This is the artificial intelligence voice of Chris Williamson narrating this pod slice summary of the Modern Wisdom Podcast.

In the course of this discussion, Chris Williamson and Louise Perry delve into various societal trends related to marriage, birth rates, sexual norms, and cultural attitudes. They talk about how the perception of marriage among young adults, with 40% of them according to a Wall Street Journal article, believe that the concept has outlived its usefulness. Perry posits that this growing sentiment could be a result of roughly half of children in parts of the West reaching the age of 15 without their biological fathers around.

An intriguing insight from Perry is on the influence of social mimicry and normalcy on people’s decision to have children. She suggests that less exposure to stable families and motherhood caused by reduced fertility rates has led to a decrease in the desire for having children. She sees the plummeting birth rates in several countries as a clear indication of this pattern, negating the traditional demographic belief that 2.1 children per couple is a natural settling point.

Perry also talks about an emerging trend among women concerned with the health effects of hormonal birth control. This group, dubbed as the ‘goop class’, she says, are turning towards alternate methods, including fertility-tracking technologies, that are more in line with wellness, despite their effectiveness being questionable.

A secondary theme of the discussion was the cultural shift between ‘prudishness’ and ‘licentiousness’, in this context, referring to conservative and liberal sexual attitudes respectively. Perry suggests that our culture is transitioning back to prudishness. However, she doesn’t expect this phase of prudishness to be as intense as historically due to the availability of technologies like the contraceptive pill and the internet.

Another fascinating note is a UCLA study which indicated that younger generations want less sex depicted in their movies and TV shows, preferring more content focused around platonic friendships. Perry hints that this could be a consequence of multiple factors, including young women reacting against porn culture, differential fertility rates influencing conservatism and religiosity among young people, and shifting societal attitudes.

Overall, this conversation weaves together the complex dynamics of sexual attitudes, birth rates, and societal perceptions and how they are evolving in contemporary society.

In a complex discourse on societal norms, sexual preferences, and fertility changes, Chris Williamson and Louise Perry debate various prevailing attitudes and reactions in society, holding technology, affluence, and evolving cultural perceptions responsible for redefining sexual attitudes and ultimately affecting population growth.

An interesting theory that Williamson presents is that male testosterone levels are mediated by the fertility of the women in their local ecology. With widespread usage of hormonal birth control, women’s artificially suppressed fertility influences men’s testosterone levels, leading to an increase of lower testosterone or “low T” men.

This hormonal shift has far-reaching consequences. Perry astutely highlights the dilemmas faced by a society filled with low T men; while it could lead to less violence, typically associated with high testosterone, it could also result in lowered fertility rates and less dynamic relationships between men and women.

Both hosts speculate a possible societal shift away from not just a sexually charged culture, but away from romantic culture at large. This shift could be influenced by younger generations pushing back against traditional ‘fairy tale’ narratives, exemplified by recent have-it-all retellings of classic princess stories like Cinderella, Rapunzel, and Snow White.

Regarding fertility choice, Perry suggests that women, being higher on the conscientious and agreeable scale than men, fare better in a technologically advanced, brain-based economy. This decreases their dependency on men, and ironically works in favor of an economy and society that is struggling with birth rates.

Perry admits to the possibility of patriarchal societal structures being necessary for an increase in fertility rates, due to the conflict between labor-market activities and reproduction for women. Most women, caught in this dilemma, tend to choose career advancements over having more children, leading to lower fertility rates.

As the conversation unfolds, the interplay between technology, affluence, societal norms, and human biology comes starkly into light, helping understand the undercurrents causing the radical shifts in societal attitudes around sex, relationships, and reproduction.

In this part of the podcast, Williamson and Perry delve further into discussing the effects of lower fertility rates, societal attitudes, and the struggles of modern women as they balance work and maternity. They refer to a few intriguing studies, pop-culture visions of motherhood, gender roles, and the notion of patriarchal societal structures.

Testament to the shifting societal norms, they mention a TikTok influencer listing numerous reasons why she does not wish to have children, showcasing a tendency among modern women to consider career and personal growth over motherhood. The list was an eye-opener and gained huge attention, although it was contested by the hosts, emphasizing the joy and rewarding experience of parenthood often outweigh the superficial perks of a child-free life.

Navigating the discussion further, Perry explores the struggles of working mothers. She discusses the concept of ‘second shift’ where women, despite contributing to the workforce, continue to handle a disproportionate amount of housework and childcare. This discussion is expanded further with the mention of a study that revealed married women tend to be happier in relationships when their spouses contribute a larger portion of the family income. The deconstruction of traditional gender roles is questioned here – where is the equality in women having to ‘do it all’?

Consequences of economic gender inequality leading to more satisfying relationships presents a paradox, especially when tied with the fact that men adopting traditionally feminized roles like stay-at-home dads are met with dissatisfaction and are predictors of divorces. Furthermore, it’s even associated with more male use of erectile dysfunction medication. It paints a clear image of deeply ingrained societal attitudes towards gender roles.

