(NYT)Many Ways to Be a Girl, but One Way to Be a Boy: The New Gender Rules

I'm inclined to agree that immigration right now is partially a short term tie over as we move to a more automated lifestyle where rationing and universal basic income will become necessities. I think 100 plus or so years from now the world is in a sense going to flip. I see lower birth rates, longer life spans, and no real retirement age. I picture robotic maids/housekeepers. Individuals not owning cars, but essentially having a driverless Uber-like network of highly efficient cars. Lot of time spent in Virtual Reality (simulated vacations etc). Tones of low value add jobs will become extinct and changed into care giver like jobs for the elderly.

I don't mean this as a negative vision, I think life in 100 years will be a LOT better than it is now. I think though that it will be unsettling for a lot of people to go through so much change.


Lol thankfully I’ll be long gone in 100 years
 
Will it though? I don't think its some sort of genetic trait that can be selected for like that. Across the entire developed world, from the US to Japan, we see this trend of low birth rates.

It could just be that the nature of a developed society is such that a certain portion of people who grow up in them willing decide not to reproduce. Then in the next generation, now smaller than the first due to the lower birth rates, the same portion of people decide to forego parenthood and so on and so on until you find yourself where Japan is, where schools are closing and the ratio of adult diaper sales to baby diaper sales is rapidly increasing.
Low birth rates a natural response to to overpopulation. There are many direct parallels between John Calhoun's Mouse Utopia and modern human behavior. However there is also a strong correlation between any behavioral mechanics which directly effect reproduction and generational responses. Generally you see this effect in Asian countries where life is much harder, resources more scarce, and reproduction is much less necessary for social survival but the distilled desire of individuals to reproduce is much stronger.

Japan is an outlier, but even japan will see a rise after the population group with lower intrinsic desire to reproduce dies off. Evolution is best thought of as the application of simple cause and effect applied to generational responses. When you remove a pool of people specifically by trait, you will see subsequent generations express those traits less often regardless of the apparent nature of that trait. Even if it doesn't seem so, there are specific biological traits that lend themselves to specific behavioral tendencies.
 
The only remedy thus far for this is to promote immigration. I'm not staunchly anti-immigrant or anything but to me that's a short term solution to the problem since those immigrant communities also see a drop in their birth rates over time. Hypothetically if the developing world were to become as developed as Germany or Japan within ten years and followed the same trend in birth rates, the human race would presumably calmly walk towards extinction while mindlessly consuming whatever the latest distraction the mega-corporations can pump out until the global economy collapsed under the weight of the unsustainably ageing population, Children of Men style.

The evidence suggests the opposite, birth rates are steadily declining across the developed world. The more developed, the lower the birth rates are. Even immigrant communities from highly conservative cultures see their birth rates drop generation to generation when they move to developed countries.

I said more traditional families of 2....3....4 children would likely produce people that would be more inclined to have bigger families , and your " counter " is that my assertion is wrong because 3rd world people that have traditional / big families are out pacing progressive / western 1 or no child families? Interadasting conclusion!

I don't think we are far enough removed from the onset of the trend to observe any pattern / correction anyhow. You're simply seeing relatively recent downward economic pressure right now. Its very hard for most people to stay economically viable with 3 or 4 kids anymore.
 
Low birth rates a natural response to to overpopulation. There are many direct parallels between John Calhoun's Mouse Utopia and modern human behavior. However there is also a strong correlation between any behavioral mechanics which directly effect reproduction and generational responses. Generally you see this effect in Asian countries where life is much harder, resources more scarce, and reproduction is much less necessary for social survival but the distilled desire of individuals to reproduce is much stronger.

Japan is an outlier, but even japan will see a rise after the population group with lower intrinsic desire to reproduce dies off. Evolution is best thought of as the application of simple cause and effect applied to generational responses. When you remove a pool of people specifically by trait, you will see subsequent generations express those traits less often regardless of the apparent nature of that trait. Even if it doesn't seem so, there are specific biological traits that lend themselves to specific behavioral tendencies.
Birth rates drop dramatically generally as infant mortality drops. The more likely your kids are to live to adulthood, the less reason to have a bunch of them. But in Japan they take that even further, they have fewer and fewer kids because of how competitive they are when it comes to education. So on average they have like one kid so that they can pour as much resources into that one kids as possible(tutoring, prep school, extra curricular). But if most families only have one kid the birth rate is below replacement.

