Breaking News: Life Isn’t Simple

In the 1950s, life was simple. Boys walked to school ten miles in the snow uphill both ways, and then they got steady menial jobs with a promise of cradle-to-grave employment, and a good, submissive wife who stayed home and never demanded anything. Unfortunately, as Rosie Boycott claims, second-wave feminism eradicated those good old days, so now life is more complex.

When I was young and my father was temporarily unemployed after leaving the Army in the Fifties, there was no question that my mother might step into the breach and go out to work. We just went short of money.


Nothing is so straightforward any more. My mother needed my father to keep a roof over her head and food on the table for her children.

Women don’t need that now.

That’s one way of looking at how great life was in the 1950s. Another is that it was fraught with poverty and absurd social restrictions and saw a steady destruction of women’s selves. The thing Boycott says that comes closest to evidence that “My father’s generation defined their wives: nowadays, the role has completely reversed and men are defined by women” is a statistic that 39% of married women believe that they make more money than their husbands. Never mind that Britain has a wage gap of 17% among full-time workers; because a minority of women believe they earn more, feminism destroyed men.

The rest of the article is standard for men’s rights rhetoric. For example,

Jobs which give satisfaction, especially for poorer white males – who are now the worst-performing group in our education system – have become almost impossible to come by.

Women, meanwhile, are groomed relentlessly to succeed. How did we get into such a predicament? No feminist I ever knew wanted to see a world in which men were beaten by women: a world in which one dominant group was just replaced by another.

Our problem is, I think, largely to do with the fact that our ideas of success are still derived from making money and being top-dog in the office.

Sadly, women’s liberation, which ought to have made it easy for both sexes to choose their roles in life, has actually managed to denigrate the role of motherhood and caring.

No feminist I know wants to replace patriarchy with matriarchy, either, but since that’s not what has happened or will happen, it’s a moot point. Following Betty Friedan, feminists used to argue that full-time caregivers were especially prone to depression because they had no large group of coworkers to socialize with. I’ve heard of studies that nail the evidence for that down, but I can’t find them and I’m not going to base my posts on linkless “studies say…” hatchet jobs. But the part about denigrating the role of motherhood is still an exaggeration of the idea that defining one’s life based solely on caring for others makes no sense.

And that was in the 1970s. Just like feminists today no longer say that the most important feminist battle is suffrage, so do they no longer say that leaving home to work is the most important thing. First there’s the issue of pay inequality, and then there’s the issue of work-family balance. Although part of the latter emphasis is empirical – flex-time reduces gender discrimination – it’s become about more than just that.

That’s at least as far as feminism goes. There’s been an erosion of men’s position, largely because in many countries, real wages have not kept up. But that has nothing to do with feminism and everything to do with Reagan and Thatcher; easy as it is to blame all of men’s troubles on women, in Britain there’s only one woman who’s really responsible.

While their traditional role in society is being ripped from them, young men are losing the social compass which once came naturally. Women now demand that their men not only succeed in business and maintain a fat bank balance: now they’re expected to be emotional, open, caring-and-sharing types, too. That may be fine for some, but for others it is clearly not.

And finally, the world is moving on from the simple life that enabled every halfwit to have a decent job and stunted every person with a functioning neocortex. It’s called progress. It’s expected that people who can’t keep up with more complex expectations than being a brute are irrational enough to blame feminism for their troubles. But that doesn’t mean they should be indulged the way Boycott does, especially not when they’re the same kind of people who’re against showing anyone but themselves any kind of compassion.

9 Responses to Breaking News: Life Isn’t Simple

  1. Roy says:

    I love it.
    “Life is so hard now, and it’s women’s faults! Now I’m expected to have a job, and be emotionally supportive of another person, and do my fair share of the work around the house, and generally take an *even part* in the life of my wife?!

  2. Hujo says:

    Personaly I feel men dont need women anymore than women need men but kids need parents and our family courts are still stuck in the “men work, women mother” mindset.

    This here anti-feminists isn’t looking for trad roles but a society that gets behind shared parenting marrige is dead, love is dying, so all we have as individuals is the children and women are the default parent. I blame feminism for demonizing men and for encourqaging hatred and superiority in women, this may have somthing to do with men caring less about succes, but who cares we are where we are now its time to be equal that means equal parents and equaly tolorant of eachother,

    “What are men for?”

    “Well that’s an easy one. Deep dicking, of course! Oh…wait.(link to dildo).”–Jessica Valinti

    In other words nothing like this.

    Alon your feminist “friends” see your worth as a human as a second rate vibrating fake cock.

    I would hate to meet your enimies.

  3. Hujo says:

    Dang, if you could edit here I would change much of the above post but I feel I should point out that I meant (love™) is dying.

  4. Alon Levy says:

    Alon your feminist “friends” see your worth as a human as a second rate vibrating fake cock.

    And they say feminists have no sense of humor…

  5. Hujo says:

    Well that’s convenient, my comments were tongue in cheek as well, couldn’t you tell?

    Anyway goodish article, how is feminism relevant to our age group and geography taking into account the now anyway? Is not feminism destined to die and humanism to take over why hold on to a concept of oppression that exists only in the minds of out of touch academic elitists or would that kind of thinking enable too many lesser genes from passing on into the perfect matriarch or something there, dude?

  6. Alon Levy says:

    Is not feminism destined to die and humanism to take over

    Once gender inequality ends, sure.

    If you hate feminism so much, why don’t you work to kill the wage gap as to make it obsolete?

  7. Hujo says:

    I think I am but I talk to much no?

    What do you think is needed to be done? What sort of action should take place to end the wage gap?

  8. Hujo says:

    AND what do you think the wage gap looks like in twenty something people as a whole? If it is non existant or reversed isnt it time for humanism?

  9. Alon Levy says:

    It’s existent. It’s smaller than among thirty somethings, but not because things are getting better; the wage gap today among 35-year-olds is higher than it was ten years ago among 25-year-olds.

    The courses of action that have worked in the past include stricter enforcement of anti-discrimination laws, adoption of flex time, and, I think, subsidized daycare. Also, Norway and Sweden are experimenting with parental leave laws that don’t encourage discrimination; in Canada, this might mean tweaking the current parental leave laws to mandate a set amount of time for each parent, rather than a shared pool of parental leave that the parents can divide however they like.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: