The three common trends at the beginning of the IFS report come down to this: structure, activity, and socialization.
You can get all of the advice in the world from parents, pastors, or influencers. You can get into the nitty gritty details. If the individual isn’t building and operating their life, isn’t participating in events for their life, and isn’t talking to people, all the advice and deep details aren’t going to matter. These fundamentals, among men and women of all ages, are lacking. The little things make the big things possible.
One interesting finding from the report was that young liberal fathers were more likely to be married than young conservative fathers.
The Thomas Pacicco's of this world, summarized: I refuse to put any effort into proving the people who mock me and deride me wrong about me, and refuse to do anything that might better my circumstances because the world isn't fair.
Well, mac, why step up and improve yourself? For the good of your own soul and health, if nothing else.
I'd be interested to see the breakdown between liberals and education, and religious and education. It looks as though their profiles are almost identical, but I would have assumed that in the States religion correlates with conservatism?
Regardless, it does seem to be true that despite people saying that universities are designed to strip people away from the faith, that it's actually those that go on to higher education that are the most likely to be Church goers.
On dating, the comment "I'm not ready to start a romantic relationship" -- agreed with by a majority of young men! -- stands out to me. It feels new for young men to talk this way. Unless of course it is intended in the sense of "not ready to settle down with any one woman."
In my single days, "I'm not ready for a relationship" was normally something a woman said when she was trying to let you down easy.
I feel that the shift towards recognizing financially independent as the real goal, versus "working full time," is likely a realistic one. The point of work is not to work per se, it's to provide for ones material needs (and perhaps wants).
Notice also that the 2025 values that dominate are: "be financially independent," "get married," and "have a child." These are very personal things that affect one's life directly and profoundly. The 2002 cohort, besides "working full time," listed "completing a degree" and "being able to provide for others." The first two are essentially about external social validation, and "being able to provide for others" is actually pretty similar to (if a weaker statement than) being financially independent. Essentially, getting married and having a child (things that are rarer in young adults than they used to be) have replaced working full time and completing a degree, things which are even more common than they used to be. College degrees are slightly more common than they were in 2002, and unemployment was somewhat higher than following the dotcom crash. In each case, the "adulthood" differences seem to reflect things that were statistically a little rarer and harder for each generation at that point in their respective lives.
I'm not even a little bit surprised that liberal young men are more likely to have a degree. Significant elements within conservative culture actively discourage further education. This isn't universal of course, but it's meaningful and enough to show up in statistical outcomes. I distinctly remember being shamed when younger by some people for pursuing "secular" college education (as opposed to BJU, Liberty U, or similar).
Re: dating. I think the looksmaxing crowd does a lot of psychological damage to young men. But, the reality is that looks DO matter and the percentage of young men these days who are overweight/obese and don't even keep up their basic hygiene and appearance continues to climb. I suspect that many statements like "not ready to start a romantic relationship" probably reflect emotional self defense because relationships feel unattainable, rather than more than half of 18-29 year olds actually not feeling ready to pursue romantic relationships. The "fear being rejected" and "it's been difficult" results are unsurprisingly pretty similar in total percentage to the "not ready" crowd in this survey.
The amount of women who are in debt, on mental health meds and deform their bodies is staggering too. But men need to step up because why? What is the goal of our society? What is the point of higher education? What is the point of money or assets? Men and women have two completely different answers to all those questions. We have no unified goal between the semester and the elders do not articulate a real end goal either. The prioritization of foreigners both at home and abroad along with favoring females more generally adds to the failure of our "elite" to form a coherent goal and why others especially males should follow them. Follow them to what?
Men as individuals who are unhygienic, unhealthy, and unhappy with their personal dating lives need to take responsibility for their own shortcomings if they want to change their personal circumstances and outcomes. And many ultimately do just that. This is not mutually exclusive with the notion that men should also advocate for their interests as a group (re: the legal system, K-12 educational culture, and other areas where women are systematically advantaged in contemporary US society). Anyone who is unhappy with how their life is going, at some level, needs to operate at both the systemic and individual levels.
The notion that "foreigners" are why some random joe sixpack can't get a date is absurd. Are there important policy discussions to be had around immigration? Sure. But some people use real systemic problems to rationalize inaction in their own lives when productive individual actions are still available to them; it's a seductive and dangerous trap that many fall into.
