I agree with a point that Aaron makes in this article and others, that guys like Scott Galloway talk as if the decline in male-female romantic relations can be largely fixed by only men changing (while women remain the same).
Let's suppose all the dateless men follow Scott Galloway's type of advice and they all become gainfully employed, socially adept, physically fit, and they start going out drinking 3 nights per week with the intention of meeting women in real life. This only works if women also go out to the bars to spontaneously meet men. Why would they? They already have no problem matching on dating apps with the type of guys they're interested in meeting in person. Why would they spend more effort than necessary, to go meet guys they swipe left on?
To the extent that it's possible to fix the decline in male-female relations, it requires changes by both men and women.
Curious whether Mr. Renn has reviewed Giff Lasta's books. Mr. Lasta is all over Twitter/X with (what appears to be) a Christian version of manosphere advice:
Re: His entire future life trajectory of success would likely have never come into being were he starting out 25 years later. He might well have ended up dead in a gutter from a drug overdose instead.
I very much doubt that. So what if one does not get into the most topmost-ranked college to which one applied? In that case there are "B"-level colleges that will take the applicant. And frankly, diplomas from the ivies (public and private) are over-rated outside a handful of top corporations in finance and tech. Moreover a guy like Galloway has serious entrepreneurial skills (which are rather rare in the populace). Yes, he was lucky to hit the tech boom when he did and ride it to the heights, but he would likely be at least a modest success in any economy. We should beware the supposition that everyone must go to college. There's a small trend nowadays for guys to forego college and look to the trades instead.
On Galloway's first divorce, I am reminded by what is said here of those middle aged women who divorce their husbands not because they have any serious cause but only because they have become bored with him.
I've listened to Galloway's podcast from time to time. He strikes me as a very charismatic person who's probably always been charismatic and cool. This must have contributed to his success in his professional and personal life (whether or not we approve of his specific goals).
Books in this genre, which might be described as Airport Bookstore Personal Growth Advice, tend not to focus on the set of traits that cluster around charisma. Perhaps this is partly because the authors know that that topic wouldn't play well with their audiences. "I became a rich CEO in part because I'm smarter, funnier, less awkward, taller, and just generally superior to you" isn't a very actionable insight, even if it's true. It's easier to talk about the life lesson they learned from their McDonald's coworker in high school, or discrete career decisions that they made.
I think secular priests like Galloway are as important as their nonsecular counterparts for maintaining social cohesion and motivation for the people. I also do not think inequality is unstable, rather, inequality especially across sexes is significantly more stable than an attempt to impose and maintain equality. In 17th century Spain or France Galloway would be preaching deference to the aristocracy, martial virtue, a moderate and ironic form of chivalry, and lay piety to the Catholic Church. Instead he affirms in his homilies and his pamphlet the value system of our aristocrats.
"This is a straightforward result of his inability to make any politically incorrect statements about women...And of course his own divorce was by his own admission him dumping his wife for selfish reasons."
The former, I suspect, is a result of the latter, at least subconsciously. He knows he acted badly, and so either A. projects his own inadequacies onto other men, or B. thinks that his history puts him in a position where he doesn't have the right to criticize women.
"He also says women “bear the brunt” financially in divorce."
This is true in some cases, but let's be real here: The type of guy whose job and lifestyle allow him to skip out on alimony payments is not the type of guy who is going to read this book, and the type of guy who reads this book isn't able to skip out on alimony payments and almost certainly doesn't know anyone who is.
I was curious about Galloway's book but no longer, thanks to your review.
I've followed Galloway's blog for many years. I knew about his divorce from his first wife. I did not know, however, until your review that he didn't regret it because "if I’d stayed married, my resentment would have infected everything." My goodness. It shows a lack of growth. I would have looked for him to say instead, "I regret that I was not grown up enough yet, and would not be for some time, to be able to get past the destructive resentment I would have felt."
Spot on. Galloway is a charlatan. Virtue signaling while pulling up the ladders behind him. Doubt his audience are figures are real, he is obnoxious. This book is for white liberals to rationalize the destruction they have caused instead of fixing anything.
While I have my disagreements with him, Galloway is the only voice on the center-left that I tune into regularly.
I haven’t read this book yet but his Algebra of Wealth was a good read. It is focused more on career and financial advice. I recommend it.
