It’s time for men to man up

The rise of the man-child is a sad sign of the times.

Alexandra Phillips

Share
Topics Feminism

I think of myself as more #MeNeither than #MeToo. I despise the self-indulgent, counter-productive narratives of fourth-wave feminism. Women need to be equipped with assertiveness and tangible skills, not treated as society’s victims. And identity politics more broadly is fostering a culture of censorship and narcissistic introspection. No wonder mental illness is said to be at an all-time high – ours is an era in which not having an ‘issue’ can be an issue in itself.

I’m also a staunch advocate for men. I grew up as half of a dynamic duo with my older brother. I even attended an all-boys grammar school for sixth form. I thrived in the male-dominated common room where problems were solved with fisticuffs rather than the Machiavellian, inter-clique battles waged by adolescent girls.

The woke set’s puerile fixations on things like ‘man-spreading’ (surprise: men have appendages between their thighs) and the horrendous concept ‘toxic masculinity’ (there is just as much female internecine warfare) sit awkwardly alongside high levels of male suicide, Instagram-fed body dysmorphia, and white working-class boys’ academic underachievement. Then there’s the slur ‘gammon’, which suggests that vast swathes of the male population are aesthetically and intellectually inferior – including people like my dad, and probably yours, too.

But 36 years on this planet – and 20 years of dating members of the opposite sex – have led me to realise that there is another serious issue affecting menfolk. The problem is man-children. Somewhere in between the Boomers and today’s fragile millennials, a large population of immature males has emerged.

I once left an iPhone charger at the house of a guy I was dating. He only lived around the corner, but he had been ‘ghosting’ me – a typically cowardly way for such men to behave. When I asked if I could come over to collect my charger, he mockingly referred to this as ‘stalking’. I had zero interest in laying eyes on him – I just wanted to avoid spending time and money buying a new charger when I could take a five-minute walk to collect my own.

Charger-gate might sound like a trivial, one-off encounter. But I have had all kinds of lousy experiences with millennial men, from an assault to a previous partner lying about getting another woman pregnant while he was secretly pinching money from my savings.

My fear is that 21st-century culture is helping to infantilise men, and that this in turn feeds bad behaviour. We no longer venerate great fathers, husbands and brothers. Instead, we are expected to value self-obsession, self-promotion and self-prioritising. Men don’t seem to strive to have a family anymore. Increasingly, they have protracted, frivolous and feckless existences. Their adolescence stretches way beyond their youth.

None of this is to say that men who aren’t in relationships or are childless are lesser beings. The point is that fewer men harbour the ambition to fulfil ‘traditional’ roles of husband and father. The values that once epitomised manliness for our grandfathers are dissipating, if not derided as ‘patriarchal’. Current and future generations need to be reminded that there is not just a nobility, but also a social necessity, in striving to be a loyal spouse and parent.

One problem is that decent male role models are on the wane. We have a well-known philanderer in No10. He’s no better than most overpaid pop and sports stars. One last hope might have been Prince Harry. Yet, rather than salute his dedication to his wife, we are tearing him limb from limb. Megxit sticks in my craw as much as the next royalist, but I do have a certain jealousy of Meghan for finding a man so committed. In a pouting, posing, photo-filtered culture, decency and commitment are so often eclipsed by the vapid and vacuous.

Part of me suspects there will be an element of self-correction as one generation learns from the one that came before it. Generation Z is said to be more prudish, eschewing the alcohol and casual sex that was more common for the youth of my generation. Hearteningly, Gen Z’s successors are to be called Generation Alpha. But it remains to be seen whether they will live up to the high standards that name implies.

We need the narrative to change. We need to move beyond the rigid view of woman as victim and man as aggressor. The blurring of genders doesn’t help, either. We need to project a more positive image of men, so that they aspire to be pragmatic, paternal and protective.

Alexandra Phillips is a former Brexit Party MEP for South East England.

