JDPoZ

Let's re-examine your statement by switching out a couple of words that keep the idea of "why should they get ?" to show how it would sound with any other context.

I - why should we force for what is already the most entitled generation ever?

They - they can . Otherwise where does it stop? Are they going to next?

Why not? It’s the same principle.

Do you understand now? If not, try changing what's in the to being related to "cancer treatment" or "the 40 hour work week" or "social security."

Just because something before was bad and we made it better, doesn't mean we should not do it just because it won't help everyone.

Framing here's a bit off. You shouldn't have to go to school - sure... as a requirement... but the big thing that's completely being missed (as we have been taught that college is for "fancy" jobs) is that in other decent countries... there is no cost to it.

Advanced educated populaces are seen by non - "authoritarian-run-shit-holes" as something that makes a country more economically competitive in an increasingly global job market.

Whether it's being paid to learn on the job training with a welding apprenticeship subsidized by taxes, or being able to go to medical school via tax-subsidized funds that don't create artificial barriers to entry for the poor for no other reason - it's a good thing for advanced education (and pre-school and every other form of education) to be publicly funded.

Those of us who've been on the internet since the mid-90s remember how Digg fucked up. Apparently none of those people who remember what happened last time are around at the top of Reddit anymore.

Stealing my old comment from the place that shall not be named in response to a similar question asked there by someone in a comparable situation to share here due to relevancy - A person had replied to the OP question declaring that "women didn't respect men's hobbies" so I said :

Perhaps there is a more useful way to frame things…

How about instead :

“It’s somewhat common for people with some level of disfunction within their intimate relationships to be okay living their entire lives with a partner essentially dictating what is ‘acceptable’ in their lives together in such a way that is uncompromising for said other partner - who then feels like they are not deserving of the things that make them happy. This is unhealthy as it builds resentment and encourages dishonesty and ‘going around’ set boundaries only really agreed upon by one party.”

The takeaway should not be : “Women have no respect for men’s hobbies.”

There are plenty of women who love games, and plenty of men who don’t.

The takeaway should be : “Partners in an intimate relationship should have enough love and respect for one another that they can truly find middle ground with issues they disagree on - while at the same time trying to better empathize, communicate, and enrich each others’ lives. If you and your partner disagree on where gaming should be as an aspect of your personal hobbies and interests, a reasonable compromise should be discussed.”

I am a guy at the same age. My spouse doesn’t really game much… but we have our video games in the living room, as that allows me to enjoy our home theater setup for single player type and online multiplayer gaming between my fellow parent gamers and myself, while also allowing us as a family to play certain games like Mario Kart and Castle Crashers together across seating that is comfortable and roomy.

My partner loves me and wants me to be happy. And I want them to be happy. If you aren’t happy with the arrangement currently set… talk about it. If they can’t meet you in the middle… then decide if it’s worth it to continue discussing it or not and go forward.

Really that’s a foundational aspect of healthy relationships… communication, respect, and a hope that you help make the other happy and feel supported.

A relationship without that foundation will likely eventually fail.