By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - The American family is falling apart

Player2 on 07 April 2018
EnricoPallazzo said:
What about the data for white people, why does it stop on the 90's?

Because skin color wasn't enough to separate "us" from everybody else, so more criteria was added.



Around the Network
o_O.Q on 07 April 2018
the-pi-guy said:
o_O.Q said:

"Not usually. "

uh again that's not true

Do you have some examples or do I have to take your word for it?

"This is another big part of feminism, women should be allowed to join the military, become garbage women, etc.  "

my point was being made with regards to your argument about past oppression 

and really? i'll concede on the military, but a big part of feminism is getting women to become garbage women?

You bet.

https://foresternetwork.com/msw-management-magazine/ms-waste/ms-waste-collection/women-in-waste/

"Pretty much."

lol ok and why is rape a crime therefore?

The fact that it's a crime means I'm wrong?  Okay.  For a long time marital rape wasn't a crime.  You were legally allowed to shove your wife down and rape her regardless of what she felt about it.  This didn't become a thing until 1979.

Why do you think that might be?

http://time.com/3975175/spousal-rape-case-history/


"https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/02/us/brock-turner-release-jail/index.html"

there have been cases where men were jailed for false accusations... does that invalidate your argument? or is the justice system just not perfect?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-surrey-11676804

No it doesn't invalidate my argument.  The justice system is imperfect.  

btw it appears that the investigation did not produce significant evidence to conclude he raped the woman... were you there? do you have sufficient evidence yourself to conclude that he did rape her? or is her accusation enough evidence?

from this article you posted it appears that this is the case

5 men who were accused of sexual assault and got little or no jail time

because women never lie and there are never misunderstandings between people... may the gods have mercy on you and not let you fall into a situation where a misunderstanding with a woman or a dishonest women result in your own ideas about these situation result in you getting shafted

I never said women don't lie.  

Feminism made articles like these:  https://www.nicholls.edu/wrso/sexual-assault/safety-tips/

 

"In many situations, there's very few precautions that can be made."

example?

Really?  You think there's precautions that can be made in every situation?  Unless you're a person who has their gun out and pointed at anyone you see, there's tons of situations where you can't do very much.  


'A lot of these things are vastly more complicated than just women being different.  The fact that society has certain expectations also ends up affecting how women believe they should see themselves, same with men.  "

well yeah, but that's an existential problem... you are never going to have a society that does not have expectations for the individuals that comprise it

and there are always going to be people that fall short of these expectations

but regardless can you give me as example of the expectations you are referring to with regards to women

 

"Society believes men should be emotionless creatures, then we wonder why suicide rates are so high.  "

yeah but again there will never be a society that does not have a concept for what the best behavior for individuals will be 

Well I'm feeling optimistic.

 " early on in education, these differences often don't exist at all."

yeah... noticing that before puberty the differences between men and women are not as pronounced isn't earth shattering, the point of puberty is to mature as a man or woman

is your argument that its education and not puberty/biology that causes the greater divide seen later on?

No, my argument is that society has an impact on individuals.  You are arguing that all the time.  You argue that random articles cause people to feel victimized, and whatever else.  

Eating disorders are a huge example of how society affects how we see ourselves.   There was a study about eating disorders and bringing television to an island population.  The island went from having no eating disorders, to have very high rates of eating disorders in just a few years.  

the only way that could be is if you don't acknowledge that there are fundamental differences in men and women

There are none that matter.  

"Do you have some examples or do I have to take your word for it?"

uh car insurance? home owners insurance? 

 

"https://foresternetwork.com/msw-management-magazine/ms-waste/ms-waste-collection/women-in-waste/"

can you identify the feminist organisation involved in this? or is the assumption just being made that this is a result of feminist advocacy?

 

"This didn't become a thing until 1979."

again, i'm talking about 2018 not decades ago

 

"I never said women don't lie.  "

but that would be the obvious conclusion if all claims they make must result in convictions as you have implied by linking an article that states that men should be jailed simply for accusations

 

"Feminism made articles like these:  https://www.nicholls.edu/wrso/sexual-assault/safety-tips/"

and the vast majority of feminists now would call this an example of "victim blaming" because it advocates for the agency of women

but yes this is good

 

"Really?  You think there's precautions that can be made in every situation?"

i'm trying to get a better understanding of the situations you are referring to

 

"No, my argument is that society has an impact on individuals."

again, this is an existential problem, its never going to be the case that a society will not mold and shape an individual which is why its important for people to balance their socialisation with their individuality

 

"Eating disorders are a huge example of how society affects how we see ourselves. "

you seem to be referring here to women trying to compete with beauty standards

but the thing is that this is not a gendered problem, men also have an ideals they try to live up to in order to be attractive

this is another persistent problem that always will occur when you live among other people

 

"There are none that matter.  "

it'd be funny if you were a heterosexual or homosexual saying this(and you might be i don't know)

but no you're wrong

the gender pay gap, for example, is caused by the differences between men and women

women obviously take more time off for their pregnancies and family life and beyond that they seek out professions that are lower paying to a higher degree

http://www.thejournal.ie/gender-equality-countries-stem-girls-3848156-Feb2018/



CrazyGamer2017 on 07 April 2018
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
CrazyGamer2017 said:

Sorry I'm a freethinker, I use my brain so I don't need to believe in some imaginary invisible man in the sky ruling the universe and pray to him to justify my existence.

As for marriage, for the last time, it's not marriage that produces children it's sex and you mentioned fertility and people are not less fertile cause they are not married compared to people that marry.

If people don't have kids or less kids it's because it's hard, expensive and there is no time with careers in our modern world and NOT because people choose relationships out of wedlock. Anyone can marry and decide to have NO kids just as anyone can never marry and have a ton of kids and that's all there is to it.

No, i wouldn't say you are any kind of thinker at all.

I don't think you know what fertility even means. Here straight from wikipedia of all sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility

"In demographic contexts, fertility refers to the actual production of offspring, rather than the physical capability to produce which is termed fecundity.[1][2] While fertility can be measured, fecundity cannot be."

A marriage as the primairy pair bonding strategy provided fertile people with the reasons to have children in the past. Reasons as security or social status. But since marriage is dead and nothing has replaced it, there are far less reasons to have children as is proven by the low birth rate in most countries.

The reason that "out of wedlock" is indeed a stigma, is because marriage was the primary pair bonding strategy. With that gone and no replacement, fertility can only fall.

 

 

A religious nuts telling me I'm not a thinker LOL, but jokes aside you have no idea what a freethinker is. Like I said a while ago, go back to your 19th century and pray for our souls or something.

But a fair warning, all your praying won't change the matter at hand, that marriage is not popular anymore and yet the human race will continue existing with less and less marriage and all your delusions that marriage is some kind of pillar without which, life is not possible or whatever it is you believe in, is just going to crumble a little more with every passing generation, which beyond our little bickering, is all that matters truly.



o_O.Q on 07 April 2018
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
CrazyGamer2017 said:

Sorry I'm a freethinker, I use my brain so I don't need to believe in some imaginary invisible man in the sky ruling the universe and pray to him to justify my existence.

As for marriage, for the last time, it's not marriage that produces children it's sex and you mentioned fertility and people are not less fertile cause they are not married compared to people that marry.

If people don't have kids or less kids it's because it's hard, expensive and there is no time with careers in our modern world and NOT because people choose relationships out of wedlock. Anyone can marry and decide to have NO kids just as anyone can never marry and have a ton of kids and that's all there is to it.

No, i wouldn't say you are any kind of thinker at all.

I don't think you know what fertility even means. Here straight from wikipedia of all sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertility

"In demographic contexts, fertility refers to the actual production of offspring, rather than the physical capability to produce which is termed fecundity.[1][2] While fertility can be measured, fecundity cannot be."

A marriage as the primairy pair bonding strategy provided fertile people with the reasons to have children in the past. Reasons as security or social status. But since marriage is dead and nothing has replaced it, there are far less reasons to have children as is proven by the low birth rate in most countries.

The reason that "out of wedlock" is indeed a stigma, is because marriage was the primary pair bonding strategy. With that gone and no replacement, fertility can only fall.

 

 



Insidb on 07 April 2018

Yeah, but kids are evil.



Around the Network
sundin13 on 07 April 2018
Stefan.De.Machtige said:

A lot of people are saying that marriage doesn't matter for children of general family live. Wel if that's the case, why is fertility way down for most (if not all) countries where the marriage rate tanked...?

The answer is simple:
When the chief pair bonding mechanism fails, the bonding fails also. There was a reason why marriage was pushed in the past. They broke the social/religious contract and with it the core of society.