Let’s cancel cancel culture

Free speech is under attack from all sides – from illiberal laws, from a stifling climate of conformity, and from a powerful, prevailing fear of being outed as a heretic online, in the workplace, or even among friends, for uttering a dissenting thought. This is why we at spiked are stepping up our fight for speech, expanding our output and remaking the case for this most foundational liberty. But to do that we need your help. spiked – unlike so many things these days – is free. We rely on our loyal readers to fund our journalism. So if you want to support us, please do consider becoming a regular donor. Even £5 per month can be a huge help. You can find out more and sign up here. Thank you! And keep speaking freely.

Donate now

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Comments

Opting Out

25th March 2020 at 1:50 am

So the writer wants me to “man up”. And why is that? I have a stable job. I am without debt. I am single and I love my hobbies. I don’t depend on the government for anything. I have a fine bank balance and homeowner. I comply with the law and I pay my taxes. Have I not manned up? Well, here is the problem women find with me: I am following to some extend the MGTOW philosophy and I really like it. While I don’t agree with a lot of MGTOW hatred spewed on the internet, MGTOW has taught me that men actually can set standards for a potential partner, just like women have been setting standard for men a long time ago. In current day and age, I find the average woman to be deplorable. She has feminist trades in which I am not interested, she has had many sex partners by the time she turns 30. Lots of women are on anxiety meds, are overweight, have tattoos or have daddy issues. There is absolutely no reason to get married with the chance of losing a great part of what I have worked for, should she leave. I really don’t care if women think if I have “manned up” or not. I just say “no” and that is the end of it. Thank you for reading.

Another Way

25th June 2020 at 11:09 am

Man Up? Let me translate this for you. It means sacrifice yourself for the person calling you out. It the nature of Men to sacrifice for others. But this begs the question, what do we get for this sacrifice? Answer: 50 percent of us end abandoned and estranged from our children. And we still need to sacrifice to maintain the lifestyle of the one who abandoned us. Who would willingly enter such a contract? Or seek it out again after seeing it’s effects. Marriage is dead because women have killed it. A 50/50 split of assets makes no sense if the man made 90 percent of the income and the woman initiated a no fault divorce. She should get the 10 percent she put in. Doing otherwise turns a Marriage into a lottery for women. And slavery for men.

Stefan Minkey

10th March 2020 at 6:54 pm

36 year old woman complains about ‘man children’ she has to date and resorts to ‘man shaming’ to push old fashioned gender roles we don’t want any more because the family court laws are a disaster.

Don’t like it ? Get the laws change. Men – here for us, and not for you.

Jerry Colonna

28th February 2020 at 1:12 pm

“Somewhere in between the Boomers and today’s fragile millennials, a large population of immature males has emerged. ”

At the same time it became ok for women to have kids for benefits and a larger house?

“If women want men to act like gentlemen, then women need to start acting like ladies”
Camille Paglia (an feminist)

Cedar Grove

29th February 2020 at 8:27 am

I have to speak up for feminism here – not for the current generation’s preoccupation with vanity & victimhood, but for the desire of women to be allowed to be adult citizens, and participate in society.

How can it be right that women weren’t allowed to have mortgages without a male guarantor, or have access to contraception, or were expected to spend their entire lives doing repetitive housework? That if we were beaten or raped, e were told it was because we’d provoked it?

Feminism simply wanted basic human rights to be extended to women, and for women to have the right to choose whether to be workers, or mothers, or both.

I agree that 1970s feminism caused men to falter, because the ways they’d grown up taking for granted were no longer acceptable. But good men found a balance.

I know families where work – both for money, and at home – is shared. Pleasure and responsibility aren’t seen as mutually exclusive. People are committed to their partners without losing their sense of themselves. There was a sense of comradeship because equality in society was a shared goal.

If it isn’t like that now, I’m sorry to hear it. But for my generation, rights weren’t separate from responsibility and a sense of fairness.

Claire D

29th February 2020 at 12:33 pm

@Cedar Grove

Feminist myth-making going on there.

