"More women than men are earning college degrees in the U.S., giving them the upper hand in everything from paychecks to power plays.
Who needs a knight in shining armour when you've got a master's degree and a killer 401(k)?"
Last year we couldn't escape one simple fact: women were in a 'mating crisis' - this is the reason why the dating pool is shrinking and so many of us are staying single.
www.dailymail.co.uk
Notable highlights from the article
- "people are waiting longer to tie the knot - if they tie it at all.
- Nope, we're busy living life on our own terms.
- One man's 'mating crisis' is another woman's fist pump for freedom. Huzzah!
- No man whingeing that I was leaving him stranded.
- I had a cheeky fling with my very own Mr Big - a charming and mightily successful, salt-and-pepper-haired New Yorker who made me feel like a goddess.
- and a cheeky 'you up?' text to a former flame to quell the hangover horn.
- So, do you know what this 'mating crisis' has really brought the single women of the world? Freedom, funds, and flings - and I, for one, am very much here for it"
or Cats.. Lots and LOTS of CATS.
Pics and stuff
View attachment 8581885
comments in article ..
"Young men are eschewing university because the education system continuously informs them they are despised and unwanted beginning at a tender age. Once in university, men can be accused of any crime and receive no due process. Why stay in a system that hates you, and indeed, pay for that system?"
"Academic studies indicate that, on average, men marry across the female spectrum (including from lower social strata and wealth) as long as the man is attracted to the woman. And on average, women will consider marrying only if the man earns more than or at least equal to the woman. This leads to the broad stereotype with an important grain of truth (again, on average):
Men primarily marry for looks and women primarily marry for money and wealth"
"More women than men are earning college degrees in the U.S., giving them the upper hand in everything from paychecks to power play"
The article fails to mention any of this -
It helps when HR is pushing agendas that prioritize women over men in the hiring process, let alone, an education system that does the same.
I've been seeing a lot of these 'empowering' articles (seem to recall that being a buzzword from the 80's) with increasing frequency over the years. One of the "go girl" saber rattling I picked up on was the assertion that these women were represented a new wave of pulling in high powered careers, established presence in real estate holdings and "killer" retirement account holdings.
Don't get me wrong, this
may be accurate for her immediate circle but I have a hard time accepting that to be a marker of macroeconomic standings on these "single and ready to mingle" women. My experience is hardly indicative of larger economics but when I read these type of stories I can't help but think of at least a half dozen women I know well who fall along this mindset.
At least two of which do have outstanding educations (both lawyers) and have been in their professions for years establishing successful careers and earn relatively high salaries. But in both of their cases, they both live in HCOL areas (Philadelphia & DC respectively) and as I see it at least- it's disgusting how much taxes take before the income hits the bank account and coupled with the HCOL, those high incomes just don't stretch nearly as far as they should for single income households. That's my roundabout way of saying knowing where they live, it'd be a stretch mathematically to make it work (but they still seem to "somehow"). They look good and want to remind you of it anytime the opportunity presents itself.
But in the higher income range of the group I'm comfortable with talking about, I know it and they know it that they're living in a house of cards but their 'inner circles' as it were- are all doing the same thing so this further normalizes the behavior and belief. I could go on for hours of how this mentality and "faking it 'till you make it" runs so deep in their core that there will be no convincing them otherwise. This "go-girl" mindset is just as strong of an identity today that I'd argue parallels how 2 generations or so ago folks would use religion or nationality as equal what defined them "as a person" and knowing full well that walking that "walk" may and likely will include sacrifices with the promise that if they stay the course it'll all "work out for them". I personally find it scary how close those examples are but that's not the purpose of this thread or my reply.
Back to the house of cards comments- as I said, even those best positioned to try to make it work seem to lack the self-restraint to deny themselves from lifestyle creep. Their city living spaces continue to increase, they don't deny themselves enviable and frequent vacations, one of which decided in their 40's to have a child using the services of a sperm bank because idk- they are woman hear them roar (kind of seemed to be a bit of a boom amongst that crowd shortly before the COVID) while the other will not deny her having all of the cats & dogs they want despite living in a small apartment in the inner city.
The youngest of these two, I know absolutely certain owes more on her student loans for law school than they originally borrowed and blames the system for being predatory and somehow the faults of conservatives (I think it has something to do with the belief that Republicans in particular are against education funding or something along those lines which makes it someone else's fault) but they fail to take ownership or want to discuss how loans work (specifically the interest portion) because of it not being 'fair'.
I'd be lying if I didn't agree that a part of me at least empathizes with their position. I can at least see where they're coming from on they paid back close-to/just-over the amount of their original loan principle over a decade and they still owe just as much if not more than they did when they started. Of course explaining the "why" that happened, aka- they went on an income based repayment plan which had a monthly payment of less than what the interest accrued/and then refinanced the loans several times (I could be wrong but I think that law school/graduate school specifically is usually private loans rather than federal loans although I know people in a similar boat that lost a lot of protections from the federally backed loans when they refinanced to private loans which is it's own story for another thread).
The other one, the one who decided she didn't need a man to father a child, I believe had most if not all of her loans paid off surprisingly (after her father paid for her undergrad at Duke University but that 'doesn't count' for one reason or another) and had some savings but curses the system for having to use all of her savings for things that should have been the "government's responsibility". Mind you, she refused to live in a different area because of how "close minded" folks outside of the city due to their lack of 'diversity' were, but once the child aged into school, the government failed to provide a "safe" or "effective" program and (we're not supposed to discuss this) she used her income to move into a more desirable area (but it wasn't due to her 'privilege' apparently ) for the school districts available there and so on and so on. None of which she can comfortably or frankly even best case scenario afford but she's also the victim in the story and is blind to seeing how she cannot connect the proverbial dots in her thought system, which again I'd argue (at least from what I've seen) is the more accurate representation of the "lady's" that don't need a man or fall upon the mindset outlined in that article.
As I admitted from the get-go, my experience is hardly representative of that particular category but I can't help but think that's probably more accurate of a depiction of what this mindset leads to. In both cases of my "super successful" ladies that fall into that group, they've both built a house of cards predicated upon the availability of credit and using (to me) frightening amounts of debt to maintain the image of this particular identity.
One of which has 'accidentally' confessed to me that they know they'd just work until they die because they have yet been able to allocate a single dollar to their retirement savings because of the unjust system that requires them to service their debt. The other (and I'm conflicted on this from a macro level myself) I honestly think was counting on receiving an inheritance from their parents (being the only child) which say 15-20 years ago probably seemed like a fair bet and all of their eggs were/are in that bucket.
The part of that story that I'm conflicted about is despite having good health insurance, her father battled cancer for several years and passed away last year which took a tremendous chunk of the savings/investments set aside. Her mother, I hate to say, is also experiencing significant health issues to the point where it's becoming untenable of her being able to live by herself and of course her daughter is unable to run up from the city constantly to take care of her and it's really looking like she will have to move into assisted living before 2025 is up. The way the system is set up, there's a "look back" period of several years and the monthly cost of that care is based upon the resident/patient's (not sure what the correct term is) assets at time of enrollment. So the cancer expenses from her husband will skew what the price would be for that and (lord willing) she still has a number of years in her, I just don't see what's left of their savings/investments lasting for long before she's able to use medicare/medicaid (I can never keep it straight which is the correct one) kicks in.
The other asset they had which hopefully could have been counted on was their house, but things started falling in disrepair after the initial cancer prognosis of her father and her mother wasn't prepared to take care of things. After her mother's last surgery, there was a plumbing issue that went ignored for several weeks (admittedly it fell on the daughter who couldn't do 3-4x at once) but that of course compounded the issues in a major way and that delay (which as far as I know is still going on) still hasn't been full addressed. So that's significantly going to impact what was likely being expected to be recouped there in the "I don't need anyone/I am woman here me roar" identity.
Ugh- alright, I recognize I got on a soapbox there and went WAY further into the weeds than I wanted to. A lot of this is very personal and recent to me and guess it just struck a chord so I apologize for the rambling.
My intention though was to argue (and I didn't even get into the other 'less equipped' examples that I know of) that there has been a tremendous shift in what any 'one' person is capable of achieving even if they're otherwise very successful. And in a lot of ways, it doesn't matter whether they are a man or a woman (lord only knows what the alternative.... genders face but I'm not going to get into that), it's just freaking tough out there for anyone to go through life alone and without any help.
When it comes to the "I don't need a man" battlecry specifically though- I can't help but notice that in my relatively small pocket of very successful women that identify with it, ignoring the "shelf-life" of their looks/desirability to attracting a man should they change their minds, they're likely left at best broke/more realistically up to their eyeballs in soul crushing debt and at the rate things are going, in many cases without a possible exit/escape plan by the time they reach retirement age.
While I empathize, I can't help but wonder if this isn't going to be the next ticking "time bomb" if not an upcoming "H-bomb" economically when these... "Xena Warrior Princesses" are left in inescapable debt and have nothing but Social Security (if it's even around at that point) to survive off of and what we're going to have to do as a nation/increasing the burdens on the back of taxpayers to address this 'surprise' crisis.
That's my 2... well maybe 4 cents on the topic, appreciate you letting me vent.
-LD
