I think that right now there aren’t a lot of people out there mentoring young men, such as siblings, cousins, family friends, coaches… so I think a lot of young men are missing the boat in terms of relationships (as are women, I’m sure).
At least the internet offers more education and possibilities if someone’s immediate circle is lacking. So that’s a small beacon of hope.
A few years ago, an Australian Catholic female journalist caused a small fuss by writing articles complaining that Catholic men aren’t worldly wise enough. She still has a blog. No sign of marriage, although I suppose she could be keeping it private.
I also recall that a decade ago the young Catholic women on Facebook were posting “Catholic Ryan Gosling” memes, although he isn’t Catholic. So women can have unrealistic standards, too.
I think that a young man who is shy and not very forward will seem like weak sauce to women today. Sometimes couples need an outside push, but those influences don’t exist today.
I don’t think it’s reasonable or natural to push young people into a very wide world and expect them to find mates with little guidance or support, but that’s the world we live in today.
The response to the Australian Catholic female journalist back in 2019 was by a man who wrote a very cogent article entitled, “It’s not hard to find Mr Right, just change your perspective.”
Yeah... I can't imagine being out there, trying to get married in the modern culture and not in a specific religious one, where there are religious expectations baked into the culture. While yes, those are not adhered to 100%, at the minimum in a traditional Catholic parish you can expect/discuss normal marriage, courtship, and sexual relations without looking like a crazy loon - it's the modern that looks crazy.
And, what's more, is that the culture of the parish community re-enforces these. There isn't the stigma - not yet. But I do think that it will get there. As the wheels come off the modern culture, and the Empire crumbles, I think that liberalism in all areas will be more on the retreat.
It's still possible in this day and age. Have done it, can verify.
But.
-You have to stop caring about social status.*
-You have to STFU about it. Need-to-know only.
Once you get past that:
-No sex without commitment remains (and may even be *more* effective now, for those courageous enough to deploy it) the most devastatingly effective dating strategy ever invented. You will get fewer dates, and have fewer boyfriends. And you are far more likely to meet and marry an eligible man.
-How does that work? Well, you're single most of the time. Get cozy with that, because it's KEY. If you're shacked up with Mr. Right-Now who will waste 5 years of your youth and fertility and never marry you, guess what? For that whole five years, Mr. Right will not even approach you. Because *you're taken* and good men don't poach another man's woman.
-If you can't bear the psychological pressure of being single, you need to work on that before you even *think* about being married. A romantic partner will not solve your personal insecurities, and expecting a relationship to do that will doom the relationship. That's not what a husband is *for*. Get your sh*t together first.
-If you're not having sex, you don't need to be on the Pill... and we all know now that artificial hormones affect who you're attracted to. You do *not* want to make lifelong decisions about a mate while under the influence of HBC. If you've been on it since adolescence, you don't even know who you are, sexually, or what you find attractive, and you are in for a world of hurt if you marry someone in that condition. Someday, you're going to quit HBC to have kids or try to get your health back, wake up in an unfamiliar body, and possibly find that your partner isn't nearly as sexy as you thought... but plenty of other men are way more attractive. That's trouble.
-Keeping your pants on is the single most brutally efficient sorting mechanism in the dating world, for weeding out sh***y entitled men. They will drop you like a hot rock as soon as you're unwilling to get physical: and that's a GOOD thing.
-You don't date for fun and status. "Having a boyfriend" is not the goal. You date to find a spouse. That means as soon as a potential partner turns out to have any dealbreaker trait, he's out. He's not your type. Let go and put a hard stop to it. If you know what you're looking for that means most men are out before they ever ask, and you just say "no thank you, I'm not interested."
No, this strategy doesn't work for everyone. If you're all about looks and status, well... you get what you deserve, IMO. But if the top of your spousal priorities list is: religious, respectful, reliable, good dad, intelligent, hardworking, virtuous, free of addictions, no baggage... the strategy is *magnificent*.
