I sat down and studied more than a hundred dating videos so you don't have to, and somewhere in the middle of that marathon a pattern jumped out at me. A huge chunk of this content is built to set men and women against each other. It sells you a war between the genders, and I've come to believe that war is a lie. We're not actually separated. When the culture makes it awful to be a man in the dating world, that same culture makes it awful for women too. So this part of the series is about the creators who touch that nerve, the ones I resonate with, and the toxic red-pill, manosphere, transactional stuff I'm never watching again.
Kate Willett
Kate Willett has been getting some serious views on her videos, and this recent one, about what's really behind the collapse of modern relationships, really landed for me. I resonate with a lot of what she said. Our culture has created a pretty awful system for dating, where it sucks to be a man in this environment and it's genuinely difficult, but that same difficulty flows straight over to women, because we're not on separate teams. I love her advice about giving a partner transition time after work, and the mandate to assume good intent, which I've honestly struggled with. If a woman isn't texting me back, my mind jumps to "well, she's done with me, she doesn't care, she's ghosting." Those moments are actually opportunities for me to grow.
It's worth watching if you're struggling with underlying resentment. She talks about women being consistently disappointed by their partner's lack of effort, and I identify with the flip side of that now, because it seems like my effort has not been appreciated anywhere in dating. Some women might say I'm lazy because I won't text first, but I'm so tired of texting a woman and getting nothing back, or a lukewarm response, or "hey, would you like me to come see you?" and hearing "no, I'm busy today." My take now is: express your desire, and I'll go from there. Somebody has to reach out first, and the culture we're in seems to make it the woman, because the woman's emotional safety and readiness matter more in how this all plays out. I've been reaching out and it's gone absolutely nowhere. So I've decided I'm going to save my energy for my kids, for my videos, for my friends. I have an awesome life that I love and I'm proud of. If you want a piece of it, you need to send the first message. If you won't at least say hi, I'll take the negative assumption and figure you're not interested. In my experience, the women who are actually interested in me consistently reach out first.
The downside of her video is that it leans on those traditional gender generalizations, and honestly those assumptions fail so often that it's questionable whether they're useful at all. The whole "know your worth" culture has made simple reciprocity really difficult.
Freya India
Freya India asks why Gen Z women are lonelier than ever. Her thesis is that modern social media and the commodification of young people lead to extreme loneliness and numbness that sabotages human connection. Unfortunately this seems very accurate to me, and it's sad. I want to do whatever I can to help, but it is tough. As soon as I show that I'm not an emotionally numb partner who never needs anything, it seems like women run. As soon as I'm not just a dead kind of man, they pull back. And then look at my own behavior, refusing to text until they reach out. This stuff is hard. I've been dating some Gen Z individuals, exhausted by dating apps and social media anxiety, and it's crazy out there.
I love her framing of the marriage where the man is the CEO and the woman is the COO. I actually resonate with that and I would very much like that. This is part of why I don't use Instagram either, though I recognize how much I'm on YouTube. Social media has turned our partners into accessories, and our fake online tribes are not real community. That's exactly why I'm big on spending time with people in person, and why I keep pointing folks toward my community and the Jerry Banfield Family, because real connection happens face to face, not through a feed. If you're feeling that same loneliness, come be around real people, come to an event, show up somewhere human.
Natasha and Cassie
Natasha and Cassie cover the hottest dating trends of 2026: manosphere looks-maxing, peptides, and dating up. Their argument is that modern dating trends like looks-maxing, peptide abuse, rigid hypergamy, and keeping a roster are driven by escapism and widespread loneliness rather than any genuine relationship fulfillment. I wholeheartedly agree with the core thesis. On hypergamy there's some truth. I can't stand looks-maxing, though I do believe in taking care of my body and eating whole, plant-based. I think I look pretty good for 42, just saying, and I've done nothing to looks-max. I've gotten a haircut, I eat whole plants, I don't drink, I don't smoke. Maybe some people would call that looks-maxing, I don't even know. I don't even really know what peptides are; I've heard the word. And keeping a roster is messed up too. Be emotionally available and let one person fill that space.
Personally I don't agree with taking peptides or weight loss drugs. What I believe in, from my own experience, is whole plants. But you've got to watch out for medical claims, so do your own research and learn what keeps your body healthy. Their closing question is interesting: can you be an independent breadwinner and still want a traditional provider? There seems like a bit of tension there, but my answer is absolutely yes.
