Great article about boys and men

[wsbill]

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_21/b3834001_mz001.htm

Who put on the pants in your house.

[Bobby Orr]

... in response to Great article about boys and men, posted by wsbill on May 16, 2003

Bill - good link with gets me going, and I will have a tie-in to FSU with the comment below.  I will try to not inflame the skirt wearing liberals on this board as much as possible with this post - but sometimes the truth must be told.  We men have been giving away the farm for far too long.  This country was built by men with real women at their side, with real values, women who knew their role and their place.  Since the 1960's our government has set out on a course, whether intentional or not, of doing what they can to make boys girls and girls boys.  What we are seeing today is the fruit of our government's policy.  

What will end up happening here is what happened, for what I believe is different reasons, in the Former Soviet Union, where women became as a group highly educated and men shunned school - forcing the most valued jobs in society to be male dominated.  With it came the collapse of their society, although too much government emphasis on guns and not butter did play a role.  Those were the roots of their problem - albeit in a different way - but very similar roots of the problems we see today.  We see that here already.  As women move to the legal, medical and other professions requiring a "higher" level of education the salaries for these professions go down.  Men migrate to other professions where they can be men.  Business, where men can be men is still luckily dominated by men.  Construction / Contracting work - especially really dangerous construction work will increase in salary because they will be male dominated - as will male dominated careers such as fire fighters etc.  Men will become more and more macho -the gap between men and women and with it the over-all progress of our society will have a downward spiral.  It is great that men can dominate in physical related activities but over all bad for society.  The reason is that over-all creativity is extremely male dominated.  I am in science and no matter how many females get degrees etc., no matter how much the educational system tries to elevate and make something out of the nothing that "bright" women accomplish - it still is the men who more than 90% of the time have the scientific break-throughs.  When you get right down to it engineering and scientific breakthroughs form the basis of US superiority.  Even in science men are now forced to spend endless periods of time "justifying" and "pandering" to discussion groups and concerns of fellow women co-workers - decreasing mens ability to do what they do best - think and create.  Men have to be careful of everything they say or do around their female co-workers.......it is a joke.

Unfortunately, there is not much we can do as individuals to change things.  We are doing the smartest thing - hedging our bets ie. getting a girl from the FSU, having the ability to easily migrate back to Europe - which over the next 30 years easily could re-emerge as a country your children will be better off in.  

Now, immigration policy is just another big log our government has added to the fire.  I have made myself quite clear on the problems with this policy on other posts - which has led to discussion.

What can we do?  As white men we have no choice other to vote Republican right now - and pray that what has been done, especially since the Johnson administration, can be reversed.

[DanM]

... in response to It goes back to the vote........, posted by Bobby Orr on May 17, 2003

Although I agree with you about voting Republican, I think my basis for the decision is very different from yours.

My reasons for voting Republican are as follows:

1. I think the whole idea of a "progressive" tax structure is really stupid. If one person makes 20 times what another person makes, they should pay 20 times as much in taxes. As it stands now, they pay something along the lines of 150-200 times as much in taxes if they make 20 times as much as an average taxpayer. This isn't equitable or fair. What we have now is nothing more than wealth redistribution from a smaller demographic group to a larger. In one sense, its a vote-buying scheme whereby liberal politicians buy the votes of lower income people with the money earned by the higher income people who would not vote for them anyway. The lower income people take out more than they put in and higher income people pay more in than they ever take out. They try to rationalize it with slogans about the rich paying their fair share, but its all a bunch of BS to make people feel better about spending other people’s money for their own benefit. Simply put, its a sham and should be stopped.

2. I think the capital gains tax should be killed. Nothing would spur investment better or do more to strengthen everyone's preparation for retirement.

3. I think estate taxes should be lowered not raised. If someone earns wealth, then they should have every right to give it to whomever the wish. Goes back to respecting private property rights.

4. I like what George Bush is doing regarding foreign policy and what Donald Rumsfeld is doing with the military. Part of the reason I will be voting for George W. in 2004 is to make sure he keeps doing the same things for another 4 years.

5. I like the idea of adding a voucher alternative within the educational system. Lets face it, the educational system needs to be shaken up and there is nothing like competition to create a better system. Monopolies are inherently inefficient and that is a big reason why the state run industries of the Soviet Union could not compete. If you look at the current US educational system as a monopoly, then you can see how a voucher system could function in a manner similar to privatization of industry. Simply put, competition forces more efficient choices.

