391–400 of 806 posts
Man: hey baby, want some of this? (Pointing to his crotch)
Woman: why would I want some of that when I can get all I want whenever I want with this? (Pointing to her crotch)
-- It obviously doesn't apply to all women, but that's really what we're talking about here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the problem about 1930s-style relationships, is that a lot more of them were held together by fear and taboo than people would care to admit. Abusive relationships usually aren't known by the public. Someone might try to leave an abusive relationship, but be shamed by the public for not being "committed enough" or even get excommunicated from their church. I'm now happily married, and I hope to remain so for life.…
I honestly don't know which is worse though. The 1930s fear and taboo or the 2020 divorce court take you to the cleaners, TRO issued and banned from seeing your kids and your guns taken away and then tossed in jail because you lost your job and the judge says you still owe support. I think I'd actually take the 1930s and I say that as someone who really dislikes those taboos and social pressures you mention.
And I think a lot of the hostility that does come from divorce starts with the belief it shouldn't happen or "isn't fair". If I accept that my wife has the right to divorce me if I'm a bad partner, if she does, the first thing I have to acknowledge is that I failed as a husband at meeting her needs (or perhaps that we are incompatible in a way that I never could do so). That would be absolutely crushing, but I wouldn't blame her for it, and if I blame myself, I am probably not going to end up communicating in that procedure in a way the court would feel I am not safe to share custody with.
Accepting that both parties have the right to exit, and that a relationship is a process of continual consent changes the entire dynamic.
Also: Child support, or even alimony, is a recognition that in a marriage, the income may be produced by a single party, even if the overall roles and responsibilities were divided equally. If someone is a stay-at-home-partner, they may not be bringing in the cash income, but they are still 50% of the effort of operating that family unit as they tend to take on more responsibilities such as cooking and cleaning and child rearing which all need to be done by someone. When a marriage ends, the low-income partner cannot necessarily immediately shift into self-sufficient career mode, and obviously the child should be seeing the necessary financial support they would have, so the income of the two parents needs to be compared with where the child spends most of their time (and hence, incurs the most expenses).
Fortunatelly I have a wife now, but for me for the longest time the so called "sexual lineliness" was linked with the three facts: 1) I was raised into believing that sex implies serious relationship and vice versa. As in "if we are having sex that means we are in serious relatioinship". As it turned out - this does not work like this for most (many?) people. Turns out yuo can just have a good time and some sex witho…
> 1) I was raised into believing that sex implies serious relationship and vice versa. As in "if we are having sex that means we are in serious relatioinship". As it turned out - this does not work like this for most (many?) people. Turns out yuo can just have a good time and some sex without worrying about 1001 things before you do so. This seems to contradict some view on women's POV here. As in, for women the sexu…
If that truly were the case, you wouldn't see 5% of these hypersexual men monopolizing 50% of sex (as the paper says). Or maybe many women like intentionally putting themselves in harem-like situation, if in exchange they get to have sex with "hot men". Overall, it's a deplorable state of affairs.
The classic formula for hooking up is time and proximity - throw people together in the same space and wait - people will start hooking up. No app can provide this - they are designed with the exact opposite scenario in mind. This is why people meet in high school (4 years)/college(4 years)/at the office (40 years). With the move to remote work in many places we've cut off the office part - where people had the most…
And to the list the once more common community places, like church which pretty much disappearing from modern life (at least in the US and Europe). I'm not religious but more and more I think that church as a community place back then had a postive effect on local communites.
I am a regular reader of Reddit's "Am I the Asshole" and the sheer number of terrible boyfriends/husbands is jaw-dropping. And that's probably always been true, but what has changed is the extent to which women now have agency through having decent jobs and not being social pariahs if they're not married and pregnant by 22. The stuff my grandmother put up with just doesn't fly today. So if the content of AITA is any…
But the people experiencing sexual loneliness aren't bad boyfriends and husbands. They can't even get a significant other or spouse. Counterintuitively, being a disagreeable or even abusive partner is positively correlated with sexual success: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/31/radicalizing-the-roman...
I'll just say:
> being a disagreeable or even abusive partner is positively correlated with sexual success
Citation needed. That blog post does not provide anything resembling evidence of your claim.
For your sake, I hope you're not basing your views on sites like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been running online communities for years and this, as far as I can see, factual. I've read somewhere, maybe multiple times, that most men are emotionally and sexually deprived. That sounds correct given the data I have. I'm ok looking and I feel like I can make women like me. I still struggle sometimes. Many of my friends do much worse than me. I have friends that I find intellectually stimulating, average-look…
It's interesting to me. I have female friends in their 30s who go on tons of dates but reject pretty much all of them for any long-term relationship. The ones they seem to be in to tend to reject them after a couple of dates. I'm not there in those interactions but I wonder how much of it is a mismatch between what you desire in a relationship and who you are attracted to in a person.
