Why Love Alone Isn’t Enough for Marriage

A (potentially) controversial take of Celine Song’s, The Materialist

I recently reluctantly went to the theater to watch Celine Song's new movie, The Materialists, featuring Dakota Johnson, Chris Evans, and Pedro Pascal. I typically love a rom-com, however, I say reluctantly because I watched the preview, which you can watch HERE if that interests you, and it immediately appeared to be the same tired trope. Girl falls in love with two men. One is rich and one is financially unstable. In the end, she chooses love, forsaking financial stability. Because love is enough right?

But I went anyway because surely in 2025, they can't be selling us the same tired propaganda. Surely there would be a surprise twist.

Spoiler alert: There is no surprise twist, and the movie was even worse than I anticipated.

And it turns out, it wasn’t a romance at all. It was a HORROR film.

My skin was literally crawling the entirety of the movie, and honestly, the nightmares haven’t even ended yet. It was that scary.

The basic plot of the movie is that Lucy, played by Dakota Johnson, is a young, successful matchmaker who finds herself torn between two love interests — a wealthy and kind man, Harry, played by Pedro Pascal, and her ex, John, a struggling, financially unstable actor, played by Chris Evans.

In an early scene of the movie, we get a flashback of the reason Lucy and Chris originally broke up. They broke up because Chris didn’t have money. He even refers to himself as poor several times throughout the film (his words, not mine). It's their 5 year anniversary, and they are arguing because Chris has decided to drive them to dinner in NYC but can't afford the parking. I'm already annoyed because why would you insist on driving your car instead of taking the train if you don't have money for parking??? An annoyed Lucy gets out of the car and breaks up with him, stating that she doesn’t want to spend her life with a financially irresponsible man eating dinner from Halal cart food trucks. Homegirl literally said I can’t marry a poor man.

Fast forward several years, and she runs into her ex the same exact night she meets Harry, a wealthy, successful, $12M-penthouse-owning man, and she is now torn between the two men.

It’s important to note that at the time she reconnects with her ex. He is 37, still living with roommates in the same rundown apartment that she left him in 5 years ago. He has made zero progress in life. He’s driving the same car. Still working random side jobs. Still has no money. He is in the exact same situation 5 years later. Nothing has changed. It’s not just the fact that he has nothing going for himself, which is a problem, but even more, he’s still aimless and has exhibited zero growth in 5 years. FIVE FREAKING YEARS.

And in the end, she chooses John, who according to his own words, has nothing to offer her but love. How romantic.

I have often said that TV and film are a reflection of what is happening politically and socially, and this movie is no different. It's giving propaganda and I'm not falling for it. It’s giving marry a man who has no motivation or drive and nothing to offer you but love.

The alleged Male Loneliness Epidemic (which, for the record, is also propaganda) is being written about and discussed all over the internet and social media.

And according to Scott Galloway, who talks extensively about the “male loneliness epidemic”, we should be really concerned about male loneliness because according to him, “single men are basically the most dangerous thing in the world.”

I behoove you to watch the video below in its entirety:

So basically, according to his logic, if we don’t want dangerous, unhinged men, we women better buckle down and marry them even if they aren’t economically stable, because “when a woman doesn’t have a romantic relationship, she finds more productive uses for that additional energy. She’ll channel it into work. She’ll channel it into her friends and into her family. Guys come off the rails when they don’t when they don’t have the guideposts of a romantic relationship. I think guys need that guidepost of a relationship and oftentimes when men don’t have the guideposts of a relationship, they become insecure. They start becoming more prone to conspiracy theory. They start blaming women. They start blaming other people….and so single men are basically the most dangerous thing in the world….a young, single broke man.”

OMG, let me save the world and go find a single, broke man to get into a relationship with, despite the fact that by and large, women are fairing just fine single.

According to a 2024 University of Toronto study, entitled, “Sisters Are Doin’ It for Themselves”: Gender Differences in Singles’ Well-Being, surveying roughly 6000 single individuals (it should be noted that the majority of these folks were heterosexual), researchers found that overall, women are, on average, happier in singlehood than men. According to the research, single women reported significantly higher satisfaction with their relationship status, overall life, and sexual experiences than single men. They also expressed less desire for a partner.

And yes, I realize this is not representative of all single women. Of course it’s not.

However, the fact still remains that the economic rise of women has made marriage a choice for women rather than a necessity. And because of that, women can decide if and when and to whom they want to marry with a lot more discretion than we previously could.

