Recently, “conservative” Tomi Lahren has appeared on shows like Piers Morgan and Laura Ingraham, arguing that men are defective, weak, and lazy. She thinks that the deficiencies of men are the reason for the decline of marriage. Women want to get married, but the men are just so inferior that women cannot find any “real men”. And that’s why marriage is declining.
But are her views accurate? Is the decline of marriage really due to a shortage of high quality men?
First of all, it’s important to point out that women’s views of what a good man is have been changing. For one thing, a “good man” is now a man who embraces leftist policies like abortion, same-sex marriage, student loan bailouts, green new deal socialism, government-run healthcare, defund the police, open borders, transing the kids, etc.
The far-left UK Independent explains:
An analysis of survey data from across the developing world had found that “a new global gender divide” is emerging. The analysis, conducted by the Financial Times’ John Burn-Murdoch, showed that the developed world’s young women have rapidly become more liberal. Young men, however, have either become more conservative (as in the US) or been much slower to become more progressive (as in the UK). Gen Z, Burn-Murdoch concluded, is “two generations, not one.”
Today, young, unmarried women are more likely to support abortion and same-sex marriage than young, unmarried men. And it’s not just moral issues, it’s fiscal issues as well. Young unmarried women generally vote against the policies that make a country prosperous, such as low taxes and small government.
This study from the Journal of Political Economy explains:
This paper examines the growth of government during this century as a result of giving women the right to vote. Using cross‐sectional time‐series data for 1870–1940, we examine state government expenditures and revenue as well as voting by U.S. House and Senate state delegations and the passage of a wide range of different state laws. Suffrage coincided with immediate increases in state government expenditures and revenue and more liberal voting patterns for federal representatives, and these effects continued growing over time as more women took advantage of the franchise. Contrary to many recent suggestions, the gender gap is not something that has arisen since the 1970s, and it helps explain why American government started growing when it did.
Now, if you think that Christian leaders are opposed to this slide to the left among young women, then you are wrong. Christian leaders have embraced a view called “servant leadership”. And that view is simply that men are not supposed to lead on moral and spiritual issues, like telling the truth, making decisions, making plans, and achieving results. If men say anything that upsets non-Christians, then this is BAD, and the man has to be punished.
The new view of male leadership which is shared by Christian and non-Christian feminists is that men’s primary purpose is not to serve God, but women. Men are not there to confront lies and immorality in the culture, because “don’t judge”. Men are only there to “provide” (dispense money) and “protect” (be tall, and make muscles). Men should not expect their wives to stay home with their young children. Men must not expect their wives to homeschool the children. Men must drop off the kids at day care and public school, and pick them up. This allows men’s wives to be free to pursue their feminist goals – like buying expensive clothes, putting on make-up and going on TV, just like Tomi Lahren does.
So, how do traditional men respond to this assessment of the decline of marriage?
Here is a clip from Matt Walsh, where he explains what he thinks is wrong with Tomi Lahren’s view:
And then here’s another clip from Steven Crowder, where he explains why feminists (non-Christian and Christian) have failed to be convincing to young men:
Finally, a note. Tomi Lahren is not a conservative. Like most childless, career-oriented feminists, she’s pro-abortion. In fact, if she is like most Christian leaders, she doesn’t think that women sin by choosing abortion. It is somehow always a man’s fault when women sin, because women were not affected by The Fall.
Where are all the good men?
What about Tomi’s definition of “good men”? When modern women talk about “where are all the good men?”, they don’t mean men who are good at defeating lies and opposing moral evil. They don’t mean Matt Walsh. Conservative, Christian men “give them the ick”.
By “good men”, they mean men who:
- are tall and have muscles
- display wealth, rather than save it
- dispense lots of cash to women on demand
- put their kids in daycare and public schools
- vote for Democrat policies, e.g. – abortion, green new deal socialism, defunding police, open borders, transing kids, etc.
- don’t judge, especially don’t judge the woman’s past
Those are the “good men” that modern feminists are having so much trouble finding in their 30s and 40s, once they get tired of having “fun”, and want to settle down with a stable, boring ATM who agrees with them on secular leftism, and NEVER imposes any responsibilities or obligations on them. “Servant leadership”!
So, should traditional men wife up non-traditional women like Tomi Lahren? No. Traditional men should only get married to traditional women. Non-traditional women have to get married to non-traditional men.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
This whole discourse reminds me eerily of the scene at the beginning of “Thor: Love and Thunder” where the character Gorr confronts the “god” he’s been worshipping his whole life, only to discover that his god, Rapu, doesn’t care about him at all and feels entitled to Gorr’s worship and sacrifice while knowing that he never intends to give Gorr anything in return.
***
Gorr: But, my lord, your empire has already ended. There’s no one left to worship you.
Rapu: There’ll be more followers to replace you. There always are.
