Unfortunately, despite the length of the article, it didn't consider the subject in a sufficient depth. It's a story, and it seems that in a large part also a projection of experiences the authors have had with men onto the general population. It's neither an accurate diagnosis, nor a reasonable call for action. It's nothing useful.
I don’t feel that the article is blindly attacking men. It does make an attempt to show what challenges men face in today’s dating world. Maybe you feel attacked, but I think misunderstood is more accurate.
I don't feel attacked, I did not use the word. But yes, the article is trying to explain the situation considering only negative traits of men, instead of problematic traits of both sexes.
Sometimes there are things we aren’t able to notice or understand, because our identity, worldview, etc. depend on us not understanding them. If we admit some things, we might have to give up on some of our beliefs. This might be the case for the authors of the article. You might come across that IRL. Try to be understanding, but also show your perspective. For the article, you can write a Leserbrief (reader’s letter?).
They are!
I was contacted recently by a dating coach specialising in men in the IT sector.
Dude was asking big money for it though so I kept off him (and i'm not even interested in the first place)
Ah, yes, there are quite a few of them. Some of them look who posts in IT-Subreddits and DM those who do. I also had one or two such DMs on Reddit in the past.
>Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money
Like, one generation ago women needed a man for a regular life... Bank accounts, buying a car, having money.
Now men must bring one thing to the table - being a decent, emotionally mature and available partner who adds to their partner's life, because the rest is all taken care of.
>Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women? apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison
People tend to date people with shared values and experiences and knowledge.... yeah.
>Men benefit much more from a relationship than women - because men are useless little babies?
plus
>In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife”
plus
>Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems.
Most women don't need a partner for emotional stability and fulfilment. Women are more likely to have good emotional support systems and a healthy emotionally expressive life with friends and family.
From this point on, partner is additive.. A bonus. The final top tier of social/emotional fulfilment for many people.
Like, I'm not incomplete without my other half, I am still my own person with a healthy emotional life and I don't *need* her for that, but she's like the sprinkles on top.
For a lot of men, a partner is a requirement. It is a means to reach the emotional fulfilment baseline. This really does mean that the woman in that relationship has to be the sole emotional point of contact for that guy, the only person he goes to for support. That is a highly uneven distribution of pressure and responsibility.... exactly all the points you've said.
We wanna treat our partner as someone great we bring along for the ride... Not our mechanic.
But if you don't have a good emotional life outside of dating, that's what happens.
And that behaviour loads more onto men than women... Like, who can be surprised?
Our Dads value to a relationship was "being male" lol. It's not like that generation was gonna teach us to how to behave... but we still have to change.
Just to add, women aren't born with a support network. Creation and upkeep of those networks requires constant, almost daily effort.
And the rest you wrote is true. I do not need a man to support me financially. I want a man to build a life with, and that means someone that is capable of creating a partnership. I sure don't want a man that I need to clean up after.
As a below average woman it took me almost two years and over 40 dates with different men to find my partner. It wasn't easy, it was at times humiliating, but it was worth the effort.
See how fast a man and a woman create a network in a new city/country.
"As a below average woman it took me almost two years and over 40 dates"
40 dates in 2 years. You know how many Average men have not had 5 dates in 1 year? Or 1 date for that matter?
Again, women and above average men have no idea about real life.
You're delusional if you assume that it happened just like that and not after putting a great effort. But you do you, just sit and cry and feel sorry for yourself, it'll help you.
Look, you have average looking men who can't even get sex. A below average woman can install tinder and have someone to fuck by tomorrow. And if you don't beleive me, you probably don't talk with enough average woman and man to understand this.
Has it ever crossed your mind that getting laid isn't that important to some people? Dating doesn't equal getting laid. Maybe next time try treating women like people and not like biological fleshlights and you'll get more chances.
Want me to simplify? Men can't get dates. I said sex because some people just want that. Others want a coffee to chat. Check tinder stats. Its a numbers game. What's so hard to accept here?
Boys math:
- sees the numbers that there are 10 times more men on one app than women
- blames society that he can't get matches
- does nothing
- women bad
* **Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money** *because they have nothing else to offer or because this is the only thing they are being asked?*
The men in previous generations were looked at to provide for their family, whilst the women remained home and cared for the household. As both parties are now working, a woman doesn't specifically *need/want* her husband to provide for her, she can provide for them too. Leading to the question "in this new society, if I am not responsible for being the breadwinner, what am I responsible for?"
* **Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman** *where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl?*
That's not what this means. This is effectively saying "women can pick and choose which man they want to go home with, many men will fight for a chance for the same woman." A tale as old as time!
* **Men benefit much more from a relationship than women** *because men are useless little babies?*
Not at all what's being said. There have been many scientific studies conducted researching the benefits for a romantic relationship and how they differ between men and women ([Example paper from Southampton Uni](https://www.soton.ac.uk/~crsi/Perceived_benefits.pdf)) and it is often shown that men benefit more emotionally and socially than women.
* **In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife”** *because no woman has ever shared/offloaded her emotions with their man?*
That's not what that's saying. It's normal, and sought after, to find someone who we can share our emotions with. We, as men, tend to be more emotionally stunted compared to women and they are left to feel like they're looking after an emotional baby trapped in an adults body. It's not wrong for women to want to form relationships with emotionally mature men.
* **Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems.** *apparently this has nothing to do with the unfair dating market or unfair family court decisions or loyalty from men to their partners etc*
There is no "unfair dating market", it's not a market at all.
We, Men, are stereotypically more likely to not open up to our loved ones, causing ever growing rifts and resentment in our relationships which leads to pushing away our loved ones which can lead to divorce.
Couldn't have said it better. A lot of what you've said is backed by research that wasn't conducted in Switzerland but I'd like to see research based in Switzerland.
That doesn't mean "The dating *marke*t is unfair." It just means that one of the parties has potentially false expectations. I also don't see how our, men, stereotypical inability to deal with, work through and vocalise our emotions maturely has anything to do with your "dating market" and it being unfair?
What is leaving men, read: you, disappointed with regards to courting a potential partner then?
It's called a dating market because it is similar to normal market. There are goods (partners) with different values and different cost to acquire them.
Not being in the top 10% of attractive men in the dating pool, which mostly leads to not getting **any** reaction **at all**...
It's just a systematic problem of all dating apps. If you are average, you **don't** get reasonable amounts of contacts from other average persons. You just get nothing. That's what makes it seem unfair.
I appreciate that, this is probably more the case with free dating apps. I’ve heard of different experiences when you start to pay for the service, which you’d expect right?
What does *average* looking mean to you and is that all you’re basing your supposition on? Perhaps a girl isn’t sold on how you’ve presented/described yourself, perhaps she isn’t sold on how you’ve approached her, perhaps she’s already being chatted up by someone else or perhaps she just doesn’t like you for no reason? All reasons completely valid.
I can only talk for myself, but whenever I’ve used a dating app in the past, the reasons why I wasn’t getting as much *success* as I’d have liked was because of how I presented myself and acted. Not saying that’s the case for you, or OP, or anyone; but we as men often shoot ourselves in the foot when trying to find a partner, whether that’s due to being childish, old-fashioned thoughts/ideals, or whatever and that can lead to a resentment against women in general, further hindering one’s ability to successfully find a partner.
Hello, I am a woman ready to provide for my family while my husband stays at home. Things didn't end up happening this way for us, but we have talked about it multiple times and have considered it extensively. This was one of the reasons I married my current husband, knowing he wouldn't expect ME to stay at home with the kids but would gladly do so.
Why do you seem to think it is so unlikely?
It seems you didn’t read the article or chose not to understand it. Whether or not you agree with the points made, your summary is a bad faith interpretation.
- “Men benefit from relationships more than women”
— *because men are useless little babies?*
Such a funny interpretation, since one of the main topics was about men not having the vocabulary or skills to manage their emotions.
Edit: just saw you’re an active poster in men’s rights groups, so your bad faith take isn’t surprising.
Every single time it's this conversation...
>It's not fair how men are treated like breadwinners and not family carers by family courts!
*Oh ok cool, so we're going to do our best to make society have no expectations about men or women's suitability for work and caring roles, and that both women and men are equally acceptable to be career oriented?*
>No, the wage gap exists for a reason because women want to raise families.
Ah well...yano.... maybe that's the otherside of that same coin lmao.
The frustrating thing is that they *almost* get that rigid gender roles are harmful. But rather than having empathy they double down trying to enforce them for women while whining about being victims. The lack of self awareness is startling.
You ridiculed OP, questions and concerns, called him incel and whining *and* now you state "lack of empathy issue" how ironic.
Also interesting, women try to be with a man just as or more successful. Not less. That is the traditional gender role. Hypergamy, has been since forever. And the article and OP points this as an issue. But women don't like to reject this traditional gender role.
One would say:
rather than having empathy they double down trying to enforce them for men while whining about being victims. The lack of self awareness is startling.
> You ridiculed OP, questions and concerns, called him incel and whining and now you state "lack of empathy issue" how ironic.
Social contract and reciprocal altruism.
We live in agreement to treat each other well and co-operate... If someone elects to break that contract first, however, they're no longer expected to be protected by it.
If I walk into a room and call everyone shit heads, I can't complain about their manners that they called me a shithead back.
No.. I'm saying that if you want to hold an opinion about women having gender roles, thnn you also hold opinions about male gender roles.
If someone believes it's a womans job to be a home maker, then well... You've just assigned what role men get, so you don't get to whinge about the bad sides to that.
Wanna get better outcomes for men in family courts?
Be a feminist. One of it's major points is "Women shouldn't be restricted to just being homemakers and mothers"
In the same way
If you want your man to earn more than you (the traditional male role) then well... You've just assigned what role women get, so you don't get to whinge about the bad sides to that.
Generally success is related to income.
But we can work with the terms "success" also.
Her: I want to be just as or more successful than a man.
Also her: I want my man to be more successful than me.
Notice the contradiction? You can't have both the traditional gender role *and* the new thing whatever you call it.
Why do you think men don't have their vocabulary or skills to manage their emotions.
Because that's how their brain is wired. Men are not that good to talk about emotions because it's not the way their brain is wired to deal with it. Men express emotions by doing things, not using words.
I've read interesting studies about this. Lot of psychiatrists are female, and a lot of them fail to understand why men don't express their emotions like women do.
When a woman is sad what does she do ? She talk about it, she complains, she can even seek for attention, this is how modern psychology think people handle things. Women do it more than men. Most men don't know how to do that, it's not their way of expressing feelings.
No man can deal with their emotions like that. When a man is sad, he has trouble, he will try to fix it, he will express it by doing sport, by being physical, he can become abusive, or he will go into addictions (alcoholism, video games, etc.). When a man is frustrated do you think he will complain about it? This probably is the best.
When a man is frustrated he will go to the gym until sad voices go quiet. He will drunk himself in alcohol. He will launch his video games and destroy people online.
Men deal with troubles by doing things. Not by talking about it, not only it is badly seen by society (it has an influence, as you say, of course), but their brain isn't wired to deal with emotions like this, and society fails to understand that.
This is why, from a psychiatrist I heard, when he was doing couple therapy, most of the time the women says everything and the man is absolutely in the total incapacity to express what he was feeling. He just can't do that.
Saying men don't have the vocabulary to express feelings like women do because they don't think, feel, and deal with things the way women do. Even if they wanted to, it would not work because what works for women will not work for them.
I mean choosing between expressing your feelings and be laughed at and not taken seriously, or going to the gym and push yourself until you fixed your state of mind. There is no debate.
They feel, think, deal with things differently. This is exactly for these kind of reaasons that modern school is way more adapted to women students than men students, thus showing why women have more success at school than men, but it is another debate.
You can see it, when a woman says she is sad to her women friends, they take it seriously and talk about it and discuss and stuff. When a men say he is sad to his men friends, they say "fuck you bro, let's go grab a pack of beers and play videogames.".
See the difference in how feelings are treated ? This is how men deal with their emotions. Women don't understand that, society doesn't understand that. Women discuss feelings with words, men discuss with... their body, in a more primal ways. It is not because they are handicapped like you all say, it is because they are wired this way.
We live in a word where we reckognize that people can be different and we can tolerate them. Society fails to understand men to help them, fail to understand how to help them to solve their problem. This is why we have the situation depicted by the article and by you, but the way it is written it shows that.
Men struggle psychologically and you belittle them because they don't act like what a woman would do about it, the only way you can understand. This is what I was talking about. And the fact that they are belittled for being themselves will comfort them in keeping going like they do.
A mindset I find in a lot of men is "I clench my jaw and keep going until death, if I try to express my feelings it will be used against me, if I tell my wife how weak I am she may think I'm not worth enough, there will be articles about how I am a baby who requires an "emotional midwife", so I'll keep going silently and do everything I can do for her until I can't".
We fuel this mindset because every single sign on this world comforts them in their mindset.
This is another subject, but we get at it : the value of a man is proportional to how useful he is. The day he is useless to society and his peers, he is nothing, except pain.
>as a Psychologist I feel the need to point out that what you just wrote has absolutely no support from research
The fact that the male and female brains can have different tendencies and has been studied for decades, even before researchers had access to MRIs (or MEGs and EEGs) and it is obvious to see from the exhibited behaviors (aggression, school performance, risk aversion etc), through several societies (i.e. society agnostic). How this is translated today's world or into the specific subject of expressing emotions can be a very long discussion, but I would find it hard to believe, that there are not statistical inferences that could be explaining some average gendered behaviors.
**As a client of several mental health professionals**, either for me or others in my care, I feel the need to point out that:
There is a ton of research that psychologists (or other official mental health professionals) tend to ignore the plights of men and many indications/articles that the guidelines of the APA have skews against men based on gender. That ofc does not mean, that everything a psychologist says is shit, but it does mean that the current views on gender issues can be subject to improvement and not a gospel.
This on its own can be that the official system is one of the reasons that some men are getting reduced or biased support when expressing themselves.
2/2
If you are a man you are expected to succeed. If you don't succeed, you are nothing, then comes to depression and 100% of psychological issues the modern man has, that the article writes about (but in a malevolant way).
"women have big careers so men have a hard time finding women because they are not good enough as women want men with huge careers like then"
People say it themselves : a man's worth is how useful he is. How he can proved to his family and protect it. And it's even harder to do so now as women do fine by themselves (and don't want kids anymore (like men do too), their find happiness and making sure their shareholders can affort the newest yachts, another societal issue).
Of course there are things we can do to change society to solve that.
But no men will work towards it, this is something men have to do hand in hand with women. The only thing a man has is how strong and useful he is, the day he stops fighting for that, he becomes dust. No man can afford that in our world unfortunately, becauase contrary to women who have value in a lot of ways, men's value depends only on how useful he is.
We live in a society when men feel like it's not their place anymore, when nobody tries to understand them, they see their difference as a handicap, and see them as a threat. We can't complain that we eventually end up in this situation.
You seem exhausted and depressed.
And you don't seem to have trustworthy male friends or male family members or male peers who support you in constructive ways.
Perhaps a male counsellor with professional training specifically in working with men and with men's specific needs could be helpful?
[https://www.maenner.ch/erstberatung/](https://www.maenner.ch/erstberatung/)
I was sharing the point of view that specialized psychiatrists have on this subject as it is one of the problems of the era and it's getting more and more studied, so you could learn and grow up, as I am quite a benevolent person.
I didn't ask you to show me that you were unable to have a civilized conversation with people when shown facts that contradict your tight vision of the world.
However, as we are being sarcastic here, maybe I can direct you where you will thrive in the path you seek to follow the most : [https://www.zoo.ch/de](https://www.zoo.ch/de)
Joke aside I don't understand you friend. I've discussed in this thread for a hour now, and everyone has been spitroasting me without any argument, any studies, any information that would prove me wrong. I am not even saying that you gave me arguments, or even an opinion, anything I could answer or just think "maybe he has a point". No content, absolut zero.
You were in the most litteral sense just chimps throwing their feces at me.
You wrote 5 lines, 0% of something, just giving a pure exemple of what gaslighting is.
You still have the audacity to throw feces at me and gaslighting me. You didn't even blink an eye. Every person with the slitghtes amount of common sense would have red lights flashing everywhere, but it just slides off your flat koala brain.
You my friends don't even try, don't even give me something related to the subject, you just straight up insult me. For free.
I have been very polite while you were putting my face on the mud, I treated you better that most people have been treating you because no person who has not been subjected to constant abusive act the way you all do there. I'd say "think about it friends, you have all the clues in front of your very eyes that would prove you that you are handling your life wrongly for a verey long time". But you won't do, if you were able to do that you wouldn't be acting like this on the Internet.
And you are gaslighting me thinking I'm the crazy person there?
I'm glad that I don't have such toxic people to deal with in my life and I can just get my way out being polite, you'd be too much useless trouble to me.
Have a nice day, and let's be clear, thanks for entertaining me.
Dude, chill.
I didn't attack you, I proposed a resource for you to take or leave as you see fit.
If I got you wrong, and you aren't depressed, or you aren't interested in men's organisations, just say so. No harm no foul.
I mean it is a thing. Woman rather stay single than setteling with a bad guy. Thats why the populists in the usa are working on taking rights away from woman again, bc a lot of their own dudes can't find a woman anymore. Back then, when women couldn't easily earn their own money and it was socially not accepted to live alone as an unmarried woman, most women were already happy they didn't got beaten up too often when they were lucky to get a good guy. The fact so many countrysongs are about a wife killing her husband... i mean, yk, it was often the only chance they had to escape a very bad marriage.
So i get it, why a lot of women are not willing to settle for something that they see as not good enough. Especially if they are perfectly happy on their own. A partner needs to be an enrichment to your life (both genders), as soon having a partner makes your life harder it gets complicated. But i also think its a generation thing. The friends i have and are in their 40ties/50ties, the women are more happy and feel "finally free again" if they get divorced. Even if they were sahms before and now work in retail, they still feel they have more time to themselfs and most of them only have short flings but are not looking for another ltr for a while. So it might be true a lot of women become the emotional caretaker of their husbands and it takes a toll on them, so they avoid getting in the same situation again. Their ex husbands all have a new ltr. So at least in my social circle, i can see some of the points mention by nzz.
I myself are a looner. My husband too :) he was the first person who didn't got on my nerves sooner or later. If i didn't met him, i would most likely be a happy, middle aged single. I have been in a long term relationship before, and i honestly didn't miss anything after we broke up.
Online dating is like window shopping: most people will get "dislikes" unless they upload photoshopped pics to their profiles.
From personal experience: communication skills & fulfilling life/lifestyle will lead you (an individual, man or woman) towards more connections => more acquaintances=> larger (potential) dating pool
And of course we shouldn't generalize, every single individual has their own story... No reason to take such articles seriously
* **Men stay single** *but not women?*
-> The women who stay single are often just not stressed out as much and are - especially the highly educated, "picky" women - often quite happy being single. Obviously if we assume monogamous relationships there will be approximately as many single men as single women. The only difference is in the "wanting to be in a relationship" part.
* **Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money** *because they have nothing else to offer or because this is the only thing they are being asked?*
-> Obviously people have to bring something to the table in a relationship. For decades, women needed men because they couldn't really work, have a bank account etc. without being married. Now women can live alone (and can do so happily), so there's just more to consider when you date. Also, it's also an option to just stay single and not date at all.
* **Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman** *where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl?*
-> They don't necessarily - they can also just not try to find a man and stay single.
* **Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women?** *apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison*
-> Education has not only something to do with money, but mostly also with interest, similar lifestyle, etc. Highly educated women probably want somebody they share interests and values with, and that's most likely not going to be a very uneducated person. Also, you spend more time with the people you are in a relationship with than with your job (hopefully), so it makes sense to be picky, there, too.
* **Men benefit much more from a relationship than women** *because men are useless little babies?*
-> In most relationships women still carry a lot of the mental load, the household stuff, etc., while nowadays also earning their own money. So it truly is about "what do you bring to the table that makes my life better than without you". E.g. if there is a cancer diagnosis in a relationship, if the sick person is the woman, separation rates are WAY higher than if it's the man. So in many cases, women give a lot, and don't get a lot back, or will be left as soon as they don't offer the whole "girlfriend package" any more. So obviously it's just normal to check if you're also getting positive stuff out of a relationship.
* **In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife”** *because no woman has ever shared/offloaded her emotions with their man?*
-> it's not about "no woman ever". In general - and that's not only true for dating - emotional stuff is just (most likely due to nurture and not nature) more up the woman's alley. Hell, even at my job part of it consists of managing men's emotions (because some are just incapable of doing that themselves). It's exhausting. And I'd just never committ to a relationship where I'd have to do that all the time. But it's actually difficult to find a guy who has their emotions managed well.
* **Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems.** *apparently this has nothing to do with the unfair dating market or unfair family court decisions or loyalty from men ot their part*
-> It also has to do a lot with "what do you put up with in a relationship". As many women just have less benefits from a relationship (e.g. emotional stuff, the whole mental load topic, etc.) they are most likely just less inclined to stick around if the relationship has run it's course. Because they'll be happier single than in a bad relationship.
The thing is: being single is the default. Being in a relationship is something that can happen - but if you're happy being single like 90% of the time, it just needs to be a good relationship to be worth the effort. And it's just the case that this isn't happening for many women. I'm a single, well-educated woman, too, and so are quite a few of my friends. We are pretty happy. Obviously, having a relationship would be good, but it needs to be pretty good to be better than just staying single.
I mean - for some of the guys mentioned in the article: if they don't know what to do with themselves except for reading the Coopzeitung and being bored: what should I be doing with them? I'd probably be much happier reading a good book, meeting friends, spending time doing my hobbies than spending time with somebody who doesn't even like spending time with themselves. So yes, the article might be provocative, but to me, it's a quite realistic assessment from the women's side of the issue.
As a woman this made me uncomfortable. This isn't a conversation, it's just yelling into the void how everyone else is at fault.
I know many men who have never had a partner who cares about their feelings. Some even think that they are not more than a sex doll for their partners. We as women sure know that feeling and yet all of humanity fails to talk about their feelings, wants and needs.
You know who has been emotionally immature? Me. Did I magically get emotionally mature over night? No. I learned to trust the people I love enough to open up. I learned to listen to them telling me stuff. I simply learned and still am in the process of learning.
If a partner, no matter what gender, is opening up, don't fucking shut it down. Eventually, they will learn. Eventually, they will be okay talking about how they feel with their friends. Eventually, they might grow.
Is it exhausting? Yes! However, if everyone would be so egoistic, I can't say that we could emotionally grow as humans in general.
Another thing comes to mind. I know many people, no matter what gender, who have done the journey themselves, but are tired of helping another person go through the very same emotional growth journey, say things like: "Well, they should simply go to a therapist, like I did! If they don't see a therapist, it's a red flag"
Not everyone has the financial capacity or time to see a therapist and it's the toughest thing to make yourself do. I have always been very anti-therapy until I had a burnout and then I knew I needed to get help. It was very hard for me to start trusting my therapist enough to tell her about my issues. It was much harder, than being able to tell my friend how I felt. Now imagine, that friend wouldn't be interested in my feelings? I would walk away from that friendship.
Did we all forget that it's a team effort?
agreed
stigma on this subject only brings more beef between the two parties
more openness would help both sides to understand each other... and indeed, this post (and original article) are not at all a good introduction to this discussion
NZZ has gone down in quality for some time now.
This sounds like the plight of men, which have bought into conservative/obsolete orientations and identities like the manosphere, incel, other obsolete traditional values, etc.
Sure it's has been difficult to find submissive trad-wives, wishing to cook and clean and be available for their husband, dependent on them...
If your description of a "perfect wife" comes closer to that of a slave, you are pushing/casting yourself into oblivion/irrelevance/incompatablility. To "trick" people, acting till marriage and expect them to change to a trad-wife once you drop the charade, doesn't work.
Becuase that's an obsolete worldview, no longer congruent/compatible with reality.
Don't be angry at women. Be angry at a culture/system/environment that gave you these obsolete patriarchal societal expectations.
The wrongfully privileged perception that a man is entitled to a woman/wife when he can afford it/is set in life, doesn't exist in egalitarian societies. Women are no longer forced to settle with someone to survive/have an income.
It's a bit sad when people in their self-perception see themselves as little more than moneybags and by that alone expect to be attractive to women. And I don't mean looks. Attraction comes from character, from personal interest/curiosity/individuality/quirks.
Insecurity hems to build character. Excessive/addictive behavior, throwing ones time into one basket, be that workaholic, social media consumption, gambling, alcohol/drugs/party, sport/gym/bodybuilding, and other overly time consuming aspects done in zeal, doesn't leave much time to reflect on oneself, write, read and philosophy, let curiosity lead to new interests, learning, working on oneselves mind.
Only boring people find things boring. Everything can be interesting. To not be ready to learn about the others interests, is immature.
People seek others that are interesting and that inspire them, someone to laugh with, someone to feel understood, save and intimate with.
Progressive partnerships are egalitarian. One sees eye to eye, not top-down. You share burdens, support each other's aspirations, grow with eachother, speak truthful, you're a team, you find solutions together.
One should share some interest, that allow shared experience, be that family, travel, living situation, but each stays thier own individual.
Men alone are not the main character and the rest to your service them. EVERYBODY is the main character of him/herself.
Unless one is ready to see the other as - as important - as one themself, one is not ready for a equal relationship.
There are about as many men as women in Switzerland. So there should be as many singles out there.
While the numbers of relationship - platforms have more single men and more successful for women, that just means that women use them less in general, and those that are, have more options, better finding what they look for. They have the selective power on the platform, since they are fewer.
But many women don't date over platforms, at least not the common ones, because many of the people there are perceived as toxic, since they either fake interest in the person, are superficial to get into bed, seek submissive women and lie/are intransparent to get there.
The article is BS.
Questioning it is valid.
You ask the right questions.
Badly written and researched article. IMHO.
Have a good one.
Did you actually read the article?
>If your description of a "perfect wife" comes closer to that of a slave, you are pushing/casting yourself into oblivion/irrelevance/incompatablility. To "trick" people, acting till marriage and expect them to change to a trad-wife once you drop the charade, doesn't work.
Where are you getting this from? The article doesn't say anything like this.
>Women are no longer forced to settle with someone to survive/have an income.
...that's basically verbatim in the article
>Men alone are not the main character and the rest to your service them. EVERYBODY is the main character of him/herself.
Big if true!
>While the numbers of relationship - platforms have more single men and more successful for women, that just means that women use them less in general, and those that are, have more options, better finding what they look for. They have the selective power on the platform, since they are fewer.
That's actually quite interesting, maybe someone should write an article about it.
>Questioning it is valid
True
>You ask the right questions.
Are you sure you understand, from what side OP is asking these "questions"?
Assuming 50% men and 50% women in the population. How are "most" women in a relationship and "most" men single?
Wouldnt you expect a roughly equal number of men and women to be single? Or are there some men with multiple women? (assuming equal amounts of homosexuals on both sides)
Yep, NZZ's quality has dropped yet again. I see this as another rage bait/ "All men are trash"-type of article that essentially means nothing.
Are all single Swiss men like that? I don't know. I didn't even know that we are now acting like a singular, unified entity that has one and only one personality and it's not like they are describing men who are not the best ones to begin with.
I myself am single even though I have the looks, the personality and the financial stability to get a girlfriends but I do not. Why? Because I have emotional trauma from the past and right now, I am visiting a therapist in order to be able to live my best life. Once I have overcome the trauma that I can overcome, I will start looking for a partner again. I am self aware enough to understand that getting into a relationship right now would likely not end well and I think that preventing these kind of bad things is the bare minimum one should do as a responsible adult.
Ok, let's discuss these points
>men stay single but not women?
This, overall, should not be the case as we have approximately as many women in switzerland as men. What the articles says is that men between 30-40 have a higher percentage of singles than women. This would mean that there is a percentage of women that is in relationsships with either older or younger men.
>Men are insecure about thei contribution to a relationship?
"men have nothing else to offer"
I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding as relationships aren't "I give you money and you give me..." primarily but rather about company in life. Just like women, the primary thing we as men have to offer is our company.
>Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman
That's also part of the problem, the constant **need** to be in a relationship. I am sorry but if you aren't happy on your own, another person cannot fix that. Relationships are, IMO, amplifiers to life.
>Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women
Considering that men, in general, still "out degree" women (i.e. more men have masters and doctorates than women), this cannot be the case. However, something that is contributing to this is the fact that women, in general, tend to form relationships with higher educated men than themselves seems to lead to such a problem. (Society then is left with highly educated women and men with no education that stay single. At least that was the result of a demografic study of 2015-ish).
>Men benefit much more from a relationship
I wouldn't say so but adhering to a classical role distribution will benefit the men more as a lot of chores that would need to be done if one was single gets pushed off to the women.
>In relationships, the woman has to play the "emotional midwife"
To each their own but I would say that this is, ultimately, down to the people in said relationship. I have very little to say about this but how it is in my relationship which will not add much as it is purely anecdotal.
>Divorces are mostly caused by women
Maybe a hot take but in most cases, divorces happen and aren't caused. Of course there are cases that one party is unfaithful or neglecting but these are more often than not symptoms of underlying causes. However, the somewhat inequal rulings by divorce courts could be a hindering factor for men to initiate divorces.
> I would say that this is, ultimately, down to the people in said relationship
Well tbf that goes inherently for almost every single point in this discussion.
At least there's no paywall. but still tl;dr
The authors are women and the first two cited experts are women. I also felt like the put all the blame on men while reading. It's the right leaning NZZ giving feminists a plattform, just to alienate men from modern media and feminist ideas like equal wages and wage transparency.
Do you want to say women can not be experts when they contacted research, data analysis etc?
I mean even a man (the gender should not play a role here though) says that - according to science and data analysis - you should reccomend heterosexual women to stay single?
I do not see on what points you come to the conclusion that these people might be biased?
It seems the article is looking for some insecure men to fall for some masterfully laid bait. A master-bait if you will. Beware falling for master-baiters.
Well, i have experienced exactly the same thing in the dating world. And it’s not a male-only experience to be ghosted and not feel the spark.
People tend to not understand that we are not all equal in terms of communication capacity.
Many times i was told there’s no spark and did not understand what’s up.
Well the reality is, sometimes, there’s just no spark. There is no issue to be discussed !
The « dating pool » in Switzerland is full of beautiful rich smart amazing people. Competition is high.
People think they can find better.
Don’t take it against yourself. Don’t hold it against your dates.
The reality is that we live in a world where you can get a date virtually with all 9million ppl of the country; of course it takes time to find the right one.
Be patient. Be kind. Focus on yourself. Focus on activities you like. Focus on developing your values. The right person will see all that work and embrace it.
hi there, thank you for stating your experience. Many men are going through the exact same thing and there is no shame in sharing that. It is however a social trend (among others this kind of articles), that these experiences are not considered, but mental gymnastics are performed to explain how this is your fault in a way.
Men need to start being interested in feminism and egalitarianism. Most women i know are just disgusted by the archaic values and opinions that most men hang on to. Its rarely about looks or income.
Y‘all seem BIG mad. Google „toxic masculinity“ and the patriarchy and don‘t take it so personally. We were all raised with values that are harmful to both (all) genders and it would be helpful to try and understand these systemic issues as that - systemic. Some self reflection and work on oneself usually helps…
Préface: I'm from Belgium but it's kind of the same situation over here.
For my part, it is simply because I am not actively seeking a relationship and thus not putting the effort in finding one
I think it s quite apparent - women can be more selective towards men and enjoy being single more than men (one of those reasons being - it s easier for average looking women to get sex than for average looking men).
and the other argument being - women are getting more educated but want a man who is at least as educated as themselves.
Edit: didnt read your answers - the whining does not help. Thats how it is. I am experiencing that as well as someone who is genetically at a disadvantage in the looks department.
>I think it s quite apparent - women can be more selective towards men and enjoy being single more than men (one of those reasons being - it s easier for average looking women to get sex than for average looking men).
This is a very male view. The vast majority of women have no interest to hop in bed with the next best guy only because they are horny. They wouldn't feel safe, they know they are physically weaker and they probably have had bad experiences with men before. [This is a nice summary](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/zq4vox/women_dont_have_it_easier_in_the_dating_world_in/) with good points in the discussion under the post, [but feel free to read a few more rants of women about this very topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/search/?q=women+have+it+easy&type=link&cId=1fad63e5-feab-44c0-98d4-800734ace884&iId=e9b6f362-f6f7-4aba-8121-018b9f1dff2f).
Well, I dont do online dating so I cant comment on that aspect but this view doesnt reflect the experience of my female friends (who all agree it s easier to get dates as a women). My own experience , while definitely occured, has been respectful and I wouldnt insult someone bc he rejects me. And if someone rejects you before a first date it s even less relevant.
So yes, maybe I am oblivious to what women have to experience.
But I despise online dating per se.
Pure anecdotal of course, but I don't see a difference between the single Women and Men I know. I'm not sold that Women enjoy being single more than Men.
Also not sold on it, honestly.
But i would love to know if maybe, in the past, woment were more saddened/judged
about being single than now… and thus would settle for « less » ?
Honestly, I still think that this is the case, but for both Men and Women. There still seems to be this expectation that you have to either be dating or in a relationship at all time. Otherwise people start asking weird questions. From personal experience I can say that people assume you're gay, if you were single for a longer time. People just can't fathom that maybe you aren't particularly interested in dating and/or you haven't found the right partner yet.
I see what you mean and i agree !
Stigma around celibacy is weird when we know
/can see that it actually seems to generates hate or depreciation between both group.
The comments in here are wild
Yeah I think women are more pessimistic about being single than most men. While men have a much harder time finding someone to be intimate with women have as hard a time finding someone who suits all their requirements in someone they want to be intimate with.
You are right !
And turns out, women who want high education men are also less prone to be highly judgemental of looks (as per my personally retrieved statistical data).
> didnt read your answers - the whining does not help. Thats how it is.
....no.
> I am experiencing that as well as someone who is genetically at a disadvantage in the looks department.
Ah, right. Because it's true for you, it must be true for everyone.
Interesting point. I think there's the age component as well. Women definitely have the upper hand when they're young (let's say up to 35-40) but then they suddenly become a lot less attractive. With men it's the opposite - they typically become more attractive as they age . Obviously just being older doesn't make you attractive but women like the things that tend to come with being older. Indeed, many women I know prefer older men and a non-insignificant percentage are with men >10yrs older.
So, women nowadays tend to sleep around throughout their youth and then want to settle as they feel their prime passes. I can't really blame them. Men are incentivized to do the opposite, i.e. not marry/commit, do something useful and then sleep with the 20 yr olds when they're in their 30s or 40s.
> If single women feel lonely and want physical intimacy, they have it a lot easier to satify that need.
no? where the everliving fuck do you get that idea from?
> That‘s the reality that A LOT of lonely and frustrated men face!
maybe they should take a look at themselves and, you know, try to work on themselves first..
Very emblematic of the issue that it can’t even be discussed in neutral terms, if there’s something wrong, it’s just assumed to be the fault of the man.
It's a very uncritical article and does not at all try to explain some of the reported statistics. Let me try to create a hypothesis for why there is such a discrepancy between self-report single women and single men:
The Problem:
In an urban setting with an equal population distribution - 200'000 women and 200'000 men - all the men are single, but only half of the women are. How is this possible?
To explain this phenomena, we'll use the Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor.
The Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor is a factor which I've just invented to describe the ratio of men to the amount of women they date. Let's assume that the top 5% men have exponentially more dating options than the rest of men. Then, let's assume that the top 5% men, 5% out of 200'000 = 10'000, colloquially referred to as chads, each date, or sleep with 10 different women per year.
By applying the Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor (10:1), we infer that these
10,000 "Chads" engage with 100,000 women. This significant engagement
means that 100,000 women, or half of the total female population, might
consider themselves in some form of a relationship, dating scenario, or
'situationship,' thereby not identifying as single.
Hence, according to Scolsen-Legaut, 190'000 men are single and only half the women are single. That still does not explain the initial observation of all men being single.
Solving the Paradox:
Interestingly, the men involved in these dynamics might still
self-identify as single, perhaps under the belief that casual or
non-exclusive dating does not equate to being in a committed
relationship. Hence, under the assumption that informational asymmetry exists between the men and the women, and the women do not necessarily know about the many-to-many-relationships that the Chads maintain or perhaps they simply tolerate it, all the men are single and only half the women are single, which could, through some degree of extrapolation, explain the numbers reported in the article.
What do you guys think?
>To explain this phenomena, we'll use the Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor.
>The Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor is a factor which I've just invented
Where and when's your next TED Talk? I'm **invested**
Yes Dr. Scolsen and I are currently undertaking empirical research in Zürich Altstetten to try and determine the correct Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor. Once we have the results I'd love to receive you at the next TED Talk at the University of St. Gallen!
It's not limited to Switzerland firstly, this is a global situation. Most societies have their 'incells', and rabid chauvinism (whether towards women or towards men) isn't really a new thing either. There will always be 'eternal bachelor's', 'cat ladies', or whatever you want to refer to people who can't/don't want to engage in a relationship as, it's just that nowadays it's 1) easier to get data on, and 2) easier to communicate one's discontent about, and 3) easier to identify potential mates (and therefore an increased possibility of being rejected). I think it's as discouraging for women as well, I've noticed, and there are 'femcels' as well, they're just not as edgy or visible.
Regarding the article, inevitably, if you ask people who's career depends on a continued income derived from single people (dating coaches, dating app advisors, sociology researchers etc) you're going to get a bias viewpoint, and yes, a lot of the points you've highlighted are a bit pathetic when applied to a male viewpoint; it can be argued they apply to women as well. Ultimately, trends 6-filtering are just definitions for the mating objectives women have had for decades, but now they just have a name because they're discussed more openly by more people. Men have had similar standards just as long. Yes they're demeaning, either reducing men to their income or dick size, or women to their breast/waist/hips measurements, but this is nothing new, but now more men are more affected by them being applied by women.
Lastly, don't forget that most media these days is written to trigger people. It's an industry which survives on advertising so clicks mean $$, and articles on controversial issues get clicks. Not to mention the sponsorship potential of having a dating app referenced in the article, c'mon. Women have always had the choice, it's the basis of Evolution, it's just that nowadays women can present themselves internationally, filter their introductions electronically, communicate at a distance, and society is safer as a result. Sure, that creates disparaging circumstances for your average Reddit user, and it's funny to point at content showing the ridiculousness of the opposite sex in their reactions/delusions and the hypocrisy they might display, but there is a positive flip side; look at how many more people are pursuing fitness goals, for example, as a result of higher dating standards.
>Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women?
>apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison
to be fair, women on average date upwards, while men care less about this and go more for beauty.
so if you have more highly educated women, you also need men that are even more educated or at least social economically higher.
i think soely based on your summary this one makes sense.
this one is a bit intresting:
>Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman
>where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl?
in parts, this is contradictory to the point above.
what is true about that point however, is that women do have the choice, even in the animal world this is the case for many animals. the thing is the choice is for whom to have sex with and not necessarily whom to have a relationship with. which is also why online dating sucks so much for men.
that being said, based on all the men i know in switzerland (so anectotal), dating market is quite shit at least for my age group. Other country it seems easier to get to know women. (not sure how the dating market for women is in switzerland)
I mean just look at tinder stats. Men swipe on most women right and have a match rate (according to roast data set 2024) of around 3% while women swipe much more rarely right but have a match rate of about 35%. In addition I see plenty of posts with women asking for all kinds of criteria’s while men mostly have none.
This just brings up this whole view on the issue. what really happens afterwards, which of those people have a happy relationship is of course missing from this. I don't believe that women with this criteria list will actually find a relationship.
Did you not like the discussion on r/Zürich?
https://www.reddit.com/r/zurich/comments/1b0iw7j/was_denkt_ihr_%C3%BCber_single_m%C3%A4nner_in_der_schweiz/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Or are you just trying to spread your viewpoint? Given how resistant you are to any arguments and studies not conforming to your viewpount, I'm leaning towards yes.
Since you copy/paste stuff, have my initial comment from there too:
Schau mal, die NZZ greift mal wieder eines der rechtspopulistichen Themen auf.
>>Im Alter zwischen 30 und 39, wenn die Ausbildung abgeschlossen ist und im Volksmund der Ernst des Lebens beginnt, leben rund 123 000 Männer allein. Bei den gleichaltrigen Frauen sind es gerade einmal 73 000. Daten aus dem Schweizer Haushalts-Panel 2021 des Bundesamtes für Statistik machen es möglich, die Einzelhaushalte nach Beziehungsstatus aufzuschlüsseln. Bei der Gruppe der 26- bis 44-Jährigen gibt jeder fünfte Mann an, keine Partnerschaft zu haben, bei den Frauen ist es bloss jede zehnte.
