Post: #1

According to an OpEd in the NYT:

"SO far the gender revolution has been a one-sided effort. Women have entered previously male precincts of economic and political life, and for the most part they have succeeded. They can lead companies, fly fighter jets, even run for president.
...
As painful as it may be, men need to adapt to what a modern economy and family life demand. There has been progress in recent years, but it hasn’t been equal to the depth and urgency of the transformation we’re undergoing. The old economy and the old model of masculinity are obsolete.

Women have learned to become more like men. Now men need to learn to become more like women.
...
The way forward, we believe, is for men to embrace and adapt to the new, more androgynous world."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/opinio...yt&emc=rss
--
At least she said it. The true goal of feminism is to turn women into men, and men into women.

Post: #2

This whole article is so full of shit, statistical misrepresentation, and wish projection it's hard to get anything useful out of it.

Post: #3

As I said in my response in the "30's and hesitant to marry thread", and a follow up poster articulated the sentiment better than I did.

Build your life, and then invite a woman into it.

Get awesome, get rich, or at least onto your way where the money will flow in the future.

Then you go spouse hunting. What she offers the team is good eggs and a nurturing instinct, such as good hygiene in the house by keeping it clean and good nutrition for everyone by cooking healthy food.

You dint nerd her to work, you've got enough cash for everyone.

If that's her goal, then she isn't commuted to the same goals you are. Next her. Its not about anger, or ill will, you're just not travelling the same path together.

You build the foundation of the team, then you recruit her onto it. You don't start a team together. One has rules in place, the other builds a dynamic as they go along, and 50% of that team doesn't think clearly enough to be making rules

Post: #4

A "more androgynous world" indeed!

Post: #5

I imagine the reverse is true as well, but men want to sleep with women so women want to sleep with men.

The push for gay rights seems to now become a push to make women masculine for lesbianism and men feminine to take an ass pounding.

That and I remember as a kid the NY Times being a decent paper, or thought so at least. Now it seems to be worth nothing more than covering up the piss a from a puppy in potty training.

Post: #6

They already tried. They are commonly looked as jokes. They are more commonly known as cross dressers and transvestites.

Post: #7

Post: #8

Great comment: "Right. Men need to be more like women, until of course there's a mouse in the house or a strange sound downstairs in the middle of the night. Then of course men need to be traditional men."

Post: #9

Feminists want to turn men into something that women aren't attracted to.

Post: #10

We need to teach journalists like these Arabic and then drop them into Raqqa to weaken the jihadis.

Post: #11

Post: #12

"SO far the gender revolution has been a one-sided effort. Women have entered previously male precincts of economic and political life, and for the most part they have succeeded."

They sure have succeeded.

They've succeeded in filling themselves with mood-altering drugs in order to deal with working in the world men made. Then they succeeded in not having any kids in their eternal quest to be men.

In doing all that, they succeeded in weakening (if not outright wrecking) the family unit. They also succeeded into turning colleges into eternal middle schools -- something that tends to happen whenever any institution becomes majority female.

Add it all up and American woman succeeded in re-making themselves into something that few sane men would ever consider marrying...due to attitude, weight, tattoos, or all of the above.

Rather than men have to change "to become like women," how about we ship in some replacement women so we can have real ones? Sadly, this won't happen. If men really ran the country, all our refugees would be 18-year-old Swedish or Norwegian au pairs.

Post: #13

This is actually one of the most honest feminist articles I've seen. After all the B.S. from Sheryl Sandberg & Co. about how feminism is good for men too and how men should support feminism, this articles says things like:

"Many men have felt a double whammy: a loss of economic status as jobs in traditionally masculine sectors have disappeared and a loss of social status as women have advanced. Male wages are stagnant and among the less educated, they have fallen"

Ah, the truth at last- feminism has caused men to lose economic and social status. The math has always been simple, if women take more jobs, then fewer opportunities for men, but we've been told to ignore it.

If it's between me being a house dad, nurse, or pre-K teacher or moving to Saudi Arabia, I think I take Saudi Arabia.

Post: #14

How about any man who thinks this is right does so, and any man who disagrees does his own thing. Then we see whose strategy is most successful at continuing the species.

