Most young men are single - most young women are not

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can sneer at the quality of young men, and you can say it's their own damn fault for being unf**ckable losers that don't deserve love. You could even do those things with some justification.

But when they increasingly make the world a violent sh*tshow, none of us is going to be happy, and it's not going to make a huge difference who was right or wrong.

I think you sum it up. By every metric girls and young women are surpassing men. They are better students starting in elementary school and they carry that advantage through college graduation. If you accept that women traditionally seek men who are either at or above their level, that means fewer men to go around. You can say great for women, but large groups of despondent men who feel society has failed them tends to be a very dangerous thing for society.

[Anonymous]

DS university is 56% female, 44% male. According to DS, there’s an anonymous, school specific social platform where girls complain that the guys on campus don’t approach. He admits they don’t because they feel like creepers, an overused term used on social media. He connected a girl [friend] with his roommate, and they are now in a relationship. DS college sophomore (19) is in a very new situationship with a high school senior (18). They met in a traditional setting over the summer. She visited him on campus. We haven’t met her, but he told me yesterday that she suggested they take DH and me to dinner over winter break. I like her already. He also called his cousin who is getting married this spring to add her as his plus one 🙃. She’s been accepted to a few colleges (for civil engineering) in same city as DS. I sound like a creeper, but I’m not. He told me!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can sneer at the quality of young men, and you can say it's their own damn fault for being unf**ckable losers that don't deserve love. You could even do those things with some justification.

But when they increasingly make the world a violent sh*tshow, none of us is going to be happy, and it's not going to make a huge difference who was right or wrong.

I think you sum it up. By every metric girls and young women are surpassing men. They are better students starting in elementary school and they carry that advantage through college graduation. If you accept that women traditionally seek men who are either at or above their level, that means fewer men to go around. You can say great for women, but large groups of despondent men who feel society has failed them tends to be a very dangerous thing for society.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Single motherhood has exploded.

This is...not a good thing.

It’s great. Women are tired of men not being good partners who actually help out around the house.

Yikes...have you seen the outcomes for kids that come from single mother households? They're horrible. Even worse than kids from single father households.

What is your alternative?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is bad for a society's long run stability to have large numbers of single, underemployed, bitter men. America has been heading in this direction for a decade or so. It's not healthy that liberals scoff at studies like this with platitudes about how women are better off without men, that they're losers, etc. If we keep telling young men that they are violent, toxic sub-humans, they will continue to fail, and we will eventually have very bad outcomes. Look at Syria, Egypt, Italy for models. It is in the best interest of democracy in the United States to have *equality* of the sexes (not a war--which women have been winning for a while), and for most men to be in healthy, stable relationships. I don't know why this is controversial.

What’s your solution?

State girlfriends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Single motherhood has exploded.

This is...not a good thing.

It is the natural outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is bad for a society's long run stability to have large numbers of single, underemployed, bitter men. America has been heading in this direction for a decade or so. It's not healthy that liberals scoff at studies like this with platitudes about how women are better off without men, that they're losers, etc. If we keep telling young men that they are violent, toxic sub-humans, they will continue to fail, and we will eventually have very bad outcomes. Look at Syria, Egypt, Italy for models. It is in the best interest of democracy in the United States to have *equality* of the sexes (not a war--which women have been winning for a while), and for most men to be in healthy, stable relationships. I don't know why this is controversial.

What’s your solution?

State girlfriends.

So force women into prostitution so men won't be violent? Just fire the men into the sun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DS university is 56% female, 44% male. According to DS, there’s an anonymous, school specific social platform where girls complain that the guys on campus don’t approach. He admits they don’t because they feel like creepers, an overused term used on social media. He connected a girl [friend] with his roommate, and they are now in a relationship. DS college sophomore (19) is in a very new situationship with a high school senior (18). They met in a traditional setting over the summer. She visited him on campus. We haven’t met her, but he told me yesterday that she suggested they take DH and me to dinner over winter break. I like her already. He also called his cousin who is getting married this spring to add her as his plus one 🙃. She’s been accepted to a few colleges (for civil engineering) in same city as DS. I sound like a creeper, but I’m not. He told me!

