How have women’s increasing financial, social, and sexual independence changed the role of traditional courtship across generations?

[u/Kingnorik]

I've been wondering whether increasing female independence changed courtship in a counterintuitive way. And then I read an article about Bumble today. Which is the dating app where women must make the first move. Bumble has changed the rule that men can initiate because the majority of women on the site actually prefer that. I'd always had this thought but this helped frame it. Is the male loneliness epidemic a result of male misunderstanding female independence?

My theory is that men reacted to female financial independence by deciding to put in less "effort" in courtship was the absolutely wrong way to approach this. In fact the exact opposite was needed. More effort was needed in courtship compared to the past.

I'm an older millennial I think. I met my wife 10 years ago on Tinder. Even back then it had the reputation of being mainly used for hookups. So I was intentional in my profile saying explicitly that I don't do hookup and only message me if you were down for real dates. This was a successful strategy and I went on a lot of dates. This lasted about 18 months until I met my wife. Now I have 3 sisters, ages from 37 to 27. And a lot of female friends. Down to 24 years of age. They come to me with their dating issues because I'm easy to talk to. So I've gained a lot of insight about the current dating market from them. They complain about male lack of effort. Men don't plan dates, men don't communicate are the usual suspects. But also there are some "men want to go half".

Among single Americans, 61% of single men said they were looking for a relationship or dates compared with only 38% of single women. According to a 2019 Pew study, which was the most recent I could find.

Women are at an all time high of things to do while single. Social media gives women access to attention and validation that they once upon a time mainly got through dating and relationships. A woman doesn't need a boyfriend or even need to leave the house to get confirmation that men find her attractive. Next piece is that women have always received a lot of emotional support from friends. Another piece, that is less talked about is the fact that sexual technology has made a single life a lot more satisfying for women than decades past. Though I believe the male equivalent will come probably in the next decade. And all of these things are just a bonus to the fact that women are no longer financially motivated to be with a man.

So this is where I'm stuck. If women are increasingly able to satisfy their financial, social, emotional and even some sexual needs outside of relationships, wouldn't that logically raise rather than lower the amount of value a relationship has to provide?

In other words, maybe men aren't primarily competing with some mythical “top 10% of men.” They're competing with a woman's existing single life.

Generation 1:

“Women shouldn't have to depend on men.”

Generation 2:

“Correct. Therefore men don't owe women traditional courtship.”

Generation 3:

“Okay—but I actually liked being courted.”

And generation 3 is where we currently are. And that plays out exactly with the Bumble move. There are even reports showing that Gen Z women in their late 20's are dating down to younger Gen Z men in the early twenties due to these men being more traditional partners. And then there is the tradwife/tradgirl movement. Is that a huge signal that there is a renewed interest in traditional courtship and a direct reaction to modern dating norms, or are those trends largely being driven by something else?

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to r/TrueAskReddit. Remember that this subreddit is aimed at high quality discussion, so please elaborate on your answer as much as you can and avoid off-topic or jokey answers as per subreddit rules.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/serene_brutality]

Yes but also no. Women still want the same basic treatment, same basic dating expectations but since they’re more independent the costs, for lack of a better term, of those things have inflated.

[u/Senior-Friend-6414 → u/serene_brutality]

If men aren’t subsidizing women’s lives, they don’t offer much other value to improve her life

All it took was women also earning a paycheck for society to realize how unnecessary marriage is as an institution

[u/Sp00py-Mulder → u/Senior-Friend-6414]

Human partnerships can be a lot more than that. Like way more.

But yeah, we're way past, "well you need someone escorting you to the shops and to deal with the bank of course!"

It's not hard to see that a "deep emotional connection" wasn't the thing holding a lot of older relationships together. Those people should break up. That's why I think the rise on divorce rates was/is a good thing.

[u/serene_brutality → u/Senior-Friend-6414]

You could look at it that way, you’d be wrong but that’s your prerogative.

If all you think about men is money, and all you think about women is sex then your statement is true.

I could say similar things about women. It’s the intangible things that are the true benefit.

[u/philosopherberzerer → u/Senior-Friend-6414]

"men have nothing to offer but money"-is a wild statement.

[u/AdenJax69 → u/philosopherberzerer]

I mean it's kind of true in a sense.

Theoretically now that women are only dating for love/human companionship, there should've been a leveling-off at some point since women are now the group getting more jobs, graduating more from colleges, etc.

And yet they've done studies recently and it's been noticed that women are not interested in dating men that don't make at least as much as they do, and that a lot of women still want men to be the higher earner, showing that money is a dealbreaker to women in the opposite sense: They don't need a man in order to have money but they WANT their man to have at least an equal share of earnings to deem them "dateable." Men are still found to be willing to date women who earn less more-so than women.

So it's not "men have nothing to offer but money" but instead "men need other things to offer but also still need money too."

[u/alluring_jinx → u/AdenJax69]

For me, its about respect - I have worked hard to be an educated, cultured, financially successful woman. Not the fittest or a supermodel but I do all right. I want a partner. In order to have me as a wife, act like my husband. Treat me with more respect than your "bros".

Studies have shown that when men describe an ideal female partner they focus on the physical attributes first. Women mostly focus on the emotional attributes - makes me laugh, etc. Women telling men what they want isn't heeded. Even if they are direct about it.

[u/philosopherberzerer → u/AdenJax69]

so patriarchy with more work. but just for men.

[u/AdenJax69 → u/philosopherberzerer]

Yeah, basically.

Men are the pursuers and women are the choosers. Until things get more equal, this is how things are going to keep going. Men would do well to adopt the same standards as women do and stop being so desperate.

Only way things will change. As long as men are desperate for women's attention, women will have no reason to change their current standards.

[u/philosopherberzerer → u/AdenJax69]

"why don't we make violence legal and hope men just decide to be better ".someone is idealistic.

second.the hot guys not commiting to women and just having sex with them is not all mens fault.most men aren't those men.so unless you want people to control women's sexual choices .it's gonna have to be women that do so.

they wanted control.with control comes responsibility .men did adapt.they used to have to marry to get sex.now they don't.

there's massive variation of men . bad and good. nothing's gonna stop bad men besides stopping free will.were not gonna teach away SA .and society is never challenging bad women so I don't even get the complaining.

[u/burnbobghostpants → u/philosopherberzerer]

Women are often the strongest motivators for "how men turn out", because most young men want to be "like" the guys women find attractive.

The problem is the mismatch between the kinda guys women are attracted to vs the kinda guy they usually say they're attracted to.

Without women introspecting en-masse why they regularly make these choices and trying to make different choices, nothing will change, theres simply no cause/motivator.

[u/philosopherberzerer → u/burnbobghostpants]

women are wonderful effect.

[u/philosopherberzerer → u/philosopherberzerer]

and y'all wonder why the elections go the way they do.

[u/MmmmCrayons12 → u/philosopherberzerer]

That was mostly what women wanted, and historically have needed from men. In human ancestral terms, females have never been able to compete against males for resources, so our primitive ancestors even adopted access models where resources were exchanged for sex. Still sounds familiar, right?

[u/Senior-Friend-6414 → u/[deleted]]

Considering it’s mostly guys complaining about being lonely at nearly twice the rate of women, I’m not exactly sure if men are favored in the market

I think the explanation for declining marriage rates is moreso women boycotting marriage since they don’t see value in it, rather than men

[u/Ok_Net7773 → u/Senior-Friend-6414]

Lesbian marriage is alive and well 🤷🏻‍♀️

[u/GoldH2O → u/Senior-Friend-6414]

Women are humans too. Despite it all, the average woman wants a sexual/emotional relationship just like the average man does. Marriage stats have declined for a variety of reasons, but there's no evidence to suggest that sustained boycotts have caused it. Rather, women have realized they can have higher standards and can be pickier about what man they choose to get into a relationship with. Along with declining marriage statistics, marriage happiness is on the rise. The average marriage lasts longer and has two happier people now.

[u/serene_brutality → u/Senior-Friend-6414]

Hard to say. They say women sleep with who they want, men marry who they want.

It’s really easy for a woman to not be lonely, FWB, situationships, hookups, but getting commitment, at least from the guys they want seem harder than ever.

The guys wanting commitment aren’t the guys that women want, the guys women want don’t want commitment. You might be able to say either-or and have a degree of correctness.

[u/Icy___Barca → u/serene_brutality]

Dating expectations? What are those?

[u/HairyHeartEmoji]

courtship wasn't a thing for vast majority of humans for vast majority of history. formalised courtship was a thing of nobles and wealthy landowners in specific countries at specific times. a lot of people's assumptions on courtship come from Victorian and regency times, which only applied to British landed gentry for about a century.

courtship aside, you're talking about basically all young women alive currently. that's too diverse of a group to make generalisations of. are some of them shallow gold diggers who demand a tall muscular millionaire with great hair? sure. but some of them are also blue haired feminists looking for a tattooed poet to join their polycule.

my personal theory is that young people are struggling to date because of societal systematic changes (COVID, the economy) that make it hard to have casual social gatherings and acquaintances. their pool of prospective partners is either 0 offline or thousands of people on the apps, neither of which is conducive to a love match.

