I was born in 2000, me and the mates I have being the same age are p’d off that even being able to have a home is out of reach. Divorces are through the roof, so how can someone even have the simplest of dreams to have a wife, kids, home; when there’s such a big risk that the wife and the home is temporary. Anxiousness in society I think is amplified by social media, dividing men and women, pushing a victim mentality, give them no security (like owning a home). I’ve not seen the video yet so everything I said has probably been covered.😂
We live in a debt-based fiat money system, which has a mathematical life cycle. As the total interest owed in the system accumulates, we all have more of our productivity squeezed out until no one outside of the rentier class can afford anything. Older people appear to be better off only because they have less they need to purchase; that's not the same as the problem being their fault. I've watched this problem grow worse my entire life - couldn't afford my first home purchase until I was 42, and then it was a boarded up derelict historic building I spent 8 years reconstructing, while living in it, while keeping up with my manufacturing business. One of the bigger problems of the younger generations is thinking they're the first ones to suffer hardship, a belief they can only maintain by never talking with older generations or reading history. Things will get worse for all of us until the current monetary system blows up, which appears to be soon. How you fare on the other side of that cataclysm will be determined by what kind of system replaces it and who runs that system. If we let the same oligarchs that milked humanity to death in this system design and run the next system, we are fools who deserve the hardship. Good luck, and I hope the next system brings you the marriage, home, and kids that should be our birthright.
Yeah I completely agree, the majority of people that live in the block of flats I’m in now, plus the last place i was in are aged 40 plus. It would be ignorant to say my generation has the monopoly on these struggles; but because the situation is so dire it’s worth addressing. Going back to the divorce point I made, I’ve heard many stories from men similar aged to you that have had everything taken away from them. So they’re being forced to take part in this scandalous ultimatum of renting and that’s resulting in the growing suicide rates as well. I hope you’re right and all these issues are addressed and changed soon.
If it wasn't a birthright that had existed for thousands of years, you wouldn't be here. That's not the same as saying it can't be taken away by evil people using youth for wars, or fleecing them into poverty through financial trickery, or even sterilizing them through eugenics programs.
I thought that a large percentage of men never reproduced throughout history? Anyway, I seem to recall reading that somewhere. There are arranged marriage cultures still thriving today where most of the adult population is married. But even in that system some still fall through the cracks. Usually those cultures have what is called a "joint family" household set-up where certain members of the extended family live together under one roof. I guess that solves the housing crisis?
The solution is for men to create communes or at least communal living situations for themselves. It can start with 4 or 5 guys all sharing a flat and expenses. Monasteries still exist, should be revived and monastic life presented as a viable alternative.
Eh, people in the past were enduring a Holodomor every other year, and were fine. Meanwhile, now they're growing mad with pleasure and privilege.
One could make an argument that Western people value quality over quantity, but imo, it's excuses. Having kids is always creating unnecessary suffering, so what's the difference if they have a home or not? Just cuckoldry, plain and simple.
Don't think so. Some people just don't want kids I think it's always been that way. That people, if given the choice, would have had fewer kids (and some none at all) throughout history, but culture and circumstances at the time prevented that.
Social media makes has hacked our system and filled it with fake worries. Constantly worried about what everyone else thinks. We need to just admit we fucked it and start again with Seneca and Socrates.
If I was cynical... I'd say that women complaining about how "hard" it is to date nowadays are actually complaining about something entirely different. Which is that they're not satisfied with the selection of their biological-perfect-match guys that are available to them. Which is another way of saying that, in the absence of "consequences", women biologically prefer to "date up" to the extent that they can (hypergamy) rather than across (monogamy) which was the de facto norm of all humanity (at least for the "civilized" kind) up until the 1950s.
What changed in the 1950s? The hypergamy-unleashing, consequences-eliminating technology of birth control. Fast forward to 2024, and dating apps *combined* with birth control have made the idea of a woman settling down with her biological perfect-match (average woman <~> average guy) feel like the equivalent of killing herself. So a hundred women are all chasing the same perfect guy, and would rather *share* that one perfect guy than settle down with the dough-faced grocery store clerk who actually would be the perfect life mate for 99 of them.