Foreigners inside the usa undercut the american worker and add to competition no matter how many glowing stories about x company founded by a foreigner are thrown out into the ether. The favoring of foreign interests and labor led to shipping of our industries and money to foreign nations. Done by boomers, silents and greatest generation. So yeah, the lack of funds, investment and opportunities can be laid at those who advocated and helped foreign interests.
Also, once again, you take shots at men while ignoring the horrible state of the average women who is held to account for nothing and given all advantages that you only briefly mention. Until there is a concentrated effort to undue the foreign influence and the unearned advantages to women in our society, I do not take any of this personal help given by people who put men second seriously. Why do any of it unless there is a common goal of elevating the nation and our sons with our daughters. It is a zero sum game, especially in academia and increasingly in employment for many groups orherwise.
You also don't articulate a goal for men that is reasonable except suck it up. Your previous articles allude to this including to the discrimination inflicted on men today. All you offer is suck it up, others had it worse which is questionable at best and useless advice.
Manosphere members and mens rights activists at least give the truth and attempt to change it in favor of men instead of doing nothing about the female preferenced or some would say gynocentric society created. You do not advocate for ending female preferences at all levels of society so you are not helping at all. Unless you are willing to admit your advice and commentary is useless since you are unwilling to go against the horrible elite and their laws you love, you will continue to be outplayed by the men who advocate men's issues
Also, if all advantages to females were stripped from education and employment, we would actually have a level playing field instead of the skewed nonsense we have now. The boomer and late gen x obsession with pleasing females no matter what is pretty pathetic anyways.
The manosphere exists primarily because of the lies that spewed out of the older generation plus the unwarranted and unfair aid given to females over males in the last 30 years. No real, tangible help or attempt to make things equal ever came from the boomer or late gen x generation or the so called elite class that aaron elevates over everyone else. If more was made to tell the truth and get rid of all unwarranted female advantages in school and elsewhere including family courts and divorce law, we wouldn't be seeing these types of articles bemoaning the situation created by the so called elite class.
It seems the educated classes of which you and I belong are more concerned with foreigners than their own sons. Even your previous article while critical of some parts of immigration was laden with the usual disclaimers that heap unwarranted praise on foreigners without any regard for the native male population. Also, divide men by race and see where things land.
The three common trends at the beginning of the IFS report come down to this: structure, activity, and socialization.
You can get all of the advice in the world from parents, pastors, or influencers. You can get into the nitty gritty details. If the individual isn’t building and operating their life, isn’t participating in events for their life, and isn’t talking to people, all the advice and deep details aren’t going to matter. These fundamentals, among men and women of all ages, are lacking. The little things make the big things possible.
One interesting finding from the report was that young liberal fathers were more likely to be married than young conservative fathers.
The Thomas Pacicco's of this world, summarized: I refuse to put any effort into proving the people who mock me and deride me wrong about me, and refuse to do anything that might better my circumstances because the world isn't fair.
Well, mac, why step up and improve yourself? For the good of your own soul and health, if nothing else.
I'd be interested to see the breakdown between liberals and education, and religious and education. It looks as though their profiles are almost identical, but I would have assumed that in the States religion correlates with conservatism?
Regardless, it does seem to be true that despite people saying that universities are designed to strip people away from the faith, that it's actually those that go on to higher education that are the most likely to be Church goers.
On dating, the comment "I'm not ready to start a romantic relationship" -- agreed with by a majority of young men! -- stands out to me. It feels new for young men to talk this way. Unless of course it is intended in the sense of "not ready to settle down with any one woman."
In my single days, "I'm not ready for a relationship" was normally something a woman said when she was trying to let you down easy.
I feel that the shift towards recognizing financially independent as the real goal, versus "working full time," is likely a realistic one. The point of work is not to work per se, it's to provide for ones material needs (and perhaps wants).
Notice also that the 2025 values that dominate are: "be financially independent," "get married," and "have a child." These are very personal things that affect one's life directly and profoundly. The 2002 cohort, besides "working full time," listed "completing a degree" and "being able to provide for others." The first two are essentially about external social validation, and "being able to provide for others" is actually pretty similar to (if a weaker statement than) being financially independent. Essentially, getting married and having a child (things that are rarer in young adults than they used to be) have replaced working full time and completing a degree, things which are even more common than they used to be. College degrees are slightly more common than they were in 2002, and unemployment was somewhat higher than following the dotcom crash. In each case, the "adulthood" differences seem to reflect things that were statistically a little rarer and harder for each generation at that point in their respective lives.
