Another itty bitty post, about male office misbehavior in the past.

I started a series on the history of pornography use among the generations of American men and I haven’t got round to writing up the second part fully.

But in the middle of a discussion with T.W.O. about the Boomer bashing on the alt-right and wider right, he mentioned that male office workers were displaying the early version of graphic pornography on their computers.  That is, that Boomer women in the workforce maybe had some reasons for being so strident about male chauvinism.  The personal computer revolution, and resulting private access to scandalous material led to men breaking what were previously obvious and unwritten rules of mixed-sex office propriety.

It’s kind of also fodder for my Greater Nerd Theory, since it was men being aggressively anti-social in computer and tech companies.



Updated “Who is the Practical Conservative?”, fiction publishing plans, future blog plans

I went ahead and made more explicit the fact that this blog is linked with Carolina Hutchenson, one of my pen names.  A longer post about pseudonyms and the internet is coming sometime in the next week or two, when I get a chance to knock something that potentially lengthy out.

Carolina currently uses as a photo a picture of a long-dead jazz singer who was called “The Black Marilyn Monroe”.  She started with a very different photo that I thought was a stock photo, but which was not.  I got “tumblrd” (that’s when you grab a picture from a photo blog and figure it must be stock/open rights and find out it’s not).  Tumblr has this issue a lot, but it can happen with other sites where people repost pictures they don’t really have use rights for just because they look cool.

And I was going to wait until next year to announce it here, but Carolina will be able to have some fiction come out next year, or at least be accepted for publication.  I can safely say it will be science fiction, and some might even consider it “hard” science fiction.

There is something Really Super Groovy Cool that T.W.O. (whose pen name is “Oppressor Hutchenson”) and I are working on, but it’s a five year kind of project, so I can’t say more unless that changes, but I remain very excited to be able to do intensive creative work with my man even if we can’t get it out the door before the kids are teenagers.

As for this blog, it’s obviously heading in more of a policy and data wonk direction.  So expect more tables, charts and graphs.  There will possibly also be some memoirish posts. And I will likely repost some of Carolina’s livejournal posts, but I may not.  Still in dither mode on that one.

Repost: Domestic au pair and homemaking program

It could be more or less formalized, but training young women in the domestic, homemaking arts and giving them practical experience in childcare would be amazingly useful.

There are a number of avenues by which this could conceivably be enabled, not least as part of a general program of supporting women in their women’s work.

A model to start with would taking the system of the current international au pair program, and figuring out how to adapt it to the needs of young women who’d like to be keepers of hearth and home for their families and future husbands and families who could use the help of energetic girls in their late teens and early 20s.


Mom Bonus, less than 8 hours of tv achievement

Give yourself a mom bonus if your kid(s) watch less than 8 hours of tv a day (this includes streaming video on a computer/tablet/smartphone, video games and regular television, etc.)

That’s the current average for American children.  Teens bring it up by having an average of around 10 hours per day, but it’s not exactly low for non-school-age children either.

A brief note about Hispanic and Asian married household data

I haven’t been breaking out the Hispanic and Asian data because the oldest consistent data is from the 1980s and most of the data directly comparable to white and black households is from the 1990s on.  It’s also harder to break out because Hispanic and Asian are just broad government terms for a huge array of ethnic groups and a lot of what people mean when they say “Hispanic” or “Asian” only refers to a handful of ethnic groups.

But for the purposes of looking at current married households, I will probably go ahead and add in the Asian and Hispanic data in the next few months when we’re settled down somewhere shiny and chrome, as Asians are almost entirely “college moms” in the most recent 10 years or so of birth data (~85% rate).  Asians are also the group that are most likely to engage in the “one prized, intensively parented child fairly late in life” mothering approach.  They are more likely to do this than the usual bogeyman of college educated white women.

Hispanics, conversely are in a very real sense the direct replacement for the non-college white working class births. They really have filled in the slot formerly occupied by Catholic white ethnic groups in terms of cohesive family structure without a lot of education.

1 in 8 married couples with under-18 kids make 200k/yr or more, a doubling since 2006.

That is as of 2016, courtesy of the American Community Survey’s 1 year estimates.

1 in 10 make 150-199k per year.

Put it together and almost 1 in 4 married couples (about 22%) with under-18 kids makes $150,000 or more household income.

More tellingly, the largest single income group is $100-149,999 per year, with just under 5 million households and about 23% of the total.

Put 22 and 23 together and you get 45% of married couples with under-18 kids make 100k a year or more as a household in 2016.

A bit less than 7.5 million households bring in 50-99k per year (split about 50/50 from 50-74k and 75k-99k), which is almost exactly 33% of married folks with under-18 kids.

This means about 22% or almost 1 in 4 married couples with under-18 kids make 49k per year or less.  Not quite how the demographics of marriage are portrayed in a lot of circles, particularly on the right, where sub 50k is presented as firmly and comfortably middle class.

But in reality the true middle range for all the people married and raising kids right now is 100-150k.  This is true even in the lowest income region, the South,  at 41% above 100k.  For the Midwest and West it’s 45% and for the Northeast it’s 56%, or a clear majority.

What were things like 10 years ago in 2006?

200k- 6% nationally

150-199k- 6% nationally

100-149k- 18% nationally

75k-99k- 18% nationally (16% in 2016)

50-75k was the single largest group broken out nationally in 2006. It was 23% nationally.  It’s shrunk a lot since then and is about 17% for 2016.

So in 2006 the true middle range was more like 75k-100k, and nearly 30% of married couples with under-18 kids had sub 50k household income for the year.

In the last decade the bottom rungs are dropping out of the married with kids ladder.

Under 75k went from a slight majority of 52% of such households in 2006 to a clear minority in 2016 of 39%.

Or the other way around, in 2006 48% of married couples with kids made 75k per year or more.  In 2016, it’s 61%.