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

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

#851

Post by matheusmoreira » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:11 AM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #463

matheusmoreira wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's on you to improve yourself Incels call this "maxxing". It doesn't seem to be particularly effective for them. > Pushing the blame outwards to some other group for not bending to fulfill your needs is a real problematic stance. Why? Reducing inequality in dating seems like a fair goal to me. People become incels because everyone else rejects them. If that doesn't change, the number of incels will keep growing.

It's not working because they believe the wrong things about why they are struggling to find companionship. It's not just find some stat to max and done, positioning the problem this way is itself part of the problem. > Reducing inequality in dating What does this mean, be specific. I cannot think of anything except absolutely ghoulish ideas that remove agency from women.

> It's not working because they believe the wrong things about why they are struggling to find companionship.

So they don't need to improve themselves, they just need to believe in the right things and suddenly women will value them.

Really?

> I cannot think of anything except absolutely ghoulish ideas that remove agency from women.

And yet it's this agency that created such a thing as incels. Look at data from online dating services, plenty of evidence showing over 80% of men are rejected outright. Do you think this is normal?

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

#852

Post by staybailey » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:16 AM UTC

xiphias2 wrote: post #773

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.

What concretely changed after a year at the gym? Like did you get far more dating app matches? Were cold approaches in a public or social setting better received? Did women start approaching you when they didn't beforehand?

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

#853

Post by reducesuffering » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:23 AM UTC

ceilingcorner wrote: post #842

alpaca128 wrote: post #655

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The issue here is that the idea of “100% consensual” is 100% unrealistic. If working as a prostitute is acceptable and pays 10x the average salary, living costs adjust in reaction, then what is consensual about this? Allowing unhealthy or undesirable behaviors to be economically lucrative doesn’t make them ethically good. To me, the scenario is dystopian because it’s saying we are incapable of managing our own desire…

Are you equally concerned with how many men are (economically) forced into selling their bodies for construction (and other physically taxing) jobs en masse?

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

#854

Post by WalnutBoat » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:24 AM UTC

jjeaff wrote: post #839

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought porn was supposed to make people into sexual deviants, which is it?

A common side effect of porn addiction is that the addict requires more and more extreme situations and stimulus in order to get aroused. So I would say that is sort of turning one into a sexual deviant.

Would love to see any sort of actual studies on this, because I'm fairly confident it's false.

The argument at face value is a slippery slope, like "sugar triggers dopamine response in the brain in similar areas as cocaine, so any exposure to sugar eventually leads to someone consuming sugar at all times"

I think it's much more likely that people, in general, imprint sexual preferences around the time that they are becoming sexual in their teens, and that doesn't change much as they age.

Religion in the US tends to focus on "any exposure to porn makes you an addict," which is why I am assuming this is what you're trying to imply. If you want to play a semantics game "porn addiction is defined as" then I'd argue that the same people are -true- porn addicts at the same rate that people are -true- sugar addicts. So, not saying they don't exist, but are a significantly lower number of the population than US religions would have you believe.

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

#855

Post by monort » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:31 AM UTC

krrrh wrote: post #724

nradov wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exposure to phthalates reduces testosterone in both men and women, and thus lowers sex drive. Phthalates are widely used chemicals, primarily for softening plastic. https://news.umich.edu/reduced-testosterone-tied-to-chemical... That's not the only cause. Increased obesity levels also play a role. Probably other factors.

Widely and freely available HD porn too. It’s easier than ever for people to use it as a substitute, and it reduces the drive to seduce. It contributes to a downward spiral of satisficing. Edit: Getting downvotes from folks in denial. I’m not making this stuff up, college students rarely used to have ED, now porn-induced ED is quite common. Many such cases! [0] [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517…

From review you linked. Clearly this means research is conflicted on this topic.

Viewing Sexual Stimuli Associated with Greater Sexual Responsiveness, Not Erectile Dysfunction https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26185674

Is Pornography Use Associated with Sexual Difficulties and Dysfunctions among Younger Heterosexual Men https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25816904/

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

#856

Post by emmanueloga_ » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:32 AM UTC

That was a very, very, very long winded way to say "I'm sorry about what incels go through". I almost feel cheated to have read the whole thing without finding any substance :-/

The whole post strikes me as an example of how guarded we have become in our opinions... we have to build a fortress around discourse guarding against potential critics and justice warriors.

