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

Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

researchgate.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 806 posts

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#691

Post by lotsofpulp »

dheera wrote: post #688
lotsofpulp wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Because there is a potential underlying motive 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.

> 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?

Hence the purpose of flirting to ensure both are on the same page and accepting of the risks. Consensual-ity and motive may not be easy to objectively establish in the moment, so I am guessing this is one area where societies have evolved to play it safe.

> That's also true of same-sex configurations, though.

The low probability of this, as well as the relative strength differences between an average man and the weakest man versus an average man and an average woman make it not worth worrying about, evidently.

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#692

Post by notch656c »

bastardoperator wrote: post #682
notch656c wrote: post #652

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You walked right into it, that's not my fault. LOL. 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 data…

Yeah just be able to get the world's best neurologist and hope the situation gets better. If it does I'll say after the fact I'm sure no matter what it'd be in sickness and in health and I'm super man who doesn't fatigue. Obviously the impoverished mom who can't even afford to hire a doctor and walks away so the kids won't get bankrupted, well she just doesn't see marriage the same as you. Hell maybe she did all the things you tried and nothing responded, the husband couldn't go back to work after the operations failed and maybe even made things worse, we shouldn't really presume just because someone tapped out that they didn't go as far as you have.

You have even less than an anecdote, and then when you asked me for a response which uses actual anecdotes where it doesn't get better, you suddenly get upset about it.

>You walked right into it, that's not my fault. LOL.

This is just straight up sociopathy. You knew you had an unusual outcome, so you asked for the expected outcome with the trap that yours was a heartwarming but unexpected one. It was never coming from a place of curiosity.

>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.

Marrying someone for this is also transactional if you expect this also of your partner as a condition of getting married. In this case it's like a transaction with an insurance policy built in as par of the transaction. You're just bragging about your particular transaction and terms for insurance.

To anyone else considering this, here's a test if you believe this applies to your situation. Ask your partner if they believe they would "love their partner for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health." If they say yes, tell them you think that's all bullshit and you don't reciprocate the agreement. You'll find out fast whether a transaction happened.

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#693

Post by zozbot234 »

leidenfrost wrote: post #651
GregLan wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are a white person who goes to a developing nation you'll be top 10% while in your country you may be in the bottom 20%

I know a guy who tried to do that, but his desperation traveled alongside him. Here in Buenos Aires if there's something valued as much as looks, is spontaneity. So much, that we have the same words for "going on a date" and "hanging out". Because "a date" sounds like you are looking forwards to it and that's a turn off. You have to read the vibe to see if it's really a date or not. So, as soon as he got some attenti…

Very good point, this whole notion of "asking X out on a date" is an anti-pattern if you're genuinely trying to get to know each other socially. If you want to "date" in a formal sense, do it after the interest has been clearly reciprocated not before. Anything else really is quite creepy, and it's no surprise that people outside the U.S. will mostly reject it outright.

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#694

Post by RajT88 »

poloniust wrote: post #629
RajT88 wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you would like to list some sources for your assertions, I would be happy to demonstrate that they are extremely dubious.

Which parts of my comment do you believe are dubious, and why? If we look at the eradication of female-only spaces, for example, the reasoning behind this is that proponents of transgenderism want women's spaces to be based on self-declared gender identity rather than sex. Where this occurs, it means that formerly female-only spaces and services now admit a mixture of males and females, as they will also include men…

Everyone here can clearly see that you are a sea lion, and not worth debating.

You're not here in good faith. If you were, you wouldn't be making inflammatory assertions from the partisan playbook with no references, and you wouldn't be on here with a burner account. There's another name for that behavior: shitposting.

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#695

Post by Manuel_D »

teolandon wrote: post #431
akudha wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I happen to catch part of conversation between two young, very good looking female colleagues of mine back when I still used to go to office (same cubicle, sometimes I heard things even though I didn't mean to). They were disappointed that they couldn't get invites to some party where rich wall street type guys were going to, aka "catches" (their words, not mine). The funny thing is, the very same office was filled w…

I'm sorry but this comment is missing OP's point, and is instead just feeding into the stereotype of women being gold diggers. OP's comment was talking about the difference between guys who can afford a nice apartment vs guys who still need to live in their parents' home. It was a practical thing, where anyone would want a private space for dating. Your comment took it to a different level, where you're talking about…

Not all stereotypes are untrue. People may engage in the stereotype that men are more likely to commit violent crime - does that invalidate crime stats?

There's ample evidence that women prefer wealthy and higher status men. Income attraction is a widely studied pattern: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01672...

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#696

Post by dzonga »

notch656c wrote: post #359
frognumber wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am very well aware of those assumptions. I've lived in several countries. I've found that things function better, and people seem healthier, in more collectivist societies where there are real, permanent families and communities. To the point of the book, the way things actually were is that we evolved as tribal creatures. We didn't pick our communities, didn't have much choice of mate, and we did need to rely on o…

I would argue society-level collectivism is actually a big destroyer of these families. The phenomenon of say the elderly being disconnected from the younger I theorize is in part due to the fact they extract their social security through violence of the state in taxation rather than through family bonds. The lack of mutual familial reliance destroys the unspoken quid-pro-quo arrangements that held families together.…

no doubt.

take away social security and state pensions and see the birth rate shoot up.

since the benefit and cost is localized. people will be encouraged to have more children i.e spread the risk of getting taken care of in the future by their progeny.

some gvt social programs are necessary - but social security is not one of them. it's one big ponzi

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#697

Post by Zigurd »

astrange wrote: post #680
Zigurd wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i know women get inundated with messages on dating apps, but I would not blame the structure of dating app for the misfortune of some men. The #1 cause of men not being datable is the advice they get from other men. Try listening to women instead. In workplace settings, men tend to speak up whether or not they have something wise to contribute. This communications style carries over into the way men use dating apps.…

Libertarian techbros aren't that common. Most tech people are liberals just like any other college educated group. (Similarly, richer people/political donors are usually liberals and the richer/more they donate the more liberal they are. It's all thanks to education polarization.)

I used to think so. Maybe they have become more visible now. It feels like outgrowing Ayn Rand as an undergrad missed some people lately.

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#698

Post by [deleted] »

scifibestfi wrote: post #321
thwayunion wrote: post #59

The article correctly identifies that lack of intimacy and relationships are serious problems, with sexual loneliness being a related comorbidity (if you will). The comments, so far, predictably drift toward "how do we get everyone laid?" Giving everyone access to sex will not solve sexual loneliness. And, solving (a lot of) sexual loneliness can be achieved without giving everyone access to sex. Anecdotally, I spent…

Even a simple compliment is rare. We could start there. Does the following meme resonate? https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EcNQvJwXgAEqCLI.jpg

[deleted]

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#699

Post by seydor »

rngname22 wrote: post #690
seydor wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'll just repost the relevant part of my comment: "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."

[dead]

Re: Sexual loneliness: A neglected public health problem?

#700

Post by bryanlarsen »

benj111 wrote: post #526
haunter wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So church is a place you can go to hook up and have sex? They seem to be underselling that feature.

Google "Mormon soaking".
Post reply on HN