The Beached White Male

[Brian4Liberty]

On newstands now, the cover story of Newsweek, which is the worst kind of race baiting. Sorry, this downturn effects all men. White, Black, Hispanic, all are effected. The influx of cheaper, imported labor is almost exclusively male. White collar, blue collar, it doesn't matter. One exception may be nursing, where traditionally female jobs are effected.

http://www.coverjunkie.com/uploads/t_1303122133.jpg

Story link:
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/04/17/dead-suit-walking.html

[Agorism]

Black females are tending to do better than black males as well so it's not just white males.

[acptulsa]

Dying propaganda rag brags about its successes even as it goes under because it's title promises news it doesn't deliver.

In other news...

[Mini-Me]

Dying propaganda rag brags about its successes even as it goes under because it's title promises news it doesn't deliver.

In other news...

That's really the sick thing: It's presented with a smug sense of satisfaction, and it even reminds me of the war trophies a bit. It's sad that so many people have such strong resentment for white males and so much schadenfreude when they're getting hammered, all on account of their skin color and sex.

[Brian4Liberty]

That's really the sick thing: It's presented with a smug sense of satisfaction...

You can almost hear Rachel Maddow...

[LibertyEagle]

On newstands now, the cover story of Newsweek, which is the worst kind of race baiting. Sorry, this downturn effects all men. White, Black, Hispanic, all are effected. The influx of cheaper, imported labor is almost exclusively male. White collar, blue collar, it doesn't matter. One exception may be nursing, where traditionally female jobs are effected.

Correction. This downturn effects all people.

[TheBlackPeterSchiff]

People still read Newsweek?

[Brian4Liberty]

Correction. This downturn effects all people.

This is true. "Downturn" was too broad a term to use. That effects everyone, as does unemployment.

But the article is specifically talking about male unemployment, and both statistically and anecdotally, it is more men who are out of work.

[Anti Federalist]

Correction. This downturn effects all people.

Not really, if we are just talking about unemployment.

Men have been hit harder by unemployment than women during this downturn.

More women than men work in stable or government jobs, less likely to be affected by layoffs.


Over the course of this recession, men have experienced significantly higher unemployment rates than women. The unemployment rate for men rose by 6.7 percentage points from its 2007 average level, peaking at 11.4 percent , while the unemployment rate for women increased by 4.3 percentage points, peaking at 8.8 percent. This pattern of more cyclically sensitive unemployment rates for men has been apparent over the last four recessions.

(yeah yeah I know, what a source right?)

http://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/Trends/2010/0810/01labmar.cfm

[Romulus]

People still read Newsweek?

Yes my neighbor subscribes to it. Seriously. He think the Tea Party is ruining the GOP too.

[MelissaWV]

Not really, if we are just talking about unemployment.

Men have been hit harder by unemployment than women during this downturn.

More women than men work in stable or government jobs, less likely to be affected by layoffs.



(yeah yeah I know, what a source right?)

http://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/Trends/2010/0810/01labmar.cfm

Many women are still affected, though, by the same unemployment numbers we're throwing around. A woman may have been making less than her male counterpart who was laid off (and it might even have factored into the decision), and now has to work harder or else meet the same fate. Hours at work are longer, perks are fewer, and stress is way up. Women who are married are now sometimes facing being the sole breadwinner when a man becomes unemployed. Prices are shooting skyward, including gas and groceries which I'm fairly sure women also use. This makes times very tough, even if one is still "employed."

[justinc.1089]

Thank God someone still has the guts to stand up for white men.

WE are the people at a disadvantage that are discriminated against now.


MORE women in college than men.

MORE help to get into college for women and minorities than straight white men.

MORE pay for women. Yes, women make more money than men now. It is a statistical FACT conveniently ignored by the media because they must continue their blind hate towards straight white men.

MORE women and minorities are given promotions by the government and companies out of fear and terror of affirmitive action, lawsuits, groups like the NAACP and feminist groups, and so on.

STRAIGHT WHITE MEN are the people in constant danger of being accused of hate speech, not women and minorities.

STRAIGHT WHITE MEN are insulted daily, yet it is absolutely unacceptable, barbaric, and horrifying to insult women or minorities. Straight white men speak in fear and absolute TERROR of being misunderstood as saying something insulting to women and minorities. Why the double standard?


The anti-straight white male agenda in our media and government is blatantly obvious to anyone who wants to think logically, rather than feel guilty for the actions of ancestors of straight white males, women, or minorities. Straight white males feeling guilt for what our ancestors did, or women and minorities feeling resentment, fear, jealousy, or whatever because of what straight white males did to other groups a long time ago, is NOT logical because those people were NOT ANY OF US.





I'm SICK of being insulted and hurt by the media and government. We gave women and minorities not JUST a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD, but...

WE HAVE HELPED ALL OF YOU AND PUSHED YOU UP ON OUR SHOULDERS AND STILL YOU DEMAND THAT YOU ALL ARE NOT EQUAL, WHEN YOU ARE NOW ABOVE US THANKS TO US QUIETLY LISTENING TO ALL THIS HATE SPEECH TOWARDS US AND THANKS TO US PUTTING UP WITH ALL THE UNFAIR INEQUALITIES DIRECTED TOWARDS US!!!!!!!





I will subscribe to Newsweek now just because of this article, IF it is what the title suggests.

It is pure insanity to say men are not being hit harder than women by the recession when we are being hit TWICE AS HARD ACCORDING TO UNEMPLOYMENT STATISTICS! Get over your equality complex people.

We're past equal. It is now STRAIGHT WHITE MEN who are being discriminated against.

I ask for no help either. I don't want affirmitive action. I don't want more help for college. I don't want anything else. I don't want to rant about how disadvantaged straight white men are.

But it must be said.



And you know what else???

I'm proud to be a straight white male, and saying that isn't racist or sexist either. I'm proud of my heritage, and our accomplishments. I will say this because I am tired of being told it is racist and sexist to be proud to be a straight white male.



I will risk my reputation here to say what must be said. If I am banned for my statements, then it is only evidence that what I say is true because I cannot merely defend straight white males without being accused of racism and/or sexism. Yet, nothing I have said is sexist or racist because I would never support doing something to insult or harm a group of people.

