Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Men lag behind in most ways" Virtually every invention and artificial object in existence was made by men (and 90%-plus continue to be, esp food and shelter/infrastructure), as well as 95%-plus of top artistic achievements, etc., so I think you're getting a bit ahead of yourself. There are zero women in the top 300 wealthiest people (and two in the top 500) who did not acquire their money by inheritance or divorce. Not misogyny, just reality, for now at least. Yes, women are doing better than men lately within the structure of formal schooling, slightly better time getting/keeping low/mid-level administrative jobs, etc. (often jobs women have historically done better at, but that are now much better paid; teaching, nursing, etc.), but men continue to dominate at the highest levels. Yes women weren't really allowed to achieve things until 100 years or so ago, and I don't doubt that some women could eventually become the best at things, but they're hardly killing it yet in comparison with men. Nor is it a competition. It's supposed to be the opposite of that.
Well, I'd comment further on that, but I can't if I want to stay here.
Sorry, that's what it is. When a man has an average of 3 or 5 or 7 women he reaches out to whenever he feels like it/gets around to it and they have sex every few days or week or two, that's essentially a harem. I know women think they have a chance, but it's often minimal to none from the get-go or very shortly thereafter. Whether they know it or not (and they usually don't, it's kept secret i.e. covert), they're part of a group of women that gets used for sex = harem.
Yes, but it was that question in the broader context of 'what is inceldom and why does it exist / why has it become more prominent.' I do agree the groups probably aren't doing them any favors, but neither is denying that a new dating environment exists (which has created multiple times more incels), when it absolutely does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMo
Every generation *****es about the one after them and how awful and soft they are and it’s mostly nonsense.
Also there are things you can nitpick about other genders if you really want to. To act like women all have their Sh1t together and Men don’t is kinda ignorant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SerlingHitchcockJPeele
Let’s throw the “Incels” out for a second, this is a general statement about 3.5 billion people worldwide. You, as a man, are free to devalue yourself if you don’t think you’re heading in the right direction but you don’t speak for every guy. There have always been men who couldn’t cope with society, careers, or relationships… but don’t knock this generation just because you’re older.
I’m assuming you’re a boomer; many men in your generation were raging alcoholics, misogynists (especially in the work place), benefited solely from good ole’ boy networks, and were physically abusive to their wives and children much more so than today. They simply got away with it more because times were much different than they are now.
I do not view men as collectively heading in the wrong direction simply because there are a few saps who can’t get a girlfriend. If anything this generation of men is more inclusive of others, less sexist than yours, less racist than yours, and heading in an overall better direction than in the past. And men today work just as hard and are just as valuable to society as they have always been. The only difference is this group of men today are progressing past the mistakes made by drunk boomer dads.
It's not a pissing contest and more men being super wealthy doesn't relate in any way to some guy who's 28, living at home, working below his capacity and not doing much socially. That men are lagging behind prior generations of men and current women is a fact, but it's not an indictment of men, it's an indictment of the conditions that led men here. Those conditions are the something that's going on that's dragging men down.
Nothing changes if we can't face the need to change.
It's not a pissing contest and more men being super wealthy doesn't relate in any way to some guy who's 28, living at home, working below his capacity and not doing much socially. That men are lagging behind prior generations of men and current women is a fact, but it's not an indictment of men, it's an indictment of the conditions that led men here. Those conditions are the something that's going on that's dragging men down.
Nothing changes if we can't face the need to change.
Do you think shy awkward guys is suddenly a new thing?
Socially inept or shy men have always existed this isn’t new but like everything else it’s magnified because of the internet and social media.
Before that these people existed but didn’t have anywhere to vent or be heard.
It's not a pissing contest and more men being super wealthy doesn't relate in any way to some guy who's 28, living at home, working below his capacity and not doing much socially. That men are lagging behind prior generations of men and current women is a fact, but it's not an indictment of men, it's an indictment of the conditions that led men here. Those conditions are the something that's going on that's dragging men down.
Nothing changes if we can't face the need to change.
I don’t disagree with you about the comments about billionaires. They are totally irrelevant to a conversation about young people under age 30, because there are so few billionaires in that age bracket of either gender that it’s not even worth mentioning.
That said, I do disagree with your assessment that men are being dragged down. I don’t think that they are. If you look at the overall statistics, the number of men with college degrees has increased over previous generations. What gave men the advantage previously was that fewer women went to college (probably partially because they were still not eligible to access jobs that paid as much as men could make even with college) or were able to compete with men for the same jobs. Now more women than men are going to college and are competing with men for the same jobs. These jobs that at one point did not require a college education now do, so it’s hard for that person without the college education to get the job.
