Why are men dropping out of society? - mod note in 1st post

py2006 · 31-10-2016 03:08PM

intheclouds wrote: »

It tends to depend on who has the money to grab I think. A female friend of mine was fleeced by the courts with her lazy ex claiming and being granted spousal support plus half the property that she owned and he'd never paid a penny towards.

So yes, divorce can descend into money grabbing, from either side.

That has to be a rarity?

I don't believe I have ever heard of a man getting payouts from ex wive and entitlement to property. Other way round for defs.

Colser · 31-10-2016 03:11PM

py2006 wrote:

I don't believe I have ever heard of a man getting payouts from ex wive and entitlement to property. Other way round for defs.

You're wrong there,on another thread it's shown as being a common occurrence and has happened to posters on here.Sorry I don't know how to put up links.

py2006 · 31-10-2016 03:15PM

Colser wrote: »

You're wrong there,on another thread it's shown as being a common occurrence and has happened to posters on here.Sorry I don't know how to put up links.

Nope, I am right. I don't believe I have ever heard of it! :P

intheclouds · 31-10-2016 03:17PM

py2006 wrote: »

That has to be a rarity?

I don't believe I have ever heard of a man getting payouts from ex wive and entitlement to property. Other way round for defs.

In Ireland the spousal support can be awarded in either direction.

Often children stay with their mother hence she raises them and stays in the family home but when there's no kids it can go either way.

Although I do know a single father who was receiving child maintenance from an ex, because he was raising the child.

It depends on individual circumstances.

Colser · 31-10-2016 03:18PM

py2006 wrote:

Nope, I am right. I don't believe I have ever heard of it!

Head over to the separation thread..ðŸ˜

El_Duderino 09 · 31-10-2016 03:45PM

silverharp wrote:

men are providers right?

That's the type of thing the men's rights crew would be very upset by. Isn't equality all about freeing men from culture bound conventions like men having to be provided? But in the past, yes men were usually the providers.

silverharp wrote:

back when the US had an industrial economy a man working in a car plant or similar could have a house in the burbs , wife and family. that option isnt open to them now. So I dont think its expectations its just not possible - maybe they will all vote Trump and MAGA

That's potentially all true, but where does MGTOW fit into that? Surely sh1tty pay affects men and women in similar ways?

Actualky I think Trump has really struck a chord by telling people it's all rigged against white men.

Colser wrote:

Most families had one car,one holiday.no takeaways,seldom went to restaurants.shopped less,Christmas was one main toy,no phones,no TV package eat. It's not a man versus woman scenario but a change in lifestyle imo.

This is about expectations from life. People in the 50s might have been able to afford a house on an industrial wage, but they also had very little else compared to people now.

maregal wrote:

I'd like this thread to discuss the reasons why men are dropping out of society

Even if wages are lower now, I fail to see how dropping out of dating (or society as he OP calls it) is a gender issue at all.

Saying that men are dropping out of society, when you mean that they are not dating, shows that these fellas are putting dating at the centre of their society. It's literally 'putting the puzzy on a pedestal'.

I think the op sounds like the male equivalent of a woman asking 'where have all the good men gone?'

silverharp · 31-10-2016 04:08PM

Colser wrote: »

Times have changed in general.Most women work now where as in my mother's day very few did (outside the home).Most families had one car,one holiday.no takeaways,seldom went to restaurants.shopped less,Christmas was one main toy,no phones,no TV package eat. It's not a man versus woman scenario but a change in lifestyle imo.

thats fine when you start hitting middle class levels, Im talking about the group that are underperformers say in working class circles. its a future of poor minimum wage jobs, bad contracts, little certainty. I'd imagine the issue is that these men are broadly invisible to the other sex so at some stage they give up on the dream.
Im not suggesting its men v women , it might be men v the state though where the state has become a surrogate provider via welfare and lots of gov jobs that tend to go to women? it means the "fence" that men have to jun over to become "marriage material" is going up like in Japan where its blatant.
its the start of a reversion to the mean maybe where only 40% of men passed on their genes pre civilisation?

31-10-2016 04:18PM

Loads of lads on sh1t wages get married, largely to ladies on sh1t wages too.

Similarly loads of well paid folk are single.

