Has feminism made men less willing to commit?

[jcrew11]

It seems to me that one of the modern problems in dating is that men are less likely to commit and more willing to play the field until their 40's. Sure, some men will eventually settle down if they want children.

 

But I think one problem with modern society is that sex is more easily available from women, that men take advantage of most women. Men no longer feel under societal pressure to "protect a woman" or "claim a woman as his girlfriend/wife."

 

Feminism is the idea that a woman can be independent and financially self-sufficient. Along with birth control, it has made the idea of marriage less immediate. More women can delay marriage to pursue their careers.

 

But at the same time, single men are taking advantage of societal changes, because men are no longer pressured into providing for the women they sleep with. Men are willing to accept women as both financially independent and capable, and sexually independent.

 

Does anyone else think that these changes in modern society made single men and women more independent and less willing to commit?

[soccerrprp]

You can make an argument for it. But people still get married and most men are not waiting until their 40s to settle down. There are numerous forces, stressors that exist that I believe have made relationships more difficult, but consider that "in the old days", pre-feminism, it was unacceptable for a woman to leave her man not matter what, that many marriages were often about convenience, status and being in a partriarchal society, men had no competition and obligation to share in the relationship dynamics and responsibilities. The man was the head of the house and all or most decisions were made unilaterally. Now, well, many have a touch time with gender or relational equity. It's a power thing. Many men want it when they only had to do what he wanted to do, not what was expected and demanded by the partner.

[fortyninethousand322]

No, I still want to commit. Just not to someone who is a feminist...

[soccerrprp]

No, I still want to commit. Just not to someone who is a feminist...

 

Curious. What is about the "feminist" that bothers you?

[FitChick]

Probably more to do with people growing up in broken homes and not having a good marriage modeled for them.

[Woggle]

It is not feminism as far as women's equality goes because that is something that should be supported but constantly being told how much women don't need us doesn't exactly put men in a romantic mood. Men get a lot of mixed messages these days. In one breath we get told how independent women are and in the next breath people complain men won't commit. Men are confused as hell.

 

Marriage these days is a very shaky institution and if you don't find a woman that you are very confident won't turn on you sometimes it is better not to even bother.

[fortyninethousand322]

Curious. What is about the "feminist" that bothers you?

 

I've poked around some feminist sites and seen some stuff on twitter. I think it's pretty clear that the average feminist and I would not get along. There's a lot of "social justice" and left wing economic ideas that I disagree with that seem to be synonymous with feminism.

 

I'm ok with opposing viewpoints, but I'm not ok with outright hostility. Which is what I've seen...

[Tayken]

Curious. What is about the "feminist" that bothers you?

 

 

Oh...lets not open that can-o-worm...we can be here all night

 

NOTE: I'll lean towards what 'Fitchick' said up thread. I mean if a woman didn't grow up with a father around, how do you think that person views men? As afar as they are concerned....Mommy is the 5h1t

[Silver93]

Probably more to do with people growing up in broken homes and not having a good marriage modeled for them.

 

Good point.

[kaylan]

lol OP.

 

Men have always been this way I believe. Its just socially acceptable now to be unmarried past your 20s. Its not like many men werent cheating on their wives or playing the field back before women had more rights and independence.

 

Todays society promotes singledom and promiscuity a lot more than it has in previous generations.

[MissBee]

No.

 

Men who want to commit commit and those who don't don't.

 

Casual sex may be a bit easier to come by nowadays for both sexes because of multiple factors: social media/online dating, decreased pressures to marry etc, so maybe there is more casual sex on offer than in certain times where one maybe had to get to know someone and their family a bit more before that was on the table, but even back in the day casual sex still occurred and non-committal men existed. That is not a newfangled invention or fault of "feminism". Bachelors and men who prefer lots of women over one have always existed.

[TB Rhine]

Changing gender roles (as well as changing social mores of various stripes) have made relationships more problematic in a lot of ways - or, at least, problematic in ways they weren't necessarily before. I think the "waiting longer to settle down" thing cuts both ways, however. Women are waiting longer as well (until they finish school, get established in their careers, or if they just feel like enjoying the swingin' bachelorette-hood of their 20's a while longer). A big part of the problem, I think, is that 30-40something women are looking for men their own age, of equal or greater social standing, while men that age are looking for fresh-faced 25 yr olds who are still in the prime of their childbearing years.

[MissBee]

BOTH sexes, men and women, these days are not as pressed to be married right out of high school and popping out babies. More men and women go to college, graduate school and want to travel, have careers and lives before having children. It's not a woman thing or a feminism thing and neither is it necessarily a bad thing. I most certainly cannot fathom a life where I married out of high school and am on my 4th child in my twenties and that isn't to say that that's bad either, but part of feminism, is the fact that women have more choices and those who don't want that have options and can choose differently. If that is your idea of a happy life, I'm with it personally! But for me, I wouldn't have been happy if that was my ONLY choice or the only acceptable choice...and even now, I still have people my parents' age who are more worried about when I will marry than I am.

 

One should also look at the examples the previous generation has set, esp parents, in terms of relationships, if anything that has the BIGGEST influence on the future generation's attitudes toward commitment than anything else. Most people I know when they discuss fear of commitment or not wanting marriage it is THEIR PARENTS' relationships they mention as the reason why, and even me, while I do want marriage one day, my parents' marriage certainly has had a negative influence on me and has influenced my commitment/lack thereof. That is more important than an imagined "feminism" being responsible for people's fear of commitment or intimacy issues in relationships.

[TB Rhine]

What do older-to-middle-aged men typically bring to the table, in terms of social value? Stability. A successful woman could potentially provide this as well, of course, or at least contribute to it, but our social mores haven't evolved quite THAT much as of yet. So what exactly DOES our society value in middle-aged women? The sad truth is, not a whole heck of a lot.

 

In short, younger men offer good looks, sexual stamina, fun, validation, etc., whereas older ones offer security. Young women offer looks, fun, and fertility, whereas older ones offer... diminishing looks, maturity (read: lack of fun), decreasing fertility, and (again, sadly) nothing in the way of means or financial stability that society currently permits men to place a high value on.

[TB Rhine]

But at the same time, single men are taking advantage of societal changes, because men are no longer pressured into providing for the women they sleep with.

 

Until they get divorced or get pregnant, in which case said men's wages will be garnished for the rest of their lives.

[Tayken]

But at the same time, single men are taking advantage of societal changes, because men are no longer pressured into providing for the women they sleep with.

 

Am I reading this right....."provide for you because am sleeping with you", seriously?

 

Have you ever heard of self sufficiency? Wow...reminder not to settle for anyone with high school qualifications

[ponchsox]

I'm a 37 year old man, never been married. I would commit to the right person. But I'm not settling. I'd rather be single than be a miserable marriage.

[carhill]

IMO, not feminism nor equality, more that it seems so many women have become plain old mean. Gave it my best shot, was role-modeled by a feminist and believe in equality but I just can't stomach mean. Time for other things in life.

[lucy_in_disguise]

Interesting article touching on this topic from ny times

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/15/opinion/sunday/the-all-or-nothing-marriage.html

 

It argues that our needs/ expectations of marriage are changing as society changes. Spousal support in raising a family, companionship, and sex are no longer "enough" - we also expect a deeper connection and fulfillment, relatively new requirements which are a product of the changing times.

 

I think those additional criteria are what people frequently refer to when discussing "settling", which in modern society, with all our freedoms and greater independence, it makes less sense to do.

 

The result is that more marriages fail to meet the higher expectations, but those that do, achieve greater happiness than was possible before.

[topaMAXX]

It seems to me that one of the modern problems in dating is that men are less likely to commit and more willing to play the field until their 40's. Sure, some men will eventually settle down if they want children.

 

But I think one problem with modern society is that sex is more easily available from women, that men take advantage of most women. Men no longer feel under societal pressure to "protect a woman" or "claim a woman as his girlfriend/wife."

 

Feminism is the idea that a woman can be independent and financially self-sufficient. Along with birth control, it has made the idea of marriage less immediate. More women can delay marriage to pursue their careers.

 

But at the same time, single men are taking advantage of societal changes, because men are no longer pressured into providing for the women they sleep with. Men are willing to accept women as both financially independent and capable, and sexually independent.

 

Does anyone else think that these changes in modern society made single men and women more independent and less willing to commit?

 

I believe that the issue lies more with women and their false sense of entitlement.

 

I could go on for days about that. But I'd like to not be banned from this forum so I'll just leave it at that.

[ponchsox]

These women can get men when they want for sex. Why would they be in a traditional relationship? Most of them I have dated are divorced after marrying some deadbeat. Now we have to suffer? No thanks. I'm happy being single.

[Tayken]

These women can get men when they want for sex. Why would they be in a traditional relationship? Most of them I have dated are divorced after marrying some deadbeat. Now we have to suffer? No thanks. I'm happy being single.

 

The last 4 that I dated have been just that....I refuse to be the guy that they will make pay for the previous guy's wrong.

 

I'm a 37 year old man, never been married. I would commit to the right person. But I'm not settling. I'd rather be single than be a miserable marriage.

 

Right on...take it from those of us that have been round the block once, you are not missing much. You can have the same fun dating with less aggravation, manipulation and BS......keep it this way and enjoy your pension as opposed to someone coming along to take some of it

[pickflicker]

It seems to me that one of the modern problems in dating is that men are less likely to commit and more willing to play the field until their 40's. Sure, some men will eventually settle down if they want children.

 

But I think one problem with modern society is that sex is more easily available from women, that men take advantage of most women. Men no longer feel under societal pressure to "protect a woman" or "claim a woman as his girlfriend/wife."

 

Feminism is the idea that a woman can be independent and financially self-sufficient. Along with birth control, it has made the idea of marriage less immediate. More women can delay marriage to pursue their careers.

 

But at the same time, single men are taking advantage of societal changes, because men are no longer pressured into providing for the women they sleep with. Men are willing to accept women as both financially independent and capable, and sexually independent.

 

Does anyone else think that these changes in modern society made single men and women more independent and less willing to commit?

 

I don't believe in 'modern problems in dating'. The modern problems you speak of, are age old problems.

 

When 2 people want to commit, they'll commit. No amount of feminism, or other obstacles, will stop that from happening.

[Negative Nancy]

I would say the more compelling argument is that feminism has made women less willing to commit.

 

Yes and no. The only winners of feminism are F**kbuddy Rockbanddrummer, Alpha McGorgeous, Harley McBadboy and Frank Fratboy. They get most of the sex and most of the women. On the other hand, Eddie Steadyman, Ernie Engineer, Paul Plumber, Tom Teacher and Louie Lawyer are losers.

 

It was the opposite in the past.

 

In the past, men could only get a woman (for sex, family) if they committed to her (i.e. married). That isn't necessary anymore, since ironically feminism gives men what they want (commitment-free sex with tons of women), but not necessarily what most women desire biologically (commitment and raising a family). But to be fair, these days it's also women who ride on the c*** carousel for too long and delay marriage into their 30S and 40s and then expect a man to commit to her.

 

 

 

When women don't need a man as a personal provider and protector, they are freed up to have casual sex, delay marriage and pursue hotter men, in hopes of catching him, or, to a lesser extent, simply enjoy the ride. Top men clean up while average and lesser men are left out in theparched desert of involuntary celibacy with only their discouraging thirst for love and sex to keep them company.

 

Women are more picky because, as most Western girls, they live in a safe and prosperous society where they don't need a relationship. This gives women who choose to be so more leverage to be picky. This is a stark contrast to how women quickly picked forest husbands for protection and provision in the past.

 

Young women are the rockstars of the sexual market place. Nature puts literally all the sexual power in her hands. She can use that power to either construct a palace; or detonate everything in her path. Past generations well understood that if you allowed a young single woman to use that power indiscriminately or unwisely, she would destroy everything. They also understood that if she received some guidance and used that power within guardrails, she could build her palace and live within that palace in relative peace and contentment.

 

Well, young women decided they knew better than mom and dad, and grandma and grandpa. She fought for, and won, the right to do whatever she wanted the moment she turned 18.

 

So, before the SexRev, we had:

 

–daughter dates and/or courts under the watchful eye of dad, and with dad’s permission.

 

–dad makes the final decision on whether a man can court his daughter. Eddie Steadyman, Paul Plumber, Louie Lawyer, Phil Pastor – they can date her. ****buddy Rockbanddrummer, Harley McBadboy, Alpha McGorgeous, and Frank Fratboy may not date her.

 

–if daughter decides to date one of the latter group, that’s fine, but she has now stepped outside his protection. She is on her own. She cannot have both ****buddy’s dick and daddy’s wallet.

 

–daughter uses her sexual power to secure for herself the best man she can get FOR MARRIAGE from among men willing to offer her commitment. She withholds sex until she has secured commitment. (He, on the other hand, withholds commitment until he has selected a woman who is in love with him and wants HIM, not the idea of marriage or a wedding.)

 

–dad blesses her decision to marry one of the men he allows to date/court her.

 

–daughter has between 4 and 8 children with her husband, and she lives in relative peace and happiness.

 

 

Well, daughter didn’t like that. She wanted to do it herself. So now it’s:

 

– while at the tail end of high school, through college, and then for a few years while working, daughter dates whoever she wants. She “dates” (i.e., gets ****ed by) Harley, F**kbuddy, Alpha and Frank (and perhaps some of their friends).

 

–alas, unable to secure commitment from the attractive men who **** her, daughter then decides it’s time to look for a man to marry.

 

 

The standard narrative is that feminism removed the artificial restrictions that were holding women back, and what we observe today is a level playing field.

 

Sure, in terms of casual sex, women can get men that are hotter or badder–or whatever other adjective tingles their fancy–than they can get to marry. And many young women either engage in casual sex because they enjoy it or they think it’s the only way they can get a relationship (usually this is attempted with hotter men, which they of course rarely acknowledge because they overestimate their relationship value and their looks).

