X Close

Here come the female Andrew Tates It's not just male influencers who preach manipulation

Smiling or grimacing (Credit: Instagram/justpearlythings1)

Smiling or grimacing (Credit: Instagram/justpearlythings1)


August 17, 2023   5 mins

“Men do not love you, okay? So stop thinking that they do. They tolerate you. They lust you. That’s it.”

The YouTube influencer SheRa Seven’s advice for young women is as sharp as the wings of her black eyeliner. To single ladies, she offers the following on sex: “The longer you hold off, the more that he will like you.” To married ones: “Don’t give it up every time he want it. Make him wait, make him work for it still. Gotta make him chase!”

This chaste strategy, promoted by straight-talking female influencers with lush lips and eyelash extensions, is everywhere at the moment, proliferating under TikTok hashtags such as #feminineenergy and #lawofattraction. The women who swear by it have been compared with the pick-up artist and alleged human trafficker Andrew Tate, which has provoked a whole host of articles explaining why this comparison is extremely wrong and offensive. But it’s easy to see how these women might serve as a sort of funhouse mirror to the manosphere pick-up artists.

And yet, the advice pumped out by SheRa Seven and her kind appears to have much less in common with its contemporary male counterpart than it does with the self-help gurus of eras past. At least superficially. “Gotta make him chase” is just a reboot of “play hard to get” — a central tenet of one of 1995’s bestselling books, The Rules. Subtitled, “Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right”, it effectively schooled young single women in the art of entrapping — that is, enticing — a man. The rules number in the dozens, but they all circle the same fundamental thesis: that a woman must use her feminine wiles to stoke a man’s prey drive, just as hunters use fake rabbits on a string to train their hounds.

On this front, The Rules differs very little from the advice of contemporary dating influencers — or indeed the archaic courtship norms that ruled before the sexual revolution. And as with the YouTubers whose CashApp usernames are prominently displayed on their video content, then as now there was a certain amount of grift involved. A Time magazine article from 1996 announced: “The Rules is not just a book; it’s a movement. Around the country, Rules Girls are
 paying $45 a pop to attend Rules seminars and forking over $250 an hour for phone consultations with authors Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider — neither of whom is a credentialed anything.”

Of course, the influencers would say that their own lives are credential enough. They are, after all, the patient-zero success story for the strategies they’re selling. In the Nineties, the women who wrote The Rules held up their own successful marriages as proof that their method worked; today, in a YouTube video entitled “How to receive princess treatment” with one million views, TheWizardLiz says: “I want you to look at this video and think, whoa, if Liz expects this much from her partner, then maybe I can expect my partner to at least give me some respect.”

That this brand of self-help is having a resurgence right now is hardly surprising. The sexual revolution, whatever its benefits, also blew up virtually all the social structures and strictures that used to regulate romantic entanglements, leaving young people to navigate a lawless, chaotic landscape in which there’s no guarantee that the person you’re sleeping with even likes you, let alone intends to commit. Almost every trend in this sphere — from the demisexuals who insist that requiring an emotional connection before sex represents a protected identity category to the ubiquitous therapy-speak that turns ordinary disappointments into pathologies — represents an attempt by young women to reestablish some sort of order, to make their romantic and sexual lives make sense. And when young women are less likely to be looking for Mr. Right than hunting for the red flags that reveal a man to be undateable, it’s not hard to see the appeal of imposing a rigid framework on the whole endeavour, even if that framework is rooted in manipulation and pretence.

And yet, there is one major difference: for the Rules Girl, all this romantic espionage was ultimately a marriage plot. Yes, there was a material element — the big honking diamond ring on the book’s cover isn’t exactly subtle — but there was also the question, right there in the subtitle, of a man’s heart and how to ensnare it. The endgame was love, marriage, a committed partnership. The endgame was finding your person.

The new Rules-esque paradigm, on the other hand, wants little to do with that. The woman who successfully employs these methods isn’t loved; she’s pampered, paid for, and worshipped like the goddess she is. If marriage is mentioned, it’s as a business arrangement, one in which the woman trades her presence — and, if her husband plays his cards right, sex — for being kept in the manner to which she’s accustomed. Men are meant to be milked for all they’re worth and summarily discarded the moment they step out of line. One of the movement’s biggest influencers, Chidera Eggerue, actually got her start as an evangelist for the “dump him” school of feminism, which is exactly what it sounds like. The central thesis is that any relationship which makes demands on a woman’s time, energy and attention — which is to say, every relationship, ever — is better off terminated so that she can focus on the only thing that truly matters: herself.

Posting under the moniker “Slumflower”, Eggerue bemoans the “internalised misogyny” of heterosexual women who yearn to fall in love, who see any value in it at all. “YOU are the beginning and end of everything wonderful that could ever occur in your life,” she has written. Other influencers, such as SheRa Seven, insist that romantic love itself is a lie and a pipe dream; if you want to experience real love, she advises, your best bet is to have children.

Given how hard it leans into a certain variety of hardline gender stereotyping, you’d think the business-minded dating strategy peddled by influencers would overlap with the burgeoning trad movement, represented by antifeminist commentators such as Pearl Davis. (Davis is the purveyor of such spicy-hot takes as, “Can we at least admit a chick not being a virgin on her wedding day is equally as bad as a man cheating??”) In fact, it has far more parallels with a mainstream, #MeToo-era, progressive view of relationships — one in which love and lust and fondness are replaced by a bleak, transactional vision of romance, in which the only meaningful currency is power, and the only thing that matters is who is wielding it.

As such, perhaps it’s no surprise that some people — including the influencers themselves — insist that there’s something feminist about all this. Mainly, this seems like the result of confusing power, the kind a woman can wield over a man through manipulation and subterfuge, with the empowerment of women at large. So if the man is reduced to an object — say, his wallet — and the woman gets what she wants, the woman wins, and hence
 feminism? As one outraged letter to the editor from a reader who took exception to the Andrew Tate comparisons insisted: “Some women tackle power inequalities in society by the manipulation, exploitation or indeed humiliation of men, but this takes place within the context of the gender hierarchy where men retain pre-eminence.”

Granted, if you imagine that women are the eternal underdog in a relationship landscape ruled by patriarchy, it’s possible to convince yourself that literally anything you do at the expense of a man — including batting eyelashes until he buys you shoes — is a form of female empowerment. Just ignore the part where it reinforces rather than subverts every gendered stereotype of women as hypergamous gold diggers. This is how men who manipulate women’s psychology to get them into bed can be derided as loathsome misogynists, while women who take a similar approach with men are yass kweened all the way home.

But they’re both playing the same game; indeed, they couldn’t exist without each other. And more than that, they’re making the same mistake with their suspicious, mistrustful approach to the opposite sex. The pick-up artists instruct that women need to be tricked into giving up sex, their sole asset in the dating marketplace; the dump-him feminists do the same with men and their money. What both fail to understand, or maybe don’t want to, is that the desire for love and companionship doesn’t break down along gendered lines. Most people want to fall in love. Most people want to find a partner. And most people understand that these desires are not grotesque weaknesses, but a normal — and, if you’re lucky, wonderful — part of the human experience.


Kat Rosenfield is an UnHerd columnist and co-host of the Feminine Chaos podcast. Her latest novel is You Must Remember This.

katrosenfield

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

122 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Seb Dakin
Seb Dakin
9 months ago

I wish Monty Python were still around. A comedy send-up of SheRa and Mr Tate in marriage counselling therapy would be a good laugh. Otherwise, it’s all rather bleak.

Peter Johnson
Peter Johnson
9 months ago
Reply to  Seb Dakin

That would be very funny.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Seb Dakin

I’m having trouble understanding why any woman would want to “trap” a man.
There’s money of course, but it doesn’t sound like a recipe for long term success.
Neither does making him wait sound like a recipe for short term success. No wealthy successful man is going to engage in exclusivity and certainly not wait more than a couple of dates.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
Peter Johnson
Peter Johnson
9 months ago
Reply to  Seb Dakin

That would be very funny.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Seb Dakin

I’m having trouble understanding why any woman would want to “trap” a man.
There’s money of course, but it doesn’t sound like a recipe for long term success.
Neither does making him wait sound like a recipe for short term success. No wealthy successful man is going to engage in exclusivity and certainly not wait more than a couple of dates.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
Seb Dakin
Seb Dakin
9 months ago

I wish Monty Python were still around. A comedy send-up of SheRa and Mr Tate in marriage counselling therapy would be a good laugh. Otherwise, it’s all rather bleak.

Caroline Minnear
Caroline Minnear
9 months ago

Wowsers!
Humans that think and behave like that are equally worthy of each other and the games they play
in the mean time I’ll be hanging out with this good man that I look forward to growing old with.
Don’t need diamonds when you’ve got love.

RM Parker
RM Parker
9 months ago

Good on you. I’ll also enjoy watching from the sidelines, sharing popcorn with my brilliant partner. You know when you’ve got it right, and when you do, there’s no need for solipsistic, cynical games.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

Sadly they don’t prey on each other – what would be the point – they prey on nice people – as well as the damaged, the desperate and the codependent.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Exactly.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Exactly.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
9 months ago

There is a degree of strategy in all successful relationships.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago

But they don’t hurt!

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
9 months ago

Bravo, good for you.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago

The affluent men these women are attempting to trap almost certainly understand the dynamic at play and are quite happy to do what they have always done
 exchange money for sex. In many ways it’s a more honest and upfront interaction than conventional dating. Essentially it’s a form of legal prostitution which should be expanded to replace permanent relationships and marriage.

Alison Tyler
Alison Tyler
9 months ago

Likewise. Enjoy.

RM Parker
RM Parker
9 months ago

Good on you. I’ll also enjoy watching from the sidelines, sharing popcorn with my brilliant partner. You know when you’ve got it right, and when you do, there’s no need for solipsistic, cynical games.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

Sadly they don’t prey on each other – what would be the point – they prey on nice people – as well as the damaged, the desperate and the codependent.

Lesley van Reenen
Lesley van Reenen
9 months ago

There is a degree of strategy in all successful relationships.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago

But they don’t hurt!

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
9 months ago

Bravo, good for you.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago

The affluent men these women are attempting to trap almost certainly understand the dynamic at play and are quite happy to do what they have always done
 exchange money for sex. In many ways it’s a more honest and upfront interaction than conventional dating. Essentially it’s a form of legal prostitution which should be expanded to replace permanent relationships and marriage.

Alison Tyler
Alison Tyler
9 months ago

Likewise. Enjoy.

Caroline Minnear
Caroline Minnear
9 months ago

Wowsers!
Humans that think and behave like that are equally worthy of each other and the games they play
in the mean time I’ll be hanging out with this good man that I look forward to growing old with.
Don’t need diamonds when you’ve got love.

Sue Frisby
Sue Frisby
9 months ago

I’ve not seen Pearl ‘preach manipulation’. I found her interesting when I saw her forthrightly saying women aren’t victims, we can do pretty much what we want these days.
Since then she has come out with some controversial ideas such as considering whether women should be allowed to vote. That got me wondering why some women were against the vote originally. It was a catalyst for me to question some of the things I just took/ take for granted. (Maybe some people feared that the traditional, even natural, relationship between women and men might be lost, to our detriment. Pearl is worth a listen if you are interested in seeing the pushback against the brand of feminism that is never satisfied, still looking for problems and not considering that feminism has done damage as well as good.

