• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Young men = boys, int. article on Gen Y

Not attractive blogger, Not Attractive Interviewee, therefore their opinions dont matter. Think that is enough child-man for those bitches

kay-hymowitz.jpg
kate-fridkis.jpg
 
I'm getting really sick of reading these types of articles. They've been coming out a lot recently.
 
Same thing I've always been hearing. Women in their mid to late 20s are having a hard time finding good men. Guys on the other hand aren't looking to settle down until around 30, and at that time, can then choose from a larger pool of women as dating a younger women is normal.

I knew that the college application process is favoring men but I didn't realize 58% of recent college grads are women.

As a guy, I don't mind the article because it's basically just telling me, if I remain a decent person, I'll have a very good chance at finding a wife.
 
I dislike the article because it paints a portrait of some lazy young men that aren't ready to move on with their lives and are dicking around while the women go out and take the world by the horns.

My two most serious relationships have ended because the woman put her career above everything else not because I was sitting on my ass not doing anything with my life or wasn't ready to move onto the next stage. That's fine if a woman wants to that but then these are the women that are surprised when they're ready to settle down and can't find a decent man.

I'd rather they thanks us for the head start and shut the fuck up.
 
Young women in major cities earn over fifteen times more than their male peers


Oh really? Maybe men won't date you because you make up shit.




And because you're ass ugly.
 
This blogging hoodrat was homeschooled too. Weird shit.
 
Ha, one of my friends sent me the Wall Street Journal article when it was published a little while ago. Interesting and seems to mesh with reality a lot of the time, but not exactly ground breaking, and probably biased based on the writer's research/interviews. :noidea:
 
Same thing I've always been hearing. Women in their mid to late 20s are having a hard time finding good men. Guys on the other hand aren't looking to settle down until around 30, and at that time, can then choose from a larger pool of women as dating a younger women is normal.

I knew that the college application process is favoring men but I didn't realize 58% of recent college grads are women.

As a guy, I don't mind the article because it's basically just telling me, if I remain a decent person, I'll have a very good chance at finding a wife.

Sounds good to me.

Nice try feminists, but your perceived insults only empower us. We're proud of being awesome.
 
I want to know real college graduate numbers. I know in the 2006 census it was like 30% of people graduated from college, and so if 58% of those people are woman who really gives a shit because 70% of people are still dumb as rocks. Also I think those numbers might get shifted depending on if we are counting four year schools or not. Then even if we are only counting four year schools those numbers get shifted by dumb as rocks schools like Greensboro college. I guess my point is the majority of Americans are dumb as shit and therefore can marry each other no problems.

PS: I am proud to be an academic elitist.
 
Chicks need to go back to having babies. Their periods make them disproportionately incapable of being effective managers.
 
Chicks need to go back to having babies. Their periods make them disproportionately incapable of being effective managers.

Ha yeah seriously. I mean, I'm a chick, but where I used to work, it was always better to work for the guys. I luckily never worked for any of the women in the group, and they were very hard working, intelligent, etc.... but had a reputation of being tougher on staff members (pretend to be compassionate during a project, but then rip you a new one in your reviews, etc.). It's like they feel like they have something to prove. Plus, add in the monthly cycle and it's probably just better to keep it out of the equation. :p

A family friend of mine owns his own company and he swears by women managers... says they get shit done much better than men, because they are more effective and walk the walk (whereas guys tend to BS and talk a big game but are generally lazier). That's his opinion... most of his members of management are women.
 
Last edited:
Ha yeah seriously. I mean, I'm a chick, but where I used to work, it was always better to work for the guys. I luckily never worked for any of the women in the group, and they were very hard working, intelligent, etc.... but had a reputation of being tougher on staff members (pretend to be compassionate during a project, but then rip you a new one in your reviews, etc.). It's like they feel like they have something to prove. Plus, add in the monthly cycle and it's probably just better to keep it out of the equation. :p

A family friend of mine owns his own company and he swears by women managers... says they get shit done much better than men, because they are more effective and walk the walk (whereas guys tend to BS and talk a big game but are generally lazier). That's his opinion... most of his members of management are women.

I was saying that half in jest, of course, but your experience is closer to mine. My workplace has been disproportionately staffed by women in upper management for the last several years, and the level of dysfunction has gone up accordingly. There is a cause and effect here (and having spoken to several of the women in management, they're in agreement with me). It's not a matter of women in upper management, but the ratio of them that makes the environment so toxic. I'm talking about a ratio that is probably around 3:1, maybe even 4:1. Women think with one side of their brain (the emotional side), while men think with the other (the rational side). Without more balance, the emotional side tends to see itself manifested in policies, procedures, and personnel matters. The result is an unmitigated disaster.

I'm not saying we need to go back to the days of giving blowjobs for promotions. I simply think there needs to be about a 50/50 split, much as there is in real life. The balance takes care of past inequities like the aforementioned BJs, and lends itself to a better all-around work environment.
 
Same thing I've always been hearing. Women in their mid to late 20s are having a hard time finding good men. Guys on the other hand aren't looking to settle down until around 30, and at that time, can then choose from a larger pool of women as dating a younger women is normal.

I knew that the college application process is favoring men but I didn't realize 58% of recent college grads are women.

As a guy, I don't mind the article because it's basically just telling me, if I remain a decent person, I'll have a very good chance at finding a wife.

:D
 
I was saying that half in jest, of course, but your experience is closer to mine. My workplace has been disproportionately staffed by women in upper management for the last several years, and the level of dysfunction has gone up accordingly. There is a cause and effect here (and having spoken to several of the women in management, they're in agreement with me). It's not a matter of women in upper management, but the ratio of them that makes the environment so toxic. I'm talking about a ratio that is probably around 3:1, maybe even 4:1. Women think with one side of their brain (the emotional side), while men think with the other (the rational side). Without more balance, the emotional side tends to see itself manifested in policies, procedures, and personnel matters. The result is an unmitigated disaster.

I'm not saying we need to go back to the days of giving blowjobs for promotions. I simply think there needs to be about a 50/50 split, much as there is in real life. The balance takes care of past inequities like the aforementioned BJs, and lends itself to a better all-around work environment.

:werd: Agree that 50/50 is probably about right. I too was half joking about eliminating women from management. Just sometimes women suck.
 
I think it's interesting to look at the difference between Justices Ginsburg and O'Connor versus Sotomayor and Kagan.

The former had long marriages and were raised in an era family first. Ruth Bader Ginsburg took care of a daughter and her husband Martin who was diagnosed with testicular cancer. She also transferred from harvard to Columbia for him. Of the latter one is divorced and one was never married. Career at all costs.
 
I think it's interesting to look at the difference between Justices Ginsburg and O'Connor versus Sotomayor and Kagan.

The former had long marriages and were raised in an era family first. Ruth Bader Ginsburg took care of a daughter and her husband Martin who was diagnosed with testicular cancer. She also transferred from harvard to Columbia for him. Of the latter one is divorced and one was never married. Career at all costs.

Yeah I've discussed this with one of my cousins (also a chick) before, but we're growing up in a totally different ballgame from our parents. Relationships don't just follow the guy around anymore; both people in a couple are trying to figure out their career, post-grad education, etc. and it's hard enough to figure those out on your own, much less as a part of a couple.
 
I was saying that half in jest, of course, but your experience is closer to mine. My workplace has been disproportionately staffed by women in upper management for the last several years, and the level of dysfunction has gone up accordingly. There is a cause and effect here (and having spoken to several of the women in management, they're in agreement with me). It's not a matter of women in upper management, but the ratio of them that makes the environment so toxic. I'm talking about a ratio that is probably around 3:1, maybe even 4:1. Women think with one side of their brain (the emotional side), while men think with the other (the rational side). Without more balance, the emotional side tends to see itself manifested in policies, procedures, and personnel matters. The result is an unmitigated disaster.

I'm not saying we need to go back to the days of giving blowjobs for promotions. I simply think there needs to be about a 50/50 split, much as there is in real life. The balance takes care of past inequities like the aforementioned BJs, and lends itself to a better all-around work environment.

ELC really kicking it up a notch. Well done, sir! I completely agree.

I could less about the girls who can't find a good man. Women brought this dating market on themselves -- much like they ruin their knees wearing high heels.
 
I don't mean to suggest that a woman should blindly follow a man around. I feel that the art of compromise has been lost and if a man asks a woman to compromise he is somehow chaining her to the kitchen in nothing but an apron.

I will fully admit that this is a product of my own experiences and that I am biased. In college my ex looked for jobs in one city only and expected me to go to whatever law school I got into.

The last girlfriend wants to end up in dc with nonprofits but wants to clerk one year and do a fellowship the next. She refused to entertain applying solely for the fellowship in DC and at that point it didn't make sense to keep dating.

The pendulum has swung too far and women are upset when they have good men that they cut loose and then there aren't any more good men around when it is convenient for them.
 
Yeah, I get where you're coming from... it's not as cut and dry as it used to be.
 
Back
Top