SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Binyamin Appelbaum writes at the NYT that the share of prime-age men — those 25 to 54 years old — who are not working has more than tripled since the late 1960s, to 16 percent as many men have decided that low-wage work will not improve their lives, in part because deep changes in American society have made it easier for them to live without working. These changes include the availability of federal disability benefits; the decline of marriage, which means fewer men provide for children; and the rise of the Internet, which has reduced the isolation of unemployment. Technology has made unemployment less lonely says Tyler Cowen, an economist at George Mason University, who argues that the Internet allows men to entertain themselves and find friends and sexual partners at a much lower cost than did previous generations. Perhaps most important, it has become harder for men to find higher-paying jobs as foreign competition and technological advances have eliminated many of the jobs open to high school graduates. The trend was pushed to new heights by the last recession, with 20 percent of prime-age men not working in 2009 before partly receding. But the recovery is unlikely to be complete. "Like turtles flipped onto their backs, many people who stop working struggle to get back on their feet," writes Appelbaum. "Some people take years to return to the work force, and others never do "
A study published in October by scholars at the American Enterprise Institute and the Institute for Family Studies estimated that 37 percent of the decline in male employment since 1979 can be explained by this retreat from marriage and fatherhood (PDF). “When the legal, entry-level economy isn’t providing a wage that allows someone a convincing and realistic option to become an adult — to go out and get married and form a household — it demoralizes them and shunts them into illegal economies,” says Philippe Bourgois, an anthropologist who has studied the lives of young men in urban areas. “It’s not a choice that has made them happy. They would much rather be adults in a respectful job that pays them and promises them benefits.”
(Score: 3, Interesting) by iamjacksusername on Monday December 15 2014, @06:01PM
I am toward the younger end of the spectrum though I am approaching grey-beard status when compared to the 20-year old workers dominating the start-up world. I am seeing the trend of many men in American society are being shunted into the "undate-able" pool. My experience in the dating pool as I entered my 30s is extremely stratified. Having the following 6 characteristics will make a man a valuable commodity among his heterosexual, female peers in their 30s. This is the closest time in a man's life that he will have to the experience of being an 18-year old attractive woman. The 4th one is controversial but it would be misleading if I did not include it.
1) Having stable employment in the true middle-class (I define true middle class in the NE US as making > $80K / year. Housing in the NE metro corridor is insanely expensive compared to middle America)
2) Having my own place (renting or owning)
3) Owning a car kept in good shape... not a beater.
4) Be white
5) Be clean (no addictions, no STDs, no weird mental issues, no kids)
6) Don't be obese
The converse of this is that not having these (excluding the racial component but that is a complicated topic) makes a man undate-able. I saw an article about the woes of professionally successful women trying to date men in NYC. The issue is not the overall supply of single men; the issue was the supply of single men who were of equivalent economic status. Women do not date down economically-speaking while economics are a secondary considerations many men. In NYC, the ratio of 30+ year old single men making > $200K / year who are willing to date women of similar age and economic status is quite lopsided. Most men who are making good money in NYC have a much wider selection pool because they are not selecting on economic factors that, in NYC, are a very strong selector (because of the distorted cost-of-living economics. NYC economics). This has reversed the traditional supply and demand dynamics of the male / female coupling. In NYC, these women are the "buyers" with the men being the "commodity" in short supply.
I see this is a much wider tend across the US as male-dominated industries see significant reductions in relative wages. Pair this with the economic advancement of women in general, and the general trend of women getting more education than women, the result is one where a large portion of the male population is no longer in the traditional selection pool f0or women. I do not know the end-game... historically, this usually resulted in large emigration, voluntary or otherwise as we saw with large, migrant, primarily male labor forces in railroading, mining, farming, fishing, etc... I honestly am not sure what to expect. Maybe a Japanese trend where people coupling is no longer the usual or normal?
I do not mean this as criticism of one gender or the other. Just my observations.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday December 15 2014, @06:49PM
From my own observation your list of 6 criteria for men (and women) would seem to change it from a study of human mating habits to a study of unicorn mating habits.
In a city of eight million those criteria are so rare we may as well list the individuals by name not just count them. So Sally can't meet Harry because there's 7.999998 million other people who don't meet the criteria standing in the way, etc. Maybe online dating will help.
historically, this usually resulted in ...
Not just your economic activities, but also warfare. If I were Canada I'd be worried... you got world class maple syrup, hockey, women, and health care and we want them...
(Score: 1) by iamjacksusername on Monday December 15 2014, @07:31PM
I agree the list makes some pretty big generalizations, is very NE US-specific, and certainly does not account for outliers. However, having been in the NE US dating pool in large cities, that list definitely holds up. I think it is a very strong statement on the economic status of large groups of men in our society where simply having some very basic requirements that, 30 years ago, nobody would have given a second thought to, makes someone a unicorn (excluding the racial dynamic but that is very complicated and out of scope for a short reply).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 15 2014, @08:43PM
I agree with the experiences of this poster. Finding myself a single nerd at 25, I found myself at the top of the dating pool. It is true that the 'sexual attractiveness of an engineer starts near 30. Traits include:
- owns a house
- owns a car
- has education (MS at the time, PhD later)
- has an interesting job
- makes enough that the female wouldn't have to work (80+K/year)
- has manners/caring
- white
Women came out of the woodwork, even in the highly competitive online dating scene. I was up to 4 dates/week (different girls) before turning it down a notch. If my upbringing/goals were not what they are, I would have exploited the situation for longer.
This was a very weird experience from "high school nerd" (2004) to "top of the dating food chain" (2011), while adding "divorced" to the list of traits.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by iamjacksusername on Monday December 15 2014, @09:45PM
I would agree with the online dating as well. Online dating is highly competitive but having those attributes puts a person at the top of the heap. When I hit 30, it was like night and day. I am also not trying to date 20 year olds either... I am dating my peers.
I disagree with "makes enough that the female wouldn't have to work". It is much more "you are at the same economic status or higher than many women peers" so you have met the economic selection requirement for a very large pool. I know that sounds pretty sexist and brutal but I think, once you are out of your 20s, you really start to think about what is most important to you so partner selection becomes a lot less "soulmate" and more "compatibility seeking". This is true for both men and women' just ask a woman in her mid-30s what traits she is looking for in a partner and, assuming she is not living in fantasy world, they basically come down to economically stable and similar, culturally similar, little / no emotional baggage, and not dependent on them.
Interestingly, race is a single trait strong selector for most white women (they strongly select for white men only) but is a dual-trait strong selector for a significant minority of non-white women (they strongly select for either their own race or white men). OkCupid has a really interesting blog post about race preferences in online dating:
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/race-attraction-2009-2014/ [okcupid.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 16 2014, @01:33AM
- owns a house
- owns a car
- has education (MS at the time, PhD later)
- has an interesting job
- makes enough that the female wouldn't have to work (80+K/year)
- has manners/caring
- white
Most of these are shallow and worthless. I wouldn't want to associate with anyone so superficial.
And the "American dream" seems to be to waste lots of money on useless junk you don't need (you have to own your own *everything*, even if you don't need it) so you can impress shallow people. In other words, being a good Consumer. That's right, dear Consumer: Consume!
- has education (MS at the time, PhD later)
Having a degree != educated. Not having a degree != uneducated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 16 2014, @02:36AM
It wasn't too long ago that having a husband dedicated to providing an income was a bad thing, as he did not give her enough attention, and she would end up divorcing him.
You know, its really hard competing with the government when it comes to providing financial support for a family.
It seems families are better off these days without the dad.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 20 2014, @03:11PM
The dads are much better off without the families.
Claim your freedom. Leave it behind.