|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
[Want even more content from FPM? Sign up for FPM+ to unlock exclusive series, virtual town-halls with our authors, and more—now for just $3.99/month. Click here to sign up.]
In a recent New York Times article titled, “Men, Where Have You Gone? Please Come Back,” Rachel Drucker laments what she calls “a collective shift” in men, a “slow vanishing of presence.” So many single men, she writes, aren’t “sitting across from someone on a Saturday night, trying to connect.” Instead, they “have retreated from intimacy, hiding behind firewalls, filters and curated personas, dabbling and scrolling.” She adds, “We miss you.”
Ms. Drucker – a single, 54-year-old Chicagoan – hints that pornography is at least partly to blame for this state of affairs. She mentions that she herself spent years working in that field as the custodian of records for Playboy and its affiliated hardcore properties. She worked closely with marketing teams to understand “what cues tempt the average 18-to-36-year-old cis heterosexual man. What drew him in. What kept him coming back.” She learned that it wasn’t intimacy or mutuality, but “access to simulation.”
Now many men, she believes, have “quietly withdrawn from intimacy and vulnerability” into “indifference.” The sexes have moved, she observes, into an era when traditional courting has devolved into “directionless orbiting,” “men circling intimacy but never entering it… ‘seeing where it goes’ without ever going anywhere.” She even mourns the “unscripted contact” of one-night stands.
She concludes by pleading men, “You can still come back. We’re still here, those of us who are willing to cocreate something true… And we haven’t stopped hoping.”
The male retreat from the courting dance of days past is a tragedy, but so is Ms. Drucker’s obliviousness to the reasons for it. Yes, pornography is a huge factor; the ubiquitous availability of the most explicit imagery imaginable (and even unimaginable) to anyone with an internet connection is a terrible scourge in our society – and not only for boys and young men; it is having a devastating impact on girls as well, in a variety of ways.
But the broader explanation for the intimacy wasteland she is describing is more than a half century of radical feminism and its ruthless war on masculinity, femininity, and the nuclear family. She is finally noticing, but apparently not understanding, the blasted landscape left behind by the Sexual Revolution’s tornado of destruction since the 1960s and ‘70s that left old-fashioned courtship and sex roles in its self-indulgent wake.
If men have retreated from those traditional roles and social practices, it is because for decades the culture has been weaponized against men – disrespecting, devaluing, and even demonizing generations of them as “toxic.” Feminist thought leaders, with the complicity of many opportunistic male feminists, railed against the chimeras of “patriarchy” and “rape culture.” They demanded that men deconstruct their masculine nature to be more like, well, stereotypical women: vulnerable, emotional, and deferential to the opposite sex. They marginalized men as literally unnecessary while celebrating females as capable, courageous, girl-bosses who can and should do everything men can do. Anything less is seen as diminishing female capabilities and value. Meanwhile men are failing by almost every social metric, from education to the workplace.
Another factor is that the notorious and often cruel bias of family law against husbands and fathers has driven many men to see marriage as grossly inequitable and undesirable. Boys and young men have watched their fathers destroyed in family court and reduced to the indentured slavery of permanent alimony. They are now rethinking what they see as a no-win conventional lifestyle of marriage and family. Why volunteer to doom yourself, they ask themselves, to a system designed to bleed men dry of their money, health, and ambitions?
In recent years a backlash has begun swinging hard against the ravages of feminism, unfortunately driving millions of young men into the embrace of such online influencers as former kickboxer Andrew Tate. Tate flaunts a cartoonish vision of masculinity centered on flashy materialism and the violent domination and sexual exploitation of women. This backlash also includes an entire subculture called MGTOWs – Men Going Their Own Way by swearing off long-term relationships with women, whom they see as nothing more than greedy vampires who drain one husband, then trade up to a wealthier one.
To sum up, feminism promised to liberate women from what Karl Marx called the “slavery” of motherhood and marriage by pushing them into competition with men, and the Sexual Revolution granted them the freedom to indulge their sexual appetites as promiscuously as any man. The consequence has been a family-destroying disordering of society at home, in the workplace, and between the sexes. So now, women like Rachel Drucker, who worked in the porn industry and who confesses to many relationships including one-night stands, are left wondering why so many men have chosen to disengage, to guard themselves emotionally, financially, and physically behind a variety of walls.
If women want men to come back so that both can get off the sterile treadmill of dating apps and one-night stands, and resume the imperfect but genuine human dynamic of romance, it will happen only if the failed social experiments of the past are rolled back. This will require a concerted, grass-roots, long march through the institutions of the culture – from education to the news media to the entertainment industry – to undo the ruinous narratives that have brought us to this point.
We must stop smearing traditional masculinity as toxic and oppressive, and quit devaluing traditional femininity as demeaning and imprisoning. We must cease pitting the sexes against each other and reclaim a culture that honors and celebrates their complementary nature. The decades-long push to eradicate any differences between masculinity and femininity, to blur even their very definitions, has wrought nothing but misery, confusion, and resentment, and must be abandoned.