...but I'm not cynical. So I'll just nod my head along to this sad sad song about how hard it is to be a woman nowadays and how the deck is stacked against them. Poor dears...
In the book _The Moral Animal_ there is a section where author Robert Wright asks the question, "In a world nominally run by men, why are multiple wives illegal nearly everywhere?" The answer is that polygyny favors women: it makes hypergamy legal. Wright uses the example of 100 perfectly matched couples: if even one of the women gets to move up to a better man by being a second wife to him, all the women below her also get to move up, and the man at the bottom, #100, is left with no wife. (Wright uses a shoe salesman rather than a grocery clerk). The problem with this system is how socially destabilizing it is to have large numbers of unmarried young men scrambling to find the resources to attract even one wife. The phenomenon of both sexes giving up on marriage and children, with women empowered by birth control and access to the job market to go it alone, is new in history. I don't think it will end well, perhaps in a society similar to that depicted in the 1976 cult-classic sci-fi film "Logan's Run". Hollywood always tells us what's coming.
But that's not what we see in cultures/countries today where polygyny is legal. Those cultures value marriage and family (with most marriages being arranged by elders) and thus have a combination of monogamy and polygyny taking place.
"... women biologically prefer to "date up" to the extent that they can (hypergamy) rather than across (monogamy)"
--- Monogamy is not the opposite of hypergamy, polygamy is. One can be hypergamous and monogamous simultaneously.
" which was the de facto norm of all humanity (at least for the "civilized" kind) up until the 1950s."
--- You misunderstand what hypergamy is. When the British ruled India they coined the term "hypergamy" to describe how parents would try to arrange their daughters' marriages to men of higher socio-economic status or caste than themselves because left on their own, their daughters would choose whoever they had crushes on which were often men of lower rank.
At any rate, in a free market dating system assortative mating is the norm. Step outside and take a look around you, when you see couples you see couples who are each other's equals for the most part.
"What changed in the 1950s? The hypergamy-unleashing, consequences-eliminating technology of birth control."
--- Are you talking about condoms here? Because "the pill" didn't come along until the '60s.
"Fast forward to 2024, and dating apps *combined* with birth control have made the idea of a woman settling down with her biological perfect-match (average woman <~> average guy) feel like the equivalent of killing herself. "
--- If that were the case assortative mating would not be normative, but it is. Again, look around you at the grocery store, Walmart, or any crowded public space. As far as pills, IUDs, etc, most of the women on birth control are either married or in long-term relationships, that's why they're on bc in the first place. The idea that women not having regular sex in relationships but just scrolling from home on their phones are going to be on birth control "just in case" is absurd. It's men who are carrying condoms in their pockets when they meet women for first dates, hoping to "get lucky".
"So a hundred women are all chasing the same perfect guy, and would rather *share* that one perfect guy than settle down with the dough-faced grocery store clerk who actually would be the perfect life mate for 99 of them."
--- Doughboy's doughgirl is clerking at Walmart, that's why you don't see her.
As an GenX/early millennial therapist who sees many Gen Z women and hears their stories, there’s another problem. If the grocery store clerk knew how to take care of his basic life needs well, was not addicted to porn, didn’t expect partners to engage in painful sexual acts, was commitment-oriented and family-oriented. . .then sure. The story you tell would be a fair one.
But in reality-young men on the whole these days sound wildly immature even compared to a generation ago. That is part of what these young women are facing. The average looking men are not just average looking, they’re also often stuck in a prolonged adolescence that is highly unattractive to women.
That may be an indicator of repressed homosexuality in which case other men are more suited for them. At any rate the women should turn it around and tell them to bend over as she puts on a sterile medical glove.
I’m just saying, apparently it’s a thing. I think it came from porn where it’s sold as more pleasurable for the man, maybe it is. Don’t think it’s all repressed gay feelings bc it’s apparently so very common.