Maybe it'll self correct and maybe the time frame is too short to say that it won't but it certainly doesn't seem that way.
I said more traditional families of 2....3....4 children would likely produce people that would be more inclined to have bigger families , and your " counter " is that my assertion is wrong because 3rd world people that have traditional / big families are out pacing progressive / western 1 or no child families? Interadasting conclusion!
Huh? Uh, no. I'm saying even conservative cultures are seeing a drop in birthrates. That's both in their home countries and in the West. The point being that this trend effects even conservative families.
I don't think we are far enough removed from the onset of the trend to observe any pattern / correction anyhow. You're simply seeing relatively recent downward economic pressure right now. Its very hard for most people to stay economically viable with 3 or 4 kids anymore.
But its actually the opposite, its poorer families that have more children while more well off ones have fewer children.
 
VivaRevolution said:
Ask 100 men what it means to be a man, and you will get very similiar answers.
You make some good points so this isn't really a criticism but a question -- I wonder if this certainty is being eroded. One claim of the men's rights movement is that boys and young men no longer know what it means to be a man. This is the confusion that Jordan Peterson is supposedly tapping into and trying to solve. My entire involvement in fighting and MA was connected with what I thought it meant to be a man; namely, being physically and mentally strong while simultaneously being polite and gentlemanly. I'd like to hear from young people if this type of image is not longer "acceptable".
 
Birth rates drop dramatically generally as infant mortality drops. The more likely your kids are to live to adulthood, the less reason to have a bunch of them. But in Japan they take that even further, they have fewer and fewer kids because of how competitive they are when it comes to education. So on average they have like one kid so that they can pour as much resources into that one kids as possible(tutoring, prep school, extra curricular). But if most families only have one kid the birth rate is below replacement.

Maybe it'll self correct and maybe the time frame is too short to say that it won't but it certainly doesn't seem that way.

Huh? Uh, no. I'm saying even conservative cultures are seeing a drop in birthrates. That's both in their home countries and in the West. The point being that this trend effects even conservative families.

But its actually the opposite, its poorer families that have more children while more well off ones have fewer children.
I’ve never understood the mentality that well if 1-3 of my children may die I should have six,maybe have one or two and make sure they survive instead of spreading your household resources thin. Perhaps this concept hasn’t yet been realized by the third world. Personally if I’m struggling so hard that it’s a certainty that a child I have won’t see his 21st birthday I wouldn’t have any. Why they haven’t adopted this from the western world the last 60 years is beyond me. The best phrase I can attach to this concept is live within your means.

I get the fact most of the industrialized wealthy don’t do this with house size,cars vacations or personal belongings,but at least in this regard you only hurt yourself and go broke and nobody dies of starvation.
 
I’ve never understood the mentality that well if 1-3 of my children may die I should have six,maybe have one or two and make sure they survive instead of spreading your household resources thin. Perhaps this concept hasn’t yet been realized by the third world. Personally if I’m struggling so hard that it’s a certainty that a child I have won’t see his 21st birthday I wouldn’t have any. Why they haven’t adopted this from the western world the last 60 years is beyond me. The best phrase I can attach to this concept is live within your means.

I get the fact most of the industrialized wealthy don’t do this with house size,cars vacations or personal belongings,but at least in this regard you only hurt yourself and go broke and nobody dies of starvation.
Its also because in those societies children contribute to the family early on. If you are a peasant family, having more than a few kids means having a few extra farm hands. And in the long term for such societies, your kids are your retirement plan as when they grow up and you age you'll end up depending on them.
 
So it appears the brainwashing is not working, and human nature is dunking on the hashtags.

I think you missed the whole "very few people see marriage and family as something to strive towards" part.
 
I think you missed the whole "very few people see marriage and family as something to strive towards" part.

Meh. I wouldn't take the words of these kids all that seriously in that regard. Half of them will likely just fall into marriage, or their priorities will change when they hit their mid twenties. I'm not expecting kids from 10-19 to prioritize marriage and family, unless they're deeply religious.
 
Meh. I wouldn't take the words of these kids all that seriously in that regard. Half of them will likely just fall into marriage, or their priorities will change when they hit their mid twenties. I'm not expecting kids from 10-19 to prioritize marriage and family, unless they're deeply religious.

