ADVERTISEMENT

The boys aren't alright.

IUCrazy2

Hall of Famer
Mar 7, 2004
20,275
18,246
113

This argument has been made for awhile, as the parent of 4 boys, I do think that the girls get a more positive message and have school more catered to their sensibilities now than the boys do. The comparison of how Kindergarten was treated in 1998 as opposed to now also reinforced an opinion I had developed based on my own observations as well.

Either way, it has been great that the girls feel included but I think we still tend to push this idea that they are the ones who need the extra special push when all of the data indicates the opposite is true.
 

This argument has been made for awhile, as the parent of 4 boys, I do think that the girls get a more positive message and have school more catered to their sensibilities now than the boys do. The comparison of how Kindergarten was treated in 1998 as opposed to now also reinforced an opinion I had developed based on my own observations as well.

Either way, it has been great that the girls feel included but I think we still tend to push this idea that they are the ones who need the extra special push when all of the data indicates the opposite is true.
Staying on this topic, I've noticed an increasing trend what pretty much whenever a "family" is portrayed in a commercial or sit com, the Dad is an idiot. But if he's single (or the show doesn't focus on his family), he's generally not portrayed that way.

Great messaging.
 
I agree that we seem to too a great job encouraging our young girls' now days, especially compared to where we used to be. I don't know that we can say the same for our young boys anymore

We'd do well to remember the words of Ulysses S. Grant to his troops at the Siege of Vicksburg:

"Let's hear it for the boy, let's give the boy a hand".
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Staying on this topic, I've noticed an increasing trend what pretty much whenever a "family" is portrayed in a commercial or sit com, the Dad is an idiot. But if he's single (or the show doesn't focus on his family), he's generally not portrayed that way.

Great messaging.
💯 percent. I’ve watched an amount of Nickelodeon shows. Ward Cleaver is long gone. Dad is a clown now. Odd.

and look how they end up! Sam and Cat. Now it’s that dirty Ariana grande
 

This argument has been made for awhile, as the parent of 4 boys, I do think that the girls get a more positive message and have school more catered to their sensibilities now than the boys do. The comparison of how Kindergarten was treated in 1998 as opposed to now also reinforced an opinion I had developed based on my own observations as well.

Either way, it has been great that the girls feel included but I think we still tend to push this idea that they are the ones who need the extra special push when all of the data indicates the opposite is true.
And African American boys are really getting screwed. We all pay for that.
 
The TV show dumb dad thing is hardly a new thing.
It's getting worse.

The Watcher - thriller (total crap) on Netflix. Dad is a loser who fvcks off at his job and basically causes all his family's problems.

I know, anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but it seems to be getting worse.
 
39a890c0-03bb-47f4-a9e9-8804f3f2d042_text.gif
 

This argument has been made for awhile, as the parent of 4 boys, I do think that the girls get a more positive message and have school more catered to their sensibilities now than the boys do. The comparison of how Kindergarten was treated in 1998 as opposed to now also reinforced an opinion I had developed based on my own observations as well.

Either way, it has been great that the girls feel included but I think we still tend to push this idea that they are the ones who need the extra special push when all of the data indicates the opposite is true.
Agreed. Boys and young men are falling behind for many reasons, including the epidemic of absentee dads and school environments that cater to girls. This is obviously a huge problem with implications that extend well beyond the classroom - - - dropout rates, job opportunities, crime, etc.

 

This argument has been made for awhile, as the parent of 4 boys, I do think that the girls get a more positive message and have school more catered to their sensibilities now than the boys do. The comparison of how Kindergarten was treated in 1998 as opposed to now also reinforced an opinion I had developed based on my own observations as well.

Either way, it has been great that the girls feel included but I think we still tend to push this idea that they are the ones who need the extra special push when all of the data indicates the opposite is true.
I agree.

The expansion of girls' choices - career or stay home and take care of the kids, for example - has boxed boys/men into smaller and smaller niches, to the point where careers that had been available to men are no longer their provinces - they're either shared with women or completely taken over by women. Men who used to be breadwinners for families now aren't . . . and the women who've taken those men's jobs/careers are all too often a part of a power couple so "her" earnings often don't go to the basics of raising a family, they go to creating wealth and "lifestyle" . . . .

