Posted on 11/30/2012 4:17:23 PM PST by drewh
Believe it or not, modern women want to get married. Trouble is, men don’t.
The so-called dearth of good men (read: marriageable men) has been a hot subject in the media as of late. Much of the coverage has been in response to the fact that for the first time in history, women have become the majority of the U.S. workforce. They’re also getting most of the college degrees. The problem? This new phenomenon has changed the dance between men and women.
Women aren’t women anymore.
To say gender relations have changed dramatically is an understatement. Ever since the sexual revolution, there has been a profound overhaul in the way men and women interact. Men haven’t changed much – they had no revolution that demanded it – but women have changed dramatically.
Now the men have nowhere to go.
What if the dearth of good men, and ongoing battle of the sexes, is – hold on to your seats – women’s fault?
You’ll never hear that in the media. All the articles and books (and television programs, for that matter) put women front and center, while men and children sit in the back seat. But after decades of browbeating the American male, men are tired. Tired of being told there’s something fundamentally wrong with them. Tired of being told that if women aren’t happy, it’s men’s fault.
Contrary to what feminists like Hanna Rosin, author of The End of Men, say, the so-called rise of women has not threatened men. It has pissed them off. Men want to love women, not compete with them. They want to provide for and protect their families – it’s in their DNA. But modern women won’t let them.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I told my wife when she turned 40 I was going to trade her in on two twenty year olds. She said I wasn’t wired for 220.
When I turned 50 I told a good friend that I could do things now that I never could do at age 20.He said,name one.I said like finding 40 year old women attractive.
I appreciate your candor, and I think you’re on the right track.
I think it goes beyond what Suzanne Venker wrote here, and she may address more in some of her other writings. I would hope so.
When women left the home to seek a new life, they changed the workplace in ways they didn’t understand they would.
Before women entered the work force in a major way, we had one wage-earner families. The male went off to work, and he brought home the proverbial bacon. Mom stayed home and managed the home, and nurtured the children.
Now I’m not here to advocate for a woman left at home with no education, to be dominated by her spouse. I seriously have a problem with that. I’m sure you do too. But when women entered the work force, they doubled the presence of a commodity in the workplace. Labor.
If you have an over-supply of something, what happens? The value of that something goes down. If there are twice as many strawberries in the market-place, the cost of strawberries is going to be affected by downward pressure.
IMO, the two wage earner family allowed businesses to keep wages artificially low. We flooded the work-force with workers, and what happened? Wages came under downward pressure. If it was easier to replace workers, you didn’t have to pay a worker as much to keep them around.
I submit that if we returned to the one wage earner family, it would go a long way toward combating the downward pressure outsourcing has brought to the table.
There are other dynamics at play here as well.
In the 70s, the education folks got together and wept on each others shoulders, because women were under-represented in certain fields. It goes beyond this, but lets keep it rather simple.
Curricula was changed so that girls/young women would find these fields more enticing. It was actually quite successful. Teaching methods changed. And as those changes came into being, strangely enough, little boys began to lag behind just as the girls had.
Now we have little boys who aren’t interested in certain subjects. Whats more little boys who need to go outside to run and play and burn off energy so they can focus better, lost the only avenue they had to do this, as more and more schools eliminated recesses. Girls who didn’t need to burn off excess energy, did just fine. And sadly, nobody actually cared what this did to little boys.
In short, we have completely short-circuited the education experience for boys.
Society has also done it’s best to change what little boys should grow up to be. They are now expected to be sensitive, caring, and obsessed with going out of their way to please women. And this has gone so far as to irk women, who when the time comes want an actual man to pair off with.
The more feminine metro sexual male isn’t pleasing anyone. Men have angst over it. Women loath it. The popular culture now shows more male ass than it does female ass. I’m not trying to be crass here, but frankly it grosses me out to see so much male rump. What the hell?
And what’s all this kissing? I don’t kiss guys at all, let alone on the lips. There is a concerted effort to turn me into something in between a full male and a flaming flamingo dancer, if you catch my drift.
