What's Behind the Rise of Lonely, Single Men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a father, I signed my daughter up for GOTR and ran the 5ks with here several times.

My son was not allowed to join GOTR. There was not (and still isn’t) a running club for boys.

I signed him up for cub scouts and later Boy Scouts. But there is no longer a Boy Scouts. It doesn’t exist. It has been replaced with the co-educational group “Scouts-BSA” for girls and boys.

Meanwhile, my daughter’s Girl Scout troop is exclusively girls-only.

I think someone posted once that there is somewhat of an equivalent for boys for GOTR (my daughter was also in it).

But, ITA about the Boy Scouts. They should've kept it just boys. My kids were in Girls and Boys scouts.

Boy Scouts letting in girls is a desperate move brought on by bankruptcy and declining participation. Too many pedophilia scandals I guess.

Fine but it's ended up a positive for both genders. At least in the DC area.

And lets not forget that it was the men that caused its decline with the pedophilia. The women coming on board are helping to rescue it .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a father, I signed my daughter up for GOTR and ran the 5ks with here several times.

My son was not allowed to join GOTR. There was not (and still isn’t) a running club for boys.

I signed him up for cub scouts and later Boy Scouts. But there is no longer a Boy Scouts. It doesn’t exist. It has been replaced with the co-educational group “Scouts-BSA” for girls and boys.

Meanwhile, my daughter’s Girl Scout troop is exclusively girls-only.

So start one.

There are things for girls because women recognize the need for them and put it together. Men just sit around complaining that clubs for them don't exist.

Which is ultimately the issue - women take action. Men sit around complaining about why women aren't taking action on their behalf.

This issue has been well-documented in workplaces and with parenting.

When it comes to volunteer work that doesn't have a direct financial incentive, men will not do it. They won't do things around the office like birthdays, even though that boosts morale. They don't participate in PTA. They don't start organizations like running clubs. They expect women to do all that work for them.

Meanwhile, women do those things largely because of pressure. Good moms do those things for their kids. Good employees take on additional work.

If men want more representation, they need to start stepping it up! I'm part of a business organization for women that makes zero money because we all genuinely want to improve ourselves and lift each other up. There is no male equivalent, because men who have expressed interest want a guarantee it will bring them money, and they want someone else to do the work for them while they benefit. So instead they just complain it's not fair we women have an organization that excludes them.

[Anonymous]

For the DCUM crowd worried about your boys--here is the silver lining: College will be easier than ever for your boys to get into. Boys generally can't hack it so standards are low. Combined with the birth dirth, your boys should be at Ivies if they can just keep from attacking girls or dropping out of society for the next few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a father, I signed my daughter up for GOTR and ran the 5ks with here several times.

My son was not allowed to join GOTR. There was not (and still isn’t) a running club for boys.

I signed him up for cub scouts and later Boy Scouts. But there is no longer a Boy Scouts. It doesn’t exist. It has been replaced with the co-educational group “Scouts-BSA” for girls and boys.

Meanwhile, my daughter’s Girl Scout troop is exclusively girls-only.

So start one.

There are things for girls because women recognize the need for them and put it together. Men just sit around complaining that clubs for them don't exist.

Which is ultimately the issue - women take action. Men sit around complaining about why women aren't taking action on their behalf.

My kids are in HS now, and since PreK, I've noticed that the vast vast majority of parent volunteers are the moms.

The one area that I do see more men leaders is Boy Scouts, but even there, I do see plenty of women volunteers.

For Girls Scouts, I see hardly any dads volunteering. 99% of the cookie booths are maned by the moms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a father, I signed my daughter up for GOTR and ran the 5ks with here several times.

My son was not allowed to join GOTR. There was not (and still isn’t) a running club for boys.

I signed him up for cub scouts and later Boy Scouts. But there is no longer a Boy Scouts. It doesn’t exist. It has been replaced with the co-educational group “Scouts-BSA” for girls and boys.

Meanwhile, my daughter’s Girl Scout troop is exclusively girls-only.

Yes there is, it's called Let Me Run. But don't let reality get in the way of your narrative.

LOL for centuries everything was only for boys. That's why we had to invent all the girls-only stuff. Then while you were asleep at the wheel hoping the world would still cater to boys, the world changed. Sort of sucks for you but it was in the works for a long time and now we are just done catering to you all.

This isn't exactly true. It was started so that women could have a more private space to learn to run without pressure from boys or something like that. They wanted it to be a non-competitive atmosphere for exercise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the DCUM crowd worried about your boys--here is the silver lining: College will be easier than ever for your boys to get into. Boys generally can't hack it so standards are low. Combined with the birth dirth, your boys should be at Ivies if they can just keep from attacking girls or dropping out of society for the next few years.

The supreme court is about to ban race in admissions, gender will be next. If anything colleges will start skewing more heavily female.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a father, I signed my daughter up for GOTR and ran the 5ks with here several times.

My son was not allowed to join GOTR. There was not (and still isn’t) a running club for boys.

