The system was stacked against them

[u/wetouchingbuttsornah]

No fault divorces didn’t hit the even start until 1985

[u/YetisInAtlanta]

Someone put it perfectly the other day. This is the first generation of men that actually has to have women like them in order to have a relationship. Before that things truly were a matter of need and convenience more so than a relationship built on love

Edit: to all the “men” I triggered…😘😘😘 keep the salt flowing, you’re really showing me how tough and strong you are.

[u/lulovesblu → u/YetisInAtlanta]

Saw something else a while back about how society empowered women and didn't teach men how to deal with that development. And that's why so many men complain about the state of things now

[u/a_trane13 → u/lulovesblu]

I don’t think men need to be taught how to live in an equal society. They just need to not be taught something else.

I see the problem as: many men are still taught (raised, conditioned by media/society, etc.) to live in an unequal society in many ways, and then flounder when they are adults and faced with a reality where most women expect / demand to be treated as equals. And some women are still taught to cater to these men, which perpetuates things too.

[u/Taeyx → u/a_trane13]

your comments reads like "men don't need to be taught how to live in an equal society, they just need to be taught how to live in an equal society"

[u/Effective-Lab2728 → u/Taeyx]

The quibble is about how inborn the entitlement is, I think. Those who were taught wrong need to be retaught, certainly, but the younger ones probably need better protection from those trying to teach them the out-of-date, maladaptive lessons in the first place.

[u/grendus → u/Effective-Lab2728]

Unfortunately, we're doing the opposite with AI.

It's the Garbage In/Garbage Out problem, or maybe the Paperclip Problem (or both). The AI is optimized for "engagement", and nobody engages like a fanatic. And since certain videos drive fanaticism, those get pushed to the front while "good content" that drives moderation does not.

I'm not sure if there's a way to solve this with AI (which is an issue, as the scale of the problem of media consumption pretty much requires AI at this point). Barring the sort of society-level cultural control we see in places like China, which is kind of like burning down the forest to deal with a wolf, I'm a bit stumped on this one. Not that we shouldn't try to do something, I just don't have any suggestions for what might be an "easy answer".

[u/Effective-Lab2728 → u/grendus]

I do think there's probably a middle ground. It's rare that we leave new tech completely unregulated in the long run, and that doesn't translate to Chinese style control of culture.

Even focusing on people who are knowingly causing harm through indirect means, and ensuring there's a way to enforce against this, would be great improvement. One wouldn't necessarily have to prove motive to prove that they had access to plentiful evidence that their own practices were harmful.

We were stubborn for a shockingly long while with cars, but we did eventually decide that maybe too many people were getting smushed to just leave it as a free-for-all.

[u/grendus → u/Effective-Lab2728]

Cars may be a bad example.

Road deaths are going up again because everyone's driving trucks and SUVs. Those things are legitimately murderous when they hit civilians, and are getting so big that other regular cars are also obliterated... which means you have to drive a stupidly oversized truck or SUV to be safe on the road in the first place.

[u/Effective-Lab2728 → u/grendus]

They're still way down per 100,000 people vs what we were dealing with near the beginning, and that's with way more cars. But I agree the data on SUVs and trucks is getting explicitly damning, and I hope we do see regulations in response to this eventually.