Posted on 05/22/2026 8:23:08 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The warning signs have been there for decades.
Back in 1983, American author Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a powerful book — The Hearts of Men: American Dreams and the Flight from Commitment — arguing that a male revolt was underway. Since the 1950s, she suggested, men had begun rebelling against the breadwinner ethic, inspired by Playboy culture, the counterculture and a desire for personal freedom. They were rejecting the cultural ideology that had shamed them into tying the knot and becoming a good provider, lest they be seen as immature, irresponsible and less than a real man.
Ehrenreich understood that marriage was the mechanism by which society harnessed male productivity. Remove the shame and the yoke comes off.
Forty years on, the yoke has disappeared. In April 2026, the American male labour force participation rate hit its lowest level since records began in the 1940s, according to the US Bureau of Labour Statistics. One in three American men — roughly 33% — were not working or actively looking for work. The overall male participation rate for men aged 16 and over stood at just 67%, down from 73.5% two decades ago and from 87% in the postwar years when Ehrenreich’s story begins.
The trend is not confined to America. Similar declines — though less dramatic than in the United States — have occurred in the UK, Australia and Canada.
The marriage collapse runs in lockstep with the workforce data. According to US Census Bureau data, married-couple households made up 71% of all US households in 1970; today it’s just 47%. As University of Virginia sociologist Brad Wilcox documents in his 2024 book Get Married, the marriage rate has fallen 65% in the last half century.
Ehrenreich had made the argument that marriage and productivity were inseparable — that the same mechanism which got men to the altar got them to work. The data suggest she was right.
What Ehrenreich did not fully reckon with — and could not have foreseen in 1983 — was that the inducements for tying the knot would collapse. The shame mechanism has disappeared, yes. But the incentive has simultaneously imploded. The product on offer has changed beyond recognition. If you want to understand why men are voting with their feet, you need to look not just at what marriage now costs them — and the costs are severe — but at what it delivers. Increasingly, what it delivers is a pretty dud deal.
The modern woman: a prospectus:
They are the most miserable, anxious and insecure cohort in living memory — hardly great marriage material.
Most married women go off sex — and the husband who objects is seen as the problem.
Many women don’t actually like men very much. The more educated she is, the higher the contempt.
They’ve gone full throttle Left — and three quarters of college-educated women won’t even date a man who votes differently.
They’ve rigged the education system and colonised corporate and institutional life, turning universities and workplaces into man-repellent factories.
Yet their hypergamy is still running hot. Despite outnumbering men in education and careers, they still demand a tall, equally high-status unicorn.
The modern female threat-detection system is hyperactive. Almost any male behaviour — silence, opinions, jokes, breathing — gets flagged as a red flag.
They’re extremely well-versed in the lucrative economics of divorce, including a well-timed false allegation to eliminate tedious shared parenting.
What rational man reads this list and thinks: yes, that’s exactly what’s been missing from my life?
To examine more carefully what is going on here, let’s start by looking at the latest addition to this sorry reckoning. I’m referring to the finding published in the New Statesman last month that many young women don’t like men.
A Merlin Strategy poll of young Britons aged 18 to 30 found three times more young women than young men held a negative view of the opposite sex. Only about 50% of women had a positive view of men compared to 72% of men feeling positive about women. For women under 25, it was even starker: only around one-third (35%) reported a positive view of men. This applies particularly to professional and managerial young women of whom just 36% hold a positive view of men, compared with 61% of working-class women.
The contempt for men is hardly surprising – that’s what they have been taught. Mary Harrington, a British journalist and cultural critic who writes on Substack, frequently criticises what she calls the “femosphere” — the online feminist spaces where women bond through shared grievances about men.
“The online feminist scene often feels like one long group therapy session for women to compare notes on how awful men are,” she writes, suggesting this makes men the universal scapegoat, where ordinary male behaviour is routinely framed as toxic or oppressive, while women’s collective resentment is rewarded and amplified. “Casual, low-level male-bashing has become the background hum of progressive online culture.”
Not only does this toxic climate encourage women to be wary of men, but growing up in a hate-fuelled online sewer takes a toll on their mental health.
Psychologist Jonathan Haidt has long been warning that the toxic world of social media would lead to a rise in mental health problems, particularly in girls and young women.
“Since the early 2010s, young people across the developed world are becoming more anxious, depressed and lonely. The increases were even greater in young women,” he said.