Historically women could not get mortgages prior to the early 1960s because they simply did not earn enough money. Not only that but most men could not get mortgages before 1951 either, for the same reason, the Tory government under Macmillan only began their idea of a ‘Property Owning Democracy’ in that year; women began to be able to get mortgages when it became financially viable for Building Societies to offer them to women, feminists had nothing to do with it.
As for contraception the 1967 Family Planning Act was introduced into the House of Commons as a Private Member’s Bill by Edwin Brooks; he had identified a social problem whereby low income groups were at risk of economic struggle through having more children than they could afford. Legal abortions were included in the same Bill. (A bit of eugenics going on I suggest.)
Nothing to do with feminists, everything to do with economics and social change.

Facts.

Claire D

29th February 2020 at 12:47 pm

Real rape is a terrible crime, it has always been difficult to prove unless the woman or man who was raped is seen quickly after the event. All too often the evidence is circumstantial and it’s her, or his, word against the perpetrator.
Up until very recently anyone charged with any crime in this country has been presumed innocent until proven guilty. To prove guilt you need evidence. If we change that, if feminists force that to change here, as they have in the USA, it will be a step back to before Magna Carta.

Claire D

29th February 2020 at 3:04 pm

It’s interesting that Edwin Brooks, a Labour MP 1966-70, who was responsible for the 1967 Family Planning Act, also published an essay entitled, ‘This Crowded Kingdom : an essay on population pressure in Great Britain’, in 1973.

Amanda Purdy

29th February 2020 at 7:31 pm

@ClaireD. You give us some worthwhile facts, yes, but why label the introduction of contraception and safe terminations as “eugenics”? The MP in question seems to have been concerned about overpopulation. Eugenics usually implies some level of coercion rather than choice. If one really cannot afford more children it is certainly better to prevent (or as rarely as possible terminate) pregnancies. The old idea of preventing overbreeding in the ‘underclasses’ does not gel with the understanding of how genetics actually works. Today it is often difficult to make the point that people who cannot afford children should not be having them (and assuming that the State will always help pay for them) because it gets tarred with the brush of ‘eugenics’ instead of just being sensible behaviour to take personal responsibility for ones own actions.

Claire D

1st March 2020 at 12:06 pm

@Amanda
Thanks and I agree with the points you make. If I could have edited my comment I would have replaced “eugenics I suggest” with “eugenics perhaps ?” which would have been closer to my meaning, ie, more open ended and questioning. Labelling was not my intention.

Claire D

1st March 2020 at 12:09 pm

A 5 minute edit facility would be useful.

Dam Kerr

26th February 2020 at 1:29 pm

Actually registered just to reply to this article.

For the record I’m happily married, having moved to Asia and married a sweet Asian lady. I have no problem with the concept of marriage, as it used to be and still is here but has not been in the UK for a long time.

Since the 70’s we’ve had “no fault” divorce, meaning literally a man can be divorce-raped of everything, for no fault of his own.

You can come home and find your wife sexing someone else, be a victim of her violence or other abuse, and it doesn’t matter. You’re still the one kicked out of the house, forced to keep paying for it, forced away from any children yet again forced to pay, and pay and keep paying.

The woman (usually) keeps the house, the kids and your income. The only thing she loses is the thing she wants rid of, which is you.

And that “marriage” is the Grand Prize, if you’re “lucky” enough to work hard enough and be gifted enough to out-earn the smaller, weaker lower-earning woman. Which is increasingly tricky when we’ve pushed female-everything so hard at school, uni and the workplace for decades now.

Boys and young men, and huge swathes of us older men, have wised up that the game is so heavily rigged against us that it’s just not worth playing anymore. So why NOT just stay single and enjoy a risk-free and easier life? Why knock ourselves out just to compete for the chance to get divorce-raped and some kids raised to hate us, that we have to pay? What kind of a deal is that?

No.

