'This is the reality that comes with the bright lights and shining glory of “hooking up."'

Hooking up ain't what hooking up is said to be.

That's pretty much the message being delivered in this must read piece by Jeffrey McMahon who did his hooking up at the University of Michigan:

As an underclassman, if you found me out on a Saturday night, I’d be the one holding a Gatorade bottle full of vodka coming home drunk and trying to remember the name of the girl that I just made out with. I slept with four different women during my first three years on campus and rarely made the claim that any of them were my “girlfriend." I bought in to all of the hype, but did so without ever reading the fine print. I wasn’t ever told that I would cause a young girl to cry her heart out in front of me while feeling completely numb myself. The world kindly left out the deep emptiness I could always feel the morning after, the same feeling that I’d just pretend wasn’t there. There was no mention of the walk up to a pharmacy counter hoping for the best, but fearing my luck had come to an end. This is the reality that comes with the bright lights and shining glory of “hooking up."

I’ve been there. I’ve experienced that life and I know how it feels. Having been through it all, it pains me to hear women on campus resigning to that lifestyle or even choosing it. But, at the same time, I can’t blame them. Take a look around campus and it’s hard to find any real men. Sure, they do exist, but they’re all hidden behind the swath of boys equipped with a few pick-up lines and a fifth of liquor. So, my beef is with the boys on campus. My issue is with the boy I once was, the one I constantly fight against becoming again.

Where are the real men while this is happening to women? What are we up to while girls are pushed to look for fulfillment shot by shot, wearing barely more than a bathing suit? Sure, we can claim that it’s not all our fault. Popular media tells us that using women and putting notches on our bedposts make us real men. It's no longer honorable for men to consider women precious and something to be honored and cherished rather than possessed and used. Commitment is for fools and old-fashioned folks. Who needs commitment when we can have it little by little each weekend? Are we so void of hope for a consistent love that we’ll settle for scraps from the table?

Men, the women on campus are all vulnerable. They’re away from their homes and families and are now in our care. So far we’ve done nothing but put them in harm’s way and exploit them. It’s time to take a stand and become real men. What will happen when this college life is over? Will we continue chasing women for sex? Excuses like, “I’ll stop once I settle down and have a family” are all too familiar. Do you really think that all of a sudden we can change our hearts? What’s next … we’re so attached that we look at pornography with actors our daughter’s age, or we leave our families and wives for younger models? Carrying this mentality only results in broken families and more fathers who aren’t man enough to show their daughters how treasured and incredibly important they are. Let’s become the men that we want to be in the future.

There's more.

It's counter-cultural stuff.

Some of you will likely make fun of what's being written here.  In fact, I imagine Mr. McMahon will catch grief from lots of guys... and sadly, lots of gals.

It's where we are today.

H/T to Matt Archbold.

Comments

[GoneWithTheWind]

You have a low opinion of women. For example: "Men, the women on campus are all vulnerable." Do you really believe that? And I suppose the other side of that coin is men are not. Another quote "Where are the real men while this is happening to women?" You could just as easily and accurately have said where are the real women while this is all happening to men.

Whatever it is that is happening to men or women at college or not at college is the responsibility of the individual man or woman. To try to guilt one gender for the perceived misfortune of the other gender is ludicrous.

[R.C.]

I agree with a lot of this....

...but I think one must ALSO remember that men are strongly disadvantaged in the classroom, in affirmative action, in all legal disputes between a man and a woman or which feature a male defendant and a female plaintiff, in all the laws related to marriage, and in the cultural mores related to marriage and commitment.

This has happened because our culture has, for fifty years or more, been crafting women who are entitled, undisciplined brats who expect their love lives to consist of the following steps:

STEP 1: A parade of casual-sex hook-ups until they bore of it;

STEP 2: A few experimental long-term relationships begin, with the intent of whittling them down to "the One";

STEP 3: "The One," a.k.a. Prince Charming, arrives at the door, carefully not asking about her sexual history or noticing her entitled undisciplined brat-hood, and being enamored of the precious little jewel she is;

STEP 4: She condescends to marry Prince Charming, provided his financial and physical Alpha traits are sufficient;

STEP 5: Prince Charming caters to her every whim, is manly at all the right times and sensitive at all the right times, lets her dispose of most of the household income, doesn't offend her sensibilities or restrict her freedom in any way...unless he doesn't, in which case she casually divorces him, takes half his stuff and any kids they have, and loops back to STEP 3 in pursuit of the next Prince Charming.

