ironically i find the implication that all professional-class men are either woke huckers or socially inept nerds totally bizarre, but i guess that only reinforces your meta-level point
…it’s a fair cop. I meant to put in a stinger to the effect of “this applies as much to myself as to the people I read,” and I forgot, and obviously it would have been very apropos in this particular situation. I do think that if you drill down to the male sectors of the Discourse Class, those two groups are going to dominate; people who like to spend their free time talking about ideas tend to be either nerds or Intellectual Cool Kids, and the male archetype of the latter these days is the woke hucker. But the Discourse Class is obviously a lot smaller than the professional class in general.
@ponteh2dhh1ksdiwesph2tres:
the implication that urban liberal women aren’t Like That is p bizarre given that urban liberal women are most likely the ones they’re talking about, and at least IME *are* Like That
I mean, the class of urban liberal women is massively heterogeneous, just like every human class of comparable size. I’m sure plenty of them are Like That. I’m especially sure that you’ll find many of them who are Like That if you go looking for women while prioritizing the kinds of traits that these essayists talk about prioritizing.
Many of my friends are urban liberal women. With maybe a couple of minor exceptions, they are not Like That. They have all the traits that the essayists claim that you can’t find in women. Their romantic choices, in particular, look nothing like the ones that the essayists attribute to All Women. The snarky part of me wants to shake these dudes and say maybe you should fucking take a look around, or else own up to your revealed preferences. The more-charitable part of me thinks that they’ve been trapped in a bubble where they can’t find the thing they’re looking for, and that this is at most only a little bit their own fault. But either way, man. The world is wide.