Sadia Psychology
By this point I'd gotten halfway through the whole list. It took me about two hours to get through the first fifty, with two more to go, so I started speeding up. Sadia Psychology has a video titled "if you're a nice guy, she will lose sexual attraction, and here's why." Her point is that women don't lose attraction to men because they're kind, they lose it to nice guys because those men are weak. And the mature advice is to warn against dating down to avoid being cheated on, which makes absolute sense. At the same time, it carries the same cynical critique I've heard elsewhere, that men who want highly agreeable women are only planning to manipulate them or set up for alimony once the kids arrive. That's pretty cynical. Modern masculinity gets framed as a choice between being a pushover and being a pickup artist, and both are traps. I'd like to think I'm walking the middle ground.
Elliot Scott
Elliot Scott did a live stream, the only thing I could pull from him. There was a lot of emphasis on attraction and tactics, on men operating from straightforward opportunistic sexual strategies, and on women needing to stop romanticizing mixed signals or waiting for commitment from guys who just want to keep their options open. That part I do agree with. I see too many women hanging around guys who don't want relationships, or who are already in one. When I was married, I saw some women do that a bit with me, and it's a trap. You need to find somebody who is emotionally available. Don't get into that situation. I understand how it happens, and I've barely avoided a few myself.
But I don't believe in this hyper-evolutionary, transactional view of dating. It's highly reductionist. I can't stand the raw sexual opportunism and the whole SMV, sexual market value, framing. That's complete nonsense to me. It's not that there's zero truth in it, but emphasizing it that heavily signals to me a lack of understanding of deeper human nature. I am not afraid of commitment. Maybe there's a sliver of fear in there, but I love commitment. The 15-year relationship I'm in, I love that. Some men are afraid of commitment; I'm not. Focus on what you're actually looking for.
Emily
Number 69 on my list, which I paired with the thumbnail on purpose because I thought it was funny. Emily has so many of these videos about why men are done dating this way, and yes, modern dating culture has definitely exhausted good men. I've certainly felt it. It can feel like you have to play manipulative games, absorb one-sided expectations, always pay, always text first, put up with ghosting and endless flaking, all while she's talking to eight other guys at the same time. It's rough, and it's crazy. I agree with communicating in a straightforward way and rejecting arbitrary dating rules like pretending you're not interested. But here's my problem: it seems like every woman I've expressed clear interest in has had her fire put out instantly. The moment I say "I like you, I'm interested, I'd like to date you," it completely douses the flames. Maybe it wouldn't always, but that's been my recent experience.
That has pushed me into a "you express interest first before I do" posture, and if both people take that approach, and most women are passive, that's a setup for everyone to be lonely. The lonelier you get, the more you ask why even bother. I've shifted into a bit of a "why bother trying, I'll just show up in community" mindset, and then I feel defeated, like nothing's going to happen no matter how many women I talk to, no matter the chemistry. So I totally get where good men are coming from. But I don't agree with the generalization that modern women are entirely to blame for male burnout. It's important that women take responsibility for the beliefs and behaviors that have made this so hard, and men, we've done our part too. The goal is to come together and figure out how to work with each other now, not to keep blaming each other. I do think a lot of women are filtering out the healthiest men by expecting them to fight for it. At this point, if I see a woman worth fighting for, I'll fight for her, but I'm tired of fighting for women who don't want to be fought for, tired of texting and calling only to watch their interest drop to zero. Is fighting for it just showing up all the time? This stuff is hard. And maybe it should be.
The Way of Cam
The Way of Cam would probably be honored to be in this roundup. He started his channel pretty recently, I've watched several of his videos, and he's good at clickbait titles, like "I'd rather die alone than try dating in 2026." His thesis is that modern dating operates as a highly competitive, skill-based matchmaking system, that men who get frustrated and give up have a loser's mentality, and that you must actively level up your looks, change your environment, and stay open-minded to find a long-term partner and avoid a lonely old age. I agree with a lot of that. It felt like he was talking to me personally. He calls out refusing to date women who go to bars, and I felt seen, because I've literally said I'm not dating a woman who drinks or goes to bars. I even told my matchmaker I might need to lower my standards, that they've been too high, and it's already taken four months.
Part of why I've been so willing to widen my net is that it took my matchmaker forever to find six women in a big metro area, because I'd had my standards so high. I finally said, all right, let's make this easier. So if you're a chronically online, lonely man who's fallen into a doomer mindset, yeah, I get it. I don't agree with the heavy reliance on the hypergamy framework, which especially breaks down when you actually know people in person over time. But can toxic internet frameworks trick lonely men into healthy habits? Perhaps. You should go outside. You should stay open-minded. Absolutely. So some of this is somewhat practical, somewhat aimed at a relationship.