Okcupids data showed this in nice clear charts.
The numbers invert as you get closer to 40. Single women at 40 are desperate, single men at 40 have a jaded, and quite accurate, view of the majority of women.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One difference with online dating is that people tend to objective and quantify the other person more easily. In person, there tends to be fewer traits known before getting to know the person. Online, you have a dossier that causes more candidates to be rejected without a chance to get to know then. In some ways this is great because you don't waste your time, or their's, if there's a serious incompatibility. But I t…
I'm not sure that's true. The traits "known" are more subversive. Did you meet at a country/city club? At a gym? An upscale restaurant or bar? Do you have an accent? What are you wearing? What are you drinking? What do your friends look like? How do you carry a conversation? What unconscious body language and facial cues do you communicate? I'm willing to bet that I could reliably predict 80%+ of whatever profile att…
We've become more connected than ever, but we're more singular and selfish than ever. This is worse with generations that have had an internet-connected computer in from of them their whole life, especially in the social media era (studies show). I expect people to be getting more and more neurotic and weird.
I think also that the effects of internet porn really can't be underestimated. There's something emasculating about one of humanity's ultimate drives being sated with a couple of mouse clicks. Then look at what is delivered: it's not sex, it's not even a depiction of sex, it's a depiction of a simulacra of sex. Generally speaking, porn divorces us from our own sexuality. Instead of exploring and developing our own sexuality with others, we're served the depiction of others performing for the camera and we get that in our heads. If you think that doesn't impact your sex life or sexuality I don't know what to say.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly don't know which is worse though. The 1930s fear and taboo or the 2020 divorce court take you to the cleaners, TRO issued and banned from seeing your kids and your guns taken away and then tossed in jail because you lost your job and the judge says you still owe support. I think I'd actually take the 1930s and I say that as someone who really dislikes those taboos and social pressures you mention.
So the experience I've seen is quite different: Family courts today are actually really focused on joint custody, to the extent that I guarantee you a lot of people have joint custody who probably shouldn't. If someone has a TRO and is banned from seeing their kids, there's a good chance a court has a really strong case to believe that person is violent and abusive. And I think a lot of the hostility that does come f…
This varies wildly by jurisdiction, but the burden of proof can be pretty slim and the judges in some jurisdiction have been on the record saying they grant them out of fear if something goes wrong when they haven't that they'll be held responsible.
[0] http://www.ejfi.org/PDF/Nestler_Letterman_TRO.pdf
>Also: Child support, or even alimony, is a recognition that in a marriage, the income may be produced by a single party, even if the overall roles and responsibilities were divided equally. If someone is a stay-at-home-partner, they may not be bringing in the cash income, but they are still 50% of the effort of operating that family unit as they tend to take on more responsibilities such as cooking and cleaning and child rearing which all need to be done by someone. When a marriage ends, the low-income partner cannot necessarily immediately shift into self-sufficient career mode, and obviously the child should be seeing the necessary financial support they would have, so the income of the two parents needs to be compared with where the child spends most of their time (and hence, incurs the most expenses).
This is an interesting monologue but we all know the reasoning by child support. I'm merely pointing out it's a real specter. When I'm married if I lose my job there's no court process and if I have to take a shitty one and spend way less money on the kid then we will adapt; but after a divorce you have an "imputed income" which is what the judge expects you could make. The judge also expects you're spending 20% of that imputed income towards the kid even though if when you were married it could be just 5% and the kid was fine. If I have to take up trucking and the judge says I really could be an engineer and I'm slacking then I could end up in jail. Granted most people making an effort probably aren't going to end up in jail but merely the fact you have potential debtor's prison hanging over your head at all times is a very real concern even in the event it is justified.
To point out the absurdity of child support debtor's prison as currently run, see the story of the guy arrested because he was held hostage in Iraq while working the contract job he needed to work to pay his child support... [1]. The reasoning? He did not mail the support while the captors were pointing a gun to his head. IMO any system where you can be jailed because you didn't make payments because you were taken hostage while trying to earn support for your children is just utterly fucked.
[1] https://greensboro.com/ex-hostage-jailed-in-child-support-ca...
The classic formula for hooking up is time and proximity - throw people together in the same space and wait - people will start hooking up. No app can provide this - they are designed with the exact opposite scenario in mind. This is why people meet in high school (4 years)/college(4 years)/at the office (40 years). With the move to remote work in many places we've cut off the office part - where people had the most…
I would contest this. Don't (EDIT: i m talking about social network apps) apps do exactly this, on a global scale? They bring people closer at all times, have regularity, and even have silly competitions, self-promotion , and all ways for people to 'hook up' with each other.
Of course, in any physical space there is only a limited amount of people so competition is lower and possibly that s why there are more compromises. in a global contest only the olympic athletes win.
And while remote work is certainly going to be a huge factor, things have changed a whole decade before remote work became mainstream