Subscribe
Notify of
guest
19 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
3 months ago

There’s loads of women out there who won’t find a partner. It won’t be because they are too ugly or too ‘weird’, it will be because they simply have no concept of masculinity and have zero respect for any man who displays it.
They want a wife, not a man.
Sadly, that would almost certainly be a sex-free existence.

Mônica
Mônica
3 months ago
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

Does it mean being a wife is so awful that no sane man would want to be seen as behaving like one (subdued, voiceless, obedient)? If not, what are these wifely attributes you want no part of – but think women should want for themselves?

Karim Ayoubi
Karim Ayoubi
3 months ago

I tried, but I couldn’t read past the first 4 paragraphs – you just can’t help yourself, can you? You just cannot discuss an issue that women are facing without shitting all over men for several paragraphs first. And that is precisely why men and women are becoming increasingly estranged from each other.
Unherd put out some of the best interviews during covid, but the written “journalism” I’m seeing from them since then is truly AWFUL.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
3 months ago
Reply to  Karim Ayoubi

And yet… you’re free to disagree with it, and expand your views on why you disagree at length if you wish. Isn’t that the point? Articles are there to be taken as an expression of democratic opinion, and should vary as widely as possible in an environment where free speech is at least encouraged, even if it’s not always possible to be practised due to online publishing requirements. Anyone finding their posts blocked can, however, attempt to re-write them in such a way to avoid the moderation trap.
The only fair criticism from a journalistic point of view should concern articles that are simply badly written, rather than ones you disagree with. It could well be that such articles are written expressly with the intention of emphasising a particular meme, to gauge the reaction.

Last edited 3 months ago by Steve Murray
Terry Davies
Terry Davies
2 months ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

The points you make re difference of opinion is one of the main reasons I subscribe to Unherd. I want to be challenged and I want to understand.

Michael Upton
Michael Upton
3 months ago
Reply to  Karim Ayoubi

One thing which is estranging to all decent folk is charmlessly characterizing an opinion that one does not share as amounting to “shitting all over” its subject.

Ben Flenderson
Ben Flenderson
3 months ago
Reply to  Karim Ayoubi

Wow. I have absolutely no idea how anyone could read this as “shitting” all over anyone. And if you’re so sure that the remarks about incels vs femcels are inaccurate, why don’t you pull up the first 50 posts on the relevant sites and see who is more likely to viciously abuse the opposite sex? Oh, of course you won’t do this, you’re too committed to equating genuine evidence based criticism with “shitting”.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
3 months ago
Reply to  Karim Ayoubi

Only the people who consume too much media (and thus think the world is ending) are becoming increasingly estranged from each other. The rest of us happy people out here are having a blast!

James Wills
James Wills
3 months ago

I truly bleed for the involuntarily celibate of both sexes, but to my eye at least much of the problem can be traced to two places: online dating and Western divorce law. Having been stung twice by gynocentric “family courts” in America, I’d never consider marrying again. There is a Very Good Reason, as Pooh might say, that over 80% of American divorces are initiated by the woman: she has no incentive to stay married whenever she gets her knickers in a twist or just gets that well-known hypergamous wandering eye, and every incentive – financial and otherwise – to bail out at any time.
Secondly, it’s instructive to look at online dating data: first, most “dating” nowadays is done online, but most interesting is the “swipe” rate. Eighty percent of women swipe right, meaning approve-of, just 20% of the men; eighty percent of the men are ignored, as nearly all women try to hook-up with the “Chads” – the hot-bodied, chisled-chin studs. Of course, those men are in a target-rich environment, and they use that attention to slice through those silly women like a chainsaw. News flash, girls – they ain’t going to marry you or enter an LTR – long term relationship; you’re just another warm, wet field for them to plow.
No, Western men are wising up, ladies. If you want to get married and have families, I have a few bits of advice for you: first, do it in your ‘twenties; thirty is “The Wall” and too late. Second, advocate for a repeal of the “no-fault divorce” laws; as long as men face the current Family Court system, only the dumb ones will marry. Third, try to get your hypergamy under control; nowadays men see through you like a windowpane.
Otherwise, enjoy your cats. Cheers.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
3 months ago
Reply to  James Wills

I do enjoy a good rant!