The discussion takes a turning point when Perry asserts that although western society has not been strictly patriarchal in half a century, the deeply ingrained notion exists that masculinity equates to a higher status than femininity. This often subconsciously influences women’s rush to engage in more ‘masculine’ roles and the increasing reluctance of men to do the reverse.

Nonetheless, the conversation circles back and concludes on the note that the majority of women might not find happiness in emulating more ‘masculine’ roles. It raises thought-provoking questions about gender roles, societal captions of success and independence, and whether they’re really improving societal happiness or instigating yet another paradox.

Delving deeper into societal issues, Williamson and Perry discuss changes in societal norms driven by technology and the denial of sexual differences within these norms. They comment on the ‘tyranny of minority,’ explaining how its overwhelming focus on minority outliers like the male CEOs has skewed societal perspectives.

They examine how this issue ties in with gender equality in leadership, citing that in the early 2021 statistics, 34% of new CEOs in America were women. While this is hailed as a breakthrough in female representation, the hosts speculate if this statistic over-represents the number of women who actually aspire to this high-stress role.

Shifting their focus to feminism and the aftermath of the Me Too movement, they affirm that the claims of some men feeling apprehensive about approaching women due to Me Too are valid. Yet, they argue that the campaign likely has not altered the behaviors of men prone to sexual aggression while making innocent men overly cautious.

They advocate for recognizing the disparities in physical strength and psychology between men and women for women’s safety rather than making men and women’s behaviors identical. Perry and Williamson challenge the notion that promoting an equivalent level of brutishness in women is the solution. Noting that promoting the idea of chivalry and deference towards women can encourage society to view women as deserving of protection, rather than promoting the now prevalent “every woman for herself” mentality.

They further touch upon the issue of victim blaming, asserting that society should stop misleading women with unrealistic assurances of equality and inform them of the harsh realities they might face. They implore society to stop sugar-coating the threats that exist, so women can take the necessary precautions while dealing with strangers.

They further debate on the idea of “consensual and good”, where Perry points out that being ‘consensual’ does not necessarily equate to being ‘good’. Bad things can happen even within the framework of consent, and the conversation ends with them reflecting on the importance and benefits of preserving certain ‘old-fashioned’ norms like gentlemen behavior and highlighting the need for a societal movement that supports and protects women beyond just focusing on equal rights.

They posit that replacing the traditional household model with a wealth-based system promotes the survival of the fittest mentality, engendering an even larger social rift. The conversation debates the swift social changes stemming from feminist movements and how the emancipatory ideas can morph into “luxury beliefs” that are not necessarily applicable or beneficial to everyone.

The insightful discourse continues between Williamson and Perry, as they bring up how men’s fear of approaching women has come about, as a result of both societal changes and the Me Too movement. They humorously discuss how about half the men aged 18 to 24 have confessed to never having approached a woman in person, ad explore the reasons behind this. Perry provides a historical perspective, attributing this change to the shift from arranged marital norms that used to prevail in many societies into the culture of instant meet-ups, facilitated by technology.

Engaging in a worthwhile exchange, the team brings up the idea of approach anxiety amongst men, where even a simple, “Hi, how are you?” could feel like a battlefield to men contemplating striking up a conversation with a woman. They propose that this fear isn’t novel, but a part of the societal expectations that have evolved over time. They argue that the shift in the ideology of relationships from a more socio-economic to an emotional bond has brought about a whole new set of challenges.

Continuing the exploration of complexities in the dating realm, they also touch upon the “All or Nothing” concept in marriages. They elaborate that the modern concept of marriage puts immense pressure on spouses to be perfect in every aspect, from being sexually to conversationally compatible, leading to a lot of marriages collapsing under the strain of unrealistically high expectations.

Further reflecting on the evolution of societal norms and expectations, they delve into discussions about the shift from traditional courtship gestures, like ladies dropping handkerchiefs, to the more nuanced signals of interest in the modern era. They point out the need for men to be more receptive to, and respectful of, these subtle cues from women. They share the interesting notion that men typically overestimate women’s interest while women underestimate men’s interest, adding another layer of complexity to modern relationships. This male over-perception and female under-perception dynamic is even exaggerated by alcohol, leading to even more misunderstandings.

Moving into a more serious zone, they address the issue of safety, touching on incidents of sexual misconduct reported in UK schools, that’s been brought to light through campaigns like “Everyone’s Invited”. They argue that these incidents, which often unfold at parties or social gatherings outside of school, prove that schools alone can’t solve this issue.

Lastly, they discuss the issue of teenage girls and the confusion between flirting and safety. They discuss the complexities of the conversation around victim blaming. While they agree that it is crucial to educate young girls about the potential risks and repercussions of their actions, they underscore that the intention is never to blame the victims but to ensure their safety. This makes clear the layered, multifactorial issues at play in modern relationship dynamics, echoing the ongoing theme of the podcast – how societal changes are constantly reshaping norms and expectations.

While addressing varied, thought-provoking topics, our hosts Williamson and Perry further delve into the implications of societal judgments and their influence on mental health, particularly in young women. They highlight a particularly disturbing statistic that elucidates the prevalence of feelings of hopelessness in 60% of 12-16-year-old girls. Perry ascribes a significant part of this problem to the way girls interact with social media, which she suggests, is often used as a tool to torment each other.