I am only saying straight white men are insulted and hurt in today's world everyday of our lives. We cannot escape insults nor can we avoid being hurt somehow everyday of our lives now.

And I'm absolutely not saying most women and minorities dislike straight white men. However, you don't walk in our shoes everyday, and don't see the world as a straight white man, so I don't think you notice the ridiculous discrimination we face all the time.

[MelissaWV]

Oh. Goody. THIS is where this thread is going.

[justinc.1089]

Oh. Goody. THIS is where this thread is going.

You really think you are still at a disadvantage compared to a man? You really think men are not being hit harder by the recession than women?

I already said I am not for any form of assistance to straight white men. I simply want a level playing field, my dignity from no longer being insulted everyday simply for being a straight white male, and I want the fact that women and minorities are assisted to pass straight white males to be acknowleged.

1. A level playing field where no individual is helped to surpass another individual over race, gender, or sexual orientation is the morally correct thing to do, and also what Ron Paul advocates if that matters to you.

2. Straight white men are insulted daily, and we are hurt daily by problems we encounter due to being straight white males. For example, I have had female professors, at least 3 of them, that gave me a lower class grade than I deserved because I was a white male, and going to get a B or A depending on what class. I am absolutely certain one professor did this because I know my grades, I talked to the professor so she knew me out of random students, and I got a C+ when I should have got an A-. And that's just one example of ways I have been hurt from being a straight white male, and does not get into the insults. The insults are the bad part because that happens at least almost everyday.

3. Are things like affirmative action, financial assistance for everyone other than straight white males to go to college, and so on, really truly fair to us as individuals? If they are not fair, then women and minorities are not at a disadvantage, and are actually at an advantage compared to white males.


Your emotional statements are nice, but not logical. There has never been a time as hard for straight white men as today's environment in history from a straight white male's perspective.

[MelissaWV]

2. Straight white men are insulted daily...

Your emotional statements are nice, but not logical.

Uh huh.

Which "emotional" statement is that?

I was responding to AF about women not being hit by the recession because they are largely in recessionproof industries that insulate them from unemployment. In reality, unemployment is affecting those who are employed as well.

My response to you was the sigh of realizing a trollfest is about to begin in what could have been a rational discussion.

The only person really getting riled up and emotional around here is you.

[justinc.1089]

Many women are still affected, though, by the same unemployment numbers we're throwing around. A woman may have been making less than her male counterpart who was laid off (and it might even have factored into the decision), and now has to work harder or else meet the same fate. Hours at work are longer, perks are fewer, and stress is way up. Women who are married are now sometimes facing being the sole breadwinner when a man becomes unemployed. Prices are shooting skyward, including gas and groceries which I'm fairly sure women also use. This makes times very tough, even if one is still "employed."

It was not said women are not being affected. Men are being affected more, so saying women are being affected too is just an emotional but not logical response to try to justify the idea that "its not just men or women, its everyone because we're all equal."

That's the emotional part.

[JustinTime]

Huh, well whaddaya know...

A few months ago there was something about a making it easier for women to sue because they supposedly get paid less, I guess we dudes can expect the same measures to be taken on our behalf?

[justinc.1089]

Uh huh.

Which "emotional" statement is that?

I was responding to AF about women not being hit by the recession because they are largely in recessionproof industries that insulate them from unemployment. In reality, unemployment is affecting those who are employed as well.

Men are being hit harder. That does not mean women are not being affected.

My response to you was the sigh of realizing a trollfest is about to begin in what could have been a rational discussion.

Its hardly a trollfest! That really annoys me. I get insulted everyday for just being a straight white male, which I didn't even decide to be. So I say what straight white men everywhere need to be saying together to get our respect back from other people, and that is somehow a "trollfest?" I gave you PERFECTLY logical points to refute. Instead of logically refuting my points, you respond with an emotional rant not addressing the points I made. If I called women stupid women everyday, and you had to hear comments like that everyday of your life, wouldn't you be bothered by it? Especially if when you said something about it people told you that you're being sexist towards men by accusing them of calling you stupid? Because that is exactly what straight white men deal with every single day.

The only person really getting riled up and emotional around here is you.

No. I was emotional talking about how straight white men are discriminated against because it IS an emotional thing to go through. So my logical response is going to be emotionally charged when addressing that since I have been insulted and hurt like most other straight white males pretty often, simply because I'm a straight white male.

In my response to you, I gave you a logical response clearly defining my points to you. Then you gave me an emotional response accusing me of trolling, and did not even address my points. You just called me a troll instead of refuting my perfectly logical points. My points are logic, you calling me a troll is emotional. It's certainly not logical because I'm not trolling, so it must have been an emotional response to me disagreeing with you. Or either you did not understand my post and really thought it was just trolling, but honestly, if you read it all I don't know how you could misunderstand that.

[justinc.1089]

Huh, well whaddaya know...

A few months ago there was something about a making it easier for women to sue because they supposedly get paid less, I guess we dudes can expect the same measures to be taken on our behalf?

Did you even read what I said?

I said like 5 times I DO NOT WANT advantages given to straight white men because of our sexual orientation, gender, or race!

[reardenstone]

On newstands now, the cover story of Newsweek, which is the worst kind of race baiting. Sorry, this downturn effects all men. White, Black, Hispanic, all are effected. The influx of cheaper, imported labor is almost exclusively male. White collar, blue collar, it doesn't matter. One exception may be nursing, where traditionally female jobs are effected.

http://www.coverjunkie.com/uploads/t_1303122133.jpg

Story link:
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/04/17/dead-suit-walking.html


This is no accident. Who owns the banks and who were the shadow recipients of the bailouts? Who knows Bernanke and Greenspan personally?
Two more letters, okay... (why the length compliance?)

[MelissaWV]

Justin...

The original statement I responded to was:


More women than men work in stable or government jobs, less likely to be affected by layoffs.

I found this to be a false statement, which I countered, providing reasons. I don't think the layoffs are less likely to affect women. The logic that fewer women being laid off means they will not be affected by them does not follow.

Your response was...


You really think you are still at a disadvantage compared to a man? You really think men are not being hit harder by the recession than women?

Followed by similar paragraphs.

Your later response, which you for some strange reason attribute to me via quotes, was...


Its hardly a trollfest! That really annoys me. I get insulted everyday for just being a straight white male, which I didn't even decide to be. So I say what straight white men everywhere need to be saying together to get our respect back from other people, and that is somehow a "trollfest?" I gave you PERFECTLY logical points to refute. Instead of logically refuting my points, you respond with an emotional rant not addressing the points I made. If I called women stupid women everyday, and you had to hear comments like that everyday of your life, wouldn't you be bothered by it? Especially if when you said something about it people told you that you're being sexist towards men by accusing them of calling you stupid? Because that is exactly what straight white men deal with every single day.

I doubt your claims at least as much as I doubt your ability to read my posts and understand what I was responding to.

The fact that you said


Men are being hit harder. That does not mean women are not being affected.

...just goes to show you aren't reading, since AF did talk about the particular subset of women (in Government and nursing jobs) being insulated from the effects of the layoffs.

Why does one gender have to have some kind of monopoly on being screwed over by this economy? Why's that so important to you?

If I heard that stuff every day, I'd make a value judgement as to whether or not my interaction with the people saying it was worth it. Then I'd decide whether to stay or go.

More of your logical, unemotional responses:


WE HAVE HELPED ALL OF YOU AND PUSHED YOU UP ON OUR SHOULDERS AND STILL YOU DEMAND THAT YOU ALL ARE NOT EQUAL, WHEN YOU ARE NOW ABOVE US THANKS TO US QUIETLY LISTENING TO ALL THIS HATE SPEECH TOWARDS US AND THANKS TO US PUTTING UP WITH ALL THE UNFAIR INEQUALITIES DIRECTED TOWARDS US!!!!!!!


However, you don't walk in our shoes everyday, and don't see the world as a straight white man, so I don't think you notice the ridiculous discrimination we face all the time. You don't see the irony in this statement, where you sound like every cliche minority that's ever boo-hooed about bad treatment by "the Man"?


For example, I have had female professors, at least 3 of them, that gave me a lower class grade than I deserved because I was a white male, and going to get a B or A depending on what class. I am absolutely certain one professor did this because I know my grades, I talked to the professor so she knew me out of random students, and I got a C+ when I should have got an A-.

Was this by chance a Composition class? :p Seriously, though, what's the anecdote have to do with my observation that a downturn in the economy does affect everyone?

You do have one thing right, though:


"its not just men or women, its everyone because we're all equal."

No kidding. We're all getting fucked over. You're arguing as to what position it's being done in.




Yes, you're being illogical, and absolutely you are being emotional.

[Humanae Libertas]

Newsweek is known for race baiting:

http://www.imao.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/newsweekcoverbabyracist.jpg

[AuH20]

Thank God someone still has the guts to stand up for white men.

WE are the people at a disadvantage that are discriminated against now.


MORE women in college than men.

MORE help to get into college for women and minorities than straight white men.

MORE pay for women. Yes, women make more money than men now. It is a statistical FACT conveniently ignored by the media because they must continue their blind hate towards straight white men.

MORE women and minorities are given promotions by the government and companies out of fear and terror of affirmitive action, lawsuits, groups like the NAACP and feminist groups, and so on.

STRAIGHT WHITE MEN are the people in constant danger of being accused of hate speech, not women and minorities.

STRAIGHT WHITE MEN are insulted daily, yet it is absolutely unacceptable, barbaric, and horrifying to insult women or minorities. Straight white men speak in fear and absolute TERROR of being misunderstood as saying something insulting to women and minorities. Why the double standard?


The anti-straight white male agenda in our media and government is blatantly obvious to anyone who wants to think logically, rather than feel guilty for the actions of ancestors of straight white males, women, or minorities. Straight white males feeling guilt for what our ancestors did, or women and minorities feeling resentment, fear, jealousy, or whatever because of what straight white males did to other groups a long time ago, is NOT logical because those people were NOT ANY OF US.





I'm SICK of being insulted and hurt by the media and government. We gave women and minorities not JUST a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD, but...

WE HAVE HELPED ALL OF YOU AND PUSHED YOU UP ON OUR SHOULDERS AND STILL YOU DEMAND THAT YOU ALL ARE NOT EQUAL, WHEN YOU ARE NOW ABOVE US THANKS TO US QUIETLY LISTENING TO ALL THIS HATE SPEECH TOWARDS US AND THANKS TO US PUTTING UP WITH ALL THE UNFAIR INEQUALITIES DIRECTED TOWARDS US!!!!!!!





I will subscribe to Newsweek now just because of this article, IF it is what the title suggests.

It is pure insanity to say men are not being hit harder than women by the recession when we are being hit TWICE AS HARD ACCORDING TO UNEMPLOYMENT STATISTICS! Get over your equality complex people.

We're past equal. It is now STRAIGHT WHITE MEN who are being discriminated against.

I ask for no help either. I don't want affirmitive action. I don't want more help for college. I don't want anything else. I don't want to rant about how disadvantaged straight white men are.

But it must be said.



And you know what else???

I'm proud to be a straight white male, and saying that isn't racist or sexist either. I'm proud of my heritage, and our accomplishments. I will say this because I am tired of being told it is racist and sexist to be proud to be a straight white male.



I will risk my reputation here to say what must be said. If I am banned for my statements, then it is only evidence that what I say is true because I cannot merely defend straight white males without being accused of racism and/or sexism. Yet, nothing I have said is sexist or racist because I would never support doing something to insult or harm a group of people.

I am only saying straight white men are insulted and hurt in today's world everyday of our lives. We cannot escape insults nor can we avoid being hurt somehow everyday of our lives now.

And I'm absolutely not saying most women and minorities dislike straight white men. However, you don't walk in our shoes everyday, and don't see the world as a straight white man, so I don't think you notice the ridiculous discrimination we face all the time.

White men are an easy target.

[justinc.1089]

Justin...

