681–690 of 806 posts
> The National Survey of Family Growth data shows that in 2002 the most sexually active top 20 % of American heterosexual men had 12 lifetime sex partners while the top 5 % had 38 partners.3 Ten years later, in 2012, the most sexually active top 20 % now reported 15 lifetime sex partners and the top 5 % of men reported 50 lifetime sex partners. Year | 2002 | 2012 --------------------------------- Top 20% # Partners |…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My wife (in her mid thirties) sustained a nerve injury, couldn't move her leg, lost all mobility, was mostly in bed everyday and needed help standing, a special toilet seat, the whole nine yards. We were told this is a permanent condition. I never left her side or stopped supporting her. I didn't get fatigued, I got motivated and we found one of the best Neurologists in the world. It took a several years and surgerie…
Lol it's hilarious you pretended to ask a genuine question when you already knew the answer for your marriage. In fact you intentionally withheld it as some kind of poorly executed trap. Talk about a bad faith discussion. Not all marriages involve people with the money to continue supporting the children when both rather than just one parent is bankrupted by medical debt, and not all disabilities end with being able…
First you had family that worked in healthcare "I have family in healthcare so I hear the stories.". Now you're able to draw parallels because you get to see the people that deal with others? It doesn't even make sense. I have people that work in the healthcare industry including doctors too. Your evidence is andetoal at best, hearsay at worst. You don't have a dataset, you have stories. So which is it? Talk about a bad faith discussion...
The reality is there are plenty of people that would love their partner for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, there are some interesting papers suggesting that women on the pill prefer less masculine men. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/03/study-wom... Personally that is one of my personal favourite, perhaps not conspiracy theories, but a "wacko" theories that can explain a lot of our modern world.
By interesting papers you mean "paper" singular and it was conducted at a science center with no control. > Target participants were 170 male-female couples (aged between 18 and 73, mean = 35.8, SD = 11.3). All couples reported to be heterosexual. We collected data and images from 333 couples who were visitors to a science exhibition centre and who responded positively to a face-to-face invitation to participate.
"Although this general idea and the research looking into it is still in its infancy, the data that do exist suggest that the pill might influence who you’re attracted to, the dynamics of your relationships, the quality of your sex life, how jealous you are, how you respond to your partner’s face, how sexy you are to others, and your likelihood of getting a divorce."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23528282/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21993500/
https://www.smr.jsexmed.org/article/S2050-0521(16)30022-1/pd...
https://www.scraigroberts.com/uploads/1/5/0/4/15042548/2010_...
https://academic.oup.com/scan/article/11/5/767/1753384
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most people don't feel great after each rejection and so are not willing to put in the work. Don't talk lightly about such things. Rejections are a known cause for suicides. > The only exception is if the person has some kind of trauma or psychological wall and exposure harms them - in that case, I recommend talking to a professional first. It's likely everybody had a rejection at least once. It's also likely a lar…
> Don't talk lightly about such things. Rejections are a known cause for suicides. If being rejected by a potential employer or potential sexual partner results in suicide ideation - I strongly recommend talking to a professional expeditiously. A person in a healthy state of mind can be disappointed by rejection, but ought to realize that a self-fulfilling fear response while interacting with the potential employer/p…
Hmm...
> A person in a healthy state of mind can be disappointed by rejection, but ought to realize that a self-fulfilling fear response while interacting with the potential employer/partner is unhelpful and take steps to mitigate future occurrences.
Imagine you need to fly over a river to save your life, because you're being chased by a maniac with an axe. Would you fly?
No, because you can't. Person in a healthy etc. can realize that thing about fear response, but be unable to control that said response. Somewhat, but not quite, similar to being unable to hold breath voluntarily, for arbitrarily long time.
You might be right about the need talking to professional expeditiously. However many don't, and are ok, even though they pass through quite - to the point of those thoughts - dark area in their life. We know about some unfortunate outcomes of such situations; that doesn't mean all the rest have it easy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I may be totally wrong, but please bear with me: what do you feel about going out? Not for dates but for "honing" some social skills and maybe even creating opportunities (okay less of that but still).
