PS Power Books • Forum

It took me a bit to get into this book since the gender neutral stuff was grating my nerves; reading "te" was just confusing and a little irritating. I thought it was funny as hell as Mason pretty much echoed my sentiments on the issue as it being a small sect of people that wanted to be special snowflakes forcing the rest of the world to accommodate them.

Once I got passed the first couple of chapters I really started to enjoy it. There seemed to be a big MGTOW/MRA theme throughout the book that I found surprising since those subjects aren't exactly popular at the moment.

As for the end of the book:
1) It was very Star Trekky (replace printers with replicators) in the manner of collapsing the economy. The big problem I see is how do you handle compensation for people that do jobs that don't actually produce a physical good? Who would design and construct roads, building, bridges, etc? How do you handle the service industry that can't be replaced by a bot or simply recycling a good (dirty laundry for instance)?

I guess some of it would be handled by people that simply enjoy what they do and do it for that reason without needing compensation. But there are some jobs that are tough, require education, and can't be done by the laymen (doctors, lawyers, skilled trades, etc).

2) What is Lexi's physical status? Is she an android or is she biological with an artificial brain? If she were a pure android, I would have expected Mason's scan of her at the beginning of the book to discovery some anomalies.

I have to agree with the te issue. It did slow me down in the 1st few chapters. Over all i really liked this book as well.

1) Answer to question 1, or at least the example of laundry. Put dirty clothes in the disassembler, and use the resulting materials to have a printer make you new ones. The answer to your overall question however was that they weren't trying to get rid of money and paying jobs all together. They where just removing the power structure to replace it with one that is a little more even handed and fair. Not one run be a very few ultra elite big shots, and their army of flunkies and goons.

2) Answer to question 2. He did notice some electrical anomalies when he scanned her early in the book. He just wrote it off to her having some implants he didn't know about. Which was also one of the factors mentioned when he realized she was and AI being (the scan anomalies from before).

The only complaint i have about this book (at all) is that it felt like it should be about 100 pages longer (please feed my addiction lol). The ending felt a little forced (though honestly i could see the reaction that was written taking place as well. When you try to take power away from people who really want it. Most of them will go to great extremes to keep it or make sure no one else gets it at least).

First: I had no clue what MGTOW was until after I wrote the book. Then I looked it up, almost by accident. I honestly just see that part taking place.

I may write more about that later? After all, I fit that description almost perfectly. It's a silly acronym though. For those that don't know MGTOW means: Men Going Their Own Way. Basically it describes a man that is opting out of marriage and relationships with women, due to various social factors, such as the legal system and so on. It doesn't mean gay, before you go there. If I was homosexual, then it would be easier, after all.

It's similar to the "herbivore" men in Japan. (Thing to look up!)

Just to clarify, I don't hate women, nor am I an MRA (Men's Rights Advocate) nothing wrong with that in the main, being less of a hate group than radical feminism, but both are failed/failing ideas. (You can't base an ideology on the idea that half the world is responsible for all your problems. Not if you want it to work in the end!) I just don't believe that MRA is going to get anything done, so it isn't worth the time at this point.

I was doing MRA/Feminist research for the next set of books, though that will be played down.

Te... I see that happening too, if in a different version. Probably with five or six different gender identifiers in the end.

Lexi is an android. It's pretty much like Bardic said in the book.

*As for the ending, I have noticed a trend in my writing where I tend to start "shorthanding" things a lot more near the end, in the wrap up. I don't know that expanding on things would really help all the time. In this case, Mason's part in things was finished, more or less. I wanted to make sure it didn't turn into an action adventure novel. (Nothing at all wrong with that, and I plan to do a real one of those sometime this year. I just wanted this to be about social issues.)

*Edit: I'm not saying that being gay is easier than not having relationships at all. I wouldn't know, but it sounds pretty tough actually. I meant that it would be easier to explain in a single forum post.

See, this is why I've said this was a challenging book. It does challenge some of the belief systems we just take for granted. MRA is a little premature at the moment but I can see it becoming more active in the future. Not commenting on the need for such, just see the trend. Lawyers are now billing themselves as such in custody fights, looking to attract "maligned" male clients.

Te really was annoying, which made it even more humorous. As for the gender identifiers, I just see it as another way to separate "us" from "them". As for the ending, Dale, you and I had that discussion previously, and I completely understand the reasoning. Mason is our guide, and he would have no place in the post-event scramble. Maybe follow up with on of the "Bigs"?

I personally found Lexi immensely entertaining, and the dragon scene early on sort of tipped it for me. AI is all the rage these days---just check out Ultron and the Vision on the big screen. This version, though, seems more realistic and satisfying. Dale, I have to applaud your tenacity and willingness to go your own way. My review says it all, really. These characters, at first glance, seem more alien than just about anybody in Tor's world. Too bad we didn't get more Ford time in the end, though.

The herbivore thing is an asian thing, it just has many names, not just Japan

But yes I also see this book as an eventuality, I have never even heard of the MRA or MGTOW yet still see men turning this way in the end... ofc we will probably all kill ourselves before then or aliens/God will come and destroy/end the world first!

My guess is that we will see a rather short lived, one to three generation long, movement of men avoiding marriage, having children or being tied down to providing for women in any systematized way.