Oh- also choking partners during sex is now a big thing. Young guys raised on a porn diet apparently aren’t easily satisfied with ‘regular’ sex anymore!
These must be some of the reasons for 4B and just the general backing out of the dating scene that women are doing. And boy oh boy people, even politicians, seem to be mad as hell about that!
So you're saying that the available guys which these girls are encountering (on Tinder?) are beneath their standards, is that correct?
Does it occur to them that the men they *think* they deserve, those who work hard, are focused, have stable careers, have the ability and desire to support a family, are caring and vulnerable, etc., have standards also?
Does it occur to them that these men might be looking for clues in these womens' appearances and behavior that might indicate that they are worth risking everything they've worked for and entering into a lifelong partnership with them?
Do these women present the same qualities of loyalty, fidelity, caring, modesty, thoughtfulness, independence of mind, and healthfulness that they desire in their partners?
Here are a few of the indicators that quality guys often use to identify whether a woman is likely to be a good long term investment, or not: What is her number of sex partners? Is she mostly free of tattoos and or piercings? Is she healthy and fit? How well does she take care of her appearance? What amount of time does she spend on social media?Does she communicate well and keep her commitments, or is she flaky? Does she have a social life and authentic friends or does she hang out with "the wrong crowd"?
Guys may be dumb in many ways but they are not stupid. They can figure out pretty easily whether a woman is high risk or low risk. Low quality guys like the kind you're describing will take what they can get, but the high quality guys your clients seem to be looking for are discerning. If a girl is offering herself up freely they may oblige themselves to return the favor, but their instincts are going to inform them about whether or not to stick around.
"If the grocery store clerk knew how to take care of his basic life needs well, was not addicted to porn, didn’t expect partners to engage in painful sexual acts, was commitment-oriented and family-oriented. . .then sure. The story you tell would be a fair one."
... Sounds like women who take care of their basic needs, are not addicted to porn, do not expect their partners to engage in painful sex acts and are commitment-family oriented simply expect to be with men who are the same. That's simple, fair and reasonable. And really just the basics. The bar is set low for these dudes out here.
As someone of your grandparents generation (b 1952) I grew up without the social media that Gen Z have to contend with but with the daunting prospect of having to ask a girl out face to face if I was ever going to get a date. Like many other teenage boys I was shy and this was a real worry for me but eventually, of course, I did though I recall being terribly tongue-tied and embarrassed... but she said "yes"!
I was not a serial dater - few of us were - but I recall being advised by my parents that I should go to dances, etc. to meet women to date. I chose to ignore that advice because that wasn't what I enjoyed and felt that if I did the things I liked, I was more likely to meet someone with similar tastes. It took some time - until I was 25 actually - but it worked! We're both sport loving engineers and have been together for 46 years and have 2 daughters. We have always trusted each other - never checking to see if the other was hiding anything - and I see that as foundational for a long relationship.
Having had a wonderful marriage myself, it makes me so sad to hear of the plight of GenZ. I'm sure your advise on the issues facing them can make a huge contribution to improving things in the future.
I'm 3 years older than you, so most of my relationships were found "the old-fashioned way" like yours, meeting them in natural (non-digital) settings. But I unexpectedly found myself single at age 50 and turned to dating sites, so I've experienced both "meeting" methods. I now look at randomly meeting a new partner as quaint & romantic, but unlikely. On the other hand, there's something curiously traumatic about using dating sites where the search becomes almost frenetic, the pool of the opposite sex appearing so large, yet the number of actual compatibles so small, and the rejection rate so high. I can easily imagine Gen Z becoming numb to the chase and giving up. I'm now 15 years into the relationship that finally came from my search.
