What if Masculinity’s Current Shortfall Is Really a Femininity Problem?

Yes, I am going there - hold my beer!

Apr 27, 2025

I can always read the room and, in my college years, that skill got me into the fuzzier, softer sides of female dormitories and sororities. I have an innate ability to enter a crowd of complete strangers and engage in comfortable conversations. I can speak extemporaneously on multiple topics, whether it be business, arts, music, sports or philosophy. When it comes to casual conversations, I am like a talk show host, a mile wide but an inch deep.

I learned early on that the dude that genuinely (or fake) listens to female conversation fares better at scoring some one-on-one time than the guys who behave and talk, well like guys, merely about themselves and inane dude stuff. What aids my "listening" skills is that I possess an audio memory. It is not a memory that creates lasting impressions in my mind, but a type of "tape recorder" recall. This means that I can recall word for word what someone says, but I have zero comprehension of its meaning or context. But, to the outside observer, it appears that I am listening. It also is a great parlor trick to pull out when an exasperated partner utters those fateful words, "Are you even listening to me," and I repeat word for word what they just said. Over the years, several ex-Mrs. Nelsons found my memory recall prowess less endearing.

When it comes to engaging with the opposite sex, my enthusiastic communication skills allow my wit and charm to take hold well before my less attractive and far more controversial conservative worldview emerges. But, by the point in a relationship when politics come up, the hook is set. And although women I fancy rarely share my political views, they tolerate it as part of maintaining a relationship with me.

I also do not make my politics a litmus test for female companionship as political sparring is not my primary female friendship goal. Furthermore, I attended a liberal arts school in Minnesota. Seeking political parity in that institution would have rendered me a very lonely lad. As it was in my college years and for all ages prior, feminine tolerance of masculine behavior is the basis for all heterosexual relationships. As a result, males seeking mates simply adapt their current behavior to meet a minimum expectation of female acceptance. Women, much more than men, dictate what is acceptable male behavior, at least in the arena of "hook-up" competition.

First a bit of history

Do you really think two medieval dudes sat around the pub after slaying dragons and cooked up the code of chivalry? No man left to his own devices would have said after drowning his third ale, "You know mate, I think we should set a code where we are absolutely fierce in battle among men and 100% gentle in the court among women." The code of chivalry developed because of the influence of women’s masculine expectations and man's desire for female companionship.

So too with the Victorian era. The uptight moral stiffness of men in that era was not the brainchild of two gents with top hats drinking snifters of brandy saying, "You know old boy, what we really should do is set a code of religious intolerance that bans any public display of sexual expression whatsoever." Of course not, Victorian men behaved that way because moral stiffness was what it took to woo the Victorian women of the day. And the fact that birthing large families during that time meant that men adapting to female desires for decorum accomplished their companionship goal. It also meant that what went on behind closed doors did not in any way represent the public persona of Victorian uptightness.

Then came the Western Hemisphere exploration and expansion. Civilization was less civil, and women demanded that men be tough and rugged. Protection from the wild and unknown required men of grit. Men of that era left to their own devices caused the types of problems that other men like Bat Masterson and Wyatt Earp were hired to clean up. The women of the frontier were no shrinking violets either. For a man to win that woman's heart, he needed to be made of tougher stuff and prove resilient to adversity and steadfast in family. The Yellowstone franchise is now in its third iteration of this frontier masculine trope.

Throughout history, when what a woman wanted was noble, the men who wanted women attempted to emulate nobility. If the women sought piety, the men seeking women became pious. When women demanded protection, the men desiring women protected. It was the power of femininity that reigned supreme. Men who desired female companionship capitulated their behavior to an expected feminine norm. In our relationship past, it was women, not men, who dictated the rules of engagement. Men, after all, are surprisingly simple creatures. Whatever they truly desire, whether it be wealth, fame, adventure or female companionship, they will devise the simplest plan to get it.

Of course, this whole female power of attraction thing is predicated on one simple premise, women can only mold the social behavior of men if they are deemed desirable by said men. If men are not attracted to the feminine, then no power on Earth is strong enough to unite the opposite sexes. Men, sans a genuine attraction to women will engage in men centered activities. Chivalry, Victorian morals and handsome ruggedness all fall by the wayside.

When it started to go bad

Recent history has proven that men acquiescing to female desires is never a sure thing. Societally speaking, there were times when women overplayed their cards. And in those eras, when what is masculine does not find that which is feminine attractive, men simply tap out. Men will not mold their behavior to fit a feminine driven social norm if the ultimate “prize” is not worth beholding.

The temperance movement of late 19^th and early 20^th centuries is one such ‘bridge-too-far.” Women of that era deemed alcohol a detriment to family and communities and started political campaigns to reduce or eliminate its consumption. Such groups as Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU), Anti-Saloon League, Daughters of Temperance and Martha Washingtonians were successful in framing temperance as a moral duty and a women’s right to protect their homes. These women led organizations won the ultimate prize. Prohibition was enacted in 1920 with the ratification of the 18th Amendment and the enforcement of the Volstead Act. Although men initially followed along with the abstinence madness for the reason’s I previously stated, they soon found that the “juice wasn’t with the squeeze. Apparently, the motto, “party until she is cute,” isn’t just a sophomoric pub joke. Prohibition also proved governments cannot legislate morality and men faced with the two options, sober female companionship or lawbreaking drunken debauchery, they pick the latter.

The female driven sexual revolution of the 1960’s, made mostly possible by the advancement of contraception, was another era where men’s behavior was modified negatively regarding women. With women setting the standard that sex can be casual and non-committal, men took that gift and ran with it. No chivalry, no steadfast commitment or requirement to protection of femineity of family and no being there in the morning, was something men had been chasing since they were cast out of Edan. And the women of the sexual revolution gave it to them “neat and with a chaser,” and with no strings attached. It is ironic that within one generation, women when from banning of all alcohol to protect their families to “drink up boys, this round is on me!”

The modern feminist movement has come full circle as women now have equal or greater footing in our churches, academic institutions and government agencies. Although, women are not at parity with men in government influence, if the trend line on this chart continues, women representation in government will hit 50% in less than 20 years. From local school boards up to the national level, the feminine is now well represented.

A graph showing the growth of women in the u. s.

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Do we have a femininity problem?

With women attending and graduating from college in greater numbers than men, they are quickly becoming the bread winners of modern families. There is no doubt a male / female paradigm shift is going on within Western societies regarding gender roles. But the one thing that has not changed through all the ages is men’s innate willingness to adapt their behavior to what women of any era demand. Unless, of course, what women offer isn’t worth the effort.

Articles upon articles are written within Substack and other outlets all asking the same question. “What is wrong with men?” Diminished masculinity theories abound claiming that it is video game culture or easy access to pornography that are destroying masculinity. Some claim that the problem is a lack of fathers in the home or if there is a dad still involved, his low “T-levels” have rendered him impotent in both the bedroom as well as in fatherhood. The psychologist and social “scientists” are racking their brains to answer the question, “Where did the men go?”

What if the answer to that was simple and right under our noses. What if the answer is, “men are right here where they have always been.” I contend that men throughout the ages have always adapted their behavior to women’s current normative expectations. And that they do so, not because it is part of their base nature, but because it leads them toward the prize of female companionship. If that is true, then there is truly nothing wrong, or deficient about masculinity. But there may be something seriously wrong with femininity. Because if males are becoming less attracted to females, shouldn’t we be asking the question. “What is causing femininity to be less attractive?”

Hope springs eternal in the mind of a male pursuing female attention. That notion is comedically made crystal-clear in this “So you are telling me there is a chance,” clip of Jim Carrey from the movie, Dumb and Dumber. Men are relentless in their pursuit of things they truly desire. So, if a man will not take his “one-in-a-million” shot at wooing a woman, is that a masculinity problem or is it a femininity problem?

I recently read in this article; Gen Z Men Have Given Up On Dating. And Honestly, Who Can Blame Them? It was reported that, according to the dating app, OK Cupid, women on the app found 80% of men unattractive. It seems that women on this dating site are holding fast to the 6-6-6 dating rule. It would also appear that for the few men that “measure” up to that devilish standard, the dating app is their oyster.

But men are not bowing out of the dating scene because they can’t meet women’s dating standards. A man’s embellishment of his attributes to woo women has long been an arrow in his dating quiver. Men are exiting the dating scene simply because they don’t deem winning the heart of a woman a worthy endeavor. And in that case, it seems to me to be a problem with the perception of femininity and not a shortfall of masculinity.

What is happening with young men now is a rejection of modern femininity in favor of an attraction toward conservative values. This fact was borne out in the most recent election where Gen Z men overwhelmingly voted for the republican party. Gen Z men are also joining churches at a greater rate than their female counterparts. It seems to me that men are rejecting a fickle and seemingly ever-changing femininity in favor of knowing God. If I were the parent of a young woman in the dating world, I would instruct her to get off the dating apps and get into a church. The young man who places God at the center of his universe will long out last whatever short-term superficial and unrealistic status a 6-6-6 may bring to a relationship. For in the end, when marriages fail, couples divorce unmet expectations not each other.

IT WOULD BE NICE IF...

Discussion about this post