Robert Devaney
Robert Devaney
9 months ago
Reply to  Sue Frisby

Given that 3 UK women a week are murdered by partners or ex partners, you do not have to look far or hard for “problems”

Sam Barkes
Sam Barkes
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

Men are 80% of murder victims. You’re reaching.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Sam Barkes

Yeah, but they kill each other as well as women; accounting for 97% of violent crimes. Busy, busy, busy. A score women can’t even begin to compete with. Just because men are so busy killing other men doesn’t mean that they dont have time to kill a lot of women too! So wad r u talkin’ aboot?

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Sam Barkes

Yeah, but they kill each other as well as women; accounting for 97% of violent crimes. Busy, busy, busy. A score women can’t even begin to compete with. Just because men are so busy killing other men doesn’t mean that they dont have time to kill a lot of women too! So wad r u talkin’ aboot?

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

3 per week? That is easily explained by human psychological problems alone. You are looking at a tiny pathological segment of society.
Hundreds of surveys show that IPV is an equal proposition. Most men are taught never to hit a girl. Women commit the majority of lower-level IPV, then are shocked when men sometimes (rarely) strike back harder.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Humm, I see: justifiable homicide?

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

Humm, I see: justifiable homicide?

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

And 1 UK man per week, though I guess that doesn’t count.
And 3 UK per week in workplace accidents, how many women I wonder.

But leaving that aside, that’s about 15,000 odd in a century.

That’s less than the number of British men that died in a single day in the battle of the Somme.
Close to 1.5mn British soldiers died in wars in the last 150 odd years, pretty much all men, while the women were relaxing at home.

Do you think that’s a problem? Do you think it’s sexist that dying in war or doing hazardous occupations is entirely left to men?

Sam Barkes
Sam Barkes
9 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Partner homicide vs men is higher than the stats show because due to the difference in strength women will use covert methods and proxies rather than direct violence like a man would.
IPV is not a gendered issue.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Sam Barkes

No, it’s a sexed issue.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Sam Barkes

No, it’s a sexed issue.

odd taff
odd taff
9 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Nothing wrong with your numbers but the women at home weren’t relaxing, Many were doing jobs that had been vacated by the men at the front and others were making munitions or nursing. Yes relatively few women died in WW1 as a direct consequence of enemy action but they weren’t relaxing.

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  odd taff

Nobody said they were relaxing. But did they replace the men in the front lines so the death rate would be equal? Of course not. Most women are born misandrists.

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  odd taff

Nobody said they were relaxing. But did they replace the men in the front lines so the death rate would be equal? Of course not. Most women are born misandrists.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Must be a friend of the Yorkshire Ripper.

Sam Barkes
Sam Barkes
9 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Partner homicide vs men is higher than the stats show because due to the difference in strength women will use covert methods and proxies rather than direct violence like a man would.
IPV is not a gendered issue.

odd taff
odd taff
9 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Nothing wrong with your numbers but the women at home weren’t relaxing, Many were doing jobs that had been vacated by the men at the front and others were making munitions or nursing. Yes relatively few women died in WW1 as a direct consequence of enemy action but they weren’t relaxing.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Must be a friend of the Yorkshire Ripper.

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

3 women murdered? This absolute value is meaningless. How many men are murdered in comparison? Study some logic please and don’t pollute the airwaves.

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

300,000 men have died in the Ukraine war (on both sides), for the past 80 weeks. That is 3,750 men a week. Where are the women in this war? Far behind the front lines. Cry me a river.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

I haven’t heard of any men that have killed 7 babies and attempted to kill many more.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
John Dee
John Dee
9 months ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Well, there was this King called Herod…

Martin Ambrens
Martin Ambrens
8 months ago
Reply to  John Dee

Herod killed male babies only. Pretty sure.

Martin Ambrens
Martin Ambrens
8 months ago
Reply to  John Dee

Herod killed male babies only. Pretty sure.

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
8 months ago
Reply to  William Shaw

So this counts against all women? You’re the opposite of the misandrist, racist wokies who like to say that the majority of serial killers are white men.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Well, Dr. Shipman’s victims weren’t babies because they couldn’t leave him any money.

John Dee
John Dee
9 months ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Well, there was this King called Herod…

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
8 months ago
Reply to  William Shaw

So this counts against all women? You’re the opposite of the misandrist, racist wokies who like to say that the majority of serial killers are white men.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Well, Dr. Shipman’s victims weren’t babies because they couldn’t leave him any money.

Sam Barkes
Sam Barkes
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

Men are 80% of murder victims. You’re reaching.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

3 per week? That is easily explained by human psychological problems alone. You are looking at a tiny pathological segment of society.
Hundreds of surveys show that IPV is an equal proposition. Most men are taught never to hit a girl. Women commit the majority of lower-level IPV, then are shocked when men sometimes (rarely) strike back harder.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

And 1 UK man per week, though I guess that doesn’t count.
And 3 UK per week in workplace accidents, how many women I wonder.

But leaving that aside, that’s about 15,000 odd in a century.

That’s less than the number of British men that died in a single day in the battle of the Somme.
Close to 1.5mn British soldiers died in wars in the last 150 odd years, pretty much all men, while the women were relaxing at home.

Do you think that’s a problem? Do you think it’s sexist that dying in war or doing hazardous occupations is entirely left to men?

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

3 women murdered? This absolute value is meaningless. How many men are murdered in comparison? Study some logic please and don’t pollute the airwaves.

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

300,000 men have died in the Ukraine war (on both sides), for the past 80 weeks. That is 3,750 men a week. Where are the women in this war? Far behind the front lines. Cry me a river.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Robert Devaney

I haven’t heard of any men that have killed 7 babies and attempted to kill many more.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Sue Frisby

“saw her forthrightly saying women aren’t victims”
That a statement like that is considered deeply problematic, is in itself a concern.
It shows that young women are trained, not to be resilient or face up to life and win, but be endless victims who would rather blame external agencies, society or men for their failings.
And this is especially concerning because the target market is a class of upper class western women who face few barriers and if anything are highly privileged……I dread to think that the young girls I know might end up on that same old well trodden path, soft uni courses that involve no maths, nice NHS or uni or govt job, no genuine interest in broadening horizons….

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

But women are still vicimized especially when they’re young and naive.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

From my experience, most men at least in my generation, once past their teens / early twenties, don’t look to “victimise” women. It was a small minority who behaved badlt.

The problem is two fold.
While young women are taught about “men”, they have much less ability to spot and avoid the rotten apples.
And the incentives seem to work against decent men who do the right thing. A man who sleeps around, doesn’t take responsibility etc is actually better off thanks to our current social and legal systems.

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

And men are victimized when she takes the children, half the money, and receives unbounded alimony, and then cohabitates with a new man. Cry me a river.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

From my experience, most men at least in my generation, once past their teens / early twenties, don’t look to “victimise” women. It was a small minority who behaved badlt.

The problem is two fold.
While young women are taught about “men”, they have much less ability to spot and avoid the rotten apples.
And the incentives seem to work against decent men who do the right thing. A man who sleeps around, doesn’t take responsibility etc is actually better off thanks to our current social and legal systems.

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

And men are victimized when she takes the children, half the money, and receives unbounded alimony, and then cohabitates with a new man. Cry me a river.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Wow, hope these guys don’t have any daughters.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

But women are still vicimized especially when they’re young and naive.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Wow, hope these guys don’t have any daughters.

Robert Devaney
Robert Devaney
9 months ago
Reply to  Sue Frisby

Given that 3 UK women a week are murdered by partners or ex partners, you do not have to look far or hard for “problems”

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Sue Frisby

“saw her forthrightly saying women aren’t victims”
That a statement like that is considered deeply problematic, is in itself a concern.
It shows that young women are trained, not to be resilient or face up to life and win, but be endless victims who would rather blame external agencies, society or men for their failings.
And this is especially concerning because the target market is a class of upper class western women who face few barriers and if anything are highly privileged……I dread to think that the young girls I know might end up on that same old well trodden path, soft uni courses that involve no maths, nice NHS or uni or govt job, no genuine interest in broadening horizons….

Sue Frisby
Sue Frisby
9 months ago

I’ve not seen Pearl ‘preach manipulation’. I found her interesting when I saw her forthrightly saying women aren’t victims, we can do pretty much what we want these days.
Since then she has come out with some controversial ideas such as considering whether women should be allowed to vote. That got me wondering why some women were against the vote originally. It was a catalyst for me to question some of the things I just took/ take for granted. (Maybe some people feared that the traditional, even natural, relationship between women and men might be lost, to our detriment. Pearl is worth a listen if you are interested in seeing the pushback against the brand of feminism that is never satisfied, still looking for problems and not considering that feminism has done damage as well as good.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago

Men are changing too.

They have started asking what the heck a woman brings to the table, starting to ask WHY they should be expected to provide and share resources.

From a male perspective, if all a woman is bringing to the table is head games, youth and a great figure and expects resources (money) in return, then she is a short term purchase, not an investment. Any woman in that position, that only brings “hot” with a chance of sex, to the table, is a depreciating asset.This is the kind of woman you lease, not buy.

From a guys perspective, you trade in a woman like that regularly for a new one. More, because it is essentially a financial transaction, you need not feel any guilt or remorse for tossing them over.

As sad as it is, really, if these are the rules of the game, and women are setting the rules mind you, then a man’s best strategy is to work hard, build his own home and never share it with a woman. He should never give gifts, hoard his resources or spend them on his interests and only spend money on a woman when it suits him. The fact is, most men are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, they can cook, clean, do laundry, and they can fix and repair things in a house, and what they cannot do themselves they can pay someone to do for them. If they just want sex, hookup culture has made that pretty simple. Worst case, they can hire a hooker and probably a pretty hot one for the cost of taking any woman to a show and dinner.

At the end of the day, men really do not NEED to be in a committed relationship with a woman to live a comfortable life. We have each other for companionship. We can take care of and provide for ourselves. We have hobbies and interests. Apart from sex, what does a woman bring to the table, that we need today? And if that can be bought on an as needed basis, then why the heck would we invest long term in something that costs us more financially and in terms of time and stress? Never mind the risks. A woman today will bail on a man as soon as she is not happy. If you are married to her, she can take your home, your stuff, your money and your kids. If she wants to play hardball, she can run to a family court and say three magic words, “I am afraid.”.

A friend of mine, a divorce attorney, told me that the minute a woman stops working in a marriage, you should divorce her ASAP and have a prenup that says she will always work. Why? Because even if she is a surgeon, if she quits working for 3 years, then the courts will not look at the fact that she used to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, but will look only at those last 3 yrs where she had zero income, in determining alimony. This is particularly true if the couple has young kids and she says she wants to stay home.

For the love of God, there are sites out there now telling women that it is Ok to leave a good man if they are just not happy. As if the man is responsible for her happiness. We all know darn well that no woman is going to feel responsible for a man’s happiness.

No, the calculus has changed. For men, relationships are too risky and too expensive for very very little return.

Matt Slinger
Matt Slinger
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Wow this is a sad post. Sad, because you are probably a nice guy that has been scarred somehow and at the risk of sounding patronising you just haven’t found the right person yet. I’d ask you not to lose faith in the fact that there is someone out there who will put you first. The right person is totally free and offers you everything in return.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

I do not disagree that it is sad. But I do not think it is wrong either.

