After I finished this book, I was in a sobbing heap because it's just about the most depressing book I've ever read about dating. Luckily, after a night's sleep, I have a clearer head (both about the book and about dating).
For context, I'm a thirtysomething woman who lives in a rural area.
Online dating is pretty much the only way I'm going to meet people because rural area. Birger even says that online dating is probably the best option for people in rural areas. But nonetheless, the first thing Birger does is rip into online dating and how terrible it is and how bad the data is for people who meet online, even if they get married. Cool cool cool.
Later, he goes on to encourage women to not focus on their career in their 20s and instead start focusing on marriage earlier because dating is like musical chairs (he actually makes this analogy) and the dating pool gets worse as you get older. Cool cool cool.
{deep breath}
Here's the thing. Birger makes the argument that dating apps don't market how many successful matches they make, because it's better for them if people don't meet up and stop using the app, they want to turn them into repeat customers. (This is actually wrong - Bumble routinely posts pictures of couples and weddings from people who met on Bumble, and Hinge's marketing is about how it's the dating app that wants to be deleted. This is just one of many ways in which Birger tells on himself as knowing very little about modern dating culture, but more on that later.) Now, in terms of how they make their money and how they maintain a userbase, that may be true. But similarly, I'd encourage any woman reading any dating book to apply that consumer/capitalist mindset to the dating book itself. Birger knows that men aren't going to buy dating books. Men don't buy dating books, they don't hire dating coaches, because they aren't told repeatedly that they are the problem. Women buy these things, and therefore most dating books come down to some variety of "women, this is your fault." Because if we are the problem then we're also the answer! So it must just be as simple as fixing ourselves because we are the problem! What a beautiful lie.
Now, I mentioned that Birger tells on himself as knowing very little about modern dating culture. It's hard to catch onto this at first because he uses the great magicians trick of distraction - he references so many stories from women he knows and their successful relationships. So clearly he must talk to women! EXCEPT, he clearly wrote off women who aren't in relationship as being failures not worth talking to, because he has no idea what women who are currently dating are actually doing. This man repeatedly references The Rules as though he's under the impression that women are still buying and reading this book. Y'all, The Rules was an outdated reference when "Sex and the City" was airing, and we're now at the point where "Sex and the City" is outdated. That's how outdated this man's dating references are. He touts research from OkCupid, which was relevant 10 years ago, now... less so. It's not even in the top three popular dating apps. And he suggests people use Meetup.com to meet people. I... yeah.
Because he's convinced that The Rules is still the modern woman's dating bible (lololol), he thinks that the biggest problem is that women are playing hard to get. If you, you know, TALK TO WOMEN WHO ARE DATING, you'll know this ain't it. But you don't have have to do that. Just listen to any dating advice podcast (my favorites are Just Break Up, Ask Nick) and you'll know this isn't the problem. The problem is basically the opposite. An inordinate amount of dating advice letters are basically: woman tells story about a man who clearly isn't that into her and is just biding his time until he finds someone better, woman asks, is he into me? Will he ever come around and want to actually date me? In a twist, He's Just Not That Into You might actually be the most relevant modern dating book (I'm being tongue-in-cheek here, I haven't read that since college), or at least the idea that women accept a pittance from men and then spend a lot of time thinking that that dude likes her when in reality he's just queuing up the next woman he can monkeybranch to. (TO BE CLEAR, I'm not saying all men do this, or that only men do this. It absolutely happens across genders.)
To go back to an earlier point about Birger knowing who his demographic is and catering to that, Birger also relies heavily on research that supports the points he's making while conveniently ignoring research that doesn't. This is the problem with research. It's easy to impose your bias on it, but it makes you look like an expert, and most people won't blink twice about thinking that because you cite a study, you must be right. (Hopefully the prevalence of that whole "you can catch covid by running in someone's breath stream" study which was later heavily debunked will serve as a good reminder to people that just because it's in a study doesn't mean it's true.) If you go on to google and search "do relationships last between people who meet online" the first link that comes up is a story that points to two studies that say that people who meet online are happier, and that their marriages last longer. Birger, of course, finds studies that say the opposite. And for all of the research that he points to that supports the idea of women looking at marriage earlier, he conveniently doesn't include all of the research about how the older you are when you get married, the more likely the marriage is to last.
Now, there is good stuff in here. All of the encouragement for women to make the first move is good, and the idea of widening your search outside of certain parameters, that's all good stuff. But with Birger's dated references and clear lack of understanding the modern dating scene, it feels like he's built this particular pyramid on sand.
And, having said that, wow, there's so much other problematic stuff in here that I haven't even touched on. He talks about how the #MeToo movement has made dating harder for men (poor babies?), which may be true, but... really, bud? That's the point you want to make? You know what also makes dating hard for men? A culture of toxic masculinity that encourages them to not have feelings or talk about those feelings, that tells men that there is nothing wrong with them, that is the reason why men will never pick up this book, that's why men need a lot of pushing to go to therapy. But again - keeping the focus on what's wrong with women serves his demographic, because men won't buy this book.
He also: encourages women to propose, which is fine, but like - it isn't that simple? He says for women who are with men who won't pop the question that they should just do it. (And he once again blames women by talking about how women are picky about how they want to be proposed to.) If you've talked about marriage already and know that that's what you both want, that might be a fine step. But he touts it as a solution to commitment-phobic men and it ain't that easy.
Oh god, and he also suggests trying to go back to an ex. HAHAHAHAH. Sigh.
Anyway. There is good stuff in here, but again, it feels like it's propped up on a base of sand. This feels a bit like the Charlotte Simmons of dating books. Old white dudes shouldn't write novels from the perspective of college-aged women, and old married white dudes probably shouldn't write books telling young single women how to date. If you want a decent dating book, I would steer you away from this one, and steer you towards Logan Ury's How to Not Die Alone, since she takes the whole "broaden your search" approach without feeling blamey, and she's actually a younger woman who has recent dating experience to speak of, and has a better understanding of the modern dating scene since she works at Hinge. (Realizing I never reviewed that one, and I guess I should!) That said, the same caveat applies - remember that dating books are written for women because men don't buy them (aside from bullshit like The Game maybe, I guess?), and always read them in that context.