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

61–70 of 1001 posts

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

#61

Post by joshuamorton »

treesrule wrote: post #18
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 and sexual relationship is not a requirement for a happy life. I don't have the all data off hand (see some citations below) but I believe they say married men live longer, commit less crimes and are happier. So yes in some sense, can you be happy if you are not married however, is it almost certainly harder. I assume you would find similar data for not having a romantic parter. You, a human, are…

There's a correlation/causation issue here.

The GP pointed out that the relationship described in this has red flags because the relationship alone is the source of happiness. It would lead to a happier, possibly longer lived, less criminal person.

You seem to be implying (and I don't think this is intentional) that close personal and romantic relationships [for straight men] == a wife. But that doesn't necessarily need to be true. Maybe for romance, but certainly not for close personal friendships.

You're correct that a person isn't an island, but the focus on single romantic partner may be to the detriment of other forms of relationship which are still hugely valuable health wise.

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

#62

Post by ayyy »

thekashifmalik wrote: post #29
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…

I'm not sure I follow; sex and sexual activity are a part of the first level of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Note, it's not intimacy but sex itself. Intimacy lies on the 3rd level.

You might be confused because Maslow thought sex was on the same level as food and sleep.

Of course, today, the idea that men need sex simply because they are alive is repulsive.

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

#63

Post by Supermancho »

the_af wrote: post #45
Supermancho wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is basically a red flag for any relationship. If the only thing making or allowing a person to be happy in life is their partner then something is wrong When you get older, a partner (or children) are important to keep you going. Your body will fail you. Your mind will fail you. Your life will end and (statistically) it will be a long downward slope. Binding yourself to the right person keeps that slope more e…

You have a point, but in this case the author of the article says: > I was a bit of an oddity in that I was anticipating marriage since early adolescence; that outsized-value for relationships came with what I feel were comparably overgrown feelings of loneliness. 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 hap…

> So it's not old age, but youth in his case that was unhappy until he met his wife.

Some people feel the existential dread before it is realized. This is shared by both sexes and sometimes expressed at absurdly young ages without prompting.

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

#64

Post by giantg2 »

Phrodo_00 wrote: post #50
throwawayboise wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or equality of opportunity vs equality in outcomes.

Genuine question: Isn't this equivalent to equity vs equality?

Exactly. There's a good fence and box example in here.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/equality-vs-eq...

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

#66

Post by ryandrake »

edgyquant wrote: post #10
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>having a romantic and sexual relationship is not a requirement for a happy life. It is for many, many, many people.

Yeah people who say this are so wrong, companionship and a significant other is a required for a fulfilled life for a majority of people. We evolved to have this, and most people need it. You shouldn’t depend on one for happiness, but there is nothing wrong or weird about longing for one.

It's kind of like a rich person telling a poor person "hey, money isn't everything!" True, but it won't make the poor person feel any better.

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

#67

Post by thepasswordis »

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…

>This is basically a red flag for any relationship.

No it isn't.

My grandparents, who were married for 60 years had this mentality. My wife's grandparents, who were married for a similar amount of time, also shared this mentality. My wife's parents still share this mentality (and are obviously completely devoted to one another, which you will notice if you spend about 5 seconds with them). My parents divorced, which has had an incredibly destructive effect on my family, almost certainly as a result of my father's belief that he needed a life that was independent of our family, and that he could somehow live "independently" and still fulfill his role with my mother as the leaders of our family unit.

Go talk to some elderly people: the ones who have been in marriages that have lasted the entire lives are generally completely devoted to one another, and as an extension their families. Unsurprisingly, those families seem to be generally full of happy, healthy people in their own happy, stable relationships.

There is a bizarre (and imo destructive, and toxic) idea that seems to be running through tech especially that devotion to your partner is rooted in "jealousy". It usually leads to "maybe you guys should become polyamorous. What are you jealous?"

And then, predictably, that leads to relationship collapse, heartbreak, and bitterness about 100% of the time. Shocking.

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

#68

Post by dnautics »

edgyquant wrote: post #36
Pfhreak wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the flip side, however, no one owes you companionship or a relationship (platonic or not). If you are struggling to fulfill that need, it's on you to improve yourself through building skills, seeking therapy, finding appropriate medications, or whatever else. Pushing the blame outwards to some other group for not bending to fulfill your needs is a real problematic stance.

Indeed, you shouldn’t based your identity around it or blame others (e.g. incels) but at the same time you shouldn’t be made to field there’s something wrong with you for wanting it. Like most things there is a balance to be found. I think the stars every day that I failed my way into relationships for most of my life and I can’t imagine the struggle of these individuals.

I don't think the identity of inceldom is necessarily blaming others for being lonely (though probably most incels do), but being angry at society for trying to sell an incorrect narrative of relationships.

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

#69

Post by tayo42 »

temp667 wrote: post #27

Is this too simplistic? Take care of yourself - health (mental and physical etc). Sex work should be legal if there is a "market failure" as the article argues. If someone doesn't want sex in a relationship and other person does - any way to negotiate something - ie, get on tinder for one person or whatever if the issue isn't so critical to break up over? Is porn a problem? ie, perception everyone getting lots of cra…

Kind of interesting, I really have no idea what peoples sex life is like on average. Idk how you can find out, no one wants to talk about it. So either porn or the rare few that do want to talk about it. But those few are going to be such outliers they're likely not average or just lieing

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

#70

Post by michaelpb »

eloff wrote: post #9
giantg2 wrote: post #3

"It’s 2021, and it would be pretty hard to find someone who would come out and say that women deserve to be treated worse than men by default, and similarly difficult to find someone believes men shouldn’t have rights. In that sense at least we are all feminists and men’s rights activists, but nearly 100% of everyone reading this would have felt some emotional recoil from being called at least one of those two things…

Honestly because neither feminists nor men's rights activists want equality, despite whatever they purport to be about. Just like there's a political spectrum with the crazies at the edges of both left and right, there is also a spectrum on gender issues, race, or any other social issue. The crazies are to be found at the edges of that, again on both sides.

The problem with this line of thought is that some of the "crazies at the edge" in the past are the sensible, moderate ideas that you no doubt hold right now. For example, viewing slavery as an evil institution was considered the "crazies at the edge" opinion in the early-mid 1800s in the US, as opposed to the dominant opinion among "sensible" abolitionists that slavery was personal sin that requires a redemption process (like drinking). In some cases, this change of sentiment can take only a couple decades: See opinion polling on gay marriage or weed legalization.

This is why both-sides-ing or argument to moderation is not really a useful or convincing rhetorical device.

Post reply on HN