Single men have never been civilization’s most responsible actors; they continue to be more troubled and less successful than men who deliberately choose to become husbands and fathers. –Kay S. Hymowitz in WSJ
So I write for a troubled website? Rush to fatherhood is more responsible than taking my time and getting my life in order? So I haven’t been fairly successful to date because I’m not out trying to club my Wilma and drag her back to my Harlem 3rd floor palace? Are you out of your f*cking mind? Why yes, I think you are.
My face before riotous laughter ensued.
These are just a few of the questions and comments I had after reading the excerpt above from a WSJ article titled “Where Have the Good Men Gone?” by Kay S. Hymowitz. You can only imagine how many other thoughts and outbursts I had from reading the unintentionally hilarious article. I started off sitting on my couch then ended up on the floor between my coffee table and said couch frozen in crunch position with shoulders bouncing in laughter. The only things good about this article other than the ab workout were that it wasn’t written by a Black women and that the author looks about as delusional as what was penned. Not trying to be tacky. Look up a picture and you’ll see what I mean. Anyways…
I struggled a bit in figuring out how I wanted to tackle this post. There was so much wrong with the opinions expressed in this article that I wonder how it even made its way onto the WSJ website in the first place? Rather than elaborate on why I’m glad the author isn’t friends with any of the women I take a liking to, I’ll try to summarize and share my 2 cents without giving you a really long one. Pause.
Hymowitz is basically arguing that there’s a shortage of g00d men in their 20s because many of us are stuck between adolescence and adulthood in a place called Pre-Adulthood. From what’s described, this is a place characterized by irresponsible responsibleness and the ability to write our own tickets which in turn somehow retards us in our pursuit of forced marital happiness. This snippet sorta sums it up:
Unlike adolescents, however, pre-adults don’t know what is supposed to come next. For them, marriage and parenthood come in many forms, or can be skipped altogether. In 1970, just 16% of Americans ages 25 to 29 had never been married; today that’s true of an astonishing 55% of the age group. In the U.S., the mean age at first marriage has been climbing toward 30 (a point past which it has already gone in much of Europe). It is no wonder that so many young Americans suffer through a “quarter-life crisis,” a period of depression and worry over their future.
Right. Because relationships and/or marriage solves everything and puts the mind and heart at ease. Guess that means the divorce rate is acceptable since it means people are at least trying right? My head is shaking like a polaroid picture.
I can’t help but think that the people that subscribe to beliefs like this deserve a stretch of unhappiness somewhere along the way. This emphasis on hopping into a relationship because it’s the right thing to do despite the fact it isn’t the right thing to do is part of the reason that the “how to find love” articles and blog posts tend to be so popular. As I was reading, I also found myself thinking about how many times I’ve seen or heard women complain about a man saying “I’m too busy with my career” or “I’m pursuing my dreams” as a way to avoid commitment and the accompanying responsibility. Sometimes it’s accurate and for the better.
I’m doing well in my day gig as a professional cookie baker aka HRman. I’m also tied up in an assortment of other ventures and opportunities that have me aggressively using google calendar like I’ve never used it before. These things take an enormous amount of time, which in turn affects my ability to commit to someone at the level they deserve. But according to this article, I haven’t reached adulthood because I haven’t accomplished what I deem necessary for my own success yet and still like to have fun on the weekends? Pound sand. Seriously.
A good man realizes when he’s not able to meet obligations and communicates this upfront. He doesn’t take a shotgun wedding approach to everything because he knows that won’t bring him the happiness he wants. A good man doesn’t live on someone else’s schedule. He lives on the one that’s put him in the best position to be successful in all aspects of his life including love.
But what do I know? I’m not grown yet. I guess I’ll wait for this growth spurt, holler at the Clearasil, and make plans for a wife before I’m even financially stable. Yeah, that’ll solve everything. In the mean time, I’m moving back into mama’s basement.
Still Shaking My Head,
for the record, i know lots of young guys but they don't mirror any of those people she cites as examples in her article. the young men that orbit my world have a pretty good grasp on what they'd like their futures to look like and are working to get there. i question the judgement (and sanity) of the women that get involved with one peter pan after another and then cry foul. it's not like they're in disguise – if he's still living in mama's basement and a bong is his best friend…
tho i did nod slightly with one part of her piece. the 'cultural uncertainty about the social role of men' – and the reality that husbands and fathers are now often viewed as optional. of course anyone with a working knowledge of familial constructs, or heck, a working flat screen that tunes in dr. phil knows how not optional those roles are for men – and woman and children, too. but, that has little to do with age and more to do with cultural/societal expectations.
the good ones haven't disappeared – they are developing into great ones. so keep on doing your thing, young(ish) ones.
oh, and you're right, her pic doesn't help matters at all.
I wanted to include the part about the roles of husband and father being optional, but didn't know how to weave that in. The thing with the article was that she weaved in and out of lucidity and reality, so any of the good points were sorta lost with me.
i saw the article…
i rolled my eyes at the article..
and i snickered at the comments…pretty much dead on imo…this was the eventual result from what has been going on for the past 40-50 years..
but that's neither here nor there.
but if you'll excuse me, i have some video games to go play. #Manchild
I went ahead and read this article by Hymowitz to make a balanced analysis. This article makes her sound loopy, bitter and hopeless in young men coming up. My uncle and father are not good men and they’re in their 50s. Let’s see her explain this one. I’ve concluded, in my short time here on earth, that a good man is a good man regardless of age, ethnicity or location. Her definition of pre-adulthood can be applied to men and women in their 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and so on. Wall Street Journal ought to be ashamed of themselves with this article…and the fact that they have no crossword puzzle.
P.S…you shouldn’t use Clearasil. It’s not healthy for your skin. Use Neutrogena…it’s doctor recommended to fight acne.
Nice thought provoking post.
Nice note on the Clearasil. **puts down circular acidic paddy thingie.**
"…a good man is a good man regardless of age, ethnicity or location…" And gets better with age… (wink)
@Symbiotic Loner
Oh, is that so? I'll make a mental note of that.
While you're taking notes, many a "good" woman have said similar. (smile) As is my style, I like to "fair things up". AND, I like to take notes.
Yes, she's a bit off and loopy. Plus I felt the angry tone in her writing. Also, I cosign Neutrogena. I've tried all of the fancy stuff. Best skin care brand around. 🙂
That WSJ article made my eyes bleed….lol!
And the way the article was written…it’s almost like it’s saying that for a person to be single is a BAD thing….when it’s fun. I am beginning to think that some people don’t like their single status and in turn they are taking it out on all of the folks that are enjoying being single while it lasts….
At one point, I considered sticking needles in my eyes but then the laughter overtook me.
This is my first SBM comment! Long time lurker, though lol.
As a woman, the WSJ article didn't strike me as being so negative. I did not see it as an attack on men my age, but more so as a sociological observation/commentary. I do understand your reaction and sensitivity to her opinion though, because your demographic is the target of her analysis. I also think it's interesting that a few male relationship bloggers have had this same personal reaction. Yet, at some point, some (if not most) have said something to the effect of "it's annoying when every woman I've dated thinks I'm talking about her in every post"–implying that she should recognize when something is not about her and not take offense. In that same vein, if you don't feel you fit Hymowitz's description of a pre-adult man and his motivations, why get aggy?
Back to the subject at hand. To me, the author was merely noting that our generation has different values than those of our parents at this age. Also notably, it seems while women have evolved past men AND women of previous generations in their academic and professional lives, we have not necessarily surpassed those same demographics with regard to our want/timeline for getting married and having a family. The fact of the matter is that this has changed the dating game/courting process and a lot 20-something year old women are frustrated. Whereas 25-year-old men and women wanted pretty much the same thing in 1970, that is no longer true. I think the article did a fine job of pointing out ONE of the roots of that disconnect.Though, I do concede that "Good" was not a good word choice on Hymowitz's part.
Yikes, that was lengthy. Sorry!
If the "like" button was still available, I would "like" this comment.
