And yet you wont quote it and you wont answer it. Pretty funny.
Did you just try to quantify procreation in fiscal terms?
Oh please, as soon as she saw that men were complaining she just assumed it was a desire to make women their inferiors. Lursa's comment was sexist, and frankly, I have seen Lursa be sexist on this forum plenty of times.
It would seem a portion of their problems come from trying to force the old model that Americans have long since shrugged off. If it were more acceptable for a woman to have a family AND work, they might not be headed down this path and in reading further, it there are other societal customs and issues peculiar to Japan. I cannot copy and paste more (Fair Use) but to paraphrase, the expectations placed on married couples to buy property (a stress directly placed on men because working mothers are scandalous) and the uncertain demands of in-laws is freaking out men. When they do marry, men will work 20 hours a day and so are on their own a great deal. Sangha had this right in his earlier post. Japan's problems are economic and that is driving people to re-evaluate marriage.
Hmmm? What did you ask me to quote and answer again? I must have tuned you out on accident. :mrgreen:
Not at all. I was just pointing out a blatant hypocrisy (which actually indicated *equality*)....you just didnt like it.
In a thread that developed into (frequently) being about women disrespecting men...I just asked how many men had lied to get sex?
Actually, the problem is mainly two-fold:
One part *is* economic. The other part is, completely contrary to what Gath has argued, that Japanese young adults are clinging too tenaciously to traditional values (wife stays home, husband provides, no pre-marital sex) which are inappropriate given their economic situation.
Another problem is their lack of immigration
To this point, she pretty much admitted flat out that when she read the description of the book when she saw the words marriage and kids she had a preconceived notion that men were desiring to make women their inferiors and that the book was expressing this desire. Where would that little preconceived notion come from you think and why would someone have it? Isn't it a bit interesting that she couldn't help herself to express it? Lursa is a sexist, and she can deny it all she wants but I have plenty of evidence towards it.
It's cute how outraged you still are. I didnt denigrate the book or even dismiss it. Quite the defensive post there.^^^^
It would take an educated male populace to realize that women are depreciable assets.
Plenty of men wish they could consider women submissive and inferior to them....that's not news. I could name a couple in this thread that seem exactly like that. Some men 'need' that. I didnt need the blurb of the book to know that.
And as for sexist....I am more than happy to come down on my sisters anytime...and I do. It's just not a topic in this thread. I will not defend the ones that make us all look bad and speak out about it here AND in real life. You're just too biased to have noticed. No worries, I dont really care.
I was never outraged at all. You're a sexist that just so happens to like making sexist conclusions on the contents of books you never read. Both are pretty common.
They're avoiding marriage and procreation in favor of money grubbing self-centeredness.
They're basically par for the course. :shrug:
Their reaction has just been a bit more extreme than most.
"Promiscuous sex" is neither here nor there. You're missing the point.
Screwing around outside of relationships is really no more desirable than simply avoiding them entirely. In some ways, the latter might actually be preferable, simply because it is less liable to result in socially burdensome unwanted pregnancies or STDs.
Did I say they were?
Then they should be getting married if they're being honest about it being what they truly desire.
And? What do think this shows?
Men are already fully aware of that. Look how many dump their wives for younger models?
It's kind of silly to call women shallow because they want successful men when the same generalization works out that men only care about how women look. Two sides of the same coin. I see people only calling out the women on it in this threat tho (not you.)
Which wasn't mentioned at all in the book in the OP by someone that knows more about it than someone just making conclusions of things out of their ass.
You don't even know what you're defending against since you never even bothered to learn about the topic. You're just running around in the dark in this thread, sorry.
There you go again. Women wanting successful men isn't shallow, but part of their nature.
You really have a hard on for that book dude. It barely even crossed my mind. so little of my posts were based on it. What, were you interviewed in it or something?
And? How does this differ significantly from the rest of the industrialized world?
Japan is an extreme case. I'll freely admit that. However, the pressures at play are very similar to what we have in the United States as well.
