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

The Agony of Eros: Dating

ava.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 270 posts

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#211

Post by vmception »

bradlys wrote: post #208

This article speaks a lot from a position of privilege and mostly from a straight woman’s view. The aspect of dating a lot in their 20’s is something most relegated to the most attractive men and most women these days. If you want to have stable relationships - you need to commit to people who are actually interested in you. The reason many women have these bad experiences with men is because they’re all dating the s…

People aren’t willing to have the conversation that acknowledges

1) most men aren't attractive to women at no fault of their own and aren't included in the perceptions of consensually hooking up with or dating men. Its easier to denigrate a man that ever speaks up about a poor experience dating (your profile wasn't good, your game wasn't good)

2) that men have any trouble at all. so a lot of people have withdrawn from that conversation.

Giving that there is a symbiosis involved, the experience of all genders is all part of the same discussion.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#212

Post by vmception »

librish wrote: post #8

I find the discussion of ghosting interesting. If I've gone on a bad date or two I don't specifically tell the other person I don't want to see them again unless they ask me. This allows for a lot more saving face if I run into them in the future (we can both pretend it just fell through the cracks) and is exactly how I want to be treated. While I appreciate the honesty I do find it a little condescending when someon…

Ghosting is abruptly not responding to attempts at communication.

Men are in a decent privileged position where most women to most dates, culturally, wont initiate an attempt at communication. so its very easy for us to just never acknowledge the date because we never sent another text.

But thats not ghosting.

Ghosting is having a great date (or a benign one, or a bad one) and never getting a response again, or even blocked, or not even knowing if your date got home at all but not being in a position to even ask. As another person wrote, it doesn’t have any regard for the psychological consequences. Its more likely I would switch to Liam Neeson Taken mode to help a complete stranger than risk getting myself villified for trying to see if my unresponsive date made it home. The culture broke itself.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#213

Post by id »

durnygbur wrote: post #186
meerita wrote: post #58

The author clearly didn't studied the matter and she's speaking from personal and enviroment-she-can-perceive point of view, no offense with this part. After reading the entire post, I can see she's biased with her own perception on the matter. Reading other articles, who are also biased just make it worse. When you look at the data, you realize the dating world for men is close to doom. Only a small fraction of men…

> These men sustain Tinder economy, for example, as all the algorithms are made just to milk men money just to land some opportunity of attractions. This goes even lower and darker. As a man pays for gold, platinium and gains infinite swipes, one discovers it's mostly profiles of scams, outright asking for money, proposals of findom, some women or fake profiles toying with you purely for their entertainment. A man do…

>A man doesn't even get sex for the money.

What makes you think paying for Tinder gold entitles you to sex?

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#214

Post by CipherThrowaway »

Brian_K_White wrote: post #178
CipherThrowaway wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being knowingly ignorant is less ignorant than being unknowingly ignorant. Over systematization of dating creates illusory knowledge that impedes connection. I've seen how the obsessive-analytic mindset fares in dating. I'll take bumbling along any day.

This article specifically decries systems. The advice not to over-analyse is itself an analasys and a piece of wisdom, which you and anyone you tell it to is better off for knowing. You have improved your and any readers life by becoming less ignorant . Your analasys is actually merely about optimization, specifically over-optimization or mis-directed optimization. And that is just one of the many thhings that are va…

Yes, the article decries some systems. But it's still over-thinking and over-systematizing in it's own way.

People saying "don't overthink it" aren't advocating for ignorance. They are recognizing that over-systematizing and over-thinking is its own form of ignorance. It's a particularly seductive form of ignorance for engineers because we carry tacit assumptions about how systems can be broken down and analyzed. These assumptions are a bad fit for dating and many other non-technical domains such as people management.

In art classes beginners are often taught to "see like an artist." That is, in terms of shape, color and composition rather than objects and logical descriptions. It's not that the logical view is factually incorrect. It's that it emphasizes the wrong sort of knowledge.

>But you know who really does advocate for ignorance? Predators.

This and your "miserable victimhood" comment make me wonder if your views aren't being driven by some personal pain or trauma. If so then it might be worth unpacking your experiences with a therapist. Overthinking doesn't protect you from pain or abuse. It is the opposite if anything.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#215

Post by solenoidalslide »

bradlys wrote: post #205
solenoidalslide wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would that be the goal? Men who have a partner still have the option to pursue sex outside of a relationship. Many simply pay for that type of sexual relationship with no "struggles" you speak of.

