I guess if you're standing on the deck of a naval vessel, it doesn't matter much what you're wearing

This is a 45 minute long video. Post a tldw

If the enemy thinks your ship is already sunk, they're less likely to try and sink it

I'm sure there's people out there that this is genuinely great advice for, but at least from my perspective, it just reads like an extremely long way to say almost nothing. "be out there and be confident" is like the most basic possible dating advice, ever, and is really only useful if you're completely off track on things. And to some extent, I feel like the article did itself a disservice by making it entirely gender neutral, because like it or not, society still tends to be highly gendered, and the problems people face in dating tend to be different along gendered lines.

The problem here isn't that they have unattainable standards, it's that a lot of men aren't putting in effort to meet those basic standards, for whatever reason.

Are men obligated to meet those standards if they have no interest in doing so? Men don't just exist for the sake of giving women someone to date, after all. And while the article was (I hesitate to say intentionally) vague about specifics, one thing it mentioned multiple times was holding a college degree. It's hardly what I'd call "basic standards", considering it takes a huge amount of time, and a fair deal of money to achieve. Of all the men I've talked with, myself included, that "standard" doesn't seem to be prevalent, with the closest thing being "I guess it would be cool".

At what point does the principle of "if everywhere you go smells like shit" start applying to these women who date but seem to never find a man that meet their standards? It only seems reasonable if nobody meets the standards, that the standards may be a major part of the issue.

And I don't mean to say that women should just settle for men they don't like, but "just stay single" is always an option, one men are told repeatedly whenever they struggle with relationships.

I would hesitate to draw conclusions from something like that. Both me and a lot of the other men I know just flat out skipped basically every assignment like that if it didn't give enough points to be worth the effort, from middle school up through college.

Beyond that, it just seems like a shitty assignment as a whole. Because either a) it's done under an assumption that their day as the opposite sex would be spontaneous, and thus would have very few relevant differences from their normal days (and we can easily guess those differences) or b) it's done under an assumption of having always been the opposite sex, in which case it would just be an exercise in the butterfly effect, since huge amounts of things would be different, to the point that any generic hypothetical day would work.

All this is to say, it's a prime assignment for skipping

This video is over an hour long. At least hit a mild tl;dw, if nothing else.

Not even getting into substantive issues, the people who loudly proclaim their feminism online are usually total fucking jackasses since honest people see little need to hide behind the concept of "feminism", as if it's a shield against criticism.

Overall, a more substantive survey would just be better. Or really anything beyond "self ID with a broad and contentious label".

I mean it makes sense. Feminism has become quite the loaded term as of recent, and young people are going to be a lot more distanced from the earlier wages of feminism.

Is this specifically a reference to gate, or have we just accidentally come to the exact same end point independently?

Looking back, I'm really glady middle and high schools made participation in extracurricular sports a requirement, even though I hated it at the time. Because even though I felt like the lazy slob compared to a lot of the people on other teams we played, once I got to college and beyond, especially considering I'm in a technical field, I realized that I was actually fairly athletic, relatively speaking, and had an inflated idea of what most people did.

Looking through that paper, it's not something to be held up as a particularly good source. I don't disagree with the conclusion, but it feels like it was written not necessarily with the intent to create this conclusion in particular, but definitely to create a conclusion that makes a good headline.