On incels, dead bedrooms and the hard problems of loneliness • Hacker News Board

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

#921

Post by devchix » Wed, May 05, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

throwaway1282 wrote: post #846

mettamage wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. I sometimes walk by the red light district. One time I seriously considered having sex with a sex worker. I talked to multiple of them to find a click and I was appalled by all my interaction. I realized that I wanted intimacy leading into sex. What they offered: strictly penetrative sex and nothing else. As I got older, another issue arose: to what extent is intimacy actual intimacy when you are paying for it?…

I've made the plunge and become a "John" a few times now, always in other countries where sex work is either legal or tolerated/quasi-legal. I must say the experience varied a lot. About half were mechanical and just felt like they were trying to get my money. That feels pretty hollow. But I've also had some really great experiences where I felt like we had a genuine connection. I grant that this is not "real" intima…

I've finished my 2nd viewing of Blade Runner:2049; the replicant K buys an AI(-ish) holographic program that presents itself as a beautiful, loving wife, her name is Joi. Think about that, robots buying robot love (I know it's a movie, work with me.) Comes the turning point, they have to run. Joi has been a constant companion to K all this time, if the bad guys get access to her "memories", they have access to everything K ever did, saw, everywhere he went. You have to destroy the console, she said. But that means if anything happens to the remote, you'd be destroyed, gone forever, he said. Break the antenna too, she said.

On first watch, I thought, awww, semi-sentient AI fumbling toward love. On second watch, I thought, there's nothing here that replicant K doesn't want. He wants to destroy the console. He wants to destroy the antenna. That it came from her voice doesn't change that, especially not when the advert for Joi - a Wallace product - is "Everything you want to see, everything you want to hear." There's no AI in love, there's only K, has been all along. Joi is an extremely well-adapted product.

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

#922

Post by BeFlatXIII » Wed, May 05, 2021, 2:22 PM UTC

screye wrote: post #364

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…

>Lonely? Make strong friendships! Poor? Get rich? Self-fulfilling prophecies are futile. > romantic and sexual relationship is not a requirement for a happy life We have proof of various intelligent animals, domesticated and wild, that display signs of depression, loneliness and self-harm when separated from their bonded partner. If anything, the need for intimacy and romance are central to life as we know it.

Do they display those distress behaviors before they have any bonded partner or do they only emerge in grief after the loss of the partner?

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

#923

Post by eloff » Wed, May 05, 2021, 2:25 PM UTC

krastanov wrote: post #275

textgel wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering the year on year decrease in women who identify with the movement, its fairly clear anyone who would describe said movement as "reasonable" would no doubt hold the traits inherent in the movement that so many find despicable.

You are making some pretty wild misrepresentations of reality: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/07/07/a-centu... The closest thing I can find to your interpretation is that women of color are less probable to adopt the term "feminist" because they are less probable to feel the movement has done enough for them. I do not know who has convinced you of an alternative definition of the word, but feminism me…

In defence of the OP, I've also heard that less women are identifying as feminists because they feel the movement has lost its way somewhat. It seems like there's some debate if that's true or just wrong things that people repeat. I've never seen numbers one way or another - and your link doesn't present numbers either, it talks about gender equality not whether more or less women identify as feminist.

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

#924

Post by throwaway8581 » Wed, May 05, 2021, 2:28 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #881

throwaway8581 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. This is also ancient wisdom. The major religions all maintain that spouses have a duty to sexually please each other.

Not really. In many of them it's just about having kids.

At least all the Abrahamic religions, which I'm most familiar with, emphasize the good of sexual pleasure between spouses. That sex is only for procreation and not pleasure is a common misconception of the Christian view.

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

#925

Post by 2lwxxtj » Wed, May 05, 2021, 2:57 PM UTC

Pfhreak wrote: post #861

2lwxxtj wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yes, and it's shared by nearly everyone. Not really. If you're talking specifically about whether an unmarried man that fits some particular criteria is owed a wife, most people in the western world at this point in time would agree with you. But that's far from universal. >The alternative is that you believe someone does owe you a relationship, which is anathema to anyone who values individual liberty and freedom a…

So... Oppress women is the solution you are proposing here? Why have you gendered it at all? Why do women have to face social stigma and not men? What about gay relationships, presumably you'd apply the same thinking (en route to a marriage or married)? What about poly relationships? > I think from society's perspective, my wife should owe me a relationship. I'm going to assume you mean owes you a supportive, caring,…

>So... Oppress women is the solution you are proposing here?

If that's what you want to call shaming them for certain behavior, yes.

>Why have you gendered it at all?

