American Men Seem 'Stuck' in Traditional Gender Roles, Study Finds

[opebo]

What are our values in this country?!

Slavery, mainly.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

I would say anyone in this economy who was not singlemindely pursuing some means of independently supporting themselves starting in the teen years is a reckless idiot.

I see. Well screw you too, then.

Lol.  You think encouraging young people regardless of gender to secure the means of providing for themselves in case of unforseen calamity is worthy of a "screw you"?!

You didn't 'encourag[e] young people regardless of gender to secure the means of providing for themselves in case of unfor[e]seen calamity'. You repeatedly insulted people for not being singleminded careerists (as in, you said singleminded, that's your word, not mine) starting in high school. There is a difference.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Apparently not singleminded careerism? Sorry that bothers you so.

[DC Al Fine]

...No?

My uncle is a public high school teacher (how's that for eschewing gender roles! ) and he has noted that young women are out-performing young men not just in college, but also at the high school level and even earlier.

When I asked him why he thought that was, he just said, "the guys aren't taking education as seriously anymore. You aren't entitled to an good education simply by virtue of being a guy."

Food for thought.

Not surprising nor new information.  I post this fact every time the bipartisan mob of white males rises up to say how much they hate affirmative action... I guess they think if their weren't preferences for coloreds there would be a lot more white males at prestigious universities.  Unfortunately reality says the opposite.  There would probably be a ton more Asian women.

A little inconvenient fact the forum will never acknowledge...

No, it's just that the forum doesn't buy into your silly notion that one shouldn't support policies that don't personally benefit oneself.

[Link]

You repeatedly insulted people for not being singleminded careerists (as in, you said singleminded, that's your word, not mine) starting in high school. There is a difference.

I was being over the top.  But given the massive teen unemployment, mounting student debts, and bleak career prospects what would you call someone regardless of gender who surveys that landscape and at 15 or 16 and shrugs and says I'm just going to marry someone who will support me?

Doing a modicum of preparation to feed yourself as a teenager does not make you a "careerist."  You seem to have conveniently skipped over the part of my post where I said my mom happened to be a housewife for a number of years but that didn't prevent her from going to school and getting more education than most men and evetually once her children were older making more money than most men.  It is not mutually exclusive.  That is what I am pushing back against.

If my dad died my mom would have worked full time.  She wouldn't sit there helpless on welfare just because she spent her teens daydreaming about being a stay at home mom.

This isn't about "careers."  This is about basic survival.  Why do you think it is the LAW that everyone regardless of gender must attend high school till the age of 18?  Is it because the community is full of nothing but "careerists"?  Or is it because they recognize you can't just assume someone else is going to take care of you for the rest of your life?

Honestly I have never heard anyone in high school regardless of gender say their goal is to be a housewife/husband.  It is not a gender thing.  Especially in this economy people of both genders happen to end up being housewives/husbands but it's not like they sat their at 15 and decided that's the only work goal they were going to have.

[Link]

Not surprising nor new information.  I post this fact every time the bipartisan mob of white males rises up to say how much they hate affirmative action... I guess they think if their weren't preferences for coloreds there would be a lot more white males at prestigious universities.  Unfortunately reality says the opposite.  There would probably be a ton more Asian women.

A little inconvenient fact the forum will never acknowledge...

No, it's just that the forum doesn't buy into your silly notion that one shouldn't support policies that don't personally benefit oneself.

You don't know how much I really wish that were true.  America would be a much better country if that was the case but the empirical evidence when it comes to things like base closings, tax breaks, government jobs in your Congressional district, etc there is a bipartisan and universal desire to grab things you think benefit you while cutting the other guy's throat.  Anyway you should read those threads.  If you notice the tone and tenor of the conversation it is not people saying I refuse to go to such and such college because my grades are lower than a more worthy white female and she should take my spot.  You will never hear than on Atlas.  So let's stop playing make believe.

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

You repeatedly insulted people for not being singleminded careerists (as in, you said singleminded, that's your word, not mine) starting in high school. There is a difference.

I was being over the top.

It wasn't easy to tell.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

'Despairing', possibly.

____________

The rest of what you say is entirely reasonable considering that you said you were being over the top.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The article discusses a non-existent problem.

[Link]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

'Despairing', possibly.

____________

The rest of what you say is entirely reasonable considering that you said you were being over the top.

Lol.  Yes I was being over the top.

I read these articles and honestly I think most families have to struggle on two incomes to make it in this economy.  We don't have the luxury of the European social safety net.  I mean even in my family where both my father and mother work and make a great income they've made career decisions based upon getting good health insurance.  It's just so tough in America.   I really wonder who has the luxury of deciding whether they work or stay home?  It wasn't a planned thing in my family.  Family pressures kept mounting and my dad made more money so my mom quit her job and stayed home for a few years.  And once the child rearing eased up she went back to work.  But it wasn't a matter of her sitting in high school planning on a man taking care of her.  There certainly is a discussion to be had but that guy is not the poster child for it.

