This post is dedicated to everyone who is single, or those about to become single again, who will find themselves searching for love after a period of mourning. For all of you lucky and privileged enough to be in a healthy relationship: this post does not represent you or speak to you. You can still read it to understand the mental and moral drama that lonely souls experience before, during, and after today’s first dates. But for you, it will simply be a moment to laugh and be grateful that you are in love and happy, perhaps with a family that loves you and fills your heart.

For those, however, who are in a complicated relationship forced by their own hands (like yours truly), or with vibrating objects of various shapes and sizes, while seeing naked bodies only on a 4K screen—this is a necessary post.

It is time to understand what isn't working in the modern world of romantic relationships and to find a possible solution to finally start living all those first dates necessary to reach eternal love.

The Context

If one wants to understand anything about this historical moment and why love for single people has decided to behave like Hans Landa with the Jews, it is necessary to start with the context. Without knowing which arena you are playing in, it is difficult to understand which rules to follow to win.

In which arena are we playing? In the one that represents the trench warfare of 1918. Right now, love has abandoned its "good guy" phase and embraced evil, transforming something simple into a war of attrition. On one side, women are launching chemical and bacteriological vials against the male trench; on the other, men—to survive—don't fight back, but retreat at full speed. This is the current situation. The sad thing is that I’m not even exaggerating. They don’t use lethal vials, for obvious legal reasons, but something even more fatal: words of a cruelty never before seen in the war of the sexes.

On one hand, we have groups of loud and violent women with poisoned, sharp tongues; on the other, the entire male gender has moved onto the defensive, avoiding any contact with the female world. Under these conditions, it is truly difficult for a man and a woman to even get close enough to talk and see if there is a spark to work on.

It is a truly tragic moment for humanity, in which men and women have never been so far apart. Not even when children were used as bargaining chips were we this distant. The question arises: is there an escape route? A detail that could change everything, restoring that spiritual freedom to grant first dates as if it were raining?

Let’s start by looking at the female situation, then move to the male one. Finally, we’ll sum it up and see just how tragic the situation actually is.

Feminism 3.0: open war on couples.

Women are living through a very particular moment. We are in the middle of the third feminist wave. The first was about the vote, the second about civil rights, and now we are at this one. The current third feminist wave started by asking for gender equality (social, sporting, and economic) and then, once equality was obtained, transformed primarily into dismantling and tearing down male control of society. Now, a part of the female gender (a minority, but a very loud and convinced one) has taken on the burden of fighting for all other women—who often support these struggles with silence—by carrying out a smear campaign against the male gender. It is now clearly an open and declared war.

This open war is all-encompassing. Every element of life is questioned and destroyed. It spans the world of work, entertainment, sports, and life as a couple. Especially the life of a couple is becoming the bloodiest front.

The war within couple life is truly fascinating and horrible at the same time. There are two core concepts: "being single in a relationship" and the "veneration of the female image."

Single, but not alone!

Let's start with a very simple concept: in a couple, both must have personal space, maintain social relationships, and have hobbies. As long as it’s about that, there would be no discussion or guerrilla warfare. However, the concept of "being single in a relationship" dictates that a man must accept that a woman's freedom has no limits whatsoever. A woman must always be free and independent, and no man can say anything to her, even if what she does is wrong. For that extremist fringe of feminists, a woman can maintain relationships with other men—even very "intimate" ones—go to clubs until late at night to get drunk and flirt. If betrayal happens (which it often does), he must forgive and accept that "a woman is a free being owned by no one" and certain things just happen... even though she is in a relationship and therefore obligated to show fidelity to her partner.

A Goddess.

Not just freedom, but veneration. For the extremist fringes of feminism, a woman is a divine being because she gives life. Furthermore, she is always right about everything because she is an infallible being. With this mentality, a man is required to always agree with her and submit to her will because she is a woman, and therefore superior to the man, who is considered an inferior being. Does this sound exaggerated and completely made up? I wish! It’s not me saying it. Go to TikTok or Instagram and see how many women are expressing this thought. Even worse, go look at how many women comment in support of those posts.

The Ruin.