Then, after an artificial scarcity exists long enough, one of two things will happen. Either there will be a token "relief" effort made, which will give men some agency over their own lives, even if they are with a women relationship wise, OR, there will be instated a "Bachelor Tax" which is being suggested in Japan, to help force young men that are opting out to pay for the care of women and children by force.

Both such things are likely a long way off however.

This won't be a long lasting trend, societal speaking. Biological imperatives are too strong for that. Eventually men will break down, and go back to the traditional system, in order to have access to sex, and the approval of women, which are both incredibly powerful motivators for men. The only reason that this exists right now as a movement is that the state has become involved in relationships (divorce/child support/enforcing false paternity claims with the threat of prison if you don't pay up, backing up false claims of spousal abuse, arresting abused men for daring to be beaten, and so on.) and that involvement makes it too great a risk for modern men.

Instead, for now, it makes more sense for the average man to step back, not have those relationships at all, and to use his financial resources, personal labor and effort, as well as free time, on himself.

Apparently this makes some people upset when they hear it? I haven't noticed that yet. Then, I don't think the heart of this is in the "evil of women" which is a tempting, but ultimately fruitless theory. It's conflicting biological needs, men to have sex, and women to secure their futures and that of their children, which causes the basic conflict. The interposition (I might be using that word incorrectly...) of the state into relationships in a way that has common, powerful, and indeed, nearly inevitable, negative consequences for men only is the main problem we have in this regard at the moment. That won't last forever, particularly if several generations of men grow savvy to the risk and opt out.

Ideally (from a movement point of view that is) men would vanish, and withhold even their work and presence in society. "Ghosting" as it's called. That's basically becoming a hermit. That would have the fastest effect on society as far as making real changes.

*Sorry, I got a bit derailed there. I was going to address that the problem is, in good measure, due to men needing women in a biologically driven way. It pushes men to act against their own self-interests to a very high level. Women have their own drives and needs, which don't help the current situation, but that does not mean they are bad for being what they are. It's the situation we live in right now that is making things worse for men. (I don't know if it negatively impacts women, not being one.)

I didn't have a problem with using the gender neutral te. At first I thought I was dislexic and had to reread it. Then it hit me. Spanish uses tu for personal you and usted for you all. Why not a third gender he, she, te. With the way that lgbt has become an alphabet soup of different variations, why not opt for another designation? I like the face paint references. Did you have clown training?

I think Dale has nailed it for an explanation for the battle of the sexes. Biology vs. Intellect. However, it's nothing new, really. Just a deeper insight or perhaps awareness of the conflict. New labels? Much like jail rape, under-reported until lately. Or military sexual misconduct, due to skewing by societal male domination in the military until recently. These things, as well as, demanded male responsibility have always existed. They're just more visible in our omni-informational society. So I'm not sure if the "movement" will last for any length of time, only the coverage. For the most part, I think, the situation comes down to an individual/personal decision. With the only trend being the reporting or noticing of that trend being the difference. Cynical? Yup. We are, after all the most highly evolved animal on this planet. But an animal, nevertheless. Whether God's greatest creation, or Darwin's apex evolution, still not perfect.

I don't see any movement ever getting around having children; it's a strong biological drive for both sexes, not just women.

The problem (and I blame modern feminism for it) is that men are avoiding marriage. That would be legal marriage, not long-term monogamous relationships. Unless something in case law or legislative law changes, there's nothing for men when it comes to marriage. The only thing we get is the risk of losing our homes, cars, retirement funds, 30% of our income to child support and 50% to alimony (which is part of the reason why suicide rates among men are so high).

I think it's safe to say that many women are starting to feel the same way. Marriage has degenerated into contractual dating. It's simply too much of a hassle to break out of it. You can go to Vegas and be married in 10 minutes, but it can take more than a year and thousands of dollars to get out of it even if the split is amicable.

I don't see the problem going away until child support laws are reworked. I've known people that have to pay $2000 or MORE per child: That's not child support, that's extortion.

I knew a guy 12 years ago that had 3 children by 3 different women. One of those women was a habitual heroin user -- and she STILL got custody. The guy was making more than $100k a year as a software engineer and was having to live in a mobile home in a crappy area of town because nearly all his income was supporting 2 ex-wives and an ex-girlfriend through child support. The irony is, if the courts had awarded him custody, he and his children would have been better off.

To my mind the MGTOW (pronounced mig-tow, with the tow being like the ou in ouch, with a t on the front...) movement isn't about forcing society to change, but a simple reaction to the modern situation. I'm probably a bit stricter in my interpretation and lifestyle than many, since I'm resisting having any relationships on a personal level at all, but that is pretty extreme.

The fact is though that any deep level interaction with a woman in our modern society (and no, I'm not saying that we can't be friends! I actually like women, which is part of the problem...) can end up with a man being forced to part with a large chunk of their wealth or freedom. Sometimes literally, if a woman gets mad at you and claims that you hurt them in some way. Most women wouldn't lie like that, of course...

But if twenty percent would, that's a one in five chance that you might well end up being in trouble without ever doing anything wrong. ( I know, why twenty percent, instead of ten, or fifty? It's all guesswork, based on what I've heard form other people. The real number could be anything. I'm not trying to claim that these are stats here!)

Plus, lets face it, do you really think I could keep up my current work schedule with a wife and kids making demands on my time? So there's that portion of life too.

In the end, it's a lifestyle choice though, and probably not that important to the greater reality.