I think you covered all of your bases on this one… great job.
Yeah, you need to be a regular in the mix. I just clicked the invisible like button.lol
Co-Sign!
Great breakdown. You summed up my thoughts better. I didn't find her article to be THAT offensive. It was obvious who her target was. Yes our parent's generation was different and had different priorities. We're in a different time.
"As a woman, the WSJ article didn’t strike me as being so negative. I did not see it as an attack on men my age, but more so as a sociological observation/commentary"
yep. and cosign the entire comment…
Ditto. I clicked on the link expecting something far worse, but what I read actually resonated with quite a few things I came across in past Sociology courses.
I don't think I could of said it any better myself….
There is def a split (as a woman) b/n this need to excel professionally and personally. Although I want to be head b!tch in charge at a firm it doesn't mean that I want to wait until all my ducks are in a row to also have a marriage-heading relationship. Lately this just seems to be the two options these days with guys waiting to get their lives together and women doing the same.
Good stuff Dukie.
haha thanks 🙂 way to call me out! i better not start catching Duke shade lol
I'm standing in the co-sign line for this one. Excellent breakdown.
heyyyy baby girlies! and hey to you too mommy! #seewhatididthere
I would assume the author of the article was not talking about men like you Slim, seeing as though you have your career in order and go to a fulfilling job everyday, couple with a mindset of yours atleast from what I've read from you.
I do agree with the idea the idea of "cultural uncertainty of the social role of men". I've been saying it for quite sometime now that I feel men are lost. But now as opposed to viewing it as unwillingness to change with the times, they just don't know what there supposed to do or how to fit into a world where women are essentially independent. As oppose to fighting the change and demanding for barbaric ideals in order to confuse and emotionally manipulate women's desires for a mate and children they need to work with us and relinquish the ideals of the past of what a man and woman ought to be individually and to one another.
In terms of dating and marriage I thought this limbo was a good thing. I'm still surprised young men and women still get married in their early 20's. I figured they would know better by now lol. Studies show college educated individuals who marry later in life are more likely to have good marriages and less chance of divorce. Financial stanility and realism is essentially apparent by heading into a marriage later in life. I know many men who wouldn't mind getting married now, because its what they've been taught is next. Men and women alike are going into the role not because they are truly devoted to this one individual but because they have been conditioned to seek the engagement or they were knocked up lol.
Good Points.
I co sign here!
I married early 20's. Although it was a great experience, my ex-wife recognized that there was a part of herself that she never had the opportunity to explore because we were conditioned to get married when it seemed like the "right thing to do when people loved each other"
It took me 2 years to get over this Mount Kill-a-Man-jaro, I'm proud that she stayed loyal to herself versus a contract.
Commitment doesn't reflect MATURITY…commitment reflects purpose or ambition for a desired result. However, society has warped the idea of commitment to mean something more than what it really is. So if I commit to someone I'm mature, but if I don't liberate someone who doesn't wanna commit, I'm immature? Love lets go, yet it endures according to circumstance.
There are some people who are practical in seeking a mate (loosely romantic), and those who are actually spiritual in seeking a mate (romantic). I prefer the latter of the two; but how can a single male accomplish this union without having a 10-20 year grace period to gather some experience?
" I’ve seen or heard women complain about a man saying “I’m too busy with my career” or “I’m pursuing my dreams” as a way to avoid commitment and the accompanying responsibility."
Women who think like that are misusing the term "responsibility". I have a responsibility to MYSELF…she's trying to make feel miserable for not submitting to her selfish standards. Misery loves company right?
"Commitment doesn’t reflect MATURITY…commitment reflects purpose or ambition for a desired result. However, society has warped the idea of commitment to mean something more than what it really is. So if I commit to someone I’m mature, but if I don’t liberate someone who doesn’t wanna commit, I’m immature? Love lets go, yet it endures according to circumstance."
Allow me to disagree. Commitment as it relates to various spheres of life does, in fact, reflect maturity. That is why people who are unable to follow through with anything are regarded as immature. Mind you, maturity also dictates that you realize when it is best to let go of something. Staying committed to a course that you will likely finish with no more than a 45% in instead of dropping it and keeping your GPA intact is no sign of maturity.
Allow me to disagree. Commitment as it relates to various spheres of life does, in fact, reflect maturity. That is why people who are unable to follow through with anything are regarded as immature. Mind you, maturity also dictates that you realize when it is best to let go of something. Staying committed to a course that you will likely finish with no more than a 45% in instead of dropping it and keeping your GPA intact is no sign of maturity.
(shrugs) mmmk
Excellently written. I agree with you 100%. No way does it make sense that rushing into a marriage equals adulthood and that article was so hard to read I'm not sure I finished reading it. Wow and to think she wrote an entire book.Smh.
I've heard what she described but it being called 'extended adolescence'. I experienced it. I knew it when I was doing it. It only really stopped for me recently with the death of a long-time friend. I had that 'what-wait' moment.
The problem with reactions to articles like this is that NOBODY wants to be told what they are doing is NOT a human norm–especially if it's not a statistical norm. I had a SO come out the gate telling me no man should even consider marriage until they're 35. I nodded thinking, "Nga, don't try to normalize your dysfunction." Men have been marrying SUCCESSFULLY for generation upon generation. Yet, today, they must wait until 35 because it's what the SO had to do? Never mind he had friends and family who were all married by 28 and are still married decades later (with no outside kids and messed up credit). Give me a break. He went on to say men need to get themselves together. I'm an asshole so I flatly asked, "Well then that would mean men two generations must have been smarter cus they were able to get themselves in a position to provide for a family by 25. It must be something else because today's men don't seem less capable. Back in the day, those men didn't have nearly as many mainstream opportunities as you guys do now. I wonder how they were so successful." I think that's when he fell in love with me.
"don’t try to normalize your dysfunction". Exactly. That's why I said we should discredit the entire article. She made some good points. My parents have been married for 33 years. Yeah, it was rough in the beginning but they have a bond like nothing I see today. Waiting until 35 on purpose is silly to me. There are alot of men today who have their priorities all messed up. This is the man I think she was referring to.
"…especially if it’s not a statistical norm."
SHOULD BE
"…especially if it’s a statistical norm."
" …. Well then that would mean men two generations must have been smarter cus they were able to get themselves in a position to provide for a family by 25. It must be something else because today’s men don’t seem less capable."
I would HIGHLY disagree with that. In the 60s, 70s and 80s a man could get a job in a factory at 18 and make enough to support a family. This is not true in today's financial climate – all those stable jobs have been outsourced. The bachelor's degree is going the way of the high school diploma and it's becoming common to need a master's degree or better to be competitive in corporate America.
IMHO, a man needs to make $75,000+ (AFTER taxes) to support a wife, and 2-3 children on his one income comfortably. Making that much is not necessarily possible in your early twenties. you need time to get an education, get your foot in the door and move up the ranks a few times.
I think it's great people are putting off marriage until they're REALLY ready. Families are stronger and more stable when the unit is financially viable. Nothing is sadder than when you see a man out with his wife and children and he has that miserable, tired "wtf did I get myself into?" look on his face, while the wife is happy as a clam and completely oblivious to her busband's misery.
If a woman is hell-bent on having children and a husband before age 30 then she needs to find an older man (30+) who is stable and family-oriented. The young bucks just aren't there yet and as a woman you have deal with that reality.
lol @ shaking like a polaroid picture.
well written, sir.
i have to say though, i didn't see the article as so extremely negative. she might be bitter personally, but the article seems to be pointing out statistics and comparing them to the past more so than anything.
i do think her opting to use the word "good" was a stretch for sure, because good men and women are naturally waiting longer to marry simply for all those factors she named in her piece… degrees take years… positioning yourself at a comfortable place in your career where you can even earn enough to provide for a family… takes years. our society now does not provide for stability until mid to late twenties, and i think stable individuals will definitely be more successful at marriage rather than jumping in and trying to make it work.
good post.
I've always said that for men, marriage is as much about station in life as it is about the woman you're marrying and age. Most times, a man will get married when he gets to the point in his life where he can look out at the next 5-10 years and see exactly what will happen.
I can understand why this would be frustrating to women, particularly since these men aren't abstaining from all interaction with women during these times of uncertainty.
Good post though Slim. I thought you captured how many men in their late 20's feel.
"I can understand why this would be frustrating to women, particularly since these men aren’t abstaining from all interaction with women during these times of uncertainty."
YES!!!
This is what frustrated me during most of my 20's. I understood that the guys that I dated weren't at the point of wanting to be settled down because they still had things they needed to accomplish. But I never understood how they could be cool with doing EVERYTHING else, BUT settling down…lol. I never understood why they wouldn't just leave me alone all togther… I mean they knew what I was looking for.
Took me a while to realize that I need to stop trying to understand it and just take it for what it is. And… I guess I chilled out a bit, too…lol. 🙂
But I loved your entire comment…
It's not that we are cool with doing everything except settling down its just that settling down is a big responsibility. We have our own ready check that women don't seem to get and it's not until we pass that check that we get married.
yup… gotcha. And I know that NOW… but when I was younger, I just didn't get it…lol. Took me a while…
When a man's ready… he's ready.
SO TRUE! Men get married to whomever it is he's dating (given that she's wifey material) when he's ready to settle down. There's no magic to it …
As a woman you have two choices:
A) Bide your time and wait in the wings for your man of choice to be ready
B) Find a man who expresses an interest in marriage and family and get the ring sooner rather than later.
I'm with you 100% on this comment. I never understood that either, and probably never will…but just recognizing that it is a trend was enough for me to eventually learn to chill out and stop seeking those guys out with hopes that they would "change."
"But I never understood how they could be cool with doing EVERYTHING else, BUT settling down…lol. I never understood why they wouldn’t just leave me alone all togther… I mean they knew what I was looking for."
God Yes!
Well Im just learning this and I must say it was really pissing me off. But I have a better understanding now. Though I still would rather guys leave me be.
exactly…. i actually think this might lead to a surge of winter-spring relationships.
yes yes yes! women in that age range somewhat audition nearly every man they date for the husband role (even when they are nowhere near ready to be someone's wife), but men are absolutely not auditioning every woman they take down.
yup… thats where the disconnect comes in…lol.
[LIKE]
C'mon! Even car insurance knows that single young men are not statistically the most responsible in society. lol!
Just because you or someone you know does not fit the profile that doesnt not make this study false. The problem with generalizations is that there are always going to be outliers. You do not disregard the data because of the outliers.
Now in regards to the article… I believe there was a lot of truth in there. We have definitely changed as a society since the 70's so of course this has affected our marrying patterns as well as our thoughts on gender roles.
My extended adolescence ended when I didn't have to pay that stupid under 25 fee to rent a car.lol. Speaking of insurance, I need to go hollet at Geico for my money or the good neighbor.
I work in insurance as an analyst. You still pay less if you are married (in most states).
Oh… and about holla'n dont forget we are on your side! lol!
Well, hold on. Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. I see both sides. Yes, I agree with you Slim in that no one should ever rush into marriage. The fact that divorce rate is so high means the quality of marriage is falling. That in itself is an incentive to take things slow. My man proposed 2 times: when I was pregnant and when I left him years later. I couldn't say yes because I knew the quality of marriage was going to be poor. I don't believe in divorce so I need us to be ready on all levels. People married more back in the day because there was less emphasis on desire and more emphasis on duty.
On the other hand, she made some good points. Some of us justify ourselves out of commitment. I can put everything before relationships if I choose too. We put so much emphasis on things that shouldn't matter at the end of the day that we ignore our basic needs for companionship. Before we know it, we're old and alone. My need for a mate is primal. I know this. Sure, I may have time but how much time do I have? I don't want opportunities to pass me by because I was chasing the dollar and a dream.
"People married more back in the day because there was less emphasis on desire and more emphasis on duty."
That's interesting. it sounds pretty constraining, though I get it. Naturally people have a lot more options today so the timetable has gotten extended. But the idea of "I really need to start thinking about find a wife" hasn't even touch the furthest regions of my mind. I don't know that I'll ever have that attitude. I feel like it'll just happen.
I don't think anyone should start "looking for a wife". That old school mentality is constraining to a point. I don't think it will just happen either because most relationships don't start out marriage ready. That part takes work but you'll definitely know when it's time for you.
@ SFG
The world is so full of temptations and distractions that one may not know when they are truly ready.
IMO, there is NEVER a perfect time to get married. You can go to college, get a degree, get paid and still end up broke after you say "I do"…then what?
"Temptation & Distraction"
THIS!!!
I know. I was actually just trying to be nice. lol I don't plan on waiting until I'm 35 to settle down. You're right, it will never be perfect timing. It takes work and a desire to settle down with that person.
i'm 29. still in school and i can barely support myself. what i look like jumping into a marriage just because i've reached a certain age? i will never put a limit on the age i should be married. i'm with TMIMITW on this one. i'm waiting till i get to a certain point in life before i get married. its not something that i will just jump head first into.
I do believe that there is a difference in the way men are viewing marriage. To be personal, I think that Black men REALLY struggle with this, and Black women struggle somewhat too. The fact of the matter is that we no longer see marriage as a part of what it means to be an adult. We have a list of things it means to grow and mature, but we have started leaving marriage off that list. For me my value system leads me to want a family and marriage is a critical part of that for me. Therefore, when I think of the type of man I want to be perceived as, marriage is a part of that part of my maturity. Most of my peers just do not echo my same sentiments.
This weekend I told a girl, and she probably was shocked that I complimented her in this way, that she would make a great wife. My reason was because she a had strong desire to be a wife. Most people have no idea what it means to want to be a husband, or what it means to be a husband. They sort of just fall into it on their own schedule.
I'd like to say that I think our white counterparts share the same problem, but i've just been observant to their approach to dating and after college they typically date women with whom they have intentions on marrying. To a large extent than that of the African American community, they view marriage as a sign of success and virtue. Whereas Black men, have no intentions on marrying the women they are dealing with and don't regard marriage as a sign of success or virtue. This is a deeper much more rich topic that may be worth a podcast in the future.
Welp! I agree with your entire comment. I had a really good white guy friend. We share the same birthday. When he turned 30 and wasn't married, he was an official failure. He wasn't really grown in his mind. He had somehow made it to 30 without having found a woman to be his wife. This bothered him. He's married now to a lovely woman. Another difference I noticed was that he was dating women from a trusting stand point. He didn't convict every woman of being a gold-digging whore. He thought he was smart enough to choose women who weren't those things. He assumed he was capable of choosing wife-iesque women.
I enjoyed reading this comment.
lol, I think Reecie hired herself to be my voice while I'm away toiling for the man.
I'm so glad a man said this…and a black one at that. Excellent and insightful!! In the island culture, it's like you're groomed to be a wife. At a young age, we're taught domesticated things. I notice in american culture, there's more emphasis individuality and choice. I'm not saying one is better than the other but I like to find a balance in the two…because eventually I want to be someone's mate. I think that's our purpose, it's just hard to find a balance so some of us choose one over the other. We don't see the virtue in commitment. We rather "play house" (which is really no different) instead of being bound by legalities.
Great comment!!! and so true…
I grew up in a predominately white suburb, and pretty much ALL of my white classmates are already married with kids. I do agree with you… in general, they view marriage differently…
With you on the podcast idea Doc.
I gotta be somewhere on that podcast, I feel like I have some value to add to it
@ Dr. J
Great comment.
i love this comment.
i've received that compliment before, and i overlooked it because it was our first date, but it's a nice thing for a man to think about you. no one wants to hear they'd make a great jumpoff. lol
anyhoo. lovely comment.
Since I'm running late again I'll simply #co-sign this statement. As a black man, I'm sad to concede this point but it does appear to be an accurate description.
"Whereas Black men, have no intentions on marrying the women they are dealing with and don’t regard marriage as a sign of success or virtue."
Thats because success is subjective. My marital status should not be an indicator of success or failure, but an indicator of my condition as a human being. The nature of my marital status is no different than the nature of my health status.
Marriage and kids doesn't define a man. A man is defined by character; not the conditions surrounding his life.
What bothered me the most about this article was the author's one-sided "analysis" of pre-adulthood. This concept is not new, nor is it unique to men. Because women, as she puts it, continue to pursue careers and such, does that mean we are ready to get married? Sure the biological clock and years of social norms weigh in on the desire of many women to be married, but does that mean we understand what it means to be wives any more than these men she talks about understand what it means to be husbands? And she assumes that all women want to get married. Maybe that's changing too, though. Considering the state of marriage, I'm not so sure that the blame can be attributed to one gender or the other. We are missing each other along the way in some ways, but I don't think all hope is lost. Not for me at least. Our generation is basically writing new rules. How the rules play out of has yet to be seen.
ure the biological clock and years of social norms weigh in on the desire of many women to be married, but does that mean we understand what it means to be wives any more than these men she talks about understand what it means to be husbands?
Sweet Jesus I wish more women thought this way!
marry me…
Your response was a summary of all the points I had in my head and didn't get a chance to write down. The conversation was so one-sided that it looked at the female population as ready willing and able, without viewing the changes in society and it's effect on woman views.
Exactly.
Ummmmm…guys latched on to that comment quick…lol.
For every two women that don't want to get married there are 10 that do.
Let's keep it 100 here if we are truly looking for solutions…k!
That's exactly my point. Just because those 8 out of 10 women want to get married doesn't mean they should or are ready to. Want doesn't = should. Same goes for a man who doesn't have his ish together but wants to have babies and a family, with no way to provide. As I understand it, marriage isn't just about love and all that picture book stuff.
[LIKE]
" but does that mean we understand what it means to be wives any more than these men she talks about understand what it means to be husbands? And she assumes that all women want to get married. Maybe that’s changing too, though. Considering the state of marriage…"
Yeeees!!! There is soooo much to consider when making ONE commitment. Conditions change all the time, and although women acknowledge this fact, it seems to hold little relevance in decision making because DESIRE supersedes. Which is understandable. But if you think with your mind, instead of your heart, have we considered the divorce rate? It's not to imply that OUR marriage would drop into that abyssmal catagory….but the probability doesn't give a sense of security and warmth.
Change is a great factor to consider in decision-making.
Ask yourself, how many times did you change your mind about your career choice when you were a kid between teenage years…and college? Very few people KNOW what they wanna be when they reach adulthood because as we grow….we discover new aspects of ourselves, which changes our outlook on career choice. It's always advisable to follow your dreams for the sake of happiness, rather than follow what's practical, be miserible, and eventually unproductive socially and economically.
If we compare this concept to marriage and love, we need to insert the "happiness principle" into the equation. If you're gonna propose the idea of marriage to a man (or a woman), we require recognition on WHY it's a good idea/choice. Commitment has its pros AND cons, and to be biased is to be prejudiced and unfair. Once this decision is made, turning back breeds corrosive criticism, and both parties suffer critical losses.
(likes her post [melts])
A good man realizes when he’s not able to meet obligations and communicates this upfront. He doesn’t take a shotgun wedding approach to everything because he knows that won’t bring him the happiness he wants. A good man doesn’t live on someone else’s schedule. He lives on the one that’s put him in the best position to be successful in all aspects of his life including love.
Nothing else needs to be said. Well done.
I'd just like to say… I neeeeeeed the "like" button back b/c I have about 6 different comments I want to like.
In no particular order they are:
Dr. J (I love the expansion on marriage & the black male b/c truthfully that introduces another element completely)
SFG ("Some of us justify ourselves out of commitment." PREACH NOW!)
TMIMITW ("…these men aren’t abstaining from all interaction with women during these times of uncertainty." *waving my MLK church fan*
Ms. Smart (“Nga, don’t try to normalize your dysfunction.”)
Lauren (your comment just made me do the poetry snaps)
And after reading the article… to this quote, "Single men have never been civilization's most responsible actors; they continue to be more troubled and less successful than men who deliberately choose to become husbands and fathers." I feel as if she is regarding those who have the means (financially and otherwise) to become husbands/fathers but elect not to thereby extending their "pre-adulthood" into their late 30s and 40s.
oh and I meant to say "big ups Slim" nice post there brethern.
That article was my laugh for the day! Oh, the cachinnation!
Typical frustrated woman overanalyzing something that is extremely simple. This has absolutely nothing to do with maturity, movies and hobbies, and very little to do with women's income and career development. This is simply the reality that marriage has become an increasingly less desirable option for men at a young age. With women reassuring us we're not necessary because of their independence and providing $ex so readily, what's the rush? This is just sour grapes from a woman complaining the world isn't as she would like, and instead of changing her behavior, thinks the world should conform to her.
Most men aren't immature because they aren't married. They aren't married because they aren't fools, and aren't going to marry just anyone just to say they're married. The average woman is an idealist and the average man is a realist. Most women think about how lovely it would be to be married. Those “immature” men think about all the responsibilities of being married, the consequences of a failed marriage, and are hesitant because we don’t think women put as much thought into actually being a wife versus just having marital status. For example, it is well known that the primary reason marriages fail is because of finances, yet Ms. Hymowitz saying men are immature because they are trying to get financially stable. Ideal over reality.
"Most women think about how lovely it would be to be married. Those “immature” men think about all the responsibilities of being married, the consequences of a failed marriage, and are hesitant because we don’t think women put as much thought into actually being a wife versus just having marital status."
I completely disagree with this statement. Most men don't get married because they actually think about the responsibilities of being married? Maybe you but not what I see/hear. Alot of men don't want to get married because they fear commitment. I see it everyday. Women can be molded into a good wife. I'm not saying there aren't bad women out there but to say that most men won't get married because women lack the knowledge on how to be a good mate is ridiculous and offensive to me. Men would rather play house and get us pregnant? That's better? Cause statistics disprove your theory.
“Alot of men don’t want to get married because they fear commitment. I see it everyday.”
Correct, now follow through to the logical conclusion. Why do men fear commitment?
“to say that most men won’t get married because women lack the knowledge on how to be a good mate is ridiculous and offensive to me.”
Please reread. I never said women “lack the knowledge on how to be a good mate”. I said that most women don't put as much thought into being a wife versus simply being married, not that they don’t know how or couldn’t learn. Especially considering this article was speaking in the context of younger people in their twenties.
“Men would rather play house and get us pregnant? That’s better? Cause statistics disprove your theory.”
I never said nor implied playing house was better, just that it was the reality. Again, as a man, I was being a realist.
Well when you put it that way, I get your point. My original comprehension was you blaming women's lack of ability as the reason why men don't marry. I was rush reading, I recant. I'm realistic too btw, we're not all idealistic. Ha! 🙂
SmartFoxGirl: "I’m realistic too btw, we’re not all idealistic. Ha!"
I love you.
SFG,
I echo his sentiments, and replace most men with "most good men". He's not talking about your players and pimps4Life dudes, but men who are looking at their careers and see the bigger picture. He's right in that the incentive for us to become married isn't there. So the 'commitment' fear you speak of isn't because of monogamy but a real gamble on the outcome of a marriage.
In a way you agree with him, just from a different perspective.
Yeah I get it. Plus, I agree with it being most GOOD men. There's alot of good men out there who realistically weigh their options. Unfortunately, the players ruin it for everybody. lol
That fear of commitment is BS… The fact that good men consider their options is a GOOD thing…. And if he is afraid of commitment… HE HAS GOOD REASON… A woman can take half (or more) of his resources (& take the kid away) if a marriage fails…
You make fear of commitment a bad thing…
What is the upside of a man getting married in Western Society (I'll give you a hint : NONE)
Woah woah woah! Easy now. I'm here to help. First, I need you to take your hands off of your keyboard. Thank you. Wait 30 secs. Now take your mouse and click on your Start button on the task bar below. Great. Now you see where it says Log Off? Good, click it.