Hi Tom, It's good to hear the views of someone who's experienced both the traditional "old fashioned" way of meeting potential partners and also the online dating apps. For me, of course, anything I say about the dating apps is based on what I believe, not what I know from personal experience. Having said that, I have enormous sympathy for Gen Z in the dating app era because, to me, it is probably the worst imaginable way of choosing a partner - for starters, anyone can write anything they'd like to be down as their description, it's not possible to judge what someone is really like without meeting several times, it's not a sound plan to have a specification for your ideal partner because they won't exist and, finally, photos can be digitally altered so they're unreliable
(as well as irrelevant!). We all meet lots of possible partners daily - if we'd bother to talk to them, we'd find that out! I suppose I'm saying we need to get off the smartphone and connect with real people in the real world. It doesn't guarantee success, of course, but I believe it stands a far better chance than the wishful thinking of the dating apps.
I'm lucky to have several family memoirs written and published for within the family going back to the late 1800's. One on my great aunts came into the family as a "mail-order bride", selected in part because the prospective husband knew she was "good at math". To us nowadays, that's an appallingly bare amount of information about someone we intend to be legally our lifetime partner. But even face-to-face meetings can have plenty of deceptions, misrepresentations, and hidden agendas so I consider dating sites useful to at least winnow out the most unlikely candidates without wasting time on dates or getting hopes up. My first wife, who I met at a dinner party when I was 21, was not at all who she had held herself out to be. That's the danger of trying to please someone by being what you think they want to see: you can only keep up the illusion for so long. Totally agree about getting off of smart phones long enough to live a real life. That's one of the things I like about my PC - I can't carry it around with me.
Once again, you make good points. The Victorian marriage was, I think, more of an agreement to work together to raise a family than a love affair - it was a tough time.
I accept your point about the PC vs. the smartphone!
In my case, I knew my wife at work, and works functions, for a year before we ever dated and we sat opposite each other so I think we knew each other quite well before things progressed past mere friendship. And neither of us was trying to impress the other ; just being ourselves - which helps a lot, too.
This was an insightful interview. I also quit social media years ago and went back to Instagram a few times and quit again a few months ago. Interesting you discuss the “seeking authority” as one of the potential reasons for anxiety. I am a crowd safety advisor and write about human and crowd behaviour. This lack of trust in authority is showing up as deviant behaviour at events, and I wrote about this in my article on post pandemic crowd behaviour (https://isemurphy.com/crowd-behaviour-taylor-swift/). I am writing a new article as the next episode of post-pandemic crowd behaviour as I see the impact of phones/social media on younger generations, coupled with trauma of the pandemic. I will be referencing your work in it.
I also write on Substack about personal development (the spiritual side of human behaviour!) and recently wrote about this situation from a Human Design perspective (https://isemurphy.substack.com/p/the-enshittification-of-social-media), that the collapse of authority was always going to happen, and it’s time that we listen to our own authority. It’s a very challenging time.
You are sorrounded by cameras 24/7 and if you just happened to be recorded saying the wrong thing, even in your worst day ever, or out of context, it doesn't matter, that can ruin your entire life. One bad post or a video of 10-20 years ago can destroy everything you worked towards to, so no wonder people are so full of anxiety.
Fantastic interview Freya! Such an important topic and (as always) so beautifully articulated and insightful 👍 Thank goodness for young woman such as yourself and all the fabulous work you do 🙏
Women want to be ignored by men, so that's what they get. Not worth the drama to approach a woman anymore. Some get desperate enough to talk to men now, so since I'm far from desperate, that's the game I play.
