Financial Times article says things are getting bad for boys, redditors say "What about REEEEEMALES!?!" Jannies do their thing.

women want to be coddled and independent at the same time

if they picked one or the either it would be fine but that would require women not wanting everything

Male prestige jobs gonna catch a big W in the next decade

It's funny. When men were the educated ones and out earning women, they didn't call it "dating down" and "settling" when they were looking for a partner. They provided and did their part.

In ye olde days there was a huge stigma against dating someone from a different social class. If my dad was planning to bring a girl home, the first question he'd get asked is "what does her father do?" and the second was "she is Catholic, isn't she?"

During that era, there were definitely "trophy wives" and "starter wives" (for men who married early, made money later, and "traded up").

Same same but different.

A nice response where they both misunderstand what a trophy wife is (a guy with a trophy wife isn't settling), follow it with something that wasn't ever really a thing outside of like celebrities if it even was then, and then the point of their reply is completely missing.

If she's not willing to either split the bills or take on home chores, you've found the female version of the jobless man who wants his wife to be his mother

This just ends up being "my just-so story is so much better than your just-so story!"

The real idiocy is coming from Richard Reeves who thinks that depriving boys of schooling during the most critical phase of development (early childhood) is going to somehow improve things. It will make it worse, and it won't even be obvious until an entire generation has been stunted.

The only reason feminists complain about the man paying the bill is because they think it creates an expectation that things will progress further. It has nothing to do with them wanting to provide for themselves or any sense of equality. To them, the best case scenario is that the man pays the bills but doesn't expect anything in return - but most feminists realize how entitled that sounds out loud so they publicly state they prefer splitting the bill, when doing so absolutely gives them "the ick".

You ideally want to date a woman who makes solid enough money to contribute, but still less than you.

Maybe this why I have entered my "dirty old man" phase and am mainly right-swiping 25 year olds () despite being in my 30s

Women need to learn to be a sugar mommy and men need to be able to swallow their pride and until this happens everyone will be upset and lonely.

Women are in charge of boy's education at all points, but it's sports that cause them not to do well.

The real issue is that they like esports and not realsports

But kids that do sports actually do better in school and are less likely to get into drugs and shit.

I think it might literally kill some of these people to be objective about issues.

cultural changes

Probably around the time they invented "kill all the men from the opposing tribe and enslave the women"

To be fair to them, universities give preferential treatment to women, and soy megacorps compete harder for women. Remember that time Google found out it "accidentally" underpaid young male new hires across the board?

What percentage of men need to be failures before we start posing a threat to the successful?

But there are female billionaires, thjs would make all but a handful of men, including you, failures

The ladies love neets with no prospects who smoke weed, play video games, and hangout on obscure internet forums all day. Instant panty dropper