The Demise Of Guys The End Of Men And Where Have All The Good Men Gone?

[Questing Beast]

That was the topic of today's lesson in priesthood meeting, quoting from Todd Christofferson's last general conference talk, I believe.

The topic upset me because the lesson turned into a gripefest about the state of affairs in today's shifting world. The Internet was singled out as a particular "evil" because of the ease of abuse and the huge waste of time and the distraction that it is to mostly men. Girls and women tend to use the Net to communicate, guys use it to entertain, i.e. waste time. No solutions were on offer, just "we have our work cut out, don't let your sons/grandsons believe the message that they are nobodies or less important than women", etc. No counsel on how to accomplish this gargantuan task of educating boys to not feel inferior to girls. Girls get the best grades, stay in school more, and earn more degrees today than boys do. And girls are swiftly advancing into the top paying careers. That's because today's world does not answer the typical male mind: jobs that are on offer are mostly sit in front of a computer jobs, that engage communication skills and problem solving related to that. I guess the description falls under the heading "information services": that is the biggest and fastest growing field of employment in the USA, so I have read, and it does not appeal to the typical male mind, which is more geared to physical work with eye-hand coordination skills involved, you know, mechanical things. Those kinds of jobs pay well enough, but there is very limited availability. Most men cannot work in those kinds of jobs these days, and such jobs are steadily diminishing in number as technology takes over more and more human involvement through automation, etc.

With the kind of work that most men find intuitive and even satisfying drying up, the world of the near future looks dire indeed for males. More and more women are going to become bread winners, while the men do odd jobs or hobbies while looking after the children. Reversal of roles. And the Church is supposed to deny this how exactly? No clue.

If the world goes back to being a more dangerous place, and less automated, because of some hypothetical reversal of our technological level such that hard physical labor and dangerous (that is to say defensive) roles need to be filled in large abundance, then I see no problem: men will dominate in the defensive and bread winning roles, while their more intuitive and even smarter (as to academic things) wives will keep the home fires burning. But with the world of the future, as things are moving now, all I see is further dominance in the high paying jobs by women, and the resulting roles will increasingly be homemaker men and smarter, decision-making women, who possess the highest degree of education as well, making them superior to men in all practical things. Society will be completely turned upside down, and the Church will be out of step with that reality, and only change after everybody else does. The fallout of that intransigence will be diminished membership especially among men....

[rpn]

Isn't the approach to help our young men understand and act on improving all skills that are necessary, developing work ethic and service ethic --- both of which will give experience that will improve job hunting? And isn't the salvation in running our aaronic priesthood quorums like they are supposed to be run? And helping our boys do all of the merit badges fully and with enthusiasm as that is a good way to figure out what kinds of work they might like and be good at, and/or what floats their boats?

Seems to me that you are falling into a reverse trap from the one that women have historically complained about ---- being home is not equal to being second class.

[Pandorian]

My wife and I own a childcare center. Because of some recent legal situations though, I have ended up having to spend more time at home, while she is the one primarily running the business. So I end up doing quite a bit of the laundry and cleaning and keeping house, etc.

Anyone who says that women just sit at home all day eating bon bons while guys do the actual work is full of it. Its interesting doing all the running around and trying to keep up, and do all the doctors appointments for the kids etc. Although, I will admit that being at home, and having time to explore on the computer has peaked my interest in Web Design and I have started taking some classes to retool.

Like the Proclamation says, sometimes you have to adapt for personal circumstances.

[Scott Lloyd]

That was the topic of today's lesson in priesthood meeting, quoting from Todd Christofferson's last general conference talk, I believe.

The topic upset me because the lesson turned into a gripefest about the state of affairs in today's shifting world. The Internet was singled out as a particular "evil" because of the ease of abuse and the huge waste of time and the distraction that it is to mostly men. Girls and women tend to use the Net to communicate, guys use it to entertain, i.e. waste time. No solutions were on offer, just "we have our work cut out, don't let your sons/grandsons believe the message that they are nobodies or less important than women", etc. No counsel on how to accomplish this gargantuan task of educating boys to not feel inferior to girls. Girls get the best grades, stay in school more, and earn more degrees today than boys do. And girls are swiftly advancing into the top paying careers. That's because today's world does not answer the typical male mind: jobs that are on offer are mostly sit in front of a computer jobs, that engage communication skills and problem solving related to that. I guess the description falls under the heading "information services": that is the biggest and fastest growing field of employment in the USA, so I have read, and it does not appeal to the typical male mind, which is more geared to physical work with eye-hand coordination skills involved, you know, mechanical things. Those kinds of jobs pay well enough, but there is very limited availability. Most men cannot work in those kinds of jobs these days, and such jobs are steadily diminishing in number as technology takes over more and more human involvement through automation, etc.