I found this to be a false statement, which I countered, providing reasons. I don't think the layoffs are less likely to affect women. The logic that fewer women being laid off means they will not be affected by them does not follow.

The layoffs are less likely to affect women. This is a statistical fact. Less women are layed off, and more women work in jobs that are more stable. Its just statistical fact quoted in lots of articles. I'm not going to bother doing the research to verify it for you because I've got a lot to do right now, so I don't have the time.


Your later response, which you for some strange reason attribute to me via quotes, was...

I just didn't put it in the quote.

I doubt your claims at least as much as I doubt your ability to read my posts and understand what I was responding to.

Why doubt my claims? Why would I make it up when people like you aren't going to believe it? Open your eyes. Straight white men are insulted everyday all around you, and you're oblivious to it because it does not affect you.

The fact that you said



...just goes to show you aren't reading, since AF did talk about the particular subset of women (in Government and nursing jobs) being insulated from the effects of the layoffs.

Why does one gender have to have some kind of monopoly on being screwed over by this economy? Why's that so important to you?

Uhm, hello? I said WOMEN ARE BEING AFFECTED TOO. Again, an emotional but not logical response. I don't get what your problem is with what I said. Why are you taking issue with me? As for AF, he did not say women are not being affected either, at least not the way I perceived his remarks. I understood him to say what I'm saying, that women are affected less than men by layoffs, which is statistically true. That doesn't mean women aren't being affected at all. I was barely even addressing women being affected by the bad economy anyway, so I don't know what your problem is. I was talking about men being at a disadvantage, not women not being affected by the bad economy. It would be crazy to say a certain group of people is magically unaffected by the bad economy.

If I heard that stuff every day, I'd make a value judgement as to whether or not my interaction with the people saying it was worth it. Then I'd decide whether to stay or go.

Right, except its everywhere. Right now, since I'm a student, I hear it daily during college from my classmates and instructors. When I'm at work, I'll hear insulting remarks from customers about straight white men. When I turn on a television, straight white men are insulted and degraded. I mean have you watched sitcoms lately? I can't stand to watch them because the majority of them are solely about making out the straight white husband and father to be a bumbling idiot, while the wife is portrayed as capable and as leading her incompetent husband. When I read my textbooks, they teach me that as a business manager, I need to hire/ promote females to management because "females are better leaders because they're more participative than males, and connect with relationships to people better."

No offense, but saying that if you were around people like that you would just go away, is the same as saying blacks should have just went away from white people telling them they needed to get lost or to the back of the bus or whatever. They couldn't just "go away" because all of society was like that at the time! They would run across it everywhere. And when black people say they still run into racism like that, I tend to believe them, and feel sympathy for them since straight white males endure the same stuff now days. However, when groups like the NAACP say straight white males like myself are holding them back, I wonder how that can be with all the advantages all groups aside from straight white males have been given.

More of your logical, unemotional responses:



You don't see the irony in this statement, where you sound like every cliche minority that's ever boo-hooed about bad treatment by "the Man"?

I see no irony. I sympathize with groups that have been discriminated against. I do not sympathize with groups begging to be given special advantages however because that is the ultimate form of discrimination against straight white males today. My statements were also logical as well as emotional. If society was once controlled by white males, and one day after groups that were being discriminated against were given special advantages to help them become equal, who gave them those advantages? The straight white males that had previously discriminated against them because that's the only place those advantages could be funded from. I don't know how to explain this any more simply. Its not hard to understand.

Was this by chance a Composition class? :p Seriously, though, what's the anecdote have to do with my observation that a downturn in the economy does affect everyone?

I can write as slack as I choose, or as good as I choose. I have peer reviewed plenty of papers, and I know because of that I have an exceptional writing ability. Since I'm getting off soon, I responded without worrying about writing perfectly. I figured your reading comprehension was good enough to figure it out. I have a 20 page proposal to write and a math exam to study for. So I think I can get away with writing poorly here, and I don't see what my writing has to do with discrimination against straight white males anyway. If someone else was saying what I'm saying, and was a poor writer, would it matter? No.

You do have one thing right, though:

We're NOT equal! Will you people stop saying that? I gave you 3 perfectly logical points in a calm manner because my emotion was not directed towards you, and you choose not to respond to them! You emotionally insulted me calling me a troll, instead of refuting my 3 points. You cannot claim logic until you refute the 3 points I gave you. You cannot claim I was being emotional until you point out where I was just being emotional in the post where I gave you my 3 points. I don't know why you're responding to anything else I have said. Nothing else matters to me in relation to you that I have said, except my post contains my response to you.

Do you realize if I was female or not white I would stand a real chance of getting into a university for grad school on the level of MIT, Harvard, Yale, Duke, and so on? I looked through a list of the top universities and checked out information about getting into them, and found out I would have a shot at the best of the best only if I was female or not white, because the standards are FAR tougher on straight white males.

You call stuff like that equal???

No kidding. We're all getting fucked over. You're arguing as to what position it's being done in.

Yes, you're being illogical, and absolutely you are being emotional.

So please, refute my logical 3 points, and demonstrate why they're not logical. Also show where my emotion was in that response to you, because nothing else I said was a response to YOU. I responded calmly and logically to you, because my emotion is directed at the discrimination towards straight white males, not you. I had no issue with you until you decided to get all emotional and call me a troll instead of logically refuting my 3 points.

[justinc.1089]

White men are an easy target.

I suppose so sadly. It just makes white men that pay attention feel like no matter what we do, we will be blamed for our ancestors' actions. I mean we're at a disadvantage now, and mocked often, and yet we're still somehow supposedly keeping everyone else down. I wish other people understood how we feel. Its very disheartening and saddening really.

I'm just tired of hearing how bad I am for being a straight white man, which is why I can really sympathize with victims of discrimination from other groups as well when they say someone treated them badly for some stupid reason like sexual orientation, race, gender, ethnicity, etc...

Its not right for anyone to ask for special advantages because of that however. So if someone does that, then I lose my sympathy for them.