I was born in 2000, me and the mates I have being the same age are p’d off that even being able to have a home is out of reach. Divorces are through the roof, so how can someone even have the simplest of dreams to have a wife, kids, home; when there’s such a big risk that the wife and the home is temporary. Anxiousness in society I think is amplified by social media, dividing men and women, pushing a victim mentality, give them no security (like owning a home). I’ve not seen the video yet so everything I said has probably been covered.😂
We live in a debt-based fiat money system, which has a mathematical life cycle. As the total interest owed in the system accumulates, we all have more of our productivity squeezed out until no one outside of the rentier class can afford anything. Older people appear to be better off only because they have less they need to purchase; that's not the same as the problem being their fault. I've watched this problem grow worse my entire life - couldn't afford my first home purchase until I was 42, and then it was a boarded up derelict historic building I spent 8 years reconstructing, while living in it, while keeping up with my manufacturing business. One of the bigger problems of the younger generations is thinking they're the first ones to suffer hardship, a belief they can only maintain by never talking with older generations or reading history. Things will get worse for all of us until the current monetary system blows up, which appears to be soon. How you fare on the other side of that cataclysm will be determined by what kind of system replaces it and who runs that system. If we let the same oligarchs that milked humanity to death in this system design and run the next system, we are fools who deserve the hardship. Good luck, and I hope the next system brings you the marriage, home, and kids that should be our birthright.
Yeah I completely agree, the majority of people that live in the block of flats I’m in now, plus the last place i was in are aged 40 plus. It would be ignorant to say my generation has the monopoly on these struggles; but because the situation is so dire it’s worth addressing. Going back to the divorce point I made, I’ve heard many stories from men similar aged to you that have had everything taken away from them. So they’re being forced to take part in this scandalous ultimatum of renting and that’s resulting in the growing suicide rates as well. I hope you’re right and all these issues are addressed and changed soon.
"...they’re being forced to take part in this scandalous ultimatum of renting and that’s resulting in the growing suicide rates..."
--- They lose their jobs and get evicted so they commit suicide? Or just renting alone is enough to send them over the edge?
" I hope the next system brings you the marriage, home, and kids that should be our birthright."
--- How are these a "birthright"?
If it wasn't a birthright that had existed for thousands of years, you wouldn't be here. That's not the same as saying it can't be taken away by evil people using youth for wars, or fleecing them into poverty through financial trickery, or even sterilizing them through eugenics programs.
I thought that a large percentage of men never reproduced throughout history? Anyway, I seem to recall reading that somewhere. There are arranged marriage cultures still thriving today where most of the adult population is married. But even in that system some still fall through the cracks. Usually those cultures have what is called a "joint family" household set-up where certain members of the extended family live together under one roof. I guess that solves the housing crisis?
The solution is for men to create communes or at least communal living situations for themselves. It can start with 4 or 5 guys all sharing a flat and expenses. Monasteries still exist, should be revived and monastic life presented as a viable alternative.
Eh, people in the past were enduring a Holodomor every other year, and were fine. Meanwhile, now they're growing mad with pleasure and privilege.
One could make an argument that Western people value quality over quantity, but imo, it's excuses. Having kids is always creating unnecessary suffering, so what's the difference if they have a home or not? Just cuckoldry, plain and simple.
"Eh, people in the past were enduring a Holodomor every other year, and were fine. "
--- They weren't fine but it's true that many people today have entitled attitudes and are not grateful for what they do have.
"Having kids is always creating unnecessary suffering"
--- This ancient wisdom is coming back into the mainstream. People are having less kids now.
They are having no kids due to cuckoldry (=love of foreigners, human rights and perpetual peace), not "ancient wisdom".
Don't think so. Some people just don't want kids I think it's always been that way. That people, if given the choice, would have had fewer kids (and some none at all) throughout history, but culture and circumstances at the time prevented that.
Social media makes has hacked our system and filled it with fake worries. Constantly worried about what everyone else thinks. We need to just admit we fucked it and start again with Seneca and Socrates.
You're everywhere and I'm loving it!
I’m anxious and I’m not even Gen Z.
Mary has an amazing voice
If I was cynical... I'd say that women complaining about how "hard" it is to date nowadays are actually complaining about something entirely different. Which is that they're not satisfied with the selection of their biological-perfect-match guys that are available to them. Which is another way of saying that, in the absence of "consequences", women biologically prefer to "date up" to the extent that they can (hypergamy) rather than across (monogamy) which was the de facto norm of all humanity (at least for the "civilized" kind) up until the 1950s.
What changed in the 1950s? The hypergamy-unleashing, consequences-eliminating technology of birth control. Fast forward to 2024, and dating apps *combined* with birth control have made the idea of a woman settling down with her biological perfect-match (average woman <~> average guy) feel like the equivalent of killing herself. So a hundred women are all chasing the same perfect guy, and would rather *share* that one perfect guy than settle down with the dough-faced grocery store clerk who actually would be the perfect life mate for 99 of them.
...but I'm not cynical. So I'll just nod my head along to this sad sad song about how hard it is to be a woman nowadays and how the deck is stacked against them. Poor dears...
In the book _The Moral Animal_ there is a section where author Robert Wright asks the question, "In a world nominally run by men, why are multiple wives illegal nearly everywhere?" The answer is that polygyny favors women: it makes hypergamy legal. Wright uses the example of 100 perfectly matched couples: if even one of the women gets to move up to a better man by being a second wife to him, all the women below her also get to move up, and the man at the bottom, #100, is left with no wife. (Wright uses a shoe salesman rather than a grocery clerk). The problem with this system is how socially destabilizing it is to have large numbers of unmarried young men scrambling to find the resources to attract even one wife. The phenomenon of both sexes giving up on marriage and children, with women empowered by birth control and access to the job market to go it alone, is new in history. I don't think it will end well, perhaps in a society similar to that depicted in the 1976 cult-classic sci-fi film "Logan's Run". Hollywood always tells us what's coming.
But that's not what we see in cultures/countries today where polygyny is legal. Those cultures value marriage and family (with most marriages being arranged by elders) and thus have a combination of monogamy and polygyny taking place.
"... women biologically prefer to "date up" to the extent that they can (hypergamy) rather than across (monogamy)"
--- Monogamy is not the opposite of hypergamy, polygamy is. One can be hypergamous and monogamous simultaneously.
" which was the de facto norm of all humanity (at least for the "civilized" kind) up until the 1950s."
--- You misunderstand what hypergamy is. When the British ruled India they coined the term "hypergamy" to describe how parents would try to arrange their daughters' marriages to men of higher socio-economic status or caste than themselves because left on their own, their daughters would choose whoever they had crushes on which were often men of lower rank.
At any rate, in a free market dating system assortative mating is the norm. Step outside and take a look around you, when you see couples you see couples who are each other's equals for the most part.
"What changed in the 1950s? The hypergamy-unleashing, consequences-eliminating technology of birth control."
--- Are you talking about condoms here? Because "the pill" didn't come along until the '60s.
"Fast forward to 2024, and dating apps *combined* with birth control have made the idea of a woman settling down with her biological perfect-match (average woman <~> average guy) feel like the equivalent of killing herself. "
--- If that were the case assortative mating would not be normative, but it is. Again, look around you at the grocery store, Walmart, or any crowded public space. As far as pills, IUDs, etc, most of the women on birth control are either married or in long-term relationships, that's why they're on bc in the first place. The idea that women not having regular sex in relationships but just scrolling from home on their phones are going to be on birth control "just in case" is absurd. It's men who are carrying condoms in their pockets when they meet women for first dates, hoping to "get lucky".
"So a hundred women are all chasing the same perfect guy, and would rather *share* that one perfect guy than settle down with the dough-faced grocery store clerk who actually would be the perfect life mate for 99 of them."
--- Doughboy's doughgirl is clerking at Walmart, that's why you don't see her.
As an GenX/early millennial therapist who sees many Gen Z women and hears their stories, there’s another problem. If the grocery store clerk knew how to take care of his basic life needs well, was not addicted to porn, didn’t expect partners to engage in painful sexual acts, was commitment-oriented and family-oriented. . .then sure. The story you tell would be a fair one.
But in reality-young men on the whole these days sound wildly immature even compared to a generation ago. That is part of what these young women are facing. The average looking men are not just average looking, they’re also often stuck in a prolonged adolescence that is highly unattractive to women.
" expect partners to engage in painful sexual acts,"
--- What?!
