Politics

Society Can’t Afford The Educated Woman

442 Comments

Women are making great strides academically, so much so that I think it fair to claim at this point that they have overcome just about all of the road blocks to higher education previously placed in front of them.

Women in the United States now earn 62 percent of associate’s degrees, 57 percent of bachelor’s degrees, 60 percent of master’s degrees, and 52 percent of doctorates.

So clear is this triumph that people are starting to ask a question rarely considered in our modern society: what about the boys? Few folks seem to care about them really, instead celebrating the triumph of women as a sign of the female’s greater adaptability.

As the United States moves toward a knowledge-based economy, school achievement has become the cornerstone of lifelong success. Women are adapting; men are not.

collegedegrees

That’s all good and well, but a recent perusal of a New York Times article got me thinking about a crucial aspect of this growing academic “fempire” that seems overlooked: the utility of the educated woman.

I’M a doctor and a mother of four, and I’ve always practiced medicine full time. When I took my board exams in 1987, female doctors were still uncommon, and we were determined to work as hard as any of the men.

Today, however, increasing numbers of doctors — mostly women — decide to work part time or leave the profession. Since 2005 the part-time physician workforce has expanded by 62 percent, according to recent survey data from the American Medical Group Association, with nearly 4 in 10 female doctors between the ages of 35 and 44 reporting in 2010 that they worked part time.

This may seem like a personal decision, but it has serious consequences for patients and the public.
Medical education is supported by federal and state tax money both at the university level — student tuition doesn’t come close to covering the schools’ costs — and at the teaching hospitals where residents are trained. So if doctors aren’t making full use of their training, taxpayers are losing their investment. With a growing shortage of doctors in America, we can no longer afford to continue training doctors who don’t spend their careers in the full-time practice of medicine.

Women are dominating men in classrooms now and this is, of course, hailed as a good thing, a sign of modern progress and, some would argue, greater potential for societal improvement (that argument stemming from the notion that women are more adaptable and more benevolent than men and, thus would better the world if found more prominently in positions of power).

lawyers

The article above, however, raises serious concerns about this celebrated trend, as does this one:

One tiny problem may be holding women back: they are leaving the workforce in record numbers…
…There are numerous explanations put forth to explain this trend. Most tend to identify two categories of workplace drop-outs…
…The second (and more problematic) group consists of highly educated women who drop out (or “opt-out”) when they have children, even though they have the skills and income necessary to hire childcare. This latter bunch has economists and feminists alarmed for different reasons.

Economists consider the defections costly for the country; we need highly talented and trained workers. For feminists, the drop-out trend undermines their argument that women – even our most accomplished and best educated — are victims of discrimination. If the women most likely to enter the C-suite marathon increasingly choose to hang up their running shoes, why should we expect more finishers?

A recent study by Joni Hersch, professor at Vanderbilt Law School, makes that case. She looks at female graduates of our top universities – those presumably who have the best shot at shattering the glass ceiling – and finds that once they have children, they are more likely to quit their jobs than are women who graduated from less selective schools.

Overall, Hersch reports that 60 percent of women who graduated from our top schools are working full time, compared to 68 percent who made it through less prestigious institutions. Married women without children from top schools are 20 percentage points more likely to work full time than those with children; the difference for graduates of lesser schools is 13.5 points.

Perhaps most astonishing is that only 35 percent of women who have earned MBAs after getting a bachelor’s degree from a top school are working full time, compared to 66 percent from second-tier schools.
So, as Hersch argues, if only a little more than one third of the best C-suite candidates continue to work after they have children, it is not surprising that women are not showing up more often in corporations’ top ranks.

Tremendous amounts of economic and social effort have gone into the promotion of the educated woman and the more gender-diverse workforce. Tremendous amounts of real capital have gone into the promotion and education of women, the goal being to bring them fully up to par with men in both ability and opportunity.

Are we getting a good return on that investment? This is a question feminists do not want to hear about, but how long can it be avoided?

Gear-UP

When it comes to educational costs, women are by all means equal to men. It does not cost less to educate a woman at Harvard Law or [insert prestigious and preposterously expensive medical/law/business school here] than it does to educate a male. It does not cost less to send a woman to an elite liberal arts school than it does to send a male. These costs, I don’t need to tell you, are massive.

Society is, collectively, making a gargantuan investment in educating college students with the hope that there will be some return on that investment. That return doesn’t have to come in the form of capital, but rather in productivity: those receiving these extravagantly expensive educations are expected use them in order to enhance their performance in professional fields. Said enhancement leads to better performance of professional fields as a whole (ex: a larger number of competent doctors, lawyers, investors and the like available to a larger share of the population), and that in turn leads to a better society.

The problem here is that men are offering a greater return on that investment than their equally well educated female counterparts.

CompEng2012_0041210912030547PM

The maddening reality for feminists is that this can’t be blamed on the patriarchy. There are many more women capable of holding elite white-collar positions than there are women actually holding them. That differential is, as the article above mentioned, due to female choice, not to male oppression. Women not only self-select out of many demanding, prestigious and high paying fields (even if they’ve not shown any lack of mental capacity to do the work), they also seem to very strongly favor the birthing and raising of children (and the professional sacrifice that comes with it) to the maintenance of a life on the hard-charging career track.

tumblr_mta26lvnp01rpe0jco1_500

Most women (and men, actually) want kids, and (unfortunately for feminists), no amount of protest and advocacy for increased gender equity is going to close the gap between the biological role men and women play in reproduction. That burden will always be harder on the female than the male, and child nurturing is always going to be a greater female burden than male (another reality hated by feminists, except when our court system uses it against men). Therefore, so long as people want kids, women will always have a harder time keeping up with men on the career track, and will always “opt-out” at vastly higher rates.
Now, I don’t see anything wrong with women opting out in principle. Feminists shouldn’t either—after all, female choice is the most important thing, right? Women who opt-out are merely exercising their choice, and that’s fine.

The problem, however, is not one of principle but one of practical matters, particularly those relating to finance. Western nations are running out of money and, as the aforementioned New York Times article notes, running out of educated professionals in many crucial fields:

The Association of American Medical Colleges estimates that, 15 years from now, with the ranks of insured patients expanding, we will face a shortage of up to 150,000 doctors. As many doctors near retirement and aging baby boomers need more and more medical care, the shortage gets worse each year.

Yet, this continues to be a reality:

women received 48 percent of the medical degrees awarded in 2010.

Despite this:

But their productivity doesn’t match that of men. In a 2006 survey by the American Medical Association and the Association of American Medical Colleges, even full-time female doctors reported working on average 4.5 fewer hours each week and seeing fewer patients than their male colleagues. The American Academy of Pediatrics estimates that 71 percent of female pediatricians take extended leave at some point — five times higher than the percentage for male pediatricians.

This gap is especially problematic because women are more likely to go into primary care fields — where the doctor shortage is most pronounced — than men are. Today 53 percent of family practice residents, 63 percent of pediatric residents and nearly 80 percent of obstetrics and gynecology residents are female.

How long can this go on? I’m sure the pie in the sky ideas promoting absolute gender equality and the costs associated with it were more bearable in an age when economic growth seemed endless, an age in which the generation that largely began this whole gender revolution (hi boomers) grew up in.

Today, however, we’ve got a harsh reality staring us in the face: we’ve decided to take a massive portion of society’s investment in education and focus it on women and we’re seeing less of that investment returned to society. We’re paying more and, essentially, getting less. We’re committed to maintaining equality in our investment, but totally unconcerned with the equality of the return. This isn’t sustainable in world of finite money/resources.

tumblr_mt9q6l6apX1s1rffco1_1280

The answer, surely, is not to stop educating women. Rather, it is to find a way to improve the return on the investment that said education symbolizes. How should this be done? If the answer means perhaps accepting persistent gaps in career earnings between men and women (due to female choice), tolerating some persistent gaps in male-female professional achievement (due to female choice) and perhaps pushing for a closing of the current gender gap in education that favors women in order to ensure that a larger share of this society’s massive educational investment goes to males (who, again, offer a greater return on it), will feminists and their progressive allies be able to accept that?

Female-graduates-006

Feminists are going to have to find a way to answer this question, and soon. A society that fails to take a truly objective look at dilemmas of this sort and grapple with their serious (and, some will argue, horribly sexist) implications may be a society that, ultimately, fails to persist.

Read Next: Why Modern Feminism Is White Woman’s Privilege

442 thoughts on “Society Can’t Afford The Educated Woman”

  1. The brilliant irony.
    Feminist policies are the very policies that will cause the economy to collapse and therefore remove a society’s ability to harbor feminism.
    Feminism is literally a self destructive movement… too bad they’re dragging the rest of us down with them.

    1. This article also makes the claims, that feminism was funded so women would work and could be taxed, more believable.
      If that’s true, jokes on them, women aren’t producing.

      1. ¿Taxed (libertarian argument) or exploited for the surplus value they produce when working (marxist argument)? (also, decreasing wages through competition, since the average wage will cover necessities per iron law of wages, and women need less overall since… men need the status to form and maintain a family, hence lower wages).

    2. Hey come on, who cares. Don’t be naive. As long as the feminist writers are making money, why should they care. 😉

  2. It seems educated women realized that the grass wasn’t as greener on other side as they were told. So they are opting out…

  3. Athlone, throwing down great articles. This, the Black America one and Feminism being white women’s privilege. Of course the jezziwhores will be out in force denying everything you’ve written without reading it.
    Feminism destroys economies, just like socialism.

    1. feminism = socialism, there really is no difference between the two . I think (no sure though) Stefan Molyneux once said: “feminism is socialism with tits”. Take with force from the perceived strong to give to the perceived weak. In this case rob men and give to women, so they’ll keep you in the seat of power.

      1. any cry for equality is a cry for the dumbing down to the lowest level… what happens if we want equality for mental retards… then everyone has to act retarded ? what happens if we want equality for blind people, should we all wear blind folds ? how about the deaf people.. .we better all wear ear plugs too… equality for quadriplegics… we all need tongue controlled wheel chairs….
        no offense to disabled people of course.. i’ve met some wonderful people with afflictions through no fault of their own. i’m just showing how absurd equality is…
        funny how the olympics still has male and female caetgories… how about men do the 100m against women – but have to wear a 20kg rucksack…. we have equality, but the race times will always be slower…

      2. any cry for equality is a cry for the dumbing down to the lowest level… what happens if we want equality for mental retards… then everyone has to act retarded ? what happens if we want equality for blind people, should we all wear blind folds ? how about the deaf people.. .we better all wear ear plugs too… equality for quadriplegics… we all need tongue controlled wheel chairs….
        no offense to disabled people of course.. i’ve met some wonderful people with afflictions through no fault of their own. i’m just showing how absurd equality is…
        funny how the olympics still has male and female caetgories… how about men do the 100m against women – but have to wear a 20kg rucksack…. we have equality, but the race times will always be slower…

  5. An important point that you haven’t touched on is that an MBA in marketing or finance in NO WAY prepares a woman for motherhood and child raising… what is worse is that many ex-career girl mothers are stuck at home with the burden of kids, feeling depressed, unaccomplished and fed up… leading to divorce….
    Not only are they not well educated in taking care of children and all that involves, but they feel demoralized doing it.
    Where the business / corporate / government environment requires dealing with adults, meeting targets, hitting deadlines and accomplishing ‘successes’ – home making and childcare is a more solitary business and is a case of maintaining a default standard. Washing, cleaning, cooking, provisioning the house, dressing little johnny, taking out the trash, cleaning up his puke and the toys he leaves all over the house, is a constant (and arduous) work that only restores order. It has no targets, deadlines, or particular accomplishment that can be measured month to month. It also requires the mother to deal with constant tantrums, disciplining the child, and living in that ‘childish’ world of a toddler or preteen.
    It requires a totally different mindset that is not instilled by colleges, universities, career jobs or MBA courses.
    It’s about time that pregnancy, birthing and childcare required a license and that license will not be issued to women with MBAs, especially in areas like medical science where staff numbers are in short supply.
    You want to have an illustrious career… get your pipes cut before you start…. FAIR IS FAIR

    1. I was following you up until the childcare license.
      Aaron Clarey would call this “progressive credentialism”
      I know exactly what you mean – I just don’t think government intervention is the answer. Moving further into socialist territory can only mean bad things for us producers.

        1. exactly…. driving licenses work great….. it’s one area where we can say government does a ‘relatively’ ok job compared to having 13 year olds and drunk hooligans behind the wheel….
          chinese implemented the one child policy, it had blow back effects, but it did help….
          the license doesn’t have to be onerous… an 8 week course, with all the scare stories and nightmares of pregnancy, child birth and more importantly child raising… couples and mothers often do some prenatal course… but none of it includes child raising… a child is for life, not just for fun in the birthing clinic…
          universities can ask for proof of sterilization before accepting women for advanced courses and courses like medicine where there are shortages… fighter pilots can’t be accepted if they have to wear glasses… fair is fair…
          women that want to have babies need to take MUCH MUCH MUCH more responsibility… decisions need to be made in the cold hard light of day, not because “they feel like it…”
          the father side can also be clarified… will you work more and pay more to support the family or is mom going to do a job and you will be a more hands on dad…. half the time the guy gets pushed out, and the other times he misses endless career opportunities because his baby momma saddles him into changing nappies and spending all weekend with the kids.
          There are no problems only solutions.

        2. Need a policy in which twice as many women as men are born.
          Imagine living in Europe post WW-I and WW-II with the surplus of women? I would wager game was not necessary in that time.
          A great contribution of the Manosphers is bringing to light an economic analysis of the heterosexual mating / sex scene. It’s supply and demand. When male to female ratio is nearly equal, the demand for women increases thus increasing the price demanded by hypergamy.

        3. But do you really -need- government for this? I agree it’s worked relatively well…
          But people can choose whether they want a licensed hair cutter. And insurance companies can refuse to insure unlicensed drivers.

        4. I agree. It would never work and would be kind of tyrannical. Also while driving and cutting hair are not strictly speaking rights, sex, reproduction, and raising children are enshrouded by several constitutional rights.
          But there is a severe societal problem with too many unqualified parents having too many children.

        5. leave it to free market forces… private (and expensive) training for want to be parents…. health insurance companies can choose not to insure unlicensed parents, schools can refuse to accept children from unlicensed parents… large security deposits required upfront….if you want to have hippy bastard children, fine but that’s up to you to do it on your own….

        6. yeah, but the price for sluts is still only a few hundred bucks… not much has changed except the 80s and 90s instilled men with this new age ‘sensitive’ BS… that’s where the problem lies… women got used to being told and experiencing that they could always have their way…. whereas before a woman could pick and chose but once she made her decision she had to stick with it or face social and financial ruin.

        7. 1) Supply and demand. If you were one of two men in a club with 100 women, your SMV would skyrocket and you will have easy command. As the supply of labor exceeds available employment positions, men will compete and come to accept harsher working conditions, lower pay, longer working hours, fewer benefits. And whereas men are less picky, women by nature are highly scrupulous in mate selection — they naturally set their sights on the top 1% of men (anything less is settling)
          As Chris Rock says, “cuz you ain’t her first choice.”
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vnU7g4m0XmU
          2) women became hyper self-aware of their own SMV (ever know a beautiful women unaware of her SMV?) and the social acceptance of casual sex opened up the sex / mating / dating market that exists today.

        8. That would produce cruel results — uninsured children, bankrupted families, and prisons even more full of improperly raised men (it costs 50K per year to imprison a man).
          There’s no easy answer to this. As much as I rail against religion, I often wonder if the old religious teachings would best stem the problem of too many children born to incompetent young mothers. On the other hand, the most religious regions of the nation have the highest rates of teen pregnancy.

    2. Therefore, never get serious with a chick that has more then an assiociates degree. Everything more then that is a liability. These chicks generally know their place. College chicks = false sense of accomplishment, can’t shut up because they think they’re smart but aren’t, and a whole roster of other negative traits.

      1. Preach it.
        Contrast: military basic training is designed to be *just* challenging enough that it feels like a major accomplishment, while being passable by anybody who’s in decent physical condition – while also teaching as much as possible to the average Joe about being a soldier.
        College is marketed as being an accomplishment, but has been dumbed down to the point where anybody with an IQ over 85 can pass these days.
        The military actually is challenging (pushing you right up to your limits) and the pride is earned; schooling is a ponzi scheme, and the pride is based upon nothing.

        1. “schooling is a ponzi scheme, and the pride is based upon nothing.”
          One area that college is useful is STEM. That is much harder to self learn from online resources although still very doable than silly majors such as business, communications, etc.

