The Embarrassment of Boyfriends: A Critique of Modern Relationship Narratives and Gender Ideologies

Dr. Orion Taban, host of Psychax, critically analyzes a Vogue article titled "Is having a boyfriend embarrassing now," which suggests that publicly displaying relationships on social media is becoming "cringe" for straight women. While agreeing that a relationship should not be the sole basis for a woman's (or man's) identity or self-worth, Dr. Taban argues that the article quickly deteriorates into a series of logical fallacies and ideological misrepresentations. He contends that the article misidentifies the "two worlds" women attempt to straddle, suggesting it's not about avoiding appearing "culturally loserish," but rather about simultaneously reaping the social benefits of having a partner and being perceived as single and available.

A significant point of contention is the Vogue article's "solipsistic and delusional" omission of men's influence and attention in women's choices and social media behavior. Dr. Taban explains that the observed drop in follower counts when women post about their boyfriends is primarily due to men unfollowing, as it shatters the parasocial relationships and fantasies of mutual interest they had cultivated. He further critiques the article's progression, which he perceives as moving from a commentary on social media etiquette to an unstated implication that heterosexuality itself is problematic, repressive, and even "reprehensible," akin to a moral imperative for women to reject heteronormativity and embrace gender queerness.

From a practical standpoint, Dr. Taban advises women to be honest with themselves about how their chosen self-presentation aligns with their personal goals, particularly if they desire a heterosexual relationship. He observes that women who conspicuously present as uninterested in the male gaze often struggle to find masculine partners, as masculine men typically prefer feminine women. He also dismisses the notion that being single is a "flex" or an accomplishment, arguing that an outcome requiring no effort cannot be valued as such. Instead, he posits that being in a committed relationship, which demands effort and mutual attraction, is the true accomplishment.

Ultimately, Dr. Taban views the Vogue article's conclusion—that proud singleness marks "another nail in the coffin of a centuries old heterosexual fairy tale that never benefited women to begin with"—as an "insidious advancement of a political ideology" and "cultural propaganda." He asserts that the claim that heterosexual relationships have never benefited women is "patently untrue" and that the article's trajectory is designed to promote a future that is not only "female" but also "queer," achieved through a series of logically flawed arguments. He also briefly touches on the concept of intrasexual competition, suggesting that advice to remain single could inadvertently serve to reduce competition among women.

I don't think that a relationship should necessarily serve as the ground for a woman's identity or the basis of a woman's self-worth.

Pretending that half the human race doesn't exist and that men's attention and attraction has nothing to do with the choices that women make is frankly solopistic and delusional.

Women who publicly post their relationships often do want to straddle two worlds. One where they receive the social benefits of having a partner. Yes. And another where they receive the social benefits of being single.

The ones who leave in droves after a woman publishes her relationship on social media are men. These are men who have been developing a parasocial relationship with her that is based on a fantasy of mutual interest and connection.

When the author quotes someone else asking why does having a boyfriend feel Republican, she's suggesting that heterosexuality, like literally being attracted to men, is as transgressive or reprehensible as voting for Trump in a blue state.

And coincidentally, these women often seem to have trouble finding a boyfriend. Like I've read a number of articles recently in which women lament the non-existence of masculine liberal men and I think that's because most masculine men prefer feminine women and they intentionally keep a very wide birth between themselves and women who perform gender queerness.

And I'm sorry, but that will never ever be the case. And it will never ever be the case because you can do nothing and remain single. And the outcome that requires no effort cannot be an accomplishment.

Being in a relationship absolutely requires more effort than being single. Among other things, being in a relationship requires that you be sufficiently decent and attractive that another human being would want to commit to you and not any other person on the planet. And that's actually a flex.

An article that began as a commentary on posting your boyfriend on social media ends on a rejection of an entire sexual orientation on self-evident grounds.

The future apparently is not only female, that is women alone in their power, it's queer. And we get there through a series of steps that if is full of logical fallacies and if intended is nothing short of cultural propaganda.