Because women are, on average, different from men, and, on average, exhibit different tendencies. Different measures are needed to push their behaviors to the same point.

>Why do women have to face social stigma and not men?

As I said, a man who has sex with a woman outside of marriage should be pressured to marry her, or in other words, if he doesn't marry her, he should be shamed for it.

Note that I don't think that should apply if he's not the only man that's had sex with her. In that case she is the one that should be the subject of social shaming to discourage other women from following in her path.

>What about gay relationships, presumably you'd apply the same thinking (en route to a marriage or married)?

I don't think homosexual behavior is very relevant to the discussion of men being unable to find suitable wives, but generally speaking, I don't think society should put any effort toward ensuring homosexuals end up in healthy marriages. And if there is any conflict between the interests of homosexuals and the goal of getting normal people in to healthy marriages, the conflict should be resolved in favor of normal people every time.

>What about poly relationships?

I think society should reject polygamous relationships.

>I'm going to assume you mean owes you a supportive, caring, platonic relationship. Eg, two married people support one another to their mutual benefit. I'm going to assume you don't mean to imply your spouse owes you sex.

I mean both. Both are important to the maintenance of most healthy relationships.

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

#926

Post by amznthrowaway5 » Wed, May 05, 2021, 3:04 PM UTC

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #878

colmvp wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a short guy, I chuckled at being grouped with dumb guys, and guys with terrible hygiene lol You're not wrong though, both men and women love to make fun of a short guys.

My take on it has always been that you wouldn't want to date someone who picks on physical features like that anyway, it's a giant red flag for an overall shitty personality.

Nearly everyone has physical dealbreakers, and height is a very socially acceptable one that the vast majority of women have. Most women also filter on somewhat less politically correct factors like race. The total hypocrisy when it comes to this topic is considered acceptable since women control the market.

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

#927

Post by strofcon » Wed, May 05, 2021, 3:17 PM UTC

ceilingcorner wrote: post #240

These issues are far more serious than is known and commenters saying “too bad, you don’t deserve to date someone” really don’t understand how ineffective this approach is. You can’t just shame tens of thousands of men into accepting a substandard life. Disclaimer: I am not making any ethical judgments here, just observing. This problem didn’t really exist before for three reasons. One, widespread access to prostitut…

"You can’t just shame tens of thousands of men into accepting a substandard life."

I would challenge the "substandard life" assertion, as it's a framing issue.

The biological need for sex is indeed great, I won't argue that point - but I don't believe that lacking sex necessarily makes a life substandard.

In all fairness, it is extremely difficult to re-frame something so primal, but I think a stronger focus on acceptance of the world and healthier views of one's capacity to influence it would be a prime candidate for reducing the harm of the incel mindset.

Getting there in any practical manner, of course, is... probably not gonna happen.

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

#928

Post by defterGoose » Wed, May 05, 2021, 3:52 PM UTC

troway357924 wrote: post #794

serverholic wrote: post #648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you're a straight male, I dare you to cry in front of your girlfriend/wife.

I'll never forget the girlfriend who when I showed emotional vulnerability grabbed that knife and twisted it in the wound, telling me to man up. More painful than the immediate situation was the realization that I couldn't rely on her, that she was a fairweather girlfriend. Yes I broke up with her and yes I talked to a therapist about it. Never had a guy say anything like that to me. Other girlfriends have been there…

| Maybe some parts of toxic masculinity are perpetuated more by women and the media than other men.

Absolutely. During the Kavanaugh confirmation process I was blown away by how many women spouted off the "boys will be boys" excuse. It was frankly disgusting. In a similar way, the body image problems that so many women have are very much driven by male ideals about beauty.

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

#929

Post by astura » Wed, May 05, 2021, 4:05 PM UTC

kaba0 wrote: post #885

serverholic wrote: post #644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A weak woman will still be able to find a man to take care of her. A weak man not so much.

There are plenty of women with strong mother instincts, that happily take on a “weak man”. But of course you would not want to be with someone not giving any sort of “benefit”. A relationship goes two ways, so without any other good qualities I’m not sure what they want.

In my mom's case, at least, the "benefit" is being able to feel superior and having someone to fight with 24/7 (she absolutely loves conflict - arguing and starting fights is her favorite activity in the world).

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

#930

Post by supernovae » Wed, May 05, 2021, 4:06 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #775

supernovae wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shorter work weeks, universal healthcare, affordable housing, open borders, freedom to travel, less consumerism, more time for friends/family...

I'm pretty sure that universal healthcare isn't compatible with open borders. Budgets aren't infinite.

Why do people assume open borders means freeloaders vs freedom?