Men Without Work (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#271

Post by tennisflyi » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:06 PM UTC

jimmaswell wrote: post #98

blahblah1234567 wrote: post #53

I think "Men Without Work" is a euphemism. The problem is: - Men without Skills in-demand-- skills which are at least somewhat fulfilling & interesting to those men. Solution: Research labor data for careers in high demand, then cross reference those careers with skills a person is interested in. Then identify resources & a roadmap for learning those skills. And sit down, and put the time in to learn & apply those sk…

> Their problem is that they refuse to put together a well formatted resume, apply to jobs, and accept that they may have to start at the bottom of the career ladder. I see this a lot. Younger people who have been led to believe by incendiary reddit and twitter rants that everyone lived like some Leave it to Beaver sitcom in the near past and they should be able to own a house and support a family at 19 on a McDonald…

I can not for the life of me get a "bottom of the career ladder" SDR/BDR position...

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#272

Post by xg15 » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:07 PM UTC

bluefirebrand wrote: post #249

xg15 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Men's rights are human rights. They are father's rights. They are worker rights. It means equal protection under the law, protection from rape and violence, protection from discrimination and threats. These are basic human rights that should be afforded to everyone. This should not be a zero-sum game: to give one group rights you should not take them away from another group! There are plenty of rights to go around…

> E.g., I haven't yet seen a feminist sub on reddit excuse a female rapist They don't have to, society already does this for them all the time. Pay attention to how media frames the crime when a female teacher sleeps with an underage male student versus when a male teacher rapes an underaged female student. My word choices are deliberate here. In a vast majority of headlines and articles I've seen, if the perpetrator…

Yep, I've seen this as well. What I've haven't seen is actual feminists endorsing those articles.

This makes me think this kind of narrative stems more from "woke captialist" media or from people pushing the "men are always happy about sexual attention" narrative. That narrative is considered part of "toxic maskulinity" - exactly the mindset that feminists want to get rid of.

Also note that (in the US) the legal definition of rape was changed to include men no earlier than 2012 [1] (i.e. under Obama). Under the previous definition, it was fundamentally impossible to consider a man a rape victim. That previous definition was from 1927.

So the assumption that only women could be raped was the older one. The modern progressive movement was who got men included in that definition.

[1] https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition...

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#273

Post by Beltalowda » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:09 PM UTC

patorjk wrote: post #135

asperous wrote: post #50

I wrote the original wikipedia article for this! I haven't read the book just thought it was notable. It was a little tough getting past the editors (the section referencing all those news articles they made me put in to reach notability). I also got called a shill for the publisher.

I don't understand why some people feel the need to be so snarky in their summary messages: > I'll bet this clown got paid to write this article and they did a poor job of it, too. It's really turned me off from contributing. Years ago I got into a spat where someone didn't like something I added to an article and said my sources weren't valid since they were blog posts. I went and found a mainstream magazine article…

In practice Wikipedia is often an effortocracy, not the meritocracy it wants to be.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#274

Post by luckylion » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:28 PM UTC

lazide wrote: post #259

luckylion wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true, and I don't think society will say "we've let you down but in return you don't owe taxes". I meant to ask more about the ethics. Should you feel obligated to uphold your end if the other side does not?

Practically, does it matter if the other side has guns and doesn’t care what the person thinks? (Ethically, of course, spherical cows and all, there are many ways to discuss it - but why?)

Society doesn't function because of law enforcement (and the threat of violence by the state), it functions because the super majority doesn't break the laws. If the social contract breaks away, you can have an army but you can't run a modern society on threats, or you'll exhaust the resources by government watchmen, and you'll end up with 10% in society being productive and the rest watching them and each other.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#275

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:33 PM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #268

JKCalhoun wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but there are communities within the larger community. If you're into D&D you can fit comfortably within a like-community of RPGamers. And I can't help but think back to the punks, or goths or any of the other disenfranchised youth cultures that appeared to revel even in the rejection from broader society. "The children they despise us, the difference is now we want to be hated."

It's funny to think of a future where the rising difficulty of surviving in mainstream culture for anyone who's not a movie star eventually results in a society evenly split between punks and goths, but something tells me that's not a real solution. :-)

[deleted]

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#276

Post by lordfrito » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:36 PM UTC

Karawebnetwork wrote: post #270

lordfrito wrote: post #215

My 2c. Society doesn't care about young men. They're pretty much left to fend for themselves. Hopefully they have a good family structure, and a few good male friends. Without that they're toally adrift. I learned this lesson when I got a flat tire driving across two states when I was 20. No one is willing to help. I guarantee a 20 yo woman would have no problem flagging down help, heck people would stop to help with…

> Or maybe this is a win for feminism? I understand this is a passing remark, but I want to answer the question anyway. Feminism is not about making men's lives more difficult or about cheering when men struggle. Most feminists believe that gender equality can benefit everyone, including men, by creating a more just society. It is not about oppression or mistreatment of any group, not of even men. Men supporting and…

Ultimately feminism or not isn't the point to me. You can't get two people in a room agreeing what feminism is and isn't anymore. No true scotsman etc. So I've given up arguing isms.

Whatever it is, we can all agree that society is in flux. Old rules are being thrown away, new and unproven rules are being written. There will victories, losses, and speed bumps along the way.

I'm not qualified to judge the goodness or badness of what's happening overall. I have my doubts, but they're mainly just for me as they reflect my personal experience and biases. Society will go on without me (and my generation) regardless of my views. In the end this is civilizations burden, not mine.

