Tuesday, November 12, 2019
Home > text > You don’t hate men, you hate capitalism. by biBiPDantinatalist

You don’t hate men, you hate capitalism. by biBiPDantinatalist

I have seen so many posts on the Internet in the past 10 years, complaining about how Millennial men are huge failures, "where have all the good men gone," etc. The truth is that most Millennial men are being socially excluded by business owners who refuse to give them an above subsistence job. There's nothing men can do about this. If you're IQ is too low to become a STEM Lord (80% of the male population in the US), you're SOL. and you're never going to be "marriageable" with your precarious gig.

Average Is Over: Powering America Beyond the Age of the Great Stagnation

Tyler Cowen

Chapter 1: Work and Wages in iWorld For the figures on wages of college graduates, see Heidi Shierholz, Natalie Sabadish, and Hilary Wething, “The Class of 2012: Labor Market for Young Graduates Remains Grim,” Economic Policy Institute, May 3, 2012, http://www.epi.org /publication/bp340-labor-market-young-graduates/. For differing and indeed more pessimistic estimates, see Michael Mandel, “The State of Young College Grads 2011,” Mandel on Innovation and Growth, October 1, 2011, http://innovationandgrowth.wordpress.com/2011/10/01/the-state-of-young-college-grads-2011/, and also “Bad Decade for Male College Grads,” September 25, 2011, http://innovationandgrowth.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/bad-decade-for-male-college-grads/.

"In terms of real earnings, male college graduates were absolutely pounded, taking a 9.7% decline in real pay from 2000-2010 (that’s bachelor’s only). Meanwhile female college grads saw no decline at all in real earnings. (we’re looking here at the real mean earnings of full-time workers 25 years and over)."

Wow.

Mandel’s work has been updated by Diana G. Carew, “Young College Grads: Real Earnings Fell in 2011,” blog: The Progressive Fix, September 20, 2012, http://www.progressivepolicy.org/2012/09/young-college-grads-real-earnings-fell-in-2011/. Again, these data are for the individuals not going on for graduate degrees. The underlying raw data come from the Census Bureau, Table P-32, Educational Attainment, currently online at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/people/.

What has women's response to this been? Mostly shaming men for being poor losers in a capitalist system that sets them up for failure while demanding even more social justice spending for women and their bastard children from the welfare states of the First World, and even actively thwarting government programs to create shovel ready jobs for men.

When Obama announced his stimulus appropriation, he promised millions of "shovel-ready" jobs. Many people worried about increasing the national debt to create government jobs, but his proposal was attractive because it conjured up visions of crews in hard hats repairing our nation's infrastructure, roads, bridges and electrical grids, and building long-needed highways and schools.

We were told that the purpose of this extraordinary deficit spending in the stimulus package was to jolt the economy. We expected the money to be concentrated on the areas that have suffered the steepest decline during this recession, such as the auto industry and housing construction.

But the feminists then demonstrated the death grip they hold over Obama and the leaders of the Democratic Party. The feminists swung into action with noisy accusations that the stimulus discriminated against women because its jobs would go mostly to men.

The men who own the system have absolutely no incentive to change it. They're quite happy to see average men rot in their parents' basement while their underemployment makes them just enough to pay off their student loans and buy some Steam games. Before you write statements supporting capitalist realism or how men just need to double down and marry those sluts hustle harder in their precarious gig, remember that a better system exists for creating marriageable men. The Chinese Communist Party is committed to creating an economy in which men can become marriageable instead of becoming gamers in their mom's basement.

“The Chinese government sees marriage and family as the basic cell of society,” explains Hong Fincher. “They see marriage between a man and a woman as a politically stabilizing institution.”

The country where 70% of millennials are homeowners

Chinese internet giant limits online game play for children over health concerns

Canada's government doesn't give a damn about Canada's marriage rate, or even our legitimacy rate at this point. That's "a private matter" and "none of their business" while technocratic oligarchs hollow out what's left of the economy and replace careers with precarious gigs thanks to neoliberal policies, fire women for taking maternity leave, monopolize housing, and make life hell for newly weds who make less than $200k combined.

If polygamy remains illegal, it's mathematically impossible for all of you to marry a STEM Lord. Since you're the majority of the electorate in every First World country, you can vote to create a system in which men are not a shrinking minority of university students, precariously employed, and socially excluded, or you can continue to stab working class men in the back for another decade by voting against reforms, at which point capitalism will probably lose its legitimacy and be replaced by violent revolution.

Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960–2010

Chapter 7

Belmont and Fishtown

In which I describe two fictional neighborhoods called Belmont and Fishtown, and explain how I will use these neighborhoods to track the founding virtues from 1960 to 2010.

THE NEW UPPER class is a subset of the upper-middle class and the new lower class is a subset of the working class. I have devised what I hope you will find an intuitively understandable way to think about the trends in the larger classes from which they are drawn by creating two fictional neighborhoods named Belmont and Fishtown. The details are given in appendix C, but the following will give you the essentials.

Two Neighborhoods

Belmont

The real Belmont, zip code 02478, centile 97, is a suburb of Boston and the home of people who are mostly in the upper-middle class. Many people in the professions live in Belmont—physicians, attorneys, engineers, scientists, university professors—alongside business executives and managers of nonprofits and government agencies. The people of Belmont are highly educated—63 percent of the adults had BAs in 2000. It is affluent, with a median family income of $124,200 in 2000.

The fictional Belmont that I will be using in part 2 differs from the real Belmont in that there are no exceptions. For whatever database I am using, I assign unmarried persons to Belmont if and only if they have at least a bachelor’s degree and are managers, physicians, attorneys, engineers, architects, scientists, college faculty members, or in content-production jobs in the media (e.g., journalists, writers, editors, directors, producers). I assign married persons to Belmont if either they or their spouse has at least a college degree and is in one of those occupations.

Fishtown

The real Fishtown, zip code 19125, centile 8, is located in the northeastern part of Philadelphia. It has been a white working-class neighborhood since the eighteenth century. In the real Fishtown, some people still don’t finish high school, but most get their diploma and go straight to work. Some have gotten technical training after high school. Some have attended community college or given a four-year college a try for a year or two. Some have been in the military, where they have received technical training. But completed college educations are rare in Fishtown—only 8 percent of the adults had college degrees in 2000.

Fishtown has many highly skilled blue-collar workers, such as electricians, plumbers, machinists, and tool and die makers, but also many people in midskill occupations—drywall installers or heavy-equipment operators, for example. Low-skill jobs are also heavily represented among the breadwinners in Fishtown—assembly-line workers, construction laborers, security guards, delivery truck drivers, or people who work on loading docks. Most families in Fishtown have incomes somewhere in the bottom half of the national income distribution—the median family income in 2000 was only $41,900—and almost all the people who are below the poverty line live in a place like Fishtown.

Men of Fishtown can no longer expect to earn enough to get married, own property, or have children, or in many cases even support themselves. They can expect to be socially excluded and shamed by the women of similar class origins.

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *