On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness • Hacker News Board

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#241

Post by jhgb » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:26 PM UTC

rjbwork wrote: post #229

jhgb wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "a boogie [sic] man". Marxist governments were definitely not "analyzing history", they were enacting government policies. That's what governments do, unsurprisingly. (Source: I grew up in a Marxist country and was taught Marxism by a Marxist teacher.)

You're probably thinking of Marxism-Leninism, though it's hard to know without knowing what country you're talking about. I'm not even sure what a "Marxist" country could possibly entail. They'd dedicate all resources to analyzing society through the lens of historical materialism?

You surely won't be surprised if I tell you that Marxism-Leninism embeds the ideas of Marx about stages of societal development.

Also, no; most prominently, we largely dedicated our resources to pointless heavy industry at the expense of light industry and services.

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#242

Post by Loughla » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:26 PM UTC

textgel wrote: post #206

sudosysgen wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely isn't. Progressives, when they see inequality of outcomes at the group level , correctly identify an inequality of opportunity. There's no progressive in the world that thinks that everyone should have the same outcomes. That's different from wanting similar outcomes between groups of millions of people, because those almost invariably come from inequality of opportunity. I don't know of any left tenden…

You believe in quotas, you believe in equality of outcome. In fact I could be inclined to agree with you in some ways; its more accurate to state that progressives don't believe in equality of outcome in much the same way as they don't really hold any disdain for racism/sexism or any of the other causes that claim to champion but they like the power that comes from doing so. For example no progressive has any issues…

Those are a lot of absolute statements you're making, and I just don't understand. There is so much wrong with your argument. You're attributing motive and action to someone else, with zero proof, in my opinion.

>You believe in quotas, you believe in equality of outcome.

Who is 'you' here? Who said they believe in quotas?

>they like the power that comes from doing so.

Again, who is this mysterious strawman you're building? Where is this argument coming from? What is your proof? I am very progressive, and I very much have disdain for racism, sexism, and any other bigoted activities. It has nothing to do with power. Often, I am unable to do anything about this behavior because I lack any sort of structural power in my local area. So what does that mean for your argument?

>For example no progressive has any issues with an imbalance in genders in nursing

I literally work to bring men into underrepresented fields in higher education. There are programs across the nation specifically designed to recruit, assist, and help ensure the academic success of men in nursing, men in daycare/education fields, and men in other traditionally 'feminine' fields. Claiming this absolute of a statement is just absurd.

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#243

Post by hbeqresponse » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:26 PM UTC

“It's a fact...that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization . Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women; others with none. It's what's known as 'the law of the market'...Economic liberalism is an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. Sexual liberalism is likewise an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society.” - Michel Houellebecq, Whatever

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#244

Post by throwaway0a5e » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:27 PM UTC

everdrive wrote: post #190

>Her response was that they had so much "male privilege" and that they have no excuse for underperforming. That, thus, they should still be _ahead_ of women, presumably, despite the goal being that they... shouldn't be. This will be downvoted and poorly received, but the fact is that women despise weak men. If a man is in a poor state, most women will be visibly disgusted by him. A man generally should not expect sym…

Everyone wants everyone else to adopt an idealistic world view while they use shrewd pragmatism to navigate life.

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#245

Post by schnevets » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:27 PM UTC

colanderman wrote: post #154

I feel a common issue with such "dead bedroom" discussions is the seeming lack of capacity of some parties (including some prominent toplevel comments here) to understand how deep a need for sex many people have. To think sex can be replaced with "strong friendships" is laughable to anyone who actually feels a strong desire for sex. The dead bedroom situations I've seen with my friends (M->F equally as well as F->M)…

I am frequently surprised by the number of "dead bedrooms" I know about among friends, and I sincerely believe the problem is the western world's secretly coy perception of sex. There is a superficial surface level that is extremely wrong (for example, Successful people have sex, the most successful people have the hottest sex with the hottest partners; Sex isn't about planning it's about letting the desire overcome you; Doing this thing will make you more desirable to your partner... unless you suck; All people are secretly kinky and the happiest people figured out what makes them tick), and then there is a deeper level of taboo that discourages any honest communication about sex.

There is no panacea to this problem because it involves mutual collaboration between both members of the couple. The things that seem to work (couples therapy, self-help books) only actually work because they spark a conversation. Regardless, it always seems to involve rejecting some of those superficial notions I listed above and acknowledging that 90% of the stuff you learned or assumed about sex is wrong.

I think this is a very Americanized perspective, though, so I would be especially interested in hearing perspectives from other cultures.

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#246

Post by dudul » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:27 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #233

dudul wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Her response was that they had so much "male privilege" and that they have no excuse for underperforming. That, thus, they should still be _ahead_ of women, presumably, despite the goal being that they... shouldn't be. I genuinely don't understand how someone can reconcile these in their head.