STEP 6: This endless loop continues until she suddenly finds herself too old to easily attract men. Then begins the transition to the "Post-Male Empowered Career Woman": The bitter, smoking divorcee who shows disrespect for he children's dad(s) in front of them and complains about how today's guys aren't manly enough to be real men and show appreciation for all her fine qualities by asking her out.

All her financial difficulties at this point, naturally, are blamed on the patriarchy. And because white liberal men are willing to kowtow to this kind of silly nonsense, laws are passed to officially subsidize this attitude.

That is what modern American women are like. And the university system and the culture, and all our political correctness, combines to encourage them to be this way.

So, in fairness to men, one has to consider what they're up against. The system has been gamed against them. They cannot (in general) find any women with virtuous hearts and a level heads. They cannot find any women who would make good mothers.

What the find, allowing for a little deviation around the norm, are shallow entitled sluts who're hoping for some sucker to come in and play the role of their Prince Charming for as long as they still "feel in love" with him...after which they'll take his stuff and chuck him for the next sucker.

Now, only a fool would play that sucker's game. So what do men do instead? Easy: They tune out from dealing with the shallow entitled sluts in favor of shallow guy activities. If the shallow entitled sluts happen to come around looking for a relationship, they get used for temporary entertainment, since "Devices For Temporary Entertainment" is what these girls have made themselves into. But a guy who's smart will not let his heart get too attached to any such device. That way lies the sucker's game.

Yes, it is true, there remain a few (1 in 4? 1 in 5?) girls who come looking for a genuine relationship off the bat, and who have not been part of the hook-up scene previously, and who might possibly (30% chance, maybe? 35%, optimistically?) have the character and mindset to be good wives.

If a guy senses that a particular girl is one of these, he ought to treat her right.

But the odds are not good, and his ability to detect a shallow slut in disguise is deeply fallible.

So he may be better served, if there's any doubt about the kind of girl she is, to pump and dump her, and steer clear of attachment, lest he get suckered.

A few innocent, virtuous, and entirely undeserving girls will get unjustly pumped-and-dumped this way, of course. But they're such a rare species that when a guy decides to do this, the chances of him committing an injustice on this particular occasion seem quite low. He thus feels more or less wise and correct in doing it.

That is modern life.

So, sure, the women are vulnerable...but not because men are being evil. It is mostly through their own COLLECTIVE lack of good character.

If enough women were actually good -- actually kind and loving and wise and diligent and faithful and didn't have a prior sexual history as long as my arm -- then the odds of finding one would be good enough for men, collectively, to take a different approach to their species. And this would be particularly common in a sexually traditional society, with strong disincentives for sex prior to marriage and strong incentives to stay married.

But as things stand, the bag-and-tag approach is a wiser attitude for more men. And while not all women are individually at fault, collectively, more of them are part of the problem than are part of the solution.

[Clinton]

Want some depressing reading? Check out the comments posted
at the site of the Michigan paper where this piece was originally
published. It is amazing how so many there have spun Mr. McMahon's letter as some sort of demeaning, patriarchal and outdated
view on women.

It's sad we've come to this, when a young man will be berated
for believing he should take greater responsibility for his acts.

[Rick]

Sadder still that someone who knows me not would suggest that I have a low opinion of women.

The truth is that I have a low opinion of a value system that demeans women and yet is propagated as a value system that instead lifts them up.

And if you're one who holds to that value system... guess what... I have a low opinion of you...

Deal with it.

[GoneWithTheWind]

"a young man will be berated
for believing he should take greater responsibility for his acts."

Reread the article, he was berating all men for what he considers their egregious acts.

"Sadder still that someone who knows me not would suggest that I have a low opinion of women."

You said "Men, the women on campus are all vulnerable."