I agree with a point that Aaron makes in this article and others, that guys like Scott Galloway talk as if the decline in male-female romantic relations can be largely fixed by only men changing (while women remain the same).
Let's suppose all the dateless men follow Scott Galloway's type of advice and they all become gainfully employed, socially adept, physically fit, and they start going out drinking 3 nights per week with the intention of meeting women in real life. This only works if women also go out to the bars to spontaneously meet men. Why would they? They already have no problem matching on dating apps with the type of guys they're interested in meeting in person. Why would they spend more effort than necessary, to go meet guys they swipe left on?
To the extent that it's possible to fix the decline in male-female relations, it requires changes by both men and women.
Curious whether Mr. Renn has reviewed Giff Lasta's books. Mr. Lasta is all over Twitter/X with (what appears to be) a Christian version of manosphere advice:
https://x.com/GiffLasta
I have his book but haven't read it yet.
Re: His entire future life trajectory of success would likely have never come into being were he starting out 25 years later. He might well have ended up dead in a gutter from a drug overdose instead.
I very much doubt that. So what if one does not get into the most topmost-ranked college to which one applied? In that case there are "B"-level colleges that will take the applicant. And frankly, diplomas from the ivies (public and private) are over-rated outside a handful of top corporations in finance and tech. Moreover a guy like Galloway has serious entrepreneurial skills (which are rather rare in the populace). Yes, he was lucky to hit the tech boom when he did and ride it to the heights, but he would likely be at least a modest success in any economy. We should beware the supposition that everyone must go to college. There's a small trend nowadays for guys to forego college and look to the trades instead.
On Galloway's first divorce, I am reminded by what is said here of those middle aged women who divorce their husbands not because they have any serious cause but only because they have become bored with him.
I've listened to Galloway's podcast from time to time. He strikes me as a very charismatic person who's probably always been charismatic and cool. This must have contributed to his success in his professional and personal life (whether or not we approve of his specific goals).
Books in this genre, which might be described as Airport Bookstore Personal Growth Advice, tend not to focus on the set of traits that cluster around charisma. Perhaps this is partly because the authors know that that topic wouldn't play well with their audiences. "I became a rich CEO in part because I'm smarter, funnier, less awkward, taller, and just generally superior to you" isn't a very actionable insight, even if it's true. It's easier to talk about the life lesson they learned from their McDonald's coworker in high school, or discrete career decisions that they made.
Young men deserve better mentors than this to be sure.
I think secular priests like Galloway are as important as their nonsecular counterparts for maintaining social cohesion and motivation for the people. I also do not think inequality is unstable, rather, inequality especially across sexes is significantly more stable than an attempt to impose and maintain equality. In 17th century Spain or France Galloway would be preaching deference to the aristocracy, martial virtue, a moderate and ironic form of chivalry, and lay piety to the Catholic Church. Instead he affirms in his homilies and his pamphlet the value system of our aristocrats.
"This is a straightforward result of his inability to make any politically incorrect statements about women...And of course his own divorce was by his own admission him dumping his wife for selfish reasons."
The former, I suspect, is a result of the latter, at least subconsciously. He knows he acted badly, and so either A. projects his own inadequacies onto other men, or B. thinks that his history puts him in a position where he doesn't have the right to criticize women.
"He also says women “bear the brunt” financially in divorce."
This is true in some cases, but let's be real here: The type of guy whose job and lifestyle allow him to skip out on alimony payments is not the type of guy who is going to read this book, and the type of guy who reads this book isn't able to skip out on alimony payments and almost certainly doesn't know anyone who is.
I was curious about Galloway's book but no longer, thanks to your review.
I've followed Galloway's blog for many years. I knew about his divorce from his first wife. I did not know, however, until your review that he didn't regret it because "if I’d stayed married, my resentment would have infected everything." My goodness. It shows a lack of growth. I would have looked for him to say instead, "I regret that I was not grown up enough yet, and would not be for some time, to be able to get past the destructive resentment I would have felt."
THanks.
Spot on. Galloway is a charlatan. Virtue signaling while pulling up the ladders behind him. Doubt his audience are figures are real, he is obnoxious. This book is for white liberals to rationalize the destruction they have caused instead of fixing anything.