I think the economic position has less to do with relationship status than others in here seem to think.

Fair enough. You won't see a female lecturer hook up with a minimum wage paid van driver too often.

SarahMollie · 31-10-2016 04:25PM

Got to about page 11 of this thread and couldnt take it anymore, but wanted to know if this has been mentioned?

http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Moncrieff/Highlights_from_Moncrieff/160949/Men_Going_their_Own_Way

Sean Moncrief on Newstalk interviews a guy from MGTOW.

Firstly - the man won't even identify himself, because apparently its not about him, its about the movement (???)

Cherry picks scenarios which he then goes on to apply his bias to = twisted thinking. AKA the news only portrays men in negative situations like when a man robs a shop, but apparently men who accomplish things never get any recognition in the media. So.....Elon Musk is never covered in the media? Bill Gates and his foundation? The O'Donovan brothers in Rowing?

Advocates mistreating/using women when asked about the need for physical intimacy. He also seems to think that women are constantly tricking their husbands into rearing other mens children, like this is somehow commonplace?

Most of his examples come from TV (which he can't even reference correctly) which leads me to believe that he's not living in the real world.

This is definitely bad for society and a warped way of thinking to say the least.

silverharp · 31-10-2016 04:28PM

Augeo wrote: »

Loads of lads on sh1t wages get married, largely to ladies on sh1t wages too.

Similarly loads of well paid folk are single.

I think the economic position has less to do with relationship status than others in here seem to think.

Fair enough. You won't see a female lecturer hook up with a minimum wage paid van driver too often.

sure its about average behaviour, but whatever stat you take from 1980 and look at any mature western economy, the number of women that have had children is dropping, number of marriages etc. higher divorce . short of blaming it on the demise of Disco something has happened

31-10-2016 04:47PM

silverharp wrote: »

sure its about average behaviour, but whatever stat you take from 1980 and look at any mature western economy, the number of women that have had children is dropping, number of marriages etc. higher divorce . short of blaming it on the demise of Disco something has happened

Improvements in family planning etc contribute no doubt.

El_Duderino 09 · 31-10-2016 04:54PM

silverharp wrote:

thats fine when you start hitting middle class levels, Im talking about the group that are underperformers say in working class circles. its a future of poor minimum wage jobs, bad contracts, little certainty.

Those are legitimate social problems. I've no idea why it's being viewed as a gender issue though.

silverharp wrote:

I'd imagine the issue is that these men are broadly invisible to the other sex so at some stage they give up on the dream.

Waoh the pony. Working class people get married and unemployed get married. How poor do you need to be to be invisible to the other sex? Again, if his is true why is it being viewed as a gender issue? Presumably there are women who are in sh1tty jobs who are invisible to men but we don't know about them because... they're invisible to us fellas?

silverharp wrote:

Im not suggesting its men v women, it might be men v the state though where the state has become a surrogate provider via welfare and lots of gov jobs that tend to go to women?

Why is it men vs anyone? As a matter if fact, do more government jobs go to women in terms of numbers and pay?

silverharp wrote:

it means the "fence" that men have to jun over to become "marriage material" is going up like in Japan where its blatant.

Is this really the case? Looking around, the "fence"isn't as high as you're making out. Lots of people from all socioeconomic backgrounds get into relationships. I've no idea how happy they are relative to anyone else bit it's not impossible to have a decent relationship unless you're middle class.

Augeo wrote:

Loads of lads on sh1t wages get married, largely to ladies on sh1t wages too.

Which would be fine if everyone has reasonable expectations from life. Maybe these fellas are watching too much tv and have warped expectations of what women are.

Thee has been loads and loads of talk from MGTOW fellas about attractiveness of women, and almost nothing about personality and compatibility or working as a team. I think their expectations of women are limited in some ways and blown out of proportion in other ways.

intheclouds · 31-10-2016 04:56PM

silverharp wrote: »

sure its about average behaviour, but whatever stat you take from 1980 and look at any mature western economy, the number of women that have had children is dropping, number of marriages etc. higher divorce . short of blaming it on the demise of Disco something has happened

Women used to have no control over their reproductive systems AT ALL. The pill and the coil have contributed massively to allowing COUPLES to decide not to have 16 or 17 children. Because that's how it used to be. A baby every 18-24 months for a woman's entire reproductive lifetime regardless of the ability of the couple to financially support another child. There must have been awful pressure on men as the sole provider in those times, the situation has vastly improved for men since then. Thankfully.

