goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: star seed 7 on March 29, 2019, 09:58:50 AM
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/2019/03/29/share-americans-not-having-sex-has-reached-record-high/
-
MAGA
-
Interesting article. The graphs show that the percentage of women having sex is higher than the percentage of men having sex.
Incels are a pretty unsympathetic lot - at least the ones you hear about. But I do have some sympathy for these people and understand why a lot of them are so bitter. They're victims of this technological/economic/social phenomenon, and for them, that must really suck.
-
Victims of what exactly?
-
The argument as I understand it is that these people are entitled to having sex no matter how terrible of a person they are. Read that in a weirdly paced Canadian accent.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Interesting article. The graphs show that the percentage of women having sex is higher than the percentage of men having sex.
Incels are a pretty unsympathetic lot - at least the ones you hear about. But I do have some sympathy for these people and understand why a lot of them are so bitter. They're victims of this technological/economic/social phenomenon, and for them, that must really suck.
Yeah, I think this is due to online/app dating becoming the norm. Something like 80% of women only give attention to the same 20% of men on these platforms. It's very interesting stuff.
-
Interesting article. The graphs show that the percentage of women having sex is higher than the percentage of men having sex.
Incels are a pretty unsympathetic lot - at least the ones you hear about. But I do have some sympathy for these people and understand why a lot of them are so bitter. They're victims of this technological/economic/social phenomenon, and for them, that must really suck.
Yeah, I think this is due to online/app dating becoming the norm. Something like 80% of women only give attention to the same 20% of men on these platforms. It's very interesting stuff.
This has always been the case
-
Interesting article. The graphs show that the percentage of women having sex is higher than the percentage of men having sex.
Incels are a pretty unsympathetic lot - at least the ones you hear about. But I do have some sympathy for these people and understand why a lot of them are so bitter. They're victims of this technological/economic/social phenomenon, and for them, that must really suck.
Yeah, I think this is due to online/app dating becoming the norm. Something like 80% of women only give attention to the same 20% of men on these platforms. It's very interesting stuff.
This has always been the case
The graphs in WaPo disagree with you.
-
Victims of what exactly?
Genetics, basically.
-
What is your hypothesis for the bone rate between sexes diverging when it used to stay relatively similar?
-
Interesting article. The graphs show that the percentage of women having sex is higher than the percentage of men having sex.
Incels are a pretty unsympathetic lot - at least the ones you hear about. But I do have some sympathy for these people and understand why a lot of them are so bitter. They're victims of this technological/economic/social phenomenon, and for them, that must really suck.
Yeah, I think this is due to online/app dating becoming the norm. Something like 80% of women only give attention to the same 20% of men on these platforms. It's very interesting stuff.
This has always been the case
The graphs in WaPo disagree with you.
Appears to be behind a paywall for me can you post the graphs
-
Open link in incognito mode
-
(https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4C7SSBIXSNFCLOJIGCWUOKDYTY.png)
-
Looks like Mikey bishop caused the entire country to make love in 97
-
Victims of what exactly?
Genetics, basically.
For the vast vast majority, I doubt it. I could buy some of them being victims of culture (but that would lead to butt hurt town about gender studies and whatnot for those folks).
-
Victims of what exactly?
Genetics, basically.
For the vast vast majority, I doubt it. I could buy some of them being victims of culture (but that would lead to butt hurt town about gender studies and whatnot for those folks).
I'm interested to hear your theory.
-
To be clear, theory about what?
-
Open link in incognito mode
Thanks that worked. I suppose the dating apps do magnify the gap. I think it’s more of a societal shift towards acceptance of a hookup culture. Maybe we are saying the same thing.
-
To be clear, theory about what?
Well you alluded to a cultural issue. But broadly, why you think more women are having sex relative to men.
-
The technology aspect does make some sense, as it makes it easier for women to find attractive men and men probably aren't as picky. I get the sense that most of the incel dudes really don't try very hard, though.
-
Open link in incognito mode
Thanks that worked. I suppose the dating apps do magnify the gap. I think it’s more of a societal shift towards acceptance of a hookup culture. Maybe we are saying the same thing.
But assuming there was a societal shift towards acceptance of hookup culture, wouldn't you expect the number of people having sex to rise?
-
To be clear, theory about what?
Well you alluded to a cultural issue. But broadly, why you think more women are having sex relative to men.
I am not sure I am convinced that more women are actually having sex relative to men. But even if this was true, what possible genetic change in humans could have occurred in the past decade to cause this result?
I know most people here think gender studies is just a big whine-fest about how women are harmed by social pressures, but its also a study of how these systems also affect men adversely as well.
