(05-10-2022, 09:18 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 08:40 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There are some areas where women under 30 earn slightly more than men under 30. In most of this US this is not true.
But now you seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.
First you said women need to avoid deadbeats.
Now you're saying that women should accept men who earn about the same amount as them, rather than holding out for someone who earns 50% more.
Which is it? What did I miss?
So in your mind, making the same as a woman makes a man a deadbeat?
If the woman earns little or no money, yes.
Regardless, none of this pertains to the traditional lifestyle JJ seems to be advocating for.
Middle and upper class women in the olden days of the United States usually kept busy and had active social lives, but they rarely earned money.
Imagine an 18-year-old girl who today graduates high school says she just wants to get married as soon as possible, start having kids, and never hold down a money-making job of any kind. We might think she was crazy. Degenerate. A drag on society. Yet this type of young woman was absolutely the foundation of the past versions of American society that JJ seems to want us to aspire to.
You live in a fantasy land.
(05-10-2022, 09:18 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 08:40 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]There are some areas where women under 30 earn slightly more than men under 30. In most of this US this is not true.
But now you seem to be talking out of both sides of your mouth.
First you said women need to avoid deadbeats.
Now you're saying that women should accept men who earn about the same amount as them, rather than holding out for someone who earns 50% more.
Which is it? What did I miss?
So in your mind, making the same as a woman makes a man a deadbeat?
Speaking from experience, making the same or slightly less than my wife, kind of makes me a genius.
(05-10-2022, 11:48 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 09:18 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]So in your mind, making the same as a woman makes a man a deadbeat?
If the woman earns little or no money, yes.
Regardless, none of this pertains to the traditional lifestyle JJ seems to be advocating for.
Middle and upper class women in the olden days of the United States usually kept busy and had active social lives, but they rarely earned money.
Imagine an 18-year-old girl who today graduates high school says she just wants to get married as soon as possible, start having kids, and never hold down a money-making job of any kind. We might think she was crazy. Degenerate. A drag on society. Yet this type of young woman was absolutely the foundation of the past versions of American society that JJ seems to want us to aspire to.
Delusional. There's a significant portion of Society that wants her to do exactly that, many girls who aspire to it, and many grown women who regret that they didn't choose it when they had the chance.
(05-10-2022, 01:25 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 11:48 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]If the woman earns little or no money, yes.
Regardless, none of this pertains to the traditional lifestyle JJ seems to be advocating for.
Middle and upper class women in the olden days of the United States usually kept busy and had active social lives, but they rarely earned money.
Imagine an 18-year-old girl who today graduates high school says she just wants to get married as soon as possible, start having kids, and never hold down a money-making job of any kind. We might think she was crazy. Degenerate. A drag on society. Yet this type of young woman was absolutely the foundation of the past versions of American society that JJ seems to want us to aspire to.
Delusional. There's a significant portion of Society that wants her to do exactly that, many girls who aspire to it, and many grown women who regret that they didn't choose it when they had the chance.
OK.
Exercise for you.
Clear your mind.
Imagine your stereotypical single mother who is really struggling financially who would certainly choose abortion if she got pregnant again.
Imagine she actually had that first kid at age 16.
Do you really look at the woman you're imagining and say, "She should have just stayed with the guy who knocked her up at age 16."
Or do you really say, "She could have waited a year or two, but what she really needed to do was get hitched to a financially independent male by age 18, then everything would have gone fine for her."
(05-10-2022, 01:31 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 01:25 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Delusional. There's a significant portion of Society that wants her to do exactly that, many girls who aspire to it, and many grown women who regret that they didn't choose it when they had the chance.
OK.
Exercise for you.
Clear your mind.
Imagine your stereotypical single mother who is really struggling financially who would certainly choose abortion if she got pregnant again.
Imagine she actually had that first kid at age 16.
Do you really look at the woman you're imagining and say, "She should have just stayed with the guy who knocked her up at age 16."
Or do you really say, "She could have waited a year or two, but what she really needed to do was get hitched to a financially independent male by age 18, then everything would have gone fine for her."
Man those goalposts must be hollow the way you throw them around.
(05-10-2022, 12:42 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You live in a fantasy land.
What a helpful comment.
(05-10-2022, 01:33 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 01:31 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]OK.
Exercise for you.
Clear your mind.
Imagine your stereotypical single mother who is really struggling financially who would certainly choose abortion if she got pregnant again.
Imagine she actually had that first kid at age 16.
Do you really look at the woman you're imagining and say, "She should have just stayed with the guy who knocked her up at age 16."
Or do you really say, "She could have waited a year or two, but what she really needed to do was get hitched to a financially independent male by age 18, then everything would have gone fine for her."
Man those goalposts must be hollow the way you throw them around.
I'm not moving any goalpost.
But the stereotypical young woman you imagined in the earlier comment, was a bit different than the one you thought of in the later comment.
(05-10-2022, 01:35 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 12:42 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You live in a fantasy land.
What a helpful comment.
It should be, but you don't take advantage.
(05-10-2022, 01:35 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 12:42 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You live in a fantasy land.
What a helpful comment.
(05-10-2022, 01:33 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Man those goalposts must be hollow the way you throw them around.
I'm not moving any goalpost.
But the stereotypical young woman you imagined in the earlier comment, was a bit different than the one you thought of in the later comment.
Sure you did, you went from 18 year old high school graduate to 16 year old single mom. Then you pretend like she'd be labeled awful things for wanting a traditional family life. Because you're failing at trying to make another point that you really, really want to be seen as insightful. But you know that, you just like to play dumb on the internets for fun.
(05-10-2022, 03:18 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 01:35 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]What a helpful comment.
I'm not moving any goalpost.
But the stereotypical young woman you imagined in the earlier comment, was a bit different than the one you thought of in the later comment.
Sure you did, you went from 18 year old high school graduate to 16 year old single mom. Then you pretend like she'd be labeled awful things for wanting a traditional family life. Because you're failing at trying to make another point that you really, really want to be seen as insightful. But you know that, you just like to play dumb on the internets for fun.
The law of unintended consequences in that if you want to encourage 18 year old girls to marry up and start making babies, 16 year old girls will also be encouraged the same way. Let's consider three, and they are all 16. One already got knocked up. Should she marry the guy who did it? The other is still a virgin but she wants to have sex with her 16 year old boyfriend. They are both in love and want to get married and have kids right away. But of course he has no money and has completed no education, not yet anyhow. Should they get married and start reproducing? The third is also a virgin and a financially independent 24 year old man has expressed an interest in her. What should she do?
Is "I don't want to finish high school and I just want to be a mom" a commendable choice for any of them?
(05-10-2022, 03:51 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 03:18 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Sure you did, you went from 18 year old high school graduate to 16 year old single mom. Then you pretend like she'd be labeled awful things for wanting a traditional family life. Because you're failing at trying to make another point that you really, really want to be seen as insightful. But you know that, you just like to play dumb on the internets for fun.
The law of unintended consequences in that if you want to encourage 18 year old girls to marry up and start making babies, 16 year old girls will also be encouraged the same way. Let's consider three, and they are all 16. One already got knocked up. Should she marry the guy who did it? The other is still a virgin but she wants to have sex with her 16 year old boyfriend. They are both in love and want to get married and have kids right away. But of course he has no money and has completed no education, not yet anyhow. Should they get married and start reproducing? The third is also a virgin and a financially independent 24 year old man has expressed an interest in her. What should she do?
Is "I don't want to finish high school and I just want to be a mom" a commendable choice for any of them?
???
Bruh. This is off even for u.
(05-10-2022, 07:39 AM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 07:18 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]We should not assume anything about how human mate selection worked before we were born.
We didn't observe it, and our parents didn't give us a full unvarnished set of facts.
We also should not underestimate the task of rewiring the next generation of young lovers to make more socially productive choices. None of the Disney princesses fell in love with men their parents set them up with. Sleeping Beauty did, but she didn't know it was him. That was an accident. The others actively avoided their parents in the process of finding a mate. So that's just one set of stories advanced by one corporation, but think of all the other love stories floating out there that would need to be rewritten. Do we need to put high caste Indians in charge of all romantic entertainment?
That's all sarcasm of course.
I think we need to deal with the society and culture we have via the laws, tax policies, and welfare qualification requirements we can actually change.
I'm not talking about a caste system. I'm talking about viewing matting through an economic lense. On average women make more than men until they are 35 years old. For women to view men as suitable long term partners they want guys that make around 50% more than them. That math doesn't work! Right now. We designed a system to waste guys time. If the goal is to become an economically attractive man with a family the displacement of men till their mid thirties is a recipe for disaster.
Obviously I didn't understand what you're trying to advocate for here.
Can you explain it again?
I mean I noticed you advocated for 12 year old boys of middling means to become apprentices, typically that would last 7 years, so they'd be 19, with a guild license, and ready to get into a socially sanctioned marriage with a 14 year old girl. Is that what you actually want to go back to? We're mixing up a lot of time periods here and I don't think you actually want to go back to any of them.
You know why society keeps extending the age of childhood and allowing earlier and earlier retirement, right? It's not big government. It's just mechanization and automation.
You love to wax philosophical. I wish it was profound.
(05-10-2022, 05:06 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 07:39 AM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]I'm not talking about a caste system. I'm talking about viewing matting through an economic lense. On average women make more than men until they are 35 years old. For women to view men as suitable long term partners they want guys that make around 50% more than them. That math doesn't work! Right now. We designed a system to waste guys time. If the goal is to become an economically attractive man with a family the displacement of men till their mid thirties is a recipe for disaster.
Obviously I didn't understand what you're trying to advocate for here.
Can you explain it again?
I mean I noticed you advocated for 12 year old boys of middling means to become apprentices, typically that would last 7 years, so they'd be 19, with a guild license, and ready to get into a socially sanctioned marriage with a 14 year old girl. Is that what you actually want to go back to? We're mixing up a lot of time periods here and I don't think you actually want to go back to any of them.
You know why society keeps extending the age of childhood and allowing earlier and earlier retirement, right? It's not big government. It's just mechanization and automation.
I'm not being charged for these strawmen am I?
(05-10-2022, 08:28 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 05:06 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Obviously I didn't understand what you're trying to advocate for here.
Can you explain it again?
I mean I noticed you advocated for 12 year old boys of middling means to become apprentices, typically that would last 7 years, so they'd be 19, with a guild license, and ready to get into a socially sanctioned marriage with a 14 year old girl. Is that what you actually want to go back to? We're mixing up a lot of time periods here and I don't think you actually want to go back to any of them.
You know why society keeps extending the age of childhood and allowing earlier and earlier retirement, right? It's not big government. It's just mechanization and automation.
I'm not being charged for these strawmen am I?
You wouldn't pay even if you were.
I'll try again.
I didn't understand what you're trying to advocate for here.
Can you explain it again?
(05-10-2022, 11:33 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (05-10-2022, 07:37 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]So when will you try it?
After you.
He says the truth as he sees it and everyone respects him for that.
You? I think you are naive or an attention seeker. You're definitely a contrarian - which I can get behind. I often play devil's advocate about things I don't care about.