Still it's good to see stuff like this at least discussed. There was a time you got shot down for merely mentioning that many men have it hard as well.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#277

Post by joeman1000 » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:37 PM UTC

lordfrito wrote: post #215

My 2c. Society doesn't care about young men. They're pretty much left to fend for themselves. Hopefully they have a good family structure, and a few good male friends. Without that they're toally adrift. I learned this lesson when I got a flat tire driving across two states when I was 20. No one is willing to help. I guarantee a 20 yo woman would have no problem flagging down help, heck people would stop to help with…

I’m really feeling this. I’m 26 and have noticed that I’m chopped liver in terms of hiring/recruiting. Also same for life in general. I feel a bit ‘fucked over’

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#278

Post by mint2 » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:40 PM UTC

epups wrote: post #262

lordfrito wrote: post #215

My 2c. Society doesn't care about young men. They're pretty much left to fend for themselves. Hopefully they have a good family structure, and a few good male friends. Without that they're toally adrift. I learned this lesson when I got a flat tire driving across two states when I was 20. No one is willing to help. I guarantee a 20 yo woman would have no problem flagging down help, heck people would stop to help with…

I'm sorry, but I think your narrative is misguided. When you were 20,which was 30 years ago, it might have been less likely that you would get a stranger to change your tire. But it was much more likely you, rather than a woman, would find employment and especially reach a position of power. Which one do you think is more important for a satisfying life? The fact that we are working towards a more equal society is no…

This comment leaves out a major important point.

In the original comment, calling out the troubles of men as a win for feminism is a totally wrong premise. It was also an offhand remark at the end and really took away from the commment. feminism is unrelated to creating those cited difficulties and actually try to solve some of them.

The troubles described sounded more like the product of rising inequality, reduced union sway, and growing power of the corporate machine. Some also sounded like products of unhealthy machoism in society where “real men” are expected to be 100% self reliant and always do things like change their own tires

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#279

Post by lazide » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:41 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #274

lazide wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Practically, does it matter if the other side has guns and doesn’t care what the person thinks? (Ethically, of course, spherical cows and all, there are many ways to discuss it - but why?)

Society doesn't function because of law enforcement (and the threat of violence by the state), it functions because the super majority doesn't break the laws. If the social contract breaks away, you can have an army but you can't run a modern society on threats, or you'll exhaust the resources by government watchmen, and you'll end up with 10% in society being productive and the rest watching them and each other.

I think you misunderstand my point.

Good fences make good neighbors.

Enforcement is the fence.

Functional societies have reasonable fences, and rarely need to test them in the majority case, because they’re functional. There is no point in thinking about testing something you know works.

When someone starts wandering off, or a problem case is there, it also deals with them in a way that doesn’t undermine everything else. It keeps problems at bay.

Without that fence, or when the fence starts being moved so it’s NOT in the right place, problems cascade and grow, society starts fighting itself and others as trust is lost in institutions and other people, and eventually, either vigilantism, civil war or mass corruption is the result. Like you’re discussing.

It’s a constant, ongoing process.

This also makes it pretty rough being an edge case, which is the context of the thread we’re in.

A society beyond a certain, relatively small size without law enforcement (or similar boundary setting and enforcement) will, no matter how amazing, fall apart as the natural forces of corruption and selfishness tear at it unchecked. It doesn’t have to be a professional corps of folks, but it has to be a working mechanism though. Even small groups have this. Usually in the form of a chief, village head, etc.

Larger groups of course need something more formalized eventually, just due to scale.

Regardless, not towing the line is going to get you stomped on, unless you’re able to get under the radar, or are part of a large enough group that you can force the apparatus to leave you alone. Though that definitely contributes to the whole ‘mass corruption’ problem.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#280

Post by ajsnigrutin » Tue, Jan 03, 2023, 10:47 PM UTC

Karawebnetwork wrote: post #270

lordfrito wrote: post #215

My 2c. Society doesn't care about young men. They're pretty much left to fend for themselves. Hopefully they have a good family structure, and a few good male friends. Without that they're toally adrift. I learned this lesson when I got a flat tire driving across two states when I was 20. No one is willing to help. I guarantee a 20 yo woman would have no problem flagging down help, heck people would stop to help with…

> Or maybe this is a win for feminism? I understand this is a passing remark, but I want to answer the question anyway. Feminism is not about making men's lives more difficult or about cheering when men struggle. Most feminists believe that gender equality can benefit everyone, including men, by creating a more just society. It is not about oppression or mistreatment of any group, not of even men. Men supporting and…

> Feminism is not about making men's lives more difficult or about cheering when men struggle. Most feminists believe that gender equality can benefit everyone, including men, by creating a more just society. It is not about oppression or mistreatment of any group, not of even men.

The problem here is, that in many places, we've gone past equality to clear privilige for women (and other groups, that mostly are not young men). In my country women can get a grant every year for 3-5k eur to start a private company. Up until recently they had to work less years until (government) retirement, got higher pensions for the same amount of money paid in (still true), and since they live longer, they get to receive the money for a longer time in average. For same crimes, they get lower punishments, they get priority due to hiring quotas (especially in tech), and in recent times even existential threats are better for women than men (eg. being able to leave a war-torn country or just not get drafted to war). On the other hand, there are many support systems from women, from women-only workshops, places, scolarships, sponsorships, to shelters, support groups and treating mental healt issues way differently than with men. Add to this a lot of media (both social and mainstream) propaganda how (white) men are the problem of the world, how women are better in everything,...

How should a young, not very-pretty and not rich men feel in such a society? They're basically worthless if they don't provide for others while being treated as shit by everyone while playing at an uneven playing field. I totally understand that more and more of those men will just say "f*ck everything" and remove themselves from society that doesn't value them.