Human relationships were a construct created by a patriarchal system of control propped up by religion.

Prior to this, women would mate with strong genetic suitors often in impulsive lust, and then the child would be raised by the tribe.

Nowadays that translates into step dads or paternity fraud or social programmes. It’s what happens with sexual freedom and the loosening of the patriarchal grip.

I am for those things. Equality and freedom is more important than anything and a section of male society being left sexless isn’t a reason to stop it. Now your sexual success is entirely down to you as an individual and the choice of other individuals. It’s pure freedom. Nobody can hand you attractiveness.

I’m not saying people cannot form a long term relationship built on attraction. It happens often, but it’s mostly between people who find each other very attractive who then manage to build a bond on top of that attraction. Nobody here will contradict this either, as using your own relationship as an example by stating your partner isn’t “attractive” is to admit that objective attractiveness exists and you believe there were other people you could be more attracted to if such circumstances had presented themselves.

So either a woman finds a man she lusts for and builds a great bond with, or they mate with a man genetically gifted due to impulsive passion, followed by society raising the child as was done in humanities more natural and primitive history.

We are turning back to our more natural mating state and this may actually be a good thing, we just need to adapt.