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

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

#771

Post by coronasaurus » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:06 AM UTC

letonmorri wrote: post #725

coronasaurus wrote: post #698

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2847291?seq=1

The ratio of older women to men: historical perspectives and cross-national comparisons https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10902048/ This paper seems to disagree heavily with you.

Just going by the abstract that you linked, that study seems to only relate to the past 100 years.

And extrapolating this to the middle ages and earlier:

In general, countries with a lower overall life expectancy had a lower number of women per 100 men aged 75+, while countries with higher overall life expectancy had a higher female to male ratio in this age group. A hundred years ago there were nearly equal numbers of women and men aged 75+ in many countries.

It doesn't seem to disagree with me at all.

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

#772

Post by slg » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:07 AM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #739

slg wrote: post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>various quota systems that mandate granting unequal opportunities for otherwise equally suitable applicants in order to achieve an equitable outcome for various groups This is the problem in your definitions. Are you talking about equity of outcome at the individual or group level? You are mixing the two there. No on is advocating equity of outcome at the individual level. People are using equity of outcome at a gro…

I'm quite explicitly talking about outcome at the group level and opportunities at the individual level (as you correctly note, it does not make much sense otherwise). But there seems to be a "definition mismatch" about what "equality of opportunity" means - I'm talking about equality of opportunity and equal treatment for individuals as they are right now at any particular decision point; and this is substantially d…

This goes back to my first comment about definitions. You are defining "equality of opportunity" as "equality". You basically want a meritocracy in which everyone is treated the same. I was defining "equality of opportunity" as "equity". This means people are treated differently depending on their needs. This is the classic fence example.

You admit "equality of opportunity" isn't practical right now due to existing systemic biases. The people fighting for equity would probably say it isn't practical in any foreseeable future. Maybe some day we will correct for systemic biases against certain races or genders, but odds are there will always be some sort of inherent disadvantage for various people. Physical disabilities are one example. That is where equity comes into play. Forcing an employer to install a ramp for a an employee in a wheelchair isn't being "background blind". They are not being treated equally because extra attention and resources are being devoted to them in comparison to their coworkers. However this unequal treatment is just in order to provide them an equal opportunity to overcome a disadvantage their coworkers never experienced. They would not have "equality in opportunity" without an inequality in how they are treated.

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

#773

Post by xiphias2 » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:08 AM UTC

a_puppy wrote: post #510

I'm a guy who has, for my entire life, struggled to form romantic relationships. For a long time, I also struggled to form friendships. So I've spent quite a bit of time thinking about this, and here are my thoughts: The term "incel" is used to mean two wildly different things: - One meaning is "an incel is someone who's single and complains about it". Statistically, a few percent of 30-year-old men are virgins. Some…

There is no easy solution, but there is a simple solution (simple is often hard to do): work out 5x1.5 hours a week for a year (and then don't stop) and eat healthy.

I was incel for a long time because I believed that personality matters with dating (it matters for finding a long term partner, but not for getting laid). The ,,game'' helped incels (including me) to go even more on the wrong path.

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

#774

Post by gautamcgoel » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:08 AM UTC

alpaca128 wrote: post #655

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…

As someone living in a country where prostitution is legal I have a hard time seeing how your argument goes from that to dystopia. It's heavily regulated and controlled, which is better than people doing it anyway without any oversight and the safeties from that. And even aside from that I don't see a problem with it, of course as long as it's 100% consensual. Maybe I'm missing some obvious problem, but the thing cur…

Just out of curiosity, which country are you describing?

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

#775

Post by tomp » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:11 AM UTC

supernovae wrote: post #668

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like we need to address depression and anxiety with something other than drugs.

Shorter work weeks, universal healthcare, affordable housing, open borders, freedom to travel, less consumerism, more time for friends/family...

I'm pretty sure that universal healthcare isn't compatible with open borders. Budgets aren't infinite.