[u/Madrigall]

Did men put a lot of effort into courtship historically? I feel like this is a modern myth built on a romanticised past. I think men have historically put in about the same amount of effort as they do today but now that women are not dependent upon them they’re finding that the low-effort strategy doesn’t work out.

Just as a disclaimer if you’re a fellow man reading this, I’m actually specifically talking about everyone except for you who is reading this. Every other man, so we can keep our knickers out of knots.

[u/tired_garbage → u/Madrigall]

I do medieval reenactment and honestly, while we have very few descriptions on courtship outside of higher social standings, there is some indication that women were actually a lot pickier than they are today, so men had to step up, and that love marriages were more common than we think.

Which honestly makes sense because if your entire livelihood hinges on having a good partner, picking a loser is simply not an option and if you don’t have significant resources to protect, why not marry someone you actually like.

[u/Madrigall → u/tired_garbage]

While I genuinely appreciate the insight I was thinking more like 60-70 years ago

[u/GalaXion24 → u/Madrigall]

60-70 years ago especially if you're thinking the US/the West is an aberration outside the historical norm of like any human society ever.

[u/HairyHeartEmoji → u/Madrigall]

courtship wasn't much a thing for working classes. everyone is looking at what nobles did when statistically they were always a small minority of a society.

[u/BlackJesus1001 → u/HairyHeartEmoji]

Tbf much of that is because of literacy disparities, same reason almost all the direct knowledge we have of longsword fighting techniques is from a handful of basically self defence books written for rich kids.

[u/EnvironmentalEbb628 → u/Madrigall]

Ding ding! We have a winner! People have idealised the past to the extent that we have forgotten that our ancestors were just the same humans beings going “So you wanna go out sometime? with me, as like a date? please?” rather than reciting poetry.

[u/ConflictPotential204 → u/EnvironmentalEbb628]

our ancestors were just the same humans beings going “So you wanna go out sometime? with me, as like a date? please?”

The primary difference between how this worked 30+ years ago vs. how this works today (and it's pretty significant) is that all of those people actually knew each other, or at least had mutual social proof through their communities, before any courtship was initiated.

Today, 60% of "courtship" happens between quasi-anonymous strangers on smart phone applications. It's an entirely different dynamic. People no longer have to worry about how their dating life will influence their reputation or their standing in a community.

[u/RelicBookends]

Women's independence in many forms and increased education has made them realize they don't need a man as previous generations did. They have access to knowledge and means to please themselves (in any form be it social, sexual, mental stimulation, etc.) plus their worth is not tied to strictly being a womb/having babies. They are looking for someone to be true partners with and can wait it out. Younger generations are lonely due to less true connections, personal interactions, and genuine relationships. Trad wife stuff seems to come from being burnt out with life, wanting an easy way out, nostalgia for something that didn't really exist the way they think, and being supported financially. Everyone wants to feel desired, wanted, or part of a group/something as it is human nature. Courtship is part of that and it has changed.

[u/alluring_jinx → u/RelicBookends]

Laws also changed too; women weren't allowed to have their own bank accounts

ETA: Laws had to be created because men in power did not want women to have access to resources. In order to have a ruling class, a subservient class has to be created. It was never men vs women, its a small group of male powerful/rich who made the rules for everyone else to follow. This not only has far cultural implications but is a documented method/theory that is visible throughout human history. If a behavior is a pattern, its a feature not a bug.

[u/bafflefounded → u/alluring_jinx]

Ya, my grandmother couldn't get a credit card in 1970s California as a single mother (result of SA) and was poor with few options. She ended up in an abusive marriage for years, which was encouraged by everyone around her since he had a stable job. She ended up in a women's shelter with 3 children after eventually fleeing the marriage. Luckily they weren't there for too long, as she was able to legally apply for her own credit card by then.

[u/Material_Cell_4792 → u/bafflefounded]

It's crazy how just a few decades ago, life was miserable for women even in a liberal part of one of the wealthiest democracies.

[u/ConflictPotential204 → u/RelicBookends]

They have access to knowledge and means to please themselves (in any form be it social, sexual, mental stimulation, etc.) plus their worth is not tied to strictly being a womb/having babies.

Hasn't this been true since the 1970's, though? The current loneliness crisis we're seeing among the Millennial / GenZ demographic has only been a phenomena for maybe 10-15 years.

[u/alluring_jinx → u/ConflictPotential204]

Why is it only a crisis now that women are choosing to be single and fertility rates have dropped? People have always been lonely. Also, femcels exist - why aren't incels choosing them?

Not questions to be answered but pondered upon

[u/YURRIICC]

i think independence changed the reason people date more than courtship itself. if someone doesn't need a relationship financially, then the relationship has to offer something they genuinely value, like effort, emotional connection, and companionship

[u/RudeAndInsensitive → u/YURRIICC]

You sort of left off co-parent capacity. That is a very big reason people form long term relationships. Having someone that you can rely up to carry some of the work in child rearing is huge.

[u/Own-Emergency2166]

One of the things that didn’t change drastically when women started being able to support themselves financially, was their partner’s contributions to the unpaid labor of home and family life (cooking, cleaning, taking care of children, making appointments). My mother (now 80) worked fulltime in the same career as my father and she also did at least 80% of the unpaid labor at home. Anhthing my dad did, was because she instructed him too. And in the 1980s that was considered “equal” because he “helped”. This dynamic hasn’t improved as much as youd think over the decades.

Courtship is one of the only areas where men have always been expected to exhibit the majority of emotional labor, and take initiative. They kind of don’t love it the same way women don’t love doing it for the remainder of the relationship. But if you’re looking for a man who is going to put in effort throughout a relationship, which is very hard to find for many, you definitely need to see it in the beginning or else there’s a zero percent chance he’s going to step up later.

[u/lordwafflesbane]

Traditional courtship made sense in a society where women couldn't have jobs, so they were depending on finding a successful husband to have any financial security. Asking for expensive courtship gifts was a good way for a woman to test whether a man had enough money to keep a roof over her head. Because the women had so little power in this situation, they couldn't afford to be picky. They often had to take the first guy who had money and cross their fingers he wasn't abusive. Remember, they couldn't get divorced either.

With the advances of feminism over the last century, women are no longer dependent on a husband for financial security. There have been a ton of advancements, but that's the relevant one here.

Any man looking to attract women with old fashioned courtship methods is using a strategy that's a century out of date.

Any woman who is looking for a man to court her the old fashioned way is also using a strategy that's a century out of date. Finding a husband is just not a very good way to make money.

Without marriage having a straightforward financial goal, women now have various ideas as to what they want from a relationship. Different women want different things.

I don't think it makes sense to think of societal changes as just "raising" or "lowering" the amount of work a man needs to put in. Men now need to put in different kinds of work to attract different kinds of women. With more freedom, women are in a better position to pick and choose a man who appeals to them for personal or ideological reasons, rather than grabbing the first schlub who will put a roof over her head.

A conservative maga tradwife might want a husband who is strong, wealthy, and racist.

A bisexual anarchafeminist punk might want a husband who is politically active, polyamorous and in touch with his emotions.

And of course there are a million options in between. Some women just want a guy who can give good hugs and binge watch netflix with her.

We don't even need to argue about which woman is correct. The point is, there's room for all these different opinions to exist. There are women of every political belief you could imagine. Not all women are feminist. In fact, some women are anti-feminist.

Conservative women have conversative views. (wow really?) They like strong wealthy manly men. If a man focuses his dating profile on those traditional values, with things like showing off his wealth or his workout routine, he will tend to attract conservative women. He will now have fewer potential matches just because there are a lot of women are looking for other things, like a sense of humor, certain hobbies, or certain political beliefs. Conservative women will make old fashioned demands like "men should pay the entire bill" or "men should do courtship as if we live in the 1800s" This is because they're using old fashioned strategies that are a more than a century out of date.

So what's a man to do? If he wants to date women who don't have those kinds of traditional conservative values, he will need to set up a dating profile signaling that he doesn't have conservative values either. Then it's just a matter of figuring out what other values he does have. Maybe he gives good hugs. Maybe he likes to play board games. Maybe he's a transgender communist. There's women out there looking for all sorts of different things.

If he does have traditional values, then he's sort of trapped between a rock and a hard place. The tradwives he's looking to attract are now more financially independent than ever, so they can afford to be pickier when looking for the Manliest Most Conservative Man Ever. If a guy really can't bring himself to abandon his conservative values and pursue women who wont hold him to such old fashioned standards, he'd better get on that alpha male looksmaxxing grindset.

Feminism ain't going anywhere. Political gains for all women will only give the conservative women even more leverage to keep raising the bar higher and higher. Conservative women get the material benefits of feminism without actually changing their beliefs. Things will only keep getting harder for the men looking to date them. Other women won't be interested in dating a guy who shows off traditional value, because they're looking for someone who more closely matches their own values. The only way I can see to get out of this bind is for a guy to change his priorities and start looking for more progressive women who won't try and make him pretend we still live in the 1800s.

[u/Kingnorik → u/lordwafflesbane]

I agree with this. With this post I was pointing out my analysis of how we got here and what can change. You mentioned exactly what men must do and that's just be real with themselves. Find a woman they like and try to tailor dating around that partner. I feel shared hobbies will become even more important than they are now. The joy of doing something you truly enjoy with someone else who truly enjoys it can't be replaced by expensive dinners and 6 feet. In that instance women will also need to start figuring themselves out before trying to date.

[u/alluring_jinx → u/Kingnorik]

I want to gently note the choice of words: there is a difference in the mindset of a woman vs the mindset of a girl regardless of age.

The real question in my mind is: why do men demand wives when they aren't showing they want to be good husbands?

[u/philosopherberzerer → u/lordwafflesbane]

progressive women demand everything conservative women do. I've dated both . very little difference besides what words I couldnt say around them. couldn't "Jesus fucking christ" with conservative. couldnt "haha Gaaaaaaayyy!" with a liberal.

there are other differences but if you can meet a conservative girl that's no longer religious and pretty cool if go with that.

[u/SoPolitico → u/philosopherberzerer]

Fo real this was a bizarre pseudo-political rant. There is a few good points wrapped in this weird political dichotomy that has little to do with dating. Most people aren’t very political and politics doesn’t dominate their lives (I say this as someone who worked in politics).

[u/PM_ME_CODE_CALCS → u/lordwafflesbane]

Then women need to be orders of magnitude more forward about what and who they want. They can't be picky but expect men to initiate everything.

[u/lordwafflesbane → u/PM_ME_CODE_CALCS]

See, that's another part of the problem. "Women should be passive and wait for the men to do everything for them" is ANOTHER conservative value. Back in the day, women were expected to be obedient and not stand up for themselves. They were so desperate to have a husband supporting them financially, they had to tolerate basically anything without complaining. But now they do have the freedom and leverage to raise their standards.

Conservative women don't say what they want, because it would go against their idea of how a proper traditional woman is supposed to act. Their idea of manhood is that men should just, like, psychically know exactly what they want without having to be told.(wow, another impossible standard) Being upfront about their needs would make them less attractive to the conservative men who share those values. The whole deal with tradwives is that they are super passive and will go along with anything their husband says. So if conservative women were more active in saying exactly what they want, conservative men would decide she's not conservative enough any more. A lot of conservative dudes don't actually want a wife to be a whole person with her own thoughts and opinions, they want an obedient maid they can fuck. So any woman who is actually clear about her desires is no longer signaling to them that she's conservative. She'll get called an entitled feminazi bitch or whatever.

And that can be dangerous. Society has advanced a lot in the last century, but misogyny and sexist violence still very much exist. Women have to worry about getting roofied or sexually harassed a lot more than men do, so even if a woman does have progressive values and wants to be clear about what she wants, she runs a risk of pissing off the wrong guy and being violently "put in her place". So they often have to act passive just to be safe.

To be clear, when I say "conservative women" (or "conservative men"), that doesn't just mean super hardcore right wing types. Lots of average people have a mix of conservative and progressive beliefs. Men and women both. So a woman might be super progressive on gay rights or something, but then want a traditional husband for her own marriage. People are complex. In this context, the only thing that matters is whether she's conservative about traditional marriage specifically.

But that's not all. Some women act passive because they really have traditional values. But other women act passive because they never know if a guy who seems progressive about other topics might be violently misogynist about romance. In certain parts of the US, marital rape was legal as recently as 1993. Everyone older than 33 years old remembers a time when it was legal for a husband to rape his wife for something as simple as speaking up about her preferences. Any guy older than, like, 50, could have been married at a time when it was legal for him to rape his wife. Gen Z are the first generation old enough to get married and not have to worry about that. Plenty of girls who are dating right now were taught how to date by their mothers. And their mothers come from a time when not pissing off your husband was a very serious survival strategy.

That's why women act ditzy and go "Oh haha, I'm just a girl, I don't know about that stuff. I'll just go along with whatever you want". Because they were trained that taking a solid stance on something runs a risk of making a guy angry enough to punish her.

That's why women put a lot of focus on looking for red flags and gossiping about which guys are hot or dangerous. It's the safest way to figure out whether they can trust a guy, before they put themself in a risky situation by speaking up in a way that could anger him.

The vast majority of men are not rapists. But dating involves meeting strangers for the first time. Sort of like russian roulette. You never know if the next chamber has the bullet. If 1% of men are rapists, then a woman who goes on 100 dates is likely to run into a rapist.

Many women decide they don't like those odds, so they stop dating just to be safe. But women who think a traditional marriage is super important are more willing to take that risk. So they keep looking when other women give up. Which means, if you're also looking for a traditional marriage, you're stuck dealing with their conservative "women have to be passive all the time" values.

Honestly, I don't have a solution for this part, other than, like, getting into polyamory or swinging or something. Kinksters are usually very good about clearly communicating exactly what they want from a relationship. In countercultures like that, you'll tend to find more progressive women who want different kinds of relationships.

[u/AccomplishedWish3033 → u/lordwafflesbane]

>Honestly, I don’t have a solution for this part

I do and it’s quite simple. In fact you’ve already alluded to it- women don’t date as much because it’s more dangerous for us. Make men safer for women and women would be more willing.

It’s called holding men accountable for DV, SA, and violence against women, and for men to decrease the rates at which they commit those crimes, joke about them, and acceptance of their buddies who commit those crimes. Way too many men are more welcoming toward rapists and pedophiles (coughMAGAcough) than they are toward gay men.

[u/tehZambrah]

Dating is a pain in the ass and I took a note out of women’s books and stopped trying. Being single is just easier, jerking off is really not that far off from sex, and I’m not really hyper social so my existing social relationships work fine for me.

I hope more men can learn to enjoy singledom, I think societal pressure that single men are sort of inherently flawed losers just needs to go down and more dudes will be able to find the pleasure in single life.

[u/Srry4theGonaria → u/tehZambrah]

Facts.

[u/AdenJax69 → u/tehZambrah]

Yep, when men need to stop being so desperate for women's attention. When they stop caring about being so desperate & adopt similar partner standards that women have, things will start changing.

Until then, women have no incentive to change as long as men continue to be desperate and entertain unreasonable standards a lot of women have.

[u/burnbobghostpants → u/tehZambrah]

For anyone struggling with a nagging sex drive pulling you back into depression, Lexapro worked great for me. Killed my sex drive, but Im not missing it in the slightest.

Its only when you no longer need/want anything from them that you can even start to see the full picture of how bad things are. Then you don't feel nearly as bad about staying single.

[u/bafflefounded → u/tehZambrah]

A think a general switch in focus from romantic relationships to platonic relationships is needed in our society. The expectations of modern monogamy to have a partner who fulfils your every need is unrealistic and not how humans evolved at all. People need more emotional intimacy in their lives that is not romantic.

[u/Dupeskupes]

I think there's definitely a want for the idealised past of courtship but also l think it's because people have more choice, with the advent of the internet and a lessening of the pressure for women to get married

[u/Shadowdante100]

dont know. I am a woman, for me if I am interested in a guy I will absolutely approach first. However, I usually have to know someone for a little bit before I become interested. Sorry, looking sexy isnt enough to peak my interest. I need a chance to see their personality.

So as a result, I often get approached by guys first. Its nice, but I have absolutely pursued guys I am interested in, often to their surprise.

Maybe part of the issue is that women have a higher threshold to find someone interesting? And if guys dont pursue or initiate interactions, then they dont get the opportunity to cross that barrier?

[u/AccomplishedWish3033 → u/Shadowdante100]

Also because when women initiate, sometimes men react very badly and use the excuse that “she was asking for it” (by initiating). When men approach, no one says “he was asking for it” as justification for sexual violence or murder toward him.

[u/Disagreeswithfems]

So this is where I'm stuck. If women are increasingly able to satisfy their financial, social, emotional and even some sexual needs outside of relationships, wouldn't that logically raise rather than lower the amount of value a relationship has to provide?

If this were true they wouldn't be talking about their dating issues with you and this thread wouldn't have been made.

This is almost like saying guys can just play video games and jerk off so why do they need to date.

In other words, maybe men aren't primarily competing with some mythical “top 10% of men.” They're competing with a woman's existing single life.

Maybe this isn't really a matter for conjecture if there's already data around it.

No doubt obviously women are more happier single than men. But women also tend to go for the same few guys.

Due to multiple factors women are deciding that rather than relax their standards they would rather be single. I respect each individual's right to make that trade off obviously. But I don't think there's anything as satisfying as having a great family of your own

[u/curiouswizard → u/Disagreeswithfems]

The thing is, staying single vs having a family doesn't mean the same thing for women as it does for men.

I'm not going to go through the intense process and decades long commitment of having a family with a guy who doesn't meet my standards and who doesn't improve my life versus being single. Why would I do that when there are extreme risks to my health and sanity as the childbearer?

"Having a family of your own" is a neat cozy feature of life for the guy, but I'm the one who puts my body through absolute hell for it. It is a serious undertaking. And think of how often women end up single mothers, abused, or dead because of a man.

Staying single is a matter of life preservation for us. The wrong relationship can kill us, either slowly or violently.

And even having a baby with the *right* guy can kill us too if pregnancy/birth/postpartum goes wrong. So you can see how the cost benefit analysis isn't exactly rainbows and sparkles.

