The shorthand of ‘socially liberal, fiscally conservative’ to express one’s political beliefs has become a red flag among women in the modern dating scene and for good reason
Age, height, relationship type, political affiliation are the major checkpoints of any dating profile assessment. But given that politics can really kill the mood, it’s hard to find an answer that will encompass the many nuances of the topic. That said, there’s always been one right answer: Socially Liberal, Fiscally Conservative or SLFC.
The breezy shorthand has long been a socially accepted response to the contentious question: what are your politics? SLFC is the ultimate virtue signal: indicating you care deeply for people and their rights but also you love money and want your government to remain competitive in a capitalist society. Essentially, SLFC translates to: don’t worry, I believe in equal rights too, we don’t need to get into the details.
But in a reality where governments are systematically curbing support for healthcare and education and DEI programs are under threat, fiscal conservatism is being called out as blatant conservatism. Women in particular are asking the question, if you really care about reproductive rights, DEI programs, climate change and social programs, then why don’t you want government investment in these areas?
SLFC has become a watchword for right-leaning politics. The topic has gained a lot of attention recently, with conversations on the latest Love is Blind and White Lotus series drawing attention to the oxymoronic nature of SLFC. Now, when women hear SLFC on a date, they’re running for the hills.
A flurry of debate has taken hold of social media, with many calling out the privilege that comes with fiscal conservatism. One Instagram user writes: “It’s giving, ‘I’m not a bad person and don’t have anything against you! I just vote for all the polices against you, because I care more about my tax rates than your freedoms!’”
Others are saying it’s unfair to equate fiscal conservatism with a disregard for public welfare: “Wow, just wow. First off, kind of immature. Second off, I have some names of world leaders who were exactly this ideology and have arguably the best legacy of all time. Calvin Coolidge, Winston Churchill, Shigeru Yoshida, and Grover Cleveland are the ones I’m well researched on. Look any of these up, and you will see how much they did for the people of their nation while being hands off fiscally.”
For some, there’s no blatant conflict of interest. One commenter contends it’s not even all that serious: “Why can’t I advocate for guns, weed, gays, and capitalism.”
For most, the debate suggests a larger problem of political illiteracy. A commenter acknowledges: “The amount of people conflating fiscally responsible with fiscally conservative is very telling about the average level of political literacy.”
Women are standing firm that SLFC is more than an ick but an indication of a person’s lack of genuine interest in seeing the government making actionable investments in the social and health programs that affect their lives. It’s a cop-out and one that they are no longer willing or able to accept.
That said, dating profiles are designed to fit people’s political affiliations into easily skimmed boxes. But if anything is clear from the online debate, it’s that there is a need to re-evaluate what ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ really mean to people and if those are still the best terms to categorise our political affiliations. Or if they ever were.
But that work doesn’t have to be done in isolation, nor should it be. Women remain ready and willing to bring political discussion into their pursuit of love. They can’t afford not to. Politics is the new pillow talk.
