Why Men Are Slackers And Women Are Single

Started by Eviltwin, Feb 13, 2013, 04:31 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

Eviltwin


This article is kind of a mixed bag. The idea that men who are unwilling to support unappreciative women, who are perfectly capable of supporting themselves, are "slackers" is really irritating. On the other hand the author puts the blame squarely on feminism which is where it belongs. What really makes the article worth reading are the comments which are pretty good.

http://www.nationalreview.com/home-front/291473/why-men-are-slackers-and-women-are-single/suzanne-venker

Why Men Are Slackers And Women Are Single

This past Valentine's Day brought with it, as it often does, scores of articles about love and romance. But rather than celebrate its usual counterpart -- marriage -- we celebrated something new: singlehood. Single women, to be exact.

The rise of the single woman is hardly something to celebrate. She represents the culmination of a decades-long revolution that has chipped away, relentlessly and insidiously, at the traditional family unit. First it was motherhood, now it's marriage.

Before I write more, let me be clear: There is absolutely nothing wrong with being single. Being single, by definition, is not a flaw; and it requires no justification. What is wrong is when feminists use this very purposeful trend to try and upend a centuries-old global institution that serves millions of adults -- and their children -- exceedingly well.

In the widely read November 2011 Atlantic cover story, entitled "All the Single Ladies," singleton Kate Bolick declares that "it's time to embrace new ideas about romance and family -- and to acknowledge the end of traditional marriage as society's highest ideal." And her latest piece, published this weekend in the Wall Street Journal, is titled "For Women, Is Home Really So Sweet?" In it, Bolick compares home ownership for single women to society's high opinion of marriage. (Hint: They're both overrated.)

Just some articles by a frustrated woman? Hardly. Bolick's "All the Single Ladies" -- which has been "recommended" 51,000 times on Facebook -- is being made into a television series. So now the young people of America will get this message crammed down their throats every week. That should make for some good partnerships down the road, don't you think?

Indeed, Bolick is in good company -- not just with Hollywood but with like-minded pontificators such as Hanna Rosin, who wrote a similar article last year called "The End of Men" - also in The Atlantic, and also widely read. The online version of this article incorporates a video in which Rosin (and her daughter) conclude, while sitting at a table opposite her son and (very emasculated) husband, that "girls are better than boys." And we can't forget one of the liberal media's favorite professors, Stephanie Coontz. In an article last week in The New York Times, entitled "The M.R.S and the Ph.D.," Coontz exalts the ascension of women and suggests they resign themselves to marrying down.

Then there are articles that aren't so well-known -- such as last month's cover story in Boston magazine, entitled "Single by Choice." The smaller caption reads, "This is Terri. She's successful, happy, and at 38, just fine with never getting married. Ever." It's enough to make the average person think there's something fundamentally wrong with the married state.

Which, of course, is the point.

Unlike women such as Condoleezza Rice, who quietly lead unconventional lives without a trace of resentment toward their fellow men, feminists are inherently insecure women who demand validation for their unusual choices. They do this by implying the so-called rise of women is a great thing -- and proof that marriage is an outdated, patriarchal institution. At an event in Washington D.C., Bolick and Rosin appear together to do just that. Rosin, in her trademark elitist and condescending fashion, had this to say: "Having reported a lot on Christian conservatives, I can tell you they get married, like, as soon as they fall in love and, you know, it's probably because they can't have sex unless they're married -- which is not the case for most of us." (Envision lots of insulting facial gestures, as well as laughter coming from the audience.) Just imagine if I were to say in a similar forum, "Yeah, you know how those Jews are."

High-profile feminists such as Bolick, Rosin, and Coontz celebrate the ascension of women as though it were a win-win. But the fact that today more women than men get college degrees and have good jobs is nothing to smile about. "The good news about women is accompanied by bad news about men, which also turns out to be bad news for women," writes Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto.

The "bad news" about men is always couched in the context that men aren't "manning up," or doing what's necessary to be responsible adults. Perhaps they aren't -- they're certainly retreating from marriage, that's for sure. The question is, why? And the answer is simple. With premarital sex a foregone conclusion and cohabitation on the rise, men live the good life with no responsibilities. Moreover, women have made it clear they don't need a man to support them, to be happy, or even to become a mother. The result is that men become slackers.

And those so-called empowered women feminists created? Many learn, eventually, that they were cruelly misled. Millions of women find that they do, in fact, want to stay home with their babies when they're young and therefore need a husband with a good job. But by that time, it's too late. Their husbands have been schooled in the art of feminism just as they have and expect their wives to go to work and "pull their weight."

And that's just the women who were fortunate enough to find husbands in the first place. Others put off marriage indefinitely -- until they decide they want a baby. Trouble is, they can't find men who are willing to marry them.

To repeat what James Taranto put so astutely in his WSJ article: Happy Valentine's Day.

