I am having a good laugh at Eric Kaufmann of the National Review who is grappling with some really bleak numbers about dating in a September 2020 survey by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). Specifically, “a sample of nearly 1,500 female Ivy League students was asked whether they would date a Trump supporter, only 6 percent said yes.” When all non-Trump supporting female college students are included, “fully 87 percent of all female college students wouldn’t date a Trump supporter.”
Basically, if you support Trump, you might as well be wearing a hat that says “herpes.” Your dating pool with college girls is the size of a water bowl.
This is supposedly a big problem because it means that college-age women are “progressive authoritarians” who want to enforce their “woke” positions on race, gender, and sexual mores.
Kaufmann tries to marshal some statistics about ideological and religious intermarriage to argue that there are reasons to worry about what this means for the health of the country. I mean, he says things are easier for Protestant-Catholic couples in Northern Ireland than for a young campus Republican who’s trying to get laid.
I don’t dispute this characterization, but I have trouble seeing it as an area of concern.
It’s Kaufmann’s own fault that people are almost dying of amusement when they read his essay. He didn’t have to tie it all to dating. That was an own goal.
His real point is that a whole generation of educated people think Trump supporters are barely human and have no problem if their genes go extinct. That’s a bad sign for a lonely conservative who just wants to find acceptance in the world. What’s needed is a conservative abandonment of “deregulatory libertarianism” because without government action Republicans will never get naked with a woman again.
To be sure, he wants to talk about free speech and censorship, but what’s he asking us to do is take Trumpists seriously and treat them with respect. Even if we’d never dream of having sex with one of them, we shouldn’t be allowed to fire them just for, say, interrupting our business meeting to declare that our Anglo-Saxon traditions are under threat.
He even compares the mating prospects of conservatives to the plight of Jews, gypsies and other victims of Adolf Hitler. At least, I think that’s what he’s getting at when he notes approvingly that post-war Germany reformed their education system to account for its capture by Nazis. That’s apparently the model he wants conservatives to follow. First, take over the government and then purge the country’s universities.
Again, he’s saying it’s not all about the dating. He just wants conservatives to have some protection against discrimination and consequences. But if he purges colleges of people who want nothing to do with a Trumper, most classes will have more graduate assistants than students.
Somewhat seriously, we can talk about free speech and censorship in universities but it can’t be part of a lament that Trumpers are pariahs among educated people.
The way forward is so much simpler than Kaufmann’s grand idea for fighting back with laws. If people would stop listening to Trump, they might get some respect. They might not get canceled. They might even meet someone who will want to date them.
I’d recommend starting there and see if there’s any noticeable improvement.
I made an effort to read the original article and didn’t get past the line, “when people are free to discriminate however they wish when dating…”
The idea that anybody should be able to dictate (or force?) who somebody does or does not date is ludicrous. The whole point of dating is practicing discriminating who you choose to be with. I can see this idea feeding into the popular (sic) INCEL movement, though. Nope. Don’t owe anybody my company. Natural consequences of behavior.
And no, National Review, I do not want your notifications or your weekly newsletter. Not even to try. See how that free choice thing works?
Kaufman needn’t worry. I just read a story on WaPo about an Appalachian nurse who was surrounded by dummies who think Covid is a Democratic Party hoax designed to take over the world. There were plenty of women who nodded in agreement with their MAGA husbands and relatives. So, there are plenty of women left for Kaufman and his ilk to date and cohabit with. They just won’t be college educated. Or, maybe not educated at all. But, that’s what they want, isn’t it? Blind and dumb subservience.
The concept of liberal college females not dating certain kinds of males is not new. Over 50 years ago many young women were not attracted to drunken frat rats supporting the Vietnam War and Nixon. The difference is that these idiots didn’t have the social media platform to whine about their rejection. This crying about no one to date will result in fewer relationships, not more. What a turn off. Yuk!
I read this yesterday and the whole article is a bath of wtf. The only thing i might comment on here is to excited some skepticism regarding the lack of prospects for young male Trump supporters. A. I’ve can always keep your mouth shut and claim to be uninterested in politics and B. When you ask someone is they want to date a Trump supporter, i suspect when your ask about dating a Trump supporter you might as well ask if they want to date broke hillbilly. When it comes to specific people, they might relax their standards.
OK… typed that on my phone in a hurry and it shows. I guess it’s intelligible, at least.
Even if you ignore all the insanity of Trump and current Republican positions on just about everything, just looking at the Republican position on abortion and birth control alone, how could one be shocked that college-educated women are repulsed by Republicans.
“Oh, so you mean the primary means by which I can stop an unwanted pregnancy in the form of birth control is something you want to deny me access to and then if I get pregnant I should be forced to give birth against my will and possibly imprisoned should I choose to do otherwise? Well you’ve got me. Let’s get married!
I mean seriously, this putz is surprised this is just a bit of a turn off to women?
Read this yesterday and was shocked that this dufus tied his argument to Trump supporters’ dating prospects with college women. That’s beyond own goal. Might as well wear a sign that reads “kick me”.
Given how much disdain Trumpers have for liberals (and vice versa, but that’s another topic) why would they even WANT to date a liberal? I mean that sincerely.It would just be one argument after another. Back in the Obama years, a buddy of mine set me up on a date with a gal who turned out to be a Republican. She wasn’t awful—acknowledged he was American at least—but her positions on guns, abortion, religion, etc were simply disqualifiers for any future romantic relationship. And that was BEFORE Trump.
Besides, the can always visit <a href=”https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righter_(app)”>Righter</a> (it’s the wiki entry, not the actual site).
The article sounds ridiculous, and I have no desire to read it. However, there is an interesting flipside to this. Since there are far fewer conservatives than liberals receiving an elite education, the conservatives have far less competition for the plum jobs. That’s why Ted Cruz is a senator, while Austin Goolsbee, Dahlia Lithwick, or any other of his peers from the 1980s college debate circuit are not. That’s why medium-smart Brett Kavanaugh is a supreme court justice, while uber-brilliant Merrick Garland is not (compare their academic records at Yale…there is no contest). In fact, being a conservative is a smart career choice – they control access to at least 50% of the power positions in the country, but have only about 5% of the top graduates. It pays to be the smart fish in the dumb pond.
So I should give a shit if all conservative genes go extinct from lack of dating? Tell me more. Sounds like a plan.