The End of Man–Woman Relationships: How the Sexual Revolution and Feminist Upheaval Led to Sterile Polygamy and Celibate Isolation, By Mrs Vera West and Mrs (Dr) Abigail Knight (Florida)
Josh Konstantinos recently described a curious cultural pattern as "sterile polygamy" — a social condition where relationships proliferate without permanence, commitment, or generative intimacy. It's a vivid phrase, but it only begins to name a deeper structural collapse: not simply a transformation of marriage, but the erosion of stable male-female bonds, sexual commitment, and family itself.
This is not a defence of bigotry or reactionary nostalgia. It is a sober diagnosis of what happens when society abandons the norms and institutions that once mediated human desire, responsibility, and community.
1. From Marriage to Market: The Feminist and Sexual Revolutions
The feminist revolution supposedly fought for women's equality, autonomy, and opportunity. The sexual revolution supposedly fought for liberation from so called prudish moral codes. But both movements, in their radical forms, also dismantled the social structures that historically governed relationships:
Marriage shifted from institution to lifestyle choice.
Sexual access decoupled from commitment.
Masculinity lost its customary teleology.
Femininity lost its social anchor.
Combined with the rise of consumer individualism, these revolutions unintentionally privatised intimacy and commodified desire, leaving individuals responsible for markets of attraction without shared cultural standards.
2. Sterile Polygamy: Many Partners, Empty Commitments
"Sterile polygamy" captures a stylized truth: people have more options than ever, yet fewer stable, enduring partnerships. Casual relationships have replaced commitments. Hookup culture has displaced dating. Ghosting has replaced conversation. The result? More connections, less intimacy. More sex, less belonging.
When relationships are untethered from commitment:
Men retreat into games, careers, or addiction.
Women confront social pressure to "have it all" without stable support.
Both discover that quantity is a poor substitute for depth.
This is not liberation; it is fragmentation.
3. The Greatest Irony: The Sexual Revolution Ends in Celibacy
The sexual revolution promised liberation — but for many, it has delivered isolation.
In recent years, sociologists and commentators have documented a rise in:
Celibacy among adults under 40
Involuntary celibacy
Rising rates of "incel" identification
Declining marriage and child-bearing rates.
The very era that declared sex "free" now sees less sexual activity and more emotional loneliness than generations before us. This isn't freedom — it's desertion.
4. Why This Collapse Matters
Strong male–female relationships are not mere social niceties. They are:
The foundation of family stability
The primary context for raising children
The mechanism by which societies reproduce not just biologically but culturally
The crucible for mutual self-sacrifice, care, and belonging.
When men and women stop committing to each other, the broader community fractures:
Single parenthood rises.
Youth lack anchors.
Social trust diminishes.
Depression and loneliness explode.
A society without stable relationships is not liberated — it is atomised.
5. The Cultural Drivers Behind the Collapse
This breakdown did not happen spontaneously. It is the product of several converging forces:
a. Radical Individualism
The creed of "self-fulfilment above all" makes deep commitment unattractive because it requires sacrifice.
b. Consumer Dating Culture
Apps treat people like products — swiped, ranked, and discarded — eroding empathy and patience.
c. Economic Pressures
Housing costs, job instability, and economic precarity make long-term commitment risky.
d. Decline of Religious and Communal Norms
Faith communities once provided moral frameworks and social support for marriages — structures now depleted.
All these forces push toward fleeting connection over enduring relationship — sterile polygamy rather than fertile commitment.
6. A Conservative Rebuttal: Reclaiming Relationship, Commitment, and Purpose
Conservatism does not seek to return to a mythic past. But it does recognize that civilisation depends on order, restraint, and continuity. Male–female partnerships are not just personal choices — they are social goods that sustain the next generation and anchor moral responsibility.
This means:
Valuing marriage as more than symbolic
Encouraging long-term relationship formation
Calling out cultural narratives that inflate novelty and shrink commitment
Supporting policies that make families economically feasible.
We must shift away from a culture that prizes endless options and toward one that prizes enduring bonds.
Conclusion: From Fragmentation to Flourishing
The sexual and feminist revolutions expanded choice and autonomy in important ways. But without anchoring these freedoms in community, responsibility, and norms, we risk a civilisation of lonely individuals rather than flourishing families.
Sterile polygamy is not the endpoint we should celebrate. Neither is the rise of celibacy, incelism, or the shrinking of romantic bonds.
The recovery of enduring man–woman relationships — rooted in commitment, mutual respect, and shared purpose — is not reactionary. It is the civilisational repair work our culture desperately needs