    3. Excellent, Ray, excellent. It’s time to stop pouring money and resources into partial return. My buddy’s oldest daughter is a perfect example of this — a bright girl who inherited her dad’s STEM abilities; her parents paid for her double-major mechanical engineering/biomedical degree at a top notch university ($250,000.); upon graduation she got in with a great firm; got her PE license; got a major promotion and was relocated to her firm’s headquarters within three years ($$ cost to firm). But at age 26 she got the I-gotta-get-married-and-have-kids bug, quit work, got married, and is at home playing housewife and expecting her first child. All those resources, money, and mentoring down the drain after a mere three-year career. Her dad is heartbroken and pissed. My way of thinking, he should have told her if she wanted this education and career, she’d have to get a tubal ligation before he shelled out the cash. Same goes for the firm before they promoted and relocated her. What a stupid, bloody waste.

      1. Don’t worry, she will return to the workforce in 13 years expecting to smash glass ceilings.

        1. He already knows. I don’t want to rub it in. Now he’s worrying about daughter #2, who’s about to graduate.

        1. STEM majors usually intend to have long careers. It’s not a basket weaving degree. The girl’s dad didn’t fork out $250,000. for her to work only three years. Sure, it was her choice to quit, but at whose expense?

        2. STEM majors usually intend to have long careers. It’s not a basket weaving degree. The girl’s dad didn’t fork out $250,000. for her to work only three years. Sure, it was her choice to quit, but at whose expense?

        4. Maybe she will and maybe she won’t. Her dad used a chunk of his earnings and dipped into his 401K, and her mother spent part of her small inheritance, to finance the girl’s education, only to see her drop out after three years. The possibility of her returning to work one day is scant comfort to them. BOTH parents — not just the dad — feel cheated and ripped off.

    4. You assume that anything prepares a woman for motherhood. Only motherhood prepares a woman for motherhood. If a woman has neglected her mothering duties, regardless of having a degree or not, that is indicative of her own personal failure not her education. My mother and grandmother both earned their degrees and they were never absent for their children. Plenty of educated women act as responsible and nurturing mothers. Please don’t categorize everyone based on exceptional cases.
      But I do agree with you on one point: Too many unqualified individuals are having children. They cannot support them and they certainly don’t make “good” parents. However, as KalosLogos mentioned below, reproductive rights are protected by the constitution. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. You win some, you lose some.

      1. motherhood was experienced by young girls long before having their own children, as they were around older sisters, cousins, aunts and so on and so forth that had babies before them… and the family unit NOT the government and a bunch of social workers and law courts provided both the support system for mothers and the prenatal education system for them… .if you are busy in an office all day, you have as little contact with young children and pregnant women as any man…. zero.

        1. Educated women still have those experiences growing up. You seem to forget that by the time a child reaches 4/5 they enter the school system. Most work hours coincide with school, so the mother really isn’t losing on much, save for those few professions that require more than the usual 40-hour work week. This particular article seems to also suggest that women work far less than their male counterparts, so that’s even more time they dedicate at home. If the kids are in school anyway, why shouldn’t the mother be working those hours? Nothing is wasted.

  6. I suppose that, as this problem gets worse and more men decide to opt out, we’ll see men get taxed more because it isn’t fair that they’re making money without the sacrifice of getting the pointless degree.

    1. Yes and no. Women will try to come after men, but because men are producers by nature, they will find ways to produce that can’t be taxed (these ways exist, but should never be discussed publicly).

    2. Just wait, the Feminists will try to lobby for a “Being A Single Male Tax” for the men who go their own way. I wouldn’t put it past the Misandrist whores.

  7. Great article.
    Another negative effect is that women who go through all the rigors and cost of obtaining higher degrees, disproportionately the high IQ subset of the female population, have fewer children than they otherwise would. Thus, not only is society being negatively impacted today, for the reasons you have pointed out, but it will be negatively impacted in perpetuity due to the birth of fewer high IQ people. A less intelligent population is a less capable one.

    2. Most men want an attractive, pleasant, compliant mate who will be a loyal wife and good mother. Brainpower is far down the list of male must-haves in selecting a woman.

      1. One of the most sexist comments I have read in my life.
        Good luck genuinely connecting to someone that vapid, you misogynist pig.

        4. Most guys don’t want a vapid dummy, but neither do they require an Einstein. Brains aren’t the major attraction of females to men and never will be. That fact may offend you, but it’s the truth. Most women know it, too.

  8. They don’t realize the extent of the consequence’s of matriarchy. Its a woman’s nature to work like a man. Sure she’ll can be ambitious, moving up the corporate ladder using the mantra “I’m a strong, independent women”.
    What happens next? She’s 35 years old and with her wall fast approaching, she hooks an unsuspecting mate for his seed. Finally realizing the absolute importance of child rearing, finally realizing the amount of sacrifice it takes to raise a child. Her maternal instincts go into overdrive and her 100k p/a executive employment just doesn’t tickle her feathers anymore. What does she do? She quits
    The public service/banks/private-public companies etc are all impacted by these naturally impulsive decisions.
    This is why men are historically and currently valued more for employment. Its not sexism,patriarchy,misogyny. Its simply sustainable performance from employees that employers value.
    Men don’t need maternity leave
    Men don’t have a ‘biological clock’
    Enjoy the decline

    1. Business is objective, only profit dictates decisions.
      If women are paid less, they don’t generate as much profit.

    2. We need to help women restructure feminism. Get the education, in fact offer credits for it just like now, but offer them to women (who are married) that have had two children and (preferably) seen them to Kindergarten (5).
      They start a little later, but no longer have to stop at 30-37 to run and have kids before their ovaries shrivel up. Kids get the bonus of a SAHM until 22-25. Husbands get a traditional role, but they are more important because marriage is valued again.
      Hopefully this would reinforce the value of both parents. Hopefully it would maximize HER career in the long run as well. I truly believe it would maximize the children’s development as well.
      We would have to run it as an experiment to be sure, but I think it could lead to a renaissance in the West.

    3. “…the amount of sacrifice it takes to raise a child” is zero. 60 hour weeks working for a demanding stranger just to bring home money someone else decides how to spend is a “sacrifice.”
      Get real. Females aren’t dropping out of the rat race to stay home and play House and Baby Doll because the rat race is easy.

      1. “females aren’t dropping out the rat race to stay home and play House and Baby Doll because the rat race is easy”
        Destroy the family, you destroy the country.
        -Vladimir Lenin

        1. What’s the matter? All you do is quote — don’t you have a brain? The spine and brain are connected — try using them in tandem.

      2. How many of you little red-pill twits have actually been in a long term relationship with a woman?

    5. It’s a shitty reality, yes, but a generality. I’ve never desired children or a husband. When I get old and infertile, oh well. By then I’ll have had nearly two decades to build myself up in a career, and if I suddenly want children, there are always plenty that need to be adopted, rather than rot away in foster care.

  9. Here’s a challenge for us male readers (I’ve tried): try to get a scholarship as a male. As you can see, we’re in the minority, so you’d think it would be easy for us to get one. Wrong! While there are plenty of scholarships for women (on the basis of their gender, even though they’re over represented), there are few for men.
    Now consider that society isn’t just bearing the cost for these women while they’re in school, we have institutions handing women free money to go to school only for them to work part time (or completely drop out), while men must pay their way through school and end up becoming more productive.
    And don’t forget grants either!

    1. Not to forget the higher grades for no other reason then the fact that she’s female. Even the prof can’t resist being manipulated by those titties. Got to give it to them; chicks know how to get away with things.

      1. Because there’s no possibility that females work harder than males, are more patient, and generally respect the class!

        2. Women don’t work harder than Men,they work more subserviently than men.And all public education is geared towards that.Rote learning and education based on feelings rather than critical analysis.All this praise for academic achievement is just plain garbage because it amounts to nothing,since all the Science and Technological progress is still dominated by Men.

        3. You don’t think all that progress is because women, throughout history, were never given a chance to pursue those fields (and in fact, some were burned for it)?

        4. Most men, also, “were never given a chance to pursue those fields”.
          You need to study history. Conditions were not at all like today. Most were poor; a tiny minority had the time and the knowledge to develop science and technology.

        5. Doesn’t invalidate my point. If you restrict the population under discussion to “those who could possibly have pursued those fields,” many more women were barred than men.
          You need to direct some of your no doubt prodigious mathematical ability to studying the work of Bayes. Then you might be able to realize which pieces of evidence invoke which conclusions.

        6. That’s not at all clear. Probably fewer, since most women aren’t interested in those fields.
          I’m busy with other things.

        7. What about today in the modern era? You think women don’t have an equal chance, NOW? They have way more than equal opportunity NOW. It’s easier to have cumulatively higher scores when there are so many MORE women than men in college. And yet men heavily out-populate and out-perform women, in all of the HIGHER fields like math and science. Women only get higher scores in bullshit classes like the one’s you almost certainly take, where the curriculum is twisted. And yes, they get sexist favors from man-pussy professors. Best work ethic and attitude, my ass. It’s a broken, Kafkaesque mockery of an education system…Not a fucking meritocracy, like it should be. The only remaining semblance of a meritocracy exists only within those very higher thinking fields like the sciences, where women are just plain out-classed by men. Your use of an evidential logical fallacy headed with an arbitrary mention of “Bayes Theorem” highlights how fucking inept your sex is at critical thinking, compared to men. How ironic. Women, always kissing their own asses while they have a stacked deck.

        8. lolz. math and computer science major here, taking one of the hardest math classes in the country.
          and i’m not even going to /start/ with how the arts are just as important as the sciences.

        9. ” It’s easier to have cumulatively higher scores when there are so many MORE women than men in college.”
          …And you blame this on women how?
          “And yet men heavily out-populate and out-perform women, in all of the HIGHER fields like math and science. ”
          You don’t think that the representation of women in those areas is due to cultural pressure? okay, sample scenario: a student doesn’t do well on a test in a math/science. Under your logic, if the student was female, this should be confirmation that they’re not cut out for the topic (this reaction would be a direct result of societal pressures and stereotypes that women are “worse” at science.) If the student was male, they’d just shrug it off and study harder next time. The truth is, the second course of action should be a viable option for all genders.
          “Women only get higher scores in bullshit classes like the one’s you almost certainly take, where the curriculum is twisted. ”
          Let’s see… I’m a freshman at a top 3 university in the US, taking a top 5 math class in terms of difficulty, and a computer science course. WTF does twisted mean?
          “The only remaining semblance of a meritocracy exists only within those very higher thinking fields like the sciences, where women are just plain out-classed by men.”
          See above. Also, I challenge you to make meaningful contributions to literature analysis, or create an original piece of art. Don’t bullshit “higher thinking.”

  10. Classic tale of children whining because they want something they don’t have, then when they get it, they don’t want it anymore.
    Pfft.

      1. tall children don’t whine about their height, I mean a tall dude can get laid way easier in America compared to a 5’1-5’5 dude who ends up sexless.

  11. What if, instead of accepting gender-related pay gaps, we cut down on student loans? Most people who want to go to college (and who need to be there. Sorority girls and “retail management” majors, I’m looking at you) would surely find a way to apply for merit-based scholarships and grants. I work hard to pay back my loans, which I wish I hadn’t taken out, but I know that others of recent generations don’t feel so beholden to their creditors. And speaking as a high school teacher, I can tell you certainly that the kids going into college now don’t feel a sense of gratitude or obligation to clear debt. Rather they avoid it by having their parents take out loans instead, and expecting the parents to pay back the loans. I digress. If the degree is harder to come by and pay for, fewer women will “opt out” of the workforce to have kids, *and* the public will bear no cost to have educated them. I see no problem with women opting out as long as it doesn’t leave the public with their debt. Myself, I have a Master’s degree and if we ever have kids, my husband will be a stay-at-home dad. But not because he’s emasculated or I’m taking on the “man’s role.” I’m the one who took out the college loans, and I’ll be damned if I let someone else pay them back for me.

    1. The edumacation-industrial complex is a key source of money, power, and social status for the cathedral. Accordingly, the cathedral will not accept any dimunition of its influence or revenues.

  12. I’m at peace with it all. Western society is declining. It must decline at some point, as all civilizations do. It will be a good thing when it finally dies, because it will be vindication for all the myriad of people whose lives were extinguished so this monstrosity could exist.
    It will also be a lasting reminder to women for centuries to come that men and women are different, and those roles should be respected. Trying to change women into men is just as foolish as doing the opposite. If you’re a male in college, I guess you just have to enjoy the ride.
    There are many things that are approaching within our lifetimes that will likely collapse western society. I’m at peace. I know it’s coming to an end. I’m going to enjoy the ride along the way.

    1. “The Owl of Minerva begins her flight at dusk”
      It’s not in decline. Western Civ is fine.

      1. You quote Hegel, but refuse to “believe” the master/slave concept?
        Hegel’s influential conceptions are those of speculative logic or “dialectic”, “absolute idealism”. They include “Geist” (spirit), negativity, sublation (Aufhebung in German), the “Master/Slave” dialectic, “ethical life,” and the importance of history.
        Can’t pick and choose.
        Decline of civilization can be predicted when global trade breads down. You think economic and talent specialization is possible in the Dark Ages?

        1. Hegal was a profound genius. But he was like Marx, Nietzsche and many others: grand historical narratives that attempt to answer everything in one neat big theory.

        2. “Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus”
          “False in one, false in all”
          A Roman legal principle indicating that a witness who willfully falsifies one matter is not credible on any matter. The underlying motive for attorneys to impeach opposing witnesses in court: the principle discredits the rest of their testimony if it is without corroboration.
          Just like Hegal & Marx to communism and Nietzsche to fascism. Liberals like you start and think with the wrong grand big theory.
          The only perfect big theory is that is proposed by the wisest and richest king of all who was King Solomon.
          Try reading Pslams, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. I challenge you to disagree with any of the principals written in those books.

        6. You prefer not because you know what you’ll read will be truth.
          Book of Proverbs: It is an example of the Biblical wisdom tradition, and raises questions of values, moral behavior, the meaning of human life, and right conduct.
          Book of Ecclesiastes: The book is in the form of an autobiography telling King Solomon’s investigation of the meaning of life and the best way of life. He proclaims all the actions of man to be inherently hevel, meaning “vain”, “futile”, “empty”, “meaningless”, “temporary”, “transitory”, “fleeting” or “mere breath”, as the lives of both wise and foolish men end in death. While Koheleth clearly endorses wisdom as a means for a well-lived earthly life, he is unable to ascribe eternal meaning to it. In light of this senselessness, one should enjoy the simple pleasures of daily life, such as eating, drinking, and taking enjoyment in one’s work, which are gifts from the hand of God. The book concludes with the injunction: “Fear God, and keep his commandments; for that is the whole duty of everyone” (12:13).

        7. You Will Know Them by Their Fruits
          “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them.” Matthew 7:15-20

        8. I see you hold your self out as having extra special magic powers of divining false from true prophets.

        9. Sorcery (Witchcraft), divination and magic is prohibited in the bible.
          “But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Revelation 21:8
          You’re in agreement, perhaps you should read it all and see how much more you agree with the bible?

        10. Why would you assume I haven’t read it?
          “Fear of power invisible, feigned by the mind, or imagined from tales publicly allowed, religion; not allowed, superstition. And when the power imagined is truly such as we imagine, true religion.” — Hobbes

        12. Pushing existentialism? Please show me where I’ve advocated the notion that we live in a meaningless universe to which we by force of human will supply meaning.
          I mentioned only in passing that you claim to have the power to divine false from true prophets. That’s quite a claim.

        13. Tell that to the Christian Right… They seem pretty content, and to an extent successful, doing it.

        15. Marx was a scientist whose main output is about explaining the economic system known as Capitalism and why it is wrong. Communism is just an afterthought derived from the concept of surplus-value and can (and has been) superseded by better post-capitalist theories. His most famous book is called “Das Kapital” for a reason.

      2. Decline doesn’t have to mean fire and brimstone. What happened to the British empire during the 20th century would, by any definition of the word, be considered severe decline. The UK now is just a mockery of itself.
        The same thing will happen to the US, it’s just a matter of time. Yet, just like the Roman Princes who’s ’empires’ were reduced to just single cities, had no power left, and had become the laughingstock of everyone around them by refusing to believe that the Roman empire had been gone for centuries, there will still be people in the US who will insist that the US is fine, even after it’s lost all its power.

        1. The Brits extended themselves too far and the costs of maintaining the exceeded the benefits.. It’s economics. Same with Rome.
          I couldn’t care less whether the US has power — so long as it has power sufficient to quell attacks. The US exists for the reasons spelled out in the Constitution.

        2. > The Brits extended themselves too far and the costs of maintaining the empire exceeded the benefits..
          Hrm, this sounds familiar….

        3. Exactly. It’s not culture that leads to the demise of civilizations; it’s usually economic factors. It’s almost always economic/financial factors that drive the major events in history.

    2. I’m 31. I think, if I time it just right, the Bible is right about one thing “With My last breath, I shall bare witness to the end of days.
      Maybe China will support UNICEF’s goal of feeding the latino theist who make up the ‘Estados Unitos’ but I hope not. I’d rather them watch their children starve to death.

      1. Yea. Get help. You want to see children starve to death? The Bible is Bullshit. Live free of religious stupidity.

        1. Yes. The bible is bullshit. That is why I stated that it was right about ONE thing.
          And yes. I do want to watch the shit-colored, anchor babies of 3rd world illegals starve to death. I’d have them executed if I had the power to do so.

        2. Get help? For what? Stating his beliefs? I love how you insinuate that he’s nuts to try to make your argument. Ad Hominem Abuse argument doesn’t hold up.

    3. Then live amongst your “people”. I love it here. I struggled and I made it. You’re an idiot if you think men have it harder than women. Absolute idiot. You either didn’t study hard enough or you simply were not smart enough. Period.

  13. If you haven’t seen this (as well as his breakdowns of elementary/middle/highschool) then you certainly should.

  14. Boilerplate Elmer :
    Peter Drucker, in his famous essay Managing Oneself, advised strongly the need to understand your strengths and weaknesses, and observed that you can never win by improving your weaknesses, only by improving your strengths. In broader socio-economic terms, we have given women the opportunity to build on their weaknesses (ability to compete against men) and discouraged them from capitalizing on their strengths (youth and fertility). They compete through artifices of fairness and inclusion that are borne on the backs of an ever-dwindling pool of male supporters. We have weakened society as a whole by building on women’s weaknesses in attempts to make them the equal of men, rather than encouraging them in their natural strengths. And while this charade is going on, men are encouraged to adopt feminine attitudes and lifestyles at the expense of their own natural strengths, now deemed unnecessary in the new gender-neutral economy.

      1. yes spot on… feminism wants women to be like men, instead of supporting and encouraging women to be better women…. better mothers, better nurturers, better wives, better homemakers…. dare i say it better sluts…. if the unhappy married women got it on with their husbands regardless of whether they ‘feel like it’ the divorce rate would plunge… a couple of handjobs in the shower and a BJ on the weekend could keep many a husband happy…. learn how to swallow and do anal for birthdays and holidays…. i reckon the pole dancing fitness classes that have become quite popular lately did more to make happy marriages than any feminist ever did…

  15. This article, while well-written, sidesteps a serious issue. It’s immoral, on some level, for women to be filling classroom seats and taking jobs that would be otherwise populated by by men, when they plan on not using their education or keeping those jobs.
    Women, as we see, can rely on a husband when they don’t want to work. Men have to work and are being deprived of it because of the women described here. Roissy once wrote that careerism in women is a form of cheating. I’d like to take that one step further and say careerism for women — or at least married women — is a form of outright immorality.

    1. In the U.S. today, there are plenty of men who rely on their wives for income while they stay home. Men do not have to be the ones who earn the money in this modern world

      1. “[T]here are plenty of men who rely on their wives for income while they stay at home…” until wifey realizes she’s sexually repulsed by kitchen-bitch and divorces him. Then he gets to pay child support based on court-determined “imputed” income or gets to go to jail. Hope he likes working at Home Depot and living with roommates at 45, in the U.S. today.

        1. Yeah like that always happens. Just because your life sucks doesn’t mean everyone’s does.

        2. Just because you won the lottery doesn’t mean everyone else will, old timer.
          Over half of marriages fail these days. When children are involved, custody (read child support) is overwhelmingly awarded to the mother. (Last I checked, the national stats indicate custody goes to the mother 90% of the time.) And if you live in the US, you WILL end up in serious trouble if you fail to meet arbitrary, difficult-to-contest child support obligations.
          Best case scenario, today’s marriage-minded young man faces fairly bleak prospects. Denial and obsfucation of this reality– e.g. “you can be a happy househusband!” or “divorce isn’t that bad!” or “NAWALT”– is damaging.
          My life is great. No divorce rape for me. Thanks for your concern.

        3. That should read: “And if you live in the US, and you’re male, you will end up in serious trouble…” thanks to unequal, discriminatory enforcement of the horrendously unjust Bradley Amendment:
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Amendment
          (Damn Disqus, screwing up usernames. Of course this type of dismissive, invective response would come from a feminist. Such empathy for men. Quelle suprise.)

      2. Who would want to live like that? I wouldn’t. I already feel emasculated enough whenever my girlfriend drives the car.

        2. I agree, Nicholas. Any guy who doesn’t want to tuck his dick back between his legs and take on the female role in a relationship is obviously just insecure. The only “real men” are one’s who are indistinguishable from women.

      3. This is a disastrous trap that usually ends up with the man booted out of the house. Please read up on this. You can’t rejig mother nature, at least not in most cases.

      4. 1). Any man would be rejected by any woman if he tells her he wants to stay home while she works.
        2) As broken arrows says, if he’s out of work and living off her, he has a short window to get work before her hypergamy kicks in, her friends and family come to see him as a “deadbeat” leeching off her, she starts an affair, and leaves him (in that order).

        1. This. If every job in this country was held by men, women would still have shelter, food, and be provided for. If every job in this country was held by women, men would starve.

        3. Well, we ALL have moms so I guess that can’t be too bad, right?
          This could happen in the future. China, reversed. Male babies left abandoned in the streets, in garbage cans

      5. I get the feeling women don’t trust themselves enough to provide for a family. The female craves security, which is mostly the reason that a feminist democracy has so many nanny state regulations. A kitchen bitch husband is on thin ice.

        1. Wrong again. I keep reading your posts and you keep purporting to know what women want/know/need. You’re always wrong. Fascinating. Keep trying though.

        2. And you have any more credibility than he to make comments on what women want?
          All three of us have little credibility, save for our own limited anecdotal experience.
          BUT. far as I’m concerned, assuming he’s a straight male, he’s probably dated more women than you ^_^

        3. Yes, I do, because I *am* a woman (and my friends are women — we tend to tell each other what we want in men). Duh.

        4. Yeah, but you’re all self-delusional. You all *say* you want something, you even tell *yourself* you want something, but that’s all just fore-brain babble. At the end of the day, your hind-brain dictates your core behaviours, and women are programmed by evolution in the very depths of their hindbrain to desire alpha males who are capable of providing material resources and safety. Its evolutionary biology, baby, and all your po-mo, go-grrl fem-talk espousing pretty little lies will never change it.

      6. I get the feeling women don’t trust themselves enough to provide for a family. The female craves security, which is mostly the reason that a feminist democracy has so many nanny state regulations. A kitchen bitch husband is on thin ice.

      7. Bullshit. Read an article on the Huff Po (not exactly a manosphere site) that made the case that most marriages where the woman earns more money than the husband fails because the woman loses respect for the man. And as purely anecdotal evidence, I just got into a debate with some of you rabid fem-bots in the comments section of another article. And even those women (every one of them) admitted that they preferred a man who “pulled his own weight” and earned either the same, or more than they do. They claimed they didn’t want to support “leeches”.
        The women who spout this line are just like the ones who claim that we should get rid of gender roles and allow men to be “less masculine”. Then she turns around and ONLY dates masculine guys. Now I hear all of these feminists claiming we need to encourage more men to take on the role of househusband, the only problem is that none of them actually want to be married to a househusband.

        1. Another great point, Travis. A perfect example is Gloria Steinem who preached equality but only dated the richest, most powerful men. She was not dating fellow magazine editors.

      8. Wake up; “plenty of men” is not a number and cannot be used to form a percentage. Your fantasy is not reality, nor can it be used to generalize in order to help for a rational social policy.
        Back to grammar school for you, dearie.

    2. I wouldn’t say that the article side-steps that issue but it does flirt with it suggestively. The frequent references to return on investment lead one to consider that as a reader, rather than taking on the preachy liberal role of declaring something to be immoral.
      In order for one of the poor investments to reach the conclusion or even ask the question about the morality of taking from another who could potentially do more with it is a huge step. This would require a paradigm shift away from the entitlement mentality and until that is addressed, there will be no objective evaluation of their ability to contribute. The implications of that are far too great for many to consider.

    3. Another thing missing from an otherwise good article: CREDENTIALISM
      Much of female “achievement” is actually credentialism gone wild.
      Examples of female-oriented credentialism:
      – “Educators” (fka teachers) who can’t teach math but can discourage boys
      – Sociology Counselors with PhDs in kittens, rainbows, and unicorns
      – Tenure-shielded professors with PhDs in Insignificance and Cultural Marxism
      – Rape Culture Imagineers with degrees in Womyn’s Cisgender Studies
      – Twofer, independent black women grads who “don’t need no man”
      – Lean-in practitioners who drive large corporations into the ground
      – Human Resources Gestapo enforcers who are real people persons
      …

      1. Here’s just one example of what you’re referring to: https://harass.stanford.edu/about/staff
        I can’t imagine how many thousands of “Sexual Harassment Policy Offices” or the like, have been established in universities, corporations and at all levels of government in recent generations, and concurrently the tens of thousands (or more) women employed by them.

      2. Hahahhahaa — another great post! Oh Art– you kill me. With your not knowing anything about, well, anything. Whew. How come no picture or credentials — I proudly show mine. Oh! it’s because you live in mom and dad’s basement (I know! it’s just “for now”) and you’re so important you don’t want anyone to ruin your professional reputation. Got it.

        1. SO… you (allegedly) attended/graduated “Hah-vahd”, but ate your way into obesity? Talk about society being short-changed. End Times indeed.

        2. hahahaha — Look at my picture, dummy. I’m hardly obese. Try again. This is way too easy.

    4. The irony is that Ivy League women most likely find richer husbands and can afford to stay home and raise children, while the women from less prestigious institutions likely have to work whether they like it or not.

      1. Wrong! 🙂 Have a great day though. Keep coming up with your random theories.

        1. Are you autistic? Do you have anything useful to say or do you just go around the internet going “beep boop beep”

        2. God, you’re dumb too. I love how none of you have the balls to use your real pictures. Yet, you have no problem calling me names. I’m using my real pic — yet I’m not the least bit fat, uggo or anything you proclaim me to be.

        3. I’m not surprised you use your real name and picture because you appear to be completely lacking in self-awareness.
          If you realized how unhinged your rants sound you would probably use an anonymous handle.

        4. Yawn, I’m not ashamed of myself – -as you are. I don’t regret nor lie about anything. Self-awareness? Do you comprehend anything you write? Pony up little man (or fat man) — who are you?

        6. She lack basic skills in reasoning and reading comprehension :
          “Overall, Hersch reports that 60 percent of women who graduated from our top schools are working full time, compared to 68 percent who made it through less prestigious institutions. Married women without children from top schools are 20 percentage points more likely to work full time than those with children; the difference for graduates of lesser schools is 13.5 points.”

        7. “Fat man”?
          Nice fat shaming language, feminist. Try repeating those insults on xoJane or jezebel.

        8. Dumb, dumb, and dumb.
          “She lack basic skills in reasoning and reading comprehension :”
          Try reading what you wrote before you post it. Genius.

    5. The irony is that Ivy League women most likely find richer husbands and can afford to stay home and raise children, while the women from less prestigious institutions likely have to work whether they like it or not.

    6. I think calling it immoral is taking it to quite an extreme. As long as you’re decently intelligent, college isn’t hard to get into. if a man wants to go to college he will, and no woman is going to take his place. I don’t know the statistics but I’m sure there are plenty of men who have quite their jobs, or don’t use their degrees. If fact most of the people I know in the professional world end up doing jobs that have little to do with their degree.

      1. Sure, sweetheart, I bet you know lots of male medical doctors and similar highly-trained professionals who “quite [sic] their jobs, or don’t use their degrees.” Hundreds, maybe thousands. They’re all just itching to drop it all to be stay-at-home dads or Eat, Pray, Love. Maybe they’ll hook up with a sugar momma, take a couple years off for paternity leave, gossip with their guy friends at Starbucks over lattes, form a Lean In bookclub. Shit happens Every! Day!
        (In the real world, male college admissions and graduation rates are dropping precipitously. Primary education in our country is oriented for female success and is clearly failing men. Your casual dismissal does not change this. “I don’t know the statistics…” Yeah, no shit.)

        1. Maybe this is more to blame on the men who are dropping out of college and high school than women graduating? Trust me, if you have the grades and willpower you can get into a university just fine. They will be more than willing to take your money. When it comes down to it, women are just more qualified these days.

        2. Those men have every right to not want to take part in all of this B.S. If our society as a whole is going to squeal with glee over women damn near forcing men to let go of the reins and soak up large amounts of jobs and occupations, demanding “liberation” from their perceived traditional roles while still expecting men to maintain theirs, then let them.
          Women wanted control and now they have it. Let them eat cake.

        4. If a man works hard he will get a good job. The real problem with our gender is people unable to take responsibility for their own lives and actions.

        5. Wrong, women are not better qualified; they are just better suited to dealing with the bs inherent in attending femcentric, femnazi dominated colleges.

        7. LOL. The reverse doesn’t exist amongst males. There is very few examples of ceos or doctors or guys who made it to top schools in top fields like law or finance ad just quit in their prime to be stay at home dads. This is rare and usually only occurs amongst older men in their 50s and 60s who want to enjoy their life before they get alzheimer or are shitting themself in a wheel chair and don’t know where they are. Ie. Mitt romney probably doesn’t work anymore but he is almost 70, frankly do you want to be working to the grave? I’d rather enjoy the last 10 years of my life.

        8. First time you ever got to call someone “sweetheart” huh? Good for you. Gnite sweetpea!

      2. This here is plain rubbish, Kelsey. I sat the GAMSAT in Australia (Graduate Australian Medical School Admissions Test) in 2009 and obtained a score of 65 (was equated to the 90th percentile, i.e. in the top 10%).
        But I was unsuccessful in the panel interview and was thus denied a place to study medicine. Later on that year I met this girl who was really bubbly and attractive, but a bit ditzy. I was shocked to find that she had gotten in to that same Medical program with a GAMSAT score of just 57 (which equated to ~55% percentile). She said yeah she hadn’t thought she’d be able to get in with that score, but the panel in the interview really liked her and so she got in.
        Now, she would just have finished her degree now, will she go on to have a long and successful career, will she repay the hundreds of thousands of dollars of cost to society it took to educate here with a decent return on investment? Its not impossible. But I tend to think, because of how attractive she is, and the type of personality she is, that its more likely she’ll find a rich Doctor to get herself married to, and stay at home living the privileged life.
        But the fact that SHE (or well maybe not her specifically, because I’m sure there were other less adept candidates than me who nevertheless succeeded in the interview due to their gender) took a Commonwealth Supported Place at Med School instead of ME, despite my FAR better aptitude, as demonstrated by the GAMSAT result, put an absolute lie to your assertion above. And that’s not even considering the true fact that society would have gotten a better return on investment out of me, because I’m a male, than it is likely to out of this chick.

        1. I agree with your post, but was it possible her grades were higher or do they pick by personality?

        2. I had an excellent GPA in my undergraduate degree, a very good GPA. She had a good GPA too though.

        4. No, I’ve moved on to better things now. Its a shame for society that they were deprived of a potentially very good Dr., and its sad for society that the money allocated for educating Doctors was wasted instead of being invested more productively; but for me personally, I’m quite happy about how it has all turned out and where I’m at in my life now days.

      3. So what’s the ducking point of getting a degree? There isn’t. I’m fairly certain the reason fewer men attend college is because they’re smart enough to recognize it for what it is–a SCAM. Unless you plan on practicing rocket science or something like that, college is completely useless. Any trained monkey can do 90% of the jobs out there

    7. Also, no one has mentioned the fact that women don’t marry down. I read the other day that 1/3 of women with a college education aren’t going to be able to find college educated mates. And these women won’t marry non-college educated males.
      The bottom line is that, if every job in this country was held by men, those men would still marry women, feed them, house them, etc. If every job in this country was held by women? Marriage would truly be over, and men would starve. Women don’t want a man “leeching” off of them. Whereas men, on the other hand, don’t really mind the other way around.

      1. Great point, Travis. It’s confirmed when people get married and his money is “theirs” while her is “hers.” Women aren’t about to supporting any man — they even get the gov’t to do it when they have kids.

        1. I don’t think men like the idea of being supported either, even if women were willing to do so – maybe temporarily during a bad run of luck but not forever. Something about being supported by a woman kills off any attraction he may have for her. Maybe it is reprising the mother-son role for him, in addition to the emasculation of losing control and not being able to call the shots anymore.

      2. Good point. And it shows that, on the whole, men are much more benevolent then women are. Men are much more willing to share the fruits of their labor with women and children than women are.
        I wonder if these facts will ever reach the consciousness of the mainstream again. I say again, because at one time, everyone knew these things to be true.

      3. “I read the other day that 1/3 of women with a college education aren’t
        going to be able to find college educated mates. And these women won’t
        marry non-college educated males.”… “Women don’t want a man “leeching” off of them. Whereas men, on the other hand, don’t really mind the other way around.” Where do you get these facts? Please post. 1/3 huh? I guess 2/3 of us are doing something right. Well, actually that’s not the truth either. My guy dropped out of college and has a successful company he started up 7 years ago. There goes those stats! I didn’t even know that about him at the time — I just thought he was hot! Oh — and I have a math degree. How ’bout them apples?

        1. just like a woman; equating everything to her own solipsistic, anecdotal, experience as if her life alone is the rule that proves the norm.

        2. Is that all you have? Good work with the thesaurus. Hahaha. I just proved you wrong, that is all. Should I have stayed silent like a good women?

        3. No, you should have realised anecdotal evidence is worthless when it comes to general statements, like a smart person.

        5. Dear Feminist Troll:
          While you claim to have a math degree (hmmm…), you lack even the basic skill of using using that oh-so confusing website called Google. I will show a little Christian charity to you because I do not blame you for your naturally-addled brain.
          “The next chart shows the percent by which college-educated women outnumber men in the 15 largest American metro areas. […] The median gap among all 102 metro areas I considered was 29.7 percent.”
          Weissman, J. (2013, February 15). The Worst Cities for College-Educated Women Trying to Find a Decent Date. The Atlantic. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/the-worst-cities-for-college-educated-women-trying-to-find-a-decent-date/273158/
          Given current trends in student demographics and the college applicant base, this number is slated to rise significantly in the future.
          Sincerely,
          Your Better

      4. I wouldn’t mind being with a guy with lower income, as long as he was charismatic, intelligent and a hard worker. I think as long as the gap in your incomes isn’t too huge, it’s generally not a big deal.

    8. I don’t see anything immoral with equal opportunity at the university level. If you were to study the issue more closely, it has to do with more guys dropping out of high school and college and is not necessarily an issue of competition. If you are willing to take the risk, any guy can get a college degree and can find a university that will take their money.

      1. Men are dropping out because they are not welcome in academia. Even with increasingly widespread recognition of the declining ROI of higher education, that’s what it really boils down to.
        Think about what it’s like for the average kid going to school these days: male role models– teachers, authority figures, potential mentors– are few and far between (due to discriminatory hiring practices and a particularly male-hostile workplace milieu in our schools), rampant misuse of psychotrophic medications to “correct” normal, but sometimes challenging, juvenile male behaviors, draconian zero-tolerance policies for normal play and socialization (if free, self-directed play is even permitted anymore), classes often geared exclusively for female interests, documented grading bias in (predominantly) woman teachers, and so on and so on.
        If our protagonist manages to find “a university that will take [his] money,” he faces a whole new set of challenges. Now he’s privilieged to mortgage his uncertain financial future for: feminist brainwashing through mandatory sexual harassment workshops, Title IX star chambers, sexist and racist general curriculum coursework, upcoming sex quota restrictions on admission into STEM majors, and on and on and on.
        The situation is FUBAR. And no one cares. In fact, the “end of men” in education is– perversely– celebrated by politicians, pundits… and guys like you.
        For young men, the glimmer of hope in all of this is online self-education and entrepreneurism. That’s their future, but it can be a tough, hardscrabble path to follow. I’m sure a nice communications major HR sinecure would be far less stressful. But thems the breaks, boyo.
        Thankfully, the ancien regime is beginning to creak and, soon, will collapse under its own weight. I, for one, can’t wait to listen in on all the blustery feminist semiotics debates behind the counter at Starbucks. “Grande espresso, Professor. Thanks.”

        1. Really? I welcome you to come to my school any day. You get your ass here. I will make sure you get treated equally. Stop whining like a little bitch, get a new bra, get some brunch and then tell me about the real world.

    10. I know a couple that actually lives out the reverse: the husband is a stay at home dad for the children, while the wife has a long-term professional career. And it works fine.
      Personally I don’t hate kids, but I’ve never wanted them, and the idea of marriage has never sounded great. I would rather slave away at a meaningful career that will benefit society, if it gives me fulfillment without having to be stuck as a domestic housewife/mom. To each their own.

  16. You didn’t mention the preferential admissions. Half the starting class at elite technical universities like Cal Tech and Harvey Mudd are women. Does anyone seriously believe that reflects the qualified applicant pool? No, thousands of men are being denied entry to prestigious programs in favor of less qualified women.

  17. The cure to this “problem” is simple: stop financing education with tax money. Let everybody that deseris to be educated pay for him- herself. Socialized education has brought nothing but worthless “diploma’s” (no real knowledge) and inflated female ego’s. Using education as an emancipation vehicle for women is a testimony to short sightedness. Wasting a female’s prime years on a BS “education” (HRM, English, Psych etc.) or an education with worth (medicine etc.) but not used for anything productive.

  18. Actually this is again a silver lining for us. Men in their early twenties are often incapable of taking the blue pill. They are very vulnerable to social pressures. As men get older they get more independent-minded. That is why in the past society tried to pressure men to get married, have children, and get a mortgage early on before they could get old enough to wonder if that was the right thing to do. Now young men don’t have that choice and have to put many years of work in before they can get their careers in place to even make that possible.
    If I had had a good paying job when I graduated at age of 24 I probably would have got a nice apartment, saved some money, and started looking for a woman to start a family with as I had been taught to do. However, I have been shuffled around between temp jobs with fairly long stints of unemployment and my current one is a graveyard shift job which gave me lots of time alone on my days off to surf the internet. That is how I found the manophere/red pill.
    So don’t fret, REJOICE. A man making 30k per year and living in a bachelor pad is happier than a man making 60k per year and coming home to a moody wife. Turn that frown upside down ROK. Focus on the positive.

    1. yeah… you said it…. RoK and others are doing the sex / social educating that boys miss out on… and girls come instinctively programmed with….

    2. yeah… you said it…. RoK and others are doing the sex / social educating that boys miss out on… and girls come instinctively programmed with….

    3. agree 100%. You can’t put a price on freedom. There are many, many miserable American men out there who work only to pay bills. They go from work, to home, and back to work again. They eat crap at home, they eat crap at work. They don’t exercise. Before they realize it, they’re 40 years old, 30lbs over-weight, have ED, oh yea, and deep in debt. No thanks.

      1. hahahahaa you slay me with your delusional arguments. argumentum ad ignorantiam. Go on with your bad self.

    4. agree 100%. You can’t put a price on freedom. There are many, many miserable American men out there who work only to pay bills. They go from work, to home, and back to work again. They eat crap at home, they eat crap at work. They don’t exercise. Before they realize it, they’re 40 years old, 30lbs over-weight, have ED, oh yea, and deep in debt. No thanks.

    5. Exactly :
      – Choose a nice but small (thus, inexpensive) appartment, no need for bigger, you live alone).
      – You can come back home and relax, or go out. In both cases there’s no bitchy wife waiting.
      – If you get bored with a woman, replace her. Or do a rotation.
      – Use your money as you want (buy toys, retire or invest it) instead of using it for your wife’s wants.
      – Don’t lose everything you owned in a divorce.
      It is easy to get how you’d be happier at 30k with the redpill than at 60k+ without it.
      The best being 60k+ with it of course.

      1. I was like “Hey, these people are making good points,” but then you had to go into saying stuff like “b****y wife waiting” (as if that’s the only option for married life) and replacing women. Marry someone because you love them, not because you just got into a dating relationship for long enough and didn’t explode. Well, I suppose some people aren’t even that cautious.
        P.S. – I have a wife who hasn’t had a full time job since we started raising kids. In any case, it’s the exact fact that I DO have a wife that causes me to see statements like “If you get bored with a woman, replace her,” as so…sad. Tragic, even.

        1. “but then you had to go into saying stuff like “b****y wife waiting” (as if that’s the only option for married life) and replacing women.”
          – Don’t tell me you never wished you could get back home and relax the evening, without someone telling you every thought she “stored” during the day.
          – Don’t tell me you never wished you could go where you want whenever you want, without having to tell anybody (before or after) about your plans.
          – Don’t tell me you never wished you could make every decision in your life (from the color of your couch to the city you live in) without having to consult anyone but yourself.
          I have a very low tolerance for people preventing me from living exactly as I want. Yours seem higher and it is good for you since your married. But trust me living on your terms is very enjoyable.

        2. APPEAL TO IGNORANCE: (argumentum ad ignorantiam) attempts to use an
          opponent’s inability to disprove a conclusion as proof of the validity of the
          conclusion, i.e. “You can’t prove I’m wrong, so I must be right.”
          example: We can safely conclude that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy,
          because thus far no one has been able to prove that there is not.

        3. Penguin, some people just enjoy being married. Just because its something you don’t want doesn’t mean you should push your views on them.
          I’m as anti-marriage as the next red piller, but its almost getting to the point where we are pushing anti marriage almost as hard as mainstream society pushes marriage on uninterested men.

        4. “Just because its something you don’t want doesn’t mean you should push your views on them.”
          Where did I? I just gave the benefits of being single, I’m still far from “pushing my views”.

      2. You can come back home and relax, or go out. In both cases there’s no bitchy wife waiting.
        False dilemma.
        Either 1+1=4 or 1+1=12.
        It is not the case that 1+1=4.
        Therefore 1+1=12.
        My God this is easy

    7. Great post, this is the kind of attitude men in their 20s can have. A bright future awaits those that don’t tie themselves down with the drudgery of marriage and the slavery of children.

        2. Because it affects the economy and by direct effect, YOU.
          The entire purpose of this article is to point out economic problems, is it not?

        3. It affects economic pyramid schemes, normal economics does not require more and more people until the earth is completely overcrowded.
          That is nonsense.

    8. This is why it’s still pushed for men to “man up” and wife up women, b/c men can live like Spartans and be more than happy, no need to be a mindless consumer. The Consumer economy is really the female economy. Most the useless crap in any household was either bought by the woman or was what the woman asked/told her husband to buy. A male economy would have all of about 14 products. It’s also what drives the debt economy. The wife pushing for a new car, a bigger house, etc. Just when financial freedom is in sight, they can’t help but push further into debt. It’s just my theory, but I think that a lot of the housing bubble was female driven. From my experience, most men could live in a house the size of a 10×10 jail cell.

      1. Bonecracker said it best: whenever someone makes a point to you leading the sentence with a “A real man…..”
        Expect an attempt to manipulate you.

        1. “being a good person” is another way. I don’t even enjoy talking to many people anymore b/c the bullshit is very obvious to me now and I can break down most human communication/interaction to the base motives.

        2. True. A real man doesn´t give a shit what a ¨real¨ man is supposed to do esp. if it comes from the mouth of a female.

  19. Women aren’t really dominating men in the classroom. If you examine the distribution of degrees and control for education, the soft sciences, and psychology there really isn’t an imbalance – it’s simply women pursuing, by and large, a less stressful, more rewarding careers (to be subsidized, of course, via her hypergamy).
    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/S4VjUpQKPhI/AAAAAAAAM2g/TS2nMuquIts/s1600-h/degrees.jpg
    On the other hand, you make a decent point. Many women who practice in one of the professions are soon disillusioned by the hard work, competition, long hours, dedication, and stress of the work — they’re shocked at the lack of glamour. When they hit their 30s women begin to drop out in large numbers – electing to be stay at home moms or electing part time work (subsidized by a well earning nest helper). It’s a waste of an education and, lets not forget, these career drop outs had once occupied a classroom seat that would have otherwise gone to a man the school rejected.

    1. yes… i have seen many women do this… i call it the playing the uterus card… they didn’t get the easy success, glamor and recognition they expected, or when they got there they found it was way more hard work than they imagined…
      so rather than admit the fact that they can’t hack it in a demanding male career… they get pregnant and use that as an excuse and a fall back….
      what the statistics don’t show is how many women past the age of 35, that drop out to have kids, weren’t really cutting it in their career in the first place. It’s one thing to talk about educating women and them voluntarily dropping out to have babies… it’s another altogether when they play the uterus card and cop out, because they aren’t that good and or don’t like the hard work a career demands.
      Not only have they been educated for no reason, but there was no point in educating them in the first place because as they aged they weren’t going to be able to keep up the pace anyway.
      You’ve taken a scooter and tried to drive a formula one race with it… of course it craps out after a couple of laps… uterus card or not.

    2. Women pull this type of thing all the time in the military. A common tactic among female armed forces personnel is to get pregnant to avoid deployment to dangerous areas like Iraq and Afghanistan.
      I worked on helicopter hydraulics; a job that can be very physically demanding and dirty. You also aren’t in the comfort of a hangar, but out in the elements. A female Marine who also worked on hydraulics once used the excuse that she was trying to get pregnant and therefore had to avoid contact with any type of mechanical “fluids”. It just so happened to be raining and very cold that day. See was later reassigned to a desk job because she was dead weight in the maintenance shop; a warm body taking up space that a useful male could have occupied.

      1. When the ban was lifted on women in combat, I was startled by the complete lack of celebration by feminists. If feminists really want equality, they would have celebrated this as an advancement toward real equality.

        1. I guess you don’t pay attention to major news outlets. They looked to be celebrating to me, if not upset that more was not achieved. Meh, if they want to go into a combat zone so be it. I trust officers to be able to determine whether or not a candidate is suitable for a particular mission.
          http://www.stripes.com/news/supporters-critics-open-fire-on-women-in-combat-1.226563
          http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/20/21553229-women-in-combat-three-female-marines-march-into-history-by-completing-infantry-training

      2. @theoverwatch:disqus
        Those women should be discharged immediately. And never allowed to come back.

    3. Exactly, “hard work, competition, long hours, dedication, and stress of the work” I’m sure it plays a bigger role than the want to have children.

      1. It gets better. When they do drop out, our society has fixed the false belief that women are actually sacrificing for not working!!!!!!! It’s ingenious. This gives her tremendous power in domestic negotiations — the feeling is he owes her because she is sacrificing by not working. And, if they get divorced, he will owe her alimony because, the myth goes, she sacrificed by not working. lol
        How did they pull this off?

        2. The usual perps also routinely trot out the “true value for women’s unpaid work”, which is about triple what any average man can earn for his family.

        3. So she’s taking advantage of you if she doesn’t work or she’s taking advantage of the system if she does. Can she do ANYTHING right?

        4. Where did I write women take advantage of a system by being working? Where did I write she’s taking advantage of me is she doesn’t? If a couple agrees she will drop out of the work force, that’s a private agreement between them. But, if she construes her dropping out as a sacrifice for which he owes her, that’s fraudulent. It’s not a sacrifice to pursue your biology while having another support you.

      1. Which of my points is contradicted by that 27 page study?
        I don’t have time to read it all. Sorry.

        1. “When they hit their 30s women begin to drop out in large numbers – electing to be stay at home moms or electing part time work (subsidized by a well earning nest helper).”
          Not so, that particular age group is just as involved, and at times more so, than their younger counterparts. Numbers/percentage wise. So say the findings, anyway. Yes there are women in their 30s that stop working after having children, but the percentage of women at work in that age group is just as large and prevalent.

        2. First, your stats cover all of labor. This RoK article applies to educated women and my post addressed professionals and the hard and stressful work that accompanies a professional career.
          Thus: “Fifty percent of the undergraduate class of 2003 at Yale was female; this year’s graduating class at Berkeley Law School was 63 percent women; Harvard was 46 percent; Columbia was 51. Nearly 47 percent of medical students are women, as are 50percent of undergraduate business majors (though, interestingly, about 30 percent of M.B.A. candidates). They are recruited by top firms in all fields. They start strong out of the gate.
          And then, suddenly, they stop. Despite all those women graduating from law school, they comprise only 16 percent of partners in law firms. Although men and women enter corporate training programs in equal numbers, just 16 percent of corporate officers are women, and only eight companies in the Fortune 500 have female C.E.O.’s. Of 435 members of the House of Representatives, 62 are women; there are 14 women in the 100-member Senate.”
          http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/11/magazine/the-opt-out-revolution.html
          Another article on highly educated women opting out
          http://www.forbes.com/sites/meghancasserly/2012/02/28/why-is-opting-out-a-bad-word-for-women/
          “In the United States, mothers at the top of the educational ladder are disproportionally opting out, according to a new paper by Joni Hersch, a professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee.”
          http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20130619-how-to-keep-moms-in-the-workforce
          “Sixty percent of women who have a bachelor’s degree from prestigious institutions such as MIT and Harvard work full time, according to a study from Vanderbilt University.”
          http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2013/05/26/women-graduates-elite-colleges-more-likely-opt-out-workforce/wQAmXRV9WMWtFKph26ORBM/story.html
          http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/04/17/Why-Women-Are-Leaving-the-Workforce-in-Record-Numbers

        3. And you’re using data that mostly covers elite schools, of which only a very small percentage of individuals attend. It is not reflective upon the larger population which attends traditional 4 year institutions. To quote one article you referenced:
          “Most tend to identify two categories of workplace drop-outs: the first includes young mothers who are not highly educated and therefore not likely to earn enough to pay for childcare. Economically, these women are better off staying home.
          The second (and more problematic) group consists of highly educated women who drop out (or “opt-out”) when they have children, even though they have the skills and income necessary to hire childcare.”
          Either not educated enough or legitimate opt-out. It’s not black and white. A complex problem for a complex society.

        4. It’s very complex, I’ll agree. However, as my article stated:
          “Despite all those women graduating from law school, they comprise only 16 percent of partners in law firms. Although men and women enter corporate training programs in equal numbers, just 16 percent of corporate officers are women, and only eight companies in the Fortune 500 have female C.E.O.’s. Of 435 members of the House of Representatives, 62 are women; there are 14 women in the 100-member Senate.”

  20. Yea, I think the average female is more intelligent than the average male. I think most men are suckers/idiots/pussies and deserve to be manipulated and controlled by more intelligent women. That being said, the top 1-5% of a society will naturally be male dominated since the variance of the distribution is higher for men even though the mean is relatively the same. If the top 5% are male dominated, it necessarily means that the average woman is much more intelligent than the average male given that those two aren’t a part of the top 1-5%.
    If I’m correct, I believe the median income for a woman below the age of 35 is higher than the median income of a man before the age of 35. This too should be of no surprise since most men are, for lack of a better word, retards/pussies.

    1. it’s not that men are more stupid. i know women with MBAs that can’t find the cornershop without a GPS installed….
      It’s that the female has a natural predatory and manipulative instinct and is well aware of her child birthing capabilities from a very young age… at 18 months girls are already asking for dolls and prams !!!.. They know what is going on….
      Whereas boys play with guns and toys and enjoy themselves… that doesn’t make them stupid, it just makes them very unaware of what is going to happen to them when those balls start demanding some where to shoot into… and girlfriend is 10-15 years ahead in terms of understanding the social mechanics of sex, kids and family….
      that same predatory instinct in universities and middle management is what propels women forwards and enables them to ‘use’ men as something to stand on…. HOWEVER.. like you say, the top 5-10% will always be male since they are better equipped for rational thinking, risk taking and so on that builds the technology, business environment, logistics, planning and so forth.
      Men are not stupid but a large amount of them are built to be part of a system that is controlled from the top… think army or corporation…. women are more manipulative, so they can quite easily corner a man inside a marriage with kids.

      1. Being intelligent means not being a sucker. If most men are suckers that get caught up with stupid ways of thought unfit for the modern world, they are better controlled than they otherwise would be by themselves. They are simply less dangerous when controlled/manipulated.
        Have you ever gotten into an argument with 4 or 5 guys when you’re right and they’re clearly wrong? They become more extreme and dangerous. Groups of men like that need to be controlled.

        2. Yea…I’m not a “femicunt”. I’m merely pointing out logically equivalent statements.
          I sir, am an elitist. I believe that the best and brightest should run society since 95% of people are idiots (including females). So the world should be run by the top 5%, most of whom will be male. I don’t know why you’d want to give betas control over society; how does that end well?

    2. You think a lot. Maybe less thinking more reading? Men irrespective of location consistently score higher on IQ (no a lot more on average but still). That being said, males raised by single moms have on average lower IQ’s. Given that, males by and large inherit their intelligence from their mother. Dumb son thus equals dumb mom i.e. a lot of dumb males suggests a lot of dumb females a generation prior.

      1. You’re completely wrong. The mean IQ of men and women are, for all practical purposes, the same. The variance for the male distribution is much larger (i.e. the tails are fatter). The mean IQ for a male is around 3 points larger than the female IQ, but the variance for the males is much, much larger. If you account for the top 5-10%, the bottom portion of women must be more intelligent. It’s a mathematical equivalent as saying the top 1-5% are male dominated (which is obviously the case). I’ve actually seen studies where the mean for females was significantly higher.
        Also, IQ is largely genetic, as you duly point out. However, that wasn’t a part of my initial argument.

  21. Here is a personal story.
    Both of my sisters got high end degrees, paid for by mom and dad. 10 years later both quit their jobs, one sister got married and decided she wanted to bake cookies, another got “chronic pain syndrome” and now lives on the government dole.
    I was the only son; guess what I got for college? Nothing. My parents decided that they wanted to spend the money on themselves. So I had to work like a dog to scratch my way into a lesser college. Couldn’t get a scholarship because yes, I was male.
    25 years later I’m still slaving away trying to raise a couple kids on a dramatically lesser salary compared to my peers. The lack of a good school makes a huge difference.
    My parents keep whining about the fact their grandkids’s don’t have better living conditions. Fuck you mom and dad, you fucking morons.

    1. If my parents would have done this to me, I would have told them to go screw themselves and never look back. This is seriously messed up. Let me guess:
      1. fat dominant mother
      2. pussy whipped passive father
      3. Overly Christian

    2. Why did you have two offspring you couldn’t afford?
      Avg cost of raising an offspring to maturity 18 = $250,000
      Could have invested or gotten your graduate or PHD with that money.
      Should have used birth control or had an abortion. We need more stem cells for research!

      1. “Why did you have two offspring you couldn’t afford? Should have used birth control or had an abortion.”

        Where did he say he chose to have kids? The woman could have just decided by herself that it was time to have kids, and gone off of the pill without telling him. It happened to me.
        Also since when can men use birth control, or have abortions?

    3. So what? You sound like a feminist. My parents cut-off all of their children (myself and my 4 siblings) at 18 so we all went heavily into debt attending college. We also went into fields that pay and justify going into debt like Economics, Computer Science, or medical fields. And none of us were dumb enough to have children before being established in our careers and having all our debt paid off. Thank you mom and dad, for teaching me independence.

  22. Vox Day covers this topic extensively on Alpha Game and Vox Populi; more is always better. For another take on the same topic, here’s a great article from the Daily Caller. Notice how the man who writes it is absolutely skewered in the comments (something you are sure to be used to by now) even though he goes to great lengths to qualify that motherhood and household management are critical and important tasks for the family:
    http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/23/godfather-of-hipsterdom-feminism-makes-women-miserable/
    ‘Godfather of Hipsterdom’ Gavin McInnes: Feminism makes women miserable

  23. In the new socialist order “return on investment” certainly isn’t a concern, and in any case women are far more suited to government jobs than men. A male doctor might perform better, but will demand that the job is done right, and he has to be paid what he’s worth; for the same money you can hire 4 part-time lady doctors, and they’ll overlook the half-assed Obamacare they inflict on people since they’re only concerned with the work/life balance they are entitled to

    1. Job security and benefits (Squee!) who cares if the patient dies? (They are “only following orders” without any personal responsibility like folk tried at Nuremberg, you know.)

    1. Google is owned by Guggenheim family from the very beggining of that company. Said family and their business partners are some of most staunch financial supporters of third-wave feminism. Such a gesture is not surprise.
      Sorry for my bad english.
      All the best

  25. Whatever happened to finishing school ?
    Seems like a sweet deal. They teach you the blueprint to succeed in ways unique to your biology. Classical education which actually enhances your real intellect plus feminine grace and charm.
    Now college is simply a worker bee prep school. Androgynous at best, pushing feminine cultural socialism at worst. It’s no surprise the real elite guys such as Gates, Jobs, Dell, Branson saw it for what It was and dropped out and it’s only gotten worse much worse since when they were in school.
    We have the internet now. All the information you ever need is out there. Whatever you want you can search it out and find a way to fix it. College is paying 50 – 100 k simply for the privilege of being owned by a corporation and a bank. Hell that’s for the more practical ones, the dumb ones pay that money to be a pauper working in a coffee shop with worthless degrees when they could have gotten the exact same information and knowledge for free without the social Marxist indoctrination.

  27. Fully half of all Women Doctors will be out of medicine or working part time within 10 years of graduation.
    Half.
    Whenever you hear the phrase “Doctor shortage,” understand that this is caused by women doctors leaving the profession early.
    Interestingly, the male number of early burnout increasing, and the prime reason for this is the extra shifts and night shifts men have to do because women aren’t working.
    The solution to the doctor shortage is to fix burnout. Identify women who wolnt leave early and admit them and only them. The doctor shortage cannot be fixed by training more doctors. There are only so many available patients to train on.
    Affirmative Action for women in medical school is beyond crazy. Why admit under qualified people, if, statistically, they aren’t going to work at the job they are trained for.
    It’s only a matter of time before the government denies patients the right to see a doctor for many maladies, so that the available doctors can be used elsewhere while nurses treat patients. People will die. Why should anybody have to die for this?

    1. Let us not forget that the UK, because so many women leave medicine, have been out stealing doctors from places like pakistan, India, and african countries that speak english.
      The result? Women and children in those countries are undeserved by doctors.
      It is no exaggeration that in order to deliver on the “entitlement” of white feminist british women to TRAIN as doctors but not actually BE doctors women and children in poor countries DIE from lack of medical attention by doctors they paid to train.
      But that’s ok because they are only black and dark skinned women and children and white skinned women do not care about women and children who have dark skin. White british women doctors are racist and sexist against dark skinned women to the extent they do not care when they are the cause of their DEATH.
      I have been pointing this out for about five years now….nice to see other men are starting to notice.

  28. This article seems to fall a little short of the importance and urgency to actually go as far as to ban women from certain professions. To let women fill the limited and sought after spots in medical schools simply cuts out the much needed opportunity to train doctors that are male.

  29. Feminists professors from my undergrad college continue to promote this concept of “gender justice” and one article complained about not being to get men into roles traditionally held by women, such as homemaker and nanny. Feminists cannot seem to understand that not only will they require a complete matriarchy instead of equality to achieve their ideas, but that a matriarchy is practical impossibility.

  31. all this website does is whine about how white men are ‘oppressed’ like get your head out of your wet asshole you’re not even close to being opressed

    1. (Poster doesn’t realize the author is a black man. Is there, perhaps, some implicit racism in there? Oh, irony.)

    2. “you’re not even close to being opressed”
      98% of war dead are men.
      93% of workplace dead are men.
      You do not get much more “oppressed” than dead.
      Want to see REAL oppression? One word.
      Conscription.
      Women have been the most pampered and protected animal on the face of this planet for 5,000 years if not longer.
      Men have been the oppressed people since the first “nuclear family”.
      Marriage is slavery and oppression for MEN..not women. And many of us men who are post-married know it.

      1. Most of the war dead are men because women do not make the majority of military bodies, as they are discouraged or prevented from joining and even if they did joing getting a combat role was difficult or impossible. You can’t prevent women from doing certain things and them blame them for not doing it!

  32. ROK is on a roll right now with these hard-hitting articles that spit in the face of modern convention. Expect larger mainstream media entities to pick up on articles like this one. Especially with all the attention ROK has gotten the past week.
    Another thing…I haven’t heard or thought about the return on investment argument before. But it make sense when you think about previous posts on how women are cheaper, lazier, and expect better wages without putting in the work.

    2. I think you’re talking about the millennial generation here, not necessarily women. Women in the workplace actually put in more hours than their male counterparts, with the same relative job responsibilities and titles, and still earn less than them. They’re also less aggressive when it comes to seeking compensation and are often looked over when promotions become available even though recent findings discovered they actually make better leaders within organizations (better profits/productivity), reasons as to this are debatable though.

  33. “Society” is an idea people use to describe a group of people. The idea that “Society” invests in a person or group and reaps a return on “its” investment fails.
    This is the classic ‘we are taxed too much’ problem and instead of being angry about being taxed, the author gets ‘angry’ at one of the recipients of ‘taxpayer’ funds. He says “women do not return as much as men in these professions, to society.”
    No need to compare the ROI of anyone relative to society. The solution is to stop using society as an investor. Use a real group of people instead. Use parents, students, professors, future customers, instead.

  34. I don’t want kids. Should I still plan on derailing my education so that a man can have my job, or can I rest happy knowing that this article is not directed toward me?

    3. Unfortunately a woman’s word now isn’t worth a penny but if you are sterile or get tunes tied and can legally prove it then you’re good for work.
      It’s called being a grown up, you go to school to be a doctor get educated be like men doctors who are adults and don’t bail their patients because kids come into the family.
      Women treat work as a temporary thing but demand respect as a part time player in a full time men’s world

  35. No need to ban women. Just say that if you do a degree that is heavily government-subsidized, you have to:
    a) work a certain number of years/hours to give back to society
    or
    b) pay a financial penalty to get out of that obligation
    This will help keep students spots available for people who are truly interested in pursuing the career.

    1. Sounds great but no way would out government hold a woman responsible for that and make tax payers would foot the bill.
      Think about it, a single mom refuses to pay back community debt or in the rare case she has to pay child support all they get from a judge is a slap on the wrist but a father does it? Forget it, his ass is thrown in jail until he snaps in line and gets with the program.
      Here’s what every man should do we all unite. Don’t ever select a female doctor for any reason. Female doctors have to have make patients to survive so cut them at the knees where it hurts.

  37. Solution: educated women should not have children so they don’t have to drop out of their socially important jobs

    1. But, but, but they can do it all!!!!
      (FYI: Men have never been able to do it all because it’s not humanly possible)

  38. I put my ex through uni and helped her along to get her job at IBM.
    And what did she do? When she had kids she refused to go to work.
    In divorce she said “It is your fault I did not go back to work. You should have MADE ME go back to work.”
    Really? Made you? How?
    Women in the workplace are largely responsible for the collapse of western economies.
    Who would have thought almost doubling the workforce in 40 years would depress salaries? No one could EVER have seen that one coming, right? Duh!?

    1. “Women in the workplace are largely responsible for the collapse of western economies.”
      You make me laugh. See Germany. They’re doing just dandy.

      1. Louisa,
        I live in Germany. And women in Germany are nothing like women in the west.
        Germany is not a “western” economy. Germany is not a “western” culture. Living in Germany is like living on a different planet. And that, in a very major part, is why they are doing well economically.
        Maybe the next time you want to try and mock someone by saying “you make me laugh, see Germany” you might want to find out if they actually LIVE THERE in the first place! LOL!!
        My…didn’t you just make yourself look stupid.

        1. Germany is a Western country, Western culture, Western economy, Western all and everything. Stop warping geography with your ideological stands.

        2. Jesus Christ, open a geography book, Germany IS part of Western Europe and a Western culture in the global stage. I’m surprised that someone who claims to live abroad is so uneducated about the world. Living in a particular region does not an intelligent person make. Thank God you’re living there, wouldn’t want you spreading your genes here.

        3. It’s true Germany is part of the West geopolitically speaking, but as someone who has lived there recently (until 2012) I can ascertain the disfunction you observe in the West (Anglosphere) is far less intoxicating in Germany. By the way even as we speak, Germany is a dying nation as is the rest of the West.

        4. “Jesus Christ, open a geography book, Germany IS part of Western Europe and a Western culture in the global stage. ”
          Sweetie. I live in Germany. It is not western culture. Not even close. And as far as Geography goes? Germany is in central europe, not western europe.
          Comment like yours are why I do not bother talking to women in the west. You refuse to listen to facts.

        5. Germany belongs to both if you bother doing any actual reading. AGAIN, open a goddamn book. Calling the sky green doesn’t make it so. It is still part of the Western political realm. Others in the thread have also confirmed this: see below.
          I’m not bothering with you anymore, clearly speaking to someone who values the appearance of truth over the reality of fact.

        6. “AGAIN, open a goddamn book. ”
          Sweetie. I do not need to “open a book” to learn about the culture of germans. I have been here on and off for 7 years now.
          German people are wonderful people. They actually show men the respect they have earned across their lifetime.
          No person living in Germany would ever dis-respect me like you have done in your comments. That’s why I live here and not among people like yourself. You, and people like you, are simply not very nice people and I do not wish to live among you. Since I have a choice. I don’t.

      2. Louisa, you are such a shameless alpha male attention whore, it’s not even funny.
        Why don’t you just come out and say directly what you really want?
        You want a massive hard cock to fuck.
        “The only cure for a woman’s feminism is a good hard alpha male enjoyable fuck.” – Hugh Hefner, 1974 november issue

        1. She’s not like to get it here, all I see are men that have become embittered by the women they wanted but could never get.

        1. She meant Germany currently has one of the strongest economies in the Union while also being one of the most balanced when it comes to men and women in the workplace. They pay grades are also pretty close, much less than the disparity we see here in America. Germany serves as the perfect example of an economy that thrives even when men and women are treated equally in the workforce.
          They are perhaps superhuman in the fact that they have transformed themselves from one of the most reprehensible nations (Nazi Germany) into one of the most accepting and prosperous. Their stance against racism is also borderline vicious, legally speaking, to the partial detriment of free speech.

      4. “Louisa Valentín, Parsippany, NJ”
        Your profile says you come from New Jersey. Parsippany. Not the most salubrious parts of New Jersey, right?
        In case you do not know? I worked for the Bergen Record in Hackensack in 2001/2. So I know New Jersey pretty well. And I know US women pretty well.
        You could learn a lot from your sisters who live in Germany Lousia. Not least of which is to show men the respect they have earned. Women in Germany are great people and I even quote two of my favs in my books. Both these women come from eastern european and work their fingers to the bone to make their livings.
        My fav#1 has worked in Hungary and Germany most of the last 12 years sending every penny home she earns to pay for her mother, son, brother and his wife in the Ukraine. She would show you a think or two about hard work, love, sacrifice, honour, honesty, integrity…all things you western women have no idea about.
        So when you talk about how well the german economy is doing? Just remember? That many of the women who work in it work very hard, work long hours, are far from their loves ones, and have quite a harsh existence themselves.
        Western women tell me “you just like eastern european women because they are desperate and compliant and easy to control” and things like that. Roosh and ANY man who has dated eastern european women women will tell you that even if these women are not well off financially, there is nothing easy to “control” about them and they are not “desperate”. Not the majority by far.
        Quite the opposite. They usually are very strong willed, very hard working, do not take any nonsense from anyone and are proud of their culture and heritage. They have backbone and spirit but in a civilised and feminine way.
        And far from being “desperate”? I told my fav#1 years ago that she could leave her job any day she wanted if she would choose to be with me. She said no because she wanted more children and we split on that point. That was in 2010. Now she has given up hope of more children? I asked her the question again earlier this year. We have remained great friends as she searched for her prospective husband these last 3 years. She is the only woman who calls me for my birthday and christmas…we catch up when we can.
        So when I put the question to her again now she has given up on more children I thought she might say yes. But she didn’t. She finally decided that for all the benefits being with me would offer she would say no because she did not love me. Gee…such a “gold digger”, eh? She actually said “You could give me a million euros tomorrow and ask me to marry you and I would say no.”
        We had a long talk that day. She said as much as she enjoyed our time and as much as she had hoped to fall in love with me and have children some years ago…..she knew in her heart that I was not the man for her and nothing I could offer her would change her mind.
        She openly admits that I am the best man she has ever met and admits that she wishes love would have come. A part of spending time together was to see if love would come…..but it didn’t. And since we have known each other for 6 years she knows love will not come to her for me.
        And get this…she was VERY sorry and apologetic to deliver that message…..she knew it would sting because she knows what a great man I am. She knows what I am doing.
        Talk about a woman who knows her own mind and refuses to take advantage of a man. I would stack this woman up against any other woman in the world for honesty, honour, integrity, work ethic, love, caring, kindness….you name it. She would come out the hands down winning.
        What a shame so few women are like that today….really, just what a shame.

        1. Hungary, Germany and
          Ukraine are in the West. They’re all Western countries. You should say “anglosphere women” when referring to USA/UK females.

        2. So even though Germany is one of the most “progressive” nations when it comes to employing women and compensation, and they sport a relatively strong economy serving as a model to the countries around it, you discount their example because one woman regretted her decisions? Your logic leaves much to be desired, but then again your ideology made that pretty clear from the start.

  39. In case anyone has missed this….Berns take on a woman chemist…..not far from woman doctor all in all.

  40. Very well-written piece. Universities are turning out so many female graduates now that there is no stopping the fed. The pigs will have to print money until their hooves get sore, in order to make up for the lost tax revenue and productivity.
    There is still a good life to be made for a man (avoid the trap of marriage and get a practical education). But yes, get your money into inflation-resistant investments. As the boomers start to retire and soak up astronomical amounts of medicare and social security we will face inflation and decades of economic decline (similar to Japan at present day).

  41. This is why Iran has banned admitting women to certain fields of study and profession; they drop out or sharply reduce their productivity due to family and create a loss of both investment and return in critical/understrength areas Iran can’t afford. This may be in our future if our situation gets worse.

  42. This is why Iran has banned admitting women to certain fields of study and profession; they drop out or sharply reduce their productivity due to family and create a loss of both investment and return in critical/understrength areas Iran can’t afford. This may be in our future if our situation gets worse.

    1. ….lol Are you seriously comparing the United States to the educational and professional standards of Iran? Do you listen to yourself?

      1. Considering how Iran won the last set of negotiations… yes, we are. They’ve figured out stuff we haven’t.

        1. “Won?” lol Please, they’re a dog on a leash. Do you know how their people live? How their economy fares? Would anyone who had experience western prosperity ever want to move there? I don’t think so. That place is a disaster.

      2. Iran was a modern country when the theocratic mullahs took over; they can’t ban women from being educated or working if they wanted-to, won’t happen. However, their economic situation is so critical, they can’t afford to expend limited resources to produce petroleum engineers (for example) who’re just going to have kids, quit and not produce when they could’ve used those resources on someone who produces a return. They prefer to have all men keeping their oil industry going instead. They’ve had 30+ years, along war with Iraq and decades of confrontation with the West to be sexist, but now they’ve found they can’t afford the trained dropouts.

    1. The article is not about blaming women for “taking our spots” (or jobs). I didn’t lose my spot at a good school to a woman and I’m sure one won’t take my job either.
      All the article does is point out a legitimate concern relating to said females and how they use the educations they receive (and how we afford them). This is a real problem, and the article linked in the post show educated women themselves (a doctor, an elite law school professor, etc) describing this as a real problem. I didn’t make this up from nothing; even feminists are concerned about this topic.
      The article does not suggest that we cease education females, only
      that we face the financial issues they’re presenting now and deal with
      them before they become insurmountable.

    2. I have zero complaints with either the universities into which I was accepted, the university I attended, and the career I have.
      I have significant complaints with my female friends who live with a crushing debt load of $50k – $100k for a bachelor’s degree that now lets them get a $14.00/hr a job, and have trouble affording rent and food in the same month.

      1. Men find themselves in this particular bind as well, or have you not read the recent college grad stats? Most kids coming out of college find themselves in huge debt with a job market that sucks. This is a fact of the times not exclusive to women.

        1. 65% of 2013/2014’s freshman class is female.
          Men figured out this is a rigged game and are opting out.
          Women do what they think is expected of them and try to do the “right thing”. They’re all being told going into tons of debt for a worthless degree is the right thing.
          (No complaints from me–I’ve been on the receiving end of tuition dollars. The work was easy and the rates were high.)

        2. Are you actually saying it’s a good thing for men NOT to go to college? What’s going to happen to all those professions that require a degree? Are you going to leave them all to women? lol Think about that for a second… I’m not saying some of the ridiculous college costs can always be justified, but it is a proven fact that college graduates earn more than their degree-less peers. Now you’re just helping women take control.

        3. The workplace is morphing into a place where you can have a college degree… or equivalent experience.
          Of course, you can’t get government make-work jobs (other than as a contractor), but those jobs aren’t good career choices anyway.
          There is no proof that students entering college today will get a positive net return on missing 4 years of wages + work experience + $200k+ of debt.

        4. I disagree. When I was last looking for a job, 2 years ago, all employers required that I at least have an undergraduate. A master’s was seen as a bonus not not a requirement. I still browse the job market relatively regularly, not much has changed since then.
          But you’re right, there is no proof or guarantee as to how much return you will get for you degree. But that’s life, a little bit of chance. Statistically speaking though, those with degrees have a higher standard of living than those who do not.

  44. Very nice article. WOMEN are not cut out for the work load that we can haul. It’s just the way it is. All these valid points but the best one is no matter what a woman will never out perform me in any aspect at work. Yet women I feel are give more advances and chances. And ate protected by laws such as harassment.. And in the blink of an eye or swimming of Sperm a woman will throw all her professional accolades away to raise a child yet putting more pressure on the male to provide.. In a position that he earned more so unlike the woman did. I’m not a man who says woman are inferior to men. I’m just a man who keeps it real and realistically.. It’ no comparison

  45. Very nice article. WOMEN are not cut out for the work load that we can haul. It’s just the way it is. All these valid points but the best one is no matter what a woman will never out perform me in any aspect at work. Yet women I feel are give more advances and chances. And ate protected by laws such as harassment.. And in the blink of an eye or swimming of Sperm a woman will throw all her professional accolades away to raise a child yet putting more pressure on the male to provide.. In a position that he earned more so unlike the woman did. I’m not a man who says woman are inferior to men. I’m just a man who keeps it real and realistically.. It’ no comparison

  46. “This may seem like a personal decision, but it has serious consequences for patients and the public.
    Medical education is supported by federal and state tax money both at
    the university level — student tuition doesn’t come close to covering
    the schools’ costs — and at the teaching hospitals where residents are
    trained. So if doctors aren’t making full use of their training,
    taxpayers are losing their investment. With a growing shortage of
    doctors in America, we can no longer afford to continue training doctors
    who don’t spend their careers in the full-time practice of medicine.”
    You owe it to us! We paid for it!
    There’s a couple problems with this. Government spending money on something is not investment, and that money spent on education is mostly printed out of thin air with nothing to back it. Very little of what is spent was ever collected from taxpayers.

  47. I laugh at men who feel threatened by an educated female. I realize this is a reflection of his deep seated need to control and a rampant inferiority complex that just keeps on kicking and screaming due his plight on having to live on the bottom of the fish tank. It is easy to laugh and walk away from men like that because they are obviously weak and not to be friends with let alone living with or mating with.

    1. Nobody here is threatened by the educated female. All the article does is point out a legitimate concern relating to said females and how they use the educations they receive (and how we afford them).
      The article does not suggest that we cease education females, only that we face the financial issues they’re presenting now and deal with them before they become insurmountable.

      1. So we should only educate people who give back to society.
        lol k let’s cut out all the arts and english programs and all of the CULTURE from our society then, screw all the losers, they’re hopeless anyways, oh yeah and women too because they totally don’t even have a CHOICE in both being educated (which, by the way, is a RIGHT for all people who can work for it) and be mothers.

        1. “So we should only educate people who give back to society.”
          We need to face financial and practical realities relating to shortages in capital and shortages in qualified professionals working in crucial fields (ex: medicine), which the article outlines quite clearly.
          If you have a shortage of doctors caused in large part by those who’ve been trained leaving the profession/not practicing full time, then you’re not helping yourself if you continue to train more doctors who are more likely toleave the profession full time. You merely exacerbate the shortage of doctors, which isn’t good news for society.
          “lol k let’s cut out all the arts and english programs and all of the CULTURE from our society then”
          You don’t think that individuals educated in such programs are capable of giving back to society?
          “oh yeah and women too because they totally don’t even have a CHOICE in both being educated (which, by the way, is a RIGHT for all people who can work for it)”
          University/graduate level education is not a “right” for anyone.
          As for women, the article does not contend that they should not be educated.

        2. I will give you a chance to revise your comment, taking into account this time the -breathtakingly obvious- sarcasm with which I imbued my last paragraph, before dignifying you with a more comprehensive response.

        3. “taking into account this time the -breathtakingly obvious- sarcasm with which I imbued my last paragraph”
          Didn’t seem so obvious to me. If your intention was sarcastic then I don’t think that came through well in your comment.
          Then again, who knows? Maybe it’s just me.
          “I will give you a chance to revise your comment”
          I’ll pass.

    2. Men choose feminine girls over ’empowered’ girls because they’re invariably nicer to be with and more attractive. ‘Threatened’ is a great way to rationalise the fact that men won’t stick around and accommodate demands since your prime zoomed past..

    3. Educated men prefer educated women. And most men on this site are more educated than the average American male. Particularly the contributing writers. Some men have identified a negative correlation between a woman’s education and her possessing an ideal personality. Additionally, many educated women have used up their most attractive years in school not seriously considering their relationship partners and expect men to be impressed with them after they finish their education. The reality is that men of value are already financially independent and a woman’s educational background is far less important than her other characteristics such as personality and appearance.

    5. None of us feel “threatened” by an educated female; they’re easier to game and they pay for their own dates.
      We just don’t consider them good candidates to be wives and mothers.

    6. “I laugh at men who feel threatened by an educated female.”
      I have never met a man who feels threatened by a woman about anything….education or otherwise.
      Men DO feel threatened by cops with guns and tasers, by judges who will order said cops to steal our kids and our houses…and funny enough women laugh at us and find it “funny” that they can criminally victimise us via the force and violence of state sponsored terrorism.
      So well done. Western women have demonstrated, for decades, that they are willing to destroy mens lives and drive them to suicide and that they will then laugh at such men. We got the message.
      YOU HATE US MEN.
      And we shall pound this message into the minds of the young men so that they really get it.

      1. You just seem really bitter about that divorce… I’m telling you, not all women are crazy bitches. Are you now single? Re-married? How does your significant other feel about these thoughts?

  48. I’m actually impressed with this article. Good job. It’s not attacking women or making them seem like lesser individuals. It was well thought out (some bits taken from other articles were a big excessive) but overall you make a very valid and non-aggressive point. I respect that.

  49. So the problem is not that government planning on fiat credit doesn’t work; it’s that the planning should not favor women so much. That will fix everything. Right, Pedro? Right, Gethro? Here’s your student loans. We believe in you. Take these resources with our unlimited stream of credit and make our ‘investment’ in the future a success. ha, haa

  50. I have to say, I don’t agree with the article. And even less so with the misogynistic comments. What if someone’s father dies and the widow is left to support the children alone? Is she then not allowed to work?
    Are you all so deluded that you don’t realize that there are too many jobs in the world that need doing to be able to say that no women should be allowed to take them. It isn’t “Feminist policies” which “are the very policies that will cause the economy to collapse”, it is your chauvinistic views which would ruin us, if you weren’t such a huge MINORITY.

    1. Does anyone else think that, since Roosh is banning females, we’re going to get a whole bunch of new posters with male names who sound suspiciously female?
      In case you haven’t heard, it’s our chauvinistic views that created Western civilization (as well as EVERY civilization that has prospered and thrived since the dawn of time) and the society that you live in. Our “chauvinistic views” created the most powerful, most prosperous nation on earth. Our country just began our downward slide in the last couple of decades. Around the same time that we decided to let you feminists dictate how our society should be run. Coincidence?

      1. And yet America’s real economic growth was happening during the first World Wars when women were coming in waves into the workforce while men were overseas… Men came back to a pretty functioning society. Buildings were still standing, the stock market was still going, factories were producing, etc. Was that all imaginary?

        1. War is always good for the economy. Maybe we should start another World War and send a bunch of boys overseas to die to offset your feminist policies. Is that what you’re suggesting?

        2. No, I’m saying that the readers here seem to suggest that women can’t hack it in the working world when they’ve proven time and time again that they can. Personal sentiment is clouding the judgement of most of the visitors here I find.

        3. Did you read the article, “Nicholas”? Please quote the part where the author claims that women can’t hack it in the working world. I’ll wait…
          He DOES claim that women leave the workforce in large numbers in order to have children and raise families. Which is a proven fact. It’s also a proven fact that this hurts the economy. But that’s not the same as saying they can’t hack it. It’s saying that many choose not to. Do you deny that?

        5. In your opening statement you said:
          “I have to say, I don’t agree with the article”
          Can you tell me what it is that you disagree with?

        6. Nicholas said that not me, but I also don’t agree with some of the assumptions of the article. I realize there are women that do stop working after having children etc. I, however, do not agree with some of the other economic points.

        7. Women can hack it in the working world. They’re just not as good at it as men, and it slowly destroys their souls.
          For example, women were not as good at men at critical combat roles… so instead they stayed home, sewing silk parachutes.

    2. Also, if you’d read the article, you’d know that the author wasn’t suggesting that women not be allowed to work or go to school. He was pointing out something that even feminists admit is a problem. Pull your head out of your ass. If you want to criticize, do it intelligently. During this entire flood of brainwashed feminist drones, I can honestly say that I’ve only seen ONE SINGLE feminist actually debate our arguments with any logic and reason. That’s one single woman, out of hundreds (maybe thousands), who had something to say other than name calling and shaming language.

      1. Have you missed all the other male posters suggesting anyone with a vagina get a hard cock in their mouth or calling women fat ugly bitches for having a different opinion or point? Have you not seen the written poetry posted by some of these so called “alpha males?” Moving stuff really.

        1. They’re suggesting you get a hard cock in your mouth, and calling you a fat, ugly bitch because THEY DON’T WANT YOU HERE! You aren’t adding ANYTHING to the conversation except childish name calling and shaming language. And you expect them to treat you with respect and welcome you?

  52. Great article, but there was no mention of the additional fact that men are opting out due to favoritism towards women and minorities. We’re Going Galt. So not only do women not provide a return on investment, the policies favoring them and punishing men deter productive men from realizing their full potential. A total clusterfuck, from an economic productivity standpoint.

  53. It’s heartbreaking to have friends who are women in their 30s who did everything they were told: they got that bachelor’s and master’s degree; they worked hard and built a career for themselves.
    Now they’ve got a few extra pounds from years spent in a cubicle. They’ve realised they’re just a cog in a machine. No man wants to pay attention to them. They’ve got anxiety disorders, depression, and overeating disorders. They won’t really have a chance to have their own kids.
    Women get to be men–and life for lower-middle-class men never really consisted of much other than working hard until the day you die with a sore back and shot knees.

    1. And it’s their own doing. No reason why girls shouldn’t date while studying or working. I think women that make excuses for why they’re not pursuing relationships partly do so because they’re afraid they will be rejected, like everyone else.

