Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, men are falling behind in every single factor. It's crazy. So many men are just completely checking out, giving themselves up to a life of video games, porn, and maybe some low income job to collect a paycheck. It's extremely sad and concerning.

I think a lot of times women are just tougher. Females have a much higher infancy survival rate and just seem a lot more capable of handling BS, be it physical, emotional, mental, whatever. They just kind of... adapt.

There's always been slogans about "women are tougher" but over the stress this country has been in for the past 20 years, we're really seeing it be proven true beyond all doubt. And there's really nothing anyone can do about it, save maybe banning these things like China has done recently.

What we are seeing is fear manifesting itself as laziness and detachment. I've been haunted by something a medical professional told me about the male student body at a highly competitive institution of higher learning. He said that each year, they are seeing more men who have never had an intimate relationship. On its face, that is not necessarily a bad thing, but one reason given was fear of fallout from a relationship gone wrong (such as adverse social media) that would "ruin" their future. At the root is anxiety and lack of confidence in communication skills. Remember, these are motivated high achieving men who are so worried about opening up, they would rather not have any relationships and instead turn to porn.

As this thread shows, we still want to tell makes to stop being snowflakes and to toughen up any time they struggle. This attitude makes it less likely that those in need of help will seek it.

Remember, it's not about whether one gender is better or stronger than another. We should be concerned about developing healthy empowered individuals in elementary school and beyond. They aren't "weak" for struggling, but that's the message they are receiving, so they check out.

It is true that a lot of it is fear, but that's the thing- the solution IS toughening up. Part of it is accepting that rejection WILL happen, inevitably, and it's fine. You'll be okay. If you ask someone out and they say no, you'll still be standing. If youre relationship ends and your heart is broken, you'll be okay. This seems to be something most women have grasped, that rejection is a necessary part of life, but young men seem completely stymied by. We have coddled young men for the past couple decades and it's completely backfired. The solution is actually teaching young men that they CAN handle things, that they NEED to be tough and somewhat stoic, and that failure is a part of life and perfectly fine. As it stands now, we seem to be herding them into further and further incompetence and alienation. And it's sad.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, men are falling behind in every single factor. It's crazy. So many men are just completely checking out, giving themselves up to a life of video games, porn, and maybe some low income job to collect a paycheck. It's extremely sad and concerning.

I think a lot of times women are just tougher. Females have a much higher infancy survival rate and just seem a lot more capable of handling BS, be it physical, emotional, mental, whatever. They just kind of... adapt.

There's always been slogans about "women are tougher" but over the stress this country has been in for the past 20 years, we're really seeing it be proven true beyond all doubt. And there's really nothing anyone can do about it, save maybe banning these things like China has done recently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, men are falling behind in every single factor. It's crazy. So many men are just completely checking out, giving themselves up to a life of video games, porn, and maybe some low income job to collect a paycheck. It's extremely sad and concerning.

I think a lot of times women are just tougher. Females have a much higher infancy survival rate and just seem a lot more capable of handling BS, be it physical, emotional, mental, whatever. They just kind of... adapt.

There's always been slogans about "women are tougher" but over the stress this country has been in for the past 20 years, we're really seeing it be proven true beyond all doubt. And there's really nothing anyone can do about it, save maybe banning these things like China has done recently.

What we are seeing is fear manifesting itself as laziness and detachment. I've been haunted by something a medical professional told me about the male student body at a highly competitive institution of higher learning. He said that each year, they are seeing more men who have never had an intimate relationship. On its face, that is not necessarily a bad thing, but one reason given was fear of fallout from a relationship gone wrong (such as adverse social media) that would "ruin" their future. At the root is anxiety and lack of confidence in communication skills. Remember, these are motivated high achieving men who are so worried about opening up, they would rather not have any relationships and instead turn to porn.

As this thread shows, we still want to tell makes to stop being snowflakes and to toughen up any time they struggle. This attitude makes it less likely that those in need of help will seek it.

Remember, it's not about whether one gender is better or stronger than another. We should be concerned about developing healthy empowered individuals in elementary school and beyond. They aren't "weak" for struggling, but that's the message they are receiving, so they check out.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, men are falling behind in every single factor. It's crazy. So many men are just completely checking out, giving themselves up to a life of video games, porn, and maybe some low income job to collect a paycheck. It's extremely sad and concerning.

I think a lot of times women are just tougher. Females have a much higher infancy survival rate and just seem a lot more capable of handling BS, be it physical, emotional, mental, whatever. They just kind of... adapt.

