Table of Contents
Ironically, a generation obsessed with self-preservation will preserve nothing and leave nothing behind.
Death of Interdependence, Rise of Demographic Replacement
Men and women are actively being conditioned to see the opposite sex as burdens. This is the result of a media environment that thrives on keeping the sexes divided and resentful of one another. Hollywood storylines and viral social media clips alike repeatedly validate declarations of withdrawal from the dating pool. Our culture uplifts those who celebrate removing the opposite sex from their lives entirely.
The single woman in her late thirties who “never settles” is propped up as a self-sufficient role model for young women. The man who insists he will never marry because “marriage is a scam” gets praised for being a champion of masculinity for younger men. Both preach that individualistic, materialistic, and hedonistic accolades are superior to interdependent, altruistic, and ascetic accomplishments. This message has become the manufactured consensus, repeated so often that now millions of Americans believe it to be the ideal. The false consensus is reinforced through media, institutions, and peers among Generation Z. When everyone is saying the same thing, how could it possibly be wrong?
These narratives dominate because they are easy to sell to the most vulnerable consumers. They emphasize interpersonal conflict and offer a ready scapegoat, preying on those who feel isolated from a successful romantic life. A person who has no partner or family to invest in becomes the ideal consumer, left to spend their time and resources on themselves. Single adults have more discretionary time and disposable income, which they are encouraged to channel into overconsumption. They spend more on housing, food, clothing, travel, and lifestyle products than their married counterparts. Adults committed to singlehood can now fill the absence of meaningful connection with material comforts and novelty. Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics confirms this trend, showing that single adults consistently spend more per person than married couples do (Hawk, 2011). The system profits most when people are alone and consuming endlessly without any obligation to a partner or children.
The idea of “decentering men” was once a fringe feminist concept but has now gone fully mainstream across leftist social media. They frame interdependence as an outdated concept that has “held women back” for generations. Decentering men is “a feminist practice that aims to shift attention away from men’s perspectives and needs, instead [prioritizing] women’s voices and perspectives” (Project Self Worth, 2024). As one psychologist explains, [decentering men] is presented as a radical, liberating choice to reclaim power that women have unconsciously ceded for generations (Glasbergen, 2025). In parallel, some right-leaning men are embracing the “red pill” in light of being wronged by a “modern woman.” Many men have started positioning lifelong singlehood as the superior alternative to dealing with women who celebrate “not needing no man.” Both groups ultimately believe they are protecting themselves; these ideas emerge as a form of postmodern self-preservation. What looks on the surface like another shallow “culture war” is, in practice, normalizing isolation, eroding trust between the sexes, and accelerating demographic decline.
The United States is currently failing to produce families at a rate that sustains itself. Fertility has fallen below replacement level, while marriage is delayed, avoided, or dismissed as an “outdated concept” entirely. Birth rates are collapsing while self-help slogans and online talking points fill the space where stable partnerships once anchored a functioning society. People now speak more about “protecting their peace” than “leaving behind a legacy.” A society that refuses to build and endure will inevitably collapse and disappear. Human survival depends on interdependence, always has and always will. The longer we celebrate the division of the sexes, the fewer children will be born to uphold our nation’s values. But don’t worry. Our leaders insist the falling birth rate is no problem, because they will simply import a billion jillion Indians to keep the GDP on the rise. Perhaps the next step is to put a naval blockade around China to ensure our adversaries do not get any of these “amazing Indians,” who are absurdly likened to advanced nanotechnology (Hyde, 2025). People are not interchangeable economic units, and reducing them to such is inherently anti-human.
Feminist Empowerment and “Decentering Men”
Modern feminism tells women to prioritize themselves and their careers above all else. This prioritization rears its ugly head in Generation Z female voting behavior, with one of the demographic’s top priorities always being abortion access. Their rhetoric sounds like framing men as distractions to career goals, threats to autonomy, or temporary accessories, instead of another human being they might build a life with. Women have been taught to manage their lives the way a corporation manages its brand. They have been conditioned to view committed relationships as long-term liabilities rather than long-term investments. Compromise is perceived as “submission,” and for women who reject biblical womanhood, that word alone is enough to provoke outrage.
The anti-interdependence feminist ideology hinges on the illusion of control. By decentering men, these women are promised peace, stability, financial autonomy, and “true happiness.” They are told that freedom begins where male influence ends. A partner becomes a play toy while children are taken off the table entirely. The self becomes their only fixed point—which leads to an endless cycle of self-focus in pursuit of control that isolates rather than fulfills. Career ambition and financial independence are not the problems. The problem is the belief that committed partnerships with the opposite sex are oppressive. That belief erodes any foundation a lasting relationship could stand on and breeds resentment towards the idea of depending on a man for anything. This belief also fosters hostility towards men who are still seeking interdependence. Women who subscribe to this ideology portray men seeking a wife and family as wrong for doing so and maybe even “fascist” in nature. The mere suggestion that a man wants you to have his children will almost surely evoke mention of The Handmaid’s Tale or a lecture on CIS heteronormative society being oppressive to women and queers.