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the bill which ensured women had the right to open bank accounts and get credit in our own names, without a man, was passed in 1974. In just 50 years, women have made incredible strides. In 2022, single women owned 58% of the nearly 35.2 million homes owned by unmarried Americans, while single men owned 42%. In addition, U.S. women are outpacing men in college completion, including in every major racial and ethnic group.

Under the patriarchy, women had less choice and less options. And of course, the patriarchy very much still exists, but more and more women are freeing themselves from the system of subjugation that cut us off from existing on our own, allowing us the freedom of choice.

We can have jobs and bank accounts and homes. We are doing things that many women before us never had the option to do. We are breaking the chains which forced us into marriage and motherhood without options.

We are no longer forced to choose between a man with money or marrying a man for love.

We actually don’t have to choose a man at all.

If I was the protagonist, I would have chosen Henry. I would have moved my happy ass right into his $12M penthouse and spent my summers yachting in Capri without a second thought about it.

But you also don't have to choose money over love if that's not your thing.

There is indeed a third option. You can choose yourself.

And Lucy could have said, actually, neither of these are viable options for me. Instead, I'm going to choose being single for a while, go to therapy, and work on my self worth because I clearly don't love myself. And I say this because throughout the course of the movie, she berates herself for not being good enough for Harry and then later berates herself for being a terrible person because she wants financial stability.

Newsflash – having financial standards doesn’t make you a bad person. It makes you a wise person, especially in a capitalist society in which 50% of marriages end in divorce, with finances being among the top reasons for separation.

And perhaps a controversial opinion, but America was founded by and for the benefit of white men. If you, as a white man, can’t succeed in a system designed for you, I, as a woman, am not going to sign up to hold you down. I SAID WHAT I SAID. Of course the patriarchy hurts everyone, men included, but it’s not women’s responsibility to both dismantle the system that has subjugated us for hundreds of years and to pick up the pieces of the broken men its harmed. In my opinion, marrying for potential, especially a 37 year old grown man with no drive or motivation, is bullshit.

I could write and write and write about this movie, because I found so much wrong with it — like the fact that they glossed over the traumatic sexual assault experienced by one of Lucy’s clients by reassuring the client that one day she’ll find her true love — but instead I’ll leave you with my three main takeaways.

1) The main character doesn't love herself.

That’s one of the biggest problems with the movie. It carelessly portrays a woman who has low self worth and is seeking her value from a man and a relationship. This is a theme throughout the move.

2) Love is not enough.

It's the bare minimum. A person openly telling you they have nothing to offer except love is not romantic. It’s crumbs, and we all deserve more than crumbs.

3) Women are not bad for wanting more for themselves.

Male loneliness epidemic be damned. You do not have to choose an unmotivated, financially unstable man for the sake of love. Standards and expectations are a great thing, especially when entering a legal contract with someone (marriage is a contract), and particularly when the data suggests that being married shortens a woman's lifespan while lengthening a man’s lifespan. I’m not saying women shouldn’t get married, but I do think we choose wisely.

In the last scene of the movie, broke John proposes to Lucy in the park with Halal cart food and a flower ring from some bodega flowers he purchased on the way and Lucy accepts.

How romantic, right? Wrong. In the end, Lucy settled for the exact thing she said she didn't want, and John didn’t even attempt to give her more. He gave her the same crumbs down to the Halal cart dinner, except this time she accepted it.

I spent $21.19 to see this movie, and ultimately, they owe me that money plus compensation for the two hours of my life I will never get back. So do as you please with information, but if you haven’t seen it, I would save your money.

As a single woman who was previously married for 11 years to a kind and financially responsible nice man, I always feel uniquely positioned to have an opinion on these topics. I’ve been on both sides. And in my humble opinion, love alone is not enough to sustain a relationship. In fact, it is just the bare minimum requirement. And I wish Hollywood would stop trying to convince young women otherwise.

And listen, before you jump into my comments with your personal example of how marrying for love alone worked out for you, I love that for you. But it’s not my dream, and I don't think it’s the dream we should be selling women.

Finally, Celine Song, if you’re reading this, you have some serious explaining to do.

Thank you so much for reading The Liberation Collective. I’m eternally grateful to have you here. You can also follow along on Instagram and TikTok. And if you want to partner with me, you can email me at info@chrissyking.com

---

Support Black Women Writers.

Your support as a paid subscriber on my Substack is essential to sustaining the work I do. I’m committed to keeping my writing accessible to everyone, but to maintain this structure, I need your help. By subscribing, you’re not just supporting me, a Black woman writer, you’re investing in a platform that’s committed to sharing meaningful and thoughtful content.

Please consider joining as a paid subscriber today to support my work.

---