And this is without even touching on the fact that modern women have become almost caricatures of everything men don’t want, with double or triple figure partner counts, overweight, aggressive and wearing their disdain for men on their sleeves with pride?

No. Just no.

Israel R

26th February 2020 at 6:12 am

I just want to add my experience as it is a collective of all of these social problems everyone seems to complain about.

In truth, i do not feel pressured to be a father or have a family like “people” “expect”. Mostly because we live in a modern world where freedom and choice is more accepted than in any other time. If i am given the choice of an easier life vs working day in and day out to support my family, i will chose the easy life. Why? Because ive seen the consequences of it first hand.

When i first began working at a restaurant i used to see the line cooks working really hard and long hours just so they could support their families. This painted a very dark future in my head. One that i did not want to live in. Of course i wouldnt be working in a restaurant forever, i got my college education and i am starting as a solar technician at the moment.

On the other hand, women are also progressing on their own and starting to realize they can do this by themselves. Theres nothing wrong wtih this.

All in all, i believe we have just broken free from societies traditional roles, Thats what i call freedom.

nick hunt

25th February 2020 at 5:38 pm

“My fear is that 21st-century culture is helping to infantilise men”. So what’s different about that culture, Alexandra? Could it’s war on men and masculinity be involved? And who’s conducting it? If you haven’t seen ‘The Red Pill’, the excellent journey of discovery by a feminist film-maker investigating the men’s rights movement, and revealing the extraordinary hate they attract from leftists and feminists, you most certainly should.

Rikhard Wright

25th February 2020 at 5:31 pm

I’ll happily join the “me neither” ethic, but when it comes to understanding how this situation has arisen, I think we have to get our hands dirty and actually talk about morality.
When men no longer feel pressure from society to conform to the “good father and husband” framework, but do not want either to fit into the “narcissistic wastrel” category which the media would have us believe is the only alternative, we clearly need a third way. Religious orientation and purpose used to be that third way, yet fashion basically dictates that only a loony would choose that path.
Well, given that somebody has fortunately reshuffled and scattered all those cards on the contemporary table, some face-up, others face-down, we are all going to have to find our own way, and a good thing too. The Age of the Group is coming to an end, and men are going to become men at last. I hope it is obvious from this that women are going to become women too, by the way.
As a footnote, it’s “on the wane”, like the waning Moon. “Wain” is an obsolete word, as in Constable’s “The Hay Wain”.
Okay, I’m a teacher, and I find it hard to shut up in the face of mistakes. Apologies if any group is offended by this…

nick hunt

25th February 2020 at 5:28 pm

The pussification of western men doesn’t only threaten women’s happiness. Those involved in the US men’s rights movement claim that a culture not willing to sacrifice its young men in war will not survive in the long term. Similarly, Stefan Molyneux claims that a culture which defers to women will soon be replaced by one that oppresses them.

Bill Whittaker

25th February 2020 at 4:55 pm

“Man Up”. I have to ask why?

After all, “We no longer venerate great fathers, husbands and brothers.”

Why should he Man Up and get married? – Divorce means you’re screwed for life. Besides, Women want to pursue a Career instead of giving up her Career to raise children.

Masculine traits are attacked as toxic. Feminists frequently winge about PATRIARCHY. No wonder that “The values that once epitomised manliness for our grandfathers are dissipating”.

Boys are falling further behind in education. Mary Curnock Cook, ex-UCAS chief warns Britain’s Schools are failing to help boys who under perform. Feminists block any effort to help Boys. The result is that girls are succeeding at the expense of boys.

The message is clear, if our Culture doesn’t want Boys to grow up into Men, they will stay Boys.

David George

25th February 2020 at 6:33 pm

Women have always tested men, it’s instinctive, a way to affirm that their (prospective?) mate is up to providing and protecting them and any little ones that they’re blessed with. The WW1 white feather movement a great example.
Perhaps the western man is now undergoing such a test – collectively and individually; the courageous, protective, forthright, successful, strong and loving partner the desired ideal.
The denigration of the positive masculine does seem quite pervasive in Britain. My son and two of his cousins are married to (or marrying) British girls and several of their British friends are keen to move out and grab a piece of Kiwi manhood.
Jordan Peterson:
“We’ve been fed this unending diet of rights and freedoms and there’s something about that that’s so pathologically wrong.
People are starving for the antidote. And the antidote is truth and responsibility… That’s the secret to a meaningful life. If you don’t have that, all you have is suffering and nihilism and despair and self-contempt. It’s necessary for men to stand up and take responsibility. They all know that. They’re starving for that message.”

Sam Ford

25th February 2020 at 1:01 pm

The reason we don’t look up the archetypal male is simply the cultural Marxist agenda forced women to work to compete with males not for the best among them.The best among them steriotype has been made so.multi culturally bland and genderless that it creates no feeling with which to celebrate around other than the in the most base ways.Stop reproducing (classically)in its tracks to the degree social engineering has on every level what is there to aspire to? People don’t even honour their tradition by passing it on successfully and culturally with their gender opposite counterpart.Once this elevating and valueing selection process and honouring of families by reproducing them to some degree collapses there aren’t alot of connected links left..I’m sure Furedi family and crew would disagree but they still scratch their heads and live in the sixties still wondering why the utopia can’t seem to happen while deliberatly overlooking the elephant in the room…nation building is dead ..along with the male whose purpose was to uphold defend and reproduce it harmonious through the ages with his female…

Gordon The Gopher

25th February 2020 at 12:11 pm

I blame PlayStation

It’s effing great though. Who cares about the real world when you can kill baddies, win F1 and get QPR to beat Real Madrid in the Champions League final?

a watson

25th February 2020 at 3:03 pm

Gordon, I watched QPR beat WBA in 1967 and saw Bowles and co beat Liverpool at Loftus Road. Those were the days.

Jim Lawrie

25th February 2020 at 11:25 am

“Somewhere in between the Boomers and today’s fragile millennials,” I stopped reading right there. I cannot go the argot of the sociologists, and am not interested in articles on sociology.

Genghis Kant

25th February 2020 at 11:19 am

I read some feminist stuff in my twenties (in my sixties now), and tried to be the kind of man the feminists claimed they wanted, until all the women I knew told me that was exactly the kind of man they didn’t want.

Gweedo LeStrange

25th February 2020 at 2:47 pm

Who cares what women want?

Lauder Eric

25th February 2020 at 9:58 am

The best way to fatherhood is through surrogacy, and in the future artificial wombs.
The old way doesn’t work anymore: children are hers, not yours, you’ll have just to pay for them.

Linda Payne

25th February 2020 at 9:10 am

There were never any ‘real’ men; I suffer the results of the man all my family still consider a hero when in fact my head became his punchbag for 13 years; on the outside he was a hard working man trying to keep his family together with a mental wife, they still beleive this I am the outcast, the loony the personality disordered

David George

25th February 2020 at 6:49 pm

Sorry to hear of your tragic experience Linda. It does seem a shame though that people often attribute to (toxic?) masculinity what is, in fact, a classic example of a psychopath. The positive masculine is a courageous, protective, forthright, successful, strong and loving partner. Look for that and don’t settle for overgrown babies or monsters. Best of luck to you, there are good men out there.

Gareth Hart

25th February 2020 at 9:10 am

“None of this is to say that men who aren’t in relationships or are childless are lesser beings.”

I get the impression that this sentence is incomplete and missing a “,but…” at the end of it.

I see the sentiment of single and childless men being lesser beings, not just by feminists either, across the political spectrum shaver this is discussed in the comments sections. They’re not just called man babies, but also involuntary celibates, misogynists and “gender based extremists” from people who define a man’s worth on the basis of how women view him in terms of attractiveness, which for men is based on socio-economic status.

