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

On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness

residentcontrarian.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

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

#291

Post by ceilingcorner »

rc-1140 wrote: post #279

One thing about the post in its entirety, not just the content, that really stood out to me was that there was a commenter "kayla" who behaved exactly in the manner that the author outlined when talking about the "feminist" and "MRA" subgroups. They immediately jumped onto the aggressor's bandwagon, saying that the lowercase-i incels were simply too lazy to fix their problems even though extremely-generalized and dis…

If the model did not accurately predict the hostile reaction, it was not a useful model.

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

#292

Post by guerrilla »

openasocket wrote: post #148

> if 51% of young men are single and only 31% of women in the same age bracket are, that implies something is up So that statistic really confuses me, how could that be the case? The data seems to imply a significant number of women are dating men far older than themselves, which just doesn't seem true to me. I'm wondering if that is a sampling error or different genders are interpreting the question differently. It…

> So that statistic really confuses me, how could that be the case? The data seems to imply a significant number of women are dating men far older than themselves, which just doesn't seem true to me.

Having just read a bunch of research coming from psychology on sex differences, this is very plausible to me. Most studies indicated that women wanted to date someone a few to ten years older while men wanted to date someone few to ten years younger.

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

#293

Post by colanderman »

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.

I don't think I implied that it was. But someone in an exclusive relationship who no longer is willing to fulfill one of their partner's basic needs, has an obligation to work with their partner to find a way to fulfill that need. Otherwise you are just denying them something they are incapable of not needing.

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

#294

Post by wizzwizz4 »

thepasswordis wrote: post #228
void_mint wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're kind of just arguing past the people in this thread ("these relationships in my life are healthy and not codependent, so codependence is not a problem in relationships"). I would also argue that your takes offer the same "armchair psychoanalysis" you're arguing against, fwiw. > If we're redefining romantic devotion as an "addiction" then I think we have officially lost the plot. No one is redefining anything.…

When you use the word "codependent", what do you mean?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codependency#Individual_dynami...

> A codependent is someone who cannot function on their own and whose thinking and behavior is instead organized around another person, process, or substance.

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

#295

Post by zerkten »

benlivengood wrote: post #93
tachyonbeam wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one bitter truth about life: (almost) everyone needs some amount of physical intimacy to be happy, but it's not something anyone is entitled to. Those of us who have access to that are privileged. I agree with the author though. IMO the existence of so many "incels" is some expression of a real societal problem. Many young men are suffering, and we don't acknowledge their suffering as genuine. We just tell the…

At least in the bay area there are plenty of cuddle parties for platonic physical touch. Feminism has a pretty convincing answer to the problem like I edited my original comment to include. Toxic masculinity is the social exclusion of deep emotional relationships between men, including the "suck it up" culture. The key is that only men can really participate in that healing because it's entirely a problem between men…

> At least in the bay area there are plenty of cuddle parties for platonic physical touch.

I never knew such a thing existed until you posted this, and perhaps I could have done with this at earlier points in my life. My receptivity would have varied greatly at different times though.

Fundamentally, I'm not sure it would have helped me as much as finding a therapist and talking about this stuff. Now that I'm out of the rut it would be much easier to approach a cuddle party.

Men struggle to see therapists as part of the "suck it up" culture so it's extremely difficult to get out of the existence once you are part of it. The system is self-protecting and does things to embed people deeper into the anti-feminist rut.

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

#296

Post by d0mine »

cushychicken wrote: post #174
landryraccoon wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man this thread sure must be depressing if you're single. Single? That's your problem, that your single. Go get a relationship and be happy! Way to dogpile on people when they're down. I say enjoy being single. If a relationship happens, good for you, but don't listen to people that say you're damaged / worse off / going down the drain because you're single. They're just jealous you can travel and play video games wh…

Another way to phrase the original top comment (which, btw, is very deservedly the top comment): "If you can't be happy on your own, there's no way you'll be happy with a partner." Happiness comes from within. Pegging your happiness on something external to yourself - material wealth, social standing, another human being - is giving away all agency you have over your own happiness.

> Happiness comes from within.

It sounds good but it is BS e.g., money won't make you happy but the absence of money would make unhappy many people.

You can try to become Stoic or Buddhist monk but it is not the natural state for most humans.

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

#298

Post by textgel »

sudosysgen wrote: post #236
textgel wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You believe in quotas, you believe in equality of outcome. In fact I could be inclined to agree with you in some ways; its more accurate to state that progressives don't believe in equality of outcome in much the same way as they don't really hold any disdain for racism/sexism or any of the other causes that claim to champion but they like the power that comes from doing so. For example no progressive has any issues…

I don't believe in quotas. I don't think people from every different group should do the exact same in every job. I don't think that quotas are an effective way of dealing with inequalities either. I do believe that roughly speaking, for an equal amount of work, black and white people should have similar salaries, for example. Something that is not the case today. This is a disparity that can't be explained away by c…

Perhaps you don't, but for progressives it remains a core part of their ideology and one that can't be no-true-scotsman-ed away, now that the belief has become publicly embarrassing to have supported.

And the same goes for your opposition to the gender gap in nursing; as demonstrated by the mysteriously absent global-push to rectify the issue.

Funnily enough I seem to recall it being the countries with far poorer track records on "equality" that tended to produce the higher number of female engineers; and that (for example) scandinavian efforts towards "equality" seemed to have quite the opposite result.

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

#299

Post by Manuel_D »

openasocket wrote: post #262
nextlevelwizard wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about second study or what flaws they had, but that definitely is possible if: A) the men in the study are having "side chicks" i.e. in sexual relationship with multiple women at the same time. B) women are more selective with whom they sleep with i.e. they rather not have sex than have sex with a "loser". It only doesn't make sense if everyone are in monogameous relationships and everyone has sex as oft…

So your explanations for why men might have more sexual relationships than women on average is flawed, none of those reasons would change the averages. Imagine if you had 5 men and 5 women, where 1 man had a sexual relationship with all 5 women and the other 4 men had no sexual relationships. The average number of sexual relationships for women would be 1, because each has a sexual relationship with the one man. The…

"Average" can mean median, not mean. If 10 men all have 3 sexual relationships, and 7 women have 1 sexual relationships and 3 women have 10 sexual relationships it evens out.

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

#300

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

the_jeremy wrote: post #35
benlivengood wrote: post #4

> I got absurdly lucky when I found my wife, but I spent every day without her more or less miserable. It’s arguable she’s the only reason I’m able to be happy. I imagine some of these men are similar to me in the loneliness and not as lucky in finding someone, and it’s impossible for me to not feel something. This is basically a red flag for any relationship. If the only thing making or allowing a person to be happy…

> having a romantic ... relationship is not a requirement for a happy life Do you think having friends is a requirement for a happy life? It's not strictly necessary, but they are a positive factor, and most people will not be happy entirely devoid of friendship. Having a partner is a friend you commit to and are closer with than other friends (generalization, sure). I have friends who I would not support through dep…

> 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 real bonds once they leave their teenage years and early 20ies behind. not much new happens (such as puberty) that you struggle through as a group. try to make friends in your 40ies that are as strong as your oldest friendships and it'll be pretty much futile to get anywhere. it's even worse: trusting somebody at that age to become a close friend is a natural red flag for most men. the smell of danger is too high. you're meant to stand on your own feet with that age and better be used to (or even enjoy) being alone (if you don't have a partner)

Post reply on HN