It is a sexual recession. Man and women are not getting sex and children.
It is a sexual secession. Men and women are going separate ways (which results in no one getting sex and children)
Surveys show men and women are both hurting — less sex for everyone, though more women are getting sex than men. Women, however, are disappointed in the sex, because not getting love and investment, just booty calls.
Leftists worst hit, libertarians quite badly hit, conservatives doing less badly, reactionaries least affected, though everyone is hurting.
The apps like Tinder are no longer the problem.
When Tinder first appeared, Miss Average was totally wowed to discover that she could get nailed by a six foot six athlete with six pack abs and six figure income.
Then she gradually woke up to the fact that she was just another booty call.
Men and women on the apps gamified, minimaxed, and optimized their tactics — Which, since the game of players and bitches is a prisoner’s dilemma game, a negative sum game, made the experience on the apps worse for everyone. As everyone got better at taking advantage of the apps, the outcomes were worse for everyone.
So now the chicks are getting off the apps. Which you might think is good news for those of us who are under six foot six, or lack a six pack abs, or a six figure income. But they are not getting sex, not getting into sexual relationships, and in a startlingly large number of cases are remaining virgin, or claim to be remaining virgin. Which would be good news were it not that the way the wind blows they are likely to continue not having sex till their eggs and their faces wither.
Women are complaining men are not hitting on them.
Why are men not hitting on them?
Some men, primarily leftists, thinks that men pursuing women just oppresses women. It is creepy. It is abuse according to the Duluth model. So the leftist male waits for a relationship to “organically” emerge from friendship and political solidarity. And, surprise, surprise, this does not happen. Movies are always trying to depict relationships “organically” emerging and it always feels gratingly forced, artificial, and unnatural. Because over the past six million years, that is not how men and women did it.
The mating dance is that men conquer and women surrender, but men perform and women choose. So you drag her back to your lair and tell her to make a sandwich and warm the bed, and if she runs off screaming your performance was not up to scratch.
One factor deterring men from hitting on women is the Duluth model. “Believe all women”. In practice of course, on matters related to sex and reproduction, women don’t know the truth and do not care. And in any case the Duluth model does not mean “believe all women”. It means that police and courts should believe her if she says a man is being bad to her, and disbelieve her if she denies a man is being bad to her. The Duluth model defines patriarchy as a criminal offense, and if the women is complicit in a patriarchal interaction, then so much the worse for her. It essentially criminalizes the the natural and normal sexual and romantic interaction between a man and a woman.
All happy families are alike. Each unhappy family is unique.
A man wants sex. A woman wants sex with investment, A man wants investment with ownership.
In a K selected species, nature and nature’s God wants the transfer of resources from men to women, and from parents to children, but, without patriarchy, without male ownership of a woman’s sexual and reproductive services, without what the Duluth model calls abuse, sexual harassment, sexual assault, and rape, none of that is going to happen, and the result is that the species goes extinct.
Leftists think that there is some other way a family can be happy, it can be happy and not be what the Duluth model calls “abuse”. This does not work. If you are happy with your woman, you are a criminal abuser, and if she is happy that she makes you happy, she is complicit in your criminal abuse. Leftists try to find some other way to make it work, and it just is not working for them.
Men and women can get together as equals for a hookup, just as gays get together as equals for a hookup. But because of reproductive biology, cannot get together as equals for family formation. And hooking up results in girls becoming distressed and crazy.
Without male ownership, women do not receive male investment. Without male investment, sex makes them unhappy. They stop engaging in sex, or they go crazy, and eventually crazy and evil. They complain, but in the world of “point deer make horse”, they lack the words to express their unhappiness, and express it in words that are back to front from the reality, using instead the word of patriarchy as abuse, of sex as exploitation, of love and family as exploitation and oppression. They are unowned, are angry because unowned, but instead complain of being owned, their words blatantly untrue, and weirdly disconnected from concrete events.
I see a whole lot of false charges of sexual harassment etcetera.
When a man is sexually attracted to a woman, his natural reaction is to stare at indicators of fertility, such as her boobs, and to be nice to her.
When a woman is sexually attracted to a man, her natural reaction is to hit him with a shit test to see what he is made of. And the Duluth model makes being hit with a shit test quite dangerous for men. Often the only way to pass a shit test is to do what men have been told to consider is assaulting a woman or sexually harassing her. If you are not willing to break the law, it is hard to score with women. And if you fail the shit test, the woman is going to feel you are creepy. And if she feels you are creepy, you must have sexually harassed here, sexually assaulted her, or raped her. Thus, in practice, the vast majority of sexual harassment charges, as near to all of them as make no difference, are actually lack of sexual harassment charges.
I know this because of what I have seen in front of my nose. Do you doubt me? Well then explain the strange fact that women in workplaces that are overwhelmingly female are far more likely to complain of sexual harassment than women in overwhelmingly male workplaces. Making the woman the victim and complainant in sex cases, rather than the male who has proper authority over her sexual and reproductive services, results in them complaining about what we do not want them to complain about, and failing to complain about what we do want them to complain about.
the red pill, the reactionary
The reactionary prescribes lifting weights, losing fat, adding muscle, game, and dominance to make a woman submit.
Emotions? What are emotions? A man should be stoic. A man is a rock, and a woman is a storm. The storm does not shake the rock. The only emotions he knows are hungry and horny, and it is a woman’s job to fix both of those.
The bible prescribes that husband should cherish his wife, and a wife obey and fear her husband. That works. Get on with what works, what has always worked.
What the leftist thinks is Duluth model, the red pilled reactionary thinks is the scriptural model, commanded by the scripture, by nature, and by nature’s God.
the libertarian
the libertarian interprets the problem as a market failure. Low value women, noticing that they can get high value semen, are setting an insanely high price upon relationships. So, the only male option is to not buy until the price comes down. Eventually women will respond to failure to attain a relationship by adusting their price. Unfortunately markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent So: “Men going their own way”.
A very short analysis — but if you model individuals as rational and sovereign, there is not a lot to say.
This is an inadequate model for men, and a much worse model for women.
The failure in this prescription is that it prescribes that women, being rational sovereign individuals, should respond to market forces. Nothing men can do. But, of course, women are not sovereign rational individuals, and are never going to respond to market forces. Women expect men to forcefully solve this problem for women. For that was men’s job in the ancestral environment of evolutionary adaptation and successful female reproduction.
the leftist numale
The leftist prescription is — complicated. The leftist is full of many words that contain little meaning. He suffers from analysis paralysis.
The leftist prescribes a radically different kind of self-work. He believes that the traditional masculine traits the right worships (stoicism, emotional repression, dominance, financial provision) are precisely what repels modern women and makes him miserable.
His action plan to get a girlfriend involves:
- Therapy and Emotional Literacy: He believes he needs to become a safe, emotionally vulnerable, and communicative partner. He thinks women are tired of men who can’t process their own feelings, so he works on articulating his emotions rather than suppressing them.
- He rejects the “Sexual Marketplace”: He refuses to view dating through the lens of “value” or “leagues.” He tries to build connections based on mutual interests, shared political values, and friendship first, rather than treating sex as a prize to be won through performance.
- Feminist Praxis in Dating: He actively works to dismantle his own internalized misogyny. This doesn’t mean he thinks wanting sex is evil; it means he believes sex should be an enthusiastically consensual, mutual experience. He thinks the reactionary’s path (coercion, manipulation, or “imposing” patriarchy) is not only unethical but deeply unattractive to the kind of woman he actually wants to date—a woman who is his equal, not his subordinate.
- A loving, committed, heterosexual relationship is perfectly moral and desirable. He wants that. Provided, of course, it works exactly like a gay relationship. A relationship built on power-over dynamics, financial control, emotional manipulation, and unilateral decision-making (i.e., patriarchy) is what is abusive.
Therefore, his solution to the personal crisis is to build a relationship that explicitly rejects the “patriarchal deal.” He wants a partnership based on egalitarianism, shared household labor, and mutual care. He thinks the only way to get a girlfriend and keep her—while also having a fulfilling sex life and eventually children—is to offer her a deal that doesn’t require her to submit. He offers her freedom, respect, and genuine co-leadership.
Which sounds like it should work, because that is what women believe they want. But, in practice, this works out very like a booty call, because it is modeled on gays hooking up. And Miss Average is not going to attend our leftist’s booty call unless he is mister one in thirty. This sort of sex results in women becoming unhappy, crazy, and destructive.
He is so terrified of coming across as “creepy,” so afraid of violating consent, and so worried about objectifying women that he often becomes paralyzed. He may wait for explicit, written-in-stone consent before making a move, killing any sexual tension. He may treat women with such careful, distant reverence that he forgets to flirt or express desire, and he gets firmly placed in the “friend zone.”
He doesn’t think it’s morally wrong to have a girlfriend; he thinks it’s morally wrong to pursue one the way the right does. So he waits for a relationship to “organically” emerge from friendship and political solidarity.
In summary: The leftist addresses his personal crisis not by withdrawing (MGTOW) and not by dominating (Red Pill). He addresses it by trying to become the “ideal feminist man”—emotionally intelligent, egalitarian, and conscientiously non-threatening.
The fatal flaw in this approach is that: Women are only attracted to men who make them afraid.