for President in the U.S., I don’t think it has anything to do with sexism.
Well, Corazon Aquino wasn’t qualified, either. She was a housewife who ran for president in a snap election after her senator husband was assassinated, presumably by the incumbent president. The assassination was the last straw for many voters. Few people cared whether she could do the job or not; they just wanted to see her predecessor out and to know that their votes counted for something again.
Bellita´s last [type] ..Masculine Women 2
@JT
Thank you. Serfdom and materialism has been marketed as empowerment and freedom. It really is incredible what people will believe.
—–
Reflecting upon it, especially now that some people have brought up Sex and the City, I do think that many women seriously do not want a husband and especially children. Being a good wife and especially a good mother is hard work and our society is not based on instant gratification, entitlement, and narcissism. I do think that many men and women are too selfish for such endeavors….the problem is that biology trumps even a decaying society’s message and these women will eventually rue the day they chose Prada over pampers. But of course it always happens when it is too late.
Flavia´s last [type] ..Happy Valentine’s Day: Then and Now
David,
“my perception is that one major reason Margaret Thatcher (the “grocer’s daughter”) was so hated by many was **class prejudice**, plain and simple.”
What do you mean?
Byron´s last [type] ..28,000,000 Africans To Be Genitally Mutilated By UN
Byron,
See, for example, Margaret Thatcher’s greatest battle was against snobs
“I do not wish Kate Bolick’s life for anyone who wishes to marry. I’m simply saying that giving what has already happened, and the very real possibility that she may not find a life partner”
For a middle aged woman, her life is largely spent. There is no life partner anymore.
A man’s life expectancy is 75.6 years. A woman’s life expentancy is 80.8. A woman is expected to outlast a man. Statistically, her marriage will be less than half her life if it lasts even that long. Marriages are doomed with women being the flakes.
The best thing you can get out of a marriage is kids. Without this child-parent bond, a marriage is just advanced dating. Its Legal Cohabitation.
For many single people, its a lie to suggest your life has meaning from your job or accomplishments. Most people are not so talented that they leave a mark on society. The best thing most people can or should do is leave the world to the next generation.
I always like family/relationship oriented people more. However, I think this is wrong. I find a great deal of personal fulfillment in my writing–and this was true before I achieved even an ounce of success with it.
This reminds me of something Joseph Campbell said (I know, I keep quoting the mofo… but he was a genius). “People think we’re all searching for the meaning of life, but I don’t think that’s what we’re really seeking. I think what we’re really seeking is the experience of being alive.”
Life is essentially meaningless. You can pass your genes to the next generation and they, in turn, can pass it down further, but eventually the planet’s going to grow cold, and, somewhere down the line, the sun is going to implode… or explode… or maybe just burn out like a candle at the end of it’s wick. And when that happens, the universe isn’t going to remember any of this. And the universe is going to keep on not remembering any of this until it expands to it’s fullest extent and starts contracting and eventually… idk, disappears? Whatever the case, it’s all meaningless.
But people can experience life in a myriad of ways. And while some of them may not be to our liking, it doesn’t make it any less valid for them as individuals.
“Susan, you mentioned that a focused single woman will one day perhaps be elected President. Why is the career of M. Thatcher so invisible to the feminist inspired world?”
—
“Or Golda Meir, Indira Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto, Corazon Aquino. Personally, I don’t think a qualified woman has run for President in the U.S., I don’t think it has anything to do with sexism.”
—
Ellen Sirleaf-Johnson and Michelle Bachelet made it to the top without succession-line family connections. Bhutto was the daughter of Zulfikar Bhutto and terribly corrupt. Gandhi was Nehru’s daughter.
I think that Thatcher gets no love from feminists simply because she was so unapologetically right-wing.
@Jesus “Life is essentially meaningless. You can pass your genes to the next generation and they, in turn, can pass it down further, but eventually the planet’s going to grow cold, and, somewhere down the line, the sun is going to implode… ”
I’m not trying to advance the evolutionary aspect. The best contribution to a society is one where the people are productive and reproductive. The society functions best where the people are not self-involved, narcistic, and single.
Jonny,
That’s cool. I agree for the most part. But I do think that there are many ways of contributing to society beyond having a family.
David,
No, that’s just silly. The upper & middle classes are a minority in Britain, & besides that, they were her biggest supporters. It was the ordinary people who hated her, & who her policies hurt the most: In her time in office she effectively destroyed British industry forever, viciously declared open war on the trade unions, breaking apart whole communities that depended on them & replaced them with a particularly nasty free-market capitalism. After her first term in office, unemployment was higher than any time since the 1930′s: everyone was on the dole, & the only people that benefited from her rule were the newly emerging (& much reviled) yuppies. It was under her leadership that the Poll Tax (a tax on just being born, basically) was introduced, thankfully unsuccessfully, at least in the form she intended. Under her, CCTV cameras were placed on the corner of every street & Britain became the most spied upon country in the world. Immediately after she stepped down the Conservatives introduced the Criminal Justice Act, which criminalized huge sections of society, in particular gypsies, travellers, immigrants, homosexuals, & protest of any sort.
Margaret Thatcher preached hatred & intolerance of anyone different to or poorer than her & privatized everything that wasn’t nailed down. That fluff-piece article was just another whitewashing that is being put out because they know she’s going to die soon.
On the other hand (if there is one), I’ve come to realize she was a particularly strong leader, and did all she did as well as any man, quite probably. It’s just what she did was completely abhorrent, utterly against the interest of almost everyone she was supposed to be working on behalf of, & in her term of office brought my country closer to a genuinely fascist state than it has ever been before.
Byron´s last [type] ..28,000,000 Africans To Be Genitally Mutilated By UN
You apparently have a lot of friends over 35 for a 21 year old girl.
Jackie–
Congratulations on winning those scholarships! Very impressive!!
I used to feel like your ex-fiance did. My DH, who worked his way through school, felt otherwise. As I have had the opportunity to see how being in affluence with no challenges affects kids, I have become more interested in having my kids learn how to meet challenges than in having them learn curriculum. I’ve seen a lot of friends kids go off to college, drift around, party and generally act stupid. The kids have a tremendous sense of entitlement and ultimately come crashing down when they come face to face with the realization that no one really cares about them or thinks that are as great as their parents lead them to believe. I pity kids whose parents don’t teach them to take care of themselves.
I’m not saying there aren’t some rare exceptions among women out there who really don’t want and children and really do not want to spend their lives with someone,
Yeah, it happens but it’s odd. Every once in a blue moon, I’ll meet someone who really is asocial and much happier alone . More often it’s a man, not a woman, but there are rare people who seem to be just wired that way.
1 2 3 … 6 »
{ 2 trackbacks }