I am editing out many abusive, or inane comments from this discussion. Sorry if this makes it hard to follow but I am responsible for ensuring a civilised debate on these pages.
Well done Bettina. Great piece and makes sense to me. Luckily, on my second marriage my wife is low in neuroticism and a well balanced family AND career oriented woman who sets an amazing standard to my children. Previous relationships confirm your theory but there is hope for men who are patient to wait and find a truly great partner that inspires men to take responsibility and the burdens of family etc as it's a worthwhile lifelong endeavor.
Disappointing that abusive and inane comments had to be edited. I thought I was joining a more civilised community and one that is hopefully unlike other social media platforms. Isn’t the expectation that we are all responsible for being respectful and are skilled at disagreeing rationally.
I’m so sorry, I have life to live and it’s much too short to be wasted in hyperventilating online in asinine discourse about issues that are unchanging in the world by any amount of discussion about it. Take action on it in a real, measurable, and meaningful way or cease the incessant rambling over it.
Good day, sir.
May your heart someday be warmed to the comfortable temperature of your mother’s basement where you spend the inordinate amounts of time debating with strangers you know nothing about and wouldn’t even dare to approach in real life.
The fact that you have to edit out comments just strengthens the assertions made here. As an older happily married female for over 40 years, I survey the landscape frequently when we are out and I am disheartened. I am saddened for the younger females generations - it seems they will never know the joy I have experienced in my marriage and my career!
If your husband gets prostate cancer, he will find that your fellow feminists made sure there is three times more taxpayer funding for breast cancer than prostate cancer.
I guess that once the traditional model of marriage blew up in the 70s, everyone all these decades later is even more confused than before. The only thing accurate about relationships now seems to be “It’s complicated.”
1) How was this an appropriate response to her comment?
2) Arguably, breast cancer poses is ~3x the burden that prostate cancer does. I think that when we prioritize interventions, we should account for the number of life-years lost from it, not simply the number of lives, and breast cancer affects women at younger ages than prostate cancer affects men.
Apologies for butting in here, mate... but, who made you judge and mediator of appropriateness in one's comments? It's a bloke and his thoughts. Nothing could be more appropriate than that.
Also, what defines burden in the eyes of those afflicted? Life-years is not really a measurable metric, nor is it technical jargon, so why resort to it? It's what leftists and those without merit in the argument tend to do most when the ground upon which they stand is shale, loose footing. They renegotiate the terms and redefine the language. I think you're better than that, mate.
Lastly, aren't YOU a man? Don't you have a pair of testes and a prostate? Please give them a tug and a poke, respectively, and sound off in solidarity of the team that you were born to play for.
Breast cancer is NOT three times the burden - there are 20% more breast cancer deaths, but it gets 300% more funding.
If you want to look at life years lost, consider that men die at younger ages and in greater numbers from every major cause of death in the USA - but there are 10 offices for women’s health, but not even one for men’s health. There are four times more male suciides than female suicides, but there is no government program to address that
There are 20% more breast cancer deaths than prostate cancer deaths per year, but breast cancer gets 300% more funding. The American Cancer Society does this, as well as government agencies. I asked the ACS on Facebook how they could justify far more funding for breast cancer. Their answer was, “we want to fund where it does the most good”.
Agreed, that walking life with a open heart and taking others at face value is a great strategy. At the very least, it helps us stay wholesome and unspoiled. Caution, that those who pursue this path can be unreasonably reluctant and stubborn when it comes to recognizing underhandedness and ulterior motivation.
And it's been an utter disaster all the way around. Our institutions have become more feminized (in a radical way) over time and all of them have been made worse as a result. I'm not doing the "women vs men" thing here. I think women are essential in the areas they were designed to be strong in. Feminism has shifted the balance unhealthily in the wrong direction - trying to replace men with women. This would go no better if men tried to replace women everywhere.
I understand the demands of moderating comment sections and appreciate it. I also understand why on some sites they turn off the comments on certain articles because they KNOW what's coming!
Agreed, but people seem to forget that others can and will post their opinions just as they did. Some will disagree with your opinion, no matter what your opinion is. Unfortunately, people either can't/don't read for understanding and context so it's a given that they're simply going to miss the point. It took me some time to get there, but I don't go back and forth with people on the internet anymore. If the first comment to my post totally misses the point or is something rude, I don't respond at all. You know that there's NO getting through to that person if their first response to you totally misses the point.
I think an article like this is always going to elicit many negative as well as positive reactions…and the author likely expected that. The problem is when people become abusive instead of giving their honest comments on a subject matter.
Unfortunately, any article where there's a comment section inevitably turns negative, because people are miserable. People don't know how to engage in polite, civil discourse.
This is an odd article. It seems like the sort of thing a wounded man would write after a break-up, but is posited as a semi-journalistic essay of social critique written by a very sympathetic woman. As a man myself, I have certainly met some women who fit the description of the embittered women the author presents as the new standard. But only a few. Most women seem pleasant to me. Then again, I don't assault or insult them or expect anything beyond the same consideration I give. I have also known men all my life, and I've always been surprised that so many women seem to be genuinely attracted to them. I write it off to reproductive biology. This fits with my observations (which are no better researched than the opinions in this article) that many women realize they prefer to be without men as they reach financial independence, menopause, or both. I can't be sure. I haven't interviewed dozens of women to get their thoughts on my hypothesis. Come to think of it, I didn't see any interview excerpts from any men for this article either...
I understand that this is largely an opinion piece. But you are making claims that ascribe points of views to a large proportion of men. In my personal experience, it doesn't hold up. If this problem of men being completely turned off by feminists is as widespread as you claim there should be some supporting data.
My experience is different. Among unmarried men that I know, this attitude is *pervasive*. I'm a proponent of marriage as the basic civilizational building block and relational design of God, but I've sat through long arguments with these men who simply do not believe the juice is worth the squeeze for them anymore. Women let them cohabitate (giving them access to sex) and they do all the married couple things anyway. They even have kids - all while unmarried and uncommitted. Women often pressure for commitment but the men involved don't because this legally obligates them to parting with 50% of their life's assets if/when they separate. They would prefer a "you take what you brought into the relationship" but we all know this is not how it works. You lose half, then you pay child support even though you share 50/50 custody of the children (make that make sense!) and depending on the state you pay alimony after that. I still think marriage is God's design and the right way to go about relationships and I argue passionately this is the case but given the circumstances men find themselves in how can I argue against all of this? If the women live with them, have children with them, have sex with them, and all the things why get married? It's not good at all. This is not 100% the product of feminism, but it's largely come about because the ideas women have in regards now to relationships and feminist power - mainly being that they can initiate divorce whenever they want and for whatever reason they want (and they do, as 80% of divorces are initiated by women) and men are absolutely powerless to stop it - you will lose your assets, livelihood, and your children sometimes through no fault of your own.
Just read this article today. It seems like you’re saying you don’t like the data she brought up- so why not argue with the researchers? Your argument boils down to “I don’t believe the election polling because my neighbors don’t poll that way, and I don’t like that you brought it up.”
If you get prostate cancer, you will learn that your feminist pals in Congress made sure that three times more taxpayer funds are spent on breast cancer than prostate cancer. Then you will be a wounded man.
Prostate cancers kill us real slow, though, brohemmus. When my uncle died at 91, he’d had prostate cancer twenty years or so, and that wasn’t what killed him.
My wife’s breast cancer diagnosis at 55 was early stage one, but she was not going to see 60 without surgery. Breast cancer is some scary shit!
Hmmm, I don’t get it. I finally settled down and married a beautiful young mother of two who was struggling to make it. My observations not her complaints.
All I know is I watch the strengthen her and working through issues of everyday life and more. Her mother was being treated for cancer.
There’s more, much more, but I found her strong and worthy. Not needy.
So enough of all the bullshit. There are many great wonderful women out there. And men.
Let’s just let nature take it course and stop fucking it up with a bunch of studies and all.
Women are not trained from infancy to stifle their feelings and maintain a phlegmatic exterior. They are also coo-cooed into believing their hormonal swings and effects are a thousand thousand times worse than what men go through. I’m no endocrinologist, but would guess that is almost certainly nonsense, and even if it were true, it would make a poor starting premise from which to build a self-observed life.