There's always been slogans about "women are tougher" but over the stress this country has been in for the past 20 years, we're really seeing it be proven true beyond all doubt. And there's really nothing anyone can do about it, save maybe banning these things like China has done recently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, men are falling behind in every single factor. It's crazy. So many men are just completely checking out, giving themselves up to a life of video games, porn, and maybe some low income job to collect a paycheck. It's extremely sad and concerning.

I think a lot of times women are just tougher. Females have a much higher infancy survival rate and just seem a lot more capable of handling BS, be it physical, emotional, mental, whatever. They just kind of... adapt.

There's always been slogans about "women are tougher" but over the stress this country has been in for the past 20 years, we're really seeing it be proven true beyond all doubt. And there's really nothing anyone can do about it, save maybe banning these things like China has done recently.

Yet women are crying on here every day about how to bag a rich guy. Sorry, but plenty of women are losers and users. They work dead end jobs, for crap pay, and then bear the brunt of raising their kids. Not seeing how they are winning by being tough. They seem angry, anxious, bitter and depressed.

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, men are falling behind in every single factor. It's crazy. So many men are just completely checking out, giving themselves up to a life of video games, porn, and maybe some low income job to collect a paycheck. It's extremely sad and concerning.

I think a lot of times women are just tougher. Females have a much higher infancy survival rate and just seem a lot more capable of handling BS, be it physical, emotional, mental, whatever. They just kind of... adapt.

There's always been slogans about "women are tougher" but over the stress this country has been in for the past 20 years, we're really seeing it be proven true beyond all doubt. And there's really nothing anyone can do about it, save maybe banning these things like China has done recently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a college degree really held back Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, Ted Turner, Michael Dell, and David Geffen from any real success. Poor guys.

A lot of these guys figured out what top-level NBA players know: superstars are wasting their time if they stick around college for four years.

This was my takeaway. Most people (including the educators interviewed in the article) are missing the point. The engineering and business schools still have plenty of men. Men are also skipping that step altogether and going straight into business. It’s the LACs that are becoming more and more female, and that’s been going on a while. Do you really think having liberal arts colleges become the province of women is going to make either women or liberal arts colleges more powerful? To the contrary, these schools, and those professions, will become “pink ghettos,” to the extent they aren’t already. How many times has it been posted on here that it is easier for men to get into William & Mary than UVA? There’s also been much discussion about how W&M seems to be losing ground to UVA, financially and otherwise. The two are not unrelated.

These schools have made it clear that they’re not interested in educating men (especially white men), and the men took the hint. Especially considering the rising cost of a college education, they’ve also realized that the value ROI isn’t there, anymore. The article seemed more about the schools themselves realizing that this is a problem, more so than the men whining. As these colleges become more and more expensive, they can’t afford for 1/2 of the population, especially the 1/2 that has always been more powerful in the past, to decide that their credential is unnecessary.

So, women are going to get what they want; these prestigious colleges will become “safe spaces” that prefer women. But the irony is, that in the process, the value of the degree will have been devalued.

as ñ
I don’t think this is an implausible theory. Lower income white boys may be rationally entering the workplace instead of college. Probably a big urban-rural difference that explains higher enrollment of male POC.

Many of those 'lower income white boys' can start earning $20-25+/hr as an apprentice right out of college. Apprentice electricians already make $50k+ per year, which is more than many BS degrees from college earn out of college. During that time you can immediately start contributing to your retirement accounts. By the time a college grad has finished college, they're already 4 years behind in savings compared to the 'lower income white boy' who has been saving for 4+ years. After 4+ years, the apprentice is now well on their way to become a master in their trade, and can be earning $70k and easily over $100k+ with OT. Meanwhile, Suzy and her 'prestigious' college degree haven't even begun to save a dime yet for either their retirement or a home because they are busy paying $400 per month now in student loan debt while they're making a crappy $15-20/hr salary in an entry level job that basically doesn't even require a college degree. Have fun with 10+ years of debt for that worthless degree.

Imagine wasting time in college all through 2010-2020. You missed out on the historic bull run of the market during which you could have easily tripled your money. You spent 4 years in college earning $0 (actually negative dollars), then are spending the other half of the decade pissing your money away down the toilet on interest on your student loan debt. Meanwhile, the kid who went to trade school to become an electrician or an elevator repair man earning $70k+ has been saving money for 10 years, has tripled their money on the market, and has zero debt. Oh yeah, and tons of job security because you can't offshore many trade jobs that require a license.

But this isn't what many are doing. They are are taking low-end service jobs, being regularly unemployed and wandering aimlessly and taking on consumer debt rather than student loan debt.

