Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Manipulated Man

123457»

Posts

  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    Fartacus wrote: »
    Irond Will wrote: »
    Fartacus wrote: »
    mrt144 wrote: »
    Professionally it absolutely can have consequences.

    Haha, wait, you're asserting that being a bachelor has negative career consequences?

    haha

    ahahahaha

    This thread has gotten so fucking surreal

    But, so this post isn't completely unproductive: do you care to explain how, exactly, this operates? Have you ever been in the working world? I don't think I've ever seen a man be ostracized for being a bachelor in my life.

    negative things are sometimes inferred about lifelong bachelors in, say, their 40s.

    this isn't uncommon

    like, back when being a "bachelor" was a code-word for being gay, maybe?

    Maybe it's a local thing but I've never seen it be a problem for anyone.

    Is your locale under a rock? Or have you never faced being patronized for clearly stating that you never want to have children and start a family. Seriously, it pisses me off that someone who claims to have insight into discrimination could so blithely dismiss discrimination when it's a first hand source. And then the audacity of claiming ignorance because you live in an area supposedly populated by nothing but philandering high status dickfaces is beyond the pale.

  • cloudeaglecloudeagle Registered User regular
    cloudeagle wrote: »
    It's withholding the entire relationship. It's answering stupid with stupider.

    Yeah, ok. At this point you're completely removed from any kind of reasonable definition of withholding. You're constructing a semantical shell to try to protect your ego from learning anything.

    I dunno, that's pretty semantical of you as well at this point. Just pretend he used the word "ending" instead of "witholding." Is his point now valid on that basis?

    The point is that 'withholding sex' is a term with a very definite meaning. When you say that someone is 'withholding sex', you know what it means. And it does not mean a breakup. It does not mean storming out during an argument, it doesn't mean cheating. It means in the course of a relationship, using sex as currency. Which, by the way, is not what he did.

    Cloudeagle is trying to say that the guy is 'withholding sex and affection' by his actions. He's trying to equate his actions with hers, since this is not a phrase you would use in another context. If you were fired, your employer is not 'withholding pay' (not necessarily). He's trying to draw upon existing emotions and prejudices to the term and assign them to him.

    So yeah, if he were to use the term 'ending', that would be fine, because then he wouldn't be trying to make a reference to her actions, and imply that HE IS THE REAL MONSTER by doing the same thing she does like a twilight zone episode full of irony. But sadly, that's not what he did, and so I'm just pointing out that he shouldn't do that because it's completely wrong. Like I said at the beginning, my issue is that people are just seeing that he did something silly in general, and are making inaccurate assumptions about what he did in particular.

    Again, why are they inaccurate? There's very little about what he's been saying that doesn't portray him as a massive goose.

    Zangief wrote:
    My low point came while I was crushing man's skull like sparrow's egg between my thighs. But then I thought to myself, "who else would crush man's skull like sparrow's egg between his thighs?"
    3DS: 0344-9335-6762
  • TheNomadicCircleTheNomadicCircle Registered User regular
    Well, I guess being a bachelor in the workplace is the heads and tails of a coin.

    The head is obviously you're an asset to the company? How? Well, family men are seen as having restrictons on them, like "I got to take Sally to practice today so I can't work till 5" while Bachelors are seen as having no restrictons. More likely, Family men are targeted for being overused and under paid at the workplace because, hey you've gotta family to feed so work or else. Bachelors in the workplace can get a lot more money and have a lot more freedom of finding that perfect job because of no restrictions on himself/herself.

    On the flip side, a bachelor is seen as aloof and not really CEO material or managerial material exactly because he/she can't settle down, therefore they have no sense of commitment and thus no promotion since they can't be trusted. Apart of the social outings that they are also excluded from no one takes them seriously as a married person.

    Of course both of these are not valid if the bachelor has their own business then its no issues all benefits I would think.

  • SmurphSmurph Registered User regular
    Yeah it is definitely a double edged sword. On one hand a bachelor can work longer hours when he needs to and distinguish himself from the married 9 to 5ers who have to put their families before work. On the other hand, when someone needs to put in the long hours or take the week long trip to Assdick, Alabama, the bachelor is likely to get the call whether he wants it or not. So you're more valuable because you can make work your #1 priority, but the down side is that your company sometimes assumes you've done so even if you'd rather be doing other things.

