/lit/ - Literature

>>14550017
>Why would male enrollment in higher education matter for women? Because women, on average, prefer educated men.

Hahahah what? This is a stupid set of sentences.

>>14487517
Because they're coping with the fact that men are the utility elements of the human species and their value, including their repressed assessment of themselves and their extrinsic material reward/social status, is directly related to what they can do or provide for others.
Women have a sort of inherent value but it's pretty much the same for them too, but they'll never have to deal with nobody ever wanting them and complete, utter, desolate isolation unless they really fuck up.
Not trying to sound like an incel. This is natural and normal and permanent, the response is to stop being a self-centered child like you know you should.

>>12540373
Most people are hypocrites and will abandon any principles in the face of actual challenge.
If someone claims to be pro-inclusion, pro-cultural diversity, etc etc, they will probably stop once that process actually challenges something they care about.
For example:
>Tech executives will stop being libertarian once the USA stops insuring their losses and giving them exclusive tax favors
>SJW feminists will stop being pro-diversity when a young, pretty, traditional woman gets positive attention for something feminine
>bumpkin republicans will defend family values until family values includes not spending family money on guns dip or cigarettes
>Progs will be in favor of financial redistribution until the 1% are tapped out and the system begins needing to pull money and status from the aspirational 15%
Everybody thinks their rules are for somebody else. This, to me, is why it's best to be a pragmatist.