When women talk about these things, they bake in a lot of assumptions.
So women are more prone to care about feelings and less about truth, let's say that's true. Can they improve upon that? Can they be taught to cut out the canceling bullshit and learn to live with the discomforts of reality?
Let's say women are hypergamous. Can a female lawyer learn to love a male plumber? Can a 5'10" lady figure out how to be attracted to men shorter than her?
When women talk, the answers to all of these questions are assumed to be no. The Louise Perry viewpoint is deeply conservative in the sense that it assumes that women simply are the way they are and that societies should be tailored to their needs.
Conversely, the idea that men should be locked into a state of slavery to their own sexual desires in order to be molded into some more useful form is a different type of assumption. What if men who sit around and watch porn and play video games are happier than men who start a business and get married? Why is that wrong? Isn't in incumbent on a woman seeking a partner to prove that she's bringing more to the table than that low baseline?
Wow. I can almost hear the vomit gurgling in the back of Bari and Ms. Perrys throats as they confess that Christianity has done more for women and disabled than any other force in the world, that the military should be all men, that women are difficult to supervise, that women are censorious, that unlimited abortion is bad etc..... In some sense, women have made this problem over the past 60 years, and women will have to play a part in fixing it. ( I was thinking the other day that 60 years ago organized hating and despising of men did not exist as a thing and that it was essentially invented by the post-WWII womens movement) BTW: disclosure, I am a Bari fan and I liked what Ms. Perry was saying. They just sounded so darned apologetic for saying it.
I really want Louise Perry to write something to balance out the two recent articles on masculinity, following her maiden, mother, matriarch theme… please please please.
I feel sorry for this sanctimonious generation of young people who can barely talk to each other, let alone have casual sex.
They are missing out on a lot of fun!
The idea that a woman needs to save her body until he puts a ring on her finger seems pathetic to me.
A one-night stand with a guy I never expected to meet again ended up in a 30-year loving relationship, 22 years of marriage (because I had no interest in getting married until we decided to have children) and two beautiful daughters.
The podcast discussion gives way too like credit to adult men and women!
Your experience with a one night stand is quite rare. Women more often than night report that a one night stand led to nothing. It is important to remember that your experience might be the minority experience. As a therapist, I have had hundreds of single female clients who find one night stands to be unfulfilling.
That was an excellent podcast. Louise's outlook was such a breath of fresh air in being common sense, non-ideological and based on intelligent interpretation of going where the data leads. I think we'll be hearing more from her on other social issues in the future.
I agree with Louise Perry on a number of issues but think she takes everything too far and is too narrow minded. For example, you could reserve sex for serious relationships. Porn in small doses like any vice is not particularly harmful. Icecream isn't necesary either. I agree that some kind of spiritualilty needs to be brought back, but it doesn't need to be Christianity. She does elude to this, but the valuing and protection of women was by and large inherited by Christians from Judaism. Though, you have to give credit to Christians for normalizing these values around the world.
"One of the things I've learned from having been married so long..." If I understood correctly she said she's been married for 10 years. If that is correct, it is a little presumptuous to consider that enough of a criterion for making sweeping generalizations. I've been married for 45 years, and I wouldn't dare to presume that is sufficient even for an anecdotal response.
I confess to feeling irritated by this discussion, perhaps because I felt that throughout there was an underlying assumption that men are the problem. That may in fact be the case, but when it comes to something so intrinsically determined by biology, by the overwhelming contribution of the XY chromosomes and all the physiology that entails, that having a female tell a male how he should see his sexuality is frankly a bit much.
Other nits to pick: Using ultra-orthodox Jews as examples of how modernity responds to declining birth rates is an oxymoron. A cult that lives in its own pre-modern world, where girls are forced to bear children from an early age is not a solution. It's a problem. A better example would be modern Israelis, overwhelming secular, who have a birth rate above maintenance levels. The reasons for that are more interesting than repressive religious practices.
Anyone who thinks that men are hierarchical and women are not has never been to high school. The distress of my son at getting in a fight with other boys was not nearly as great as my daughters' at not being invited to a birthday party with the other girls.
There was never a society where sex did not create tensions. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I loved this conversation! So much to chew on and consider. It is nice to hear a conversation between two very different people and walk way thinking - they were actually attempting to understand one another. Keep these coming.