    As far as not getting promotions because of not being married? It really depends on the office. Some have a better mix of married and non-married people, and tend to not make a big deal about it. I've also noticed that people who are married but do not have kids tend to get treated more as single people than family people.

  • Pi-r8Pi-r8 Registered User regular
    I'm not sure about workplace discrimination, but I doubt we're going to see a POTUS who is a bachelor in our lifetimes. Everybody would think that there is something wrong with his character.

  • FartacusFartacus __BANNED USERS
    mrt144 wrote: »

    Is your locale under a rock? Or have you never faced being patronized for clearly stating that you never want to have children and start a family. Seriously, it pisses me off that someone who claims to have insight into discrimination could so blithely dismiss discrimination when it's a first hand source. And then the audacity of claiming ignorance because you live in an area supposedly populated by nothing but philandering high status dickfaces is beyond the pale.

    well to be fair you have been super vague about it

    and I've never seen any studies or anything of the like on the subject, so even if you did elaborate it'd still be pretty anecdotal

    I don't see what you're saying as any sort of common consensus, but you're stating it like I should take it on faith or I should already believe it because it's common knowledge.

  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    Fartacus wrote: »
    mrt144 wrote: »

    Is your locale under a rock? Or have you never faced being patronized for clearly stating that you never want to have children and start a family. Seriously, it pisses me off that someone who claims to have insight into discrimination could so blithely dismiss discrimination when it's a first hand source. And then the audacity of claiming ignorance because you live in an area supposedly populated by nothing but philandering high status dickfaces is beyond the pale.

    well to be fair you have been super vague about it

    and I've never seen any studies or anything of the like on the subject, so even if you did elaborate it'd still be pretty anecdotal

    I don't see what you're saying as any sort of common consensus, but you're stating it like I should take it on faith or I should already believe it because it's common knowledge.

    How many politicians are unmarried? How many of these people are without children? How many advertisements feature the politician surrounded by their family and espouse how they're a family man? Even within this smallish sample size you can clearly see the dynamics of bachelor discrimination at play.

    There haven't been any studies on it so it must not exist...

    And of course you don't see common consensus on it because everything that's been discussed in this thread is a hypothetical pro and con list instead of data and aggregated anecdotes.

  • taoist drunktaoist drunk Registered User
    Somebody's been watching the Departed.

    Ellerby: How is your wedding coming along?
    Colin Sullivan: Great, great; she's a doctor.
    Ellerby: That's outstanding.
    Colin Sullivan: Yeah.
    Ellerby: Marriage is an important part of getting ahead: lets people know you're not a homo; married guy seems more stable; people see the ring, they think at least somebody can stand the son of a bitch; ladies see the ring, they know immediately you must have some cash or your cock must work.

  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    Smurph wrote: »
    Yeah it is definitely a double edged sword. On one hand a bachelor can work longer hours when he needs to and distinguish himself from the married 9 to 5ers who have to put their families before work. On the other hand, when someone needs to put in the long hours or take the week long trip to Assdick, Alabama, the bachelor is likely to get the call whether he wants it or not. So you're more valuable because you can make work your #1 priority, but the down side is that your company sometimes assumes you've done so even if you'd rather be doing other things.

    As far as not getting promotions because of not being married? It really depends on the office. Some have a better mix of married and non-married people, and tend to not make a big deal about it. I've also noticed that people who are married but do not have kids tend to get treated more as single people than family people.

    The worst is the patronizing nature married people with children have towards you if you state you aren't going to have children. My fiancee get's it worse because she's female and there's the automatic supposition that women just want to have babies and if they don't right now, they'll eventually come around to the idea and that, in fact, they had reservations about children also. Fuck you bitch, my fiancee doesn't want a rotten crotch fruit running around pretending they're the most angelic beings on earth.