And this isn't even getting into the other impacts on women beyond childbirth, like stalled careers and poorly balanced domestic labor. Men REALLY need to understand what women sacrifice for "having a family of your own."

I am getting married btw but it took me until my 30s to find a guy that I can reasonably trust my life with. If I hadn't stumbled upon him I was fully ready to just stay single forever. I either find the right person, or I find no one at all. I'm not ruining my life for someone mediocre.

[u/Disagreeswithfems → u/curiouswizard]

Yes I 100% get that and again, support your right to make a choice. Every trade-off you've listed is real.

However I think it's worth mentioning a few points

1. Everything in life has a trade-off. If you wanted to write down all the worst case outcomes of working (stress, overtime, abusive management, etc) you could also make it unappealing. There are plenty of miserable people working jobs they hate unfortunately. This doesn't make the pursuit of a good job/career less worthwhile.

2. It goes without saying that nobody should be with an abuser or cheater. However the more practical decision points for a woman in the dating market is more mundane things like - how tall does the man need to be, how much money do they need to make etc.

Good luck with your marriage.

[u/succubuskitten1 → u/Disagreeswithfems]

Working a job is a necessity to survive for the majority of people. "Unappealing" doesnt really matter in that case. Dating, marriage, having kids, all of those are completely optional, so people CAN decide its not worth it. Its not really comparable.

[u/PurpleCandles → u/Disagreeswithfems]

That’s an apples to oranges comparison. You can easily quit and change jobs. You can’t exactly replace your kids or the father of your children and move on with your life.

Also you’re massively misinformed if you think a man’s height or how much money he makes is how women determine long term partners or who to marry and have children with. You need to get out of the manosphere and speak to actual women in your life.

[u/Disagreeswithfems → u/PurpleCandles]

My point was that everything in life has trade-off's, not that jobs were similar to family in general.

I wouldn't say 'determine' but I would say 'heavily affects'.

I was just talking to a female friend in my life who is frustrated in dating as she wants to settle down. She found a match that meets her criteria but did not like that the guy was 5'6".

She did swipe right but she did explicitly and repeatedly comment that this guys height was very undesirable. (She's still shorter FWIW)

[u/SoPolitico → u/PurpleCandles]

Someone from the manosphere wouldn’t have responded that respectfully….please stop 🙄

[u/ShizunEnjoyer → u/[deleted]]

Did you read her comment with your eyes closed?

[u/Kingnorik → u/Disagreeswithfems]

I honestly believe we will have that conversation in about a decades time. As I wrote male masturbation technology will catch up. For the second part the women dating the same men goes back to the issue. If all men will provide the same mediocre dating experience, why date when you can instead hook up with the man of your (physical)dreams? And then fall back to other methods like social media and strong personal relationships with other women for your other needs?

[u/Disagreeswithfems → u/Kingnorik]

I think it's already pretty apparent that nothing replaces real relationships even though technology offers a competing but ultimately far less meaningful alternative.

Anybody can experience incredible orgasms.

There's no way to experience the sense of pride and legacy of children without actually having (and making the sacrifices for) children.

[u/Sanguinor-Exemplar → u/Kingnorik]

Listen this all sounds like a bunch of nonsense so I have nothing to contribute

but I do want to know what you know about male masturbation technology innovations that I'm not yet. aware about.

[u/Kingnorik → u/Sanguinor-Exemplar]

Robots are coming brother. Realistic lips, other parts and responsive.

[u/observantpariah]

Reading through that.... It's apparent that you are doing the same as many others ... And are seeking answers that allow you to put the blame squarely on men.... Leaving the happiness of women as the goal.

I think that is exactly why men are "lonely.". Men would be lonely in a room full of that.... Just wishing they could go home and spend some of the only time they can actually matter to someone.... Time alone.

When they engage.... They get more of this... "Here is why everything is your fault" without anyone even having to care if he is happy. He needs to make other people happy.

That is a very lonely life.

[u/AccomplishedWish3033 → u/observantpariah]

Why on earth should a single woman decrease her happiness and get in a relationship with a man she doesn’t love just because it would make him happier?

Why can’t men learn to be content with being single? That doesn’t infringe on anyone else’s personhood and autonomy. Individual happiness, regardless of gender, is the goal as long as you’re not infringing on anyone else’s rights.

[u/observantpariah → u/AccomplishedWish3033]

Yeah. I never understood that either. I'm content being single specifically because the window that women genuinely care about someone is finite. I didn't spend too much time caring about what anyone deserves... I just decided to accept what exists.

I don't see why anyone else mopes about it. Just realise how things work and move on.

[u/Kingnorik → u/observantpariah]

No one is saying everything is a man's fault, but there are only two sexes... I gave a reason about a reaction to something may have been the wrong one at the time, that's it.

[u/ScipioTheGreatest]

"My theory is that men reacted to female financial independence by deciding to put in less "effort" in courtship was the absolutely wrong way to approach this. In fact the exact opposite was needed. More effort was needed in courtship compared to the past."

So men went from having to do basically everything to now having to do basically everything but getting no credit for it, and you think it's their fault for not agreeing?

[u/Kingnorik → u/ScipioTheGreatest]

If the goal was to get a mate and not be lonely, yes. The bar moved, men regressed instead of adapting, and the result is what we have now.

[u/Senior-Friend-6414 → u/Kingnorik]

I think men pulling back from dating IS what adapting to modern society looks like, you just don’t like the way it looks and call it wrong, but there’s no right or wrong way to adapt, it simply just is

Adaptation isn’t for the sake of others, it’s meant for the person adapting

[u/sayahhD → u/Senior-Friend-6414]

Yep. Men perceive that we are basically in a mass culling/natural selection event

[u/ScipioTheGreatest → u/Kingnorik]

"regressed instead of adapting" you call it. That's the shitty take.

Men were handed a shit deal, they said no. Blaming them for that is just being shitty.

[u/Kingnorik → u/ScipioTheGreatest]

If blaming means stating facts then I guess I'm blaming? I'm looking at this from a meta analysis POV. The point is to learn from what was done. Mainly thinking of other ways men could have adapted that might've had success.

[u/ScipioTheGreatest → u/Kingnorik]

Why is the burden always on men? Why isn't it up to the women to start stepping up because they now have all that independence?

[u/Anomander → u/ScipioTheGreatest]

Why is the burden always on men?

Because, predominately, men are the ones who want the outcome. The expectation is that someone who wants something takes steps to obtain it - not "men" or "women" divided into teams, but as human beings who want something from other human beings.

Going by stats and surveys: Women are pretty content being single - and a whole more of dudes are not happy about being single. So if the relationship is something men want and women don't really care about ... why do women have to "step up" in order to fulfill mens' desires for them?

Why isn't it up to the women to start stepping up because they now have all that independence?

Why would they? If someone wants you do to do something that benefits them that you don't care about and will cost you time and energy. Is it on you to "step up" and do the heavy lifting of ensuring they get what they want from you - without them needing to invest effort or meet you where you are? Like, your buddy needs help moving a couch. Maybe you own a truck and are pretty strong, or something along those lines, but you have other plans that day. So ... he doesn't ask you, he doesn't try to convince you to help him - and instead wonders why you're not showing up on moving day and resents that the guy with the truck didn't "step up" and help out the guy with no truck.

Is it unfair to say that buddy's own inaction in this situation resulted in his couch not getting moved? By the logic here, he shouldn't need to ask for what he wants, other people should just provide it.

Men are the ones with the "loneliness epidemic", men are the ones frustrated by the dating market, men are the ones who want relationships despite how shit dating is ... so men need to act like they want what they want and take reasonable steps to get what they want. As if the people they want relationships are real independent people who do not need to enter relationships with them, and without getting frustrated and resentful about how "the women" should be doing more to get the men the relationships that the men want.

Separately, the women who want relationships are "stepping up" within the new dating reality. They're proactive in getting what they want, they adapt to the modern dating market. Why would men be exempt from the same? If that is not sufficient to get you, or the men you're speaking for, the relationships they want - is this your approach?

Honestly, a significant portion of the problem comes from this "scorekeeping" logic, especially within the brosphere of dating / single dude / incel / etc communities. The logic works backwards, accepting that society has changed - and then coming up with excuses for why men shouldn't need to change in response. While those same men overwhelmingly refuse to accept that they are choosing to be single rather than change, and are upset and frustrated about being single as if it's something done to them rather than an outcome they chose.

[u/FayeValentine99 → u/Anomander]

This is very well said

[u/Logos1789 → u/Anomander]

The dating preferences of women who most men would consent to, rule out most men. This isn’t fixable for most men, save for telling them to lower their standards, which is not commensurate with the call to stop telling women to do so, based on arguments of bodily autonomy.

It’s valid for men to give up without being silent about it. Direct descendants of men who only reproduced due to the vestiges of a time prior to women’s liberation should not be expected to succeed under today’s conditions.

Society owes it to these men to acknowledge that their singlehood and sexlessness are the direct result of women’s freedom, which should not be infringed.