      1. Oh, they’ve all dated, or been married/divorced… their relationships just don’t last because they believe the lies they should try to have it all, and that they should dump guys who don’t meet their checklists.
        Or they get busy chasing alphas out of their league who will have sex with them, but are too high-value for exclusivity, cohabitation, or mariage.

        1. Or they’re just getting married too young before both people realize what they really want in a wife/husband.
          Stats show that people who get married after 25 have a higher success rate than those who don’t.

    2. “It’s heartbreaking to have friends who are women in their 30s who did everything they were told”
      Aaron. 35 years ago…when I was 14….I was telling the girls who were going on about “I am going to have a career like a man” that it was an incredibly stupid idea. Plenty of women were told that the whole idea of “going to work and having a career” was not a good idea.
      My own ex, Jennifer, went on and on about getting a job when I was telling her that being a housewife was much better. She knew my parents so she knew what I was talking about.
      Anyway…she decided she wanted a job. She wanted to be a librarian. Imagine where she would be now if she did that 30 years ago! LOL! In the age of google librarian jobs are disappearing. And they were very poorly paid anyway because anyone can be a librarian.
      I persuaded her to be a programmer instead. She eventually got a good job at IBM. And what did she do when we had kids? She refused to go to work even though we had bought our house based on two incomes. The entire burden of earning for a family of 6 in Sydney fell on me.
      Now she is 50…no husband….no skills worth speaking of…..massively overweight……and reportedly so miserable that she needed 18 months of counselling to “help” her once she realised what she had done in abusing me so badly that I ended our marriage.
      Lots of western women are tragic cases like my ex….but they only have themselves to blame. They were given every opportunity in the world and they went out of their way to screw up their lives and the lives of those in their families. I have no sympathy for any of these women….they certainly have no sympathy for the lives of men they ruin.

      1. I have sympathy for these women because I believe women lack moral agency, empathy, and the ability to understand their past decisions are responsible for their current situation.
        I make sure the women in my life feel great when they’re around me, and exercise enough dominance to keep them from making horrible decisions. The choices are to either do that, or abandon and avoid women completely.
        Anything else is unloving and cruel, sort of like letting a horse eat as much food as it wants until it founders.

        1. “I make sure the women in my life feel great when they’re around me”
          And what do you do for men who have had their lives destroyed by women and who are suicidal?
          What do you do for men such that women can no longer destroy their lives?

        2. Eventually I cut off contact with women who are suicidal and aren’t taking steps to fix it.
          For the men in my life? I try to teach them game and teach them truth and get them out of the beta non-reality world they’ve been trying to live in.

        3. “I try to teach them game and teach them truth and get them out of the beta non-reality world they’ve been trying to live in.”
          Might you not be better to teach them how to rescind their consent to be governed so that it is no longer possible for them to be legally criminally victimised?
          You can do that by giving them a copy of my free ebook “living free in the femnazi world”. I rescinded my consent to be governed 4 years ago and have raised cases against all members of the australian parliament and irish parliament to remedy the crimes committed against men.
          Apparently my fellow men think they have no part to play in bringing criminals to justice in about the 99.9% majority. Sad that.
          Teaching a man game does not help him when the cops come though his door because they want to steal from him as the hired goons of criminal guvmints.
          Look how many men are in jail in the US for non-crimes. And look how few men care about them. 99.9% of men could not care less about a man rotting in jail for a non-crime.
          If you doubt that statement? Ask all the men you know what they have done to get men out of jail who are there for victimless crimes like carrying some of gods green produce or unpaid extortion money called alimony or child support. I think you will find that 99.9% of men you ask will say “I have done nothing to help those men”.
          So why do men help women while letting their brothers rot in jail for non-crimes? It is a good question that men do not like to confront.
          http://www.a-man-zon.com/Books/B0000PeterNolan.aspx

        4. I have a problem with “game.” It implies I should present a persona in order to attract a mate. I’m either confident and appealing enough or I’m not. If I need to use game to get someone’s attention, they’re not worth my valuable time.

        5. Most men have natural game–and spend their whole lives having it beaten out of them and told it’s wrong.

        6. I don’t subscribe to fringe movements.
          I do tell friends not to get a marriage licence.

  54. I was wondering if anyone knew how I could bypass state laws to take my daughter out of middle school so that she can help keep up the house. I live in Mississippi. Thanks

  56. I have always said that the modern day problems have been caused because the workforce has been doubled. Where before you had two families with the same amount of income… now you have one family with double the income and another family with much less. It’s all simple math really.
    I don’t think it’s that hard to see.

  57. I work for a medium sized company, and although informal, we have a strict “no breeders” policy when it comes to skilled engineering and management staff. The part-time, temporary contract, low level replacable drones, no problem. They’re a dime a dozen. But we can’t afford the reproductive churn when it comes to the productive staff and researchers. Works for us.

  58. Only problem is this, Universities don’t purposefully let more women in. It just so happens that girls do better in school; more extra-curriculars, higher grades the works.
    Are you suggesting some form of Affirmative Action that favors men should be implemented? Affirmative action is bullshit no matter who it favors, I really hope that’s not your idea for fixing this issue.
    This article would’ve been useful if it actually offered some form of solution instead of just whinging and complaining.

    1. They may not purposefully let more women in, but the admissions process and education style is femalecentric.
      Does writing a thought provoking, grammatically correct, error-less essay on Florence Nightengale make you a better candidate to be an RN? Not really.
      Does my ability to tear apart and rebuild a car make me a better candidate to be an RN? Not really.
      But, which one of those skills will get you admitted?

  59. As a woman working towards a PhD, I have to say I think you point out a very salient economic point. This is the first article on this website I’ve yet seen that I can actually say I respect. Well done.
    That said, I don’t think the answer is to educate less women. I think the answer lies in making the home a more equal environment. I’d love to see equal time put into raising kids and maintaining a household on the part of men and women. I don’t think so many women should leave the workforce once they are in it.
    A survey of the top five happiest countries in the world reveals in interesting common denominator: men and women have the SAME amount of protected leave once they have a new child. Maternity leave=paternity leave. That way, both parents can be equally involved in caring for an infant. Once the child is old enough to be left with a non-parent, the governments of these countries subsidize child care, so both parents can go back to work. It’s a model in which everyone wins.
    Women should stay in the work force and men should contribute more to home and family life. That way, we all get to use our educations efficiently and effectively.

    1. “Once the child is old enough to be left with a non-parent, the governments of these countries subsidize child care, so both parents can go back to work. It’s a model in which everyone wins.”
      Except for the kids themselves.
      Yay, Mommy letting strangers raise her children so she can work and have a ‘career’ all to make more money for her corporate masters!

      1. It’s a myth that mothers are superior at caring for their children. SO many bad moms out there, even ones who stay at home, do SO much worse than educators and caretakers that have studied child development and psychology. Nannies and live-in tutors are a childcare staple dating back to the middle ages, at least in western culture. In fact, they used to be a sign of wealth and progress.
        Also, those countries outrank the US on just about every child-oriented statistic imaginable. They have less child mortality, better education statistics, and better health statistics, both mental and physical. Maybe you missed it in my original post–these are the HAPPIEST countries in the world. All in all, they must be doing something right.

        1. The USA != Scandinavia and never will.
          The only way to ‘solve’ the problem of a non-homogenous society not working for the common selflessness good is to have every single race bang each other until we resemble Brazilians and then run psy ops into building a post racial identity based on a ‘USA’ race. Even we you get past the sticky race issue then where are all the magical resources going to come from to prop up 300+ million people? Last I checked Norway Jed Clampetted their way to huge amounts of wealth to support 5 million people when they shot their metaphorical rifle into the ocean and ‘Texas Gold’ came out.
          The Nordic countries are the happy countries because they have a very unique position in the world. They all have some sort of jante law concept which keeps people from acting superior in public and they are flush with money which they use to support people who (and this very important) they see as their extended family because of biological conditions. It’s not because women work or they have daycare you dumb twat.
          Also do you really think that any race of people wants to lose their ethnic identities to move into this Brave New World? Hispanics, Blacks, Asians don’t want to become White just as much as White don’t want to become them. Most people like their own race and don’t want to lose who they are. The only people that really want this are the losers who want to redefine the earth into a world where they are the new winners.

        2. Most of what you say is ridiculous and nonsensical. Racial homogeneity is not a necessity for a functioning social democracy–remember comparative government?
          Also, I did not say the happiness of society was a result solely of childcare leave policy–that would be idiotic. You’re ignoring my ACTUAL argument so that you don’t have to think hard and answer it. You can call me a dumb twat if it makes you feel good, but I know for a fact my IQ bests yours just based on the incoherent blatherings you post.
          Despite what you seem to have taken away from my post, I did not, nor have I ever, advocated for racial homogenization in the US. At one point, I debated another guy who commented on this post about this same issue. He was tactful and made good points; it was a much better quality dialogue than this one, which is probably why the moderators removed it. It’s a shame; you could’ve learned a lot by reading that exchange.
          Anyways, since you were too dull to figure it out the first time around, let me break down what I said:
          -mothers are not automatically the best qualified caretakers of their kids
          -whatever the Scandinavian model is, the statistics prove that it works
          See? Not one single mention of race.

        3. “whatever the Scandinavian model is, the statistics prove that it works”
          They don’t prove shit you dumb fuck.
          What part of “Correlation isn’t Causation” don’t you understand?
          The reason I brought up racial homogenization is that’s what I was pointing out that’s the main factor combined with the windfall of wealth that the Scandinavian countries are being successful. It certainly isn’t feminism. It’s simply that they are so strong right now that they can take the hit of being feminist.

    2. “A survey of the top five happiest countries in the world reveals in
      interesting common denominator: men and women have the SAME amount of
      protected leave once they have a new child. Maternity leave=paternity
      leave.”
      I’ve heard this kind of proposal before.
      The main problem with it is that, in the short term at least, it does exacerbate a major issue: absences/slowdowns in productivity relating to child care. Right now, women generally have these slow downs alone. With mandated paternity leave, we’re essentially doubling the issue by forcing men to go through the same thing.
      The only way I could see this working is if the larger issue (women dropping out of the workforce/leaving the main career track period/going part-time) were to be somehow solved by creating this short term problem (forcing men via paternity leave to decrease their productivity following childbirth in the way women do). That is to say, would bringing paternity leave on par with maternity leave lead to a decrease in the number of women who ultimately decide down the road to “opt-out” (leave work/go part-time, etc)? This is the kind of question we need answered.
      Do we have any evidence of the equalization of paternity and maternity leave leading to a substantial decrease in the number of long term female “opt-outs” in any of the nations in which said equalization has been put into law? Do those nations have larger numbers of women in higher professional positions relative to the USA and other nations that lack such laws?
      Again, if we decide to mandate paternity leave, we’ll be incurring a pretty substantial cost. The productivity of female workers is already hit heavily by maternity leave, so we’d essentially be doubling that hit. That can work in the short term, but only if the answer to both of the above questions is “yes, and by substantial margins”. That’s the only way this strategy leads to positive gains relating to the return on educational investment given the sheer amount of money (covering the cost of paternity leave in addition to existing productivity slowdowns relating to maternity leave, covering subsidized childcare for everyone, etc).
      With regard to the “happiest countries”, Scandinavians have had a tendency to be quite aggressive in regard to these kinds of policies, so I’m guessing they are on your mind as a model for us to follow.
      I’m cautious of this. Scandis are a unique breed of people living in societies with some unique traits that we do not possess. We’ve got to be very careful about basing solutions to our problems on their models-the pieces won’t always fit. I can already think of a few social problems inherent to the American context that might make some of the Scandi family initiatives much harder to push through.

      1. A few things. Maternity and paternity leave are always optional. it’s never mandated. The only mandate is upon employers–they must allow men and women equal leave for infant care, if they want it. Think of it more as an anti-discrimination policy than time off forced on the employees themselves.
        And yes, these countries actually score extremely high on gender equality tests, including number of women in high professional positions. Gender equality is a metric considered whenever these “happiest nations” lists are compiled.
        Also, from what I understand, leave isn’t doubled, so there is no net negative impact on social productivity. That is to say, the total time of leave a household gets stays the same, it’s just that either the mother or the father can take it. Basically, the countries allow for the father to bear some of the burden, rather than expecting the mother to take care of it totally. It’s not like each spouse gets three months off; more like they get three months total to divide between them.
        Yes, Scandinavian countries are the most famous for this, and yes, their unique sociocultural homogeneity plays a huge role in the success of many of their social policies. Still, I think it’s a cultural reality EVERYWHERE that if children are being born, parents need to be around to care for them, both the mother AND the father. Rather than penalize workers for this, employers should be prohibited from punishing new parents of either gender. After all, like you said, if the nation and the corporation want a growing, resourceful economy, then they need new workers who are educated and emotionally stable. And that only comes from things like protected childcare leave.

        1. “A few things. Maternity and paternity leave are always optional. it’s never mandated. The only mandate is upon employers–they must allow men and women equal leave for infant care, if they want it. Think of it more as an anti-discrimination policy than time off forced on the employees themselves.
          Also, from what I understand, leave isn’t doubled, so there is no net negative impact on social productivity. That is to say, the total time of leave a household gets stays the same, it’s just that either the mother or the father can take it. Basically, the countries allow for thefather to bear some of the burden, rather than expecting the mother to take care of it totally. It’s not like each spouse gets three months off; more like they get three months total to divide between them.”
          OK, that makes more sense.
          We’ll see where nations like the US end up on this.

    3. “Women should stay in the work force and men should contribute more to home and family life. That way, we all get to use our educations efficiently and effectively.”
      This response is regurgitated feminist drivel yet again. If you look at surveys done in places in which people are the “happiest,” even the women there prefer NOT to work full time WHILE having a high income full time working partner — usually male. The idea of having both maternity and paternity leave as being “optional” is a red herring — the data show that women tend to CHOOSE to want to stay at home and work less, particularly once they have children. In other words, after maternity/paternity leave has been completed, women STILL wish to stay home more; men do not. That holds even when maternity leave is extended to almost a year (which is the case in places like Canada). Anecdotally as a doctor, I’ve found that my highly professional, could get a full-time job if they wanted to, peers often want to work part time once they become mothers even when their partner is more than willing to stay home as well. At some point bitching that the above is merely societally mediated (particularly in the face of seeing primates and other mammalian females do PRECISELY THE SAME THING after childbirth) truly needs to stop.
      To be more clear, even if men were cooking, cleaning, and doing the housework en masse while taking care of the kids, the data (and my own observations) basically demonstrate that the vast majority of women still would want to work part-time and take care of the children while pursuing hobbies. Why this fact befuddles the average feminist is beyond me.
      As an aside, take, for example, the netherlands, which is often the highest on Western “happiness” scales, certainly for women. Recent surveys have shown that the average woman far more prefers to work part-time while her spouse earns a “high” income. And it’s not because she hates working and doing household duties — it’s because she gets to “pursue hobbies”.
      http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2010/11/going_dutch.2.html
      Just a minor point: if you include “gender equality” using western norms of what “happiness” means for country-wide surveys, you are going to get countries that implement your definition of “gender equality” on the top of your “happiness” lists. It’s sort of, uh, a tautology.

  60. Return on your investment, eh? YOU start paying my tuition and bills and then we’ll talk, asshole.
    Also, DESPITE all of the facts that show that women are absolutely academically dominating, we are still payed $0.77 to every man’s dollar. Yep, we’ve got it made.

    1. Maybe you’re poorly “payed[sic]” because you’re not very bright. When you control for job description, education, years of experience, and–here’s the part women who throw out that 77% lie don’t like to hear–actual hours worked per year, there is no statistical disparity in men’s and women’s wages. Changing diapers 20 hrs a week doesn’t pay as well as electrical engineering 60 hrs a week, and the engineer who’s successfully spearheaded projects for twenty years gets paid more than the one you graduated last year. “Academically dominating” is bullshit; in the real world the A you got on your Femynyst Studies paper is completely meaningless. Coming in on Memorial Day Weekend so the client can get a working version up and running by Tuesday morning will get you the bonus.
      If you want to get paid like a man, sweetiecakes, you have to work like a man. Choose a job that requires math, science, and logic, then spend long hours at it. If you want to do something easy, or take years off to do something “emotionally fulfilling” you lose the right to bitch about people who don’t getting paid for showing up and working hard at hard things.

      1. Yes it’s so surprising how women forget not only men work longer hours than them but also in harsher conditions…
        15 yrs ago, in my computer degree class, there were only 2-3 girls…and I know all of them went on to do MBA (HR) for easy job.
        Situation hasn’t changed much. Women wants easy jobs where they can buff their nails, gossip all day and spot talent to feed on.

  61. Society Can’t Afford the Educated ‘Person’ – Most of the “education” that “society” pays for (via tax extortion) is just dumbed-down indoctrination…regardless of gender. What value does “society” receive from bachelor of arts degrees? None. What value does someone receive by getting into tens of thousand of dollars in debt? None. Anyone with a library card or an internet connection could learn that stuff for free.

