That's a lot of generalizations and stereotypes to make.
If someone aspires to develop positive relationships - I know I do - casting such hurtful and negative inferences about potential attachments isn't a good foot to start on.
Because frankly, if someone spoke so negatively of having a characteristic - which frankly - I didn't bring up, the author did, and acted as if I somehow deserved to be a target of such vitriol, as this author does, I'd be very far away from them.
That leaves you in a situation where the only ones left to speak to are the ones you seem to not want to be around. Because no self-respecting person wants be a punching bag.
Maybe people such as this author would be best served by forming some personal and professional friendships with men, rather than viewing them as adversaries. They may be surprised to see kind people were in front of them all along.
It may involve a temporary hiatus in writing posts on the internet insulting people.
"Although there is no reason in theory why men could not become nurses or care-home assistants, few do."
When it's women in tech, it's obviously discrimination, but when it's men having a rough time breaking into female-dominated fields, the cause is a mystery.
"Most schools would love to have more male teachers to serve as role models for boys, but not many volunteer."
When women refuse to join tech companies despite the demand, the cause is obvious - harassment and a hostile workplace. When the same thing happens with men, it's again, a mystery.
The article goes on and on like this, laying down stereotype after stereotype and wondering why men "just can't make it", oblivious to its hypocrisy. The crowning moment is when the author proudly proclaims that men are failing at school, that maybe they're just not good enough? But when it's women that don't do well, it's obviously the Patriarchy weighing them down.
The answer to this is a universal jobs program, lasting at least until society adjusts more fully to gender role changes and these old attitudes die out, in order to satisfy both the financial needs of these individuals and their personal belief that they need to be a good provider. (Something that UBI would never satisfy, by the way.)
If you think this accommodation is unnecessary, just remember that all of these people can cast votes.
I welcome this. The days of a man's man's man's world (as author put it) are becoming numbered. Women are closing the gap and it's showing. It may not be so obvious at the top, but it's creeping upwards and I hope it will continue to do so.
Automation + an increasingly intelligent workforce is putting pressure on the bottom 30% of workers. I want to believe people can find new jobs else where, but my very job as an engineer is to automate people out of work. One day, that may include myself. Is UBI the answer? Some weird tax the robot thing? It will have to be something.
This article is saying the world is changing and we'd better be ready to discuss and act on solutions otherwise we'll leave ourselves behind and a vast majority become adrift.
8 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 29.3 ms ] threadIf someone aspires to develop positive relationships - I know I do - casting such hurtful and negative inferences about potential attachments isn't a good foot to start on.
Because frankly, if someone spoke so negatively of having a characteristic - which frankly - I didn't bring up, the author did, and acted as if I somehow deserved to be a target of such vitriol, as this author does, I'd be very far away from them.
That leaves you in a situation where the only ones left to speak to are the ones you seem to not want to be around. Because no self-respecting person wants be a punching bag.
Maybe people such as this author would be best served by forming some personal and professional friendships with men, rather than viewing them as adversaries. They may be surprised to see kind people were in front of them all along.
It may involve a temporary hiatus in writing posts on the internet insulting people.
When it's women in tech, it's obviously discrimination, but when it's men having a rough time breaking into female-dominated fields, the cause is a mystery.
"Most schools would love to have more male teachers to serve as role models for boys, but not many volunteer."
When women refuse to join tech companies despite the demand, the cause is obvious - harassment and a hostile workplace. When the same thing happens with men, it's again, a mystery.
The article goes on and on like this, laying down stereotype after stereotype and wondering why men "just can't make it", oblivious to its hypocrisy. The crowning moment is when the author proudly proclaims that men are failing at school, that maybe they're just not good enough? But when it's women that don't do well, it's obviously the Patriarchy weighing them down.
According to the article it's not a mystery, it's because men are deficient.
If you think this accommodation is unnecessary, just remember that all of these people can cast votes.
Automation + an increasingly intelligent workforce is putting pressure on the bottom 30% of workers. I want to believe people can find new jobs else where, but my very job as an engineer is to automate people out of work. One day, that may include myself. Is UBI the answer? Some weird tax the robot thing? It will have to be something.
This article is saying the world is changing and we'd better be ready to discuss and act on solutions otherwise we'll leave ourselves behind and a vast majority become adrift.