One thing worth mentioning here is that this is now the 3rd or 4th article to cover this political turn to label young Korean men misogynistic despite no actual evidence of misogyny being presented. Maybe they are! This article doesn't show that though.
Like when you're saying it's rampant misogyny among young Korean men one would expect to have survey results showing that, idk, those men hate women or something.
Instead we just get: their sexist misogynists, no evidence needed.
Maybe it's extremely obvious in the intra-Korean discourse that this is the case.... but for those of us on the outside, it's difficult to know exactly what's going on here.
one could, if one were so inclined, see how korean men under 30 compare in their responses to internationally standard survey questions such as "Are men better political leaders than women?"
in such an endeavor, one would find that young Korean men are indeed somewhat more sexist than their income group peers.
also, so are young Korean women.
the gap between them is not especially unusual.
In general, I feel like "group X in Y country is very weird in this specific and possibly inflammatory way!" takes should usually at least glance at comparative survey data to figure out a little context.
also from the same survey here's share of men under 40 who say they are willing to fight for their country
spain and italy are just like "lol, take us over please, someone, anyone"
Japan too. Japanese dudes EXTREMELY not interested in fighting for Japan. Canadians and Kiwis kinda ambivalent about if theyr country is worth it or not.
Koreans, Taiwanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, Indonesian dudes are all kinda spoiling for a fight though; they all report high willingness to fight for the nation.
the big Japan vs. rest of Asia split is very interesting.
you may wonder what country has the MOST willingness to fight
as soon as i say the answer you'll be like
"lol, of course"
georgia
it's georgia
because of course it is
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I think this is wrong. There will never be a surprise attack, because Russia's strategy rests on an overpowering aerial assault, electronic warfare, massive bombardment, etc. Russia cannot actually afford to take huge losses of ground troops.
So literally no matter when Russia attacks, it would have to be presaged by huge accumulation of troops and equipment and considerable action prior to crossing the border.
Key to remember that Ukraine's military actually has more men than Russia has available to invade.
And to provide that invasion force, Russia has basically stripped the districts east of the Urals of almost their entire military force. If somebody wanted to make a move on Siberia or whatever, now would be the time.
Is it reasonable for parents to prefer that their children speak the same language as them vs. some other language?
Is it reasonable for parents to prefer that their children learn to enjoy the kinds of food the parent enjoys?
Answer options here are "Yes, duh" or "I'm actually do not have a brain." Those are literally the only options, there is no middle ground.
Regardless of what may be efficient or useful for a child, it is entirely reasonable for parents to prefer that their children develop in ways which are comprehensible to the parent. Other concerns might motivate caveats or deviations, but the question is about the reasonability
Cogent article from @akarlin0 on why he thinks Russia will invade and win rather easily.
A few qualms with it though. To the extent season matters, the thaw already came: it's been above freezing and raining in Kharkiv for days! akarlin.substack.com/p/regathering-…
The slushy above-freezing rain is forecast to continue at least until this coming Tuesday, and there is no forecast yet for a return to below-freezing daytime highs. i.e. Russia has already lost the window for hard-frozen ground.
That said, it's not clear how much this actually matters, since as @akarlin0 notes, given Putin's pretty strong aversion to reporting casualties, Russia would likely try to use longer-range weapons as much as possible so they can roll into uncontested positions.
So apropos my controversial thread of the past few days, many commenters have claimed that I'm being bigoted because I'm worried a schoolteacher mentioning homosexuality will turn my kid gay.
Obviously, this is not at all what I believe.
But I think there are some people who do worry about that scenario.... and there are also people on the other side who believe *so deeply* in the immutable nature of sexuality that they make similarly implausible arguments.
So first of all, it's important to just empirically demonstrate that sexual identity is not perfectly static. Here's a nice longitudinal study looking only at adults in the US between 1996 and 2006, so it isn't "young people discovering their sexuality." link.springer.com/article/10.100…
Pets are a huge part of many peoples' lives. We spend money on them, we care about them, etc. Human-animal relations writ large are kind of a massive field of human social life and crucial for understanding human society.
And yet, even though shifts related to animal domestication and husbandry are key elements in the rise of settled human life, virtually no social surveys included any questions about animals until very recently. GSS added a pet question in *2018*.