 

So many mistake their sexual value for their relationship value and keep getting pumped and dumped or strung along in noncommittal relationships where they think it is something or hope it will lead somewhere–but in the guys’ mind the woman is clearly on the sex-only ladder and not the relationship ladder.

 

Other young women are not slutting it up but are putting off relationships because they are so picky that they are pricing themselves out of the market, which reduces the number of young women available for young men, especially the average ones. Meanwhile, "less attractive" men have to wait on the sidelines.

 

The ultimate insult, ladies, is that so may of you are willing to spread for bad men, overandoverandover again, while rejecting men of much higher moral qualities.

 

I would consider marrying a woman who rejected me while I was younger, PROVIDED she was chaste during that time and was unable to secure commitment from a “better deal”.

 

However, most women will screw whatever high status guy they are interested in while they wait for their future husband to come along and pay full price (marriage) for what she is giving away for free.

So we get her when she is older, much closer to menopause, much of her innocence and joy drained away on a bunch of bad boy lovers.

 

Even as we men are rising up in value and in our careers, our future wives have spent the best of themselves on other men.

Why should I want these women and their broken hearts and banged up pride?

 

And then to add the additional insult, for this ex-whore to imagine that she is “settling” for me?

 

She gave the best of her youth, beauty, and sexual innocence away for free to other men. I will not put a ring on the dried-up husks of her former beauty. Nor am I interested in her imminent menopausal transition, complete with facial hair, wrinkles and the absolute disappearance of 85% of her looks.

 

 

You spent it ladies, you gambled it away in life’s casino, and I am not going to buy the leftovers.

 

 

I once thought that there was nothing I wanted more than to put a smile on a woman’s face, and joy in her heart. Now that I realize what 90% of women think of men, I can think of nothing that brings me more satisfaction than a lonely, crying woman, with a string of bad boy lovers and heart that is beyond broken.

 

I heard some woman crying in the hall at work the other say, obviously talking to one of her girlfriends about the latest mistreatment her boyfriend had done to her. Gone was any sense of empathy or concern, instead I wanted to collect her tears and drink them. In my age group, the shoe is starting to be on the other foot, and I will not pass up a single opportunity to return the insults and rejection to the women who handed them out when younger.

 

I recently ran into a girl from my high school days who was a real picky little bitch. Now, she is fat, with blotchy skin and still single. I am just waiting to run into her again, and I get the opportunity, I am going to drop some comment about not wanting to date fat chicks. It’s gonna burn her pride, of course, since she’s a porker as well. I can’t wait to see the flash of rejection and shame wash across her face.

 

I hide this side of me from the women I date, of course, since there are a few nice women who I do not want to make feel bad. But I will gleefully shame the hell out of any woman who I detect has a past that makes her worthy of it.

 

So go on. Live your lives. Go ahead and continue hoping that ****buddy Rockbanddrummer or Alpha McGorgeous or Harley McBadboy or Frank Fratboy will put a ring on it.

 

Go ahead with your fabulous cubicle careers and travel plans to Brazil and Kuala Lumpur. By all means, EatPrayLove your way across Asia until you all Get Your Grooves Back.

 

Keep purchasing your Manolo Blahniks and your Louis Vuittons.

 

But let’s not kid ourselves. ****buddy, Alpha, Harley and Frank are not good bets for women long term. They are not marriage material as long as they continue to act in their own short term interests. Is that a bad thing? Yes, because they are not good for marriage or children, and it’s not good for society.

 

Be that as it may, women are screaming loud and clear by their conduct that they want the Four Horsemen of the Alphacalypse. They are screaming that they don’t want Eddie, Paul, Tom, Louie or Ernie, at least not until they have gone through F**kbuddy, Alpha, Harley and Frank.

 

The feminist system comes with perverse incentives regarding family formation. The most capable women are encouraged to delay childbirth as long as possible. At the same time, successful men fear becoming fathers because fatherhood is the bait for the trap feminists and their enablers have set for honest men.

 

To put it bluntly, manning up for real and getting an education and employment is more likely to get them divorce raped — if they can find any woman willing to marry them at all. At best, many of these men find themselves married to shrill harpies or women who let themselves go or entitlement princesses or closet feminists or women who cut them off sexually. They tether themselves to unworthy, ungrateful women who view marriage as their entitlement after slutting it up for a decade.

 

Incentives matter.

 

And the biggest incentive for most non-apex men is this: find a good woman in his league to love and be loved by. A society that removes this incentive from young men is a society where said young men will be much more listless and detached. In fact, I think this is one of the biggest factors in why so many young men are underachieving today–the incentive’s just not there for them anymore.

[Hornylildevil]

Funny, as a man, I am having that problem. I rather think the opposite. I think women are more in it for NSA/ FWB and are not 'down' for a LTR.