Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The data are clear: The boys are not all right

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#721

Post by bradlys »

imbnwa wrote: post #628
bradlys wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shit sells products. Straight men are a vulnerable audience to sell to. They want sex as much or more than most women and yet they have the least access to it of all people. Sell an image - get them invested in it and sell products that aim to get them somewhere. Yet - it ultimately does nothing. I think Japan is a pretty decent model of where most of the US is going. Anime weebs and what not with waifu pillows will…

We've already seen a few outbreaks the last six or seven years: * The Santa Barbara shooter angry at women * The El Paso, TX and Miami, OH shooters angry about the end of white genetic pool dominance or something * The guy who tried to go on a shooting spree in Harlem and got caught after killing an elderly Black man as practice because "Black men are taking all the White women"

Unfortunately, there are many many more examples of real world violence. If you peer into the abyss that is the online world - it seems like there are an endless amount of shooters waiting to happen in the US. It's no surprise that it happens so often. A lot of men in pain who want everyone else to experience the pain they've been feeling before they themselves commit suicide. With access to guns - it makes it so easy to do.

The biggest surprise for most women out here might be this tidbit: most men are incels until they're not. It's that some men never get out of that horrible rut and a small amount of those are the ones you see end up doing the shootings. The rest suffer silently or just kill themselves.

It's sad. Most of my female friends are completely unaware. All of my male friends are painfully aware because almost every man who ever went through that phase to any significant degree will do almost everything but forget it. Someday we'll get to the point where we acknowledge this but part of me thinks we don't ever want to. If we did - then we'd have to really change things and no one likes to change shit.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#722

Post by d0mine »

thematrixturtle wrote: post #451
irrational wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who wouldn’t prefer to stay home if they had the choice? I could spend my days traveling, hiking, going to the beach, reading, working on hobbies, learning new skills, cooking, etc.

I think you misspelled changing diapers, doing laundry three times a day, spoon-feeding broccoli puree, scraping dried broccoli off the floor, shopping while trying to contain a squealing octopus, etc.

The statistics for what it is worth is 56% (kids) vs. 39% (no kids) women chosen "homemaker" option i.e., perhaps diapers are not as important.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#723

Post by rsanek »

imbnwa wrote: post #628
bradlys wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shit sells products. Straight men are a vulnerable audience to sell to. They want sex as much or more than most women and yet they have the least access to it of all people. Sell an image - get them invested in it and sell products that aim to get them somewhere. Yet - it ultimately does nothing. I think Japan is a pretty decent model of where most of the US is going. Anime weebs and what not with waifu pillows will…

We've already seen a few outbreaks the last six or seven years: * The Santa Barbara shooter angry at women * The El Paso, TX and Miami, OH shooters angry about the end of white genetic pool dominance or something * The guy who tried to go on a shooting spree in Harlem and got caught after killing an elderly Black man as practice because "Black men are taking all the White women"

https://www.gwern.net/Littlewood

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#724

Post by rank0 »

> Many boys are thus often growing up raised by single mothers, the share more than doubling between 1980 and 2019, from 18 percent to 40 percent.

The study he sites at https://www.statista.com/statistics/276025/us-percentage-of-... is titled "Percentage of births to unmarried women in the United States from 1980 to 2019"

I think it's quite dishonest to present this data as "2/5 men are raised without a father." I simply do not believe that claim. Maybe my perception of the country is detached from reality so please correct me if my intuition is wrong.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#725

Post by dougmwne »

ianai wrote: post #717

You’ve got to give people a way to live out their lives with some minimal amounts of dignity, self respect, and some basic life necessities like those. If they can’t find those they’ll turn to all the evils of humanity to obtain their semblances or numbness. Society was formed because it was better for all members than all members being left to do it all themselves. Fail to fulfill the basic needs of its members and…

I think you really get it. Once enough people find themselves on the outside of it, the social contract disintegrates. Has happened many times before.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#726

Post by nautilius »

rayiner wrote: post #716
nautilius wrote: post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obsession about equality as a central tenet in Christianity? You may want to read up on the crusades, slavery, the 30 year war, how even other Christian immigrants (Irish, Italian, etc) were welcomed into the US etc. Also, just because some Christians share some of the morals of your humanist friend does not imply any relation whatsoever. There appears to be that desire from religious groups to often exaggerate and e…

> Obsession about equality as a central tenet in Christianity? You may want to read up on the crusades, slavery, the 30 year war, how even other Christian immigrants (Irish, Italian, etc) were welcomed into the US etc. You may want to read up on slavery. Abolition in Christian societies was mainly a religious movement. Arab societies practiced it extensively as well, but kept going until the 20th century, and only re…

> You may want to read up on slavery. Abolition in Christian societies was mainly a religious movement.

