Posted on 11/06/2025 8:47:10 PM PST by SeekAndFind
For most of human history, coupling up was not merely a norm; it was a necessity. Before reliable contraception, women could not control their fertility, and most were far too poor to raise children alone. Hence the centuries-old convention that, whereas a tragic play or saga ends in death, a happy one ends in marriage.
So the speed with which the norm of marriage—indeed, of relationships of any sort—is being abandoned is startling. Throughout the rich world, singlehood is on the rise. Among Americans aged 25-34, the proportion living without a spouse or partner has doubled in five decades, to 50% for men and 41% for women. Since 2010, the share of people living alone has risen in 26 out of 30 rich countries. By The Economist’s calculation, the world has at least 100m more single people today than if coupling rates were still as high as in 2017. A great relationship recession is under way.
For some, this is evidence of social and moral decay. As we report, many in the “pro-natalist” movement believe that the failure of the young to settle down and procreate threatens to end Western civilisation. For others, it is evidence of admirable self-reliance. Vogue, a fashion magazine, recently suggested that for cool, ambitious young women, having a boyfriend is not merely unnecessary but “embarrassing”.
In fact, the rise of singlehood is neither straightforwardly good nor bad. Among heterosexuals (about whom there is the most research) it is largely a consequence of something clearly benign: as barriers to women in the workplace have fallen, their choices have expanded. They are far more able than in the past to live alone if they choose, and face less social stigma for doing so. The more they can support themselves financially, the less likely they are to put up with an inadequate or abusive partner. This shift has saved countless women from awful relationships, and forced many men to treat their mates better if they want to stay together.
However, it has also had unhappy knock-on effects. Flying solo can be liberating, but it can also be lonely. Plenty of singletons say they are content to remain so, especially women. But surveys in various countries suggest that 60-73% would rather be in a relationship. A poll in America in 2019 found that, although 50% of singles were not actively looking for a partner, only 27% said this was because they enjoyed being single. Many have given up, either because they despair of finding a mate, or because they don’t rate the mates on offer.
Some think social media and dating apps have fostered unrealistic expectations (other people’s relationships look fabulous on Instagram) and excessive pickiness (most women on Bumble reportedly insist that a male must be six feet tall, thus filtering out 85% of potential matches).
Another problem is the growing political gulf between young men and women, with the former leaning right and the latter leaning more to the left. Many singles insist that any partner must tick the same partisan boxes, which makes matching trickier.
Other experts point to a decline in social skills as people spend more of their lives gawping at screens. Americans of all ages socialise less in person than they did two decades ago, but the decline is especially steep among the young. Social media spread fears that women will be assaulted if they go out; and that men will be digitally shamed if a date goes badly.
Perhaps the most important factor is that, as living alone has become easier, women’s standards have grown more exacting. For many, a mediocre partner no longer seems a better bet than remaining single. Women are more likely than men to say that they want their mate to be well educated and financially solid. More men are failing to clear this moving bar, as they fall behind women educationally and the less bookish ones flounder in the job market. Men with no college degree and low earnings struggle to attract a partner; doubly so if they do not share domestic chores, or if after frequent rejection they start to dislike women, a common vice in the online “manosphere”.
Some of these problems may be self-correcting. One obvious idea is for men to grow up, do a little more housework, behave more responsibly and so turn themselves into more desirable partners. Cultural norms may impede this shift. But the prospect of avoiding lifelong loneliness and celibacy will surely serve as a powerful incentive for men to change. Many countries have been moving in this direction for years, with cleaning, cooking and child-minding more evenly split between men and women.
And yet, even in such enlightened spots as the Nordic countries, the trend towards singlehood shows no signs of abating. In Finland and Sweden roughly a third of adults live alone. At the very least, the shift is likely to exacerbate the already dramatic fall in global fertility, since single-parenting is hard and cultural taboos against it remain strong in many regions. Since young, single men commit more violent crimes, a less-coupled world could be more dangerous.
It is also possible that the relationship recession will not correct itself. A striking 7% of young singles say they would consider a robo-romance with an AI companion, and these lovebots will only get more sophisticated. AI, after all, is patient; AI is kind; it does not ask you to clean the bathroom or get a better job.
Many may worry that a world with fewer couples and children will be sadder and more atomised. Yet bemoaning the prospect will not avert it. And it is not the place of governments to overrule ordinary people’s preferences—though they should certainly try to tackle male underperformance in school. A future with far more singletons is coming. Everyone, from construction firms to the taxman, had better prepare. ■
So men wanting an inexperienced and naive wife is not something to be judged, but women wanting a successful husband is. Interesting.
It's one of the factors that has led to this current situation, yes. Women learned, during the 20th century, that letting their financial well-being rest entirely on one man was not as safe as it once was. It always amuses me that men on FR absolutely refuse to accept one iota of blame for today's world. It's allllll the women. Men were wonderful. Perfect. Angels! And these damn women were ungrateful, and now here we are.
NO ONE said men were perfect angels. Absolutely no one. The imaginary hobgoblins of the men who claim such innocence is a favorite of the globalists who push Feminism. Fathers knew what men were and much of the institutions women claim oppressed them were put in place to protect them, which is why the nuclear family was targeted.
And exactly what blame do men have for "today's world"? Enough didn't die to create it? Enough didn't die defending it ? Men didn't vote socialist enough? Men created and supported almost every single thing in "today's world". Which of those should they not have done?
Women learned, during the 20th century, that letting their financial well-being rest entirely on one man was not as safe as it once was.
They learned relying on one man was not safe in the 20th century? So "letting their financial well-being rest entirely on one man" was safe enough in the 7th century, the 15th? the 18th?
