GENDER & SOCIETY · SOUTH AFRICA
Free 15 Min Private Session
GENDER & SOCIETY · SOUTH AFRICA
Pay close enough attention to the logic men use when talking about women and you will discover something strange. Nobody hates men more than men themselves.
The "body count" argument is well known. Men claim that a woman loses value every time she sleeps with a man, while a man gains value every time he sleeps with a woman. This gets labelled as misogyny (hatred of women). But read it again more carefully.
If sleeping with a man decreases a woman's value, then men are the thing decreasing it. By their own logic, men are the contaminant.
This is not just misogyny. It is misandry as well, self-hatred dressed up as a rule about women. They are not just saying women are worthless. They are saying that contact with men makes you worth less. That men are, by their own definition, something to be avoided.
Men who push this logic also tend to be the same ones who resent women for having male friends, for having romantic histories, for saying "men are trash." They get angry at feminism for supposedly turning women against men.
But feminism did not tell women that sleeping with a man lowers her value. Men did. Every time that argument gets made, it sends one clear message to every woman listening: men are a liability. Men are something to be ashamed of being near. Avoid them.
You cannot spend years telling women that men contaminate them and then act surprised when women start keeping their distance.
The preference argument collapses the moment you look at it clearly. Women do not walk around insisting on dating the oldest man they possibly can. That is not a pattern. But men who insist on dating the youngest woman they legally can... that is a pattern. And patterns have explanations.
When your preference consistently targets the person least equipped to hold you accountable, least likely to set boundaries, and most likely to accept bad behaviour, that is not a coincidence. That is a strategy.
There is a real and growing male loneliness crisis. More men than ever report having no close friends, no intimate relationships, no sense of connection. Many are struggling deeply and some are not surviving it.
But the question worth asking is: who built the conditions that led here? The people who most naturally want to be close to men, straight women and gay men have been told, repeatedly and loudly, that desiring men is something to be ashamed of. That desire for men is a flaw. That being with a man costs you something.
If being with a woman raises your value, and being with a man lowers it, then the logical conclusion is that women who love women have the highest value of all and that men are simply not worth choosing. That is not a feminist conclusion. That is the direct mathematical result of the rules men invented.
Lonely men who are angry at women for avoiding them need to reckon with the misogynistic culture they contribute to. A society that treats desire for men as shameful, that mocks women for their romantic histories, that frames closeness with men as degrading. That society does not produce men who are loved. It produces lonely men.
If men want to be chosen, wanted, and valued they must abandon misogynistic beliefs entirely.
The "body count" rule (sleeping with a man lowers a woman's value) is not just misogyny. By its own internal logic, it is men declaring themselves a contaminant.
Men who push this narrative are teaching women to be ashamed of wanting men.
Shaming the people most likely to love men (straight women and gay men) and then complaining about a loneliness crisis is a direct contradiction.
If the logic holds, women who avoid men entirely come out with the highest "value" — a conclusion men created for themselves.
The male loneliness crisis is real and serious but its roots are partly in a culture that made closeness with men feel like a cost, not a gift.
Anger at women for keeping distance is the wrong response to the right observation.
Disclaimer:
I am not your therapist, attorney, or doctor. I cannot diagnose you, represent you, prescribe anything, or replace professional support. What I can offer in good faith is a thoughtful perspective from someone who understands the social, cultural, and political landscape most of us are navigating in South Africa, without judgment, without an agenda, and without compensation.
A 40-year-old man has nothing in common with an 18 year old boy. He knows it. So why does he insist he has so much chemistry with an 18 year old girl?