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

Men Without Work (2016)

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 471 posts

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#71

Post by ponow »

fullshark wrote: post #14
afavour wrote: post #8

I'm very far from a red-pilled anti-feminist but I do think this is a hugely overlooked problem. Perhaps too much of an aside but I was lucky enough to be able to take an extended parental leave when my child was born, being a "stay at home dad" for the best part of a year. It was incredibly hard work, incredibly rewarding but also a real eye opener at how society still doesn't know what to do with a full-time parent…

I think this book is probably more about men who aren't working and are instead doing nothing productive. Raising children wouldn't count.

It does if you got a serious education that goes woefully underutilized.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#72

Post by kranke155 »

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…

The amount of meaningful, well-paid work in our society is also shrinking at a rapid rate.

Expecting everyone to just become baristas and waiters (which is what's happening in the UK at least) is just pushing people towards a giant mental health crisis.

Without manufacturing there is no middle-class, and the West has abdicated its manufacturing. That's led to the bifurcation of our society in two halves - the well-to-do service workers who have accumulated valuable knowledge, and the people serving them. I don't think it's a healthy outcome.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#73

Post by dumpsterlid »

javajosh wrote: post #51
afavour wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The American Zeitgeist around gender issues is distorted to dehumanize men and alienate anyone who even dares to recognize this fact. I'm conflicted about that. Not denying that what you've said is true but I specifically chose the term "red pilled" because there are huge toxic (predominantly online) communities that are openly misogynistic. e.g. in theory I'd like and participate in the "men's rights" subreddit, i…

>in theory I'd like and participate in the "men's rights" subreddit, in reality it's a pit of toxicity. Indeed, but so is the equivalent feminism subreddit (try "r/askafeminist" for example). And yet "women's rights" don't have the same stigma as "men's rights". What explains this asymmetry? Why is it some movements get defined by their extremists, and others don't? >: a lot of this societal pressure against men bein…

[dead]

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#74

Post by afavour »

javajosh wrote: post #51
afavour wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The American Zeitgeist around gender issues is distorted to dehumanize men and alienate anyone who even dares to recognize this fact. I'm conflicted about that. Not denying that what you've said is true but I specifically chose the term "red pilled" because there are huge toxic (predominantly online) communities that are openly misogynistic. e.g. in theory I'd like and participate in the "men's rights" subreddit, i…

>in theory I'd like and participate in the "men's rights" subreddit, in reality it's a pit of toxicity. Indeed, but so is the equivalent feminism subreddit (try "r/askafeminist" for example). And yet "women's rights" don't have the same stigma as "men's rights". What explains this asymmetry? Why is it some movements get defined by their extremists, and others don't? >: a lot of this societal pressure against men bein…

I’d argue that women’s rights, from Suffragettes on, has a widely documented history of… reasonableness, for want of a better term. Men’s Rights doesn’t yet. It’s a much newer movement, things may change. But right now I’m struggling to think of the sane, sensible organisations out there promoting men’s rights.

I’d also question whether /r/askfeminists is “the equivalent”. It has 100k followers, /r/twoxchromosomes has 13 million followers and from a brief read through doesn’t feel like a particularly toxic place, despite discussing feminism/women’s issues. Maybe the key here is that women’s issues are mainlined into general conversation while men’s issues are sidelined to their own area where toxicity breeds.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#75

Post by giantg2 »

Damogran6 wrote: post #57
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…

Unspecified in all of this is: Society at large needs less labor to function. What happens when all of the production is automated to the point we don't NEED 'Men to work'? What do we do with them? What mischief do they get into when they have idle hands?

I mostly agree.

I feel like some people will gravitate back towards self sufficient activities. There are a lot of people on this site doing stuff like building their own furniture, gardening, etc. Of course I do think there will be a subset that use their time for more destructive things, as happens even now.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#76

Post by TylerE »

javajosh wrote: post #51
afavour wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The American Zeitgeist around gender issues is distorted to dehumanize men and alienate anyone who even dares to recognize this fact. I'm conflicted about that. Not denying that what you've said is true but I specifically chose the term "red pilled" because there are huge toxic (predominantly online) communities that are openly misogynistic. e.g. in theory I'd like and participate in the "men's rights" subreddit, i…

>in theory I'd like and participate in the "men's rights" subreddit, in reality it's a pit of toxicity. Indeed, but so is the equivalent feminism subreddit (try "r/askafeminist" for example). And yet "women's rights" don't have the same stigma as "men's rights". What explains this asymmetry? Why is it some movements get defined by their extremists, and others don't? >: a lot of this societal pressure against men bein…

Is it really that hard to understand the difference between a historically oppressed minority and the minority that historically was doing the oppressing?

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#77

Post by JKCalhoun »

adversaryIdiot wrote: post #39
ianai wrote: post #2

In lieu of any particular review I’m submitting the Wikipedia page. I was unemployed for most of the Great Recession and can empathize with much of this book. I also just remember the “tragedy of my twenties” realizing society had basically no interest in me. Despite a math degree and IT/programming experience. Then the myriad people I’ve interacted with in the last decade plus who are in this situation. Luckily I no…

man I am so happy i heard someone else say it too. I seriously felt like "society had no interest in me". Not being able to find a job and getting no matches on things like tinder left me devastated. I am on anti depressants and fear that time to this day.

> I seriously felt like "society had no interest in me".

I'm pretty sure society is not obligated to have an interest in you (I'm not trying to put words in your mouth however).

I think you become truly actualized only when you decide what it is you want, what you imagine for yourself. If what you want is in conflict with what society wants of you, you have to decide then whether it is important enough to you to take the road less travelled.

Watching biographies of various artistic people ("The Art Life" about David Lynch comes to mind, also "Crumb") it's clear that some people are just "a certain way" and will choose to live that way - society be damned. (Of course, that there are documentaries about these luminaries tells you that a few at least have found societal acceptance after all.)

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#78

Post by vikingerik »

tejohnso wrote: post #38

> Statistically, the labor force involvement for men twenty and older fell from 86% to 68% between 1948 and 2015 So what are they doing instead? How are they surviving?

If that number is just for age 20+ with no upper bound, then the missing ones are the retirees, there are a lot more survivors past age 65+ now than in 1948.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#79

Post by fullshark »

ponow wrote: post #71
fullshark wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this book is probably more about men who aren't working and are instead doing nothing productive. Raising children wouldn't count.

It does if you got a serious education that goes woefully underutilized.

I don't know, I have a "serious" education and using it to help a corporation make a little bit more money doesn't really seem that much more valuable than raising my kid. The opportunity cost for many with serious educations is maybe not that high.

Re: Men Without Work (2016)

#80

Post by giantg2 »

goldenchrome wrote: post #45
tejohnso wrote: post #38

> Statistically, the labor force involvement for men twenty and older fell from 86% to 68% between 1948 and 2015 So what are they doing instead? How are they surviving?

They’re NEETs. Likely live with their parents. May sell odd things here and there to make a buck. Likely invested in cryptos which until recently was enough to get by. Often getting some government gibs like unemployment or disability benefits. American society doesn’t know how to use low skilled men so we keep ‘em fed and put them to the side.

Probably a lot of FIRE too, if I remember right.

Edit: Why disagree?

Post reply on HN