Post: #15

Women decided they want to be like men. Then women decide the want their men to be more like woman.

But women don't even like other women.

Post: #16

All sexual groups apart from the heterosexual man of moderate to low social-economic status have seen their access to sex boom since the so-called sexual revolution.

Within the heterosexual dating market, the sex supply has shifted to higher status men as 80% of women demand and seek equality through consummation with 20% of the men.

What does a society therefore do with the rump of heterosexual men whose access to sex is when they mysteriously 'get lucky' once in a while and who will unlikely marry for life - even marry at all?

Stimulate androgyny which will neuter interactions between fertile women and men shut out from the sexual market place.

Alan Watt has been speaking about the androgyny agenda for years now.

For example

Alan Watt - The Great Leap Forward - Human Progeny to Androgyny

Post: #17

Rather women needs to learn to behave like women

Post: #18

For decades now, men have been told to stop oppressing women.

Now we're told we need to act more like women.

It's always men's fault. Everything we do is wrong.

Post: #19

"The old economy and the old model of masculinity are obsolete."

Is anyone else here besides 2Wycked a fan of the old show "The Twilight Zone?" It often had surprise endings. A lot of times the main characters got what they were hoping for, but with some unexpected twist.

I'd like to see this writer in an episode of that show.

The first 15 minutes would depict a world that she wanted -- where old-style masculinity would be declared obsolete. We'd see her laughing and carrying on with her dream fem-boys, happy in a new, liberated world. She's dressed in pink; so are they. Everybody's giggling and happy.

And then one day her town is hit with a massive hurricane like Sandy.

All of a sudden there is no power. To her dismay, there is no one around to fix that. The *new breed of men* she demanded are unskilled in manual labor. And, besides, they're afraid to go down into the sewers to make repairs. There might be mice down there. And rats. OMG! Eek! OMG!

The episode closes with her looking horrified at the girlie shrieks of the men afraid to open the city's newly-declared "personhole" covers. Instead, they skip off to an Ariana Grande Dance Party.

And that new economy? It's called the barter system. It's what you get when you can't power up cash registers.

Rod Serling's Closing Voiceover:

Meet our New York Times writer. She got what she wanted. But never thought about losing what she had. She now sits in a room without electricity. Her new occupation? Consoling a generation of non-masculine men who are afraid of the dark. It's tough job but it needs to be done in..."The Twilight Zone."

Post: #20

Having read the whole article, it's one of the very worst and most virulent Year Zero screeds of its kind that I've ever seen. I believe that if it hadn't been published around the same time as the Paris attacks, it would have been pretty big on the web.

What makes it particularly terrible is the confident and even nonchalant assurance with which these monsters call for the most sweeping and wholesale changes to society and to human nature itself, as if these changes were the most obvious things in the world. This is the tone of people who are deeply entrenched in power and expect their precepts, no matter how ludicrous they may be, to be obeyed as a matter of course.

These paragraphs are a good illustration of what I'm talking about. Note the calm self-assurance with which these Year Zero cadres predict and expect these sweeping and unprecedented changes that go against the very nature of what men and women are:

Quote:There is, for example, a growing desire among some policy mavens to create more “marriageable men” by providing them with the kinds of apprenticeships and wage subsidies that will enhance their marriage prospects. This whole enterprise is shot through with a breadwinner-male definition of marriage that is well past its sell-by date.

None of this is to say that better wages and more skills aren’t needed for men: They are, desperately. But it is just as important to keep lifting up women’s skills, earnings and incomes. We don’t want a world in which men can get better jobs than women simply because they are men. Nor are we going to restore marriages based on the superior earning power of men.

Resistance to these kinds of changes in familial roles is often based on assumptions about innate biological differences. There is little doubt that evolutionary differences exist. But it is hard to say how much they influence the adoption of certain roles under current cultural conditions. We suspect beliefs about innate differences are often an excuse for preserving the status quo. If the role of biology is exaggerated, society will suffer.