I signed him up for cub scouts and later Boy Scouts. But there is no longer a Boy Scouts. It doesn’t exist. It has been replaced with the co-educational group “Scouts-BSA” for girls and boys.

Meanwhile, my daughter’s Girl Scout troop is exclusively girls-only.

Yes there is, it's called Let Me Run. But don't let reality get in the way of your narrative.

LOL for centuries everything was only for boys. That's why we had to invent all the girls-only stuff. Then while you were asleep at the wheel hoping the world would still cater to boys, the world changed. Sort of sucks for you but it was in the works for a long time and now we are just done catering to you all.

This isn't exactly true. It was started so that women could have a more private space to learn to run without pressure from boys or something like that. They wanted it to be a non-competitive atmosphere for exercise.

Exactly. We had to start girls-only spaces because when everything is run by men and attended by boys/men you get a bunch of toxic behavior--anger, competition, forced leadership by men, sexual aggression, and so on. Girls schools exist for this reason. I think it's a good thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the DCUM crowd worried about your boys--here is the silver lining: College will be easier than ever for your boys to get into. Boys generally can't hack it so standards are low. Combined with the birth dirth, your boys should be at Ivies if they can just keep from attacking girls or dropping out of society for the next few years.

The supreme court is about to ban race in admissions, gender will be next. If anything colleges will start skewing more heavily female.

Start?! They are by increasingly larger percentages every year.

[Anonymous]

I'm a married guy, so I only hear anecdotally what is going on out there in the dating world. Everyone in my peer group is either married or successfully dating after divorce, regardless of gender.

But then I see all of these articles about lonely men, MGTOW, "female hypergamy," women happier single, etc. Am I in a class bubble? Is the "only 20 percent of men get 90 percent of the women" thing only happening outside of the professional class? Because it sure seems like a lot of nerdy, rich people are monogamously paired where I live (Bay Area). There are very few hot trophy wives or single professional women hooking up with men who are objectively attractive in a physical sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the DCUM crowd worried about your boys--here is the silver lining: College will be easier than ever for your boys to get into. Boys generally can't hack it so standards are low. Combined with the birth dirth, your boys should be at Ivies if they can just keep from attacking girls or dropping out of society for the next few years.

The supreme court is about to ban race in admissions, gender will be next. If anything colleges will start skewing more heavily female.

Start?! They are by increasingly larger percentages every year.

Right now schools can still try to balance for gender, take that away and boys better learn how to be better applicants

[Anonymous]

Boys and men are TERRIBLE. F**k them. Then point and laugh at them because they are so TERRIBLE. HAHAHA, Stupid lazy males!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a married guy, so I only hear anecdotally what is going on out there in the dating world. Everyone in my peer group is either married or successfully dating after divorce, regardless of gender.

But then I see all of these articles about lonely men, MGTOW, "female hypergamy," women happier single, etc. Am I in a class bubble? Is the "only 20 percent of men get 90 percent of the women" thing only happening outside of the professional class? Because it sure seems like a lot of nerdy, rich people are monogamously paired where I live (Bay Area). There are very few hot trophy wives or single professional women hooking up with men who are objectively attractive in a physical sense.

How old are you all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a married guy, so I only hear anecdotally what is going on out there in the dating world. Everyone in my peer group is either married or successfully dating after divorce, regardless of gender.

But then I see all of these articles about lonely men, MGTOW, "female hypergamy," women happier single, etc. Am I in a class bubble? Is the "only 20 percent of men get 90 percent of the women" thing only happening outside of the professional class? Because it sure seems like a lot of nerdy, rich people are monogamously paired where I live (Bay Area). There are very few hot trophy wives or single professional women hooking up with men who are objectively attractive in a physical sense.

If you are in the professional class in the bay area, your husband and your friends are part of that 20 percent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a married guy, so I only hear anecdotally what is going on out there in the dating world. Everyone in my peer group is either married or successfully dating after divorce, regardless of gender.

But then I see all of these articles about lonely men, MGTOW, "female hypergamy," women happier single, etc. Am I in a class bubble? Is the "only 20 percent of men get 90 percent of the women" thing only happening outside of the professional class? Because it sure seems like a lot of nerdy, rich people are monogamously paired where I live (Bay Area). There are very few hot trophy wives or single professional women hooking up with men who are objectively attractive in a physical sense.

If you are in the professional class in the bay area, your husband and your friends are part of that 20 percent

yes, well off men aren't the ones having a hard time finding women to date.

Most of the incels and men who have turned to violence against women are not the UMC professional class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the DCUM crowd worried about your boys--here is the silver lining: College will be easier than ever for your boys to get into. Boys generally can't hack it so standards are low. Combined with the birth dirth, your boys should be at Ivies if they can just keep from attacking girls or dropping out of society for the next few years.

The supreme court is about to ban race in admissions, gender will be next. If anything colleges will start skewing more heavily female.

Start?! They are by increasingly larger percentages every year.

I think this is a funny one. Do they really think it will increase the participation of white males?