Skip to comments.
Proof young women are opting out of casual sex?
The Spectator ^
| 05/29/2024
| Amber Duke
Posted on 05/29/2024 8:36:35 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The popular dating app Bumble was forced to apologize recently when its anti-celibacy advertisement didn’t land the way that it had hoped. Bumble tried to tap into many women’s frustration with modern dating, telling women who are having trouble finding a significant other that “a vow of celibacy is not the answer.” But whoever is on Bumble’s marketing team failed to realize that many women are opting out of casual sex and hook-ups as they realize they prefer settling into a long-term partnership before they engage in a sexual relationship. Others are taking a break from dating…
The popular dating app Bumble was forced to apologize recently when its anti-celibacy advertisement didn’t land the way that it had hoped.
Bumble tried to tap into many women’s frustration with modern dating, telling women who are having trouble finding a significant other that “a vow of celibacy is not the answer.”
But whoever is on Bumble’s marketing team failed to realize that many women are opting out of casual sex and hook-ups as they realize they prefer settling into a long-term partnership before they engage in a sexual relationship. Others are taking a break from dating entirely, as they feel a deep dissatisfaction with the current landscape, which seems centered around fleeting physical attraction and short-lived connections. On TikTok, the #celibacy hashtag has had more than 195 million views and Google searches for “celibacy” were up 90 percent in January 2023.
Women let Bumble know that they did not appreciate the ads, which seemed designed to shame them for their choice to save their bodies for someone special. Bumble apologized in turn. “We made a mistake,” the company said. “Our ads referencing celibacy were an attempt to lean into a community frustrated by modern dating, and instead of bringing joy and humor, we unintentionally did the opposite.”
Some Gen-Z TikTokkers refer to the trend as going “boy sober,” and the reasons why young women are swearing off the hard stuff (apologies) are numerous. Liberal and progressive women argue that it would be irresponsible for them to engage in meaningless hook-ups when abortion restrictions and bans have made the stakes of an unwanted pregnancy much higher. (Ironically, this is exactly what pro-life activists have long encouraged women to do; practice safe sex or abstain to avoid getting pregnant in the first place, rather than terminating an unwanted pregnancy after the fact).
Other women acknowledged that they choose celibacy because they do not believe it’s empowering to give up sex to a man who does not meet some bare minimum standards. There is an important acknowledgment here that having sex with men who don’t treat you right or who don’t actually want to commit to you only engenders their bad behavior and incentivizes it. As the old saying goes, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free?
The backlash to Bumble’s ad doesn’t change the fact that a lot of young women are still having casual sex. The American Psychological Association found that 70 percent of sexually active 12-21 year olds reported having a casual sexual encounter in the past year. What is different, though, is that young women are starting to associate their dissatisfaction with the dating scene and negative feelings about themselves with their choice to engage in hook-up culture. According to the Institute for Family Studies, “an APA survey of 1,468 undergraduate students found that 82.6 percent reported negative mental and emotional consequences after hook-ups, including embarrassment, loss of respect and difficulties with maintaining steady relationships.” Similarly, 78 percent of women and 72 percent who engaged in uncommitted sex acts experienced regret over their actions. The Journal of Sex Research says engaging in hook-ups and the number of hook-ups are correlated with rises in depression and anxiety, which are reaching crisis levels in young people.
Louise Perry, author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution told the Guardian that many young heterosexual women “now feel as if they have to run the gauntlet of hook-up culture if they want to have any kind of sexual relationship. I think a lot of them, quite fairly, would rather not have any sexual relationship at all.”
Women no longer buy the feminist lie that casual sex is “empowering” or gives them some special kind of agency over their own body. They are able to differentiate between “intimacy” and “sex.” And they don’t want to be with men who only desire them for what they can offer physically.
