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

The End of Men

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 130 posts

Re: The End of Men

#111

Post by FlorinAndrei »

gambling8nt wrote: post #103
FlorinAndrei wrote: post #16

Well, the modern society is less like the savanna, which was the environment that shaped men throughout the evolutionary history of our species, and more like the cave, which was the environment that shaped women. Less physical confrontation, more squabbling. Less concrete, immediate dangers, more abstract worries. Less ass-kicking, more cooperation. Heck, even spatial abilities are so last-century, now that everyone…

Half a century--two human generations--is not nearly enough time for evolutionary pressures to have the sort of effect you are talking about. Least of all in a society of abundance in which the majority of members reproduce. Instead, I'd suggest you look at the various changing environmental factors for an explanation of these phenomena: BPA in plastics ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A ), the growing use of…

Sure, phyto- and xeno-estrogens are strong suspects in this case. But here's another data point:

Measure the testosterone level in your bloodstream.

Then for a few weeks start doing heavy squats (weight lifting) every other day, go car racing, skydiving, etc.

Now measure T again. See the difference?

There are all sorts of things like that. The bottom line is, the more secure the environment, the less the need for men to be "men".

Also, I was not implying that the new evolutionary pressures have already made changes, I was just saying the changes are being made now - but how long before they will become visible, I have no idea. Probably not tomorrow.

Re: The End of Men

#112

Post by Groxx »

dfranke wrote: post #87
gaius wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course there is an orchestrating hand. This is what teachers are taught to teach in teaching colleges. This is why men who want to become teachers (here in the UK at least) are forced through the humiliating process of proving that they are not paedophiles. Perhaps the political theorists behind it haven't thought it through, but emasculating men is policy.

Perhaps the political theorists behind it haven't thought it through, but emasculating men is policy. The first part of this sentence contradicts the second. Emasculating men is not policy. Emasculating men is an unintended side-effect of policy. The creators of that policy, in turn, were shaped by their own education, and so-forth in a cycle of positive feedback. Even if you want to find some ruling class to single…

Policy A is explicitly intended to cause B and C.

Policy A also causes D.

How is D not part of policy A?

If there were a policy where vehicles were not allowed to be within X miles of the coast (to prevent pollution / damage to the flora), wouldn't it also be a policy against living that close to the coast? Sure, some people would still do it... just as some men are still teachers in the UK.

Re: The End of Men

#113

Post by gambling8nt »

FlorinAndrei wrote: post #111
gambling8nt wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half a century--two human generations--is not nearly enough time for evolutionary pressures to have the sort of effect you are talking about. Least of all in a society of abundance in which the majority of members reproduce. Instead, I'd suggest you look at the various changing environmental factors for an explanation of these phenomena: BPA in plastics ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisphenol_A ), the growing use of…

Sure, phyto- and xeno-estrogens are strong suspects in this case. But here's another data point: Measure the testosterone level in your bloodstream. Then for a few weeks start doing heavy squats (weight lifting) every other day, go car racing, skydiving, etc. Now measure T again. See the difference? There are all sorts of things like that. The bottom line is, the more secure the environment, the less the need for men…

I agree that lack of physical activity is another likely factor for changing hormone levels and their secondary effects.

However, I know of no reason to think that these changes are heritable, or that naturally low T is actually a reproductive advantage in our society. (Indeed, given that we have inverted the more typical historical trend of the wealthy out-reproducing the less wealthy, and the selection of low-T for wealth here asserted, one might expect that this society actually reflects reproductive pressure against low-T, rather than in favor of it.)

Re: The End of Men

#114

Post by timwiseman »

rubashov wrote: post #70
scott_s wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As perhaps [he] is suggesting"? He suggested nothing of the sort. He didn't even come close to implying it. Please don't play those kinds of games here.

Nobody is playing games and perhaps you should look up "perhaps". He presents the idea that poor people are incapable of raising their children as a useful fact. The only way this information could be useful is some sort of policy of intensive state interference in child upbringing. We've two competing hypotheses here, both unpleasant: 1) Genetics explains a lot of group differences. 2) Poor groups can't raise their…

2) Poor groups can't raise their own children and there should be intervention.

I think you may be misunderstanding part of the discussion. Saying that the poor cannot provide certain advantages to their children that better off parents can provide is not saying that the poor cannot raise their own children.

I think it is obvious that more well off people can provide advantages. The better off can afford extracurricular activities for their children, an abbundance of books, healthier food. At the truly high end of the economic spectrum you see private schools, private tutors, trips to other countries. And that is before you mention that generally the better off are better educated so they provide more cultured, articulate role models for their kids. Etc.

This is not saying that the poor cannot raise highly moral, hard working, children that become excellent people. But it is saying that when it comes to raising children that are educated, literate, and articulate the poor tend to be at a disadvantage.

And saying that the children from the poor could benefit from some appropriate assistance is not offensive, it is a simple fact. In fact, some programs for that very purpose already exist like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_Start_Program and I have not yet heard it called offensive.

Sounds a lot like the native american forced assimilation attempts to me.

Well, one obvious difference is the word "forced", another was that was trying to deliberately destroy the Native American's culture rather than providing education for people who (generally) want education. The forced assimilation programs were a national tragedy. Attempting to level the playing field in youth so that the children of the poor have a realistic chance of competing with the children of the better off in the job market is generally a good thing for the nation, as long as the programs involved are both effective and voluntary.