The issues around the family courts, divorce courts, #MeToo and the changing dynamics of male-female relations in dating where the rules constantly change, misogyny hate crime category, demands for action against unattractive men harassing women for merely being unattractive in the eye of a woman, where even a “good morning” is deemed harassment, these concerns are merely handwaved away as the misogynistic ramblings of a radicalised “incel” extremist as men are told to “man up”, an easy, throwaway phrase with nothing of substance other than it makes the person saying it feel good to get one up on the “lessers”.

Claire D

25th February 2020 at 8:56 am

Human behaviour patterns on this scale are as a result of economic conditions and the social consequences of those conditions.
I don’t know how much money a man would need to be earning from the moment he finished education, to be able to afford a deposit on an actual house, with a garden + job security, to look forward to being a husband and father with confidence.
I think young men know all this instinctively even if they don’t consciously. What’s the point of aspiring to something virtually impossible ? Have you read about all the young couples stuck in flats with dangerous cladding which they cannot sell ?
And then there’s the dreaded ‘feminism’, also a result of market economics. This has resulted in women competing with men at all levels, for jobs, status, whatever.
The trouble is women have got what the feminists demanded (and they have’nt finished yet) but they don’t like it, they want men to be reliable, honourable and aspirational as well, like they were in the past.
Alexandra, you cannot have it all ways. Blaming men for your predicament is not the answer.

Gareth Hart

25th February 2020 at 9:18 am

Even worse when you consider that in general, women are hypergamous and prefer to date men higher in socio-economic status. When women have achieved higher socio-economic status than their male peers whilst feminism gives advantage to women and girls in school, higher education and the workplace and men see the game of life as rigged so descend into dropping out into video games and other pursuits, don’t be surprised by the recent glut of “where have all the good men gone” and “man up” articles.

Claire D

25th February 2020 at 10:37 am

Oh I’m not surprised at all.

Jane 70

25th February 2020 at 11:19 am

Interesting. Given the recent hysteria about the threats of eugenics, I think we already acknowledge and condone a form of social eugenics, which has always been present, in one way or another.

Well connected, wealthy people marry amongst their ‘in group’,thus perpetuating the divides which exist,despite all the claims to the contrary.

Women, increasingly successful, tend to choose men of high status ,both in physical and social and economic terms.

Since our society is predicated upon choice and the drive for personal fulfilment, I cannot see this changing.

The left shouts about gender fluidity and racism,all the while wielding its increasingly intolerant tolerance on the rest of us.

I don’t envy the many youngsters growing up today, who lack the advantages of wealth, connections and physical attributes.

Claire D

25th February 2020 at 2:06 pm

@Jane

Obviously my experience may not be universal, but amongst the people I know, mostly lower economic class and middle class, (I don’t know any upper class !) unsuccessful relationships/marriage breakdown seems fairly evenly distributed, ie, economic advantage does’nt seem to make that much difference.
Connections ? Perhaps, but I’d say that the lower economic class look out for each other just as much as the middle class, if not more, passing on information on employment opportunities etc. Also family connections make a big difference amongst both classes, with grandmothers assisting with childcare.

The people who really suffer are the downright poor, people on benefits, no family to help them etc, but then they always have have’nt they ?

Jane 70

25th February 2020 at 2:34 pm

@Claire D: your reply of 2pm Claire: I agree that marital breakdowns are evenly spread amongst different classes, but what I was alluding to was the selection practised by the affluent and well connected, not whether their marriages/ family structures are more or less less likely to break down.

To give an actual example: my background is poor but well educated ; my parents always rented and had very little in the way of assets; however, we were all encouraged to read and visit museums and galleries.

All this many years ago, in a more equitable era.

However, my niece , who went to a private school and then to a university known for its preponderance of students from affluent backgrounds, now mixes exclusively with the well connected sons and daughters of wealthy and successful professional families.

She acknowledged once that she doesn’t have any friends or acquaintances who went to state schools.