I sure wish women would speak up regarding this. I would think it would gross them out too.
At any rate, it does please me to see articles like this once in a while. We need to put the brakes on this roller coaster. It’s out of control.
Hope you don’t mind me picking you to talk to, because you exhibited a grasp of the material in the article.
I'm not even in the market. I'm done.
I enjoy living alone now.
I had up until this past September 10, 2012, a wonderful and I mean a TRULY wonderful 21 years of a loving man/woman relationship with Christian, Bible loving gentleman, seven years younger and a very hard working guy. For the glory of the Good Sheperd, he pointed me in the direction of the Good Sheperd and King of Kings. I was seven years older, yet the love we had was and in a special, right after I had a life threatening illness and emergency dental surgery, during the last two months of his life, went very deep indeed.
We had plans for the rest of our lives together including marriage as well as to be able to grow old together, which would have included possible living in North Carolina, but God had better plans for him, and after a very brief and sudden illness, God took him home to his eternal reward and rest at the age of 46.
As a significant other widow, I will MISS BIGTIME this coming Christmas, but the one confort I could take is that he will celibrate Christmas in Heaven with the King of Kings.
Opps, forget to say, WILL MISS BIGTIME this coming Christmas my beloved SO.
Ever laid your life down for a slave?
I wanted to mention something to you.
When I read your post, I focused more on the reaction to the article than your age. As I was writing, I thought I was talking to a person older than you are.
I hope I didn’t offend you, and there was certainly no intent to.
Take care.
At this point in my life, after a what was truly a loving longtime relationship which ended in sudden death of my SO, it is more likely I am finished with dating men.
I know young men who want to commit but will not because they do not want to be on the hook for massive amounts of child support or having to give up half of their property to a woman who is not committed.
The war on ‘masculinity’- not war on ‘men’.
Irresponsible, sissy men like Obama are encouraged.
Evidently your definition of marriage doesn't involve a little thing called "commitment."
not my definition. almost all states have this as their definition in their state laws concerning marital property.
and it sounds like you are totally great with people arrying to attempt to brden another person with their pre-marriage mountain of debt. that be love to you, but not me.
Sweet sentiments.
My wife and I agreed on a certain set of values that we vowed to not deviate from before we were married. One of them was that I would provide for and protect the family. She would stay home with the kids (work from home part time as she could or wanted to). We would not pay for daycare, nannies, etc. Over the years, we have been tested and this value has been pressed. Alas, even in these tough financial times for us, she is home to pick up the kids and we have never had daycare.
We agreed on the “traditional” roles and responsibilities and recognize each others importance and contribution to our union and our family. We joke and laugh often, still. And we get a little silly and carefree when we are alone without the kids. We joke that she married me for my earning potential and I married a trophy-wife ex model (which she was as a teen).
We each get a 50/50 vote on most things. But she agrees I get an extra vote if the overall welfare of the family is at stake. She gets the extra vote if there are decisions about the upbringing of our children, decor of the house, vacations, gifts, schedule, etc.
I put her on a pedestal and treat like a queen. She respects me and takes care of us. She shows me how much she loves me when she leaves honey-do lists and repair orders along with broken nic-nacks on my work bench in my shop. :o)
Very Happily Married,
Tenacious1
I think men have made great strides regarding high achieving women. I mean, look at the tens of millions of men who are totally devoted fans of women’s sports.
To Keep a Woman one needs Time and Money
Woman = Time * Money
Ben Franklin Taught Time is Money, so
Time = Money
Substituting
Woman = Money * Money
Woman = Money^2
We are Taught however that Money is the Root of all Problems
Money = SQRT (Problems)
Money^2 = Problems
Substitution
Woman = Problems
/sarc sort of...
I’m not interested in a woman who wants to compete with me.
That’s a sign that’s she’s just looking out for #1 and using me.
That's always on my mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