Anecdotally, my male and female acquaintance do often calm noticeably near the age of fifty. Many females, in particular, become much more practical and rational, especially in their relations with others. Personally, at 70 I handle with good humor and aplomb events that would have upset me a few years ago. These matters vary greatly from person to person, and being categorical seldom assists understanding. I do notice that people who shoulder great personal burdens early on tend to grow faster and farther than the rest of us.
So in your world view, men are only productive when they are shamed into it ? Moreover, you equate marriage with a transaction : men bring money, women deliver sex. Seriously ?
I married an angel. I was blessed once and have decided it’s better to explore more of life alone than attempting to be struck by lightning again. From my perspective — and only my perspective — relationships have become mine fields because of political toxicity. No, thank you. Being loved unconditionally won’t ever happen again: once in a lifetime will suffice.
Why should marriage have anything to do with the desire to work and be productive? If they aren’t interested in working unless attached to a woman, how are they going to support being by themselves?
Men only want to work if it means getting married??? Do men not resent good things for themselves? Do they not want to achieve for themselves? Do they not want to contribute to society?
What are you saying about men? That they are like little boys?
Women generally behaved as traditional wives until the 1960s. Birth control changed everything. Women are now doing many of the things men did for thousands of years. Less than seven decades have passed since women gained reliable control over childbearing and began joining the workforce full-time in large numbers. The resulting anxiety and social turmoil among both men and women should hardly be surprising.
Barbara Ehrenreich would take umbrage at your misreading of her work. Using it as evidence that feminism made women insufficiently sexually available or agreeable inverts one of Ehrenreich’s central arguments.
Isn’t it interesting that mothers of sons worry about some Hussey ensnaring their sons with her pregnancy. While female friends have told men “you can’t trust that girl” or the general societal feeling that women don’t trust women. My mother god bless her was the first woman to teach me “You can’t trust a woman” and every woman i have met subsequent has taught me the same thing. i don’t think it is just me.
Sadly Bettina, you might weed me out for having the temerity to suggest to you that the empirical evidence you cite can be equally argued is a man problem of their own making, not of a woman rightly throwing off the yoke of misogyny and patriarchy.
For this white dude with two sons and both of whom who have many male and female friends, what you write of is simply a false thesis using dodgy data to suggest causality.
Sure, there might be an association, but your conclusion is so unreasonable that even Trump University would not award you a qualification of any kind based on your interpretation of very dodgy evidence.
Or maybe the deeper issue is that men think they themselves are not worth it? When watching the Manosphere doco, I was so struck by how often there was language of value and explicit arguments (by male influencers) that women had inherent value (albeit as objects) where as men had to prove it through dominance, wealth, control. It made me profoundly sad. But I offer that as a way of saying I think it is far more complex than blaming women for actually demanding standards of equality and respect. Men have to respect themselves and we can't do that for them.
From my own personal experience……..This is a crock of horse excrement…I’de like to know how many of our mothers and grands, ad infinitum…..were in what they felt were stable marriages. Why do women today have such negative opinions of men? Fathers who drank and or beat wives and children….husbands who had a piece on the side…women had no alternate way of providing for themselves than to take on a husband to survive a hundred years ago. And as for women who withhold sex…how many men cared a spec about whether their wives and partners had any inkling/ semblance of sexual satisfaction? Who wants to have sex with someone who continues to not be in a committed partnership?! My grandmother always said, “men may work from sun to sun, but woman’s’ work is never done!” How many old men go looking for another spouse if their beloved wives die of some malady…, almost immediately after their passing? They want a mother…someone to cook and clean and make their doctor’s appointments for them, plus bring home extra bacon while, after their retirement, they go play golf! Gee, come to think of it…young men still do that very same thing….a good many of them still need release of sports after work…and their wives left home again, to shoulder the responsibility. Many women today may prefer depending on their own labor without another “child” to care for…and a great vibrator may bring it on home!