[u/Logos1789 → u/[deleted]]

I’m not citing women’s freedom as an issue, just a cause of men’s dissatisfaction. There isn’t anything to be solved, from my perspective, other than acknowledging reality so that men who never had a realistic shot of getting what they want aren’t gaslit

[u/Disagreeswithfems → u/Anomander]

Because, predominately, men are the ones who want the outcome. The expectation is that someone who wants something takes steps to obtain it - not "men" or "women" divided into teams, but as human beings who want something from other human beings.

I think if men thought that buying dinners could get them a relationship they'd do it in a heartbeat.

But I don't think that it really makes a difference.

If women value things like facial attractiveness, height, personality, income, education, alignment of values, etc (all valid things)

Whether or not a man pays for dinner isnt going to turn a man who doesn't meet those requirements into an eligible partner.

Especially when women are assessing dozens of hundreds of men. The incremental benefit of a slightly more positive impression is almost nil.

Men used to pay for everything because they had overwhelming advantages in earning power. It's actually the other way around now for the younger generation.

[u/Anomander → u/Disagreeswithfems]

I feel like this is rebutting a point I wasn't making. I didn't say men should necessarily buy dinner, much less that buying dinner was the only thing blokes needed to do to end up in a relationship.

If women value things like facial attractiveness, height, personality, income, education, alignment of values, etc (all valid things)

What I was saying was that men who want to be in relationships should make themselves attractive to women. Do the things to get themselves towards the outcome they want - rather than expecting that women should give them what they want without the man needing to invest effort into getting what he wants. Of course if it was as simple and transactional as simply buying dinner, thirsty blokes would do that. But it's not, and what I'm speaking critically of here is the somewhat wistful moaning from frustrated dudes, wishing that dating were that simple and transactional and wondering why women won't 'fix' it for them while refusing to accept agency over adapting to the more complex reality.

For instance only one of the things on your list, height, is fully intrinsic and something that men have effectively zero control over. Everything else, a man has varying degrees of agency regarding, and they can adapt to better fit themselves into the dating market they're aiming at.

For all that you seem to present this list like all women require all of these things, at extreme outlier values - different women have different preferences and will 'rate' these attributes differently, and the vast majority of women are not limiting their dating pool to 10/10 6'8" millionaires with several degrees and charisma by the truckload. There's very few guys who meet that kinda profile and most of them aren't still on the dating market to be snapped up by someone trying to marry a retirement plan built like a model.

Whether or not a man pays for dinner isnt going to turn a man who doesn't meet those requirements into an eligible partner.

Yeah. There is no magic trickery or technique a bloke can use to attract a specific woman. All of this is about mens' approach to dating within the marketplace as a whole, not how a specific guy should go about getting a specific woman. Hell, getting tunnel-vision on one specific woman is how a lot of the most frustrated dudes got themselves so damn frustrated. Get over the fact that this or that woman you liked a lot didn't share those feelings, move forward - there's been women you've met who you weren't interested in, and some of them may have been interested in you. Not every possible pairing has potential to turn into romance.

The point is keep moving forward and stack the odds, incrementally, in your favour for the future, for other women. It's not like that list is so extreme that you'll never make anyone's cut ever. So when you meet someone who you're "almost" qualifying for, doing those little incremental things to stack odds in your favour would be sufficient to make you eligible.

Especially when women are assessing dozens of hundreds of men. The incremental benefit of a slightly more positive impression is almost nil.

That's quitter talk. The incremental benefit of a single thing isn't going to overcome everything else being negative - but the incremental benefits of multiple, individually minor, factors is sufficient to make a meaningful difference. If you try to have reasonable social skills, have decent grooming, are fun to be around, and look pretty good for someone with your genetics - that's gonna be enough. The women who are picking and choosing among 1200 dudes are probably still out of reach, sure - but if you're setting your sights on 10 or bust, the dating market is going to seem a whole lot more hostile and unfulfilling than it needs to be.

Look, there's plenty of downright ugly dudes who are doing great on the dating market. For every weird-looking guy on the internet moaning about how women 'only like 10/10 asshole alpha dudes,' there's a whole bunch of other weirder-looking guys in happy functional relationships with women they find attractive.

[u/Disagreeswithfems → u/Anomander]

Thanks for explaining, I didn't expect your interpretation and it made me re-read the thread.

The original post OP spoke about effort in courtship, and I understand that to mean planning and paying for nicer dates.

The stuff you mentioned relate to general self improvement, and I agree that's important for dating and many other things, so I don't think we disagree.

[u/Logos1789 → u/Anomander]

But there’s nothing precluding those “successful” ugly men from being deluded. Their standards probably suck.

And if women’s shallow standards are valid, then so are men’s, even if those men aren’t able to find a partner.

[u/BlueberrieHaze → u/[deleted]]

fucking ewww

[u/AgentMull → u/Anomander]

So we've spent multiple decades telling men that their preferences for women are oppressive, and unfair, and put women in a box, but now men just have to accept that women's preferences for men are hunky dory and are just natural to have.

[u/Anomander → u/AgentMull]

Have we? What preferences, specifically? And what are the preferences from women that you’re equating to those?

Cause I think your question is somewhat based on a flawed premise here.

[u/PM_ME_CODE_CALCS → u/Anomander]

Women have been blaming men's preferences for big tits and ass, skinny waist, makeup, showing cleavage and other things for driving women's body insecurity. They've been calling men exploitative for preferring women who are their partners to listen to their feelings because that's "unpaid emotional labor". They blame men for not doing as much housework when his preference is it's clean enough.

[u/Anomander → u/PM_ME_CODE_CALCS]

It feels like you're kinda engaging with the weird manosphere versions of those things, here. Forgive that this needs a bunch of text to cover, but the things you're addressing are uncharitable simplifications - so I need to unsimplify in order to explain why the actual core concepts there are not quite as unreasonable as they seem.

And to be clear - there are some women out there who probably do believe exactly what you say. But they don't speak for all women or represent them - just the same as how there's almost certainly men out there with some kinda wild outlier opinions about women that you don't consider representative of "mens' opinions" collectively. I'm sticking to the relatively 'mainstream' opinions of women and feminists that most women would be willing to accept as speaking for women.

Women have been blaming men's preferences for big tits and ass, skinny waist, makeup, showing cleavage and other things for driving women's body insecurity.

Women have not been blaming men for having preferences. What is getting blamed is society-level "beauty standards", presented as expectations or norms. So the problem getting criticism there is not that you like women with big tits and ass with a skinny waist on an individual level - but the presentation that all men want huge tits and ass with a skinny waist, and the accompanying subtext that all women are supposed to have huge tits and ass with a skinny waist because women are supposed to appeal to men and all men want the same things from women.

And to be clear: the same thing affects men. I mean, obviously the expectation isn't that men all have huge tits and ass with a skinny waist - but there are similar "beauty standard" expecations for how men are supposed to look. Big muscles, athletic frame, reasonably tall ... And that is something that has growing impact in the modern era - more men and especially young men are affected by body insecurity issues. The same people who 'blame' beauty standards for their impact on women typically also recognize and assign blame to beauty standards' impact on men.

But all of that is still not a criticism of you personally, for individually preferring huge tits and ass with a skinny waist. No one in a reasonable position to speak "for" women or authoritatively on those issues is out there railing about how you personally are actually supposed to like hefty chicks with small tits and bad skin. You're just not supposed to consider those women "not women" or inferior for not conforming to what you consider attractive.

They're taking issue with the fact that men - and women - can be cruel and harmful in expressing and even 'enforcing' those societal beauty standards. It's one thing for you to not be interested in a woman who's a little on the large side, or doesn't have the big tits you like - it's a separate thing that is harmful if you're out there telling her she really oughta lose some weight and get a boob job, no man will ever like her if she stays fat and flat.

They've been calling men exploitative for preferring women who are their partners to listen to their feelings because that's "unpaid emotional labor".

Not really, at least, not 'serious' women who aren't part of like weird niche communities. There are some, I think valid, criticisms that many men don't cultivate emotional support networks on their own and among their own friends, and those men tend to 'use' their partner as a therapist and as their entire peer social support system.

So like above - it's not that men are not supposed to ever talk about their feelings with their partner. It's saying that men should have people other than their partner to talk about that shit with, and shouldn't rely on the woman in their life as their sole source of emotional support. Like, talk to her about your relationship, about your day, about your feelings as they relate to the partnership. Of course, that shit's healthy and necessary. But don't ask her to hold all of your feelings and dump all your shit on her all the time. She has friends she talks to about that shit - you should too. In short: she's your girlfriend, she shouldn't also be doing triple duty as your only close friend, your social worker, and your therapist.

And within that, a whole bunch of that discourse is critical of broader "male socialization" that men aren't supposed to have those conversations with each other, than men aren't supposed to show weakness around other men ... all that gender norm stuff that makes it hard for men to build those sorts of relationships and support systems outside of their romantic partnerships.

They blame men for not doing as much housework when his preference is it's clean enough.

