At the same time, families are going broke, over the basics:
Finally, we have a coming together, of the left and the right. Tucker Carlson agrees with Elizabeth Warren on a pretty big question, of one big reason why the American Middle, is screwed. It turns out, feminism is at fault. Here’s how I got that: At 7:25, in above video, Tucker drops a giant Truth Bomb on the frauds in Washington who claim to be for “family values” …they are not, because the frauds who run our country have driven the wages of men, into the ground, for decades. At the same time as this has been happening, feminism has grown as an ideology, including the belief that we should equalize the wages of men and women. Well, guess what? That feminist nugget is bullshit. Working towards gender equality ruins life….for most women. How so? It’s pretty simple. Keep in mind that Washington has been pretending to support family values, while screwing middle class men over for decades, while we as a culture have been embracing feminism. How does that cocktail of things wreck Middle Class America? It’s pretty simple. It turns out, as Tucker put it:
“When men earn less than women, women don’t want to marry them…
That’s the key to the whole thing.
Sorry to break the main feminist paradigm, but that’s the truth. And that’s a real problem. It gets to the heart of what is screwing up America.
As Tucker reminds us, the ruling elite….both Republican and Democrat, is happy to help themselves, help fight malaria in Africa, but they won’t do anything to raise men’s wages in Dayton, Ohio.
Why is that? Ordinary middle class American men simply don’t count, to our elite. They don’t care about us or our problems. And they may not understand how they destroy women and families, when they have that attitude. However, this is highly problematic, for women and feminism. How so? For one thing, when you hurt and ignore middle class men, it’s actually women who, in the end, get hurt badly.
The root of this is female nature, or what women are like. I could care less what feminists say: Women won’t marry men who don’t earn enough money. In the Men’s Rights Community we call it hyper-gamy. In his book 12 Rules for life, Jordan Peterson writes:
“Women have a strong proclivity to marry up or across the economic dominance hierarchy. They prefer a partner of equal or greater status. This holds true, cross-culturally. The same does not hold, by the way, for men, who are perfectly willing to marry across or down. (as the Pew research indicates) “Page 301, 12 Rules for Life, by Jordan Peterson.
This is the same thing Tucker says: Women don’t want to marry men who earn less than they do. Tucker has 3 daughters. No doubt he has asked them that question. So what has happened, is the American elite have screwed over middle class men, economically, and this destroys marriage….thus hurting women. This was done by:
-too much immigration generally, which drives down wages for American men
-letting in 30 Million illegal Mexicans, drove down wages for American men
-business leaders encouraged women to enter the labor market in the 1970s, they did so and tens of millions of women are now competing for jobs with men, thus driving down male wages
-shipping jobs to China and Mexico for decades, elites like Mitt Romney have had American men, who need a lot of money to live, have them compete on labor with Chinese and Mexican men, who can live on 1/10th the wages that American men need to live and start a family.
American male wages for middle class men, have not increased in 40 years. That’s cruel. Isn’t it amazing how “compassionate” the left presents itself as, letting in so many immigrants, legal and illegal. Well, they are anything but compassionate. They are heartless. That’s why Donald Trump was elected. Even if the people have not put two and two together, they know what is going on. Middle America has taken a beating from the elites, who are supposed to look after their economic interests and lead the country, but have failed to do so. So for those Trump haters out there, I say: You deserve Donald Trump, and a whole lot worse.
It’s not only the cruelty of our elites, I object to. It’s also their greed, their indifference, their intellectual laziness, their cowardice, that keeps them from seeing the harm they do, to women and children in America. When men get destroyed, when average male wages get destroyed….as they are being, by the economic and political elite, then women and children suffer, because in most women and children’s lives, there is a man somewhere, paying her bills….or at least trying to.
So, other than stupidity and callousness and greed, why do our elite act like this? The elite benefit from destroying the economic prospects of the average American man, since they own most of the wealth in America. Business owners make more money when they have lots of cheap labor, even if it drives down male wages. The Investor Class made a ton of money, building up China, sending factories overseas, destroying the middle class. Most of those jobs used to be done by males. This turns out, to hurt women and children. The problem is, when the middle and lower class White men and African-Americans and Mexican-American men get royally screwed over by the elites and don’t have enough money, they can’t start families. Guess what? Baby needs new shoes….and when money goes out the window, love walks out the door.