She now has a lucrative trainee position with a firm of upmarket estate agents and is going out with an equally well connected bloke, who also has a good job.

Much of her success has been due, as well as her own hard work and good looks, to the network of connections established during her years at school and university.

I’m pleased for her, even though I can see the power of the networks which exist: who you know, where you were schooled, family links etc.

Claire D

25th February 2020 at 3:26 pm

@Jane

Hope you’ll find this, articles and comments seem to be disappearing in a random sort of way.

Yes of course you are right. I live in a different world to such people as your niece, I bear them no ill will or envy and wish them all the best, but we could almost be on different planets.

Nevertheless I prefer my sphere, my community any day of the week. What I miss are pubs the way they used to be !

Ven Oods

25th February 2020 at 8:49 am

“ours is an era in which not having an ‘issue’ can be an issue in itself.”
A good observation.
“One problem is that decent male role models are on the wain.”
Shame about the ‘wain’. That’s the hay cart in the Constable landscape.

Philip Humphrey

25th February 2020 at 7:43 am

The problem is what’s in it for men if they do ” man up”? I suspect many of them deep down do want to commit to a relationship, family and children, but they’ve seen too many male friends and relatives committing and being stripped of all that in divorce on a whim of their partners. Add to that the general tide of misandry and description of masculinity as “toxic” in the media, education, courts etc. and it’s hardly surprising that men may focus on number one.
There really has to be some sort of quid pro quo to build meaningful relationships and commitment. If there is no “quo”, no commitment on the other side, than many men are unlikely to risk their “quid” and remain in an uncommitted state.

Claire D

25th February 2020 at 10:25 am

Yes, that’s an important point and ties in with my comment above I think.

Mark Houghton

25th February 2020 at 7:23 am

1. Men like me are dropping out of dating women because there are so few decent women out there. Perhaps they should ‘women up’?
2. All these man babies – the primary influence on most young men these days are women – mothers, daycare, infant and junior school – so whose fault is it?

steve moxon

25th February 2020 at 7:05 am

?!
Given the ubiquitous feminist man-hating original core of ‘identity politics’ going exponential in an all-pervasive pathological cultural turn, it’s a wonder there are any men who haven’t given up on society and engaging with women.
Lack of role models?!
What planet has Alexandra Philips been living on?

Lauder Eric

25th February 2020 at 11:08 am

Her biological clock is furiosly ticking.
It’s simple as that.

K Tojo

25th February 2020 at 6:33 am

There is an interesting essay “Men Without Chests” by C S Lewis (he of Narnia) which I think has some relevance to this question. The title refers to an atrophied capacity for emotion.

In his final paragraph Lewis says:
“…such is the tragedy of our times – we continue to clamour for those very qualities we are rendering impossible”.
and:
“We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful”.

Ven Oods

25th February 2020 at 8:59 am

I preferred Lewis’s ‘The Screwtape Letters’. No wardrobes (or closets, come to that).

K Tojo

25th February 2020 at 6:18 am

Articles of this kind are becoming increasingly common. Latter day feminists are starting to bemoan a shortage of the kind of “real men” they imagine they deserve.

Alexandra Phillips complains that “We no longer venerate great fathers, husbands and brothers”. Indeed, but we are constantly told that these roles are no longer important and in fact they serve to reinforce the hated patriarchy. We are constantly urged to venerate high-achieving women with, perhaps, a nod of approval for men who encourage and support them.

Phillips pines for a man of commitment but, as I am sure many men can attest, once a woman tires of a relationship that much prized “commitment” will rapidly be downgraded to mere possessiveness.

It is almost impossible to get feminists to admit this but feminism has hollowed out men’s lives to a damaging degree. “…decent male role models are on the wain” say Phillips but what use is a role model when male roles are constantly being challenged, subverted and colonised by women? Pushing the damage to a new level we have transgender activists trying to bully is into accepting that there is nothing special about masculinity – a woman can become a man if she decides to and vice versa. It’s all just a matter of preference.

