The New York Time’s opinion page has one of those Onion-like titles that really makes you shake your head just hoping it’s a parody: “Is America Ready for More Old Men?” (via Instapundit):
A recent Times article noted that the number of men age 65 and older increased by 21 percent from 2000 to 2010, nearly double the 11.2 percent growth rate for women in that age group.
What are the implications — the benefits and the costs — of having more men around longer? While most experts say it may be only a blip, some demographers say that a surprisingly rapid rise in the number of men could cost society even more in retirement costs, since they earned more than women and would collect more, and they would add to the long-term care problem.
But it’s not a parody, it’s dead serious and a bunch of “experts” pose a debate about how men dying as quickly and efficiently without bothering women is the best outcome–oops, I mean the debate asks, “How might this narrowing gap change society and male-female relationships?”
Opinions seemed to focus much on the negative aspects of men’s longer life on women. For example Stephanie Coontz, author of A Strange Stirring: The Feminine Mystique and American Women at the Dawn of the 1960s says ” …. a woman trapped in an unhappy marriage might not find her husband’s extended lifespan very beneficial. Among unhappy couples, even a few extra minutes a day with one’s spouse raises blood pressure and lowers immune functioning. So imagine the toll that extra years can take.”
Another paragon of compassion, Susan Jacoby, author of Never Say Die: The Myth and Marketing of the New Old Age seems to think men’s sole purpose in life is to care for women. The man’s death is a “price to be be paid by a woman.” His life is not important in and of itself. Only women seem to have that autonomy. She says, “When a husband dies, the price for women — and society — is both economic and emotional. Women will likely face their closing, sickest years without a partner to help care for them. That’s one reason nursing home residents are overwhelmingly female.” Note no mention of the huge cost to keep women in nursing homes. Most older men are dead. I guess this is better in her mind.
As they say, living well is the best revenge. If I were male, I would strive to live as long as I could and collect as much of the Social Security benefits and other entitlements as possible. After all, men in the past have been putting into the system for years only to die and give their benefits up–usually to older women. Now perhaps the tables are turning and more men will be collecting. It’s only fair.
Categories: Uncategorized
They seem to think that men should work hard all our lives in order to provide a comfortable retirement for our widows. It’s amusing to see how our deaths are such a burden on our wives (unless they’re in unhappy marriages, of course). Our deaths are pretty inconvenient to us, too.
What they fail to see is that if more men live longer, there wouldn’t be so many lonely women in nursing homes. As it is, men are often outnumbered by 3-1 or more in retirement communities.
Oh, they would still be lonely, but they would have someone to blame for leaving the toilet seat up though.
Just another way the patriarchy is oppressing women and minorities.
Pretty soon these uppity guys will be demanding that as much government money that gets spent on breast cancer research gets spent on prostate cancer.
You would think that after all this time these old geezers would take the hint and just die to make the world a better place.
/sarc off
I’m seeing a lot of old guys these days. My oldest patient today was a 94 year old man.
I agree the editorial is… bizarre. But in fairness, the article it references was actually quite sympathetic to the problems of elderly men, and particularly widowers.
I suppose the editorial board, having seen that something pro-male had slipped through the cracks, felt it needed a counter-balance.
isn’t the real problem that ugly old woman outlive their usefulness?
a single 70 year old man with a nice pension could help a 35 yo woman raise her brats.
what good is an old woman? aren’t they the real problem?
no offense to old broads, tongue firmly in cheek
The NY Times “opinion” pages (actually, that’s the whole freakin’ rag, isn’t it?) is mostly a bunch of useless old men, right Comrades Krugman and Friedman?
Poor me! Since my wife died of cancer, I’ve had to pay a price: wash my own clothes, make my own meals, clean the house… Oh the humanity!
Hey, I was doing all that long before my wife died of cancer. Now I only have half as much laundry and cooking to do.
Women live longer, but men are catching up. That’s bad. If minorities are catching up economically, that’s good.
Liberalism is a mental disorder. There is no other explanation.
Whatisit with these elites who always look at people as parasites? It would seem to me that having couples live closer to the same number of years would be a vast improvement in the quality of life of society’s elderly.
This whole growing mentality though that sees humankind more and more as an infestation rather than a gift to our culture and society is troublesome.
You could always move to Thailand, where old white men are appreciated, rather than being blamed for everything.
Jaafar in Chiang Ma
” The NY Times “opinion” pages (actually, that’s the whole freakin’ rag, isn’t it?) is mostly a bunch of useless old men, right Comrades Krugman and Friedman?”
I’m sorry, you’re incorrect. Paul Krugman and Tom Friedman are both useless old *women*. I refuse to believe I live in a country where a man, no matter how worthless, would appear in public in the pansy-ass facial hair sported by those two pencil-necks.
Geez. I have no intention of ever getting married in a country afflicted by a viciously anti-male legal system, but if I did, I’d want to marry a bright, relentlessly fair-minded lady like Ms. Helen Smith. I’d be happy! ^^;
Frankly, I’ve been taking care of everybody else for so long, I hope I go first. Let them clean up the mess for a change.
On the plus side, this should lay bare the ridiculous zero-sum assumptions that drive liberals’ envy politics.
Ok, farang.