    I get it from my boss and a coworker sometimes and it's in no small part to them having 9 children between the two of them. Marriage isn't a means to an end for children, it's more than that and when you don't fit the mold of getting married, having a child, buying a house, etc etc you do face social consequences that aren't fair.

  • FartacusFartacus __BANNED USERS
    mrt144 wrote: »
    How many politicians are unmarried? How many of these people are without children? How many advertisements feature the politician surrounded by their family and espouse how they're a family man? Even within this smallish sample size you can clearly see the dynamics of bachelor discrimination at play.

    Actually, short of Presidency, not having children or a spouse isn't really a huge deal. It's not that common, true, but that's because being a childless bachelor at 40 is just less common in general. I actually think we could see a childless or divorced/current bachelor president in the near future. People really overestimate how much that sort of thing matters. I mean, we have an African American president, for chrissake. I think it's a bit less of a stretch for most of the country to have a dude who isn't married.
    There haven't been any studies on it so it must not exist...

    Not what I said. my point was that whereas with, say, female pay discrimination, or whatever, people are often fairly familiar with statistics and studies (on both sides of the issue) regarding the topic. So, you know, it's not a big deal if you don't cite anything because you can reasonably expect people to be familiar with data on the topic (and people will generally give you the same benefit of the doubt). That's just simply not true in this instance. Bemoan it all you want, but heterodox positions necessarily require more evidence. Welcome to argument?
    And of course you don't see common consensus on it because everything that's been discussed in this thread is a hypothetical pro and con list instead of data and aggregated anecdotes.

    I meant more broadly than this thread. See my above graf.

  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    Fartacus wrote: »
    mrt144 wrote: »
    How many politicians are unmarried? How many of these people are without children? How many advertisements feature the politician surrounded by their family and espouse how they're a family man? Even within this smallish sample size you can clearly see the dynamics of bachelor discrimination at play.

    Actually, short of Presidency, not having children or a spouse isn't really a huge deal. It's not that common, true, but that's because being a childless bachelor at 40 is just less common in general. I actually think we could see a childless or divorced/current bachelor president in the near future. People really overestimate how much that sort of thing matters. I mean, we have an African American president, for chrissake. I think it's a bit less of a stretch for most of the country to have a dude who isn't married.
    There haven't been any studies on it so it must not exist...

    Not what I said. my point was that whereas with, say, female pay discrimination, or whatever, people are often fairly familiar with statistics and studies (on both sides of the issue) regarding the topic. So, you know, it's not a big deal if you don't cite anything because you can reasonably expect people to be familiar with data on the topic (and people will generally give you the same benefit of the doubt). That's just simply not true in this instance. Bemoan it all you want, but heterodox positions necessarily require more evidence. Welcome to argument?
    And of course you don't see common consensus on it because everything that's been discussed in this thread is a hypothetical pro and con list instead of data and aggregated anecdotes.

    I meant more broadly than this thread. See my above graf.

    Your implicit assumption is that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

    http://www.amazon.com/Singled-Out-Singles-Stereotyped-Stigmatized/dp/0312340826/ref=ed_oe_p/102-4637341-6604139

    There is some material I haven't read about the subject of "singlism" but now might pick up because of this discussion.

  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    I'd also like to point out that being a bachelor and getting more work assigned to you isn't something that encourages an increase of stature in the workplace. It's something that is done because your free time isn't respected nearly as much as someone who has a family and if you're salaried you are getting paid less for the time you put in by working longer.

  • FartacusFartacus __BANNED USERS
    mrt144 wrote: »

    Your implicit assumption is that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

    No. Stop reading things into my posts that aren't there. My sole point was that you can't assume audience familiarity with your positions if they are relatively heterodox, or under-studied/under-publicized.

  • KastanjKastanj __BANNED USERS
    5 Reasons Being Single Sucks Even More Than You Thought



    Reason 5: You get less money when working, because you won't spend it on Bieber concerts and plastic shit
    Reason 4: You work more, because the normies get sympathy from bosses
    Reason 3: The government hates you, and denies you plenty tax breaks
    Reason 2: People start thinking you are a pariah
    Reason 1: You die sooner and have a worse immune system

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Sign In or Register to comment.