Recent large-scale surveys (Ipsos 202-–2026 across 31 countries, Gallup 2025) are showing Gen Z women currently report the highest recorded levels of anxiety, persistent sadness, hopelessness and depression of any female generation at the same age.
Not much fun for their partners. Last year Psychology Today had a stark warning for men about these women as marriage prospects.
The saying ‘happy wife, happy life’ may have some validity, but the lesser-known saying ‘anxious wife, miserable life’ has research-approved validation. … The more neurotic the spouse is, the less happy the relationship — but women’s neuroticism seems to carry more weight in the overall marital happiness equation.
Then there’s the intriguing issue of married women turning off the tap, leaving sex-starved husbands as the norm. For as long as anyone can remember, men were shamed into showing up economically. Society has absolutely nothing to say to women who stop showing up sexually. One obligation was enforced by church, law and community for centuries. The other is now abrogated on the grounds of bodily autonomy.
So here we have the portrait of the modern woman as marriage prospect: miserable, anxious, politically radicalised, contemptuous of men, often sexually rejecting and trained to see menace in ordinary male behaviour. And yet the puzzled chorus from commentators, economists and policymakers continues: why won’t men commit? Why won’t they work?
The approved explanations are dutifully trotted out. The economic story: men have been displaced by automation and globalisation. The health story: opioids, disability, mental illness. The educational story: men are falling behind women in universities and therefore in the job market. The cultural story, favoured by progressive commentators: toxic masculinity is preventing men from adapting to a modern service economy. All of these contain a grain of truth. But they do not account for what is really going on. The obvious explanation — the one staring out of every data table — is intentionally ignored.
Marriage was the primary incentive for sustained male economic effort. It has always been — Ehrenreich knew it in 1983, and the economists have now confirmed it. There’s an economic research paper, ‘The Declining Labour Market Prospects of Less-Educated Men, which establishes that the prospect of forming and providing for a family constitutes a critical male labour supply incentive, and that the decline of stable marriage directly removes it. Researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas calculated that declining marriage rates are responsible for roughly half the drop in the hours men work.
Remove the marriage and you remove the responsibility. The data have been telling us this for decades.
But here is what nobody in the mainstream conversation will say: it is not only that marriage has become too costly and too legally treacherous for men — though it has. It’s that many young women themselves have become, to put it plainly, not worth having. Half of young British women don’t trust men. More than half of educated young women view men negatively. They arrive at relationships pre-loaded with grievance, primed by algorithms that have fed them a diet of male failure and female outrage since adolescence. They are, by their own account, anxious, miserable and politically furious.
What rational man, surveying this landscape, concludes that what his life is missing is a legally booby-trapped commitment to a woman primed to be impossible to keep happy?
Ehrenreich feared in 1983 that if the shame mechanism collapsed, male productivity would follow. She was right. What she could not have anticipated was the other half of the equation — that the feminist revolution would produce not a generation of fulfilled, generous, companionable women, but one that is, by every available measure, angrier and unhappier than any before it.
The yoke is off. The men have looked at what’s on offer. And many have, with considerable rationality, decided to go and play video games instead.
As one of Australia’s first sex therapists, Bettina Arndt began her career discussing sex on television and training doctors and other professionals in sexual counselling at a time when such topics were largely taboo. Her current – and even more socially unacceptable – passion is exposing Australia’s unfair treatment of men through the relentless weaponisation of laws and policies that portray women solely as victims. Her decades of advocacy for fair treatment of men in the Family Court included serving on key government inquiries. Bettina makes YouTube videos and blogs on Substack.
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
We’re still living in a man’s world.
Females wanted to be like men. Men, without responsibilities, only do as much as they need to do for themselves. Women wanted men’s positions, so men have left the bills to the women.
Trad wives from Asian and South American cultures are a thing for many American men for a reason.
There are, however, other factors, too. The gov't has expanded the safety net to the point where you really don't have to work if you don't want to. Also, parents seem more amenable to the idea of a son living at home, even into their 30's.
Even worse, women expect men to make them happy. If they remain unhappy, it's the man's fault. He has been "emotionally abusive."
Hence, divorce is morally justified. Divorce is the path to her "healing."
Yes, the “healing journey” otherwise know as riding the CC.
The Pill changed everything.
Also, passport bro’s are a real thing.
That’s the sad truth.