Look at the culture.

Men are bashed and vilified at every turn by women.

We hear endlessly about men abusing women, never mind that 40% of women admit to physically assaulting men they have been with.

We hear constantly that men are dogs that will leave in a minute for the next thing, yet 80% of divorces are filed by women, that goes to 90% for college educated women. The greatest predictor of a divorce is if the man loses his job or develops a mental illness. Can you imagine what a man would be called if he filed for divorce because his wife lost her job or developed sever depression? Whereas you know that a woman’s friends are gonna be like “You gotta protect yourself.”.

50% of married women will have an affair. If a man does it, he is a scumbag, if she does it then he must not have been meeting her needs. He failed if she cheats. He is a scumbag if he does.

It is estimated that 1/3 of all babies born are not the husbands or the boyfriends. The problem has gotten so bad that some states are now looking to require paternity tests before a birth certificate can be signed by the father. TN just passed that law and others are looking at it.

The abuse of protective orders has just gotten wildly out of control. Research suggests that up to 80% of them in some districts are simply for the purposes of gaining leverage in a divorce or revenge. Ask any divorce attorney. They will tell you that a PO is the fastest way to get your husband or boyfriend out of the house and in the case of a marriage, the fastest way to get posession of the home, the kids and get support. All that is required is to go to the JDR court and swear in front of a judge that you feel afraid. That is it. No prior history of abuse. No hearing with the man there. No evidence required. No police report. Just a statement of her feelings. The greatest predictor of whether a PO will come up in a divorce is income. The more money and assets on the line the more likely it is to happen.

Now seriously, what could any woman possibly bring to the table, that a man cannot provide for himself, that is worth the risk?

What can a woman UNIQUELY bring to his life that makes those risks worth taking?

But women will make you miserable if they are unhappy, regardless of the reason. The old adage “Happy wife. Happy life”. Ever seen anything about a happy husband? No. Cuz they do not give a crap.

Men are always measured by what they bring. It is only fair to ask the same question of women. My guess? Most of them will not have a good answer, they will look at you with a blank stare and think that just being themselves, sharing their time, is enough. But 90% of women find 80% of men unattractive or unfit for a relationship.

Champagne Socialist
Champagne Socialist
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

You are very sad person. I feel sorry for you.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago

Hey CS, even when you say something which is sensible in a right-wing sort of way, you still get down-voted! You must really get under their thin skins

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago

A truly sad person is one who has submitted to the abhorrent religion of socialism and has lost the ability to think freely.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago

Hey CS, even when you say something which is sensible in a right-wing sort of way, you still get down-voted! You must really get under their thin skins

Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago

A truly sad person is one who has submitted to the abhorrent religion of socialism and has lost the ability to think freely.

Champagne Socialist
Champagne Socialist
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

“50% of married women will have an affair.”
“It is estimated that 1/3 of all babies born are not the husbands or the boyfriends.”
“Research suggests that up to 80% of them in some districts are simply for the purposes of gaining leverage in a divorce or revenge.”
All of this is utter nonsense. Flat out lies.
Maybe some woman hurt you and maybe you are very sad but that is no excuse for dishonesty.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

“Men are bashed and vilified at every turn by women.”
The bashers are not representative of the majority of women. The just have a disproportionate access to media, being rich, white, urban, Western well-educated etc. Rural women in the village where I live do not hate men at all. Unfortunately, the voices of rural women are not considered or listened to and the urban whiney women deign to speak for all women.  But they don’t.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Daniel you really need some therapy. You’re a very bitter man.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Are ad hominem attacks the best response you can manage?
Daniel understands reality.
Boys and young men need this information.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Are ad hominem attacks the best response you can manage?
Daniel understands reality.
Boys and young men need this information.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Daniel, you are seriously mentally deranged. Better yet, an incel?

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago

Really Daniel?

How is that precisely?

Please, take a moment and counter each of the points I made. Please show me where there is an error in my facts, show me different research if you have it.

Then, please explain to me precisely why you think that my point, that men do not NEED to be in a relationship with any single woman, to live a good, satisfying life.

Please, tell me precisely what a man NEEDS from a woman that he is unable to provide for himself if he so chooses. That is, allowing for the fact that we A) have a strong hook up culture facilitated by apps with lots of women being willing to hook up for a body count and B) there are still lots of escorts and hookers out there if they feel the absolute need to get laid.

Finally, if you would please be so kind as to answer my earlier question. “What do YOU bring to a man that is so unique, so special, that he cannot find it elsewhere?” What do YOU bring to the table?

Cuz I will tell you, if you think bringing YOU and a pretty face is enough, then you are mistaken. Thats great for a date and a one night stand, but not nearly enough for an investment of time, energy, emotional commitment and money. It is nowhere near enough to take all the risks.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago

Really Daniel?

How is that precisely?

Please, take a moment and counter each of the points I made. Please show me where there is an error in my facts, show me different research if you have it.

Then, please explain to me precisely why you think that my point, that men do not NEED to be in a relationship with any single woman, to live a good, satisfying life.

Please, tell me precisely what a man NEEDS from a woman that he is unable to provide for himself if he so chooses. That is, allowing for the fact that we A) have a strong hook up culture facilitated by apps with lots of women being willing to hook up for a body count and B) there are still lots of escorts and hookers out there if they feel the absolute need to get laid.

Finally, if you would please be so kind as to answer my earlier question. “What do YOU bring to a man that is so unique, so special, that he cannot find it elsewhere?” What do YOU bring to the table?

Cuz I will tell you, if you think bringing YOU and a pretty face is enough, then you are mistaken. Thats great for a date and a one night stand, but not nearly enough for an investment of time, energy, emotional commitment and money. It is nowhere near enough to take all the risks.

Champagne Socialist
Champagne Socialist
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

You are very sad person. I feel sorry for you.

Champagne Socialist
Champagne Socialist
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

“50% of married women will have an affair.”
“It is estimated that 1/3 of all babies born are not the husbands or the boyfriends.”
“Research suggests that up to 80% of them in some districts are simply for the purposes of gaining leverage in a divorce or revenge.”
All of this is utter nonsense. Flat out lies.
Maybe some woman hurt you and maybe you are very sad but that is no excuse for dishonesty.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

“Men are bashed and vilified at every turn by women.”
The bashers are not representative of the majority of women. The just have a disproportionate access to media, being rich, white, urban, Western well-educated etc. Rural women in the village where I live do not hate men at all. Unfortunately, the voices of rural women are not considered or listened to and the urban whiney women deign to speak for all women.  But they don’t.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Daniel you really need some therapy. You’re a very bitter man.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Daniel, you are seriously mentally deranged. Better yet, an incel?

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

This is not sad but simply an accurate post. Accurate, because it reflects the reality of divorce rates, alimony / family courts, and the mindset of modern women.

And yes, he is probably a nice guy. The scumbag would actually be really happy about the rules governing relationships today. Sleep around, treat women like objects, take no responsibility, and the system works fine for you.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

Assuming Daniel has “everything” to offer.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

Totally disagree.
Daniel spelled out reality.
Our boys need this information.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

I do not disagree that it is sad. But I do not think it is wrong either.

Look at the culture.

Men are bashed and vilified at every turn by women.

We hear endlessly about men abusing women, never mind that 40% of women admit to physically assaulting men they have been with.

We hear constantly that men are dogs that will leave in a minute for the next thing, yet 80% of divorces are filed by women, that goes to 90% for college educated women. The greatest predictor of a divorce is if the man loses his job or develops a mental illness. Can you imagine what a man would be called if he filed for divorce because his wife lost her job or developed sever depression? Whereas you know that a woman’s friends are gonna be like “You gotta protect yourself.”.

50% of married women will have an affair. If a man does it, he is a scumbag, if she does it then he must not have been meeting her needs. He failed if she cheats. He is a scumbag if he does.

It is estimated that 1/3 of all babies born are not the husbands or the boyfriends. The problem has gotten so bad that some states are now looking to require paternity tests before a birth certificate can be signed by the father. TN just passed that law and others are looking at it.

The abuse of protective orders has just gotten wildly out of control. Research suggests that up to 80% of them in some districts are simply for the purposes of gaining leverage in a divorce or revenge. Ask any divorce attorney. They will tell you that a PO is the fastest way to get your husband or boyfriend out of the house and in the case of a marriage, the fastest way to get posession of the home, the kids and get support. All that is required is to go to the JDR court and swear in front of a judge that you feel afraid. That is it. No prior history of abuse. No hearing with the man there. No evidence required. No police report. Just a statement of her feelings. The greatest predictor of whether a PO will come up in a divorce is income. The more money and assets on the line the more likely it is to happen.

Now seriously, what could any woman possibly bring to the table, that a man cannot provide for himself, that is worth the risk?

What can a woman UNIQUELY bring to his life that makes those risks worth taking?

But women will make you miserable if they are unhappy, regardless of the reason. The old adage “Happy wife. Happy life”. Ever seen anything about a happy husband? No. Cuz they do not give a crap.

Men are always measured by what they bring. It is only fair to ask the same question of women. My guess? Most of them will not have a good answer, they will look at you with a blank stare and think that just being themselves, sharing their time, is enough. But 90% of women find 80% of men unattractive or unfit for a relationship.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

This is not sad but simply an accurate post. Accurate, because it reflects the reality of divorce rates, alimony / family courts, and the mindset of modern women.

And yes, he is probably a nice guy. The scumbag would actually be really happy about the rules governing relationships today. Sleep around, treat women like objects, take no responsibility, and the system works fine for you.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

Assuming Daniel has “everything” to offer.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Matt Slinger

Totally disagree.
Daniel spelled out reality.
Our boys need this information.

Last edited 9 months ago by William Shaw
UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

The legal system makes everything worse for men.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

No it doesn’t.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

You need to urgently come back to plant earth, or stop “smoking”.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

No it doesn’t.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  UnHerd Reader

You need to urgently come back to plant earth, or stop “smoking”.

T Bone
T Bone
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

You sound like me 10 years ago. I think skepticism is healthy because the anecdotal circumstances you’re referencing are real but I wouldn’t give up on all women. There are plenty of good ones out there but because society has become so transactional and impersonal, its indisputably more difficult to find a partner that compliments you.

Keep the skepticism but don’t give up.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Wow, your attitude towards women and relationships is very disturbing.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Well Clare, cannot say that your opinion matters much to me.

But…Keep in mind..

Over 50% of men under the age of 35 are not even trying to look for a date. They have no interest in even bothering.

It’s not men, young men in particular, who are online wondering why women do not approach them anymore. Nope, that is young women.

It is not men online complaining that women do not want to get married anymore. Nope, that would be women, young women in particular.

It is not women that have gotten so fed up that they are willing to actually leave the country to find someone, nope, that is young men who do not want to deal with modern western women.

It is not women being told by their mothers to never ever marry, but many fathers are telling their sons that they never should. Whole thing going around about that. Heck, there have been articles in the NYT’s telling fathers to stop doing it. Heck, my best friend is a long time divorce lawyer, he is dead set against men marrying and he thinks that they have to be morons to do it without a lock tight prenup. His friend, a female divorce attorney, agrees with him which is why she only represents men.

