Men and Women, Women and Men

Off Topic
885

So, like, a normal person?

3 Likes
886

Good read.

Part 1: My Life Is a Lie - by Michael W. Green

1 Like
887

From the article. I will finish it later.

“For 1963, that floor made sense. Housing was relatively cheap. A family could rent a decent apartment or buy a home on a single income, as we’ve discussed. Healthcare was provided by employers and cost relatively little (Blue Cross coverage averaged $10/month). Childcare didn’t really exist as a market—mothers stayed home, family helped, or neighbors (who likely had someone home) watched each other’s kids. Cars were affordable, if prone to breakdowns. With few luxury frills, the neighborhood kids in vo-tech could fix most problems when they did. College tuition could be covered with a summer job. Retirement meant a pension income, not a pile of 401(k) assets you had to fund yourself.

Orshansky’s food-times-three formula was crude, but as a crisis threshold—a measure of “too little”—it roughly corresponded to reality. A family spending one-third of its income on food would spend the other two-thirds on everything else, and those proportions more or less worked. Below that line, you were in genuine crisis. Above it, you had a fighting chance.

But everything changed between 1963 and 2024.

Housing costs exploded. Healthcare became the largest household expense for many families. Employer coverage shrank while deductibles grew. Childcare became a market, and that market became ruinously expensive. College went from affordable to crippling. Transportation costs rose as cities sprawled and public transit withered under government neglect.”

All this yet young men are deemed loser incels for failure of provision.

1 Like
888

I think that the problem is that they are blaming the wrong people. It’s not the women who are causing this with their alpha fucks and beta bucks, nor the divorce industry, but rather the corrupt government whose purpose has ceased to be the benefit of its citizens and whose purpose has instead become the benefit of the insurance companies raising prices to benefit wealthy stockholders and the corporations who’d rather not pay pensions or much of its workers’ insurance costs, along with all of the other entities (incl. foreign governments) buying the cooperation of our elected officials.

1 Like
889

In this area, yes, that’s right.

1 Like
890

Not sure it is so normal among some groups.

Even here it seems.

891

Look, i agree with most of your comment, but how is it that literally everyone but women is responsible for women’s behavior?

2 Likes
892

Seems unnecessary to create a label to describe beliefs that are fairly normal tbh.

Have fun when that term gets twisted to mean something you’re not on board with.

1 Like
893

This is not the long post I intented and probably causes a shitstorm, since I don’t explain these things as throroughly as I should. I still feel I need to give you some answer. I might do a longer text to the log later.

As the west I mean countries with western culture (most of Europe, North America, Australia/New Zealand etc.)

None of these are probably sufficient to bring down a civilization/culture, but I think it will be a combination of things below. Also, the collapse is not most likely going not happen fast, it usually doesn’t. Rome did not fall in decades, but in centuries. It will still lead to (hundreds of) millions people dying and cause unimaginable suffering.

West loses the economic competition against China and Asia Not a 100% to happen, and EU + US could together make this a very unlikely scenario. But currently I would put my bets for China.

Political and administrative dead end This is difficult to explain shortly. But by the iron law of oligarchy and political/societal stagnation the democratic processes lose meaning. This cause political turmoil and instability. It can be seen happening in several countries already. In history long standing civilizations tend to have this kind of development, at least according to Spengler.

Weakening of global order. Even thought UN and EU etc. are very flawed and need rework, destroying them completely will hurt the west much more than it would benefit it.

Environmental issues A no brainer. Many people like to live in a fantasy world where they deny our massive effects to environment and the problems it will cause. This mistake has been done before by other civilizations, but never in this scale.

Over-individualistic, pleasure based over-commercialized culture. This is debatable, but I think our culture will suffer a ton from these things. For many only goal in life is the seek of immediate/easy enjoyment and wealth. The ideal of knowledge/sophistication is dying in the west. Current development with AI will make this even worse.

Vulnerability of global distribution systems. This is a huge one, and ties to all the stuff above.

There’s probably more, but something like that.

2 Likes
894

You mean like all terms these days?

Don’t worry. I will.

1 Like
895

I mean, yeah, but I’m not self labeling as anything because I’m not about to have some blue haired cuck go twisting my beliefs based on a label they don’t understand.

Within a year i promise groypers will be synonymous with nazism. But you do you.

2 Likes
Trump 2025 - Resuming The National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity (Part 1)
896

Twisting of definitions and terms has always been a vital part of political discussion. When you acknowledge this there’s no need to get angry about it.

1 Like
897

I wouldn’t worry too much about this.

China’s economy is pretty precarious, more so than that of the US and EU.

1 Like
898

I see what you mean, but that will be irrelevant to me.

Will just be another useless word.

899

Remains to be seen. But I also don’t count that as the most major threat currently.

China has developed insanely in power, influence and wealth, and it’s goals are very clear. But China has it own problems to deal with too.

2 Likes
900

Unlike America, East Asian societies aren’t individualistic clown societies. Even here in the US, someone who lives amongst Asians, as I have, observes their communities are not clown communities.

Solid post overall.

2 Likes
901

Fantastic post, and I don’t find anything to disagree with.

2 Likes
902

Who is suggesting any such thing? I think the incel issue as concerns women is that the women don’t want to have to be responsible for the MEN’S behavior. Not that anyone should do so for them. Have your shit together or don’t, but if you can’t be better than nothing, why would someone take you on?

Men have long maintained the same standard. A troubled skank isn’t your cuppa tea? Who would blame you for preferring your own company? Why would a woman want a slob who games all night or someone who’s constantly shouting and swearing and slamming things?

903

sure, and I see the exact same concern from men.

Except that men are somehow always responsible for women’s behavior, while women are regularly excused from their own actions.

…

Umm you?

Women are hardwired for alpha fucks beta bucks; its not their fault they’re like this - but it is their fault when they act upon these instincts.
Women aren’t (directly) responsible for the hard financial times we’re in, but they are responsible for deeming young men “loser incels” or “brokies” for their failure to provide, which is what @BrickHead was getting to here

Do corporations and government hold a lot of the blame for the world we’re living in? Absolutely
But its not corporations and government labelling broke young men as incel virgins; its women.

If women are equal to men, stop giving them a blanket of protection… start treating them equally.
Its what you wanted, right?

2 Likes
904

Some of this is certainly true, what’s interesting to me in these discussions is:

There are many, many, many things we take for granted today that would be considered beyond luxury in the 1960’s.

I asked Grok to summarize the top 10. Some of them validated the concern that women in the workforce tilt markets negatively due to supply and demand principle. Examples are child care expenses and climbing housing prices. I will say most people in dual income houses offset cost with a net positive balance, however.

If people lived like the 60, they could still get close. It would require a 3 bed, 1 bath, 1,200 square foot home and a stripped down, standard transmission vehicle though.

  1. Central Air Conditioning (and smart climate control) In 1960, only ~12% of U.S. homes had any form of A/C, and almost all of it was window units. Central A/C was a rich-person feature in the South or Southwest. Today, ~95% of new U.S. homes have central A/C, and running + maintaining it is one of the biggest summer utility bills.
  2. Multiple Personal Cars per Household (often $40k–$80k each) In the 1960s, the majority of middle-class families had one car—sometimes a station wagon for the whole family. Two adults with two separate $50k+ SUVs or crossovers (plus insurance, gas, maintenance) is now standard in suburbia.
  3. Smartphones + Unlimited Data Plans Non-existent in 1960. Today a family of four easily spends $2,500–$4,000 per year on devices and plans that are treated as utilities, not luxuries.
  4. Streaming Subscriptions + Giant 4K/8K OLED TVs + Home Theater Systems Color TV itself was still a luxury in 1960 (and tiny). A 77-inch OLED + Dolby Atmos setup + Netflix/Disney+/Max/YouTube Premium/etc. now runs $3,000–$15,000 upfront + $150–$300/month ongoing for many households.
  5. College Education for Children (private or out-of-state public) In the 1960s, flagship state universities were often under $500/year in today’s dollars, and many middle-class kids went essentially free. Today, sending two kids to college easily costs $200k–$500k+ per family and is seen as non-negotiable.
  6. Year-Round International Travel / Destination Vacations In 1960, flying was expensive and rare; most families took one modest domestic road trip per year (if that). Today, many middle-class families budget $5k–$15k+ annually on flights, hotels, and Disney/Europe/Caribbean trips.
  7. Third-Party Food Delivery & Meal Kits (Uber Eats, DoorDash, HelloFresh) Didn’t exist. Now millions of households spend $500–$2,000+ per month on delivered takeout and subscription meal boxes that were unimaginable.
  8. Bottled Water & Daily $6–$8 Specialty Coffee In 1960, bottled water was essentially nonexistent in the U.S., and coffee was brewed at home or the office. Today, families routinely drop $300–$800/month on Evian, Fiji, Starbucks, and Dutch Bros as a “normal” expense.
  9. Private Childcare / Preschool / After-School Programs / Tutoring Most mothers didn’t work full-time in the 1960s, so childcare was free (mom). Today, quality daycare + preschool + activities for two kids can exceed $30,000–$60,000 per year in many metro areas—often more than rent or mortgage.
  10. Home Internet + Whole-House Wi-Fi + Gaming PCs/Consoles + Cloud Gaming Subscriptions Zero households had this in 1960. Today, gigabit fiber + mesh Wi-Fi + multiple gaming rigs or consoles + Game Pass/PlayStation Plus easily tops $2,500–$5,000 per year and is considered as essential as electricity.
    Honorable mentions that just missed the top ten:
    • Pet healthcare & luxury pet services (common $5k–$15k/year now)
    • Cosmetic dentistry & orthodontics (Invisalign for the whole family)
    • Subscription fitness (Peloton, high-end gym memberships, personal trainers)
    • 401(k)/investment “must-contribute-to” culture (people now feel they “have to” max them out)
    These items collectively add $30,000–$100,000+ per year to many modern household budgets—expenditures that would have marked someone as extravagantly wealthy in 1965.
1 Like