This is not really a partisan issue. Both parties are equally evil. President Trump is trying to change that. Both Democrats and Republicans have a long history of not controlling border security, of just allowing tens of millions of illegal workers into the country, of off-shoring American jobs, of not figuring out policies to shore up the economic prospects of middle class men in this country, of letting in too much immigration in general, of supporting women working, which drives down wages, for men. The American elites….Democrat and Republican, are evil and greedy. Our elites are frauds. They don’t believe in “family values”. I’m very thankful for President Trump, who is trying to change this.
Let’s go back a few decades, to see what happened: What happened was, starting in the 1970s, second wave feminism came in. Women were encouraged to go to work, or go to college. Many did. Big business benefited from the influx of all those female workers. Labor was cheaper, for big business. Birth control had been invented and introduced in the early 1960s, so women were free to work, without fear of pregnancy. This sounds like a good thing, but lots of unintended consequences happened.
One of the bad consequences of women working, is that male wages get suppressed. It’s simply supply and demand. Women are now half the labor force. Even if the economy is growing, there are limits to how much wages can increase. Female wages place restrictions on the rise of male wages, because women are capable workers, they compete with men for jobs, so this suppresses male wages. And average male wages, adjusted for inflation, have not increased in nearly 40 years. Nada, nothing. No increase.
Before any feminists out there circle the block or do a Victory Dance and proclaim that it’s about time, because maybe women are catching up, consider this: This fact turns out to be a problem for women, because when women get pregnant, they need the man’s money, to look after them when they raise children. That’s how life used to work, but thanks to re-engineering sexual roles, life doesn’t work that way, for women. Trouble is, there are millions of women out there, competing for jobs, driving down her husband’s income.
Remember Professor Peterson’s research into why women have a strong preference for marrying at least someone of the same economic level, but preferably the man earns more than she does. Women are not evil for wanting this. They are simply in tune with their biology and know that women get pregnant, she needs his money. That’s why a feminist economy of striving for wage parity between the genders, won’t work. That’s why cruelly suppressing average male wages hurts women.
Another problem is that, when women have their own income, they depend on men less. This is both good and bad. It is likely one of the things jacking up the divorce rate, since the 1960s. The courts are already heavily rigged against men, in favor of women, so when women start to be financially independent, they realize they can take the money and run. We incentivize women to break up their marriage. It’s not a coincidence that 70% of divorces are initiated by women, not men…and the overall divorce rate, particularly for the middle and lower classes, has gone through the roof. For the upper classes, the divorce rate is very low. Guess why? They have lots of money, so the women stick around, that’s why.
Tucker has figured this out this basic narrative and so has Elizabeth Warren. They agree on this. The left and right are converging on agreement: You destroy the economic prospects of middle class men, you destroy women, you destroy a nation.
When Elizabeth Warren was a professor at Harvard, she did a lot of research, into the new social patterns, brought about by feminism. We all thought feminism was a good idea. We were wrong. We all thought, women earning money, how can that be bad? Well, look more carefully at Elizabeth’s research, for the answer. It turns out: There are practical and unanticipated problems that arise, when women work. This is how our little feminist economic experiment went wrong:
With both people working, couples suddenly wanted bigger houses. The figured they could afford it, since the wife was now working. The graph below about house size is really about women working. Once women work, they earn more money, so they want a bigger house….naturally. Builders comply to the demand…naturally. This larger house makes it seem like the couple is getting ahead, getting richer, but that is a financial illusion….as Elizabeth Warren found out, in her research. A mirage. It doesn’t turn out that way, for couples, and women in particular. Financial reality works out a little different, than we imagined it would. The truth is, houses take a few decades to pay off. So the couple that buys a bigger house, because the wife is working, now finds that the wife can’t quit her job. She can’t work part time. She is usually trapped, in chains like the man is trapped, working for the bank. Women’s liberation has turned into a prison for women. Empowerment? Working is empowerment for women? A few decades ago, working was optional for married women. Now it’s mandatory. You tell me, how this is liberation for women? It’s not. It’s bondage and everyone knows it.
Average house size in United States
The United States Census states that the average square footage of a house is 2,598 square feet. The average house size has increased by more than 1,000 square feet in the last 40 years. At the same time, on the same graph, family size is going down. In 1972, it was 3.06 people per household. In 2009 it was 2.57 people per household.
So, houses are getting bigger, families are getting smaller:
The reason this turned into bondage, are practical and common sense: Now that women work, they need a car to get to work. That means a lot of extra expense: for the car, for insurance, for gas and oil, for maintenance and repair, etc, etc….and that’s a lot of money, for most people. Elizabeth explains all this in the short 4 minute video, above. So the gains in income from women working are actually offset by this additional expense. People end up having less discretionary income, than a few decades ago….and a whole lot more stress. Especially women have a whole lot more stress. They have been conned by corporations and the greedy elite, into bondage. They have been torn from family, torn from their children, and impoverished and indentured, to make our greedy corporate overlords like Mitt Romney, even richer. Now, in our new feminist economic arrangement, women feel pressured to work more, so they put their kid in child care, and that again, is an added expense. And of course, with all this new stress, family life suffers, health suffers, people don’t even have time to eat properly.
So is at least working to make women happy? Are women happy with this new arrangement? No. Not at all. Female happiness has been tracked, since this started. Women are more and more unhappy with this arrangement, more and more unhappy, every year. For most women, this new feminist/corporatism world of bondage and wage slavery, just feels wrong:
Fast forward this feminist/corporatism economic model, past the 1970s, from when it started, till today….2019…..and we now find: women are starting to out-compete men in the work-place. Decades of feminism has transformed schools in women’s favor. Laws and attitudes push women to the front, in an effort to make women economically “equal” to men…following feminist Orthodoxy. So how is this project going? Well, two things: Millennial women now out-earn Millennial men, and secondly marriage rates are now at an all time historical low, for Millennial women. And the birth rate is at an all time historical low. Coincidence? Not likely…..but we don’t need children to continue our way of life, do we?
Millennial women out-earning Millennial men:
Not surprising. Birth rate in America at all time low:
Again, we have the same problem. Women evolved for hyper-gamy….for a reason: Women get pregnant. Constructing a society where women are equal to men means there are not enough men for the women to want to permanently mate with. The birth rate drops like a rock, ending your society in a few generations. Feminism is a death sentence for America.
I explore the future prospects for Millennial women, in this related blog post:
One obvious problem with our new feminist corporatism economy is that besides affordability and high costs, our modern economy conflicts with evolution. Women evolved to have children, in their 20s. They did not evolve to work and compete with men, in their 20s. Capitalism is screwed up, because it is ignorant of evolution. Since women can only have babies till they are about 30, this puts incredible strain and pressure on women, in their 20s, who are told, get an education, get a career going, work and start a family, all within 10 years….from age 20 till age 30. This is insanely cruel to women, on the part of elite men. Men who run corporations and run society are being insanely cruel to women, to foist those expectations on young women…..then to lie to them and tell them, it’s good for you. Our leading men who support feminism should be ashamed of what jackasses they are, for inflicting this kind of cruelty upon women. I’ve noticed that women will generally do and comply with, whatever the leading men in our society say is normal and healthy. Well the leading men in our society are cruel, greedy assholes who are destroying society, destroying women.
Let’s take a look at some of the practical outcomes of accepting this new feminist corporatism: What happens when women earn more than men? Even if they marry first, what happens if she in time ends up earning more? From Forbes Magazine:”
Working women have both added to the economic well-being of U.S. marriages and, according to a new study published in the October issue of the Journal of Family, threatened their resilience.
Courtesy of the Great Recession, men are no longer dominators in the labor force. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, women were the majority of payroll employees for the five months that ended in March 2010.
But career women who are the family breadwinners are nearly 40% more likely to get a divorce than women without the same economic resources, according to a 25-year study by Jay Teachman, a sociology professor at Western Washington University in Bellingham, Wash…
As reported in the New York Post, researchers found that the tipping point is when the wife pulled in at least 60% of the family’s income. Couples in this position were 38% more likely in any given year to get divorced.”
So, what the bold highlighted response shows us is that, by encouraging women to earn more than men, we incentivize divorce. That should tell us something, about what men and women are like, in evolution. Think about what Jordan Peterson said, in the quote at top, about economic dominance hierarchies….how they work.
So, question: If we are successful as a society, of getting to the place, where women’s wages are equal to men’s wages, if feminism succeeds, will this new feminist economics work as an organizing principle for marriage? My guess: No it won’t. If we reach this feminist goal, the marriage rate will continue in the toilet it is now. Think about it statistically: If women as a group earn as much as men as a group, then for any two random people, 50% of the time, the woman will out-earn the man. Do half the women in the population really want to pay most of the bills for their men? Do women want to marry men who earn less than them? Can women give up their dreams of Prince Charming and a Castle, and embrace the Loser they have to financially support? Did women evolve that way? Is it in their nature? Do women want to support their men, financially? I doubt that, very much. As Professor Peterson pointed out, women don’t marry down. They always marry across or up, financially. The math and logic of feminism simply doesn’t work, over large populations, for most people. There are exceptions of course, but as a general rule, this is true.
Pocahontas was right. She even wrote a book about it, called the Two-Income Trap.
Reviewer James Sadler said it best:
“The mother/daughter team of Elizabeth Warren and Amelia Warren Tyagi have written one scary book. What exactly makes this book so frightening? The fact that many of their conclusions are probably correct.
A friend who happens to be a CPA who counsels families in financial trouble told me about this book. She actually is warning her clients not to read it because it paints a fairly bleak and depressing picture. Naturally, after she told me this, I had to read it, even though she was correct, much of the information contained in it is depressing.
For one thing, in many ways the integration of women into the workplace and the rise of the two income family has not had the positive effect one might have hoped it would. Because so many families are now two income dependent they have become trapped and are more financially vulnerable than previous generations. Many families use all of the income they receive from both husband and wife, and barely get by. As a result, any interruption of the income flow can result in disaster. One telling statistic: today’s two-income family earns 75% more money than its single-income counterpart of a generation ago, but actually has less discretionary income once their fixed monthly bills are paid.
This is generally blamed on overconsumption and claims that we are a credit card generation that it is paying the price for its free spending ways. And no doubt credit spending has its role in the financial problems of middle America. But Warren and Tyagi make a compelling case that this is not necessarily the whole story. Instead, they propose that the culprit is in large part the ever escalating cost of housing and education in America’s suburbs. As many parents chase the better schools in an attempt to assure their children the best possible education, real estate prices in areas serviced by those schools rise and with it the cost of the homes.
At one time, families could count on stay-at-home mothers as a kind of financial safety net if disaster struck. If dad lost his job or some other financial problem arose, mom could go to work either fulltime or part-time to help tide the family over until the crisis abated. But today, when so many families are dependent on two incomes, families are at a frightening risk should any financial crisis arise in the family.”
So conservative guy Tucker Carlson, and Elizabeth Warren agree? Scary stuff. Yeah, middle class life is screwed. Doesn’t work….thanks to feminism. Women went to work, we men bought into the lie of feminism, the birth rate sank, divorce went up, society de-stabilized, families fell apart, women out-compete men and then don’t want to marry them, the marriage rate is at an all time low.
This new social pattern doesn’t work for most people. It only works for the elite, since they have most of the money now, and don’t care. And guess what? Everyone knows it, by now. When Elizabeth Warren ends up agreeing with Tucker Carlson, we know we’re screwed…..
The reason this madness has been allowed to destroy America is that there is an exception to my comments:
Although marriage rates are now extremely low among the middle and lower classes, and divorce is high, that’s not the same, for all Americans. As I said previously, feminism does not work over large populations, but there are exceptions in specific segments of society: Marriage among the elite…the college educated top 30%….who earn the most money…. is still very common and divorce is very low…under 5%. Marriage among the elites are stable and happy. Guess why? They have lots of money, simple as that. And that’s why the elite don’t see all this: their lives are fine…better than ever. Life is easier, elite women don’t have to work, because life is easy. I know these people: The women go to yoga class, while their professional husband often makes more than enough money, for both of them. They have nice houses, nice lives, because they can afford it. But the bottom 70% of Americans don’t have nice lives. They struggle mightily in the Roseanne Barr way. Dan barely makes a living. Divorce and stress and opioid addiction are tearing middle America apart. The elite know this. Their response is to wreck the lives of the men, so the elites can earn more money. And that wrecks families, hurts women and children.
To the elites I say: shame on you.
Here’s why upper middle class men don’t see this:
I said a few lines ago, right above the Princess picture, There are exceptions of course, but as a general rule, this is true. “So the exception to this, is what I call “The Glass Ceiling of Hyper-gamy”….basically it means that women in the top echelons of society, who have the richest husbands, they have happy, successful marriages because their bills are paid, they can afford a nice house, a nice life, with little stress, because their high earning husbands can earn enough for both of them to live on, if need be. If upper-class women work, it’s only bonus income, and it’s only if she wants to work. Like the 1950s housewife, the upper class women work if they want to, they work for satisfaction. But often they can be seen in the middle of the day, with their yoga mats, heading to class.
What’s needed of course, is to figure out a way to give middle class women and lower class women, what upper class women have: partners who have enough money, they can buy a home when they are still young, when nature intended them to have children. This can bring more social stability to America. It’s what women generally want. It’s the way America used to work, when I was young. Everyone got married back then. And most people got married young. That’s because houses were cheap. As Professor Warren points out, back a generation ago, it only took 1 person, usually the man, to work and afford a home for his family. I lived through that era. For women back then, working was option. Now, it’s mandatory for most women. Back then, in that social pattern, the marriage rate was around 80% in the 1960s. We need to get back to that. As Elizabeth Warren’s research indicates, for most of the population, women working just means a “Two Income Trap”…it doesn’t work. Having enough money to buy a home, without a lot of stress is the reason upper-class marriages are stable: the women get to have a home and family, the women don’t face a lot of pressure to get jobs to make ends meet, their lives have less stress.
A dumb feminist goal: Equalize pay between the genders, focus on women working and going to school in their 20s….in other words, our current feminist social paradigm.
A smart feminist goal: A pro-natal push for social policies that allow women to have children when they are young, have a house and a middle class life, have a partner who can help them achieve that. The focus should be on a pro-natal policy, for a culture that wishes to survive. About 20% of women prefer to be full time Moms, according to Christina Hoff Sommers. Let them. Being a Mother is enough of a contribution to society, if a woman has 4 or more children, she is contributing mightily to the future economic prospects of the country and social policy should reflect that. But have choice for women who prefer to work and school and no family, let them do that. About 20% of women prefer just a career, according to Christina Hoff Sommers. Let them do that. And for women who want to work part time, have fewer children, let them chose that as well. But the largest social rewards should go to women who brings lots of life into the world. They make the largest contribution, of any group of women, by far.
I once visited a Masai tribe in Africa. They are in tune with nature and evolution. I was struck by one of them saying that when a young couple married, the village got together, built them a hut, so they could live as a couple, when children came along. These people understood some things that modern people seem to have forgotten:
-females only breed when young
-it’s best to help young people with housing needs, as it stabilizes the couple, allowing the woman a place to raise her children
-it takes a lot of work to raise very young children, so it’s best if the young Mother not be burdened by economic work to pay for her house
-it is the social role of the rest of the community, to support young couples, for the future of the tribe depends on them
I remember a young Masai warrior describing how it took a couple of weeks to complete a house. After that, I remember thinking, the house is very simple, I would not want to live there, but not paying for a 30 year mortgage sure must have freed up a lot of time, to play in the sun and just be alive. While I would not want such a technologically primitive life, there is much to be admired in how much in tune the Masai are, to the ancient rhythms of evolution. If we keep on doing stupid things, contrary to the norms of evolution, they may out-compete us in the long run.
We now have an economic system where the population of breeding females now earns more money than males of their age. Since we cannot at this time, pull babies out of a hat and we rely on breeding females to produce the next generation of offspring, capitalism has not found a substitute for sexual reproduction, which is essential for the continuance of our culture and our economic system. And since females evolved under conditions of hyper-gamy, they will not breed when they materially out-compete men. So congratulations feminism and capitalism. By not understanding human biology and economics, you have doomed our economic system by dooming our biological and social stability.
If we are to change this, it means addressing the issue of male wages, hyper-gamy and the science of when women evolved to have children, address some of the assumptions of feminism, and how this all relates….translate that into sound economic policy, to help families get started. That’s the way to Make America Great Again!
In a curious twist of reality, it turns out the liberal Professor Elizabeth Warren, has key insights, that even conservative Tucker Carlson agrees….can help Make America Great Again!
Even that liberal magazine, Vox, seems interested in this debate between Tucker and Elizabeth Warren, that it can be the start of some bi-partisan talk on problems and solutions:
But for now and the foreseeable future, unless reform is made, Middle Class America is dead.