Women didn't suddenly learn about such risk. They learned they could vote to have The State (which was funded by men) provide for them financially. They chose Socialism under the pretext of Feminism and here we are. Once "liberated" from marriage, they were free to practice hypergamy and have someone else pay for it.
"It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of unorthodoxy." - George Orwell '1984'
Except Feminism didn't free women from the oppression they were told they were under, it freed men from the oppression they didn't know they were under. It took a while but once enough men saw it, it couldn't be unseen. It was buried under decades of social conditioning, outright propaganda, and institutional indoctrination.
Men started walking away because it is so far gone that the only winning move is not to play. As some women are now left to realize that The State can't be their daddy husband, especially States that are $138 trillion in debt (which was a goal of the globalists), they are surprised when the same men they reviled and marginalized want nothing to do with them. Too late, no refunds.
These "boss babes" and "slay kweens" are now facing BACODA - Buy A Cat Or Die Alone.
It is totally reasonable for women to want successful husbands.
That is why they should oppose any political and social barriers to making that happen.
Men are willing to compromise (that is among our chief distinguishing features vis-à-vis our female counterparts).
Yes, that must be why the overwhelmingly male Congress is putting us through the longest government shutdown on record. Because men are so good at compromise. Never knew you were such a comedian, Alex!
...make herculean efforts (push for career advancement; spend a significant portion of their spare time in the gym, trying to maximize their physique...
I understand you live in Germany, but have you seen American men lately? Many have a spare tire by 30. Most are complete blobs by 40. To have the belly of a 9 month pregnant woman without the blessings of pregnancy is a mockery of nature. And it's not like their weight makes them more humble or agreeable or harder working. Maybe things are different in Germany, but most American men are not salvageable.
FormerFRLurker: Yes, that must be why the overwhelmingly male Congress is putting us through the longest government shutdown on record. Because men are so good at compromise. Never knew you were such a comedian, Alex!
We can't know how a female-dominated Congress would act, Lurker, so we have no comparison! And I was, of course, speaking about men compromising in the dating/mating market - not about national politics.
FormerFRLurker: I understand you live in Germany, but have you seen American men lately? Many have a spare tire by 30. Most are complete blobs by 40. To have the belly of a 9-month pregnant woman without the blessings of pregnancy is a mockery of nature. And it's not like their weight makes them more humble or agreeable or harder working. Maybe things are different in Germany, but most American men are not salvageable.
If you hadn't improperly abridged my quote to which you are responding here, you'd see that you are actually arguing my point!I namely said:
On the whole, men are more inclined to compromise on looks, weight, virginity, etc. than to shift into overdrive and make herculean efforts (push for career advancement; spend a significant portion of their spare time in the gym, trying to maximize their physique; gain pick-up skills; etc.) to outcompete their brethren in order to seize that last, good-looking woman. They will instead "settle."While I don't condone your gratuitous man-bashing, you and I are basically in agreement: Men do not have to attempt to outcompete their more-industrious brethren: They can instead 1) "settle" for a physically less-appealing woman or 2) withdraw entirely from the competition.
Regards,
...at the cost of half their savings, being kicked out of their homes, child custody routinely being awarded to the mothers, alimony, etc.
And remember: Women are overwhelmingly the ones filing for divorce.
Do you remember the phrase “Trophy Wife?” Men have contributed to this greatly.
You are guilty of the "Apex Fallacy!" Not "men" have contributed to that - rather, the top 10% of men have contributed to it. The vast majority of men do not aspire to acquiring a "Trophy Wife" (usually because they are ordinary joes who are capable of realistically estimating their own SMV and who thus can be content with an average woman; hypergamy is an exclusively female failing).
It wasn’t just feminism that convinced women to go out and earn their own keep. It was fear that they’d be discarded once they were middle-aged.
Again: Women are overwhelmingly responsible for filing for divorce. If anyone has anything to fear, then it's the men.
Regards,
Come on! It's the EIGHTY PERCENT of Black women who give the other 20% a bad name!
Regards,
“It wasn’t just feminism that convinced women to go out and earn their own keep. It was fear that they’d be discarded once they were middle-aged.”
I think you’re right APLady, though it’s only a co-factor along with feminism.
Like everything else, it was a shift in thinking and in behavior that had never occurred in the past. The question is why.
The behavior of men changed. They became more willing to leave their wives. Why did they not do this in previous centuries?
It all has to do with the effects of turning from God. Men didn’t leave their wives because their faith in God kept them on the straight and narrow.
Men would rather date the secretary than the boss.
Men don’t care about a woman’s career, it just is.
Around 70% of divorces in heterosexual marriages are initiated by women.
Apparently you are buying into the propaganda by the Left.
“It all has to do with the effects of turning from God. Men didn’t leave their wives because their faith in God kept them on the straight and narrow.”
It’s important to point out that acceptance of this cause and effect relationship does not equate with acceptance in God’s ontological existence.
No, you’re not thinking carefully.
I’m simply stating that the behavior of men—like the behavior of women—changed when our society turned from God.
You are entitled to your beliefs.
Then you think the behavior of men is not affected by their belief in God.
You’re wrong about this and it would be good for you to think more carefully.
“They became more willing to leave their wives. Why did they not do this in previous centuries?”
Because with feminism, men knew wives were capable of bringing home the bacon without them. Nobody was happier about the feminist movement than men — especially lazy promiscuous men. They were like kids in a candy store with a big crop of young women in the office.
I heard a monologue by Rush maybe 20-25 years ago explaining this in detail
Okay. I am wrong. Does this make you feel better? lol
BFL
Okay, but don’t miss the big picture.
All of it had to do with turning from God.
And by the way, another meta-narrative here is the cabal’s attempts to divide men and women.
I’ll counter it with this: I’m a man, and I love all women.
No.
I’d prefer you get it right for your own sake.
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.