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

#857

Post by DyslexicAtheist » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:37 AM UTC

corty wrote: post #494

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very glad we're not friends. edit: I just found this meme: https://i.imgur.com/WCzNW77.png and I decided to link it here. People think friendship is something that is built over years because it takes years in order to have finally made it through enough hardship and shared struggle so calling each other friends is justified. This is the literal meaning of having a friend. You know they'll help you even you got n…

> You know they'll help you even you got nothing to give and without expecting anything in return from them. I cannot decide if that is more abusive or more romanticized. If you expect your friends to be there for you without you returning anything, you are abusing them. That isn't friendship, that is exploitation. And if your friend is there for you even though you are incapable of returning anything, it is incredib…

life is swings and roundabouts. having nothing to give in return isn't romantic - it's humbling. it's depressing and devastating the one who has no choice but to accept and I'd rather they get out of their dump than thinking about my expectations. it's more important that they're OK to me than if they give back (which I trust will anyway happen because "swings & roundabouts").

I understand most people are more calculating. My own family who would keep tabs of what they give and receive so to never feeling they're in somebody#s debt. I'm like that in business situations, and to those who I know would do it to me, but not to those who are close enough to consider friend.

> for me, friendship is also very much about knowing the limits of what i should make my friends suffer through.

yes, this very much!

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

#858

Post by xiphias2 » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:41 AM UTC

ceilingcorner wrote: post #838

xiphias2 wrote: post #720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why haven’t these been tested? They were tested and perfected a hundred thousand years ago when humans were living in tribes. In a tribe shaming people for being polygamous was part of the system to keep some checks and balances. With people moving to cities and dating online, those checks and balances are suppressed, and the market balance shifted towards polygamy (few high value man date many women).

I haven’t studied the anthropology, but is it true that people in tribal societies tend to be monogamous?

The usual statistic that we hear from people who study genes is that about half of the men are fathers to women. It's a significantly different statistic from OKCupid / Tinder matches, which is closer to 80-20, and the fact that less young men are having sex than before suggests that it translates to real life.

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

#859

Post by parineum » Wed, May 05, 2021, 5:48 AM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #315

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…

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…

Ironically, I think the internet's connection is causing the problem on both ends of the phenomenon.

Dating apps allow women to expand their dating pool to people they would never encounter in everyday life. I have quite a few female friends and I've been around them while they're swiping around and they are absolutely brutal in a way that's not at all malicious.

Then the regular (male) losers in that system can then all commiserate on 4Chan.

I think a smaller dating pool forced women to give men who _seemed_ less ideal matches a chance and resulted in more successful relationships.

I suspect that both men and women don't have any idea what would actually make a good relationship but they have a "type" that they like. With a limited pool, you could work through everyone of your type in a reasonable time frame. With a larger pool, it can take forever.

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

#860

Post by Pfhreak » Wed, May 05, 2021, 6:06 AM UTC

matheusmoreira wrote: post #851

Pfhreak wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not working because they believe the wrong things about why they are struggling to find companionship. It's not just find some stat to max and done, positioning the problem this way is itself part of the problem. > Reducing inequality in dating What does this mean, be specific. I cannot think of anything except absolutely ghoulish ideas that remove agency from women.

> It's not working because they believe the wrong things about why they are struggling to find companionship. So they don't need to improve themselves, they just need to believe in the right things and suddenly women will value them. Really? > I cannot think of anything except absolutely ghoulish ideas that remove agency from women. And yet it's this agency that created such a thing as incels. Look at data from onlin…

No, you misunderstand. They are optimizing for what they think will get them success, not what will actually get them success.

> And yet it's this agency that created such a thing as incels.

No, incels were not created created because women have agency in who they date. What toxic nonsense.

And also, you still haven't put forward any changes you'd like to see to remedy the situation as you see it. Bring solutions to the table if you think there is a problem.