Many feminists cite things like overpopulation and climate change to further justify their decision to stay single for life. They genuinely believe the world is nearing collapse. They think that alleged rising temperatures and melting ice caps will make the planet uninhabitable for humans in their lifetime. As a result, they reject the idea of motherhood on what they frame as an eco-conscious, altruistic, and empowered basis. Yet the coastline where I grew up in Massachusetts has not changed in my 24 years, despite constant warnings of climate catastrophe. The reality is much of the world remains untouched by apocalyptic global warming scenarios that women imagine in their minds. Overpopulation, the other crisis they often cite, is not a Western problem at all. It’s primarily concentrated in developing regions, like Africa and India. In fact, the West is having the opposite issue, which I am highlighting in this article. We have grocery stores, infrastructure, and technological systems designed to sustain a large population. So, despite living in societies fully equipped to support millions more, these women see creating life itself as a problem. To them, another child represents another “carbon footprint” on an already doomed planet.
In a paper by economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers (2009), the authors identified what they called the paradox of declining female happiness. Despite major gains in freedom, education, and opportunity, women’s self-reported happiness has steadily declined since the 1970s. This suggests that the modern feminist model of empowerment may not actually provide the fulfillment it promises. The pursuit of personal freedom, detached from relational and familial purpose, appears to come with a psychological cost that modern culture refuses to confront.
This mentality will leave many women with nothing to show for their lives beyond a long resume and a digital footprint of curated memories. It does not represent progress or empowerment for women or for humanity. We are seeing a clear retreat from the realities and responsibilities of human perseverance and generational success. The refusal to engage with men or allow partnership to shape one’s life leads only to isolation and a tendency to mentalize everything instead of truly living.
Red Pill Reaction and Resentment
A parallel rejection is emerging among men, arguably, in response to much of this “decentering” mentality. Many Generation Z men have abandoned the ideal of partnership altogether, mainly in reaction to modern anti-interdependence sentiment. Young men are no longer pursuing marriage or family, and many have stepped back from seeking partnerships entirely. Young men are embracing discipline and structure, both of which are admirable pursuits that greatly improve one’s life. However, once the search for partnership is stripped away, these healthy habits lose direction, devolving into apathy, isolation, and chasing temporary highs. What remains is a disciplined life without purpose beyond, once again, consumption.
While the highly disciplined “red pill” man claims to reject the modern “Matrix,” his habits still entrap him in the same way he believes marriage would. Whether he turns to pornography, casual sex, alcohol, cars, jewelry, or travel, each function as another outlet for increased consumption. The objects change, but the core behavior does not. What began as a sense of self-mastery results in self-indulgence, the very thing they claim to rise above.
This mentality is marketed as masculine self-respect, framing women as agents of chaos, distraction, or betrayal. Their solution is to opt out entirely. Stay single, stay focused, and guard your money from “gold-diggers.” The man who avoids women is upheld as wise, while the one who still yearns for connection is deemed naive. Seeking a woman’s affection has become a sign of weakness. These men speak of women with contempt and reduce them to liabilities. Now, this perspective did not appear out of thin air. As previously discussed, many “modern women” view their male counterparts as optional accessories to their lives, people they can use and discard when most convenient, not someone who is “necessary to their future.” Humans want to feel “wanted” by those in their lives. So, considering this, it’s no wonder there are millions of men who have effectively given up on finding a wife. When potential life partners spit in your face and say they don’t need you, why on Earth would you stick around trying to convince them otherwise?
I do not believe the red pill movement offers a viable future for this country, in the same way “decentering men” will soon doom us all. It provides men the same illusion of control sought by feminists, substituting the vulnerability of connection with the predictability of consumerist isolation. These ideas promise men freedom, but a man without a mission beyond himself and consumption cannot build anything that lasts. The red pill rejection of these women does not protect men from their failures; it imitates them. Men have every right to be frustrated with the absolute state of “modern women.” I’ve come to argue that women need to let go of this defiant mentality, men need to use better discernment when picking a partner, and both of us to make these changes soon. Otherwise, we will lose our country to third-world immigrants who want us and our way of life eradicated.
Demographic Decline Accelerated by Ideology
The United States now has a fertility rate well below what is needed to replace its own population. In 2024, the CDC recorded an estimated 1.6 births per woman, far below the replacement threshold of 2.1 (CDC, 2024). While total births increased 1% from 2023 to 2024, the general fertility rate declined 1% to 53.8 births per 1,000 women aged 15–44. Despite this marginal increase in total births, long-term trends have remained downward for almost two decades. The United States has not reached replacement-level fertility since 2007, even when accounting for delayed childbearing and immigration-driven growth (CDC, 2024).
At the same time, the share of Americans identified as non-Hispanic White continues to shrink. In 2020, White people made up about 58% of the population, down from roughly 64% in 2010 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021). For the first time, the White population under the age of 18 declined in the 2010s, and that trend shows no sign of stopping (Frey, 2021).