Phillips’ final paragraph with three sentences beginning “We need…” offers no serious solutions. Feminist hostility to masculinity continues to grow in power and influence. It is unlikely to be deterred by calls for a “change in the narrative”.

Brandy Cluster

25th February 2020 at 6:56 am

Real men (like my 2 sons) avoid feminists and grievance-junkies like they have Coronavirus. Seriously. One word about ‘diversity’, ‘feminism’, ‘glass ceilings’ and multiculturalism and they’re shown the door.

Lauder Eric

25th February 2020 at 11:11 am

Transgender ideology is a threat to children.
Transgender ideology is also a threat to female privilege.
In NO way transgender ideology is a threat to grown men: grown men have just only to gain from transgender ideology.

Jane 70

25th February 2020 at 6:17 am

It seems to me that the flawed aspirations apply to females as well: why do so many young women wish to transform their natural selves into the pouting, surgically enhanced Barbie Dolls who inhabit the dreadful ‘Love Island’?

Why do they think that dressing like slappers denotes power and equality, while at the same time claiming victim hood?

Young people, both male and female, must wonder where the limits lie in the age of woke, instagram, vlogging, insecure employment prospects and dodgy, fleeting relationships.

No wonder so many are signing off .

Ven Oods

25th February 2020 at 8:56 am

I saw a bit of Lurv Island (only a few seconds) when I was channel-hopping the other night. A young woman was orange, face buffed to a shine, with stick-on eyelashes like you see as a joke above some car headlights….
Thank goodness I’m not in the dating game nowadays. Frightful!
Of course, I could be wrong and she could have been a totally-engaging polymath… but I doubt it.

Jane 70

25th February 2020 at 11:10 am

I did read that one particularly-and alarmingly pneumatic- female participant was a practising pharmacist, but I’m afraid my cynicism got the better of me! I wouldn’t ask her to dispense anything.

On surgical enhancement and bizarre alterations,have you noticed that Carol Vorderman seems to be embarked on a surgical attempt to turn herself into what I can only describe as a human banana?

I know bananas have more chromosomes than us, but even so.

Claire D

25th February 2020 at 11:34 am

Hi Jane,
surely “Love Island” is just an elaborate game for adult children of both sexes to play for TV voyeurs, like a glamorous version of ‘mummies and daddies’ or ‘doctors and nurses’ ?

Mixing harsh reality and vulnerable people in the spotlight and falseness of TV is bound to end in tragedy at least some of the time.

Jane 70

25th February 2020 at 12:53 pm

Not sure Claire; it does seem to have fatal consequences-at least in 3 well publicised cases-so I think it’s taken seriously by many hopefuls and successful contestants.

I find it grotesque and rather sad and exploitative, but it’sa money spinner and the makers know what keeps bums on seats,eyes on screens and generates lucrative business for the cosmetics industry.

Jim Lawrie

25th February 2020 at 12:09 pm

I do wonder how they manage to resist the urge to scratch at the scars.

Mark Williams

25th February 2020 at 3:36 am

I hate to break this to the author, but as a man, I’ve had all sorts of lousy interactions with child-like women, including being ghosted.

Brandy Cluster

25th February 2020 at 6:55 am

My divorced 43 year old son (with 2 beautiful children) is keeping company with a 35 year old female, childless and never married. He really likes her because she’s not ‘needy’ and when I asked him about the available field of women to date he replied, “the vast majority of them are slappers and drop-dead uncouth”. What a sad reflection of the new feminism.

Gweedo LeStrange

25th February 2020 at 2:57 pm

I’m in a similar situation. Women drop feminism when staring down the barrel of a lonely old age.

Ven Oods

25th February 2020 at 8:52 am

Have to agree, Mark. When I compare my wife (adult, nice to be around) with most of the females I’d dated up to that point, they all look like fickle, needy, self-obsessed schoolgirls. (And this wasn’t any time recent, either.)

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.

Deplorables — a spiked film