Aside from publishing P.J. O’Rourke, what has “The Atlantic” ever contributed to regular people’s lives? I’m sorry that urban Yankee feminists aren’t happy, I suppose ... but they could move South, act like ladies, and go to church, if they wanted better potential outcomes.
I saw the pics of Kate Bolick, and as they might say down South “she’s kinda homely”.
A reflection of her inner self no doubt.
Ten Reasons to NOT Get Married
http://www.nomarriage.com/top-ten-reasons-you-shouldnt-get-married/
(I don’t agree with these but did find them amusing. Marriage is a horrible deal legally in America for most men absent a pre-nup.
Divorce judges (excuse me, family judges — actually anti-family in reality) are overwhelmingly female. The entire legal system is anti-male. For example, a married woman who hides cheating successfully can get a man on the hook for child support even if the baby isn’t his.)
The Atlantic has the occasional worthwhile article, but mostly it´s predictable liberal cant.
On the actual issue, I´d say that the winners and losers (on the male side) from the sexual revolution can be subdivided into a couple of camps:
Winners:
Alpha males, I.e. sexually desirable males who know how to navigate the new sexual marketplace (I.e. men who have “game”).
Losers:
Beta males, I.e. run-of-the mill men who are not quite adept at navigating the new sexual marketplace (including those poor men who actually buy into the feminist cant).
Needless to say, civilization loses out bigtime. As do most women, as feminism has the side effect of actually diminishing the supply of desirable men for women.
Charlotte Allen had a good piece on the new sexual system over at the Weekly Standard last year:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/new-dating-game?page=12
I believe that is pretty much the point the article made, sans the moving south. Promiscuity had led to the decline in marriage, was the gist of the article. I have my own opinions as to why feminism has led to the decline in marriage but will refrain from stating them here.
Watch a televised sporting event in the North and you will see a lot of grim female faces - watch one in the South and you will see loads of enchanting smiles. And it isn't just the weather!
I like your post and points. To add to Mona’s sociological point...
We’ve suffered the impact of decades of gubmint $$$ being REWARDED to single mom.
More kids without fathers present? (except when the welfare checks come in, THEN they’ll come sniffin around!)
More $$$ for the mom.
Gubmint REWARDS promiscuity. It’s a generational INDUSTRY.
Vannevar Bush - As We May Think - 1945
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/3881/
He lays out the concept of hyperlinks 50 years before the WWW. (I make all my computer intro students read this)
But, outside of this article, I can't think of anything else from The Atlantic I even remember reading.
“I suppose ... but they could move South”
Too much of that already! Ya’ll just stay up in the frigid north. (Exceptin’ maybe you sweet Mainiacs. The only northern girls I’ve ever known to show spunk!)
Hey! We don’t need any yankee feminists moving down here.
I’m sorry that urban Yankee feminists aren’t happy, I suppose ... but they could move South, act like ladies, and go to church, if they wanted better potential outcomes.