ignore the obvious
July 27, 2015 § 2 Comments
“A study that followed 3,700 low-income working couples between 1998 and 2000 found that for every dollar a man’s hourly wages increased, the odds that he’d get hitched by the end of a year rose by 5 percent, and those earning more than $25,000 during the year had twice the marriage rates of those making less. The Pew researchers also concluded that “the economic hardships of young adults may be one reason that so many have been slow to marry.”
Isn’t it fascinating how people will talk around the bitter truth that nobody wants to face? Everybody already understands that equality is a sham and that women expect breadwinners, that male social and sexual success is entirely conditional and entirely dependent on macro economic, political, and historical forces he will likely have very little control over.
And yet, everybody, including the author of this article no doubt, will curiously forget this when they start mewling and bleating about male privilege and the supposed oppression of women. They will wail and moan about “misogyny” and roll their eyes when you point out that men are disposable. What does the above statistic prove if not that? How is it possible that so many people who should know better can’t infer the obvious here and recognize that, to the extent that there is a wage gap and that men do work longer hours or choose more dangerous and demanding occupations, these “choices” they are making are powerfully influenced by, if not entirely the product of, women’s expectations of them? Is it not fucking obvious? Is it that everybody knows it but is afraid to say it in public? What the fuck?
As I’ve pointed out elsewhere, women leave men little choice but to succeed financially and professionally, then turn around and use this male success as proof of women’s oppression. This is laughably stupid and yet these ideas still retain mainstream currency. We’re suppose to invest in young women’s education so that they can compete with men for the same jobs and drive everybody’s wages down even when men face far greater social consequences than women for not succeeding professionally? What?
We’re supposed to break the bank and blow all our resources on getting women into STEM fields they aren’t even interested in when it is men who are far more likely to be homeless, far more likely to commit suicide, far more likely to engage in criminality, and so on? Even while all these statistical disparities are easily linked to poverty and lack of opportunity? And all of this so she can play grown up for a few years after her astronomically expensive and tax payer funded education until she opts out to have children?
It’s like they obscure the truth from themselves. Even the things they know can be forgotten or dissociated from their obvious implications if that is what’s required to protect their ideological ego investments. I can’t think of a more profound, destructive, and deeply rooted form of public irrationality. Not even racist and religious stupidity gets the pass that gynocentrism does.