The Sexodus, Part 1: The men giving up on women and checking out of society(breitbart.com)
breitbart.com
The Sexodus, Part 1: The men giving up on women and checking out of society
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/12/04/The-Sexodus-Part-1-The-Men-Giving-Up-On-Women-And-Checking-Out-Of-Society
9 comments
I'm not really buying this. Look at the Nordic countries that rank highest in the world in gender equality[1]. They certainly don't have problems with men "checking out". In Sweden and Iceland the difference between male and female unemployment is a couple percentage points (< 5%)[2][3]. As with any major economic change (industrialization, technological revolution, etc..) there will be growing pains. Bringing women into the workforce is a massive change and of course there will be some casualties. But as with the industrial and technological revolutions, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone saying life was better before these events (environmental problems not withstanding)
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Gender_Gap_Report [2] http://www.tradingeconomics.com/sweden/long-term-unemploymen... [3] http://www.tradingeconomics.com/iceland/long-term-unemployme...
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Gender_Gap_Report [2] http://www.tradingeconomics.com/sweden/long-term-unemploymen... [3] http://www.tradingeconomics.com/iceland/long-term-unemployme...
[deleted]
One can have a perfectly fulfilling life without a partner, and lack of a partner doesn't mean your life is "empty".
People in relationships aren't necessarily happier or more fulfilled than others. There are plenty of relationships that are dysfunctionnal while they last and miserable when they end. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to notice that, or blame feminism to opt out of it.
People in relationships aren't necessarily happier or more fulfilled than others. There are plenty of relationships that are dysfunctionnal while they last and miserable when they end. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to notice that, or blame feminism to opt out of it.
I'd like to see some references for that claim. Far as I know, most measures of quality of life improve with a partner. Even blood pressure for heavens sake.
I suspect 'sour grapes' at work here.
I suspect 'sour grapes' at work here.
>I'd like to see some references for that claim. Far as I know, most measures of quality of life improve with a partner.
You can tell you're on Hacker News when someone asks for verifiable sources for things like feelings, hah.
You can tell you're on Hacker News when someone asks for verifiable sources for things like feelings, hah.
What a horrid piece of crap that article is. I feel dirty just trying to read it.
At its core, it complains that men don't and can't know "the rules", and yet it complains about the existence of (unfortunately but clearly necessary) classes that teach them those rules (consent). The article even explicitly doesn't like that you need consent at all.
At that point I really don't know what to say anymore. This article is coming from a really toxic attitude about women and sex.
In any case, I think that whatever problems there are, are mainly caused by extreme gender segregation. The more culture treats men and women as totally different species, the more misunderstanding and lack of respect there's going to be. More egalitarian societies don't have this problem.
At its core, it complains that men don't and can't know "the rules", and yet it complains about the existence of (unfortunately but clearly necessary) classes that teach them those rules (consent). The article even explicitly doesn't like that you need consent at all.
At that point I really don't know what to say anymore. This article is coming from a really toxic attitude about women and sex.
In any case, I think that whatever problems there are, are mainly caused by extreme gender segregation. The more culture treats men and women as totally different species, the more misunderstanding and lack of respect there's going to be. More egalitarian societies don't have this problem.
My feelings are very similar to the author of this article.
This is a parody article, right?
He even trotted out that worn-out trope that woman use rape allegations as a tool against men. That argument should be taken out behind the barn and shot. Its old and it don't hunt no mo'.
I was really hoping for some thought-provoking counterpoints to feminism, but sadly there were none to be found. Just some anecdotal whinging and a couple quotes from the Ann Coulter of feminism.
I was really hoping for some thought-provoking counterpoints to feminism, but sadly there were none to be found. Just some anecdotal whinging and a couple quotes from the Ann Coulter of feminism.
Just calling something "a worn-out trope" does not make it false, or any less serious. It needs to be studied, verified, and denied if that is the case. But until then, there have been numerous studies with wildly differing findings. Everywhere for 1.5-2% all the way up to 90%. Even if it's just 1.5-2%, that is no laughing matter, or one to be dismissed as as old, or "shot".
Many studies regarding false-rape accusations are linked to from the wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape
Many studies regarding false-rape accusations are linked to from the wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape
Okay, so those men who will only accept a woman's company if she is subordinate are having a harder time to find a willing partner.
What's wrong with that?
What's wrong with that?
That's a completely false misrepresentation of what the article is talking about. To boil it all down to "men can't find willing partners if 'she' isn't subordinate to them" is quite frankly, very dishonest.