I think it’s kind of easier to point out with sports competitions. If you look at the latest figure skating competition, the top female skaters were doing quadruple jumps just like the male skaters. 30 years ago, there was really only one woman doing quadruple jumps and the men had more difficult programs by far. That said, the top women from today’s Olympics would blow the men from 1992 out of the water. Of course, in figure skating the men have also continued to improve, so it isn’t directly comparable, but it is just easier to point out the difference between one side staying status quo while the other side continued to improve/progress.
I think there is also a situation where women who are leaving the job market to be SAHMs are doing so at a later age and often have less of a career gap than women in prior generations had. Women are seeing the problems that come with leaving the job market permanently or for too long if they end up getting a divorce. In older generations, you might have women leaving the workforce when they reached 25 to have kids. They wouldn’t have made it very far up the career ladder. I think now the average age for a woman to have her first baby is 29, which is ample time to establish a career before taking time off.
How are you judging success? The fact that the so-called Chad may be able to talk to a woman and get her to go on a date with him doesn’t mean it goes any farther than that. In fact, we know it doesn’t go farther than that when the guy is doing the exact same thing with another girl the very next weekend. A “top-tier guy” would be one that is able to get AND keep a woman without appearing to make much effort, not a guy trolling OLD or bars for a new woman every other night.
The issue with incels is that they seem to think that the two are the same thing, but they are not. There may be people who are interested in a fling or one-night stand, which is totally fine. Most people are looking for longer term relationships unless they are on hookup apps.
As for your other post about someone being extra flirty, I’m still not sure what that even means. I say that because I’ve been in a lot of situations where I am just cordial to someone and they seem to think I am super flirtatious. I’ve even asked people what it is that makes me seem flirtatious and haven’t managed to get an answer I find helpful.
For me success would be a long term relationship. Although when it comes to OLD, just getting responses to my messages would have felt like a huge success in itself.
The problem with the Chads is that they are still successful with women despite not wanting anything more than flings and one night stands. But the women who fall for them seem to be head over heels for them regardless. So the guys who are desperate for any attention at all see this and think. "What is it that Chad is doing that I'm not doing?" So it's the fact that the Chads are getting the love that the Timothys so desperately crave that make them want to be Chad themselves.
I don't know if "extra flirty" was the term that I should have used. I think that it would have been more like just flirty in general. While it's hard to describe, it went a bit past a smiling face and friendly demeanor. It was other non verbal signals that the books purport to be signs of interest and/or attraction.
Not to mention voice tone and so forth. An example would be saying "Hiiiiiiii! How are YOU doing today?!" as opposed to just "Hi."
It's like she was trying to intentionally use a sexy voice.
While I realize that people in certain jobs are trained to greet and be polite to customers, the way that she did it can definitely be construed as a bit more. Especially if a guy is as clueless as I have always been.
Not to mention that lonely and desperate guys will latch onto any potential show of interest like a guy dying of thirst will latch onto a glass of water.
So the only conclusions that I can draw are:
A) She was just having a good day and trying to share the joy
B) That good feeling could have been due to Chad rocking her world the night before
C) She was just one of the naturally flirty types who likes attention
D) She really was interested but was quickly turned off by my shyness and awkwardness
So basically I have no idea. This stuff is just too complicated. LOL!
First, you envision the world as a bunch of people dumped into a room competing to have sex with the most attractive person there. Leaving aside the fact that perception of attractiveness varies, your view of the loud guy in the room is far too simplistic to be used as an analogy for how society actually works.
Second, this is the guy that draws your attention. You aren't paying attention to the quite guy (or woman) in the corner who is making a connection with somebody. You aren't paying attention to the couple on the other side of the room who came together and are not competing to pick anybody up.
Dating apps are a weird thing in themselves. Again, your life view is weird. No, not everybody is "competing" for the same woman. I have had three serious relationships in my life. From a physical standpoint, one was somebody you would probably consider top-tier. The other two, not. All in all, the physical attributes are much less interesting to me that everything else. The two who were not "top-tier" were still really desirable to me.
Play your own game, let others play theirs. It is a big world, there are lots of people out there.
Dating apps are a terrible way to get to know people. I used them briefly, never had much luck. A few dates that just never went anywhere, mostly because they were just based on looks and after meeting, the mutual decision was ... meh, why bother? While at the same time I was meeting women in the more traditional ways.
Bottom line, you keep falling into this incel way of looking at the world, and that worldview is harmful. It is not realistic, puts too much emphasis on working withing these fallacious categories, and just creates insecurity and resentment. Stop thinking about Chads, Staceys, femoids, and all that other stupid stuff. Treat people as the amazingly varied individuals that they are.
Oh it's definitely a competition as women are evolutionarily predisposed to seek out the best possible mates to sire their offspring. Thus why the confident and outgoing guys are viewed as the alphas and best candidates to protect the females and resulting offspring from the lions, tigers, and bears. (Oh my!)