-- Suzanne Venker is co-author of the book The Flipside of Feminism: What Conservative Women Know - and Men Can't Say, and author of an upcoming book about modern marriage. Her website is www.suzannevenker.com.
Affirmative Action: The federal government takes your job away from you and gives it to a woman. Then she sneers at you because you are unemployed.

Cysterhood

I agree its a nixed bag Eviltwin. Even though she seems to be a supporter of the male point of view she still uses the usual double standards and shaming that women apparently can''t stop doing in order to get men to do waht they want.
Quote

The "bad news" about men is always couched in the context that men aren't "manning up," or doing what's necessary to be responsible adults. Perhaps they aren't -- they're certainly retreating from marriage, that's for sure. The question is, why? And the answer is simple. With premarital sex a foregone conclusion and cohabitation on the rise, men live the good life with no responsibilities. Moreover, women have made it clear they don't need a man to support them, to be happy, or even to become a mother. The result is that men become slackers.

Therefore women who don't have kids or get married are slackers too. No labeling those women who have the good life with no responsibilities either.
I'm mad.
I'm furious.
I've enough rage to fuel a thousand suns.

Eviltwin

When women resort to name calling in an attempt to induce men to marry, they are actually highlighting how little they have to offer. They are unable to think of any positive reasons for a man to marry so they are forced to fall back on traditional shaming and blaming tactics in order to make men feel guilty about staying single. Unfortunately for them these tactics are not always effective. When a woman calls me a slacker for being single, it actually makes me happy that I am not married to her and reinforces my decision to remain single.

If women treated men as nicely as they treat their cats, they would have a lot less trouble with them. There is nothing more lazy and shiftless than a cat, but when a woman wants her cat to come to her, she calls to it in pleasing tones that the cat enjoys hearing. When the cat comes to her she fondles it and pets it, and she may even reward it with a little treat. It only takes a couple of seconds for a woman to put the toilet seat down after a man has raised it, but she considers it to be a great inconvenience. On the other hand she will spend a lot of time dredging out her cat's litter box without complaint. One of the great things about bachelorhood is that you can leave the toilet seat in whatever position you want, and it will always be handy for the next time you need it.  :greener:
Affirmative Action: The federal government takes your job away from you and gives it to a woman. Then she sneers at you because you are unemployed.

Stallywood

#3
Feb 14, 2013, 09:42 AM Last Edit: Feb 14, 2013, 10:09 AM by Stallywood
Many men have an aversion to the institution of  marriage, because of the fear of being azz raped in good ole family court. Not because they are slackers, and want free milk for the rest of their life's. As a matter of fact, getting married is not a guarantee to regular sex, as many a man has discovered to his dismay.  What, expect your wife to have sex with you??!!  What kind of monster are you?  She is not just a receptacle for your lust!!..... Divorce is what you get.  And the kids, the house, and lots of money go with her.
        Hmmm, I guess that free milk wasn't worth it.
 Too many men  have seen what happens to Dad, Brother, Friend, ect after a divorce.  House gone, Kids gone, lots of money gone, and you get the honor of watching your children, being raised by another man.  F$%k this idiot.
Marriage is supposed to keep you from a lonely life, but what it often does, is give you a lonely life minus any money , and a sense of loss (children, house, maybe car).
    Also, another reason why men dont want to marry, is that who wants to  marry a woman who often times would not give you the time of day when she is young an hot, but after years of slutting around, wants you to subsidize her in her old age?  And give her a baby.  Or raise the kids she already has, as a result of her "expressing her sexuality"
  I recommend any man with the means, to go European.
    Oh, the author came on the comment board, and said she didn't mean all men were slackers. Just the younger ones, the 20's crowd.
Gentleman is a man who consciously serves women. I prefer the golden rule.

Behind every great man, is a
parasite.

Women who say men won't commit, usually aren't worth committing to.

Cordell Walker

call me a slacker and you get a twofold response
1. to be despised by the despicable is as good as being admired by the admirable
2. bitch, when is the last time I asked you OR al-fed'da for a GOD DAMN THING??????? you got a bitch like sandra fluke on the TV cryin about the government not payin for her birth control. bitch, I dont give a damn that suckin and fuckin is your hobby. My hobbies are poppin of my mosin nagant and .357, fishin for blue cat, and drinkin beer------------you see me up on TV askin the god damn government to pay for my 7.62x54, my chicken liver bait or my pabst blue ribbon?????
thought not, who's the slacker now
"how can you kill women and children?"---private joker
"Easy, ya just dont lead em as much" ---Animal Mother

Cordell Walker

oh and I forgot to ask-----------what is the ratio of single women to single men that are on the welfare dole???
I dont know but Im willing to venture a guess
"how can you kill women and children?"---private joker
"Easy, ya just dont lead em as much" ---Animal Mother

neoteny

what is the ratio of single women to single men that are on the welfare dole


Yeah, but you forget the childrunz.