Sometimes societal progress can be made only by acknowledging we have taken a clearly destructive path and retracing our steps to where we first lost our way. It’s the only hope for men and women to – as Rachel Drucker put it with such yearning – cocreate something true.
The republication of this article is made possible by The Fred & Rheta Skelton Center for Cultural Renewal.
Follow Mark Tapson at Culture Warrior
Bring back the Real Men not the Pinkos in Ballet Skirts and Hugging Trees
Interesting piece. It’s not that I disagree exactly.
But I’ll add: The so called sexual revolution was, IMO, an attack on women. It removed protections of courtship and other romantic traditions and replaced it with sexual pressure and disrespect and then demanded we women pretend that was better or enjoyable. It wasn’t. It met man’s needs (well, their immediate physical needs) and left happiness, love and joy out of the equation for women. I suppose the point made here is that it left these out for men too. Yes, I can see that. Men need civilizing for society to work. These days so do many women.
Do not blame something called “ radical feminism” when it’s really just the left again. For in doing so, you risk blaming women and implying women are all vultures, That just fuels the popularity of monsters like Tate. It’s the left that started radicalizing everything good and joyful out of our lives and into misery and confusion.
I do remember. The past wasn’t all good. But it was better than this. That’s why many of us watch old movies to remember feeling human again for 90 minutes.
No. It’s radical feminism
Of course it is. There is feminism and then there is radical feminism. The latter is the more toxic brew.
Sebastion, you are right – but so is Cat.
I do not suggest an alternative, but a lower foundation. Radical feminism did not spring fully formed from the forehead of Marx, neither was RF the foundation of all that ails us. RF was birthed, with so many other -isms, in the destruction of natural hierarchies to create radical equality between persons. It was thought this would bring liberté, égalité, fraternité amongst all humanity, but it was rebellion made in covenant with Death.
Wherever there are distinctions, there must be hierarchy. We hate this and so attempt to erase distinctions – an impossible and unnatural task. But, because we would love to have it so, we pretend these distinctions (i.e. sex, culture, achievement, race, value, merit, courage, grades, etc. ad nauseam) are of no consequence or do not exist. And in the wake of our fantasies, Will Thomases and female police officers, soldiers, rulers and incompetent magistrates and administrators arise.
At core, we commit rebellion against and hatred for the LORD, Who made the world subject to Himself and gave dominion to man as His representative on earth.
Radical feminism is just one facet of a huge, satanic, multi-headed conglomerate whose single and united aim is to destroy the foundations of western Christendom, with all its blessings.
It begins with destruction of natural hierarchies to make a utopia in which each of us is the very image of god.
:”The past wasn’t all good. But it was better than this.”
You got that right.
Funny how women are asking, “men, where have you gone?” while imploring, “please come back.”, but the solution is always “we” have to fix the problem.
This is where conservative men always get it wrong. Men, en masse, have decided “We”, don’t have to do squat.
Evolving into the Eloi depicted in that book from the 1895 novel H G Wells.
Even the Eloi were still getting laid.
It’s TRUE!, demon-rats have appealed to voters (women51%) to give them power over men’s resource. This was seen, and i disengaged decades ago. If pushed far enough, men will think with their Top Head. Demon-rats fuck up everything! It’s all about votes/power to them- – not the health of the country. Even faggy boys can kick girl ass in sports. Does this translate, bet yer fat ass it’s does! I don’t dirty my rootacus any more! Don’t care.
Dr Jordan Peterson has studied this issue extensively. He believes that it is a case stunted growth, of immaturity by young men to not grow up and take full responsibility for their actions. They are lost and suffering. Dr.. Peterson is very adamant about this growing serious problem with young men.
His background in psychology allows him to discuss topics like personality, emotion, and behavior in a way that resonates with those looking to understand themselves better. His insights into male and female dynamics also attract interest. The meaning in life, which can be particularly appealing to young men navigating the complexities of adulthood. His discussions on responsibility, suffering, and purpose provide a framework for understanding their experiences. his blend of psychological insight, philosophical exploration, and cultural critique offers a compelling narrative for young men seeking clarity and direction in their lives. He advocates for personal responsibility and self-improvement, encouraging young men to take charge of their lives. This message can be empowering, especially in a time when many feel lost or disillusioned. Peterson offers a structured approach to life through his psychological insights, which can help young men make sense of their emotions, relationships, and societal roles. His practical advice on setting goals and establishing order in one’s life resonates with those seeking direction.
You’ve summed up the contribution Jordan Peterson has made to society in general but specifically to young men, quite well.
How many times did this article mention Jordan Peterson? Almost every conservative response to these types of essays is to point out Andrew Tate. You peel back the red pill onion and it’s Andrew Tate all the way down to mainstream conservative pundits.
