|
Men Fear to Buy a House, but Women Buy by Rabbi David Eidensohn - 2/12/06 Single men fear, says a front page story on the New York Times of 2/12/06, to buy a house. The headline announces, "For Men, a Fear of Commitment." The article asks, "Why are single women twice as likely to be home buyers?" Single women bought 21 of homes recently, while men bought only 9 percent. One explanation of the trend is that men don't want to buy a house, because they "gravitate to a lifestyle not unlike that enjoyed by fraternity brothers: relatively free of commitments and rife with male companionship." Let's pause a moment and digest this, if you have a strong stomach. If 21 percent of new home purchases are by women and nine by men, we have a total of 30 percent, almost one third of houses, by single people. It used to be that we bought homes for the family, not to remain single. Now, single is forever, and people, single, buy homes. Men don't want to buy a house, because they want to be completely free, with no commitments. I used to think that modern men would not commit to a wife and family, and that was bad. Now, they won't even buy a house, even if they can afford it, because they don't like "commitment." Phew. This is the result of a few decades of gender war. Men want nothing to do with women, and women have enough money to buy a home and live their alone. Where will children come from? They won't, unless they are the non-marital type. We used to support retirees and the elderly when sixteen workers, younger people, paid premiums to support one retiree. Now, we are closing in on parity, three or less people for one worker. Of course, this means the end of Social Security, and paid retirement. Where do the retirees go? The government can't afford to care for them, and they have few children. This country is ready for the pits. We worry about terrorism, but without that we have plenty to worry about. In just a few years, or a generation or so, it can all come unstuck. No commitment by men means no family and no family means no demographic stability, and no continuity. Ultimately, the unnatural state of affairs caused by printing trillions of dollars with no natural backing will lead to the fiscal and family abyss, and there is no way to deal with that. The Clinton Administration did a study on the increasing reluctance of men to marry. Men wanted fun. When men wanted fun, women didn't want to kill themselves for family, and the feminist movement was born. Women then became men, and men became children. Women work to make money and buy homes, whereby men want to pretend they are still in college. Fun. Not family. The fifties, with television and fun, destroyed manliness in America. When men went to fun, and saw women as toys, women rebelled and there was nobody to talk to about having families. Our fiscal disaster of deficits and care for the elderly is the result. As women became angrier, and gender war erupted big time, the culture, courts, and colleges sides with the women. Family courts are disasters for men. But all a woman has to do is to go to court and sign a form and she can get her husband thrown out of the house, and she then becomes the de factor parent of custody. Nobody protests this. Women are served, and too bad for the men. Colleges batter away at male self respect until men are increasingly refusing to go to college. One college started and outreach program to attract men. Keep it up, America. Destroy your men by teaching them fun, destroy your women by teaching them hate, and just keep printing the money. If we have to, we will print children, and when they cry for love and attention, we will print parents. Right? So the trend is for real, and it will to the destruction of America as we know it, the land of love, family, and security. Men want fun, women hate men, men hate women, both pursue their interests with little time for children. When children come into the world they arrive just in time for the divorce court, because fun people can't survive a home. Is that why men fear to buy a house? Does it remind them of the home they once had when they were little, but can't have for themselves, and the next generation?
|