[Gorr shudders]
Gorr: We have suffered… and we have starved.
[He begins weeping.]
Gorr: My daughter died… in your name.
Rapu: And well you should. Suffering for your gods is your only purpose. There’s nothing for you after death. Except death.
[A new, violent feeling arises within Gorr’s soul. He looks at Rapu angrily.]
Gorr: You are no god.
(Breathing heavily, he proceeds to rip the necklace with Rapu’s symbol off his neck.)
Gorr: I renounce you.
[Not letting the words the slightest moment to sink in, Rapu rises rapidly and picks Gorr up by the neck, slowly choking him. Cue an alarming, suspenseful choral music. When it rings the second time, Rapu speaks up.]
Rapu: Now your meaningless life finally does have a purpose. To sacrifice yourself to me.
***
Following this, Gorr is indwelled by the Necrosword and kills Rapu, making it his mission to kill all gods in the universe with his newfound power.
While not a perfect analogy, Tomi and all other such “conservative” women genuinely seem to think that men’s only purpose in life is to serve women as goddesses, suffering and dying if necessary, while women are not expected to give them ANYTHING in return. In fact, most women actively despise the men who put forth efforts to please them, treating them with disdain and disrespect while continuing to demand more of their capitulation.
Is it really any mystery that men aren’t interested in being in relationships with such arrogant and entitled women? Best case, men simply choose to opt out. Worst case, they become like Gorr the God Butcher and decide to actively turn against the women who have responded to their efforts with disdain and entitlement.
What exactly do women think will happen if the government systems that protect them from bad men fall apart?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Great post.
The most important part of this post is the “conservative” women headline (with intentional scare quotes). There are no “conservative” women anymore. In fact, we’d do well to go back and reconsider what “conservative” means now.
On another note, I have said this at other blogs. There is presently a pervasive and persistent notion in our society and culture now that men should get nothing from society and from their relationships with others. Men exist to make money and give all of it to women, who use it for their own purposes. Men don’t get anything – not even common courtesy.
That is a major reason why men are walking away from relationships. They have no power to do anything else. And there is nothing that can presently be done about this other than to allow the entire edifice to fall.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you for commenting.
I’ve just suddenly become aware of how natural it is for many people who you THINK are pro-male to see men’s earnings as just a pile of money to be distributed to others. They don’t see a man’s money as his voice to invest in the people and causes that he cares about. It’s just more like “oh, look that man has money, take it and spend it on whatever you like, and ignore him. If he talks, silence him.” A friend of mine is getting divorced by his wife because she wanted more money, and it’s just been a shock to see the Christian counselors, Christian pastors, and even “pro-family” Christian apologists, all see his earnings as just something to plunder. Including making his kid fatherless. All because she likes to spend money on takeout food, cosmetics, travel and EVEN COSMETIC SURGERIES.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is why I don’t miss relationships. I miss a good one, but a good relationship should be give and take from both sides, not one side doing all the taking. I can do literally anything else and get some return for it.
So no, Tomi and others, we don’t need you. Not only do we not need you, we don’t want you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t think things are going so well for anyone right now that ordinary people can afford to take on the spending of another person. In my opinion, you need 1.5 million to retire, by around age 60. That’s a daunting requirement. Marrying someone who wants to spend, spend, spend would slow me down in getting there. We just haven’t done a good job of making the real fiscal state of affairs clear to young people, and they are still voting for crazy things, like illegal immigration amnesty, free IVF, student loan bailouts, etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
you need 1.5 million to retire, by around age 60.
Yes. For one person. For a married couple it’s around $2.3 million (guesstimate). Most people won’t have anything close to that saved. I am looking after an elderly father who still lives alone. He is fortunate – but totally dependent on social security. If he weren’t receiving that, he’d be in the poorhouse. He would have to live with family or a nursing home.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Deti, for me the most alarming thing has been observing how anxious Christian leaders are to put pressure on husbands to let the wife grab control of the finances, despite the fact that the husband is doing the earning. Just individual cases, like where there is a consensual affair in the workplace, and the man gets fired, and the woman gets 1.5 million dollars, despite both being equally guilty. Or in the case of my friends divorce, where leaders of a “pro-family” ministry side with the big-spending wife who is initiating the divorce against the husband, who is in full-time ministry, making the kids fatherless because of course the man has to quit ministry to get a higher-paying job so she can burn through the money for cosmetic surgeries.
I’m watching how comfortable society is with treating a man like a slave whose job is to “provide” for women, and it causes me to want to keep out of that system. If you’ve seen our Knight and Rose Show podcast, there is plenty for a Christian man to do rather than expose himself to the chivalrous money-grabbers.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m so old I can remember when women (as a group) were more pro-life than men. Sigh…
LikeLiked by 1 person
The older generation is better than the younger ones on policy.
LikeLiked by 1 person