Bettina Arndt explains why traditional men are declining to date and marry

Well, the last (maybe) episode of Knight and Rose Show is up and I’m starting to wind down the blogging and spend more time on my health, fitness, nutrition and playing all the games that I had been neglecting. But I’m still very active on Twitter. And I saw a great article on there from Bettina Arndt, who is a pretty famous men’s advocate from Australia. This article will be helpful to traditional men living in a world of non-traditional women.

So, the first thing to do is link to the article and then give you my favorite part:

If you want to understand why men are voting with their feet, you need to look not just at what marriage now costs them — and the costs are severe — but at what it delivers. Increasingly, what it delivers is a pretty dud deal.

The modern woman: a prospectus.

  • They are the most miserable, anxious, and insecure cohort in living memory — hardly great marriage material.
  • Most married women go off sex — and the husband who objects is seen as the problem.
  • Many women don’t actually like men very much. The more educated she is, the higher the contempt.
  • They’ve gone full throttle left — and three quarters of college-educated women won’t even date a man who votes differently.
  • They’ve rigged the education system and colonised corporate and institutional life, turning universities and workplaces into man-repellent factories.
  • Yet their hypergamy (desire to marry up) is still running hot. Despite outnumbering men in education and careers, they demand a tall, equally high-status unicorn.
  • The modern female threat-detection system is hyperactive. Almost any male behaviour — silence, opinions, jokes, breathing — gets flagged as a red flag.
  • They’re extremely well-versed in the lucrative economics of divorce, including a well-timed false allegation to eliminate tedious shared parenting.

To examine more carefully what is going on here, let’s start by looking at the latest addition to this sorry reckoning. I’m referring to the finding published in New Statesman last month: that many young women don’t like men. A Merlin Strategy poll of young Britons aged 18 to 30 found three times more young women than young men held a negative view of the opposite sex. Only about 50% of women had a positive view of men compared to 72% of men feeling positive about women. For women under 25, it was even starker: only around one-third (35%) reported a positive view of men.

This applies particularly to professional and managerial young women of whom just 36 per cent hold a positive view of men, compared with 61 per cent of working-class women. In other words, the contempt for men is most concentrated in educated, middle-class women — precisely the demographic that has benefited most from feminist gains and whose prospects are objectively the strongest.

By the way, there used to be a guy who would write on these issues who was pretty good – his name is Dalrock. And he wrote a great article about this exact issue of traditional men realizing that marrying a non-traditional woman is a bad deal:

But there is another aspect to this, because women’s past decisions to delay marriage also played a role in shrinking the pool of men who prepared to take on the role of provider.

The first generations of women who decided to push out the age of marriage for the most part found that the same number of men still prepared to be husbands.  But over time as the length of the delay increased, this weakened the signal women collectively sent to young men that respectable men will be sexually successful.

It isn’t just that young women are now astonishingly open about their intent to have sex with badboys in their prime and settle for a beta provider at the last minute, although that has to have an impact.  It also isn’t just that as a society we see married fathers as beneath contempt, although surely that’s having an impact as well.

Today an 18 year old man doesn’t see the same incentive to knock himself out on education and career that men of previous generations saw.  Today an 18 year old man sees that for the next decade or so his most effective sexual strategy is to focus on being the sexy badboy young women dedicate their sexual prime to, not patiently preparing to be the boring loyal dude who will pick up the tab*.

And another great article that I really liked about how marriage has changed from being a good deal for men to being a bad deal for men:

Feminists and their enablers have slowly shaved off the value of marriage for men.

Marriage for men no longer means:

  • Being the legally and socially recognized head of the household.
  • An expectation of regular sex.
  • Legal rights to children.
  • Lifetime commitment.

As men came to accept each [change], additional [changes] were continuously made. Women chose to marry later in order to first have a degree. This older bride then came with a little extra attitude, maybe some student loan debts, and perhaps more expensive tastes. Again, the choice by men was to accept what was commonly on offer or avoid the transaction altogether.