I actually thought you were going to have something insightful to say in response to that… But the fact that there was no real response lets me know that you get it…
I think the whole fear of commitment spiel needs to be further examined
Good perspective as usual Hugh.
"With women reassuring us we’re not necessary because of their independence and providing $ex so readily, what’s the rush?"
Yes and this statement prove how mature this thinking really is.
What does a woman having the means to provide for self and having basic human needs have to do with a MAN taking all that for granted? You are blaming it on women as if we prefer to just want you all as organic dildos. Some of us do yes, but not majority.
Sex does not equal marriage. A man's ability to get P**** from a woman that he has no intentions of marrying does not make him a realist. It makes him selfish. If that woman gets pregnant…he is still committed to that child therefore committed to THAT WOMAN!
Beef Bacon: “What does a woman having the means to provide for self and having basic human needs have to do with a MAN taking all that for granted? You are blaming it on women as if we prefer to just want you all as organic dildos. Some of us do yes, but not majority.”
First, how can it possibly be taking it for granted if the woman is using the man as an “organic dildo” to satisfy her “basic human needs”? I call that quid pro quo. And if we are talking about a long-term relationship and not a jumpoff, then how is it “taking all that for granted” if he’s treating her the same way as if he were married? The only thing the marriage provides is are harsh legally-bound penalties in the event of a breakup.
Second, this comment reflects a statement in Rick’s comment: some women want to have their cake and eat it too. Women changed the rules, and now want to be upset because men changed their strategy of playing the game?
Womenfeminists wanted to have careers, have casual $ex, and for us to hear them roar, but obviously they never considered the law of unintended consequences. As you said in an earlier post, if more women went on a “p” strike, things would shift back in their favor.“Sex does not equal marriage. A man’s ability to get P**** from a woman that he has no intentions of marrying does not make him a realist. It makes him selfish.
But my dear bovine porcine friend, a man isn’t a realist because he’s sleeping with women he has no intention of marrying. He’s a realist because he’s not going to hop into marriage without thinking very hard and long (pause) about the consequences. Also, it’s not selfish for a man to sleep around if the woman he’s sleeping with is simply seeking to have “her needs met”.
@Hugh Jazz
“The average woman is a idealist and the average man is a realist.” “Most women think about how lovely it would be to be married.”
So true. Marriage for many women in their 20s is a fairytale. They prevail in planning a magical wedding, but fail at wanting to be an exceptional wife and mother once married. They’re dreaming about their wedding gown, floral arrangements and that perfect song to dance to with their future husband. Then they look at wedding rings to figure out the karat size they want their ring to be, so they can flaunt it to their girlfriends. Being an actual wife and mother within the marriage never crosses their mind. Meanwhile, the man is trying to figure out how he’s going to pay for that magical wedding she wants, while factoring in their future children and the lavish house with the big backyard. The 70s was not an era of marriage and family. They were all about that hippy-dippy, “I do as I please,” free love (especially for most White people). I have friends of various ages (16-70) and ethnicities (Mexican, Arab, Filipino, Italian, Japanese, Black, Cuban, Chinese, Dominican and White) whose parents only married because their mother was pregnant. Let’s stop fooling ourselves with these theories and peer reviewed scholarly articles. It’s the same picture, but in a different frame.
I think many older people are just bothered by the concept that one can be mature, wise, successful and live a full and complete life without marriage.
It goes against their religion and everything they have been taught. And it causes them to question the choices they've made.
Like men with long hair in the 70s or tight jeans now. ROFL.
The world has changed and people don't like it.
PREACH!!!
[LIKE] + 1
"This is simply the reality that marriage has become an increasingly less desirable option for men at a young age. With women reassuring us we’re not necessary because of their independence and providing $ex so readily, what’s the rush? This is just sour grapes from a woman complaining the world isn’t as she would like, and instead of changing her behavior, thinks the world should conform to her. "
C-C-C-C-C-Cosign# 🙂
And here we have it…
WOMEN: this is how most men really think. If you want a husband, go on a p strike until you get a commitment. Otherwise, you will not get the commitment and those same men will turn around and say…it is your fault.
Babe, if I want to get some p from a female these days (car, house, job helps), but essentially, I have to do do a song & dance to get it… I just can't walk up to most women and say, can i get some P…?
So, of course you have to play the game to get a commitment out of us, it goes both ways
At the heart of this is whole argument is an opposing view of the nature of man. I see it all through these comments……
Those who believe man's natural state is monogamy and those who don't.
Those who believe man's natural state is monogamy view singleness as a dysfunction.
Whereas others view marriage as the ultimate act of mindless conformity.
I also read the WSJ article and can agree that the author made quite a few quantum leaps in deductive reasoning, however regarding the idea of pre-adulthood, I didn't find her original point ("it doesn't bring out the best in men") to be completely off-base. Notwithstanding the obvious paradox of a "man" in pre-adulthood, it's true that nobody would want to be in a relationship with or marry a guy who simply isn't mature enough to handle the nature of that commitment. I've come across the type of immaturity Hymowitz describes in plenty of guys, but I know many more guys who otherwise have their lives in order and simply have no desire to settle down yet. I see nothing wrong with that nor would I call them irresponsible or "bad" for that reason alone. Where the author really lost me was basing much of her argument on an opinion that being single makes a man irresponsible and less successful, which we know just isn't the case. The effect of having a disposable income, no family responsibilities, and an endless array of gadgets and entertainment is certainly not limited to single men. It is also not limited to those with a four-year degree, or whites. (While she wasn't blatant with the race card, her references to non-immigrants, all white comedians, and the all-American frat boy ideal implied as such.) Like some of your other readers have also commented, Hymowitz could have substituted another word for "good" and focused on the facts surrounding what is basically a cultural shift toward extended bachelorhood and marriage later in life. Contrary to her claim, maybe it's women who haven't "evolved" fast enough. Our biological clocks (and most of the entertainment/advertising industry) might still be telling us we need to be settled down and start popping out babies before we hit the ripe age of 30, yet there really are few economic or even medical reasons these days to be in such a rush to get married. The disconnect that so clearly exists between men and women our age could be better explained without all of the generalizations she made and the implication that being single and a "good" man are mutually exclusive. That said, the author isn't necessarily crazy or a male-basher for saying that most women would rather walk away from the "pre-adulthood" guy she describes. Where she fails is by using that to justify women giving up on finding a good man altogether. Personally I'd rather see a guy get the extra 5-10 years to figure out who he is a person, than to settle for one who hasn't. That's more time for me to enjoy the single life and accomplish my own goals prior to the responsibilities of holding down a family. In the end, that's a win-win situation for both of us.
#co-sign this whole discussion…
I thought a dude had wrote this till I read the last paragraph and quickly look up to see who(what) I was agreeing with.
Good point
I used to listen to the Tom Leykis Show when I commuted from MD to B'more. And while most of what he said is stolen verbatim from the myriad PUA books/classes out there, one thing he said always hit home for me. Basically, a man shouldn't even begin to consider marriage until he's reached his earning potential or very near to it.
Let's face facts folks, marriage costs, kids cost, your mortgage and all the things that can go wrong with owning a home will cost. Like Tunde said above, it makes no sense if a man can barely support himself that he would take on the added responsibility of a wife, home and eventually a child. The days of "living on love" are long gone and they quit manufacturing the model of women that believed in that sh*t a long time ago.
And I agree, with the OP. If you peeped her pic in the article, it's clearly evident "why" she's not getting dates….
"The days of “living on love” are long gone and they quit manufacturing the model of women that believed in that sh*t a long time ago"
Poetically written.lol
I disagree Eddie, again like I said, Black men have a tendency to view marriage differently. There are white men who get married while heading into business or law school. They do things together. Most Black men will begin the conversation with a conversation about finances. They are the only ones who think that though because their opinion of what a marriage is, IS FLAWED. A better way to approach the issue is to say, "Marriage is hard work." Plenty of people get married at a young age and climb several income echelons before all is said and done. It's just that Black men are thinking to themselves, "I got to do for myself before I can do anything for anybody else."
I made a comment like this one time, and I was told to just keep saying, "I" until I got tired of it. Marriage is a partnership, not a one person thing. More that your thinking is about yourself, you'll just remain selfish and alone. When you think about it as a union then you'll see that you can be broke and in love with someone for years. IS THIS NOT WHAT OUR GRANDPARENTS DID?!
When you really think about it, marriage has always cost money, and kids too. But our grandparents just made it work. Men took wives and built homes for them, and put food on the table too. This is when Black people were making scraps. When it came to raising children, our grandparents sent our parent's generation to college. They worked extra hard because financial aid was not what it is today. The marriage is about hard work and doing it together. If more people focused on that, they would stop using weak excuses about, "I need to take care of myself."
"The marriage is about hard work and doing it together. If more people focused on that, they would stop using weak excuses about, “I need to take care of myself.”"
You deserve a coming to america bath for this one Dr. J!
"You deserve a coming to america bath for this one Dr. J!"
#co-sign
I'm bout to fall off topic hard here…..but congratulations on your upcoming Bacon Bit!!!! I meant to tell you that the other day.
"They do things together."
This sentence right here is the truth. I don't understand why men don't allow women to work with them. There are women out there who will without doubt stand by your side through the ups and downs. Marriage is about a partnership, it takes two. If you have to go to school in the day and work at night please understand I'm cooking, cleaning, taking care of the kids and holding down the fromt while you're getting your stuff together.
On the other hand, I do respect a guy who knows he's selfish and doesn't rush into marriage.
"If more people focused on that, they would stop using weak excuses about, “I need to take care of myself.”
I think people not taking care of themselves first is one of the biggest issues in relationships in general fam. I see your perspective, I just really disagree that someone recognizing this is exercising their right to use a lame excuse.
Everything else in the comment gets a nod.
Slim,
"I think people not taking care of themselves first is one of the biggest issues in relationships in general fam."
Okay. I get what you are saying, however I really disagree.
The choice to just take of self, is in itself SELFISH. Self-preservation is key, but a marriage is not two people but ONE UNIT. Therefore, you ARE taking care of yourself when taking care of your wife and children.
Getting your career together and completing college is great and all, but if you believe in a higher power, you know that college and money is NOT what all this here on earth is about. I KNOW that God is NOT going to say, well what college did you graduate from, oh and by the way since you choose to get married before getting your finances in order…jokes on you…Those things are just means to and end.
You will gain and lose throughout your life. Money and careers will come and go. However, a wife and husband (if chosen carefully) will withstand ALL OF THAT.
Foundations matter and if men are basing their foundations on the ability to provide financially ONLY, than that will show in the marriage…no matter when it happens. Men should be more confident in what they bring to a marriage cuz its not JUST money!
@ Beef w/ child
I was actually referring to before marriage. I do believe that once people are married, they should tackle things together. You make that agreement when you decide to walk to aisle or go to Vegas. When it comes to taking care of oneself, I was thinking more broadly. Other than that, good points as usual.
Beef Bacon:
"The choice to just take of self, is in itself SELFISH. Self-preservation is key, but a marriage is not two people but ONE UNIT."
Herein lies the problem. The idea that a guy can be focused on their own needs and interests = selfish…as if that's a bad thing.
And to avoid the label of selfishness, a guy has to make babies as quickly as they can, and start up a family? I don't see how that 'logic' follows.
There are many ways to contribute to others and give of oneself. Black folk who work tirelessly in classrooms, mentor inner-city folks, fight racism within institutions, etc. are selfless even if they never marry.
So do brothers and sisters who work their tails off to get high end careers with long hours that do not accommodate child rearing (ie law, banking, medicine, etc.)
So this idea that selflessness requires a particular way of giving to others is nonsense on stilts. Marriage and baby making shouldn't be seen as "community service."
I ask you Beef Bacon, is a woman who focuses on her career and getting financially stable selfish because she doesn't marry by 32? If not, then why is a guy who does the same selfish? Why is marriage the most important and sole way of being non-selfish, and who has the right to decide that?
There's really no way to respond to this without me becoming The Realest Eddie Brock. #noshots
These women you point out who are willing to "take him as he is", whether that means broke as a joke grad student or the guy sweeping floors who one day dreams of operating the fry machine and then onto the cash register are few and far between.
I hate to generalize, [so I'll try to keep it at a minimum] but isn't that one of BW's biggest complaints about us? "He couldn't afford to take me to XXX and this n*gga tried taking me to the Cheese Cake Factory on a first date". I'm fully aware that not all women [Black, White, Latina, Martian, etc] aren't like this [and thank Baby Jesus] but for a good majority it's simply not the case.
@ Eddie
How are those women far and few in between? Every woman that visits this site probably have 50-11 women in their lives that they KNOW are the breadwinners on their households.
I see more than enough women taking care of the house financially, holding it down while ray-ray works on his next big plan and accepting that john may just feel depressed after losing that big position with XYZ. I see this all day every day. So it is safe to say there are more women willing to be a great wife to a man whom just happen to not be making great money at the moment.
However, if men are only there for the nana, how will they ever KNOW if that is the type of woman they have?
@ Beef Bacon
Exactly.I know plenty of girls that would do this, easily.
@ Eddie
Although many want a man to be established and everything it is not a requirement. We WILL do what we have to to make the marriage work.
THANK YOU, that woman who will struggle with you through thick and thin was my grandmother, my mother, BUT I DON"T SEE ANY OF THAT IN THE WOMEN I SEE TODAY
maybe in the young white women that I meet, but def not the black women… that is a rarity
I totally agree…it"s about building together.
Like
I need you to get out of my life Slim!
This was right on time. I've been hearing this(not where I want to be) a lot lately and not quite understanding what was being put across. Now whether they were saying it genuinely or not I don't know, but this(your) article and the comments as well as the 3 hour conversation I had last night has really shed some light on things.
Gracias from a young inexperienced lady
If you're walking down the street and see someone hiding behind a bush or tree, it isn't me.
Men are simply choosing their own paths minus the influence of women.
50 years ago when women collectively said "we don't just want to be wives, mothers, and home makers, we want to decide what we want to be in life" they had their movement, was liberated from being what MEN wanted them to be.
Now fast forward….and men are collectively saying (moreso thru actions than words) that "we dont just want to be husbands, fathers, and a walking wallet, we want to decide what we want to be in life" and men are now "liberating" themselves from being what WOMEN want them to be……………………………………….oh now it's a problem.
So let me get this straight, women want to be WHATEVER they choose (house wife, career woman, etc), and men are to accept it………yet women STILL want men to be the traditional man. Get.The.F$%K.Outta.Here.
I'm sure when women were liberated, men weren't happy about loosing their tradition home makers, now it's simply women's turn to be disgruntled as men choose their own paths in life.
Rick,
We didn't want to be free from men…just EQUAL…not free but treated with respect as any human deserves!
A marriage consist of two people, not just a WOMAN! You make it seems as if woman only benefit from marriage. You are not doing any woman a ‘favor’ by marrying her…wtf?
When in fact, the opposite is true: men live longer when married…not women. And I see why from some of these comments…smh!
"men live longer when married…not women. And I see why from some of these comments…smh!"
Is this a contractual marriage we are talking here….or a spiritual marriage? If that's the case, I can have a spiritual marriage without the legal chains and whips…
….BF and GF status…..
Women want their cake & eat it too… & so do we
what's the point of having cake…if you can't eat it?