These two aspects of the feminist mentality soak into every second of their lives, influencing any relationship with a man. If a woman thinks in these terms in everyday life, do you think she changes in love? No, in love it’s even worse!

To seek a relationship, specific conditions are set for the first date. Conditions that are ruining them.

The self-induced drama of feminists starts even before the fateful first date. We know that with dating apps, a woman has an enormous choice. So, they look for the handsome, rich man. They aren't satisfied with normality. Or rather, one shouldn't settle for normality when perfection is out there! If you listen to the "Whatever" podcast, or many other podcasts by women for women, you will realize how many women—even in their forties—have the brilliant idea of saying "if he isn't a certain height and doesn't have a certain lifestyle, I won't even consider him," even if she is either broke, no longer fertile, or has a very high "mileage" on her body.

Even if a woman is lucky enough to find someone like that, the drama doesn't end there. Precisely because that man is rich, she expects something magical. In the minds of these women, a man has the moral task of creating something special for the first date, which she simply "graces" with her presence. I wonder how he can hit the mark if they don't even know each other...

Furthermore: she doesn't drive, she doesn't put herself out there but she judges, she doesn't pay, and she gives nothing. He is the one who must pick her up, he must talk, he must accept being judged, he must pay (and pay a lot), and he must expect nothing—not even a message the next day (because she is a free woman, therefore without any obligation). This is the ideal first date for many women out there.

For these "modern" women, grabbing a coffee together is an insult because he didn't put effort into choosing something special; a walk in the park is a humiliation because you take the dog to the park to do its business; and any regular restaurant—even if the food is divine—is not at the level of female greatness.

Let's do a quick summary. He must be tall, rich, and handsome. He must be a telepath and understand what the woman wants; he must spend hundreds of dollars/euros for a first date; he must pick her up, expose himself to judgment, pay, and expect nothing from her. Basically, women are looking for someone like Henry Cavill with the skills of Casanova. Not only that: if the first date goes well, throughout all subsequent dates and the relationship itself, she wants to keep all doors open (I’m talking about other penises), she can decide to do whatever she wants, and he must always indulge her—just because she is a woman, and therefore worthy of such freedom and veneration.

Then you see women crying on social media because they are single and no man wants them, after being proud to have been part of the firing squad, regretting having been so mean and violent, generalizing a male world that is everything but certainly not generalizable.

I believe I haven't missed anything. Need I say more?

Soldiers in retreat: the crisis of male identity.

Now, as a member of the male category, you might expect me to say that men are blameless and that we are innocent victims. No, we have our faults too. Honestly, the rhetoric that "only women are responsible for this mess" is unbelievable. Simply pronouncing the word femicide makes people scream "it's all the man's fault." Unfortunately, although women love to use femicide as an excuse for their violence, it is not a valid excuse. Not all men are brutal, and not all men have mental problems. As I wrote before, generalizing the male world is wrong, just as generalizing that "all women are bad" is wrong. Just as good women are suffering from the violence of extremist feminist fringes, there are also good men who have enormous difficulty finding happiness in love.

Fear.

Let’s start with a particular element: fear. Today, a man is afraid of a woman. Not because a woman is scary in herself, but because it’s a matter of a broken balance that can no longer be found. Until before this third feminist wave started, he was in control of the narrative. She was the one who was "exposed" while we were the ones who chose. The "hunter and prey" discourse. If you think about it, the basic idea was that he made the first move, while women were always waiting. Sure, women might throw signals to be noticed in the crowd, but they never chose directly.

This male dominance brought a small contradiction: women were obligated to maintain very high beauty standards because the competition was fierce, while the man didn't have to do much, because there was no competition among men—since males were the ones choosing, forcing women to accept whatever came along. In the past, for example, very few men did skincare or nail care, and those who did were labeled as gay.

Now the world of dating has changed. The man no longer has that control. A woman has taken that control. The reasoning is simple: "you men demand physical perfection from us? We want it too!" From that moment, many men who were previously considered "acceptable" no longer were, because women set a standard of beauty that a man must maintain to even have a chance. Which is absolutely normal: just as a man wants a model, a woman wants a man who is mentally, economically, and emotionally stable. Different tastes for different sexes.

