Tag: relationships

Beta Signalers or Legit Feminism Regretters? Examining Another Female Meltdown

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment

Sorry, I’m not buying it.

Source: Fox News

Every once in a while I’ll encounter these weepy profile pieces on middle-aged women who have allegedly “seen the light” about how feminism tricked them/destroyed their life/whatever, and how they now just want a nice, “traditional” life with a husband and family.

Recently, this article from the New York Post has been making the rounds in certain communities on X about a 38-year-old woman named Melissa Persling who feels “betrayed” by feminism. In an article she wrote in Business Insider, she confessed:

“I’m 38 and single, and I recently realized I want a child. I’m terrified I’ve missed my opportunity.”

Shortly after publishing, Ms. Persling suddenly had an epiphany about some guy she had friendzoned a year earlier. Now this guy is magically “the one” and in fact someone “God has been preparing” for her. Now the two are together, thinking about the future. She can’t wait to have a traditional life, even if that means not putting on “heels” and going to “fancy dinners.”

I’m happy the lady has seemingly found happines. But I’m not buying her bullshit. In fact, there are so many red flags here it’s hard to know where to begin.

For starters, Ms. Persling was married at 22 for eight years to a nice, small town Christian guy, before getting divorced at 30. But back then she was firm about not wanting children, and by her own admission, treated the guy with disdain. After her divorce:

“I told my friends and family I’d never get married again. I needed independence, a fulfilling career, and space to chart my own course, and I didn’t think marriage fit into that vision. I was content to look toward a future without a husband, children, or the trappings of a ‘traditional’ life,’” she wrote.

But as age 40 approached real terror set in, and Ms. Persling became afraid that she’d end up alone forever. Now she’s a born-again traditionalist.

Sorry, I have no sympathy for people who were basically gifted everything, and then decided to throw it all away because it somehow wasn’t good enough. All while treating the people who gifted her stuff like shit.

Ms. Persling goes on to say how she had a lot of self-discovery to work through, including “previous trauma” about her parent’s divorce.

“I grew up in a fairly traditional family, but my parents were divorced. And I would say that probably had some effect on my feelings about having a family coming from a broken home certainly has its hardships,”

And yet, this alleged “trauma” didn’t prevent her from marrying a guy for 8 years. However, I blame the guy for wasting all that time with her. If you’re a man who wants children and a family, don’t waste your life on someone who’s firmly against all that. Far too many men these days are far too indulgent and nice toward women who are selfish assholes. I mean, pussy is good and all, but at a certain point you’ve got to put your foot down and commit to your values.

Ms. Persling adds:

“I feel unbelievably betrayed by feminism, and I don’t want to put it on the movement [entirely] because I believe you make your own choices… But I was constantly fed this idea that women can do everything. We don’t really need men… I kind of want to go back to some of those teachers and coaches and say, ‘What did you mean by that? Because we can’t do it all.’”

The hysterical emotionally charged phrasing of “unbelievably betrayed” makes me suspicious right away. It’s too melodramatic. It’s too performative and “damsel in distress.” This isn’t about declaring some genuine internal change. This is attention-seeking behavior rubbing against the grain of feminism because that’s what will generate clicks and engagement. Anti-feminists are all the rage on YouTube and X now. Melonie Mac, for instance. They’re weird types. Often tattooed, masculine, swearing like truckers all while professing Christianity and traditionalism.

Ms. Persling is exactly the kind of toxic personality men should avoid. These 30-something born again Jesus-loving ephiphany-havers are sadly a common type. I used to see them all the time on dating apps. It’s practically a cliche, and almost always indicative of a troubled past and severe baggage that some nice sucker will soon be expected to handle. There was one profile I saw of a 33-year-old who declared in her profile that, “You would be expected to help me walk in the faith.” Madam, I don’t even know you and you’re telling me I’m partly responsible for your eternal soul?

It’s not that I don’t believe people can really change. It’s that I think a lot of women like this have just found a way to repackage their troubled, sloppy selves to make them more enticing to suckers. Rebaiting their hooks, so to speak.

I do applaud Ms. Persling on her personal development. I wish her all the best. Seriously. But she’s a good reminder for why a lot of good men decide to just stay single.

Examining A Cynical Red Pill Dicktum: “Women Hang Out at the Finish Line and They Pick the Winner.”

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment

Source: Midjourney

The other day I went to visit a Lamborghini dealership and found a bunch of hot supermodels hanging out by the front entrance.

“Hey, what are you fine ladies all doing here?” I asked, after stepping out of my 2006 Saturn Ion.

“We’re hanging out at the finish line and picking the winners,” said one, who was still wearing her Miss America Contest sash across her clingy low-hanging silver dress.

“Isn’t that just like gold digging?” I asked.

“No, we’re just trying to find a high value man who will support us so we don’t have to work. This is totally different.”

“Oh, okay. Thanks. Have a nice day,” I said, and went inside to see if I could use the restroom.

If you hang around the Red Pill communities on X or YouTube enough, you’ll certainly run into the “dicktum” in the title of this article. It’s an expansion on the concept of hypergamy, wherein women searching for a guy will always look to date one who’s at a minimum across and up from her in terms of hierarchy and status. It’s caustically cynical, and more misogynistic than meanginful. Another smarmy throwaway is the oft-repeated, “She’s not yours it’s just your turn.” But that one is for another time.

Like many red pills maxims, there’s some truth in the statement mixed in with a whole lot of carnival philosophy. I’d argue everyone is looking to date “up,” both men and women. No one wants to date a “loser.” But everyone has different weights and measures when it comes to determining a “champion” verus a “chump.”

It’s not all about money or even looks. I’ve stated before that personality and geographic proximity have a lot more to do with attraction than most other things. If someone is with you just because you’ve got money or you look like Brad Pitt or Sydney Sweeney, your relationship probably won’t last or be very worthwhile. If you’re a guy who can’t get a girlfriend, it’s probably not because you’re cursed or something. It’s likely because you’re not social enough and therefore your potential partners don’t even know who the hell you are.

I’ve come across all kinds of weird and “illogical” relationships in my life. Ones that didn’t seem to make sense on the outset. I had a friend once who had been a “lazy weed dealer” (his words) who was in a commited relationship with a beautiful, college-educated, and very capable woman. She cooked, she cleaned, she even managed the finances. And she was in love with him. They’re married now.

I had a coworker; an attractive woman in her late 20s. She was always complaining about her boyfriend, who was unemployed and kind of weird. Then one day I asked if he’s so terrible then why did she have three kids with him? She couldn’t answer. Many such cases.

Point is, social proof markers and attraction are often very subjective, unpredictable, and even chemical things. Relationships are sloppy and rarely make perfect sense. The prince doesn’t always marry the princess.

“Women hang out at the finish line and they pick the winner” is an attempt at systemetizing courtship. As if it were as easy as just be jacked and rich and you’ll be sure to “get da girlz.” Sure, the beefy, rich dude might have an easier time at the bar with the floozy who just wants to have a good time. But there are plenty of guys and girls in that superficial category who end up as lonely assholes in life.

The statement does a real disservice to the whole idea of love and romance. It’s demoralizing to men in particular. It makes them think that if they’re not some handsome billionaire then they’re not worthy of a relationship. It turns women from human beings into essentially animals driven entirely by survivalist instinct. Like the xenomorph from Alien, or something.

I mean, if it were really true, you’d see single women lined up outside Goldman Sachs or Corvette dealerships all the time, looking to snag a “high value” alpha male. The last time I walked down Wall Street I didn’t see any hot girls holding signs with “Pick me!” written on them, I just saw some homeless guy puking into a trash can.

“Why Don’t Men Attend Singles Events?”

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment

Or, why speed dating blows.

Back in the late 2000s, early teens, when I cared about going to such things, I attended three speed dating events in Philadelphia.

I was in my late 20s, working full-time, lived in an apartment on my own, had my own (beater) car, and made a slightly below-average but above-median income for the time. I hadn’t finished college yet, having only around 72 credits towards a bachelor’s. I’m of mixed heritage, part White, part Hispanic. From the lower-middle class. Unremarkable looks. Thin, non-athletic. Six feet tall, though. I was just an average guy living in Philly.

Speed dating, if you’re unaware, is like playing Russian Roulette. But instead of a 1/6 chance you paint the walls with your brain matter, you have a near 100% chance of disappointment, frustration, awkwardness, some anger, relief when it’s over, maybe a few laughs, and a piercing sense of humiliation. And also dehydration.

I went through some outfit called Speed Dating Philly, which was/is I think a subsidiary of Speed Dating USA. I don’t know if they still operate.

Basically, you have a room filled with a bunch of guys and gals. The way Speed Dating Philly did it, the gals would sit in one spot, and the guys would get up and move. You’d get five minutes to talk to someone before moving onto the next. At the end of the night, you went home and filled out an anonymous survey filled with just the first names of each attendee. If you clicked on someone’s name and they clicked on yours, it was a match, and you’d get each other’s email addresses or phone numbers.

I went to three of these events over a two-year span or so. Enough to learn that speed dating blows. Lately, I’ve seen Tiktok videos reposted on YouTube of women bemoaning why men don’t attend singles events, and only women show up or guys who already have girlfriends.

So, I thought I’d share some brutally honest reasons from the perspective of a man about why men generally avoid these events. These are solely based on my experiences as a single average guy living in a major city.

1. It’s Not Fun. It’s a Pain in the Ass Just to Go and It Costs Money

At the time I went to these events, I wasn’t making much money. I worked from 4 PM to 12 AM Sunday through Thursdays. Speed Dating Philly only held events on Thursday nights, of course. Which meant if I wanted to go, I had to take the day off from work. I only had two weeks (ten days) of vacation a year.

The event organizer also charged around $40 to attend. I later found out that only the men paid. Women got to attend for free or at a severe discount if Speed Dating couldn’t fill enough slots (which they never could). That didn’t seem fair, but whatever. Chivalry and all.

These speed dating events were held downtown in the city, which meant I had to drive across town, and then look for a place to hide my scrap heap. Luckily, I was usually able to at least find free parking spots.

Thus far, I’m down one day off and out forty bucks, which was a lot to me then. But hey, that’s a small price to pay for the potential to find true love, right?

The events were always held in the cramped private upstairs room of some hot, stuffy bar, with loud music playing. Speed Dating Philly comped one free “drink.” I mean, it was liquid, yes, with a whole lot of ice, and hardly any flavor.

So, I’ve no sooner entered than I’m already sweating, dehydrated, can hardly hear anyone talk due to the shitty loud music playing, and having to crunch ice from my “drink” the whole night to keep my thirst at bay. Things that would make anyone annoyed and irritable. Not exactly a pleasant atmosphere for socializing.

2. The Boy/Girl Ratio is Out of Whack

I don’t know where some of these modern ladies are getting the idea that only women go to these singles events. Maybe that’s the case now. But back then, it was quite the opposite.

Speed Dating Philly tried to set up events with 15 men and 15 women in a similar age group. Well, there were ALWAYS 15 dudes there. But there were NEVER also 15 chicks. Often, there’d be just twelve. So, from the getgo the gender ratio is at a disadvantage for men.

From a customer perspective, I’m seeing this and getting even further annoyed, demoralized even. Granted, these kinds of public events are tricky to pull off. An equal number of women is not guaranteed. But I’ve paid money and taken the night off to come here. I at least want a shot at the maximum number of women possible.

It’s not a total dealbreaker, though. I’m here, so I might as well make the best of things. But mentally I’m already kind of checking out, and the night’s barely started. Not good.

3. Few if Any Viable Prospects

Okay, here’s where things get spicy. Sorry, not sorry.

After taking in the hot, sweaty, noisy ambiance, of course the next thing I do is scan the room to check out the potential partners who didn’t flake out. You know how in The Terminator when we see things from Arnold’s Terminator POV? It’s like that with the male gaze. I’m running calculations, checking odds, trying to determine realistic probabilities of an actual match.

Race, of course, plays a factor. These speed dating things were often White-dominant. But typically there’d be at least three, maybe four Black ladies. Let me be more specific. Black ladies from the city. Ladies whom for damn certain were not interested in a racially ambiguous guy like me, and whom I was likewise not interested in whatsoever. I’m not attracted to Black women in general, and in the case of these ladies from the city, there was also a clear difference in culture and background. In every five-minute chat session I had with them over the three events I attended, it was a waste of time for both sides. It is what it is.

As for others, there were maybe a few Asian or Hispanic women there once in a while. Maybe one woman who was mixed or biracial. Other than that, it was mostly White/Black.

Look, race matters in mate selection whether you agree or not. The majority of people marry within their own race. Something like 80% of White women marry White men. People can say whatever they want about being color-blind. But when it comes to making major life decisions — who they marry, where they live, where they work, and who they tend to freely associate with — they often stick with their own kind.

So, now we’re down to eight or nine potential prospects. Except, not really.

Typically, you could count on around 4–5 women at these events who knew each other, and were only there on a girl’s night out, and/or for their own amusement. You might have two besties yucking it up the whole time, and then a group of three being professionally ironic for the evening. Well, you could always write these fine ladies off, because they weren’t there to be serious. They were just there to pregame for a party.

So, what are we down to now on this awful reality show? Five prospects? That’s five remaining women that I now have to hope I find attractive, and for whom I’m potentially competing against fourteen other guys. We’re not quite in Hail Mary territory yet. But you know how in Super Bowl XLII, right after David Tyree caught the ball on his helmet, when he got the Giants on the Patriots’ 24-yard line and in position for the go-ahead score? That’s where we are now. The game’s not lost yet, but getting dangerously close.

With the five left, I could often count on at least one being a professional career woman with some advanced degree who was looking for her Mr. Big from Sex and the City. As I was not a doctor, lawyer, accountant, or some Ivy League grad with a hotshot job, I was not in her class.

That leaves four candidates left. Not matches, because remember I have to also find them attractive myself, and then hope they think likewise of me. These are just four in the maybe pile.

Well, now Plaxico Burress has scored and the Giants are up 17–14 with 35 seconds left. We are officially in Hail Mary territory.

4. Rudeness/Poor Attitudes

The last two reasons for why speed dating sucks have been centered around diminished numerical odds.

This reason has more to do with the sometimes poor, sarcastic, and rude attitudes many women had that I encountered. Some of these women were in the “not viable candidate” list anyway. Some were in the maybes, and so disqualified themselves on behavioral grounds.

For the most part, people were nice and polite at these things. But there was often this palpable awkward sense of sad resignation, resentment, and mild despair that I sensed from many of the women there. And if I’m being honest, from myself as well. A weird veil of hopelessness. An anxious sense that things went horribly wrong somewhere in life and that they should not be here. I can’t imagine these singles events are any less stressful for women than they are for men.

Then there were the rude and/or weird assholes. I had one lady who started complaining to me because some guy was there that she’d gone out with on a date before who’d ghosted her afterward. When it became clear I wasn’t going to serve as her temp therapist, she took her phone out and started texting while I was still sitting there. Disappointingly, she’d been in the maybe pile. Then there was the party girl who, between giggles with her bestie, asked me what my fetishes were.

Thankfully, the vast majority of my interactions at these events were forgettable. For the first two I clicked on a few names I liked in the follow-up survey. For the third and final, I clicked on all of them just as an experiment. I never got one match in any.

In short, speed dating, and singles events in general, hold no real advantage over any other form of “throw everything against the wall and see what sticks” style mate seeking. It’s no better than using dating apps, or going to a bar. So why bother paying extra or going out of your way for some “special” event, when there is no real statistical upside? Men are (at least they try to be) logical creatures. I suspect many men share my experiences, and so they’ve determined it’s just not worth their time or effort.

Speaking to the business model of speed dating, however, it’s just short the border of a scam or grift. You pay good money to get shafted with fewer women than advertised, in a crappy bar, with a piss poor free “drink,” music blasting, in front of a meager few candidates who look like they’d sooner step on your face than talk to you. Yeah, that sounds like a great evening.

Final Thoughts

I don’t think ALL singles events are a waste of time. Speed dating is a very specific kind of singles activity, and my experiences are limited to the mere three I attended. That’s not a large sample size, for sure.

However, I don’t think these types of contrived social situations are ideal if you’re looking for a potential mate. You should try to be in a relaxed, enjoyable, and healthy atmosphere. Some hot, stuffy bar with loud music, crammed in with 25 or so people is not that.

This is why college is often the best place for meeting someone. You’re around your peers and age group, you naturally group together based on common interests, and there is a diverse and ample variety of potential partners. Especially at big universities. Churches are also good, although hardly anyone goes to church anymore.

After that, the list of good meet market places starts to drop off pretty hard. The workplace? Hmmm, risky with today’s HR. Dating apps? If you’re a masochist. Grocery stores? Get real. Bars and nightclubs? Maybe if you’re a fuckboy (which I’m not).

I’m not even against going to singles events in the future, if solely for the entertainment value.

My experiences were not a total loss, either. They (and many others) were part of what inspired me to write my novel The Lek, a dystopian-set thriller set in a world where men have to compete for women in a deadly tournament. It’s a satirical X-Rated Hunger Games. Check it out.

But here’s another cold hard truth about why men don’t go to these things, and I suspect likely why many women don’t go either. If you’re at a singles event, especially post age 25, then most likely you missed your best chance to meet someone and find love. It probably wasn’t your fault. That’s just how it went. But you’re leftovers. You’re the weird-looking piece of chicken on the buffet no one wanted to eat. You’re not high value, because if you were, you wouldn’t be there. You know it. Everyone knows it. And everyone’s sour about it, even if unconciously. That kind of poisons the air. Who the hell wants to breath that in for two hours?

Angry Single Man Rejected by ‘30 Million Women’ Goes on Shooting Rampage, Killing Three

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment

Remembering the 2009 Bridgeville LA Fitness shooting committed by George Alfred Sodini.

Sodini. Source: https://murderpedia.org/male.S/s/sodini-george-photos.htm

It’s awful to say, but there have been so many shootings over the last twenty-some years that it’s hard to keep track of them. They all seem to sadly blend together into one tragic ongoing blur.

There have been what I’d call “milestone shootings,” at least to me. Ones that really stand out. The Columbine High School Massacre on April 20, 1999, is the most memorable, and arguably one of the most impactful. I was in high school myself at the time, so naturally it hit home. In fact, earlier that year, a friend of mine had brought in his bow and arrows (minus the arrow heads) for a class presentation where we had to talk about our hobbies. Something he likely would have been arrested for doing just a few weeks later.

Then there’s the 2009 Collier Township shooting that took place at a Pittsburgh-area LA Fitness. Committed by lone nutjob George Sodini, who shot up a workout class filled with mainly middle-aged women, shooting nine, killing three, before putting a bullet in his head.

I remember this shooting particularly because of Sodini’s bizarre and disturbing online ramblings about his frustrations with women as the apparent source of his rage that led to his murderous actions. Here’s what he said in his blog from a December 24, 2008 posting, as sourced by ABC News:

Moving into Christmas again. No girlfriend since 1984, last Christmas with Pam was in 1983. Who knows why. I am not ugly or too weird. No sex since July 1990 either (I was 29). No — — ! Over eighteen years ago. And did it maybe only 50–75 times in my life.

Later on December 29th, he writes:

I actually look good. I dress good, am clean-shaven, bathe, touch of cologne — yet 30 million women rejected me — over an 18 or 25-year period. That is how I see it. Thirty million is my rough guesstimate of how many desirable single women there are. A man needs a woman for confidence.

At the time, Sodini was a systems analyst working at a law firm, with a net worth of about $225,000. An amount which in today’s dollars would be around $325,000. He had a lot of spare time to travel. He mentions in his blog about taking a trip to Los Angeles, and having several weeks off a year. He had by all accounts a successful career and a decent amount of money for his age (48). He lived in a densely populated area. This was a year after the 2008 Wall Street crash, when the tech industry was beginning its parabolic growth trajectory that would see companies like Apple reach trillion dollar valuations. He was in a high-end sector with lots of opportunities for meeting people.

Made with Midjourney by the author.

So why all the questionable failures with women? Why the isolation and loneliness? How could a guy go almost 25 years without a girlfriend? Almost twenty years without sex? I remember being equally disturbed and perplexed by this case. And thinking to myself, had this guy never heard of the brothels in Nevada? Had he not heard of escorts? Or places like Bangkok or Amsterdam? For a guy who’s hard up there’s all kinds of ways of finding release. Sex is easy to find. It’s love and quality relationships that are the needles in a haystack. For a guy with money like him there’s always sugar daddying, too. And there’s the traditional routes for meeting people. Churches and bars.

Of course, being married or in a long-term cohabitation doesn’t equal having a good relationship. Most marriages are teetering on collapse, while half ultimately do. Divorce court is filled with the bitter ends of what might have started as a fairy tale. Only the rarest couples seem destined for each other and stick it out for a lifetime. And good for them. The dark reality is the majority of relationships are business decisions with an unknown ticking clock until the unraveling.

I remember this shooting later being used as one of the first examples of “incel” rage and violence. Retroactively used as some kind of harbinger that was to come. A precurser to the much-needed “reckoning” during #MeToo, and the growing chasm between men and women seen now during this Red Pill phase. But is it really? As tempting as it is to accept the incel angle, I’ve never really bought it. A guy might go crazy and go on a rampage over being rejected by a particular woman, sure. Especially if it’s to a hated rival. People have done all kinds of insane things over jealousy. But to go on a rampage over not being married or accepted by women in general just seems a stretch. Especially in recent times, with marriage itself increasingly falling out of favor. This guy was not some knight in the Middle Ages owed a fair maiden for slaying a dragon. He was a computer dude in 2009, a time when you could ring up a blowjob for $150 off Backpage.com.

Sodini adds this in another entry dated December 31, 2008:

My dad never (not once) talked to me or asked about my life’s details and tell me what he knew. He was just a useless sperm doner. Don’t know why, find it fun talking to young kids when I visit someone.

