Discontent Towards Boomers

[sangheilios]

The Greatest Generation (aka GI Generation) were the 1910s-early 1920s births. Most of them died off by the early 2010s.

Boomers are 59-77 years old right now. So your area is likely Boomer retirees with some remnant of the Silent Generation (late 1920s-1945) in there.



The median age of a US House member in January 2023 was 57.9, which made the median U.S. House rep a borderline Boomer/Gen X'er. The median age of a US Senator is 65.3 years old as of January 2023, which is squarely in the Boomer range.

House gets younger, Senate gets older: A look at the age and generation of lawmakers in the 118th Congress

The median age of voting House lawmakers is 57.9 years, while the new Senate’s median age is 65.3 years.

www.pewresearch.org

In business, a lot of Boomers have retired in the last 10 years, so business leaders are trending more Gen X than Boomers now. Business leaders tend to be younger than US legislators.



Accurate



When an earlier Boomer finished high school between 1965-1975, a college education was less necessary and less commonly obtained. For those who finished high school between 1965-1975, they could more easily mold a career without a college education. By the time the Millennials started to graduate high school around 2000, the path for a typical high school graduate was some McJob at McDonald's or Walmart. Boomers had the option of having a viable life without a college degree or getting ahead with inexpensive degrees. For Millennials or Gen Z, the options are more of college, McJob, or maybe a useful trade certification. Parents and high schools in general have done a poor job promoting trade school paths and a lot of this falls on crap Boomer parenting.

Fewer Boomers have bachelor's degrees or higher as compared to Gen X, Millennials, and likely Gen Z in a few years.



Both true



Boomers liked liberalism and feminism in the 1960s-1970s because male Boomers thought that they'd get their penises wet more often. Boomers were the first larger generation to benefit from this idea. These ideas of liberalism and feminism have more origins in the Silent Generation. The Silent Generation was born during the 1930s and early 1940s. During the 1930s, people didn't want to have kids because they couldn't afford to have kids then. There were fewer female birth control methods then. The diaphragm was popular for females in those days and condoms for males did exist.

The earliest beneficiaries of the birth control pill being introduced in 1960 were Silent Generation young adults. Most Boomers were too young to be on birth control pills until at least the late 1960s and it wasn't until the 1970s that the widest grouping of Boomer females started to use birth control pills.

In the earlier days of feminism and liberalism of the 1960-1974 era, late Silent Generation and Boomers wanted to have their fun for a few years of sex. Instead of getting married at 18-19, they wanted to get married at 22-23. And at 22-23, they wanted a few more years of childless couple fun times before kids.

The consequences of liberal, feminism, birth control, etc. wouldn't really be felt in the sexual marketplace until the later generations. The 50th percentile Boomer guy got 1-2 more sexual partners before marrying some 50th percentile Boomer woman whereas the 50th percentile Millennial guy got virtually ignored by the 50th percentile Millennial female.



Yes



The success of most Millennials will depend upon how much money their Boomer parents leave them.

There's been a lot of talk about the transfer of wealth coming in the not too distant future. Average life expectancy in the U.S is around early 80s, and actually on the decline now. Many boomers are already close to 70 even 80, so many of them are going to start slowly passing over the next 10-20 years. For white boomers, the vast majority in this demographic are going to be at least middle class, have homes that are paid off, 401ks, etc. Naturally, this will go to their children.

However, I've seen some polling data that showed a decent percentage had 0 intention of leaving an inheritance, which is something that rhymes with some of my observations. I've actually recently been hearing stories of people I know or know of that decided to not leave inheritance for their children, I'm not privy to the back stories of these individuals so I can't elaborate as to why this is. Granted, I don't think this is going to constitute the majority of boomers but it's something interesting to consider.

As for boomer males, I'm fully convinced that the average man in this generation would have been a a complete incel if they were young men today. In previous generations, people dated, married and ultimately had children with those that they had some sort of proximity or connection with that were around their level. An average man that had a job and was of normal weight did not have trouble finding a healthy weight, childless and normal woman to date. In today's world, many otherwise average men are struggling to get anything, let alone something around their level. This is a reason why PUA nonsense and all of these other youtube channels and followings have grown so much over the last several years. We've discussed this before many times, it's going to be a crazy century and most of us posting on this thread will live to see most of it.

