With the celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Live Aid Concert it may be worthwhile to do some re-thinking of Madonna and living in the material world.
A few observations. The discussion around going to the next step beyond having consent for sex sounds an awful lot like what the Catholic Church teaches as the reason for waiting for sex within marriage. I found it a bit amusing. Secondly I don’t think the discussion of why gen z is more conservative to be very rationally based in data. It is pretty obvious to me that this trend is to a very significant degree as a backlash against the culture of last 20 years. Her remarks that it was linked to political chaos and depressive events makes little sense to me. I think these things could certainly impact gen z being more angry or depressed but I am not sure there is a very strong link to becoming more conservative. Besides the backlash around how men are depicted there is a backlash to immigration and things like defund the police. Her points made very little sense.
Reading through the transcripts and having a couple of Gen Z kids, and talking to all of the friends of my kids I'm struck by how different things are now from the pre aids days of my own youth. Some kids still have long term relationships. Many seem to have none, and all of them without a main squeeze seem to be having a heck of a lot less sex than back in the day. Far fewer seem to be in relationships also. People aren't having kids.
If the measure of success is a long and fulfilling relationship of marriage with well rounded kids growing up to lead constructive lives in their own time I'd say we are failing. Many of our cultural taboos have led to very late marriages and people without kids.
The Liberal Patriot episode titled “Gen Z’s Dating Disaster” is, in substance, a conversation almost entirely about the heterosexual dating landscape. A more accurate title would be “Gen Z’s Straight Dating Disaster.” The discussion focuses on male–female psychological differences, the shortcomings of dating apps like Tinder for women, and the broader cultural confusion around sex and gender roles—entirely within a heterosexual framework.
Christine Emba briefly references Grindr to explain the origin of swipe-based hookup apps, suggesting that it was well suited to a certain kind of male psychology. But this mention serves only to set up Tinder’s failure in heterosexual contexts. There is no meaningful engagement with how Gen Z gay men or lesbians navigate the same landscape of digital alienation, emotional disconnection, or sexual dissatisfaction. Lesbians are not mentioned at all.
What’s entirely absent is any recognition that many gay and lesbian Gen Z-ers also face profound challenges in today’s sexual culture—including the pressure to conform to queer theory's destabilizing notions of sexual identity, fluidity, and the erasure of coherent sex roles. For young people who simply want to form healthy same-sex relationships grounded in mutual understanding and stable identity, this intellectual environment can be alienating and disorienting.
Moreover, while Grindr is mentioned as emblematic of gay male hookup culture, it is important to note—tactfully but clearly—that not all gay men use Grindr or similar apps as their primary way to connect with others, just as not all heterosexuals thrive in hookup culture. Many gay men seek friendship, affection, and lasting partnership outside the transactional logic of location-based apps.
This critique is not a call for ideological “inclusivity” in the woke sense. It is a reaction against invisibility—the default assumption that when we talk about “young people,” we mean only heterosexual ones. For a podcast episode concerned with alienation, emotional dissatisfaction, and the erosion of relational norms, the total exclusion of same-sex attracted people—and the distinct pressures they face—is a telling and unfortunate oversight.
Good point, Ollie. I wouldn’t ding her for not including the gay perspective. The writer probably isn’t familiar with any such dating differences, and the vast majority of people are heterosexual. Still, your point is valid and this is a topic that deserves more attention. Maybe you could pen something or introduce John to a writer who you think has a good understanding of the dating world for young gay men and women.
With the celebration of the 40th anniversary of the Live Aid Concert it may be worthwhile to do some re-thinking of Madonna and living in the material world.
A few observations. The discussion around going to the next step beyond having consent for sex sounds an awful lot like what the Catholic Church teaches as the reason for waiting for sex within marriage. I found it a bit amusing. Secondly I don’t think the discussion of why gen z is more conservative to be very rationally based in data. It is pretty obvious to me that this trend is to a very significant degree as a backlash against the culture of last 20 years. Her remarks that it was linked to political chaos and depressive events makes little sense to me. I think these things could certainly impact gen z being more angry or depressed but I am not sure there is a very strong link to becoming more conservative. Besides the backlash around how men are depicted there is a backlash to immigration and things like defund the police. Her points made very little sense.
Reading through the transcripts and having a couple of Gen Z kids, and talking to all of the friends of my kids I'm struck by how different things are now from the pre aids days of my own youth. Some kids still have long term relationships. Many seem to have none, and all of them without a main squeeze seem to be having a heck of a lot less sex than back in the day. Far fewer seem to be in relationships also. People aren't having kids.
If the measure of success is a long and fulfilling relationship of marriage with well rounded kids growing up to lead constructive lives in their own time I'd say we are failing. Many of our cultural taboos have led to very late marriages and people without kids.
This review of the Netflix Series Adolescence is relevant to the discussion about the relationship between boys and girls currently in high school. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/07/18/adolescence-emmys-review/
The Liberal Patriot episode titled “Gen Z’s Dating Disaster” is, in substance, a conversation almost entirely about the heterosexual dating landscape. A more accurate title would be “Gen Z’s Straight Dating Disaster.” The discussion focuses on male–female psychological differences, the shortcomings of dating apps like Tinder for women, and the broader cultural confusion around sex and gender roles—entirely within a heterosexual framework.
Christine Emba briefly references Grindr to explain the origin of swipe-based hookup apps, suggesting that it was well suited to a certain kind of male psychology. But this mention serves only to set up Tinder’s failure in heterosexual contexts. There is no meaningful engagement with how Gen Z gay men or lesbians navigate the same landscape of digital alienation, emotional disconnection, or sexual dissatisfaction. Lesbians are not mentioned at all.
What’s entirely absent is any recognition that many gay and lesbian Gen Z-ers also face profound challenges in today’s sexual culture—including the pressure to conform to queer theory's destabilizing notions of sexual identity, fluidity, and the erasure of coherent sex roles. For young people who simply want to form healthy same-sex relationships grounded in mutual understanding and stable identity, this intellectual environment can be alienating and disorienting.
Moreover, while Grindr is mentioned as emblematic of gay male hookup culture, it is important to note—tactfully but clearly—that not all gay men use Grindr or similar apps as their primary way to connect with others, just as not all heterosexuals thrive in hookup culture. Many gay men seek friendship, affection, and lasting partnership outside the transactional logic of location-based apps.
This critique is not a call for ideological “inclusivity” in the woke sense. It is a reaction against invisibility—the default assumption that when we talk about “young people,” we mean only heterosexual ones. For a podcast episode concerned with alienation, emotional dissatisfaction, and the erosion of relational norms, the total exclusion of same-sex attracted people—and the distinct pressures they face—is a telling and unfortunate oversight.
Signed,
A gay boomer and subscriber
Thanks for the feedback.
Good point, Ollie. I wouldn’t ding her for not including the gay perspective. The writer probably isn’t familiar with any such dating differences, and the vast majority of people are heterosexual. Still, your point is valid and this is a topic that deserves more attention. Maybe you could pen something or introduce John to a writer who you think has a good understanding of the dating world for young gay men and women.