It's an old story: can't live with 'em . . . can't live without 'em . . . .
 
Somewhere along the line some brainiac had the idea that we should start looking at men and women as equals. That has been extremely deleterious to males. Men are the dominant gender, men should say what goes, men should have first dibs.

I don't have the time to get into all the details right now but if you would like more literature on this topic please join me and my comrades at fight4mensright.org and incelnation.com
 
Staying on this topic, I've noticed an increasing trend what pretty much whenever a "family" is portrayed in a commercial or sit com, the Dad is an idiot. But if he's single (or the show doesn't focus on his family), he's generally not portrayed that way.

Great messaging.
Was just discussing this with my wife about a week ago. It's a complete flip from 50 years ago when women were stereotyped as ditzy, naive, uninformed, poor decision-makers, etc. The negative portrayals (women) were wrong then, and they're wrong now (men).
 
Last edited:

This argument has been made for awhile, as the parent of 4 boys, I do think that the girls get a more positive message and have school more catered to their sensibilities now than the boys do. The comparison of how Kindergarten was treated in 1998 as opposed to now also reinforced an opinion I had developed based on my own observations as well.

Either way, it has been great that the girls feel included but I think we still tend to push this idea that they are the ones who need the extra special push when all of the data indicates the opposite is true.
I believe the political reason this isn't addressed or given as much attention as other less stark issues is based on a fallacy that undergirds much of identitarian politics.

In this fallacy, categories of people are created across time and generations and everyone in that category carries the moral burdens of everyone else in the category. So we get people thinking "We were legally discriminated against in the past (when they've never faced that legal discrimination personally) ; we were denied the vote (when they've always been able to vote personally); we were subjugated (when many have excellent standards or living or are in positions of power now, personally), etc." and "you [read: people in your category in the past] were on top; you were the ones in power doing the subjugation; you were the ones benefitting from [name the societal evil]."

If you took the "we" and "you" out--if you limited the categories to people in a time and in a place--these statements are more accurate. Most relevant here, it is true that middle- to upper-class white men if you want to look at them as a category really did benefit from college admission practices--in the 1800-1950s or 60s [of course, not all did]. But that has nothing to do with today's young men.

Go out, though, and talk about these stats with people and you are likely to get eye rolls and sarcastic comments like "oh yes, just tell me all the way men have it so rough in our society." I've brought it up with a superintendent and principle in my children's district and the response was "that's just the way boys are." That's the other prejudice you run into.
 

This argument has been made for awhile, as the parent of 4 boys, I do think that the girls get a more positive message and have school more catered to their sensibilities now than the boys do. The comparison of how Kindergarten was treated in 1998 as opposed to now also reinforced an opinion I had developed based on my own observations as well.

Either way, it has been great that the girls feel included but I think we still tend to push this idea that they are the ones who need the extra special push when all of the data indicates the opposite is true.
There ain’t nothing wrong. But something ain’t right
 
I've not been to either link, and I know nothing regarding any men's movement or incels, so I don't know.

This is one where someone has to take me around the corner to explain it to me . . . again.

Thanks!
You have been femininized by the GloboHomo regime of elitists. It is not surprising that this went over your head.

To my comrade above, I stand with you. A society ordered by men, protected by men and ran by men promotes the general welfare of both genders.
 
But that has nothing to do with today's young men.
Except that today's young men, specifically white young men, could be in a radically different position in society and economic strata based on the circumstances of their grandfathers vis a vis their minority counterparts.

I don't think we can ignore that completely when comparing 25 y/o males across the spectrum.
 
You have been femininized by the GloboHomo regime of elitists. It is not surprising that this went over your head.

To my comrade above, I stand with you. A society ordered by men, protected by men and ran by men promotes the general welfare of both genders.
We're doing this today?

Well, ok then.
 
Except that today's young men, specifically white young men, could be in a radically different position in society and economic strata based on the circumstances of their grandfathers vis a vis their minority counterparts.

I don't think we can ignore that completely when comparing 25 y/o males across the spectrum.
We are comparing males to females here. Females would receive that same advantage/disadvantage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT