5 ms·

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/when-young-men-dont-work/ https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/when-young-...

vixen99 7y ago
"Perhaps one should not dwell too long, however, on the question of what type of leisure low-skill young men are engaging in. The more important fact remains that leisure is slowly replacing work in their lives, as immigrants replace them in the labor force."
- earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago
  That is probably the one part of the article they really should've made more prominent. Yet they didn't. They hammered it home that videogames and young men not getting married and having 12 kids is the problem. Maybe culturally getting married is incredibly more time consuming and difficult than it used to be? I mean I'm reading George Orwell's Burmese days and the main character was trying to propose (and the girl wanted him to) within 2 weeks of knowing eachother! Granted it's a book, but that doesn't sound outside the realms of normalcy, especially in Burma during the 1920's where there were like 1/1000 ratio of white person to native.
  - watwut 7y ago
    It did used to be normal to marry after extremely short time from our point of view. And divorce was harder. There were consequences for that through - partner who hate each other, violence, abuse (verbal, emotional, physical). Alcoholism.
    - magduf 7y ago
      >There were consequences for that through - partner who hate each other, violence, abuse (verbal, emotional, physical). Alcoholism. Yeah, the people who pine for the "good old days" when people married for life always leave this part out.
      - mywittyname 7y ago
        Yet, they always seem to remember what milkmen and secretaries were for.
      - earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago
        Abusive MEN in particular. Especially radical christians where divorce is stigmatized. It's like they take it as a free pass to just be hateful person. Honestly my dad more than anything made marriage seem worse than it could be that I figured if that's the worst case scenario, hoping for the best isn't even worth the gamble.
    - earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago
      I totally agree and don't think I'm idolizing the past. It's just a different world today and the culture has not caught up with reality.
- riversflow 7y ago
  Why is this downvoted? Insofar as I understand economics, it’s a factual reality. The middle class and up are benefitting from immigration driving down the price of food and services in this country. If you’re a low-wage-earning-potential male, given our levels of inequality, why would you want to be a wage slave if you don’t have to? You aren’t going to significantly improve your lot in life by throwing 40+ hours a week at a job that barely pays the bills. It makes you feel like a loser doing the work, and you don’t get to bury that feeling in anything, as you spend all your money just getting by.
downerending 7y ago
I'm seeing a lot of this in my extended family. If society isn't telling you that you have a primary role in creating and supporting a family, and that you're necessary for the future of society itself, it turns out that you need a lot less money to survive, and you have a lot more time on your hands.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
  I'm part of the problem I suppose, in so much as one can call it a problem. I gave up dating a decade ago because being in a relationship was not necessary for my life goals and dating was a pain in the ass, plan to semi-retire early with a relatively minimalist lifestyle and part time job, etc.
- arkh 7y ago
  When you don't have someone to spend your money to keep up with the Joneses you suddenly need a lot less: less space, less home decoration, less clothes, less going out for food, a smaller ride.
  - magduf 7y ago
    Yep, you "need" a lot less money when you don't have someone insisting that you buy her a diamond ring, a BMW, designer clothes, a big house, maid service, give 10% of your income to some church, etc.
belorn 7y ago
I dislike this kind of cheap generalization which only look skin deep and don't even try to find common behavior between genders. Young men spend about an 2 hours on games per day, and the numbers for young women is much lower. Young women however spend about 2 hours more on their phones per day more than men. Something seems very similar here if we look at the two activities together rather then in isolation. I would instead ask what gendered benefit men get from gaming, and women from doing social activities on their phones, and I would guess the answer has something to do with inter-gender competition and status.
- watwut 7y ago
  > I would guess the answer has something to do with inter-gender competition and status And simply socialization. Gaming is socialization for many male gamers - it is their primary or only social circle and friends. It is the main thing they talk about even in person (what tv used to be).
  - magduf 7y ago
    Exactly: this is what I've found with my younger coworkers. I played video games a lot when I was young, but it wasn't that much of a social thing because the internet wasn't commonly available (we had BBSes) and the games were all single-player DOS or console (NES/SNES) games. Now it seems video games are a social outlet for men under 30, and as you said it's what they talk about in person a lot too, unlike TV.
- naravara 7y ago
  >Young women however spend about 2 hours more on their phones per day more than men What does "on their phones" mean? This is like saying they spend time "reading books." There are good books and bad books. There are edifying and educational books and pulpy trash books. Just saying "books" says nothing about the productivity.
earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago
You know, it'd be nice if they'd look at the cultural aspects of gaming as opposed to just assuming all videogames are bad. It's like being in the 1920's criticizing someone spending time reading as opposed to working in a mill. But what can you expect from a clearly biased news source that, while possibly not wrong, is likely not going to give any benefit of the doubt to people who live life differently from the "good 'ol christian boy" fashion.
dfxm12 7y ago
No one knows exactly why this is happening, though declining demand for low-skill work seems to be a factor. What happens as this continues to decline?
- Enginerrrd 7y ago
  Not sure, but historically large numbers of unemployed young men has not been a good thing for societal stability.
  - irrational 7y ago
    India and China both have a problem with large numbers of unemployed or under employed young men. I bring that up because recently there has been lots of talk about WWIII, but many people say that China, for example, would stay out of it. But, what if they saw it as a solution to their abundance of young men problem? Yikes.
    - swalsh 7y ago
      I think it's a very reasonable concern, making matters worse their one child policy has shifted the demographic towards a higher percentage of men. In Polygamous societies, civil war is very frequent (meaning men without a chance to find a woman find ways to vent often through violence). Add to that, Chinia is a very fragile state economically. Their banks are extremely overleveraged. This is a historically dangerous situation, and that's not even accounting for the newly minted authoritarian dictator.