So Clare, what unique and special thing do you bring to the table? What could or would you be willing to give to a man that he cannot get for himself, do for himself, or pay someone for? What do you offer that would be motivation enough for a man to put his personal and financial resources on the line or invest them in you? Not what you would value or think he should value, but that HE would value.

Gonna bet that you have so little understanding of men that you cannot provide one good answer. Gonna bet that you function from the female, social narrative, of what men are.

In my experience, the only women who come close to really understanding men are those who have become mothers to sons and even most of them lose the thread after their boys hit their teen years.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

In case you haven’t noticed, more and more women are doing WITHOUT men… because we are done with being responsible for them in every way. So rest easy in your basement, we are not coming after/for you, especially not you.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago

Well that is cool. Enjoy.

AND…I think you will find that we do not need women to be responsible for us. YOU may think you do, but we do not and never have.

And I can say that as a man who earns hundreds of thousands of dollars a year (I’m a Sr. VP for an IT consulting firm) and has done it as a single dad of two kids for over 10 yrs. I have a nice 3 bedroom home in a gorgeous small town near DC. My daughter is in law school and my son on his way to VT. I’ve made the money, gotten the kids to where they are. (both refuse to talk to their mother, my daughter has not spoken to her mother in 8 yrs) I’ve kept the house clean, the clothes washed, cooked dinner almost every night, done the homework, done all the things necessary to run a home and raise kids to be successful.

I do not lack for dates. But, that has nothing to do with my point.

WHAT precisely does any women bring to the table with a man that would possibly justify the risk associated?

I might point out, that your comment is a PRIME example of why men are choosing not to take the risks and/or commit to or invest in a woman.

Men are logical creatures focused on problem solving. What did you expect the response was going to be from them when women told them they were not needed? That they would sit around feeling ashamed and inadequate? No, they heard you and said; “Ok, well then, I need a new approach.”. How liberating do you think it is to men to realize that they are not under any obligation to provide for a woman and children? Plus, if they do not need us, then there is no reason to marry them, so now we can spend all our money on ourselves with no consideration of what a woman wants. And since women have determined that sex is for entertainment purposes only, like some frat boy from the 80’s, there are plenty of willing partners to find.

Hot flash for you. Feminism did more for loutish men than it did for women’s happiness. Just look at the polling data. It did more for corporations than it did for women. It expanded the labor pool and generally speaking I find women make better workers who are less likely to ask for or fight for or negotiate higher pay. In short, it has kept wages down which is good for profits.

In fact, I was at a conference a few months ago where this guy from Wall Street was talking about how we had to get all those women that chose to stay home after COVID back into the labor market.

LOL…Danielle, women went from staying home, to having the choice, to now the are expected to not stay home. Being a stay at home mom is now a luxury only the wealthy can afford. Women did not win the right to work, they won the right to be wage slaves along with men, and gave up the right to be a mother and homemaker. And do not prove to me that you are an idiot by telling me a career is fulfilling. If careers were fulfilling then we would not get paid and most people, male and female, would not always be talking about retirement.

Last edited 9 months ago by Daniel P
William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Well said Daniel.
Best post in this thread.
Men need to educate their boys so they understand what you do.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
8 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

American, figures. An American who needs to let the world know how much he makes as the VP of an IT company, figures. Btw, are we supposed to be impressed? As for the rest of your diatribe, vertical filing.

Last edited 8 months ago by Danielle Treille
William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Well said Daniel.
Best post in this thread.
Men need to educate their boys so they understand what you do.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
8 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

American, figures. An American who needs to let the world know how much he makes as the VP of an IT company, figures. Btw, are we supposed to be impressed? As for the rest of your diatribe, vertical filing.

Last edited 8 months ago by Danielle Treille
Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago

Well that is cool. Enjoy.

AND…I think you will find that we do not need women to be responsible for us. YOU may think you do, but we do not and never have.

And I can say that as a man who earns hundreds of thousands of dollars a year (I’m a Sr. VP for an IT consulting firm) and has done it as a single dad of two kids for over 10 yrs. I have a nice 3 bedroom home in a gorgeous small town near DC. My daughter is in law school and my son on his way to VT. I’ve made the money, gotten the kids to where they are. (both refuse to talk to their mother, my daughter has not spoken to her mother in 8 yrs) I’ve kept the house clean, the clothes washed, cooked dinner almost every night, done the homework, done all the things necessary to run a home and raise kids to be successful.

I do not lack for dates. But, that has nothing to do with my point.

WHAT precisely does any women bring to the table with a man that would possibly justify the risk associated?

I might point out, that your comment is a PRIME example of why men are choosing not to take the risks and/or commit to or invest in a woman.

Men are logical creatures focused on problem solving. What did you expect the response was going to be from them when women told them they were not needed? That they would sit around feeling ashamed and inadequate? No, they heard you and said; “Ok, well then, I need a new approach.”. How liberating do you think it is to men to realize that they are not under any obligation to provide for a woman and children? Plus, if they do not need us, then there is no reason to marry them, so now we can spend all our money on ourselves with no consideration of what a woman wants. And since women have determined that sex is for entertainment purposes only, like some frat boy from the 80’s, there are plenty of willing partners to find.

Hot flash for you. Feminism did more for loutish men than it did for women’s happiness. Just look at the polling data. It did more for corporations than it did for women. It expanded the labor pool and generally speaking I find women make better workers who are less likely to ask for or fight for or negotiate higher pay. In short, it has kept wages down which is good for profits.

In fact, I was at a conference a few months ago where this guy from Wall Street was talking about how we had to get all those women that chose to stay home after COVID back into the labor market.

LOL…Danielle, women went from staying home, to having the choice, to now the are expected to not stay home. Being a stay at home mom is now a luxury only the wealthy can afford. Women did not win the right to work, they won the right to be wage slaves along with men, and gave up the right to be a mother and homemaker. And do not prove to me that you are an idiot by telling me a career is fulfilling. If careers were fulfilling then we would not get paid and most people, male and female, would not always be talking about retirement.

Last edited 9 months ago by Daniel P
Susie E
Susie E
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

I’m curious as to what you’re hopes/dreams are for your daughter. I’m guessing you’re going to want her to remain a wage slave so she never has to rely on a man. Please don’t encourage her to deny herself a loving husband and the joy of a family.
I think the biggest problem here is that many of us have forgotten what marriage really is. It’s the promise to continuously serve eachother until death do us part. Men and women have different roles to play in order to make this happen. I think our society has subverted this to such a huge extent the system is broken. I don’t want a husband who does the housework. I want a husband who comes home from work and appreciates the work I’ve put into raising the kids and keeping the house. As a society we definitely do not value women who do this. We think they should all be at work paying taxes.

You’re clearly very capable and a good father, but very bitter. I’m sorry that your ex wasn’t a good wife, but you need to move on for your children’s and grandchildren’s sake… I’m not sure this bitterness serves anyone in your family well. I also hope you’ll find a partner one day who doesn’t value you for your ability to do the housework and raise kids, but for your vision of the future you could build together. All the best.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Susie E

Susie,

I hope for her the same thing I hope for my son. I hope she lives the life that she envisions and dreams of and that she can feel valued and fulfilled as much as any human can. If that includes a husband and children then so be it.

I remind her constantly that she is building a LIFE and a career is just part of a life. When its all over, nobody looks back and wishes they had spent more time writing briefs. I also told her, that she should always be capable of providing for herself, and,if need be, for a husband and children. What happens if he gets critically ill? Not that she should always work, but always be capable of working. An insurance policy against bad things happening. Just as I taught her to shoot and hunt and combat knife fighting and got her to her black belt so she could protect herself. You hope to God she never has to shoot anyone, but if she ever had to, I know, and more importantly, she knows, that she can.

My son, a lot more complex. There are just so many risks that a boy takes. It ranges from asking the wrong girl out and getting humiliated on social media to having what you thought was consensual sex that she decides later was not and getting tossed out of school for it. It goes on to dealing with the kinds of women the article was about. And even if the majority of young women do not share these views to this extreme, most do not condemn it either. Hell, even my daughter told me she would go to bars and milk guys for drinks when she was broke. Both of her first year roommates were NOTORIOUS for using men because they were broke and wanted to go out. Their attitude about it is “Well, if they are dumb enough..and I gave them my time”. No man should expect sex for buying dinner but no
woman should let a man buy her dinner knowing that she has absolutely no interest in him beyond a free meal and not staying home watching Netflix.

Then, it goes all the way through to marriage and divorce. You hear women complaining all the time about what men do or do not do at home. You often hear “He just does not do what I need him to do.”. Well, have they ever once considered that the home is equally his home and that he gets a vote in the priorities and how things get done? Now, you say that to most women and what you will get back is that their way is the right way and he just needs to listen and do what she asks. As if men are complete incompetents with no agency, but we are not. We just have different perspectives. Have you ever heard a man wonder why his wife won’t just do what he asks and aerate the lawn the right way when he wants it done? And maybe he has a list of things too, like draining the hot water tank so it does not rust out or changing the furnace filter and cleaning the dryer vents to prevent a fire. Maybe he thinks leaving his shoes by the bed is ok even if she does not and in a reasonable world, one where he has equal say, they would compromise or he would get to leave his shoes there without being harassed.

But see, here is the thing. Women wanted to go out and work and not be at home. Ok, all good, go for it. BUT, they also did not want to give up control of the household. That women made most of rules for a home when they stayed home made sense because they had the responsibility of running it as their job. If they lacked the authority to run it then that would be pointless. For the same reason they had the largest role in how the kids were raised. But when women went to work and then demanded that their husbands step up at home to take on the duties of keeping up that home, beyond the traditional tasks of mowing lawns and cleaning gutters etc, they simultaniously also gave up sole authority. Husbands, because they now have more responsibility, also need authority over the priorities and their opinions matter. If he does the laundry and chooses to role socks instead of folding, that is ok, even if she does not like it. If he chooses to put the chairs up on the table when he mops, that is his perogative since he is the one doing it, regardless of her opinion on the matter. If he cooks dinner and gives the kids mac n cheese with a steak and she thinks they should have had chicken and salad, then she should cook. Same for men. If she cooked and you did not have to, just appreciate it. I honestly think that many women never expected that and it is why I think so many of them scramble and rush to stay ahead of things, and their husbands, they do not want to lose control. I remember my ex wife asking my opinion on some furniture she wanted to buy. I gave it to her. She got this look on her face and then said, “I knew you had opinions, just not so many.”. Eventually she told me that she only asked my opinion to validate her own.