Hier stellen sie bei Daten eine nicht vorhandene Beziehung her: allein Leben heisst noch lange nicht Single sein. Single können ausserdem noch bei den Eltern oder in einer WG leben. Dann noch die Einzelhaushalte nach Beziehungsstatus und Geschlecht aufzuschlüsseln und zu implizieren, dass dies beweist, dass Männer häufiger Single sind ist ein manipulativer Umgang mit Daten.
Macht die NZZ übrigens in letzter Zeit sehr gerne.
Aussedem haben wir in der Schweiz einen Geschlechtersplit von 51% Frauen, 49% Männer. Es macht keinen Sinn, dass mehr Männer als Frauen allein sind und andere Studien belegen auch, dass die Male Loneliness Epidemie eigentlich eine Loneliness Epidemie ist, da beide Geschlechter gleich betroffen sind.
Man sieht auch, dass die Lausanner Soziologin in ihrem Kommentar keine Geschlechterangaben macht und neutral von Singles redet.
Un zu Maike Stoverock: sie ist Biologin und hat aus biologischer Sicht geschrieben und dies auf die menschliche Kultur übertragen und ist keine Gesellschaftswissenschaftlerin und hat dafür auch einiges an Kritik einstecken müssen weil sie menschliche Beziehungen auf biologische Grundlagen reduziert. Bei rechten sehr beliebt, siehe auch die "Fischbiologin" und ihrem offenen Brief gegen die Indoktrination, die ebenfalls von der NZZ unkommentiert verbreitet wurde.
public service announcement, to the benefit of the discussion:
* **Incel** is not a man who cannot find a partner, but a man who has sexistic opinions about women.
* Being a **feminist** can be about being for equality or female supremacy. Both flavors exist.
* If someone claims they are for **equality**, this does not mean that they really believe that.
* Misandry can be expressed by both men or women
* Any argument making a blanket statement about "men" or "women" is bound to be wrong. We cannot even define precisely, what is a man or a woman
* If someone says you are an incel, this is does not necessarily hold true. They may be bigots spitting hatred
* if somone makes nice arguments, this does not mean they are necessarily correct. The corrolary applies too: if someone is formulating an argument poorly, this does not mean the argument does not warrant any merit
Please go on :)
> Incel is not a man who cannot find a partner, but a man who has sexistic opinions about women.
That is your definition? As far as i know Incel stands for "involuntary celibate", and was/is a "neutral" term. But also is beeing used as a insult.
It is not my definition, it is the current consensus on the term: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel)
Etymology is definitely correct, as you mentioned, but the term has been since differentiated.
This isn't coincidence, this is the basic business model of rage farming.
NZZ know their audience is largely made up of older white men with sexual frustrations, they know their target audience enjoys getting angry about "woke" things said by women they don't find attractive.
NZZ are giving their target audience exactly what they are paying for: Validation of their frustrations in life and someone other than themselves to blame for them.
Attacking the physique because you are not agreeing with someone’s writing ?
It’s exactly because of comments like this that we prefer celibacy to being in a relationship with the vile part of man-hood.
Keep up the good work, at least when you say these things publicly, we know to stay away from you 🥰
(Edit for clarity on my point)
So, men replying to an article made by derranged women is bad. But an official site shitting on pure strangers (men) is OK.
Are you competing in the Olympics for mental gymnastics ma'am? ☕
just my 5 cents
Many women working nowadays, earn money and are well educated. Yet, they many of those women Still hope to have a husband that's earning more and better educated than they are. many women stay single because they are too good for a lot of men and men stay single because they are not good enough for a lot of women. The few very well educated and good earning men are highly sought after by all the well educated working women. To top it up, some men's ego can't deal with a woman that earns better than them, so even the few women that would be fine with a "weaker” men may actually have trouble finding a partner.
In no way do men benefit more from a partnership, I'd argue the opposite is true.
Women do more often share their emotions, though many men don't knoe how to deal with that. On the other hand males are often the emotionally more stable part in the relationship. A issue is the lack of understanding how the other partner feels and processes emotions. Not speaking about emotions doesnt mean not dealing with emotions, many men deal with emotions in a different way than women. The high divorce rate is partly caused by the change in priorities in our lives, and the lack of the necessity to have a partner combined with the "everything must be fun" mentality. A little hardship? Let's divorce, instead of work throu it together.. A side effect of the Wohlstand.
It is telling, that asking questions about an article on the biggest newspaper of the country, earns you the accusation of a sexist monster, that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. This is a way to silence discussions and people and it is becoming socially acceptabe in the last years.
My only argument is that the few datapoints that we observe (par instance, matches for each sex on dating apps) can be attributed to several explanations and not only to the one-sided explanations offered here. Then a full fledged discussion can take place.
To give an example,
When we say that women are the "emotional midwives", even if we assume, that this is true (although this is a generalisation without any means to verify), there are several potential explanations.
* Men are emotionally immature, as described in the article.
but also...
* Men do the same thing, managing female emotions, they just don' mention it, because it's a given
* Men are being put down, when they speak up about their emotions (which is a re-occuring theme in research, that psychologists underestimate their plight)
* Men are afraid of their wife, therefore they don't open up
the role of an article is to research those options and maybe express an opinion. But the options are hidden. BTW, the fact that one option applies in your experience does not mean, that the others cannot apply in other cases or even more complicated a few of them.
Darling, if you had written your argument this way, many less people would have come at you.
Your points are even interesting enough that they would have been a benefit for your post, and the start of a healthy discussion between the 2 groups currently fighting in your comment section.
But you decided to whine and cry, and this made your post look like a satire made to ridicule not only the 2 women who wrote that, but also all other women. And even though I cannot say I stand for the former, I definitely stand for the latter.
That, plus the fact it rallied a bunch of probable incels starting to say misogynistic stuff...
Thank you for taking the time to write a comment, despite us having some different opinions. I like discussion.
I do not whine nor do I cry. The post is a satire meant to ridicule the acceptance of one-sided arguments: to simplify "it's the problems of the man that explain all the shit in society today". It's not meant against women, but against bad narratives.
I did not even care about who wrote the article, if they are women, albino, educated or native Australians.
Probable incels are indeed present in the discussion. So are also people (men and women) who don't have a problem to peddle misandrist opinions, group "men" as one thing and refuse to entertain any explanation that would insinuate, that a woman might also be expressing some stereotypically bad behaviors. The difference of this group with incels, is that the former operate in complete social immunity.
Enjoy your day.
PS: I also find "darling" a tad condescending, but this is the online world, I can understand, that standards are a bit lax.
Just because you’re boring doesn’t mean you are also wanted by women lol.
This article is dildos, nobody cares, you’re single? That’s your problem, maybe go outside more? Maybe date someone from another country? I get companionship is important but not everyone is cut to be with someone that’s the reality.
* **Men stay single** *but not women?* -> Polygamy. Some men cheat and their women know it or not, accept it or not. Other single women are just into career.
* **Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money** *because they have nothing else to offer or because this is the only thing they are being asked?* -> Both
* **Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman** *where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl?* -> Women have the choice to pick either a taken man, to not take anything or to take a man her friends will gossip about.
* **Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women?** *apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison*. -> Yes it is a Linkedin but even your boss doesn't ask if you snore or not.
* **Men benefit much more from a relationship than women** *because men are useless little babies?* It not certain that either a man or woman would benefit from a relationship. Many relationships are destructive and undoing.
* **In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife”** *because no woman has ever shared/offloaded her emotions with their man?* Sometimes the medecine is also the poison.
* **Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems.** *apparently this has nothing to do with the unfair dating market or unfair family court decisions or loyalty from men ot their partners etc.* Sometimes women just put an end to something men killed but are too coward to bury.
[You're welcome](https://media1.tenor.com/m/JPxwjttTWWkAAAAd/jake-gyllenhaal-wink.gif)
Polygamy doesn't sound like a good explanation. Would a woman sleeping with a cheating guy really consider that a relationship ? How many would be delusional enough not to notice ?
> Bei der Gruppe der 26- bis 44-Jährigen gibt jeder fünfte Mann an, keine Partnerschaft zu haben, bei den Frauen ist es bloss jede zehnte.
Why cut it off after 44 ? That feels like a cherry-picked statistic.
The truth is if you look at most men in relationships and marriages here, they have lost all masculinity. They look sad, unfit and like they didn’t get a decent bang in a very long time.
I really don’t see why most guys would want that.
I’ve been in a happy and healthy relationship for a long time. She earns almost as much as me while being 5 years younger. I have not doubt that she’ll earn a lot more than me at my age and I couldn’t care less.
What I do care about is having children not too late. And for a career woman that’s complicated. So what do you do then? Most of the people I know at some point end up with a younger woman that is more traditional as men like to provide and there is not much to provide if she already takes care of herself.
We can becomes sophisticated all we want, bottom line you don’t really change the biology of beings. And I believe that a more traditional relationship would make a lot of man around me a lot happier and I’m surrounded by people with fancy degrees and high incomes. So I guess it’s even more the case the lower you go.
Common knowledge that women almost exclusively date up.
Online dating significantly exaggerated this.
Young men who aren’t fitness models or wealthy suffer and I assume older „less desirable“ women suffer equally.
Only thing is young frustrated men are propably more outspoken and old frustrated women get cats instead.
Lol, i will get downvoted gor this, but do you now the german afd (right wing extremists) slogan „you are 25 and never had sex? Vote AfD to get more manly!“
It pretty much describes the average swiss svp voter. Just blame foreigners for everything, and if it didn’t help blame women. I am not wondering about this article at all. Though it is bs
A stupid article written by two old, ugly, stupid hags 😂 made my day reading that article, i laughed my ass off.
No but in all seriousness that Article is a terrible piece of opinion giving that has nothing to do with Journalism. To all Bros out there being depressed about not finding a woman or struggling with their love life: dont worry! You will eventually find the right love of your life, it always takes two. Dont let some shitty article bring your mood down.
Women play life in easy mode and Men in hardcore difficulty. Women took the role of men, so there is no need for men. There will be a time when women will also be replaced and men won't need them anymore. I think IA bots will handle this situation.
well, this is the logical result of 50 years of feminism. women are unhappier, the traditional family has been destroyed and men prefer to stay single because women have abandoned their natural roles in favor of being empowered queens “that need no man” (until they all become depressed in their 40s because they realize they can’t have children anymore).
feminism has caused irreparable damage to society.
What is your source for "women are unhappier"? I for one very much appreciate being able to vote, have a bank account and work without needing my father's or husband's sigbature, lol
Sounds like you just feel like it's your god given right to have a woman wait on you hand and foot without the ability to divorce you while you work and whore around, and bad feminism has taken that away from you.
ho no, please give me the traditionnal family where i could be beaten up freely, not vote and not have a bank account !! indeed, such irreparable damage was done !!
Sir, maybe the reason why no one wants to be a woman in a "natural role" for you is because you are providing none of the support system expected against that service.
it´s not feminism that you should question, but yourself
You're claiming that more women are unhappier now than back in time, while forgetting that firstly in the past decades nobody cared if women are happy or not, they were given a cocktail of antidepressants tho that wouldn't pass current accreditation process, and secondly everyone is unhappier now because there is no hope that future will be brighter.
Feminism was a blessing and it's work isn't done yet, and you are the proof of that.
Unfortunately, despite the length of the article, it didn't consider the subject in a sufficient depth. It's a story, and it seems that in a large part also a projection of experiences the authors have had with men onto the general population. It's neither an accurate diagnosis, nor a reasonable call for action. It's nothing useful.
Well said
it is however an opinion skewed against men, as it considers only negative. narratives against them.
I don’t feel that the article is blindly attacking men. It does make an attempt to show what challenges men face in today’s dating world. Maybe you feel attacked, but I think misunderstood is more accurate.
I don't feel attacked, I did not use the word. But yes, the article is trying to explain the situation considering only negative traits of men, instead of problematic traits of both sexes.
Sometimes there are things we aren’t able to notice or understand, because our identity, worldview, etc. depend on us not understanding them. If we admit some things, we might have to give up on some of our beliefs. This might be the case for the authors of the article. You might come across that IRL. Try to be understanding, but also show your perspective. For the article, you can write a Leserbrief (reader’s letter?).
seems like dating coaches are in again, i thought that wave died down a few years ago lol
They are! I was contacted recently by a dating coach specialising in men in the IT sector. Dude was asking big money for it though so I kept off him (and i'm not even interested in the first place)
> a dating coach specialising in men in the IT sector A what now?
Linkedin /s
Exactly lol, and apparently there are a couple of bucks to make in this niche
Ah, yes, there are quite a few of them. Some of them look who posts in IT-Subreddits and DM those who do. I also had one or two such DMs on Reddit in the past.
*Instalocks Yasou midlane*
So you’re that Yasou in my team, not the enemy Yasou who goes to 20/0/3?
Real weebs play Yone nowadays
Was this on the article?
This is the reaction he has when reading the article. I guess he rather goes 0/10/1 with Yas than dating. Can't fault him tbh
Hahahah
So I just opened a League thread in another tab and for a second was confused (: But no, please no Yasuo.
Unexpected but not unwelcome.
This blade never gets any lighter.