Do you have support for that assertion? Because when I look at service jobs, I see predominantly females and some Latino men. It’s pretty rare to see a white guy in unskilled service jobs….maybe a few at places like pet stores, book stores, Home Depot (but those are old guys who I think are mostly former tradesman on disability retirement).

From the article data and examples, the young men were working service jobs like package delivery for Fedex or working in an Amazon warehouse, not skilled trade jobs.

You'd be surprised how much package delivery guys for FedEx and UPS can make after a just a few years. Just as much, if not more than, many college grad degrees. FedEx is also well known for hiring from within. Most managers in FedEx started as delivery drivers. Now they make $100k. You can also use a starting gig at FedEx to springboard into getting a CDL to transport specialized good and materials. $50-70k salaries if you put a few years in at FedEx with zero college debt required. A huge company with room for growth as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a college degree really held back Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, Ted Turner, Michael Dell, and David Geffen from any real success. Poor guys.

A lot of these guys figured out what top-level NBA players know: superstars are wasting their time if they stick around college for four years.

This was my takeaway. Most people (including the educators interviewed in the article) are missing the point. The engineering and business schools still have plenty of men. Men are also skipping that step altogether and going straight into business. It’s the LACs that are becoming more and more female, and that’s been going on a while. Do you really think having liberal arts colleges become the province of women is going to make either women or liberal arts colleges more powerful? To the contrary, these schools, and those professions, will become “pink ghettos,” to the extent they aren’t already. How many times has it been posted on here that it is easier for men to get into William & Mary than UVA? There’s also been much discussion about how W&M seems to be losing ground to UVA, financially and otherwise. The two are not unrelated.

These schools have made it clear that they’re not interested in educating men (especially white men), and the men took the hint. Especially considering the rising cost of a college education, they’ve also realized that the value ROI isn’t there, anymore. The article seemed more about the schools themselves realizing that this is a problem, more so than the men whining. As these colleges become more and more expensive, they can’t afford for 1/2 of the population, especially the 1/2 that has always been more powerful in the past, to decide that their credential is unnecessary.

So, women are going to get what they want; these prestigious colleges will become “safe spaces” that prefer women. But the irony is, that in the process, the value of the degree will have been devalued.

as ñ
I don’t think this is an implausible theory. Lower income white boys may be rationally entering the workplace instead of college. Probably a big urban-rural difference that explains higher enrollment of male POC.

Many of those 'lower income white boys' can start earning $20-25+/hr as an apprentice right out of college. Apprentice electricians already make $50k+ per year, which is more than many BS degrees from college earn out of college. During that time you can immediately start contributing to your retirement accounts. By the time a college grad has finished college, they're already 4 years behind in savings compared to the 'lower income white boy' who has been saving for 4+ years. After 4+ years, the apprentice is now well on their way to become a master in their trade, and can be earning $70k and easily over $100k+ with OT. Meanwhile, Suzy and her 'prestigious' college degree haven't even begun to save a dime yet for either their retirement or a home because they are busy paying $400 per month now in student loan debt while they're making a crappy $15-20/hr salary in an entry level job that basically doesn't even require a college degree. Have fun with 10+ years of debt for that worthless degree.

Imagine wasting time in college all through 2010-2020. You missed out on the historic bull run of the market during which you could have easily tripled your money. You spent 4 years in college earning $0 (actually negative dollars), then are spending the other half of the decade pissing your money away down the toilet on interest on your student loan debt. Meanwhile, the kid who went to trade school to become an electrician or an elevator repair man earning $70k+ has been saving money for 10 years, has tripled their money on the market, and has zero debt. Oh yeah, and tons of job security because you can't offshore many trade jobs that require a license.

So, there's no problem, right? No problem for young men, since they would be worse off going to college, so this is a good thing for them.

Great. Glad to know there is nothing to fix. Congratulations, PP. Now we know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a college degree really held back Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, Ted Turner, Michael Dell, and David Geffen from any real success. Poor guys.

A lot of these guys figured out what top-level NBA players know: superstars are wasting their time if they stick around college for four years.

This was my takeaway. Most people (including the educators interviewed in the article) are missing the point. The engineering and business schools still have plenty of men. Men are also skipping that step altogether and going straight into business. It’s the LACs that are becoming more and more female, and that’s been going on a while. Do you really think having liberal arts colleges become the province of women is going to make either women or liberal arts colleges more powerful? To the contrary, these schools, and those professions, will become “pink ghettos,” to the extent they aren’t already. How many times has it been posted on here that it is easier for men to get into William & Mary than UVA? There’s also been much discussion about how W&M seems to be losing ground to UVA, financially and otherwise. The two are not unrelated.

