RSS

Creeping realization about men and women in the NY Times

29 Feb

Oh, the NY Times tells us, Equality in Marriages Grows, and So Does Class Divide. (One recalls here the old joke about the NY Times story about an asteroid threatening to wipe out planet earth: “Asteroid to destroy earth tomorrow. Women and minorities worst affected.”) Still, they are useful as a triangulation point as to what the “protected class” (really: read that link. Alt-right has won.) is thinking.

From the story itself:

Despite being more common, these marriages are a break from tradition, and that can present problems.

Marriages in which the woman earns more are less likely to form in the first place, which accounts for 23 percent of the overall decline in marriage rates since 1970, according to a large study by the economists Marianne Bertrand and Emir Kamenica of the University of Chicago and Jessica Pan of the National University of Singapore.

Hmmm. I guess what Roissy writes about men not being attracted to female accomplishment is correct?

When these couples struggle, it is often over issues like sexual desire or the division of housework and child care, Dr. Doherty said, particularly if the woman loses respect for the man and the man feels insecure about his role in the family.

Hmmm. If you want to still be having sex at 55, ladies, it might be better to invest your young, attractive, fertile years in a man you can literally look up to.

That this message is true, and is penetrating the fog of equalist lies can be demonstrated by a comment from Sharon:

One day when I was in graduate school (around 2001) we were hanging around and chatting during a break and the subject of dating came up. All of the guys said they would not date / marry women from our MBA class; that they would prefer a woman with only a high school diploma or an AA at most. Why? Because after a long, hard day at work, they wanted to come home to a clean and stress-free environment with a meal cooked and a relaxed wife, not one that had her own career stresses, worries and distractions.

15 years later, most of the women from the class are still single. I know of only two women who married; one woman quit working as her husband works internationally and she does not have authorization to work as an expat. The other woman married “down” to someone who works free-lance on movie sets and is able to be the primary caregiver to their kids.

I don’t know any men who are remotely interested in their spouse’s intellect or ability to earn money. In fact, I have found my brain and my bank account to be the biggest impediment to my romantic life.

Sharon has been lied to by society (not, however, by her MBA classmates; I bet most men in grad school wouldn’t even tell her that directly now); I no longer gloat or laugh at these unfortunate women, despite their having made the choices they made. Neither should you. Still, Sharon might learn that her inability to see and accept reality, and adjust, is the biggest impediment to her “romantic” life.

Sharon has an icon that goes with her name. I paste it in here, without comment.

Screen Shot 2016-02-29 at 12.26.36 PM

Advertisements
 
30 Comments

Posted by on February 29, 2016 in Uncategorized

 

30 responses to “Creeping realization about men and women in the NY Times

  1. Will S.

    February 29, 2016 at 12:50 pm

    Bwahaha!

    Meow!

    Sorry not sorry; I’m a cruel Canuck. 😉

     
  2. electricangel

    February 29, 2016 at 1:00 pm

    There are no cruel Canucks.

     
  3. Will S.

    February 29, 2016 at 1:04 pm

    🙂

     
  4. Different T

    February 29, 2016 at 2:37 pm

    Fear of consequence should not be mistaken for “realization” of anything. The presence of articles like this have been around for some time, though we may expect to see them more frequently.

    And we can certainly expect them to be used to justify ever more intervention, not to justify disavowing the “discoveries” modernity has made about genders, etc.

     
  5. Hosswire

    February 29, 2016 at 2:59 pm

    “In fact, I have found my brain and my bank account to be the biggest impediment to my romantic life.”

    Pure Hamsterese. It’s not the brains & money that turns men off. It’s much more likely to beher lack of youth & beauty & pleasing feminine gentleness that does it.

     
  6. buzz

    February 29, 2016 at 3:32 pm

    It’s like the smokers of the 40’s-1950’s. You were duped and I feel bad for the results. After that, you knew, and that’s your problem. Enjoy the cats girls.

     
  7. electricangel

    February 29, 2016 at 3:38 pm

    @Hosswire,

    What is she supposed to do? As Roosh V once wrote, your 20s, women, is when you are hottest and most attractive to men. If you threw them away on the carousel or pursuing useless degrees, there is nothing you can do about that now.

    She’s doubling down on a horrible bet. If she was in grad school in 2001, she’d be about 38 now. Smart enough to go to a good MBA school, but lied to about what would make most (not ALL) women happy: a little bundle of joy. There is no helping her on that latter point now; best to make her comfortable and encourage her to post that comment on EVERY page advising women to go to grad school. That is the number one social role she can play now.

    Look, there are women who are unfit to be, or undesirous of being, mothers. They ought to go to grad school. For the others? The Truth is the only answer.

     
  8. electricangel

    February 29, 2016 at 3:45 pm

    @Buzz,

    If we say “Enjoy the cats, girls,” then we put Sharon on the defensive. She clearly regrets her choice in some way. We need her to tell her story: go be strong, independent women all you want. You go, gurrl! Except: don’t expect to get a worthwhile man out of it.

    We need either false or genuine empathy for Sharon. I feel the suffering she suffers, and I want other, younger women (and the men they would deprive of wives) to understand it, especially since, as I noted, most young men in MBA school simply would never tell the modern Sharons what the older, less-PC men told Sharon; they know that nothing good will come of it. Sharon has to feel safe and encouraged to speak, and if she wants to blame men not liking her “brain and bank account” for the reason she cannot get a man, that’s OK: the message will come through that the path to feminine happiness through the Educational complex DOES NOT EXIST.

     
  9. Different T

    February 29, 2016 at 4:18 pm

    Sharon has to feel safe and encouraged to speak, and if she wants to blame men not liking her “brain and bank account” for the reason she cannot get a man, that’s OK: the message will come through that the path to feminine happiness through the Educational complex DOES NOT EXIST.

    Come on, electric. This is not about females learning. It’s never been about females learning.

     
  10. electricangel

    February 29, 2016 at 4:28 pm

    @Different T
    Au contraire, amigo, to mix a few Romance languages. Women CAN learn, but to try to frame a rational argument will not work. They will connect emotionally with “cannot get a man,” since Sharon here doesn’t have anything to gain by putting herself out there.

    We might differ on tactics, and you might be correct: seeing men mock and shame Sharon might well frighten a younger woman into avoiding the path. I think that the message she delivers ought to be enough. It will go past the system 2, logical mind, and send shivers right down to the Amygdala: you can have a career and a grad school degree, or you can have a home life, as the game is currently configured.

    Feminists did a great thing for the (tiny) minority of women who do not want children and family, by freeing those women from the obligation to pursue that life. At the same time, they completely ruined the society for the vast majority who did want that. Sharon clearly WANTS a romantic life, and if guided on the right path might have HAD a romantic life. We’re trying to prevent the creation of more “mutilated beggars,” in Amneus’ pithy phrase; we’re try to create a Sharon-less society.

     
  11. elmertjones

    February 29, 2016 at 5:15 pm

    A man wants a wife, not a co-worker.

     
  12. elmertjones

    February 29, 2016 at 5:18 pm

    I have attempted to provide some alternative career advice to young women vs what feminist have demanded :

    Girls! The Work-Life Balance Plan the Feminists Don’t Want You to Know

    http://wp.me/p6QFjS-3B

     
  13. Different T

    February 29, 2016 at 5:26 pm

    I think that the message she delivers ought to be enough.

    Good luck with your thoughts. Seriously.

     
  14. Different T

    February 29, 2016 at 5:29 pm

    When you combine electricangel’s post here with the Devil’s Dictionary link:

    electricangel, we know your fingers are fat, but how fat are they?

     
  15. Hosswire

    February 29, 2016 at 6:45 pm

    @electricangel

    “What is she supposed to do?”

    I dunno exactly. But I do know that she will never figure it out as long as she refuses to see facts as they are.

    Any solutions she comes up with based on the ego-salving falsehood that she is “too intimidating” to “men who can’t handle” a “successful woman” are bound to fail everyone.

    However…. A solution based on the ego-searing reality that men find her Sexual Market Value low for specific, understandable, & evolutionarily-valid reasons might possibly succeed. Like she might start looking for an equally low SMV mate for herself.

     
  16. Harold

    February 29, 2016 at 8:34 pm

    There seem to be a lot of reactionaries who claim that women are not designed to have free rein over their sexual and romantic lives and at the same time laugh at them when they make poor choices. Choose one or the other.

     
  17. Different T

    February 29, 2016 at 10:28 pm

    @ Harold

    Can you expand on that? It certainly seems to indicate something (maybe like resentment against women), but you seem to imply it is hypocritical…

     
  18. electricangel

    March 1, 2016 at 12:11 pm

    @ElmerTJones,
    Not uncle Elmer, are you?

    Thanks for the link. From historical genetic information, we know that probably 80% of all women who’ve lived, and 40% of all men who’ve lived, have left behind descendants. In other words, most women have lived and thrived being mothers at some point. Your article makes the point that choices matter; career and school may make it impossible for a woman to have what 80% of them have had, most of those wanting it.

     
  19. electricangel

    March 1, 2016 at 12:20 pm

    @Different T,

    I think that the message she delivers ought to be enough.

