Romance today, or whatever

Here’s what marriage looks like to what seem to be an increasing number of young men. It appears that getting rid of traditional rules and understandings hasn’t done much for relations between men and women. Many men find that the classic accusations of the misogynist—women are fickle, deceitful, treacherous, perverse, manipulative, sexually unreliable, physically repulsive and whatnot—are gaining in plausibility. This is bad. As a general thing I have no objection to the battle of the sexes, it keeps both sides on their toes, but this isn’t fun any more. The piece fills out another piece, by a female author, that I cited once before.

11 thoughts on “Romance today, or whatever”

  1. I have to sympathise with
    I have to sympathise with Darren Blacksmith’s frustrations because I went through I similar set of experiences when I was in my 20s and early 30s and looking for a wife.

    It’s become very difficult to meet women who are feminine and family oriented, and who are looking for decent men to marry. Middle class girls in particular, especially the brightest and most self-disciplined, cling to the idea that it’s a failure to marry in their 20s, and they are often hostile to those women who break ranks.

    Then there’s the awareness of the vulnerability of men in divorce, which is particularly hard to take when you’re young and your instincts toward marriage and fatherhood are particularly strong.

    The choices available to a 25 year old man seem to be to marry a non-Westerner; to adapt to the culture and become a “player”; or to attempt a long term de facto relationship.

    I didn’t find any of the choices appealing. If men were to take Darren Blacksmith’s advice and marry a non-Westerner then there would be no long term future for Europeans. Becoming a player means a willingness to exploit women and to lower your own standards of manhood. And to a man wanting to settle down, a de facto relationship offers only the sacrifices of marriage without
    the commitments to family he is looking for.

    The good news is that some women begin to have a change of heart when they approach 30. They start to think that they’ve done the career thing, and they are increasingly aware of the biological clock. If a man can keep his better instincts alive long enough (say to his mid-30s) then he’s likely to find a much larger pool of women who are serious about marriage.

    I think Darren Blacksmith is right also about the larger proportion of psychologically wounded people and the difficulties this creates in finding a marriage partner. It was only when I became older and more confident at dealing with, rather than rejecting, the symptoms of such psychological damage, that my own prospects of marriage improved.

  2. Mark Richardson wrote:
    “If a

    Mark Richardson wrote:
    “If a man can keep his better instincts alive long enough (say to his mid-30s) then he’s likely to find a much larger pool of women who are serious about marriage.”

    The downside to that approach is that just as these women become psychologically marriagable they become infertile. Women who defer their first child to age thirty have only a 30% chance or so of ever having a child at all without specialized fertility treatment. That’s why fertility treatment has become such a booming industry, with ovulation predictors for sale right alongside the condoms at the local drug store.

  3. I perceived Darren’s column
    I perceived Darren’s column as yet another attempt to defame the fathers’ rights movement by trying to make it look like a general anti-marriage movement—something US Democrats are much in favor of. Male feminists have imposed the same reputation through similar posts to fathers’ rights forums for a few years to set their female counterparts up to yell to media and politicians that we all hate women and marriage. It’s the broad generalizations that hurt our efforts. Generalizations about “women,” “western women” and “marriage” make all who are outside of our sphere of advocacy very angry at us all.

    Several others have informed me since, that Darren is really distressed and sincere. Alright. I feel bad for him. I went through a lot once, too. …won’t go into that.

    But I’ve received many letters of distress over the years from men who married or cohabited with eastern women and women from Central and South America. It doesn’t take women from overseas long at all to get a feminist feel for the contemporary social quirks and laws of western society.

    For generalized men’s lib advocacy against marriage, maybe Darren could more accurately have written a piece titled, “Sex With Women: Just Say No.” He could have taken that to its logical conclusion—the pure “masculist” advocacy that feminists intended to plant when they installed “masculism” in men’s lib forums in the early 1990s.

    Notice, BTW, that Darren’s column came along just as Stephen Baskerville was trying to prove the point that fathers’ rights activists are staunchly, immovably in favor of marriage, although we do try to inform men as to what can happen to them if divorce occurs (which happens all too often). Darren, whether intending to or not, supported Tom Sylvester’s dishonest argument that fathers’ rights activists are against marriage. Tom Sylvester has handed the same lie to popular news publication. The left is terrified that conservative political organizations will get close to fathers’ rights (as conservative organizations should, given the likelyhood of socialism if we continue the high divorce/cohabitation rates).

