Ein Artikel, den man schon für seinen wunderbaren Titel lieben muss:
Männer taten größere Dinge, als es schwieriger war, Brüste zu sehen
Aus dem Artikel:
Men also used to marry younger and in larger numbers to lock down their very own real-life woman. Now, why bother doing the decent work of marrying and raising a family if you can swipe right and see a new pair every night? “Seventy percent of American males between the ages of 20 and 34 are not married, and many live in a state of ‘perpetual adolescence’ with ominous consequences for the nation’s future, says Janice Shaw Crouse, author of ‘Marriage Matters.’”
In a bizarre gambit to gain equality, women gave away a ton of the power they had accumulated in society. They held a majority of the cards in sexual relationships and, facing a royal flush, decided to fold. Women used to set the cultural standards and parameters for intimate activity. Now often the guys wield more power over sex and the girls are working way too hard, way too soon, for no reciprocity. More widely available hookups have made men less likely to commit.
Das ist denke ich zum Teil eine „Apex Fallacy“. Besonders begehrte Männer mögen ein Überangebot erleben, dass es vorher nur für Könige gab, aber der normale Mann kommt zwar leichter an Sex, aber gleichzeitig auch schwieriger. Früher musste die Frau sich ebenfalls entscheiden und die verheirateten Männer waren weg. Heute kann sie Sex haben, aber sie wird es nicht unbedingt mit dem weniger begehrenswerten Mann haben, den sie vielleicht ansonsten geheiratet hätte, weil er derjenige war, den sie erreichen konnte. Sex war nie so einfach, aber junge Menschen haben gleichzeitig immer später Sex und der Anteil der „Incels“ ist gestiegen.
The greatest century ever was likely the twentieth century AD, which should be known as BKK, before Kim Kardashian’s breasts were available as an everyday experience. After the twentieth century, more than 98 percent of U.S. homes had flushing toilets, electricity, and telephones: “More than 70 percent of Americans own a car, a VCR, a microwave, air conditioning, cable TV, and a washer and dryer. At the turn of the century, almost no homes had those modern conveniences. And although Americans feel that they are more squeezed for time than ever, most adults have twice as much leisure time as their counterparts did 100 years ago.”
This may sound a bit Trumpesque, but to Make America Great Again we may need to Make Seeing Boobs Rare Again. Men did great things often in pursuit of women. Eric Clapton, in desperate love with George Harrison’s wife Patti, wrote the famous rock anthem “Layla” in pursuit of her. Men used to be rewarded with attention from women based on their accomplishments. When homeless millennial men can find shelter by hooking up with a different woman every night, you need to question feminists’ tactical battle plans.
We are now riding on the immense technological advancement—often made by men, as Camille Paglia frequently points out—that has made us more free and prosperous than ever before. Now the risk is what to make of that new gift of leisure time. Do we take it and create even more successful families, businesses, inventions, cures? Or are many men who would have spent their twenties working hard if given the right social incentives instead spending that time watching the unrated version of “Blurred Lines” one too many times?
The opportunity cost of overly available women may mean shallower thinking from 50 percent of our populace that contributes to lower productivity. While it’s wonderful women are making strides in college education and the workplace, there’s no reason this must be at the expense of men. Less stability for unmarried men diminishes their success all through life. That loss means less success for all of us.
Even worse, in dropping their standards women have reduced their capacity to get what they really want. Less commitment, less caring, less respect, and an increased emphasis on appearance are poor outcomes for women, too. Their random “empowerment” pictures on social media in emulating Kardashian are the only lever they have left in the arsenal because they’ve given everything else away. In an attempt to be known for our personhood, we thrown ourselves back on the most obvious weapon in a woman’s arsenal: curves.
Reverting to a primitive charm offensive in hopes of luring a man’s attention for 10 uninterrupted minutes is not empowerment. Nor is it what makes married women happy: “The biggest predictor of women’s happiness is their husband’s emotional engagement. The extent to which he is affectionate, to which he is empathetic, to which he is basically tuned into his wife, this is the most important factor in predicting the wife’s happiness. This basically drowns out every other factor in our models.”
Instead you have young girls today pushing themselves too early into pleasing men without expecting reciprocity. “College women are more likely than men to use their partner’s physical pleasure as the yardstick for their satisfaction, saying things like ‘If he’s sexually satisfied, then I’m sexually satisfied,’” says Sara McClelland, a psychologist at the University of Michigan. “Men are more likely to measure satisfaction by their own orgasm.”
If you cross this fact with what drives happiness for women in marriage, nobody is winning this war of the sexes. Kim Kardashian looks lovely, but she may be making us all less prosperous.
Auf der einen Seite die Frage: hat sie Recht? Dagegen spricht, dass Länder, in denen man keine Brüste sieht, nun nicht gerade die Fortschrittlichsten sind. Die Frage wäre, ob Brüste bzw das härter für die Frau arbeiten müssen der wesentliche Faktor ist.
Auf der anderen Seite natürlich: Wenn ihr mehr Wohlstand wollt liebe Frauen, dann arbeitet doch selbst.
Und natürlich: Ihr habt mehr zu bieten als Brüste. Strengt euch an.
Gefällt mir Wird geladen …