 

[Bigpapa]

There's been a lot of talk about the transfer of wealth coming in the not too distant future. Average life expectancy in the U.S is around early 80s, and actually on the decline now. Many boomers are already close to 70 even 80, so many of them are going to start slowly passing over the next 10-20 years. For white boomers, the vast majority in this demographic are going to be at least middle class, have homes that are paid off, 401ks, etc. Naturally, this will go to their children.

However, I've seen some polling data that showed a decent percentage had 0 intention of leaving an inheritance, which is something that rhymes with some of my observations. I've actually recently been hearing stories of people I know or know of that decided to not leave inheritance for their children, I'm not privy to the back stories of these individuals so I can't elaborate as to why this is. Granted, I don't think this is going to constitute the majority of boomers but it's something interesting to consider.

As for boomer males, I'm fully convinced that the average man in this generation would have been a a complete incel if they were young men today. In previous generations, people dated, married and ultimately had children with those that they had some sort of proximity or connection with that were around their level. An average man that had a job and was of normal weight did not have trouble finding a healthy weight, childless and normal woman to date. In today's world, many otherwise average men are struggling to get anything, let alone something around their level. This is a reason why PUA nonsense and all of these other youtube channels and followings have grown so much over the last several years. We've discussed this before many times, it's going to be a crazy century and most of us posting on this thread will live to see most of it.

Makes no sense what you are saying

Quite sure that every generation had their incels, just that back then there were no forums like this

Apparently historically only like 40% of men had children vs 80% of women


"[Historically] more of the women were reproducing than the men," study researcher Mark Stoneking, a professor of biological anthropology at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, told Live Science in an email. "This often happens in human societies, because not all men are able to afford wives, or sometimes a few men will have many wives."

“In terms of standardized educational level and income among peers, social status positively predicts men’s mating and reproductive success in contemporary China. However, while a higher social status increases the probability of having at least one child, it does not predict a greater number of children for men. A status difference between spouses, on the other hand, consistently predicts having children. Thus, the higher the husband’s status relative to his wife, the greater the likelihood of having the first, second, and third children. The current results suggest that when examining the effect of status on mating and reproduction, social status and status within a family should be considered. We also stress the importance of exploring the potential proximate mechanisms by which a status difference influences childbearing decisions”

More Women Have Reproduced Than Men

A new study shows that more women than men have contributed to the human gene pool

www.smithsonianmag.com

8,000 Years Ago, 17 Women Reproduced for Every One Man

An analysis of modern DNA uncovers a rough dating scene after the advent of agriculture.

psmag.com

Social status predicts different mating and reproductive success for men and women in China: evidence from the 2010–2017 CGSS data - Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology

Abstract Evolutionary psychological theories posit that higher social status is conducive to men’s reproductive success. Extant research from historical records, small scale societies, as well as industrialized societies, support this hypothesis. However, the relationship between status...

link.springer.com

 

[sangheilios]

Makes no sense what you are saying

Quite sure that every generation had their incels, just that back then there were no forums like this

Apparently historically only like 40% of men had children vs 80% of women


"[Historically] more of the women were reproducing than the men," study researcher Mark Stoneking, a professor of biological anthropology at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, told Live Science in an email. "This often happens in human societies, because not all men are able to afford wives, or sometimes a few men will have many wives."

You have no idea what you are talking about and taking things way out of context.

When they are referring to "historically" they are referring to thousands and thousands of years ago, well before the advent of advanced societies. We are talking about stone age times here, ok. There have been many stats that showed a substantial number of skeletal remains from this time period showed signs of trauma, indicating that they had violent deaths. This could have been from wild animals or other people. Naturally men are going to be the ones at a greater risk of having a violent death, and that is because they were the ones that would have had encounters with dangerous animals, hostile strangers, etc. This naturally limits the number of men that end up reproducing, thus why you are seeing those numbers. If you are imagining a society where literally only a handful of men are reproducing and the majority of men are going without you are delusional. You probably aren't even aware of this, but there was a major bottleneck event that occurred somewhere around 70,000 years ago with anatomically modern humans, and I'm sure there were others as well.