    Most men’s libbers haven’t been married or had children. But they have opposed marriage since the time of their “Aunt Nancy” predecessors, who were male feminists in the 1800s. Every time that I know of that the anti-marriage argument has been inserted in fatherhood forums in the past, it’s been done by a man who’d never been married or had children—likely “confirmed bachelors,” in most cases, given the comprehensive gist of their arguments.

    We need to destroy feminism. That’s the answer. We won’t destroy feminism by being public antagonists. We must be public benefactors. Men and women must be informed through every medium as to what feminism and socialism will do to us. The “gender gap,” more than any other part of feminism, must be resisted with all that we can muster. The resistance includes that against the men’s libbers who are trying to kill masculinity. Men and women who love each other will prevail one way or another, sooner or later. Pagan buildups do not go on for long. If our Father does not destroy them, they consume themselves.

    Jim, keep up the good work. I’ll let you know when the next early feminism installment is up. The one that is likely to come after the next should be particularly interesting.

  4. And by the way, I do *not*
    And by the way, I do *not* own Someone else owns it. The link is here only to promote it for him.

  5. So, then, for American men
    So, then, for American men like myself in their 30’s and 40’s who deeply desire to find someone to marry, whether “homegrown” – so to speak – or a foreign bride brought here: what now?

    Is it effectively “all is lost”? Are we doomed to live the rest of our days in lonely singlehood, or give into the dominant hedonist culture and be wannabe Lotharios or Don Juans?

    Is there an answer, yes or no?

  6. Roy Moore, I suggest you
    Roy Moore, I suggest you don’t give in to lonely singlehood. I personally found it soul-destroying to be single well into my 30s; I consider myself fortunate to have met my wife when I did.

    Having said that, I’ve had to accept things that I think are wrong. The problem is that our generation of men doesn’t have the time to try and put things right before we marry and reproduce.

    It seems the best we can do is marry and have a family, in the wrong circumstances, and then work hard to put things right so that our sons don’t have to go through what we were forced to experience.

  7. We’re here.

    I agree with
    We’re here.

    I agree with eveything you wrote about our culture and problems with feminism.

    We’re here and we are looking for the christian gentleman also.

    I throw a question back – when you are looking for this christian woman, what are you looking at.

    Many women with the qualities desired by this christian man may not be found in a size 6 babe. She may not look like Cindy Crawford. She may not be in the bars after work looking for you. She may be self-contious about actively dating men after many relationships that were short-lived becaus she wouldn’t put out.

    Where are you looking and what are you looking at?

  8. We like to mutter & wine
    We like to mutter & wine about our plight, Yet weaker men then us have carried heavier cross’s up steeper hills (& fell three times). The most urgent fight we face in the Western World today (politically)is the fight against gay “marriage”
    Join that cause with all your soul and perhaps other peoples sons and daughters will have a fighting chance at a decent life.

    Fitz, esq.

  9. Evolution would suggest that
    Evolution would suggest that sexual attraction exists because one person subconsciously finds some aspect of another person acceptable for procreative mating in the effort to preserve the species. There are a lot of other factors, in relationships, but my observations, experiences and study would indicate that initial attraction is keyed by these types of subconscious factors.

    Initial communication, both verbal and non-verbal, establishes if there is attraction or the possibility of romance. Usually, this centers around the perception of confidence. Self-confidence would indicate that one possesses some admirable qualities and is thus a sub-conscious provoker of sexual desire. A lack of confidence may indicate some personal defect or other undesirable quality and is generally a “turn-off”.

    The popular movie “Swingers” provides an example of this, when one character advocates the “3 day rule” before calling on a women. Waiting three days to call a woman is indeed a bold, confident move. The implication is that waiting indicates a fulfilling personal life when the next available time to make a call is several days in the future. Over-calling, or calling too soon, may indicate a boring or unfulfilling social life.