As someone who did not have the opportunity to know his real father while growing up, I can understand the frustration, the anger, the sense of loss, and the humiliation. It’s very demoralizing, and can lead to a catastrophic loss of personal confidence and sense of identity during crucial developmental years. I don’t think modern society really gets that. I think society views men as interchangeable cogs. Widgets without feeling that need to be inserted into place to keep the machinery going. Cannon fodder. It’s even worse the farther down you go on the socioeconomic scale. Most people don’t even realize that most mass shootings take place in the inner city, and are committed by black teens shooting other black teens. Mass shootings committed by white gunmen, while obviously tragic, are actually rare, statistically speaking.

Is that to say that if Sodini had had a better relationship with daddy he would not have turned psycho and brutally gunned down three innocent women? I don’t think it’s that simple. But Sodini was certainly someone who felt disconnected and estranged from society. Caught in a feedback loop of negativity and failure with relationships. Lacking guidance. Point is, Sodini was likely damaged goods from youth, who was set adrift on a river of loneliness and never changed course. For most people they try different things until something swings their way. They try speed dating, hit the dating app lottery, go overseas, or give up altogether on love and just start a hobby or get a pet. They don’t kill. But then for some the frustration builds up with interest over a lifetime, until something snaps. And they do kill.

The LA Fitness shooting is a haunting one because on the surface it feels like Sodini had options. He had good money, a decent job, was physically fit, and seemed self-aware enough to understand his needs. But Sodini felt entitled to a life he did not have, and felt he never could. Who goes around thinking “30 million women” rejected them? That’s a hell of a lot of baggage to be carrying on your shoulders. It’s also ridiculous. Everyone has admirers. Even the Elephant Man.

But ultimately, Sodini hated women, and he hated himself. And unfortunately, there’s not really a cure for that kind of sickness and self-loathing.

Men’s Struggles with Online Dating Masks a Deeper Problem

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment
Photo by Lukas Rychvalsky from Pexels: https://www.pexels.com/photo/person-standing-near-lake-670720/

Online dating is weird, (mostly) pointless, and quasi dystopian.

All those supposed “success stories” those websites like to post? Probably fake. Or extreme outliers. Like blue lobsters. Marketing gimmicks to keep you subscribed.

The only real winners in the online dating world are the conglomerate websites. The proverbial picks and shovels sellers in this modern romance gold rush. They’re literally making billions off your yearning hearts. Cock teasing men is big business.

We already know that online dating is a venue that mostly benefits hot guys. For the uber attractive (top 5% of guys?), online dating is a fun playground. To which I say, good for them. Everyone leverages their advantages where they can.

But if you’re like most men, online dating is just a vast time suck. An exercise in futility. You shoot dozens of messages into the cyber void. Then don’t hear back. Even after spending whole minutes on messages, crafting them with attention and care. You’re not going to be like those other guys who just write things like “‘sup?” or “DTF?” You’re going to put actual thought into what you say.

Of course, the reality is most women receive dozens of messages a day. Or even hundreds, if they’re hot. Shakespeare himself couldn’t craft a sonnet steamy enough to overcome that kind of inbox inundation.

So you get depressed. You give up. Only to return, like a relapsed crack addict, back to the seductive siren call of the online dating world, weeks or months later. You think this time it’ll work out. This time your magical pixie sex-loving soulmate will appear. The cycle of failure begins again. And another dating service gets a billion dollar IPO on Wall Street.

Here’s the deal. If you’re relying on online dating to find a mate, that’s like relying on fast food for nourishment. Yeah, you can do it for a short time. But any longer and you’ll just end up killing yourself.

Online dating is stupid. Online dating has become a crutch for too many men. Online dating has become a poor substitute for actual, genuine communication and interaction. It’s fundamentally anti-human nature, which is why it really doesn’t work.

It’s also retarding the personal growth of many men. It’s helped to create a generation of poorly socialized incel losers.

In the quest for a mate, there are two factors that matter most. PROXIMITY and PERSONALITY.

Proximity. Meaning your physical social circle. Your friends and acquaintances. The people you see and talk to in-person throughout the week. Your neighborhood. The people you live near. Go to school with. Etc.

I used to work with a guy who grew up in a super small town in North Dakota. He married his high school sweetheart at 18. He has one kid, and another one on the way. Now, do you think he was able to get married and build a family at such a young age because he’s some charming swooner? No. Dude is below average-looking at best, beer-bellied, and has a mullet. But he was able to pull off the gig purely because he and his future wife graduated in a high school class of like 12 people. There was nothing special about him particularly. But he was familiar and known to her. He was one of the few candidates in close proximity to her. So, by default, Mr. Mullet Man won out. Put any other dude in that position, and the results would likely be the same for that other guy.

Personality. This is obvious. The better personality you have, the bigger net you’ll cast. Especially if you have a good sense of humor, or just put off a good vibe. There are few things better than finding out you click with someone over the course of a conversation.

Here’s the problem. Online dating eliminates those crucial features of proximity and personality that are so essential to finding a mate. Instead, it puts a digital gate up between you and everyone else via a computer/smartphone screen.

It’s much harder for your personality to shine through in a mere profile summary. Inflection, tone, subtext, and your overall vibe often get lost in translation.

Photo by vjapratama from Pexels: https://www.pexels.com/photo/man-holding-baby-s-breath-flower-in-front-of-woman-standing-near-marble-wall-935789/

I had a girlfriend one time who I was initially attracted to because of her voice. She had this sweet but firm “museum curator” like tone of voice that I really liked hearing. And when she talked, the tip of her nose bounced up and down in this really cute way that I loved watching.

How in hell does a dating profile convey one’s voice or something as uniquely attractive as the way the tip of one’s nose bounces when they talk? It doesn’t. Those were things I only noticed because I knew this girl in person.

Online dating has unconsciously trained men to be lazy, and take an easy short-cut to find a potential mate. The failure of online date is not a bug; it’s a feature.

It also dehumanizes people down to a scramble of pixels. And it’s very easy to dismiss (swipe left) a mere digital specter on your screen.

I found myself realizing this some time ago as I was scrolling through a gallery of women on a dating app. I caught myself mindlessly nexting one after another. Dismissing potential mates for the most superficial and silly of reasons. Reacting to visual stimuli from my lizard brain with guttural caveman responses. “Me not like her hair style.” “Ugh, shoulders too broad.” “Too tall, me not like.”

No doubt the same has been done to me hundreds of times.

I did a thought experiment. Out of all the women I’ve messaged who never responded, how many of them might have been more receptive if I was in their proximity? What if I was like Mr. Mullet Man above, so to speak?

I suspect the answer is I would fare much better. Any time I’ve ever been in a social setting — school, workplace, church, etc. — I’ve never had issues with meeting or attracting women. I don’t have a standout personality or anything. And looks-wise, I’m average at best. But I’ve never lacked for admirers when in a good, diverse social environment, as I suspect is the case for many other men, too.

And how many women have I nexted on a dating app that might have been good partners in real life have I missed out on? How many cute nose tip bouncers have I potentially overlooked?

So why waste time with online dating apps that don’t allow the average man to play to his strengths?

As I’ve gotten older, and my social circles have shrunk, or in some cases, disappeared, so have the opportunities for finding potential mates. This is one of the struggles with adulthood post-college, and in entering middle-age.

In response, many have turned to the dead end of dating apps as a supposed solution. But for most that’s really just setting yourself up for failure, because it causes you to ignore the two primary factors of proximity and personality mentioned above.

So men who continually fail at online dating start to give up hope, and feel like failures in life in general, when that is not the case. Really, social media overall has caused people to be far too hard on themselves in judging their social status.

The problem is not online dating. That just masks a bigger issue. It’s poor social skills. It’s not having a good circle of friends. It’s the modern problem of becoming trapped behind a computer screen, and everyone’s digital avatar becoming the substitute for their actual being.

So many men have become dependent on online dating, that it’s crippled their ability to function in real life.

The reason why incels exist, and why there are so many lonely single men these days, is not because women’s standards are too high. It’s not because hot chads are out there dominating, making it impossible for the common uggo to have a fighting chance. It’s because so many men can’t communicate or socialize properly at even a basic level. It’s like they’ve forgotten how.

This is not an endorsement of the pick up artist lifestyle. Nor am I saying that online dating is a total waste. It’s a supplement at best. It can work.

This is about simply being human and interacting with other people in healthy social environments. Something that has become harder to do these days. The pandemic only made it worse.

I think if men focus on building genuine social networks first, then the opportunities for finding mates will quickly follow.

Afterall, no matter who you are, or what you look like, you possess some unique nose-tip-bouncing quality that someone finds endearing. But it’s going to be almost impossible to find that someone if you never actually meet in real life.

What’s Riskier: Marriage, or Living Next Door to Jeffrey Dahmer?

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment
Source: https://www.biography.com/crime-figure/jeffrey-dahmer

Over the course of 13 years, Jeffrey Dahmer, also known as the “Milwaukee Cannibal,” killed 17 people. He targeted mainly young men, finding them in bathhouses, and luring them back to his house, where he would drug, rape, and murder them.

Hey, what else are you going to do for kicks living in Wisconsin, right?

Sometimes, if Jeffrey was feeling in need of further stimulation, he’d disembowel them, too. He was also a necrophiliac, and liked to preserve the body parts of his victims. When he was finally caught by police in 1991, he was in the process of building a throne made of human skulls.

Wow, that’s pretty creative, to be honest. I can’t even put together a 100-piece puzzle without having a mental breakdown, and this guy’s over here building Skeletor’s throne.

But even Jeffrey Dahmer, human plague that he was, can’t hold a candle to something far more horrifying —

The institution of marriage.

Marriage, in sharp contrast to the creepy bespectacled image of serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer, is often portrayed as a blissful union between two people who love each other, want to spend the rest of their lives together, and may even want to raise children together.

In reality, marriage is responsible for untold misery, death, and destruction, especially when it leads to divorce/separation (which is often).

So, what’s riskier: Getting hitched, or living next door to Jeffrey Dahmer?

Jeffrey committed some of his murders while living in his grandmother’s house in West Allis, Wisconsin. However, while Jeffrey killed hitchhikers and gay men in bathhouses, it’s very important to note that he never killed anyone living right next door to him. He never even killed his own grandmother, who finally asked him to move out due to the “funny smells” coming from the basement of her house.

Thesis: I contend that marriage is by far riskier and deadlier than living next door to Jeffrey Dahmer.

Don’t believe me? Well, let’s take a look at some alarming statistics about murder and marriage.

According to The Atlantic, which reported a study by the CDC, 55% of murders of American women are committed by an “intimate partner,” meaning a former or current romantic partner, or the partner’s family or friends.

Source: Huffington Post

The study goes on to report some more disturbing facts:

  • A third of the time an argument precipitated the murder, with 12% of the deaths associated with jealousy.
  • 15% of the women killed were actually pregnant at the time of death.
  • And almost half the murders were committed with a gun.

It gets even worse. Back in 2019, the Huffington Post, citing a study by Northeastern University, reported that domestic violence murders are on the rise.

  • In 2014, there were 1875 people killed by an intimate partner.
  • In 2017, that number rose to 2,237, almost a 20% increase.

Then there’s this startling little nugget:

  • “Every 16 hours, according to one estimate, a woman is fatally shot by her boyfriend, husband or ex.”