Tony Gaskins
Tony Gaskins does relationship advice, and his angle is "the relationship advice women are misleading you" — he says women should never take relationship advice from other women. In my view, be open to relationship advice from anybody who can actually help. His warning that taking advice from hyper-manipulative, transactional dating coaches usually leads to misery is valid. True intimacy and trust cannot exist when one person is constantly viewing the other as a mark to be gamed. That's absolutely true. At the same time, those sweeping absolutist claims are exactly what we don't want to do. I think women can absolutely give women great advice about men, so the blanket version of his take is kind of ridiculous. There's a real point buried in there — you should broaden who you listen to — but not to the point of shutting out half the population.
Michael Sartain
Michael Sartain — I'm sure he'd be unhappy he got ranked below Saudia. His pitch is "how to stop being a nice guy and get girls." A man's morality and pandering do not generate sexual attraction. I agree with that. And the claim that women consciously say they want comfort for a relationship but actually feel raw sexual arousal for men with high status, boundaries, and preselection — unfortunately, that does seem to have some accuracy. Being willing to walk away from a conversation and maintain self-respect, I agree with that too.
Where I get off the train is the insistence that a successful relationship requires a woman to know, all the time and forever, that other women find you attractive. I don't like trying to maintain that kind of jealousy. And I say that because I unfortunately did it in my own relationship. One tactic I used with my ex was making attractive female friends. I didn't do it for the whole relationship, but early on, when we were first dating, there was this woman who was so beautiful and so friendly, and I thought, I know I have a girlfriend, but I'm going to get this girl's number anyway. That was kind of messed up. I was what, 29? I had just moved in with my ex — we were boyfriend and girlfriend at the time. This girl at the gym was so hot and so animated talking to me, and I gave her my business card and she added me on Facebook. For a lot of the relationship, when we were healthy, I wasn't keeping attractive women around as friends. But when the marriage got unhealthy, I started trying to trigger jealousy in my wife to get her to step up her game. What it actually did was feed a low-level insecurity, and it probably contributed to her disrespecting me.
So in another relationship, I'd intentionally minimize having women I'm attracted to as friends. I'd keep the attractive friends I already have, but I'd deliberately avoid setting up new situations like that. For example, in 2016 I hired a personal trainer — the most attractive trainer at the gym, early twenties — and I saw her twice a week. That's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. In another marriage, I would not do that. That was messed up. And that's precisely what Sartain is describing. So do women make nice guys wait while instantly choosing players? Sometimes, not all the time.
Entrepreneurs in Cars
Entrepreneurs in Cars put out several very toxic videos. The idea of treating the dating market as pure optionality instead of monogamy — guarding his commitment, refusing to rush into cohabitation — some of that I actually agree with. I got a professional photographer for my dating profiles right before I deleted them, and honestly I didn't see it help a huge amount over what I'd already done. But my real advice is just to stop using dating apps. And I completely disagree with anything that's misleading. The "just keep them around" spinning-plates stuff is awful. I see men doing this right now. Telling a divorced man to go spin plates is the exact wrong thing to say to him, and yet the videos have racked up a bunch of views.
Ask an Older Man
Ask an Older Man leans on "dating in this economy is completely broken." Yes, it can be hard, but it's important to put out ideas that are supportive for people. Putting out the idea that dating is broken is not helping. Sometimes it is transactional and it is a gamified environment — but other times it's a beautiful and magical environment. Dating is completely working. Both things are valid. I agree with him that you should approach women naturally and comfortably, treating them like normal people. Absolutely. Do you think I'd walk up to some random guy in a coffee shop who's on his phone and go, "Hey, what's up, bro, what are you doing, you want to hang out?" You think I'd do that to a random man? So that's a good point. At the same time, the idea that a woman making a man wait for intimacy automatically means she doesn't like him and is just using him for free food — nah. I don't love that.
For my own part, I have no intention of going on a dating strike to stack my money. I'm focused on making money because I need to pay my rent off of something that isn't a credit card cash advance — which reminds me, I need to write that check today. But I'm also very emotionally available. In fact, as soon as I wrap this up, I'm going to go meet a woman who's a good friend and someone I'd definitely be interested in dating. I told her that; she was pretty uninterested in dating but still interested in being friends and working together. So I'm going to meet her at an event, stay available, and see if there are any women interested in me approaching them. But I did spend most of the day on my work.