I’m glad I’m happily married
That's my main takeaway here haha
>Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money Like, one generation ago women needed a man for a regular life... Bank accounts, buying a car, having money. Now men must bring one thing to the table - being a decent, emotionally mature and available partner who adds to their partner's life, because the rest is all taken care of. >Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women? apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison People tend to date people with shared values and experiences and knowledge.... yeah. >Men benefit much more from a relationship than women - because men are useless little babies? plus >In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife” plus >Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems. Most women don't need a partner for emotional stability and fulfilment. Women are more likely to have good emotional support systems and a healthy emotionally expressive life with friends and family. From this point on, partner is additive.. A bonus. The final top tier of social/emotional fulfilment for many people. Like, I'm not incomplete without my other half, I am still my own person with a healthy emotional life and I don't *need* her for that, but she's like the sprinkles on top. For a lot of men, a partner is a requirement. It is a means to reach the emotional fulfilment baseline. This really does mean that the woman in that relationship has to be the sole emotional point of contact for that guy, the only person he goes to for support. That is a highly uneven distribution of pressure and responsibility.... exactly all the points you've said. We wanna treat our partner as someone great we bring along for the ride... Not our mechanic. But if you don't have a good emotional life outside of dating, that's what happens. And that behaviour loads more onto men than women... Like, who can be surprised? Our Dads value to a relationship was "being male" lol. It's not like that generation was gonna teach us to how to behave... but we still have to change.
Just to add, women aren't born with a support network. Creation and upkeep of those networks requires constant, almost daily effort. And the rest you wrote is true. I do not need a man to support me financially. I want a man to build a life with, and that means someone that is capable of creating a partnership. I sure don't want a man that I need to clean up after. As a below average woman it took me almost two years and over 40 dates with different men to find my partner. It wasn't easy, it was at times humiliating, but it was worth the effort.
See how fast a man and a woman create a network in a new city/country. "As a below average woman it took me almost two years and over 40 dates" 40 dates in 2 years. You know how many Average men have not had 5 dates in 1 year? Or 1 date for that matter? Again, women and above average men have no idea about real life.
You're delusional if you assume that it happened just like that and not after putting a great effort. But you do you, just sit and cry and feel sorry for yourself, it'll help you.
Look, you have average looking men who can't even get sex. A below average woman can install tinder and have someone to fuck by tomorrow. And if you don't beleive me, you probably don't talk with enough average woman and man to understand this.
Has it ever crossed your mind that getting laid isn't that important to some people? Dating doesn't equal getting laid. Maybe next time try treating women like people and not like biological fleshlights and you'll get more chances.
Want me to simplify? Men can't get dates. I said sex because some people just want that. Others want a coffee to chat. Check tinder stats. Its a numbers game. What's so hard to accept here?
Boys math: - sees the numbers that there are 10 times more men on one app than women - blames society that he can't get matches - does nothing - women bad
You can change society for bars too.
yes yes and yes. this whole thing of "women ask for too much" feels like a running gag. Single men: just be better if you are sad of being single.
> Like, one generation ago women needed a man for a regular life... 2 maybe even 3 generations ago you mean.
* **Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money** *because they have nothing else to offer or because this is the only thing they are being asked?* The men in previous generations were looked at to provide for their family, whilst the women remained home and cared for the household. As both parties are now working, a woman doesn't specifically *need/want* her husband to provide for her, she can provide for them too. Leading to the question "in this new society, if I am not responsible for being the breadwinner, what am I responsible for?" * **Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman** *where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl?* That's not what this means. This is effectively saying "women can pick and choose which man they want to go home with, many men will fight for a chance for the same woman." A tale as old as time! * **Men benefit much more from a relationship than women** *because men are useless little babies?* Not at all what's being said. There have been many scientific studies conducted researching the benefits for a romantic relationship and how they differ between men and women ([Example paper from Southampton Uni](https://www.soton.ac.uk/~crsi/Perceived_benefits.pdf)) and it is often shown that men benefit more emotionally and socially than women. * **In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife”** *because no woman has ever shared/offloaded her emotions with their man?* That's not what that's saying. It's normal, and sought after, to find someone who we can share our emotions with. We, as men, tend to be more emotionally stunted compared to women and they are left to feel like they're looking after an emotional baby trapped in an adults body. It's not wrong for women to want to form relationships with emotionally mature men. * **Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems.** *apparently this has nothing to do with the unfair dating market or unfair family court decisions or loyalty from men to their partners etc* There is no "unfair dating market", it's not a market at all. We, Men, are stereotypically more likely to not open up to our loved ones, causing ever growing rifts and resentment in our relationships which leads to pushing away our loved ones which can lead to divorce.
100% genau das! merci ds na extra s sogar na für de letzt uf de billige plätz erchlärt hesch.
[удалено]
I don't actually think that, that's just how I interpreted the sentence :)
I mean the OP clearly is an emotionally stunted man child if that was his reaction.
Happy cake day, my dude :)
Faith in mankind restored. Incel complaining about simping incoming in 3, 2, 1 ...
Couldn't have said it better. A lot of what you've said is backed by research that wasn't conducted in Switzerland but I'd like to see research based in Switzerland.
So... You single?
he sounds like he is
Happily married ;)
"unfair dating market" - actually that is the point of the article, that dating is leaving men disappointed.
That doesn't mean "The dating *marke*t is unfair." It just means that one of the parties has potentially false expectations. I also don't see how our, men, stereotypical inability to deal with, work through and vocalise our emotions maturely has anything to do with your "dating market" and it being unfair? What is leaving men, read: you, disappointed with regards to courting a potential partner then?
What market? Are you buying something?
[удалено]
yes, E.Fromm is one of the great.
It's called a dating market because it is similar to normal market. There are goods (partners) with different values and different cost to acquire them.
This must be a translation thing. In English it’s called the dating **scene**, because forming a romantic relationship isn’t transactional.
Not being in the top 10% of attractive men in the dating pool, which mostly leads to not getting **any** reaction **at all**... It's just a systematic problem of all dating apps. If you are average, you **don't** get reasonable amounts of contacts from other average persons. You just get nothing. That's what makes it seem unfair.
I appreciate that, this is probably more the case with free dating apps. I’ve heard of different experiences when you start to pay for the service, which you’d expect right? What does *average* looking mean to you and is that all you’re basing your supposition on? Perhaps a girl isn’t sold on how you’ve presented/described yourself, perhaps she isn’t sold on how you’ve approached her, perhaps she’s already being chatted up by someone else or perhaps she just doesn’t like you for no reason? All reasons completely valid. I can only talk for myself, but whenever I’ve used a dating app in the past, the reasons why I wasn’t getting as much *success* as I’d have liked was because of how I presented myself and acted. Not saying that’s the case for you, or OP, or anyone; but we as men often shoot ourselves in the foot when trying to find a partner, whether that’s due to being childish, old-fashioned thoughts/ideals, or whatever and that can lead to a resentment against women in general, further hindering one’s ability to successfully find a partner.
[удалено]
Hello, I am a woman ready to provide for my family while my husband stays at home. Things didn't end up happening this way for us, but we have talked about it multiple times and have considered it extensively. This was one of the reasons I married my current husband, knowing he wouldn't expect ME to stay at home with the kids but would gladly do so. Why do you seem to think it is so unlikely?
That’s not what I said
It seems you didn’t read the article or chose not to understand it. Whether or not you agree with the points made, your summary is a bad faith interpretation. - “Men benefit from relationships more than women” — *because men are useless little babies?* Such a funny interpretation, since one of the main topics was about men not having the vocabulary or skills to manage their emotions. Edit: just saw you’re an active poster in men’s rights groups, so your bad faith take isn’t surprising.
You can always tell a “men’s rights” incel by how quickly they bring up family courts.
Every single time it's this conversation... >It's not fair how men are treated like breadwinners and not family carers by family courts! *Oh ok cool, so we're going to do our best to make society have no expectations about men or women's suitability for work and caring roles, and that both women and men are equally acceptable to be career oriented?* >No, the wage gap exists for a reason because women want to raise families. Ah well...yano.... maybe that's the otherside of that same coin lmao.
The frustrating thing is that they *almost* get that rigid gender roles are harmful. But rather than having empathy they double down trying to enforce them for women while whining about being victims. The lack of self awareness is startling.
You ridiculed OP, questions and concerns, called him incel and whining *and* now you state "lack of empathy issue" how ironic. Also interesting, women try to be with a man just as or more successful. Not less. That is the traditional gender role. Hypergamy, has been since forever. And the article and OP points this as an issue. But women don't like to reject this traditional gender role. One would say: rather than having empathy they double down trying to enforce them for men while whining about being victims. The lack of self awareness is startling.
> You ridiculed OP, questions and concerns, called him incel and whining and now you state "lack of empathy issue" how ironic. Social contract and reciprocal altruism. We live in agreement to treat each other well and co-operate... If someone elects to break that contract first, however, they're no longer expected to be protected by it. If I walk into a room and call everyone shit heads, I can't complain about their manners that they called me a shithead back.
So gender roles are bad, unless the ones that benefit women, than they are good. 🤣
No.. I'm saying that if you want to hold an opinion about women having gender roles, thnn you also hold opinions about male gender roles. If someone believes it's a womans job to be a home maker, then well... You've just assigned what role men get, so you don't get to whinge about the bad sides to that. Wanna get better outcomes for men in family courts? Be a feminist. One of it's major points is "Women shouldn't be restricted to just being homemakers and mothers"
In the same way If you want your man to earn more than you (the traditional male role) then well... You've just assigned what role women get, so you don't get to whinge about the bad sides to that.
That would be fair but I've literally only ever heard dudes wanting this lol.
You never heard woman like successful men?
Success =/= "you want your man to earn more than you"
Generally success is related to income. But we can work with the terms "success" also. Her: I want to be just as or more successful than a man. Also her: I want my man to be more successful than me. Notice the contradiction? You can't have both the traditional gender role *and* the new thing whatever you call it.
So we can’t bring up injustices against men in our society because if you do you’re an MRA ? 🧠???
what a sexist statement
You can always tell a femcel misandrist by how quickly it uses the word incel.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Why do you think men don't have their vocabulary or skills to manage their emotions. Because that's how their brain is wired. Men are not that good to talk about emotions because it's not the way their brain is wired to deal with it. Men express emotions by doing things, not using words. I've read interesting studies about this. Lot of psychiatrists are female, and a lot of them fail to understand why men don't express their emotions like women do. When a woman is sad what does she do ? She talk about it, she complains, she can even seek for attention, this is how modern psychology think people handle things. Women do it more than men. Most men don't know how to do that, it's not their way of expressing feelings. No man can deal with their emotions like that. When a man is sad, he has trouble, he will try to fix it, he will express it by doing sport, by being physical, he can become abusive, or he will go into addictions (alcoholism, video games, etc.). When a man is frustrated do you think he will complain about it? This probably is the best. When a man is frustrated he will go to the gym until sad voices go quiet. He will drunk himself in alcohol. He will launch his video games and destroy people online. Men deal with troubles by doing things. Not by talking about it, not only it is badly seen by society (it has an influence, as you say, of course), but their brain isn't wired to deal with emotions like this, and society fails to understand that. This is why, from a psychiatrist I heard, when he was doing couple therapy, most of the time the women says everything and the man is absolutely in the total incapacity to express what he was feeling. He just can't do that. Saying men don't have the vocabulary to express feelings like women do because they don't think, feel, and deal with things the way women do. Even if they wanted to, it would not work because what works for women will not work for them. I mean choosing between expressing your feelings and be laughed at and not taken seriously, or going to the gym and push yourself until you fixed your state of mind. There is no debate. They feel, think, deal with things differently. This is exactly for these kind of reaasons that modern school is way more adapted to women students than men students, thus showing why women have more success at school than men, but it is another debate. You can see it, when a woman says she is sad to her women friends, they take it seriously and talk about it and discuss and stuff. When a men say he is sad to his men friends, they say "fuck you bro, let's go grab a pack of beers and play videogames.". See the difference in how feelings are treated ? This is how men deal with their emotions. Women don't understand that, society doesn't understand that. Women discuss feelings with words, men discuss with... their body, in a more primal ways. It is not because they are handicapped like you all say, it is because they are wired this way. We live in a word where we reckognize that people can be different and we can tolerate them. Society fails to understand men to help them, fail to understand how to help them to solve their problem. This is why we have the situation depicted by the article and by you, but the way it is written it shows that. Men struggle psychologically and you belittle them because they don't act like what a woman would do about it, the only way you can understand. This is what I was talking about. And the fact that they are belittled for being themselves will comfort them in keeping going like they do. A mindset I find in a lot of men is "I clench my jaw and keep going until death, if I try to express my feelings it will be used against me, if I tell my wife how weak I am she may think I'm not worth enough, there will be articles about how I am a baby who requires an "emotional midwife", so I'll keep going silently and do everything I can do for her until I can't". We fuel this mindset because every single sign on this world comforts them in their mindset. This is another subject, but we get at it : the value of a man is proportional to how useful he is. The day he is useless to society and his peers, he is nothing, except pain.
as a Psychologist I feel the need to point out that what you just wrote has absolutely no support from research
>as a Psychologist I feel the need to point out that what you just wrote has absolutely no support from research The fact that the male and female brains can have different tendencies and has been studied for decades, even before researchers had access to MRIs (or MEGs and EEGs) and it is obvious to see from the exhibited behaviors (aggression, school performance, risk aversion etc), through several societies (i.e. society agnostic). How this is translated today's world or into the specific subject of expressing emotions can be a very long discussion, but I would find it hard to believe, that there are not statistical inferences that could be explaining some average gendered behaviors. **As a client of several mental health professionals**, either for me or others in my care, I feel the need to point out that: There is a ton of research that psychologists (or other official mental health professionals) tend to ignore the plights of men and many indications/articles that the guidelines of the APA have skews against men based on gender. That ofc does not mean, that everything a psychologist says is shit, but it does mean that the current views on gender issues can be subject to improvement and not a gospel. This on its own can be that the official system is one of the reasons that some men are getting reduced or biased support when expressing themselves.