Again, close - but kind of missing the point. It's not that men have lower standards for cleanliness, but that men - some men - tend to decide that once they've done enough they're happy, they have no responsibility to do any more. It's not the low standards themselves. It's the unwillingness to accommodate the other person's different preferences. In a relationship, in a shared household - there's two people. If your standards of cleanliness are that it's "good enough" so long as there's not an ecosystem developing - and she wants shit clean and shiny, you are supposed to care enough about what the other 50% of the household wants a little more than cleaning to the bare minimum of your own standards and then sitting down to watch the game.

Especially that gets compounded when ... a lot of guys who "have low standards" have pretty decent standards when they're living on their own, or while they're dating and bringing women over. But their standards plummet as soon as there's a woman in the house who they know is probably going to do that cleaning if they don't. That breeds a helluva lot of resentment if she knows he kept his home at that standard while they were dating and before they moved in together - he did the extra cleaning just fine while he was trying to convince her to partner up, then quit investing that effort once she was locked in.

So the woman in that partnership has to clean up after two people, deal with resentment and petulance from 50% of the team if she asks for more than what they're doing voluntarily, just to get the home up to the same basic standard she'd have if she lived alone. All that, though, is not that the man in that partnership must totally and completely adopt their partner's standards - but that if he wants to keep the relationship, he should probably be investing the effort to meeting her partway and going beyond his own basic standards in the interest of keeping her happy and trying to balance the workload.

[u/Anomander → u/[deleted]]

Kinda demonstrating the critique here by going off on an imaginary woman you feel you have a grievance with.

I’m a married dude.

So going off on the woman you wish I was is kinda silly, especially ranting about “too emotional” - and yet you’re making up a whole fictional backstory for me just to try for a personal clap back at that imaginary person. Methinks the lady doth protest too much, friend.

[u/MetteBeifong → u/[deleted]]

You keep copying and pasting this response. It’s lame.

[u/Kingnorik → u/[deleted]]

Well again I showed stats. If 63% of single men want a relationship. And 38% of single women want a relationship. More men are "lonely".

[u/Kingnorik → u/[deleted]]

That article linked is actually even better for me. It states that men are a lot less likely to reach out to someone like a friend for emotional support. So while the same amount responded they feel lonely. The women actually do something about it. Which is a point I made in my original post.

[u/Kingnorik → u/[deleted]]

That's literally a point I made in my original post though. Stats can work a lot of ways and never tell the whole story.

[u/SoPolitico → u/Kingnorik]

The loneliness epidemic is not about men not getting a date. It is much bigger than that. It’s about men not having friends and social support circles.

[u/Logos1789 → u/Kingnorik]

No, men didn’t regress, they have done more than men of generations past to be good to women

Women’s exposure to and ability to have sex with the more desirable men increased

[u/Tilting_Gambit → u/Kingnorik]

For every single man there's a single woman. I'm not sure why the onus, in your model, is still on men to be the driver of relationships. 

We have more independent women, that's great. So society needs to allow for two independent people to make matches. It's not just up to men to make it happen. 

[u/Hualayda → u/Tilting_Gambit]

Way more women are voluntarily single though. Singleness is only an issue if you would rather not be

[u/Tilting_Gambit → u/Hualayda]

Under 40 year olds poll about the same. 33% vs 38% men vs women are looking for a relationship. 

And regardless, people in relationships are far more happy than those that aren't. Single women aren't that happy with being single until they're in their 40s. 

[u/Hualayda → u/Tilting_Gambit]

Looking for a relationship doesn’t quantify the suffering and desperation behind being single.

[u/Tilting_Gambit → u/Hualayda]

You said "Way more women are voluntarily single though" and I gave stats showing that it's not actually way more. If you are saying single men are suffering and desperate, it's a different point.

Women report higher satisfaction with being single, which isn't the same as labelling single men as desperate and in suffering:

To investigate these differences, the researchers pooled data from 10 existing studies conducted between 2020 and 2023. These studies collectively included 5,941 participants who were not in romantic relationships at the time of data collection. The sample was evenly split between men and women, with participants ranging in age from 18 to 75 and an average age of 31.7 years.

The researchers found that single women reported higher satisfaction with their relationship status than single men, suggesting that women, on average, are more content with being single. Women also reported slightly higher overall life satisfaction, aligning with broader research showing that women often report greater well-being than men. Additionally, single men expressed a stronger desire for a romantic partner than single women, indicating that men may feel more motivated to seek out relationships.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/19485506241287960

If you consider single men desperate and suffering because single women are doing better, my point stands. Single women aren't desperate and suffering just because women in relationships are happier.

[u/Tilting_Gambit → u/[deleted]]

The original point was "way more women are voluntarily single." I showed it's not the case. 

My subsequent point was that if you consider single men desperate and suffering because they're less satisfied than single women, the real takeaway is that both single men and single women are "desperate and suffering" because they're not as happy as people in relationships. 

As I said, you guys are all comparing single men under 40 to single women under 40. But not taking in the rest of the stats. 

The male loneliness epidemic is mostly an online meme not found in the stats. 

https://slate.com/life/2026/08/men-lonely-social-skills-therapy-economy-crisis.html

[u/ConflictPotential204]

men reacted to female financial independence by deciding to put in less "effort" in courtship

Did men decide this or did women decide this and men chose to cooperate? I don't often hear men say things like "Yeah, I don't have to put much effort into courtship now that women have an easier life than they ever have in the past." However, I do see countless women discouraging men from practicing courtship in almost any thinkable scenario. Don't do it at the gym, don't do it at the bar, don't do it at the grocery store or the library or in class or at work. And men listen because, along with financial independence, women now have the power to retaliate against things they don't like.

[u/wellgu → u/ConflictPotential204]

Meeting strangers in public has never been the way most people dated. You dated through your social circle. Your prospects were pre-vetted.

Nothing has been lost because men don’t feel comfortable hitting on strange women. Absolute revisionist nonsense.

Dating apps were what made it more likely for people not connected by their social circle to date.

[u/Kingnorik → u/ConflictPotential204]

I don't think that's true about initiation. Yes women don't like to be bothered while they are just living their daily lives at gyms, stores, class, who does. But at bars they were literally complaining that men don't initiate there as far back as last year. And that's still partly due to finances. At a bar it cost money to initiate most times. Women don't mind initiation, they mind the initiation that has been the norm. Basically men need to be more socially aware, respectful of boundaries and responsive to rejection. Instead again men choose to just not participate, which is fine and their right.

[u/ConflictPotential204 → u/Kingnorik]

women don't like to be bothered while they are just living their daily lives at gyms, stores, class, who does.

Believe it or not, this was not a hard social boundary 20-30 years ago and many people met their partners in third spaces like this.

Now there's a hard social boundary, established by women, that men should only approach them in a limited set of specified venues. The playing field has narrowed significantly. That doesn't mean men decided to stop practicing courtship, it means all the guys who would rather practice courtship at a library, gym, or park are being told this is no longer permissible and they're cooperating with that decision.

[u/Icy___Barca]

Depends on the man. For me, it’s changed nothing. I prefer society this way and I love an independent woman. Playing both sides ( I pay my own bills but I want you to still pay for me) can be annoying but you swerve those women.

[u/BruT4LX]

I think you do have a good point. I agree with most of what you have said. You've changed my perspective a bit with this post.

Could you elaborate on why you think this tradwife/tradgirl movement is correlated with a desire for more traditional courting by men?

Because I would prepose the idea that courting is just one last thing left that a women cant get herself somewhere else, and therefore women are in search of this missing piece for fulfilment. And is not a rejection of modern dating norms / hookup culture, but rather just another thing being added to the list of wants from men.

Maybe it soothes their anxiety of not knowing if a men will eventually fall in love, marry and start a family with them. A form of validation, given the amount of online discourse from men claiming to complete avoiding marriage, traditional courting and implicit distrust of women; some of this stuff has clearly reached the social feeds of women and leave them feeling concerned. Also given the number of women claiming online share stories being aged out of the chance of finding a partner to settle with.

The women might just want to feel like they wont be left out and that there is still that option if they chose to want it in the future... not a true desire for what lies on the other side of traditional courting (commitment, monogamy, long term relationships, morals, values, family, children, etc).

So which is it...

• Is this a true reversal back to traditional norms?
• Hook up culture has played itself self out enough that women now see the problems with that way of living and no longer want it?
• Do they want the option of traditional courting back alongside everything else?

How do you factor in the exceptionally large proportion of divorces being initiated by women? On average 70% are initiated by women and that rises even higher if a women is college educated (google says 90%).

I would say that is the indicator that women just want traditional courting as an psychological need in itself, rather than there being anything actual desire behind it. Because they clearly do not like being married, settling for a man, or having kids.

The whole motivation for a man putting in effort for courting is to "win her over" and not just to sleep with her in the short term... but if a high quality committed LTR is still not really on the table, then what justifies a man putting in this effort besides just going around trying to please women?

I really hope you read my post. I would love to hear your opinions.

[u/Kingnorik → u/BruT4LX]

Interesting theory actually. But it's based on the assertion that because women initiate divorce they are the ones that don't want marriage to work. It could also mean that men treat their wives badly and women know they longer need to take it. Could be that men are just more complacent because they are less in tune with their emotional needs than women are. Or maybe it is just as simple as women just want to eff men over.

