Culture I am Gen Z. Men in my generation are not dating. Why should we?

Article/Archive

All across America, marriage, sexuality and relationships are on the steady decline among young people. According to a new Pew Research study, 63% percent of men aged 18 to 29 report being single. That means the number of single young men is nearly twice that of single young women, indicating a large breakdown in the social, romantic and sexual lives of American men. The big question is: Why?

One would think that making romantic connections would be easier than ever in our digital world, but the opposite is true. Our culture of convenience has paradoxically made dating more difficult for men as they are forced into a hyper-competitive, superficial environment that emphasizes instant gratification over true human connection. While there are several potential culprits causing this relationship breakdown, nothing has done more damage to the dating landscape than dating apps, social media and pornography.

Let’s start with dating apps. The advent of relationship websites started with Match.com in 1995 and evolved into the swipe-based platforms we know today with Tinder and Hinge releasing in 2012, and Bumble in 2014.

According to a survey of 6,034 adults, 53% of adults ages 18-29 have found someone to date through an app or site. However, new Census data shows that the U.S. marriage rate hit an all-time low in 2019. For every 1,000 unmarried adults, only 33 got married. This number was 35 a decade ago in 2010 and much higher at 86% in 1970. So, what gives?

It’s easier for men to date, thanks to technological conveniences, yet this technology has created a counterintuitive situation leading them to have a fickle attitude toward relationships, constantly searching for the next thing instead of committing to one person.

With the abundance of choices on dating apps, young men are finding it difficult to build deeper connections with a single person due to that sense of constant availability. When a minor red flag appears in a relationship that is otherwise going smoothly, why stick around and work it out when thousands of other choices are right at your fingertips? Young men are making that calculation every day on dating apps and are siding with the latter. How can you blame them with the constant programming coming from social media?

With social media today, men can scroll through their feeds and popular pages to view more beautiful women in one sitting than most men would see in their lifetime a hundred years ago.
Social media vies for people's attention leading women to commercialize themselves, which gives men an unrealistic expectation of the dating pool. On social media, people are encouraged to only show their best, even if it’s fake! With the advancements in facial-recognition technology, many times men are looking at women through heavily filtered and airbrushed lenses.

While women reap the benefit of the online attention, men are left wondering how the dating pool has gotten so far out of reach. Consequently, those same women who are marketing themselves as something they’re not are left without a partner and wondering where all the good men have gone. Through social media, both sexes are conditioned to treat themselves as a number instead of embracing true human connection and partnership.

Maybe I’m just old-fashioned, but to me, flirting face-to-face leaves a bigger impression on the potential for a relationship than reacting to girls’ Instagram Stories with the flame emoji. Coupled with the barrage of women on dating apps, the culture of constant comparison fostered by social media makes it hard for men to commit to a relationship and settle down. If that wasn’t enough, now even men’s greatest source of dating motivation has been co-opted by pornography.

There is no doubt that lust, which is carnal in nature, is the strongest driving motivation for men when it comes to dating. It sparks initial attraction and passion and draws people together. Ultimately though, lust may fade, but the emotional connection typically built upon that initial sense of attraction is what can determine a relationship’s success.

Pornography, however, completely destroys this dynamic, because it shifts men’s reward system to simply being carnal and physical in nature but lacking the emotional connection necessary for healthy relationships. Today, pornography is easier than ever to consume. Forty million U.S. adults regularly visit pornography websites, and 10% of U.S. adults admit to having an addiction to Internet pornography.
It’s easier for men to date thanks to technological conveniences, yet this technology has created a counterintuitive situation leading them to have a fickle attitude toward relationships, constantly searching for the next thing instead of committing to one person.
Research shows that about 67% of 13-year-old boys have seen at least one pornographic image on some sort of digital device in the past year, and by the age of 18, that number rises to 90%.

In porn, finding a "relationship" is effortless. With porn, this digital partner has nothing else to do but wait for you, please you and give you exactly what you think you want. If this partner ever fails to keep you entertained, they can be exchanged with a single click. Why waste your time dating, flirting and putting in effort when men can have their deepest sexual desires met online?

Today, men in their 20s are more likely than women to be romantically uninvolved, sexually dormant and friendless. Studies have shown that men are more likely to engage in risky and violent behaviors when they lack a stable relationship, leading to higher crime rates, substance abuse and social unrest. Single men may also be less invested in building strong social networks, leading to isolation and a lack of community engagement.

