Oh, you ladies, why do you even bother getting educated – sorry, “educated?” Don’t you know that if you get too educated you might end up marrying some dude who is less educated than you, which is apparently contrary to the laws of nature? Or maybe you’ll end up not getting married at all? The horror.
On The Spearhead, guest poster Lyn87 explains how he dropped some “red pill” knowledge on a buddy of his during a recent outing:
One guy has teenage daughters that he’s planning to put through college. I could not resist inserting some red pill into the mix, so I mentioned that 60% of degrees were going to women, and that women prefer to marry up. Since “educated” women don’t often go for “uneducated” men, a lot of women of his daughter’s generation were on their way toward spinsterhood for lack of “suitable” mates.
So women with education are only “educated” in scare-quotes. But men who are “uneducated” also get the scare quotes, because presumably they are wise beyond their years of formal study.
Alas, Lyn87’s friend wasn’t convinced by this brilliant argument to reconsider his decision to put his daughters through college, which leads Lyn87 to consider the possibility that “that some malevolent group of “Jezebels” is dissolving blue pills into the supply of drinking water.” Lions and tigers and malevolent Jezebels, oh my!
Consider his daughters. I’m sure they are good kids who would make any parent proud. But they don’t live on an island – they live among their peers and within the confines of biological and demographic reality. Even if EVERY one of their male college classmates marries one of his female classmates, a third of those young women will not find a male age-peer who is even her “academic equal,” much less someone with a higher level of education. But not every male graduate will marry a female classmate. Some will marry down. Some will choose not marry at all. Then subtract out the guys who are “creepy,” gay, or otherwise unsuitable, and we are left with a generation of “educated” women who are barreling toward a demographic wall at high velocity.
So women marrying guys with less education, or deciding not to marry at all, is somehow the equivalent of careening into a brick wall at top speed?
Marry up? My buddy’s daughters will be lucky if they can marry “across.” Many women of that generation will face hard choices: supply and demand in the adult world doesn’t much care how “empowered” you were in college. The women of that generation may be able to marry down, but few will want to. They may not marry at all and become wards of the state when they bear bastard children. They may become involuntary childless spinsters. They may go for much older men, but many of them have been through the Family Court meat grinder and must devote much of their effort to paying their exes’ bills.
Or they could end up like a friend of mine, happily unmarried at the age of 40 and dating a dude in his twenties. Or like another friend of mine, also 40, in a happily open marriage with a man a few years her junior and with several regular partners on the side. Or in a committed lesbian relationship.
And why assume that any single woman older than, oh, 25 is “involuntarily childless?” Most of the women I hang out with don’t want kids. They really, really don’t.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Lyn87, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
We know the score here: the degrees these girls are getting cluster in the “Who are you trying to kid?” category. They are not truly superior to the guys of their generation, but that degree in “You Must Be Joking!” makes them think they are. Most emerge from college with a pile of debt, no marketable skills they didn’t already possess in high school, and a few laps around the carousel – older but no wiser, and blissfully unaware that half of their years of prime beauty and fertility are already in the rear-view mirror.
Ugh. This again? At the age of 22 or so, “half of their years of prime beauty and fertility” are gone? Really? Their biological clock starts ticking at the age of, what, 16?
So instead of going to college, girls should be getting hitched before they even graduate from high school, so as to maximize their prime years of beauty and fertility? Sorry to have to break this to you, Lyn87, but that’s a recipe for disaster — even by “traditionalist” standards. According to a 2001 study by the Centers for Disease Control, nearly half of those who marry before they’re 18 divorce within ten years; that’s twice the divorce rate of those who wait until they’re at least 25.
Lyn87, somehow I suspect your buddy with the teenage daughters is doing a better job of looking out for their best interests than you are.
Some, er, “highlights” from the comments.
Kendoka seconds Lyn87’s concerns:
I question the popular wisdom of fathers relinquishing custody and authority over their 18 year old daughters by putting them through an institution designed to indoctrinate and create entitled promiscuous feminist careerist harpies and not loving wives and mothers through marriage.
A Father’s work is not complete until he has guided his daughter directly into marriage with his authority transfered to her husband. “Careers” can wait. Family cannot.
DruidV shares his less-than-fond memories of life in the 1980s, and offers a note of optimism for the future (for dudes anyway):
Way back in prehistoric times, say around 1985, I used to find myself very depressed when I would take note of all the foolish and desperate males I knew, who were jumping through impossible hoops for fickle females that just would let the poor bastards continue to keep right on jumping through those hoops, apparently just for their own entertainment. These twats seemed to take an almost sociopathic delight in this ‘sport’. The males were simply trying to be accepted.
Pathetic, really.Nowadays, I look about and see that young males are sick, tired, disgusted and jaded with these soulless cunts. Make no mistake, the hoops are still there, firmly in place for the males to jump through, but they are seeing less and less traffic every day.
I for one can easily see the females of generation z growing old alone, but for their cats and dying that way too and from what I’ve seen, these bitches can forget about marrying up, or even across anymore. These asshole entitlement whores won’t even be marrying down, in the not too distant future.
YAY!!!
Keyster presents a similarly optimistic scenario for the future — if predicting the apocalypse counts as optimism, which it generally does in MRA circles:
We have a perfect storm brewing of women working, men not, and each one rejecting marriage. In case no one noticed the Feminists started the gender war, and they won. Present day we live with the spiraling consequences; societal decline. Upon the collapse women will be the victims, AGAIN. The survivors will be men with only their own self-interest in mind. The last remnants of white-knightery will struggle to protect and provide, but will be ill-equipped to handle the guilt of failing.
Days of Broken Arrows isn’t quite so dramatic. He merely predicts that the dad planning on sending his girls to college will end up regretting this decision:
[N]ow instead of his daughter someday marrying the guy she met at 18, he’d prefer [her] to be using every orifice when she’s a fucktoy for a line of Alpha males who’ll pump and dump her. And he means that he doesn’t want a son-in-law or grandchildren. Well, I guess that’s all well and good, so long as it’s not “the way it used to be.”
Huh. Do colleges even have classes any more, or is it just one long orgy? How do these Alpha males have any time to study?
@pillowinhell – the UK is not the US nor Canada. Our coppers (while still having many, many faults) are probably the most PC in the world (they still get called racist, and some probably are) … a white woman was recently jailed here for purely for a racist rant on public transport (she didn’t threaten anyone or offer violence. She was jailed under race hate / public order laws).
While you might see similarities to the US in the big inner cities, (and some of the big towns where there’s very little work and lots of e.g. muslim immigrants), in contrast to the US (afaik, I could be wrong) there are far more areas of areas of the UK where the the underclass is, like most of the country, white Scots / English / (Viking) / Welsh / Irish / Cornish.
I don’t even care if Joe thinks there are women’s issues that need to be addressed, because based on all the evidence his proposed solutions would be whatever knee jerk response he came up and not based on what women actually need. We don’t need allies like him, or their faux concern about equal rights.
This isn’t new nomnom, when men are asked about what they are going to do when they start having kids, when employers start forcing men to feel like shit for staying home with sick children, when professors stop having to counsel men about balancing the career with family life/responsibilities/household maintenance, come and talk to me.
The American Educational System is a national embarrassment. It is most decidedly not a meritocracy and it never has been.
WHAT exactly is it that such women like you want??? No concessions are ever enough to get you folks to stop whining and complaining. When anyone who is NOT a white female dares to speak out about the injustices they face, you lash out at them because only white females get to have victim status!
Yeah, I’m calling bullshit on that. But thanks for sharing your fantasy world with us.
I see Joe has never been to London, since he thinks British coppers are as a group not at all racist.
Om nom is awfully excitable today, isn’t he?
I remember a lecture where an American educational theorist effectively said that there is no such thing as ‘the American educational system’. That is, the patchwork structure of American education makes things so internally inconsistent that you can’t really say anything about ‘American education’ except in the broadest of terms.
Well bullshit isn’t answer your call.
Fixed.
“Well bullshit isn’t answer your call.”
What is this meant to mean? And why do MRAs hate the English language?
@Cassandrasays and pillowinhell – looking out for women and girls issues is exactly what feminism is for, right? Feminism is doing very well on making those issues prominent in media and politics without my help. Besides, my help wouldn’t be welcomed!
I’ll advocate for my interests, you advocate for yours, hopefully between us we’ll find a balance / common ground / meet in the middle.
@whoever – obviously class / money / selection are big factors in too.
But you aren’t advocating for the interests of boys, Joe, you’re just trolling feminist blogs trying to play gotcha.
Even looking at today’s “radfems are transphobic” derail, yes, indeed, many of them are…which is primarily aimed at trans women, not trans men. Hence, what you spent your day doing today was not in any way advocating for the interests of boys or men.
Joe, there are plenty of feminists here, of every gender, who are actively involved with various issues facing men. They work in mens shelters, help men traumitized by rape, work in medical areas specific to men, and so on.
There are plenty of feminists working to alleiviate the suffering of boys and men.
“@whoever – obviously class / money / selection are big factors in too.”
You’re missing the point (again) — you can’t just look at private schools because class and other selection factors make it highly skewed data. And as for the slight decrease in male reading scores, race is a much bigger factor than gender, at least in the US.
Regardless, the common thread in this patchwork is that these institutions are not based on meritocracy. There is no single set of academic standards that apply across the board for everyone regardless of who they are or what their background is. It’s all about politics and whether or not you happen to belong to a preferred ethnic group. Unlike Finland, where higher education is free and there is a qualifying exam which every application must take and pass to get in: NO EXCEPTIONS. Doesn’t matter what your background is or what you ethnicity may be.
Actually the whole thing about boys at private schools that are single-sex doing OK is a perfect example of why you’re such a failure as an activist. Effective activists understand context, and they’re able to pinpoint exactly why a given group of people are struggling, which is necessary in order to help. With the boys who were my peers (ie. went to single sex private schools, many of which were probably boarding schools), a lot of those schools cost more to send your kid to than the average person makes in a year. The kids at those schools, male or female, will be just find regardless of the specifics of how their education is arranged, because they were for the most part born into wealth and privilege. They’re not the group of kids who you need to be looking at, and their success doesn’t tell you very much, because most of those kids were always going to succeed one way or another.
(BTW, what I’m doing here? This is called acknowledging your privilege. You should try it some time.)
Omnom, why don’t you tell us who the “preferred” ethnic groups are, and what the evidence is for that position? That should be good for a laugh.
Fine, not find. Typing was one skill that my fancy school did not teach me, unfortunately.
This thread has become tiresome. Thanks a lot, Joe.
Hopefully it’ll become interesting again when Mikey de-flounces and complains about how education is MISANDRY!!!!
Oddly, I partly agree. State provided higher education is a glorious thing, and all you need to make it work is an electorate that understands that taxation is a means to an end rather than a personal affront.
As for the meritocracy angle, I’m guessing that’s some sort of dog whistle about affirmative action, and therefore not worth discussing.
Oh, crap, speaking of education, I’ve got to get to class.
This might be a bit of a derail, but has anyone noticed how it’s becoming more of an act of rebellion to not be a dick to people than it is to try to be all “edgy” and trollish on the internet, or is it just me?