Owen Cook
Owen Cook — this one hurt to put down here, because Owen has a lot of good videos and a lot of great points. I watched an almost four-hour video of his at double speed. His pitch is "best life ever, endless girls and money," essentially fooling around like an idiot. Owen has a lot of practical tips for attractiveness and success. He clearly seems to have an incredible body count, he's got kids, a highly energized life, he's made a lot of money, and he's helped a lot of people, though he's also had to deal with a lot of controversy. A lot of what he says about being overly technical, rigid, or outcome-dependent is really good.
But the whole "be a chaotic, high-energy rock star to attract women" thing — using Owen himself as the example — I don't see any evidence that he's had a decade-long relationship with a woman that was loving, positive, supportive, a real team. It looks like a ton of hookups. He came out of RSD as Tyler Durden, from the early pickup community. And the promotion of being this wild, performative dude encourages men to act obnoxiously, cross social boundaries, and exhaust themselves trying to keep up a rock-star persona. Watching his infield videos is so cringe — "Are you a vibe? Are you a vibe? Are you a vibe?" Like, you're a psycho. I like a lot of what you say, but your infield stuff makes me have zero interest in ever buying your course, despite my having watched probably 40 or 50 hours of your content. No, I don't want to learn more of that.
So with Owen Cook, I've learned some helpful things, but I want to learn from people who've had happy relationships, who know how to build a successful partnership, and who respect people and their boundaries. Now, Owen would say, "You're just a bitch, Jerry. Look at you, you're not making money." But I am making money. I started on YouTube about a hundred days ago and I'm already up to $1,500 a month. That's pretty good. And I expect it to climb toward $10,000 a month in the Skool community in no time, because I provide fantastic value in there — that community, the Jerry Banfield Family, is exactly where I put the real work. Owen would probably still say I'm just a bitch. But this is my video, Owen. You're number 96 out of 100.
Pearl
Pearl lands even lower than Owen. "How I got red-pilled" — men, wife, hoes, all the time. Do we even need to talk about this one? Obviously you don't need revenge fantasies, and the dating market doesn't necessarily deliver karma. Absolutely. I can't stand the highly transactional, cynical view that relationships are purely about selling yourself to desperate men. I definitely don't agree with that. What happens when red pill's own creators admit the doctrine is cope? Just be yourself. Be authentic.
Justin J.
Justin J. almost got down to 100. I was frustrated and feeling hurt, and I got sucked into watching some of his videos, and he really does find great clips to roast women on. He argues modern dating is failing women, and I agree that fast-tracked access through dating apps and heavy texting creates a dangerous illusion. He makes some good points. But man, I just feel bad after watching his videos. He constantly speaks in half-truths and puts women down. His videos are some of the most popular in dating right now — he grinds them out. But when I'm watching them, I feel like I'm sabotaging my own chance at a healthy relationship.
I ranked him off one specific recent video, and he could change at any time. I would love to see him change and stop essentially promoting this gender war. When you listen to him, dating is framed as us versus them. But it's not us versus them. It's us with us. It's all of us trying to work together and have some love. When you're dating, you do not want an us-versus-them mindset. When you're a man who wants to date women, you want an "I love women" mindset. I respect and worship the goddess. I prepare to receive all the love that my queen has to offer. That's the mindset you want to bring.
Alexander Grace and the survey-of-women genre
That's exactly why I do videos. I'd love for somebody who's watching Justin J to watch my videos and notice how they feel afterward compared to how they feel watching his. And number 99, even lower than Jocelyn Jay, is Alexander Grace. He builds his whole thing around surveys of women, and honestly a lot of it just puts women down. There's some valid data behind some of it, sure. But then you get into the political-boundary stuff, and I'll be honest, I've seen way too many dating profiles say something like "if you voted Trump, swipe left." To me that's a pretty stupid thing to filter over, because often it's polarity that makes things interesting, and it's non-polarity that makes people insane.
I feel this way partly because of my own history. My ex had exactly that boundary. She said she wasn't going to date a guy unless he was liberal. I was middle of the road. I was so people-pleasing back then, exactly the kind of thing Owen would call me a bitch for, that I even ended up trying to be a liberal. And I'm middle of the road. I don't believe either side's bullshit. It's all bullshit, all a distraction. There are some points on both sides, but filtering and only wanting to date liberals is crazy to me, so on that narrow point I actually agree with him. At the same time, framing marriage as a transactional exchange and running content like "women's lies exposed," some of that is helpful, but most of it is corrosive. We don't want a gender war. There's no gender war. We need to work together.