I was that picky. Married the first guy I ever kissed: nobody else ever got that close. 15 years and 3 kids later: no regrets.
*Look down at your shoes. If they are pointy and uncomfortable, you care too much about status.
I'm honored that you wrote a whole post about my comment!
I don't know the answer to this either. A little more detail - I had an interesting childhood, because on the one hand, I went to a church-affiliated parochial elementary school and was raised in church, and it was definitely the expectation that I would not have sex before marriage. On the other hand, my parents believed in equality and encouraging girls to be anything they wanted to be. I was a very academically-oriented kid so everyone especially encouraged me to aim high. There were also enough examples in my family of women who'd been gravely harmed by traditional gender roles and lack of choices for women for me to embrace feminism (of the old-fashioned, equal rights flavor). My grandmother was a big supporter and told me "Don't ever be financially dependent on a man." because she didn't ever want to see me trapped in the kind of situation she'd been trapped in.
After all that, I arrived at adolescence and the big scary world of public high school at around the same time, and I remember thinking to myself that the world I'd been raised for didn't exist. Even back then (late 80s - early 90s) the world was a bit tribal - there was a small subset of very religious guys who would have been ok with not having sex but would not have been ok with my ambitions and plans and desire for adventure and basically my personality, or I would have to join the mainstream. I existed kind of in between those spaces for a while (it wasn't as if guys were beating down my door anyhow - I was an awkward and nerdy girl) but by the time I was 18 I was pretty well committed to the mainstream because I couldn't handle the expectations the religious crowd would have placed on me. (In my neck of the woods most of the religious crowd is Mormon, although I was not, so they tended to crank the gender role expectations up to 11.)
I also think it's not wise to marry to young, before you've figured out what you want in life. But if we're being honest it's not entirely feasible to expect everyone to remain a virgin until they're 25 or 30. I don't know the answer to this either, and I struggle with what to want for my teenage daughters. I wouldn't want them to marry at 19. I certainly don't want them to have promiscuous sex with multiple partners. I don't want to see them develop an emotional bond with an inappropriate partner because they had sex (which is something my oldest is going through now). I don't want to see them end up alone if they wish to marry and have a family. I don't want to see them in relationships where they don't have any power, or have to give up important aspects of themselves to meet someone's expectations.
I have no idea what the answer is. Of the religious girls I grew up with, one married at 21 to a very religious guy and they are still married, mostly happily, although I think she has some regrets over feeling she missed out on learning to be independent when she was young. Another one never married or had a family, even though she would have liked to but she never found the right trad man. I don't know any women personally who got strung along until it was too late, although I've heard about them. My situation turned out ok, although not perfect, and in hindsight I might have raised my kids in a religious "tribe" in spite of some of the issues I see because the mainstream is so toxic now.
1. As a man there's little to no assurance that a woman is actually virtuous. It's all too common for a decent man to be denied sex by a girl that's sleeping around with more attractive/bad boys.
2. Feeds into 1, there is a lack of vetting and social proof on both sides. A woman's friends especially and a man's friends also will be on their side and help them out rather than enforce any moral standards. The community around people also rarely enforces standards of temperance so you're really just left with what you can observe and dig up about a prospect on social media.
3. Feeds into 2, the vast majority of young people are opposed to traditional structures that established and held relationships together like matchmaking and family involvement or the highly-successful arranged marriage. The problem exists on every level, not one locus: the people seeking marriage aren't on board, the community isn't on board, and the cultural norms are strongly opposed. There are exceptions but they're rare, at least in the US.
4. A general issue of human nature, trying to revive something old just isn't exciting or compelling especially in a culture that values progress for the sake of progress. Going backwards is never gonna be popular and one of the critical cornerstones of restoring traditional marriage is to completely reject feminism which even conservatives do not agree with.
I think that right now there aren’t a lot of people out there mentoring young men, such as siblings, cousins, family friends, coaches… so I think a lot of young men are missing the boat in terms of relationships (as are women, I’m sure).
At least the internet offers more education and possibilities if someone’s immediate circle is lacking. So that’s a small beacon of hope.
A few years ago, an Australian Catholic female journalist caused a small fuss by writing articles complaining that Catholic men aren’t worldly wise enough. She still has a blog. No sign of marriage, although I suppose she could be keeping it private.
https://www.catholicweekly.com.au/for-want-of-a-lot-of-good-men/
I also recall that a decade ago the young Catholic women on Facebook were posting “Catholic Ryan Gosling” memes, although he isn’t Catholic. So women can have unrealistic standards, too.
I think that a young man who is shy and not very forward will seem like weak sauce to women today. Sometimes couples need an outside push, but those influences don’t exist today.
I don’t think it’s reasonable or natural to push young people into a very wide world and expect them to find mates with little guidance or support, but that’s the world we live in today.
The response to the Australian Catholic female journalist back in 2019 was by a man who wrote a very cogent article entitled, “It’s not hard to find Mr Right, just change your perspective.”
https://www.catholicweekly.com.au/its-not-hard-to-find-mr-right-just-change-your-perspective/
Worth a read!
Yeah... I can't imagine being out there, trying to get married in the modern culture and not in a specific religious one, where there are religious expectations baked into the culture. While yes, those are not adhered to 100%, at the minimum in a traditional Catholic parish you can expect/discuss normal marriage, courtship, and sexual relations without looking like a crazy loon - it's the modern that looks crazy.
And, what's more, is that the culture of the parish community re-enforces these. There isn't the stigma - not yet. But I do think that it will get there. As the wheels come off the modern culture, and the Empire crumbles, I think that liberalism in all areas will be more on the retreat.
It's still possible in this day and age. Have done it, can verify.
But.
-You have to stop caring about social status.*
-You have to STFU about it. Need-to-know only.
Once you get past that:
-No sex without commitment remains (and may even be *more* effective now, for those courageous enough to deploy it) the most devastatingly effective dating strategy ever invented. You will get fewer dates, and have fewer boyfriends. And you are far more likely to meet and marry an eligible man.
-How does that work? Well, you're single most of the time. Get cozy with that, because it's KEY. If you're shacked up with Mr. Right-Now who will waste 5 years of your youth and fertility and never marry you, guess what? For that whole five years, Mr. Right will not even approach you. Because *you're taken* and good men don't poach another man's woman.
-If you can't bear the psychological pressure of being single, you need to work on that before you even *think* about being married. A romantic partner will not solve your personal insecurities, and expecting a relationship to do that will doom the relationship. That's not what a husband is *for*. Get your sh*t together first.
-If you're not having sex, you don't need to be on the Pill... and we all know now that artificial hormones affect who you're attracted to. You do *not* want to make lifelong decisions about a mate while under the influence of HBC. If you've been on it since adolescence, you don't even know who you are, sexually, or what you find attractive, and you are in for a world of hurt if you marry someone in that condition. Someday, you're going to quit HBC to have kids or try to get your health back, wake up in an unfamiliar body, and possibly find that your partner isn't nearly as sexy as you thought... but plenty of other men are way more attractive. That's trouble.
-Keeping your pants on is the single most brutally efficient sorting mechanism in the dating world, for weeding out sh***y entitled men. They will drop you like a hot rock as soon as you're unwilling to get physical: and that's a GOOD thing.
-You don't date for fun and status. "Having a boyfriend" is not the goal. You date to find a spouse. That means as soon as a potential partner turns out to have any dealbreaker trait, he's out. He's not your type. Let go and put a hard stop to it. If you know what you're looking for that means most men are out before they ever ask, and you just say "no thank you, I'm not interested."
No, this strategy doesn't work for everyone. If you're all about looks and status, well... you get what you deserve, IMO. But if the top of your spousal priorities list is: religious, respectful, reliable, good dad, intelligent, hardworking, virtuous, free of addictions, no baggage... the strategy is *magnificent*.