Could you clarify what you mean when you say that marriage is the "chief pair bonding mechanism"? It sounds like what you are saying is that people form bonds through marriage, but that isn't really how the institution of marriage is supposed to work (unless you are talking about arranged marriage, which I don't think you are, and I don't think many here would support). Marriage is a symptom of bonding. It does not create the bond, it just writes about it on a piece of paper.

Theoretically, in a strong, healthy relationship, marriage is meaningless (beyond the tax breaks).

That is why I personally dislike the idea of marriage and I would probably not get married to whomever I plan to spend my life with (assuming they don't care one way or the other). Negative reinforcement is not what healthy relationships should be built on. I don't think that it is in my best interest to stay with someone I don't want to be with just because of how annoying divorce proceedings are.

Marriage as an institution does not build strong relationships, it sloppily holds together weak ones after they've already fallen apart.



Conina on 07 April 2018
Stefan.De.Machtige said:

A lot of people are saying that marriage doesn't matter for children of general family live. Wel if that's the case, why is fertility way down for most (if not all) countries where the marriage rate tanked...?

The answer is simple:
When the chief pair bonding mechanism fails, the bonding fails also. There was a reason why marriage was pushed in the past. They broke the social/religious contract and with it the core of society.

Ain't it a good thing if fertility goes down in many countries?

The world population has grown from 1.65 billion to 7.6 billion since 1900 and is still growing on a planet with limited resources:

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

Do we really need more people on the planet? 



o_O.Q on 07 April 2018
Conina said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:

A lot of people are saying that marriage doesn't matter for children of general family live. Wel if that's the case, why is fertility way down for most (if not all) countries where the marriage rate tanked...?

The answer is simple:
When the chief pair bonding mechanism fails, the bonding fails also. There was a reason why marriage was pushed in the past. They broke the social/religious contract and with it the core of society.

Ain't it a good thing if fertility goes down in many countries?

The world population has grown from 1.65 billion to 7.6 billion since 1900 and is still growing on a planet with limited resources:

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

Do we really need more people on the planet? 

with every new person born the chances of bringing the next genius like einstein or tesla into the world increases

you drop the birth rate and the chances of it happening fall drastically



Stefan.De.Machtige on 07 April 2018
sundin13 said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:

A lot of people are saying that marriage doesn't matter for children of general family live. Wel if that's the case, why is fertility way down for most (if not all) countries where the marriage rate tanked...?

The answer is simple:
When the chief pair bonding mechanism fails, the bonding fails also. There was a reason why marriage was pushed in the past. They broke the social/religious contract and with it the core of society.

Could you clarify what you mean when you say that marriage is the "chief pair bonding mechanism"? It sounds like what you are saying is that people form bonds through marriage, but that isn't really how the institution of marriage is supposed to work (unless you are talking about arranged marriage, which I don't think you are, and I don't think many here would support). Marriage is a symptom of bonding. It does not create the bond, it just writes about it on a piece of paper.

Theoretically, in a strong, healthy relationship, marriage is meaningless (beyond the tax breaks).

That is why I personally dislike the idea of marriage and I would probably not get married to whomever I plan to spend my life with (assuming they don't care one way or the other). Negative reinforcement is not what healthy relationships should be built on. I don't think that it is in my best interest to stay with someone I don't want to be with just because of how annoying divorce proceedings are.

Marriage as an institution does not build strong relationships, it sloppily holds together weak ones after they've already fallen apart.

Bold: This is (partially) true if you're talking about the 'modern' marriage.

In the past marriage was not really about love. It was a almost unbreakable contract recognized by state/church/class/just important people which would bind two sexes together and see the continuation of the society. For the most part it was simple enough: A man provided resources and authority and the women provided fertility and sex.

When you commited to this contract, it was a very big deal for all parties. It was one of the most important contract you could enter with far-reaching consequences for both sexes which could last untill death. Under that understanding it can build very strong relationships where business, heritage, blood and even love are mixed in a mutual beneficial contract for both. One of the best free trade deals around  untill .gov got in on the game .

As a literal contract it means indeed nothing as all social constructs do. But in the context of the past and social cohesion, it did mean a lot. In the current times it's value is almost zero i quess.

I would not marry myself at this point. As a man there is nothing to gain in marriage.

 



In the wilderness we go alone with our new knowledge and strength.

Signalstar on 07 April 2018

We need more sex ed and people need to use condoms.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.