Meanwhile, here’s a few fast facts about Jeffrey’s serial killing career:

  • It lasted 13 years, between 1978 and 1991.
  • 17 boys and men were murdered, often quite gruesomly.
  • Most of Jeffrey’s victims were non-white, including a 13-year old Laotian boy.

Now, let’s consider a few points.

According to Legal Jobs, the average length of a marriage in the U.S. is only 8.2 years. That’s almost five years less than Jeffrey’s serial killing enterprise, which shows that unlike all these short-timer married folks, Mr. Dahmer possessed a capability for long-term committment. Had Jeffrey not been caught in 1991, he’d likely have just kept on killing. And why not? The dude was clearly awesome at it. Whereas it appears most people are looking to bail on their marriages A.S.A.P.

‘Till death due us part? LOL, yeah right. What a sick joke.

It’s a sad testament to today’s society when a serial killer like Jeffrey Dahmer is a greater model of reliability and dedication than the institution of marriage itself.

Furthermore, unlike with marriage, Jeffrey was a danger exclusively to males. If you’re female, he was as harmless as a Lifetime movie, though certainly far more entertaining.

But all joking aside, according to the National Center for Family and Marriage Research (NCFMR), in 2019, 2.2 million women were married, a rate that has been stable since reaching a 45-year low in 2010.

Source: NCFMR

Now, factoring in some of the above-mentioned statistics concerning intimate partner homocides, if on average 2,000 women are killed every year by their SOs, while about 2 million women are married every year, that means a woman has roughly a one tenth of one percent chance of being murdered by marriage.

Mind you, she plays those odds every year she stays married. Hmm, maybe there is something to that 8.2 year average divorce deadline, afterall.

Only about 5% of murdered men are offed by their romantic partners. In fact, about 500-750 married men are whacked each year. That works out to under three hundredths of one percent of men married each year being killed by a spouse.

Now, those numbers may look pitifully low. But they are orders of magnitude higher than Jeffrey’s body count. Jeffrey only killed 17 guys over a 13-year period. In that same period of time, marriage might have killed almost 26,000 people. Roughly the population of Neenah, Wisconsin, a small town 84 miles from Jeffrey’s birthplace of Milwaukee, and famous for making manhole covers.

Now, let’s a break from all the murder and mayhem, and discuss something far more important.

Money.

Did you know that the cost of an average wedding AND an average divorce both come out to about $20,000? Combined, that comes to a grand total of $40,000, which is just below the median income in the U.S. of $44,225, according to Zippia. For comparison’s sake, the average person only loses about $500 gambling in Las Vegas per trip.

Man, marriage can end up being a pretty big blow to one’s net worth.

But you know who never reduced anyone’s federal income tax bracket? Good ol’ “Kill ’em cheap” Jeffrey Dahmer, that’s who. A budget-minded serial killer, who often plied his victims with offers of free food and drinks to lure them back to his apartment.

This adds up to a pretty disturbing truth: Strictly financially speaking, it’s not only cheaper, but likely more profitable, to be killed by Jeffrey Dahmer, than to end up in a bad marriage, or one that leads to divorce. At least with Jeffrey you get treated to a good meal and (possibly) mindblowing sex before your visit with the Grim Reaper. Which is more than what many can say about their failed marriages, much less the dating scene itself overall.

Certainly, it’s safer (and healthier) to be Jeffrey’s next door neighbor than to be a divorcee, no matter what your gender. A study that appeared in Annals of Behavioral Medicine showed divorce linked to a “wide range of poor health outcomes, including early death.”

Meanwhile, Jeffrey’s grandmother, Catherine Jemima Hughes, whom he lived with during his first three murders, lasted to the the ripe old age of 88, dying on Christmas Day in 1992.

And this leads to a realization that really rocked my world —

It’s possible that actually being married to Jeffrey Dahmer might have been the safer option, rather than being married to some other random person. Jeffrey never killed anyone he lived with, or next to, remember.

Married folks, let me emphasize that: Statistically, you would have been safer being married to Jeffrey Dahmer than to your current husband/wife.

Finally, we get to the issue of race. As mentioned earlier, Jeffreys victims were primarily non-white. Many of these melanin-enriched unfortunates were picked up in gay bars and clubs. Which goes to show that Jeffrey, for all his shortcomings, was definitely not a racist. Or a homophobe.

The institution of marriage on the other hand? It’s practically wearing a pointy white hood.

Even though, according to Gallup, U.S. approval of interracial marriage has hit a new high of 94%, Wikipedia points out that, “White Americans were statistically the least likely to wed interracially.” Even very recently, according to Pew Research, only 19% of newlyweds in 2019 were interracial couples.

Source: Pew Research Center

By contrast, Jeffrey judged not by the color of his victim’s skin, but whether they’d make a fine addition to his skull throne. His body count was a color-blind meritocracy, just as Dr. King would have wanted. Given Jeffrey’s racial preferences, you could even say he was a devout anti-racist before it was cool to be a devout anti-racist.

The results are clear: Jeffrey Dahmer wins this debate pretty handidly. You would have been statistically safer living next door to him during his killing spree than you would have been getting married.

A quick recap:

If you’re a woman, you have a low but not insignificant chance of being murdered by your partner. But you would have had a ZERO chance whatsoever of falling prey to Jeffrey Dahmer, even if you were living with him. Or married to him.

Point goes to Jeffrey for his chivalry.

If you’re a man, you also have a greater chance of being killed by your spouse or partner than ending up part of Dahmer’s body part trophy collection.

Another point to Jeffrey.

For either sex, marriage can lead to breaking the bank. Death by Dahmer? Zero out of pocket costs. And you might even get a free dinner and drinks.

