Article Online women influencers pretending to be celibate (social media fashions)

[C C]

Women are hiding their boyfriends online and there's more than one reason why
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93x1q5395do

EXCERPT: Tawana is one of many women reluctant to hard-launch their relationship online, and social media users are picking up on it.

So much so that last month, British Vogue published an article titled "Is Having a Boyfriend Embarrassing Now?", which inspired TikTok and Instagram posts asking the same question.

In the viral article, writer Chante Joseph suggests there has been a shift in how heterosexual women present their relationships online, writing that women want to reap the "social benefits" of having a partner, without appearing "boyfriend-obsessed". Posting your partner frequently can come across as "cringe" and "culturally loser-ish", Joseph writes.

On a more serious note, she says having a boyfriend is no longer "considered an achievement", and isn't seen to make you any more - or less - of a woman in the way it might once have done. She believes women are hesitating to post their partners because of the "patriarchy we live under, and how oppressive it is to women".

"A lot of women have been saying, it's cool to have a fiance. It's cool to have a husband," Joseph told BBC Radio 4's Woman's Hour on Wednesday. "It's not. We need to re-evaluate our relationship with men in this political climate."

She tells BBC News she received a "plethora of DMs" from people telling her they'd unfollowed her because they could no longer relate to her content once she had a boyfriend. "That day I think about 1,000 people unfollowed me," Yeboah recalls.

But she says she understands why people can find boyfriend-related content too much. "A lot of relationship content is corny - I think people kind of just cringe now when they see it."

"They're selling a distinct aesthetic, a distinct taste," Dr Brooks explains. "They're catering to a very devoted and distinct audience, so if they go off brand they confuse their audience base, and people will just leave them." (MORE - missing details)

[Syne]

So between placating incel female audiences and wanting to keep their options open online, just more ways modern women are making themselves unappealing for relationships... hence hookup culture.

Apparently reappropriating the word cunt too:

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/79hdGovXbNU

[C C]

So between placating incel female audiences and wanting to keep their options open online, just more ways modern women are making themselves unappealing for relationships... hence hookup culture.

Apparently reappropriating the word cunt too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79hdGovXbNU

This trend isn't even in response to specific social injustice circumstances in the real-world environment. But instead, a far-left orientation bullying its members to be ideologically correct with its latest hipster fads. The very kind of artsy and intellectually pretentious hauteur that rich, elite social circles are traditionally known for.

Below, I'd disagree a bit with respect to mainstream feminism being focused on "destroying the patriarchy". Radical feminists are actually the ones more in patriarchy conspiracy mode and essentialism, which enables them to be skeptical of some parts of LGBT+. To be the ones who are TERFS (gender-critical): "A man is always privileged and exploitive, even when wearing a dress."

Whereas mainstream feminism bends a devoted knee to the whole Neo-Marxist agenda. Thus, their receptiveness to trans-women receiving "total female" status (zero distinction from born/biological classification). Mainstream feminism is not exclusively about supporting and defending women, as radical feminism is. It's about global radical equality and "fighting oppression" across the board, which is how they could play a heavy role in pushing, policing, expanding (and even authoring) the propaganda and reach of other marginalized population groups.
- - - - - - - - - - - -

VIDEO EXCERPTS: Gay men are less harmful to our social fabric than heterosexual feminist women. They make up 2% of the population. It's been remarkably stable.

And every time I talk with gay men, if I say, "You know what? Here's the thing. No one wants to see any hate crimes, but we want to strive for a heteronormative society that encourages a nuclear family, particularly because of birth rate issues."

They go, "Got it. No problem." They were fine with such.

It's white feminists, usually white privileged feminists, who say, "Whoa, that sounds to me like you're against gay marriage."

If you say that to a gay man, like "I get it." So, as long as we get the tax pennies, we're fine.

It's the feminist agenda that spearheaded the LGBTQ ever expanding agenda. And that is predicated on destroying patriarchy. Gay men don't want to destroy patriarchy. They benefit from it. Times two.

So that brings us to Vogue...

[...] I know they're laying down some bait, so it'll make it seem like men or older people are out of touch.

[...] I think that's what they're doing. They're like trying to reappropriate it. We're going to use it to empower us.

[...] We are going to make that word great again.

[Yazata]

And people wonder why reproductive rates continue to plummet far below replacement...

Feminists have come to perceive not only children, but male companions as well, as balls-and-chains that limit their lives unacceptably. They would much rather become girl-bosses.

Interestingly though, and nobody seems to talk about this, the difference in reproductive rates between "liberals" and "conservatives" is large and growing. Conservative reproductive rates are still near replacement, while liberal reproductive rates are far below replacement and falling fast.

That's probably because the great majority of feminists are lefties. Not only that, LGBT militancy is overwhelmingly on the left as is "gender" politics and upheaval in general. It's gone so far that the democrats have abandoned their 20th century working-class base and opted instead to frame their party around homosexuals and young single females. Then they wonder why their party is losing its appeal to males. (No, Tim Walz isn't going to fix that.)

When heterosexual relationships become uncool, undesirable or even politically incorrect, birth rates are inevitably going to collapse.

There are going to be an awful lot of lonely aging cat-ladies on the left side of the political spectrum in a few decades.