When Year Zero cadres can swiftly and relaxedly dismiss the most basic differences between men and women as being "well past their sell-by date", as if they were pretty much the same as a 1980s big hair fad, and when they can do away with the small matter of "innate biological differences" in a single shrugging paragraph, you know that things have come to a serious pass, and that the power this movement wields is both real and growing.

Perhaps the most terrible strength these people possess, and where they truly shew their YZ (my abbreviation for Year Zero) dark powers, is in their instinctive inclination, and dreadful ability, to create new and instantly deadening language, almost out of nowhere -- language that takes words that have warm, rich, and age-old meanings and instantly replaces them with words that reduce and deaden the world in the service of the Year Zero ideology. Here is where the black magic happens:

Quote:“Stewardesses” have become flight attendants. Good. So why not call nurses “health attendants” (if entry level) or “health associates” (if more highly trained)? Getting more men into teaching would have two advantages: widening male job prospects and at the same time providing more diverse role models for boys in the classroom.

When a couple of Brookings YZ operatives are able, almost on the spot, to dismiss the ancient and beautiful word "nurse" and to conjure the deadly compounds "health attendant" and "health associate" out of thin unoxygenated Year Zero air -- that is when I stand up and pay attention, because shit just got real.

*************

Finally, as a special turd cherry on top of the whole massive YZ sundae, here is a comment on the article by a New York Times reader named Diana from Phoenix:

Quote:Women have always had to adapt to survive. We adapted or died. Men literally beat us and raped us into doing what we were told and we have evolved into people who know how to do what they're told and adapt. Men, on the other hand, subconsciously believe that they own the space of the world and that entitlement hinders their adaptive capabilities. I see this in my classroom every day. Boys don't believe they should behave or listen, especially to a woman. It's about time our skills brought us something. Too bad it's not a higher paycheck.

Can you imagine having a fucking cunt who thinks that as your son's "teacher"? I don't want to think about that too much, but let's just say that if I ever encountered Ms. Diana in real life, I would not be a fan.

Post: #21

(11-18-2015 08:49 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  "The old economy and the old model of masculinity are obsolete."

Is anyone else here besides 2Wycked a fan of the old show "The Twilight Zone?" It often had surprise endings. A lot of times the main characters got what they were hoping for, but with some unexpected twist.

I'd like to see this writer in an episode of that show.

The first 15 minutes would depict a world that she wanted -- where old-style masculinity would be declared obsolete. We'd see her laughing and carrying on with her dream fem-boys, happy in a new, liberated world. She's dressed in pink; so are they. Everybody's giggling and happy.

And then one day her town is hit with a massive hurricane like Sandy.

All of a sudden there is no power. To her dismay, there is no one around to fix that. The *new breed of men* she demanded are unskilled in manual labor. And, besides, they're afraid to go down into the sewers to make repairs. There might be mice down there. And rats. OMG! Eek! OMG!

The episode closes with her looking horrified at the girlie shrieks of the men afraid to open the city's newly-declared "personhole" covers. Instead, they skip off to an Ariana Grande Dance Party.

And that new economy? It's called the barter system. It's what you get when you can't power up cash registers.

Rod Serling's Closing Voiceover:

Meet our New York Times writer. She got what she wanted. But never thought about losing what she had. She now sits in a room without electricity. Her new occupation? Consoling a generation of non-masculine men who are afraid of the dark. It's tough job but it needs to be done in..."The Twilight Zone."

If I could like this post again I would. Brilliant! I can perfectly imagine Rod Serling reading that last line.

Post: #22

I'm also surprised this article hasn't gotten more attention, and it is probably due to being posted at the same time as the Paris attacks.
This article also seems to take a tone that admits feminism has already won, and women have made significant gains, this is in contrast to most feminist articles that only talk about oppression. It really is a change in tact.

Post: #23

Feminism totes won. Birthrate; down. Happiness by all metrics; down. Education quality; down. Innovation; down. Decisiveness; down. Wage growth; down. GDP Growth; Down. Social trust; down. Workplace cohesion; down. Male Suicide; up. Abortions; up. Divorces; up. Porns made and consumed; way up. ONS; up.

Could go on.

Interesting other statistic; women who identify as feminists; down.

Post: #24

delete