They aren't contradictory. One is an assessment of the currently perceived reality and one is a stated goal. The mindset is simply that we haven't reached the goal yet.

But the "currently perceived reality" (eg the fact that men are now behind in terms of college graduation) is exactly what you would see once you've reached the goal.

By saying "well, they were so far ahead they have no excuse to not be better anyway" you're basically saying that you will reject potential evidence that the goal has been reached.

Maybe I misunderstood the GF's point, but it just sounds like such a lack of empathy for people who face hardship for reasons that are specific to their individuality. It's like saying "poor men are too stupid to not be poor, they have no excuse to be poor".

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#247

Post by rmk » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:27 PM UTC

What I'm saying below applies to the advanced liberal economies (the rest of the world is not in this place yet).

I think the intersection of feminism, women entering the workforce, globalization and the attendant economic insecurity, and the shift to a service-oriented economy (where women do much better than men) have all combined to put men in a difficult position: on average, women are feminists when it comes to power plays that pit females as a class against men (feminism is first and foremost about power, equality second), but they still expect men to be the providers (most women do not want to marry a man who makes less than them), and also expect men to do the dangerous occupations (oil rig workers, police, military, particularly infantry, waste disposal and handling, construction). Perhaps women have won a pyrrhic victory here: they have successfully risen in power, pay, education, independence, and social standing, but at what cost? The asymmetry in sexuality between the sexes has always been there, but now, there is no framework to reconcile it: traditional norms, which reconciled this at great cost to women, have now been overturned, but modern-day practices have pushed things in the opposite direction, extracting a heavy cost from men. It's difficult to say one is better than the other.

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#248

Post by brianxp » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:28 PM UTC

2lwxxtj wrote: post #102

tachyonbeam wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one bitter truth about life: (almost) everyone needs some amount of physical intimacy to be happy, but it's not something anyone is entitled to. Those of us who have access to that are privileged. I agree with the author though. IMO the existence of so many "incels" is some expression of a real societal problem. Many young men are suffering, and we don't acknowledge their suffering as genuine. We just tell the…

>That's one bitter truth about life: (almost) everyone needs some amount of physical intimacy to be happy, but it's not something anyone is entitled to. That's not a truth about life, it's an opinion.

it is, I notice that me or even people in my family who often times tend to show anticonformity behavior need some love.

Often times I wonder how would I feel if someone were to hold my hand, or give me a kiss but the feeling goes soon away perhaps dictated by the way I was raised or my own genes (something I'm can't determine since I'm not an expert neither in science or parenting)

Just to give you some context I grew up in a family with 6 uncles, 2 aunts and my mom, just one of them married, although all of them seem to fare well economically speaking.

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#249

Post by BlargMcLarg » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:28 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #223

tachyonbeam wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one bitter truth about life: (almost) everyone needs some amount of physical intimacy to be happy, but it's not something anyone is entitled to. Those of us who have access to that are privileged. I agree with the author though. IMO the existence of so many "incels" is some expression of a real societal problem. Many young men are suffering, and we don't acknowledge their suffering as genuine. We just tell the…

Masculinity isn't toxic. It becomes toxic when it blames women for its problems. Feminism is all for men talking about their issues. It practically begs them to. It is absolutely, positively not feminist to tell men that you're not enough if you can't get a woman. That doesn't, however, pose an obligation on any woman to listen to you. It doesn't matter whose fault it is that you can't get a woman; it does matter tha…

Modern feminism has actually been fairly two-faced on what it really wants. At this point, I can't tell whether feminism would prefer (given constraints only allow for one):

* Working on an issue which only helps women a bit, but doesn't help men at all

* Working on an issue which helps both women and men a lot

Considering media has a routine narrative of painting men as demons and women as angels, any claim that feminism is for anything in regards to men, might need to be backed up with some strong cases.

Re: On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

#250

Post by rayiner » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:28 PM UTC

benlivengood wrote: post #4

> I got absurdly lucky when I found my wife, but I spent every day without her more or less miserable. It’s arguable she’s the only reason I’m able to be happy. I imagine some of these men are similar to me in the loneliness and not as lucky in finding someone, and it’s impossible for me to not feel something. This is basically a red flag for any relationship. If the only thing making or allowing a person to be happy…

> This is basically a red flag for any relationship.

This is a very odd western view of things. None of my Bangladeshi aunts would find it at all controversial if a young man said he was sad because he was chronically unable to find a relationship. Humans are supposed to be in intimate relationships of some sort, for the purposes of making children. Friends and hobbies aren’t a replacement.

I find the ease with which people throw around “codependency” similarly perplexing. I don’t doubt that this situation exists among some people. But normal healthy marriage involves a large degree of codependency. The idea you need to be a standalone individual who would be happy with or without their spouse is inconsistent with how people actually work.