I don't know what being deeply religious has to do with anything. Getting married and having a family was something I've wanted my whole life, and I'm far from deeply religious.
 
Meh. I wouldn't take the words of these kids all that seriously in that regard. Half of them will likely just fall into marriage, or their priorities will change when they hit their mid twenties. I'm not expecting kids from 10-19 to prioritize marriage and family, unless they're deeply religious.

I don't think marriage is valued much in pop culture, and often it is devalued. The have lots of sex and be free of such things is promoted quite a bit. The materialist perpetual adolescent, for both men and women.

Of course pop culture doesn't represent everything but it has a constant pushing effect on people over time which affects behaviors and values.

Religious values and traditional values in general world wide and historically tend to highly value marriage and family (unsurprisingly considering the benefits to society). So modern Western pop culture (McCulture) is I would say a deviation from the norm.
 
I don't know what being deeply religious has to do with anything. Getting married and having a family was something I've wanted my whole life, and I'm far from deeply religious.

Different strokes and all that. I'm just saying, I don't find it all that alarming that kids don't value it all that much at that point in their lives.
 
I can point to studies. And evidence and left wing political leaders.

The right is the ones with the hard on for aggrression and outdated concetps of masculinity.

I dont need to live in America to see the evidence on internet, media, and journals and studied done.
then you don't fully understand the situation, A lot of what you're saying is true about politics, and media in America. But you forgot about the most important thing in a Country, that's culture. Most rappers are left leaning like eminem, well sans kanye, and they're doing what you claim the right is doing, showing full aggression and masculinity in their behavior.
 
then you don't fully understand the situation, A lot of what you're saying is true about politics, and media in America. But you forgot about the most important thing in a Country, that's culture. Most rappers are left leaning like eminem, well sans kanye, and they're doing what you claim the right is doing, showing full aggression and masculinity in their behavior.

A simple google search shows that the vast majority % of population is not listening to that music. And American blacks are more tribal than whites so they stick to any pan african or black cause. And american and western blacks in general vote left only because it benefits them more but they are not the vanguard behind the liberal or progressive causes. in France or UK overwhelmingly africans are not pro trans or bending over to whie people nor are Arabs. I @Trotsky even made post before about minorities being and enjoying hyper masculine culture. Latinos in US who listen to hardcore reggaetton and Trap capos are not likely to be social or progressive men but sure as heck would dislike trump given his comments on latinos and response to Puerto rico. Not to mention the white liberals in media frame Trump and republicans as pro white party only which be fair republicans dont back away from. Thereby sending Latinos to democrat side way more.
 
A lot of them are sick of the jealous petty racist bullshit.
we're all on the same boat, the way forward is to be honest, but we all know that will never happen with our government.
 
A simple google search shows that the vast majority % of population is not listening to that music. And American blacks are more tribal than whites so they stick to any pan african or black cause. And american and western blacks in general vote left only because it benefits them more but they are not the vanguard behind the liberal or progressive causes. in France or UK overwhelmingly africans are not pro trans or bending over to whie people nor are Arabs. I @Trotsky even made post before about minorities being and enjoying hyper masculine culture. Latinos in US who listen to hardcore reggaetton and Trap capos are not likely to be social or progressive men but sure as heck would dislike trump given his comments on latinos and response to Puerto rico. Not to mention the white liberals in media frame Trump and republicans as pro white party only which be fair republicans dont back away from. Thereby sending Latinos to democrat side way more.
again, a lot of what you say is true, but not all, hip hop music is bigger than ever in America, it's become a part of pop music and influences other genres and industries as well. Eminem is not Black, he's White. Lots of democrats of all colors look up to him. Black American music is not just for Black people, it's for anyone that listens to it around the World. Everyone can enjoy and is susceptible to this hyper masculine hip hop culture, not just Blacks or Hispanics. I think both sides display hyper aggressive masculinity, even though the left is more open to ideas, I stand by what I said, that everyone (no matter the party) is affected by this gender rule society has placed upon them.
 
Saw a woman wrote the article, did not read.
bork1}
 
They're screwing up a generation, or trying.
 
I have a friend who sends me stuff like this too often. I think he may secretly enjoy this type of stuff. It is a tiny minority.



Dr Soh has said a number of times that a lot of the kids who dress like girls end up being gay and not transexual. It is kind of a phase for some gay guys. This looks like the case here.
 
Back
Top