[QueenB4Liberty]

I have had female professors, at least 3 of them, that gave me a lower class grade than I deserved because I was a white male, and going to get a B or A depending on what class. I am absolutely certain one professor did this because I know my grades, I talked to the professor so she knew me out of random students, and I got a C+ when I should have got an A-. And that's just one example of ways I have been hurt from being a straight white male, and does not get into the insults. The insults are the bad part because that happens at least almost everyday.





How do you figure this? I understand getting a bad grade on a Libertarian essay if your professor is a Socialist, but I don't think the teachers hand out grades based on gender.

[justinc.1089]

Also, I'm not saying discrimination against straight white men is why white men are being hit harder by the recession.

That's not the situation at all.

I'm just saying white men being hit harder by the recession is not discussed, because its always said straight white men are somehow better off than everyone else, no matter what is happening to them.

So I'm glad to see this article pointing out white men are being hit harder than other groups by the recession. We're at the biggest loss in this recession, and that is NOT saying other groups aren't suffering too. Everyone is hurting, but it is white men who are hurting the most because we have lost the most jobs by far. That's all I meant to say.

[justinc.1089]

How do you figure this? I understand getting a bad grade on a Libertarian essay if your professor is a Socialist, but I don't think the teachers hand out grades based on gender.

They talked trash about white men, especially the one I mentioned where I should have had an A- and got a C+. She referred to "worms" almost every class, which was her favorite insult for "rich old white men." They didn't like me because I was a good student and a white guy. They were nice to female students, and harsh on white male students. Mainly they only treated the better students differently, like the students that were possibly going to end up with A's in the class. At the very least, the one professor had a complex that "worms" run the world by disciminating against other people, and so, to make things fair, she needed to hold back the young little "worms."

I don't have proof. I mean its not like she openly talked about it and emailed someone else like her lol. Its just one of those things you figure out after a long time of being around the person and talking with them. My brother and a friend of ours also came to the same conclusion I did by themselves without me mentioning it to them. They felt like the one professor, she was the only one we all three had, disliked her white male students from her remarks. Ironically she was white herself though so I don't quite see her logic in the race part lol...

Some people will hand out grades based on gender and other stupid reasons just like political persuasions. Politically, I could relate to the lady as far as some things went, which is why she knew who I was. We agreed the wars needed to be ended and maybe some other things I don't remember that she might have remarked about in class or something.

[eOs]

This article and the concept is complete shit...it's happening to everyone not just 'white males' ..we're all fucked under this system. stop paying attention to these ridiculous media outlets

[AuH20]

I suppose so sadly. It just makes white men that pay attention feel like no matter what we do, we will be blamed for our ancestors' actions. I mean we're at a disadvantage now, and mocked often, and yet we're still somehow supposedly keeping everyone else down. I wish other people understood how we feel. Its very disheartening and saddening really.

I'm just tired of hearing how bad I am for being a straight white man, which is why I can really sympathize with victims of discrimination from other groups as well when they say someone treated them badly for some stupid reason like sexual orientation, race, gender, ethnicity, etc...

Its not right for anyone to ask for special advantages because of that however. So if someone does that, then I lose my sympathy for them.

The worst aspect is that our opinion supposedly carries less weight, since we're supposedly all comfortably perched at the top of the food chain. We've been transformed by the media and society at large into this fearsome apex predator, that is merciless, irredeemable and driven by an insatiable hunger to dominate all forms of life, great and small. Basically, we're devils minus the horns.

[Mini-Me]

Did you even read what I said?

I said like 5 times I DO NOT WANT advantages given to straight white men because of our sexual orientation, gender, or race!

Dude, calm down. JustinTime wasn't even responding to you; he was making a sarcastic comment to lampshade the predictable hypocrisy of the feminist and affirmative action camps.

MelissaWV isn't your enemy either, and if you calm down she might be more willing to engage you on the points you made. Believe me, I can empathize with your position on this. I see the double standards and discrimination, and I see the rampant ill will towards towards males, white people, and straight people. When you're all three combined, you automatically have a lot of people loathing you for real or perceived advantages and hoping you fail.

There's a prevailing sentiment that "straight white males are a thing of the past, and thank God for that," and it's really sinister. A lot of it is obvious blowback from the past, but that doesn't make it any more fair either. Worse though, I think a lot of it is manufactured. For many, a lot of the hatred is about "sticking it to the man," but the truly powerful have been deliberately misidentifying "the man" for three reasons:
It deflects attention from the real institutional issues. The power elite who have dominated society for so long are also primarily straight white males, but they have nothing to fear from this process and they know it.
It's symbolic. "Straight white males" are meant to symbolize the traditional American values, real (like free enterprise) or perceived (like fancy suits and the corruption of corporatism). On the magazine cover and in the early paragraphs of the article, notice that the "beached white males" are made to be synonymous with "the suits." The idea is that destroying straight white males will usher in a new era, where corporatism no longer reigns, and the world will be a more fair and equal place. Of course, corporatism isn't going anywhere, but what's left of free enterprise is. Destroying straight white males is symbolic for destroying free enterprise and ushering in a system of "social justice," which is a euphemism for massive government dependence.
In the same vein, it's about demoralization: You can undermine certain values - like free enterprise or limited government - by demoralizing the traditional defenders and "mascots" of those values.

[AuH20]

At this moment in time, white males are the only thing standing between them and their collectivist utopia. Let's cut right to the chase. They'll never say this out aloud, but it's so transparent, it's laughable.

[Brian4Liberty]

Hours at work are longer, perks are fewer, and stress is way up. Women who are married are now sometimes facing being the sole breadwinner when a man becomes unemployed. Prices are shooting skyward, including gas and groceries which I'm fairly sure women also use. This makes times very tough, even if one is still "employed."

Yep, they are putting the screws to anyone who is still working. IIRC, the article talks about the extra stresses that result in so many relationships where women are now the sole "breadwinners".

[MelissaWV]

Blaming your failures (or "C" grade, or whatever) on perceived discrimination is weaksauce without any real proof. Sometimes there's only a hunch. You can do something about that.

The "it's everywhere" followed by examples of sitcoms is actually pretty spot-on. You could, you know, not watch them. You could not pay them any mind. I don't know if they discriminate against you, frankly, because I don't watch that drivel.

You are putting your responses within quotes of my text. The first time I read your response, I was wondering what I had said that you were bolding. It's not really a nice thing to do. It's a bit tiresome, actually, and hopefully no one attributes those ridiculous statements to me based upon your false quoting.

You continue with the accusations of my being emotional, and cite my calling you a troll as proof. So far, you are fitting the definition quite well. The dictionary must indeed be an emotional book, full of words and definitions.

I'm not sure if anyone has told you, but bold and CAPS are considered shouting. Your poor composition, coupled with the bold and CAPS, make it seem like you're breathlessly ranting. If that's not the impression you wish to give, then consider devoting a little more time to your posts.


We're NOT equal! Will you people stop saying that?

Which people, precisely? This thread and the original article are about the stupid attempt to split the economic downturn into a race and gender issue. We are equal in that we are being screwed by Government. Since you say women are making more, surely you realize they must therefore be paying quite a bit in taxes. Since white males are discriminated against to the point of losing their jobs at such a massive rate, surely that must mean that many are receiving Government assistance. It would seem that your logic would, superficially, make women more likely to get screwed over by the current economy. One of the major pillars of this current mess is unemployment.

All I said to set you off on your hopscotch of name-calling and finger-pointing was
Oh. Goody. THIS is where this thread is going.. I still hold the same view. Rather than talking about the article, and about the economy harming us all, it's become a one-upmanship contest where you talk about the bad grades you got because you're a straight (who brought sexual orientation into it?) white male. It reads like a therapy session, full of anecdotes and random punctuation.

Since you can't distill my answers from their context throughout my posts, I guess I'll address your "logical points" which you wanted me to talk to you about.


1. A level playing field where no individual is helped to surpass another individual over race, gender, or sexual orientation is the morally correct thing to do, and also what Ron Paul advocates if that matters to you.

I'm sure you realize this isn't a question, which might be why I didn't answer it. Your "if that matters to you" is neither insult nor emotion to you, curiously enough. A level playing field is not something I've ever spoken against. I don't see why you keep calling for me to do so. It makes no sense. None.


2. Straight white men are insulted daily, and we are hurt daily by problems we encounter due to being straight white males. For example, I have had female professors, at least 3 of them, that gave me a lower class grade than I deserved because I was a white male, and going to get a B or A depending on what class. I am absolutely certain one professor did this because I know my grades, I talked to the professor so she knew me out of random students, and I got a C+ when I should have got an A-. And that's just one example of ways I have been hurt from being a straight white male, and does not get into the insults. The insults are the bad part because that happens at least almost everyday.

Once again, since this was not a question it did not get an answer. You believe you should have gotten an A- and the professor gave you a C+. What does this have to do with unemployment right now? It seemed more like an anecdote than anything you wanted to discuss. You are calling for me to counter your "logical" point here, but I don't understand what that would entail. Am I to say "no, you didn't have a professor and you obviously deserved a C-"? I did that, albeit jokingly, and you called it illogical and emotional.


3. Are things like affirmative action, financial assistance for everyone other than straight white males to go to college, and so on, really truly fair to us as individuals? If they are not fair, then women and minorities are not at a disadvantage, and are actually at an advantage compared to white males.

Aha! A question! At last! Of course, your premise is a little bit faulty on various levels from where I see it. Affirmative Action is a hurtful program, obviously, but you're discussing college throughout your post and even this point. Ideally, colleges should be able to discriminate as to whom they grant admission. There could be a left-handed college, for all I care, and it would be great. Colleges accepting public funds... well that muddies things. Scholarships and aid from private sources should likewise be for whoever the sources want. Financial aid at colleges is actually based on your application, at least here. I can't speak for your experiences. Of course, here you also get a boost into a state school if you have a decent GPA and did some community service, regardless of race or financial status. Plenty of "straight white males" fall into that category as well. There are a lot of "diversity" -obsessed schools which twist it all around and will bend over backwards to admit an Inuit amputee whose father served in the Vietnam War and played the flute, or some other treasured "minority." Avoiding those like the plague helps matters immensely, too.

Finally, you keep referring back to the statement from which these three points come as the apex of your argument, the crucial point after which I became emotional and you called me on it. That would hold more water if this shining example of naked logic didn't begin with:


You really think you are still at a disadvantage compared to a man? You really think men are not being hit harder by the recession than women?

...and end with...


Your emotional statements are nice, but not logical. There has never been a time as hard for straight white men as today's environment in history from a straight white male's perspective.

Since the first one was a question, I'll even loop back to answer it. No, I don't feel that I'm at a disadvantage to men in general. I have two jobs at the moment. I don't think a man is going to swoop in and get paid double for doing the same work, or call me "cupcake," or any of the things the cliches say will happen. My boss values my work, which brings results that can be quantified and analyzed. Most of my co-workers are female because they are ex-nurses. Most of our best-paid employees are male (physical, occupational, and speech therapists). I don't think they get paid more because they're male. I think they get paid more because they have to deal with hoisting up a 300-pound naked man and helping him learn to walk after a knee replacement.

I think that, largely, people get paid what they deserve. If I'm not making enough, I can lobby for more or seek better employment. I don't get why there has to be some imaginary war between genders over it. If you are personally being discriminated against, do something to better your lot.

I also believe you really are still arguing over who's getting screwed over in the most comfortable position.

This country is in deep, deep trouble. I'm sorry your professor discriminated against you (???). Can we now get back to figuring out how to wrest the economy from the sleazebags in Washington? You know, the sort that write divisive little articles in the hopes that someone will sit around bemoaning the lot of their race/gender/etc. rather than do something productive? :)

[Brian4Liberty]

I will subscribe to Newsweek now just because of this article, IF it is what the title suggests.

Save your money. The tone of the article is gloating, condescending, and smarmy. In essence, the only downside to the "destruction of the white male" is that you won't be making money to pay taxes.

[acptulsa]

In essence, the only downside to the "destruction of the white male" is that you won't be making money to pay taxes.

Who will? This is like saying, we finally screwed our country and ourselves over so badly that even our enemies the CEOs are having to take pay cuts! We're all starving, but yay!