Once I read “Boys Adrift” by Leonard Sax it opened my eyes to the manipulation by the radical feminist education system to stamp out any semblance of rational responsible masculinity. All men are lumped into the worst aspects of a few men’s nature’s and are to be held accountable for another man’s actions.
Meanwhile women are in a mad rush to emulate top tier men, so long as they get special privileges to gain access to the corner office. Oil rigs, lineman, hod carrier…that’s for the dregs of society.
It doesn’t help that young white man, have been over-looked and discriminated in employment. As society has turned a blind eye. The employers would much rather have a foreign worker for their ability to control them AND hit their quota. They don’t care what it does to a person, to be discriminated on their sex and race so the company can “look good.” Elevating UN-inpressive and UN-earned women and non-white foreigners over the true brains, that hold it all together. Silicone Valley even has special finance Loan programs to help FOREIGNERS start, start-up companies. I kid you not. While, American man go begging for capital for their ideas. It’s a joke. White males have become “the foreigners,” in their own country.
Turning Boys into stupid Ballet Dancers or Tree Sitters Hollywood junk like Billy Elliot and such the fathers in fact the whole family need to get back to the Traditional American Family
Men haven’t “retreated” from family life. They have been shoved out by feminists and a sympathetic judicial system that a rewards divorcing women (and it is mostly the women who press the divorce) with the house, the car, custody of the children, and half his income. “Joint” custody is little better turning men into weekend fathers. That’s not how fatherhood is supposed to work.
“Please come back?” To what? You want to “tempt the average 18-to-36-year-old cis heterosexual man”? To start off stop calling him “cis” … or is it “sis”? Men have not “retreated” from “traditional” roles. Those roles don’t exist any more. If they did Ms. Drucker and her sisters would scream “rape culture” quicker than you can say “a fish needs for a bicycle”.
Ms. Drucker claims to see the problem, but who does she blame for it? The men. Of course. We’ve seen 60 years of that sort of endless complaining and it’s still everywhere we look. Every commercial shows some doofus male being set straight by some smart woman or women.
It’s the women who need to come back. Stop trying to invade every male role, stop smoking cigars and getting tattoos. Start being feminine again, if you can still remember after decades of “conscious raising”. Come back to being a faithful wife. Leave the workplace to the men. That’s the most important of the male traditional roles; the breadwinner. Wade into this and deal with it: there is only one way back. Back to patriarchy.
It’s that or nothing.
The fathers who have nurtured their daughters to become harridans is why men take refuge in anything but women.
Porn is after the fact – not the cause.
I faced this.
“Another factor is that the notorious and often cruel bias of family law against husbands and fathers has driven many men to see marriage as grossly inequitable and undesirable. Boys and young men have watched their fathers destroyed in family court and reduced to the indentured slavery of permanent alimony.”
And vanished rather than be a victim. The judge ordered all to her, and I made sure she got nothing. I “Withdrew the means of production!”
Getting married now is a minefield for men especially. Marriage used to be a covenant between the parties and the LORD until death, with only cruelty, adultery or abandonment justifying separation or divorce because of the hardness of our hearts. Then marriage became contractual – a lesser obligation than covenant. Finally, we got no-fault divorce, which just means “I don’t feel like being married to you anymore. I am taking the kids, the house and retirement.”
So a woman can marry a man, have children with him and divorce him on a whim and taking everything they have made together, including the children. Alimony remains a last vestige of the recognition of female vulnerability – largely but not completely unnecessary today when children are raised by paid third parties or grandparents.
Both men and women are vulnerable, but I think the children and the men have it worse than the woman.
They don’t make wimin like they used to…. Sex dies after marriage…. They & the rug rats ain’t worth ure pay check!
One of the more important factors is the fact that young boys from Kindergarten are treated as defective girls in primary school. Many of these boys are destroyed before they even get a chance to start puberty much less manhood. We cannot continue to let our young men be crushed so early in their life.
My wife and I just celebrated our 50TH Wedding Anniversary with a big party – catered meal – great band – and 184 of our friends and families! Has it been easy? Hell no!! Would I do it again? Would she?? Can’t say for sure, but we worked, raised our kids, lived within our means, got terrible sick of eating $.25/box mac and cheese something! We rarely went out without our kids – our “go to” restaurant was Po Folks (kids eat free until 6th Birthday)! There are MILLIONS of couples like us – grew up together – faced hardships – did what we HAD to do rather than WANTED to do! Many don’t want that now – either too selfish – too greedy – too “woke”! They’re also too UNHAPPY! Life is a lot different now than 50 years ago – people have more stuff to waste money on – glad we had the luxury of being poor when it was affordable!!
After joining the military and being sent overseas, watching how the local women acted, the contrast to the female thugs back home was a wake up call.