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

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

#351

Post by spoonjim » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

Quarrelsome wrote: post #312

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…

I would argue that recent switches to a "pick up style" of dating app (e.g. Tindr) exacerbates this problem.

For sure. Most heterosexual women would prefer sex every 10 days with a very sexually appealing man who is having sex with 9 other women than having sex every day with an average-looking exclusive Schlub. The latter was their life under the proscription of extramarital sex but Tinder allows them the former.

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

#352

Post by colanderman » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

Kye wrote: post #317

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)…

Strong friendships can involve lots of sex, but it seems like people outside queer communities have a harder time with that.

Not if you're in a sexually exclusive relationship.

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

#353

Post by gsk22 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

mlyle wrote: post #335

void_mint wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but this is the statement that someone pointed out as a red flag, that you disagreed with > 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. Which is basically the exact definition of codependence.

Look-- my life would be crap without my wife. She's awesome and I am much happier in partnered life. I'd survive and have some enjoyment alone, but most of us end up partnered up because it's a serious buff to life fulfillment. That doesn't make us codependent, to know that I'd spend lots of time miserable if unpartnered and without my wife in particular.

There's a big difference between "I am happier with a partner" and "I am miserable without a partner".

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

#354

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:53 PM UTC

corty wrote: post #146

tonyp2121 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you not support your friends through depression?

Because supporting depressed people is depressing and often futile. Mental illnesses can be transmissible that way. Also, supporting a depressed person needs lots of time and effort, and while they are depressed they give nothing back except bad vibes.

You're making assumptions that you won't find yourself in the same state one day where you require the selfless help of others.

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

#355

Post by srean » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:53 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 depends on the attachment style of the person. An avoidant would say 'I want to be independent and no one should take a dependence on me. I feel suffocated if someone does. Nobody likes it".

The other extreme is anxious attachment style. The extreme forms of both are considered personality disorders.

I have lived a significant part of my life being independent, without a partner. But now that I have, I enjoy the interdependence. It is very fulfilling.

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

#356

Post by toyg » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:54 PM UTC

ceilingcorner wrote: post #240

These issues are far more serious than is known and commenters saying “too bad, you don’t deserve to date someone” really don’t understand how ineffective this approach is. You can’t just shame tens of thousands of men into accepting a substandard life. Disclaimer: I am not making any ethical judgments here, just observing. This problem didn’t really exist before for three reasons. One, widespread access to prostitut…

> Personally, that seems something of a dystopian solution to the problem

It's the one with the fewer externalities. Forcing an unhappy couple to stay together can traumatize children, produce widespread violence (another one of those things that were kinda just "accepted" in the past), and even end up in murder.

It would be much more dystopian to force women into distributing sex equally, surely?

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

#357

Post by eloff » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:54 PM UTC

krastanov wrote: post #54

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.

Are you equating reasonableness of the *average* person that self-identifies as feminist and the *average* men's-rights-advocate?

No, because men's rights advocates are a smaller group further to an extreme end of the spectrum. Let's be generous and say it's 0.2 % of the population. Are the most extreme 0.2% of the population identifying as feminists just as unhinged? Could be. I don't think either of us could say for sure, but it's plausible. There's some value judgments to be made there. But there are crazies on both sides of the issue - that's self evident, right?

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

#358

Post by tsm_sf » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:55 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…

The problem is this bizarre set of expectations that's sprung up with some folks. Sex isn't equal. It never has been. It never will be. Think about it for real for a minute.

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

#359

Post by mrweasel » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:55 PM UTC

waythro123123 wrote: post #52

My pet theory is that the developed or post-industrialized world is becoming increasingly two-classed. I have had the privilege of having a decent job (being so-called "economically desirable") and decent education and was able to find someone who I think loves me for who I am, for some definition of "I am". That being said, the "incel" problem concerns me. I think the existence of this entire class of individuals sh…

There was an excellent interview in Danish radio with male/couples therapist, his take was really interesting. There are three groups of men, in his view. The lower class, being uneducated and poor, the upper class, being extremely successful. Both of these group have no problem with the changing male roles or feminism, they just ignore it or it doesn't affect them. They just continue as always and it works for them. Then there is the largest group of men, the middle class. They're told that the male role has to change, or is changing, and they do as they always do, they adapt. The kicker in this thesis is that they're then told that everything is still wrong. That is confusing, angering and leave a large number of men in a state where they no longer care or they develop an anger towards modern society and women.

The solution, again according to this theory, is not to redefine the male role in society, because that was never going to work. Instead we should return to the traditional male ideals, without the negative aspects. In essence to bring back the gentlemen.

Personally I like this theory, because it has practicality, something that is lacking in the idea that men need to evolve, adapt or "find their place in modern society".

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

#360

Post by giantg2 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 6:55 PM UTC

GavinMcG wrote: post #270

tryonenow wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with the definition of equality within the modern feminist movement is that it does not make allowance for the social power that females intrinsically have over men. In particular it completely ignores that, as in the vast majority of sexually dimorphic species, women are (at social scales) effectively the gatekeepers of the bedroom, and this gives females massive influence over male behavior. The dominan…

> the gatekeepers of the bedroom There is no way this can be true. Sex takes two consenting people; there is no "gate" to be unequally "kept" because both parties have autonomy. Trying to shift to "social scales" to escape the central role of autonomy is a nifty trick. But casting individual bedroom decisions as a matter of social equality is to presume a degree of entitlement in the bedroom. After all, we're entitle…

"Trying to shift to "social scales" to escape the central role of autonomy is a nifty trick."

I don't understand this comment. Isn't feminism addressing an issue at social scale, often in areas that include autonomy? Even looking at marriage, you are expected to treat each other fairly.