This actually indirectly incriminates feminism, article says men will do what is required of them to get sex and feminism sees women being promiscious as "right". But in turn allows one night stands to be common thus lowering the requirements to get sex. Contrast this from older times where majority men would get sex if they were okayed by parents of a woman and then got to marry ... Parents would look at character, wealth, profession, and more all indicators of stability. So men responded by pursuing those things .... But with tinder why bother let's play COD all day and be high 24/7
No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
881–890 of 1001 posts
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#882I can appreciate this perspective because I used to have it. I even wrote a similar blog post 10 years ago - it was on the top of HN and the comment section was a beautiful shitshow. For me, this perspective was a good story to tell myself - it justified why I was only investing my time in “work”, and validated me for having “come so far”. Over time, I have reflected and shifted this perspective. That reflection cent…
I agree - and will take it one step further: he misses the root causes of "instability", and I bet it tracks directly with the gutting of the middle class starting in the 70's, and/or the same flat-lining of wages (not keeping up with inflation etc) despite huge increases in productivity in about the same time period. Money is a huge stressor in relationships. Misogyny is still a huge thing (to my utter surprise hone…
>Misogyny is still a huge thing (to my utter surprise honestly). Abuse, etc. Options for financial stability to escape these things I would suspect to contribute as well.
yes, this is why I couldn't quite be convinced of the thesis being proposed here. Or at the very least, they way they try to describe the "marketing" of being in a faithful marriage runs counter to the reality. While the situation of "deadbeat dad becomes alcoholic, won't get jobs, and cheats" is not an uncommon cause of divorce, the more common narrative pushes it as a liberation of women's right. Less about a man breaking away to be free and more about a woman not being trapped.
That above deadbeat stereotype has more become the "violent domestic abuser" type as of late. So divorce is a way to turn an absolute nightmare of a situation into emotional stability in exchange for what will likely be financial hardship. It turns a bad into slightly less bad, not a potentially patchful good into a bad.
Or at least, that's how society markets it. I don't have hard sources and admit these are just the notions I feel have risen over 3 decades of media consumption.
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#883Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the trouble, they don't know what they're trying to explain. This thread is a reverberation chamber for irrational masculine fear. A bunch of people trying to pinpoint something that may not even exist, and choosing to look backward for familiarity. You can't engage with that. Not online. Sometimes the healthy response is "This shit is nuts, I'm going to go talk to people in person and touch some grass."
I think you’re calling it “irrational” to give yourself an excuse to engage in bad faith — such as using demeaning language towards a large group of people. That gives you an “out” from having to understand something that might conflict with a belief you hold or make you uncomfortable.
Or maybe it's just irrational. Not saying the feelings expressed here don't point to a very real issue, but there's no chance in any meaningful engagement with the vast majority of the comments in this thread. You have a bunch of scared men making emotional arguments that somehow their entire self worth and sense of direction relies on society demanding something of them. The something in most cases being rooted in nostalgia, either for times when men rode horses, or when it was more acceptable to slap a woman around - but don't worry, that didn't happen much, because it was also a time of tighter extended family and thus other men around to protect and avenge her. Boyish fantasies of cowboys, knights, and getting to beat up your brother-in-law if he hit your sister and left a mark. It doesn't get less insane as you continue reading.
By all means let's talk about what men are going through and feeling, let's treat it seriously, but let's not scramble in terror backwards.
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#884Earlier quoted context omitted.
In some places people have centuries of social-structure adaptation to deal with the stress of being systematically oppressed (by local elites, colonial overlords, ...). E.g. money gets shielded by community institutions (such as local religious organizations) that are harder for elites to steal from than individual peasants, and then those act as a kind of social safety net in hard times. Extended families/clans bui…
I don't think describing them as "rural peasant societies" is a great perspective to assume.
What do you mean? Historically most people in most places in the world (e.g. my ancestors in Europe a few generations ago, my godparents in southern Mexico recently, or most of your ancestors if you go back a couple centuries, wherever they happened to come from) have lived as rural peasants.
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#885Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rob went to Yale. He's literally a luxury columnist.
He went to Yale, yes, but he doesn't have the typical Yale graduate background of wealth and status. He had a drug addict mother and was sent to foster homes until he was adopted. He experienced the various levels of society first-hand.
Once you're in, you've got the same privilege as everyone else.
Homeless to Yale isn't that different from Cisco-engineer-parents to Yale. You're still at Yale. You're still hobknobbing with the elites, and you are one of them.
He is part of the problem, even if he doesn't get it.
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#886Earlier quoted context omitted.
they endorse it in order to reduce stigma; but reduced stigma leads to greater prevalence
Changing the meaning of words (i.e, reducing stigma) never works. It's a practice used by authoritarians to get what they want fast because it's cheap and relatively easy. I'm curious what the GP was told that makes them think the alternative to endorsing single motherhood is worse. The alternative to reducing stigma would be fixing the underlying issues that cause the stigma...in this case the lack of ability for a…
The Modest Proposal is to put all children of single mothers into foster homes. Done, no more single mothers.
Destigmatizing doesn't increase prevalence more than the conditions that actually cause it (welfare donut hole, the drug war).
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#887Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably because single motherhood is generally not a choice made willingly. There isn't any hypocrisy here, they don't endorse single motherhood because it's fashionable they "endorse" it because the alternative is worse.
Curious what you see as these worse alternatives? Abortion, adoption, abandonment, forced marriage, forced labor for child support?
Yes, I think all of those are worse if they are effectively coerced.
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#888Earlier quoted context omitted.
What the heck? He did reply to the argument. He didn't call anyone in the community names, and the beliefs and position held by the author absolutely DO matter in this context. Dang you need to really revaluate your decisions on when to post or call people out for "rule violations".
I don't see any reference to beliefs or positions in the GP comment, nor replies to arguments. "Luxury columnist" is obviously being used as a dismissive label in this thread. If you toss in "Yale" as more or less a bad word, then the entire comment reduces to name-calling. This was not a borderline moderation call. (Btw the guideline against calling names isn't limited to people in the community.)
The fact that it's considered a epithet is more revealing than anything else.
Him being an elite - someone who knows he's intrinsically superior to everyone else by virtue of selection - is 100% relevant to his opinions being flawed.
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#889Earlier quoted context omitted.
He went to Yale, yes, but he doesn't have the typical Yale graduate background of wealth and status. He had a drug addict mother and was sent to foster homes until he was adopted. He experienced the various levels of society first-hand.
> Of my five closest friends in high school, none went to college. Two went to prison. Agreed, couldn't be further away from your typical Yale graduate.
Not typical - he's a veteran. I admire that. But he still got in. Therefore, he's superior (nearly intrinsically, on almost every dimension) to 99.5% of the American population and has the privileges that come with it.
Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing
#890Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this a bad thing? The US was founded by immigrants. Immigration, diversity, and the US’ history with these topics (good and bad) is huge part of the national cultural identity. As a US citizen, I think as long as we can maintain the cornerstones of our national heritage (democratic traditions, constitutional freedoms, etc) it should be fine if things change to reflect the demographics of our population.
Immigration has a large history in the US, yes, but historically immigrants were encouraged (through social pressures) to assimilate part of their identity. Is that pressure for partial assimilation still there? Or do we encourage diversity so much now that anything goes?
That pressure still exists. I'm not sure why you might think otherwise. Various parts of current culture came from immigrant communities maintaining parts of their cultural identity while still broadly assimilating, eg St Patrick's Day.
Keep in mind a lot of immigrants from Central/South America 6 generations ago just pass for "white people" now so you don't notice them.