On items 1-3, its a matter of respect for private property. If one person earns more than the average, it does not mean the government or any vocal special interest group is entitled to what this person has earned. Sorry, but this seems pretty obvious to me. Even if that person wishes to spend their earned wealth on fancy cars, fancy homes or gifts to their children, it should be their right to do so. They earned the money and should be allowed to keep it. They created the wealth and should be allowed to benefit from it. Its not right for a government to unduly tax this person no matter how many opinionated and sanctimonious people think they know better ways to spend this person’s money.

As for all the drama about gender equity, its all been talked to death. Nothing here is new. From high school and college sports to the business world, its been said a million times. We will never have true gender equity, because its not some static term with a commonly accepted definition. What we are seeing now is nothing more than the swinging of a pendulum. 30 years ago women had unfair barriers, now we are seeing the pendulum swing against men.

At the end of the day, we want to maximize our human potential (as a workforce). That should be the underlying goal for all issues of race or gender equity. As long as we do not compromise performance standards or discriminate against anyone (including white males), I am in favor of including all people in every aspect of our society.

I mean, if you were on the hospital table and you were about to go under the knife, I am sure you would want to know that the best possible doctor was doing the surgery. You would not want the best Christian white male doctor. You would want the very best doctor possible. By the same token, you wouldn’t want to know about how your hospital values gender and racial quotas more than skill or experience. See what I mean. Its the same with the office of president, teaching positions, policemen, etc. When the most qualified are in the right positions, then good things are more likely to happen for everyone. Its a really simple point, but a lot of people seem to forget about it somewhere in the discussion.

The big thing we should be focusing on is not the favoritism of one gender or race over another, but how to achieve a true merit-based system, that does not discriminate against any group, have quotas or lower standards. In such a system, the best will move forward regardless of who they are. If you are correct about the inherent superiority of white males, then you will see them disproportionately represented in the best jobs. If you are wrong, then you won't see it. Either way, society will be better off for having the most capable where they are needed most.

Just my 2 cents.

[Bobby Orr]

... in response to Re: It goes back to the vote........, posted by DanM on May 19, 2003

I agree with what you say and the rationale behind it.  See how it is possible to come to the same conclusion from a different fundamental thinking.  You definitely are well versed in economics.

[DanM]

... in response to Good post., posted by Bobby Orr on May 20, 2003

Thanks for the compliments. I agree we can find a lot of common ground even though we have some very big differences on some other issues.

The thing that makes economics interesting to me is that I will never really understand everything that affects the equation. In that sense, the challenge never really ends. At best, the questions can only be improved and refined.

[stefang]

... in response to It goes back to the vote........, posted by Bobby Orr on May 17, 2003

Well my cousins boyfriend had very good grades in Engineering and when he was graduating he had to search hard to find a job. He was pretty p!$$ed off when the women where offered about 20 jobs apiece so the firms could show women engineers in employment. The men still do most of the designing women are smarter in many ways but men are still the inovators of the world. Ever since this  equalization that fanatic Feminists have pushed they lowered both men and women.
If men and women were equal we would not of had seperate sexes to begin with. How much equality between males and females in the animal world? None, equality doesn't exist it makes me angry when I see women complain about a job held by men for centuries and they sue to open the labor market. Proof is the fire department I saw a television show where the NOW and ACLU sued local fire departments to get women in. They contended in court that the strict physical requirements should be lowered to give a woman a better chance. They were showing two women trying to lift a latter and they couldn't, when it takes one man to do it. The department argued that you had to be strong enough to lift a 200 lb man and carry him out. Do you know what the ACLU and NoW said? They said it was safer to drag the person out so they would not breath the smoke. Now imagine a woman dragging you down a flight of stairs while your head is bouncing of the cement steps, real safe. If a woman is strong enough to pass the male requirements then she should be offered the job but don't lower the standards just to be politically correct.

[wsbill]

... in response to It goes back to the vote........, posted by Bobby Orr on May 17, 2003

But I have to admit, the mexicans are population in my town has like double and growing.  Tyson Chicken, prefers to hire out of towner vs locals.

We'll probably live the rest of our lives here in America, but by getting a foreign wife of our ethiniticy(?) our children will be able to travel to and from with ease in the coming globalization world/economy.

[Scaught]

... in response to Great article about boys and men, posted by wsbill on May 16, 2003

This book came out a few years ago. The popular media bombards us with the politically correct lies of special interest groups, as we all know. This book documents the deception regarding the systematic demonization and ghettoization of boys that our public educational system is all too eager to enable.

Makes you wonder if we are living in a Matrix, and spoon fed diarrhea through a cord in the back of our brains. Unreal!

But really, it reminds me of the communist Soviet Union where everyone knew the truth-- that the system was a complete failure, yet had to pretend it was working. In America, we spout how we believe in equality, but obviously there is widespread, intentional, systematic discrimination against half of our own children by people who are supposed to know better, but are too ignorant and blinded by their politically correct ehjukayshunul system.

[fencer]

... in response to "The War Against Boys" by Chri..., posted by Scaught on May 17, 2003

yeah, whoever thought that when the cultural marxists in the universities talked of 'deconstruction' they *actually* meant it.

There is definitely something Orwellian about the phenomenon or as you say Matrix like. An entire gender deconstructed in 30 years and a new one built on top of it.

By the way, a long article by Sommers similar to the book can be found online at

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/05/sommers.htm
entitled coincidentally "The War Against Boys".

One of the sad things about the BW article is it shows how parochial Americans have become in their self-interest. For instance, if I have 2 daughters, which would be fairly common, then this situation actually benefits me - maybe people don't make that calculation explicity but it is probably there and in sufficient numbers to quell any outrage by the broader society.

[Bobby Orr]

... in response to Re: "The War Against Boys" by ..., posted by fencer on May 17, 2003

The guy thinking he is looking out for his two daughters is actually hurting society - and his own interests as well in the long run.  Men need to be men and make sure the women are women - period!

[DanM]

... in response to Selfish, posted by Bobby Orr on May 17, 2003

Also those 2 daughters will have more trouble finding a good man. Just something to think about. We are all connected and all dependent on the greater good.

[fencer]

... in response to Great article about boys and men, posted by wsbill on May 16, 2003

The problem must be so dire that even the liberal media publications can’t ignore it. By its own admission the problem has been festering for 30 years – now they congratulate themselves for bringing it to our attention, but only as a way to cut themselves slack. Note they are smart enough to do the mea culpa's when the problem is effectively irremediable.

This is malfeasance by our American institutions – they even admit to it: “Indeed, many administrators saw boys..as the problem.” – Administrators ostensibly charged with these (poor) boys’ education.

However in the best American tradition where there is a problem there is money to be made – and slightly relevant to the nature of this forum: a mail order husband service.

The article bemoans the new inequities facing American [their victimhood never ceases to amaze]– not enough high earning men with the same status education to be suitable marriage partners, leaving tons of American Women stuck on the sandbar of spinsterhood like beached whales. Not to be bitter about it – but it serves them right.

Anyone got 100K to invest?

[stefang]

... in response to what a betrayal by our so-called educati..., posted by fencer on May 16, 2003

Well didn't you know I had to search in South America since I never finished college. AW don't want Blue collar workers we are trash and throw aways. Now I wonder what do you do with children today. If you have a son will the school force you to drug him because he touched a girl. Wow to think of it in Brasil women greet you with a kiss on each cheek but in America you would be labeled a future rapist.

Makes me wonder if I should bring a woman to America or flee to her country. I don't agree about many things with Bush but I think he does need to get rid of some of the AA laws. Maybe we need open season on lawyers also, there are to many in our society today. Women today complain that men don't act like men anymore but the school system tries to destroy any pride in boys at an early age.

[wsbill]

... in response to Re: what a betrayal by our so-called edu..., posted by stefang on May 17, 2003

The stock market to crash on a epic proportion size.  Down to a level where women have stay at home.   Right now with all the companies laying off people, it's like a role reversal - women can find work, men cannot.  We're being descriminated against.  So the crash, will have to be very severe.

[vagn]

... in response to Re: I think what America needs is for, posted by wsbill on May 17, 2003

Wishing hardship on anybody is just nuts.
And as for the discrimination against men --
we've always had to endure it -- just now
it has a name.  Suck it up and deal with it.

What I mean is that this country has always
had men that had to deal with the extra
complication of (depending on the decade)
being italian, norwegian, polish, german,
irish ... and that's just the whites.
Black brown and yellow always have to deal
with it -- whether their women stay home or not.

Suck it up and deal with it.