An article written by a woman that laments the fact that traditional marriages and relationships are falling apart, to the disadvantage of women. It’s an important point; if Tinder was working out in women’s favor there wouldn’t be any griping about it. But it turns out that giving men access to loads of women causes men to lose interest in entering committed relationships.
Let us not forget however, that these women themselves are perfectly willing to sleep with men whom they found by swiping an app a few hours earlier, a fact which seems to have been lost on the writer concerned. News flash, sweetheart: it takes two to tango.
Sexual liberation is a fabulous thing – in some ways. But it can also turn men into louts, because women don’t expect much in return for access.
It’s a fabulous thing for women who get to have no-strings-attached sex, but it’s not a fabulous thing if men get the same deal. Women who have lots of sex with multiple partners that they meet on the internet are “liberated” and “finding their inner passion” I presume, while the men of course are simply louts for doing the exact same thing.
There follows a great deal of wailing and complaining that there aren’t any marriageable men to be found, (another hot tip for you gals out there: the marriageable men are not inclined to marry chicks who sleep with strangers that they meet on Tinder – just throwing that out there, crazy eh?)
But right at the beginning of the piece there was this little unintended gem:
Single women are more equal and empowered than ever before. They have unparalleled sexual, reproductive and economic autonomy. In many ways, they’re doing much better than the men. (Just look at the lopsided university graduation rates, which are now around 60-40). And yet, large numbers of young women admit their private lives are a sad mess.
It’s funny, but “doing much better than men” doesn’t sound like equal to me. It sounds unfair. But leaving that aside, the gals have economic autonomy. How great for them. But what impact might this have on traditional relationships?
It used to be that men and women each had something the other really needed. Men needed access to sex. Women needed access to resources. Men couldn’t get steady access to sex unless they had resources to offer, so they worked hard for them. The partnership between men and women was a grand bargain that (usually) left both sides better off.
Incredibly enough, the writer does not make the obvious connection that since women are now economically autonomous they don’t need men to provide for them anymore. The traditional partnership was broken by women. Instead she goes off on a rant about how men are getting lots of sex so they don’t want a relationship, oh woe is us wymens. Yet another example of the subconscious feminine imperative at work.
So the women got their sexual liberation, thereby throwing away a core asset that made them attractive to men for long term commitment, and then they got their economic freedom, which meant that they didn’t require men as providers. As a result from their early twenties into their early thirties, the years where they are most attractive to men, they use up all of this precious time in a wasteful excess of “having it all”. And then what happens? What happens when they get this sudden inkling that they may not be quite as in control as they originally thought?
Spend a little time with single women in their early to mid-30s, and you’ll be grateful you’re not one of them. The relationship scene is even more dismal today than when I was their age. All the women want serious relationships that lead to marriage, but many of the men they meet do not. All too often a woman moves in with some guy, hoping they’re on the road to somewhere. Two years later, he tells her he’s not ready for marriage and kids just yet. Splat.
Let’s pick apart this paragraph and find out just why things are shaping up in this manner.
Spend a little time with women in their early to mid-30s, and you’ll be grateful you’re not one of them.
Unintentionally and hilariously accurate.
The relationship scene is even more dismal today than when I was their age.
Due to the fact that back then women were still nice to men because they needed a provider.
All the women want serious relationships that lead to marriage, but many of the men they meet do not.
Men know that they will be severely disadvantaged financially and emotionally if there is a divorce, over 70% of which are initiated by women, there will be a high chance that their estranged wife will use his own children against him, and men can get all the sex that they want with no commitment from sites like Tinder. What possible reasons are there for a man to marry a woman in her 30s who has spent her glory years sleeping around and slaving away in a cubicle when he can pick and choose from women in their early 20s who have not made the same catastrophic mistakes?
Ladies, you are in competition with each other, and the older you get the more the number of younger, firmer, prettier, and nicer girls that are tapping you on the shoulder and telling you to stand aside.
All too often a woman moves in with some guy, hoping they’re on the road to somewhere.
Here’s a little sexual market ugly reality for your girls out there – if you move in with a guy before you get married, the chances will be very high that he won’t consider you as marriage potential.
Two years later, he tells her he’s not ready for marriage and kids just yet.
See what I mean?
That’s the sound of these women running headlong into the wall. Once again, unintentionally and hilariously accurate. Why is that the case? Because the predicament that these women find themselves in is not down to the mythical patriarchy, it is not down to men being brutes and cads, and nor is it down to simple bad luck. It is entirely the result of their own actions. These women chose to put off marriage to an age where they would be in competition with younger and more attractive women. They chose to prioritize their careers over the supposed drudgery of being a wife and mother. They were not forced to make these choices, although one could argue that they were encouraged in such willful excess by other women promoting the glorious and sophistical feminist mantra that “women can have it all”.
Now they must live with the consequences of their actions. There is no more fitting outcome for the willfully foolish. Let their misery be a severe and living example for the generations of women to follow.