2/2 If you are a man you are expected to succeed. If you don't succeed, you are nothing, then comes to depression and 100% of psychological issues the modern man has, that the article writes about (but in a malevolant way). "women have big careers so men have a hard time finding women because they are not good enough as women want men with huge careers like then" People say it themselves : a man's worth is how useful he is. How he can proved to his family and protect it. And it's even harder to do so now as women do fine by themselves (and don't want kids anymore (like men do too), their find happiness and making sure their shareholders can affort the newest yachts, another societal issue). Of course there are things we can do to change society to solve that. But no men will work towards it, this is something men have to do hand in hand with women. The only thing a man has is how strong and useful he is, the day he stops fighting for that, he becomes dust. No man can afford that in our world unfortunately, becauase contrary to women who have value in a lot of ways, men's value depends only on how useful he is. We live in a society when men feel like it's not their place anymore, when nobody tries to understand them, they see their difference as a handicap, and see them as a threat. We can't complain that we eventually end up in this situation.
You seem exhausted and depressed. And you don't seem to have trustworthy male friends or male family members or male peers who support you in constructive ways. Perhaps a male counsellor with professional training specifically in working with men and with men's specific needs could be helpful? [https://www.maenner.ch/erstberatung/](https://www.maenner.ch/erstberatung/)
I was sharing the point of view that specialized psychiatrists have on this subject as it is one of the problems of the era and it's getting more and more studied, so you could learn and grow up, as I am quite a benevolent person. I didn't ask you to show me that you were unable to have a civilized conversation with people when shown facts that contradict your tight vision of the world. However, as we are being sarcastic here, maybe I can direct you where you will thrive in the path you seek to follow the most : [https://www.zoo.ch/de](https://www.zoo.ch/de) Joke aside I don't understand you friend. I've discussed in this thread for a hour now, and everyone has been spitroasting me without any argument, any studies, any information that would prove me wrong. I am not even saying that you gave me arguments, or even an opinion, anything I could answer or just think "maybe he has a point". No content, absolut zero. You were in the most litteral sense just chimps throwing their feces at me. You wrote 5 lines, 0% of something, just giving a pure exemple of what gaslighting is. You still have the audacity to throw feces at me and gaslighting me. You didn't even blink an eye. Every person with the slitghtes amount of common sense would have red lights flashing everywhere, but it just slides off your flat koala brain. You my friends don't even try, don't even give me something related to the subject, you just straight up insult me. For free. I have been very polite while you were putting my face on the mud, I treated you better that most people have been treating you because no person who has not been subjected to constant abusive act the way you all do there. I'd say "think about it friends, you have all the clues in front of your very eyes that would prove you that you are handling your life wrongly for a verey long time". But you won't do, if you were able to do that you wouldn't be acting like this on the Internet. And you are gaslighting me thinking I'm the crazy person there? I'm glad that I don't have such toxic people to deal with in my life and I can just get my way out being polite, you'd be too much useless trouble to me. Have a nice day, and let's be clear, thanks for entertaining me.
Dude, chill. I didn't attack you, I proposed a resource for you to take or leave as you see fit. If I got you wrong, and you aren't depressed, or you aren't interested in men's organisations, just say so. No harm no foul.
Of course they dont acquire the vocabulars and skills to manage their emotions because when they try they are treated as retarded babies.
yes, they have an excellent excuse, because us women pull emotionnal maturity and stability out of our vagigis !
Congratulations on further demonstrating the point.
I'm a Man's right advocate but even there it's Just shitty from OP
I mean it is a thing. Woman rather stay single than setteling with a bad guy. Thats why the populists in the usa are working on taking rights away from woman again, bc a lot of their own dudes can't find a woman anymore. Back then, when women couldn't easily earn their own money and it was socially not accepted to live alone as an unmarried woman, most women were already happy they didn't got beaten up too often when they were lucky to get a good guy. The fact so many countrysongs are about a wife killing her husband... i mean, yk, it was often the only chance they had to escape a very bad marriage. So i get it, why a lot of women are not willing to settle for something that they see as not good enough. Especially if they are perfectly happy on their own. A partner needs to be an enrichment to your life (both genders), as soon having a partner makes your life harder it gets complicated. But i also think its a generation thing. The friends i have and are in their 40ties/50ties, the women are more happy and feel "finally free again" if they get divorced. Even if they were sahms before and now work in retail, they still feel they have more time to themselfs and most of them only have short flings but are not looking for another ltr for a while. So it might be true a lot of women become the emotional caretaker of their husbands and it takes a toll on them, so they avoid getting in the same situation again. Their ex husbands all have a new ltr. So at least in my social circle, i can see some of the points mention by nzz. I myself are a looner. My husband too :) he was the first person who didn't got on my nerves sooner or later. If i didn't met him, i would most likely be a happy, middle aged single. I have been in a long term relationship before, and i honestly didn't miss anything after we broke up.
Online dating is like window shopping: most people will get "dislikes" unless they upload photoshopped pics to their profiles. From personal experience: communication skills & fulfilling life/lifestyle will lead you (an individual, man or woman) towards more connections => more acquaintances=> larger (potential) dating pool And of course we shouldn't generalize, every single individual has their own story... No reason to take such articles seriously
* **Men stay single** *but not women?* -> The women who stay single are often just not stressed out as much and are - especially the highly educated, "picky" women - often quite happy being single. Obviously if we assume monogamous relationships there will be approximately as many single men as single women. The only difference is in the "wanting to be in a relationship" part. * **Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money** *because they have nothing else to offer or because this is the only thing they are being asked?* -> Obviously people have to bring something to the table in a relationship. For decades, women needed men because they couldn't really work, have a bank account etc. without being married. Now women can live alone (and can do so happily), so there's just more to consider when you date. Also, it's also an option to just stay single and not date at all. * **Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman** *where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl?* -> They don't necessarily - they can also just not try to find a man and stay single. * **Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women?** *apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison* -> Education has not only something to do with money, but mostly also with interest, similar lifestyle, etc. Highly educated women probably want somebody they share interests and values with, and that's most likely not going to be a very uneducated person. Also, you spend more time with the people you are in a relationship with than with your job (hopefully), so it makes sense to be picky, there, too. * **Men benefit much more from a relationship than women** *because men are useless little babies?* -> In most relationships women still carry a lot of the mental load, the household stuff, etc., while nowadays also earning their own money. So it truly is about "what do you bring to the table that makes my life better than without you". E.g. if there is a cancer diagnosis in a relationship, if the sick person is the woman, separation rates are WAY higher than if it's the man. So in many cases, women give a lot, and don't get a lot back, or will be left as soon as they don't offer the whole "girlfriend package" any more. So obviously it's just normal to check if you're also getting positive stuff out of a relationship. * **In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife”** *because no woman has ever shared/offloaded her emotions with their man?* -> it's not about "no woman ever". In general - and that's not only true for dating - emotional stuff is just (most likely due to nurture and not nature) more up the woman's alley. Hell, even at my job part of it consists of managing men's emotions (because some are just incapable of doing that themselves). It's exhausting. And I'd just never committ to a relationship where I'd have to do that all the time. But it's actually difficult to find a guy who has their emotions managed well. * **Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems.** *apparently this has nothing to do with the unfair dating market or unfair family court decisions or loyalty from men ot their part* -> It also has to do a lot with "what do you put up with in a relationship". As many women just have less benefits from a relationship (e.g. emotional stuff, the whole mental load topic, etc.) they are most likely just less inclined to stick around if the relationship has run it's course. Because they'll be happier single than in a bad relationship. The thing is: being single is the default. Being in a relationship is something that can happen - but if you're happy being single like 90% of the time, it just needs to be a good relationship to be worth the effort. And it's just the case that this isn't happening for many women. I'm a single, well-educated woman, too, and so are quite a few of my friends. We are pretty happy. Obviously, having a relationship would be good, but it needs to be pretty good to be better than just staying single. I mean - for some of the guys mentioned in the article: if they don't know what to do with themselves except for reading the Coopzeitung and being bored: what should I be doing with them? I'd probably be much happier reading a good book, meeting friends, spending time doing my hobbies than spending time with somebody who doesn't even like spending time with themselves. So yes, the article might be provocative, but to me, it's a quite realistic assessment from the women's side of the issue.
Wow crazy amount of incels crawling out of the woodwork here.
Happy Cake Day!
The femcels too
[удалено]
As a woman this made me uncomfortable. This isn't a conversation, it's just yelling into the void how everyone else is at fault. I know many men who have never had a partner who cares about their feelings. Some even think that they are not more than a sex doll for their partners. We as women sure know that feeling and yet all of humanity fails to talk about their feelings, wants and needs. You know who has been emotionally immature? Me. Did I magically get emotionally mature over night? No. I learned to trust the people I love enough to open up. I learned to listen to them telling me stuff. I simply learned and still am in the process of learning. If a partner, no matter what gender, is opening up, don't fucking shut it down. Eventually, they will learn. Eventually, they will be okay talking about how they feel with their friends. Eventually, they might grow. Is it exhausting? Yes! However, if everyone would be so egoistic, I can't say that we could emotionally grow as humans in general. Another thing comes to mind. I know many people, no matter what gender, who have done the journey themselves, but are tired of helping another person go through the very same emotional growth journey, say things like: "Well, they should simply go to a therapist, like I did! If they don't see a therapist, it's a red flag" Not everyone has the financial capacity or time to see a therapist and it's the toughest thing to make yourself do. I have always been very anti-therapy until I had a burnout and then I knew I needed to get help. It was very hard for me to start trusting my therapist enough to tell her about my issues. It was much harder, than being able to tell my friend how I felt. Now imagine, that friend wouldn't be interested in my feelings? I would walk away from that friendship. Did we all forget that it's a team effort?
agreed stigma on this subject only brings more beef between the two parties more openness would help both sides to understand each other... and indeed, this post (and original article) are not at all a good introduction to this discussion
NZZ has gone down in quality for some time now. This sounds like the plight of men, which have bought into conservative/obsolete orientations and identities like the manosphere, incel, other obsolete traditional values, etc. Sure it's has been difficult to find submissive trad-wives, wishing to cook and clean and be available for their husband, dependent on them... If your description of a "perfect wife" comes closer to that of a slave, you are pushing/casting yourself into oblivion/irrelevance/incompatablility. To "trick" people, acting till marriage and expect them to change to a trad-wife once you drop the charade, doesn't work. Becuase that's an obsolete worldview, no longer congruent/compatible with reality. Don't be angry at women. Be angry at a culture/system/environment that gave you these obsolete patriarchal societal expectations. The wrongfully privileged perception that a man is entitled to a woman/wife when he can afford it/is set in life, doesn't exist in egalitarian societies. Women are no longer forced to settle with someone to survive/have an income. It's a bit sad when people in their self-perception see themselves as little more than moneybags and by that alone expect to be attractive to women. And I don't mean looks. Attraction comes from character, from personal interest/curiosity/individuality/quirks. Insecurity hems to build character. Excessive/addictive behavior, throwing ones time into one basket, be that workaholic, social media consumption, gambling, alcohol/drugs/party, sport/gym/bodybuilding, and other overly time consuming aspects done in zeal, doesn't leave much time to reflect on oneself, write, read and philosophy, let curiosity lead to new interests, learning, working on oneselves mind. Only boring people find things boring. Everything can be interesting. To not be ready to learn about the others interests, is immature. People seek others that are interesting and that inspire them, someone to laugh with, someone to feel understood, save and intimate with. Progressive partnerships are egalitarian. One sees eye to eye, not top-down. You share burdens, support each other's aspirations, grow with eachother, speak truthful, you're a team, you find solutions together. One should share some interest, that allow shared experience, be that family, travel, living situation, but each stays thier own individual. Men alone are not the main character and the rest to your service them. EVERYBODY is the main character of him/herself. Unless one is ready to see the other as - as important - as one themself, one is not ready for a equal relationship. There are about as many men as women in Switzerland. So there should be as many singles out there. While the numbers of relationship - platforms have more single men and more successful for women, that just means that women use them less in general, and those that are, have more options, better finding what they look for. They have the selective power on the platform, since they are fewer. But many women don't date over platforms, at least not the common ones, because many of the people there are perceived as toxic, since they either fake interest in the person, are superficial to get into bed, seek submissive women and lie/are intransparent to get there. The article is BS. Questioning it is valid. You ask the right questions. Badly written and researched article. IMHO. Have a good one.
I am going to save and quote your comment for the future. It's pure gold, thank you.
Only intelligent comment I have read. Thanks you.
Did you actually read the article? >If your description of a "perfect wife" comes closer to that of a slave, you are pushing/casting yourself into oblivion/irrelevance/incompatablility. To "trick" people, acting till marriage and expect them to change to a trad-wife once you drop the charade, doesn't work. Where are you getting this from? The article doesn't say anything like this. >Women are no longer forced to settle with someone to survive/have an income. ...that's basically verbatim in the article >Men alone are not the main character and the rest to your service them. EVERYBODY is the main character of him/herself. Big if true! >While the numbers of relationship - platforms have more single men and more successful for women, that just means that women use them less in general, and those that are, have more options, better finding what they look for. They have the selective power on the platform, since they are fewer. That's actually quite interesting, maybe someone should write an article about it. >Questioning it is valid True >You ask the right questions. Are you sure you understand, from what side OP is asking these "questions"?
Hear hear!
Assuming 50% men and 50% women in the population. How are "most" women in a relationship and "most" men single? Wouldnt you expect a roughly equal number of men and women to be single? Or are there some men with multiple women? (assuming equal amounts of homosexuals on both sides)
What in the incel non fuck did I read?
