thanks for the support guys, im feeling pretty down right now but the comments on the last video were so nice. i really appreciate it :))

Kay S. Hymowitz argues that too many men in their 20s are living in a new kind of extended adolescence.

So much amatonormativity, gender essentialism, and “old man yells at cloud.”

Argues that love is one of the few free things in the anglosphere. Quite naïve IMO given history: arranged marriages, interracial and queer love, women historically having been the property of men…

via: https://www.writingruxandrabio.com/p/female-neediness-is-real-but-its

In which I discuss the greater female need for commitment, the absurdity of anti-freedom “solutions” to it (coming from reactionary feminists)

Life sucks, I guess. Yet more evidence I’m glad I’m aromantic.

Are the straights okay? In episode 44 of Overthink, Ellie and David dive into “heteropessimism,” the sense of disillusionment or even shame associated with heterosexuality. From viral TikTok videos to studies showing that women are less dissatisfied than men in heterosexual relationships, post #metoo society is reckoning with the everyday sexism of many relationships. Ellie and David explore the reasons for heteropessimism, consider alternatives such as political lesbianism and boys’ education, and ask: how can we be attracted to things that are bad for us, and how can we break out of a heteropessimistic approach to love?

In this episode of Overthink, Ellie and David conclude their four-part series on intimate relationships with a discussion of polyamory. Many argue that polyamory has liberatory potential as a radical form of relating to others. Some say that polyamory is natural for humans–is this story from evolutionary biology true, and does it matter? Ellie and David discuss these issues and also explain how polyamory encourages us to rethink jealousy through the concept of compersion. The two also touch on the relation between polyamory and colonialism, and gender and racial dynamics in understanding poly identities!

previous: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tsaa821kWQ8

In this episode of Overthink,  Ellie and David talk about open relationships. 50% of millennials are not interested in having purely monogamous relationships. With many still wanting a primary partner, some are turning towards open relationships. What do open relationships have to offer? Ellie and David start off by talking about their own experience with open relationships and its ties to their philosophical and feminist beliefs. Then the two dive into the open relationships of famous existentialist thinkers Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir. It’s juicy! By the end of the episode they also discuss the romantic mystique, the triangulation of desire, our ability to understand desire, and more!

previous: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wA45EN78ji8

On this episode of Overthink, Ellie and David dive into monogamy. Ellie jumps into her obsession with reality shows centered around monogamy that are actually examples of polyamory, aka the entire Bachelor franchise. Then they discuss the appeal to nature that is often made when talking about monogamy as well as Aristophanes’ story of the one, the potential negatives of all-consuming love, cheating, and more!

previous: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BYtI6GmOeo

On this episode of Overthink, Ellie, and David discuss the history and philosophy of marriage. Why do married people in the U.S. receive over 1,000 legal benefits that single people do not? Ellie and David dive into Foucault’s analysis of ancient Roman marriage and Hegel’s idea that marriage unites the subjective and objective spheres. Then the two discuss the way it’s been used bio-politically, as well as queer critiques of marriage. They also discuss minimal marriage as a solution, how the average wedding in America costs thirty thousand dollars, their own experience with the idea of marriage, and much more!

The dynamics of this are straightforward: when a man is not ravenous for female approval, he relaxes and stops contorting himself into shapes designed for the approval of others (which girls hate, ironically), and a natural consequence is a significant step-change in attractiveness. “Confidence” is the casual shorthand for this phenomenon.

Alloromantic people are fascinating. Thank God I (hopefully) shall never live their lives.

People seem to be more willing to listen to advice if it’s provided with a bit of gender flavor. It’s easier to buy that what you’re doing doesn’t work if you can attribute your failure to the Fundamentally Alien And Incomprehensible Nature Of Men/Women. But that doesn’t mean that men and women are fundamentally different—even if the advice works. Sometimes all of you guys are neurotic.

I was cancelled in November of 2021 after about 4 weeks on the app and, of course, I subscribed for 3 months and Hinge never responded and kept all of my money. I have no idea why I was cancelled. One of the women I dated penned the “Men, Where Have You Gone? Please Come Back” essay in NY Times and let’s just say there was a giant gap between her in person reality and the epistle she wrote. Another woman I dated would leave me voicemails telling me that “Jesus would save me!” Maybe it was she? I think it was the latter person who narced on me because I was beyond saving. Anyway, the apps are expensive and toxic and I would never go back.

This is a hilarious comment.

see: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/20/style/modern-love-men-where-have-you-gone-please-come-back.html via: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/03/hinge-banning-dating-apps-matchgroup/686445/

People are being banned from dating apps without knowing why.

They should be glad they are. Why do people do this to themselves LOL.

Then one day a couple of giggling girls approached me and told me that another girl liked me. The girl in question was, in my opinion, the hottest girl in my year. While there were girls that I would briefly consider the possibilities of a future relationship with, before shaking it off, I never thought about this girl that way even once because she was so clearly out of my league. But these girls were telling me she was interested in me? In me?! The girls wandered off while I sat there in bewildered silence.

After a moment I shrugged the whole thing off and decided to forget about it. Because clearly the most logical explanation was that someone was playing a practical joke, either on me or on the girl. I wasn’t going to fall for it.

Not everyone wants romantic partnership and many singles find more happiness and autonomy in their solo life.

Amatonormativity is a word I coined to describe the widespread assumption that everyone is better off in an exclusive, romantic, long-term coupled relationship, and that everyone is seeking such a relationship. The belief that marriage and companionate romantic love have special value leads to overlooking the value of other caring relationships.

The OG.

There’s an irony in this. We use these words euphemistically because we’re too afraid to say the word ‘sex’. Our inability to talk about sex plainly forces us to recruit other (very useful!) words for the task. Because we cannot say ‘fucking’, ‘eating out’, or ‘jerking off’, we say ‘we slept together’, or ‘we were intimate yesterday’. The irony is that this prudishness is making everything more sexual.

I kinda get what this person is tryna say, but it don’t feel quite right. I think for many people reading the article, the message fell flat because of its inherent crassness. I think the author does phrase in a useful way the relationship between social categories and social scripts, but I they ultimately end up falling into the pit of “if only everyone just…” I dunno; I need to keep digesting it.