[Brian4Liberty]

At this moment in time, white males are the only thing standing between them and their collectivist utopia. Let's cut right to the chase. They'll never say this out aloud, but it's so transparent, it's laughable.

On the bright side, no need to actually castrate men anymore. They figure they have achieved the same goal via "humbling"...

From the article:


Dead Suit Walking

If this isn't the Great Depression, it is the Great Humbling. Can manhood survive the lost decade?
...
As if middle age isn’t bad enough. The moribund metabolism. The purple pill that keeps your food down. The blue pill that keeps another part of your anatomy up.
...
The wife who doesn’t look at you quite the same way.
...
The stain on your masculinity for becoming the bread-loser.
...
"I’m depressed, I can’t sleep, my sex drive is shot, and my wife now has to support the family, but I don’t need marriage counseling! I’ll just give Mommy a back rub, do some housework"
...
In the NEWSWEEK Poll, 45 percent of men admitted to a diminished interest in sex. It’s a vicious cycle, Diamond says. “You don’t feel as manly because you lost your job. You don’t feel as sexy, so there are more problems with you and your wife.”

Intellectually, women can say, “It’s not his fault, he’s working hard to find a job.” Emotionally, it’s another story.
...

[MelissaWV]

I have been in way too many communities. I really thought you meant "humbling" in another sense, especially when you mentioned castration.

Do yourself a favor. Don't Google "humbler."

[Anti Federalist]

I have been in way too many communities. I really thought you meant "humbling" in another sense, especially when you mentioned castration.

Do yourself a favor. Don't Google "humbler."

Oh now, c'mon, you know what I'm going to do this very second.

ETA - FFS...I "googled" images with safe search turned off.

Note to self: when somebody says don't google so and so...DON'T!!!!

[Brian4Liberty]

I have been in way too many communities. I really thought you meant "humbling" in another sense, especially when you mentioned castration.

Do yourself a favor. Don't Google "humbler."

Oh boy, you learn something everyday. :eek:

Thanks for enlightening us.

The quote was direct from the article:


...the Great Humbling. Can manhood survive...

Now that you have pointed out the double entendre, it makes perfect sense. I beleive I even mentioned that you can hear Rachel Maddow in that article. Very similar to Maddow's overuse of the word "teabag". All the pieces come together. There's no doubt about what they intended with that article...

[ninepointfive]

I have a theory to propose. to put it simply:

Do you think that this is some form of mate selection? Whereas the women of society berate white straight men, and if they become pussies, those men deserve no respect. It would take an alpha male to succeed in such a world, and therefore the women tend to select and compete for the most confident male.

[iprice81]

I was told by someone (family friend) in HR at large company. That the deliberately start white males at lower compensation then women and minorities so that in average they do not discriminate against the latter.

[JustinTime]

Did you even read what I said?

I said like 5 times I DO NOT WANT advantages given to straight white men because of our sexual orientation, gender, or race!

You took my comment the wrong way.

[acptulsa]

You took my comment the wrong way.

He actually seems to think it's more fun that way.

[JustinTime]

Blaming your failures (or "C" grade, or whatever) on perceived discrimination is weaksauce without any real proof. Sometimes there's only a hunch. You can do something about that.

Yep, but what constitutes proof changes radically from one complainer to the next. Claiming women are paid less than men doesnt seem to require much proving at all... all one need do is make the claim.

[JustinTime]

I was told by someone (family friend) in HR at large company. That the deliberately start white males at lower compensation then women and minorities so that in average they do not discriminate against the latter.

I wouldnt doubt it, its basically affirmative action, and thats accepted government and corporate policy.

[Brian4Liberty]

I have a theory to propose. to put it simply:

Do you think that this is some form of mate selection? Whereas the women of society berate white straight men, and if they become pussies, those men deserve no respect. It would take an alpha male to succeed in such a world, and therefore the women tend to select and compete for the most confident male.

It certainly would effect a male who is looking for a mate. Jobless is a negative.

Existing relationships only seem to be effected if they were already "on the edge", and/or the male only served as a money provider.

[Brian4Liberty]

I was told by someone (family friend) in HR at large company. That the deliberately start white males at lower compensation then women and minorities so that in average they do not discriminate against the latter.

I have witnessed money (salary) being distributed to female workers over other workers, even when overall "performance ranking" did not warrant it. The manager making the decision was female, and occasionally spoke about making up for past "injustice" against women.

Edit: This type of "preference" is by no means isolated to any particular group. It is human nature, and fairly common.

[Pete Kay]

It's surprising to me that so many on this board don't seem to talk about or understand cultural Marxism and the explicit attack on White males as a means to "equalize" society. From the cultural Marxist point of view, White Christian males have established an oppressive social system that is designed to enrich White Christian males at the expense of women and minorities. So they long ago came to the conclusion that the existing social norms and the establishment must be destroyed and that means destroying the White Christian male. This was once something that was openly opposed, but over time, through shaming rhetoric, White males have laid down and given up and accepted their displacement and loss of power. This Newsweek article is the celebration of that.

That's why the Tea Party is so troubling to the Leftists. They see a movement that is primarily White and socially conservative and that means that there's some breath of life left in the lowly White Christian male and that scares them. So what do they do to try to derail the Tea Party? They use shaming rhetoric to divert the attention of the movement by calling them racists and bigots. And the Tea Party, so oblivious to the Left's tactics, complies by wasting time and energy trying to prove that they aren't racist and bigots.

[Brian4Liberty]

This Newsweek article is the celebration of that.

Nice description.


That's why the Tea Party is so troubling to the Leftists. They see a movement that is primarily White and socially conservative and that means that there's some breath of life left in the lowly White Christian male and that scares them. So what do they do to try to derail the Tea Party? They use shaming rhetoric to divert the attention of the movement by calling them racists and bigots. And the Tea Party, so oblivious to the Left's tactics, complies by wasting time and energy trying to prove that they aren't racist and bigots.

Good catch on a related issue. That would explain the venom being thrown out by some people at anything "Tea Party".

[LibertyEagle]

Dude, calm down. JustinTime wasn't even responding to you; he was making a sarcastic comment to lampshade the predictable hypocrisy of the feminist and affirmative action camps.

MelissaWV isn't your enemy either, and if you calm down she might be more willing to engage you on the points you made. Believe me, I can empathize with your position on this. I see the double standards and discrimination, and I see the rampant ill will towards towards males, white people, and straight people. When you're all three combined, you automatically have a lot of people loathing you for real or perceived advantages and hoping you fail.

There's a prevailing sentiment that "straight white males are a thing of the past, and thank God for that," and it's really sinister. A lot of it is obvious blowback from the past, but that doesn't make it any more fair either. Worse though, I think a lot of it is manufactured. For many, a lot of the hatred is about "sticking it to the man," but the truly powerful have been deliberately misidentifying "the man" for three reasons:
It deflects attention from the real institutional issues. The power elite who have dominated society for so long are also primarily straight white males, but they have nothing to fear from this process and they know it.
It's symbolic. "Straight white males" are meant to symbolize the traditional American values, real (like free enterprise) or perceived (like fancy suits and the corruption of corporatism). On the magazine cover and in the early paragraphs of the article, notice that the "beached white males" are made to be synonymous with "the suits." The idea is that destroying straight white males will usher in a new era, where corporatism no longer reigns, and the world will be a more fair and equal place. Of course, corporatism isn't going anywhere, but what's left of free enterprise is. Destroying straight white males is symbolic for destroying free enterprise and ushering in a system of "social justice," which is a euphemism for massive government dependence.
In the same vein, it's about demoralization: You can undermine certain values - like free enterprise or limited government - by demoralizing the traditional defenders and "mascots" of those values.

Great post. I tried to give you +rep, but apparently I've run the well dry for the time being. :)

[reardenstone]

Thank God someone still has the guts to stand up for white men.

WE are the people at a disadvantage that are discriminated against now.


MORE women in college than men.

MORE help to get into college for women and minorities than straight white men.

MORE pay for women. Yes, women make more money than men now. It is a statistical FACT conveniently ignored by the media because they must continue their blind hate towards straight white men.

MORE women and minorities are given promotions by the government and companies out of fear and terror of affirmitive action, lawsuits, groups like the NAACP and feminist groups, and so on.

STRAIGHT WHITE MEN are the people in constant danger of being accused of hate speech, not women and minorities.

STRAIGHT WHITE MEN are insulted daily, yet it is absolutely unacceptable, barbaric, and horrifying to insult women or minorities. Straight white men speak in fear and absolute TERROR of being misunderstood as saying something insulting to women and minorities. Why the double standard?


The anti-straight white male agenda in our media and government is blatantly obvious to anyone who wants to think logically, rather than feel guilty for the actions of ancestors of straight white males, women, or minorities. Straight white males feeling guilt for what our ancestors did, or women and minorities feeling resentment, fear, jealousy, or whatever because of what straight white males did to other groups a long time ago, is NOT logical because those people were NOT ANY OF US.





I'm SICK of being insulted and hurt by the media and government. We gave women and minorities not JUST a LEVEL PLAYING FIELD, but...

WE HAVE HELPED ALL OF YOU AND PUSHED YOU UP ON OUR SHOULDERS AND STILL YOU DEMAND THAT YOU ALL ARE NOT EQUAL, WHEN YOU ARE NOW ABOVE US THANKS TO US QUIETLY LISTENING TO ALL THIS HATE SPEECH TOWARDS US AND THANKS TO US PUTTING UP WITH ALL THE UNFAIR INEQUALITIES DIRECTED TOWARDS US!!!!!!!





I will subscribe to Newsweek now just because of this article, IF it is what the title suggests.

It is pure insanity to say men are not being hit harder than women by the recession when we are being hit TWICE AS HARD ACCORDING TO UNEMPLOYMENT STATISTICS! Get over your equality complex people.

We're past equal. It is now STRAIGHT WHITE MEN who are being discriminated against.

I ask for no help either. I don't want affirmitive action. I don't want more help for college. I don't want anything else. I don't want to rant about how disadvantaged straight white men are.

But it must be said.



And you know what else???

I'm proud to be a straight white male, and saying that isn't racist or sexist either. I'm proud of my heritage, and our accomplishments. I will say this because I am tired of being told it is racist and sexist to be proud to be a straight white male.



I will risk my reputation here to say what must be said. If I am banned for my statements, then it is only evidence that what I say is true because I cannot merely defend straight white males without being accused of racism and/or sexism. Yet, nothing I have said is sexist or racist because I would never support doing something to insult or harm a group of people.

I am only saying straight white men are insulted and hurt in today's world everyday of our lives. We cannot escape insults nor can we avoid being hurt somehow everyday of our lives now.

And I'm absolutely not saying most women and minorities dislike straight white men. However, you don't walk in our shoes everyday, and don't see the world as a straight white man, so I don't think you notice the ridiculous discrimination we face all the time.

+2x44!

Just kidding, but seriously, I'm glad you have the courage to saw you've had enough. I have similar frustrations and assumptions made about me but I am so afraid to speak out for fear of being labeled a "racist" with "white privilege".

[Pericles]

News flash! - Life is unfair.

[moostraks]

News flash! - Life is unfair.

:) Here I thought everyone gets a trophy. In reading through these posts I have ascertained one thing, it is clearly an effective article for pitting sexes and races against each other.

Wallowing in self pity never gets anyone anywhere. Some folks need to learn to turn adversity into positive motivation to defeat their oppressors rather than flailing at others who are not oppressing them.

[Mini-Me]

:) Here I thought everyone gets a trophy. In reading through these posts I have ascertained one thing, it is clearly an effective article for pitting sexes and races against each other.

Wallowing in self pity never gets anyone anywhere. Some folks need to learn to turn adversity into positive motivation to defeat their oppressors rather than flailing at others who are not oppressing them.

This too. As long as the power elite can subdivide us into groups and pit us against each other, they know we will never be able to unite against them.

[anaconda]

I started to read the article but it is downright corny. It's trying to paint the unemployed guys as all having these shattered self images and crumbling families. That is simply bullshit. I'm sure some people react that way or have superficial families that might turn on them. But as some sweeping generalization I find it corny.