Young White Americans are disproportionately targeted by both feminist decentering and red pill ideologies. Feminist influencers often address educated, single, career-oriented Gen Z and younger millennials. Red pill communities recruit primarily White men from that same age cohort (Hodgetts, 2025; Newsweek, 2025; Sherman, 2025).
This overlap matters. Young White Americans form the demographic most likely to avoid long-term partnerships under cultural pressures. They are delaying marriage, opting out of childbearing, or rejecting the idea of interdependence altogether. This intensifies both fertility decline and the erasure of the White population in America. These ideologies promise young people personal liberation but continue to deliver fewer families. The target audiences for these ideals have lost faith in human continuity and generational legacy. The demographic facts presented here surmise the national trajectory shaped in part by self-defined empowerment. If young White Americans continue adopting these harmful perspectives on partnership, we will soon not have a country left to save. Swaths of third-world migrants (primarily military-aged men) will continue to overtake our cities, siphon “social safety net” resources, and undermine the very cultural fabric of America.
Ideological Comfort vs. Biological Realities
Ideas have consequences, and outcomes keep score. A generation of White Americans can choose detachment, look down on marriage, and avoid bearing children. But no ideology can override biological reality. A society that devalues reproduction will not sustain itself. A culture that treats family as burdensome or optional will inevitably be replaced by a culture that does not.
As previously discussed, both movements offer individuals a sense of control. They provide schemas to explain disappointment in relationships, rationalize emotional unavailability, and justify broad feelings of mistrust and frustration toward the opposite sex. These belief systems feel validating because they allow responsibility to be shifted elsewhere. It is never the individual’s fault but the fault of the opposite sex. In many ways, they allow people to avoid taking accountability for choosing the wrong partner. These ideas give people a convenient excuse or “reason” for failed relationships. Failed relationships often result in people feeling disillusioned, heartbroken, and bitter—leaving them receptive to narratives that portray the opposite sex as the source of all their pain. Regardless of intention, neither of these worldviews will yield the basic conditions for a flourishing, self-sustaining nation. These ideas encourage nothing meaningful, but rather a life of self-centrism sustained by consumption.
Nature does not ask whether your choices feel empowering. Biology does not reward moral posturing about climate change. Reality rewards perseverance in the face of adversity. The world belongs to those who conquer. Cultures that reject self-erasure will continue to grow, while those that embrace it will vanish in time.
The Sexes Must Unite to Save America
A nation cannot survive the pathological avoidance of reproduction. We must choose to form bonds, build families, and create a future that extends beyond our lifetime. The longer men and women are taught to “decenter” each other, the more rapidly our cultures will drift into irrelevance. We cannot reject the conditions that guarantee our value systems will survive. With young White Americans being the main targets of these subversive ideologies, that should tell you everything you need to know about the projected future of America—if we do not act soon.
Human beings require a sense of purpose larger than the self to thrive. Throughout history, man’s purpose was usually a strong belief in God and their family. Today we have seen faux virtue, pride, selfishness, materialism, and hedonistic pursuits take the place of “something greater than oneself.”
The only way forward is to recenter basic truths that hold functioning societies together. Men and women need to cooperate. Men should be fathers, and women should be mothers. Children need parents to lead them. Nations need families. Legacy begins when we choose to procreate. I believe there is still time to correct the course, but that window is closing quickly. The future will not belong to the most ideologically correct; it will belong to those who remain.
References
Frey, W. H. (2021). Census shows America’s post-2020 population is driven by diversity, especially among the young. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/census-shows-americas-post-2020-population-is-driven-by-diversity-especially-among-the-young/
Glasbergen, J. (2025). Decentering men: Unlock the hidden power of women’s liberation. Beyond Psychology. https://beyondpsychology.eu/decentering-men-unlock-the-hidden-power-of-womens-liberation/
Hawk, W. (2011). Household spending by single persons and married couples in their twenties: A comparison. In Consumer Expenditure Survey Anthology, 2011 (pp. 40–46). U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/cex/research_papers/pdf/hawk-household-spending-by-single-persons-and-married-couples-in-their-twenties.pdf
Hyde, S. [@wigger]. (2025, January 1). Dear Elon [Video]. X. https://x.com/wigger/status/1873892448692486480/video/1
Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Osterman, M. J. K., & Drake, P. (2024). Births: Provisional data for 2024 (Vital Statistics Rapid Release; No. 36). National Center for Health Statistics. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40996517/
Over, H., Bunce, C., Konu, D., & Zendle, D. (2025, January 13). Editorial perspective: What do we need to know about the manosphere and young people’s mental health? Child and Adolescent Mental Health. https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12747
Project Self Worth. (2024, November 20). How to decenter men. Project Self Worth. https://projectselfworth.com/how-to-decenter-men/
Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2009). The paradox of declining female happiness (NBER Working Paper No. 14969). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w14969
U.S. Census Bureau. (2021, August 12). 2020 United States population more racially and ethnically diverse than 2010. U.S. Department of Commerce. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/08/2020-united-states-population-more-racially-ethnically-diverse-than-2010.html