Jonas Moze
Jonas Moze
3 months ago

I became a widower a wile ago and as I am the sort of man who does not do well single; I worked hard at dating. What I found is you can have dates with woman you do not want, but not with ones you do.

One of the main issues is I am one of the more eccentric kind of men, my life has been so out of sync with the normal world that I suspect I am like one of those fantastically scarce varieties of lemur running around the forests of Madagascar, which are full of the common kinds….so we look at each other, and I think… no, not really – and the common female looks at me and says, no way, and so we pass on by.

It is not even an attractiveness issue for the main part – I just spent so many decades off living in weird places and unconventional ways, that my reality is not much like the normal person’s reality is – and I see it in them, and they see it in me. It is rather dreadful, this inability to find a mate when it is a genetic imperative I cannot ignore.

I do meet a few women I would love to be with – but they do not feel the same for me, I am just too far beyond the pale I suppose….. it is just life, the Great Wheel…..

I always liked the line in the movie ‘Castle Keep’, a very surreal WWII movie with Peter Falk. Two GIs are talking in a fox hole about women… one tells what the eternal problem between the sexes is as he sees it…paraphrased

”You see a man and a woman, they can never really get along – they want opposite things in life’….and the other solder asks him what he means, and so the first solider explains…
‘See, a man wants a woman, but a woman wants a man – opposites; and so they can never really get along’…..

haha….

life……

Gordon Black
Gordon Black
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonas Moze

You’re the third contributor to Unherd who cannot spell ‘while’: the others were an Aaron – and a Galetti -. Wile is a noun meaning ‘cunning plan’ or a verb meaning ‘to entice’. Happy New Year.

Philip Stott
Philip Stott
2 months ago
Reply to  Gordon Black

They’re all the same person – Sanford Artzen.
And yes, sorry for your loss Sanford.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonas Moze

Sorry for your loss, Tavis.

Michael Upton
Michael Upton
3 months ago

Surely the heart of the matter is when Mary Gaitskill writes, above, that “In the past, when most women in most societies would not have sex before marriage, men were in the position of coming hat in hand; this hasn’t been true in America for a very long time. And so there are women who have trouble getting sex and love. At least with the men they want. And not all of them are ugly.” Throughout all our recorded history until the 1960s, most women were members of a trade union called Christian Respectability, and men got sex by obeying the union’s rule: Marriage. Then the 1960s brought independent bargaining, and one could be forgiven for thinking that Mary Gaitskill is right that it hasn’t served women well. The moral seems obvious. But never mind what’s moral; consider what is expedient. Insofar as women (or men) are denied heterosexual sex, their line will tend to die out. They will be buried by the children of the people who have other ways and customs. I suspect they will be buried by the offspring of the women who are still members of the trade union. You can say the names that the trade union goes by now in our lands, if you want to be ethnically or religiously controversial.

Last edited 3 months ago by Michael Upton
Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
2 months ago

Errrr…. they are not.

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
2 months ago

“Elle” announced femcels are “reclaiming celibacy.” This logic is redolent of Naomi Wolf, darling of third-wave feminism, who praised the chadoor and niqab as enhancing women’s sexuality by privatising it, and removing it from the degrading experience of male sexual objectification. It is putting necessity in the service of promoting an ideological argument, which is that masculinity is toxic, and so anything that removes women from it is inherently positive.

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
2 months ago

What was the point of writing all this? This article is the worst I have read yet. One of your paragraphs gave me a complete mind f… and I have no idea what the point of it was. Sorry I wasted my time .

Mark M Breza
Mark M Breza
2 months ago

Then why did the not so handsome or very brainy, though he was a prince, the current King Charles iii, reject the idolized pretty Diana for the average looking Camilla. One might assume Diana was hard as a brick, unable to hold an intelligent conversation & a behind doors ‘B’. However despite her outward dumb blond sexuality she seems to be worshiped by feminists and portrayed by bisexual actresses in her bios. There always has been a war between the sexes; now it seems there is a generation choosing not to fight; becoming incel, femcel, homosexual or even transexual or binary.
A relationship between opposite sexes does take a lot of effort. Is there a new laziness afoot ?