Has feminism made men less willing to commit?

[Tayken]

But to be fair, these days it's also women who ride on the c*** carousel for too long and delay marriage into their 30S and 40s and then expect a man to commit to her.

 

Ahahahahah...I think they do more than RIDE IT

 

It starts from the teenager years..mostly moms allowing their daughters to go out and have sleep overs, and buying them all the sexy gear they need to prep themselves...

 

Then they become "besties" with their daughters as vacating the parent role...and this s where things start to go downhill.

[Woggle]

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

 

 

 

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

 

Exactly. I am not single but when I was there were a good deal of women while I was in my 20s who were mistreaed by some obvious players that wanted all men to pay. I had major trust issues with women back then but I was still always honest with them.

 

It seems that instead of standing up to or confronting the men who wrong them some women dump all that rage and anger on a good guy who won't fight back and no self respecting man wants to be a punching for something he didn't do.

[lucy_in_disguise]

Some serious mysogeny happening in this thread. I think you anti-feminists do not have a good grasp of history.

 

Promiscuity has always happened, though in the past, men were the ones who were more likely to get off scot-free. One could bang a hooker or a waif and even get her pregnant with no repurcussions. Sure men settled down but for the women they were settling with, it was not roses and gravy as you anti- feminists seem to believe. And for the women they were NOT settling with... Well, it was even harder.

 

People, especially men prior to the advent of birth control, have been having affairs for as long as they have been greeting married, but in the past, there were few options available but to accept infidelity. Divorce was stigmatized and more importantly, women were dependent on their husbands for their economic survival.

 

It's not like being treated poorly by the other gender is a new phenomenon.

Edited February 24, 2014 by lucy_in_disguise

[fortyninethousand322]

Some serious mysogeny happening in this thread. I think you anti-feminists do not have a good grasp of history.

 

Promiscuity has always happened, though in the past, men were the ones who were more likely to get off scot-free. One could bang a hooker or a waif and even get her pregnant with no repurcussions. Sure men settled down but for the women they were settling with, it was not roses and gravy as you anti- feminists seem to believe. And for the women they were NOT settling with... Well, it was even harder.

 

People, especially men prior to the advent of birth control, have been having affairs for as long as they have been greeting married, but in the past, there were few options available but to accept infidelity. Divorce was stigmatized and more importantly, women were dependent on their husbands for their economic survival.

 

It's not like being treated poorly by the other gender is a new phenomenon.

 

Eh, I don't have a problem with the part of feminism you're talking about. It's the other stuff that I'm against...

[Woggle]

It's not even feminism I have an issue with. I have an issue with people that hate me no matter what walk of life they are from. They use feminism the same way that bigots use religion. It just gives them an excuse for their hatred.

[Eggplant]

Men in the past or in other societies were/are more eager to get married, as they felt/feel no obligation to sacrifice much on their part, and merely accept and take advantage of the sacrifices of their wives. They often had/have no intention of staying faithful, or sharing in any of the child-rearing. Basically they gain/gained property. By contrast, in today's society, more men actually consider making sacrifices on their own part, and so they think twice and make sure they can genuinely commit before they tie the knot.

[TheGuard13]

I like how people keep pretending there was some glory day where people didn't have casual sex and some women wouldn't date or marry certain men.

 

 

Feminism didn't do anything except make people aware that women want equal rights and opportunities. Anything beyond that is not neccessarily feminism, but someone's personal values.

 

 

I would blame the sexual revolution in general for some of this stuff and altered behavior before I blamed just feminism.

 

 

Feminism just seems to provide some men a convenient blanket excuse to explain their failure in the sexual and dating marketplace.

[Eggplant]

A big part of the problem, I think, is that 30-40something women are looking for men their own age, of equal or greater social standing, while men that age are looking for fresh-faced 25 yr olds who are still in the prime of their childbearing years.

And yet the ratio of men to women is still 50-50 give or take. So the demand for the 25-year-old woman is disproportionately high, since men of her age and older are competing for her. So yes, some of those 40-year-old men who are in demand might get a 30-year-old. But they'd better be damn worth it. Men are fertile for life, but their ability to produce healthy offspring without risks for diseases like schizophrenia goes down. And their energy and stamina to have a baby also isn't that of a guy in his 20's or 30's. As a woman in my mid-20's, from where I am, pretty much all the men who are worth being married to are definitely married long before age 40. The only 40-year-olds who are available are usually not the kind of man who could compete. And the divorced ones ... that's a red flag. They have baggage and they left the mother of their children? Wow, hmmm.

 

I do agree with you that it's better to get married younger, particularly for women, but the idea that men don't get old isn't really accurate.

[ponchsox]

I like how people keep pretending there was some glory day where people didn't have casual sex and some women wouldn't date or marry certain men.

 

 

Feminism didn't do anything except make people aware that women want equal rights and opportunities. Anything beyond that is not neccessarily feminism, but someone's personal values.

 

 

I would blame the sexual revolution in general for some of this stuff and altered behavior before I blamed just feminism.

 

 

Feminism just seems to provide some men a convenient blanket excuse to explain their failure in the sexual and dating marketplace.

 

Either a woman is a feminist or she's not. It's not a blanket statement.

[jcrew11]

Some serious mysogeny happening in this thread. I think you anti-feminists do not have a good grasp of history.

 

Promiscuity has always happened, though in the past, men were the ones who were more likely to get off scot-free. One could bang a hooker or a waif and even get her pregnant with no repurcussions. Sure men settled down but for the women they were settling with, it was not roses and gravy as you anti- feminists seem to believe. And for the women they were NOT settling with... Well, it was even harder.

 

People, especially men prior to the advent of birth control, have been having affairs for as long as they have been greeting married, but in the past, there were few options available but to accept infidelity. Divorce was stigmatized and more importantly, women were dependent on their husbands for their economic survival.

 

It's not like being treated poorly by the other gender is a new phenomenon.

 

Sure, men who want to cheat and bang lots of women is more acceptable now, as our modern society has become less "focused on marriage."

 

But are Women still unhappy with "marriage or the lack of marriage in modern society"?

 

It seems to me, at least as evidenced on this forum, that women are still complaining about Men cheating and not willing to commit to them.

 

I really don't know if there is any answer for "encouraging men to commit more." I was trying to think of reasons why it is acceptable for men not to commit. With the sexual revolution and birth control, pre-marital sex is acceptable and encouraged.

 

I don't know if feminism is any cause, but it gives men a convenient excuse to allow women to be more independent and promiscuous. In our modern society, instead of encouraging "more marriage" we are becoming a "marriage-less society" - where its easier to have casual sex and delay marriage forever.

 

Are single women unhappier Today with "the liberalized modern dating paradigm"?

[topaMAXX]

I like how people keep pretending there was some glory day where people didn't have casual sex and some women wouldn't date or marry certain men.

 

 

Feminism didn't do anything except make people aware that women want equal rights and opportunities. Anything beyond that is not neccessarily feminism, but someone's personal values.

 

 

I would blame the sexual revolution in general for some of this stuff and altered behavior before I blamed just feminism.

 

 

Feminism just seems to provide some men a convenient blanket excuse to explain their failure in the sexual and dating marketplace.

 

The sexual revolution derived from feminism.

[Tayken]

Feminism didn't do anything except make people aware that women want equal rights and opportunities.

 

Like equally paying bills on dates, in the household once married, home chores etc?

 

I don't think any man in his right man today objects to inequality of the opposite sex. The ones that do, probably need a frontal lobotomy

 

The actions of some women though contradicts the whole "equality" thing.....how does feeling entitled to stuff / having stuff your way in a relationship speak to equality?

[Eggplant]

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

 

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

When I'm middle-aged, I'll have had my children, and I'll probably be highly successful in my career, and if I happen to be single, I won't even be looking for a man. Why would I want one?

 

That said, you need to qualify your bolded sentence with "as a mate". And while many older people still have much life left and much to offer as a mate, I'm not going to argue that, but rather I object in a bigger way to people like you making the leap from "as a sexual prospect" to "as a human being, contributor to society." This society trashes and throws away old people in general, in particular women, but a person's value in society is not a function of what they offer sexually or reproductively.

[Tayken]

but a person's value in society is not a function of what they offer sexually or reproductively.

 

Tell that to the women picking their "real men" based on height, looks etc as we've read in many a posts on here

[Eggplant]

Tell that to the women picking their "real men" based on height, looks etc as we've read in many a posts on here

You utterly missed my point. Of course women and men pick their MATES based on criteria that have to do with MATING. What I'm saying is, a person's whole worth to society isn't limited to what they provide as a MATE. That doesn't mean that you should pick them for mates. It just means some RESPECT is in order, regardless of what a person does for your

[Grumpybutfun]

After reading this thread two things occurred to me...men do not understand feminism and there is no question as to why there are so many failing at relationships. Change isn't necessarily a bad thing. Marriage isn't necessarily the pinnacle of women's happiness anymore.

Carry on,

Grumps

[Tayken]

men do not understand feminism

 

Definition: Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women.

 

Now if only we can get women to define "spark", without giving the ubiquitous answer of....."you just know it when you see it"

[fortyninethousand322]

After reading this thread two things occurred to me...men do not understand feminism and there is no question as to why there are so many failing at relationships. Change isn't necessarily a bad thing. Marriage isn't necessarily the pinnacle of women's happiness anymore.

Carry on,

Grumps

 

I don't know, I get my understanding of feminism from the NOW (National Organization for Women), Feministing, and Feminste, among others.

 

I don't have much at all in common with them. They've gone way off the deep end...

[lucy_in_disguise]

 

Are single women unhappier Today with "the liberalized modern dating paradigm"?

 

Yes, men (and women!) are less interested in marriage these days. You are right, "feminism" has lessened the need.

 

We all want what we can't have, but I would still argue that yes, we single women are are happier now.

 

I can't imagine going back in time to a society where I had to tie my life to a man in order to survive, where my intelligence and talent had no chance to flourish, where my accomplishments would never be acknowledged. Even if that meant I would have an easier time landing a husband.

 

Your argument essentially is that your right to be acknowledged as an equal human being, to pursue your own happiness and independence, is not worth the extra hassle it takes to find a man to commit.

 

I think women these days often don't appreciate how hard those before us had to fight for our right to independence. Yes, it can be a drag to be expected to support yourself, but living your life in someone else's shadow,no matter your interests, talents, or inclinations, is even less appealing IMO.

 

Anyway, there are still a ton of men in the world who are willing to commit, and many that would be happy to structure their relationships like its 1899. I am sure if you look in the right places, you will find one.

Edited February 24, 2014 by lucy_in_disguise

[TB Rhine]

A person's value in society is not a function of what they offer sexually or reproductively.

 

It is, though.

 

See, I agree that these things are not synonymous with a person's value as a "human being," in a philosophical sense. I *don't* agree that that's the way in which human beings actually behave.

 

ALL of our instinctive drives, as human beings, are based on two things... survival, and reproduction. (Perpetuation of the species). To wit, women instinctively desire strong, healthy men to protect them, and men desire healthy, attractive women to bear them children. Romance, inner worth as a human being, etc. are all abstract concepts that we try to spackle over these innate drives, in order to convince ourselves that we're not all primates.

[Eggplant]

It is, though.

 

See, I agree that these things are not synonymous with a person's value as a "human being," in a philosophical sense. I *don't* agree that that's the way in which human beings actually behave.

 

ALL of our instinctive drives, as human beings, are based on two things... survival, and reproduction. (Perpetuation of the species). To wit, women instinctively desire strong, healthy men to protect them, and men desire healthy, attractive women to bear them children. Romance, inner worth as a human being, etc. are all abstract concepts that we try to spackle over these innate drives, in order to convince ourselves that we're not all primates.

People who are active contributors to society do enhance survival and reproduction, albeit indirectly. For example, suppose there is an infertile person, not related to you. But that person is extremely knowledgeable and uses his or her abilities to invent something that betters human life. Or suppose there is a kind-hearted person who devotes themselves to teaching children, maybe your grand-children, and bettering their lives. Then we as a society should honor these kinds of people, even though they may not be the bearers of our children.

 

I agree that people might instinctively treat anybody they don't find sexually appealing like crap, but we all as a society have a moral duty to make those people STFU. And social mores are an evolved trait.

[mortensorchid]

I don't know if that is true or not, I have thought about it myself. I for one think that men in general want someone who is lesser than they are. That means a lot of things - career success, charisma, looks, popularity, etc. They want to feel superior to them in some way. Hence, they go for trashy girls rather than a good woman. It's partially the same mentality that women tend to go for Bad Boys, that men go for Bad Girls (even though we don't use the term so much).

 

 

Feminism caused men not to commit? Not exactly, it's been a mass amount of changes in the world that have lined things up to be as they are.

[Woggle]

After reading this thread two things occurred to me...men do not understand feminism and there is no question as to why there are so many failing at relationships. Change isn't necessarily a bad thing. Marriage isn't necessarily the pinnacle of women's happiness anymore.

Carry on,

Grumps

 

I understand what the dictionary definition of feminism is and I support that. What many in the modern feminists movement are about I can't support because I don't support anybody that hates me. Go on Jezebel or a site like that and you see why I can't support it.

[jcrew11]

I think women these days often don't appreciate how hard those before us had to fight for our right to independence. Yes, it can be a drag to be expected to support yourself, but living your life in someone else's shadow,no matter your interests, talents, or inclinations, is even less appealing IMO.

 

Anyway, there are still a ton of men in the world who are willing to commit, and many that would be happy to structure their relationships like its 1899. I am sure if you look in the right places, you will find one.

 

But it seems to me, for at least the women complaining on this forum, that single women do want to go back in time to a more conservative era where men "courted women with romantic dates, poetry, etc." - Men were expected to be "gentlemen who knew how to take care of a woman."

 

Now maybe this idea of "romantic courting" is fiction from jane austin and other novels. Maybe Men never "courted" women, and dating and committment has always been as messy as it is today.

 

It seems that there are plenty of women who "want the idea of independence" but can't actually live with being "independent and without a boyfriend/husband."

 

The idea of "cheating" is also a "conservative idea." In modern society, if a guy wants to cheat, then he should be independent enough to do so; and the woman should accept that there is free will in modern society, and that a woman can leave her husband/BF or accept modern sexuality and sexual independence.

 

It seems that feminism and the sexual revolution has allowed women to be sexually independent, but it also has allowed men to be sexually independent and more poly-amourous.

 

Only now, its modern single women who complain that men can't be monogamous or willing to marry. Feminism has said women can be equal and independent; and Men are saying that women should be free and independent without the necessity of marriage or monogamy.

[Woggle]

You do see a lot of posts on here complaining that men don't court women and that chivalry is dead and all of that. You also have another poster who I won't name who insists that men have to lie to women in order to have casual sex and FWB relationships and acts like they are completely innocent victims in all of this. These same women then go on about women being independent. It seems that a lot don't know what they want.

 

I think that men get so many mixed messages these days that many are throwing up their hands and doing what the hell they want. It just seems pointless trying to please women to a lot of men.