I always wanted to say/type that to someone. 🙂
Putting it that way, we need a better expression…
I'm glad you got to type it to me, congrats
FML. I just read all 120+ comments for the first time on this site (normally when it gets over 50 I just scroll to view certain commenters). First off, great write-up Slim; timely and universal, always a winner. Plus you and the comments inspired at least two or three blog ideas for my site. lol *shrugs* Just being honest.
Woo-sah!
While I'm not saying this one is the best, it is the one that seems to align best with my own personal views. "GREAT F*CKING COMMENT," Rick.
*George Jefferson strolls out the building*
Rick: "Men are simply choosing their own paths minus the influence of women.
50 years ago when women collectively said “we don’t just want to be wives, mothers, and home makers, we want to decide what we want to be in life” they had their movement, was liberated from being what MEN wanted them to be.
Now fast forward….and men are collectively saying (moreso thru actions than words) that “we dont just want to be husbands, fathers, and a walking wallet, we want to decide what we want to be in life” and men are now “liberating” themselves from being what WOMEN want them to be……………………………………….oh now it’s a problem.
Rick for the win…
"A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."
— Irina Dunn
the bicycle is starting to pedal away.
*shrug*
i appreciate your honest perspective on this issue–great post/topic.
i think often times, single women (who desire to be married with children) have a hard time grasping the idea that there are single, eligible men out there who dont want the same things we want, when we want them. and many times we attribute eligible but not "available" (i.e. ready for marriage) men to being bad, whereas men who are eligible and available are labeled "good."
readiness and willingness to marry and start a family ISNT a measure of ones character (i.e. good v bad) and it shouldnt be a measuring stick for success and achievement. as you stated before, SJ, marriage doesnt solve all problems (just ask your friendly neighborhood divorce lawyer).
in the end, i think communication is key–understanding men and women's struggles in society today and how that confounds their ability and/or desire to enter into long-term relationships/marriage. no, we're not all going to be on the same page at the same time, especially at a young age when we are still "finding ourselves."
i can honestly say i havent found a husband yet because im probably not as ready for an LTR as id like to believe i am, not because there is a shortage of "good men". when im ready, i have no doubt i will find a man who is ready also.
keep hope alive my beautiful single sistas!!!!
GOTO: "i think often times, single women (who desire to be married with children) have a hard time grasping the idea that there are single, eligible men out there who dont want the same things we want, when we want them. and many times we attribute eligible but not “available” (i.e. ready for marriage) men to being bad, whereas men who are eligible and available are labeled “good.”"
Cosign. Especially the bold.
I meant to say this was a good comment. Thanks for coming out of lurksville!
Co-sign AALLL!!
Hmmmmm.
When analyzing choices, one should carefully look at the fruit of that choice.
So what, blacks have started waiting longer to get married or just not getting married at all.
Yet, look at our children.
So what, black men can get the panties without commitment.
Yet, look at the affect of the child support system and the lack of fathers in homes.
So this is the fruit of our choice tree. Based on this, I would say that the choices we are making are not to our benefit in the long run. The choices we make today not only affect us but the very thing we are put here to protect: OUR BABIES.
Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. People keep saying things have changed….but that’s BS…because there is nothing NEW under the sun, just different versions. Furthermore, MORALS and VALUES should not change just because its 2011 and no longer 1970.
Since we have begun making all these “changes” our community has gone to HELL! Maybe yall choose not to see because you like making selfish choices. Whatever your reason for it, don’t make an excuse about it. If you are adding to our demise, call it what it is!
what's funny is i just took a course on that reiterates the very same arguments she mentioned in her writing. This isn't just the ramblings of some crazy woman, but rather, an idea and concept that's gaining ground within the academic community. Except, in the required text i read for the course, they called people the ages between 18 -25 "Emerging Adulthood."
People should also remember that over 100 years ago, the period of "Adolescence" was a novel idea. Before academics started studying children and their development, nobody thought it was important that children between ages of 12 – 18 had time to be "children", especially when those children were needed to help out on the farm, or get an extra job to help the family. It's because of the invention of "adolescence" that our labor laws regarding children are the way they are today.
But anywho, I hate to say it, but there are some points where I agree with the author. The truth is men don't have to be men, and women don't have to be women because it's much more lucrative for big businesses to convince you that you're supposed to "life it up" in your 20's, buying clothes, gadgets, and other crap you don't need for an entire decade. There's a reason why businesses cater and validate the lifestyle of people in their 20's through advertising and entertainment, and it has nothing to do with helping you "find yourself." There's a lot of money to be made on people who have the ability to work and earn money, but have no other obligations besides themselves.
But on a lighter note, this music video by Lily Allen sums up the general paradox of women in their 20's today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWjNFC-FinU
Name (required): "This isn’t just the ramblings of some crazy woman, but rather, an idea and concept that’s gaining ground within the academic community."
And people wonder why I think college is a waste of time and why I have little respect for degrees.
Also, as much as i hate to bring this up, we should be reminded that our biological clocks don't work the same as a man's. a man can have children well into his 70's, but unfortunately, for women, after the age of 35, you are taking a risk by having children. That's just plain medical fact. Of course there are medical innovations that have allowed us to do so more safely, but even those careful practices are no guarantee to provide and safe and healthy pregnancy. It took thousands of years in evolution to bring us to this point, and i don't think our biology is going to change simply because women have been liberated for 40 years in this country. Also, your body snaps back into shape after having a child at a younger age rather than in your 30's or 40's.
Instead of trying to align ourselves with the way men think, we should instead be focusing on those men who are ready to commit, because that is what would be most benneficial for you (unless of course, you don't plan to ever have children).
I demand that you pick a name for yourself! lol
*Stewie Voice* SHOW YOURSELF
NO COUNTRY FOR ANONYMOUS COMMENTS!
Yes, i'm screaming.
I really like the topic…
The article is weird… But let me some it up
I am 22 years old, I got kicked out of college, no kids, floundering at the moment… never married
If I never decide to get married & never have kids, am i a bad person…?
If I decide to get married, be faithful & have kids, does that make me a good person…?
The same with getting an education…
The last time I checked this is America… land of the free, home of the brave…
But it is amazing when you don't do what your family, friends, society expects of you and you get called a douchebag, or if you decide to go to church, have kids, wife, education & on the so called straight & narrow & you are a "good" person
All of it is PURE BS…
Another hit by your boy Slarack Jobama…
Good Post Brother
Some of y'all are looking at this equation backwards. Material success will not help you find a good WIFE. Maybe a prettier wife, but not a better one. But a good WIFE will help you get a great JOB and propel your material success. She'll proof read your homework and bring you sammiches when you're pulling all nighters trying to finish that masters or get another technical cert. She'll rub your shoulders and help you strategize about your next move professionally. She'll give you some dome just to help relax your mind. She'll represent you well in your professional circles. She's your cheerleader. As long as you're about something she's gonna be about you. And if you really start falling off she will nag the dog shyt outta you to get you back on the ball. Good wives are just useful like that. We're partners in crime, not dead weight.
Antywho, don't try to blame the fact that you're not ready for a wife on your wallet or your ambition. A good woman will make that easier, not harder. If you're not ready just say, "I'm not ready. I still want to play around a bit." There's nothing wrong with that. But readiness is not in a degree or a professional achievement. It's in your mind.
I guess my question is what about when you're not out playing the game and you're really just legally hustling? Some of these comments have me thinking that a few folks really dont think it's possible for a guy to be that way.
that means you aren't ready.
If you're out hustling THAT hard, then you're right – you don't have time to court a woman and bring her in. But my thinking on that is 2 fold:
1. You'll trust the woman that you meet now more than the woman who comes along after you've reached the mountaintop.
2. If you meet the right woman you will MAKE time for her.
Thanks for the congrats Teflon!
And THANKS for writing this! My sentiments exactly.
Great comment Teflon.
If that woman doesn't like what she sees right off the bat [i.e. what you look like, own a car, own a residence] you ain't even close to getting one of those kneck rubs or sammiches anyways.