Actually, it's a problem at both extremes, highly educated, dogmatic, and selfish VERSUS intellectually lazy uneducated (I'm not referring to whether or not a woman has a degree, but whether or not she is curious about the world we live in and is at least as interested in current events as she is in the latest beauty/skincare/makeup podcast).
On that end of the spectrum, IMHO, you have women who see men as a meal ticket and would rather hang out with their mother or girlfriends than actually engage in a meaningful marriage.
Excellent article. Thanks for posting.
I believe if women could figure out how to train a dog to make $50K/yr, she’d have no need of men. I mean, watch how women treat their dogs and how they treat their husbands and tell me which they value more?
We’re still living in a man’s world.
We live in a misandrist matriarchy.
------
Women alone choose whether a child lives or dies:
A woman can kill an unborn child and the father has no legal right to stop her from killing his offspring.
A woman can kill an unborn child to remove her parental responsibility but the father can't remove his financial responsibility by any means.
The abortion rate today is similar to the infant mortality rate of the past. Women have aborted an eighth of the world population.
------
Men's Obligations:
If a man can't pay child support, he's thrown in prison. If a woman can't pay child support the government forces taxpayers to give her money, housing, and even transportation.
The state forces men to pay child support with zero confirmation that the money is being spent on the child.
Men's obligations to women are enforced by the law, but there is no obligation for a woman to a man that is enforced by the law.
A doctor is required to get a wife's approval before a husband gets a vasectomy but can prescribe birth control or abort a child without the husband knowing.
------
The Vilification of Masculinity:
Our misandrist society is more willing to accept gay men than it will accept straight men who don't meet women's definition of masculinity. On a related note, there is no such thing as "Toxic Masculinity". There is only masculinity. Notice the absence of the term "Toxic Femininity" from publications.
Men can only show aggression when it's in the service of government. Women can show aggression freely and are encouraged to do so.
Men's "empowerment" is about duty and sacrifice while Female "empowerment" is all about liberation and choice.
------
Believe All Women:
A woman can lie about paternity of a child without fear of being charged for paternity fraud and the state can even force the cucked father to continue paying for a child PROVEN to not be his. If a hospital switched children by accident, it's a million dollar payout. If a woman switches fathers, she faces no repercussions at all.
A woman can falsely accuse a man of rape and when caught lying will face no charges.
If a woman revokes consent after the fact, she has the power to get a man fired from his job, kicked out of school, or thrown in jail.
------
Men are Viewed as Second-Class Citizens and as Problems:
Men have to die at work or at war.
Women are not subject to the draft, yet can vote.
Women can hold political office and send men to die in war without any obligation to go themselves or send other women.
Men's cancer research and treatments are funded to a mere fraction compared to women's cancer research and treatment.
Men are not given additional consideration for college admissions, jobs, opportunities, and scholarships.
Men are treated as though the problems they face are their own fault but with women it's considered a "systemic" problem, not a personal failure.
No man has to buy into the “bail out and play video games route”. Though he may be called upon to be patient.
No woman has to buy into the “career success and independence before marriage and children” route.
If you are a man or a woman looking for a good marriage, ignore these articles, because a man does not marry an aggregate, or statistical sample. He marries A WOMAN. ONE.
So, my wife married me when she was young, and I was older, but I had waited to find the right woman. I had told her that I wanted to be faithful to whomever my future wife would be. That was the right answer. She is quite intelligent, and was home schooled. I know plenty of college educated women, and she is more intelligent and better educated (Seton Home School) than most of them. She had no student loans, and though we wound up adopted, we agreed at the time of our marriage that we would have a “traditional” setup.
Her two sisters BOTH married good men when they were in their very late thirties. One had been in a convent for a long time before problems with the convent forced a departure before final vows. They other one had serious health problems that precluded marriage. They both found men who were just a little bit older, but who had never married either. These men are now heads of their own families, and both sisters are pre-feminist wives raising children.
The odds of either of them finding such a match on paper is about 1% each. They beat the odds not true luck, bit because their field of marriage candidates (traditional Catholic churches) is different, and NONE of the baggage described in the article was carried by them. The men also thought enough of themselves to not even look among the women described in the article.
Sleepy time gal, when all your dancin' is through
Sleepy time gal, I'll find a cottage for you
You'll learn to cook and to sew
What's more? You're gonna love it, I know
When you're a stay-at-home, play-at-home
Eight o'clock sleepy time gal
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.