Men, the Gender Wars Are Over--We Won

[ryanh]

It doesn't matter if women "won" some things or men "won" some things (and yes, I do understand that the claim that men won is intended to be facetious). The traditional family unit has lost, and therefore, society looses. The change has caused it to be much more difficult to create and sustain the fundamental building block of society - the family.

With the supply/demand dynamics of the workforce shifting so dramatically with the wholesale entrance of women to the workforce, it is much harder to support a family on one income than it was in my father's or grandfather's day. Women who wish to choose the role of stay-at-home-mother have much less opportunity to do so than before because of the fundamental shift in wage profiles from one-income feasibility to two-income necessity.

Rights and fairness could have been obtained IMO without the same level of consequences. Society looses to the gain of the selfish.

[Vort]

IThe traditional family unit has lost, and therefore, society looses.

Common misspelling or insightful commentary?

[ryanh]

Perhaps intended dual meanning?

No, simply bad spelling.

[Vort]

Perhaps intended dual meanning?

No, simply bad spelling.

I choose to believe "insightful commentary". :)

[Guest mirancs8]

I just came across this thread. Excellent point Ryan! I have always argued this point and people think I am out of my mind.

Ryan said:

It doesn't matter if women "won" some things or men "won" some things (and yes, I do understand that the claim that men won is intended to be facetious). The traditional family unit has lost, and therefore, society looses. The change has caused it to be much more difficult to create and sustain the fundamental building block of society - the family.

With the supply/demand dynamics of the workforce shifting so dramatically with the wholesale entrance of women to the workforce, it is much harder to support a family on one income than it was in my father's or grandfather's day. Women who wish to choose the role of stay-at-home-mother have much less opportunity to do so than before because of the fundamental shift in wage profiles from one-income feasibility to two-income necessity.

Rights and fairness could have been obtained IMO without the same level of consequences. Society looses to the gain of the selfish.

__________________

[Feathertail]

With the supply/demand dynamics of the workforce shifting so dramatically with the wholesale entrance of women to the workforce, it is much harder to support a family on one income than it was in my father's or grandfather's day. Women who wish to choose the role of stay-at-home-mother have much less opportunity to do so than before because of the fundamental shift in wage profiles from one-income feasibility to two-income necessity.

That assumes that there is a finite supply of jobs, and that their purpose is to dispense money to people who have them. Therefore more people wanting jobs = fewer jobs available, and less money for everyone.

The people who are hiring, though, are paying people to create wealth for them. Wealth equals reinvestment, which means more jobs for more people. Otherwise each following generation would have worse jobs, because they have to compete for the same number as the one before.

Perhaps there are other reasons why one income's no longer enough.

those masterpieces of art and science and literature, for which men have been almost exclusively responsible

This is an extremely unkind thing to say. And I say that as a male who writes fiction professionally.

It's accurate (for European culture), but it doesn't examine the reasons why that was the case.

[Guest Godless]

Isn't Pajamas Media the same organization that sent Joe the Plumber to Israel as a field journalist?