I'm not even a little bit surprised that liberal young men are more likely to have a degree. Significant elements within conservative culture actively discourage further education. This isn't universal of course, but it's meaningful and enough to show up in statistical outcomes. I distinctly remember being shamed when younger by some people for pursuing "secular" college education (as opposed to BJU, Liberty U, or similar).
Re: dating. I think the looksmaxing crowd does a lot of psychological damage to young men. But, the reality is that looks DO matter and the percentage of young men these days who are overweight/obese and don't even keep up their basic hygiene and appearance continues to climb. I suspect that many statements like "not ready to start a romantic relationship" probably reflect emotional self defense because relationships feel unattainable, rather than more than half of 18-29 year olds actually not feeling ready to pursue romantic relationships. The "fear being rejected" and "it's been difficult" results are unsurprisingly pretty similar in total percentage to the "not ready" crowd in this survey.
The amount of women who are in debt, on mental health meds and deform their bodies is staggering too. But men need to step up because why? What is the goal of our society? What is the point of higher education? What is the point of money or assets? Men and women have two completely different answers to all those questions. We have no unified goal between the semester and the elders do not articulate a real end goal either. The prioritization of foreigners both at home and abroad along with favoring females more generally adds to the failure of our "elite" to form a coherent goal and why others especially males should follow them. Follow them to what?
Men as individuals who are unhygienic, unhealthy, and unhappy with their personal dating lives need to take responsibility for their own shortcomings if they want to change their personal circumstances and outcomes. And many ultimately do just that. This is not mutually exclusive with the notion that men should also advocate for their interests as a group (re: the legal system, K-12 educational culture, and other areas where women are systematically advantaged in contemporary US society). Anyone who is unhappy with how their life is going, at some level, needs to operate at both the systemic and individual levels.
The notion that "foreigners" are why some random joe sixpack can't get a date is absurd. Are there important policy discussions to be had around immigration? Sure. But some people use real systemic problems to rationalize inaction in their own lives when productive individual actions are still available to them; it's a seductive and dangerous trap that many fall into.
Foreigners inside the usa undercut the american worker and add to competition no matter how many glowing stories about x company founded by a foreigner are thrown out into the ether. The favoring of foreign interests and labor led to shipping of our industries and money to foreign nations. Done by boomers, silents and greatest generation. So yeah, the lack of funds, investment and opportunities can be laid at those who advocated and helped foreign interests.
Also, once again, you take shots at men while ignoring the horrible state of the average women who is held to account for nothing and given all advantages that you only briefly mention. Until there is a concentrated effort to undue the foreign influence and the unearned advantages to women in our society, I do not take any of this personal help given by people who put men second seriously. Why do any of it unless there is a common goal of elevating the nation and our sons with our daughters. It is a zero sum game, especially in academia and increasingly in employment for many groups orherwise.
You also don't articulate a goal for men that is reasonable except suck it up. Your previous articles allude to this including to the discrimination inflicted on men today. All you offer is suck it up, others had it worse which is questionable at best and useless advice.
Manosphere members and mens rights activists at least give the truth and attempt to change it in favor of men instead of doing nothing about the female preferenced or some would say gynocentric society created. You do not advocate for ending female preferences at all levels of society so you are not helping at all. Unless you are willing to admit your advice and commentary is useless since you are unwilling to go against the horrible elite and their laws you love, you will continue to be outplayed by the men who advocate men's issues
I call BS on Renn's snark comment on people
Also, if all advantages to females were stripped from education and employment, we would actually have a level playing field instead of the skewed nonsense we have now. The boomer and late gen x obsession with pleasing females no matter what is pretty pathetic anyways.
The manosphere exists primarily because of the lies that spewed out of the older generation plus the unwarranted and unfair aid given to females over males in the last 30 years. No real, tangible help or attempt to make things equal ever came from the boomer or late gen x generation or the so called elite class that aaron elevates over everyone else. If more was made to tell the truth and get rid of all unwarranted female advantages in school and elsewhere including family courts and divorce law, we wouldn't be seeing these types of articles bemoaning the situation created by the so called elite class.
It seems the educated classes of which you and I belong are more concerned with foreigners than their own sons. Even your previous article while critical of some parts of immigration was laden with the usual disclaimers that heap unwarranted praise on foreigners without any regard for the native male population. Also, divide men by race and see where things land.