Hamster in overdrive

I was going to write something criticizing this piece in The Atlantic, but Dalrock wrote a good response. And Ilkka summarized it in a sentence, saying it "hilariously confirms everything that Roissy ever wrote, especially his observation that the sixties ‘sexual revolution’ was really just a return to the sexual organization of the Pleistocene."

I’d like to add a few points to Dalrock’s able response.

Ms Bolick’s piece is particularly frustrating because – in several cases – she seems to understand the issues at hand.

For example, she makes several realistic assessments of sexual market value. She also notes that the lifestyle she comes close to supporting has been prevalent in the black community for decades, with devastating results. And yet . . . she can’t stop the hamster.

She claims that she has yet to decide whether or not she’s having children, for example. Newsflash: if you’re 39 and single, you’ve decided not to have children.

The article concludes with a strange discussion of alternative lifestyles. She seems to be suggesting that women should get together and live in whorehouses, sorry, I mean communal houses and collectively raise their bastard children.

Truly, the power of the hamster is awesome to behold.

Al Fin makes perhaps the most important point: "When too many people in a society grow old and childless, the potential — the future — of that society withers on the vine. The generations of the unborn begin to haunt the false over-cheeriness of the singles gathering in bars and pubs."

7 Responses to Hamster in overdrive

  1. rightsaidfred says:

    Thanks for the links. I started reading the Atlantic story, and figured it would be good for some internet discussion.

    In the Utopian novel Walden II, women had kids as soon as they were able, 15 or so, then had their college and careers after the kids were launched. Makes more sense than having Kate Bolick complain about the lack of quality men.

    • sconzey says:

      In the Utopian novel Walden II, women had kids as soon as they were able, 15 or so, then had their college and careers after the kids were launched. Makes more sense than having Kate Bolick complain about the lack of quality men.

      This is pretty much what happens with middle class girls in India. They marry young, pop out as many kids as they want, then get sterilised and go to University and get a job. It’s the rational strategy if you want to both: a) have kids and b) have a career, given that there’s a natural time limit on the first of those two.

      That many western women who claim to want the same things do not in fact employ this strategy does seem to indicate that they also want to c) exploit their peak physical attractiveness to slut around with the alpha males. Indian women employing this strategy spend their peak of physical attractiveness married and raising kids. I’m sure Bolick would find this mindset an anathema.

      • Handle says:

        I’ve actually heard a few women, both young and old, hit upon this as an “independent discovery” and say they wish they could / would have pursued such a strategy. When I ask why they don’t / didn’t, the answer is twofold.

        First, they and their families are being brainwashed from birth to believe in a certain false consciousness of the modern-women-having-it-all life-path, which is supposed to lead to fulfillment and contentedness and equality, etc.. I call such an “optimal life-strategy story” a “happiness model”, and this one is being aggressively sold to young women without contention, competition, or socially-acceptable alternative.

        Second, and relatedly, is the social pressure to conform and do what everyone else is doing. They fear that to make this life choice in our society is to set themselves apart from the herd and make it likely they’ll be ostracized as a weirdo and be put at other professional and social disadvantages. If the only way to succeed in any particular profession is to “be like a man” and get on a particular family-unfriendly conveyor belt of an education and career path from right out of high school then many young women will make that choice. Being the first to step out of the mainstream and stop sharing common experiences with your class peers is profoundly challenging for many women.

        My own opinion is that the Indian Strategy is the right one. Jack Welch said that “There’s no such thing as work-life balance. There are work-life choices, and you make them, and they have consequences.” I think he’s right. Most women aren’t happy trying (and often failing) to “have it all”, and a compartmentalization of one’s lifetime into distinct family and work phases would probably make a lot of people happier.

        But, you know, then everything wouldn’t be exactly identical between the genders, and that can never be permitted to exist.

      • K(yle) says:

        Third, women don’t want what they say they want and Sconzey up above is correct. They view family obligations, in particular to a single husband/father of children as a serious impingement of their ‘freedom’. They aren’t choosing work over ‘life’, they are choosing short-term hedonism over basically everything else.

      • sconzey says:

        @Handle: That’s a good point, never attribute to rational malice that which could equally be explained by irrational incompetence. 😛

        I was talking to a female friend of mine the other day — lovely girl, pretty good with an SLR but not what you’d call academic — and she said : “Mainly I just want to settle down with a good man and have kids.”
        And I thought: “That’s unusual…”
        Then she continued: “So I’m going to go to University…”

  2. Matt Weber says:

    The problem is careerism. Everyone thinks that a rewarding job is the key to happiness. The main problem is that there aren’t enough rewarding jobs. The second problem is that family life is always subordinated to career, because your boss won’t let you get away with what your family will.

  3. Fake Herzog says:


    Glad to have you back. I check your blog every weekday and miss you when you aren’t regularly posting. Here is my take on the execrable Kate:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: