No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing • Hacker News Board

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#971

Post by Zababa » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 3:20 PM UTC

filoleg wrote: post #719

AvocadoPanic wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure r/childfree has lots of this sort. They often seem a bit too into being childfree to me, I probably wouldn't like their shitty kids anyway. There's an opportunity cost for most life decisions. Sometimes they're obscured. It's often not presented this way but for a cohort of women university and work, displaces marriage and children.

Imo r/childfree to normal people who just don't want to have kids is like r/atheism to normal people who just happen to not be religious. Both subs are absolutely insufferable, even to many of those who align with them on the core premise. It feels like a lot of users there, instead of replacing all that time/effort/money spending (that comes with having kids) with a bunch of fun/useful/exciting things to do in life,…

> Imo r/childfree to normal people who just don't want to have kids is like r/atheism to normal people who just happen to not be religious. Both subs are absolutely insufferable, even to many of those who align with them on the core premise.

That's an important point. I'm in the "people that just happen to be not religious" group, some people around me are religious and we have no issues getting along. These subreddits are based on a total rejection of "live and let live".

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#972

Post by quantified » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 4:17 PM UTC

the_solenoid wrote: post #410

jcstk wrote: post #132

I 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…

>> Some of the jobs he can get don’t pay enough to give him the self-respect he feels he needs, and others require him to get along with unpleasant customers and coworkers, and to maintain a submissive attitude toward the boss.”

> It used to be high-status to hold a job and take care of your family. Not so much anymore.

As though it’s ever been considered high-status to have crap pay and deal with abusive bosses and coworkers. Ask the really high-status people whether it was.

You need recordings to be able to review interactions for who is more in the right, telling the employee they need to turn off FB and get on with work seems like it management would say it’s reasonable and worker might say it’s overbearing.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#973

Post by ALittleLight » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 4:20 PM UTC

marcusverus wrote: post #967

ALittleLight wrote: post #901

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The portion of double income households more than doubled between 1960 and today[1]. The middle class is working more because they want to, or because they need to? Purchasing power for the average worker is flat[2]. In some sense, it's like the middle class has been working for fifty years without a raise, only now two people in the household need to work. That fewer people are getting married or having kids is like…

> The portion of double income households more than doubled between 1960 and today[1]. Your data only represents "married couples with children under 18"--a (shrinking) minority of households. By definition it does not account for the dramatic rise in single-adult households.

The single adult households are a separate and bad thing. I don't think there has been a substantial shift in human desires in the last couple generations - most people still want to get married and have kids and fewer of them are. That they are able to subsist in one family households is not a bragging point for our system.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#974

Post by StellarTabi » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 4:24 PM UTC

motohagiography wrote: post #877

d23 wrote: post #44

Do people find this stuff compelling? Rank speculation and confident assertion with minimal substantive backing? I’d find this statement equally compelling (which is to say, not at all): > Since we stopped using horses as a primary means of transportation, men’s sense of self worth has diminished. Riding a horse carried a lot of high status connotations: drive, masculinity, towering above the land, and man’s dominati…

Triggered my HN alert on horses. I ride seriously more days than not. It's a huge and rich topic, but short version is - there were no kings without horsemen. It's been the training for officer class for milennia because it uniquely inculcates a fearlessness and physicality and magnanimity that really does elevate and improve men by developing qualities that are transferrable to other beings in nature. There are men,…

> Women who ride seriously are usually superior leaders as well

Always good to wake up one day and find out I'm a superior leader.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#975

Post by kasey_junk » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 4:30 PM UTC

the_only_law wrote: post #891

kasey_junk wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it’s a particularly bad short slogan because it says something a) no one really believes and b) something that is particularly unpopular. Defund the police sets back the very things it’s trying to address. Contrast that to “Black Lives Matter” or “We are the 99%” which are also short slogans that encapsulate the broad and varied beliefs of the respective movements without being off putting to even the people who…

> Contrast that to “Black Lives Matter” or “We are the 99%” which are also short slogans that encapsulate the broad and varied beliefs of the respective movements without being off putting to even the people who agree. Err, the former had people shitting themselves over it online for years.

People who disagreed with the movement. People that agreed liked (and posted signs in their yards, etc) found it to be a moving slogan.