A single employable male gets harassed to no end in the welfare office: they make him document his job search to make it practically a full-time job in itself (while paying him an amount which can last only if he doesn't get out on the door at all). At least that was my experience in British Columbia in 2010.

A single woman who has a child or multiple children experiences "barriers to entry" into the workplace: there's no free daycare &c. So practically she gets paid to babysit her own child(ren).

I don't know how a really single (ie. childless), otherwise employable woman is treated by the welfare office.
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical

BRIAN

Those 20 something's she said are slackers are doing what men have always done. Living their lives building careers and contributing to society. The only thing they are doing different is forgoing the worship of all things female. These smart young guys are getting laid and doing their own things with out laying a sacrifice of half their worldly goods on the altar of the bitch godess. That chafes the hell out of the Feminazi crowd because they can't control these men and the establishment types becaus these men are refusing to become drones to slave away providing revenues for the state.
You may sleep soundly at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence upon those who seek to harm you.

Eviltwin

Getting married is like signing a long term lease on a bad car. Long after the car has quit running you are still expected to pay for it.
Affirmative Action: The federal government takes your job away from you and gives it to a woman. Then she sneers at you because you are unemployed.

neoteny


Getting married is like signing a long term lease on a bad car. Long after the car has quit running you are still expected to pay for it.



That's interesting. Another analogy could be: buying a house in an overheating market (when a real estate boom is going on) then finding oneself saddled with a home of much reduced value which still costs the same to finance when the bubble bursts.
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical

Galt

I don't see women being called on the carpet as much - although criticism does exist - for being slackers.

You don't dare say that a housewife may not really be doing much in the home - in comparison to the stress that her working husband is under -  if she doesn't have kids.

I think it's because men are supposed to be the providers / givers and women are supposed to be the providees / takers ... and ... women can just hide it better: A man sitting at home with no job and no kids, with his wife working and paying for him, is a slacker. Rightfully. A woman in the same situation is doing the hardest job in the world. In the whole wide world.

Galt

A comedian, I think it was Bill Burr, said that he was confused about the most important job in the world: being a housewife. He kinda thought it might be a coal miner or a roofer in July, and that any job you can do in your pajamas may not be the hardest job in the world.

If you think that women kind of belong to a different species, and you have your fixed job as a man to supply her, and she has a fixed job of ... whatever ... because she is only going to do what she wants after she gets married ... then I can understand the avoidance of any discussion of housewives without small children being lazy pieces of shit.

But if you accept the view that women have some human characteristics, and you are willing to accept that you are being used based on dopey media representations of what "real men" do, then you kind of start seeing the idiocy of all of this. Men are slackers for not getting Real Jobs that can not only support themselves, but also a parasitic other human being (hereinafter referred to as a "woman"), but women are not slackers for parasitically living off the efforts in the real world of the man.

I mean, kinda sorta.

neoteny

He kinda thought it might be a coal miner or a roofer in July, and that any job you can do in your pajamas may not be the hardest job in the world.


All those jobs which can be done at home -- by telecommuting -- are jobs which can be done in your pajamas. And many of today's jobs fall into that category: from (some) management to design (industrial, pharmaceutical, graphics, software), writing/translating/editing, research which doesn't require a physical laboratory &c. Does it mean that all those jobs are "easy"?

The issue is that maintenance-type work done in one's home doesn't generate any goods which can be exchanged for other goods: people aren't paid for washing behind their kids' ears, nor for vacuuming out the place. It is work which doesn't make someone richer beyond the satisfaction of having a neat kid & a clean place.

Division of labor & comparative advantage both militate against doing these kind of jobs for oneself: if a woman can make $30/hour and has to pay only $10/hour for preschool (or for the cleaning lady, 3 hours a week) then it makes eminent economic sense for her to get a salaried job.

OTOH if she can get a job which pays only $11/hour (and has a small child), it isn't such a good idea for her to get a(n outside) job: she would be left with $10 at the end of the week once she paid the preschool & the cleaning lady. Better if she stays home and look after the kid and does the cleaning: she still creates $430 "value". Of course if her skills can command only $11/hour, it is unlikely that she can find a part-time telecommuting job to "fill up" those times she isn't engaged in taking care of the kid or cleaning. So when she "works", it isn't necessarily "easy"; and when she doesn't, that's because she can't.
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical

Galt

Alright, Neoteny, you've convinced me that being a housewife without kids or a job is something more than being a parasitic piece of shit. Reading novels and then clicking on Dr. Phil and Judge Judy is admittedly a bitch. Add dusting and loading the dishwasher, and you've got a nightmare.

At least allow me the pleasure of sitting back and laughing at the stupidity of it all. You're not going to take that away from me, are you?

Galt

It's funny: I keep saying "without children" or "without small children", and you keep putting children into your answers.

I guess the little money-makers for the woman are the difference. But how about an answer to women who leech off men without having children? Gets a bit more difficult to chivalrously defend women, doesn't it? But good arguments always come up.

Go Up