All Of You Need To Grow Up!

Wtf you mean I have to mature, I am level 70!!!


jk, I hate WOW :)
 
And you don't see T-shirts writing books and articles and making asses of themselves. Score one for T-shirts.
 
the article said:
For the problem with child-men is that they're not very promising husbands and fathers.
Click to expand...

Is that what my problem is, Mrs. Hymowitz? That I'm ill-suited for my purpose on this planet, which is to serve my wife and kids?

You know, I look back at my college experience now and think, "What a waste, I actually went to school to study medicine, philosophy, other cultures, and the technical arts... really, it's just a shame."

Thanks for opening my eyes, Kay. What a service you have done...
 
Kid: "Mommy?"
Kay Hymenowitz: "Yes?"
Kid: "I read your article today."
Kay Hymenowitz: "Great! What'd you think?"
Kid: "...do you still like daddy?"
 
Oh wait! That last post wasn't what I meant to write at all... so here goes:

How dare you judge me? What gives you the right? God? Your Master's degree in English Literature? The fact that you were born with a vagina?

There are thousands of people with doctoral and postdoc degrees in sociology, psychology, and American culture. Why didn't one of them write an article with the premise of yours? Oh, that's right, it's because they are educated in the field of human sciences, and understand that 1) you can't and shouldn't try to impose your judgments and standards on a society, and 2) stereotyping is bad, mmmkay.
 
Alienraptor said:
...I cannot disagree with Hymowitz in her position that males these days (though I would expand that to popular culture at large) is obsessed with the crude, tasteless, material, base rubbish that is thrown at us and passed off as "popular culture." ...
...And more to the point, regardless of which sex it is, these behaviors only exist because they are promoted and facilitated by the world's corporate machinery, entirely devoid of any values....
...This phenomenon is now widespread; everyone seems to have universally bad taste.

Young people hardly ever attend the symphony, patronize theatre, or spend a night out at the opera. Museums only ever have old white people or tourists (not mutually exclusive) in them. The study of the humanities is a lost art because it is not profitable and does not lead to any high-paying jobs...
Click to expand...
I find myself agreeing with all of what you said except for what I quoted above. In general I perceived a lot of elitism in your comments.

I don't at all despair the presence of "trash" TV. I am a young person who attends the symphony and orchestra. I visit museums. I read a variety of literature. I like to consider myself someone who has an appreciation for "fine" arts. Yet I have difficulties justifying calling those arts "fine".

It is absolutely certain that the popular music of our times is simple compared to the works of great composers. To really appreciate an orchestral piece you need to have a musical attention span much longer than 32 measures, whereas the entire complexity of common rap songs can be heard in just 2. To many people, this has somehow come to mean that rap and other popular music deplorable. I do not think so; music and indeed all forms of art is simply a method of expression.

If the artist has a message to convey that is profound or enjoyable to me, then I am content to simply enjoy that message without concerning myself with what is concerned "fine" art and what is not. Art is Art. To me, "taste" is simply a matter of preference. There can be no such thing as "good taste" or "bad taste" because it is an individual characteristic. When you call some material "bad taste" you might as well be calling those who enjoy that material "bad people"

So, to my understanding, you say in your post that "everyone seems to universally be bad" and that strikes me as extremely elitist.

"Trash TV" is A-okay with me, because as long as people enjoy it, it should be made. Heck, on occasion I'm certainly in the mood for it - it doesn't take much attention, it can be humorous, it can be visually exciting. It just doesn't provoke too much thought. It's not bad, it's just easy.

Instead, I worry simply about the lack of alternatives to "Trash". I feel there would be a lot of improvement in the average person's ability to think and imagine if there was simply more sources of entertainment that required such actions. Perhaps more people would be fond of "fine art" if it were simply more exposed.

So, as it relates to the original topic, I really dislike Hymowitz's attitude towards things like drinking, playing video games, or enjoying one's sexuality as if they are somehow inferior to shopping and eating dinner with friends. It's all about personal preference.

As a final remark: the reason why playing in a the symphony isn't terribly profitable isn't just a function of popularity of "classical" music. With so many other musicians, your share of total profits is bound to be a small percentage. Furthermore, music is cheap now. When you can spend 99 cents for a song on iTunes, it becomes very difficult to justify spending $80 to see an orchestra play one or two pieces (although those compositions are much much longer). And there continues to be a huge focus on live performance over recordings. Live music is awesome, but it's not portable. Everybody has a portable player now.
tickle_me_emo said:
Men are choosing to live like teenagers and frat boys well into their 30's BECAUSE IT'S A BETTER LIFE.
Click to expand...
Exactly! If you enjoy doing that, but you can still pay the bills and make responsible decisions, then what's wrong with that. If you'd rather play games than get married and have kids, then go ahead and play games. The world isn't in any danger of underpopulation here.
 
dumb feminist said:
Give young men a choice between serious drama on the one hand, and Victoria's Secret models, battling cyborgs, exploding toilets and the NFL on the other, and it's the models, cyborgs, toilets and football by a mile.
Click to expand...

She pretty much answers why men choose to be like this, who the fuck likes serious drama? Sounds like she's jealous tbh.
 
Kaldskryke said:
Exactly! If you enjoy doing that, but you can still pay the bills and make responsible decisions, then what's wrong with that. If you'd rather play games than get married and have kids, then go ahead and play games. The world isn't in any danger of underpopulation here.
Click to expand...

whats wrong with getting married, having kids and also playing games?
 
I gotta ask where do you find a playground with open bars, XBOX 360's, and promiscous women?

The one's I go to only have tennis courts and occasionally a few ladies playing horrible version of tennis or a concrete basketball court where somebody broke off the rim.
 
Holy sexism, Batman!

Yeah, so apparently all young men love bars and clubs (I don't smoke, do drugs or even drink) and we somehow "bed" women often after meeting them in those places even though all young women are successful and not into those things at all? What women are we "bedding" exactly if they're all so great and none of them are drunken sluts who spend most of their free time in bars and clubs? If young women had good jobs, hobbies and spent their time doing innocent little things then no guy would be able to find any young women in clubs and bars, right? If young women liked nice guys and not complete assholes and losers then all assholes would be single. It must be nice to be a women and get away with all these sexist one-sided arguments. If a man wrote that he'd have been sued and called a sexist before the article even made it on the internets.

Why if I wasn't so lazy I'd sue her myself for putting me in the same category as some assholes she chose to date. *shakes fist in anger*
 
So, I'm a worthless bastard because I work my ass off and raise my son by myself because I also play video games, drink beer occasionally and every once in a great while go out to the bar?

On the other hand, my son's mother is a deadbeat, can't hold a job, doesn't even have a high school diploma or GED, has refused to support her first child for 5 years and can't even handle spending 8 hours alone with him and yet there is nothing wrong with her?

She was the one that ran around, partied and cheated while I was raising our son by myself. She has since been kicked to the curb and has a horrible life including getting knocked up again and having that child taken away. Now she bitches because she has to work 2 part time jobs to pay $500/month in child support on that child.

Yeah, who is the deadbeat here?

 
SmokeRngs said:
She was the one that ran around, partied and cheated while I was raising our son by myself. She has since been kicked to the curb and has a horrible life including getting knocked up again and having that child taken away. Now she bitches because she has to work 2 part time jobs to pay $500/month in child support on that child.

Yeah, who is the deadbeat here?
Click to expand...

Lol. That reminds me of someone i know. ex-wife had a child by the divorce lawyer.

A video game analogy of this whole ordeal to spite Hymowitz:
Counterstrike is a game about killing terrorists.
Counterstrike Source is a game about killing counter-terrorists.
so Source is a bad game cause its kill simulator training kids how to kill police.
(you can't state facts that true about both sides and pretend they are exclusive)
 
SmokeRngs said:
On the other hand, my son's mother is a deadbeat, can't hold a job, doesn't even have a high school diploma or GED, has refused to support her first child for 5 years and can't even handle spending 8 hours alone with him and yet there is nothing wrong with her?
Click to expand...

Actually, it sounds like she meets the definition of the "New Girl Order"
 
someone here has got to have connections with Anon / other hacker groups...............
 
So she based her observations on comedies with men orientated jokes that makes us look bad?

Girls like to go out and spend money on travel and overpriced clothing while we are quite happy spending it on the tech that goes into the house....sounds like a balance to me, they have their crap, and in their view we have ours.

And their are girls out there that play games just as much as men, look at group PMS!
 
Kaldskryke said:
I find myself agreeing with all of what you said except for what I quoted above. In general I perceived a lot of elitism in your comments.

I don't at all despair the presence of "trash" TV. I am a young person who attends the symphony and orchestra. I visit museums. I read a variety of literature. I like to consider myself someone who has an appreciation for "fine" arts. Yet I have difficulties justifying calling those arts "fine".

It is absolutely certain that the popular music of our times is simple compared to the works of great composers. To really appreciate an orchestral piece you need to have a musical attention span much longer than 32 measures, whereas the entire complexity of common rap songs can be heard in just 2. To many people, this has somehow come to mean that rap and other popular music deplorable. I do not think so; music and indeed all forms of art is simply a method of expression.

If the artist has a message to convey that is profound or enjoyable to me, then I am content to simply enjoy that message without concerning myself with what is concerned "fine" art and what is not. Art is Art. To me, "taste" is simply a matter of preference. There can be no such thing as "good taste" or "bad taste" because it is an individual characteristic. When you call some material "bad taste" you might as well be calling those who enjoy that material "bad people"

So, to my understanding, you say in your post that "everyone seems to universally be bad" and that strikes me as extremely elitist.

"Trash TV" is A-okay with me, because as long as people enjoy it, it should be made. Heck, on occasion I'm certainly in the mood for it - it doesn't take much attention, it can be humorous, it can be visually exciting. It just doesn't provoke too much thought. It's not bad, it's just easy.

Instead, I worry simply about the lack of alternatives to "Trash". I feel there would be a lot of improvement in the average person's ability to think and imagine if there was simply more sources of entertainment that required such actions. Perhaps more people would be fond of "fine art" if it were simply more exposed.

So, as it relates to the original topic, I really dislike Hymowitz's attitude towards things like drinking, playing video games, or enjoying one's sexuality as if they are somehow inferior to shopping and eating dinner with friends. It's all about personal preference.

As a final remark: the reason why playing in a the symphony isn't terribly profitable isn't just a function of popularity of "classical" music. With so many other musicians, your share of total profits is bound to be a small percentage. Furthermore, music is cheap now. When you can spend 99 cents for a song on iTunes, it becomes very difficult to justify spending $80 to see an orchestra play one or two pieces (although those compositions are much much longer). And there continues to be a huge focus on live performance over recordings. Live music is awesome, but it's not portable. Everybody has a portable player now.
Click to expand...

Well stated. I understand the perceived elitism (I was concerned about how to state my points without coming across as such). I suppose at a certain level, I have made a rather arbitrary choice to elevate the finer arts to a particular position of superiority. I should address this apotheosis of sorts.

It is not so much that I value the complexity of classical music over contemporary popular music, but that I value its thoughtfulness and purpose. Much of popular music is not written by its performer(s); indeed many individual artists represent a minute fraction of the work put into the music. But this particular discussion begins to wax Marxist so we shall venture no further. The corporate machines that drive the most popular of music is, as many fans of independent music would agree, constructed entirely for the purpose of creating as profitable of an environment as possible. Deprived of its creative motive, I find the product inferior. This is clearly subjective.
I enjoy contemporary music that is thoughtfully composed, with a purpose or a message from the artist. This includes music that is acoustically unique, or intended to prompt inspection of preconceptions about the rules of music (Philip Glass is a marvelous example, as is Ravel; a more familiar example would be Godspeed You! Black Emperor). It also includes lyrical music with a message designed and intended to challenge the listener (Tupac had some good tracks in this area, as does Felipe Coronel a.k.a. Immortal Technique; both have songs that raise or confront very important social issues, as do many other rappers).

This is easily extended to other forms of art and expression, and in the above respects I find that much of the content with which we are presented is woefully inadequate.

I appreciate your point about taste. This is clearly subjective. Though objectively you are obviously right, I cannot resign all sense of aesthetics. I disagree with the assumption that bad taste neccessarily implies a bad person. It is a criticism of aesthetics, not of character.

The existence of "easy-to-consume" content in popular culture is rather unavoidable, and indeed not necessarily bad. But there is no compelling reason why a piece of entertainment that is easy to absorb cannot simultaneously be thoughtful, deep and complex. In my opinion, Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto in D is a beautiful concerto, and incredibly easy to listen to. It is also musically rich and can be explored in many ways if the listener so desires. Nothing prevents either or both approaches from being possible at a given time. I fail to see why such a quality cannot exist in other forms of media, except that the thoughtfulness and richness is purposefully omitted for reasons of cost and efficiency, and the condition sustained for lack of demand for alternatives.

Clearly the relationship is highly reciprocal; demand is low for more intelligent content in popular media and culture, which sustains the prevalence of mindless entertainment and consumerism; this in turn teaches members of this culture to accept the content presented to them. A few may reject it, but that segment of the populace is not profoundly large. Large institutions do exist which contribute to alternative content, but their influence and exposure is limited. The aforementioned reciprocity confounds this situation. Those are some long words.