With the kind of work that most men find intuitive and even satisfying drying up, the world of the near future looks dire indeed for males. More and more women are going to become bread winners, while the men do odd jobs or hobbies while looking after the children. Reversal of roles. And the Church is supposed to deny this how exactly? No clue.

If the world goes back to being a more dangerous place, and less automated, because of some hypothetical reversal of our technological level such that hard physical labor and dangerous (that is to say defensive) roles need to be filled in large abundance, then I see no problem: men will dominate in the defensive and bread winning roles, while their more intuitive and even smarter (as to academic things) wives will keep the home fires burning. But with the world of the future, as things are moving now, all I see is further dominance in the high paying jobs by women, and the resulting roles will increasingly be homemaker men and smarter, decision-making women, who possess the highest degree of education as well, making them superior to men in all practical things. Society will be completely turned upside down, and the Church will be out of step with that reality, and only change after everybody else does. The fallout of that intransigence will be diminished membership especially among men....

As I recall Elder Christofferson had some pretty decent solutions in the very conference talk that was under discussion. Was this entirely a gripe fest or was there any discussion of his teaching?

Edited April 29, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Questing Beast]

First of all, I don't get this forum: how is this a "social hall" topic exactly? Anyway...

Yes, it was totally a gripefest. The instructor did not get into the "solutions". I don't remember Christofferson's "solutions" either, and I dimly remember hearing the talk and thinking that, man he is really on one! Meaning, I thought that it was too negative for his own good. I don't remember the so-called solutions. But I can guess: increased focus in the home on family prayer and fhe and counseling especially from the fathers, who concentrate on giving more father's blessings and controlling Internet/computer time and regulating the insistence upon getting good school grades before 'puter time is allowed, and making sure that children's friends don't subvert the TBM paradigm, and in short instituting and continuing the ideal LDS lifestyle, that will fight back effectively against this malaise of role shifting. Notice the subtle allowance that being the "homemaker" is a secondarily prestigious role, and the "breadwinner" is the most desirable role: that is what we are fighting against, and having women go into the workforce until the roles have effectively been shifted is playing right into the typical male mind's way of doing things: "my time to play is not going to be taken away by anybody". If work isn't the option, because the real breadwinner is the woman, then the man, essentially just a big boy in his mind, by nature, typically, will succumb to the opportunity to play. Give a guy lots of free time and no responsibility to defend anything or anybody, i.e. a perfectly safe world of no challenges, no battles, no zombies, terrorists or wars looming, and the guy will look for hobbies to take up the slack. If jobs are not on offer or required, because the mother is taking care of all of that, the guy will not respond to any amount of Church insisting that he do his duty. His "duty" will not seem that important compared to the duty of bread winning, therefore he won't have to spend all those years and all that money on getting a higher education, he can just marry and stay home with his children....

Edited April 29, 2013 by Questing Beast

[Questing Beast]

One quip the instructor made was more prescient than he seemed to appreciate: geneticists have already gone there with animal sperm, having developed it artificially. "If they ever make it so that men are not needed for pregnancy, then we won't be needed for anything!"

My daughter (into her third trimester after years of trying to get pregnant) said that God won't allow such a development. I said how can you be so sure? The only way we would be stopped at this rate is if all of our technology goes down the drain. If we are going to continue to develop our knowledge and abilities then this baby step playing with artificially manipulated animal sperm will produce the first artificially created baby animals, and human beings can't be far behind. It is a disturbing, dream world, line of thought. Scifi never came up with anything more reality altering than artificial babies. At that point, genetics will be utterly at "our" command, and men will either cease to be, or "women" will create a combined "perfect species" with all the desired, most perceived, physical traits of "beauty". Whatever, "men" in the historical sense will be extinct....

[CV75]

One quip the instructor made was more prescient than he seemed to appreciate: geneticists have already gone there with animal sperm, having developed it artificially. "If they ever make it so that men are not needed for pregnancy, then we won't be needed for anything!"

My daughter (into her third trimester after years of trying to get pregnant) said that God won't allow such a development. I said how can you be so sure? The only way we would be stopped at this rate is if all of our technology goes down the drain. If we are going to continue to develop our knowledge and abilities then this baby step playing with artificially manipulated animal sperm will produce the first artificially created baby animals, and human beings can't be far behind. It is a disturbing, dream world, line of thought. Scifi never came up with anything more reality altering than artificial babies. At that point, genetics will be utterly at "our" command, and men will either cease to be, or "women" will create a combined "perfect species" with all the desired, most perceived, physical traits of "beauty". Whatever, "men" in the historical sense will be extinct....

Anything can happen in a fallen world. That is why we are commanded to stand in holy places. The Holy Spirit will help us navigate through the problems du jour. Chapter 22 in the Lorenzo Snow manual offers a very good basis for succeeding in what God wants couples and families to accomplish, and how.

[thesometimesaint]

One quip the instructor made was more prescient than he seemed to appreciate: geneticists have already gone there with animal sperm, having developed it artificially. "If they ever make it so that men are not needed for pregnancy, then we won't be needed for anything!"

My daughter (into her third trimester after years of trying to get pregnant) said that God won't allow such a development. I said how can you be so sure? The only way we would be stopped at this rate is if all of our technology goes down the drain. If we are going to continue to develop our knowledge and abilities then this baby step playing with artificially manipulated animal sperm will produce the first artificially created baby animals, and human beings can't be far behind. It is a disturbing, dream world, line of thought. Scifi never came up with anything more reality altering than artificial babies. At that point, genetics will be utterly at "our" command, and men will either cease to be, or "women" will create a combined "perfect species" with all the desired, most perceived, physical traits of "beauty". Whatever, "men" in the historical sense will be extinct....

IMNTBHO God isn't in the business of deciding what his children can't do. But he is pretty consistent in telling us that we are responsible for the consequences of those things that we do do.

Morality aside we're a LONG way off from being able to command genetics. OTOH If we could eliminate genetic diseases like Tay-Sachs disease. Why wouldn't we?

Edited April 29, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[pmccombs1]

That's because today's world does not answer the typical male mind: jobs that are on offer are mostly sit in front of a computer jobs, that engage communication skills and problem solving related to that. I guess the description falls under the heading "information services": that is the biggest and fastest growing field of employment in the USA, so I have read, and it does not appeal to the typical male mind, which is more geared to physical work with eye-hand coordination skills involved, you know, mechanical things. Those kinds of jobs pay well enough, but there is very limited availability. Most men cannot work in those kinds of jobs these days, and such jobs are steadily diminishing in number as technology takes over more and more human involvement through automation, etc.

Oh, I wouldn't worry about that. Information Systems (IS) is a techie field, along with IT and software development. I work in that area and am a member of the Association for Computing Machinery. Did you know they have an organization specifically designed to get women and girls interested in STEM careers? STEM stands for "Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics." It would seem that these types of jobs are in high demand and that, for some reason, males tend to be interested in them, but not females. There are maybe one or two women in technical roles sitting in front of computer screens on my floor of about 60-70 individuals.

The only way we would be stopped at this rate is if all of our technology goes down the drain.

Good. I think you're onto something. See, we don't have the right view of technology at all, and it's too bad because all of our greatest Noticers have warned us about it all along. G.K. Chesterton knew it. So did Marshall McLuhan. Neil Postman wrote about it in detail. We've been asking the wrong First Question. The First Question isn't, "How can we use this neat technology for good and not evil?" That's not it. Maybe that's a good Second Question.

When you take a culture, and you add technology to it, you don't get culture plus technology. When you take a religion and you add technology to it, you don't get religion plus technology, either. What you get are entirely new things. You get a whole new culture. You get a whole new religion. You get a whole new species. So the right First Question ought to be, "What new thing will this technology create? What does the new culture look like? What is the new face of religion?"

If you want to save things and conserve them, you're right. You can't have much in the way of technology. The formula doesn't work that way. The Amish certainly don't regard these modern wonders as evidence of the enlightening Spirit of God at work in the world.

At that point, genetics will be utterly at "our" command, and men will either cease to be, or "women" will create a combined "perfect species" with all the desired, most perceived, physical traits of "beauty". Whatever, "men" in the historical sense will be extinct....

Yes, this would be an artificial short circuit. Nature already does this. Life is a grand emergent system, and we already see instances in which the male is being pruned out of certain species as an unnecessary, inefficient waste.

Give a guy lots of free time and no responsibility to defend anything or anybody, i.e. a perfectly safe world of no challenges, no battles, no zombies, terrorists or wars looming, and the guy will look for hobbies to take up the slack. If jobs are not on offer or required, because the mother is taking care of all of that, the guy will not respond to any amount of Church insisting that he do his duty. His "duty" will not seem that important compared to the duty of bread winning, therefore he won't have to spend all those years and all that money on getting a higher education, he can just marry and stay home with his children....

Well, that mostly sounds good to me--a perfectly safe world, that is. Marrying and staying home with kids sounds nice too. Remember the David McCullough lecture on the humanities entitled "The Course of Human Events"? A passage from John Adams was quoted:

I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study paintings, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.

John Adams did all that manly, "duty" stuff so that his grandchildren could "look for hobbies to take up the slack." Why not? Alas, our hobbies once were useful. Who could have foreseen that we'd go for entertainment instead? See my comment on technology above.

[Scott Lloyd]

First of all, I don't get this forum: how is this a "social hall" topic exactly? Anyway...

Yes, it was totally a gripefest. The instructor did not get into the "solutions". I don't remember Christofferson's "solutions" either, and I dimly remember hearing the talk and thinking that, man he is really on one! Meaning, I thought that it was too negative for his own good. I don't remember the so-called solutions.

It strikes me as odd that a priesthood lesson would focus on a general conference talk but that the class members (and apparently this includes you) would not even bother to consider or discuss the substance of the talk.

Edited to add:

Here is a link to the text of Elder Christofferson's talk so you don't have to speculate about or try to "dimly remember" its content.

Edited April 29, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Maidservant]

I don't know that what I have to say is a direct reply, but I will kind of riff on the 'male' subject. As a mother of four sons, this subject in general is of deep personal significance to me, as I proactively guide my sons in becoming the men I hope they will be and the kinds of philosophy and decisions I have deliberately put into that.

Let me start off by saying that I feel there is a great deal of hope to be had and I don't see the doom in the future of gendered beings and relationships between genders. I see healing that is taking place and that will continue to take place.

Let me disclaim a bit on my perspective, that through my experiences in life (without detailing them at length), that I have completely discarded the idea of social roles for men and women. That is, the only role for a man IS a man, father, husband. The only role for a woman IS as a woman, wife, mother. (Can also add in daughter, brother, friend, etc.) To speak of economic and social jobs or of the allocation of tasks in a functioning home and family as being gender related, I find to be unsupportable in any sense. (There is no female gene for sweeping the floor!) Some of my gender perspective is also entangled with my perspective on the most healthy order of society and again to make a long story short--we don't have it! ha ha (For example, I am an anarchist and a non-capitalist, so when people discuss public [at work]/private [at home] dichotomies for example, I see that divide, that dichotomy as an artifact of capitalism, and therefore a more or less defective paradigm) NOT of spirituality or gender necessities; that is, if we could heal from capitalism, that artifact would not longer need to be dealt with on any basis including that of gender.)

Girls and women tend to use the Net to communicate, guys use it to entertain, i.e. waste time.

Ha ha. Well, I don't know about that. *knows a lot of women that do a lot of Farmville*

No solutions were on offer, just "we have our work cut out, don't let your sons/grandsons believe the message that they are nobodies or less important than women", etc. No counsel on how to accomplish this gargantuan task of educating boys to not feel inferior to girls.

I would like to think that we can influence our children to be the best that can be as individuals (corny but true!). I don't think the sense of gender needs to come into play at all. I am reflecting on my own sons, and maybe they carry some private thoughts I don't know about, but I am thinking that both my sons and my daughters have been free to pursue what they care about. Period. (My children are ages 7 through 22 at the moment.)

Girls get the best grades, stay in school more, and earn more degrees today than boys do. And girls are swiftly advancing into the top paying careers. That's because today's world does not answer the typical male mind: jobs that are on offer are mostly sit in front of a computer jobs, that engage communication skills and problem solving related to that. I guess the description falls under the heading "information services": that is the biggest and fastest growing field of employment in the USA, so I have read, and it does not appeal to the typical male mind, which is more geared to physical work with eye-hand coordination skills involved, you know, mechanical things. Those kinds of jobs pay well enough, but there is very limited availability. Most men cannot work in those kinds of jobs these days, and such jobs are steadily diminishing in number as technology takes over more and more human involvement through automation, etc. With the kind of work that most men find intuitive and even satisfying drying up,

I really don't think the idea that desk jobs (etc) aren't intuitive to males can be supported. I think pmccombs said it better, but I think men cotton to IT jobs amazingly (as just one example) and I think that both men and women enjoy healthy teamwork professional relationships. Again, my personal perspective would point to the shortcomings of our entire educational and economic system itself--that if we could sort that out, this gender narrative and the 'realities' it may represent would heal alongside. Visual, mechanical and other axes of aptitudes are an individual matter. Yes, there may be some statistical picture of what goes for males v females, but how is that really helpful to an individual who is trying to create their meaningful and prosperous life? There has to be room for everyone to self-determine what they can enjoy and what they can contribute--whether inside or outside the box so to speak.

the world of the near future looks dire indeed for males. More and more women are going to become bread winners, while the men do odd jobs or hobbies while looking after the children. Reversal of roles. And the Church is supposed to deny this how exactly? No clue.

