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

A generation of American men give up on college

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 824 posts

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#661

Post by approxim8ion »

zz865 wrote: post #657
approxim8ion wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This all seems horribly insecure. I refuse to partake in it as a man.

What does that mean? You will seek out a over educated achiever wife or avoid one?

It means I won't be intimidated by my partner's credentials or success. "Over-educated" is not a thing.

If men were free to chase whatever professional growth they wanted and women just had to stuff it because they would be avoided by men if they were "over-qualified" according to you, then that's a dynamic I cannot wait to see completely obliterated. I'm not saying only one partner being a provider or sole breadwinner is a bad thing, but it absolutely does not need to be the only role possible. These men you and GP talk about need to figure out what else they can bring to the table in a relationship, because the ability to put food on the table is hardly the only "desirable" thing people see in a partner, and it doesn't seem like a great thing to tie your self-worth to.

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#662

Post by [deleted] »

tck42 wrote: post #538
nemo44x wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's advocating for "anti-racism" which claims there is no such thing as "not racist" policy, only racist policy and anti-racist policy. But he jumps through hoops to redefine racism so that it can suit his argument that "not racist" doesn't exist. That if you don't consider race in literally everything then you are racist, by his definition. This is in direct opposition to the Civil Rights act of 1964: "Since the 19…

I think the redefining racism you mention is simply pointing out, at a high level, that one law does not erase injustice ingrained into power systems that were instructed by racism for literally hundreds of years, or the effects those systems have had on the targets of this racism and their offspring (things like generational wealth accumulation), and everyone else subject to those systems. The other thing is the ide…

[deleted]

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#663

Post by Arainach »

nickysielicki wrote: post #94
Arainach wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can make NYC/SF money and save/invest a portion of your income, you can retire and do significantly better elsewhere. You can't do the opposite. If you can have a decent lifestyle in Ohio on 40k (big if, when you factor in retirement planning) you can still fundamentally never leave Ohio.

> you can still fundamentally never leave Ohio. God forbid. Think of all the experiences you and your family will miss out on! Lately all I want is to get as far away from people as possible. The internet has negated every advantage of these regions and of money broadly. You cannot buy a nuclear family.

>God forbid. Think of all the experiences you and your family will miss out on!

This is a snide remark, but it is absolutely a factor. I grew up in Michigan, and the number of people who never venture beyond their almost-entirely-white small town to see what other communities and cultures are like is a huge contributing factor to the amount of prejudice and judgmental nature that makes me never want to move back.

Seeing people different from you and different places is broadening and gives you a much better perspective to be able to understand the world. This is important in life as well as in your career.

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#664

Post by refenestrator »

nemo44x wrote: post #649
refenestrator wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If all of my policy preferences code as progressive but I think Kendi and the white fragility lady are jackasses, what does that make me then under your definition?

Charitably, cognitively dissonant and more harshly, a useful idiot some would say. I’d assume an egalitarian person who means well and has started to become suspicious of the more illiberal aspects of progressive motivations.

Wow. So, what, I have to vote Trump now? That won't be happening but always interesting to hear different perspectives.

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#665

Post by wheelinsupial »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #123
orwin wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure about that, i've hear Professor Emeritus Mallard talk about his youth in the genetical field and the first use of computers to assist geneticists, he told me that he basically never saw men doing computer work, and that changed in the 80s, along with the culture.

There were a lot of women in computing in the 50s, 60s, and 70s, and they've mostly been forgotten by the "Women don't really like this stuff" crowd.

Apparently the amount of women in computer science majors peaked in the early-80s around 36-37%: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when...

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#666

Post by zepto »

teawrecks wrote: post #660
zepto wrote: post #596

“Young men get little help, in part, because schools are focused on encouraging historically underrepresented students. Jerlando Jackson, department chair, Education Leadership and Policy Analysis, at the University of Wisconsin’s School of Education, said few campuses have been willing to spend limited funds on male underachievement that would also benefit white men, risking criticism for assisting those who have hi…

After a few hundred years of race/gender based policies working in favor of whites/males, I don't know what else we would expect from a deliberate effort to reverse it. You can't expect to play a game, give one team an advantage for the first half, give neither team an advantage in the second half, and call it a fair game at the end. Yeah, it sucks for individuals in the meantime, but we were simply never going to ac…

> You can't expect to play a game, give one team an advantage for the first half, give neither team an advantage in the second half, and call it a fair game at the end.