I’ll also add one thing as women we have done too much of…baby their man children of the past few generations. Tough shite if men don’t have equality..it’s been thousands of years that women have carried the load of much of the family’s survival…women have always worked…like dogs at home…now we often do most of the child rearing and “house work” in addition to out of their home jobs. From the statistics, no wonder the author has removed so many of what she called “inane” comments… at the beginning the stats say there were 133 replies… but as I post, the number of comments supposedly were 33….I sure don’t see that many comments now…..all the comments from women seem to be missing…wonder if she’ll leave my opposing views here???? Also, in the future, men will be doing work like “women’s work” with robots doing the “hard labor….” It might be good for the men to get used to evolving with the world!
I'm male. My wife & I just celebrated our 35th wedding anniversary and, until just a couple of years ago, I had worked nonstop for 45 years. I suppose my life is an exception to the portrait painted in this piece, which left me numb & speechless.
I am editing out many abusive, or inane comments from this discussion. Sorry if this makes it hard to follow but I am responsible for ensuring a civilised debate on these pages.
The power you wield must be a fix eh?
I would just like to know how to stop this thing from showing up in my notes. Is there a way I can do that?
By abusive and inane, do you mean anyone who disagrees with you?
Civilized means you agree with it, or profanity in the comment, or a man wrote a comment ?
“Civilized “ these days is not a well-defined term.
PS
I look forward to finding my comment amongst the many.
You can't have a civilized debate when you present garbage for "arguments."
Well done Bettina. Great piece and makes sense to me. Luckily, on my second marriage my wife is low in neuroticism and a well balanced family AND career oriented woman who sets an amazing standard to my children. Previous relationships confirm your theory but there is hope for men who are patient to wait and find a truly great partner that inspires men to take responsibility and the burdens of family etc as it's a worthwhile lifelong endeavor.
Ross, how old were you when you took responsibility for wetting the bed?
Disappointing that abusive and inane comments had to be edited. I thought I was joining a more civilised community and one that is hopefully unlike other social media platforms. Isn’t the expectation that we are all responsible for being respectful and are skilled at disagreeing rationally.
I’m so sorry, I have life to live and it’s much too short to be wasted in hyperventilating online in asinine discourse about issues that are unchanging in the world by any amount of discussion about it. Take action on it in a real, measurable, and meaningful way or cease the incessant rambling over it.
Good day, sir.
May your heart someday be warmed to the comfortable temperature of your mother’s basement where you spend the inordinate amounts of time debating with strangers you know nothing about and wouldn’t even dare to approach in real life.
Please take the hint.
God bless you, wandering mind.
Have a blessed day!
Did you mean inane or insane?
It's really depressing to see all the ,man-hating feminists here. But that just reinforces the points you make here.
The fact that you have to edit out comments just strengthens the assertions made here. As an older happily married female for over 40 years, I survey the landscape frequently when we are out and I am disheartened. I am saddened for the younger females generations - it seems they will never know the joy I have experienced in my marriage and my career!
Consider yourself blessed or lucky, as you will.
If your husband gets prostate cancer, he will find that your fellow feminists made sure there is three times more taxpayer funding for breast cancer than prostate cancer.
I guess that once the traditional model of marriage blew up in the 70s, everyone all these decades later is even more confused than before. The only thing accurate about relationships now seems to be “It’s complicated.”
I have two thoughts about this:
1) How was this an appropriate response to her comment?
2) Arguably, breast cancer poses is ~3x the burden that prostate cancer does. I think that when we prioritize interventions, we should account for the number of life-years lost from it, not simply the number of lives, and breast cancer affects women at younger ages than prostate cancer affects men.
Apologies for butting in here, mate... but, who made you judge and mediator of appropriateness in one's comments? It's a bloke and his thoughts. Nothing could be more appropriate than that.
Also, what defines burden in the eyes of those afflicted? Life-years is not really a measurable metric, nor is it technical jargon, so why resort to it? It's what leftists and those without merit in the argument tend to do most when the ground upon which they stand is shale, loose footing. They renegotiate the terms and redefine the language. I think you're better than that, mate.
Lastly, aren't YOU a man? Don't you have a pair of testes and a prostate? Please give them a tug and a poke, respectively, and sound off in solidarity of the team that you were born to play for.
Cheers!
Breast cancer is NOT three times the burden - there are 20% more breast cancer deaths, but it gets 300% more funding.