This is really not polyamory or non-monogamy in the way you’re framing it. Paying for sex outside of your marriage isn’t really non-monogamy in my book - it’s just sad.

The original argument is that monogamy is in place because men cannot get sex elsewhere. That is obviously not true. The point being that men also desire faithful long-term companionship. The ones who want casual sex or multiple partners still obtain that even in our monogamy-by-law society.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#216

Post by bradlys »

vmception wrote: post #211
bradlys wrote: post #208

This article speaks a lot from a position of privilege and mostly from a straight woman’s view. The aspect of dating a lot in their 20’s is something most relegated to the most attractive men and most women these days. If you want to have stable relationships - you need to commit to people who are actually interested in you. The reason many women have these bad experiences with men is because they’re all dating the s…

People aren’t willing to have the conversation that acknowledges 1) most men aren't attractive to women at no fault of their own and aren't included in the perceptions of consensually hooking up with or dating men. Its easier to denigrate a man that ever speaks up about a poor experience dating (your profile wasn't good, your game wasn't good) 2) that men have any trouble at all. so a lot of people have withdrawn fro…

Men having trouble is shown as not masculine. The dialogue goes: If you were a man - you wouldn't have troubles. By having trouble therefore you are not a man. Thus, you do not deserve respect, to be listened to, etc. You are just a boy, at most. We don't listen to boys.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#217

Post by vmception »

bradlys wrote: post #216
vmception wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People aren’t willing to have the conversation that acknowledges 1) most men aren't attractive to women at no fault of their own and aren't included in the perceptions of consensually hooking up with or dating men. Its easier to denigrate a man that ever speaks up about a poor experience dating (your profile wasn't good, your game wasn't good) 2) that men have any trouble at all. so a lot of people have withdrawn fro…

Men having trouble is shown as not masculine. The dialogue goes: If you were a man - you wouldn't have troubles. By having trouble therefore you are not a man. Thus, you do not deserve respect, to be listened to, etc. You are just a boy, at most. We don't listen to boys.

That is what is said, and also expected by a large distribution of people of all genders.

Reality is that the competition is doing many nonconsensual things at all steps of the way. Its really disgusting (if you care about that at all) and it undermines the handwavy ambiguous logic of “masculine man getting the women”, they are saying that a masculine person can get into or out of any situation with using force, the implicit threat of force along with resolve to use it, and that this concept alone is appreciated to create sexual desire. That's impossible to reconcile in a consent driven and collaborative world.

Many/most men are not attractive, when apps are involved the inputs are still mostly visual, compared to the inputs possible in person that are also relevant across genders. Women are with the same men and build their own frustrations off of the same few men they are predominantly being with.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#218

Post by Thetawaves »

immigrantheart wrote: post #189
jawarner wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really think dating used to be easy? I fail to see how "dating apps and social media" is the direct cause of the problems you mention, or that any of those problems are new to society.

yes, I think dating used to be easier.

Think again. The age of Tinder has made this vastly easier - not harder.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#219

Post by xyzzy4747 »

virtualritz wrote: post #190
xyzzy4747 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Berliners are a weird group culturally. This is the same bunch of people that went on an anti-Semitic and racist bender and massacred millions of people across Europe. I don’t think they are a good example of how life should be lived. Weird/crazy people being weird. Everything is acceptable to Berliners.

I can't find that funny. I have Jewish ancestry and never met my grandfather because of those criminals. I assume you are joking because comparing Berlin 2022 with Berlin during the third reich can only either be a joke or an absence of basic understanding of European history between now and then so flabbergasting that it borders on imbecility.

The criminals which had widespread support across Berlin and Germany. It was also only a couple generations ago.

I’m also of Jewish heritage and multiple members of my extended family were wiped out.

Like I said, Germans and Berliners particularly seem very tolerant of all sorts of extremist ideas. I count “open relationships” as one of them.

It’s like who cares about why things are traditionally the way they are, let’s throw out the old ideas and try new crazy ones. Whether it’s reinventing relationships or sexuality or murdering millions of people. Anything goes.

Re: The Agony of Eros: Dating

#220

Post by mgh2 »

bradlys wrote: post #208

This article speaks a lot from a position of privilege and mostly from a straight woman’s view. The aspect of dating a lot in their 20’s is something most relegated to the most attractive men and most women these days. If you want to have stable relationships - you need to commit to people who are actually interested in you. The reason many women have these bad experiences with men is because they’re all dating the s…

Makes me remember of this controversial article: https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/why-women-lose-the-dating-g...
Post reply on HN