NOT A CHANGE IN WOMEN, IT’S THE ECONOMY STUPID We need to get these men working.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/young-women-are-more-career-driven-than-men-now/IT’S NOT A CHANGE IN WOMEN, IT’S THE ECONOMY STUPID

We need to get these men working. That’s what the numbers say.

The survey results are an aggregate numerical effect, not one that belies any change in male preferences or behavior.

Factors:

a) wider distribution of male abilities than female abilities means the lower part of society is male, plus males are disproportionately affected by the ongoing ‘Man-recession’.

b) fewer men going to college

c) lower male workforce participation rate

d) ongoing effect of the recession

e) the tendency of men to state what is possible as a preference.

f) the fact that males mentally mature more slowly due to how we enforce education today.

Basically:

1) the lower quintiles of males affect the aggregates.

2) The abandonment of the workforce by increasing numbers of men below 30 and above 52.

3) The remaining mailes can’t compensate for the other two groups.

We are not going to have the wonderful world everyone imagined post 1950. The lower classes are abandoning the institutions that made us a ‘society’. Marriage, and the nuclear family will be signals of wealth. And wealth is uncommon. Males will do here, what they have done in the rest of the world when they are no longer bound by marriage.

That’s what they’re doing. That’s what we’re seeing. It’s just data.

Does it matter?

Unemployed disenfranchised women don’t really matter to a polity. Unemployed disenfranchised men create an infinite number of problems. Not the least of which is that they’re a precondition for revolution.