I’ll be blunt. . .anal sex. I’m hearing that the young guys these days expect it.
But, it’s not actually fun or comfortable for the majority of women from what I hear.
That may be an indicator of repressed homosexuality in which case other men are more suited for them. At any rate the women should turn it around and tell them to bend over as she puts on a sterile medical glove.
I mean, I agree!
I’m just saying, apparently it’s a thing. I think it came from porn where it’s sold as more pleasurable for the man, maybe it is. Don’t think it’s all repressed gay feelings bc it’s apparently so very common.
Oh- also choking partners during sex is now a big thing. Young guys raised on a porn diet apparently aren’t easily satisfied with ‘regular’ sex anymore!
These must be some of the reasons for 4B and just the general backing out of the dating scene that women are doing. And boy oh boy people, even politicians, seem to be mad as hell about that!
So you're saying that the available guys which these girls are encountering (on Tinder?) are beneath their standards, is that correct?
Does it occur to them that the men they *think* they deserve, those who work hard, are focused, have stable careers, have the ability and desire to support a family, are caring and vulnerable, etc., have standards also?
Does it occur to them that these men might be looking for clues in these womens' appearances and behavior that might indicate that they are worth risking everything they've worked for and entering into a lifelong partnership with them?
Do these women present the same qualities of loyalty, fidelity, caring, modesty, thoughtfulness, independence of mind, and healthfulness that they desire in their partners?
Here are a few of the indicators that quality guys often use to identify whether a woman is likely to be a good long term investment, or not: What is her number of sex partners? Is she mostly free of tattoos and or piercings? Is she healthy and fit? How well does she take care of her appearance? What amount of time does she spend on social media?Does she communicate well and keep her commitments, or is she flaky? Does she have a social life and authentic friends or does she hang out with "the wrong crowd"?
Guys may be dumb in many ways but they are not stupid. They can figure out pretty easily whether a woman is high risk or low risk. Low quality guys like the kind you're describing will take what they can get, but the high quality guys your clients seem to be looking for are discerning. If a girl is offering herself up freely they may oblige themselves to return the favor, but their instincts are going to inform them about whether or not to stick around.
I didn't get that from what Rebecca posted...
"If the grocery store clerk knew how to take care of his basic life needs well, was not addicted to porn, didn’t expect partners to engage in painful sexual acts, was commitment-oriented and family-oriented. . .then sure. The story you tell would be a fair one."
... Sounds like women who take care of their basic needs, are not addicted to porn, do not expect their partners to engage in painful sex acts and are commitment-family oriented simply expect to be with men who are the same. That's simple, fair and reasonable. And really just the basics. The bar is set low for these dudes out here.
Excellent interview, thanks.
As someone of your grandparents generation (b 1952) I grew up without the social media that Gen Z have to contend with but with the daunting prospect of having to ask a girl out face to face if I was ever going to get a date. Like many other teenage boys I was shy and this was a real worry for me but eventually, of course, I did though I recall being terribly tongue-tied and embarrassed... but she said "yes"!
I was not a serial dater - few of us were - but I recall being advised by my parents that I should go to dances, etc. to meet women to date. I chose to ignore that advice because that wasn't what I enjoyed and felt that if I did the things I liked, I was more likely to meet someone with similar tastes. It took some time - until I was 25 actually - but it worked! We're both sport loving engineers and have been together for 46 years and have 2 daughters. We have always trusted each other - never checking to see if the other was hiding anything - and I see that as foundational for a long relationship.
Having had a wonderful marriage myself, it makes me so sad to hear of the plight of GenZ. I'm sure your advise on the issues facing them can make a huge contribution to improving things in the future.
I'm 3 years older than you, so most of my relationships were found "the old-fashioned way" like yours, meeting them in natural (non-digital) settings. But I unexpectedly found myself single at age 50 and turned to dating sites, so I've experienced both "meeting" methods. I now look at randomly meeting a new partner as quaint & romantic, but unlikely. On the other hand, there's something curiously traumatic about using dating sites where the search becomes almost frenetic, the pool of the opposite sex appearing so large, yet the number of actual compatibles so small, and the rejection rate so high. I can easily imagine Gen Z becoming numb to the chase and giving up. I'm now 15 years into the relationship that finally came from my search.