What kind of Victorian attitude is that? Has it occurred to you that women are no more vulnerable then men, that women have brains and social skills. They aren't toddlers to be protected from the real world. While your greater point that casual sex might not be wise it is no more wise for men then it is for women and without exception everyone in the casual sex game is in it by choice. If you have a valid thesis then try to write it again without blaming every man on earth for all of women's problems. I have children and grandchildren, I have nieces and nephews. I sincerely try to give them advice and help them avoid the pitfalls that so many young people fall into. Generally they are polite to me but ignore my advice because the lure of "hooking up" or alcohol or whatever is more appealing. That is what "kids" do. We adults wish we could save them from themselves but it is an uphill battle. But it doesn't serve your arguement to blame everything on college boys. Wake up! These college girls are having fun, at least they think they are. No one is twisting their arm. The one thing I have learned from my children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews is girls are smart, capable and they make their own choices. They are no more or less "vulnerable" then boys of the same age.

[Clinton]

GoneWithTheWind, my comment above was referring to the
comments posted in the Michigan paper where Mr. Mcmahon's
article originally appeared. It is astonishing how his call for
men to reject the hookup culture is met with howls of protest.
Reread my post.

GWTW: "They (women) are no more or less 'vulnerable' then
boys of the same age". Really? Ask your local police officer
or rape hotline operator whether a young woman is just as safe
walking 10-15 blocks at night as a man the same age. And if
hooking up goes awry, which of the two involved will become
pregnant? Which of the two is more likely to end up seeing the
inside of an abortion mill?

[GoneWithTheWind]

Ahhh! The rape card! Who could have seen that coming? When you are losing the arguement then change the subject or cloak yourself in self rightiousness. We weren't talking about rape but since you bring it up: More then half of all rape charges are false and made by women seeking attention, excuses or in some cases to defraud programs that provide money for people who have suffered a violent crime. More men are raped in the U.S. then women!!!

Is a young woman as safe as a man walking late at night? Yes, in fact much safer. Men are 10 times more likely to be the victim of violence then women and men are 20 times more likely to be the vitim of violent crimes then married women!!

Which is more likely to end up pregnant? The one who didn't take birth control!!!

Abortion mills!!! Are you serious? It is done in hospitals and clinics not in "abortion mills".

[Clinton]

GWTW, my mistake, I thought you were serious.

[Ilíon]

"In fact, I imagine Mr. McMahon will catch grief from lots of guys... and sadly, lots of gals."

I think far more of it will be from girls than from boys.

[citizen of liberty]

I went to the university where Gov. Scott Walker now governs and graduated in '83. Feminism ruled that campus. I was spoon-fed liberalism there at every turn. Several of my friends who experimented with homosexuality (even those who eventually decided they were straight) ended up dying of complications of HIV or AIDS. But I stayed on the straight and narrow and married Catholic five years after college. The young man had had one sexual relationship in college. He abused me during the marriage. I divorced, and annulled that marriage. When I remarried, again in the Church, the second husband (who had also only had one partner, that being his annulled ex-wife) turned out to be a sexually-transmitted disease carrier. He caught it from the first wife. In me, it turned to cancer. Now he is caring for me in my illness. So these young kids who mistakenly think a condom will protect them from the physical effects of their "hook ups" are deluding themselves. As to the emotional damage they are doing to themselves, those of us who are older know that this inevitably leads to things like abortion, divorce, and other more insidious things like pornography use, just to name one horror predicted by Humanae Vitae. I knew on 22 year old in college who blithely said she had had seven abortions because sex with a condom was "less fun." I was shocked. I suggest the book "Adam and Eve after the Pill" by Mary Eberstadt for the demographic fallout of the sexual revolution. But for the concrete evidence of the real destruction of our society thanks to my generations sexual promiscuity, just look at the comments attached to that article. What hostility to sensibilities that were familiar and thought to be good only 50 years ago. When I was a young woman the doctors would warn us that when you slept with a man, you were sleeping with all of his former partners too. Well, I certainly learned that the hard way, even in marriage it happens. Young people always think they are bullet-proof, healthwise. Very sad. These kids are damaged right out of the gate because of these attitudes they embrace. They have little chance of forming lasting relationships, not impossible, but so much harder when you are used to being treated as a sexual toy. Not to mention the contraception mentality they all have bought into...no wonder young women are so screwed up, and the good men are ridiculed. George Gilder predicted it in the '70s....