I am not for eliminating all fun, nor all entertainment; far from it. I believe the people of the world deserve better. Just because you don't want to think all the time does not mean you are utterly incapable of it. But by and large that is how popular culture and media treat us - as if we are incapable of thought (e.g. RIAA, MPAA). The best qualities of the "fine" arts, particularly evident in more recent art movements and the work of those underappreciated critical theorists, is to challenge its audience to think - but not just about anything. There is a time for simply enjoying things, but it is hard to argue that popular culture ever challenges us to think about the very content we are consuming, as say, Ravel's Bolero challenged audiences and critics of classical music to consider the "rules" of composition. I think there is a place for such intellectual challenges, particularly in popular culture, to encourage people to really decide what they want. Idiocracy may be gross hyperbole, and not even that good, but the main point - that we are being encouraged more and more to think less and less ("...but it's got electrolytes...") - remains valid.

Also, to Hymowitz: nice flame.
 
I've got a girlfriend who's cool with halo 3 and sex, so I think I'm all set. :rolleyes:
 
This article seem to be written by an angry women, probably the result of personal history that is fresh or still has an impact on the writer. I could go on and on still about this artile and the many way I do not agree with it but I will stop here.
 
shaggy77 said:
Hi,

The issue is the author feels that a certain age demographic is not living up to its true potential. The author focuses on certain mass media depictions i.e. several choice movies such as "Knocked Up" to emphasize their point of view...
Click to expand...


I don't even feel her opinion on "Knocked Up" is actually correct either. When I watched that movie what I came way with is that you are wrong. Yes you are wrong, more so everyone in the movie was wrong for what they had done. The main Lady, she was wrong for going out on a benge because she got a new job and having sex with some unknown guy she just met in a club. The main Guy was wrong for basically living off the settelemnt and just hanging out for years with a half baked idea. The Main chracer's wife was wrong for being so demanding and suspicous of her husband, her husband was wrong for hiding his feelings and his club. However despite how everyong had something that was wrong they still had the opportunity to correct it. The main Lady didn't get pregnant as a result of some misfortune but because of a series of bad choices
 
tickle_me_emo said:
WRONG.

What these so-called "child-men" (what an insulting phrase!) fear, with very good reason, is a LACK of TRUE commitment by women.

Women initiate most divorces (about 75%). Women then take the kids, the car, the house, and half of any remaining money or investments.

Men not only lose the above, they are effectively indentured servants for the rest of their lives. They need to pay alimony for life in some states (California, if the marriage lasts at least ten years). They must pay child support for at least eighteen years (twenty-three if the kids go to college).

If women are rewarded for destroying a marriage, and men are punished for creating a marriage, then why the hell SHOULD men volunteer to become serfs??

Marriage is no longer a smart move - more often than not, it is the single most costly mistake a man can make.

Women must accept ACCOUNTABILITY and RESPONSIBILITY if they want to restore marriage to its former status.

I won't hold my breath waiting until THAT happens.



Since female empowerment means having laws set up so that men get screwed in order to even the score of all the times men get away with rape, abuse... in order to keep the tallies even and maintain equality, then yes, men see they have no reason to get married or to have kids since they kids won't be theirs or will be taken away from them.



Men are choosing to live like teenagers and frat boys well into their 30's BECAUSE IT'S A BETTER LIFE.

Drink beer, sit around playing Halo 3, and spend all day making fart jokes with my buddies

OR

settle down with some bimbo who will turn into an old frigid bitch that will expect you to spend all your money on them, squirt out some screaming brats, get divorced, dragged through the courts and taken to the cleaners. I think this one is a no-brainer. Beer, halo, toilet humor and buddies please.
Click to expand...

Why hello to my fellow Leykis-listener. Anyway, QFT, 100% agree.

In the past year of my life I've done some hefty examinations of my future and what I intend to get out of life. Needless to say, save me a spot over in the ranks of the "child-men".

Being employed and having a job that supports me and my lifestyle? Not having to pay out money to some bitch or having some bitches hand in my wallet all the time? Being able to do what I want, when I want, under my own terms? Sounds like a deal! Sign me up.
 
Ehh whatever, as a whole, women want men, not a man that acts like a woman. What the feminazis say will not change that little fact. That or the dirty little secret that, the men a woman wants to marry is generally not the same men she wants to sleep with.
Clean up your own life ladies, b4 you go talking trash about mine.
 
Kay S. Hymowitz is a sexist person, probably just getting over a bad relationship and is in an "anti-guy" faze....
 
ATT161343.jpg
 
It's their own fault.

In the old days you had to get married to have lots of regular sex so guys ended up "buying the cow" in their 20's.

Today's women are "giving the milk for free" so where's the incentive for us to settle down at 25? It's just not there. We marry when we're good and ready, not before.

It's Male Liberation.
 
Ahh yes a biased editorial written by, you guessed it, a woman. Probably a nagging, power tripping bitch whose ex-boyfriend ignored her due to the constant drivel spewing from her mouth. He most likely preferred going out with the boys and playing Halo because he couldn't stand her.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top