If you want to look at life years lost, consider that men die at younger ages and in greater numbers from every major cause of death in the USA - but there are 10 offices for women’s health, but not even one for men’s health. There are four times more male suciides than female suicides, but there is no government program to address that
What us the burden of breast cancer vs prostate cancer?
There are 20% more breast cancer deaths than prostate cancer deaths per year, but breast cancer gets 300% more funding. The American Cancer Society does this, as well as government agencies. I asked the ACS on Facebook how they could justify far more funding for breast cancer. Their answer was, “we want to fund where it does the most good”.
Agreed, that walking life with a open heart and taking others at face value is a great strategy. At the very least, it helps us stay wholesome and unspoiled. Caution, that those who pursue this path can be unreasonably reluctant and stubborn when it comes to recognizing underhandedness and ulterior motivation.
Feminism has power.
They've been indoctrinating three entire generations of women to hate men.
And it's been an utter disaster all the way around. Our institutions have become more feminized (in a radical way) over time and all of them have been made worse as a result. I'm not doing the "women vs men" thing here. I think women are essential in the areas they were designed to be strong in. Feminism has shifted the balance unhealthily in the wrong direction - trying to replace men with women. This would go no better if men tried to replace women everywhere.
What he means is... women no longer have to take whatever men tell us and make due, and that threatens his sense of self.
I understand the demands of moderating comment sections and appreciate it. I also understand why on some sites they turn off the comments on certain articles because they KNOW what's coming!
They should not post if they can’t handle the blowback.
Agreed, but people seem to forget that others can and will post their opinions just as they did. Some will disagree with your opinion, no matter what your opinion is. Unfortunately, people either can't/don't read for understanding and context so it's a given that they're simply going to miss the point. It took me some time to get there, but I don't go back and forth with people on the internet anymore. If the first comment to my post totally misses the point or is something rude, I don't respond at all. You know that there's NO getting through to that person if their first response to you totally misses the point.
I think an article like this is always going to elicit many negative as well as positive reactions…and the author likely expected that. The problem is when people become abusive instead of giving their honest comments on a subject matter.
Unfortunately, any article where there's a comment section inevitably turns negative, because people are miserable. People don't know how to engage in polite, civil discourse.
This is an odd article. It seems like the sort of thing a wounded man would write after a break-up, but is posited as a semi-journalistic essay of social critique written by a very sympathetic woman. As a man myself, I have certainly met some women who fit the description of the embittered women the author presents as the new standard. But only a few. Most women seem pleasant to me. Then again, I don't assault or insult them or expect anything beyond the same consideration I give. I have also known men all my life, and I've always been surprised that so many women seem to be genuinely attracted to them. I write it off to reproductive biology. This fits with my observations (which are no better researched than the opinions in this article) that many women realize they prefer to be without men as they reach financial independence, menopause, or both. I can't be sure. I haven't interviewed dozens of women to get their thoughts on my hypothesis. Come to think of it, I didn't see any interview excerpts from any men for this article either...
How many women have you known for your assessment to mean anything?
Based on the question, I'd estimate ~100X the number you've known.
Well said, Matthew. Bettina is a card-carrying member of patriarchy. A loyal handmaiden!
I was simply putting together some research studies... not going out and interviewing a bunch of women!
We noticed it in your heavy anti-woman slant.
Truth hurts sometimes.
I understand that this is largely an opinion piece. But you are making claims that ascribe points of views to a large proportion of men. In my personal experience, it doesn't hold up. If this problem of men being completely turned off by feminists is as widespread as you claim there should be some supporting data.
