Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

residentcontrarian.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

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

#671

Post by oarabbus_ »

insickness wrote: post #260
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.

>It's not something you can talk yourself or someone else into.

This seems based in some fantasy land, though. I'd be absolutely stunned if you didn't have at least a few unattractive friends who do very well in dating/relationships/finding sex partners, because they are funny, or charismatic, etc (speaking about male friends here generally but this can apply to anyone).

If attraction was as you described, no one would be attracted to anyone outside of pro athletes and supermodels. Clearly, many normal, non-models are quite attracted to their non-model partners.

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

#672

Post by symlinkk »

a_band wrote: post #77

The correlation of the appearance of this phenomenon with the rise of porn really shouldn't be ignored.

Porn has been around since the 70’s, internet porn since the 2000s. The incel phenomenon arrived in the 2010s, around the same time dating apps took off.

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

#673

Post by ianai »

waterhouse wrote: post #578
TameAntelope wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know we joke about it a lot, but I think there's a serious case to be made that the Internet's ability to connect groups of previously unconnected people might end up literally ending humanity, or at least severely setting humanity back from a human rights standpoint. "Incels" are one example of this that you're pointing out here, where a group of people who've always existed without name are now able to group toge…

> create a feedback loop amongst themselves that results in literally mass murder. I dispute that causation. Mass murderers are extreme outliers that usually have identifiable mental problems, and I would say the primary cause of their behavior is those mental problems, not whatever particular thing they say triggered them. Also, even if you did show that a certain ideological group was significantly overrepresented…

I think the internet can act like an insulating force and for certain people a viscous feedback loop. Like it’s far more easy for certain types of personalities to call themselves “incel” and whine about it on the internet than get out of their bubble and talk to people. The insularly force is clearly amplifying other communities so this is probably “just another” instantiation of the same effect.

Edit-I don’t know the best way to exit this problem. But I’d probably start with telling the disparate groups that their positions are not so abnormal and maybe they would be happier focusing on other things-like hobbies that require time offline. Have your “incel” days and have days you force yourself to do something, anything else than think that.

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

#674

Post by dumbfoundded »

waterhouse wrote: post #578
TameAntelope wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know we joke about it a lot, but I think there's a serious case to be made that the Internet's ability to connect groups of previously unconnected people might end up literally ending humanity, or at least severely setting humanity back from a human rights standpoint. "Incels" are one example of this that you're pointing out here, where a group of people who've always existed without name are now able to group toge…

> create a feedback loop amongst themselves that results in literally mass murder. I dispute that causation. Mass murderers are extreme outliers that usually have identifiable mental problems, and I would say the primary cause of their behavior is those mental problems, not whatever particular thing they say triggered them. Also, even if you did show that a certain ideological group was significantly overrepresented…

New forms of mass communication can certainly create political instability. The connection between the rise of Nazi Germany and the increasing widespread radios in everyone's homes is an interesting link (1)

(1) https://daily.jstor.org/an-affordable-radio-brought-nazi-pro...

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

#675

Post by schnevets »

swiley wrote: post #584
schnevets wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I used to think this (Americans don't have sex because they're shy about it) but the data says the opposite.

I'm curious about what data suggests this, since getting honest answers about sexual activity from the public is a famously difficult challenge.

As an entertaining example, Seth Stephens-Davidowitz's big data book Everybody Lies mentioned a study that asked people in the United States how frequently they had sex, and how frequently they practiced safe sex with a condom. If the resulting data was accurate and projected across the entire country, the United States consume 2.7 billion condoms a year... even though only 600 million condoms are sold in a year.

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/06/our-searc...

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

#676

Post by standardUser »

addison-lee wrote: post #645
standardUser wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your son will likely never be sexually harassed or assaulted, which is something we can't say about most women.

And there it is, your bias is exactly the problem. Per https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics 81% of women experience sexual harassment/assault in their lifetimes along with 43% of men. Please educate yourself and stop spreading the lie that men are not sexually assaulted, it’s incredibly destructive.

Less than half? Seems like my statement was factual, but that didn't stop you from jumping all over it to make some kind of point.

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

#677

Post by johnnyanmac »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #363
toyg wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a function of massive income inequality across countries, though. Fix that, and the incentive for trafficking disappears.

But fixing income inequality would presumably reduce the number of women willing to sell sex, so you're back to square 1.

Fixing income inequality creates more opportunities to perform activities, which leads to more socialization leading to more potential romantic encounters. Hard to think about a spouse when you're making $8/hr but spending 33% of your life behind a counter.

I also wager a portion of the people who feel they "need but can't get sex" may also learn that what they desired wasn't what they actually cared that much about.

In this regard, I guess one can argue that prostitution is a crutch to a much larger problem that may never truly be solved.

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

#678

Post by souprock »

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…

Childcare expense has a natural limit: the income of one parent. I have a dozen kids, and I certainly do not attempt to pay for childcare. The kids have a mother to care for them.

It's interesting to ponder how close people might be to hitting that natural limit. Some have gone over it, perhaps without realizing so. There must be many people who would save money by parenting their own kids.

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

#679

Post by mettamage »

robocat wrote: post #606
toyg wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is no practical way to “tax and redistribute” sex. But there is a way to improve supply: give dignity to prostitution.

Physical sex is not intimacy. Sex work leads to some very strange dynamics, because often the Johns are desperate for intimacy, but they are paying for women that provide zero actual intimacy (because it is usually entirely faked.) I am sure there is some ideal world where prostitution could satisfy emotional needs, but in my admittedly very limited knowledge it doesn't. Prostitution has been legal in my country sinc…

This.

I sometimes walk by the red light district.

One time I seriously considered having sex with a sex worker.

I talked to multiple of them to find a click and I was appalled by all my interaction.

I realized that I wanted intimacy leading into sex.

What they offered: strictly penetrative sex and nothing else.

As I got older, another issue arose: to what extent is intimacy actual intimacy when you are paying for it?

Intimacy implies someone caring about you and you caring about him/her. That suddenly means it has an ethical component of idealism attached to it.

For me anyways.

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

#680

Post by textgel »

michaelpb wrote: post #641
textgel wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask yourself if you or other people would be more comfortable identifying as feminists publicly now as opposed to 5/10 years ago; that'll give you answer 1. As for answer 2, I've shown what basic searches can come up with. "why im not a feminst" might give you what you're looking for.

Not OP, but Answer 1: Yes, it's anecdotal but you definitely see the trend. Answer 2: So I did the Google search as you requested, and read about the book [1]. I hadn't heard of it but it looks interesting, thanks for recommending. From what I can tell, it's central claim is that feminism has an image problem due to it being co-opted by the US right-wing which she calls "choice feminism", and the remedy is a need to…

A full on reading into one particular book is probably going above and beyond (though I cant immediately see anything about right wing co-option on a skim read of that particular one; the general criticism at the moment seems to centre on the radical lefts takeover).

The search for me at least brings a number of articles which highlight common criticisms of the movement such as rampant sexism, advocacy for abolition of basic rights (free speech, right to fair trial etc), general hypocrisy and bad faith action (see the Cathy Newman vs Jordan Peterson interview for a great example of this)

Post reply on HN