[…]There’s just one more small thing. It took her so long to find you that you can’t reasonably expect her chastity to be perfectly in tact. I mean, it’s mostly there, but it suffered a ding or two. Her virginity was gone to her first boyfriend, but don’t worry it was very romantic and she still has fond memories of that special time. Not too long after that those jerks at the frat house did a number on her pride, but you can’t hold that against her. She’s a bright gal, and after that she learned how to hook up smart.

Sadly, Dalrock has stopped writing, and even taken down his blog to focus on his own wife and kids.

Now, when I think about Christian pastors and Christian leaders – and here I will include literally all of the people who are writing about relationships and marriage from a Christian perspective – they are all 100% clueless about how men are calculating the value proposition of marriage. The cannot name the threats facing men, and they blame women’s bad choices on men. So, no one traditional or conservative is leading women to be marriage-ready.

If you must get into a relationship with a woman, I would screen the candidate for a worldview like my podcast partner, Desert Rose. If you can’t get that level of apologetics knowledge and policy knowledge, forget about it. That’s the bare minimum for marriage and kids now.

Knight and Rose Show #76: Passing the Torch: Standing Firm in a Secular Culture

Welcome to episode 76 of the Knight and Rose podcast! In this episode, Wintery Knight and Desert Rose interview our protégé Ella, a promising young Christian standing firm in her convictions in secular Europe. If you like this episode, please subscribe to the podcast, and subscribe to our YouTube channel. We would appreciate it if you left us a 5-star review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.

Podcast description:

Christian apologists Wintery Knight and Desert Rose discuss apologetics, policy, culture, relationships, and more. Each episode equips you with evidence you can use to boldly engage anyone, anywhere. We train our listeners to become Christian secret agents. Action and adventure guaranteed. 30-45 minutes per episode. New episode every week.

Episode summary:

Wintery Knight and Desert Rose welcome Ella, their protégé, to discuss her experiences as a young Christian in secular Europe. They explore how she moved from doubt to confident faith through apologetics. Ella shares her journey navigating university life, the workplace, and cultural pressures while mentoring the next generation. She offers practical encouragement for young believers seeking to live out Christianity with courage and conviction.

Outline and transcript

Here is a transcript of the show provided by TurboScribe AI. TurboScribe AI allows you to translate the transcript into many, many different languages. You can also export the transcript into many different formats, with optional timestamps.

Episode 76:

Speaker biographies

Ella is a student who lives in a very secular European country. She is currently completing her university degree and working part-time in the area that she is studying. She mentors young women in her church and is actively trying to influence her culture. Her long-term plan is to grow string and have an influence for Christ. Ella blogs at Ella Apologetics.

Wintery Knight is a black legal immigrant. He is a senior software engineer by day, and an amateur Christian apologist by night. He has been blogging at winteryknight.com since January of 2009, covering news, policy and Christian worldview issues.

Desert Rose did her undergraduate degree in public policy, and then worked for a conservative Washington lobbyist organization. She also has a graduate degree from a prestigious evangelical seminary. She is active in Christian apologetics as a speaker, author, and teacher.

Podcast RSS feed:

https://feed.podbean.com/knightandrose/feed.xml

You can use this to subscribe to the podcast from your phone or tablet. I use the open-source AntennaPod app on my Android phone.

Podcast channel pages:

Video channel pages:

Music attribution:

“Strength of the Titans” Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Atheist responds to case for intelligent design in “The Story of Everything” movie

I’ve put up a few posts about this new “The Story of Everything” movie that is available to see from April 30th to May 6th. My tickets are for tomorrow (Monday). Some of my friends went to see it on the weekend. One told me it sparked discussion about the big questions of life among her four children. But some people in my office were skeptical that such a movie could have appeal to non-Christians. So, today’s post will be very helpful.

Today’s post is a review of the movie from a website called TechSpective. The reviewer is Tony Bradley.

What caught my eye was this introduction about how the writer abandoned his faith:

I should tell you upfront: I’m an atheist. I was born-again Christian as a kid, read the Bible end to end more than once, and eventually landed somewhere else entirely. I mention this not to pick a fight, but because it’s relevant to what I’m about to say about a documentary that opens in theaters today — one I might have dismissed without a second thought if I hadn’t spent an hour talking to the man behind it.