Better Bachelor, creator 100 out of 100
And Better Bachelor takes the position of creator 100 out of 100. This is the video with the claim that over 96% of men are competing for the bottom 20% of women. Totally inaccurate. It's built off an evolutionary-perspective study saying the top 1 to 5% of men are sleeping with 85% of the women. I know a number of men and a number of women, and that's just not accurate. The advice to avoid despair and resentment, that part makes sense. But this has a huge number of views, a lot of people watching it, and you've got to really watch out for the uncritical acceptance and broadcasting of extreme self-reported data.
Yes, some guy calls himself "top 1%," but is a man truly top 1% because he's slept with 287 women? I've met some of these guys in person, I've even created content with them. And this idea that 95% of men have zero options, I don't agree with that at all. Yes, some women are sleeping with these guys because they're essentially getting tricked into attraction, a one-night stand or a situationship. But we need to stop treating hookup-app statistics as the whole story. Monogamy is not dead. My ex met one guy on one app and, as far as I know, is dating him. She doesn't tell me much more than that, because she doesn't want me broadcasting it all over YouTube, and she's probably already told me too much. You have to be careful with that data anyway: the women on dating apps are generally much more interested in hooking up, not always, but generally, and the men on dating apps are also the ones much more interested in hooking up. So of course the app numbers look the way they do.
What I actually took from 100 videos
To pull it all together, here's what I took from watching more than 100 of these videos. Attraction definitely matters, but it's not enough. Emotional regulation shows up over and over, but it's tricky. For me, emotional regulation is really about being careful where I put my energy. If I chase a woman, pursue a woman who hasn't signaled she wants me, that drains my energy. I've come to believe that the romantic spark is way overrated. And there's a lot of fear-based dating advice out there that's addictive but seriously corrosive. The best advice helps you become someone worth choosing and choose someone worth building with.
To me, a lot of men are struggling to become a man worth choosing, and a lot of women are struggling to pick a man worth building with instead of chasing romantic spark or raw attraction. There are problems on both sides. There are men who pick women who aren't worth building with, and there are women who need to work on becoming more discerning in who they choose.
So let me simplify and wrap this up. What really seems to work is this: tactics open the door, and confidence with clear intent gets you the first date. The practical scores are real. I know how to get a date. I've got maybe 20 dates' worth of experience using all kinds of techniques, and I can get dates. But what difference does going on 20 dates make when, in a lot of ways, it'd be better not to go on them at all, because they consistently don't work? You use tactics and attraction to get the date, and then the date itself isn't satisfying. You need emotional regulation and self-worth to keep it open and to build a happy relationship. And the more you get into instantly having sex, negative mindsets, gender wars, all of that, the harder it becomes to stay emotionally regulated.
The gap is the lesson. The best creators, the ones most worth following, focus on both attracting and building connection. The attraction and the connection-building have to go together. Most men are being taught attraction, and most women are being taught vetting. But women need to learn more attraction, clean up your habits and your life, and men need to learn more vetting. I've been learning that I personally need to watch more advice meant for women on spotting red flags, because I get over-emotionally-regulated when I'm not vetting and I slip into a buyer's mindset. The whole idea is: become someone worth choosing, and learn to choose well. Work on yourself, and also learn to make choices you're actually happy with.
Where to go from here
We got through this entire presentation, four hours and nineteen minutes straight, all Jerry Banfield, never chased. If you made it to the end of this, my Skool community is calling your name. Don't be an avoidant, get on in there. If you want to create a life you love, join the Jerry Banfield Family and my Skool is there to support you. You can DM me anytime and I'm right there. I get the DMs instantly on my phone when you message me. I run weekly group calls, and right now for dating those are wide open, so we can set that up. You can post questions and ask anything. I'd prefer you don't lean on a dating profile, but if you've got one, we can give you feedback on it. You can talk about your dating, post to get help, get feedback from the community, and stay accountable.
Ultimately this online community exists to help you build the thing you really need, which is community to build with in person. The online space is there to support you in building in real life. If you want belonging and community and a feel for what that's like, we're here, and we'll help you find more ways to build that in your actual life. If you want to live a healthy life and build income with YouTube and AI, my Skool is there for all of that too. And if you'd rather talk one-on-one, you can always schedule a Zoom with me.
Thank you so much for making it to the end. I've heard myself talk so much today I'm almost tired of it. Now I just need to find a woman who wants to hear me talk this much too. If you want the full ride through every creator I covered, it's all in my Dating playlist. Thanks for reading.