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

#776

Post by johnnyanmac » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:20 AM UTC

at_a_remove wrote: post #172

toomuchredbull wrote: post #124

I think it's fair to say his data shows a high percentage of "incels" are not the incels on the internet that are bad, but just guys who can't get women and they don't deserve our hatred. Similar to the Japanese phenomenon of "grass eaters"

"Not deserving hatred" isn't enough today. Nuance is too much to ask for. Lump them all together and despise them, that is the order of the day.

[Milkshake duck](https://www.vox.com/culture/22350188/what-is-a-milkshake-duc...) has been my favorite and most depressing way to portray and demonstrate this phenomenon as of late.

Not to belittle people speaking out against abuse, but at some points in life you just see people digging through years, decades of internet comments and more just to find a "gotcha". It's honestly exhausting.

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

#777

Post by lurquer » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:26 AM UTC

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.

> Attraction is not a choice.

Yes it is. An orgasm is a powerful reward. You’ll become more and more attracted to the person with whom you associate orgasms.

Sex has a reproductive purpose. It also has a ‘unicative’ purpose. If you avoid masturbation and have sex exclusively with your mate, your mate will become more and more attractive to you.

Obviously...

Keep your mind focused on your mate when you orgasm. Porn, masturbation, and promiscuity utterly destroy this natural unicative feature of sex.

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

#778

Post by fallingfrog » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:29 AM UTC

Ok, I was expecting something caustic and awful but that all seemed pretty reasonable. It does suck being a young man who can’t get anyone to date you. Water water everywhere as they say.

Here’s one thing that might help: women are in my experience often afraid of unattached young men, for good reason. They are afraid of being assaulted, they are afraid of being called “sluts”, they are afraid of men who become clingy and needy. And for good reason. If men’s behavior would change- which takes generations- women’s would too. Men need to be taught how to identify snd deal with their emotions at a young age, like women are, and how to think about the needs of others. That’s to do with upbringing and socialization.

A person who doesn’t know how to be gentle and considerate is scary, especially when he is 6 inches taller and has 30 pounds more muscle mass than you, and it doesn’t take many of them to poison the well so that women just can’t take chances. Every woman has a stalker story- ask her about it.

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

#779

Post by old_fart_dev » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:34 AM UTC

CapCade wrote: post #769

I expect this will get lost in the commotion here, but: The author uses language around sex that I think treats it, subtly but disturbingly, as a commodity. They write of a "withholder/withholdee", of "women who want to provide sexual intimacy" (note the word "provide"), and of "women... putting out". The problem with this framework (which is endemic to the larger culture) is that it runs against bodily autonomy for…

This is an excellent point. I always assumed the emotional aspect of sex was part of the reason the verb "withholding" was used, much in the same way it's used to describe a more generalized "withholding" of love and affection, whether it's as simple as a kind word or hug on upwards to the more carnal. But withholding something implies that thing is deserved or earned, which runs contrary to body autonomy.

Even though he used this language, I thought the author did a pretty good job explaining why sex isn't something that's rarely "withheld" as a means to an end. But our language around love (physical and emotional) and relationships needs work.

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

#780

Post by johnnyanmac » Wed, May 05, 2021, 12:35 AM UTC

the_jeremy wrote: post #728

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have friends who I would not support through depression they aren't your friends then. aquaintences perhaps but not real friends. I'd jump through fire for my friends and know they would do (and have done) for me. but then I also run a tight ship with what I consider a friend. if we haven't gone through some kind of shared struggle together we can never be friends. that's why most men will have trouble making rea…

Sure. At that point, this is just a semantic difference in acquaintance / friend / close friend / best friend. I would argue that there are many people who have zero friends by your definition. I have friends (by my definition) who I'd, say, drive 30 min out of my way to pick them up if they got car trouble, but I wouldn't lend them $10,000. These are people I see regularly and actively make time to hang out with. I…

my old roomate wouldn't even lend me $200 one night, but he was more than willing to basically chauffer me around for a week when my car was in the shop. This included taking me to work 20 minutes north every day. Despite that, he wouldn't take the $50 I offered for gas. Definitely still consider him a friend.

This doesn't mean anything at all to this thread, but your comment reminded me of that. it still bugs me a tiny bit, even if I completely understand and don't blame him for it. I know some people are just extremely picky about money.