There’s just one small problem: female standards for male aesthetics are extremely high. As I said, not everyone is Henry Cavill with the seductive skills of Casanova. The rhetoric of "Yes, but they can always be reached with physical activity, a balanced diet, and going to the beautician" is false. No, they can't—just as not all women have a 90-60-90 body.

With absurd beauty standards, the fear a man has is not of being "gay," but of being alone. Strange, because in the past it was the exact opposite: people were afraid of seeming gay, but no one was afraid of staying alone.

Sex.

Sex also plays a role. The first date no longer happens because women "are not virgins." Many of them, with the rhetoric of "my body, my choice," arrive at various first dates with previous sexual experiences. A man doesn't like this because, in our subconscious, it represents a woman who is "too free with her body." A man likes a "new" woman for two reasons: pride, because he must be the first to "drive that car," and security, because a "sexually free" woman could be a woman who cheats, given that she maintains relationships with those partners. The excuse is always the same: "No, but we’re just friends!" A man sees a woman with many sexual partners behind her not as a woman to have a stable relationship and a family with.

On this point, I agree with the feminists. A man can demand virginity from a woman, but it must be reciprocal. If a woman must be a virgin, so must the man. The double standard that a man can do whatever he wants in bed while the woman must keep her instincts in check is not right. Either both indulge in wild joy, or both stay in chastity. Once you choose which side to be on, you behave accordingly.

Laziness and Inaccessibility.

However, there are men who are aesthetically beautiful and overlook a woman's sexual history. Yet, even they will have a very hard time getting a first date.

The biggest barrier between man and woman are the absurd demands made by women on men. They are excessive and completely out of place and context. Not everyone can afford Michelin-starred restaurants or some grand event. Even those who can afford it say, "Sure, I’ll spend a thousand euros, as long as we have sex after!" But no, because a woman has no obligation to repay the man for the effort made. Remember? A woman is a goddess to be venerated. Under these conditions, even the rich and handsome stay away from women and spend their thousand euros on a professional. If the relationship becomes a transaction without reciprocity, the man (who has the means) chooses the pure and simple transaction.

On the other hand, we men have been very disappointing from this point of view. In the history of dating, we’ve seen first dates inside a car, hoping to have sex immediately, with mothers in tow or in unbelievable situations. Often, for a first date, the man hasn't thought about doing anything nice. It was simply about going to eat and having sex afterward. And the woman was definitely expected to accept it because it was her moral duty. In short, those 20 dollars spent on dinner instead of a video game was an investment worthy of sex. Male laziness has at times been incredible.

Now women are asking for creativity and effort. The real problem is the exaggeration. However, beneath the madness, there is a request that is altogether legitimate. They are simply asking for something that is entirely possible. It costs a man nothing to go on a diet, go to the gym, or take care of his physical appearance. A woman now, holding the handle of the knife, is saying: "Listen, I make myself pretty for you, I suffer to be beautiful, and I spend a lot of money. I expect a minimum of effort from you, man!" It doesn't seem like such an unreasonable request, or am I wrong?

Final Thoughts.

Net of the madness of female extremism that wants male annihilation and those who support them silently, all other women are demanding from the male gender the same equality of effort that a woman puts in to be acceptable in a man's eyes. Just as a woman cares about being pretty in a man's eyes, the man should do the same.

As far as I’m concerned, it’s a reasonable request. Think about it: a woman waxes EVERYWHERE, suffering; she spends hundreds of euros/dollars on cosmetics and hair stylists, as well as more money on clothes and shoes—at times of unheard-of discomfort—just to be looked at by the man she is interested in. For the gender equality that the world flaunts so much, a man should also think in this sense. What does it cost a man, who is looking for a woman for life, to go to the barber once a month, take care of his face, stay in shape, and live healthily—EVEN DURING THE RELATIONSHIP? Nothing.

The game of seduction has changed. Now there are two parties who have expectations and needs that must be satisfied. If one of the two parties is not satisfied, the first date doesn't happen.

Perhaps that’s the point: on one side, men don't want to step up, while women are tired of being the ones who have to be chosen and want to choose for themselves too.

M.