Of course, the rise of celibacy among young people is not all good. It is certainly better from a mental and physical health perspective to avoid unsatisfying sexual encounters that lack any real long-term connection. But some researchers believe the decline in young people having sex can be attributed to things like video games, social media and pornography. So while some people are choosing be voluntarily celibate, others are not having sex because they are simply unable to make real personal connections in a world gone digital. This comes with its own set of negative consequences for mental health and family formation. Young people are getting married later and later and many don’t expect to marry or have children at all. The US birth rate has cratered. None of this bodes well for society, which thrives on healthy and robust family structures.
So, what’s the answer to this problem illuminated by Bumble’s unfortunate anti-celibacy ad? Young women are right to lay off casual sex until they find the right man, but they shouldn’t give up on love entirely. Statistically, the happiest group of women are married mothers. That’s something worth staying in the game for.
TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: casualsex; dating; fornication; mansophere; mgtow; pua; redpill; relax; socialmedia; women; youngwomen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-153 last
To: metmom
So its no accountability for women. Thats your response? So womens promisciuty is now mens fault. Great. A raging feminist could not have said it better.
To: KC_Conspirator; FormerFRLurker; grey_whiskers; metmom
1. Men leave their terminally ill spouses in greater percentages than women leave their terminally ill spouses.
Response: Possibly true (I can neither confirm nor refute this claim). But even if true: It's an extreme case - probably applying to only a tiny, tiny percentage of all divorces. Thus of negligible importance for this discussion. Like pointing to "men who have climbed Mt. Everest divorce their spouses more than women who have climbed Mt. Everest divorce their spouses" - might be true but is still, on the whole, statistically unimportant. Functionally equivalent to observing "most serial killers are men" and then concluding "(all) men are monsters."
2. "20 million, or 1 in 6 married American men, were on Ashley Madison before it was hacked. That's an awful lot of married men looking to trade up from the woman they've got."
Response: We don't really know what those married men on AM were doing / seeking. Were they just "joy-riding" or maybe "testing the waters" or simply "assessing their market value?" Looking for a casual hook-up to allay the pain, frustration, and loneliness of an already sexless marriage? Seriously contemplating divorcing their spouses, and already on the look-out for a new mate? Or was their marriage effectively already a "marriage in name only?" Had the women already announced her desire to split? Were the men merely waiting for the divorce to be finalized? The hypergamous scenario you posit ("trading UP") is pure speculation. We simply don't know what they were up to.
3. "Claiming women are the gatekeepers of sex, is only an excuse for [...]"
Response: Are you perhaps claiming that women are NOT the gatekeepers of sex?! Really?! Then who are?! Men?! If you admit that not men, but rather women are the gatekeepers, then your "is only an excuse" evaporates.
4. "If men want virgins for wives, then they need to stop hypocritically pressuring women into having sex with them and then looking on them with contempt for giving them what they pushed for."
Response: Apex Fallacy mixed with Equivocation Fallacy! In essence: You are invalidly / deceptively saying "men" when "top 4% of all men" would be correct in one clause, and "vast majority of low-tier men" would be correct in the other clause.
The men wanting virgins are namely the "regular Joes" - the average guys who are themselves hardly able to score, and who might have a notch-count of 2 or 3. Whereas it is the "Chads" who are having rampant sex (you assume without evidence that some form of "force" is involved).
Regards,
142
posted on
06/03/2024 10:32:48 AM PDT
by
alexander_busek
(Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
To: alexander_busek
Whether men currently are or not gatekeepers of sex is irrelevant. They SHOULD be.
Women have been forced into that position by men who are abdicating their role as protector of women by not being gatekeepers of sex.
143
posted on
06/03/2024 12:06:35 PM PDT
by
metmom
(He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus…)
To: alexander_busek; KC_Conspirator; FormerFRLurker; grey_whiskers
Response: We don't really know what those married men on AM were doing / seeking. Were they just "joy-riding" or maybe "testing the waters" or simply "assessing their market value?" Looking for a casual hook-up to allay the pain, frustration, and loneliness of an already sexless marriage? Seriously contemplating divorcing their spouses, and already on the look-out for a new mate? Or was their marriage effectively already a "marriage in name only?" Had the women already announced her desire to split? Were the men merely waiting for the divorce to be finalized? The hypergamous scenario you posit ("trading UP") is pure speculation. We simply don't know what they were up to. What a BS weasel out answer.