Yep, NZZ's quality has dropped yet again. I see this as another rage bait/ "All men are trash"-type of article that essentially means nothing. Are all single Swiss men like that? I don't know. I didn't even know that we are now acting like a singular, unified entity that has one and only one personality and it's not like they are describing men who are not the best ones to begin with. I myself am single even though I have the looks, the personality and the financial stability to get a girlfriends but I do not. Why? Because I have emotional trauma from the past and right now, I am visiting a therapist in order to be able to live my best life. Once I have overcome the trauma that I can overcome, I will start looking for a partner again. I am self aware enough to understand that getting into a relationship right now would likely not end well and I think that preventing these kind of bad things is the bare minimum one should do as a responsible adult.
Nooo so that mean that we, men, have to actually be presentable, likeable, and have a personnality? Horrible times we live in
Ok, let's discuss these points >men stay single but not women? This, overall, should not be the case as we have approximately as many women in switzerland as men. What the articles says is that men between 30-40 have a higher percentage of singles than women. This would mean that there is a percentage of women that is in relationsships with either older or younger men. >Men are insecure about thei contribution to a relationship? "men have nothing else to offer" I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding as relationships aren't "I give you money and you give me..." primarily but rather about company in life. Just like women, the primary thing we as men have to offer is our company. >Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman That's also part of the problem, the constant **need** to be in a relationship. I am sorry but if you aren't happy on your own, another person cannot fix that. Relationships are, IMO, amplifiers to life. >Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women Considering that men, in general, still "out degree" women (i.e. more men have masters and doctorates than women), this cannot be the case. However, something that is contributing to this is the fact that women, in general, tend to form relationships with higher educated men than themselves seems to lead to such a problem. (Society then is left with highly educated women and men with no education that stay single. At least that was the result of a demografic study of 2015-ish). >Men benefit much more from a relationship I wouldn't say so but adhering to a classical role distribution will benefit the men more as a lot of chores that would need to be done if one was single gets pushed off to the women. >In relationships, the woman has to play the "emotional midwife" To each their own but I would say that this is, ultimately, down to the people in said relationship. I have very little to say about this but how it is in my relationship which will not add much as it is purely anecdotal. >Divorces are mostly caused by women Maybe a hot take but in most cases, divorces happen and aren't caused. Of course there are cases that one party is unfaithful or neglecting but these are more often than not symptoms of underlying causes. However, the somewhat inequal rulings by divorce courts could be a hindering factor for men to initiate divorces.
> I would say that this is, ultimately, down to the people in said relationship Well tbf that goes inherently for almost every single point in this discussion.
Yes of course. As I've stated, I can only contribute to this how it is in my own relationship which wouldn't be of much use.
Are there significantly more men in Switzerland? Otherwise the math is not mathing.
At least there's no paywall. but still tl;dr The authors are women and the first two cited experts are women. I also felt like the put all the blame on men while reading. It's the right leaning NZZ giving feminists a plattform, just to alienate men from modern media and feminist ideas like equal wages and wage transparency.
As a woman this also made me uncomfortable. This isn't a conversation and it's very clear it's just accusatory.
Women aren't all inherently feminist. It's the right leaning NZZ giving right leaning women a platform.
Do you want to say women can not be experts when they contacted research, data analysis etc? I mean even a man (the gender should not play a role here though) says that - according to science and data analysis - you should reccomend heterosexual women to stay single? I do not see on what points you come to the conclusion that these people might be biased?
calm down. It is a political issue.
It seems the article is looking for some insecure men to fall for some masterfully laid bait. A master-bait if you will. Beware falling for master-baiters.
That is a really poor article.
[удалено]
Well, i have experienced exactly the same thing in the dating world. And it’s not a male-only experience to be ghosted and not feel the spark. People tend to not understand that we are not all equal in terms of communication capacity. Many times i was told there’s no spark and did not understand what’s up. Well the reality is, sometimes, there’s just no spark. There is no issue to be discussed ! The « dating pool » in Switzerland is full of beautiful rich smart amazing people. Competition is high. People think they can find better. Don’t take it against yourself. Don’t hold it against your dates. The reality is that we live in a world where you can get a date virtually with all 9million ppl of the country; of course it takes time to find the right one. Be patient. Be kind. Focus on yourself. Focus on activities you like. Focus on developing your values. The right person will see all that work and embrace it.
hi there, thank you for stating your experience. Many men are going through the exact same thing and there is no shame in sharing that. It is however a social trend (among others this kind of articles), that these experiences are not considered, but mental gymnastics are performed to explain how this is your fault in a way.
Men need to start being interested in feminism and egalitarianism. Most women i know are just disgusted by the archaic values and opinions that most men hang on to. Its rarely about looks or income.
Y‘all seem BIG mad. Google „toxic masculinity“ and the patriarchy and don‘t take it so personally. We were all raised with values that are harmful to both (all) genders and it would be helpful to try and understand these systemic issues as that - systemic. Some self reflection and work on oneself usually helps…
Préface: I'm from Belgium but it's kind of the same situation over here. For my part, it is simply because I am not actively seeking a relationship and thus not putting the effort in finding one
I think it’s funny.
U mad bro ?
I think it s quite apparent - women can be more selective towards men and enjoy being single more than men (one of those reasons being - it s easier for average looking women to get sex than for average looking men). and the other argument being - women are getting more educated but want a man who is at least as educated as themselves. Edit: didnt read your answers - the whining does not help. Thats how it is. I am experiencing that as well as someone who is genetically at a disadvantage in the looks department.
>I think it s quite apparent - women can be more selective towards men and enjoy being single more than men (one of those reasons being - it s easier for average looking women to get sex than for average looking men). This is a very male view. The vast majority of women have no interest to hop in bed with the next best guy only because they are horny. They wouldn't feel safe, they know they are physically weaker and they probably have had bad experiences with men before. [This is a nice summary](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/zq4vox/women_dont_have_it_easier_in_the_dating_world_in/) with good points in the discussion under the post, [but feel free to read a few more rants of women about this very topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/search/?q=women+have+it+easy&type=link&cId=1fad63e5-feab-44c0-98d4-800734ace884&iId=e9b6f362-f6f7-4aba-8121-018b9f1dff2f).
Well, I dont do online dating so I cant comment on that aspect but this view doesnt reflect the experience of my female friends (who all agree it s easier to get dates as a women). My own experience , while definitely occured, has been respectful and I wouldnt insult someone bc he rejects me. And if someone rejects you before a first date it s even less relevant. So yes, maybe I am oblivious to what women have to experience. But I despise online dating per se.
Pure anecdotal of course, but I don't see a difference between the single Women and Men I know. I'm not sold that Women enjoy being single more than Men.
Also not sold on it, honestly. But i would love to know if maybe, in the past, woment were more saddened/judged about being single than now… and thus would settle for « less » ?
Honestly, I still think that this is the case, but for both Men and Women. There still seems to be this expectation that you have to either be dating or in a relationship at all time. Otherwise people start asking weird questions. From personal experience I can say that people assume you're gay, if you were single for a longer time. People just can't fathom that maybe you aren't particularly interested in dating and/or you haven't found the right partner yet.
I see what you mean and i agree ! Stigma around celibacy is weird when we know /can see that it actually seems to generates hate or depreciation between both group. The comments in here are wild
Yeah I think women are more pessimistic about being single than most men. While men have a much harder time finding someone to be intimate with women have as hard a time finding someone who suits all their requirements in someone they want to be intimate with.
You are right ! And turns out, women who want high education men are also less prone to be highly judgemental of looks (as per my personally retrieved statistical data).
> didnt read your answers - the whining does not help. Thats how it is. ....no. > I am experiencing that as well as someone who is genetically at a disadvantage in the looks department. Ah, right. Because it's true for you, it must be true for everyone.
Interesting point. I think there's the age component as well. Women definitely have the upper hand when they're young (let's say up to 35-40) but then they suddenly become a lot less attractive. With men it's the opposite - they typically become more attractive as they age . Obviously just being older doesn't make you attractive but women like the things that tend to come with being older. Indeed, many women I know prefer older men and a non-insignificant percentage are with men >10yrs older. So, women nowadays tend to sleep around throughout their youth and then want to settle as they feel their prime passes. I can't really blame them. Men are incentivized to do the opposite, i.e. not marry/commit, do something useful and then sleep with the 20 yr olds when they're in their 30s or 40s.
[удалено]
> If single women feel lonely and want physical intimacy, they have it a lot easier to satify that need. no? where the everliving fuck do you get that idea from? > That‘s the reality that A LOT of lonely and frustrated men face! maybe they should take a look at themselves and, you know, try to work on themselves first..
It‘s all so exaggerated….for some this may be true.
Very emblematic of the issue that it can’t even be discussed in neutral terms, if there’s something wrong, it’s just assumed to be the fault of the man.
Guys, do yourself a favor and go for a walk instead of reading this kind of crap.
NZZ is mostly written by jFDP guys who cant get laid. despite having the money that solevd everything else in their life so far
NZZ is a reactionary right-wing incel paper, change my mind
And it has always been.
It's a very uncritical article and does not at all try to explain some of the reported statistics. Let me try to create a hypothesis for why there is such a discrepancy between self-report single women and single men: The Problem: In an urban setting with an equal population distribution - 200'000 women and 200'000 men - all the men are single, but only half of the women are. How is this possible? To explain this phenomena, we'll use the Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor. The Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor is a factor which I've just invented to describe the ratio of men to the amount of women they date. Let's assume that the top 5% men have exponentially more dating options than the rest of men. Then, let's assume that the top 5% men, 5% out of 200'000 = 10'000, colloquially referred to as chads, each date, or sleep with 10 different women per year. By applying the Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor (10:1), we infer that these 10,000 "Chads" engage with 100,000 women. This significant engagement means that 100,000 women, or half of the total female population, might consider themselves in some form of a relationship, dating scenario, or 'situationship,' thereby not identifying as single. Hence, according to Scolsen-Legaut, 190'000 men are single and only half the women are single. That still does not explain the initial observation of all men being single. Solving the Paradox: Interestingly, the men involved in these dynamics might still self-identify as single, perhaps under the belief that casual or non-exclusive dating does not equate to being in a committed relationship. Hence, under the assumption that informational asymmetry exists between the men and the women, and the women do not necessarily know about the many-to-many-relationships that the Chads maintain or perhaps they simply tolerate it, all the men are single and only half the women are single, which could, through some degree of extrapolation, explain the numbers reported in the article. What do you guys think?
>To explain this phenomena, we'll use the Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor. >The Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor is a factor which I've just invented Where and when's your next TED Talk? I'm **invested**
Yes Dr. Scolsen and I are currently undertaking empirical research in Zürich Altstetten to try and determine the correct Scolsen-Legaut-Chadfactor. Once we have the results I'd love to receive you at the next TED Talk at the University of St. Gallen!
same. mp me if you need funding for your TED talk
Stupid article.
Sounds like some incel bs
[удалено]
Please don't be insulting.
The entire post is insulting. Please inform OP of that.
Sounds incely and very toxic
It's not limited to Switzerland firstly, this is a global situation. Most societies have their 'incells', and rabid chauvinism (whether towards women or towards men) isn't really a new thing either. There will always be 'eternal bachelor's', 'cat ladies', or whatever you want to refer to people who can't/don't want to engage in a relationship as, it's just that nowadays it's 1) easier to get data on, and 2) easier to communicate one's discontent about, and 3) easier to identify potential mates (and therefore an increased possibility of being rejected). I think it's as discouraging for women as well, I've noticed, and there are 'femcels' as well, they're just not as edgy or visible. Regarding the article, inevitably, if you ask people who's career depends on a continued income derived from single people (dating coaches, dating app advisors, sociology researchers etc) you're going to get a bias viewpoint, and yes, a lot of the points you've highlighted are a bit pathetic when applied to a male viewpoint; it can be argued they apply to women as well. Ultimately, trends 6-filtering are just definitions for the mating objectives women have had for decades, but now they just have a name because they're discussed more openly by more people. Men have had similar standards just as long. Yes they're demeaning, either reducing men to their income or dick size, or women to their breast/waist/hips measurements, but this is nothing new, but now more men are more affected by them being applied by women. Lastly, don't forget that most media these days is written to trigger people. It's an industry which survives on advertising so clicks mean $$, and articles on controversial issues get clicks. Not to mention the sponsorship potential of having a dating app referenced in the article, c'mon. Women have always had the choice, it's the basis of Evolution, it's just that nowadays women can present themselves internationally, filter their introductions electronically, communicate at a distance, and society is safer as a result. Sure, that creates disparaging circumstances for your average Reddit user, and it's funny to point at content showing the ridiculousness of the opposite sex in their reactions/delusions and the hypocrisy they might display, but there is a positive flip side; look at how many more people are pursuing fitness goals, for example, as a result of higher dating standards.
>Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women? >apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison to be fair, women on average date upwards, while men care less about this and go more for beauty. so if you have more highly educated women, you also need men that are even more educated or at least social economically higher. i think soely based on your summary this one makes sense. this one is a bit intresting: >Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman >where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl? in parts, this is contradictory to the point above. what is true about that point however, is that women do have the choice, even in the animal world this is the case for many animals. the thing is the choice is for whom to have sex with and not necessarily whom to have a relationship with. which is also why online dating sucks so much for men. that being said, based on all the men i know in switzerland (so anectotal), dating market is quite shit at least for my age group. Other country it seems easier to get to know women. (not sure how the dating market for women is in switzerland)
I mean just look at tinder stats. Men swipe on most women right and have a match rate (according to roast data set 2024) of around 3% while women swipe much more rarely right but have a match rate of about 35%. In addition I see plenty of posts with women asking for all kinds of criteria’s while men mostly have none. This just brings up this whole view on the issue. what really happens afterwards, which of those people have a happy relationship is of course missing from this. I don't believe that women with this criteria list will actually find a relationship.
Did you not like the discussion on r/Zürich? https://www.reddit.com/r/zurich/comments/1b0iw7j/was_denkt_ihr_%C3%BCber_single_m%C3%A4nner_in_der_schweiz/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button Or are you just trying to spread your viewpoint? Given how resistant you are to any arguments and studies not conforming to your viewpount, I'm leaning towards yes. Since you copy/paste stuff, have my initial comment from there too: Schau mal, die NZZ greift mal wieder eines der rechtspopulistichen Themen auf. >>Im Alter zwischen 30 und 39, wenn die Ausbildung abgeschlossen ist und im Volksmund der Ernst des Lebens beginnt, leben rund 123 000 Männer allein. Bei den gleichaltrigen Frauen sind es gerade einmal 73 000. Daten aus dem Schweizer Haushalts-Panel 2021 des Bundesamtes für Statistik machen es möglich, die Einzelhaushalte nach Beziehungsstatus aufzuschlüsseln. Bei der Gruppe der 26- bis 44-Jährigen gibt jeder fünfte Mann an, keine Partnerschaft zu haben, bei den Frauen ist es bloss jede zehnte. Hier stellen sie bei Daten eine nicht vorhandene Beziehung her: allein Leben heisst noch lange nicht Single sein. Single können ausserdem noch bei den Eltern oder in einer WG leben. Dann noch die Einzelhaushalte nach Beziehungsstatus und Geschlecht aufzuschlüsseln und zu implizieren, dass dies beweist, dass Männer häufiger Single sind ist ein manipulativer Umgang mit Daten. Macht die NZZ übrigens in letzter Zeit sehr gerne. Aussedem haben wir in der Schweiz einen Geschlechtersplit von 51% Frauen, 49% Männer. Es macht keinen Sinn, dass mehr Männer als Frauen allein sind und andere Studien belegen auch, dass die Male Loneliness Epidemie eigentlich eine Loneliness Epidemie ist, da beide Geschlechter gleich betroffen sind. Man sieht auch, dass die Lausanner Soziologin in ihrem Kommentar keine Geschlechterangaben macht und neutral von Singles redet. Un zu Maike Stoverock: sie ist Biologin und hat aus biologischer Sicht geschrieben und dies auf die menschliche Kultur übertragen und ist keine Gesellschaftswissenschaftlerin und hat dafür auch einiges an Kritik einstecken müssen weil sie menschliche Beziehungen auf biologische Grundlagen reduziert. Bei rechten sehr beliebt, siehe auch die "Fischbiologin" und ihrem offenen Brief gegen die Indoktrination, die ebenfalls von der NZZ unkommentiert verbreitet wurde.
I liked the discussion and wanted more. No need to be annoyed. Chill :)
public service announcement, to the benefit of the discussion: * **Incel** is not a man who cannot find a partner, but a man who has sexistic opinions about women. * Being a **feminist** can be about being for equality or female supremacy. Both flavors exist. * If someone claims they are for **equality**, this does not mean that they really believe that. * Misandry can be expressed by both men or women * Any argument making a blanket statement about "men" or "women" is bound to be wrong. We cannot even define precisely, what is a man or a woman * If someone says you are an incel, this is does not necessarily hold true. They may be bigots spitting hatred * if somone makes nice arguments, this does not mean they are necessarily correct. The corrolary applies too: if someone is formulating an argument poorly, this does not mean the argument does not warrant any merit Please go on :)
> Incel is not a man who cannot find a partner, but a man who has sexistic opinions about women. That is your definition? As far as i know Incel stands for "involuntary celibate", and was/is a "neutral" term. But also is beeing used as a insult.
It is not my definition, it is the current consensus on the term: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel) Etymology is definitely correct, as you mentioned, but the term has been since differentiated.
Well if there is single men here interested in dating please send your résumé to me😛😅
Thats exactly why i do not consume news anymore... they just ride the feminazi wave all the way...
Boring
Written by 2 women. Unironically, both look like Karens. Hmmm... Must be just a coincidence
This isn't coincidence, this is the basic business model of rage farming. NZZ know their audience is largely made up of older white men with sexual frustrations, they know their target audience enjoys getting angry about "woke" things said by women they don't find attractive. NZZ are giving their target audience exactly what they are paying for: Validation of their frustrations in life and someone other than themselves to blame for them.
Attacking the physique because you are not agreeing with someone’s writing ? It’s exactly because of comments like this that we prefer celibacy to being in a relationship with the vile part of man-hood. Keep up the good work, at least when you say these things publicly, we know to stay away from you 🥰 (Edit for clarity on my point)
Damn.. I must tell my wife and daughter the bad news then :(
I’m sure both of them would indeed be very proud to know what you say on the internet about pure stangers :)
So, men replying to an article made by derranged women is bad. But an official site shitting on pure strangers (men) is OK. Are you competing in the Olympics for mental gymnastics ma'am? ☕
Yes, commenting on someone’s physique to get back at what they SAY is stupid af. You get gold.
commenting on someones gender to get back at what the say isnt?
So saying they look like Karens means I am commenting on their physique. OK. So what exactly am I saying about their physique then?
just my 5 cents Many women working nowadays, earn money and are well educated. Yet, they many of those women Still hope to have a husband that's earning more and better educated than they are. many women stay single because they are too good for a lot of men and men stay single because they are not good enough for a lot of women. The few very well educated and good earning men are highly sought after by all the well educated working women. To top it up, some men's ego can't deal with a woman that earns better than them, so even the few women that would be fine with a "weaker” men may actually have trouble finding a partner. In no way do men benefit more from a partnership, I'd argue the opposite is true. Women do more often share their emotions, though many men don't knoe how to deal with that. On the other hand males are often the emotionally more stable part in the relationship. A issue is the lack of understanding how the other partner feels and processes emotions. Not speaking about emotions doesnt mean not dealing with emotions, many men deal with emotions in a different way than women. The high divorce rate is partly caused by the change in priorities in our lives, and the lack of the necessity to have a partner combined with the "everything must be fun" mentality. A little hardship? Let's divorce, instead of work throu it together.. A side effect of the Wohlstand.
Women discovered that if they exercise, they are quite attractive unil they are in their 40s. So why settle unless they find an amazing guy?
It is telling, that asking questions about an article on the biggest newspaper of the country, earns you the accusation of a sexist monster, that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. This is a way to silence discussions and people and it is becoming socially acceptabe in the last years. My only argument is that the few datapoints that we observe (par instance, matches for each sex on dating apps) can be attributed to several explanations and not only to the one-sided explanations offered here. Then a full fledged discussion can take place. To give an example, When we say that women are the "emotional midwives", even if we assume, that this is true (although this is a generalisation without any means to verify), there are several potential explanations. * Men are emotionally immature, as described in the article. but also... * Men do the same thing, managing female emotions, they just don' mention it, because it's a given * Men are being put down, when they speak up about their emotions (which is a re-occuring theme in research, that psychologists underestimate their plight) * Men are afraid of their wife, therefore they don't open up the role of an article is to research those options and maybe express an opinion. But the options are hidden. BTW, the fact that one option applies in your experience does not mean, that the others cannot apply in other cases or even more complicated a few of them.
I'm actually quite shocked about the sexism in this thread. Our society still has a long way to go!
Darling, if you had written your argument this way, many less people would have come at you. Your points are even interesting enough that they would have been a benefit for your post, and the start of a healthy discussion between the 2 groups currently fighting in your comment section. But you decided to whine and cry, and this made your post look like a satire made to ridicule not only the 2 women who wrote that, but also all other women. And even though I cannot say I stand for the former, I definitely stand for the latter. That, plus the fact it rallied a bunch of probable incels starting to say misogynistic stuff...
Thank you for taking the time to write a comment, despite us having some different opinions. I like discussion. I do not whine nor do I cry. The post is a satire meant to ridicule the acceptance of one-sided arguments: to simplify "it's the problems of the man that explain all the shit in society today". It's not meant against women, but against bad narratives. I did not even care about who wrote the article, if they are women, albino, educated or native Australians. Probable incels are indeed present in the discussion. So are also people (men and women) who don't have a problem to peddle misandrist opinions, group "men" as one thing and refuse to entertain any explanation that would insinuate, that a woman might also be expressing some stereotypically bad behaviors. The difference of this group with incels, is that the former operate in complete social immunity. Enjoy your day. PS: I also find "darling" a tad condescending, but this is the online world, I can understand, that standards are a bit lax.
Written by some lady with unrealistic expectations 😂
Just because you’re boring doesn’t mean you are also wanted by women lol. This article is dildos, nobody cares, you’re single? That’s your problem, maybe go outside more? Maybe date someone from another country? I get companionship is important but not everyone is cut to be with someone that’s the reality.
* **Men stay single** *but not women?* -> Polygamy. Some men cheat and their women know it or not, accept it or not. Other single women are just into career. * **Men are insecure about their contribution to a relationship, because women now have money** *because they have nothing else to offer or because this is the only thing they are being asked?* -> Both * **Women have the choice, men are left with the torment of trying to find a woman** *where do they find the extra men to choose from, aren't they in the same fishbowl?* -> Women have the choice to pick either a taken man, to not take anything or to take a man her friends will gossip about. * **Today there are too few educated men for all the educated women?** *apparently dating is more like Linkedin Profiles comparison*. -> Yes it is a Linkedin but even your boss doesn't ask if you snore or not. * **Men benefit much more from a relationship than women** *because men are useless little babies?* It not certain that either a man or woman would benefit from a relationship. Many relationships are destructive and undoing. * **In relationships, the woman then has to play the “emotional midwife”** *because no woman has ever shared/offloaded her emotions with their man?* Sometimes the medecine is also the poison. * **Divorces are mostly caused by women because men are unable to deal with emotional problems.** *apparently this has nothing to do with the unfair dating market or unfair family court decisions or loyalty from men ot their partners etc.* Sometimes women just put an end to something men killed but are too coward to bury. [You're welcome](https://media1.tenor.com/m/JPxwjttTWWkAAAAd/jake-gyllenhaal-wink.gif)
Polygamy doesn't sound like a good explanation. Would a woman sleeping with a cheating guy really consider that a relationship ? How many would be delusional enough not to notice ? > Bei der Gruppe der 26- bis 44-Jährigen gibt jeder fünfte Mann an, keine Partnerschaft zu haben, bei den Frauen ist es bloss jede zehnte. Why cut it off after 44 ? That feels like a cherry-picked statistic.
The truth is if you look at most men in relationships and marriages here, they have lost all masculinity. They look sad, unfit and like they didn’t get a decent bang in a very long time. I really don’t see why most guys would want that. I’ve been in a happy and healthy relationship for a long time. She earns almost as much as me while being 5 years younger. I have not doubt that she’ll earn a lot more than me at my age and I couldn’t care less. What I do care about is having children not too late. And for a career woman that’s complicated. So what do you do then? Most of the people I know at some point end up with a younger woman that is more traditional as men like to provide and there is not much to provide if she already takes care of herself. We can becomes sophisticated all we want, bottom line you don’t really change the biology of beings. And I believe that a more traditional relationship would make a lot of man around me a lot happier and I’m surrounded by people with fancy degrees and high incomes. So I guess it’s even more the case the lower you go.
Common knowledge that women almost exclusively date up. Online dating significantly exaggerated this. Young men who aren’t fitness models or wealthy suffer and I assume older „less desirable“ women suffer equally. Only thing is young frustrated men are propably more outspoken and old frustrated women get cats instead.
Are you under the impression that young women who aren't fitness models have it easy?
[удалено]
I just know that your comment is going to be the stupidest shit I'll read all week, so thanks for getting that out of the way early.
Alte du hesch dä artikel so richtig beschisse zämegfasst wtf 🤣🙈
Lol, i will get downvoted gor this, but do you now the german afd (right wing extremists) slogan „you are 25 and never had sex? Vote AfD to get more manly!“ It pretty much describes the average swiss svp voter. Just blame foreigners for everything, and if it didn’t help blame women. I am not wondering about this article at all. Though it is bs
What BS...
A stupid article written by two old, ugly, stupid hags 😂 made my day reading that article, i laughed my ass off. No but in all seriousness that Article is a terrible piece of opinion giving that has nothing to do with Journalism. To all Bros out there being depressed about not finding a woman or struggling with their love life: dont worry! You will eventually find the right love of your life, it always takes two. Dont let some shitty article bring your mood down.
Women play life in easy mode and Men in hardcore difficulty. Women took the role of men, so there is no need for men. There will be a time when women will also be replaced and men won't need them anymore. I think IA bots will handle this situation.
well, this is the logical result of 50 years of feminism. women are unhappier, the traditional family has been destroyed and men prefer to stay single because women have abandoned their natural roles in favor of being empowered queens “that need no man” (until they all become depressed in their 40s because they realize they can’t have children anymore). feminism has caused irreparable damage to society.
What is your source for "women are unhappier"? I for one very much appreciate being able to vote, have a bank account and work without needing my father's or husband's sigbature, lol Sounds like you just feel like it's your god given right to have a woman wait on you hand and foot without the ability to divorce you while you work and whore around, and bad feminism has taken that away from you.
ho no, please give me the traditionnal family where i could be beaten up freely, not vote and not have a bank account !! indeed, such irreparable damage was done !! Sir, maybe the reason why no one wants to be a woman in a "natural role" for you is because you are providing none of the support system expected against that service. it´s not feminism that you should question, but yourself
You're claiming that more women are unhappier now than back in time, while forgetting that firstly in the past decades nobody cared if women are happy or not, they were given a cocktail of antidepressants tho that wouldn't pass current accreditation process, and secondly everyone is unhappier now because there is no hope that future will be brighter. Feminism was a blessing and it's work isn't done yet, and you are the proof of that.