Incels often treat having sex with women as if it was an outcome of a videogame (a concept that is reinforced by society). If one accrues enough "life points", some woman (who by the way has to meet their standards of beauty) is the reward. They feel cheated, like they have the points needed, so why isn't the secret door getting unlocked? So they dig deeper into way the "hack the system" and buy into stuff like "The Game" etc as if it were cheat codes. At some point they project all blame externally, that women are somehow the broken component.
-
Open link in incognito mode
Thanks that worked. I suppose the dating apps do magnify the gap. I think it’s more of a societal shift towards acceptance of a hookup culture. Maybe we are saying the same thing.
But assuming there was a societal shift towards acceptance of hookup culture, wouldn't you expect the number of people having sex to rise?
No I think the societal shift puts less pressure on women to have a monogamous relationship. Also I think women now are much more likely to be financially independent. I think the same guys in 1989 that were getting sex were benefiting from society still being more heavily favored to a provider type.
-
To be clear, theory about what?
Well you alluded to a cultural issue. But broadly, why you think more women are having sex relative to men.
I am not sure I am convinced that more women are actually having sex relative to men. But even if this was true, what possible genetic change in humans could have occurred in the past decade to cause this result?
I know most people here think gender studies is just a big whine-fest about how women are harmed by social pressures, but its also a study of how these systems also affect men adversely as well.
Incels often treat having sex with women as if it was an outcome of a videogame (a concept that is reinforced by society). If one accrues enough "life points", some woman (who by the way has to meet their standards of beauty) is the reward. They feel cheated, like they have the points needed, so why isn't the secret door getting unlocked? So they dig deeper into way the "hack the system" and buy into stuff like "The Game" etc as if it were cheat codes. At some point they project all blame externally, that women are somehow the broken component.
Well yeah, I'm just basing this off of the WaPo graph. And to be fair, I assume genes have always doomed some people to inceldom throughout history. If you're born with some kind of horrible disability (for example), your odds just aren't great unless you're paying for it. I'm not saying men have gotten uglier or anything over the last 5-10 years. I am saying that I think the evidence shows that women have gotten pickier (which, to be clear, I don't think is wrong). I think a number of factors could have contributed to that (if it exists). There also exists the possibility that more men aren't meeting some minimum static social threshold for being able to woo women.
-
(https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/4C7SSBIXSNFCLOJIGCWUOKDYTY.png)
My God Obama got everybody wet
-
To be clear, theory about what?
Well you alluded to a cultural issue. But broadly, why you think more women are having sex relative to men.
I am not sure I am convinced that more women are actually having sex relative to men. But even if this was true, what possible genetic change in humans could have occurred in the past decade to cause this result?
I know most people here think gender studies is just a big whine-fest about how women are harmed by social pressures, but its also a study of how these systems also affect men adversely as well.
Incels often treat having sex with women as if it was an outcome of a videogame (a concept that is reinforced by society). If one accrues enough "life points", some woman (who by the way has to meet their standards of beauty) is the reward. They feel cheated, like they have the points needed, so why isn't the secret door getting unlocked? So they dig deeper into way the "hack the system" and buy into stuff like "The Game" etc as if it were cheat codes. At some point they project all blame externally, that women are somehow the broken component.
And to be fair, I assume genes have always doomed some people to inceldom throughout history. If you're born with some kind of horrible disability (for example), your odds just aren't great unless you're paying for it.
Yes, but that is a minuscule percent of incels. The vast vast majority of incels probably don't have some overwhelming genetics-based disability to blame for their inability to sexually attract women.
-
I kinda feel bad for the incels. They're just so utterly clueless and helpless. There are nice, single girls who would love to have a boyfriend literally everywhere and the incels just can't figure out what to do. Maybe they're all trying to compete for the top 1% most desirable women or something. ??
-
To be clear, theory about what?
Well you alluded to a cultural issue. But broadly, why you think more women are having sex relative to men.
I am not sure I am convinced that more women are actually having sex relative to men. But even if this was true, what possible genetic change in humans could have occurred in the past decade to cause this result?
I know most people here think gender studies is just a big whine-fest about how women are harmed by social pressures, but its also a study of how these systems also affect men adversely as well.
Incels often treat having sex with women as if it was an outcome of a videogame (a concept that is reinforced by society). If one accrues enough "life points", some woman (who by the way has to meet their standards of beauty) is the reward. They feel cheated, like they have the points needed, so why isn't the secret door getting unlocked? So they dig deeper into way the "hack the system" and buy into stuff like "The Game" etc as if it were cheat codes. At some point they project all blame externally, that women are somehow the broken component.
And to be fair, I assume genes have always doomed some people to inceldom throughout history. If you're born with some kind of horrible disability (for example), your odds just aren't great unless you're paying for it.
Yes, but that is a minuscule percent of incels. The vast vast majority of incels probably don't have some overwhelming genetics-based disability to blame for their inability to sexually attract women.
Agreed, just pointing out an example of genes completely rough ridin' over some people in this area.
In any event, something changed. Maybe it's the dudes' POVs (like the video game mentality you described), or them being socially stunted in some way, or a byproduct of women being more independent and less reliable on men (like wetwillie pointed out), or a combination of a bunch of factors.
But i do think it's a problem that a significant portion of people (esp. males) aren't having sex - especially when some of these guys are lashing out violently against other or (more often) themselves. I don't know of a solution to the underlying problem or the symptoms of the problem.
-
uh, adapt?
-
uh, adapt?
The solution to these guys' frustration that is leading to violence and suicide is to tell them to adapt? I don't know why no one ever thought of that. We should do that with all societal problems.
-
well some pretty well known people are out there telling incels to double down and blame women rather than adapt
-
well some pretty well known people are out there telling incels to double down and blame women rather than adapt
who?
-
They need to figure out some way to stop being incels.
-
Use it or lose it
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
well some pretty well known people are out there telling incels to double down and blame women rather than adapt
who?
that canadian guy (not pete [not buttigieg])
-
well some pretty well known people are out there telling incels to double down and blame women rather than adapt
who?
that canadian guy (not pete [not buttigieg])
Yeah you're thinking of Peterson, and you're completely wrong. His whole message is that people's unhappiness is largely their own doing. He tells people to climb the competence hierarchy, "improve yourself! shoulder a heavy burden. be the lobster who stands the tallest!" Generally some self-improvement mumbo jumbo, but "Blame women for your problems" is the last thing Peterson would advocate. incels would dismiss him as naive.
-
self-improvement is just one aspect of adapting i suppose
-
self-improvement is just one aspect of adapting i suppose
I agree, and the other one is learning to cope with the results.
-
I'm trying to think of some mod of tempty island for incels.
-
well some pretty well known people are out there telling incels to double down and blame women rather than adapt
who?
that canadian guy (not pete [not buttigieg])
Yeah you're thinking of Peterson, and you're completely wrong. His whole message is that people's unhappiness is largely their own doing. He tells people to climb the competence hierarchy, "improve yourself! shoulder a heavy burden. be the lobster who stands the tallest!" Generally some self-improvement mumbo jumbo, but "Blame women for your problems" is the last thing Peterson would advocate. incels would dismiss him as naive.
Aren't they blaming birth control?
-
Birth control, death of the monogamous relationship, death of the stay at home wife/mother, their own genes, stuff that is 100% outside of their control.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Yeah, their biggest problem is that they are rough ridin' idiots. That's not something that they can easily control, either, though.
-
wait a minute, birth control? maybe on opposite day birth control will stop you from sex'ing
-
wait a minute, birth control? maybe on opposite day birth control will stop you from sex'ing
Right?
-
well some pretty well known people are out there telling incels to double down and blame women rather than adapt
who?
that canadian guy (not pete [not buttigieg])
Yeah you're thinking of Peterson, and you're completely wrong. His whole message is that people's unhappiness is largely their own doing. He tells people to climb the competence hierarchy, "improve yourself! shoulder a heavy burden. be the lobster who stands the tallest!" Generally some self-improvement mumbo jumbo, but "Blame women for your problems" is the last thing Peterson would advocate. incels would dismiss him as naive.
Aren't they blaming birth control?
I haven't really seen incels delve into the topic of birth control. Their general ethos is that it's 100% looks-based. I don't think their looks is the sole cause of the problem, but I do think it's one of the causes - along with social ineptitude and some of the other societal factors we've discussed (which, again, i don't think are bad things).
Full disclosure, I'm sure I'm biased in this convo because i find the topic really interesting and like learning about incels.
-
I feel like it was somewhere in the Pit but don't have the time to look
It must be tough sledding to tell everyone you aren't getting any because you are too ugly and get mad at girls about it.
-
It must be tough sledding to tell everyone you aren't getting any because you are too ugly and get mad at girls about it.
They're projecting. They're just angry their lives suck.
-
iirc the birth control argument is that now women can have multiple/non-monogamous partners without risk of pregnancy and because of that are less prone to settle down into a monogamous relationship forcing a 1:1 ratio.
-
there's a few dudes banging tons of chicks on tinder.
-
iirc the birth control argument is that now women can have multiple/non-monogamous partners without risk of pregnancy and because of that are less prone to settle down into a monogamous relationship forcing a 1:1 ratio.
Why wouldn't they just settle down in a 1:1 with a non incel?
-
Yeah, their biggest problem is that they are rough ridin' idiots. That's not something that they can easily control, either, though.
That’s the irony, a good portion of the community is high IQ low EQ. It’s like chingon stated, they have accumulated the points ( money, education, etc) and want to cash in.
-
iirc the birth control argument is that now women can have multiple/non-monogamous partners without risk of pregnancy and because of that are less prone to settle down into a monogamous relationship forcing a 1:1 ratio.
The ones I've read talk about the professional freedom the pill gave women leading to less dependence on men which in turn makes monogamy less important.
-
There was no equality for women before the birth control pill. It’s completely insane to assume that anything like that could’ve possibly occurred. And the feminists think they produced a revolution in the 1960s that freed women. What freed women was the pill, and we’ll see how that works out. There’s some evidence that women on the pill don’t like masculine men because of changes in hormonal balance. You can test a woman’s preference in men. You can show them pictures of men and change the jaw width, and what you find is that women who aren’t on the pill like wide-jawed men when they’re ovulating, and they like narrow-jawed men when they’re not, and the narrow-jawed men are less aggressive. Well all women on the pill are as if they’re not ovulating, so it’s possible that a lot of the antipathy that exists right now between women and men exists because of the birth control pill. The idea that women were discriminated against across the course of history is appalling.
link (http://www.c2cjournal.ca/2016/12/were-teaching-university-students-lies-an-interview-with-dr-jordan-peterson/)
-
so birth control is causing women to have sex with more dudes, making it less likely that women have sex with ugly/weird dudes? :lol:
-
so birth control is causing women to have sex with more dudes, making it less likely that women have sex with ugly/weird dudes? :lol:
actually yes, that's how the theory goes. it's a little counter-intuitive on its face but if you think about it, you'll get it.
1. monogamous relationships cause more egalitarian sex numbers.
2. the pill leads to fewer monogamous relationships.
3. the pill leads to less egalitarian sex numbers.
if women get to be choosier, then they're not going to choose uggos/weirds.
-
there's a few dudes banging tons of chicks on tinder.
This seemed to have been true in bars pre-tinder too though
-
women are having more sexual partners than ever before, and at the same time, fewer dudes are getting laid than ever before. what
-
iirc the birth control argument is that now women can have multiple/non-monogamous partners without risk of pregnancy and because of that are less prone to settle down into a monogamous relationship forcing a 1:1 ratio.
The ones I've read talk about the professional freedom the pill gave women leading to less dependence on men which in turn makes monogamy less important.
But that doesn't create incels. It creates less marriage
-
women are having more sexual partners than ever before, and at the same time, fewer dudes are getting laid than ever before. what
"there is more money in the world now than ever before, but income inequality is worse than ever. what."
it just means some studs are getting a ton of pelts.
iirc the birth control argument is that now women can have multiple/non-monogamous partners without risk of pregnancy and because of that are less prone to settle down into a monogamous relationship forcing a 1:1 ratio.
The ones I've read talk about the professional freedom the pill gave women leading to less dependence on men which in turn makes monogamy less important.
But that doesn't create incels. It creates less marriage
which in turn creates incels. if incels had gfs/wives, they'd likely be having sex.
-
Incels aren't looking for girlfriends, they want convenient, low effort vaginas to sick their dick in.
-
i don't think it's BC, dlew. i think it's a combo of p0rn, video games, and ubereats (etc) all being incredibly amazing / more easily accessible than ever before and some guys just can't wield all that power. they just wake up one day at 34 and think holy crap i haven't gotten laid since college and there are hairs growing out of my fat sores
-
i haven't thought about this a lot tho, i admit
-
i'm also not willing to rule out bitcoin somehow playing a role (purely based on anecdotally encountering people who talk about bitcoin)
-
Incels aren't looking for girlfriends, they want convenient, low effort vaginas to sick their dick in.
I will say i think you're wrong about that. Sex is what defines them, but really, I think at the end of the day, these guys are angry at how lonely they are. If all they wanted was low effort, meaningless sex then they could go pay a pro.
i don't think it's BC, dlew. i think it's a combo of p0rn, video games, and ubereats (etc) all being incredibly amazing / more easily accessible than ever before and some guys just can't wield all that power. they just wake up one day at 34 and think holy crap i haven't gotten laid since college and there are hairs growing out of my fat sores
Yeah i don't disagree with you there. Like I said, I don't think birth control is the sole cause of it at all. I think women being economically freer (aided by the pill) is one of a ton of causes of the phenomenon. The other causes your bring up are good points too (prevalence of porn, ease of modern living, etc.).
-
It will course correct eventually but the transition could get a little ugly.
-
Man, dlew, good work in here. You're much better at expressing what I want to say than I am.
-
i'm also not willing to rule out bitcoin somehow playing a role (purely based on anecdotally encountering people who talk about bitcoin)
:lol:
-
Incels aren't looking for girlfriends, they want convenient, low effort vaginas to sick their dick in.
I will say i think you're wrong about that. Sex is what defines them, but really, I think at the end of the day, these guys are angry at how lonely they are.
I am pretty sure we disagree. I don't think they're looking for companionship (platonic or otherwise), otherwise they wouldn't be calling themselves incels. They want what Chad has (or rather what they think Chad has).
-
How do betas figure in here?
-
I think evolution will sort this out over the course of a few generations.
-
How do betas figure in here?
these are the people benefiting from BC
-
to keep with DLew's money analogy, betas are the evaporating middle class. they have either morphed into alphas due to all the no-consequence hole flying around, or have regressed into incels if nobody marries them
-
Funny how were back to talking about women like a they're commodity again.
-
Funny how were back to talking about women like a they're commodity again.
It was an analogy to help our bud mocat understand what he was treating as a statistical impossibility.
-
incels :lol:
-
How do betas figure in here?
these are the people benefiting from BC
BC (and social changes) has allowed "average" women to have purely physical sexual relationships with attractive males.
Say you have a tempty island situation with 100 random men and 100 random women. Going by dating app percentages, 20 dudes are boning 80 of the women, while 80 dudes are trying to fight for the last 20 ladies. How does that benefit betas?
-
I know that alphas have lots of sex with lots of different women. At the same time, I don't think that incels necessarily consider themselves to be betas, do they?
-
actually 82 women are boning 72 dudes.
this is down from 2008 (the november of love), when 92 (!) women were boning 90 dudes.
if there used to be 45 alphas, 45 betas, and 10 incels, now there are
50 alphas, 22 betas, and 28 incels.
so like 5 of the betas are now alphas. and although fewer women are boning, they are boning more often due to BC. the alphas can't handle the extra demand all by themselves.
-
Hmm, interesting point
-
actually 82 women are boning 72 dudes.
this is down from 2008 (the november of love), when 92 (!) women were boning 90 dudes.
if there used to be 45 alphas, 45 betas, and 10 incels, now there are
50 alphas, 22 betas, and 28 incels.
so like 5 of the betas are now alphas. and although fewer women are boning, they are boning more often due to BC. the alphas can't handle the extra demand all by themselves.
Sure we can
-
if you can show me data suggesting the amount of 3somes are up, i could be swayed
-
This is sort of like debating wether or not ice fishing is an erstwhile productive habit. Leading to positive outcomes. Or if it is a really an effective population control measure? Created solely for the purpose cleansing the defective gene pool of rural and out state Minnesotans during early season that is?
-
There was no equality for women before the birth control pill. It’s completely insane to assume that anything like that could’ve possibly occurred. And the feminists think they produced a revolution in the 1960s that freed women. What freed women was the pill, and we’ll see how that works out. There’s some evidence that women on the pill don’t like masculine men because of changes in hormonal balance. You can test a woman’s preference in men. You can show them pictures of men and change the jaw width, and what you find is that women who aren’t on the pill like wide-jawed men when they’re ovulating, and they like narrow-jawed men when they’re not, and the narrow-jawed men are less aggressive. Well all women on the pill are as if they’re not ovulating, so it’s possible that a lot of the antipathy that exists right now between women and men exists because of the birth control pill. The idea that women were discriminated against across the course of history is appalling.
link (http://www.c2cjournal.ca/2016/12/were-teaching-university-students-lies-an-interview-with-dr-jordan-peterson/)
it's been a long time since i've read any of this literature, but i'm pretty sure i recall correctly that peterson is wrong. women on the pill prefer more masculine men. i don't have any recollection to either support/not support his assertions about preferences when ovulating/not ovulating, but regardless the hormonal mix of women using hormonal birth control is not the same as non-ovulating women that are not using birth control.
-
Oh he just makes crap up and passes it off as something he "knows". Like the lobster thing.
-
Petersen also said in his book that ability to divorce has harmed women
-
My research shows women are more attractive men when ovulating and when not.
-
https://twitter.com/JonIsAwesomest/status/1286431539597725697
-
https://twitter.com/guy_freire/status/1456263126601457669
-
I (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230902/4e0dbb8dbdee90fdc22654f0acf1955d.jpg)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
lmao, that's very good
-
:lol:
-
Yes, very good