Too many things are linked to jobs. It will be a hard thing to break.
I wonder if the universal basic income will be enough to make the societal shift needed in this case.
I wonder if the universal basic income will be enough to make the societal shift needed in this case.
It's a recipe for disaster. Civilization is built on monogamous relationships: children being raised by a couple (statistically a far better environment than single parenthood), young men and women focusing their energy for the betterment of society.
I always thought their divorce and breakup rate was a lot lower than in the US?
But I was mostly dismissing it, considering that rational thought would in the end triumph. Considering that, in the least, each repetition should bring extra information for the effect to manifest.
That thread prompted me to give some though to the subject and the answer I arrived at so far does not make me happy at all. Realizing that repetition by itself is enough, clarifies some things I did not understand and simply classified as reality not making sense.
I feel ever more justified in my energy consuming efforts to fact-check information I receive and in my strides to present information as opinion/personal thought/conclusion based on sources/mere reproduction of sources instead of truth. I am more aware of this than before but at the same time it causes a lot more stress to me now than it did before.
I am less willing than I was to engage in live discussions where I receive information, because that places a burden of fact checking on me and I can not always do that at the speed of real life. And depending on the interlocutor I can not rephrase the discussion in terms of hypothetical statements.
The problem is, people would tend to not read this Wiki:Discussion page, as its "external" to the community, so in addition a system for metering trustworthiness (trusted by users i trust) would be needed.
Here's the thing though - not having a script is a good thing. It allows people to discover what matters to them and what humanity and society is to them. If it's something other than the current state of things - then it should've been changed a long time ago, rather than putting pressure on people to conform to an ideal that nobody wants when they're allowed to think for themselves. It's also what LGBT people have been dealing with for a long time, so you might want to ask how they deal with it, rather than asserting it's the end of society.
Single parenthood isn't the only alternative to being raised by a couple. In fact, those being the only two options is a fairly recent thing. It used to be that children were broadly brought up by communities - to the point that food would be served by whoever happened to have the kids nearby when it was served. Still happens in some places, even in the middle of huge cities - I was brought up like that. Now, for some reason (fear?), parents attempt to keep a tight leash at all times, and the only interaction with one's community a kid might get is through approved and strictly regulated extracurricular activities.
Additionally, there's quite a variety of different cultures around the world that all do different things. India had quite a number of polygamous marriages until relatively recently, for example - all of its major religions, and the culture surrounding them, are relatively neutral on the subject. Third genders were a relatively common and accepted thing across the world until British Colonialism introduced Christian morals to a lot of places, often reducing them to prostitutes and symbols of evil/bad luck. And so on and so forth.
Honestly - existential worry about one's place in a changing world isn't a new thing. You can find stories on the subject going back centuries. People will figure it out.
brave new world. maybe it will take the shape of "Universal Basic Soma".
orgy porgy!
> The other, minor difference is that men are polygamous, not hypergamous. A man’s imperative is not (necessarily) to get the best woman. It’s to get as many women as possible with as little investment and commitment as possible. If he can do it, he would love to get as many women as possible at and a little below his own SMV, and have sex with as many of them as possible for as long as possible, without committing to or investing in any of them. That’s spinning plates. Most men don’t do this, because they can’t, because they’re not attractive enough, but that’s a different post.
OK, so I'm a guy, and I can say for sure that this is what I always wanted. Most of the time, I wasn't attractive enough, because I was too self-conscious and nerdy. But I did manage it for a few years, until STDs took me down :(
Anyway, there's also this about women:
> A woman’s imperative is to get the best one man she can get for sex and for provisioning. That’s why you don’t see many women “dating” (i.e. having sex with) several different men at the same time. Women don’t spin plates; they pick the best plate they can and take care of it as best they can. Instead of trying to collect plates, they just change out the plates, one for another, when a bigger, better one comes along.
That's consistent with what the parent article concludes, I think. It's just that there aren't many good plates left.
0) https://therationalmale.com/category/hypergamy-2/
Edit: Responding to therpe1, I'm no evolutionary biologist, and I get that I've quoted a guy with quite an agenda. Still, the distinction that he draws fits will with the biology that I learned, and my personal experience. But please, do cite evidence.
First, most everybody has a natural urge to have sex with a lot of hot people. It's just that some people (women, for instance) will face greater opprobrium from their families and communities for doing so. That doesn't stop all women though. Many do in fact have sex with multiple men at a time. I am open to talking about the statistics of how many men vs. how many women do this, but I would not make conclusions involving stupid plate-spinning metaphors as that article does. And actually, the only stats I can find indicate that women tend to engage in polyamory more so than men [1].
And whether or not you're personal preferred lifestyle is to settle down, it's pretty much irrelevant when you're speaking about men generally. I have had a very high number of sexual partners, but I chose to then get married and have a single sexual partner. It's not because I would have been unable to keep sleeping around. I get approached by women more now than ever before and I'm not lying to say that I could find a new attractive sexual partner every day. I don't want to though. So, my experience and attitude directly contradict that passage you quoted.
[1] http://www.advocate.com/current-issue/2016/1/08/polyamory-nu...