Contrast that with “Defund the police” where even where there is broad support for alternative policing initiatives, you don’t see support for the slogan.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#976

Post by Ensorceled » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 4:31 PM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #361

Ensorceled wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "US thinkers" is a ridiculously broad term. It's a pretty good generalization, however. I see it over and over again in US political discussions a total, and possibly (probably?) deliberate, blindness to the idea that health card could be socialized, UI and welfare could be better, access to education could be universal and things like job training or maternity leave could exist, etc.

Then you're not connecting with the US "left" (probably not a coincidence). The Nation is both the oldest continuously published weekly magazine in the US (founded in 1865) and consistently represents different parts of the US left. Jacobin is another good example. It is true that if you watch network or cable TV from the US, you will not find the actual left represented, other than perhaps Bernie Sanders. What they…

> Then you're not connecting with the US "left" (probably not a coincidence).

Interesting assumption. I'm far to the left of most Canadians, let alone Americans.

> It is true that if you watch network or cable TV from the US, you will not find the actual left represented, other than perhaps Bernie Sanders.

That was my point, albeit poorly expressed; very few actual leftist thinkers get any kind of mainstream exposure so all "US thinkers" are right of centre unless you specifically go looking for the left leaning ones.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#977

Post by env123 » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 4:50 PM UTC

3np wrote: post #535

jcstk wrote: post #132

I 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…

One thing that really stuck out to me was the implicit assumption that "stable home environment" requires or is equal to "married couple of biological parents living together until child becomes adult". Especially the quote where an agreement that stability is important was interpreted as agreement that marriage is important.

Stable home environment = GOOD married couple of biological parents living together until child becomes adult

Stable home environment = GOOD biological parent until child becomes adult (if other GOOD parent dies, not leaves)

Leaves = child trauma, parent BAD = child destructive behaviour

One GOOD parent dies = child trauma, but lesser extent

GOOD = morally, respect, supportive, nice, kind, good-feel stuff

/eli5

Lesson: Marry not for looks, but personality eg. Johnny Depp and Amber Heard

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#978

Post by fineIllregister » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

yywwbbn wrote: post #472

fineIllregister wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Homer Simpson is the face of traditional American family structures. The life available to Homer Simpson included a skilled job that he could obtain without a college degree (and also while being an idiot). He was able to purchase a four bedroom home in the community he grew up in and provide for his wife and three children on that one income. That was the norm, now it's practically gone. The lack of accessible eco…

> That was the norm I don’t think you should blindly trust everything you see on TV. I doubt being able to afford a 4 bedroom while working in a low skilled job was ever the norm (even without being an idiot). In any case Homer was an engineer in a nuclear power plant, while he was probably quite underpaid, his income should had still been relatively decent.

Being able to support a family on one, non-degree necessary income absolutely was the norm.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#979

Post by mahogany » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

cebert wrote: post #71

gryson wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has a low (and falling) birthrate. Not quite as low as South Korea, but certainly not high by any means.

The US is likely fine because our southern border is porous and anyone can walk right in. I don’t see any indication that this will change. The benefit is even if the US birth rate is declining, we have an influx of younger individuals who can help keep the economy going.

> our southern border is porous and anyone can walk right in.

That's an odd thing to say when thousands have died in the desert trying to get in.

Re: No one expects young men to do anything and they are responding by doing nothing

#980

Post by jjav » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 8:17 PM UTC

kortilla wrote: post #933

ALittleLight wrote: post #901

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The portion of double income households more than doubled between 1960 and today[1]. The middle class is working more because they want to, or because they need to? Purchasing power for the average worker is flat[2]. In some sense, it's like the middle class has been working for fifty years without a raise, only now two people in the household need to work. That fewer people are getting married or having kids is like…

> Purchasing power for the average worker is flat[2]. In some sense, it's like the middle class has been working for fifty years without a raise, only now two people in the household need to work That “flat” wage is accounting for inflation according to your own link. So not only would a single earner be doing just as good today as back then, adding a second income means they are raking in twice the spending power as…

> Worst of all (from a financial perspective), they want both of their average kids to spend 4 years at an expensive university.

Expensive only because it's been allowed to become expensive. Decades ago it was normal for a good university to be nearly free or at least quite affordably by the student working part time to pay their way.

> dental care, better medical care

People "want" health care. I mean of course, but it's not a whim, it's a basic necessity. Which like the university, was very affordable to nearly everyone decades ago.

Not sure people want bigger houses either, every housing topic on HN is full of desire for smaller apartments to get built.