We have higher divorce no because we actually have divorce. We only got divorce in the past couple of decades, so naturally figures are going to be up on nothing.

bee06 · 31-10-2016 04:59PM

maregal wrote: »

I blame the single-sex school system for this. Mixed schools are becoming more common in Ireland but growing up boys and girls went to separate schools because of the Catholic church. Therefore the only time boys and girls socialized was at discos i.e. highly sexualized occasions. We never got to talk to girls in normal situations.

I don't agree with your second point but I think what you said above it a good point. I went to an all girl secondary school and it took me a long time in my early 20's to get used to talking to men under "normal" circumstances. It probably didn't help that I was painfully shy but I used to find it so nerve wracking. In my teenage years, my only interaction was the whole "will you score with my friend" kind of thing.

I think having older siblings of the opposite sex helps people relate. I'm the oldest in my family so had no older brother to interact with. However, I have two younger brothers and I can definitely say they don't put women on pedestals after growing up with three sisters!

PucaMama · 31-10-2016 05:08PM

tomofson wrote: »

This is my sort of thread me and a friend were only talking about something very similar tonight, another thing I notice when a female is murdered it is bigged up to be a crime against humanity of some sort by the media of course. Yet when a man is murdered in anyway under any circumstances its no big deal just another male on male murder. The female jail is also a lot cushier than the mans jail in fact I wouldn't even call it a prison, so female murderers get a better time in prison than male petty thieves.

Men are more creative by nature and contribute more to society yet are treated like second class citizens, I'm all for equality and it should be equal but this is not EQUALITY...

Why does men being "more creative" mean they contribute more??

silverharp · 31-10-2016 05:32PM

intheclouds wrote: »

Women used to have no control over their reproductive systems AT ALL. The pill and the coil have contributed massively to allowing COUPLES to decide not to have 16 or 17 children. Because that's how it used to be. A baby every 18-24 months for a woman's entire reproductive lifetime regardless of the ability of the couple to financially support another child. There must have been awful pressure on men as the sole provider in those times, the situation has vastly improved for men since then. Thankfully.

We have higher divorce no because we actually have divorce. We only got divorce in the past couple of decades, so naturally figures are going to be up on nothing.

I wasnt talking about Ireland, if you want to look at trends look at the US, Japan, Britain or Germany

intheclouds · 31-10-2016 06:15PM

silverharp wrote: »

I wasnt talking about Ireland, if you want to look at trends look at the US, Japan, Britain or Germany

The same point applies re contraception worldwide. The pill only emerged in the 60s.

I'm not really sure what point you are making about marriage rates being down. Marriage involves 2 people so if less people are marrying both genders are responsible. Same for divorce rates.

ressem · 31-10-2016 06:18PM

Is it isolation or loneliness (an unmet desire to be feel close to anyone. Distinct from depression or mourning)

https://newrepublic.com/article/113176/science-loneliness-how-isolation-can-kill-you

There are always men and women that drop out of society to some level. Some people, have an impulse in the mind pushing them to avoid contact with strangers, neighbours and even colleagues, family with whom they're on OK terms; and lesser social drive to counteract that.

According to that article, it's has elements of inherited behaviour and lack of training.

A trite example would be commuters that will walk 3 train carriages to find an unoccupied double seat, in contrast to those that will try to start a chat immediately with a stranger.

I'd put myself in that category of dropouts mentioned by the OP. Sure, go to work. Return from work. Do basic maintenance of shopping and commuting. Try to be polite, 'thank the bus driver'; offer and provide help, or share an umbrella if someone is stuck. But no interest in any relationships, no friendships, no keeping in contact. Just about everyone, when out of sight is out of mind.

And seeing as my boards account age is in it's teens; I don't foresee myself growing out of this behaviour at this stage.
And if I ever looked blankly at anyone's attempt to be friendly, that might be reading this, sorry 'twas me not you.

silverharp · 31-10-2016 07:10PM

intheclouds wrote: »

The same point applies re contraception worldwide. The pill only emerged in the 60s.