I do have a number of friends who are fairly high up in establishment Christianity. And I know how they explain their lack of interest in apologetics. It’s something along the lines of “Apologetics? That’s not very useful. People become Christians when it enhances their lives. It works for them when they are children, then it doesn’t work for them when they are in college and starting their careers, and then it does work for them again when they have kids. So don’t worry about apologetics, people who are raised in the church will come back to the church as soon as they have kids”. This is literally how most pastors and Christian leaders think. They are really happy with the status quo of people being involved in Christianity for emotional reasons, and then leaving it when it’s convenient.

And this also applies to their own kids, who they raised in married Christian homes and with regular church attendance. I’ve had Christian professionals in my office reject books by Dr. Stephen C. Meyer for their kids who were going off to study BIOLOGY and ENGINEERING at big universities. “Kids these days are more leftist than we were, and they just see religion differently. The main thing is that my two kids got accepted to Vanderbilt and Duke! Isn’t that great? They’re going to make a lot of money, and have a lot more kids, so I’ll have lots of grandkids.” So, even the Christians who are very smart and very good at their IT jobs – experts in technology – don’t know why the Christianity they believe in is true. It’s just what they were raised in, what makes them feel good. It’s their favorite brand of clothes, type of food or local sports team. We cheer for Christianity because we were born in the South. Rah, rah, Jesus.

Anyway, let’s see what this guy who left Christianity thought about a movie that makes truth the issue, for a change.

First, what he thinks that the movie is about:

The Story of Everything is a new film anchored by Stephen Meyer, a philosopher of science with a Ph.D. from Cambridge. It makes an explicit, unapologetic case for intelligent design — the idea that discoveries in cosmology, physics, and molecular biology point not just to some vague designer, but to a system that has been conceived and engineered with intent.

[…]Meyer’s central argument — laid out in his 2020 book Return of the God Hypothesis, on which the film is based — isn’t “the Bible says so.” It’s that three major scientific discoveries of the past century create a serious problem for strict materialism: the universe had a definite beginning, the physical constants that make life possible are calibrated to a degree of precision that strains every probabilistic resource available, and the information encoded in DNA cannot be explained by the chemistry that carries it.

That last point is where a technology background becomes relevant, and it’s what Meyer said fascinates him most. Inside living cells, the chemical subunits along the DNA molecule function like alphabetic characters in a written text — or like digital characters in machine code. The sequence is what matters, just like the sequence of characters in software. And here’s the part that doesn’t get enough attention: natural selection has nothing to select until a self-replicating system with a working genetic code already exists. The origin of that code is not a question Darwinian evolution actually addresses. It starts after the code is already there.

Then, what he thinks about the movie as an atheist:

Meyer is not a preacher. He’s a deeply credentialed philosopher and scientist with a recall of specific facts, sources, and counterarguments that’s difficult to match. During our conversation, he cited papers, named researchers across multiple disciplines, engaged Hawking’s quantum cosmology in technical detail, and pushed back on my objections with precision rather than deflection. He’d be a formidable person to debate. But our conversation wasn’t adversarial — not remotely. He was curious, thoughtful, and didn’t try to convert me or judge me for disagreeing. He was interested in the exchange, not just in winning it. That’s rarer than it should be.

Nothing about the film or our conversation fundamentally changed where I stand. But I came away with a much clearer picture of the actual argument — not a strawman version of it — and a better understanding of why serious, intelligent people find it compelling. That’s enough of a reason to watch.

It would be wonderful if Stephen C. Meyer was the baseline of what it means to be a Christian. Wouldn’t it be great if what you learned in church, Sunday school, VBS, etc. was literally the scientific evidence for a Creator and Designer. Sadly, that’s not at all what Christians who are raised in the church typically learn. And that’s because the people who are supposed to be teaching them don’t know about these things either.

If you have not yet made plans to see the movie, you should by all means do so. Take your spouse. Take your kids. And when it’s over, take them to a nice quiet restaurant with no distractions, and talk about the evidence, so other people can overhear your discussion. There is no point letting atheism take over the minds of the people closest to you, especially when atheists don’t have the facts.