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

Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

ifstudies.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 88 posts

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#31

Post by PurpleBoxDragon »

>In other words, incels are right to see themselves as part of a novel and fairly extreme change in our society's sexual behavior, with a growing share of sexless young men.

While a lot of it, including the very name, revolves around sex, I think it is important to consider the lack of emotional intimacy such relationships provide and if there is any correlation between lack of any romantic partner ships and lack of close friendships. Completely lacking both would indicate a very isolated individual, which isn't good for mental health.

Also, most the data used looked at no sex within the last year which is quite different from never having had sex. At least in the part of society I'm familiar with, there is a massive difference in social status between a guy who just has bad luck dating, and someone with the label of virgin (especially once you leave young adulthood).

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#32

Post by ravenstine »

dsschnau wrote: post #20
thrlskdjfa234 wrote: post #17

I think this misses the mark though. The main thesis of incels is basically that regardless of all other factors people can be so horribly ugly that no one in the right mind will ever desire them. Most of them don't fall into that bucket and have other issues going on, but objectively...is that idea wrong? I'd like to see the study address something like indian men under 5'4 (a strong incel demographic) and see how m…

Yeah it is wrong

Why?

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#33

Post by bitL »

mfoy_ wrote: post #28
bitL wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incel is a generic term for involuntarily celibate people. Volcel is for voluntarily celibate people. Both considered weird and unnatural by majority. Don't conflate it with some organized group that reused the name, that would be a pretty big scientific mistake, likely politically motivated.

I'd argue that "incel" is a specialized label, just like "antifa". If you identify as an "incel", that's a more loaded point than just saying you are "involuntarily celibate". Similarly, you could say you are "against fascists" without implying all the connotations that go along with saying you are an "antifa".

Could be now getting more specialized/loaded, as the non-radicalized majority that could have been labeled by 'incel' label would probably like to distance from it (in a 'leave me alone!' way) - I guess Urban dictionary will have a term for them soon. Still, in the past few years 'incel' was just 'involuntary celibate' and grumpy about that.

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#34

Post by sexlessnashamed »

maybe this is a call for help and I get HN us probably the wrong place but I haven’t had a girlfriend in 15yrs and yes that means no sex in 15yrs.

Im sure I have tons of issues. If im being defensive I’d say it’a juat bad luck. There’s been plently of women that have been interested in me and some I’ve been interested in but none where we were interested in each other. It doesn’t help that I’m a geek engineer so there are no women at work and most geek meetups are 90-95% men. Sure I go to a few non geek meetups but of course I almost never meet someone there I think I have anything in common with.

I also have this hang up that if I know the woman is not going to be long term I won’t sleep with her. The reason is in my experience, at least for my type of girl, they are always hoping for LTR even if they say short term is ok so if I already know I’m not really interested then it feels deceitful. And Im also not looking for short term.

so, I’m always hopeful I’ll meet someone but that hope is now at 15yrs.

Have had 6 LTR before I was 35 including one short marriage

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#35

Post by turc1656 »

dsschnau wrote: post #8

If you're not aware 'incel's are the woman-hating group so vile they were kicked off reddit and one of them committed the van attack in Toronto recently.

I was not aware. Never even heard the term until now. At first read, I thought this might have been in some way related to, or an offshoot of, MTGOW. However, based on reports of actual, extremely serious violence and being so bad they are booted from Reddit, I imagine they are not related at all.

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#36

Post by CodeMage »

bitL wrote: post #19
dsschnau wrote: post #8

If you're not aware 'incel's are the woman-hating group so vile they were kicked off reddit and one of them committed the van attack in Toronto recently.

Incel is a generic term for involuntarily celibate people. Volcel is for voluntarily celibate people. Both considered weird and unnatural by majority. Don't conflate it with some organized group that reused the name, that would be a pretty big scientific mistake, likely politically motivated.

