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

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

#421

Post by creata » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:21 PM UTC

ergot_vacation wrote: post #370

The vast number of people commenting here that are convinced that a happy, healthy life is impossible without a sexual/romantic partner is eye-opening, and a bit horrifying. Other people will not fix you. Trying to drown your problems in a woman (or man!) is no different then trying to drown them in food, or alcohol, or any number of harder drugs. Stop running from your problems and face them.

Mind explaining (a) precisely whom you're talking to in your second paragraph, (b) how you inferred that they're running from their problems, and (c) what those problems are?

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

#422

Post by Igelau » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:22 PM UTC

rc-1140 wrote: post #279

One thing about the post in its entirety, not just the content, that really stood out to me was that there was a commenter "kayla" who behaved exactly in the manner that the author outlined when talking about the "feminist" and "MRA" subgroups. They immediately jumped onto the aggressor's bandwagon, saying that the lowercase-i incels were simply too lazy to fix their problems even though extremely-generalized and dis…

Kayla's suggestion about prostitution was positively revolting. That position seems to hate just about everyone: incels should just go solve their problem illegally in a way that happens to be the antithesis of feminism.

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

#423

Post by 908B64B197 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:23 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…

> 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. They need to pull themselves up from their bootstraps, and "man up", but we also must remember that "man up" is a problematic term that is part of "toxic masculinity".

That made absolutely no sense.

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

#424

Post by odiroot » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

The longer I live, and especially after having read that post, the more I think the civil institution of marriage is a mistake. We would be better off, if it remained a purely religious or traditional ceremony, without the government putting a stack of papers into the equation.

Just let people be happy together; even bound by a promise, if they wish so, but without the external pressure and the fallout in case they fall out of love. Divorces are such a complicated and often-times life ruining experience.

So many people are pushed by their families (or even blackmailed by their partners) to go into a marriage they are often not very sure about, and have no easy way to get out of. It's probably one of the riskiest contracts one can sign.

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

#425

Post by username90 » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

bloak wrote: post #316

twobitshifter wrote: post #136

The average man will go through a period of involuntary celibacy and I don’t believe this is a new thing but we’re now good at labeling. History shows that 80% of women reproduced compared to only 40% of men! https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/women-who-stray/2012... (Note not sure the primary source on this stat, but the general idea is that polygamy was once common leading to fewer men reproducing) We’re doing…

"History shows that 80% of women reproduced compared to only 40% of men!" That doesn't necessarily imply polygamy, and it doesn't necessarily imply "incels". Imagine a society in which women get married at age 16 and typically die during childbirth before they reach the age of 32, and men get married at age 32, if they live that long, which most of them don't, and then get married again when the first wife dies durin…

Women have lived longer than men throughout most of history and in basically every society, so your theory doesn't hold. Childbirth was dangerous but men's work was even more dangerous.

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

#426

Post by GavinMcG » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:24 PM UTC

giantg2 wrote: post #360

GavinMcG wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

There are absolutely places where the social scale is relevant: places where one is entitled to equal treatment.

Incels mistakenly think that the bedroom is one of these places, and that they are entitled to an equal amount of sexual attention as some other man. Thus the "gatekeepers" language when there is no gate.

The social-scale concerns are totally appropriate when it comes to how we construct masculinity and what male attractiveness requires, and feminists are by and large interested in that conversation.

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

#427

Post by scriptkiddy » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:25 PM UTC

thekashifmalik wrote: post #29

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'm not sure I follow; sex and sexual activity are a part of the first level of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Note, it's not intimacy but sex itself. Intimacy lies on the 3rd level.

And what makes you think Maslow was right? Just because someone wrote something down or a belief is held as true in the Zeitgeist does not make it objectively true. There are many things that we hold as "true" which we really can't say are objective fact.

I'm not trying to be combative, I just believe that it's important to question things we believe to be true when we don't fully understand the reasoning.

Admittedly, though I know OF Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, I have no idea HOW Maslow came to their conclusions. So, I just looked it up:

> The most significant limitation of Maslow's theory concerns his methodology. Maslow formulated the characteristics of self-actualized individuals from undertaking a qualitative method called biographical analysis.[1]

> He looked at the biographies and writings of 18 people he identified as being self-actualized. From these sources, he developed a list of qualities that seemed characteristic of this specific group of people, as opposed to humanity in general.[1]

> From a scientific perspective, there are numerous problems with this particular approach. First, it could be argued that biographical analysis as a method is extremely subjective as it is based entirely on the opinion of the researcher. Personal opinion is always prone to bias, which reduces the validity of any data obtained. Therefore Maslow's operational definition of self-actualization must not be blindly accepted as scientific fact.[1]

Doesn't seem like the experiment was very rigorous or even scientific.

The linked article goes on to explain more modern and scientific research on the subject that seems to disprove some of the original hierarchy's assumptions.

[1] https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html#evaluation

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

#428

Post by jfengel » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

scarmig wrote: post #348

jfengel wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The issue is when people conflate "there's no obligation on any woman to listen to you" with "expression of frustration in a public forum is a character flaw worthy of criticism," or when people conflate "blames women for its problems" with "criticizes toxic gender norms enforced on men." Imagine a woman who is frustrated because her partner doesn't do any chores or give any indication he respects her. She complains…

Toxic gender norms hurt both men and women, but we're only willing to consider toxic gender norms that hurt women as a politicized issue.

"Patriarchy hurts men" is a feminist slogan. It gets hundreds of thousands of hits on Google. The front page is full of lefty think-pieces saying that we need to consider toxic gender norms hurt men.

https://www.google.com/search?q=patriarchy+harms+men

The fact that it needs to be said means that not everybody knows it yet. But it means that the ones who are listening to it are the feminists. Feminism is an ally in trying to fix the problems of toxicity towards men, and these threads always bring out lots of men who blame feminism for their problems. If I've accidentally confused you for one of them, I apologize.

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

#429

Post by dnissley » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

thelean12 wrote: post #327

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…

> if you can't get women, it's entirely your fault I'm curious, and this will probably be too curt but I am honestly trying to figure it out: Whose fault is it? Because incels believe it's the women's fault, and this message is the opposite. It doesn't seem productive to tell them that it's society's fault or some other external thing. What are they supposed to do about that? Most men that I know, including myself, f…

I think the answer would go along the same lines as answering the question "whose fault is it that you can't get a job?" when aimed at an identity category such as women or minorities. Basically: society has failed them in some form or other.

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

#430

Post by iammisc » Tue, May 04, 2021, 7:27 PM UTC

nkrisc wrote: post #371

iammisc wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religious couples tend to have the most fulfilling sex lives. Conservative religious couples have the best: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7060099/Highly-reli... Myself, as a highly conservative married man, my findings confirm the daily mail article, esp. when I look at the sex lives of my married friends who were more libertine in their youth. EDIT: A few theories: 1. My wife is not on birth control, whic…

Your experience is different from many others in a few regards. I assume that either you can afford to continue have more children, or you're no longer capable of conceiving. There are many monogamous married couples in the US who must use hormonal birth control or other contraception simply because they can not afford to raise another (or any) child. Childcare is expensive and very little is subsidized by the govern…

My wife and I used natural family planning (ovulation tracking) with great success when we were not having children. We had our first child four years into marriage (conceived quickly). We have never gone more than a few months without conceiving, when we have had sex freely. When tracking cycles, we've gone years.