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

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

#251

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

tomc1985 wrote: post #47

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…

EDIT to add: the best explanation that I've heard for the feeling men have of basic unhappiness without romance and sex is toxic masculinity; the general societal rejection of deep emotional relationships between straight men. Lonely? Make strong friendships! Spend your time with other men who like you and enjoy your company and validate you. A partner is not a replacement for the natural circle of close friends huma…

it's also a question of age I think.

what I recall from my time in my 20ies my desire to be sexually active was a lot more dominant and in charge of my higher faculties than what it is today nearing 50.

biology determines how strongly we feel we need to be with a partner I think. I accepted much more toxicity and negativity just to not be alone (allowing control by my partner over my emotions and was far more ready to compromise) than what I'm today.

Today any potential relationship needs to be solid on a mental level first before I'd even consider going further. That certainly wasn't the case in my early 20ies. Also I'm today able to spend time by myself (and not just get by but really enjoy my own company, thoughts etc ...)

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

#252

Post by oftenwrong » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:29 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #167

Phrodo_00 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Genuine question: Isn't this equivalent to equity vs equality?

In my experience, people who are against "equity" call it "equality of outcome" because it sounds more Orwellian/communistic/whatever your dystopian descriptor of choice is. Very few people actually advocate for "equality of outcome". Equity is closer to "equality of opportunity" than "equality of outcome". "Equality" is neither of those things because it doesn't correct for differences in opportunity and therefore o…

>In my experience, people who are against "equity" call it "equality of outcome" because it sounds more Orwellian/communistic/whatever your dystopian descriptor of choice is.

I call it Harrison Bergeron:

https://archive.org/stream/HarrisonBergeron/Harrison%20Berge...

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

#253

Post by thelean12 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:29 PM UTC

cushychicken wrote: post #174

landryraccoon wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man this thread sure must be depressing if you're single. Single? That's your problem, that your single. Go get a relationship and be happy! Way to dogpile on people when they're down. I say enjoy being single. If a relationship happens, good for you, but don't listen to people that say you're damaged / worse off / going down the drain because you're single. They're just jealous you can travel and play video games wh…

Another way to phrase the original top comment (which, btw, is very deservedly the top comment): "If you can't be happy on your own, there's no way you'll be happy with a partner." Happiness comes from within. Pegging your happiness on something external to yourself - material wealth, social standing, another human being - is giving away all agency you have over your own happiness.

> Another way to phrase the original top comment (which, btw, is very deservedly the top comment): "If you can't be happy on your own, there's no way you'll be happy with a partner."

Why does everyone in this thread like posting definitive statements like this? As if it's universally true?

Life isn't as black and white as people like to think.

I was not much of a happy person before I found my (now) wife many years ago. She helps me deal with life in a way no therapist could ever do (and vise versa, me to her). We're in it together and help each other.

I could not figure out how to be happy on my own. Once I found my partner, I was able to be happy.

This isn't universal, of course. Many people are able to be happy on their own, but it's so strange reading definitive stuff like "there's no way!" when it's just not black and white.

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

#254

Post by Manuel_D » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:29 PM UTC

edgyquant wrote: post #40

throwawayboise wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or equality of opportunity vs equality in outcomes.

I’ve seen this thrown around by Jordan Peterson and his fans but I’ve never met anyone, regardless of how crazy their ideology was, advocate for equality of outcomes outside of basic necessities. I’m convinced it’s a strawman.

I worked at a company that set a diversity target of 33% women in tech roles. In the same all-hands that announced this target leadership said using our definition of a "tech role" 20% of the workforce was women. To achieve this, we gave women two chances to pass the pre-onsite coding interview instead of one. Sure, this isn't as forceful as a hard 50/50 quota but it is pushing the needle away from equality and towards equity. Equity taking precedence over equality is also the basis of affirmative action used by private universities. And progressive taxation.

In fact, I'm a supporter of equity over equality in plenty of instances beyond basic necessities. I think certain avenues to pursuing this are better than others, and that there are some instances where pursing equity over equality is misguided. But yes, I do believe there are instances where pursuing equity - at least in part - is better than exclusively pursuing equality.

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

#255

Post by didibus » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:29 PM UTC

> In that sense at least we are all feminists and men’s rights activists, but nearly 100% of everyone reading this would have felt some emotional recoil from being called at least one of those two things. Why?

I guess I fall outside that range. Do most people actually find themselves having emotional recoil here? I personally feel very much a pro-women and pro-men rights supporter. Do most people not feel like that? But see it as a women vs men and not a equal rights for all kind of thing?

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

#256

Post by mancerayder » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:29 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…

>I think that's the strongest criticism of incels as well; having a romantic and sexual relationship is not a requirement for a happy life.

Strongly disagree, unless you have low testosterone. Nowhere on Earth except in possibly some religious circles do people mentally push away and control to the point of elimination from awareness their sexual desires and not suffer for it in some form. You don't need to be a Freudian to know that the drive exists and gets out, somehow. If you have a low drive, then it makes sense that it would be viewed as optional.

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

#257

Post by throwaway98797 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:29 PM UTC

throwaway8581 wrote: post #197

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)…

Agreed. This is also ancient wisdom. The major religions all maintain that spouses have a duty to sexually please each other.

if one is monogamous then there is obligation or so the bible says.

we modified one but not the other. we reap what we sow.

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

#258

Post by toyg » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:29 PM UTC

michaelpb wrote: post #70

eloff wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly because neither feminists nor men's rights activists want equality, despite whatever they purport to be about. Just like there's a political spectrum with the crazies at the edges of both left and right, there is also a spectrum on gender issues, race, or any other social issue. The crazies are to be found at the edges of that, again on both sides.

The problem with this line of thought is that some of the "crazies at the edge" in the past are the sensible, moderate ideas that you no doubt hold right now. For example, viewing slavery as an evil institution was considered the "crazies at the edge" opinion in the early-mid 1800s in the US, as opposed to the dominant opinion among "sensible" abolitionists that slavery was personal sin that requires a redemption pro…

Both you and parent are right, but you have to acknowledge that extremists and totalitarians do exist.

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

#259

Post by pydry » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:30 PM UTC

spoonjim wrote: post #140

Essentially, what we have right now in the sexual marketplace echoes what we have in the economy... a lot of the sex is being had by a small fraction of the people. The need for sex is perhaps as high as the need for money but nobody talks about this crushing inequality, perhaps because there is no practical way to “tax and redistribute” sex. The problem is worse for men since a man needs a certain set of skills and…

>there is no practical way to “tax and redistribute” sex

This is part of the function of anti-bigamy laws and frowning upon promiscuity, is it not?

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

#260

Post by insickness » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:30 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)…

> dead bedroom situations are always the result of one party being incapable of understanding the other's desire for sex.

Couldn't disagree more. Sexual attraction is not about 'understanding' how your partner feels. A man who is no longer attracted to his wife won't suddenly become attracted when he understands how she feels. Attraction is not a choice. It's not something you can talk yourself or someone else into.