That ship has sailed the moment they decided to name themselves "incel", as opposed to "involuntarily celibate". Orwell explained the effect nicely in "The Principles of Newspeak":

It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite picture of universal human brotherhood, red flags, barricades, Karl Marx, and the Paris Commune. The word Comintern, on the other hand, suggests merely a tightly-knit organization and a well-defined body of doctrine. It refers to something almost as easily recognized, and as limited in purpose, as a chair or a table. Comintern is a word that can be uttered almost without taking thought, whereas Communist International is a phrase over which one is obliged to linger at least momentarily.

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#37

Post by Buldak »

thrlskdjfa234 wrote: post #17

I think this misses the mark though. The main thesis of incels is basically that regardless of all other factors people can be so horribly ugly that no one in the right mind will ever desire them. Most of them don't fall into that bucket and have other issues going on, but objectively...is that idea wrong? I'd like to see the study address something like indian men under 5'4 (a strong incel demographic) and see how m…

I take the article to dispute the incel premise that a majority of women only have sex with a minority of men. My impression is that this asymmetry is crucial, because it underwrites the narrative that sexlessness is largely a problem for men and not women; and that women are in some sense blameworthy for this state of affairs. Maybe incels are right about there being a minimum threshold of attractiveness, but that only matters to their sense of aggrievement if the threshold is higher for men than for women.

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#38

Post by bitL »

CodeMage wrote: post #36
bitL wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incel is a generic term for involuntarily celibate people. Volcel is for voluntarily celibate people. Both considered weird and unnatural by majority. Don't conflate it with some organized group that reused the name, that would be a pretty big scientific mistake, likely politically motivated.

That ship has sailed the moment they decided to name themselves "incel", as opposed to "involuntarily celibate". Orwell explained the effect nicely in "The Principles of Newspeak": It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite p…

I think the main difference between that Newspeak example and them is that the Newspeak version has some intentional formulation in order to be simpler to pronounce whereas the 'incel' term seems like something that a 4channer would conjure while on a creative night filled with desolation, and then just picked up organically by those that would love to use it for shaming purposes first, maybe later in a self-parodizing way by the people it originally pertained to? Then somebody takes it way too seriously and the rest of us are left facepalming, wondering what has just happened?

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#39

Post by nqzero »

CodeMage wrote: post #36
bitL wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incel is a generic term for involuntarily celibate people. Volcel is for voluntarily celibate people. Both considered weird and unnatural by majority. Don't conflate it with some organized group that reused the name, that would be a pretty big scientific mistake, likely politically motivated.

That ship has sailed the moment they decided to name themselves "incel", as opposed to "involuntarily celibate". Orwell explained the effect nicely in "The Principles of Newspeak": It was perceived that in thus abbreviating a name one narrowed and subtly altered its meaning, by cutting out most of the associations that would otherwise cling to it. The words Communist International, for instance, call up a composite p…

"the moment they decided to name themselves"

this isn't really a choice these days. the modern mind doesn't have time or attention for something as unwieldy as "involuntarily celibate". even comintern seems a bit long. we live in a world dominated by memes

the only other likely moniker this group could have ended up with today is "involuntarily fucking celibate"

Re: Male Sexlessness Is Rising, but Not for the Reasons Incels Claim

#40

Post by bitL »

dsschnau wrote: post #13
amriksohata wrote: post #11

As a animal why would I need to goto the effort of pleasing the opposite sex if I get all the gratification for free with porn and without the stresses and hassle, of an expensive marriage and nagging?

Its because you don't, and you sell yourself short if you think you do.

It's difficult for regular guys to experience mindblowing sex with a woman that is giving them everything like they see in movies - they should be happy if they get their 5-10 minutes and then move on. So what they see in porn they never get to experience in real life and it might be significantly more enjoyable to them than the real, yet average thing that is available to them. I guess that also explains sudden interest in realistic dolls (can't shake the pathetic feeling from that). Some people here do experience the jackpot; if they are smart they don't talk about it, the rest is just theorizing what if.
Post reply on HN