vixen99 7y ago

"Perhaps one should not dwell too long, however, on the question of what type of leisure low-skill young men are engaging in. The more important fact remains that leisure is slowly replacing work in their lives, as immigrants replace them in the labor force."

earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago
That is probably the one part of the article they really should've made more prominent. Yet they didn't. They hammered it home that videogames and young men not getting married and having 12 kids is the problem. Maybe culturally getting married is incredibly more time consuming and difficult than it used to be? I mean I'm reading George Orwell's Burmese days and the main character was trying to propose (and the girl wanted him to) within 2 weeks of knowing eachother! Granted it's a book, but that doesn't sound outside the realms of normalcy, especially in Burma during the 1920's where there were like 1/1000 ratio of white person to native.
- watwut 7y ago
  It did used to be normal to marry after extremely short time from our point of view. And divorce was harder. There were consequences for that through - partner who hate each other, violence, abuse (verbal, emotional, physical). Alcoholism.
  - magduf 7y ago
    >There were consequences for that through - partner who hate each other, violence, abuse (verbal, emotional, physical). Alcoholism. Yeah, the people who pine for the "good old days" when people married for life always leave this part out.
    - mywittyname 7y ago
      Yet, they always seem to remember what milkmen and secretaries were for.
    - earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago
      Abusive MEN in particular. Especially radical christians where divorce is stigmatized. It's like they take it as a free pass to just be hateful person. Honestly my dad more than anything made marriage seem worse than it could be that I figured if that's the worst case scenario, hoping for the best isn't even worth the gamble.
  - earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago
    I totally agree and don't think I'm idolizing the past. It's just a different world today and the culture has not caught up with reality.
riversflow 7y ago
Why is this downvoted? Insofar as I understand economics, it’s a factual reality. The middle class and up are benefitting from immigration driving down the price of food and services in this country. If you’re a low-wage-earning-potential male, given our levels of inequality, why would you want to be a wage slave if you don’t have to? You aren’t going to significantly improve your lot in life by throwing 40+ hours a week at a job that barely pays the bills. It makes you feel like a loser doing the work, and you don’t get to bury that feeling in anything, as you spend all your money just getting by.

downerending 7y ago

I'm seeing a lot of this in my extended family. If society isn't telling you that you have a primary role in creating and supporting a family, and that you're necessary for the future of society itself, it turns out that you need a lot less money to survive, and you have a lot more time on your hands.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y ago
I'm part of the problem I suppose, in so much as one can call it a problem. I gave up dating a decade ago because being in a relationship was not necessary for my life goals and dating was a pain in the ass, plan to semi-retire early with a relatively minimalist lifestyle and part time job, etc.
arkh 7y ago
When you don't have someone to spend your money to keep up with the Joneses you suddenly need a lot less: less space, less home decoration, less clothes, less going out for food, a smaller ride.
- magduf 7y ago
  Yep, you "need" a lot less money when you don't have someone insisting that you buy her a diamond ring, a BMW, designer clothes, a big house, maid service, give 10% of your income to some church, etc.

belorn 7y ago

I dislike this kind of cheap generalization which only look skin deep and don't even try to find common behavior between genders. Young men spend about an 2 hours on games per day, and the numbers for young women is much lower. Young women however spend about 2 hours more on their phones per day more than men. Something seems very similar here if we look at the two activities together rather then in isolation. I would instead ask what gendered benefit men get from gaming, and women from doing social activities on their phones, and I would guess the answer has something to do with inter-gender competition and status.

watwut 7y ago
> I would guess the answer has something to do with inter-gender competition and status And simply socialization. Gaming is socialization for many male gamers - it is their primary or only social circle and friends. It is the main thing they talk about even in person (what tv used to be).
- magduf 7y ago
  Exactly: this is what I've found with my younger coworkers. I played video games a lot when I was young, but it wasn't that much of a social thing because the internet wasn't commonly available (we had BBSes) and the games were all single-player DOS or console (NES/SNES) games. Now it seems video games are a social outlet for men under 30, and as you said it's what they talk about in person a lot too, unlike TV.
naravara 7y ago
>Young women however spend about 2 hours more on their phones per day more than men What does "on their phones" mean? This is like saying they spend time "reading books." There are good books and bad books. There are edifying and educational books and pulpy trash books. Just saying "books" says nothing about the productivity.

earlINmeyerkeg 7y ago

You know, it'd be nice if they'd look at the cultural aspects of gaming as opposed to just assuming all videogames are bad. It's like being in the 1920's criticizing someone spending time reading as opposed to working in a mill. But what can you expect from a clearly biased news source that, while possibly not wrong, is likely not going to give any benefit of the doubt to people who live life differently from the "good 'ol christian boy" fashion.

dfxm12 7y ago

No one knows exactly why this is happening, though declining demand for low-skill work seems to be a factor. What happens as this continues to decline?

Enginerrrd 7y ago
Not sure, but historically large numbers of unemployed young men has not been a good thing for societal stability.
- irrational 7y ago
  India and China both have a problem with large numbers of unemployed or under employed young men. I bring that up because recently there has been lots of talk about WWIII, but many people say that China, for example, would stay out of it. But, what if they saw it as a solution to their abundance of young men problem? Yikes.
  - swalsh 7y ago
    I think it's a very reasonable concern, making matters worse their one child policy has shifted the demographic towards a higher percentage of men. In Polygamous societies, civil war is very frequent (meaning men without a chance to find a woman find ways to vent often through violence). Add to that, Chinia is a very fragile state economically. Their banks are extremely overleveraged. This is a historically dangerous situation, and that's not even accounting for the newly minted authoritarian dictator.