(edit: spelling)

Re: The End of Men

#115

Post by tomjen3 »

mynameishere wrote: post #100
hugh3 wrote: post #9

For a fun exercise, try replacing "men" with "black people" and "women" with "white people" throughout this article, and speculate on whether The Atlantic would have published it. "What if modern, postindustrial society is simply better suited to white people?" "White people live longer than black people. They do better in this economy. More of ’em graduate from college. They go into space and do everything black peo…

try replacing "men" with "black people" and "women" with "white people" Well, try replacing "women" with "black people" and "men" with "white people" and they would most certainly publish it. In fact, any time the slightest improvement in the fortune of any allegedly-mistreated group occurs (women, blacks, whatever) it is trumpeted and paraded endlessly. Anyway, the article didn't point out two salient facts: 1. Wome…

You are right about 1 anyway.

I would love to see how the sex is distributed over fields where you are likely to earn at least 50% more than those who don't have a similar degree.

I don't really count a degree in communication or womens studies as a college degree at the same level as math, biology or medicine.

Re: The End of Men

#116

Post by eru »

fleitz wrote: post #106
mynameishere wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

try replacing "men" with "black people" and "women" with "white people" Well, try replacing "women" with "black people" and "men" with "white people" and they would most certainly publish it. In fact, any time the slightest improvement in the fortune of any allegedly-mistreated group occurs (women, blacks, whatever) it is trumpeted and paraded endlessly. Anyway, the article didn't point out two salient facts: 1. Wome…

Once the gov't collapses under its own weight people will start singing a different tune. "The only problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"

Which government do you mean? You know, there's more than one government in the world.

Re: The End of Men

#117

Post by Leon »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #96
sliverstorm wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Oh, to answer your question: if I could become black, I would. Out of curiosity, what do you see as the pros and cons?

Pros: At this point in my life, the main benefit would be with women. Black guy, white girl poses little problem, while white guy, black girl is difficult [1]. Honestly, this dwarfs everything else. Affirmative action might have been helpful when I was in school, though it's probably irrelevant to my life now. Most ethnic groups besides whites have secret networks unavailable to white guys. Their quality tends to be…

On the topic of [1], since I've moved to a an area with a greater distribution of black women, this problem has been seriously brought to my attention.

My dating pool has effectively been cut down, with an advantage having gone towards black men since there is little or less difficulty with a black man and a white woman.

Having discussions with friends from outside of the US, especially those who live in Africa, have mentioned this exact situation - that African women have no problems dating a white male but blacks in America show little interest.

Re: The End of Men

#118

Post by Alex3917 »

moron4hire wrote: post #107
Alex3917 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the New York Times: "Their [research] also suggests that the disadvantages that poverty imposes on children aren’t primarily about material goods. True, every poor child would benefit from having more books in his home and more nutritious food to eat (and money certainly makes it easier to carry out a program of concerted cultivation). But the real advantages that middle-class children gain come from more elusiv…

No, I think they just mean poor. It absolutely applies to the poor community in my home town, which is (to put it succinctly) very "redneck".

They're not talking about people who sit around in cafes reading Finnegans Wake, they're talking about people of low socioeconomic status. This theoretically includes more than just blacks, but in practice the specific reforms they are talking about are only being applied to predominantly black innercity schools. You don't see any poverty stricken districts in Vermont or Appalachia using these methods, because they are specifically designed to 'correct' black culture. This is also what bill gates and Obama are endorsing, incidentally. Anyway if you want to learn more, go read Paul Toughs new book. (But read Punished by Rewards and Underground History of American Education first, because then you'll appreciate why it's fucked up much more.)

Re: The End of Men

#119

Post by Qz »

lukev wrote: post #76
Qz wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even if there are measurable statistical differences in competence at various activities between the sexes (which is far from proven), the average variation between two individuals is far, far more than the average variation between the sexes at large. This is has no bearing on the issue. Yes, two individuals are probably measurably more different than the average woman vs the average man, but the qualities of the…

> This is has no bearing on the issue. Yes, two individuals are probably measurably more different than the average woman vs the average man, but the qualities of the individual tend to balance out to a middle point in the larger picture. If the average difference between all men and all women on Skill X is 3%, and the average difference between any two given individuals is 30%, then even though there are two distinc…

> If the average difference between all men and all women on Skill X is 3%, and the average difference between any two given individuals is 30%, then even though there are two distinct loci, gender is still an extremely weak indicator.

This assumes that all qualities are perceived equally. The fact is that humans are biologically and socially predisposed to pay more attention to gender cues than almost everything else. Gender matters a lot more to basic reproduction than whether you like country and I like rap.

Besides, the fact that more women are getting bachelor's degrees, etc, says nothing about which gender has more skill (which btw is taught rather than inherent), and the article never made implied that anyway.

The point is, gender matters, and the fact that humans on the whole are more diverse from each other than one gender is from the other does nothing to change that.

Re: The End of Men

#120

Post by sgman »

hugh3 wrote: post #9

For a fun exercise, try replacing "men" with "black people" and "women" with "white people" throughout this article, and speculate on whether The Atlantic would have published it. "What if modern, postindustrial society is simply better suited to white people?" "White people live longer than black people. They do better in this economy. More of ’em graduate from college. They go into space and do everything black peo…

Try replacing "men" with "women" and "women" with "men" and speculate on whether The Atlantic would have published it.
Post reply on HN