14 ms·

Calling them shit heads for 'giving up' when they feel the deck is stacked against them is an oversimplification that avoids the issue. I think we're seeing in

by pentae 10y ago

Calling them shit heads for 'giving up' when they feel the deck is stacked against them is an oversimplification that avoids the issue. I think we're seeing in western culture what has been happening in Japan for the last 20 years. Herbivore men who simply evaluate the marketplace and decide giving up on working, women and a family and sticking to a life of video games is their best risk/reward option.

ams6110 10y ago
If you recall Maslow's hierarchy from high-school psychology, you will understand that if non-working men still have shelter and food (and television and internet in many cases) they have their most fundamental needs met. Internet (porn, games) provides sexual satisfaction and a sense of winning at something, leaving little in the way of motivational pressure to do more. TV is there as catch-all distraction in case lingering guilt remains.
- danharaj 10y ago
  Maslow's hierarchy is bunk nonsense.
  - wolf550e 10y ago
    Why do you think so?
    - danharaj 10y ago
      The evidence doesn't justify it and there are more sophisticated theories that match up better. Furthermore the theory is quite centered around bourgeois western society. Maslow's hierarchy has a lot of prominence because it's peddled in shoddy high school curricula. Is Wikipedia good enough? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs
pasquinelli 10y ago
No, no I was calling them shit heads for their personality. This idea of a chronically out of work man whose wife leaves him isn't necessarily false, but also that it doesn't mean his wife left him because he's chronically out of work but because maybe he's a jerk. My mom and dad were married 30 years and for almost all that time my dad didn't work. She did leave him though, when he developed a meth habit and became delusional. Even though he didn't work, he did raise us kids, he did the shopping, the cleaning, the cooking, he ran the household. In other words he did what should be expected of someone in a genuine partnership: nothing more and nothing less than what he was able to do of what was needed. When he stopped doing that the partnership dissolved. This "women want a higher earner" picture is a bit crude, and applying it to this situation ignores that men are often ass holes who aren't interested in a genuine partnership, and that category has some overlap with the chronically out of work.

by pentae 10y ago

ams6110 10y ago

If you recall Maslow's hierarchy from high-school psychology, you will understand that if non-working men still have shelter and food (and television and internet in many cases) they have their most fundamental needs met. Internet (porn, games) provides sexual satisfaction and a sense of winning at something, leaving little in the way of motivational pressure to do more. TV is there as catch-all distraction in case lingering guilt remains.

danharaj 10y ago
Maslow's hierarchy is bunk nonsense.
- wolf550e 10y ago
  Why do you think so?
  - danharaj 10y ago
    The evidence doesn't justify it and there are more sophisticated theories that match up better. Furthermore the theory is quite centered around bourgeois western society. Maslow's hierarchy has a lot of prominence because it's peddled in shoddy high school curricula. Is Wikipedia good enough? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

pasquinelli 10y ago

No, no I was calling them shit heads for their personality. This idea of a chronically out of work man whose wife leaves him isn't necessarily false, but also that it doesn't mean his wife left him because he's chronically out of work but because maybe he's a jerk. My mom and dad were married 30 years and for almost all that time my dad didn't work. She did leave him though, when he developed a meth habit and became delusional. Even though he didn't work, he did raise us kids, he did the shopping, the cleaning, the cooking, he ran the household. In other words he did what should be expected of someone in a genuine partnership: nothing more and nothing less than what he was able to do of what was needed. When he stopped doing that the partnership dissolved. This "women want a higher earner" picture is a bit crude, and applying it to this situation ignores that men are often ass holes who aren't interested in a genuine partnership, and that category has some overlap with the chronically out of work.