Quit Lying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >:0[
[LIKE]!! @Teflon Temptress
In short, i have to co sign much of what has been said. The article dosent really seem to consider there might be a problem wite the institution, itself; it simply assumes that the problem is young men who cannot commit. But there are other perspectives. Other solutions. I think there is also an issue with freedom and choice and these values when set alight within a materialistic culture also makes it difficult for people to submit to an institution which is essentially about giving and putting others as the prime directive. I mean people living on less than a dollar a day are having 7 kids and finding a way to survive.
"But anywho, I hate to say it, but there are some points where I agree with the author. The truth is men don’t have to be men, and women don’t have to be women because it’s much more lucrative for big businesses to convince you that you’re supposed to “life it up” in your 20′s, buying clothes, gadgets, and other crap you don’t need for an entire decade. There’s a reason why businesses cater and validate the lifestyle of people in their 20′s through advertising and entertainment, and it has nothing to do with helping you “find yourself.” There’s a lot of money to be made on people who have the ability to work and earn money, but have no other obligations besides themselves. "
But on a lighter note, this music video by Lily Allen sums up the general paradox of women in their 20′s today:
Took my eye off the ball for a minute and someone just beat me to it. Ok. I wrote my stuff independently but I cosign to this bit.
Hymowitz's article is the most sexist thing I've seen in years. Just invert the logic.
She makes fun of Star Wars and Maxim as childish, but what about Cosmo?
She says that guys who delay family and shooting out kids = men are pre-adults, but what would happen if a guy dared say, "a woman isn't an adult until she's barefoot and pregnant or "a woman's place is in the home?"
Hymowitz is only saying the same thing about men, that sexists said about women who delayed family life for the sake of a career.
Independence, self-reliance and making one's own life choices belongs to both sexes, not just women.
Just as women shouldn't be limited to housekeeping and making kids as the essential definition of womanhood, men shouldn't be limited to buying engagement rings and making babies as the essential definition of manhood. To say otherwise is the least feminist thing possible–or just low down and selfish.
Most of my arguments for and against points raised in the article have already been stated, so I won't be a (completely) redundant bugger.
The only guy I would say that I have any sort of interest in at present broke up with his last girlfriend because she was ready to settle down while he wasn't, and he didn't want to cheat her out of anything. Since then, he's made it known to one and all that he will not be ready for a relationship until he's at the very least finished his schooling. I've supported his stance fully on more than one occasion because his program is an intense one, and he knows that he would not be able to devote the kind of time and attention needed to foster a healthy and solid relationship while yet staying on top of things. He's also the kind of guy who is actually interested in building a friendship with someone before entering a relationship, rather than running in head first. According to the article, he's not a "good man"…and yet, he's an awesome father and a genuinely cool and funny guy. But then again, he doesn't fall under any of the categories listed as examples. Neither do a lot of the males here-present, so do keep that in mind as you [guys] all think about the article.
Slim, It made me smile to see quite a few comments from you today. I think it's great that you took in what was said last Friday and are acting on it. Let me be the first to say "good job".
Hi y''all. I'm from a different generation, and have noticed two things.
One. The dudes and girls in high school who knew they wanted families tended to get focused earlier about studies, because it was about getting a stable job that would allow them to raise a family, and not about finding the perfect or dream job. They went to college and some grad school immediately afterwards, or got a good government or blue collar job, and were married by 26. Most of the ones I know are still happily married, and in their late 40s early 50s with grown kids and time to do what they want and the stability to do it.
Two. In cases of early marriages, they don't fare well if the male has no direction, and is far from finding it. When he's dead on clear about his direction, the marriage is more likely to last. I know that sounds sexist, but that's what I've noticed.If the male is stable and the woman a bit unstable it isn't as much of a problem unless she's buck wild and into drugs, etc.
I know the economy keeps folks from marrying as young, but I've watched people with good jobs play all through their 20s and 30s and then decide to have babies in their 40s. Besides possible fertility problems, and the fact that kids of older parents have less energy (life force?) ,there are other issues with this.
The family elders are in their 70s and can't participate in the child's life with ease, and certainly not for long. Usually, the cousins are all older than the child is, and the parents will likely not be around for grandkids if the child has them past 25 years old. That then makes two generations of children brought up with little influence from elders. The family tree becomes a spindling stick that way.
Not everyone is cut out for marriage or parenthood, but we really do an injustice by not sitting down with teenagers and spelling out to them the consequences of marrying and having children late in life.
Mary
Mary, I disagree whole-heartedly.
Firstly, if someone has a child at 40, the family elders won't be in their 70s unless they had their children past 30. Otherwise they'll be in their 60s. Secondly, it isn't guaranteed that grandparents will have an active role in their grandchildren's lives even if they were 50 when they were born. Thirdly, 40-year-olds have much more life experience and knowledge on how to find the necessary tools to raise a child, and how to get help if it is needed.
The medical concerns for 40-year-olds are diminishing rapidly, as more and more women have children later in life. Pregnancy is always hard, no matter how old or young you are, and often older women have better support systems to help them through. And they are more aware of the risks of childbirth than younger women, as well as the time it takes to recover.
Example from my life: My parents had their first child when they were 22 (mom) and 20 (dad). My dad wasn't around for much of that child's childhood, because he had to work and party and live his youth. My mom was left with all the responsibility which caused resentment. Same thing when the second one came along. When the last children (twins) were born they were 36 and 34. My dad was done with his crazy years, and though he still had to work hard to provide for his family, he was around for these children, he was taking them to daycare, singing them lullabies etc.
The eldest child grew up to be a narcotics abuser who still, at age 38, doesn't have a job or any kind of stability in her life (despite being married, again, to a sociopath). The second child had difficulties early in life, attaching herself to men who abused her, but was able to overcome those difficulties. The twins have led happy, healthy lives with men who have appreciated them, and have not stayed with men who haven't.
Now, one could say that the parents get better with each child they have, or one could argue that it would've been more beneficial for all parties concerned if the twins had been the first children, i.e. they would have been financially on stable grounds, and more importantly mentally in the right place.
Some people are ready for kids when they're 23, but others aren't. I think generalizations done in the name of education can lead to confused teenagers who may make the wrong choices in their lives. So rather than tell them it's dangerous to have children past 35, you should tell them what having children is really like. That you do need to give stuff up, you need to commit, and if you want to do something just for yourself it's going to take a hell of a lot of planning. And that it can be wonderful and rewarding.
I guess we are talking about an idea of virtue, what is the good life and what is your idea of it? It is the fundamental question and it is one about vaules? Are we just a biological imperative to produce children, the next generation or can we pursue other goals with our lives. Marriage isn't for everyone. Kids ain't. Nike sneakers plus condo ain't going to free your azz either . And there's other ways to be selfless and make a difference.
I won't take the time here to post an extensive commentary on the article, as many of my feelings have already been espoused by my fellow readers. Although it has already been established by the group that the writer of the article in question overstepped her bounds by centralizing, I, too, grow tired of "imnotreadyitis".
Slim dear, marriage is NOT something that will "just happen". It is a lifelong commitment to another human being that, although incredibly rewarding, is a HELL of a lot of hard work. Just like a successful career will not just happen", neither will a successful marriage. You must prepare and work for it. Anyone who isn't willing to do this for their career, and their marriage, will not be successful. I maintain that marriage is at least as important a socioeconomic indicator as education. Our Caucasian and Hispanic counterparts get married at a younger age and recognize the financial and societal benefits that this brings.
A Black couple will date for seven years, maintain two separate rented residences, and not be realizing the tax breaks and lower cost of living of their union, while a White couple may date for 2 years, get married at three, combine households and expenses, and thus be four years more financially stable than their Black counterparts. I argue that this may be why more Black marriages are ending in divorce…. waiting too long in life, as opposed to too early.
I've typed way too much here, if anyone want to discuss further, get at me @TheRealChanee.
The book Ans article are based in research. Check out any Public Health School's website and see it for yourself. I've done several radio interviews on the subject with black, white, younger, and older public health professionals.
Sorry, it's based in fact.