They are on that site only to look for cheating on their wives.
Or maybe like with Playboy, they got it for the articles. (Yeah, right)
Response: Apex Fallacy mixed with Equivocation Fallacy! In essence: You are invalidly / deceptively saying "men" when "top 4% of all men" would be correct in one clause,
You can prove that number with stats I take it.
Or is that just a SWAG?
144
posted on
06/03/2024 12:10:28 PM PDT
by
metmom
(He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus…)
To: metmom; alexander_busek; KC_Conspirator; FormerFRLurker; grey_whiskers
Saw this and couldn't resist...
145
posted on
06/03/2024 7:09:25 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
( The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: grey_whiskers
Yeah pretty much which is the delusion today. One of the words used today is 49er. A 4 that thinks they are a 9 because of all the simping and beta male thirst.
To: KC_Conspirator; grey_whiskers; metmom; FormerFRLurker
One of the words used today is 49er. A 4 that thinks she is a 9 because of all the simping and beta male thirst the fact that she was able to frequently and effortlessly bed high-tier men in her early 20s.Just my personal "take" on the matter.
Pre-Wall women have, in actuality, a barely concealed distaste and contempt for those beta orbiters - in their eyes, they're only good for extracting resources, use as "emotional tampons," and as "muscle" on furniture-moving day - oh, and of course, to then conveniently "wife them up" when the women have aged out / entered the "Danger Zone."
The overarching mainstream cultural narrative, running totally counter to all common sense - that "casual sex empowers women," "Lizzo is a queen," "single mothers are stunning and brave," and "I am the table" - is the true primary cause of their delusion.
Regards,
147
posted on
06/03/2024 10:23:01 PM PDT
by
alexander_busek
(Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
To: alexander_busek
You have a good point there. Back in ye olde days like 2 decades ago, a woman who had tasted the pleasure of an Alpha for one night or non-public short fling would understand that she probably outpunched her weight class and come back to reality. But not today. Todays modern woman thinks her high water mark is the standard. They could get used like a receptacle by a music star for one night at an after party, tossed aside and never called again, but then go around and tell people she “dated” said music star. Ridiculous.
To: metmom; KC_Conspirator; grey_whiskers; FormerFRLurker
Whether men currently are or not gatekeepers of sex is irrelevant. They SHOULD be.... and it should rain sprinkle doughnuts, and unicorns should fart rainbows, and the rent should always be due tomorrow, and...
"Earth calling metmom! Come in, metmom!"
You are demanding behavior that runs totally counter to Human Nature. That might function in some utopian paradise dreamt of by Sir Thomas More or envisioned by C.S. Lewis. Some post-scarcity society inhabited by toga-wearing saints and ruled by an enlightened philosopher-king. But NOT in the real world (unless you are talking about some oppressive Islamic country where women can't be seen in public and loose daughters are stoned).
I SHOULD be able to stagger down the back alleys of Harlem at 3 a.m., drunk as a skunk, with hundred-dollar bills sticking out of my pockets, shouting "N*ggers!", with impunity, but I couldn't, with a straight face, introduce that as a basis for serious discussion of societal mores and normative behavior in 21st-century America.
Women have been forced into that position by men who are abdicating their role as protector of women [...]
This is hilarious! We have "abdicated" our role as women's "protectors?!"
"Chivalry is dead! And Feminism killed it!"
Men have not abdicated their role: Rather, it has been wrested from them!
Any man foolish enough to attempt to rush to a woman's aid in today's world is liable to run a-foul of Human Resources, if it happens at the workplace. If it happens in a public place, he might be let off easy with a mere "I'm a grown woman and can open a door for myself!"