Well, trying to have a full time job and maintain control there and trying to have full control of home and children will stretch anyone physically, mentally and emotionally. The result is that they make themselves, their husbands and their children miserable. Then, for too many of them, they conclude, supported by a culture that says we are entitled to be happy, that they are miserable. They cannot or will not quit working. They cannot or will not give up control of the home. So, they decide that the husband is the problem. Cannot get angry at your boss and blame her, you will get fired. Cannot blame your kids, you had them. If you do not want to blame yourself then the last, easiest target is your husband. If he was somehow better she would be happy. It never occurs to them that their husbands are not responsible for their happiness anymore than they are for his or that they are making themselves miserable by putting themselves in untenable positions. Nobody gets it all in this life. We have to make choices and compromises. But do not blame others for your choices and if you will not compromise, will not bend, then you will break. Roughly half of all marriages end in divorce. Depending on the study, anywhere from 70 to 80 percent are filed by women. That number goes up 10 pts if she has a college degree. The single largest reason given by women is just general dissatisfaction. So, if a man marries, he has roughly a 40% chance that she will divorce him and very likely the primary reason is just her general dissatisfaction with her life. That is gambling with bad odds. BTW….interestingly, these numbers are the same in lesbian divorces. The least likely couple to divorce are gay men. Make of that what you will. He also faces a 40% chance that at least once she will physically assault him. Friend of mine told me her mother used to punch her dad all the time. She thought that was normal and ok until her husband had other things to say about it. God help the man that strikes back and God help him if he calls the cops and she tells a different story.

So, what are the potential consequences of that bad bet a guy made?

Well, in the best case, his soon to be ex is proud and wants nothing but a quick divorce, split everything, no alimony and 50/50 custody. They still face years of arguments over custody on holidays etc, but not the worst case. This is the minority of divorces.

The average case today? Wife gets primary custody and child support in some amount. This also means that she will likely get possession of the family home if the court does not order it liquidated. Depending on the length of the marriage she will likely get some form of alimony up to about a max of 40% of his income for a period of at least 3 yrs or 60% of the duration of the marriage. Roughly. Depends on state and the particular court and how much a court thinks she can earn. My ex had a masters and made $150k a year but quit working before the divorce to show no income. She was expecting, in accordance with the guidelines, $3,300 a month in alimony and another $1,200 in child support. So dude, you are homeless and broke and to have your custody time you gotta figure out how to get a place and furnish it fast while paying her and your lawyer and maybe her lawyer too and you can bet her lawyer will ask the court for you to pay her bills and likely get it to some degree.

Now, in the worst case, she is REALLY vindictive or she cheated and knows that she may lose in court because of it or that she makes too much to get alimony. In this case, she goes down to the domestic relations court, often prompted by her lawyer, and swears in front of a judge that she is afraid. The court will immediately issue a protective order. The sherriff will show up at your house, tell you that you have 5 minutes to pack a bag and get out. They tell you that you cannot return, speak to your wife or your children or you face a felony. You will not get an actual hearing for from anywhere from 2 to 3 weeks. Now, you gotta find a lawyer to represent you, pay them, all while trying to work, find a place to sleep, and still having to pay all the household bills. I wont go into all of the details, but lets just say that you have ZERO chance of getting that PO overturned with the same judge. Ya might get it modified to allow you to see and talk with your kids, but dude there is no way your going back to that house. This is what is commonly referred to as the 3 day divorce. Day one, you get the initial PO. Day 2, you get the PO confirmed. Day 3, you use it as leverage to force your husband to give you everything you want because the PO effects his employment, his ability to own a firearm, his ability to rent a home. That PO means the he cannot get near you at school plays or soccer games or anywhere. He knows that at any time you can call the cops about almost anything and he risks a felony. SO, he will roll over to make it go away. Even if you lie in court to get that PO, no prosecutor is gonna come after you. Why? Because they do not want to be seen going after victims of domestic abuse. She will have the entire victims services department and social services and the prosecutors office behind her. Unless you are very wealthy, you will not be able to fight this.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Susie E

Susie,

I hope for her the same thing I hope for my son. I hope she lives the life that she envisions and dreams of and that she can feel valued and fulfilled as much as any human can. If that includes a husband and children then so be it.

I remind her constantly that she is building a LIFE and a career is just part of a life. When its all over, nobody looks back and wishes they had spent more time writing briefs. I also told her, that she should always be capable of providing for herself, and,if need be, for a husband and children. What happens if he gets critically ill? Not that she should always work, but always be capable of working. An insurance policy against bad things happening. Just as I taught her to shoot and hunt and combat knife fighting and got her to her black belt so she could protect herself. You hope to God she never has to shoot anyone, but if she ever had to, I know, and more importantly, she knows, that she can.

My son, a lot more complex. There are just so many risks that a boy takes. It ranges from asking the wrong girl out and getting humiliated on social media to having what you thought was consensual sex that she decides later was not and getting tossed out of school for it. It goes on to dealing with the kinds of women the article was about. And even if the majority of young women do not share these views to this extreme, most do not condemn it either. Hell, even my daughter told me she would go to bars and milk guys for drinks when she was broke. Both of her first year roommates were NOTORIOUS for using men because they were broke and wanted to go out. Their attitude about it is “Well, if they are dumb enough..and I gave them my time”. No man should expect sex for buying dinner but no
woman should let a man buy her dinner knowing that she has absolutely no interest in him beyond a free meal and not staying home watching Netflix.

Then, it goes all the way through to marriage and divorce. You hear women complaining all the time about what men do or do not do at home. You often hear “He just does not do what I need him to do.”. Well, have they ever once considered that the home is equally his home and that he gets a vote in the priorities and how things get done? Now, you say that to most women and what you will get back is that their way is the right way and he just needs to listen and do what she asks. As if men are complete incompetents with no agency, but we are not. We just have different perspectives. Have you ever heard a man wonder why his wife won’t just do what he asks and aerate the lawn the right way when he wants it done? And maybe he has a list of things too, like draining the hot water tank so it does not rust out or changing the furnace filter and cleaning the dryer vents to prevent a fire. Maybe he thinks leaving his shoes by the bed is ok even if she does not and in a reasonable world, one where he has equal say, they would compromise or he would get to leave his shoes there without being harassed.

But see, here is the thing. Women wanted to go out and work and not be at home. Ok, all good, go for it. BUT, they also did not want to give up control of the household. That women made most of rules for a home when they stayed home made sense because they had the responsibility of running it as their job. If they lacked the authority to run it then that would be pointless. For the same reason they had the largest role in how the kids were raised. But when women went to work and then demanded that their husbands step up at home to take on the duties of keeping up that home, beyond the traditional tasks of mowing lawns and cleaning gutters etc, they simultaniously also gave up sole authority. Husbands, because they now have more responsibility, also need authority over the priorities and their opinions matter. If he does the laundry and chooses to role socks instead of folding, that is ok, even if she does not like it. If he chooses to put the chairs up on the table when he mops, that is his perogative since he is the one doing it, regardless of her opinion on the matter. If he cooks dinner and gives the kids mac n cheese with a steak and she thinks they should have had chicken and salad, then she should cook. Same for men. If she cooked and you did not have to, just appreciate it. I honestly think that many women never expected that and it is why I think so many of them scramble and rush to stay ahead of things, and their husbands, they do not want to lose control. I remember my ex wife asking my opinion on some furniture she wanted to buy. I gave it to her. She got this look on her face and then said, “I knew you had opinions, just not so many.”. Eventually she told me that she only asked my opinion to validate her own.

Well, trying to have a full time job and maintain control there and trying to have full control of home and children will stretch anyone physically, mentally and emotionally. The result is that they make themselves, their husbands and their children miserable. Then, for too many of them, they conclude, supported by a culture that says we are entitled to be happy, that they are miserable. They cannot or will not quit working. They cannot or will not give up control of the home. So, they decide that the husband is the problem. Cannot get angry at your boss and blame her, you will get fired. Cannot blame your kids, you had them. If you do not want to blame yourself then the last, easiest target is your husband. If he was somehow better she would be happy. It never occurs to them that their husbands are not responsible for their happiness anymore than they are for his or that they are making themselves miserable by putting themselves in untenable positions. Nobody gets it all in this life. We have to make choices and compromises. But do not blame others for your choices and if you will not compromise, will not bend, then you will break. Roughly half of all marriages end in divorce. Depending on the study, anywhere from 70 to 80 percent are filed by women. That number goes up 10 pts if she has a college degree. The single largest reason given by women is just general dissatisfaction. So, if a man marries, he has roughly a 40% chance that she will divorce him and very likely the primary reason is just her general dissatisfaction with her life. That is gambling with bad odds. BTW….interestingly, these numbers are the same in lesbian divorces. The least likely couple to divorce are gay men. Make of that what you will. He also faces a 40% chance that at least once she will physically assault him. Friend of mine told me her mother used to punch her dad all the time. She thought that was normal and ok until her husband had other things to say about it. God help the man that strikes back and God help him if he calls the cops and she tells a different story.

So, what are the potential consequences of that bad bet a guy made?

Well, in the best case, his soon to be ex is proud and wants nothing but a quick divorce, split everything, no alimony and 50/50 custody. They still face years of arguments over custody on holidays etc, but not the worst case. This is the minority of divorces.

The average case today? Wife gets primary custody and child support in some amount. This also means that she will likely get possession of the family home if the court does not order it liquidated. Depending on the length of the marriage she will likely get some form of alimony up to about a max of 40% of his income for a period of at least 3 yrs or 60% of the duration of the marriage. Roughly. Depends on state and the particular court and how much a court thinks she can earn. My ex had a masters and made $150k a year but quit working before the divorce to show no income. She was expecting, in accordance with the guidelines, $3,300 a month in alimony and another $1,200 in child support. So dude, you are homeless and broke and to have your custody time you gotta figure out how to get a place and furnish it fast while paying her and your lawyer and maybe her lawyer too and you can bet her lawyer will ask the court for you to pay her bills and likely get it to some degree.

Now, in the worst case, she is REALLY vindictive or she cheated and knows that she may lose in court because of it or that she makes too much to get alimony. In this case, she goes down to the domestic relations court, often prompted by her lawyer, and swears in front of a judge that she is afraid. The court will immediately issue a protective order. The sherriff will show up at your house, tell you that you have 5 minutes to pack a bag and get out. They tell you that you cannot return, speak to your wife or your children or you face a felony. You will not get an actual hearing for from anywhere from 2 to 3 weeks. Now, you gotta find a lawyer to represent you, pay them, all while trying to work, find a place to sleep, and still having to pay all the household bills. I wont go into all of the details, but lets just say that you have ZERO chance of getting that PO overturned with the same judge. Ya might get it modified to allow you to see and talk with your kids, but dude there is no way your going back to that house. This is what is commonly referred to as the 3 day divorce. Day one, you get the initial PO. Day 2, you get the PO confirmed. Day 3, you use it as leverage to force your husband to give you everything you want because the PO effects his employment, his ability to own a firearm, his ability to rent a home. That PO means the he cannot get near you at school plays or soccer games or anywhere. He knows that at any time you can call the cops about almost anything and he risks a felony. SO, he will roll over to make it go away. Even if you lie in court to get that PO, no prosecutor is gonna come after you. Why? Because they do not want to be seen going after victims of domestic abuse. She will have the entire victims services department and social services and the prosecutors office behind her. Unless you are very wealthy, you will not be able to fight this.

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

In case you haven’t noticed, more and more women are doing WITHOUT men… because we are done with being responsible for them in every way. So rest easy in your basement, we are not coming after/for you, especially not you.

Susie E
Susie E
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

I’m curious as to what you’re hopes/dreams are for your daughter. I’m guessing you’re going to want her to remain a wage slave so she never has to rely on a man. Please don’t encourage her to deny herself a loving husband and the joy of a family.
I think the biggest problem here is that many of us have forgotten what marriage really is. It’s the promise to continuously serve eachother until death do us part. Men and women have different roles to play in order to make this happen. I think our society has subverted this to such a huge extent the system is broken. I don’t want a husband who does the housework. I want a husband who comes home from work and appreciates the work I’ve put into raising the kids and keeping the house. As a society we definitely do not value women who do this. We think they should all be at work paying taxes.

You’re clearly very capable and a good father, but very bitter. I’m sorry that your ex wasn’t a good wife, but you need to move on for your children’s and grandchildren’s sake… I’m not sure this bitterness serves anyone in your family well. I also hope you’ll find a partner one day who doesn’t value you for your ability to do the housework and raise kids, but for your vision of the future you could build together. All the best.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I can’t comment on the rest of it, but as a man who took on the responsibility of being the breadwinner and paying for all household expenses, and knowing a few other men with similar responsibility (but no women in such a role though)…..
I can vouch for the fact that it’s a losing proposition. Apart from the fact that society doesn’t respect our contribution and even vilifies us for not “sharing housework” (not true, incidentally),
The courts are heavily against you in case of divorce. You essentially are considered a wallet, with zero consideration for your kids or your relationship with them.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Well Clare, cannot say that your opinion matters much to me.

But…Keep in mind..

Over 50% of men under the age of 35 are not even trying to look for a date. They have no interest in even bothering.

It’s not men, young men in particular, who are online wondering why women do not approach them anymore. Nope, that is young women.

It is not men online complaining that women do not want to get married anymore. Nope, that would be women, young women in particular.

It is not women that have gotten so fed up that they are willing to actually leave the country to find someone, nope, that is young men who do not want to deal with modern western women.

It is not women being told by their mothers to never ever marry, but many fathers are telling their sons that they never should. Whole thing going around about that. Heck, there have been articles in the NYT’s telling fathers to stop doing it. Heck, my best friend is a long time divorce lawyer, he is dead set against men marrying and he thinks that they have to be morons to do it without a lock tight prenup. His friend, a female divorce attorney, agrees with him which is why she only represents men.

So Clare, what unique and special thing do you bring to the table? What could or would you be willing to give to a man that he cannot get for himself, do for himself, or pay someone for? What do you offer that would be motivation enough for a man to put his personal and financial resources on the line or invest them in you? Not what you would value or think he should value, but that HE would value.

Gonna bet that you have so little understanding of men that you cannot provide one good answer. Gonna bet that you function from the female, social narrative, of what men are.

In my experience, the only women who come close to really understanding men are those who have become mothers to sons and even most of them lose the thread after their boys hit their teen years.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I can’t comment on the rest of it, but as a man who took on the responsibility of being the breadwinner and paying for all household expenses, and knowing a few other men with similar responsibility (but no women in such a role though)…..
I can vouch for the fact that it’s a losing proposition. Apart from the fact that society doesn’t respect our contribution and even vilifies us for not “sharing housework” (not true, incidentally),
The courts are heavily against you in case of divorce. You essentially are considered a wallet, with zero consideration for your kids or your relationship with them.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Welcome to reality in 2023.
Young men are brainwashed by feminist in school.
They desperately need to know the facts you have explained so well.

Matt Slinger
Matt Slinger
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Wow this is a sad post. Sad, because you are probably a nice guy that has been scarred somehow and at the risk of sounding patronising you just haven’t found the right person yet. I’d ask you not to lose faith in the fact that there is someone out there who will put you first. The right person is totally free and offers you everything in return.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

The legal system makes everything worse for men.

T Bone
T Bone
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

You sound like me 10 years ago. I think skepticism is healthy because the anecdotal circumstances you’re referencing are real but I wouldn’t give up on all women. There are plenty of good ones out there but because society has become so transactional and impersonal, its indisputably more difficult to find a partner that compliments you.

Keep the skepticism but don’t give up.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Wow, your attitude towards women and relationships is very disturbing.

William Shaw
William Shaw
9 months ago
Reply to  Daniel P

Welcome to reality in 2023.
Young men are brainwashed by feminist in school.
They desperately need to know the facts you have explained so well.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago

Men are changing too.

They have started asking what the heck a woman brings to the table, starting to ask WHY they should be expected to provide and share resources.

From a male perspective, if all a woman is bringing to the table is head games, youth and a great figure and expects resources (money) in return, then she is a short term purchase, not an investment. Any woman in that position, that only brings “hot” with a chance of sex, to the table, is a depreciating asset.This is the kind of woman you lease, not buy.

From a guys perspective, you trade in a woman like that regularly for a new one. More, because it is essentially a financial transaction, you need not feel any guilt or remorse for tossing them over.

As sad as it is, really, if these are the rules of the game, and women are setting the rules mind you, then a man’s best strategy is to work hard, build his own home and never share it with a woman. He should never give gifts, hoard his resources or spend them on his interests and only spend money on a woman when it suits him. The fact is, most men are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, they can cook, clean, do laundry, and they can fix and repair things in a house, and what they cannot do themselves they can pay someone to do for them. If they just want sex, hookup culture has made that pretty simple. Worst case, they can hire a hooker and probably a pretty hot one for the cost of taking any woman to a show and dinner.

At the end of the day, men really do not NEED to be in a committed relationship with a woman to live a comfortable life. We have each other for companionship. We can take care of and provide for ourselves. We have hobbies and interests. Apart from sex, what does a woman bring to the table, that we need today? And if that can be bought on an as needed basis, then why the heck would we invest long term in something that costs us more financially and in terms of time and stress? Never mind the risks. A woman today will bail on a man as soon as she is not happy. If you are married to her, she can take your home, your stuff, your money and your kids. If she wants to play hardball, she can run to a family court and say three magic words, “I am afraid.”.

A friend of mine, a divorce attorney, told me that the minute a woman stops working in a marriage, you should divorce her ASAP and have a prenup that says she will always work. Why? Because even if she is a surgeon, if she quits working for 3 years, then the courts will not look at the fact that she used to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars, but will look only at those last 3 yrs where she had zero income, in determining alimony. This is particularly true if the couple has young kids and she says she wants to stay home.

For the love of God, there are sites out there now telling women that it is Ok to leave a good man if they are just not happy. As if the man is responsible for her happiness. We all know darn well that no woman is going to feel responsible for a man’s happiness.

No, the calculus has changed. For men, relationships are too risky and too expensive for very very little return.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

Men are meant to be milked for all they’re worth and summarily discarded the moment they step out of line. 

This whole thing is a bit of an arms race. While women are being shown how to take men for all they can get, men are being shown how to spot them, and either filter them out or categorise them as “recreational use only” – a modern day euphemism for harder words used in the past.

Andrew Dalton
Andrew Dalton
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Inevitable after the rise of terms like sexual marketplace or high value <men/women>. This is the rise of its consumer watchdog.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Dalton

You have read Jane Austen too, then…

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Dalton

I guess to some degree the dating scene and the marriage scene have always been transactional. Its just more out in the open today. It is more crass.

In the old days, the guy went out and worked, brought income and benefits to the household. The woman, managed and maintained the household and the kids with the money the man brought home. He put up with a commute, putting on a suite or a uniform, spending his day in an authoritarian system, dealing with bosses and customers, competing against his peers for advancement or even job security, to assure that his wife and kids had the things they needed to live. She put up with the tasks of managing a family life and home.

It was a contract agreement between the two people that was designed to assure that the important things in life were maintained and cared for. Namely, the needs of a family, home, food, health insurance, clean clothes, education, retirement.

Anyone who has been through a divorce knows just how like a contract for a business partnership a marriage really is.

All these women saying that they want a high value man, are they asking themselves honestly if they are actually high value women? If they are, what makes them so? What constitutes a high value man is dictated by women. What constitutes a high value women is dictated by men. Have these women ever bothered to ask themselves what a man considers to be high value and how they measure up? Cuz that is gonna determine whether they are in the game for a high value man.

I do not know for sure, but I would hazard a guess to say that most women have no clue what most men value in a woman and I suspect that they would be surprised given that they spend so much time telling each other what men value without ever actually asking a man. They are too narcissistic for that. More, I do not think they would believe us even if they did ask and we told them the truth. And, I also think they would have a hard time understanding that what a man values is based on context. If you are 20 yrs old with no job or are in college, with no intention of being ready to marry for a decade or more, you see one thing. If you are 33, set in your career, you seek something else. Its the old, women you date v. women you marry thing. Young men want excitement and sex. Older men, over 33 or so, want peace, reliability, a good partner to get through life with, they want to be respected and appreciated. Logically, a young woman, say in her mid to late 20’s, who wants to settle down, should look for a guy that is 6 to 10 yrs older. Logically, a guy should wait til he is in his late 20’s to early 30’s or so to marry and, if he wants children, date someone in her mid to late 20’s. If you do not want children, well then, all bets are off, but you still want a partner that brings peace and not chaos to your life. But, as Katherine Hepburn said, “The only reason for marriage is the legitimization of children.”.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Dalton

You have read Jane Austen too, then…

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Dalton

I guess to some degree the dating scene and the marriage scene have always been transactional. Its just more out in the open today. It is more crass.

In the old days, the guy went out and worked, brought income and benefits to the household. The woman, managed and maintained the household and the kids with the money the man brought home. He put up with a commute, putting on a suite or a uniform, spending his day in an authoritarian system, dealing with bosses and customers, competing against his peers for advancement or even job security, to assure that his wife and kids had the things they needed to live. She put up with the tasks of managing a family life and home.

It was a contract agreement between the two people that was designed to assure that the important things in life were maintained and cared for. Namely, the needs of a family, home, food, health insurance, clean clothes, education, retirement.

Anyone who has been through a divorce knows just how like a contract for a business partnership a marriage really is.

All these women saying that they want a high value man, are they asking themselves honestly if they are actually high value women? If they are, what makes them so? What constitutes a high value man is dictated by women. What constitutes a high value women is dictated by men. Have these women ever bothered to ask themselves what a man considers to be high value and how they measure up? Cuz that is gonna determine whether they are in the game for a high value man.

I do not know for sure, but I would hazard a guess to say that most women have no clue what most men value in a woman and I suspect that they would be surprised given that they spend so much time telling each other what men value without ever actually asking a man. They are too narcissistic for that. More, I do not think they would believe us even if they did ask and we told them the truth. And, I also think they would have a hard time understanding that what a man values is based on context. If you are 20 yrs old with no job or are in college, with no intention of being ready to marry for a decade or more, you see one thing. If you are 33, set in your career, you seek something else. Its the old, women you date v. women you marry thing. Young men want excitement and sex. Older men, over 33 or so, want peace, reliability, a good partner to get through life with, they want to be respected and appreciated. Logically, a young woman, say in her mid to late 20’s, who wants to settle down, should look for a guy that is 6 to 10 yrs older. Logically, a guy should wait til he is in his late 20’s to early 30’s or so to marry and, if he wants children, date someone in her mid to late 20’s. If you do not want children, well then, all bets are off, but you still want a partner that brings peace and not chaos to your life. But, as Katherine Hepburn said, “The only reason for marriage is the legitimization of children.”.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

The old adage about girls you date and girls you marry comes to mind.
But, I think our culture over the last 40 yrs has convinced most young women that their goal in life is to be all the things that make you the girl to be dated.

Andrew Dalton
Andrew Dalton
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Inevitable after the rise of terms like sexual marketplace or high value <men/women>. This is the rise of its consumer watchdog.

Daniel P
Daniel P
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

The old adage about girls you date and girls you marry comes to mind.
But, I think our culture over the last 40 yrs has convinced most young women that their goal in life is to be all the things that make you the girl to be dated.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

Men are meant to be milked for all they’re worth and summarily discarded the moment they step out of line. 

This whole thing is a bit of an arms race. While women are being shown how to take men for all they can get, men are being shown how to spot them, and either filter them out or categorise them as “recreational use only” – a modern day euphemism for harder words used in the past.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

“Some women tackle power inequalities in society by the manipulation, exploitation or indeed humiliation of men, but this takes place within the context of the gender hierarchy where men retain pre-eminence.”

And there is the heart of modern pop feminism in all its awfulness. Treat nice, kind, generous, naive men as dupes to be used – all under the banner “you go girl”. And it is the nice men. The nasty men are busy doing the same back.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

There are no “power inequalities” between the sexes in society today. There are only power inequalities between individuals. Pearl has a point there.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

So you’re saying it’s a match, the nasty men and the nasty women are doing it to each other.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I’m saying the opposite. Not sure how you misread my post.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

I’m saying the opposite. Not sure how you misread my post.

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

There are no “power inequalities” between the sexes in society today. There are only power inequalities between individuals. Pearl has a point there.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

So you’re saying it’s a match, the nasty men and the nasty women are doing it to each other.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

“Some women tackle power inequalities in society by the manipulation, exploitation or indeed humiliation of men, but this takes place within the context of the gender hierarchy where men retain pre-eminence.”

And there is the heart of modern pop feminism in all its awfulness. Treat nice, kind, generous, naive men as dupes to be used – all under the banner “you go girl”. And it is the nice men. The nasty men are busy doing the same back.

Milton Gibbon
Milton Gibbon
9 months ago

A small point. The woman pictured with the devil incarnate is Pearl Davis, held up as a mirror to the main thrust of the article for about two sentence (due to her over-the-top trad leanings which mock the women far more effectively than the article does). May i suggest a change of headline pic. I have never heard of any of the other people in this article but it is only fair to represent the people you are critiquing.

Last edited 9 months ago by Milton Gibbon
kalina r
kalina r
9 months ago
Reply to  Milton Gibbon

[deleted]

Last edited 9 months ago by kalina r
Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Milton Gibbon

Good point.
Men and women are very different in temperament, and that is biological. When will the Left understand that?

Last edited 9 months ago by Retan King
Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Retan King

These guys just don’t seem to get it that women’s basic biology is different than men’s. By having sex with an untrustworthy guy she will not only risk losing her reputation, but maybe her health from carcinogenic birth control or a bad abortion or lose her future to an unplanned pregnancy. Not something men ever fear – it’s not even mentioned here amid all the braying and bullying about how evil women are and how VICTIMIZED men are; so caught up in their self-referential histrionics they can’t see reality.

Betsy Warrior
Betsy Warrior
4 months ago
Reply to  Retan King

These guys just don’t seem to get it that women’s basic biology is different than men’s. By having sex with an untrustworthy guy she will not only risk losing her reputation, but maybe her health from carcinogenic birth control or a bad abortion or lose her future to an unplanned pregnancy. Not something men ever fear – it’s not even mentioned here amid all the braying and bullying about how evil women are and how VICTIMIZED men are; so caught up in their self-referential histrionics they can’t see reality.

kalina r
kalina r
9 months ago
Reply to  Milton Gibbon

[deleted]

Last edited 9 months ago by kalina r
Retan King
Retan King
9 months ago
Reply to  Milton Gibbon

Good point.
Men and women are very different in temperament, and that is biological. When will the Left understand that?

Last edited 9 months ago by Retan King
Milton Gibbon
Milton Gibbon
9 months ago

A small point. The woman pictured with the devil incarnate is Pearl Davis, held up as a mirror to the main thrust of the article for about two sentence (due to her over-the-top trad leanings which mock the women far more effectively than the article does). May i suggest a change of headline pic. I have never heard of any of the other people in this article but it is only fair to represent the people you are critiquing.

Last edited 9 months ago by Milton Gibbon
David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

Most people want to fall in love. 

But what if we lose the capacity, the trust and the generosity of heart to be able to do so?

Great piece btw.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Grandiose thinking. Try again. Fail better.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago
Reply to  David Morley

Grandiose thinking. Try again. Fail better.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago

Most people want to fall in love. 

But what if we lose the capacity, the trust and the generosity of heart to be able to do so?

Great piece btw.

Ali Maegraith
Ali Maegraith
9 months ago

Gosh we really are a confused and desperately sad bunch. Let’s lie, cheat and manipulate each other in our relationships until we are left dragging our lifeless and terribly wounded bodies and souls around the place. There is another way towards wonderfully satisfying relationships that is exceedingly better and it starts with kindness and honesty.

Ali Maegraith
Ali Maegraith
9 months ago

Gosh we really are a confused and desperately sad bunch. Let’s lie, cheat and manipulate each other in our relationships until we are left dragging our lifeless and terribly wounded bodies and souls around the place. There is another way towards wonderfully satisfying relationships that is exceedingly better and it starts with kindness and honesty.

Mark V
Mark V
9 months ago

To single ladies, she offers the following on sex: “The longer you hold off, the more that he will like you.” To married ones: “Don’t give it up every time he want it. Make him wait, make him work for it still. Gotta make him chase!”

I’m sorry but this is just good advice

Mark V
Mark V
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

The problem with contemporary relationships isn’t people playing hard to get, which is healthy – don’t give yourself up too easily or you devalue yourself.

The problem is bailing or quitting on what ought to be a serious relationship (ie you have kids or are married) at the first sign of hardship.

You only really know you love someone when fate has tested your resolve through hardship and you stuck by each other.

Robbie K
Robbie K
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

I agree it’s good advice, the wording however is somewhat questionable.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

Mark – do you have a masochistic bent? It’s terrible advice because it is suggesting manipulation and power games as a way of running relationships. And it only works with weak and desperate men.

R Wright
R Wright
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

“I’m sorry but this is just good advice”
It was when women were doing this process in their early 20s, not in 2023 when they’re usually doing it in their early 30s.

Sam Barkes
Sam Barkes
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

Disagree because the intent they have isn’t to get commitment from a good man and family. It’s to deceive, exploit and abuse a naive rich and supplicating man.

Last edited 9 months ago by Sam Barkes
UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

It’s the complete lack of gratitude, the “I deserve this” mentality, that irks me. One should want to do things for people you care about, and be grateful for gifts received.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

It does however presuppose that women never initiate. Women are as least as horny as men, and probably hornier. Any man who hasn’t figured that out must have been born ugly.  
https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/06/turns-out-women-have-really-really-strong-sex-drives-can-men-handle-it/276598/

Last edited 9 months ago by Frank McCusker
Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Thank you for your comment. And the last sentence made me laugh!

Danielle Treille
Danielle Treille
9 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Thank you for your comment. And the last sentence made me laugh!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

A couple of things…….. what’s with the “very time he want it” didn’t she mean to write “everytime he wants it”. And I find it irritating when people say “sorry” before expressing an opinion. And do you really mean it’s good advice?

Susie E
Susie E
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Sounds like awful advice to me! Has sex become a tool for manipulation, rather than a way to solidify your bond within a marriage? Surely both parties should want to do it as often as reasonably possible (within the confines of working hard to bring home the bacon and keep the house running/kids cared for). This kind of advice is mind boggling to me! Why make one of the cornerstones of a good marriage into a bargaining chip, unless you want to invite bitterness and resentment into your home?

Daniel P
Daniel P
8 months ago
Reply to  Susie E

Yes Susie, unfortunately I think that it has for a large number of the female population.

That aside, it is a really really bad strategy. First, men beyond their mid 20’s generally DO want sex but not for the reasons that most women think. Sure, its fun, but more importantly it is an affirmation of affection and an opportunity for emotional intimacy that most men will not allow themselves outside that situation.

In short, and I am sure women are the same, sometimes you just wanna F^ck and sometimes you want to make love.

But, men are genetically predisposed and then socially trained, to keep their problems to themselves and stifle their emotions. The latter, with good reason. Anyone who has ever had rushes of testosterone in their system can tell you just how aggressive it can make you feel, how prone to risk taking. If teen boys are not taught how to discipline their emotions bad things can happen. Ask most men and most of them could tell you that they have been to a party or to bar or even in a stressful situation where they can just tell that another man is massively pumped up and looking for a fight, just waiting for a reason to have one. This is particularly true of young men. It is that emotional discipline that keeps men from continuously engaging in some form of violence like punching some guy that looked at his girlfriend the wrong way, it is that discipline that allows him to take “No” for an answer even if a woman crawls into bed naked with him, it is what keeps him from racing his motorcycle on the highway at 100 mph on a dare. It is also what allows men to take one rejection after another while trying to date and still find the fortitude to go back and try again. And, lets be honest, a lot of women are flat out cruel to these young men they reject and it is worse today with social media.

But this discipline comes at a cost. That cost is the learned inability to expose emotions. It does not help that for most men, when they DO express emotions, that vulnerability will be used against them at some point. So they build up armor that is difficult to take off. That sweet 10 yr old boy is still in there, but he is coated in layers or emotional armor that very likely only one woman will ever get a chance to look behind.

One of the few times that a man has real emotional intimacy is with his partner engaged in sex. It is a safe space, or should be, or is at its best. It is an affirmation to him that she is there and still values him. Withholding sex is the exact opposite.

So when women weaponize sex, they are not just weaponizing an orgasm, they are weaponizing a mans desire for emotional intimacy against him. That will really hurt and it is a major violation of trust that a woman would weaponize such a thing. It means he will likely never trust her again, ever. He is not gonna risk that. No trust, then there is no relationship.

SO, men will go seek it elsewhere or they will simply withdraw or leave. Those are his only options. What is very likely NOT going to happen is that the woman will get the response she was looking for, some form of compliance. No, he will be hurt, he will be very angry and he will wall himself off if he is a decent guy with discipline. The bad guys with no discipline will beat the crap out of her. Funny thing is, guys know who those bad guys are, because they put us on edge too, we know, almost instinctively who the guy with the hair trigger and a willingness to be violent is and we watch them closely.

Daniel P
Daniel P
8 months ago
Reply to  Susie E

Yes Susie, unfortunately I think that it has for a large number of the female population.

That aside, it is a really really bad strategy. First, men beyond their mid 20’s generally DO want sex but not for the reasons that most women think. Sure, its fun, but more importantly it is an affirmation of affection and an opportunity for emotional intimacy that most men will not allow themselves outside that situation.

In short, and I am sure women are the same, sometimes you just wanna F^ck and sometimes you want to make love.

But, men are genetically predisposed and then socially trained, to keep their problems to themselves and stifle their emotions. The latter, with good reason. Anyone who has ever had rushes of testosterone in their system can tell you just how aggressive it can make you feel, how prone to risk taking. If teen boys are not taught how to discipline their emotions bad things can happen. Ask most men and most of them could tell you that they have been to a party or to bar or even in a stressful situation where they can just tell that another man is massively pumped up and looking for a fight, just waiting for a reason to have one. This is particularly true of young men. It is that emotional discipline that keeps men from continuously engaging in some form of violence like punching some guy that looked at his girlfriend the wrong way, it is that discipline that allows him to take “No” for an answer even if a woman crawls into bed naked with him, it is what keeps him from racing his motorcycle on the highway at 100 mph on a dare. It is also what allows men to take one rejection after another while trying to date and still find the fortitude to go back and try again. And, lets be honest, a lot of women are flat out cruel to these young men they reject and it is worse today with social media.