I'm disappointed if you didn't actually read the article before commenting on it the way you did. But I would be quite a bit less appalled at that option, than the one of you having actually read the article, and still interpreted the way it seems you did from your post.
I'm disappointed if you didn't actually read the article before commenting on it the way you did. But I would be quite a bit less appalled at that option, than the one of you having actually read the article, and still interpreted the way it seems you did from your post.
If it's a false misrepresentation, that would make it a true representation, no?
Regardless, be appalled, I read it and all I heard was an obsolete species of man whining that it sucks to be a dinosaur.
Regardless, be appalled, I read it and all I heard was an obsolete species of man whining that it sucks to be a dinosaur.
Apparently there's enough wrong with that to justify a 2716 word screed (and that's just part 1!!!)
I can write part 2 in Perl.
print "whine"x2716
print "whine"x2716
Thank you for posting this. It was a fascinating read.
Seriously boo hoooo Man up for a fucking change and deal with it. This is the same cry baby crap as gamer gate.. If a man is not having sex with a woman.. its because he wants to have sex with men.. We have to deal with the hand we are dealt. I like women and am not afraid to admit it. I could go on and on about how screwed over I have been because I am a man who works for a living but I dont.. I just find a woman I can relate to and learn to love and be loved. We owe a debt to the men and women who change our culture and make treating women with respect and humanity possible. It makes us less violent and less prone to being killed in a war. So I say get over your bromance fetish and deal with being set free
It's attitudes like those you've presented here that play a big role in the withdrawal from society a lot of these people (myself included) face.
>If a man is not having sex with a woman.. its because he wants to have sex with men..
If I have a choice between attempting to deal with women who have no interest in me (or a vain interest) with potential destructive consequences to my quality of life, or choosing instead to just say "fuck it" and withdraw to my comfortable job and pornography, I'm going to (and have for years) pick the latter. That doesn't make me "gay", it makes me unwilling to take an inflated risk for little reward. A truly equal relationship is appealing to me, as it would be to others, but that is harder and harder to find.
But you keep doing you. Flaunt your alpha male superiority in our faces. We frankly don't care, because that's not a system we want to be part of if we can help it.
>If a man is not having sex with a woman.. its because he wants to have sex with men..
If I have a choice between attempting to deal with women who have no interest in me (or a vain interest) with potential destructive consequences to my quality of life, or choosing instead to just say "fuck it" and withdraw to my comfortable job and pornography, I'm going to (and have for years) pick the latter. That doesn't make me "gay", it makes me unwilling to take an inflated risk for little reward. A truly equal relationship is appealing to me, as it would be to others, but that is harder and harder to find.
But you keep doing you. Flaunt your alpha male superiority in our faces. We frankly don't care, because that's not a system we want to be part of if we can help it.
I'm 52, married w/ teenage kids so I personally don't have a horse in this "race".
From what I can tell from listening to my kids, girls seem to own their sexuality more than they did when I was a kid. That changes things but I'm not seeing the sort of changes in that article.
I'll admit that as I read that article the idea that "these guys have no game" crossed my mind but I really don't know, I'm not out there dating.
Do people really believe that article? Is fluxquanta's choice a common one? If so, that's a bummer. Porn is fine and all but the love of a partner is an entirely different thing.
I have to wonder if we're talking about a section of society that has a tough time interacting with women (and understandably tough time, women are complicated). Seems like the marriage rate would be going down if this article is correct. Anyone have stats on that? OK, I googled and read for a while and while marriage rates are going down, the sense I got was it was mostly about economics, women aren't that excited about marrying broke people. It appears like the rate amongst upper middle class people is pretty stable.
From what I can tell from listening to my kids, girls seem to own their sexuality more than they did when I was a kid. That changes things but I'm not seeing the sort of changes in that article.
I'll admit that as I read that article the idea that "these guys have no game" crossed my mind but I really don't know, I'm not out there dating.
Do people really believe that article? Is fluxquanta's choice a common one? If so, that's a bummer. Porn is fine and all but the love of a partner is an entirely different thing.
I have to wonder if we're talking about a section of society that has a tough time interacting with women (and understandably tough time, women are complicated). Seems like the marriage rate would be going down if this article is correct. Anyone have stats on that? OK, I googled and read for a while and while marriage rates are going down, the sense I got was it was mostly about economics, women aren't that excited about marrying broke people. It appears like the rate amongst upper middle class people is pretty stable.
> I have to wonder if we're talking about a section of society that has a tough time interacting with women (and understandably tough time, women are complicated)
Women aren't complicated at all. Women are people, just like men. A relationship with a woman is no harder than one with a man, you just have to be honestly interested in the other person. The core of the problem is that a lot of men keep seeing (and presenting) women as alien, as not-real-people, as figures who only exist for sexual relationships and porn. If that's your attitude, then dealing with women who want to be treated as people is going to be hard.
Women aren't complicated at all. Women are people, just like men. A relationship with a woman is no harder than one with a man, you just have to be honestly interested in the other person. The core of the problem is that a lot of men keep seeing (and presenting) women as alien, as not-real-people, as figures who only exist for sexual relationships and porn. If that's your attitude, then dealing with women who want to be treated as people is going to be hard.
> women who have no interest in me
You make it sound like all women are the same. They're not. Of course not all women are going to be interested in you, just like you're probably not interested in all women.
But if really no women want to have anything to do with you, maybe it's time to ask yourself why. How do you behave? Are you doing anything to put them off? Is there a chance you secretly think that as a man you should be entitled to sex with a woman? Some men do think like that, and of course they are wrong, and it's a terrible basis for a real relationship. There are also men who think it's normal to behave like an asshole, a creep or a jerk. It is not, of course.
It is possible to improve yourself and become a better person. It's something everybody should strive for.
Of course another issue could be that both men and women have become too picky for their own good. I know a guy who wants a girlfriend who is young and pretty, despite him not being all that young and pretty anymore. I also see plenty fo women complain that they can't find a man. If women can't find men and men can't find women, perhaps both are doing something wrong. (And as a possible culprit, I'd like to point to Hollywood, which has been poisoning our perception of what a romantic relationship looks like with totally unrealistic expectations.)
Also, have you tried dating sites? They have the advantage that they get the initial awkward "are you even in the market?" out of the way, and you get to focus more on real interests rather than just the superficial picture. (Although lots of men also behave really badly on dating sites, inundating women with impersonal messages and calling them names when they don't respond. Don't be like that.)
You make it sound like all women are the same. They're not. Of course not all women are going to be interested in you, just like you're probably not interested in all women.
But if really no women want to have anything to do with you, maybe it's time to ask yourself why. How do you behave? Are you doing anything to put them off? Is there a chance you secretly think that as a man you should be entitled to sex with a woman? Some men do think like that, and of course they are wrong, and it's a terrible basis for a real relationship. There are also men who think it's normal to behave like an asshole, a creep or a jerk. It is not, of course.
It is possible to improve yourself and become a better person. It's something everybody should strive for.
Of course another issue could be that both men and women have become too picky for their own good. I know a guy who wants a girlfriend who is young and pretty, despite him not being all that young and pretty anymore. I also see plenty fo women complain that they can't find a man. If women can't find men and men can't find women, perhaps both are doing something wrong. (And as a possible culprit, I'd like to point to Hollywood, which has been poisoning our perception of what a romantic relationship looks like with totally unrealistic expectations.)
Also, have you tried dating sites? They have the advantage that they get the initial awkward "are you even in the market?" out of the way, and you get to focus more on real interests rather than just the superficial picture. (Although lots of men also behave really badly on dating sites, inundating women with impersonal messages and calling them names when they don't respond. Don't be like that.)
You're not "facing withdrawal", though. You are choosing to withdrawal due to what reads like an inability to handle day to day situations. I certainly don't think forgoing relationships implies anything about someone's sexuality, but your attitude certainly does come off as immature. We all deal with people having superficial interests (or disinterest) in us on a near daily basis. Platonic and otherwise. To say "fuck it, I'm out" for your own reasons is one thing, but to blame society/modern women or act like well adjusted people drove your hand is really juvenile.
It's not a matter of "alpha male superiority" - which, again, gives a very frightening look at your perspective.
It's not a matter of "alpha male superiority" - which, again, gives a very frightening look at your perspective.
Before then you could go to the next state and there was nothing they could do to you, and many 'deadbeat dads' would stay in the same state, not pay, and not face any real sanction. Today it is a federal crime to not pay interstate child support and they can efficiently deduct payments from your bank account and paycheck.
In some cases the new system is an improvement but it is not hard to find cases where some guy has to pay more support than he can afford to a mom who makes a lot more money.
Another problem I see is that almost no men are involved in early child care and elementary education. I think kids get a number of bad messages, but the worst is that school is a 'girl thing'.
In any cass the phenomenon here is well advanced in Japan and nobody has blamed feminism there, but the integration of women in the workforce has a huge number of unintended consequences. It is one of the major causes of social mobility freezing in the US. Back then a man would rise socially and bring a family with him, but now the pool of people who satisfy people prejudices has been doubled so men and women from rich families can fill all the good jobs.