Even in our own country, more and more women are avoiding family and marriage in general because they believe the trade off simply isn't worth it. Motherhood is viewed as being a troublesome burden more than a blessing in modern culture; for many of the same reasons the article put forward (financial pressure, the stress of raising a family and working, ecta).
Frankly, when you look at the numbers, we're really not doing all that much better than Japan anyway.
Knocked Up and Knocked Down: Why America's widening fertility class divide is a problem.
Is having kids now a 'social failure'?
The Middle Class fertility rate in the United States is only 1.6, weeeeelll below anything even remotely resembling replacement levels.
Furthermore, more "progressive" nations like Sweden, which give their women more benefits to offset the challenges of childrearing, really fare no better.
Sweden Total fertility rate
Economics clearly are not the major driving force in this change so much as general attitudes and the degradation of the traditional gender dynamic. Women simply don't seem to view marriage and family as being the priority that they once did.
They are far more concerned with material advancement.
Er I was quoting what others have written in the thread. And the term 'golddigger' has come up.
What sangha is pointing out is that there is not a deterministic path here. There is cultural moderation on the signal and response.
Japanese culture is very honor focused. This by itself is going to distort the response to the signal. The signal in Japan is tied to the economy - fewer jobs for salarymen means fewer able to live the salaryman ideal. I take sangha's point to be that America doesn't have to contend with those cultural vectors.
Here's what I see going on and maybe this can reconcile the two viewpoints you guys are advancing. The rise of women's liberation in the US occurred much earlier than in Japan and our culture has been less rigid in response to every change that has happened. What we're seeing in Japan looks like what we're seeing in the US but the root causes differ. In Japan this issue is being driven by labor market changes rippling out into the sexual market place. In the US, the primary driver of this phenomenon is the advance of feminism and this is rippling out into the sexual market place. Feminism is taking root in Japan and the changes there are following the trajectory pioneered in the West, but that trajectory is shallower in effect and not as far advanced, so the effect size in Japan, while still present, is small and it's really labor market changes driving the issue there.
In Japan, it appears that a lot of women are willing to give up their careers but they need a salaryman in their life to make that happen. The guys who can't be salarymen are withdrawing from having to face what they see as failure and the women are not lowering their expectations.
Which was my point. Technology is enabling many of the same things here.
It really isn't especially inconceivable that we could eventually wind up with many of the same problems if current trends continue.
Yes, traditional gender roles are unrealistic for a modern society. Their preference to marry according to traditional values is not suitable for the modern era
So then I take it you don't want to be married with children, have a career, live in your own home, and be generally independent? You have put other priorities first?
Did you just try to quantify procreation in fiscal terms?
What sangha is pointing out is that there is not a deterministic path here. There is cultural moderation on the signal and response.
Japanese culture is very honor focused. This by itself is going to distort the response to the signal. The signal in Japan is tied to the economy - fewer jobs for salarymen means fewer able to live the salaryman ideal. I take sangha's point to be that America doesn't have to contend with those cultural vectors.
Here's what I see going on and maybe this can reconcile the two viewpoints you guys are advancing. The rise of women's liberation in the US occurred much earlier than in Japan and our culture has been less rigid in response to every change that has happened. What we're seeing in Japan looks like what we're seeing in the US but the root causes differ. In Japan this issue is being driven by labor market changes rippling out into the sexual market place. In the US, the primary driver of this phenomenon is the advance of feminism and this is rippling out into the sexual market place. Feminism is taking root in Japan and the changes there are following the trajectory pioneered in the West, but that trajectory is shallower in effect and not as far advanced, so the effect size in Japan, while still present, is small and it's really labor market changes driving the issue there.
In Japan, it appears that a lot of women are willing to give up their careers but they need a salaryman in their life to make that happen. The guys who can't be salarymen are withdrawing from having to face what they see as failure and the women are not lowering their expectations.
You really have a hard on for that book dude. It barely even crossed my mind. so little of my posts were based on it. What, were you interviewed in it or something?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?