Hi Tom, It's good to hear the views of someone who's experienced both the traditional "old fashioned" way of meeting potential partners and also the online dating apps. For me, of course, anything I say about the dating apps is based on what I believe, not what I know from personal experience. Having said that, I have enormous sympathy for Gen Z in the dating app era because, to me, it is probably the worst imaginable way of choosing a partner - for starters, anyone can write anything they'd like to be down as their description, it's not possible to judge what someone is really like without meeting several times, it's not a sound plan to have a specification for your ideal partner because they won't exist and, finally, photos can be digitally altered so they're unreliable
(as well as irrelevant!). We all meet lots of possible partners daily - if we'd bother to talk to them, we'd find that out! I suppose I'm saying we need to get off the smartphone and connect with real people in the real world. It doesn't guarantee success, of course, but I believe it stands a far better chance than the wishful thinking of the dating apps.
I'm lucky to have several family memoirs written and published for within the family going back to the late 1800's. One on my great aunts came into the family as a "mail-order bride", selected in part because the prospective husband knew she was "good at math". To us nowadays, that's an appallingly bare amount of information about someone we intend to be legally our lifetime partner. But even face-to-face meetings can have plenty of deceptions, misrepresentations, and hidden agendas so I consider dating sites useful to at least winnow out the most unlikely candidates without wasting time on dates or getting hopes up. My first wife, who I met at a dinner party when I was 21, was not at all who she had held herself out to be. That's the danger of trying to please someone by being what you think they want to see: you can only keep up the illusion for so long. Totally agree about getting off of smart phones long enough to live a real life. That's one of the things I like about my PC - I can't carry it around with me.
Once again, you make good points. The Victorian marriage was, I think, more of an agreement to work together to raise a family than a love affair - it was a tough time.
I accept your point about the PC vs. the smartphone!
In my case, I knew my wife at work, and works functions, for a year before we ever dated and we sat opposite each other so I think we knew each other quite well before things progressed past mere friendship. And neither of us was trying to impress the other ; just being ourselves - which helps a lot, too.
Congratulations on your 15 year relationship. I'm just curious what would compel a 50 year old to date?
This was an insightful interview. I also quit social media years ago and went back to Instagram a few times and quit again a few months ago. Interesting you discuss the “seeking authority” as one of the potential reasons for anxiety. I am a crowd safety advisor and write about human and crowd behaviour. This lack of trust in authority is showing up as deviant behaviour at events, and I wrote about this in my article on post pandemic crowd behaviour (https://isemurphy.com/crowd-behaviour-taylor-swift/). I am writing a new article as the next episode of post-pandemic crowd behaviour as I see the impact of phones/social media on younger generations, coupled with trauma of the pandemic. I will be referencing your work in it.
I also write on Substack about personal development (the spiritual side of human behaviour!) and recently wrote about this situation from a Human Design perspective (https://isemurphy.substack.com/p/the-enshittification-of-social-media), that the collapse of authority was always going to happen, and it’s time that we listen to our own authority. It’s a very challenging time.
Thank you for what you do :)
You are sorrounded by cameras 24/7 and if you just happened to be recorded saying the wrong thing, even in your worst day ever, or out of context, it doesn't matter, that can ruin your entire life. One bad post or a video of 10-20 years ago can destroy everything you worked towards to, so no wonder people are so full of anxiety.
Fantastic interview Freya! Such an important topic and (as always) so beautifully articulated and insightful 👍 Thank goodness for young woman such as yourself and all the fabulous work you do 🙏
Women want to be ignored by men, so that's what they get. Not worth the drama to approach a woman anymore. Some get desperate enough to talk to men now, so since I'm far from desperate, that's the game I play.