An open letter to emotionally unavailable and/or unstable straight men.
And a few other things about dating.
It rained all week and I had been rewatching Girls. My silly little brain was preoccupied with thoughts of unattainable men and how to attain them. Even though I am trying to avoid becoming attached so I can focus on important stuff like my career. Dating can be stifling and stupefying and I needed an outlet. And so it struck me: if Hannah Horvath can do it, I can too. It being writing.
I am 31 and have been doing a combination of these things for most of my life. Obviously writing started earlier, not professionally or anything - the dating is more of an adult pursuit. I have been in deeeeep love four (grey area five) very amazing times but it has always ended in tears and as the title of this piece suggests, I am blaming the men. It certainly has nothing to do with me finding long term commitment terrifying. Please don’t move in with me and I absolutely never want your hand in marriage.1
Recently and increasingly frequently I am obliged to attend weddings (generally of people I love, which is nice) and as fun as it is to look hot and sip champagne and eat roast lamb, I always leave even more resolved to never marry anyone but myself.2 Also - contrary to popular belief, I deem weddings to be a huge cock block for straight women. I mean sure, if you want to sleep with a 17-year-old cousin wearing speed dealers or a 54-year-old divorcé with physical and emotional baggage. But there is typically only 1 maybe 2 straight, single, age-proximate men at your standard wedding and they tend to be average, and overly intoxicated, and sometimes you need more than just a body. In fact, this having of standards can be a huge cock block generally.
I frequently go out into the world (because I am cool) and would rarely opt to drag one of these bodies home with me, especially not when the alternative is brushed teeth, washed face, overnight lip mask on, the prospect of reading Houellebecq for hours uninterrupted ahead. When I wake on this glorious Sunday I can drink the whole pot of coffee and not have to share even a thought of my own.
Veering towards the point of this letter - there is a societal issue we must address. Perhaps we can even rectify it. For generations to come this letter could be referenced as the key that unlocked a new era of dating.3 Just like Hannah, I could be a voice of a generation.
Apparently evolution has decided that there are two predominant categories of heterosexual men - emotionally unavailable and emotionally unstable, often a combination. Of course, women with boyfriends/husbands will say “not mine” but they’re wrong.4 If men could be both emotionally available and stable, I am convinced dating without damage would be viable. No more emotional drainpipes. Everyone will know where they stand. This is an important outcome for humanity, as dating famously sucks.
I am equally convinced that if men (and why is it always the pretty ones) did the work, I would be able to remain unattached and keep my commitment issues at bay. This is an important outcome for me, and maybe you care about that too. I know I am not alone in finding myself attracted to men who are walking red flags because who doesn’t love a challenge. Cracking open an emotionally unavailable man and chaperoning him towards emotional stability is the ultimate psychotic game. I, like many others before me, am a slut for THE CHASE and the pretty ones are always the hardest to catch. Messy.
So @straight_men you need to understand - you can be emotionally available and feel something maybe even all of the things without losing your minds. Being emotionally available does not lock you into anything except the decadent challenge of vulnerability. You will still have time to get hench at the gym. You will still be able to surf or game or garden or get stoned or bush walk or rave or reddit or paint your nails silver or fish or cook the fish you caught or sculpt your pubes or masturbate. And you can even keep doing these things (maybe with the exception of the last two but no judgement) with your friends - yes, you will totally retain all of your friends.
The best thing about being emotionally available is that from the GGG (get go, gorgeous) you can bare your soul which ohmygod builds resilience and ultimately a more secure human being. You can walk - not run, best not to frighten - towards the thing that scares you.5
The alternative plays out very similarly to Adam’s early arc in Girls and trust my guts it is petrifying. The emotionally unavailable is basically a fuccboi who might treat his pray marginally better but is completely closed off to exploring or expressing anything that gives him a mere pang of anxiety. The chase is best when it could go on…forever. And yet it rarely does, because eventually the emotionally unavailable man(child) realises, suddenly, oh fuq I actually really like spending time with this goddess and she might actually give up on me soon so he cries, just like Adam: WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM ME? DO YOU WANT ME TO BE YOUR BOYFRIEND? And yes, evidently, she does. Even if she has just been knocked headfirst onto gravel, metaphorically.
What ensues is the initially emotionally unavailable man becomes more impassioned than he possibly even knew himself capable of being - he is so in love it is sociopathic. He is anxious, needy, he might become possessive or aggressive, he starts to hate himself because he doesn’t recognise himself. Cue emotional instability which is almost worse than the emotional unavailability we started with because now she is completely freaked out exhausted and has to constantly pander to his newfound absence of self/self respect. It’s gross. It’s over and hopefully he doesn’t get arrested like Adam did.
To close, I will address what you’ve likely been thinking while reading this (frankly amazing that you have read this) because it is essential for me to have the last word. Am I the problem? Should I stop falling in love when I am clearly horny for independence and have no idea what I want for my own romantic future? Absolutely not. Being in love is one of the best feelings in the world6 and I will strive to have my cake and eat it too by becoming attached only some of the time. But please, #straightmen for the good of our unborn sea monkeys and the future of society at large, stop being so boring and predictable. Practice emotionally availability and subsequent stability. The sex will be way better.
There is one exception to the marriage rule which is if I find myself in the Las Vegas scenario depicted in Sean Baker’s Anora but it is the Igor character who wants to marry me and he is Russian oligarch rich but not in the sense that his scary parents will come and tear us apart and threaten to ruin my life.
Truly. I said I would do this for my 30th birthday but accidentally fell in love as I am wont to do, so it felt inappropriate. Saving it for 40.
Reiterating that sadly - and I do mean sadly because being this straight is something to be pitied, I assure you - I can only speak from the experience of being a heterosexual woman dating (I think) heterosexual men only.
If a woman has been with the same man for a while I can only imagine she has trained him, becoming a substitute parent of sorts, in which case he definitely falls in the emotionally unstable camp but their lives are so intwined she provides enough stability emotionally and otherwise for the pair of them to survive off.
I attribute this wisdom to Brendan Hancock.
Behind natural highs (ice bath, spin class, shinrin-yoku) and maybe other highs.