Simply put, the breakdown of relationships between men and women is startling, and it is detrimental to a healthy society. The good news is that men can fix this, and the remedy is easier than we think. Leave dating apps, stop watching porn, and go talk to girls in real life.
 
Guess what? This requires an economy that isn't obviously a scam, an economy in which a man's meagre savings won't be obliterated by the next once-in-a-lifetime financial disaster.
I like that the go-to advice for these people is always something to the effect of "you gotta get out of your mother's basement and get a good job, sonny jim" as if that's not obvious to even the most delusional of tendie-chomping incels. Motherfucker, we know. We also know that the whole "living in your parents' basement" is a holdover from the days where we had such economic prosperity where you really were a loser if you couldn't scrape together enough money to rent an apartment(if not buy a house outright). Nowadays even the shittiest slumlords want at least $1000 a month for a crackerjack box you share with rats and roaches, and they'll probably still have the gall to raise your rent every year. And mass immigration and corporate consolidation has permitted companies to offer you jobs at payrates that will barely even cover that. You speak of grit and determination, but there is no man that is strong enough to singlehandedly fight off these brutal truths of modern living. It's like being asked to fight off five burly men by yourself and being told you're a pussy when you tell them that's basically impossible.
 

Unironically an interesting sympathetic breakdown of what men, and young men specifically, are going through.

Unironically an interesting sympathetic breakdown of what men, and young men specifically, are going through.
for some weird reason, this hit especially hard
but jesus fucking christ, this does not need to be, like, fifty pages, man
Agree 100% I think it's 4-6 different articles all compiled together. Too long but relevant and accurate to my eyes.
all it needs is to be cut up or at the very least reorganized: this is an article/internet page not a book
I finally finished it. That was a good read but fucking hell, it needed formatting.

Glad to see some discussion here of the article after taking forever to read it. Thanks for posting it btw.

I also read the comments too (unfortunately), where the Billionaire Psycho Substack author outs themselves as somewhat a thin-skinned asshole.

Apparently it took him? 8 months to write. He also pretentiously responds to constructive criticism re: editing in the comments that the piece "isn't intended to be read in one sitting" like journoscum mass produced articles because he finds the usual, predictable corporate article format "boring".

They explicitly stated that it was intended for the piece to be read "in 3-7 different sittings" with the reader returning at different times.

Well fuck him. Because that's not how reading blogposts works IRL.

He actually claims to have purposely stylized it this way to mimic a blogger from around 2013 named The Last Psychiatrist. This writing structure breaks things down into "Acts" where three completely disparate stories are told at length in sequence, only to masterfully be woven together into some meta narrative over the final two Acts.

The Billionaire Psycho author in the comments actually breaks down this "Act" organizational format into detailed titled chapters, which is even more convoluted than the homage because it enumerates at least 8 sections.

The author also reminded me of Nick Rekieta with his salty and name-calling replies to legitimate criticism essentially boiling down to "I did nothing wrong and won't change anything. You don't have to like my work. And I'm definitely not insulted".

Nevertheless, I enjoyed the read, though it desperately needed an editor.

I was confused by a small passing reference when the author blamed antibiotics for the decay of society and the corruption of women. But much later, the author, made a short addition that the advent of antibiotics lessened the fear of venereal diseases and encouraged promiscuity, similar to contraceptives.

Always a little disappointed that these navel-gazing pieces come up short in the solutions department.

This one after the endless blackpilling and word salad essentially boils down to

- lift heavy things
- become a chad
- don't succumb to demoralization
- gamble anyways on getting married/having children despite the last 50 pages describing social collapse and the nature of women and hope it just works out?
- when things get really bad, "brotherhood" between good men will be our salvation, rising like a Phoenix from our parallel societies

This was my favourite comment critiquing the "Brotherhood will be our salvation" conclusion

Screenshot_20231129-182336_Brave.jpg
 
It's insipid shit like this and the faux tone of authority that I was getting at.

Same reason I mocked the guy who made a blog post earlier in the thread. Even if you weren't retard #2,304 I've seen try this shtick to no avail, even if your attempt at advice was worth a fuck to listen to, your manner of communicating it is so abrasive that ironically only a complete fucking cuckold of a man would read it and have a reaction of anything other than immediate hostility.

