Live data from Hacker News

The data are clear: The boys are not all right

washingtonpost.com

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#671
Interesting: the 4th sentence shows Andrew Yang publicly acknowledging that many "ADHD" diagnoses are spurious, i.e. in those spurious cases it's just a fancy medical-sounding term for students who are struggling academically:

> Boys and men across all regions and ethnic groups have been failing, both absolutely and relatively, for years. [...] The data are clear. Boys are more than twice as likely as girls to be diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [...]

I agree that the massive increase in the US and UK over the last 20 years in the use of medical jargon such as "dyslexia" and "ADHD" in high school educational contexts isn't a helpful strategy for society to be taking.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#672
post #503

> we must stop defining masculinity as necessarily toxic I know "toxic masculinity" is a dumb academic term that never should have become a slogan, but Andrew, Mr. Yang, that's not what it means. It's like "async functions". Not all functions are async. It's okay if a function is sync. Adjectives modify nouns to make them refer to a specific subset. It's fine to be masculine. I don't know what it means to be masculin…

Functions are either asynchronous or synchronous. There's a dividing line between the two. Masculine traits are not cleanly divisible like that. Is masculine emotional distance toxic? Maybe so, if it leads to unaddressed problems; or maybe not, if it helps a man to reframe things positively. Is taking control of a group toxic? Yes if it overwhelms or dominates others, and the man doesn't know how to follow; no if it'…

Good comment. In addition addition to a very complex dividing line between toxic and healthy, there is the larger problem of creating phrases of the form "toxic X" or "healthy X" where X is an identity. There is no part of our culture where X is allowed to have the value of "blackness" or "gayness" or "femininity". The wording itself reduces the entire issue of problematic human behavior to the mechanical act of decoding a persons identity and then applying stereotypes. In that sense, it very much reminds me of astrology, which asserts that it can say something meaningful about you once you tell your birthday. I say that this astrological assertion is precisely as stupid as the identity-based assertions.

Bonus: here is the actress from the Hanna TV series, describing the father character from the show, the man who sacrificed his life to protect her from extraordinary threat, and Esme Creed-Miles lazily throws out the "toxic masculinity" label. The phrase is just a reflex, at this point, and has no meaning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPMdEtzoj-Q&t=433s

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The theory proposes six foundations: Care/Harm, Fairness/Cheating, Loyalty/Betrayal, Authority/Subversion, Sanctity/Degradation, and Liberty/Oppression; I'm curious to learn more about how he concludes that most of the US has coalesced on care/harm, as intuitively I would assume at least fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, and liberty/oppression would also apply as I see them come up a lot in the discourse here in…

I am in agreement with you that Care/Harm is probably not the moral axis most at play in the US. Liberty/Oppression is the primary axis (see gun control debates, state rights, mask mandates, neo-liberalism, etc, etc) with Fairness/Cheating (billionaires paying more tax, public healthcare for all vs excessive hospital bills, etc, etc) corresponding as the secondary political axis. Nearly all arguments portrayed in med…

I guess I don't see a particular primary moral axis. I've run workshops on responding to emotional attacks and I would imagine all 5 they listed would apply to most Americans in different ways, so I'm curious why he woukd say there's one and why he said it was care/harm.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#674

My observation is that we are going to have a radical rebalancing of who reproduces and who doesn’t. Lot of men and women who are generally not too motivated to seek out a companion, lose weight, put in the work to make it happen just…won’t pass on genetics. Children are a lot of work and energy. I’m highly introverted and high earning. My wife was the aggressor in my case. She pretty much made it all happen. I think…

> There is also a massive obesity problem. If people have trouble getting attracted to each other versus the alternatives, makes it really challenging to find the motivation.

Nobody wants to talk about this "elephant in the room" but I agree with you. Even obese people don't find other obese people attractive. Young people are dating (and having less sex) today because the majority of them are obese or overweight.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#676

The crisis, if there is one, is that society has less use for males who have IQs between 90-105 or so, who cannot cut it in STEM, and who are finding it hard to cope with increasingly competitive economic conditions and higher overall costs like rent, and is why many men are delaying family formation or moving back with parents (but also due to careerism for women). Men are just dropping out rather than doing low-pai…

I believe "who cannot cut it in STEM" is a very dangerous thing to say. How many theoretical physicists or golang developer positions are available? By definition only a minority of men can hold them. And the government is importing foreigners to compete for the same positions too. But a society is much larger than that. And if you don't support those alleged "90-105"s from your society pretty soon you'll be a minority in your own country. Which incidentally is going to happen to Americans in my lifetime.

When was the last time your heard politicians talking about it? Ross Perot and DJT?

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#677

The crisis, if there is one, is that society has less use for males who have IQs between 90-105 or so, who cannot cut it in STEM, and who are finding it hard to cope with increasingly competitive economic conditions and higher overall costs like rent, and is why many men are delaying family formation or moving back with parents (but also due to careerism for women). Men are just dropping out rather than doing low-pai…

I'm 33, Ive got a fairly high IQ, make $340k in a STEM field and enough to retire tomorrow, I'm not unattractive, and put a huge amount of effort over many years into online dating. I've pretty much given up on dating. I have a total inability to find anyone I'm interested in that is interested in me. When I was younger and I wanted to go to bars and get drunk and be an idiot I had plenty of attractive sexual partner…

As a mid-20s male I can completely relate. Have spent way too much time trying to optimize the amount of matches I can get on these apps.