Jeffrey scores again.

Marriage itself? Sadly, still an institution rife with racism and homophobia. Meanwhile, Dahmer was all about diversity and cultural enrichment.

Jeffrey with the clincher here.

And there you have it. Jeffrey Dahmer wins out on virtually every metric that matters. You’re better off living next door to a serial killer than getting married.

A Few Reasons Marriage Rates are Falling Worldwide

On By Dean BrooksLeave a comment
Photo by Nghia Trinh from Pexels

As a lifelong bachelor who’s never had more than a passing interest in getting married, sometimes I like to take a moment to examine the institution from an outsider’s perspective.

It’s not that I don’t like or trust the concept of marriage. I’m not some cynical, jaded, red pill doomer/MGTOW misanthrope. Having seen my share of “manosphere” content on YouTube, my overall assessment is it’s like most gangsta rap. Hilarious subverse, fun to listen to, but not exactly meaningful or useful for leading a productive life. Most of the so-called “unplugged” red pillers are really nothing more than just unlikable a-holes with too much money and/or time on their hands.

Yet, many of them do make very valid points in their suspicions toward the institution of marriage. It’s a coin flip. A 50% chance you might lose half your possessions (or more) in a divorce. Who wants to take 50/50 odds their parachute won’t open after they jump out of a plane? You’ve heard all the analogies and seen all the statistics before, I’m sure.

On principle, marriage is a good idea. If it represents a genuine committment and a good faith promise from parties not to screw each other over in the event of a separation. Looked at from a financial and tax perspective, there are many benefits. Given how many Millennials (who are now in the thick of their getting hitched years given their age group) are supposedly broke/unemployed/in debt/under employed/not fulfilling their economic potential, it would seem getting married makes all kinds of sense financially. Two people to share onerous rent or mortgage payments, furniture costs, Netflix subscription fees, etc. Yet, marriage rates globally continue to decline.

So, why is this? The South China Morning Post lists three reasons. The first of which is:

Independent demographer He Yafu said young Chinese women were changing their view of marriage and parenting.

“As their education and economic independence levels increase, the percentage of women who are single is increasing,” He said.

Women becoming more independent and self-sufficient as a cause for declining marriage rates is not unique to China, of course. In all my searches, I found that to be a common theme. It’s certainly a cause here in the West, in the U.S. and Canada, and elsewhere. It’s here that a red piller might posit that feminism will “destroy civilization,” as it reduces women’s interest in having committed relationships during their peak fertile windows, leading to fewer births, leading to governments having to allow for laxxer immigration policies to prop up the tax base, leading to the dissolution of unified national identity, leading to globalization, and ultimately leadings to pods, bugs, fake meat, and mandatory soy injections in the dick, or something.

By the way, if all that does happen, I’ll be happy to admit I was wrong to doubt the red pillers and for not buying a MGTOW coaching session for $20 a minute so I can be told what a loser I am for not being a millionaire supermodel pussy slayer by age 25.

Going back to China, marriage rates have dropped to their lowest rate since 1986, when statistics first started being recorded. Naturally, China’s infamous one-child policy, which favored males, gets part of the blame. And rightly so. Now China has a demographic time bomb going off with excess men, and not enough women to go around as wives. Imagine a whole nation of incels. Actually, you don’t have to. That’s pretty much everywhere now.

However, while China’s lopsided male/female ratio may be unique on the national scale, it’s not necessarily so at the local level, depending on where you live. I currently live in Western North Dakota, having moved here for the oil boom many years back. It’s not as bad now, but certainly back during the heyday of the boom, there were far greater numbers of men than women. And what few women there were, were often already attached, had children, or were not exactly in the dating pool. Western North Dakota is the place where relationships go to die, I like to joke with friends and family. Strangely, it is also the place where your bank account and networth go to live. Can’t have it all, I guess.

That South China Morning Post article also blames the COVID-19 pandemic, as it forced so many young, potentially marriageable people indoors, where they couldn’t have gone on a coffee date even if they had wanted to.

I think if anything the pandemic acted an accelerant on an already growing societal trend, though it doesn’t really get at a big underlying cause: technology. Social media, in particular, which has a way of dehumanizing people. Even good people. This is true whether we’re talking Twitter, Facebook, or popular dating apps like PlentyofTrash and OkStupid. Most dating apps create a sort of digital China experience, in which the men vastly outnumber the women. Women are often inundated with messages from thirsty dudes, while most dudes are left shooting their shot into the void with not much to show for it. That’s not to say dating apps are pointless. I’ve had some anecdotal success with them, even while living on Mars, as I do, and not being some chiseled Adonis. However, I’ve found far more success when I actually go out, and put myself in the right social situations, as I’m sure most people have also experienced. I’d never want to rely solely on dating apps ever, though. That’d be like having to rely on Burger King for every meal.

So, China blames women becoming more independent and delaying marriage, or putting it off altogether, the nation’s disastrous one-child policy that led to too many boys, and COVID-19. I think you also see these reasons playing out in the West, but sometimes in a more localized way. For instance, even in big cities, where the male/female ratio is more balanced, either sex will still complain about a lack of suitable mates. Women may complain that there are too few high status guys who match their income or higher. While many guys who don’t feel they can compete in the dating market anyway (or just don’t want the hassle, period) may simply opt out in favor of video games, movies, or internet porn.

Overall, the falling marriage rate is an alarming trend. But I think it says more about how people today are failing to connect with one another in a meaningful way rather than anything about the failure of the institution itself. Marriage has been around for thousand sof years, afterall, and will continue into the future.

But hey, maybe we’ll all have better luck in the Metaverse. 🙂