These schools have made it clear that they’re not interested in educating men (especially white men), and the men took the hint. Especially considering the rising cost of a college education, they’ve also realized that the value ROI isn’t there, anymore. The article seemed more about the schools themselves realizing that this is a problem, more so than the men whining. As these colleges become more and more expensive, they can’t afford for 1/2 of the population, especially the 1/2 that has always been more powerful in the past, to decide that their credential is unnecessary.

So, women are going to get what they want; these prestigious colleges will become “safe spaces” that prefer women. But the irony is, that in the process, the value of the degree will have been devalued.

as ñ
I don’t think this is an implausible theory. Lower income white boys may be rationally entering the workplace instead of college. Probably a big urban-rural difference that explains higher enrollment of male POC.

Many of those 'lower income white boys' can start earning $20-25+/hr as an apprentice right out of college. Apprentice electricians already make $50k+ per year, which is more than many BS degrees from college earn out of college. During that time you can immediately start contributing to your retirement accounts. By the time a college grad has finished college, they're already 4 years behind in savings compared to the 'lower income white boy' who has been saving for 4+ years. After 4+ years, the apprentice is now well on their way to become a master in their trade, and can be earning $70k and easily over $100k+ with OT. Meanwhile, Suzy and her 'prestigious' college degree haven't even begun to save a dime yet for either their retirement or a home because they are busy paying $400 per month now in student loan debt while they're making a crappy $15-20/hr salary in an entry level job that basically doesn't even require a college degree. Have fun with 10+ years of debt for that worthless degree.

Imagine wasting time in college all through 2010-2020. You missed out on the historic bull run of the market during which you could have easily tripled your money. You spent 4 years in college earning $0 (actually negative dollars), then are spending the other half of the decade pissing your money away down the toilet on interest on your student loan debt. Meanwhile, the kid who went to trade school to become an electrician or an elevator repair man earning $70k+ has been saving money for 10 years, has tripled their money on the market, and has zero debt. Oh yeah, and tons of job security because you can't offshore many trade jobs that require a license.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a college degree really held back Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, Ted Turner, Michael Dell, and David Geffen from any real success. Poor guys.

A lot of these guys figured out what top-level NBA players know: superstars are wasting their time if they stick around college for four years.

This was my takeaway. Most people (including the educators interviewed in the article) are missing the point. The engineering and business schools still have plenty of men. Men are also skipping that step altogether and going straight into business. It’s the LACs that are becoming more and more female, and that’s been going on a while. Do you really think having liberal arts colleges become the province of women is going to make either women or liberal arts colleges more powerful? To the contrary, these schools, and those professions, will become “pink ghettos,” to the extent they aren’t already. How many times has it been posted on here that it is easier for men to get into William & Mary than UVA? There’s also been much discussion about how W&M seems to be losing ground to UVA, financially and otherwise. The two are not unrelated.

These schools have made it clear that they’re not interested in educating men (especially white men), and the men took the hint. Especially considering the rising cost of a college education, they’ve also realized that the value ROI isn’t there, anymore. The article seemed more about the schools themselves realizing that this is a problem, more so than the men whining. As these colleges become more and more expensive, they can’t afford for 1/2 of the population, especially the 1/2 that has always been more powerful in the past, to decide that their credential is unnecessary.

So, women are going to get what they want; these prestigious colleges will become “safe spaces” that prefer women. But the irony is, that in the process, the value of the degree will have been devalued.

as ñ
I don’t think this is an implausible theory. Lower income white boys may be rationally entering the workplace instead of college. Probably a big urban-rural difference that explains higher enrollment of male POC.

Many of those 'lower income white boys' can start earning $20-25+/hr as an apprentice right out of college. Apprentice electricians already make $50k+ per year, which is more than many BS degrees from college earn out of college. During that time you can immediately start contributing to your retirement accounts. By the time a college grad has finished college, they're already 4 years behind in savings compared to the 'lower income white boy' who has been saving for 4+ years. After 4+ years, the apprentice is now well on their way to become a master in their trade, and can be earning $70k and easily over $100k+ with OT. Meanwhile, Suzy and her 'prestigious' college degree haven't even begun to save a dime yet for either their retirement or a home because they are busy paying $400 per month now in student loan debt while they're making a crappy $15-20/hr salary in an entry level job that basically doesn't even require a college degree. Have fun with 10+ years of debt for that worthless degree.

Imagine wasting time in college all through 2010-2020. You missed out on the historic bull run of the market during which you could have easily tripled your money. You spent 4 years in college earning $0 (actually negative dollars), then are spending the other half of the decade pissing your money away down the toilet on interest on your student loan debt. Meanwhile, the kid who went to trade school to become an electrician or an elevator repair man earning $70k+ has been saving money for 10 years, has tripled their money on the market, and has zero debt. Oh yeah, and tons of job security because you can't offshore many trade jobs that require a license.

