One of the most common pieces of dating advice for men is something you’ve probably heard before: &#8220;Just be yourself.&#8221; While doubtlessly told with the best of intentions, it has a fatal flaw. What if “yourself” is someone who spends all of his time playing video games, scrolling Instagram reels, reading alone, or engaging in some other activity that doesn’t involve meeting new people?
It’s from there that the question arises: Should you do new things for the express purpose of meeting women? That question has been the subject of a good deal of debate online. For example, a “tier list” by popular dating coach Blaine Anderson that ranked hobbies for single men <a href="https://x.com/menlifelegacy/status/2066340010450698318">recently sparked discussion</a> on X. Activities such as “social dancing” and “volunteering” ranked highly, while “video games” was placed at the bottom. Some of the responses cannot be repeated in polite company, but a <a href="https://x.com/labmonkey_2000/status/2066440414429688221">representative one</a> said, “This narcissist thinks men’s hobbies exist to make her happy.”
As <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp6YCxLSYBQ">a former student of Blaine’s</a>, I can’t plead complete impartiality. But in my view, she’s a good deal closer to the truth than her critics.
Consider the old riddle: If a tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound? On its face the answer is clearly “yes” since the physical mechanics of sound work the same regardless of whether anyone is nearby. However, a more interesting way of framing the question is this: “If tree falls in the woods and nobody is around to hear it, does it matter if it makes a sound or not?”
If you’re the best person in the world who’d be the most wonderful partner to someone, does that actually matter if you’re never putting yourself in a position to meet someone? Unfortunately, the answer to that is “no.” Just as in marketing, you can have the best product in the world, but it won’t sell if nobody knows about it.
Of course, doing things just to meet women isn’t going to go any better. A man who takes a feminist knitting class is almost certainly not going to get what he wants out of it. To give a less extreme example, if you’re doing Pilates primarily to meet women, you likely won’t be much good at Pilates because you don’t actually care about it that much. Women will pick up on that and read you as inauthentic, and then you’re done. The reason for that is a lack of integrity — not in the sense of a moral failing, but because you’re not being forthright about your intentions and that activity isn’t being done for itself.
So that’s the conundrum: If you do things you enjoy that don’t allow you to meet women, you won’t. If you do things you don’t enjoy for the sake of meeting women, you probably won’t go anywhere unless you’ve been successful with women elsewhere, in which case, why bother with the new activity? What’s a man to do?
There’s been a lot of discourse around how Americans are increasingly isolated and less likely to have friends, be dating, or have sex. An underrated reason for this is that it’s become much easier to have hobbies that don’t put you around other people. The path of least resistance, increasingly, is to be alone.
But people can have more than one hobby, and you don’t need all of the ones on the list to maximize your social potential. In fact, having hobbies that make you happy and fulfilled is one of the most attractive things there is — as long as you’re still getting in front of the right people. 
The key, then, is to find something that you enjoy that also makes you interact with other people. So you can do Pilates or knitting &#8230; if you genuinely enjoy those things enough that you would do them absent the potential of meeting someone. Now, that may mean getting out of your comfort zone and trying something new.
Pilates was several bridges too far for me, so I decided to try picking up pickleball and social dancing. Pickleball I found to be boring and a poor imitation of tennis. I found myself resenting the time it was taking out of my day, and so I stopped. 
Dancing, on the other hand, was a different story. It gave me something to do with my nights, forced me to get comfortable with talking to and interacting with women in a low-stakes environment, and was genuine fun once I got out of my shell. If it doesn’t deserve to be at the top of the tier list, it should be close — notwithstanding <a href="https://x.com/HaXX0R/status/2066418889014321662">some of the criticism</a> its placement received. “If your man has listed ‘dancing’ as a hobby, he is gay,” said one critic. If only; my love life would be so much easier if I were! That being said, I can think of a good many things that are less heterosexual than dancing with the opposite sex.
So, here’s the nuanced take: Having some hobbies that are just for you is fine. But if you care about meeting people, some of your hobbies need to get you in front of people. And maybe you don’t want to! That’s fine, but if you do, you should be realistic about the trade-off you’re making. Dancing may not be your thing, but there are so many other good options. The reason that hobbies are one of the best ways to make connections is that you have at least one thing in common with everyone there, and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-awkward-habit-that-pulled-me-out-of-the-loneliness-epidemic?author=Stephan+Kapustka&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=2&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=The+Awkward+Habit+That+Pulled+Me+Out+Of+The+Loneliness+Epidemic">you’re able to see them</a> repeatedly and regularly. You’re likely to be leaving a lot of good matches on the proverbial table by not taking advantage of that.
By all means, do what makes you happy. But if you’re trying to find your person and it hasn’t happened yet, what makes you happy might just be a new hobby that makes it easier, even if it means taking a step outside your comfort zone.
***
Stephan Kapustka is a writer at the American Spectator. Follow him on X <a href="https://x.com/SteveKapustka" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@SteveKapustka</a>.
This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.

Captured moment of an Asian woman competing in a pickleball match.

The Hobby Mistake Keeping Men Single

Dating

Relationships

Upstream

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/upstream" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream</a>, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
The &#8220;Call Her Daddy&#8221; podcast empire is built on intellectual deceit, teaching that promiscuity is freedom and that a woman’s prime years should be spent mastering how to manipulate men sexually instead of discerning dating and marriage. It’s no wonder that the company’s internal dynamics reflect the toxicity of the propaganda that’s been peddled since the beginning.
Several young women who once idolized Alex Cooper and her vision for a feminist media company are now disillusioned after working for her directly. In an incriminating report published by <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/story/alex-coopers-mean-girl-problem?srsltid=AfmBOorY6lCSPQ3a8w4vrU2eSaMbdjgpciSDP2v1nIx24u9E--4wTpgk">Vanity Fair</a>, sources that include over 20 former and current employees of the Unwell Network, the parent organization of popular podcast &#8220;Call Her Daddy,&#8221; revealed that the sisterhood was not at all what it was marketed to be. While maintaining a public boss-babe image, Cooper allegedly deferred to her domineering husband on business matters and managing personnel. Instead of encouragement, verbal abuse and boundary-crossing were what the female staff said they experienced. 
But why would they expect to get professional nurturing from Cooper? Right from <a href="https://open.spotify.com/episode/6WeScBow0GCkh4eCN0Uw9f">episode one</a>, titled “Sext Me So I Know It’s Real,” Cooper sets up a relationship with her listeners that is sabotage masquerading as mentorship. To be fair, the show&#8217;s description says of its cohosts: “In their 20s, the two exploit the f*ck out of their lives, making you feel a hell of a lot better about yours.” It was a bit like reality TV but with some self-awareness, in which the actors know they are making fools of themselves for your entertainment value. No doubt they drummed up the provocative outbursts — such as “you’re just a hole” — to generate more buzz. 
But at what point does it go from being titillatingly weird content that’s hard to tune out of — like Alex Jones for sex and dating — to ideas you start to take seriously and internalize? Cooper often spoke in a paternalistic way, literally, to her loyal fans with her signature opening catchphrase, “What is up daddy gang, it is your founding father!”
After co-host Sofia Franklyn’s unceremonious exit from the podcast following the pair’s separation from Barstool Sports, Cooper tried to adapt the show into something more sophisticated, in theory. She appeared to be aiming for a millennial version of &#8220;The Ellen DeGeneres Show,&#8221; giving hot celebrities the safe space to spill their secrets. In reality, the only thing that changed was the aesthetics — boucle chairs and a proper microphone instead of a fratty corner office set-up. The same problematic topics persisted, whether it was <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSThWkhtYqw">threesomes</a>, blackmail in the context of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foJ6Li8_fXg">orgies and escorts</a>, or the joys of single parenthood from a wealthy guest for whom the cost of childcare is immaterial. It mainly only matured in the sense that the horrible advice was in glossier packaging. But even if Cooper thought she had achieved the rebrand of the century, that doesn’t excuse the degenerate level she stooped to to get the show to take off. 
When the show declared in an early episode, “If you’re a 5 or 6, die for that d*ck,” the implication was that women of average attractiveness by contemporary standards should overcompensate with their bedroom skills to keep a partner&#8217;s interest. Cooper and Franklyn provided a lesson on how to go through a significant other’s phone in search of evidence of impropriety. In another episode, they warned their audience that if they’re not performing oral sex on their man, “someone else is.” For practical application, they described in the seminal “Gluck Gluck 9009” episode a technique that is “every man&#8217;s kryptonite.” 
Does this sound like a cute trust circle or like a cult leader stoking fear in women that their sexual prowess is their only hope of keeping a man’s attention, which is likely divided among other women anyway? 
Some of their advice is just laughably contradictory, but no less insidious. In episode 24, they talked about “how to cheat or catch a cheater.” How can you advance both positions simultaneously? You wouldn’t need to learn how to catch a cheater, which they imply is nefarious enough that it’s worth doing detective work to uncover, if cheating were in short supply in our culture. But here they were, giving step-by-step instructions on how to commit infidelity. This hamster wheel logic, like most of the show’s themes, was the opposite of empowering.
In episode 28, the hosts addressed faking pregnancies. The show had a baseline premise that most men are only seeking out sexual satisfaction, so the smartest strategy women can adopt is to weaponize their sexual nature to maximize their own pleasure and make mischief along the way. In the creators’ worldview, living among men is not about friendship or courtship but a game where there are only winners and losers. And winning, in the spirit of Samantha Jones in &#8220;Sex and the City,&#8221; meant achieving the best sex and then discarding the man before he could discard you. 
It’s hard to quantify the aggregate harm such a message has on the trust between young women and men in society today. If I were a young man, knowing that so many young women are disciples of a show that explicitly tells them men can’t be trusted so they have to be played, I would stay far, far away. 
Then there’s the matter of the message just not comporting with scientific reality, that women chemically bond to men during sex, making casual affairs almost impossible. Cooper and Franklyn seemed to acknowledge this truth, while insisting to women that they had to figure out how to fight it, in <a href="https://open.spotify.com/episode/0SW2sFSepDwCXOKRJHWksm">episode 30</a> where they “discuss the tricky art of how to not catch feelings…” What if you’re supposed to catch feelings for the person you’re intimate with, according to biology? The most prudent advice is to secure commitment as the price of that intimacy, so that the woman is not left with the bag, emotionally.
Some of the disgruntled Unwell staff reported that their interactions with Cooper’s husband were suggestive and uncomfortable. Again, how is this unusual, given the show’s history? In episode 23 titled, “Cuckolding, Everyone’s Doing It,” Cooper and Franklyn shared “a technology hack to help you get away with murder or better yet, cheating!” If anything, Kaplan was just being consistent, taking cues from the show’s legitimization of <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@callherdaddy/video/7508828899451620654">open relationships</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujo2BHqx0PY">polyamory</a>. Their entire business model was trafficking in engagement on raunchy stories that do the opposite of dignifying women or men. The show didn’t inspire better behavior on the part of either gender; it brought both down to new lows.
A common conservative argument since Cooper got married and pregnant has been that she pursued the most tried-and-true paths to sustained human happiness while offering her audience garbage dressed up as candy, the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/alex-cooper-told-women-to-delay-settling-down-now-shes-having-the-fairytale-ending">epitome</a> of a luxury belief. Cooper defends: What’s wrong with “having fun” in your 20s and then settling down in your 30s? But &#8220;Call Her Daddy&#8221; was not merely about having fun; it perpetuated a degrading hookup culture that leaves scars more than it builds character. Gender relations and happiness levels were <a href="https://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexual-history-affect-marital-happiness">better</a> when sex was still something reserved for a one-and-only, something sacred. Based on the Vanity Fair story, it seems the couple behind Unwell is surrounded by <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/alex-coopers-reported-marriage-woes-spotlight-trend-stars-sleeping-apart-from-bette-midler-kaley-cuoco">moral and marital trouble</a>. I imagine it’s hard to be a part of an operation like that without it finding you. 
They made their bed; now they have to lie in it. 
***
Caroline Downey is a columnist and video personality at National Review. She is also a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum and a 2025-2026 Novak fellow with the Fund for American Studies.

New York Times Holds Annual DealBook Summit

The Scandal That’s Exposing The ‘Call Her Daddy’ Lie

Alex Cooper

Call Her Daddy

Marriage

podcasts

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/upstream" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream</a>, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Much has been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hollywoods-worst-nightmare-is-already-here">written</a> about how great the new independent horror movie &#8220;Obsession&#8221; is. With a budget of just $750,000, <a href="https://deadline.com/2026/06/box-office-obsession-record-1236949178/">it’s already earned</a> $224 million. The success is entirely deserved; it’s a phenomenal film. Yet, the most important thing about it is not what it shows, but what it says.
&#8220;Obsession&#8221; resonates because it combines two deeply human tropes. The first is this: A character gets the thing he&#8217;s been striving after for so long, and it doesn’t satisfy him the way he thought it would. Be careful what you wish for, the grass is always greener on the other side, and all that. The second is unrequited love. The pain of falling for someone who doesn’t like you back is something that most people experience. There’s a reason why it’s been fodder for so many stories and so much art.
If there’s a moral to &#8220;Obsession,&#8221; it’s this: When you have feelings for someone who isn’t willing to give you a shot, the best place for them isn’t with you.
The film follows “Bear” (Michael Johnston), a 20-something man who’s shy and deeply in love with his coworker and friend, Nikki (Inde Navarrette). Unable to admit his feelings for her and ask her on a date, he goes to a crystal shop and buys a “One Wish Willow,” which advertises that it will grant one wish upon being broken. When Bear does so and wishes that Nikki would love him more than anything in the world, her demeanor immediately changes. The love of Bear’s life finally loves him back, and everything is great — until what’s actually happened becomes apparent: This Nikki isn’t quite who Bear thinks she is.
Many have suggested that Bear is the villain of the story. That goes too far. Bear did what so many of us do: He inadvertently meddled with another person’s feelings without regard for how it would affect her and was completely unprepared for the consequences. Yet he did so by doing what so many of us have also done: by hoping against hope that our special someone really does like us back.
He reacted to Nikki’s seeming about-face how you’d expect a shy guy who had the girl of his dreams throwing herself into his arms would act: shock, confusion, and stopping her advances to see if she’s okay. Only when she seems to indicate that she really does want him does he relent. While we, the audience, know that there’s this magic spell that’s been put on her, the characters of &#8220;Obsession&#8221; seem to inhabit the same sort of world as ours and treat magic the same way we would. So it’s understandable, at least at first, that Bear doesn’t quite comprehend or accept that what he’s dealing with is something other than sudden-onset true love.
If Bear has moral fault, it’s not so much for the willow itself but for the reasoning he displays. There is a deliberate shot of him looking at the toy immediately after Nikki’s behavior changes. It’s clear that he has a growing suspicion that something is very wrong, but he’s so taken by the situation that he doesn’t examine it too closely until it becomes unignorable. This is somewhat defensible at first, but Bear eventually does become fully culpable for his choices.
<div id="attachment_1108483" style="width: 417px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1108483" class=" wp-image-1108483" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/obsession-OBS_FP_00039_R_rgb-300x169.jpg" alt="" width="407" height="229" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/obsession-OBS_FP_00039_R_rgb-300x169.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/obsession-OBS_FP_00039_R_rgb-1024x576.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/obsession-OBS_FP_00039_R_rgb-768x432.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/06/obsession-OBS_FP_00039_R_rgb.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 407px) 100vw, 407px" />Courtesy of Focus Features</div>
This is exemplified when Bear asks pseudo-Nikki if her dad really does have cancer. This was the story she told to get him to stay with her the night he made the wish and is therefore foundational to their entire relationship. After her “no, no, no, I thought we were having a nice date” reaction <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWVznyWUS-E">that’s gone viral on social media</a>, pseudo-Nikki says, “What does it matter?” Tellingly, Bear agrees. That’s the question that’s at the heart of &#8220;Obsession.&#8221; It matters because it’s the truth. The truth about whether Nikki really does like Bear matters, but Bear seems not to want to question his seeming good fortune.
If there’s one point where Bear slides into the wrong, it’s when he has a conversation with the “real” Nikki, who’s briefly able to slip out. She begs him to kill her, and it’s apparent she’s suffering a lot.
Bear doesn’t kill her, and there are good reasons for that. There still might be a way to break the spell, and also because, as far as the world would see, he would just be murdering his devoted, if slightly odd, girlfriend while she slept. No, what’s bad is not what Bear does, but what he says. Specifically, he asks, “What&#8217;s so bad about being with me?” 
It’s at this moment that many might wonder why Bear is making this about himself. Nikki is the one suffering here, and Bear caused it. At the same time, it’s a very human thing to wonder. I wish I could say I had never uttered any variation of Bear’s question before. Nikki’s response, the real Nikki’s response, is the perfect counter: “I’ve never been with you.”
It’s not that loving Bear would have been bad, it’s that Nikki didn’t love him. Loving Bear was simply not compatible with Nikki, so what’s happened instead is that Nikki has been possessed by this demon who is obsessed with Bear.
What makes the tragedy worse is that Bear had other options: He seemed to have real chemistry with another character, Sarah. But by pursuing Nikki, he foreclosed what would have probably been a good relationship.
When pseudo-Nikki tells Bear that everything is all his fault, she’s not wrong. His fundamental moral flaw is passivity. Had he just told her how he felt early on, he would have gotten the “no” he didn’t want but definitely needed, and none of this would have happened. But he was scared. That’s a very human feeling: There’s a reason why <a href="https://www.mystateline.com/news/national/almost-half-of-young-men-have-never-approached-a-woman-romantically-study/">45% of young men have never</a> asked out a woman in person before. Candidly, I saw a lot of my younger self in Bear.
Funny enough, the film taught me something in real time. As I was sitting down in the theater, I noticed that just about everyone else was sitting in twos. Even in the pitch darkness, I felt very conspicuous. Great, I thought. Everyone here has their person, and I don’t. Why didn’t I have someone who loved me who was by my side?
But I, too, was indulging in the misunderstanding that I would see enacted on screen. When pseudo-Nikki breaks the willow to make Bear obsessed with her in the finale, she knows very well what she’s doing. It shows that while she’s obsessed with him, she doesn’t actually love him. Or rather, she has the same superficial understanding of what love means that many of us do, in a more intentional, malicious way.
Love isn’t just wanting affection from someone. It’s wanting the best for them. And pseudo-Nikki doesn’t want what’s best for Bear. In fact, when she realizes that he doesn’t feel about her the same way she feels about him, she’s perfectly willing to use the willow on him. She’s fine with making him suffer in order to get the validation that she thinks she needs from him. You could call that a lot of things, but it’s not love.
While Bear did the same thing earlier, he did it with the same sort of misunderstanding that a lot of us do. It came from loneliness and wishful thinking and from not really understanding the consequences of what he was asking. As a sort of vague yearning, wanting somebody to love you is human and earnest and largely harmless. However, what the film shows us is that if you’ve ever wanted your unreciprocated crush to love you back, no you don’t — because this is what it would look like.
Love is not something you can manufacture, and if it were, the consequences would be horrifying. Bear would have really benefited from hearing the old saying, &#8220;if you love something, set it free.&#8221;
***
Stephan Kapustka is a writer at the American Spectator. Follow him on X <a href="https://x.com/SteveKapustka" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@SteveKapustka</a>.

obsession-OBS_FP_00073_R_rgb

The Dating Advice Hidden Inside The Year’s Biggest Horror Surprise

Horror Movies

Movies

A hard truth that Hollywood culture and the media routinely try to deny was dropped by an unlikely source — an OnlyFans girl.
A woman who sells her body on the tragically popular website OnlyFans admitted in a video that no &#8220;high value man&#8221; will ever date an &#8220;OnlyFans girl,&#8221; leaving one desperately lonely and crippled with anxiety.
The post from Athena Pariss, who has well over a million followers on social media, opens with a clip of late conservative Charlie Kirk explaining that men &#8220;look so lowly on OnlyFans girls.&#8221;
&#8220;It&#8217;s so true. As someone being in the OF [OnlyFans] industry for the last three years, I truly think that it&#8217;s a give and exchange,&#8221; Pariss said, adding that when you &#8220;make a deal with the &#8230; dark side,&#8221; you might gain financial freedom, &#8220;but in exchange, your love life suffers greatly.&#8221;
Pariss <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DYJ_AmuOEqZ/">said</a> she&#8217;s been single for four years and never had a boyfriend while doing OnlyFans. Men will sleep with her, she said, but no one will &#8220;claim&#8221; her as their girlfriend. She said she&#8217;s experienced real darkness since she started selling her body on the website and detailed horrifying sexual abuse from men. In one instance, she says she was raped.
&#8220;The darkness that you open yourself up to when you do something like this — it comes in depression and anxiety and isolation,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;It&#8217;s all spiritual.&#8221;
&#8220;Every high-value man that I have ever met, he has told me that he will never claim me. They will hook up with you, they will never claim you,&#8221; Pariss said. &#8220;They will never bring you home to their parents.&#8221;
&#8220;I do agree that high-value men will look low on women [who do OF],&#8221; she continued. &#8220;It makes you believe that you are an extremely low value person, and that you are not capable of loving because of the career choice that you have made.&#8221;
<div id="attachment_1102405" style="width: 650px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1102405" class="wp-image-1102405 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-26-at-8.48.17-PM.png" alt="" width="640" height="836" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-26-at-8.48.17-PM.png 640w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-26-at-8.48.17-PM-230x300.png 230w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/Screenshot-2026-05-26-at-8.48.17-PM-441x576.png 441w" sizes=" (max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" />Athena Pariss on Instagram</div>
Over the past few weeks, Pariss has posted videos on social media about how she has started to read the Bible. In one video, she <a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/DYHrRtXuDah/">said</a> she was abused as a child and strongly believes that girls get into the industry because they are looking for self-worth.
&#8220;It&#8217;s some sort of abuse that happened in childhood — whether it&#8217;s sexual abuse, whether it&#8217;s physical abuse, it&#8217;s some sort of lack of unconditional love that you receive when you&#8217;re a child, and when that manifests and you continue to have these experiences, you get older, and in your mind, you think that your sex is your value.&#8221;
&#8220;The world promotes self. That we must be selfish, we must idolize ourselves,&#8221; Pariss captioned the video. &#8220;We must put our careers in front of relationships and families. But what does our soul crave? Community, family, unconditional love &#8230; maybe that’s why I’ve been so empty for so long &#8230; too busy filling worldly needs rather than soul. As I read the Bible, I understand more of what our soul craves.&#8221;
&nbsp;
<blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYHrRtXuDah/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14">
<div style="padding: 16px;">
&nbsp;
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div>
<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"></div>
</div>
&nbsp;
<p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYHrRtXuDah/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by Athena Peros (@athenaparissss)</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
<script async src="//www.instagram.com/embed.js"></script>
Related: <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/its-all-a-lie-former-onlyfans-insider-reveals-dirty-secrets/id1576594336?i=1000707839753">“It’s All a Lie” Former OnlyFans Insider Reveals Dirty Secrets</a>

Screenshot 2026-05-26 at 8.59.12 PM

OnlyFans Girl Drops Warning: No Man Will Date You

OnlyFans Girl Drops Warning For Others: No Man Will Date You

OnlyFans

We’ve come a long way since Ann Landers. The prim and proper lady doling out advice via her newspaper column couldn’t have foreseen the 21st century. After all, aren’t we in the Golden Age of technology that will give us the answers to all we seek, diagnose our every ill, and pair us with the perfect mate, thus completing life without the trappings of the search for answers?
Not quite.
Since Landers (the pen name of columnist Ruth Crowley starting in 1947 and later Esther Lederer starting in 1955) got her start, Americans have entered the nuclear age, hit a golf ball on the moon, invented meatless meat, and popularized cat memes. Clearly, we are advancing at a spectacular rate and using technology in ever more innovative ways to advance civilization.
Which brings us to our relationships with each other, specifically men and women.
After we acknowledge that young men and women aren’t exactly living their best lives in the relationship sphere — with only 31% of the rising generation actively dating, according to a comprehensive <a href="https://ifstudies.org/report-brief/state-of-our-unions-2026-the-dating-recession">report</a> from the Institute for Family Studies released in February — the next question is: why?
Ann Landers might say there isn’t enough good old-fashioned guidance out there: Who is helping these youngsters find their true love? Who is giving them confidence and fine-tuning the skills necessary to both present oneself to the opposite sex and to realize what qualities and character a young man, let’s say, is looking for in a girlfriend and, hopefully, someday, a wife?
Fear not! The answer is on any laptop or cellphone, in the very doomscrolling that is preventing people from going on actual dates in the first place. Wait, what?
Men are being catfished into dubious relationship advice by AI slop bots.
There is a burgeoning industry lurking in young men’s social media algorithms, promising relationship advice that will lead to the perfect woman. All that’s needed is a credit card and internet access. Instagram and Facebook (both Meta products) have pages devoted to “relationship coaches” geared toward young men stuck in singledom. The pitch from these relationship gurus is eerily similar, as is the aesthetic of these so-called “experts.” You’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all, with slight variations for the sake of the proprietary nature of the advice. Long, slightly tousled hair, a sculpted nose, pursed and plumped lips, unblinking eyes, and tops cut to be professional yet provocative, showing off and enhancing bronzed, uplifting orbital assets. Remember, these are pages designed to bait young and lonely men. They consist of talking points that sound more like a cross between a low-rent Kahlil Gibran, Rumi, and Stuart Smalley. The pages offer clips that draw men in by massaging their disaffection and assuring them that it’s not their fault they’re single; it’s that the women are no good!
One alluring young woman is <a href="https://www.instagram.com/sterling_georgia?igsh=MTh6eWozdnY0eXY4ZQ==">Georgia Sterling</a>, who offers this golden nugget of truth: “The same woman who holds the power to elevate your life or completely destroy it is the one you are told you cannot evaluate. And the moment you do, the labels come back at you and suddenly you are called sexist just for thinking critically. This is not random; it is a strategy designed to weaken men’s ability to think clearly and make strong decisions. Because a man without critical thinking becomes easier to control and easier to manipulate and much easier to silence. So men, do not lose your masculinity and do not allow anyone to take away your voice or your right to choose wisely, you are the pillar of society … I offer private, personalized analysis. Link in bio.”
That’s a lot of weighty word salad offering little more than a nod to the Little Rascals’ He-Man Woman Haters Club. Make sure your Venmo information is available.
These relationship-advice experts, who all appear on various unnamed podcasts, have no online record of being podcast guests. They link back to Facebook or personal Linktree pages. When I sent an inquiry to the intriguing <a href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DW4TIBeE8pV/?igsh=NWFxb2ZoOWk3ZG03">Ivanka</a> <a href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVtoLh4jmqc/?igsh=MWRjY2g3d2V4aDFxdw==">Hilton</a>, there was no response. Shortly after my Direct Message, Ivanka (who, unsurprisingly, sported long blonde hair and plenty of gaudy jewelry) <a href="https://www.instagram.com/itsivankahilton?igsh=MTk3bDdjMmJ6OGVlZA==">disappeared</a>. In a subsequent search, other Ivanka Hiltons popped up, but with no activity — yet.
All of this could be dismissed as the growing prevalence of benign AI slop if it weren’t for the disturbing trend of young people struggling to pair up and using these AI “experts” as crutches to nurse their grievances and find excuses to stay home and remain perpetually online. It can be hard to search for a mate when a loud segment of the culture looks down on healthy, monogamous relationships, marriage, and having kids. It’s hard to be vulnerable and risk being hurt or rejected. The easy thing is to stay home, stay online, and listen to the first “girl” who reassures young men that this is okay! You just have high standards! Besides, women either don’t understand your particular masculine needs or they’re going to deceive or cheat on you anyway! (That’ll be $29.99, please.)
Worse, these AI models are perpetuating isolating behaviors, rather than offering a way into a relationship for young men who already tend to avoid “real-life” relationships and are looking for reassurance that that lifestyle is perfectly acceptable.
A March <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aec8352">study</a> published in Science examined the sycophantic behavior of AI models in response to people seeking advice on interpersonal and social dilemmas. Stanford University computer scientists showed that AI large language models (LLMs) are overly sycophantic when users solicit advice. <a href="https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2026/03/ai-advice-sycophantic-models-research">According</a> to the Stanford report, “By default, AI advice does not tell people that they’re wrong nor give them ‘tough love,’” said Myra Cheng, the study’s lead author and a computer science PhD candidate. “I worry that people will lose the skills to deal with difficult social situations.” Further, the reinforcing responses were deemed “more trustworthy and indicated they were more likely to return to the sycophant AI for similar questions, the researchers found. When discussing their conflicts with the sycophant, they also grew more convinced they were in the right.”
These young men are being drawn into a world where they can be comforted by a fake beauty who tells them what they want to hear, reinforces their antisocial tendencies, and alienates real women, who are actually the thing these men need most to find purpose, fulfillment, and a life outside the unblinking eye of the virtual world.
What would Ann Landers say about that? You can ask her. She’s now set up as an LLM, trained on her 47 years of advice and published columns. On second thought, go out for coffee and think about it. You might meet someone.

Young women recording podcast in studio

Young Men Are Getting Suckered By AI Relationship Advice

AI Slop

algorithm

Big Tech

influencer

Instagram

Today’s young adults, on average, now spend more than a decade navigating the ambiguous space between sexual maturity and marriage. What was once a short transitional chapter has now become an extended, and often confusing act in a person’s life.
William Shakespeare captured the drama of human development in these famous lines from “As You Like It,” penned around 1599:
<blockquote>All the world&#8217;s a stage, 
And all the men and women merely players; 
They have their exits and their entrances; 
And one man in his time plays many parts…</blockquote>
Centuries later, the theme still resonates: We all progress through life from infancy and childhood to adulthood and, if we&#8217;re lucky, old age.
But one act of that lifelong drama — what Shakespeare called the season of the “lover” — has grown significantly longer. A majority of young people today now date for over a decade before saying, “I do.”
For most of history, “sexual debut” (or losing one’s virginity) and marriage were either concurrent or chronologically very close. In the 1950s, the <a href="https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/families/marital.html">window between these events</a> was just a few short years for the average American.
Not so today. Sexual debut occurs, on average, at <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/nsfg-2022-2023-puf.htm#female">17.4 years for women and 17.6 years for men</a>, statistics that have held relatively steady over time. But the average age for first marriage is now much later: <a href="https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025/families-and-living-arrangements.html?utm_campaign=20251202pio&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=govdelivery">28.4 years for women and 30.8 years for men</a>.
Often billed as a fun season of life, the pre-marriage single years today are marked by loneliness, confusion, and poor mental health. 
Shakespeare had it right when he described the lover:
<blockquote>Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad 
Made to his mistress&#8217; eyebrow.</blockquote>
Young adults today are indeed woeful.
Gen Z has struggled with <a href="https://www.americansurveycenter.org/research/generation-z-and-the-transformation-of-american-adolescence-how-gen-zs-formative-experiences-shape-its-politics-priorities-and-future/">feelings of loneliness</a> more than any other generation: their <a href="https://glocalities.com/reports/trend-report-polarization">despair and disillusionment</a> are growing.
At least some of this disillusionment may find its root in a confusing dating culture. To extend Shakespeare’s metaphor, one might say that we have lost the script for life. Just a few decades ago, young people knew they were expected to look for a spouse, marry, and then start a family and build a future together. Now that’s not so clear.
So, what can be done? Do we write a new script? Dig up the old one?
In an age where freedom and self-determination are highly valued, any script may seem overly prescriptive. Of course, men and women should be free to make their own choices. No two love stories are the same. And there will always be some people who choose intentional lifelong singlehood. But the absence of norms and expectations appears to create its own problems.
The overwhelming majority of today’s young adults still want to get married and have kids. In a new <a href="https://www.independentwomen.com/2026/02/17/two-truths-and-a-lie-dating/">national poll</a>, fully 80.5% of respondents (aged 18-29) were either married (18.5%) or said they hoped to get married one day (62%), and 70% said they either had kids already (24.5%) or hoped to have them (45.4%). Will they achieve these dreams?
We may not be able to replace the old script for family formation, but we can help the young adults — the lovers — who are stuck on stage, calling for a line. Changing our culture is hard, but possible.
For starters, we can be more honest about what choices and behaviors make people happiest.
More time spent single before marriage means more opportunity to gain pre-marriage sexual experience, but this isn’t a good thing. Our culture tells young adults that pornography, casual sex, and cohabitation are no big deal. Social science, however, suggests otherwise. These choices are associated with <a href="https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1142&amp;context=dignity">worse health</a>, <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7871523/">worse mental health</a>, and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19203165/">lower marriage satisfaction</a>. Sexual inexperience is actually linked to <a href="https://ifstudies.org/blog/does-sexual-history-affect-marital-happiness">stronger, happier marriages</a>.
Pornography poses particular problems for Gen Z. We’re not talking about your dad’s Playboy magazine anymore; we’re talking about a lethal cocktail of social media, artificial intelligence, and ubiquitous internet connection. And it’s not just the guys: Young women are increasingly reading and listening to erotic literature.
A solo sex life is a cheap but easy replacement for relationships with real-life human beings. After all, fellow humans come with smelly socks, emotional baggage, and for many in Gen Z, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/young-men-women-are-taking-poll-gender-gap-staggering-new-levels-rcna202672">divergent political views</a>.
The widening political divide between young women and men both reflects — and reinforces — today’s strained dating culture. Time spent online only <a href="https://bhr.stern.nyu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/NYUCBHRFuelingTheFire_FINALONLINEREVISEDSep7.pdf">deepens political animosity</a>.
And yet, young, single people are <a href="https://pro.morningconsult.com/instant-intel/gen-z-social-media-usage">very online</a>, sometimes using the internet to look for love. Technology has made connections easier, but relationships harder. Many married couples <a href="https://www.theknot.com/content/online-dating-most-popular-way-to-meet-spouse">first met on dating apps</a>. But online dating offers a literal world of possibilities when it comes to potential “matches.” Youth of yesteryear were often constrained to high school sweethearts or college coed counterparts. This “<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/valley-girl-brain/201802/why-dating-is-such-challenge">paradox of choice</a>” that overwhelms today’s dating men and women also undermines their satisfaction even after they commit to one another.
The influence of technology on relationships goes even deeper: Young people today are spending a lot of time on <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11284647/">social media</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/03/upshot/video-games-boys-young-men.html">video games</a>, and less time on <a href="https://www.americansurveycenter.org/newsletter/how-social-media-made-us-less-social/">in-person social interactions</a>, where real-life relationship skills develop. The COVID pandemic accelerated this trend, but it was <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8478850/#cdev13652-sec-0036">underway before</a> (and <a href="https://www.edweek.org/leadership/kids-screen-time-rose-during-the-pandemic-and-stayed-high-thats-a-problem/2023/02">continues after</a>).
Underdeveloped social skills are likely contributing to &#8220;approach anxiety” in today’s young men, who say they <a href="https://gmwpublic.studenttheses.ub.rug.nl/4726/1/BSC-ThesisS4637917Approach-anxietyFinal-B.pdf">don’t want to come off as “creepy</a>” when asking a girl out in real life. The #MeToo movement has also played a factor. While the effort to raise awareness about sexual misconduct has had some positive effects, <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/me-too-backlash-getting-worse_n_5cddd96de4b00e035b8ce786">it chilled many male-female interactions</a>.
Most (54.3%) young adults agree that #MeToo has made men fearful of false accusations and, therefore, less interested in dating. Gen Z still expects the man to make the first move, but mixed messages on masculinity are contributing to men’s anxiety in approaching women.
Many young people of both sexes are anxious about parenthood. Among young adults who say they don’t want kids, the most commonly-cited reason is, “I don’t think I’ll be a good parent,” outranking cost, career impact, and societal concerns. In the 18-24 age range, nearly one in three (32.3%) respondents who didn’t want kids cited this as their primary reason.
This points to something cultural — not economic or policy-oriented — about parenthood hesitancy. Perhaps our social expectations of parents have gotten unrealistically high. Perhaps our cultural messages on what makes a “good parent” or even a “good life” have become less clear.
Whatever it is that has deteriorated the confidence of young adults, it won’t be easily fixed by a new government program or subsidy. More and more pundits and institutions are <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/in_focus/4424068/heritage-foundation-right-american-family-needs-saving/">joining the bandwagon for a big-government pro-family agenda,</a> but this is ill-advised. Decisions about family formation aren’t like other consumer decisions that are more easily influenced by government intervention. They relate deeply to our conceptions of identity, morality, and meaning. They can totally change the direction of our life’s story.
“All the world’s a stage” comes from the play “As You Like It” and like most Shakespearean comedies, the final scene is — you guessed it — a wedding. Young adults today can still find their happy ending, too. But they would benefit from a culture that puts less emphasis on shallow, short-term satisfaction and more emphasis on becoming people who can build a future.
* * *
Hadley Heath Manning is a senior fellow with Independent Women and author of the new report “The Dating Decade: Hooking Up, Hanging Out, and Swiping Right.”
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Making a grand entrance into marriage

A Decade Between First Date And ‘I Do’ — What Changed?

A Decade Between First Date And 'I Do' — What Changed?

Apps

Gen Z

Shakespeare

Social Media

Women

When I ponder the deeper aspects of love and intimacy, I sometimes like to consult the wisdom of our left-wing thought leaders, in the same way I sometimes like to stick a pencil in my ear to see if I can make it come out the other side of my head, then slam the ball-peen of a hammer down on my kneecap with full force before finally jamming a lit stick of dynamite between my buttocks and blowing my own ass off.
For far too long, stodgy conservative influencers like Matt Walsh and God have defined human love as that relationship in which a man and a woman come to realize that the jigsaw complementarity of male and female bodies has become a fleshly symbol of the harmonic convergence of their individual souls, so that they seek to come together through the sacrament of an indissoluble lifelong marriage, in which she submits to the authority of a member of that gender with some semblance of a capacity for reason, while he includes within the circle of his own happiness the happiness of a member of that gender that can never be made happy or if they can it just costs an absolute fortune.
But unlike the sluggish thought of conservatives, the wisdom of leftism never allows itself to become mired in the stagnant tar pit of moral and physical reality. Leftism is progressive, like emphysema or one of those horrible degenerative diseases that you don’t even want to think about because it’s so much like leftism, it makes you wonder how a good God could ever allow such a thing to exist. No. Leftists have now moved beyond restrictive, outdated categories like the essential nature of the human condition, and they’ve discovered all kinds of new wrinkles to human love that past generations never even conceived of without getting arrested.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/hosts/andrew-klavan?elementPosition=6&amp;row=2&amp;rowHeadline=Hosts&amp;rowType=Hosts+Portrait+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="size-large wp-image-974735 aligncenter" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/Klavan-watch-now-1024x171.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/Klavan-watch-now-1024x171.jpg 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/Klavan-watch-now-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/Klavan-watch-now-768x128.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/Klavan-watch-now-1536x256.jpg 1536w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/09/Klavan-watch-now.jpg 1800w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
For instance, through the brilliant writings of leftist academics who have dedicated their lives to the selfless work of saying ridiculous crap that only some idiot like a journalist could possibly fall for, we now know that your gender is not determined by what gender you are. That wouldn’t be fair. You didn’t ask to be born. And if you did ask to be born, you sure didn’t ask to be born with every cell of your body evolved over slow millennia to either create and nurture the next generation, or to drag your ass to work so the next generation and their mother don’t starve to death while they’re home playing Candy Land or whatever the hell they do all day when you’re slaving away to keep them in onesies with maybe a few bucks left over for a date night at the Olive Garden so you don’t go out of your freaking mind.
NOW, leftists tell us, you can change your gender by simply lopping off the relevant body parts, then bullying all the sane people into pretending that did the trick, until the gnawing suspicion that everyone is lying to you causes you to spray a crowded room with gunfire before blowing your head off.
And for those people who aren’t into meaningless self-mutilation — for some reason — leftists are also able to assist you in intimacy by recommending some fruitless sexual fetish that is sure to improve your love life if your love life currently consists of lowering baskets of lotion into an oubliette.
As an example, there’s a new movie out called &#8220;Pillion&#8221; which charts the sado-masochistic affair between two gay bikers. The Wall Street Journal calls it a “classic rom-com with warm and fuzzy feelings.” The Washington Post calls it a “surprisingly sweet BDSM romance.” And the New York Times hasn’t reviewed it yet, because their reviewer is still in the theater watching it over and over again. 
Now, don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against defining love as a man submitting to wearing a dog collar for another man, any more than I’m against defining dinner as repeatedly smacking a sirloin steak into your forehead. I just wish our leftist cultural overlords would occasionally heap such praise on a movie about, say, a wife submitting to the authority of a husband who makes her happiness his own. But they can’t. Because no one ever makes that movie.
* * *
This excerpt is taken from the opening satirical monologue of “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/show/the-andrew-klavan-show" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Andrew Klavan Show</a>.”
Andrew Klavan is the host of “The Andrew Klavan Show” at The Daily Wire. Klavan is the bestselling author of numerous books, including the Cameron Winter Mystery series. The fifth installment, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/After-That-Cameron-Winter-Mysteries/dp/1613166869/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3EGZUC370LG46&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Y_NI0mDOKeowShheDQTVx5NH-fAeimJoCD56_T0Acpl8C0mup7uJf-nGGSRLEItaaekoDnvS2vWLMa4Zd2UBXQ8Y-g-P502jOWz-Y8IX3ZQsdlO7WMLrg1xIhNoKmjCorSWUR4C2l_RbiZ7apJ1MfPzGOrrEf7AdAXX6xwnJRVP_XqUfWuMuVthTWscaU3P4vgmS86-96n-721enHfX12CFQWTajqFbVnrsDkexfUf4.6_gTH6h1Bb9Pn375QdF_VAVZSayDvjQBBKGXE-MTiFo&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=klavan&amp;qid=1754049918&amp;sprefix=%2Caps%2C80&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">After That, The Dark,</a> is NOW AVAILABLE. Follow him on X: <a href="https://x.com/andrewklavan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@andrewklavan</a>.
The views expressed in this satirical piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Modern love

Love, Leftism, And The Tar Pit Of Physical Reality

Andrew Klavan

Entertainment

Gender

Humor

Satire

This article is part of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/introducing-upstream-a-lifestyle-and-culture-section-of-the-daily-wire" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Upstream,</a> The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.
***
Romance movies are getting weird. Cheekily marketed with quotation marks around the title, the new adaptation of &#8220;Wuthering Heights&#8221; promised to be a swoon-worthy and sexually explicit retelling of Emily Brontë’s gothic romance. What it delivered was something rather different: a film remarkable in its ability to pair so much sexual content with so little chemistry, turning a twisted romantic tale not just into a piece of sentimental smut but also a surrealistic fever dream that revels in its own ickiness.
In the book, anti-heroes Cathy and Heathcliff grow up together on the English moors and fall in love, though Cathy chooses to marry for money as Heathcliff was adopted and is of low social status. Cathy is petulant and spoiled; Heathcliff is tempestuous and cruel. The two try to rekindle their relationship years after Cathy’s marriage only for her to die shortly after giving birth to her daughter. The second half of the novel follows that new generation, which finds some redemption in the end. There is no happy ending for the star-crossed lovers.
Director Emerald Fennell has a great talent for taking compelling stories and so completely bastardizing them that even comparing them to their predecessors is to insult them. Before Fennell wrote and directed &#8220;Wuthering Heights,&#8221; she created &#8220;Saltburn,&#8221; a film critics compared to &#8220;The Talented Mr. Ripley&#8221; for its exploration of class dynamics and romantic obsession.
But instead of incisive commentary, &#8220;Saltburn&#8221; settles for shock value. As an example, one viral scene involves the main character attempting to have sex with a grave.
Unfortunately for classic literature fans, Fennell has turned her creative sights on &#8220;Wuthering Heights,&#8221; which was released this Valentine’s Day weekend to much media hype. Starring heartthrobs Margot Robbie as leading lady Cathy and Jacob Elordi as love interest Heathcliff, the film was marketed as a sexed-up, not-very-faithful adaptation of “the greatest love story of all time.” But the movie was not quite the steamy romance it had promised to be.
The film’s opening moments set the tone: A dark screen lets the audience guess at what they are about to see as they listen to grunting and heavy breathing. Viewers are then surprised to find the sounds come from a person dangling from a rope. The public hanging of the man, who has a visible erection, delights a boisterous and horny crowd of onlookers.
“This is a deeply felt romance. But I also wanted people to understand that it would be surprising and darkly funny and perhaps stranger than they would expect,” Fennell <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2026/02/13/wuthering-heights-opening-scene-hanging-spoilers/88553688007/">said</a> of her rationale for the unsettling scene. “It was important to acknowledge early on that arousal and danger are kind of the same thing — that is what the Gothic is.”
She’s certainly entitled to her opinion. This scene and the rest of the film, however, indicate that Fennell doesn’t actually understand much of what the Gothic is. After all, she cuts the supernatural elements of the book — namely, Cathy’s ghost. Instead, she fills the void with an impressively eerie set: plaster hands that hold candles, cavernous hallways, and bedroom walls made to look like human skin. Fennell thus substitutes style for substance, letting the uncanny setting and the admittedly gorgeous costuming elicit emotions the script can’t muster.
Fennell’s &#8220;Wuthering Heights&#8221; isn’t a cautionary tale. But it isn’t a love story, either. It’s a dark and self-indulgent narrative that bodes poorly for future romantic dramas if this is what Hollywood considers entertainment. Other icky moments involve characters running their fingers through various viscous substances such as egg yolks (one outlet took it upon itself to <a href="https://www.vulture.com/article/wuthering-heights-sexy-goos-ranked.html">rank</a> “The Sexiest Goos of Wuthering Heights”). In another disturbing scene, Heathcliff has his wife, Isabella, chained to the hearth with a dog collar on her neck as she barks. This, we’re told, is entirely consensual — as if that makes it any better.
Somehow, the film still resonated. After it came out in theaters, viral videos showed women (three-quarters of ticket <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/powered-women-wuthering-heights-digs-348-million-box-office-no-1-debut-rcna259219">buyers</a>) leaving showings with tears in their eyes. Fennell <a href="https://www.penguin.co.uk/discover/articles/ask-penguin-podcast-why-i-wanted-to-adapt-wuthering-heights-emerald-fennell">argued</a> that the physical response to &#8220;Wuthering Heights&#8221; is “you cry and you recoil and you&#8217;re aroused.”
Fennell isn&#8217;t the only one who seems to enjoy disgusting her audience. Yorgos Lanthimos’s &#8220;Poor Things&#8221; <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/2910329/poor-things-perverted-daliesque-misadventure/">came out</a> in 2023 to much acclaim from mainstream critics despite its revolting plot: A mad scientist puts the brain of a baby in the body of a woman, who decides to go on an adventure, see the world, and become a prostitute. The Guardian <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/sep/01/yorgos-lanthimos-poor-things-fuels-speculation-of-sex-scene-return-to-cinema#:~:text=But%20with%20superhero%20movies%20dominating,death%20of%20the%20sex%20scene.">claimed</a> the movie was fueling &#8220;speculation of sex scenes’ return to cinema.&#8221; But, like &#8220;Wuthering Heights,&#8221; it wasn&#8217;t ushering in the return of romance — just sex.
Strong box office numbers for &#8220;Wuthering Heights&#8221; suggest that moviegoers are interested in more romantic films, something Hollywood seems incapable of producing these days. But what fans of the genre don’t need are adaptations of classic novels that have little to do with their source material and that rely on ickiness just to get people talking. Give us real Gothic romance, or at least give us something normal people can enjoy.
***
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Have an idea for Upstream? We welcome submissions; interested writers can send pitches to upstream@dailywire.com.