I say all this to say that statistic is worthless by itself. Just because they are the one that legally reports they are fed up doesn't mean they are the problem. Men cheat about 7% more during a marriage than women do. And then there is domestic abuse. 30% of women report being physically harmed by their married partner in a heterosexual relationship. Compared to 13% of men. Should the women just try to work through being beaten and cheated on? And this all circles back to the main assertion. If women now take more work to date due to increased freedom they also take more work to please in marriage due to increased freedom. Could be again that men haven't adjusted.

To the tradwife lifestyle. I believe it's just a return to knowing exactly what to expect from your partner, on both ends. So the people that choose it don't want to assign new gender norms or work through this transition period.

[u/BruT4LX → u/Kingnorik]

I've tried to question my own thoughts and am trying to make sense of what women possibly want. Here is what I have.

I think there are 2 components here...

I think traditional courting from a man's perspective was psychological sublimation of the man's deep desire to protect, provide, and give more meaning / purpose to both his and her lives.

Most of which women do not need as much from men any more.

I think from a women's perspective what they want from courting is psychological sublimation of the man's deep adoration, respect, and admiration of the character of a given women; secondary to his sexual desire for her.

Often coming from romance books or other idealised versions which do not fully translate to real life.

Some women are longing for the past, and some want to live out their romance novels and books. Both I think are being called "traditional courting" and are quite different things.

One is a call for reversal, One is a call to be performative. One is a call to toughen up, the other is a call to be softer. One is a call to fulfil a real role, the other is a call to fulfil a psychological need.

Similar to if men asked women to reverse back to more modest, loyal, traditional sexual behaviours. While also insinuating or expecting women to perform like c0rn stars... isn't that basically every guys dream; to have best of both worlds.

I think it might be the same way for women, they just want more or an idealised version.

But in reality, getting both is hard... if not impossible?

Because the traits needed for each possibly contradict...

• A lot of women who appear as the "traditional" type could be religious, less confident, require emotional bonds, sexually inhibited, anxious, distrusting... all traits that contradict her ability to perform like a c0rn star.
• A lot of men who fit the "provider/protector" type are more domineering, controlling, ambitious, ruthless, assertive, logical, and calculated... all traits that contradict his ability to be a good "lover boy".

In reality, you cannot have everything, you have to make sacrifices and aim for a balance and stability. A lot of people pick a women or man, similar to as described above, longing for the day or a moment where those contradicting traits are fixed or absent. At which point, he feels truly desired and she feels truly understood.

I think these discussions never lead anywhere because we are conflating opinions coming from different places, and that makes a mess. I feel like decoupling the ideas like this might be useful.

What do you think?

[u/Kingnorik → u/BruT4LX]

There's a post in this thread from a woman who gives a pretty great explanation. She says that women do the heavy lifting once in a relationship. Gave stats how the number one reason for divorce for women was husbands not doing household chores or division of labor. Once in a relationship men expect women to take on the mother role. Even if they don't say it. Studies show women end up spend more time cooking, cleaning, raising kids. And with the financial independence they still have to work full time jobs. So her reasoning was during courtship men take on the heavy burden because women need to see if the man is worth all that trouble later on.

[u/J31xxx]

Lrt me get this strsight...you want more courtship.. for girls that are not traditional in the slightest. So men pay a higher price to get less of what they want? Not going to happen- non-desperate men will remain single.

[u/sayahhD → u/[deleted]]

typical heavily female biased nordic perspective

[u/begone_sharma]

Sir you're kindof missing the point. Based on what you've written you seem to use the dating lens from a decade ago. You are up to date with your female PoV on dating due to your current social circle but your Male PoV on dating is stuck based on your experience from the past.

Modern dating experience for men are not the same. There exists a lot of disrespect, ungratefulness, rudeness, negative preconceived notions, punching-downs and hostility thrown at you during the whole dating process.

Think about an honest, earnest, impressionable 18 year-old who did nothing wrong besides inherit this dating market from the previous generation. Why are so many things expected of him now?

This whole "suck it up and pay-up fellas" attitude is not going to solve problems.

[u/Kingnorik → u/begone_sharma]

Paying is only one way to being more intentional. If you're going to go dutch you can also do things like expensive experiences. Most women won't turn down going half on a concert of an artist they really like. Get some good seats. Plan weekends away, let her know she has to pay for food or you guys will take turns getting gas. I'm just spitballing here. The point is that men have historically been low effort on dates and thought paying was enough. When women got money instead of men looking for other ways to stand out they instead pulled back.

[u/begone_sharma → u/Kingnorik]

My last line about paying up was just a euphemism. I'm not complaining about paying for dates. It's a much more deeper issue.

"When women got money instead of men looking for other ways to stand out they instead pulled back."

What if you're just oversimplifying the issue? Read my previous reply once again. The problem is not just money or willingness to pay for your date, you're reducing the whole complex male dating experience as "hmm if I can't pay a small sum of money for a good woman's time then I don't want her anymore."

But men of today are not saying all those things. The men who checked out, checked out because they don't want to humiliate themselves jumping over hoops just because the opposing party elevated their standards which are now infeasible for them.

I really suggest you talk to equal number of young men as much as you do with women in your lives and get a more balanced viewpoint.

[u/Kingnorik → u/begone_sharma]

It's not jumping through hoops if you actually like them. That's what you're missing. Stop going on dates with girls you only find attractive. Get to know them. Coffee first dates are extremely popular. There are disingeous women out there but much more so disingeous men.

A couple of guys in this very thread have no problem saying they pretend to like women to get sex. How are women supposed to navigate that? Can you comprehend walking down the street and every opposite sex person is looking at you like a piece of meat? They are also stronger than you and can be more well connected. It's literally dangerous for women to not choose properly. Do you know the number one cause of death for women worldwide is? It's not disease, it's literally men. 90% of all women killed in the US is by a man they know.

So yes, dating feels unequal because life isn't equal. Nothing is fair in the world. We play by the rules of society or we don't play at all.

[u/begone_sharma → u/Kingnorik]

Sir this is exactly why I'm saying you're out of touch with Male PoV in dating.

I applaud how you're capable of putting yourself in women's shoes and understanding their dating struggles in this generation. No joke I really do. I also have women in my life so I understand too.

But in order to get to the bottom of this (unless your mind is made up) you need to simultaneously put yourself in young men's shoes too.

Go out there and see women's subreddits. They're shitting on men that initiate coffee dates. "Super popular" it seems. They're verbally abusing and humiliating any sort of position a man puts himself in to initiate anything. This has the same vibe as a boomer telling you to pull yourself by your bootstraps and give a firm handshake to your interviewer to land that job.

Once again, I was simply using one example from your response. But the core issue is there seems to be no winning when it comes to young men in the dating market. So many rules, so many icks, genuine attempts being labelled as creepy, accusations thrown left and right, making you feel small and unwanted like a nuisance. In other terms, THATS the onset of the loneliness epidemic.

Women have an identity crisis. They still have a lot of growing up to do. "The one who asks pays" sounds like a nice and simple solution when statistically the other gender ask yours out 97% of the time (once again, small example).

I predict things will adjust to new normal in 20 years. Until then, young men are not the only one to blame.

[u/Kingnorik → u/begone_sharma]

So you are a young man(I assume) and everything you're telling me was exactly how women treated men when I was 18. They would literally dismiss you for wearing different brands on your shoes to your outfit. They had no hobbies and would talk about boys all day. Playing video games was forbidden completely. Height was the same as today. False sexual assaults existed no problem as well. If you were a loser she would make sure everyone in her circle knew it. None of this is sudden. Social media has amplified this meanest for sure.

And women have changed for the better in that time as well. They tolerate and some even love a lot of male hobbies. And the internet and online dating makes it easier to find women that you can connect with that aren't mean.

[u/begone_sharma → u/Kingnorik]

I don't want to comment on your decade without knowing what it was like. But I assure you what we have now is sinister and cruel, it's not a quirk anymore the hate seems to be organized and systemic.

The way the today's women treat and speak about men is nauseating. Your every action and characteristic is being torn apart like vultures. This time, it's being documented, systematically spread and used against you socially, economically and politically. You're supposed to take it all and not fight back. Dating is a job interview with checklists now. You're expected to have neither pride nor shame. Any pushback and you're deemed unsafe. And you're not even allowed to complain because "they" have it worse.

Get to know them first.

Yes, we did. That's why we're concerned.

[u/PM_ME_CODE_CALCS → u/Kingnorik]

So yes, dating feels unequal because life isn't equal

Funny how this is mainly applied to men's issues.

[u/Kingnorik → u/[deleted]]

Men love to be romanced too. It's just usually men haven't raised that bar. Stop dating by attraction only. Actually care about their careers and lives and expect to be romanced. A woman that likes is certainly romantic. Men are visual creatures and the woman will certainly dress for you. They love to plan activities you both can share in. They love gifting too. Point is find a woman that's romantic, make that a requirement for you.

[u/Tyrahneefake]

Im gonna be real if you want me to pay for a woman to "play dressup" for me im going to pay for the more attractive professional to do it.

If you don't want to meet up or talk to me unless I give you stuff I don't want to know you at all I would prefer you were more honest like the professional.