It's the internet, dude. Nobody can tell if you're 6'7" and ripped or if you're just another Tomlinson stalkerincel-childing people who are complaining about this shit, even if I personally think desiring companionship to the degree some of the people who frequent these threads do is unhealthy and backwards, you still come off like an internet tough guy who says obvious shit but thinks he's brilliant for espousing it.

And for the record if it wasn't obvious I disagree with a full half at a minimum of the MGTOW-tier takes on women present in this thread.
Dorks like to be this way so they can pretend to be cool sexhavers who totally fuck. Nobody gives a fuck on the Internet if you have sex or not. In fact, if you have to make it known, repeatedly, you very likely don’t.
Considering that the general reaction to those "faux tone of authority" posts are seething about how that person is actually a total loser like how you two are doing, I can see why they do it.
 
Let's not pretend that a man can't just rape a woman in nature. Oh wait, then morality comes into the picture instead of raw nature alone, somehow.
The ultimate flaw of naturalist argumentation regarding this subject. Polygamy is natural. Hypergamy is natural. But somehow rape isn't. That's icky and yucky but the other two are totally signs of a functioning society. Just ignore the natural increase in violence or prevalence of it in polygamous societies or how no one is breeding enough to replace anymore.

It's natural so it's okay, except for when it isn't. Wow, I haven't seen that sort of logic a thousand fucking times. Just pick and choose the parts of something you like. That works...somehow.
 
I like that the go-to advice for these people is always something to the effect of "you gotta get out of your mother's basement and get a good job, sonny jim" as if that's not obvious to even the most delusional of tendie-chomping incels. Motherfucker, we know. We also know that the whole "living in your parents' basement" is a holdover from the days where we had such economic prosperity where you really were a loser if you couldn't scrape together enough money to rent an apartment(if not buy a house outright).
It's becoming clear the people that act like this are some form of male feminist or a wraparound equivalent (boomercons, etc) when their go-to insult is "incel" and they think the average "incel" is the "gross mother's basement loser" incel stereotype, when most of them are just normal men who don't know how to navigate the hellscape that is the modern dating market and have been given no actual helpful advice because none actually exists. The closest thing to useful advice is the redpill/manosphere type people and even that still just boils down to "try to make yourself as close to the 6666 stereotype that women expect as a baseline."
Working on yourself is good for many reasons, but it's still not enough for a large portion of men when it comes to the dating market. That missing piece (which seems to be at least partially the overinflated expectations of women) is what's creating the growing segment of otherwise normal men who can't attract women.
 
Considering that the general reaction to those "faux tone of authority" posts are seething about how that person is actually a total loser like how you two are doing, I can see why they do it.
Except the people that actually succeeded in this dating landscape funhouse of smoke and mirrors are not usually the ones defending it to their dying breath. The people that made it out successfully usually don't really care about a handful of people lamenting the state of modern dating. It's almost always the people that are at the bottom of the totem pole that see an opportunity to elevate themselves slightly above those dang dirty incels. Like the awkward gangly kid in high school that picks on the lone Indian kid because it's a rare opportunity to elevate his own social standing. If you talk to these people you'll usually glean that these people aren't exactly slaying it themselves, but it's okay because "I may have not have had a date in five years, but at least I'm not an INCEL." Because if they don't defend the current system to their dying breath, they might have to come to grips with the harsh reality that the game is rigged against you, and every year the odds of you making it grow just a little bit slimmer.

But no, much easier to just dismiss everyone that disagrees with you as an incel. They just need to leave their mother's basement and take a shower, it's literally that easy bro!
 
Except the people that actually succeeded in this dating landscape funhouse of smoke and mirrors are not usually the ones defending it to their dying breath. The people that made it out successfully usually don't really care about a handful of people lamenting the state of modern dating. It's almost always the people that are at the bottom of the totem pole that see an opportunity to elevate themselves slightly above those dang dirty incels. Like the awkward gangly kid in high school that picks on the lone Indian kid because it's a rare opportunity to elevate his own social standing. If you talk to these people you'll usually glean that these people aren't exactly slaying it themselves, but it's okay because "I may have not have had a date in five years, but at least I'm not an INCEL." Because if they don't defend the current system to their dying breath, they might have to come to grips with the harsh reality that the game is rigged against you, and every year the odds of you making it grow just a little bit slimmer.
That's a really weird tangent to go on considering that dude said nothing at all like that. It's crazy how saying "stop being a doomer and get real" sends so many people into a tizzy. By the way, the current system you're complaining about is probably going to be more or less the same 30 years from now, so you and people like you better get used to it, make the most of it and find some type of success, or you'll be left behind, assuming you haven't already.
 
Considering that the general reaction to those "faux tone of authority" posts are seething about how that person is actually a total loser like how you two are doing, I can see why they do it.
t's crazy how saying "stop being a doomer and get real" sends so many people into a tizzy.
Castigating someone for posting like Tonka Saw or Tomlinson is seething now?

:story:
By the way, the current system you're complaining about is probably going to be more or less the same 30 years from now, so you and people like you better get used to it
30years1 - Copy.jpg
30years2 - Copy.png

You're either delusionally optimistic or a functional retard if you actually believe that.
, make the most of it and find some type of success, or you'll be left behind, assuming you haven't already.
I agree wholeheartedly with this statement though. My advice, and outlook, is for people to stop giving a fuck about this shit and find happiness without it.

And if you can't be happy with yourself, by yourself, to begin with you're certainly not going to suddenly find happiness when you add another person to your life. All of that "get fit, get financially successful, etc" insipid shit is retarded when applied through the lens of "do it to smash box bro" when in reality it should just be something done for your own happiness.
 
done for your own happiness.
The trouble with this is the pursuit of happiness itself may just cause more suffering. If I had to give an alternative, I'd say to pursue the things you want. And if you can't have those things, oh well. Focus on the things you have. It's just the things I want are all out of reach, which is why I'm not happy a lot of the time, and what little I have is something that fills me with emptiness.
but that's just me
 
The trouble with this is the pursuit of happiness itself may just cause more suffering. If I had to give an alternative, I'd say to pursue the things you want. And if you can't have those things, oh well. Focus on the things you have. It's just the things I want are all out of reach, which is why I'm not happy a lot of the time, and what little I have is something that fills me with emptiness.
but that's just me
Have you ever considered whether or not the things you want would even bring you happiness in the first place?

Because happiness is not really something that you can find externally unless you're below a certain IQ. I've talked about it before but there's a reason why people who seem to have everything are often still either miserable or seeking more money/power/etc.

The standard shit often proffered in platitudes like get healthy, get out more, etc helps for sure but it's not the end goal, it just makes your physical existence less shit if you're an unhealthy troglodyte.
 
Have you ever considered whether or not the things you want would even bring you happiness in the first place?

Because that's not really something that you can find externally unless you're below a certain IQ. I've talked about it before but there's a reason why people who seem to have everything are often still either miserable or seeking more money/power/etc.
Tons of times. My instincts (drive for wants) and my mind (drive to want not) are constantly at odds about it. I reach clarity but I fall back into the dynamic. I hate money, I hate power, and I hate people. But I need money, will need power, and will go insane if I'm not around people. The stresses of being rich alone make me not want that life, power is as elusive as it is effective, and people help ground you but will grate on you. While I want peace, I know that's just temporary at best. Maybe this internal conflict is just how some people cope with life.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: LurkTrawl
My instincts (drive for wants) and my mind (drive to want not) are constantly at odds about it. I reach clarity but I fall back into the dynamic. I hate money, I hate power, and I hate people. But I need money, will need power, and will go insane if I'm not around people. The stresses of being rich alone make me not want that life, power is as elusive as it is effective, and people help ground you but will grate on you. While I want peace, I know that's just temporary at best. Maybe this internal conflict is just how some people cope with life.
Idk, it's something everyone probably has to get over in their own way, or die with that internal conflict still eating at them.

What won't help though is getting into a relationship only to find out that relationships are work, and adding another whole-ass person who also is struggling with that internal conflict into your life in an intimate way isn't going to suddenly fix anything even if it they met some kind of criterion for perfection that you'd set. Which is why I don't think that people who are fixated on the fact that they're not in a relationship or can't find a partner are at best putting the cart before the horse - getting with somebody isn't a magical fix to being miserable. Hell arguably that kind of thinking is part of what led to two generations worth of rising divorce rates.

Also for whatever it's worth separating your own cognitive processes like that and giving them their own agency isn't healthy. It's like an addict talking about their addiction as if it's not a controllable aspect of their psyche. "My alcoholism just flares up and I want a drink when..." kinda shit.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: God of Nothing
What won't help though is getting into a relationship only to find out that relationships are work, and adding another whole-ass person who also is struggling with that internal conflict into your life in an intimate way isn't going to suddenly fix anything even if it they met some kind of criterion for perfection that you'd set.
Oh, I know. It'd sate the desire I have for companionship at the very least. Probably far more trouble than it's worth, which is why I don't make it something I go out of my way to attain.
Also for whatever it's worth separating your own cognitive processes like that and giving them their own agency isn't healthy. It's like an addict talking about their addiction as if it's not a controllable aspect of their psyche. "My alcoholism just flares up and I want a drink when..." kinda shit.
Ultimately, it's me who decides what I do and think. I understand. Just tried to establish a dichotomy to better follow. I want something, know I don't need it, but have a hard time letting it go. And when I do, it comes up again eventually.
 
You're either delusionally optimistic or a functional retard if you actually believe that.
Things becoming more expensive will suck, but it's not the impending sign of societal collapse some are hoping it will be. People will still have jobs and start families, the institutions that do the things that this board hates will still be around doing what they do and regardless of whatever collapse copium huffing some do, life will go on more or less "normally" for the majority of people.
 
Things becoming more expensive will suck, but it's not the impending sign of societal collapse some are hoping it will be. People will still have jobs and start families, the institutions that do the things that this board hates will still be around doing what they do and regardless of whatever collapse copium huffing some do, life will go on more or less "normally" for the majority of people.
Yeah, I agree. If the inflation rate problem existed in a complete vacuum and somehow wasn't as steep as it seemingly will be like you're treating it here, rather than something I put into my post as an addendum to the other issues I linked explanatory posts in order to explain, you'd probably not be far off the mark.

The problem isn't just "things becoming more expensive", and even if it were the way you're handwaving that very generous lowball estimate of how inflation will affect the value of the dollar over the next thirty years, speaks to a mindset devoid of the far-reaching implications even that alone will have assuming quite literally everything else remained the same.

If you want to continue espousing this myopic, ignorant notion that everything will continue as it has been even in the face of evidence presented to you, go ahead. But do know that bringing rhetorical assertions alone to such discussions isn't as convincing as you seem to think it is for other people.
 
Yeah, I agree. If the inflation rate problem existed in a complete vacuum and somehow wasn't as steep as it seemingly will be like you're treating it here, rather than something I put into my post as an addendum to the other issues I linked explanatory posts in order to explain, you'd probably not be far off the mark.

The problem isn't just "things becoming more expensive", and even if it were the way you're handwaving that very generous lowball estimate of how inflation will affect the value of the dollar over the next thirty years, speaks to a mindset devoid of the far-reaching implications even that alone will have assuming quite literally everything else remained the same.

If you want to continue espousing this myopic, ignorant notion that everything will continue as it has been even in the face of evidence presented to you, go ahead. But do know that bringing rhetorical assertions alone to such discussions isn't as convincing as you seem to think it is for other people.

Any argument that everything will be fine, always continuing as it has been, forever, needs to explain why this time is different. Because that argument wasn't true in the years leading up to WW1, or the WW2, or the collapse of the British Empire, or the fall of Constantinople, or the end of the Spanish Empire, or the crumbling of the Ming dynasty, or the fall of Rome, etc. Why is the Global American Empire different? Why is our currency indestructible? Why is our marketplace eternal? Why is our military invincible? Nobody really has an answer. They just think it's obvious that this time, the laws of reality favor the perpetual dominance of America and the immortality of the American system.
 
Any argument that everything will be fine, always continuing as it has been, forever, needs to explain why this time is different. Because that argument wasn't true in the years leading up to WW1, or the WW2, or the collapse of the British Empire, or the fall of Constantinople, or the end of the Spanish Empire, or the crumbling of the Ming dynasty, or the fall of Rome, etc. Why is the Global American Empire different? Why is our currency indestructible? Why is our marketplace eternal? Why is our military invincible? Nobody really has an answer. They just think it's obvious that this time, the laws of reality favor the perpetual dominance of America and the immortality of the American system.
I have no idea how but the writers for this niche as fuck indie game understood this phenomena and had an NPC deliver a good lecture on it.
based 1.jpg

based 2.jpg
 
I have no idea how but the writers for this niche as fuck indie game understood this phenomena and had an NPC deliver a good lecture on it.

The character in that game is basically talking about boomers when he is talking about "And then come those who neither built nor conquered. They start the process of squandering..." and from there he goes on to describe Gen X, the Millennials, and eventually the zoomers. Hard to say how much will be left at that point.
 
Back