She highlights how patterns of ‘contagious mental illnesses’ such as anorexia and even tics picked up from platforms like TikTok disproportionately affect teenage girls. Perry attributes this vulnerability to the innate social sensitivity in women, an evolutionary trait that helps in forming alliances and survival.

Advancing the discussion, Perry deliberates the toxic comparison culture birthed by social media platforms like Instagram. She suggests that these platforms skew teenage girls’ perception of their ‘intersexual competition,’ by comparing them to airbrushed, plastic surgery-enhanced images of other women. This triggers a cycle of dissatisfaction and low self-esteem.

Continuing this exploration of mental health in young women, Perry and Williamson discuss the worrying rise in girls identifying as FtM (Female to Male) transgenders, which they suggest might be a result of social contagion theory. To support this, they cite studies that reveal a spiking trend of gender dysphoria diagnoses primarily among teenage girls. The conversation takes another interesting turn when it touches on the effects of hormonal birth control on young girls and its potential contribution to negative mental health outcomes.

Finally, Perry and Williamson discuss the tenuous line between societal judgment, empathy, and safety by delving into a sensitive topic of chemical castration for pedophiles – a disturbing yet fascinating exploration of unorthodox solutions to deeply-rooted societal issues. This topic taglines to the much broader theme of society grappling with the ethical boundaries of using pharmacology to manipulate the minds of criminal offenders while casually doling out mind-altering drugs like hormonal contraception to teenagers. The implications of each of these decisions, along with the tradeoffs they entail, are laid bare by Perry and Williamson, presenting a textured and stimulating discussion for listeners.

As the discussion on societal dynamics and mental health continues, Perry explores a “spicy theory” on body positivity. She coins this as the ‘Rivalry theory of body positivity,’ believing that female support for body positivity deep down is a strategy of intersexual competition, aimed at reducing competition within the dating pool. This is perceived by the women involved as a means to encourage others not to lose weight, thus potentially decreasing their attractiveness.

The hosts also explore the pressure of maintaining perceived attractiveness in society, which manifests in unnecessary beauty enhancements. Perry identifies a seemingly endless desire for beauty enhancement treatments in women, which is largely driven by technological innovation in the beauty industry. Intriguingly, this continuous advance and wide acceptance of beauty treatments have somewhat raised the minimum standard of beauty. Perry mentions that if one were to stick to beauty routines of decades ago, they might be considered less attractive compared to their counterparts today. In essence, women are competing with each other on appearance, thanks mostly to societal pressure and advancements in the beauty industry.

While examining this intense rivalry and the burden of maintaining physical appearance, Williamson presents a fascinating study that found women who perceive other women as potential dating threats would advise them to cut off more hair to decrease their attractiveness. This study shows the degree to which this unspoken rivalry could be covertly played out under the guise of friendly advice. Interestingly, the study found that women are more likely to advise those of similar attractiveness levels to cut off more hair, in an attempt to reduce competition.

Believing that men are relatively easy to please – valuing youthfulness, health, and long hair – Perry suggests that women are not just engaging with these beauty expectations and routines for male attention, but also to navigate a difficult game of female competition. In this intriguing intersection of societal norms, personal psychology, advances in technology, and intersexual competition, a complicated landscape of female identity, societal expectation, and unspoken rivalry unfolds. Through this discussion, it is clear that technology, societal expectations, and personal insecurities contribute to shaping the competitive dynamics among women regarding physical appearance.

The conversation takes a fascinating turn as Perry expounds on the dichotomy experienced by women in trying to appeal to both men and the ubiquitous game of intersexual competition. This consists of efforts to elevate one’s status not only through physical appearance but also through brand recognition and keeping up with ever-changing fashion trends. This duality may sometimes lead to a clash when a trend emerges that appeals to fashion but not necessarily to men’s preferences, such as short hair or baggy clothes.

Williamson interjects at this point, noting that men would generally prefer women to stick to what they find attractive, like form-fitting clothes. This, as the discussion reflects, illustrates the simplicity of male preference, which contrasts dramatically with the complex dynamics women navigate in their quest for attractiveness.

The conversation switches to the impact of the fashion industry on the standard of beauty. Perry underlines the fact that the fashion industry is chiefly dominated by gay men who tend to regard androgynous looks as more attractive. As an example, she cites the preference for skinny women on catwalks. However, this generalization is challenged by the recent decision of Victoria’s Secret to return to using traditionally attractive models after experimenting with a more diverse range of models.

They then touch on the controversial strategies that prominent clothing brands like Lululemon and Abercrombie & Fitch have used to maintain their image. Previously, these brands only catered to smaller sized women, creating an aspirational image linked to skinniness. However, Perry notes a recent trend reversal wherein the brands have now included plus-sized models, albeit she expresses her skepticism about the longevity of this change.

Perry, who is a multi-platform writer and host of the podcast ‘Made Mother Matriarch,’ mentions her current works, including her latest book on motherhood and fertility. Finally, Williamson lauds Perry for her enlightening contributions and wraps up the segment by recommending her works to the audience.