Granted we live in a different world now where most people don't live in caves. But thousands of years of evolutionary programming isn't easily cast aside. So women may not even realize they are doing this. Or that when they fall for a Chad or bad boy criminal, this is just their subconscious minds searching for what they think is the top tier alpha. But that's just my theory and I could be wrong. It's just based on what I have observed when viewing humans in the wild and an attempt at making sense out of things that don't make any sense at all.
As for the loud guy in the room, it's not so much him that I'm noticing as it is the women who are flocking to him like flies to a manure truck. All the while the quiet guy is sitting there thinking "What am I? Chopped liver?" Also I know exactly what he is thinking because I have been that quiet guy.
While dating sites and apps indeed suck, they appear to be the only politically correct method of meeting women these days. In fact, I have been told in this very thread that approaching women in person is creepy and stalkerish. Not to mention that a man can also be MeToo'd to high heaven for even looking at a woman these days.
So dating sites and apps it is. But the problem is that most women are only attracted to the top 20% of men while the bottom 80% have to fight for the leftovers like a pack of wild dingoes. And that is probably being optimistic since this OkCupid study was before they came up with this swipe based crap which made them more like Tinder. Speaking of Tinder that is like a cluster on steroids as I have read that men only get swiped right on something like 9%? Which is pretty bad indeed.
The bottom line is that since the dating sites and apps are based more on looks now, it only serves to help the good looking guys while making the situation that much more hopeless for the average guys. Which is pretty ironic since the good looking guys don't need to use dating sites and apps in the first place.
I don’t think anyone disagrees that dating apps are problematic. I don’t disagree with the person commenting about how women these days tend to be more likely to use filters, angle shots, and other techniques to improve their appearance. There are a couple of YouTubers who focus their content on celebrities filtered vs. unfiltered and the differences are striking. That said, you don’t need to be an avid user of this technology to be able to spot it.
I don’t think there is really the equivalent technology to improve a man’s look. As some have pointed out, there are women who focus on very shallow things like height and automatically exclude men below a certain height. I don’t think that means that short men don’t have luck. I was talking with a married male coworker about our height (we are 5’5”). I have always wanted to be 5’11” for some reason and he said he was happy to be 5’5”. My job tends to attract the less socially adept types and he’s the one that fits in the least. He is extremely outgoing and friendly. He has a lot of connections and I’m pretty sure he was involved in a fraternity in college. I am not sure how well he’d do on OLD, but irl it is easy to see how this coworker would have no trouble landing a girlfriend.
I think that’s the main downside of OLD. A lot of the men who might be a top pick irl actually end up not as great a pick because women can’t really get a feel for what makes a guy appealing. I would say the other (also married) guy in my office who has a really appealing personality is also a not particularly tall, balding guy with nerdy glasses. I think his kid is now finishing up HS, so I think it’s safe to assume he did not meet his wife on OLD, but he would not have any appeal whatsoever on OLD.
These kinds of studies are inherently problematic at the outset, based on the populations that are surveyed, and that by and large, the data is self-reported, so it's already biased.
Exactly. It’s 28% of men who participated in the study, not 28% of men across the country. I don’t know that the men who participated are actually representative of the real world. I do know that not anywhere close to 28% of the men that I know whether family or friends or coworkers, are virgins. In fact I don’t think any of them are.
Oh it's definitely a competition as women are evolutionarily predisposed to seek out the best possible mates to sire their offspring. Thus why the confident and outgoing guys are viewed as the alphas and best candidates to protect the females and resulting offspring from the lions, tigers, and bears. (Oh my!)
Granted we live in a different world now where most people don't live in caves. But thousands of years of evolutionary programming isn't easily cast aside. So women may not even realize they are doing this. Or that when they fall for a Chad or bad boy criminal, this is just their subconscious minds searching for what they think is the top tier alpha. But that's just my theory and I could be wrong. It's just based on what I have observed when viewing humans in the wild and an attempt at making sense out of things that don't make any sense at all.
As for the loud guy in the room, it's not so much him that I'm noticing as it is the women who are flocking to him like flies to a manure truck. All the while the quiet guy is sitting there thinking "What am I? Chopped liver?" Also I know exactly what he is thinking because I have been that quiet guy.
While dating sites and apps indeed suck, they appear to be the only politically correct method of meeting women these days. In fact, I have been told in this very thread that approaching women in person is creepy and stalkerish. Not to mention that a man can also be MeToo'd to high heaven for even looking at a woman these days.
So dating sites and apps it is. But the problem is that most women are only attracted to the top 20% of men while the bottom 80% have to fight for the leftovers like a pack of wild dingoes. And that is probably being optimistic since this OkCupid study was before they came up with this swipe based crap which made them more like Tinder. Speaking of Tinder that is like a cluster on steroids as I have read that men only get swiped right on something like 9%? Which is pretty bad indeed.