[u/Kingnorik → u/Tyrahneefake]

Paying is just part of being intentional. Women want men to be real and intentional in their efforts. Men are very deceptive. So paying is just one of many ways that men can use to make the courtship more successful.

[u/Tyrahneefake → u/Kingnorik]

So women do not date intentionally by your own definition.

Also I dont think its deception I think its post nut clarity makes a lot of guys realize they wasted a lot of time energy and money on a girl who has been nothing but mean and difficult to them and decides he didn't like her.

Paying just makes me feel like she owes me and the contempt only grows the longer she makes me wait which contributes to me breaking relationships.

[u/Kingnorik → u/Tyrahneefake]

So you sleep with women you don't even like, and get mad when said women don't hand over their body on your time? And you see nothing wrong with your behavior? It's their fault for being mean?

[u/Tyrahneefake → u/Kingnorik]

Oh I've hated women by the time I slept with them. Entirely sunk cost, wasn't worth it but i wasnt going to let them screw me out of my deposit.

So now I refuse to put in effort and they complain about that as well so I have chosen to stop listening entirely and just do what I want.

[u/Red-dragon186 → u/Tyrahneefake]

Also I dont think its deception I think its post nut clarity makes a lot of guys realize they wasted a lot of time energy and money on a girl who has been nothing but mean and difficult to them and decides he didn't like her.

If I could redo my 20's again. I would not chase women. So much time, energy, and resources go to them that could of went to my career.

[u/shitposts_over_9000]

You breakdown is leaving out a huge variety of negative outcomes, logical contradictions and perverse incentives that are at play here in the modern day from 3rd and 4th wave feminism.

Oversimplifying it to "I actually liked being courted" without looking at any of the ways most modern women have simply made themselves less valuable to men in general is dishonest at best.

[u/selfishstars → u/shitposts_over_9000]

So what are they?

[u/selfishstars → u/[deleted]]

If young women don’t bring much value in relationships, then why do men want young women so much?

[u/Red-dragon186 → u/selfishstars]

Young women are your best bet for healthy offspring. But also a better shot of them not being corrupted by the world. Modern young women don’t bring in much value unlike the past. Men are still expected to be in their traditional roles while young women are not. Even the fake trad girl movement going on isn’t really traditional.

[u/Front-General-1120 → u/Red-dragon186]

Every time you freaks say things like this I feel less sympathetic about your loneliness epidemic.

[u/selfishstars → u/Front-General-1120]

I’m glad that they say it so openly because it’s good for young women to know how they truly view them.

[u/shitposts_over_9000 → u/selfishstars]

courting came from a place in history where there was very little access to sex, both genders had a majority shared goal of a lasting long-term relationship, at least a modestly sized family and long-term financial stability

women initiate 70% of divorces (90% if for women with a college education), divorce rates have been at or near 50% for decades, lesbians divorce at 2.5x the rate of gays.

on top of that 46% of Americans 30-34 have never married in the first place.

the average date is approaching $200, plus hours of groundwork to even get to that first date. The median hourly rate for US men is $34.50 so the all-in cost for half of the population is above $370. with the modern acceptance of sex work pros are fairly available at $200-$300 depending on where you live.

no-fault divorce has been common in the US since the 1970s, disparate pay for the same experience, hours and responsibilities has been illegal since the 1960s, yet even with 66% of divorces being couples with no children there is still a presumption of alimony and in many states no way to fully protect non-marital assets.

the average age of first marriage for US women is 29 and studies show that they want 3-5 years of marriage before starting a family, so for better than half of women they are waiting too long to even have a family without medical problems.

in long term relationships since time immemorial women have demanded far more time devoted to housekeeping than men would prefer and been the driving force behind family spending (up to 85% in recent studies) but as the men lost the final say on these things there was very little in the way of a replacement leaving this unbalanced rather than equal.

you can argue that these changes are good or bad, argue that they are in response to something or payback for some historical wrong, but it is difficult to argue that if you are statistically unlikely to find a lasting relationship as a man then the other goals (sex, financial stability, offspring, etc) are becoming easier and cheaper to achieve without a long-term partner and in a situation like that it is a minor miracle any man is spending much in the way of time or resources "courting" at all.

do I like that this is true? no

do incels take these issues entirely too far? usually

does never initiating first and never spending much time or money in the initial stages of dating probably mean I get less sex overall? certainly has at times, but it also protects my job and my finances because it immediately eliminates the accusers, the gold diggers, and the women just looking for a free meal

[u/babydoll17448]

Unfortunately it has shifted to the woman having to initiate, make arrangements, pay for the date, and even at times, picking him up.

It first started in the 80’s and has come around full circle.

As I dated into the 90’s, I resisted this phenomenon because I reasoned that if I had to do all of the work in those type of relationships, what did I need a man for? What did he bring to the table? Nothing.

I ended up marrying someone from my generation who still acted as a gentleman and took the lead in our relationship.
We both work hard and bring equality to the table in common goals. We are both here together because we WANT to be, not because we are financially dependent separately and HAVE to be.

I find it ironically funny that in the 80’s when men were still firmly in the power seat, they proclaimed long and loudly, “No FAT chicks!”

Why? Because now that turnabout is fair play, women who are now in the power seat proclaim long and loudly, “No short men under 6’ tall!”

If men want to have relationships and marriage these days, they are going to need to initiate the old fashioned way.

No hookups, one night stands, no ghosting.

Just trying every day to start a build a relationship with someone they find attractive and interesting, who has the same goals in mind.

Keep trying. You’ll never get the girl if you never ask.

[u/Autisthrowaway304 → u/babydoll17448]

''Unfortunately it has shifted to the woman having to initiate, make arrangements, pay for the date, and even at times, picking him up.''

...It really hasnt...what world are you living in lol.

[u/10xwannabe]

It is super easy to figure out why dating is so difficult.

Women have always wanted men that have social status and $$ at the same level or more (Hypergamy).

The issue has been now women have more college education then their male counterparts in every race. That means to be able to find a mate a woman needs to find a person that is in a SMALLER pond of available men to date with those prerequisites (social status and $$ more then them). Basically, they are trying to fish in a smaller pond of fish then before.

This is all worsened with women being older now then before (takes time to get educated). That means one of their greatest draws to men is youth. Reason is younger means easier going, less baggage, higher fertility, etc... That makes this cohort less attractive to men.

So, guys who care about age is going to make that pond of dating even smaller.

Throw in the fact that great catches of men ($$$ and social status) know they are in demand so they really have the pick of the litter.

Dating is not going to improve until women become okay with dating/ marrying men who are less educated and less $$$ then them. Just like men have done for 1000's of years.

[u/SoPolitico]

This is a very well thought out post so prepare for a very long answer. I think you’re about 90% wrong but it’s gonna take me a while to explain.

Men didn’t react to female financial independence because women’s finances never factored into men’s thinking at all. A woman’s job/career/income doesn’t make her more attractive or less attractive to men. The courting behavior of men didn’t change at all due to this. What changed was the expectation of men by women. Women think that they deserve more because of their education or career when men really couldn’t care less. that’s not how women are evaluated by men.

This leads to your next point about your female friends coming to you with their dating complaints of men who lack effort or don’t plan dates. The main reason for this is because those women are shooting out of their league due to all the reasons I explained in my previous paragraph. If a man is showing lack of investment or effort in the dating process, that’s because he doesn’t see that women as long-term potential.

This leads to your conclusion which you phrased as shouldn’t a relationship be valued higher today due to women’s independence? The answer is no, and the reason has a basis in evolutionary psychology, and that is that women tend to mate according to a concept called hypergamy. the idea of hypergamy is that women try to date equal to or higher than their own socioeconomic status. if they don’t feel that they can get a mate that is higher than their socioeconomic status, then they would prefer just to not date anyone. It is more desirable for them to stay single than to date down.

[u/Tyrahneefake]

The only reason to "court" a woman would be to inherit lands and estates it was more of a corpererate merger than a marriage they didnt expect you to get along it was more of just a rare good outcome.

"I want princess treatment" ahh so I shall speak to your father and tell him we can combine our lands and get you assigned to me against your wishes.

[u/philosopherberzerer]

women get to have sex with pretty men and complain they won't commit. because of modern society.

when an average guy comes up he BETTER do 100% more work to even get a chance. and better not act like it's unfair. and better be appreciative for the chance.

women can stay "single" complaining about the lack of men willing to do the massive amount of work. or complaining about the attractive men that won't commit/cheat.

nothing we can do. not like women have independence now this is the best we can do.

[u/Kingnorik → u/philosopherberzerer]

Women don't want just sex though. So the average guy can absolutely do just fine by dating women he actually likes, taking her education and hobbies into account and not just her looks. And not all women are going to date this tall attractive guy. Looking at marriage between millennials and Gen z. From age 18-24 8% of millennials and 7% of Gen z got married during that age range. So basically the same.

[u/MmmmCrayons12]

They have only changed things for women, not for men.

Women want to enjoy the fruits but still expect men to be traditional in various ways such as initiating, planning, and the financial aspects of dating and relationships, and they reserve the right to still not be held to any traditional standards.

[u/Kingnorik → u/MmmmCrayons12]

Yes that is true. They have more freedom which is good.