The bolded is an increasingly loud chorus. But what they really mean is that guys they find attractive don't approach them and the rest are creepers. And that men are supposed to just know ex-ante which category they fall into and/or assume the risk of a Title IX complaint if they take the initiative but make one wrong move.

Women don't want to have to do anything that falls mildly outside of their comfort zones, but still want to reap all of the rewards.

Young men have been neutered in so many ways. A true cluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for supporting women and encouraging them to be leaders. However, I hate what we are doing in society today, forgetting about the boys and younger men sometimes. The old white guys seem to women out in the old generation. But they are different than the young males who are struggling right now.

In my company (in a field that was formerly considered male dominant), 65% of the leadership is women. We were told specifically to promote women into these positions, and once the women are in they continue to push other women into leadership positions. It's like the good old boys network except the other direction.

In my experience women in leadership roles tend to promote and pay women less. My company did an internal study that showed that the highest levels of pay inequity were under women hiring managers. They eventually made an effort to fix the pay gap to stop women from leaving.

This is my experience, as well. And I was directly on the receiving end of this. I was promoted by a woman who offered me XXXX money. I tried to negotiate better terms but was denied. So I left. My replacement was paid about $15K more than me (confirmed as his salary was public, this was a fed position).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Single motherhood has exploded.

This is...not a good thing.

It’s great. Women are tired of men not being good partners who actually help out around the house.

Yikes...have you seen the outcomes for kids that come from single mother households? They're horrible. Even worse than kids from single father households.

What is your alternative?

Idk...maybe a nuclear family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can sneer at the quality of young men, and you can say it's their own damn fault for being unf**ckable losers that don't deserve love. You could even do those things with some justification.

But when they increasingly make the world a violent sh*tshow, none of us is going to be happy, and it's not going to make a huge difference who was right or wrong.

What is your solution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is bad for a society's long run stability to have large numbers of single, underemployed, bitter men. America has been heading in this direction for a decade or so. It's not healthy that liberals scoff at studies like this with platitudes about how women are better off without men, that they're losers, etc. If we keep telling young men that they are violent, toxic sub-humans, they will continue to fail, and we will eventually have very bad outcomes. Look at Syria, Egypt, Italy for models. It is in the best interest of democracy in the United States to have *equality* of the sexes (not a war--which women have been winning for a while), and for most men to be in healthy, stable relationships. I don't know why this is controversial.

What’s your solution?

DP
Encourage a more balanced discourse that doesn’t rely on beating down one group in order to pull up another. Better and more support at school that finds a solution that results in quantifiable increases in male college attendance and readiness. Better male role models. Women have many many role models these days that are honorable and successful yet I have a hard time thinking of many men that I would want my son to model himself after. Especially white men. That needs to change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can sneer at the quality of young men, and you can say it's their own damn fault for being unf**ckable losers that don't deserve love. You could even do those things with some justification.

But when they increasingly make the world a violent sh*tshow, none of us is going to be happy, and it's not going to make a huge difference who was right or wrong.

I think you sum it up. By every metric girls and young women are surpassing men. They are better students starting in elementary school and they carry that advantage through college graduation. If you accept that women traditionally seek men who are either at or above their level, that means fewer men to go around. You can say great for women, but large groups of despondent men who feel society has failed them tends to be a very dangerous thing for society.

So what are we supposed to do? Discourage women from being successful? Force women to f***/date/marry men they’re not attracted to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Single motherhood has exploded.

This is...not a good thing.

It’s great. Women are tired of men not being good partners who actually help out around the house.

Yikes...have you seen the outcomes for kids that come from single mother households? They're horrible. Even worse than kids from single father households.

What is your alternative?

Idk...maybe a nuclear family?

An overwhelming number of women clearly disagree. It should be telling that they’d rather raise kids alone than with today’s men. Women have spoken. You cannot force us to marry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Single motherhood has exploded.

This is...not a good thing.

It is the natural outcome.

This is not natural. This is a result of culture and choices, as was the period when monogamous, nuclear families were in the ascendancy.