I would also say that the idea of marriage as we know it probably stemmed from this. Imagine a society where only a handful of men are reproducing and the rest of the men get nothing. This would lead to a societal collapse and would not be sustainable at all.

In civilized times with advanced societies, it is and was NOT the norm to have large numbers of men who were unmarried and childless. Look at more recent times, so let's use boomers and their parents as an example. The WW2 generation virtually all got married and had children, being a bachelor was not the norm and actively frowned upon. A really good example of this is the movie "Marty" with Ernest Borgnine, he is in his mid 30s, unmarried and receives a lot of negativity for being so. This is a reflection of the cultural norm at that time. With generations before this and after this was the case, where it is unusual for a man to be a lifelong bachelor. However, today we have not just many men but MAJORITY of young men being single and even sexless, there are tons of stats to back this up. What we are seeing with young men is not the norm at all historically and we are in uncharted territory. There are tons of stats to back this up and it's something that's even been popping up a lot recently even on mainstream media.

 

[zekko]

In 2025, the government will reduce the amount that one can gift tax free to their heirs by 50%.

Well, that's horsesh!t. Doesn't affect me though.

 

[Bigpapa]

You have no idea what you are talking about and taking things way out of context.

When they are referring to "historically" they are referring to thousands and thousands of years ago, well before the advent of advanced societies. We are talking about stone age times here, ok. There have been many stats that showed a substantial number of skeletal remains from this time period showed signs of trauma, indicating that they had violent deaths. This could have been from wild animals or other people. Naturally men are going to be the ones at a greater risk of having a violent death, and that is because they were the ones that would have had encounters with dangerous animals, hostile strangers, etc. This naturally limits the number of men that end up reproducing, thus why you are seeing those numbers. If you are imagining a society where literally only a handful of men are reproducing and the majority of men are going without you are delusional. You probably aren't even aware of this, but there was a major bottleneck event that occurred somewhere around 70,000 years ago with anatomically modern humans, and I'm sure there were others as well.

In civilized times with advanced societies, it is and was NOT the norm to have large numbers of men who were unmarried and childless. Look at more recent times, so let's use boomers and their parents as an example. The WW2 generation virtually all got married and had children, being a bachelor was not the norm and actively frowned upon. A really good example of this is the movie "Marty" with Ernest Borgnine, he is in his mid 30s, unmarried and receives a lot of negativity for being so. This is a reflection of the cultural norm at that time. With generations before this and after this was the case, where it is unusual for a man to be a lifelong bachelor. However, today we have not just many men but MAJORITY of young men being single and even sexless, there are tons of stats to back this up. What we are seeing with young men is not the norm at all historically and we are in uncharted territory. There are tons of stats to back this up and it's something that's even been popping up a lot recently even on mainstream media.

One is historically, one is from recent times and one is a scientific article from 2010

The idea is that is irrelevant if it is 40% or 60% or 80% of men father a child

The idea is that there were always incels and you do not have any right to be entitled to sleep with women or have children. It always has been the case


Also CDC says that a woman has on average 1.3 children while a guy has 0.9

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr179.pdf

And this article says that the male reproductive success is 5 times higher for men vs women

Variance in male lifetime reproductive success and estimation of the degree of polygyny in a primate - PMC

The degree of polygyny is predicted to influence the strength of direct male–male competition, leading to a high variance in male lifetime reproductive success and to reproduction limited to the prime period of adulthood. Here, we explore the ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Nature is cruel but fair

So all this entitlement around sleeping with women and fathering children has nothing to with reality. You can go back in time but you will see that more or less the same problem will hit you in the face

 

[sangheilios]

One is historically, one is from recent times and one is a scientific article from 2010

The idea is that is irrelevant if it is 40% or 60% or 80% of men father a child

The idea is that there were always incels and you do not have any right to be entitled to sleep with women or have children. It always has been the case

You clearly don't understand what you are reading. Just because only a handful of men did not actually have children does not mean that the majority of men were incels just hanging around. Again, if you are imagining a society where literally a handful of guys are having sex and the MAJORITY of the men are hanging around you are insane. This has never been the norm and would create a huge degree of conflict within a society, again this is probably where the rules around marriage as we know it came around.

The easiest explanation for this is simple, which is men are the ones that would have died in wars, been killed by other men or perhaps by a wild animal. Men also would have had a much more dangerous lifestyle overall, where they were at risk for serious injury. Naturally, there are fewer men that are reaching adulthood and therefore reproduce at a lower rate.

You also aren't factoring in that much of this was not really something had happened naturally and may have been forced. Imagine a tribe or group that comes into some sort of territory that has rich grounds that is occupied by another group. They would come in, kill off the men and then take the women in. These women didn't choose some prehistoric "Chad" they basically were forced into reproducing with the men that were of this other group. Within this other group there were not a bunch of men hanging around with nothing lol. As I'm writing this it reminds me a lot of the plains Indians.

 

[sangheilios]

One is historically, one is from recent times and one is a scientific article from 2010

The idea is that is irrelevant if it is 40% or 60% or 80% of men father a child

The idea is that there were always incels and you do not have any right to be entitled to sleep with women or have children. It always has been the case


Also CDC says that a woman has on average 1.3 children while a guy has 0.9

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr179.pdf

And this article says that the male reproductive success is 5 times higher for men vs women

Variance in male lifetime reproductive success and estimation of the degree of polygyny in a primate - PMC

The degree of polygyny is predicted to influence the strength of direct male–male competition, leading to a high variance in male lifetime reproductive success and to reproduction limited to the prime period of adulthood. Here, we explore the ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Nature is cruel but fair

So all this entitlement around sleeping with women and fathering children has nothing to with reality. You can go back in time but you will see that more or less the same problem will hit you in the face

And that CDC article is from right in the middle of when all this Tinder **** started lol. Of course the average woman has more children on average, just about every single woman wants to have children and can easily find a man to impregnate her or she can get a sperm donor lol. None of this **** we are seeing in our world is nature lol, this has never been the norm in the west for many centuries.

 

[SW15]

As for boomer males, I'm fully convinced that the average man in this generation would have been a a complete incel if they were young men today. In previous generations, people dated, married and ultimately had children with those that they had some sort of proximity or connection with that were around their level. An average man that had a job and was of normal weight did not have trouble finding a healthy weight, childless and normal woman to date. In today's world, many otherwise average men are struggling to get anything, let alone something around their level.

One of the most important points and few Boomers acknowledge their Boomer privilege with this.

Boomer privilege is real.

 

[sangheilios]

One of the most important points and few Boomers acknowledge their Boomer privilege with this.

Boomer privilege is real.

I don't even really think it's because there is something different about them compared to their sons, etc. It's pretty obvious that the expectations women have today are substantially loftier compared to previous generations of women, including boomer females.

The average man born in the 50s or 60s did not struggle to find a woman that was of a healthy weight, childless and sober to potentially date and marry. It's not because all boomer men were Chads, it's just that the expectations of them were more realistic. Boomer females weren't holding off for some guy that is 6'+, athletically built, handsome and had some 8" penis that drove a Corvette and was a millionaire lol.

The trend is clear, what we are seeing started around 2008, which roughly coincides with the recession and social media taking off. However, we see this trend accelerate around 2014-2015, which was when Tinder and other dating apps burst onto the scene, which radically changed the dating market.

I don't think privilege is the right term to use here, they simply were in their prime years where the game was much more simple and easier to play.

 

[Bigpapa]

And that CDC article is from right in the middle of when all this Tinder **** started lol. Of course the average woman has more children on average, just about every single woman wants to have children and can easily find a man to impregnate her or she can get a sperm donor lol. None of this **** we are seeing in our world is nature lol, this has never been the norm in the west for many centuries.

Dunno man, never heard of women getting a sperm donor. Is more like a news article
Or movie than an real
Life thing .could happen but is very unlikely. Maybe is a thing where you live

Also not my experience or anyone I know with tinder. Most girls never really go out with a guy from tinder. Most girls get frustrated by tinder and delete it in a couple of days. Too many low value guys they say

Everyone agrees though that when it happens it is usually way bellow your smv, which raises the question on why to go out with her in the first place if you can get a smarter/better looking girl via other methods

Dunno man, your world different than mine ( even though is the same )

 

[SW15]

I don't think privilege is the right term to use here, they simply were in their prime years where the game was much more simple and easier to play.

