I think it has more to do with how society has been overly balanced in women's favor - at the urging of women.
Divorce is only a part of that, and what divorce is really about is not money but severely misguided life expectations.
Quote:
I've heard too many young women asking, "Where are the decent single men?"
And most men could just as easily ask, "Where are the decent single women?"
The question itself really does cut to the heart of the issue: unreasonable expectations on the part of women, fed by unreasonable mores and women enjoying level of individual success totally out of whack with their individual abilities.
More than ever, getting involved with women is a fool's errand. One is expected to honor all their traditional prerogatives while maintaining a pretense of equality.
From the dark side:Quote:
Profiling the Campus Date Rapist: Inside the Research.
...He has framed a body of research around the concept of undetected rapists. Some of his conclusions will cause us to carefully re-examine our willingness to accept at face value what “HE SAID.”...
...Should the alleged victim have a right to appeal?...
The rubric helps to dispel the myths that sexual misconduct complaints are fraught with “gray areas,” or that a complaint amounts to nothing more than a “He Said – She Said.”
It's also worth noting that those stock materials total about ten thousand dollars, meaning that short of being wealthy it is impossible to get the information to compete with institutions on an even footing.
With the cards so skewed in women's favor - her word is as good as a conviction and even if her claims are baseless her word alone can put a man on double jeopardy - only a FOOL would get involved with most young women.
Because of the unreasonable advantages they enjoy throughout their lives, most women today are spoiled beyond reason. So not only do men have social, legal and economic reasons to avoid engaging women, they also have strong personal incentives to do so as well: the attitudes of women that must be endured in institutional settings where unreasonable laws and social mores can be enforced, are only palatable to the most foolish and superficial men in purely private relationships.
The article claims that it is the habits of men which drive the greater success of women. Bullshit. The educational success of women is 100% (not 25%, not 50%, not 75%, it's 100%) due to preferential treatment, both de facto and de jure. Full stop. 100% due to preferential treatment.
From a local college:Quote:
"...Rather than rendering affirmative action plans that merely represent a compilation of policies, procedures and prohibited practices solely designed to avoid discrimination, these action-oriented elements ensure that this Plan becomes a pro-active, aggressive tool as opposed to a passive document...
...assist in identifying and overcoming deficiencies, increasing representation of qualified minorities, women and disabled persons within the work force and the student body and providing increased opportunities for under-represented groups, both in the area of employment and in the area of the student learning environment...
... If the recruitment process fails to yield sufficient numbers of qualified candidates from a designated protected group, consideration may be given to reposting the position..."
"... BHCC is distinguished by the diversity of its students: six out of every ten students are members of minorities, and more than half are women..."
So even though women are the MAJORITY, they are employed for all available positions before men can
even be considered for the same jobs? Wat?
I remember this one time I took an English course. Some girl claimed her PC mysteriously deleted her paper and the entire document was blank. So she was forgiven the assignment. If she were a man it would have been an F. I could recount a string of such episodes here but I won't waste space.
I spent nine months laboring on an over-demanding paper because a professor said so. Concurrently, a girl who was far less able than myself didn't even show up to class and couldn't pass courses I slept through, got hers done first, a hack job about "cannibalism", and the requirements were sanded down because she wasn't as able but should make the same effort. If she were a man she'd have been dropped from the program for gross incompetence.
Most guys play video games because the world has nothing to offer them. Simple as that.
As Jubber would point out - and by God as my witness if we agree on anything it's because it's absolute truth - women prosper in today's organizations because of what he likes to call "the Pussification of America" and what I like to call "cultural pusillanimity and effeminacy", but it really refers to the same thing which is honoring eunuch-like behavior, obstinate and cowardly, regarding confrontation as evil, truth as subjective and incidental, and feelings of weakness and inferiority as something to be perceived as injustices not overcome as failings.
And what props this up? In a word: credit. It is through credit, supporting impractical laws and a standard of living totally at odds with the level of real productivity in this country, that keeps this house of cards afloat. In that sense we are no different than Greece, except where for them the albatross is labor unions and bureaucracy, for us it's this mess of consumerist propaganda and social engineering.
May God help us all when the credit dries up.
I really wonder where this is going. I wonder what the future will be like, within our lifetimes.
TLDR version: Jubber and Aestu agree on a social issue. The end of the world is imminent. No, really, it is.