Loved this--such a thoughtful conversation. Born in 1958, I had insight into both worlds. My mother told me I better not get pregnant, but all around me was a sexually opening world. It was a world where men always hoped to get sex and blue balls were a reality, but it was not a foregone conclusion that a date would wind up with sex and women did not get dropped merely because they chose not to put out. Virginity was still somewhat of a virtue. I had my first opportunity to lose it when I was 14, but at 24 it was my choice to pick the person. Living in the middle of two colliding world views really offered freedom for me to pick that which was best for me. The social pressure assumed to be the norm was not there, because norm was in the process of being redefined.
I also really appreciated the conversation. And this window in time where sex was not a foregone conclusion, where you really were free to pick--sounds like the paradise I imagined I had coming of age in the 90s. If I knew then what I know now, I would never have gone on "the pill". We were part of an experiment.
And. The suggestion that marital status should determine a woman's access to contraception chills my spine--both for the unmarried who really need it, and for the married who are taking it under duress.
Also, as a 45 year old woman whos been married for 24 years I’m increasingly thankful I missed out on the swipe right life. Like an existential, ovary withering doom scroll of apathy and despair.
This was SUCH a great episode. Absolutely riveting. Louise is a fierce intellect and I loved how her viewpoint was so anthropological in its essence. She is a true observer of society and culture and I am just beaming with gratitude for this incredible, honest and deeply riveting conversation.
As a 30-year-old single man, I feel like I have personally observed many of these trends over the years, in the lives of my friends as well as my own. It's almost unnerving listing to someone else come to the same exact conclusions I have on issue after issue, and in such an eloquent way!
The bad part is, it really does suck to date right now, for all of the reasons discussed and many more. But perhaps the silver lining is that nearly EVERYONE seems frustrated at the equilibrium we've somehow arrived at! That makes me optimistic for a positive change in the culture.
Thanks to Bari and Louise for such an amazing discussion. Sending it to everyone I know who enjoys these types of discussions!
This was a good podcast and covers a lot that comes up in daily life. Needless to say if someone is coming to therapy feeling hopeless about life is often a component of loneliness. I met my wife on eHarmony and I never had much trouble dating, in adulthood that is, which is strange because I wasn't a very successful guy when I met my wife. Although I was just starting out in a career. One thing I notice after having spoken with hundreds of people in therapy that makes me an odd ball is my goal, as a man, was to get married. I was direct about that and had zero interest in casual sex. I think if you’re a man approaching women as group with that attitude it is very well received, but if as a woman you are approaching men as a group with that attitude it is not the same experience.
It also stuck out to me that I talked to everyone. If eHarmony sent me a match I tried to talk to her. I notice a lot of people on dating apps filter people out for superficial reasons. I almost didn't go on a date with my wife. We had been talking and I liked her but some of her photos weren't super flattering. When she brought up meeting in person my thought process was something like "meh, fuck it, i'm not doing anything this weekend anyway." Then when we met I was quite taken with her. During our first date she said something that wasn't quite PC about Mexicans and I fell in love. It wasn't bad, she said in high school there was a soccer team they couldn't beat because everyone on the other team was Mexican, and then this Latina sitting behind her gave her a look. I thought it was amazing.
Helping people find love I think hinges on getting men to stop being superficial about looks and to focus on finding someone to settle down with. Then for women to stop being superficial about a man’s career. Does he hold down a job and make a middle class income? If yes, then what’s the problem if its less than you make.
I liked a lot of what was in this podcast and the Louise speaking against casual sex. Avoiding sex outside of a committed relationship will quickly weed out people who aren't serious about finding love. Is the man who can't wait a couple months to have sex going to be the man that stays faithful when you have cancer later in life and are uninterested in sex during chemotherapy? Is the guy that must have sex now the guy that loves you for you and will face lifes challenges with you? Same goes for men, if your serious about a woman isn't it a good thing that she won't sleep with any random person that she meets? I fail to see how casual sex improves the dating process.
Anyway, thats my essay. I could talk more about masculinity but the monologue is starting to feel a bit well... excessive.
When women talk about these things, they bake in a lot of assumptions.
So women are more prone to care about feelings and less about truth, let's say that's true. Can they improve upon that? Can they be taught to cut out the canceling bullshit and learn to live with the discomforts of reality?