I'm not really sure what point you are making about marriage rates being down. Marriage involves 2 people so if less people are marrying both genders are responsible. Same for divorce rates.

the pill changed dynamics for sure. my point is it seems to be more difficult to start a family for men because of economics so at some stage they give up and say its not for them and then things like "Tinder" are highlighting differences in expectations.
The focus of society seems to be to advance women beyond what an egalitarian would suggest. the one downside is that every man that is quota'd out of a job is one less guy that provide for a family. or the fact that more women are going to college than men or that girls are doing better in school than boys and nobody seems interested in redressing that balance then one offshoot is that a girl entering adulthood has less of a chance of having a family than her parents or grandparents. Maybe there is a natural balance and everyone is happy? if women dont have to stick to their traditional gender roles then I see no problem with a % of men not sticking to theirs? If some men want to downshift and "play video games" good for them.

H3llR4iser · 31-10-2016 09:25PM

ressem wrote: »

A trite example would be commuters that will walk 3 train carriages to find an unoccupied double seat, in contrast to those that will try to start a chat immediately with a stranger.

This would be me in the DART in the morning (only difference, I look for the whole block of 4 empty seats)

As for the "starting a chat with a stranger", it's not like nowadays one gets a lot of "vibes" from anyone else that they'd be willing to have "converstation", quite the opposite.

As for the issue at hand, I won't comment extensively as most people here have a very made up mind; I will just say that anyone, woman man or child, need to have their head well stuck down in the sand not to see that there is a certain tendency in today's western society towards both ignoring male problems (do we want to talk about medical research investment, plucking a random example?) and having the "men=expendable", "women=precious" attitude even in mainstream media.

That said, however, it's very important to point out that outside of the news outlets, the web and the discussion forums, the situation is a bit different; I may have personally experienced or witnessed a couple of episodes of prejudice (an ex girlfriend of mine had a drunken tumble in the toilet, went for a precautionary x-ray and the female nurse kept trying to get her to falsely state I had hit her; a friend's wife was randomly attacked by a drunk person on the street, sported a "fat lip" for a while and every one of her friends wanted to "talk to her about her husband"...), but reality tends to be less litigious and hooked up on words than the Internet. Unfortunately, today we're all losing the plot a bit and letting the lines blur.

As an example, if one wanted to portray a picture of Ireland through boards.ie threads alone, they'd conclude it's a fascist cesspit way past economical and social collapse with queues for the dole that go three or four times around the block, filled to the brim with xenophobia, isolationism, street thugs and junkies, feral children and con artists of every kind

Mister Vain · 31-10-2016 10:07PM

SarahMollie wrote: »

Got to about page 11 of this thread and couldnt take it anymore, but wanted to know if this has been mentioned?

http://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/Moncrieff/Highlights_from_Moncrieff/160949/Men_Going_their_Own_Way

Sean Moncrief on Newstalk interviews a guy from MGTOW.

Firstly - the man won't even identify himself, because apparently its not about him, its about the movement (???)

Cherry picks scenarios which he then goes on to apply his bias to = twisted thinking. AKA the news only portrays men in negative situations like when a man robs a shop, but apparently men who accomplish things never get any recognition in the media. So.....Elon Musk is never covered in the media? Bill Gates and his foundation? The O'Donovan brothers in Rowing?

Advocates mistreating/using women when asked about the need for physical intimacy. He also seems to think that women are constantly tricking their husbands into rearing other mens children, like this is somehow commonplace?

Most of his examples come from TV (which he can't even reference correctly) which leads me to believe that he's not living in the real world.

This is definitely bad for society and a warped way of thinking to say the least.

"Why have a wife when I can have a life." Although he did say that living life without women is not the primary consideration with MGTOW. It's just to live a life. I don't think its warped though. Have a look at TFL if you want to see warped.

El_Duderino 09 · 31-10-2016 11:04PM

Mister Vain wrote:

"Why have a wife when I can have a life." Although he did say that living life without women is not the primary consideration with MGTOW. It's just to live a life. I don't think its warped though. Have a look at TFL if you want to see warped.

If life without women is not the primary concern that's fair enough. A fair few of the posts advocating MGTOW gave had some fairly outrageous things about their view of the world. I suppose you'll only hear from he noisiest ones in the movement.