I can't "hone" social skills because I have none. And at my age you can't "get" these skills because in order to get them you need to interact with other people, and in order to interact with people my age you need social skills. Like I commented elsewhere: exposing oneself to more scenarios of rejection can only drive one deeper into misery. Like wanting to cure an autistic child's sensitivity to noise by exposing h…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> you present this as some sort of negative? I'm glad that you formulated this as a question. The answer is no, I presented it value neutral, both by intent and expressed written form. Now that GGP has a search term, he might soon find out more about the concept and also might admit it into his mind as real and true, as I once did.
Mentioned in another post but I think I misinterpreted your statement. Based on the search term, this appears to be a concept held by the incel community. Are you positioning it as true and if so, as a solvable problem or just a fact of life?
Not exclusively. I would bet that many more people who are completely clueless about incelosphere hold that belief. After all, the belief is as old as the advent of mass communication.
> Are you positioning it as true
Yes, I already said that much; also I will consider it true until a preponderance of evidence comes along that blows the pile of current evidence away.
> a solvable problem
That phrase can be interpreted in two ways.
1. Can a person fake being white? I would say, if the goal is a convincing result, then it's difficult for most people because it would involve cosmetic surgery (expensive, non-negligible risk), and ISTR that the skin treatment to make it appear light in colour comes with nasty side effects that cannot be avoided. For a smaller group, suitable contact lenses might be sufficient. Broadly spoken, the trade-off cost/risk/reward seems bad, that's why we don't see much adoption of the practice, but I gauge that solely from canvassing in popular media. I would be very interested in what the sociologists are writing in their scientific journals.
2. Can society be changed to eliminate the JBW bonus? I don't see how, but since it is an entirely social construct, I admit that under the right circumstances, it could happen quickly. Also, as a white myself, I don't have a particular interest to make it happen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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…
> This seems to contradict some view on women's POV here. As in, for women the sexual transaction is big serious deal. And other women learn how to decrease the cost. Women that are fine with hormonal birth control with partners that test for STDs frequently are fine. There is a lot of consequence free sex happening. It doesn't matter that it contradicts a view, your mistake is elevating them as representatives of th…
We probably should improve descriptions, so we wouldn't rely on ones somewhere and then rely on the opposites elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps. But it's also "weird" that it only exists with same-sex. Why is it a cultural taboo for single men and single women to say, hold hands, if they aren't in a monogamous relationship with anyone else, and are doing so consensually? I feel like traditional culture is the only thing that says "you shouldn't do that", which seems equally ridiculous to me.
Because there is a potential underlying motive, and it presents danger for one of the parties due to them being physically weaker. The risk of sending (or the other party assuming) the wrong signal is probably not worth it.
But that underlying motive could be mutual, it could not, the key is consensuality, at any point one party isn't on the same page they can and should say no, this applies to same-sex and opposite-sex configurations, no?
> and it presents danger for one of the parties due to them being physically weaker
That's also true of same-sex configurations, though.
I love how the article compares the unequal distribution of sex partners with the unequal distribution of wealth, because in my opinion that might be part of the cause. I would predict that being able to afford a nice apartment in a good area close to date locations will easily 10x your sex chances. There have been other studies about young men struggling to find jobs that pay well enough for them to become financial…
A weird thing about this is that I think I've had more sex, and met more new partners, in periods when I was unemployed or underemployed. When I've been really poor I've been depressed, which cuts my chances of meeting a new partner to about zero. But when I've been extremely employed I think I haven't had the time or emotional bandwidth for intimate relationships. Or travel: travelers get an automatic +4 bonus to se…
That's probably an effect of small apartments and lots of restaurants.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Replace all the references to sex with food/hunger in your statements - "What is the big deal about food anyway? Why do some guys go crazy if they can't eat? A lot of time and effort for what, ten minutes of deliciousness?" I think perhaps it will make sense? The reason libido is referred to as a 'biological drive' (definition: "an innate motivational state produced by depletion or deprivation of a needed substance (…
it s not a need though, nobody died from celibacy. there are thousands of men who choose to become monks etc forgoing sexual pleasure. it is a drive, but not a need
"Quotes because while you obviously don't need it to survive, the brain feels the same way for some people that it does when you "need" food."