I like the thought you've put into this, and it interests me. I just want to stir the debate a little bit. Comparing humans to apes, and why humans were able to advance to the apex of the animal kingdom...isn't it likely that what makes us more successful is our altruism? love? To be able to love for species beyond the nuclear family or pack? I think what you're saying rings true in all of us, and is what Fight Club was all about. You can't deny that the 'monkey' lives inside us. On a side note, I always loved the song 'Shock the Monkey' by Peter Gabriel, where he's comparing the emotion 'jealousy' to man's inner animal. I think it's a brilliant description of the way that jealousy hits us in such a primal way, and so hard to control.
I agree we're more complex than apes. Because we can conceptualise our feelings and the world to suite our needs. notions of 'altruism' are synthetic constructs, I think. Our basic simian nature is always there and is not altruistic and there has to be underlying practical motives for helping strangers, such as religious/ social and familial rewards or displays of prowess, for example.We are also much more likely to help those close to us or those who can help us directly or indirectly in return. Indeed, degrees of removal such as family or work group, neighbours, state, country, race etc are levels of proximity that will determine how much support we are willing to give. Just think of the way man manipulates reality to create justifiable reasons to commit atrocities against his fellow men. We lie and use language all the time to support our lies. Passion is honest, as is hate. Love I'm not so sure.
Screw what others are doing. Do the best you can with what you got both mentally and physically. It will change as you get older.Accept the changes you can't control and press on. On the topic at hand at Purdue in the late forties The damn ratio male to female was horrendous. I was so damn busy studying that it didn't matter. Worked summers at heavy construction labor and during school year as a gofer in a music store. Had to juggle schedule but still made it through in 4 years. Public education is geared toward producing drones that won't rock the boat. That requires stamping down those that are not malleable . Almost all of these are male. Go figure. If you don't fit in and follow you must have your behavior controlled by drugs if necessary. Bureaucracy runs the world. Women fit , men don't. When they take over the leadership positions (and they will) the world as we know it is changed forever or at least until a start over event (catastrophic) occurs and mankind has to start over again from the hunter gatherers.. Unfortunately to make the same mistakes again. It is built into our genes. We can't help ourselves.
What I always find striking is the male restlesness compared to women's desire for the 'static', i.e. security and routine, close emotional ties and comforting environments. Men like chaos because they can apply their skills in creating order. Women look to strong men to provide this but of course men who are good at doing this, are independently minded and adventurous will want to do it throughout their lives. Men enjoy challenges. Man looks to nature and women looks to man. Man is never content in a domestic golden cage. He'll find ways to escape it and suffer society's punishments as a consequence. The media in all it's manifestations indoctrinates us into fearing these consequences: loneliness, old age, violence etc. It creates fear in a man's heart and makes him small. The modern man is essentially a mouse compared to his ancestors. Modern urban life is a masculine nightmare when you strip away all the toys, illusions, lies and washed out dreams. What are you staring at evry morning when you shave? A ghost.
A few thoughts: 1.) Men tend to work in more economically sensitive areas with a higher level of variable income. Examples include construction, real estate, wall street, even trading (though there are very few of us). These areas are more sensitive to economic conditions. 2.) I would bet a higher % of men are in the private sector, while more women are in sectors funded by the state, like healthcare and education. Once again private sector jobs based on real consumer spending and not transfer payments are more sensitive to the economic conditions. 3.) The modern corporate workplace is largely a hoax. I have spent most of my adult life as some type of entrepreneur. However, for 3 years I was an employee at a large corporation. It was eye opening to say the least. In large organizations it is almost axiomatic that 10% of the people do 90% of the work. The 90% of the work is usually being done by a white, asian, or indian male. The "Others" are usually fluttering about making things take 2X to 3X longer than they should. Most corporate employees are basically welfare recipients. There is so much red tape, bureaucracy, workplace rules, affirmative etc today, that most of what people do is a paper shuffling hoax. Large corporations are best thought of as for-profit sectors of the federal government. I noticed that many men in the workplace understood this fact while the women were completely "on board" believing what they were doing was actually important. For this reason, many jobs ARE in fact more suited to women, because it is easier to be deluded every day than to be cynical every day. 4. Anti-male bias: As the modern workplace has become largely non-productive, the environment has been feminized: "inclusiveness", "group participation" "affirmative action" (hire anyone but a white male), etc. Being in such pussified environment made my skin crawl. I honestly think many Men, outside of sex and sex based relatiohships such as marriage, just would prefer not to interact with most women, as they tend to be irritating. This is certainly true for me. So far as a workplace, give me a team of crazy guys and we will do 10X the work in half the time as one of these "inclusive" teams where half the time is spent on bitch sessions and group hugs. But wait, that is not allowed anymore. Folks, most office-work is in fact bitch-work. The fact the government has made it this way says nothing bad about men. Men, in fact, were the ones that created the technology and factors of genuine production that made the bitch-work society possible. It is largely a product of Feminism (which itself was a product of technology, ie birth control and technological aids making housework much easier). When all those millions of women went into the workplace wanting "safe, good paying" jobs, they had to make a bunch of laws so that they would have something to do. (For example the field of "social work". Most people do not realize the field was created so that middle and upper middle class women would have, "something to do". It had very little do with actually "helping the poor" the real beneficiaries are the people getting all the paychecks. In fact, "social work" needs poor, disorderly individuals in order to exist, so it is not surprising the programs tend to in fact expand poverty and learned-helplessness. ) Don't get caught up thinking this is somehow important, it is not. Find a niche and mine it, do not worry about anything else. As for the bigger picture: As our society becomes more fragmented there may in fact be opportunities to improve things.
LOL! The beginning of the end for men! Just kidding. No, women have and do get involved in political activism but usually the're embedded within a male dominated group. They are not natural activists because they do not have the same sense of moral outrage that men are capable of. Women's moral centre is less political and usually based on family and inclusiveness rather than abstract causes. Before women's suffrage working class men had to get the vote and you'll find that the struggle for equality and justice has usually been initiated by revolutionary males who have intellectualised the problem and seek to impose a new political paradigm. Women's combative nature is usually a product if believing in familial unity. Men create the problems but the're also the ones that seek to put them right. The point is traits, not women v's men. How do men behave and why compared to the ladies. And how education and culture serve these different needs. You can see how film has reflected this over time. Bogart, Tracy, Wayne and all the plethora of 'tough' guys in many subtle forms probably epitomised by the outsider cowboy, maverick cop or lone hero was the male ideal. Now, in films like Brokeback Mountain, the idea of acceptable feminized masculinity is explored (irony here is Ledger died from drugs just like so many males that drink themselves to death now) Actors like Carey and Depp have a sexual neutrality about them and I don't think McQeen would be acceptable to a young audience today. How society reflects sexual roles is hugely influential and there is so much debate on female ideals and how women are represented/ misrepresented but little on masculinity and how this impresses upon young minds. Anyway, gotta run, the wife wants me to clean the loo.
To all men that want freedom above all: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=203429 You will need a small truck to tow it, and the house itself. I think with $50k you can be completely free. Taking on part time jobs then allows you to eat, gasoline, and pay very humble utility bills. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hce-Xvp1gm8 "Freeeeeeeeeeeeeedooooooooooooom......"
This disparity does not exist in engineering. Or math. Though oddly, there were more women in applied and pure math than even engineering.