Let's say women are hypergamous. Can a female lawyer learn to love a male plumber? Can a 5'10" lady figure out how to be attracted to men shorter than her?
When women talk, the answers to all of these questions are assumed to be no. The Louise Perry viewpoint is deeply conservative in the sense that it assumes that women simply are the way they are and that societies should be tailored to their needs.
Conversely, the idea that men should be locked into a state of slavery to their own sexual desires in order to be molded into some more useful form is a different type of assumption. What if men who sit around and watch porn and play video games are happier than men who start a business and get married? Why is that wrong? Isn't in incumbent on a woman seeking a partner to prove that she's bringing more to the table than that low baseline?
John do you believe in the constrained or unconstrained vision of life as described by Thomas Sowell?
With respect to the issues at hand, I lean more towards unconstrained.
Wow. I can almost hear the vomit gurgling in the back of Bari and Ms. Perrys throats as they confess that Christianity has done more for women and disabled than any other force in the world, that the military should be all men, that women are difficult to supervise, that women are censorious, that unlimited abortion is bad etc..... In some sense, women have made this problem over the past 60 years, and women will have to play a part in fixing it. ( I was thinking the other day that 60 years ago organized hating and despising of men did not exist as a thing and that it was essentially invented by the post-WWII womens movement) BTW: disclosure, I am a Bari fan and I liked what Ms. Perry was saying. They just sounded so darned apologetic for saying it.
I really want Louise Perry to write something to balance out the two recent articles on masculinity, following her maiden, mother, matriarch theme… please please please.
I keep falling in love with Bari's "Honestly" guests who are brilliant, female, and have English accents.
I feel sorry for this sanctimonious generation of young people who can barely talk to each other, let alone have casual sex.
They are missing out on a lot of fun!
The idea that a woman needs to save her body until he puts a ring on her finger seems pathetic to me.
A one-night stand with a guy I never expected to meet again ended up in a 30-year loving relationship, 22 years of marriage (because I had no interest in getting married until we decided to have children) and two beautiful daughters.
The podcast discussion gives way too like credit to adult men and women!
Your experience with a one night stand is quite rare. Women more often than night report that a one night stand led to nothing. It is important to remember that your experience might be the minority experience. As a therapist, I have had hundreds of single female clients who find one night stands to be unfulfilling.
That was an excellent podcast. Louise's outlook was such a breath of fresh air in being common sense, non-ideological and based on intelligent interpretation of going where the data leads. I think we'll be hearing more from her on other social issues in the future.
I agree with Louise Perry on a number of issues but think she takes everything too far and is too narrow minded. For example, you could reserve sex for serious relationships. Porn in small doses like any vice is not particularly harmful. Icecream isn't necesary either. I agree that some kind of spiritualilty needs to be brought back, but it doesn't need to be Christianity. She does elude to this, but the valuing and protection of women was by and large inherited by Christians from Judaism. Though, you have to give credit to Christians for normalizing these values around the world.
"One of the things I've learned from having been married so long..." If I understood correctly she said she's been married for 10 years. If that is correct, it is a little presumptuous to consider that enough of a criterion for making sweeping generalizations. I've been married for 45 years, and I wouldn't dare to presume that is sufficient even for an anecdotal response.
I confess to feeling irritated by this discussion, perhaps because I felt that throughout there was an underlying assumption that men are the problem. That may in fact be the case, but when it comes to something so intrinsically determined by biology, by the overwhelming contribution of the XY chromosomes and all the physiology that entails, that having a female tell a male how he should see his sexuality is frankly a bit much.
Other nits to pick: Using ultra-orthodox Jews as examples of how modernity responds to declining birth rates is an oxymoron. A cult that lives in its own pre-modern world, where girls are forced to bear children from an early age is not a solution. It's a problem. A better example would be modern Israelis, overwhelming secular, who have a birth rate above maintenance levels. The reasons for that are more interesting than repressive religious practices.
Anyone who thinks that men are hierarchical and women are not has never been to high school. The distress of my son at getting in a fight with other boys was not nearly as great as my daughters' at not being invited to a birthday party with the other girls.
There was never a society where sex did not create tensions. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
"Strategic, brief, and celibate." and "family involved." Wow. Sounds like Orthodox Jewish.
I loved this conversation! So much to chew on and consider. It is nice to hear a conversation between two very different people and walk way thinking - they were actually attempting to understand one another. Keep these coming.
Loved this--such a thoughtful conversation. Born in 1958, I had insight into both worlds. My mother told me I better not get pregnant, but all around me was a sexually opening world. It was a world where men always hoped to get sex and blue balls were a reality, but it was not a foregone conclusion that a date would wind up with sex and women did not get dropped merely because they chose not to put out. Virginity was still somewhat of a virtue. I had my first opportunity to lose it when I was 14, but at 24 it was my choice to pick the person. Living in the middle of two colliding world views really offered freedom for me to pick that which was best for me. The social pressure assumed to be the norm was not there, because norm was in the process of being redefined.
I also really appreciated the conversation. And this window in time where sex was not a foregone conclusion, where you really were free to pick--sounds like the paradise I imagined I had coming of age in the 90s. If I knew then what I know now, I would never have gone on "the pill". We were part of an experiment.
And. The suggestion that marital status should determine a woman's access to contraception chills my spine--both for the unmarried who really need it, and for the married who are taking it under duress.
Also, as a 45 year old woman whos been married for 24 years I’m increasingly thankful I missed out on the swipe right life. Like an existential, ovary withering doom scroll of apathy and despair.
This was SUCH a great episode. Absolutely riveting. Louise is a fierce intellect and I loved how her viewpoint was so anthropological in its essence. She is a true observer of society and culture and I am just beaming with gratitude for this incredible, honest and deeply riveting conversation.
Sharing it with alllll my peeps!!
As a 30-year-old single man, I feel like I have personally observed many of these trends over the years, in the lives of my friends as well as my own. It's almost unnerving listing to someone else come to the same exact conclusions I have on issue after issue, and in such an eloquent way!
The bad part is, it really does suck to date right now, for all of the reasons discussed and many more. But perhaps the silver lining is that nearly EVERYONE seems frustrated at the equilibrium we've somehow arrived at! That makes me optimistic for a positive change in the culture.
Thanks to Bari and Louise for such an amazing discussion. Sending it to everyone I know who enjoys these types of discussions!
This was a good podcast and covers a lot that comes up in daily life. Needless to say if someone is coming to therapy feeling hopeless about life is often a component of loneliness. I met my wife on eHarmony and I never had much trouble dating, in adulthood that is, which is strange because I wasn't a very successful guy when I met my wife. Although I was just starting out in a career. One thing I notice after having spoken with hundreds of people in therapy that makes me an odd ball is my goal, as a man, was to get married. I was direct about that and had zero interest in casual sex. I think if you’re a man approaching women as group with that attitude it is very well received, but if as a woman you are approaching men as a group with that attitude it is not the same experience.
It also stuck out to me that I talked to everyone. If eHarmony sent me a match I tried to talk to her. I notice a lot of people on dating apps filter people out for superficial reasons. I almost didn't go on a date with my wife. We had been talking and I liked her but some of her photos weren't super flattering. When she brought up meeting in person my thought process was something like "meh, fuck it, i'm not doing anything this weekend anyway." Then when we met I was quite taken with her. During our first date she said something that wasn't quite PC about Mexicans and I fell in love. It wasn't bad, she said in high school there was a soccer team they couldn't beat because everyone on the other team was Mexican, and then this Latina sitting behind her gave her a look. I thought it was amazing.
Helping people find love I think hinges on getting men to stop being superficial about looks and to focus on finding someone to settle down with. Then for women to stop being superficial about a man’s career. Does he hold down a job and make a middle class income? If yes, then what’s the problem if its less than you make.
I liked a lot of what was in this podcast and the Louise speaking against casual sex. Avoiding sex outside of a committed relationship will quickly weed out people who aren't serious about finding love. Is the man who can't wait a couple months to have sex going to be the man that stays faithful when you have cancer later in life and are uninterested in sex during chemotherapy? Is the guy that must have sex now the guy that loves you for you and will face lifes challenges with you? Same goes for men, if your serious about a woman isn't it a good thing that she won't sleep with any random person that she meets? I fail to see how casual sex improves the dating process.
Anyway, thats my essay. I could talk more about masculinity but the monologue is starting to feel a bit well... excessive.