You might feel like your achievements and positive qualities are not being valued by women and you've worked so hard to improve yourself for nothing. Trust me, this is not true. There are other factors at play that make online dating unreasonably unfair for you.

1. If you are in the Bay Area, you are at a distinct disadvantage. The male-female-ratio, homogeneity of interests and credentials make stand out far less than you would in the general population. It is also natural for women to form negative stereotypes about men in tech if they've been on bad dates. There's no way to tell that you won't be the same from your profile. I've experienced this first-hand where every woman I managed to go on a date with responded positively and complained to me that the guys they meet are immature, entitled or lack social skills.

2. If you are not white and live in the USA, your odds are slimmer even among your racial group. There are studies to confirm this and you can compare yourself to your peers.

3. Physical attributes like height, fitness and facial attractiveness matter but to a way lesser extent than people think. I've been skinny as a rail and ripped with a substantial amount of muscle and the number of matches were still about the same and women I met in person didn't seem to care either way though I would rate myself as considerably closer to the generally accepted male standards of attractiveness when jacked.

4. By far the quickest hack to get more matches on dating apps is to improve your pictures. Bite the bullet and do it, the bar is pitifully low.

5. No matter how many matches you get, the vast majority of them will act the same way. They'll not respond, stand you up and ghost. Most people are incapable of dealing with the pressures of interacting with other and will choose to do what's easiest for them instead of what's right. However, the more matches you get, the less you'll care about this.

6. Your point about appealing to the lowest common denominator sounds attractive when you feel like you have no prospects but you'll realize it is a sheer waste of time once you learn to value yourself appropriately and stop degrading yourself because of the feedback you're getting from the apps. This is difficult to do unless you really deeply understand the dynamics of these apps so the typical suggestion is to get off them and just date in person.

7. You were pretty much sold a lie growing up that everyone is entitled to love and the average guy will have an easy time finding a partner. When you understand the evolutionary pressures placed on women to select the best partner and today's world where women feel like there are many more high value men due to social media, it is easy to understand why they find it repulsive to settle for someone who's average. Most women grow out of this kind of thinking and seek real connection at some point though.

TLDR; You're probably undervaluing yourself but its not really your fault. Move out of the Bay Area. Get better pictures for your dating apps. Don't expect to have an easy time dating if there is nothing extraordinarily exceptional about you.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not completely different, the messianic morals are embedded in the ceremony by design: Sharing, caring, family, food, etc. These aren't incidental, they're the whole point. Sure the specific historical person, i.e. the messiah, blurs over time, as probably do the ceremonial activities, but surely they retain some of the original moral ideals.

You prove my point. You won't find many atheists (if any) that will take Jesus as in any shape or form a historical person. These are two different worlds. Atheists don't derive their morals from these stories, that's the difference. That there is some superficial overlap (a tree? presents?) doesn't allow you to claim the morality of atheists as religion-derived. That's ludicrous. It's like saying the local butcher t…

> In fact, the source of morals among atheists seems to be a permanent puzzle for many people with religious background, simply claiming them as religion-based misses the point completely.

I don’t have a religious background and it’s still a puzzle for me. Best I can manage to explain it is through a combination of tradition and genes (“human nature”), and tradition is often indeed derived from historical religious environment. Moral is mostly universal but not completely - for one example the attitudes towards hard work at the expense of everything else vary greatly across different cultures and religious traditions.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#679
post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A note on fitness. Any pressure I've had to lose weight or whatnot has come from me . All female partners have said that they don't care about my weight, and some actually like some belly to rest on. That said, they have commented favourably on other physical features, and I'm not particularly overweight. I say all this just to try and fight the idea that crops up that if you're male and don't fit some jacked or "Cha…

Forget the incel subculture, media - traditional, social, or otherwise has been feeding us that for decades as well. If you're not thin and "beautiful", your romantic prospects are zero so why even try. Admittedly, it's also partially one's own fault for buying into it, but being fed a continual stream of the best looking people from a young age seriously alters one's perspective. I spent my entire teenage and young…

Please don't take anything I wrote as an attempt to dissuade you from what sounds like a good idea. As others have pointed out, perhaps a lot depends on just how "overweight" one is. Also, do it for yourself -- the rest is incidental.

I'm 6'3"; was 190 lbs at age 19 (university); was 210 pounds at age 21 (could afford to eat out for lunch); was 245 lb at age 40 (depressed + about to be divorced); now back to 220-230 lb at age 46. Would like to be consistently 210-215 ish.

Have dated a number of 30 to 45 yo women who explicitly like a "Dad bod".

EDIT> I have never picked anyone up off the street, at a bar, club, whatever. I pass for sociable, but am actually a big introvert. Like, it bothers me when other people are in my home, with a very few exceptions. But I'm told I have "dork game". So my experience is biased -- only seriously dated in my 40's

Met my true love on Tinder, and she's more of an introvert than I am, yet fun and relaxing / no-maintenance / no-drama to be around.

There's hope.

Re: The data are clear: The boys are not all right

#680

My observation is that we are going to have a radical rebalancing of who reproduces and who doesn’t. Lot of men and women who are generally not too motivated to seek out a companion, lose weight, put in the work to make it happen just…won’t pass on genetics. Children are a lot of work and energy. I’m highly introverted and high earning. My wife was the aggressor in my case. She pretty much made it all happen. I think…

Birth control has created favor for less masculine men.

When women are ovulating, they are statistically more likely to select men with higher testosterone levels and of course the physical qualities that go along with that (bigger/more muscular, stronger jawline, more aggressive, etc...).

Post reply on HN