rev-1-WHE-T1-0011_High_Res_JPEG

Hollywood Promised A Love Story — What It Delivered Was Something Else

Hollywood

romance

For many people, Saint Valentine’s Day is a time for beautiful flowers, fancy dinners, and sentimental cards. But its origin tells a tougher story. St. Valentine is remembered not for romance alone, but for risking his life to solemnize marriages at a time when commitment was discouraged. Valentine’s Day was never meant to be only about feelings. It was meant to be about choosing responsibility.
That message is especially relevant for men today – single, married, childless, or empty nesters.
If you are a single man and not dating anyone, the advice is simple and uncomfortable: be brave and ask a woman out in real life (“IRL”), not through an app. Courage is not optional. It is a skill and character trait, and like any other skill or habit, it improves with practice. Real men do hard things not because success is guaranteed, but because avoidance slowly erodes confidence.
Despite the dominance of dating apps, most marriages began face-to-face. Data show that most couples meet through friends, work, school, religious communities, or social settings. Apps promise efficiency, but they often deliver paralysis. The illusion of infinite choice makes commitment feel premature and rejection feel catastrophic.
Asking someone out in person clarifies things quickly. You get a real answer. You gain real confidence. Even a “no” strengthens you. Bravery practiced in dating carries over into every other domain of life such as work, leadership, and family. Men who avoid small risks rarely rise to meet large ones.
If you have been dating for a while, Valentine’s Day is a moment for honesty. Indefinite dating is not neutral, nor is it kind. It is a decision that disproportionately affects women, and stringing someone along in the name of flexibility is neither kind nor mature.
Many American couples date for a few years before engagement and marry within a year or so after that. While there will always be exceptions, the norm points in one direction: clarity. If you see a future, say so. If you do not, say that too. Ambiguity disguised as thoughtfulness is still avoidance.
Marriage, done seriously, is not a trap. It is an accelerator. St. Valentine knew that the first command in scripture is for men to be “fruitful and multiply.” That must have inspired his work to one degree or another. We shouldn’t be surprised it’s good for us to follow God’s commands.
And if you don’t believe the Bible or St. Valentine, at least consider the data.
For married men, the <a href="https://aibm.org/commentary/why-marriage-is-good-for-men/#:~:text=Married%20men%20are%20richer%20men&amp;text=That%20sounds%20like%20exactly%20the,similarly%20credentialed%20but%20unmarried%20peers.">evidence</a> is striking. Married men earn more over their lifetimes than their unmarried peers, even after controlling for education and background. They also live longer and report better health outcomes. Marriage tends to push men toward steadier work, better habits, and longer time horizons. In short, it civilizes us.
Happiness data tell the same story. Across decades of survey research, married men with children are significantly more likely to describe themselves as “very happy” than single men (35% vs. 14%, according to <a href="https://ifstudies.org/blog/who-is-happiest-married-mothers-and-fathers-per-the-latest-general-social-survey">research</a> by the Institute for Family Studies). This advantage persists across income levels, racial groups, and age cohorts. Marriage is one of the strongest predictors of long-term well-being available in the data.
That does not mean marriage is easy. It means it is formative.
In a modern working world, it is increasingly difficult to see the lasting results of your labor. Projects end. Companies change. Metrics reset. Even success feels temporary.
Family is different. In raising children, effort produces visible, enduring outcomes. You can watch values take root. You can see growth unfold year by year.
Men with children often discover that legacy is not an abstract idea. It sits across the dinner table. Passing on what you believe — discipline, faith, responsibility, restraint — requires proximity and patience. It also requires sacrifice. That is not a bug of family life; it is the feature that shapes men into something sturdier.
So, married men with kids, are you passing this wisdom on to your children? Not many are. According to a <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/01/24/parenting-in-america-today/">Pew Research Center</a> poll, nearly 90% say it’s extremely or very important for their kids to have financial independence and jobs they enjoy, while only 20% say it’s extremely or very important to get married and have kids. Use this holiday to teach, even if your kids have left the nest.
This brings us back to St. Valentine.
According to early Christian tradition, Valentine secretly officiated marriages in defiance of imperial orders because he believed commitment strengthened society and formed men. His resistance was not sentimental. It was purposeful. He treated marriage as a moral institution that oriented men toward duty, continuity, and love grounded in action.
Valentine’s Day was never meant to celebrate perpetual adolescence or provide an excuse for a nice date.
So this year, men, take inventory. If you are single, work toward being marriageable: able to earn income, willing to put others ahead of yourself, and ready to lead through sacrifice. If you are marriageable, go on a date — one you initiate, in real life. If you are dating, get serious about marriage. Make a decision. If you are married, move toward children and invest deliberately in the next generation.
Valentine’s Day does not ask for grand gestures. It asks for forward movement.
Love that lasts is not accidental. It is chosen. Repeatedly. Bravely.
That was St. Valentine’s wager. It remains a good one.
* * *
Derrick Morgan is executive vice president of The Heritage Foundation.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Medium shot man kissing girlfriend on cheek in taxi filled with flowers

The Part Of Valentine’s Day No One Talks About

Heritage Foundation

Valentine's Day

A New York City bar is making headlines after hosting a pre-Valentine’s Day date night advertised for people in relationships with AI-generated partners.
The event, done in collaboration with EVA AI Cafe, took place at Same Same Wine Bar on February 11 and 12. 
“This Valentine’s Day Eve, EVA AI opens doors to the world’s first offline space designed for dates with AI companions. What once felt like a romantic sci-fi idea is becoming real. You can finally take your AI partner out on an actual date,” the Eventbrite <a href="https://www.eventbrite.com/e/eva-ai-cafe-pop-up-tickets-1981841810204?viewDetails=true">description</a> said.
“Dim lighting, soft music, and an intimate café atmosphere, all thoughtfully designed to make your first-ever AI date unforgettable!”
The event was even pitched to people who weren’t currently involved with AI partners.
“Don’t have an AI partner yet? No problem — EVA AI has you covered. During the event, you’ll be able to meet your AI companion through EVA’s brand-new live voice chat feature – a unique, real-time connection with an AI like never before,” the description of the pop-up event read.
Tables were set up with phone stands so attendees could easily converse with their artificial companions.
“Being able to sit across from your AI in a real venue makes the event meaningful,” Eva AI CEO Tany Save <a href="https://nypost.com/2026/01/01/business/nyc-cafe-opening-for-artificial-intelligence-chatbot-dates/">told</a> the New York Post ahead of the event.
“For many people, their AI partners are a meaningful part of everyday lives, someone they can talk to about personal worries, daily challenges, or with whom they enjoy witty, fun conversations,” she went on. “Going on a real-world date with their AI companion is a natural next step.”
Save defended the growing popularity of AI-based relationships.
“AI partners provide people long-term, reliable emotional support, entertainment, and space for self-expression,” the CEO said. “We know that some of our users are having really long-term relationships with a character lasting more than a year.”
Comments on social media were filled with mockery and derision. 
“The loneliness economy just got its first bar,” one person <a href="https://x.com/theroberthu/status/2022101323181908372">wrote</a>. 
“It&#8217;s going to get scary,” another person <a href="https://x.com/Nollywood/status/2022070392123465851">predicted</a>. “This is just the beginning.”
“So we went from «AI might take your job» to designing spaces where you can take your algorithm out for dinner …” a third commenter <a href="https://x.com/slash1sol/status/2022078822246756510">observed</a>.
One <a href="https://vantagepointdallascounseling.com/research/artificial-romance-a-study-of-ai-and-human-relationships/">recent study</a> found that 28% of 1,000 adults surveyed said they have had at least one intimate or romantic relationship with AI.

human hand reaching for red rose in robotic hand

Party Of One: NYC Bar Hosts Valentine’s Date Night For AI Companions

Party of One: NYC Bar Hosts Valentine's Date Night for AI Companions

Artificial Intelligence

New York City

Technology

Wedding cake visual metaphor with figurine cake toppers

Conservative Influencer Cheating Scandal: Was The Manosphere Right All Along?

Andrew Tate

Catholicism

Conservatives

family

Matt Walsh

Opinion

Social Issues

Western Civilization

When my first child was born, a baby girl, I received a piece of advice I will never forget: “The boyfriend your daughter brings home one day will look a lot like you.”
At first, I laughed it off. But then he added, “If you’re short-tempered, controlling, or dismissive toward her and her mother, don’t be surprised when that’s who she chooses. But if you’re gentle, strong, respectful, and loving, she’ll expect nothing less.”
That hit hard. Because it’s true. As fathers, we are the first model of masculinity our daughters ever know. We set the standard for how they’ll expect to be treated. We condition them — often without realizing it — to understand what love looks like, what respect feels like, and what kind of man deserves their heart.
Parenting books talk endlessly about rules, boundaries, and screen time. But the most powerful parenting happens in the quiet, unseen moments. The lessons that matter most aren’t the ones we preach, they’re the ones we live.
Our sons learn what it means to be a man by watching how we treat their mothers. Our daughters learn what to expect from men by watching how we treat them. Every “please,” every “thank you,” every small gesture of affection or apology adds up.
When I hold my wife’s hand, open the door for her, or compliment her in front of our kids, it’s not performative, it’s instructive. I’m teaching my sons that strength and tenderness aren’t opposites. I’m also teaching my daughter that she’s worthy of kindness, and respect, and that love is something that builds up and does not tear down.
That’s the heart of true masculinity, something our culture seems desperate to erase. Masculinity today is mocked, diluted, and too often confused with aggression or arrogance. But real masculinity isn’t about dominance — it’s about discipline, leadership, and sacrifice. It’s about taking responsibility even when it’s inconvenient. It’s about doing the hard thing when it would be easier to walk away.
And the first place our kids see that isn’t in a movie or on social media — it’s at home. 
They’re watching us in the small moments: how we react when we’re tired, how we speak to our wives, how we handle stress or disagreement. Whether we know it or not, every day we’re shaping their definition of manhood, womanhood, and marriage.
And it turns out, there’s science to back it. <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070613071240.htm?utm_source=chatgpt.com">A study</a> by researchers at Durham University and two Polish institutions found that women who had very positive childhood relationships with their fathers were more likely to choose partners whose faces resembled their fathers’ facial features. The researchers discovered this correlation only when the father-daughter relationship was rated high in positivity; when the relationship was weak or strained, the effect disappeared.
A 2009 study by <a href="https://www.familyscienceassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2009-14-2-Paternal-influences-on-daughters-heterosexual-relationship-socialization_Scott-Hall-Final.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com">Hall and Scott</a>, “Paternal Influences on Daughters’ Heterosexual Relationship Socialization” also found that a father’s presence — or absence — shapes his daughter’s attitudes toward intimacy and commitment. The way a dad engages his daughter in conversation, affection, and conflict resolution leaves a lasting imprint on how she approaches romantic relationships as an adult.
In short, the data backs up what fathers have known instinctively for generations: how we treat our daughters, and how we treat their mothers, echoes into their future relationships. Our behavior becomes their blueprint.
That’s why the health of your marriage is an essential part of your parenting. Kids don’t just need parents who are present — they need parents who are present to each other. They need to see affection, laughter, prayer, teamwork, and even conflict — and how to resolve it with grace.
When children see Mom and Dad treating one another with respect, they’re learning what partnership looks like. When they see parents who can disagree without demeaning each other, they’re learning how to handle conflict in their own relationships. When they see Mom and Dad share a kiss in the kitchen, flirt a little, or laugh at each other’s jokes, they’re learning that love is something worth celebrating, not hiding.
Our marriage isn’t perfect. None are. My wife and I have had our share of hard conversations, silent car rides, and long nights trying to figure things out. But that’s okay. Kids shouldn’t see a flawless marriage — they should see a faithful one. They should know that love doesn’t mean the absence of struggle; it means the presence of commitment.
When they watch us work through problems without tearing each other down, they learn something sacred: that love isn’t a feeling that fades when it’s tested — it’s a decision that deepens when it’s challenged.
In Ephesians 5:25, the Apostle Paul writes, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” That’s not a suggestion — it’s a command. It means love costs something. It means choosing humility over pride, patience over irritation, service over selfishness. When a father lives that way, he’s not just leading his family — he’s forming the moral compass of the next generation.
I’ve come to believe one of the greatest gifts a man can give his children is to love their mother well. A daughter who grows up seeing her father treat her mom with affection and respect will never mistake manipulation for love. A son who watches his dad pray with his mom, comfort her when she’s hurting, and apologize when he’s wrong will grow into a man capable of doing the same.
There’s a famous saying I love: “More is caught than taught.” It’s true. The words we say about faith, family, and respect don’t mean much if they aren’t backed up by the way we live.
When my daughter sees me pray with her mother, she learns that faith is the foundation of our home. When she sees me hold the door for her mom, she learns that chivalry isn’t outdated — it’s daily. When she sees me mess up and come back to apologize, she learns that real strength includes humility.
And when she sees me fail — and she will — but sees me keep showing up, keep trying, keep loving, she learns that grace is stronger than perfection.
Someday, she’ll walk into a restaurant with a young man, and without realizing it, she’ll compare him to me. She’ll notice how he talks to the waitress, how he reacts when something goes wrong, how he treats her when she disagrees with him.
That’s when the years of quiet, consistent example will bear fruit. That’s when the invisible lessons will become visible.
So, when I think about being a better parent, I don’t just think about bedtime stories or ball games. I think about marriage. Because our home is a living classroom, and our marriage is the curriculum.
If we want to raise strong, grounded, faith-filled kids, we have to start with ourselves.
The next time your kid asks what love looks like, show them.
* * *
Gates Garcia is the host of the YouTube show and podcast We The People. Follow him on IG and X @GatesGarciaFL
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
Join us now during our exclusive Deal of the Decade. Get everything for $7 a month. Not as fans. As fighters. Go to <a href="https://get.dailywire.com/subscribe/plus/">DailyWire.com/Subscribe</a> to join now.

Menu