Would most of the MGTOW crew be inclined to get into a relationship if the opportunity arose?

tomofson · 01-11-2016 05:05AM

whaleofaday wrote: »

I just can't get my head around your thought process here. I've never seen any murder described as anything less than an atrocity, regardless of gender.

Can you explain what you mean about how womens' prisons are "cushier" than mens? Could it be to do with overcrowding or the simple fact that there are more males in the prison population than females? I'm genuinely curious as to how you have come to the conclusion that "men are more creative by nature and contribute more to society"...care to expand?

I have seen the dochas centre and I can guarantee you its more of a spa than a prison, showers in cells just one main luxury.

Men are more creative which leads them to be more inventive

intheclouds · 01-11-2016 08:41AM

tomofson wrote: »

Men are more creative which leads them to be more inventive

What's informing this subjective opinion?

Chrome Autofill · 01-11-2016 09:21AM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If life without women is not the primary concern that's fair enough. A fair few of the posts advocating MGTOW gave had some fairly outrageous things about their view of the world. I suppose you'll only hear from he noisiest ones in the movement.

Would most of the MGTOW crew be inclined to get into a relationship if the opportunity arose?

Many women do cuckold their partners, this is backed by science.

Blacktie. · 01-11-2016 09:32AM

Chrome Autofill wrote: »

Many women do cuckold their partners, this is backed by science.

Well lads better close the thread. Can't this guys evidence.

Chrome Autofill · 01-11-2016 09:47AM

Blacktie. wrote: »

Well lads better close the thread. Can't this guys evidence.

Google it yourself if you don't believe me.

Wibbs · 01-11-2016 09:53AM

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Would most of the MGTOW crew be inclined to get into a relationship if the opportunity arose?

I strongly suspect the majority would, because a majority who have come to this "philosophy" because they feel their choices in that area are limited or nonexistent. This is NOT the usual "you only hate women cos you can't get one *blows raspberry*" response to the MGTOW. It's a personal opinion based on much of what I've read on the MGTOW stuff. It tends - like most such interweb stuff - to be an echo chamber, where men discuss PUA/Redpill and MGTOW and egg each other on. I would say that there are different points and divisions mind you. There are certainly the men who do have a choice and still feel that it's not worthwhile getting into long term relationships. At the other end there are the invisible men.

Chrome Autofill wrote: »

Many women do cuckold their partners, this is backed by science.

Bro Science(™). Just like "Men are from Mars" and all that stuff is largely Chick Think(™). It's based on single extremely dodgy "studies" and because it fits the philosophy it's regurgitated ad nauseum.

Wibbs · 01-11-2016 09:56AM

Oh and PS, Chrome Autofill banned. Again. If you ever required an illustration of how obsessive and how far down the rabbit hole PUA and Red Pill can take a person then this Scanlas rereg is it. So much so that his username has found his way into my browser's custom dictionary.

whaleofaday · 01-11-2016 11:37AM

Isn't there a danger that becoming part of this movement and identifying strongly with the beliefs just ends up becoming a self fulfilling prophecy?

I just looked up one MGTOW site to find out more and it does seem quite extreme. The handle is "men protecting their own sovereignty above all else"...protecting it from what? Women, I presume. (By the way, the choice of the word sovereignty is extremely interesting since scrolling down the same page reveals a statement about how there is no such thing as male privilege and "everyone knows it"...bit of a conflict there).

Lumping all women into some kind of evil homogeneous mass is a danger in itself - you stop seeing women as individuals each with unique personalities, passions, beliefs, morals etc and then you stop seeing their humanity. And there is no way that a man with these kinds of extreme "self preservation" beliefs about women could go about his daily life and not make it known in some way. People tend to avoid those with a chip on their shoulder because it makes them quite unpleasant to be around. It just seems that MGTOW comes across as being followed by blokes with a victim mentality. I'd love to be corrected on this, if anyone can help me understand this better.

I've met women who feel the same way about men and they are equally exhausting and hard to spend time with. It's like they have settled into one world view and this colours their entire outlook on life. "Where are all the good men" etc. And anyone with healthy boundaries and self worth avoids getting involved with people like this.

Why are men dropping out of society? - mod note in 1st post

Comments