Sexual Economics and the Forgotten Men
In my last column, I analyzed the social phenomenon of sexual repression through the lens of sexual economics. Contrary to popular opinion, there is evidence to suggest that social proscriptions against female promiscuity may be driven by female self-interest to maintain an artificially high price for intimacy. I concluded by examining some of the regressive effects of a sexual cartel, albeit with one major oversight: What of the plight of the demand curve?
We are quick to notice the seen injustice dealt to a woman born with a low sexual endowment. Before the entry of women into the public sphere, such a sensually impoverished person faced a difficult life. With precious few suitors to financially support her family, social bias against the conventionally unattractive, and limited employment opportunities, homely suppliers ran a real risk of consignment to involuntary spinstership or an unhappy marriage. Although still a work in progress, our society has taken steps to recognize and remedy the tradition of primarily valuing women for their attractiveness.
Less remarked upon are the unseen sexual pressures placed on men. The qualities they offer in the sexual market are often not as visible as those traditionally accepted as compensation from women. Historically, a man’s value to women and society derived from his ability to create wealth and materially support his family. Cultural norms harnessed male ambitions for glory and hedonism into a more socially beneficial safety net for women and their children. Men that could not amass the socially-expected level of financial success possessed low sexual endowments. These men failed doubly: Not only might they die without feeling a family’s love or a lover’s touch, they would live out their days harboring the crushing vacuum of personal inadequacy. Needless to say, sexual regulations disproportionately hurt these men.
The tragedy of these forgotten men has gone largely unmourned and unmentioned by society. Like the spinster, the low endowment male has no suitors to pay for his needs, faces social bias against his poverty, and finds few job prospects. Poor, unmarried men have been a convenient source of expendable labor throughout history. They manned the front lines in battle, set sail to dangers abroad, and died in droves building expansive infrastructure. While the spinster’s lot was undoubtedly a painful one, the unwilling bachelor’s has often been deadlier.
Why does society lack compassion for this downtrodden group? Perhaps bad behavior is to blame. Poor, unmarried men were also responsible for a considerable share of the crime rate. It is possible that the personality traits that result in a low sexual endowment also tend towards deviant behavior. On the other hand, criminal behavior may simply be a reaction to their sexual poverty and lack of according skin in the societal game. We could also borrow and invert a feminist framework: Our culture exploits male sexuality to satisfy female needs. Men who cannot make the material cut have little value in our society and deserve no pity. Sexually successful men look down on the impoverished and sneer at their inferiority. As with most complex social orders, I suspect the answer lies in more than one proposed explanation.
Our brave new sexual marketplace has changed significantly since the advent of female breadwinners, sexual liberalism, and contraception. Women and men openly seek sex for fun instead of family. Women’s sexual endowments remain similar: Men still seek the company of pretty women. For men, the game has changed. Sex has been largely (but not completely) decoupled from the implicit male responsibility to financially provide for his partner. However, birth control has not rendered sex entirely costless for women: Each potential partner carries an opportunity cost, each tryst a social cost, and each broken heart a psychological cost. Men must still find some way to compensate for these costs. So what do modern men have to offer in exchange for a chance with a modern woman?
Attractive, successful men still have an advantage at local watering holes, but it is becoming more necessary for men to compete for a woman’s attention along additional margins. A fat wallet alone can be overshadowed by rarer qualities like conscientiousness and mean cooking skills because women face fewer sexual risks and more economic opportunities. Just as women are struggling to be valued for more than their sexuality, men are struggling to be valued for more than their tax bracket. Many, it appears, are still figuring out how to adjust.
The new forgotten man is (or could be) financially stable but is socially unequipped, a living dinosaur of the old sexual economy. Lonely and adrift, some come to equate sexual success with a chance for the happiness that eludes them. Frustrated by their lack of success with women, they grasp for the guidance they never received in their youth. Some eventually discover healthy ways to improve their self-worth and find a loving partner. Too many take their lives. Others turn to the dark arts of seduction for salvation.
Enter the pick up artist. Nervous virgins and self-made lotharios experiment with seduction techniques and share experiences online. The narcissistic lounge lizards that built this community–their exploits chronicled by Neil Strauss, better known as “Style,” in his bestseller The Game–are as shamed by society as they are worshiped by the forum-dwelling faithful. Many find their ethos and methods to be distasteful or even hateful. What’s more, these behaviors tend to be self-destructive. The Game sometimes reads like a bizarre rock biography; young dreamers discover the dark secrets of success, ride the glamorous high tide of excess, and crash in a wave of sexual addiction and emptiness. Many find themselves in a worse position than they were before they joined the community.
It is probably for the best that society harbors intolerance for this kind of lifestyle, as it reinforces unhealthy attitudes towards women and sexuality while damaging its practitioners’ psyches. The rise of this community bears two takeaways. First, men face sexual pressures just as women do. We notice the ease of the smiling stud with a blonde in each arm but forget the hurdles faced by low endowment men. The combined hunger for intimacy and horror of sexual rejection presents a psychological cost to low endowment men that others just don’t fully grok. The rise of the pick up artist is more grounded in desperation than malice.
Second, this community is simply one of the first to fill a real void in many men’s lives. There exists much social support to empower young women in their career decisions. Men often do not receive comparable support for their emotional development. Fortunately, the pick up artist phenomenon has spurred the development of male communities dedicated to the healthy expression of modern masculinity, like the Good Men Project. Mark Manson, himself a reformed pick up artist, provides another alternative for men to develop fulfilling relationships and good life choices. This time around, men are making sure that others are not forgotten. I wish them all the best.