My experience is different. Among unmarried men that I know, this attitude is *pervasive*. I'm a proponent of marriage as the basic civilizational building block and relational design of God, but I've sat through long arguments with these men who simply do not believe the juice is worth the squeeze for them anymore. Women let them cohabitate (giving them access to sex) and they do all the married couple things anyway. They even have kids - all while unmarried and uncommitted. Women often pressure for commitment but the men involved don't because this legally obligates them to parting with 50% of their life's assets if/when they separate. They would prefer a "you take what you brought into the relationship" but we all know this is not how it works. You lose half, then you pay child support even though you share 50/50 custody of the children (make that make sense!) and depending on the state you pay alimony after that. I still think marriage is God's design and the right way to go about relationships and I argue passionately this is the case but given the circumstances men find themselves in how can I argue against all of this? If the women live with them, have children with them, have sex with them, and all the things why get married? It's not good at all. This is not 100% the product of feminism, but it's largely come about because the ideas women have in regards now to relationships and feminist power - mainly being that they can initiate divorce whenever they want and for whatever reason they want (and they do, as 80% of divorces are initiated by women) and men are absolutely powerless to stop it - you will lose your assets, livelihood, and your children sometimes through no fault of your own.
Just read this article today. It seems like you’re saying you don’t like the data she brought up- so why not argue with the researchers? Your argument boils down to “I don’t believe the election polling because my neighbors don’t poll that way, and I don’t like that you brought it up.”
Your White Knight comment is noted!
If you get prostate cancer, you will learn that your feminist pals in Congress made sure that three times more taxpayer funds are spent on breast cancer than prostate cancer. Then you will be a wounded man.
Yeah, but nice breasts are more fun to see than a healthy prostrate. I’m not a Doctor though…
Prostate cancers kill us real slow, though, brohemmus. When my uncle died at 91, he’d had prostate cancer twenty years or so, and that wasn’t what killed him.
My wife’s breast cancer diagnosis at 55 was early stage one, but she was not going to see 60 without surgery. Breast cancer is some scary shit!
They are both scary shit. There are 20% more breast cancer deaths than prostate cancer deaths, but breast cancer gets 300% more funding
Well goody goody gumdrops for you dude but anyone that knows women under 40 know they are completely psychotic and unreasonable when it comes to men.
Many people comment from the experiences of their sample set. Older men have rare interactions with the under 40 dingbats. And they would be lucky to.
Hmmm, I don’t get it. I finally settled down and married a beautiful young mother of two who was struggling to make it. My observations not her complaints.
All I know is I watch the strengthen her and working through issues of everyday life and more. Her mother was being treated for cancer.
There’s more, much more, but I found her strong and worthy. Not needy.
So enough of all the bullshit. There are many great wonderful women out there. And men.
Let’s just let nature take it course and stop fucking it up with a bunch of studies and all.
Women are not trained from infancy to stifle their feelings and maintain a phlegmatic exterior. They are also coo-cooed into believing their hormonal swings and effects are a thousand thousand times worse than what men go through. I’m no endocrinologist, but would guess that is almost certainly nonsense, and even if it were true, it would make a poor starting premise from which to build a self-observed life.
Anecdotally, my male and female acquaintance do often calm noticeably near the age of fifty. Many females, in particular, become much more practical and rational, especially in their relations with others. Personally, at 70 I handle with good humor and aplomb events that would have upset me a few years ago. These matters vary greatly from person to person, and being categorical seldom assists understanding. I do notice that people who shoulder great personal burdens early on tend to grow faster and farther than the rest of us.
Do you always making sweeping generalisations and bald statements?
Feminists do that all the time
I would say many of these difficult women have issues with life… men are but a fraction of that.
Oh please.
Thank you. Amen.
Says the bitter moron who is brainwashed by the media.
Reading the comments that remain I shudder thinking about the ones you deleted.
267 comments and but a few published.
Daresay the vitriol won.
Oh no however will we deal???
I'll be recommending my three daughters read the comments and note the names of men who agree with this female written misogynistic crap.
So in your world view, men are only productive when they are shamed into it ? Moreover, you equate marriage with a transaction : men bring money, women deliver sex. Seriously ?
I married an angel. I was blessed once and have decided it’s better to explore more of life alone than attempting to be struck by lightning again. From my perspective — and only my perspective — relationships have become mine fields because of political toxicity. No, thank you. Being loved unconditionally won’t ever happen again: once in a lifetime will suffice.
Why should marriage have anything to do with the desire to work and be productive? If they aren’t interested in working unless attached to a woman, how are they going to support being by themselves?
Men only want to work if it means getting married??? Do men not resent good things for themselves? Do they not want to achieve for themselves? Do they not want to contribute to society?