But this discipline comes at a cost. That cost is the learned inability to expose emotions. It does not help that for most men, when they DO express emotions, that vulnerability will be used against them at some point. So they build up armor that is difficult to take off. That sweet 10 yr old boy is still in there, but he is coated in layers or emotional armor that very likely only one woman will ever get a chance to look behind.

One of the few times that a man has real emotional intimacy is with his partner engaged in sex. It is a safe space, or should be, or is at its best. It is an affirmation to him that she is there and still values him. Withholding sex is the exact opposite.

So when women weaponize sex, they are not just weaponizing an orgasm, they are weaponizing a mans desire for emotional intimacy against him. That will really hurt and it is a major violation of trust that a woman would weaponize such a thing. It means he will likely never trust her again, ever. He is not gonna risk that. No trust, then there is no relationship.

SO, men will go seek it elsewhere or they will simply withdraw or leave. Those are his only options. What is very likely NOT going to happen is that the woman will get the response she was looking for, some form of compliance. No, he will be hurt, he will be very angry and he will wall himself off if he is a decent guy with discipline. The bad guys with no discipline will beat the crap out of her. Funny thing is, guys know who those bad guys are, because they put us on edge too, we know, almost instinctively who the guy with the hair trigger and a willingness to be violent is and we watch them closely.

Susie E
Susie E
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Sounds like awful advice to me! Has sex become a tool for manipulation, rather than a way to solidify your bond within a marriage? Surely both parties should want to do it as often as reasonably possible (within the confines of working hard to bring home the bacon and keep the house running/kids cared for). This kind of advice is mind boggling to me! Why make one of the cornerstones of a good marriage into a bargaining chip, unless you want to invite bitterness and resentment into your home?

Mark V
Mark V
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

The problem with contemporary relationships isn’t people playing hard to get, which is healthy – don’t give yourself up too easily or you devalue yourself.

The problem is bailing or quitting on what ought to be a serious relationship (ie you have kids or are married) at the first sign of hardship.

You only really know you love someone when fate has tested your resolve through hardship and you stuck by each other.

Robbie K
Robbie K
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

I agree it’s good advice, the wording however is somewhat questionable.

David Morley
David Morley
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

Mark – do you have a masochistic bent? It’s terrible advice because it is suggesting manipulation and power games as a way of running relationships. And it only works with weak and desperate men.

R Wright
R Wright
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

“I’m sorry but this is just good advice”
It was when women were doing this process in their early 20s, not in 2023 when they’re usually doing it in their early 30s.

Sam Barkes
Sam Barkes
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

Disagree because the intent they have isn’t to get commitment from a good man and family. It’s to deceive, exploit and abuse a naive rich and supplicating man.

Last edited 9 months ago by Sam Barkes
UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

It’s the complete lack of gratitude, the “I deserve this” mentality, that irks me. One should want to do things for people you care about, and be grateful for gifts received.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

It does however presuppose that women never initiate. Women are as least as horny as men, and probably hornier. Any man who hasn’t figured that out must have been born ugly.  
https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/06/turns-out-women-have-really-really-strong-sex-drives-can-men-handle-it/276598/

Last edited 9 months ago by Frank McCusker
Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Mark V

A couple of things…….. what’s with the “very time he want it” didn’t she mean to write “everytime he wants it”. And I find it irritating when people say “sorry” before expressing an opinion. And do you really mean it’s good advice?

Mark V
Mark V
9 months ago

To single ladies, she offers the following on sex: “The longer you hold off, the more that he will like you.” To married ones: “Don’t give it up every time he want it. Make him wait, make him work for it still. Gotta make him chase!”

I’m sorry but this is just good advice

Adrian Clark
Adrian Clark
9 months ago

When we can find the desire to be charitable to Andrew Tate by referring to him as a kickboxing world champion, entrepreneur and ethicist then we’ll know we’re in a civilising domain. Modelling the standard to which you’d aspire would be a helpful approach.

Adrian Clark
Adrian Clark
9 months ago

When we can find the desire to be charitable to Andrew Tate by referring to him as a kickboxing world champion, entrepreneur and ethicist then we’ll know we’re in a civilising domain. Modelling the standard to which you’d aspire would be a helpful approach.

Carol Hayden
Carol Hayden
9 months ago

Always useful to look at official stats eg UK
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/march2022#:~:text=%2Dbased%20study).-,Sex,a%20decrease%20the%20previous%20year.
yes, more men than women are murdered each year, but the common denominator is male violence

Carol Hayden
Carol Hayden
9 months ago

Always useful to look at official stats eg UK
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/articles/homicideinenglandandwales/march2022#:~:text=%2Dbased%20study).-,Sex,a%20decrease%20the%20previous%20year.
yes, more men than women are murdered each year, but the common denominator is male violence

j watson
j watson
9 months ago

‘What will survive is Love’ wrote our Phil shortly after flagging that Sexual Intercourse had commenced in 63.
Can take a lifetime to grasp that

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  j watson

What?!

j watson
j watson
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Phillip Larkin CK – lines from two of the most famous 20th century English language poems and probably couple of the most famous phrases. He covered both themes the article references. Immediately what came to mind when reading the article.

Mark Gourley
Mark Gourley
9 months ago
Reply to  j watson

Yes indeed but what a strange love life he had.

Mark Gourley
Mark Gourley
9 months ago
Reply to  j watson

Yes indeed but what a strange love life he had.

j watson
j watson
9 months ago
Reply to  Clare Knight

Phillip Larkin CK – lines from two of the most famous 20th century English language poems and probably couple of the most famous phrases. He covered both themes the article references. Immediately what came to mind when reading the article.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  j watson

What?!

j watson
j watson
9 months ago

‘What will survive is Love’ wrote our Phil shortly after flagging that Sexual Intercourse had commenced in 63.
Can take a lifetime to grasp that

William Miller
William Miller
8 months ago

I feel like everything (and I mean everything) is a scam. Trust is difficult in the modern world. Is everyone on the take?

Zirrus VanDevere
Zirrus VanDevere
9 months ago

Very concisely put, thank you

Last edited 9 months ago by Zirrus VanDevere
UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
8 months ago

Yes, “Most people want to fall in love. Most people want to find a partner. And most people understand that these desires are not grotesque weaknesses, but a normal — and, if you’re lucky, wonderful — part of the human experience.” However, given the confusion heaped on people today is it any wonder that they seek guidance anywhere they might find it? Here is a link to a discussion between Piers Morgan and Mikhaila Peterson that points it out clearly.
(102) Piers Morgan vs Mikhaila Peterson | The Full Interview – YouTube

UnHerd Reader
UnHerd Reader
8 months ago

Kat, I have read your article 3 times. I feel moved to tell you that your reader would have been best served had you started with the last 3 sentences. Not until I read and reread those sentences, did I understand what you were trying to say.

Alison Wren
Alison Wren
9 months ago

Having been born under George VIth I have seen the whole sexual revolution firsthand. Whilst I welcomed reliable contraception and legalised abortion (before which few of my contemporaries would consider PIV sex with anyone they couldn’t trust to stick with them if pregnancy ensued)it has sadly impacted on men’s pressures on women to sleep with them too rapidly, often on a first date. I think I’d like to go back to what we had in the 1970s, not a requirement of virginity on the wedding night, but men being more kind and respectful! Incidentally I also think all men should pay for the children they sire, a lot when the child is a baby (to be given to the mother) and decreasing as full-time care is less necessary. And abolish legal marriage it was only ever about attaching men to children, DNA does that now!!!

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Alison Wren

Why abolish marriage it can be a choice as it is now.

Clare Knight
Clare Knight
9 months ago
Reply to  Alison Wren

Why abolish marriage it can be a choice as it is now.

Alison Wren
Alison Wren
9 months ago

Having been born under George VIth I have seen the whole sexual revolution firsthand. Whilst I welcomed reliable contraception and legalised abortion (before which few of my contemporaries would consider PIV sex with anyone they couldn’t trust to stick with them if pregnancy ensued)it has sadly impacted on men’s pressures on women to sleep with them too rapidly, often on a first date. I think I’d like to go back to what we had in the 1970s, not a requirement of virginity on the wedding night, but men being more kind and respectful! Incidentally I also think all men should pay for the children they sire, a lot when the child is a baby (to be given to the mother) and decreasing as full-time care is less necessary. And abolish legal marriage it was only ever about attaching men to children, DNA does that now!!!

Champagne Socialist
Champagne Socialist
9 months ago

I’m looking forward to seeing the flood of bitter misogny that this post begets!!!!
Go ahead lads, prove me right again!

T Bone
T Bone
9 months ago

As a Critical Socialist with luxury values, does your mind auto-classify other readers into good and bad buckets with the Good being empathetic, tolerant sages and the Bad being irredeemable morons guilty of some vague “Ism” concocted in a University faculty lounge?

The article was far from a Man-hating rant. It was actually a call for stable, traditional monogamous relationships not the self-love mentality that generally promotes instability and leads to misery.

Champagne Socialist
Champagne Socialist
9 months ago
Reply to  T Bone

You want to try that again, old boy, but with slightly less gibberish this time?

Last edited 9 months ago by Champagne Socialist
harry storm
harry storm
9 months ago

The only exception to the continuous gibberish you peddle is your choice of name, which I’m sure is 100% accurate.

harry storm
harry storm
9 months ago

The only exception to the continuous gibberish you peddle is your choice of name, which I’m sure is 100% accurate.

Stuart Bennett
Stuart Bennett
9 months ago
Reply to  T Bone

I rather like Pearl (pictured). Some of the things she offered up on Triggernometry were a little too far fetched but she’s really grown on me and makes some good points. I’ve not watched much but some of the talk groups can be very enlightening, and funny!

Matt S
Matt S
9 months ago
Reply to  Stuart Bennett

Some good views which are then tarnished by a number of pretty awful ones. Removing the right to vote for all women because some don’t want to being one. Another being “God, men then women” as the order of things. Unfortunately, one dead fly in my soup is enough to ruin it for me.

Matt S
Matt S
9 months ago
Reply to  Stuart Bennett

Some good views which are then tarnished by a number of pretty awful ones. Removing the right to vote for all women because some don’t want to being one. Another being “God, men then women” as the order of things. Unfortunately, one dead fly in my soup is enough to ruin it for me.

Champagne Socialist
Champagne Socialist
9 months ago
Reply to  T Bone

You want to try that again, old boy, but with slightly less gibberish this time?

Last edited 9 months ago by Champagne Socialist
Stuart Bennett
Stuart Bennett
9 months ago
Reply to  T Bone

I rather like Pearl (pictured). Some of the things she offered up on Triggernometry were a little too far fetched but she’s really grown on me and makes some good points. I’ve not watched much but some of the talk groups can be very enlightening, and funny!

Christopher Hunter
Christopher Hunter
9 months ago

I’m all in favour of certain women keeping their legs firmly shut but alas here we are