Boomer privilege applies to game, inexpensive college tuition, more meaningful college degrees, and better career options regardless of education attainment.

It's pretty obvious that the expectations women have today are substantially loftier compared to previous generations of women, including boomer females.

The average man born in the 50s or 60s did not struggle to find a woman that was of a healthy weight, childless and sober to potentially date and marry. It's not because all boomer men were Chads, it's just that the expectations of them were more realistic. Boomer females weren't holding off for some guy that is 6'+, athletically built, handsome and had some 8" penis that drove a Corvette and was a millionaire lol.

Yes, Boomer females had more realistic expectations. A 50th percentile Boomer female was ok with a 50th percentile Boomer male. A 50th percentile Millennial female expects a 90th percentile Millennial male.

 

[sangheilios]

Dunno man, never heard of women getting a sperm donor. Is more like a news article
Or movie than an real
Life thing .could happen but is very unlikely. Maybe is a thing where you live

Also not my experience or anyone I know with tinder. Most girls never really go out with a guy from tinder. Most girls get frustrated by tinder and delete it in a couple of days. Too many low value guys they say

The point is that IF a woman wanted to have a child, or maybe more, it is incredibly easy for her to do so.

I'd also add a caveat here, which is that single motherhood in the U.S. is a huge issue. The highest birth rates right now are actually from the poor and uneducated, which I find hilarious in many ways. It's a cultural norm in black America to be a single mother and often have multiple children with different men. However, this is a trend that we also see in ghetto Hispanic America and been spilling over into white America as well. I could see the reproduction within these groups being very different than what we traditionally see.

This actually reminds me of an interesting stat, which is that the average IQ in America has been decreasing. The theory behind this is the ones that are reproducing at the highest rates are those I'm describing above lol.

 

[sangheilios]

Yes, Boomer females had more realistic expectations. A 50th percentile Boomer female was ok with a 50th percentile Boomer male. A 50th percentile Millennial female expects a 90th percentile Millennial male.

See, and this is the biggest issue with the modern dating market right now. I've been seeing a lot of posts online and even youtube channels discussing this recently. It's something I've actually seen for myself in the real world also, even experienced it myself as well.

 

[Bigpapa]

This actually reminds me of an interesting stat, which is that the average IQ in America has been decreasing. The theory behind this is the ones that are reproducing at the highest rates are those I'm describing above lol.

Being poor does not mean that you are stupid, especially if you live or came from an underdeveloped country where education is not as easy to get. Lower iq most likely has to do with the consumption of junk food

Also, stating that a woman is poor or from the ghetto that a guy would not bang or date her is a big stretch. Guys do not care at all if she is poor or not, if she is educated or not, etc . Desperate guys go to the middle of nowhere to get some low quality p8ssy

Really doubt that the people you described would take the time to respond to a survey from CDC, but whatever works for you

You can always look at the genealogy of your family and see how many of the guys managed to procreate, or even better at people that you have went to school with

 

[I_have_BDE]

The Greatest Generation (aka GI Generation) were the 1910s-early 1920s births. Most of them died off by the early 2010s.

Boomers are 59-77 years old right now. So your area is likely Boomer retirees with some remnant of the Silent Generation (late 1920s-1945) in there.



The median age of a US House member in January 2023 was 57.9, which made the median U.S. House rep a borderline Boomer/Gen X'er. The median age of a US Senator is 65.3 years old as of January 2023, which is squarely in the Boomer range.

House gets younger, Senate gets older: A look at the age and generation of lawmakers in the 118th Congress

The median age of voting House lawmakers is 57.9 years, while the new Senate’s median age is 65.3 years.

www.pewresearch.org

In business, a lot of Boomers have retired in the last 10 years, so business leaders are trending more Gen X than Boomers now. Business leaders tend to be younger than US legislators.



Accurate



When an earlier Boomer finished high school between 1965-1975, a college education was less necessary and less commonly obtained. For those who finished high school between 1965-1975, they could more easily mold a career without a college education. By the time the Millennials started to graduate high school around 2000, the path for a typical high school graduate was some McJob at McDonald's or Walmart. Boomers had the option of having a viable life without a college degree or getting ahead with inexpensive degrees. For Millennials or Gen Z, the options are more of college, McJob, or maybe a useful trade certification. Parents and high schools in general have done a poor job promoting trade school paths and a lot of this falls on crap Boomer parenting.