    Confidence is only one small part of sexual attraction and successful relationships, but it is important in the beginning of flirtations that may develop further. Obnoxious jerks tend to present themselves in a way that their self-absorption is misconstrued as self-confidence. This is the main reason, as Darren Blacksmith puts it, that woman find nice guys boring and tend to ‘date the bastards’.

    I think that Mr. Blacksmiths eventual conclusions are a bit of a reach. Evolution also suggests that both men and women desire stable, long lasting relationships in socially acceptable context, such as marriage. Large sectors of the population want nothing more then to live a good, moral life with their family. Relationships tend to fail because of poor communication, not some liberal conspiracy. My own opinion is that this is due to the impact of rapidly improving technology, and a general failure to realize the social implications.

    Nice guys, who “finish last”, tend to act in a courteous manner that is often oblivious to the social implications of technology and communication. For example, the three day rule. Thus, they may be perceived, subconsciously, as lacking in confidence, and effectively rejected before given a fair chance. Or, if they do establish an initial sexual attraction, they may not be able to both keep that attraction and develop a successful relationship in a modern context. The ‘nice guy’ finds himself in a self-defeating cycle: rejection -> less confidence in social situations with eligible bachelorettes -> more rejection -> even less confidence.

    Despair, as expressed in the article and some of these posts, may be a natural reaction. Yet there are ways to break this cycle. It is not a contradiction to be both self-confident and a courteous gentlemen, and you do not need to be a ‘player’ to get a date. The best way to find a wife is to not look for one. Trying too hard to get a woman’s attention is another typical indicator of a lack of confidence, by the way. Instead, seek to enrich your personal life in the face of despair, by actively pursuing interests or other activities you find fulfilling. Attaining some success at a hobby or recreational activity is a boost to one’s self-confidence, not to mention a good conversation topic and a way to enlarge your social circle. Most importantly, it seems a better way to live life then to just give up hope, regardless of status.

    Many women, in their 20s and 30s, desire marriage and in fact have been dreaming about their wedding day since a very young age. Yet, a large number of them in today’s world have been hurt previously by ‘bastards’. It strikes me as a bit selfish to be surprised that a woman who has been hurt before would maybe have some reservations about marrying you. A modern gentlemen would treat a lady with respect and patience, and would not assume that all woman will eventually cheat on them and take their money. If marriage is the joining of two people, then it is truly a losing proposition: you are no longer an individual. I don’t know if it is harder today or not, although it seems reasonable to speculate that that is so. That doesn’t mean that it is not worth the effort.

  10. JP, I don’t think you can
    JP, I don’t think you can explain things here in terms of evolution or dating technique. You’d have to really stretch the point to claim that women are delaying reproduction to the last, faltering stages of their fertility as a rational evolutionary strategy.

    The problem I had when I was single was not getting rejected (I had a steady stream of offers from women). It was both finding a marriageable woman and negotiating a relationships culture which kept demanding more things from men, including contradictory things, whilst returning less.

    Why weren’t the women I met marriageable? A few had jobs I just couldn’t keep up with: they had been catapulted into jobs in their mid 20s which my father’s generation would not have reached until their mid 40s. A few were too mannish: their main hobbies were martial arts or Harleys. A few had just too long a sexual history and had been with everyone in my social circle. A few were aggressively feminist and saw men as the political enemy. A lot of young women were sloppy and grungy and plain in their appearance; they saved the best of themselves for their work.

    But most of all, the bright, attractive middle-class girls, the ones I was most interested in, had accepted a single girl lifestyle for their twenties. They were openly hostile to marriage, and regarded it as a life failure to marry before some unspecified time in their thirties.

    Feminism was very powerful when I was in my 20s. It managed to reduce questions of relationships to “What do women want?” and the answer was always a deepening of female individualism. The role of a “good man” was to maximise this female autonomy, even if this meant accepting androgynous sex roles within a relationship. There was no attempt to find balance or parity or to establish complementary relationships between men and women.

    For a long time I persevered, hoping that conditions would change or that I would meet an exceptional woman who was strong enough to resist these trends. I finally got married when I became resigned, and realised that I would not be able to escape the reality of modern relationships.

    I found a girl who was willing, at least, to partly compromise, and I made a vow to work to improve things for my sons. (The story so far has a happy ending as the marriage has been fulfilling and our first child is on the way.)


Leave a Comment