Rich Man, Poor Woman?

Submitted by Mastodon on Sat, 2013-09-21 23:50

Article here. Excerpt:

'On Slate's feminist blog, "XX Factor," Amanda Hess delivers the news that "mothers are now the primary breadwinners in four out of ten American households." But she doesn't think that's good news, and not because in the other 6 out of 10 households women are still the bread losers. Rather, it's because the poverty rate is higher among women than among men--or, as Hess puts it, "the gender shift in these families hasn't necessarily translated to increased economic agency"--that's feminist jargon for power--"for women and children."
...
But all of the sex disparities Hess cites can be at least partly explained by female advantages--biological, cultural and legal--over men.
...
The answer to this mystery can be found in the Social Security Actuarial Life Table, which charts, by sex and at every age from 0 to 119, the probability of dying in the next year, the average remaining life expectancy, and the number (out of 100,000) who are still alive at that age ...
...
It is certainly true that the rise of the single-parent family has been bad for women. But that isn't because women are at a disadvantage to men; it's because single mothers are at a disadvantage to married ones. Marriage functions in large part as a means of inducing men to put their productive capacity in the service of women and children. Feminism and the sexual revolution have helped break down marriage by attenuating both the inducement for men to marry and the necessity for women to do so. We don't have an answer to this complicated and vexing problem, but we're quite sure it's not more feminism.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

"Marriage functions in large part as a means of inducing men to put their productive capacity in the service of women and children."

Others have pointed this out. Ironically, if it hadn't been for feminism in the '60s and '70s, there wouldn't now be not only a MRM but also a MGTOW movement/mind-set among today's single men due to their relentless anti-male propaganda and persecutory efforts in the legal system and society at large. Largely though, dedicated feminists not only don't mind this fact but probably happily accept it. After all, marriage historically has been considered by feminists to be a problem to be avoided by women by not doing it.

But I've always believed that even if a feminist movement had never arisen, men still would've been well-served by a MRM to get out from under the pre-assigned gender role of provider to women and children.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sun, 2013-09-22 02:36

This article is poorly written and has convoluted and unconvincing arguments. I'm surprised it was published in the Wall Street Journal. It seems that they've let down their standards a good deal since Murdock bought them out.

Basically the article seems to be yet another attempt to say women need more preferences, more aid, more support, etc. There is no openness to the experience of men, no consideration of what men go through... and that latter viewpoint seems to be taboo not only in the article but in the wider mass media.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by redwoodwriter on Tue, 2013-09-24 20:15