Fewer Boomers have bachelor's degrees or higher as compared to Gen X, Millennials, and likely Gen Z in a few years.



Both true



Boomers liked liberalism and feminism in the 1960s-1970s because male Boomers thought that they'd get their penises wet more often. Boomers were the first larger generation to benefit from this idea. These ideas of liberalism and feminism have more origins in the Silent Generation. The Silent Generation was born during the 1930s and early 1940s. During the 1930s, people didn't want to have kids because they couldn't afford to have kids then. There were fewer female birth control methods then. The diaphragm was popular for females in those days and condoms for males did exist.

The earliest beneficiaries of the birth control pill being introduced in 1960 were Silent Generation young adults. Most Boomers were too young to be on birth control pills until at least the late 1960s and it wasn't until the 1970s that the widest grouping of Boomer females started to use birth control pills.

In the earlier days of feminism and liberalism of the 1960-1974 era, late Silent Generation and Boomers wanted to have their fun for a few years of sex. Instead of getting married at 18-19, they wanted to get married at 22-23. And at 22-23, they wanted a few more years of childless couple fun times before kids.

The consequences of liberal, feminism, birth control, etc. wouldn't really be felt in the sexual marketplace until the later generations. The 50th percentile Boomer guy got 1-2 more sexual partners before marrying some 50th percentile Boomer woman whereas the 50th percentile Millennial guy got virtually ignored by the 50th percentile Millennial female.



Yes



The success of most Millennials will depend upon how much money their Boomer parents leave them.

However, back in the 60s and 70s if you did obtain a college degree it put you on the top and over most people and got you even more money. Today having a standard bachelors degree is not as regarded because everyone is going to college these days. Even with a college degree you're still in heavy competition. In the 60s you'd have it a lot easier.

 

[zekko]

No, the hate is real. It isn’t a trend. Young folks generally have sincere contempt for the older generations. That contempt was earned, by how the boomers fvcked over those that came after them.

You realize why baby boomers are called that, right? Because they were born during a time when there were a LOT of children being born. Did you ever stop to think that perhaps the size of that generation alone was always going to be a drain on resources, especially if it were followed by smaller generations? Maybe the biggest fault of the boomers is that they didn't have enough children. The other main factor at play here is that the size of the government is too large, so the large generation drained the social programs. It's not like they set out to intentionally fvck the next generation.

 

[zekko]

Let me throw this in here: Some resent boomers because they say it was easier to get a date in my day. Well, that is probably true. And the reason is because in the days when feminism hadn't completely taken over yet, there was still something called gender roles. Men and women were recognized to be different, and had different roles to play. So the feminine could still be attracted to the masculine. The guy didn't have to be over six feet with six pack abs and a six figure income. But boomers aren't the ones who want to get rid of gender, we're fighting against it. It's the younger kids who want to get rid of that, aside from the leftist professors and assorted screwballs.

Also, don't hate the player, hate the game.

 

[CornbreadFed]

Going slightly off topic of Boomers, Me and @SW15 are the same generation, but our birth years made a huge difference between graduating college during a recession or Job boom. Same thing for Gen Z right now, if you graduated before the pandemic, you are way better off than someone graduating afterwards. Boomers can cry about bootstraps and hard work all they want to because that probably worked for them, but we will never relate to it because that was mostly irrelevant to our generations.

 

[Millard Fillmore]

Dividing people into generations and assigning them characteristics is retarded. It's mostly based on marketing and mostly specific to the US. Totally fukking arbitrary.

Old and young people bytching about each other is nothing new.

 

[RangerMIke]

The younger generation is a mess and every generation is in a situation from the one before it. Dwelling on it is why this generation sucks so much. You're not confined to the USA, there is an entire world out there. You can thank a boomer for the internet and your ability to relocate so quickly. You can't honestly tell me that you expected that things would always be hunky dory? If you really think that Biden is controlling the USA, I have a crash retrieval program to sell you.

I didn't say Biden controlled the USA.

But again... if the younger generation is a mess, then who raised them?