voices and always in high dudgeon about something or other: never fearing to lambaste anyone no matter how far beneath him in the pecking order, never fearing for a moment, when he calls someone out for being preening or self-congratulatory, as he frequently does, that it might be true of himself as well. When Iâm in the depths of soft-heartedness, a little dose of Leon is all I need to feel like clambering back on the horse of critical judgment and denouncing someone for something.
I suppose some will condemn me for taking these shortcuts. I know the whole idea is that your moral outrage springs from some authentic place deep within the fibers of your own superego, and youâre not supposed to be enhancing your performance with artificial supplements cribbed from the Internet.
These remarks are prefatory to admitting that, having gone the motherâs little helper route on occasion myself, I find it especially difficult to pass judgment on the increasingly long list of those suspected of, or admitting to, juicing their game in some way or another too. I wish I could work myself into a lather about itâI realize the consensus view is that juicing is a moral affront. They hold Senate hearings on it, for Godâs sake. But frankly, Iâd rather juice than slip down in the rankings too. Like so many other ambition-wracked bastards, Iâll do what I have to when it comes to staying competitive.
But men have it far worse when it comes to staying competitive at the moment. Theyâve lost it, apparently: their edge is gone, theyâre lumpish, unemployed, and increasingly obsolete. Or so itâs been reported, notably by Hanna Rosin in a much-lauded magazine article with the guillotine title The End of Men (later expanded into a bestselling book). âWhat if modern postindustrial society is simply better suited to women?â asks Rosin provocatively. Patriarchy may have been the organizing principle up until now, but the era of male dominance is finally over, largely because eighty percent of the jobs lost in the last recession were lost by men (prompting the jokey term âman-cessionâ) and, according to Rosin, men arenât bothering to retool sufficiently to find new ones. We all know about declines in traditionally male industries like construction and manufacturing (of course, capital crushing the labor movement was part of the job loss story, too). The good news for women is that the information economy doesnât care about your size and strength, which were menâs sole advantages in the past. Whatâs needed today is social intelligence . Also obedience, reliability, and âthe ability to sit still and focusââtraits seen by employers as womenâs particular strengths. Which is why women are procuring the largest percentage of what few jobs remain, and are now, for the first time, a majority of the workforce.
One notes a certain mocking tone on Rosinâs part when it comes to men getting thrown under the employment bus. Theyâve lost, weâve won: hooray for us! But maybe the triumphalism is a bit myopic, given that it was the ruthlessness of winner-take-all capitalism that chewed men up and spit them out when their services were no longer necessary (then the so-called jobless recovery kicked them in the nuts for good measure). Sure itâs the new social reality, but is it really anything to crow about?
And maybe women have been a little too adaptable? Yes, the job market has flipped toward us; yes, we now hold more of the cardsâexcept, unfortunately, when it comes to heterosexual women who want some kind of equal partner as a mate, or any mate at all. With men transformed into soft-bellied unemployable losers, more and more women are left high and dry in the romance and mating department. One option Rosin offers is for men to become the wives while women go to work. The problem with this scenario, as Rosin herself acknowledges (though
I suppose some will condemn me for taking these shortcuts. I know the whole idea is that your moral outrage springs from some authentic place deep within the fibers of your own superego, and youâre not supposed to be enhancing your performance with artificial supplements cribbed from the Internet.
These remarks are prefatory to admitting that, having gone the motherâs little helper route on occasion myself, I find it especially difficult to pass judgment on the increasingly long list of those suspected of, or admitting to, juicing their game in some way or another too. I wish I could work myself into a lather about itâI realize the consensus view is that juicing is a moral affront. They hold Senate hearings on it, for Godâs sake. But frankly, Iâd rather juice than slip down in the rankings too. Like so many other ambition-wracked bastards, Iâll do what I have to when it comes to staying competitive.
But men have it far worse when it comes to staying competitive at the moment. Theyâve lost it, apparently: their edge is gone, theyâre lumpish, unemployed, and increasingly obsolete. Or so itâs been reported, notably by Hanna Rosin in a much-lauded magazine article with the guillotine title The End of Men (later expanded into a bestselling book). âWhat if modern postindustrial society is simply better suited to women?â asks Rosin provocatively. Patriarchy may have been the organizing principle up until now, but the era of male dominance is finally over, largely because eighty percent of the jobs lost in the last recession were lost by men (prompting the jokey term âman-cessionâ) and, according to Rosin, men arenât bothering to retool sufficiently to find new ones. We all know about declines in traditionally male industries like construction and manufacturing (of course, capital crushing the labor movement was part of the job loss story, too). The good news for women is that the information economy doesnât care about your size and strength, which were menâs sole advantages in the past. Whatâs needed today is social intelligence . Also obedience, reliability, and âthe ability to sit still and focusââtraits seen by employers as womenâs particular strengths. Which is why women are procuring the largest percentage of what few jobs remain, and are now, for the first time, a majority of the workforce.
One notes a certain mocking tone on Rosinâs part when it comes to men getting thrown under the employment bus. Theyâve lost, weâve won: hooray for us! But maybe the triumphalism is a bit myopic, given that it was the ruthlessness of winner-take-all capitalism that chewed men up and spit them out when their services were no longer necessary (then the so-called jobless recovery kicked them in the nuts for good measure). Sure itâs the new social reality, but is it really anything to crow about?
And maybe women have been a little too adaptable? Yes, the job market has flipped toward us; yes, we now hold more of the cardsâexcept, unfortunately, when it comes to heterosexual women who want some kind of equal partner as a mate, or any mate at all. With men transformed into soft-bellied unemployable losers, more and more women are left high and dry in the romance and mating department. One option Rosin offers is for men to become the wives while women go to work. The problem with this scenario, as Rosin herself acknowledges (though
Similar Books