I think with the statistic I posted about more women entering college and doing better we will see more and more families where the wife makes more than the man... and certainly has more invested in her career.  In those situations it's not going to make logical sense for the woman to quit her job just to scrape by on her husband's meager salary.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

...No?

My uncle is a public high school teacher (how's that for eschewing gender roles! ) and he has noted that young women are out-performing young men not just in college, but also at the high school level and even earlier.

When I asked him why he thought that was, he just said, "the guys aren't taking education as seriously anymore. You aren't entitled to an good education simply by virtue of being a guy."

Food for thought.

Not surprising nor new information.  I post this fact every time the bipartisan mob of white males rises up to say how much they hate affirmative action... I guess they think if their weren't preferences for coloreds there would be a lot more white males at prestigious universities.  Unfortunately reality says the opposite.  There would probably be a ton more Asian women.

A little inconvenient fact the forum will never acknowledge...

Wouldn't it still be wrong on principle? And if the above stated is the case, then shouldn't we, as a progressive and forward-leaning society, stop giving white males such an undue advantage?

[courts]

The article discusses a non-existent problem.

misogynist tendencies are a problem

[Link]

A little inconvenient fact the forum will never acknowledge...

Wouldn't it still be wrong on principle? And if the above stated is the case, then shouldn't we, as a progressive and forward-leaning society, stop giving white males such an undue advantage?

No.  White males as a group are the second largest group in America only second to white females.  You can't throw them under the bus.  That would be very disruptive to society.  Look at how disruptive it was when 13% of the population was thrown under the bus under Jim Crow.

A GPA or test score does not sum up a person's entire worth to society.  That's the problem.  University is not about bubbling in scantrons.  Yes you have to do that to get in but I would not go to a 100% white university in America neither would I go to a 100% African American university.  At such a formative time in my life being in a diverse environment is rewarding in and of itself.  Plus I think the ladies are probably okay with things being a little more competitive for themselves if it means there is a more favorable guy:girl ratio at the university of their choice.

I don't see a lot of brochures saying "Apply to our university ladies we have a 30% guy to 70% girl ratio!"  The only people that would be happy about that in large numbers are guys... who we've already established are not the best applicants.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I have always been saying the exact opposite. Patriarchy is oppressive to everybody and men should fight alongside with women to bring it down.

Are you sure?  There must be someone benefiting from all that oppression, n'est-ce pas?

Obviously men in general also draw huge advantages from patriarchy. This doesn't mean they can't also be oppressed in some form.

The thing about patriarchy is that it's not really a material power structure, but an ideological one. It's not about men oppressing women per se, but rather about men and women being both forced into specific gender roles, which happen to be organized hierarchically. Thus, while men are assigned a rather advantageous place in society, they still aren't fully free to choose what to do with their lives.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

A little inconvenient fact the forum will never acknowledge...

Wouldn't it still be wrong on principle? And if the above stated is the case, then shouldn't we, as a progressive and forward-leaning society, stop giving white males such an undue advantage?

No.  White males as a group are the second largest group in America only second to white females.  You can't throw them under the bus.  That would be very disruptive to society.  Look at how disruptive it was when 13% of the population was thrown under the bus under Jim Crow.

A GPA or test score does not sum up a person's entire worth to society.  That's the problem.  University is not about bubbling in scantrons.  Yes you have to do that to get in but I would not go to a 100% white university in America neither would I go to a 100% African American university.  At such a formative time in my life being in a diverse environment is rewarding in and of itself.  Plus I think the ladies are probably okay with things being a little more competitive for themselves if it means there is a more favorable guy:girl ratio at the university of their choice.

I don't see a lot of brochures saying "Apply to our university ladies we have a 30% guy to 70% girl ratio!"  The only people that would be happy about that in large numbers are guys... who we've already established are not the best applicants.

However, if the system rewards generic white male with X GPA more than it does generic other with X GPA, thus holding white males to a lower standard, then wouldn't that harm the pool of successful white males in general across the long term? If white guys think they can get in just because they're an important demographic due to their numbers, that certainly isn't going to teach them a lesson about getting competitive.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The article discusses a non-existent problem.

misogynist tendencies are a problem

There is no crisis of masculinity. There are insecure losers, and I guess they're a problem, but...

[Cassius]

I have always been saying the exact opposite. Patriarchy is oppressive to everybody and men should fight alongside with women to bring it down.

Are you sure?  There must be someone benefiting from all that oppression, n'est-ce pas?

Obviously men in general also draw huge advantages from patriarchy. This doesn't mean they can't also be oppressed in some form.

The thing about patriarchy is that it's not really a material power structure, but an ideological one. It's not about men oppressing women per se, but rather about men and women being both forced into specific gender roles, which happen to be organized hierarchically. Thus, while men are assigned a rather advantageous place in society, they still aren't fully free to choose what to do with their lives.

And? Are you unhappy that you can't wear a skirt?