What are you saying about men? That they are like little boys?
This article is an absolute DISSERVICE to EVERYONE
You truly should feel overwhelming shame
Women generally behaved as traditional wives until the 1960s. Birth control changed everything. Women are now doing many of the things men did for thousands of years. Less than seven decades have passed since women gained reliable control over childbearing and began joining the workforce full-time in large numbers. The resulting anxiety and social turmoil among both men and women should hardly be surprising.
Barbara Ehrenreich would take umbrage at your misreading of her work. Using it as evidence that feminism made women insufficiently sexually available or agreeable inverts one of Ehrenreich’s central arguments.
Isn’t it interesting that mothers of sons worry about some Hussey ensnaring their sons with her pregnancy. While female friends have told men “you can’t trust that girl” or the general societal feeling that women don’t trust women. My mother god bless her was the first woman to teach me “You can’t trust a woman” and every woman i have met subsequent has taught me the same thing. i don’t think it is just me.
What in the AI slop is this picture
Sadly Bettina, you might weed me out for having the temerity to suggest to you that the empirical evidence you cite can be equally argued is a man problem of their own making, not of a woman rightly throwing off the yoke of misogyny and patriarchy.
For this white dude with two sons and both of whom who have many male and female friends, what you write of is simply a false thesis using dodgy data to suggest causality.
Sure, there might be an association, but your conclusion is so unreasonable that even Trump University would not award you a qualification of any kind based on your interpretation of very dodgy evidence.
Or maybe the deeper issue is that men think they themselves are not worth it? When watching the Manosphere doco, I was so struck by how often there was language of value and explicit arguments (by male influencers) that women had inherent value (albeit as objects) where as men had to prove it through dominance, wealth, control. It made me profoundly sad. But I offer that as a way of saying I think it is far more complex than blaming women for actually demanding standards of equality and respect. Men have to respect themselves and we can't do that for them.
When these kinds of claims and statistics are used, there need to be notes, regardless of whether you want to interview a bunch of women or not.
From my own personal experience……..This is a crock of horse excrement…I’de like to know how many of our mothers and grands, ad infinitum…..were in what they felt were stable marriages. Why do women today have such negative opinions of men? Fathers who drank and or beat wives and children….husbands who had a piece on the side…women had no alternate way of providing for themselves than to take on a husband to survive a hundred years ago. And as for women who withhold sex…how many men cared a spec about whether their wives and partners had any inkling/ semblance of sexual satisfaction? Who wants to have sex with someone who continues to not be in a committed partnership?! My grandmother always said, “men may work from sun to sun, but woman’s’ work is never done!” How many old men go looking for another spouse if their beloved wives die of some malady…, almost immediately after their passing? They want a mother…someone to cook and clean and make their doctor’s appointments for them, plus bring home extra bacon while, after their retirement, they go play golf! Gee, come to think of it…young men still do that very same thing….a good many of them still need release of sports after work…and their wives left home again, to shoulder the responsibility. Many women today may prefer depending on their own labor without another “child” to care for…and a great vibrator may bring it on home!
I’ll also add one thing as women we have done too much of…baby their man children of the past few generations. Tough shite if men don’t have equality..it’s been thousands of years that women have carried the load of much of the family’s survival…women have always worked…like dogs at home…now we often do most of the child rearing and “house work” in addition to out of their home jobs. From the statistics, no wonder the author has removed so many of what she called “inane” comments… at the beginning the stats say there were 133 replies… but as I post, the number of comments supposedly were 33….I sure don’t see that many comments now…..all the comments from women seem to be missing…wonder if she’ll leave my opposing views here???? Also, in the future, men will be doing work like “women’s work” with robots doing the “hard labor….” It might be good for the men to get used to evolving with the world!
Notice that Bettina sets the fire and rather than reducing the harm it causes, she walks away denying she was the arsonist.
Did I spell arsonist correctly? Should it be ‘arse-onist’?
I really do miss the FB emojis!
I'm male. My wife & I just celebrated our 35th wedding anniversary and, until just a couple of years ago, I had worked nonstop for 45 years. I suppose my life is an exception to the portrait painted in this piece, which left me numb & speechless.