But this isn't what many are doing. They are are taking low-end service jobs, being regularly unemployed and wandering aimlessly and taking on consumer debt rather than student loan debt.

Do you have support for that assertion? Because when I look at service jobs, I see predominantly females and some Latino men. It’s pretty rare to see a white guy in unskilled service jobs….maybe a few at places like pet stores, book stores, Home Depot (but those are old guys who I think are mostly former tradesman on disability retirement).

From the article data and examples, the young men were working service jobs like package delivery for Fedex or working in an Amazon warehouse, not skilled trade jobs.

You'd be surprised how much package delivery guys for FedEx and UPS can make after a just a few years. Just as much, if not more than, many college grad degrees. FedEx is also well known for hiring from within. Most managers in FedEx started as delivery drivers. Now they make $100k. You can also use a starting gig at FedEx to springboard into getting a CDL to transport specialized good and materials. $50-70k salaries if you put a few years in at FedEx with zero college debt required. A huge company with room for growth as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of a college degree really held back Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison, Ted Turner, Michael Dell, and David Geffen from any real success. Poor guys.

A lot of these guys figured out what top-level NBA players know: superstars are wasting their time if they stick around college for four years.

This was my takeaway. Most people (including the educators interviewed in the article) are missing the point. The engineering and business schools still have plenty of men. Men are also skipping that step altogether and going straight into business. It’s the LACs that are becoming more and more female, and that’s been going on a while. Do you really think having liberal arts colleges become the province of women is going to make either women or liberal arts colleges more powerful? To the contrary, these schools, and those professions, will become “pink ghettos,” to the extent they aren’t already. How many times has it been posted on here that it is easier for men to get into William & Mary than UVA? There’s also been much discussion about how W&M seems to be losing ground to UVA, financially and otherwise. The two are not unrelated.

These schools have made it clear that they’re not interested in educating men (especially white men), and the men took the hint. Especially considering the rising cost of a college education, they’ve also realized that the value ROI isn’t there, anymore. The article seemed more about the schools themselves realizing that this is a problem, more so than the men whining. As these colleges become more and more expensive, they can’t afford for 1/2 of the population, especially the 1/2 that has always been more powerful in the past, to decide that their credential is unnecessary.

So, women are going to get what they want; these prestigious colleges will become “safe spaces” that prefer women. But the irony is, that in the process, the value of the degree will have been devalued.

as ñ
I don’t think this is an implausible theory. Lower income white boys may be rationally entering the workplace instead of college. Probably a big urban-rural difference that explains higher enrollment of male POC.

Many of those 'lower income white boys' can start earning $20-25+/hr as an apprentice right out of college. Apprentice electricians already make $50k+ per year, which is more than many BS degrees from college earn out of college. During that time you can immediately start contributing to your retirement accounts. By the time a college grad has finished college, they're already 4 years behind in savings compared to the 'lower income white boy' who has been saving for 4+ years. After 4+ years, the apprentice is now well on their way to become a master in their trade, and can be earning $70k and easily over $100k+ with OT. Meanwhile, Suzy and her 'prestigious' college degree haven't even begun to save a dime yet for either their retirement or a home because they are busy paying $400 per month now in student loan debt while they're making a crappy $15-20/hr salary in an entry level job that basically doesn't even require a college degree. Have fun with 10+ years of debt for that worthless degree.

Imagine wasting time in college all through 2010-2020. You missed out on the historic bull run of the market during which you could have easily tripled your money. You spent 4 years in college earning $0 (actually negative dollars), then are spending the other half of the decade pissing your money away down the toilet on interest on your student loan debt. Meanwhile, the kid who went to trade school to become an electrician or an elevator repair man earning $70k+ has been saving money for 10 years, has tripled their money on the market, and has zero debt. Oh yeah, and tons of job security because you can't offshore many trade jobs that require a license.

But this isn't what many are doing. They are are taking low-end service jobs, being regularly unemployed and wandering aimlessly and taking on consumer debt rather than student loan debt.

Do you have support for that assertion? Because when I look at service jobs, I see predominantly females and some Latino men. It’s pretty rare to see a white guy in unskilled service jobs….maybe a few at places like pet stores, book stores, Home Depot (but those are old guys who I think are mostly former tradesman on disability retirement).

From the article data and examples, the young men were working service jobs like package delivery for Fedex or working in an Amazon warehouse, not skilled trade jobs.