The bottom line is that since the dating sites and apps are based more on looks now, it only serves to help the good looking guys while making the situation that much more hopeless for the average guys. Which is pretty ironic since the good looking guys don't need to use dating sites and apps in the first place.
All of this is absolute BS. All of it.
I'm not gonna go through this post line-by-line and refute it but I will say that you have been 'mentally poisoned' by the ridiculous incel garbage with a dash of anger thrown into the mix. THAT is why you are struggling - and it shows. You cannot hide it, btw.
I am a 'quiet' person. I may be 'loud' here at times, but this *is* the internet, lol, but I digress. I overall do not have issues attracting people. Now, will I 'get' the 'party girl', the one you'll see at Spring Break, drunk and carrying on, and IMO making a fool of herself? No - and I don't want that anyway. But I suspect that is what *you* want and it's probably based on erroneous stereotypes - 'party girls' are better in bed, etc. which I will tell you is absolute bull as well.
So who do I usually 'get'? The 'quiet' people. The people who are not loud, boisterous, 'party' types. And, to blow up the stereotype I mentioned earlier, they were all wonderful in bed. Not that that is the most important thing but it does matter nonetheless... and being a 'quiet' person does not equate being 'bad' in bed. And... they weren't 'quiet' in bed, btw.
Anyway, you've got your work cut out for you. Time to hustle yourself to a therapist and get your head fixed because, until you do, you will be alone for a long time to come.
Data from the General Social Survey revealed that the number of adults under the age of 30 who aren’t having sex hit an all-time high in 2018 — despite the sheer number of dating apps that make it ridiculously easy to find someone to sleep with.
The data – which was analyzed by the Washington Post — revealed that an average of 23 percent of Millennials aged 18 to 30 (almost 1 in 4) said they haven’t had sex in the past year, and what’s more is that the number of men under 30 who reported not having sex rose from 10 percent in 2008 to 28 percent in 2018, meaning it nearly tripled.
I added the bold to highlight the relevant passage.
Even if that means they're virgins rather than what it says, that they're sexless the past year, you're exaggerating the magnitude of the difference. Almost like you don't believe your own argument so your hedging.
I will just add though that I do not think those dating apps make it ridiculously easy to find someone. I think in a lot of ways it makes it much harder than it used to be when you could just meet people organically in a bar or something. Those apps work for exceptionally good looking people, but for average people there is a lot of rejection that comes with trying to meet people online through an app or online dating.
I'm not gonna go through this post line-by-line and refute it but I will say that you have been 'mentally poisoned' by the ridiculous incel garbage with a dash of anger thrown into the mix. THAT is why you are struggling - and it shows. You cannot hide it, btw.
I am a 'quiet' person. I may be 'loud' here at times, but this *is* the internet, lol, but I digress. I overall do not have issues attracting people. Now, will I 'get' the 'party girl', the one you'll see at Spring Break, drunk and carrying on, and IMO making a fool of herself? No - and I don't want that anyway. But I suspect that is what *you* want and it's probably based on erroneous stereotypes - 'party girls' are better in bed, etc. which I will tell you is absolute bull as well.
So who do I usually 'get'? The 'quiet' people. The people who are not loud, boisterous, 'party' types. And, to blow up the stereotype I mentioned earlier, they were all wonderful in bed. Not that that is the most important thing but it does matter nonetheless... and being a 'quiet' person does not equate being 'bad' in bed. And... they weren't 'quiet' in bed, btw.
Anyway, you've got your work cut out for you. Time to hustle yourself to a therapist and get your head fixed because, until you do, you will be alone for a long time to come.
I think the part about 80% of women being attracted only to 20% of men is absolute BS. I was very open minded I gave just about anyone who was within a half hour of me a chance, and I still had very little luck online. I still got rejected much much more than I got dates. Even from men that were IMO not very attractive. I found it the opposite actually, in my experience most of the men no matter where on the ladder they fell, and wanted the women at the very top of the ladder.
On one of my first dates, was with an overweight supermarket assistant manager who had a potbelly. I was thin in shape and attractive, and made twice what he did. that did not bother me, as long as we got along I would’ve continued to date him to see what happened. But while we were waiting for dinner, he grabbed my triceps and squeezed them, saying “I thought you said you were in shape? You don’t seem very toned”. He never called me again, despite us having good conversation and a lot in common.
This is the dating mentality of the world we live in today. Potbellied men telling women they’re not in shape enough for them. Everyone feels entitled to a “10” for some reason. It is very difficult to meet people online and it does not matter whether you are a man or a woman.
Of course they’re going to be that very small percentage of both men and women who are top-tier, prom queen or whatever they may have their pick of everyone, but that’s not the vast majority of single people online. And I have known men who online dated, and the women that they had saved us their favorites were probably tens when they were probably fives. You have to be realistic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
on steroids as I have read that men only get swiped right on something like 9%? Which is pretty bad indeed.