Ah, so there were Christians who opposed it, which makes that the central tenet in Christianity. But there were also those Christians who practiced it - does that now make slavery a central tenet in Christianity instead?

You can't just cherrypick what you find most flattering for your group and then round it off with 'but the Arabs'.

Italians are still a protected minority in New Jersey, and Hispanics are still a protected minority throughout the US. Natives were forcibly Christianized and then killed or deported to barren lands no one wanted.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#727

Post by nautilius »

galangalalgol wrote: post #684
nautilius wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You prove my point. You won't find many atheists (if any) that will take Jesus as in any shape or form a historical person. These are two different worlds. Atheists don't derive their morals from these stories, that's the difference. That there is some superficial overlap (a tree? presents?) doesn't allow you to claim the morality of atheists as religion-derived. That's ludicrous. It's like saying the local butcher t…

I'd still suggest the overlap isn't incidental. Religions need stable or expanding societies to procreate. So ideology that leads to stable or expanding societies is strongly selected for. Religions with written texts have surprisingly low mutation rates in their ideology, but when conditions begin to favor different behaviors to promote stability, polygamy for instance, the ideology changes quickly. As a reference t…

But you're only arguing about proliferation of religion, you're not saying anything about the overlap?

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#728

Post by dibujante »

rayiner wrote: post #263
kevinob11 wrote: post #82

I'm a white straight male, grew up middle class near Seattle. I'm now in my mid-30s and have 3 kids. Semi-recently I had an (maybe my first?) experience where I wasn't the favored party in a situation. My kids have made focus more difficult, and I work in an industry (tech consulting) where focus is a big deal, and the idea that I'm not the perfect person for the job was a foreign feeling. I no longer felt "I was mad…

Respectfully, this is kind of a privileged take, both economic and intellectual. For the majority of men who aren’t going to college, they’ve spent a lot longer than a couple of years feeling like they’re not “the favored party” in a situation.

Respectfully, making sweeping assertions about someone without having read what they wrote and expecting agreement is kind of a privileged take.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#729

Post by joshuamorton »

javajosh wrote: post #672
strken wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Functions are either asynchronous or synchronous. There's a dividing line between the two. Masculine traits are not cleanly divisible like that. Is masculine emotional distance toxic? Maybe so, if it leads to unaddressed problems; or maybe not, if it helps a man to reframe things positively. Is taking control of a group toxic? Yes if it overwhelms or dominates others, and the man doesn't know how to follow; no if it'…

Good comment. In addition addition to a very complex dividing line between toxic and healthy, there is the larger problem of creating phrases of the form "toxic X" or "healthy X" where X is an identity. There is no part of our culture where X is allowed to have the value of "blackness" or "gayness" or "femininity". The wording itself reduces the entire issue of problematic human behavior to the mechanical act of deco…

> There is no part of our culture where X is allowed to have the value of "blackness" or "gayness" or "femininity".

I don't think this is as true as you claim. While the word toxic isn't used, black culture and to a lesser extent gay culture are often described as toxic or harmful, either to those groups or to society more generally.

This is even more true if you look at, e.g. transness, where an article about how it's contagious was in the NYT this week. And, IME, there's usually agreement that men aren't solely to blame for toxic masculinity, while allusions to these other toxic cultures are usually used to specifically avoid addressing issues that affect those groups.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#730

Post by [deleted] »

kansface wrote: post #668
8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women as an "interest group" have been incredible at PR this last century. Men, on the other hand, have yet to realize that they can't coast on the existing historic momentum and have to start speaking up. It doesn't help that folks who attempt to represent men's rights are instantly smeared as either pathetic incel losers, or as alt-right oppressor misogynists. There's no in-between that I'm aware of. From what I ca…

Doesn't Jordan Peterson occupy that niche?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN