by Roger L. Simon
I woke up earlier this week to two depressing articles that on the surface seem unrelated but are actually connected.
They both speak to the existence of a war on marriage in our culture that will destroy the fabric of our country if not dealt with. This is a war that surfaced ideologically in the early years of the Soviet Union in a way oddly similar to a primitive version of our “woke,” but was soon withdrawn as impractical even there.
Not here.
This war is now being fought in the USA on a deeper cultural level that could actually be more pernicious and ultimately succeed with monumental societal implications.
And yet we have feminists still yammering on about “equal pay.” Go figure.
You would also think these now-successful women might enjoy having a working-class man in the house who knows how to fix the plumbing or the electrical, but such is not the behavior of human society, ours anyway. If a man does not have a college degree, the fancier the better, he is filtered out on the dating apps.
What has evolved from this, according to the article, is pervasive loneliness among the younger generation.
Ms. Reingold also points out that, statistically, married people are happier. But most of us have known that from simple observation.
Meanwhile, with the male sex in decline, we have a war on gender—or more accurately, massive, and likely deliberately instigated, gender confusion, making matters worse and putting marriage in further jeopardy.
This is a portion of the massive struggle going on across the nation, all part of this war against the family that is being fought by the left—that apparently has not learned the lessons of the former Soviet Union to which I referred—on many fronts.
Disbanding the family in favor of the state is their intention. It is also another step toward globalism.
The tragedy is that it is also a road to serious human unhappiness.
When Klaus Schwab said, “You will have nothing and you will be happy,” he was also, by inference, implying the dissolution of the family. You don’t need a spouse. You have the World Economic Forum (WEF), or what flows from it, to take care of you.
If you recognize in this elements of Mao Zedong’s Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, children denouncing their parents, you are not mistaken. It’s close to happening here, indeed probably already has in isolated instances.
Not inconsequentially, I have also been reading Dennis Prager’s “Rational Bible”—at the moment the volume on Exodus—so it contains lengthy discussion of the Ten Commandments.
I know I sound almost like an idiot for doing so, but I recommend, particularly, in these times with the family in jeopardy, the Fifth Commandment:
“Honor thy father and mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.”
First published in the Epoch Times.
- Like
- Digg
- Del
- Tumblr
- VKontakte
- Buffer
- Love This
- Odnoklassniki
- Meneame
- Blogger
- Amazon
- Yahoo Mail
- Gmail
- AOL
- Newsvine
- HackerNews
- Evernote
- MySpace
- Mail.ru
- Viadeo
- Line
- Comments
- Yummly
- SMS
- Viber
- Telegram
- Subscribe
- Skype
- Facebook Messenger
- Kakao
- LiveJournal
- Yammer
- Edgar
- Fintel
- Mix
- Instapaper
- Copy Link
2 Responses
Well, I’m a huge outlier.
I’m 52, hold two university degrees [bachelor and master], and have never found a life partner. I could go on at length why, but they all fall under two column headers-
1. Wanted it, sort of, always assumed I would, but clearly didn’t want it enough to put much effort into it, ever really but with decreasing motivation over time.
2. Never had the chance, in that the chance opportunities, pursuit of me by others, fix-ups, and what not, did not much feature in my life.
I have known what it means to fail in love and have love unrequited, with specific women in question at various times, but have never been the sort to miss it in general when absent. I truly don’t get that. I watched the entire run of The Big Bang Theory and was entirely mystified by the motivations of the character Raj. Howard made sense- he was just horny and wanted sex. Leonard had a bit of that but was basically motivated by his physical and romantic desire for a particular woman. These are comprehensible. Raj seemed desperate to an absurd degree to have both sex and love and permanence with any woman at all, and for him Valentine’s Day was an emotional nightmare. I did not understand that there were men, even women, like that or even close to that in the world.
Love brings joy and pain, and hopefully more of the former than the latter. It’s absence is a calm sea, either way.
I can even sort of understand the idea and more or less evidenced fact that married people, even men, are happier married than single. But it’s hard for me to really believe. If single one loses a sense of consistency and security, but still has many of the negatives but can end them at any time, and if not involved at all, one regains consistency and absence of drama plus the sheer number of mere choices-that-have-to-be debated drops to zero, and the possibility of real argument effectively vanishes from one’s personal daily activities.
For women, the annoying problem of “doing the emotional work” to “maintain the relationship” with a man who “doesn’t communicate” goes away. For men, the annoying problem of having your woman manufacture both the concept of “emotional work” and then reams of fictional “emotional work” that the man then is actually having to do, and thus wasting time and energy to “maintain” a relationship that for him simply and already exists, also goes away.
Unless one is raising kids, there is less and less point to it.
Then again, outlier.
I understand very well what it is to be “alone” in the moment of a medical condition one then has to deal with, or get help, by oneself. Thankfully, few and far between but I’m aware of it as I age. But then, what woman wants to be just a nurse?
I do not understand the emotional condition “lonely”, outside of the above extraordinarily specific scenario. I have never felt this in my whole life. “Bored”, either.
Then again, I don’t understand many of the background social conditions.
I understand women getting more higher education compared to say, the 50s. I don’t understand why it hasn’t plateaued, more or less. Women have been getting told to be all they can be for 50 years.
I don’t understand men getting less higher education. Something in the water making them lazy and stupid?