  62. The obvious solution is to make all people that received any sort of taxpayer assistance in obtaining their professional degree (medicine, law, business, engineering, etc.) that eventually choose not to practice in that field PAY BACK the taxpayer. The amount to be paid back can be pro-rated by how much time each person actually spent in their field.
    This should be a sex (or, you prefer, “gender”) neutral policy. Of course, women will more often have to pay some money back. Or, perhaps more of them will choose not to have children. Or, even better, perhaps some of them will think long and hard about what they really want out of life before pursing that medical degree.
    Society has no obligation to make bad investments with taxpayer dollars. We are doing that right now, because feminists demand it and white knight politicians give them what they want. But that can and should change.

  63. The obvious solution is to make all people that received any sort of taxpayer assistance in obtaining their professional degree (medicine, law, business, engineering, etc.) that eventually choose not to practice in that field PAY BACK the taxpayer. The amount to be paid back can be pro-rated by how much time each person actually spent in their field.
    This should be a sex (or, you prefer, “gender”) neutral policy. Of course, women will more often have to pay some money back. Or, perhaps more of them will choose not to have children. Or, even better, perhaps some of them will think long and hard about what they really want out of life before pursing that medical degree.
    Society has no obligation to make bad investments with taxpayer dollars. We are doing that right now, because feminists demand it and white knight politicians give them what they want. But that can and should change.

  64. This is easily correctable. We don’t even have to ‘hold women back’ like a feminist would claim. Women just need to marry and have kids first. Accept that role for 4-8 years, and get a tax credit toward education, but only if you wait until 22-26 to begin college. Minimum of two kids in a marriage, and it helps incentivize marriage. Not only that, they’ll be marrying slightly older guys, 24-32 would be my guess.
    This would set society back on a slightly more traditional path…

    1. Setting minimum quantities for children in marriage is scary totalitarian. It’s like the opposite of China’s one child policy.
      Plus, what about infertile people? Or homosexuals? Or people who just don’t want kids?
      Also, I think having a college education and a few decades of wisdom under one’s belt helps a woman to be a better mother. I just don’t trust most 18-year old girls to raise well-rounded kids.
      Lastly, your proposal is economically misguided. Most men do not start making enough money to support an entire family on just their income until their mid to late thirties. Statistically, most 24-to-32-year-old men could not support a non-working wife (with no education to fall back on when times are tough) PLUS a minimum of two kids on the salaries they make. For your plan to work, you would need, on average, 40-year-old men marrying 20-year-old women. As a 22-year-old woman, I have zero desire for men that old–and I don’t want to marry a life partner who will die and leave me alone when I’m 55.

      1. “For your plan to work, you would need, on average, 40-year-old men marrying 20-year-old women.”
        This would be a bit extreme in the anglosphere where women are much less open to wide age gaps than in other societies. I agree that his proposal has some serious issues.
        What would you say, however, to a policy that suggested women in the 24-30 age range pair off with men in the 35-40 range? This allows for men to be better able to provide (they’re in the age range when they start making money) and it would allow for women to get their education before they got attached (along with a graduate degree and possibly even a couple of years out working).
        Does that seem more reasonable? Would your 26 year old self be capable of finding a 39 year old male attractive (I’m sure its happened)?

        1. I wouldn’t be for a -policy- mandating it, simply because I’m not for government getting involved at that level. Imagine the political nightmare that would result from trying to set a national mating policy. It wouldn’t work, and I wouldn’t want to regress back to a world where people are told who they can and cannot bang/love/marry.
          That said, the concept of 24-30 year old women hooking up with older men is fine–in fact, I’d go so far to say it’s currently close to the cultural norm.
          The real problem with your suggestion, at least in this dialogue, is that it isn’t compatible with Joseph’s. He wants women to mate and raise kids BEFORE they get their education–that’s how he suggests solving the problem of women not using the education they got pre-babies.

        2. Yeah, I meant to note that I wasn’t asking for a mandate/policy. I just wanted to see what you thought of the idea, as I do think it is a concept worth encouraging (not mandating) in our society. My suggestion is closer to the cultural norm than others, though I’d say it isn’t quite there (there are a lot of people who would shame a 25-26 year old woman for dating a man 14 years her senior, and more still who would shame a 40 year old guy for being with a 25 year old).
          I’m not on board with Joseph’s suggestion. I can see where he’s coming from, but I think it best to allow women to get a good chunk of their discovery/learning/”fun” out of the way BEFORE they get locked down in a marriage. If this isn’t done, there tends to be a lot of regret and resentment down the line that blows back on her husband and her children. She’ll blame both of them for having kept her from the fun/discovery she will feel her unmarried peers got while she was married, and that she’ll think she should have had a chance to enjoy.
          The ultimate goal should be to find a way to solve the problem even without women ceasing to go to school in the typical 18-24 range. That’ll be no easy task.

  66. ——Huh. The post I was replying to was deleted. —–
    Speaking personally, I really enjoy my level of education and I’m looking very much forward to whichever career I eventually choose. I also would really love to have children and raise them unimpeded by work, so that they may get the best chances in life.
    Gurl Power. U R Womyn, I hear you rawr!!!!11!!1
    You’re the type of silly bitch who will drop out of the work force for 10 year to raise your fat, autistic ‘tard children and complain that your male counterparts earn more money than you due to “Sexism”.
    As what also hasn’t been acknowledged here is that looking after children and the home is a full time job in itself,
    No it is not. Child rearing is a hobby. It is something that you elected to do for your own reason. We have 7,000,000,000 people on this planet. We certainly do not need you to shit out another. You’re free to do so but do not believe that anyone else respects you because of it.

  67. Children return sanity to the world. They fuck with feminism on the day they are born.
    And that is fuckin’ awesome.
    P.S. That photo of the mulatto baby is very inspiring. Good job.

  68. Let’s adapt a concept already well entrenched in the law – impute a man-equivalent income to Ms. Over-Educated and then tax her a** off based on it.
    Problem solved.
    Still, until men start voting as if their lives depended on it, females will remain over-privileged.

  69. I read RoK because I find a perverse glee in reading spectacularly offensive, pointless and terribly-written articles.
    I have to say, I was disappointed by this one. What you’ve written here is dangerously close to being a legitimate argument which I can actually take seriously. Incredible! I’d say other RoK authors could learn a thing or two, but they seem to be more interested in offending as many people as possible and moaning about feminist sluts.
    Anyway, good job.

  70. I have a nephew who is finishing college soon. When he was applying for college in high school, he was tied for top place with a chick (who is his neighbor) academically. They had identical transcripts & differed essentially by the plumbing between their legs. He tried for premed at 3 ivy league & 3 prestigious non ivies & ended with 0/6 admissions. She scored 5/6. Please don’t tell me there isn’t gender bias in admissions nowadays.
    He followed good advice “when life hands you lemons make lemonade”. He changed his major to tech, went to a local non prestigious lib arts school & did a kick ass B.S. degree in computer science. He’s graduating soon.
    His mother who was his biggest fan had to swallow the bitter pill of his rejections because she is as feminist as they come….and she got to see how her cause destroyed her son’s potential career as a M.D.
    Tough medicine for for the shrew.

    1. Yeah, because clearly ALL colleges are like “welp, she’s a girl, let’s let her in” and still have 50/50 gender ratios.
      Also, college admissions are now more based on essays, life background, scores (which you didn’t mention) and achievements than pure transcripts.

  71. This nyt article mentions one field and one field only where this is an issue: medicine. And yet, you somehow pull from this that there is an “educational gap,” which is a phrase that never comes up in your article of discussion. The author even implies this is not an issue in other fields, which confuses me even more as to where your claim of an educational gap comes from.

    1. “This nyt article mentions one field and one field only where this is an
      issue: medicine. And yet, you somehow pull from this that there is an
      “educational gap,” which is a phrase that never comes up in your article
      of discussion.”
      Look more carefully. The NYT article is not my only “article of discussion”. There are several others that are referenced to back up some of my other statements.

  72. there are so many outright misconceptions and false facts in this article.
    1. about the same numbers of men (slightly higher than in 1970) are going to college. Simply, more women are going to college than women did in 1970. so now it appears as though more women are going than men. the truth is, more PEOPLE are going to college than ever before, and more of those people happen to be women.
    2. the degrees that the majority of men are earning are still male-dominated. science, mathematics, and engineering are still vastly short of women. (about 1 in 4 are women)
    3. about the same numbers of white males and females are attending college. the numbers get even more skewed when you lump all the races together. young african american men and latino men can’t go to college when they’re busy being dragged to jail 3 times more often then white men.
    4. could it be perhaps, that women aren’t “quitting” or “not using their degrees” because they face an unfriendly job market, that still discriminates against women on the basis of their gender. even in female dominated fields, men are given the top jobs because they’re seen as more competent.

    1. 1. Agreed. More women are going to college. And How college is responding to this.. By Creating Feminine environment and Feminine studies… How many women you know are in Pure sciences and majoring in Chemistry or Physics Or hard stuff like Engg?
      This also adds into 2nd of your point.
      2. Yes women are more likely to do social/women studies, journalism etc… i.e. easy work… but more women means colleges are going to focus on them and their $$… It’s simple a business decision. So they spend More Money and funding to create or help “Feminine studies”.
      Quite a huge number of colleges are facing issues with funding and grants on Important topics like chemistry, physics… simply because of the above business decision.
      and This point also adds into 3rd & 4th point
      3/4. Go to college and sit through few orientations and then come back and talk about discrimination. Men are going to jail because its too biased against them. Too many cases of false rape charges or sexual harassment. When most men are treated as potential rapist, they are not going to be enthusiastic about studies.
      and talking about women facing discrimination in jobs… Are you really talking about women in US? I mean, with the kind of politically correct emasculated environment created by feminist and single moms for last 40 years, Most men are scared shitless of losing their jobs.
      Like recently when 2 programmers got booted out because of a dongle discussion because some self entitled crusader princess got offended?
      It’s happening way too many times in daily life all over… The difference this time it became a huge deal because princess was a foolish enough to use media which men understand better than her and in her quest to gather white knights manginas it backfired…

    2. “there are so many outright misconceptions and false facts in this article.”
      I don’t think you can have something that is simultaneously “false” and “fact” at the same time…
      “1. about the same numbers of men (slightly higher than in 1970) are
      going to college. Simply, more women are going to college than women did
      in 1970. so now it appears as though more women are going than men. the truth is, more PEOPLE are going to college than ever before, and more of those people happen to be women.”
      Not sure what your point is here and I don’t think we’re even in complete disagreement. The fact is that men are being outpaced in higher education right now. There are substantially more women earning degrees than there are men, and that trend is showing no signs of slowing down as of yet.
      “2. the degrees that the majority of men are earning are still
      male-dominated. science, mathematics, and engineering are still vastly
      short of women. (about 1 in 4 are women)”
      Can you provide a source for your claim that the majority of men in college right now are earning degrees in these “male dominated” fields that are “vastly short of women”?
      “3. about the same numbers of white males and females are attending
      college. the numbers get even more skewed when you lump all the races
      together. young african american men and latino men can’t go to college
      when they’re busy being dragged to jail 3 times more often then white
      men.”
      The gap in white male/female college attendance is smaller than with other races, but still substantial (46/54 as of 2003). There are substantially more white women earning degrees than there are white men, even though the situation is not as dramatic as it is among minorities..
      http://diverseeducation.com/article/6084/
      “4. could it be perhaps, that women aren’t “quitting” or “not using their
      degrees” because they face an unfriendly job market, that still
      discriminates against women on the basis of their gender.”
      I’m not saying that there is no discrimination at all against women in the modern job market.
      I am saying, however, what feminists themselves are realizing: this “opt out” phenomenon cannot be blamed primarily on the hostility of “the patriarchy”. Females (particularly the most talented and well qualified individuals) are, by and large, choosing to stand down and leave the main career track. They are not being forced out or encouraged to slow down. They are doing so of their own volition.
      Discrimination is not a non-existant issue, but it isn’t the main reason for the trend we’re seeing now. That is why this issue is such a thorny one for feminists to tackle.

  73. I think the declining number of males in University comes down to the same basic components: the disintegration of the nuclear family unit and traditional gender roles. Male students who have no strong male figures (read: father) in their lives are more likely to drop out of high school basically nixing himself from the pool of applicable candidates to begin with. Young women see that the typical modern family is comprised of a female lead and assume, often correctly, that they will be doomed to the same fate. Male children, seeing as the person they would model after is absent, cling on to things that are misguided in order to assert a false sense of masculinity. That surrogate model is often not what would make them productive in society. Females, seeing their single parent mother struggle to make ends meet on a low wage job try to play damage control by getting a degree as the presumption is degree= stability. In short: insufficient male role models create women responding out of fear to nouveau single parent paradigm.

  74. Ok gentlemen, riddle me this : According to statistics (you guys LOVE the statistics), it’s generally men who are janitors, embalmers, radio announcers, mental health professionals, and detectives. My source (you guys rarely give sources — http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2013/02/28/13-surprisingly-low-paying-jobs/ . Can a man support a family of 4 (no dog included) or 3 on these salaries? I’d say no. Not his fault. Not a woman’s fault (although, I have a sneaking suspicion one of you will make the argument – please prove me wrong). So what’s a guy to do? Change jobs? Ok! What happens to these jobs? Outsource? Yuck. Let’s put on our thinking caps. How about finding a mate that can supplement our income? Sound like a plan? Or is that backwards thinking? Holy shit, what happens if she makes more? Are there kids involved? No. Please go forward. Yes? Make private decisions and no more fucks to be given to the mass public. Mkay? [slips burqua back on as not to offend the men]
    BTW– I am not saying ALL men have shitty paying jobs. I am saying — in the event that a man has shitty paying job…

  75. It’s because, as always, College for women is Husband hunting.
    It will never change.
    Do you think a woman WANTS to work a day in her life? Not if she doesn’t have to. I see this at Stanford all the time. And the funny thing is, these girls can outscore you on a test, but does that have any bearing at all in terms of your utility at a job?
    Heres how it goes: An overwhelming enthusiam to learn and make money, “Be Something(Trademark)” Freshman through Junior year in college, then come senior year, the girls are going to Business School socials in droves, hoping to meet a hunky rich guy. Hunky rich guy never comes; Rich Guy comes, but he is not hunky. Rich guy ends up being very desperate, inept with women, and even creepy.
    Fast forward two years, our young Alumnae come back, tails wagging between legs, head sunk low, looking for a guy willing to date them. He doesn’t show up.

  76. This is a growing problem, I think the solution is eliminate affirmative action quotas and the minority status for women in higher education, and instead make each educational institution equal opportunity, so that everyone regardless of gender, race, or sexual orientation has a chance to succeed, and employers can hire the best qualified candidates that will produce more.

  78. I believe the push to educate women is part of a campaign to outsource as many men as possible in order to flood the labor market with desperate men. Why? To hasten the demise of unionism. Once the unions are gone, and laws are changed to ensure they won’t rise up again, the push will stop.

  79. I see this big-time in STEM fields too. Many brilliant wimminz I went to CMU with did not stay in Chemical/Electrical/Mechanical Engineering even until age 30, let alone 40, 50, 60… thus, an E-slot was wasted, and society short-changed. This also feeds the damage to the nation done by the H-1B visa program.

  81. “There are many more women capable of holding elite white-collar positions than there are women actually holding them”
    not buying it. Without government creating every conceivable convenience and law placed in their favor at ever level of society most of the girls would never have gotten as far as they have. They can’t do it without daddy government. BS you say? Prove it. Get rid of all these special government privileges and women’s special interest groups and let’s see them do it on their own.

  82. Why not just make a penalty for professionals that received huge scholarships, then later decide to only work part time or drop out completely due to kids? It would give all genders the incentive to remain full-time. Basically, make most scholarships require the recipient to remain a full-time professional for at least the bulk of their adult career years, or else pay back the scholarship, with adjusted inflation?

  83. since when do we allow social justice wankers pollute our space with their verbal diarrhea?

  84. The latter half of the article states in effect that feminists must make their mind up in regard to female professional productivity versus female choice. Their undue influence over political direction is the problem; they will never disavow it in favor of any balance that weakens their political hegemony. However, the entire zeitgeist of promoting females over males is the problem- there should only have been individuals- irrespective of gender- competing for college admissions. Government should never have been involved in favoring one sex over the other for loans or grants nor for the fallacy of funding- in it’s entirely- the invention of the notoriously pseudo-scientific nonsense of feminism in academia. This social “science” churns out hordes of fantastically illogical “educated” fools who spurn the tools of hard sciences as both “patriarchal” and biased, believing that female experiential “feelings” trump objective reality. The ideologically flawed concept of the partisan promotion of women- over men- caused the problem in the first place.

Comments are closed.