Let me take a step back and acknowledge that, historically, men were indeed the gatekeepers of sex and protectors of women - but only in the sense that fathers had total dominion over their daughters, and were widely recognized by society as having the right to intercede, control, admonish, and even punish them for the slightest deviation from expected behavior, right up until marriage (which, in most functioning cultures, the fathers and mothers would arrange). But let's be realistic: Barring a nuclear holocaust, that world is never coming back. The Nanny/Welfare State has supplanted men as providers, and the Police have supplanted men when it comes to physical protection.
For most of their late-teens and early-20s, most decent men* are struggling to find their footing in life, and to make sense of the modern dating world.
*I am explicitly excluding ghetto trash and the like. Instead, I am limiting my scenario to the kind of men whom you would probably say were capable of being "saved," were still amenable to rational persuasion, and the like.
These "average" men have a low SMV (Sexual Market Value), and can hence only react to existent market pressures. Rather, it is the women (with an initially high SMV) who get to establish the narratives, set the rules, dangle the enticements, etc. Any "average" man who, in this environment, would step forward and announce: "I have not abdicated my role as Protector! I will withhold sex until it is sanctified by the Holy State of Matrimony!" would be laughed out of the room.
What you don't seem to realize is that the modern dating market is akin to the Prisoner's Dilemma - a situation in which any one individual or minority of upstanding and honest individuals is automatically at a disadvantage / is actually punished for righteous behavior. In fact, even the majority of the population could sincerely wish to adhere to elevated moral principles, but will nevertheless suffer negative consequences for doing so - because a few "bad actors" suffice to ruin everything.
Now, don't get me wrong: I am not saying that the answer is for young men to abandon all morals and dive headfirst into the cesspool that is the modern dating market.
Regards,
149
posted on
06/03/2024 11:28:34 PM PDT
by
alexander_busek
(Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
To: KC_Conspirator
They could get used like a receptacle by a music star for one night at an after party, tossed aside and never called again, but then go around and tell people she “dated” said music star. Ridiculous.Absolutely!
To be honest, if - back in the day - I had had a "fling" with, say, Darryl Hannah, Sean Young, or Jennifer Connelly, I'd undoubtedly also be regaling my friends and neighbors with the story to this day.
But I'm a man. An ordinary man. And the scenario in which I "get lucky" with a Hollywood star in her prime is ludicrously unlikely - let alone that it should have happened while I was a broke student or low-ranking office worker in my 20s. And yet I know women who will boast about having had a "dalliance" with a first-tier or second-tier rock star back in their hardscrabble youth.
Regards,
150
posted on
06/03/2024 11:42:27 PM PDT
by
alexander_busek
(Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
To: KC_Conspirator
The reason for this, is that the woman thinks she has
obligated the man to commitment (at her discretion to exercise the obligation, not his), by sleeping with him. Her rationalization would be some faint echo of the old "breach of promise" -- but in fact it is a sense out outraged equity or fairness: she has given him that which is requisite for marriage, her body (and affirmations sex, not "duty sex"), so it is only fair that he come up to snuff on his end of the bargain:commitment and a ring.
Little do the women realize the irony: women love to spit on the nice boys, the betas, "women are not a candy machine where you put in time and attention and love comes out" ..but they are treating the hawt Nan the same way: "hawt men and bad boys are a machine where you put in sex (which is a lot of fun anyway) and a ring comes out."
151
posted on
06/04/2024 4:31:14 AM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
( The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: alexander_busek; metmom; grey_whiskers; FormerFRLurker
See my post just above this one.
152
posted on
06/04/2024 4:34:42 AM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
( The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: grey_whiskers
Her rationalization would be some faint echo of the old "breach of promise" -- but in fact it is a sense [of] outraged equity or fairness: she has given him that which is requisite for marriage, her body (and [affirmation] sex, not "duty sex"), so it is only fair that he come up to snuff on his end of the bargain: commitment and a ring.An amazing observation! Very much like finding some vestige of an ancestral aquatic organ in a terrestrial animal!
Regards,
153
posted on
06/04/2024 7:41:28 AM PDT
by
alexander_busek
(Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-153 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson