The Online Outrage That Harms Relationships
Part 2 of The Great Dating Divide
Before continuing to Part 3 about men, we need to revisit Part 1. The response to Part 1 was surprising yet anticipated. A small group of women vehemently disagreed, flooding the comment section and, in the process, inadvertently proving my point.
Several fake accounts, going by such clever names as “Jane Doe”, “Doe Jane”, “John Doe” (Jane’s male alter-ego), and “Jane Williams XYZ” (long lost cousin of mine) arrived at the comment section party and decided to make a scene.
They took offense to the piece on behalf of my ex-girlfriend. And decided to defend her and insult me in the process. I left the comments on the post so you can see the phenomenon for yourself.
Earlier in Part 1, I briefly mentioned how women tend to agree with each other online. I posted, in a parenthetical, a link to an article by Evolutionary Psychologist Dana Fleishman on how women in online relationship forums blow up small or even nonexistent misdeeds into relationship ending episodes (here is the link again, it’s an amazing read).
The thesis goes that women have an evolutionary need to support one another. And they need to status signal to other women that they provide the greatest amount of support. As a result, especially online where you can be anonymous and not at all accountable to your own bad ideas, things quickly spiral out of control. When a woman posts online about her husband doing something she sees as wrong (one example was literally a man asking his wife “How can I help you?”), another woman comments to provide support and tell her how her husband is wrong and how she should punish him. Then, the next woman must jump in and provide even more supportive support, which often just becomes a more unhinged variant of the previous supporter’s support. And on it goes.
And this exact phenomenon just happened in my comment section.
They didn’t question any of the arguments in the article. They didn’t try to disprove my claims. Actually, their actions just proved my claims. They proved that, in their minds, women are not supposed to succumb to any man’s relationship needs. And any man who asks anything of his significant other is a misogynistic pig.
They resorted to personal attacks to discredit me. They made fun of my income, hairline, and crooked teeth. They even called me a Christian-Trump supporter.
But I’m not a Christian (here’s my piece on why I think you shouldn’t believe in Heaven) and I hate Trump. But that doesn’t matter. Because the modern, angry, social media obsessed woman sees any man looking for a relationship that has compromise as an evil patriarch. And I guess this includes Christians and Trump-Supporters.
The attacks didn’t end in the comment section. I started getting text messages from numbers I didn’t know threatening me. They dared me to post Part 2. And told me that they were going to shut down any chance of me being with another woman.
They tried to make it seem like there was this upswell of support for their ideas. When really it was just a small group chat of young women.
All the accounts they made on Substack were all created a day or so after the article was published. That means they were made specifically to comment on that post. How do I know this? Substack gives you user data to show you exactly what posts a user has clicked on and when their account was created. And the data showed that these were just fake accounts made by two girls (and maybe some of their friends) who I know, but I won’t name.
How do I know who these girls are? They matched with me on Hinge, a dating app which I will discuss in a separate part of the series. And through some very clever detective work (they used their real email addresses, with their full names, to create their fake accounts) I was able to find them.
I don’t care to dox these women. If they don’t want to put their name on their statements and take accountability for their opinions, that’s their prerogative.
But what they got mad about wasn’t even the point I was trying to make. I was trying to make two points in Part 1:
A) That a small number of women are convincing all other women not to give in to any requests by a man (his needs) to foster healthy relationships.
B) That women are being forced into careers when many would rather be mothers, which is confusing the role of the woman and man in a relationship.
Before I wrap up, I do want to use this opportunity to expand on the one issue they repeatedly mentioned: my ex’s eating disorder.
I mentioned her eating disorder because I think it more fairly represents her aversion to physical attraction as a need. If I didn’t include it, it would hollow her argument. Including her eating disorder demonstrates our incompatibility. Not including it makes her seem inconsiderate.
Most of you probably didn’t even think about me mentioning her eating disorder. And the support I got on the piece all came in private conversations.
Herein lies the problem with social media and the internet as a whole. A small number of angry people can leave 30 comments on a blog (a blog, which, hardly anyone will read) and make it seem like there’s a 10 to 1 ratio of people who are against the ideas of the author. And consensus is truth, by the way, if you didn’t know.
This angry mob can scare anyone with a reasonable opinion away from joining the conversation for fear of being shamed.
This was cancel culture at work. They tried to shout me down online. They wanted me to take back what I said. After seeing the carnage, even my parents told me to consider taking the post down. Not because they disagreed, but for fear of my career.
And honestly, I saw my parents' point. This blog has 150 subscribers. What is the point of me saying anything in the first place?
When I read my piece over to try to see these women’s viewpoint, all I saw was an opinion that I still stand by. And I believe truth should prevail. The internet can’t all be angry people on either side of the psycho spectrum. We need reasonable people here, too.
The reason there is such a feeling of divisiveness nationwide is because while the angry people on opposing sides shout at each other loudly online, the normal people in the middle get too scared to jump into the conversation for fear of getting beaten up. However, that doesn’t stop the normal people from reading all these bad takes and thinking that this is how everyone truly feels.
But it’s not how everyone feels. They actually have the minority opinions. I’ll be the one to get beaten up. Because I want my ability to speak freely.
But anyway. Let’s move onto men. Because there’s a lot wrong. And I have more stories.
Part 3 coming soon.