    Good luck with your thoughts. Seriously.
    What other good use can Sharon be at this point? She’s unrealistic about the nature of men and what they want (tho she could certainly attract someone interested in her “bank account,” until the money runs out and Eat, Pray, Love guy goes off to find a younger woman.), she’s not going to get what she clearly wants with her self-preserving rationalizations. I think the best use she can serve is to publish her story on both left-liberal sites like the NYT, and to tell her family members the same.

    As to whether that message WILL be enough to turn aside a media-drenched younger woman, it certainly won’t for all. Then again, all women haven’t adopted the feminist ideal, either. We make our gains one at a time, at the margin, and Sharon’s story is an asset in that struggle.

    electricangel, we know your fingers are fat, but how fat are they?
    I have no idea what this means. Fat-fingered makes sense to me only in mis-typed orders on wall street that wind up costing millions. Could you clarify?

     
  20. electricangel

    March 1, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    @Harold,

    There seem to be a lot of reactionaries who claim that women are not designed to have free rein over their sexual and romantic lives and at the same time laugh at them when they make poor choices.
    I’d argue that NO ONE is designed to handle the life cycle of a woman: at 20 you have this immense SMV capital that you must somehow preserve and use to keep yourself and your offspring fed, loved, and cared for for the rest of your life. You will NEVER have as much capital as you do at 20.

    We had a social structure that reflected this mentality, and it is now gone in most of society. The analagous case would be a young man whose father gave him a large bequest at 20 with no training in thrift, wise investing, etc. We would not be surprised that the young man became a wastrel, using the positive good of wealth to destroy himself through drugs and other temptations.

    As to those who laugh at the poor choices, it’s an understandable if sub-optimal approach. I’ll finish my post on the DABDA of the manosphere at some point. Those young men have the right reaction for where they are.

     
  21. Will S.

    March 1, 2016 at 12:33 pm

    I laughed at Sharon’s self-knowledge in posting her cat as her avatar, because it does mean she acknowledges, on some level, that she’s become a ‘cat lady’, even if she can’t understand why she is where she is. I’m perhaps not as cruel as I might wish I was. 😉

    [EA: oh. Cruelty comes naturally to the cruel. I’ve had to learn to use it effectively.]

     
  22. electricangel

    March 1, 2016 at 12:48 pm

    @Hosswire,

    However…. A solution based on the ego-searing reality that men find her Sexual Market Value low for specific, understandable, & evolutionarily-valid reasons might possibly succeed. Like she might start looking for an equally low SMV mate for herself.
    Yeah, she’s gotta face that. She’d actually have quite a bit of SMV to a 60yo man, but that’s not who she sees herself as equal to. She wants a 42yo man with high earning power and social status, but he can snag a 28yo if he’s on top of things.

     
  23. Different T

    March 1, 2016 at 1:47 pm

    Baaaaaaa!

     
  24. Different T

    March 1, 2016 at 1:49 pm

    Baaaaaaa!

     
  25. feeriker

    March 1, 2016 at 3:33 pm

    Smart enough to go to a good MBA school.

    The words “smart” and “MBA school” don’t go together in the same sentence except as antonyms.

    “A man wants a wife, not a competitor.”

    FIFY

     
  26. electricangel

    March 1, 2016 at 4:23 pm

    @Feeriker,

    Turns out that getting into Harvard Business School shows you are smart and driven. Beyond that, there’s not as much signalling value to the education. The best approach is to apply, get in, and not go. They had quite the scandal a few years back when someone pointed out that the women spent time trying to catch the eye of a future captain of industry, and less time studying. Uh, yeah.

    Most MBAs? Remind me of our MBA President, GWB, who drove every company he worked for into bankruptcy, except the Texas Rangers where his crony capitalism “earned” him 18MM at the expense of taxpayers. Waste of money and time.

     
  27. electricangel

    March 4, 2016 at 11:27 am

    @Different T:
    Weisst du, was du sahst?
    Du bist doch eben nur ein Tor!
    Dort hinaus, deine Wege zu!
    Doch rät dir Gurnemanz:
    lass du hier künftig die Schwäne in Ruh’,
    und suche dir, Gänser, die Gans!

    We hope you are some day “Durch Mitleid wissend…”

     
  28. Will S.

    March 13, 2016 at 1:38 am

    Would-be troller: Re-read our comment policy / rules.

    We desire mutually respectful discourse; even where there be disagreement, discourse can be civil. When one is rude to one’s hosts, and doesn’t even have the decency to explain a cryptic yet obvious insult, one ought not be surprised to find oneself Baahammered and/or banned, because such individuals are not worth accommodating.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s