The game you are referring to is one in which you presuppose dividing people into ‘teams’.

I.e. you are simply assuming that racism is forever and that the only fairness comes dividing people by race and then balancing resources according to racial groups.

This is just more racism. It’s not the only solution.

We don’t have to ignore the effects of racism. There is nothing wrong with looking at the kinds of disadvantage it has produced and then acting to support those who are impacted.

However if we apply that support through racialized policies, we will never solve the problem.

For example, we can see that black people historically are disproportionately impacted by policies that have prevented wealth building, such as redlining. Of course so have groups of low class white people been denied access to assets, just to a lesser extent.

A racist solution would be to give advantages to black people.

A non-racist solution is to support anyone who has been less advantaged in wealth building.

This will still disproportionately benefit black people but will be self-balancing and won’t perpetuate racism or permanently embed it into our political and legal systems.

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#667

Post by rkk3 »

teawrecks wrote: post #660
zepto wrote: post #596

“Young men get little help, in part, because schools are focused on encouraging historically underrepresented students. Jerlando Jackson, department chair, Education Leadership and Policy Analysis, at the University of Wisconsin’s School of Education, said few campuses have been willing to spend limited funds on male underachievement that would also benefit white men, risking criticism for assisting those who have hi…

After a few hundred years of race/gender based policies working in favor of whites/males, I don't know what else we would expect from a deliberate effort to reverse it. You can't expect to play a game, give one team an advantage for the first half, give neither team an advantage in the second half, and call it a fair game at the end. Yeah, it sucks for individuals in the meantime, but we were simply never going to ac…

> After a few hundred years of race/gender based policies working in favor of whites/males, I don't know what else we would expect from a deliberate effort to reverse it

White hasn't even meant the same thing for over a hundred years in America. Treating "white males" as a monolithic group is a vast over-simplification of all the different sub-groups and cultures who were not equally advantaged.

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#668

Post by inkblotuniverse »

pessimizer wrote: post #350
smitty1e wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My brother in law is an electrician. I had enough EE in college to change a light switch without burning the house down. However, that book-learnin' fell apart when confronted with troubleshooting a strangely wired room, and I got very polite while asking him over to bail me out. These fellows eschewing the ivory tower, where being of European extraction and bearing a Y-chromosome on the college campus is an indictme…

> These fellows eschewing the ivory tower, where being of European extraction and bearing a Y-chromosome on the college campus is an indictment I hate to have to mention this, but not all American men are white.

What does that have to do with the quoted sentence?

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#669

Post by inkblotuniverse »

icare_1er wrote: post #378
Levitz wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let me get this straight. Your reasoning is that in brutally sexist societies women choose to study completely male-dominated fields because they don't have to make a living after it, whereas in the most egalitarian societies in the entire world sexism pushes them towards traditionally female fields to escape discrimination?

So, that makes you reach the following conclusion: "the more a society is egalitarian - say, Scandinavian countries, the more it forces women to do painting and arts". Are you saying that "egalitarian" societies are in fact sexist, and that teaching schools/staff (largely populated by progressive left-wing women), are in fact preventing little girls from doing maths and learning C in their bedroom ?

A common hypothesis is that there are genetic and social/economic aspects that push people towards one field or another. If you make an effort to remove all social forces, and succeed, then the only forces left are the inborn ones- so their effects maximize. So, if there are any inborn differences in the distribution of interest in e.g. engineering between men and women, you would expect to see their effects most keenly in the most low-pressure countries. Inegalitarianism adds pressure that money is useful for dealing with.

Re: A generation of American men give up on college

#670

Post by AnimalMuppet »

zepto wrote: post #596

“Young men get little help, in part, because schools are focused on encouraging historically underrepresented students. Jerlando Jackson, department chair, Education Leadership and Policy Analysis, at the University of Wisconsin’s School of Education, said few campuses have been willing to spend limited funds on male underachievement that would also benefit white men, risking criticism for assisting those who have hi…

> Men are failing because it is the policy not to support them.

And because men need the support. I suspect that a lot fewer men needed support in, say, 1950.

Why do more men need support than did in 1950? I think the first reason may be because of education. Our education system is failing in a way that it wasn't in 1950. (This may be too harsh. If, say, 10% of high school graduates went to college in 1950, and 50% do now, then that means that the top 10% then were more prepared for college than the top 50% are now. But apples-to-apples would be to ask whether the top 10% then were better prepared than the top 10% are now. I don't have a good feel for the answer to that question.)

Post reply on HN