I was that picky. Married the first guy I ever kissed: nobody else ever got that close. 15 years and 3 kids later: no regrets.
*Look down at your shoes. If they are pointy and uncomfortable, you care too much about status.
I'm honored that you wrote a whole post about my comment!
I don't know the answer to this either. A little more detail - I had an interesting childhood, because on the one hand, I went to a church-affiliated parochial elementary school and was raised in church, and it was definitely the expectation that I would not have sex before marriage. On the other hand, my parents believed in equality and encouraging girls to be anything they wanted to be. I was a very academically-oriented kid so everyone especially encouraged me to aim high. There were also enough examples in my family of women who'd been gravely harmed by traditional gender roles and lack of choices for women for me to embrace feminism (of the old-fashioned, equal rights flavor). My grandmother was a big supporter and told me "Don't ever be financially dependent on a man." because she didn't ever want to see me trapped in the kind of situation she'd been trapped in.
After all that, I arrived at adolescence and the big scary world of public high school at around the same time, and I remember thinking to myself that the world I'd been raised for didn't exist. Even back then (late 80s - early 90s) the world was a bit tribal - there was a small subset of very religious guys who would have been ok with not having sex but would not have been ok with my ambitions and plans and desire for adventure and basically my personality, or I would have to join the mainstream. I existed kind of in between those spaces for a while (it wasn't as if guys were beating down my door anyhow - I was an awkward and nerdy girl) but by the time I was 18 I was pretty well committed to the mainstream because I couldn't handle the expectations the religious crowd would have placed on me. (In my neck of the woods most of the religious crowd is Mormon, although I was not, so they tended to crank the gender role expectations up to 11.)
I also think it's not wise to marry to young, before you've figured out what you want in life. But if we're being honest it's not entirely feasible to expect everyone to remain a virgin until they're 25 or 30. I don't know the answer to this either, and I struggle with what to want for my teenage daughters. I wouldn't want them to marry at 19. I certainly don't want them to have promiscuous sex with multiple partners. I don't want to see them develop an emotional bond with an inappropriate partner because they had sex (which is something my oldest is going through now). I don't want to see them end up alone if they wish to marry and have a family. I don't want to see them in relationships where they don't have any power, or have to give up important aspects of themselves to meet someone's expectations.
I have no idea what the answer is. Of the religious girls I grew up with, one married at 21 to a very religious guy and they are still married, mostly happily, although I think she has some regrets over feeling she missed out on learning to be independent when she was young. Another one never married or had a family, even though she would have liked to but she never found the right trad man. I don't know any women personally who got strung along until it was too late, although I've heard about them. My situation turned out ok, although not perfect, and in hindsight I might have raised my kids in a religious "tribe" in spite of some of the issues I see because the mainstream is so toxic now.
Some of the key issues I see on both sides are:
1. As a man there's little to no assurance that a woman is actually virtuous. It's all too common for a decent man to be denied sex by a girl that's sleeping around with more attractive/bad boys.
2. Feeds into 1, there is a lack of vetting and social proof on both sides. A woman's friends especially and a man's friends also will be on their side and help them out rather than enforce any moral standards. The community around people also rarely enforces standards of temperance so you're really just left with what you can observe and dig up about a prospect on social media.
3. Feeds into 2, the vast majority of young people are opposed to traditional structures that established and held relationships together like matchmaking and family involvement or the highly-successful arranged marriage. The problem exists on every level, not one locus: the people seeking marriage aren't on board, the community isn't on board, and the cultural norms are strongly opposed. There are exceptions but they're rare, at least in the US.
4. A general issue of human nature, trying to revive something old just isn't exciting or compelling especially in a culture that values progress for the sake of progress. Going backwards is never gonna be popular and one of the critical cornerstones of restoring traditional marriage is to completely reject feminism which even conservatives do not agree with.
Excellent comment! 👏