There have always been, and likely always will be, men who disdain marriage and think it for suckers solely on principle. But these bad boys, lone dogs, or whatever you want to call them are not a bigger chunk of the population than they’ve always been.
Most men are open to the idea of marriage with a suitable mate. What’s changed is that pool of suitable mates. As the firestarter Moynihan Institute once noted at length, American women have priced themselves out of the market. Why should you sign a social contract with someone who has no desire or intention of keeping up her end and who can find all the rationalizations, positive reinforcement, and legal help she needs when she changes her mind?
When marriage was an institution with no real drawback (for either side actually, given women’s options), it was all well and good to rush to find a mate, to marry someone you weren’t completely, 100% positive about in your heart of hearts. Nowadays that would be incredibly foolish, when said person is probably willing to leave with your bank account if she isn’t being “realized” or if she thinks Oprah would agree with the issues she has with you.
The City Journal is absolutely right in their (her) premise that marriage makes men, not vice versa. But, inexplicably, they then conclude that Halo and porn are keeping young men from getting married. Hello? There’s a reason why “virgin” is still an embarrassing personal admission while “never played Halo” is not. I’m pretty sure we would drop Madden as fast as we used to drop comics, pubs, cars, fraternities, poker, dice, pamphleteering, and musket-trimming, if the right woman game along. What’s changed are those women.