How can it be dire for males to be involved with their children? My ideal economic and family situation is one where both the father and mother are in the home as much as is humanly possible while still rendering unto ceaser that which is ceaser's. That is, I counsel my sons to think carefully about their careers-- that, yes, they should do what they loved, but to the degree that it doesn't make a difference in barring them from their passion(s) in life, they should consider careers that allow them to be home on Sundays and home often during the week and able to have time off to attend children's activities, etc. I counsel my daughters to choose a profession and continue with it--not to feel like they have to stay at home unless that truly feels like their calling--but to make the arrangement of their family life a matter of counsel between husband and wife based on their talents, needs, opportunities, family necessities and situations. Only that married couple and between them and the Lord is going to know what is right for them--but meanwhile, thank goodness we have unprecedented opportunity in this day and age for all of us to choose what we want and need.

The number one thing my oldest son in particular looks forward to is babies. He cannot bear the thought of his wife doing all of the fun stuff! He wants to carry the baby, feed the baby, play with the baby, diapers. He can't wait, and has expressed that many times. This oldest son is now engaged, and you can't imagine how satisfying it is to me to see him and his fiancee, both smart, tough, spiritual kids (not so much any more!) truly have a partnership of making decisions about working, where to live, how to worship, about their future family. I am in awe of them. My son has been trained to know who the boss is ( ), in the sense that he knows that he is to be the servant of his wife and do all things for her, and that she will respond to him. Not that he can't have any opinion, but he should fulfill her requests, needs and desires--he is building the nest for her, so to speak. I don't know how any of how this is going is making him less of a man or his fiancee less of a woman. In fact, I think it heightens it--because being a gender is not in your 'jobs', it's just in YOU. In any case, this is a far cry from dealing with my son's father (my late husband) who I had to remind several times that he wasn't babysitting because these were his own children! Ha ha.

Meanwhile, I have a daughter who 'only wants to get married' and yet I see her growing and being challenged academically. At first she went to college just sort of as something to do, a 'filler' until she 'gets married', but with no prospects at hand (which feels like the death knell when you're that age), she is becoming a leader and a professional and I am excited for her opportunities, and I can see heavenly Father's hand molding her (as he did me, and is still doing me, in a way that has nothing to do directly with me being a mother--and yet, I cannot fully be a mother unless I am already myself first and have something to teach my children about life!)

If the world goes back to being a more dangerous place, and less automated, because of some hypothetical reversal of our technological level such that hard physical labor and dangerous (that is to say defensive) roles need to be filled in large abundance, then I see no problem: men will dominate in the defensive and bread winning roles, while their more intuitive and even smarter (as to academic things) wives will keep the home fires burning. But with the world of the future, as things are moving now, all I see is further dominance in the high paying jobs by women, and the resulting roles will increasingly be homemaker men and smarter, decision-making women, who possess the highest degree of education as well, making them superior to men in all practical things. Society will be completely turned upside down, and the Church will be out of step with that reality, and only change after everybody else does. The fallout of that intransigence will be diminished membership especially among men....

I just don't see these being the only two choices of worlds we have nor even the two most likely scenarios. Again, there is a lot of hope in the air. Yes the world is in transition and a lot of it is already super dangerous for most people on the earth (we're really blessed in the country I live in to not have to deal with survival conditions). But the worse time for a lady of having a baby, being in labor, is the 'transition' part--it's the most painful--and yet it means the baby is almost here! There IS a better world coming. I have faith in the human race that we will figure it out and I see a lot of people all over the world doing what they believe to be right, and serving one another. And the final configuration will have nothing to do with being cave men and women OR homemakers/breadwinners. It might also be helpful to take a longer view of history and realize that men's and women's social roles have developed and changed over time and in different places--we didn't always have the format we have now, also. (And I refer you to the book of Moses' description of Adam and Eve's working relationship--side by side.)

As a man--what do you want right now that you don't think you enjoy? Can you create it? That's an individual process--if it's not good for you, then that is a challenge to go forward on it.

As a woman, I've realized that I'm always at 'home'. China is a room in my home, Russia is another room, South America is another room, etc . . . and anything I do to create this home for my children IS my work as a woman.

pmccombs implied a possible obsoleteness to men, but I can't even bear that thought . . . I mean, who would I kiss????? Men are incredible creatures and absolutely necessary to my spiritual health as a woman (of course, right now I'm in the middle of a famine of male, except for my sons, but that makes me long and appreciate it even more). Even just to smell a man--how could there be any joyful future without that?

I'm sure it can be said that I don't 'need' a man in the sense that I can kill my own bugs, carry my own suitcases, etc. But these are tasks. How are we defining need? I want to bawl my head off about some real or imagined female stress and have my man put his arm around me and reassure me, "Honey, everything is going to be all right. I'm here." What exactly is the replacement for that?????

There is none. It's just you. The man .

Edited April 30, 2013 by Maidservant

[Questing Beast]

...

As a man--what do you want right now that you don't think you enjoy? Can you create it? That's an individual process--if it's not good for you, then that is a challenge to go forward on it.

As a woman, I've realized that I'm always at 'home'. China is a room in my home, Russia is another room, South America is another room, etc . . . and anything I do to create this home for my children IS my work as a woman.

pmccombs implied a possible obsoleteness to men, but I can't even bear that thought . . . I mean, who would I kiss????? Men are incredible creatures and absolutely necessary to my spiritual health as a woman (of course, right now I'm in the middle of a famine of male, except for my sons, but that makes me long and appreciate it even more). Even just to smell a man--how could there be any joyful future without that?

I'm sure it can be said that I don't 'need' a man in the sense that I can kill my own bugs, carry my own suitcases, etc. But these are tasks. How are we defining need? I want to bawl my head off about some real or imagined female stress and have my man put his arm around me and reassure me, "Honey, everything is going to be all right. I'm here." What exactly is the replacement for that?????

There is none. It's just you. The man .

Your positive outlook is refreshing, good for you. I too hold a positive outlook about the future, although you'd not know that reading my OP. I was responding to the HP lesson and the reaction to it by the HPs present. Doom and gloom, negativity, perplexity. I remained silent throughout, as I usually do. Then I came "here" and let it all hang out.

Capitalism is an evil system, but it is less evil than anything else on offer in the Real World. I don't know what you're hoping/expecting to take capitalism's place, but it isn't likely to be an improvement. Capitalism is superior to any other economy tried out in the Real World simply because it allows private property rights and opportunities to try your hand at any business whatsoever. The evils arise when too few rich people control too much of the wealth and use that control to restrict/eliminate competition. The Gov't "of and by the people" must impose restrictions upon the capitalists, or else the system morphs into a tyranny of the extremely few "haves" over the increasingly poor "have nots". That's a side issue, but it does impact working men and women heavily.

Genetically, if we continue as we are moving right now, we will have the power in the not so distant future to pick and choose what kind of babies we'll have, and that means gender and characteristics. So "you" can have your nice-smelling "man", or something similar, and s/he can have the characteristics that society finds most appealing. It is a horrid peek into the future that I hope never is realized, but face it, we already have powers to manipulate cells into what we are wanting to create (e.g. artificially generated sperm cells from manipulated stem or skin cells), that beggared the imagination only a few years ago. And if "men" as they currently are don't fit in easily, well, "we" can just tweak their genetic makeup so that they really do enjoy sitting at that desk job in front of a 'puter and on the telephone all day, in other words, more like a typical woman....

Edited May 1, 2013 by Questing Beast

[pmccombs1]

Capitalism is an evil system, but it is less evil than anything else on offer in the Real World. I don't know what you're hoping/expecting to take capitalism's place, but it isn't likely to be an improvement. Capitalism is superior to any other economy tried out in the Real World simply because it allows private property rights and opportunities to try your hand at any business whatsoever. The evils arise when too few rich people control too much of the wealth and use that control to restrict/eliminate competition. The Gov't "of and by the people" must impose restrictions upon the capitalists, or else the system morphs into a tyranny of the extremely few "haves" over the increasingly poor "have nots". That's a side issue, but it does impact working men and women heavily.

Off topic, but I invite you to expand your knowledge of third-way economic ideas "on offer in the Real World":

Toward a Truly Free Market

Beyond Capitalism and Socialism

Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered

The Servile State

Economics for Helen

The Outline of Sanity

Utopia of Usurers

The Hound of Distributism

I'll say that the Catholics definitely have the right idea.

Edited May 1, 2013 by pmccombs1

[captain-jack]

I think Maidservant touched on it very well but I'll still throw in my thoughts.

I've often wondered about the same thing, "What happens when genetic manipulation gets to the point where the male contribution to the process is no longer necessary or ideal?" I've had thoughts that if that time were to come, men would be delegated to tasks that are labor intensive. The male body, after all, is very well built to do so. While there are women who are physically strong, many stronger than myself, the male body is designed to have a potential that is higher than that of women. Do not believe I mean this in the regard that women are weaker, simply that physically men are designed to handle more.

That being said, I doubt there would ever be a time when this would happen. Sure, while the genetics part may take place, as Maidservant pointed out there is a key emotional element that protects us. I honestly doubt my wife would want another woman living with her. She is happy to have me, and I do my best to be emotionally supportive of her. When I see her becoming overwhelmed, I like to try to take the responsibility from her by giving her time alone. Another woman could do this, but from what I have observed there is a connection between her and I that I can be a strength in her time of need. She is also the same for me. I doubt any amount of genetic engineering can ever come close to replacing that. There will always be many women who will put up with us in spite of our flaws because they see the good in us, and they want that good in their lives. Best of all, we are happy to share.

[ERMD]

"I'm still waiting for Americans to realize that being in constant communication is not an advantage, but a short leash. Cell phones have changed us form a nation of self-reliant pioneer types into a bunch of men standing alone in supermarkets saying, "Okay, I'm in the tampon aisle, but I don't see it." --John Gierach, "Fools Paradise"

[tyler90az]

"I'm still waiting for Americans to realize that being in constant communication is not an advantage, but a short leash. Cell phones have changed us form a nation of self-reliant pioneer types into a bunch of men standing alone in supermarkets saying, "Okay, I'm in the tampon aisle, but I don't see it." --John Gierach, "Fools Paradise"

That is funny

[Calm]

"I'm still waiting for Americans to realize that being in constant communication is not an advantage, but a short leash. Cell phones have changed us form a nation of self-reliant pioneer types into a bunch of men standing alone in supermarkets saying, "Okay, I'm in the tampon aisle, but I don't see it." --John Gierach, "Fools Paradise"

Back about 30 years ago or so, my husband came home telling me how the cashier gushed over him because he was buying tampons. Apparently at least back then it was a rare sight. i've been lucky to have a husband not embarrassed by or uptight about such things, just very practical. It is only fair since I am the same way though.

[Stargazer]

As to the demise of men, I once devised an alien species for a novel which I have not yet written, and the species has three sexes: female; male; and mother. Only the female is sentient, and is humanoid in outward appearance. The male is semi-sentient, sessile in maturity, very small and barely capable of self-care as a juvenile. The mother is non-sentient bears the young produced by the male and female, and contributes genetic material to that young in order to produce all three sexes. At maturity, a male is joined permanently with a female and is carried internally, contributing a male factor to the intellect and emotion of the female. The offspring of the male and female are not borne in the female body, but is delivered to the mother in a manner which I will not discuss here (it's very private).

The backstory is that originally the species had only two sexes, like us, but through natural selection the male began to get more and more primitive (in the same way that the mammalian male Y chromosome is now shorter than it originally was and is growing shorter over time). Eventually, and because this alien species had acquired advanced knowledge of genetic engineering, they decided to "go the distance" with the male and effectively combine female and male into a single organism, at least as far as the mature adult is concerned. The Mother sex was created from whole cloth, as it were, to be the permanent nurturer. Being non-sentient, it does not want to go to college and get a job. There is no divorce because there is no cheating, and the male never has to face the dilemma of being lost and being unwilling to ask directions -- he just goes where his wife takes him. Conversations are very one-sided.

I don't know why I am telling you this. I'll probably never write the novel, so at least a bit of it will get out there.

[pmccombs1]

The offspring of the male and female are not borne in the female body, but is delivered to the mother in a manner which I will not discuss here (it's very private).

Alien stork. There, the secret is out.

[Stargazer]

Alien stork. There, the secret is out.

How'd you know that? You been sneaking peeks at my notes?

[Questing Beast]

As to the demise of men, I once devised an alien species for a novel which I have not yet written, and the species has three sexes: female; male; and mother. Only the female is sentient, and is humanoid in outward appearance. The male is semi-sentient, sessile in maturity, very small and barely capable of self-care as a juvenile. The mother is non-sentient bears the young produced by the male and female, and contributes genetic material to that young in order to produce all three sexes. At maturity, a male is joined permanently with a female and is carried internally, contributing a male factor to the intellect and emotion of the female. The offspring of the male and female are not borne in the female body, but is delivered to the mother in a manner which I will not discuss here (it's very private).

The backstory is that originally the species had only two sexes, like us, but through natural selection the male began to get more and more primitive (in the same way that the mammalian male Y chromosome is now shorter than it originally was and is growing shorter over time). Eventually, and because this alien species had acquired advanced knowledge of genetic engineering, they decided to "go the distance" with the male and effectively combine female and male into a single organism, at least as far as the mature adult is concerned. The Mother sex was created from whole cloth, as it were, to be the permanent nurturer. Being non-sentient, it does not want to go to college and get a job. There is no divorce because there is no cheating, and the male never has to face the dilemma of being lost and being unwilling to ask directions -- he just goes where his wife takes him. Conversations are very one-sided.

I don't know why I am telling you this. I'll probably never write the novel, so at least a bit of it will get out there.

I know why you feel inclined to share: you don't want your idea to die. I don't think there is any chance of that happening. You are too terrified by your own imagination to let that happen. I "like" your idea. It is entirely believable, and probably in the not so distant future, at the rate we seem to be going.

I don't think that most of us are even aware yet that what is occurring is very drastic and very fast. Already the changes imposed on "guys" by our society are huge and bewildering. One of my sons, who I have talked about briefly already, is adrift in this world. He sees permanent, repetitive work as enslaving, even emasculating. Part of this attitude he probably inculcated from his father, me, as he was growing up, and it has been reinforced since he became an adult and in his own mind independent. His bewilderment is profound, although he would be offended to see me describe him so. But he is typical of very male men, as compared to "girly men" who indeed blunder about on errands, via cellphone navigation, from their wives. Something is going on here. There is nothing healthy about guys who make up ninety percent or more of software development companies; sitting for long, long hours almost every day in front of 'puter screens indoors and whose bodies are pudgy to fat and age at a drastically accelerated rate. The bewildered guys are better off physically, but emotionally they are increasingly marginalized by Medía's siren call to duty, accompanied by the redefining of what it takes to be a "man". None of the redefining fits earlier, "genetic" identifiers. Weapons and personal self defense are denigrated as "Neanderthalic" or similar, throwback mentality. Being physically stronger is being overtaken by the modern women "heroes" in film and advertisement, making men out to be bumbling hulks or couch potatoes. Meanwhile in the real world women are getting better educations and already one quarter of them earn more than their husbands, who typically have problems emotionally dealing with not being the principle bread winner.

A recent example of this growing social shift: another son recently graduated from the local college. At the ceremonies, the opening comments, by a woman, made the point very clear that "fifty-five percent of this year's graduating class are women". And an accompanying short video, allowing graduating students to talk about their values and dreams, etc., featured over half a dozen women, and, one man....

[Avatar4321]

I think the best way to create men of honor in the world is to teach the Gospel to them. I know i would likely be a very wicked man if the Gospel was not in my life. I know the changes I made in my life and the path I was on when I recieved my testimony. That changed everything. I would not have a number of qualities I have to day and I know I would not have been the man who attracted my wife to me.

Another good way is for us to be an example of the men society needs. Since my daughter was born that's been one of my goals. My wife hasn't had the best examples of men in her life and I want her and my daughter to know that men who follow Christ (and not just profess to) can be decent and honorable. I still have alot of work cut out for me. But I am optimistic because of the Faith I have in Christ.

I think there are probably alot more things we can do to improve the situation.

[The Nehor]

I was talking with my brother and sister in law last night. She mentioned that 90% of men are useless but that is okay as 90% of women are equally useless. Luckily she categorized me and my brother as being in the 10% so I am good.

The problem of identity is mostly self-inflicted. Get off your fat butt and go to the gym or take up an active hobby. View work as your tax on living and try to make it as satisfying and enjoyable as you can but live life outside of work. Have ambitions. The problem is not with this generation (there have always been useless cipher-men around). It is just that they somehow expect fulfillment to come from nothing.

We have hordes of men who play video games all day and then complain they are not happy. If you are not happy then to quote President Uchtdorf, "Stop it!". I think it was Elder Scott who related the story of the unkempt overweight single guy with no education or prospects complaining to him that God owed him a wife because he attended church and had served a mission. That is not enough.

[pmccombs1]

I think the best way to create men of honor in the world is to teach the Gospel to them. I know i would likely be a very wicked man if the Gospel was not in my life.

I find that I'm a very wicked man in spite of the gospel.

One does not teach or learn the gospel any more than one learns to breathe. It is simply that sometimes we must be reminded of what is in us already. Perhaps men could be made better, but they are already good and honorable; they need not be made such. The gospel is just one reminder of that.

The way to have men of honor in the world is to make that gospel matter to them.

[Avatar4321]

I find that I'm a very wicked man in spite of the gospel.

One does not teach or learn the gospel any more than one learns to breathe. It is simply that sometimes we must be reminded of what is in us already. Perhaps men could be made better, but they are already good and honorable; they need not be made such. The gospel is just one reminder of that.

The way to have men of honor in the world is to make that gospel matter to them.

I was trying to be optimistic about myself. I am just wicked. not very wicked:)