Single women aren't happier than if they were married, if you think about it (lesbians, husbands)
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.
As skeptical as I am about many true singles (not in relationships or altogether celibate) being happy, I haven't browbeaten anyone in this thread.
I beg to differ:
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodheathen
Regardless, if there's a difference of opinion about getting married, it's a problem. I personally red-flag the statement as a possible sign that men's well-being is of little concern to you and suspect marriage would end in unilateral divorce. So, I don't always urge people in relationships to marry.
Why would you even say that? You don't know her at all.
Insulting those who disagree is what you do when you're out of intellectual ammo.
The real question here is why does the OP need this type of validation? I don't understand why some individuals feel the need to use other people to back up their claims. Relationships are very personal and the only generalities you can make about them is that: Most people partake in them, they all have positives and negatives, etc. And that is where the similarities stop for the most part. Underneath the surface they are WAY more complex than the OP will acknowledge.
Which brings me to another point, as much as he says he doesn't have an agenda, then what was the point of presenting this argument? He seems to be troubled by his belief that everyone thinks one way against marriage, and is trying to sway them to think another way. Which makes no sense because if the problem is too many people are thinking a certain way, why try to sway them all to another type of hivemind? That completely defeats the purpose. Why not encourage variety in thinking and belief systems?
I think the whole concept behind these types of threads, is that the individuals who create them start to worry when they meet a lot of people who don't share their same views. They start to assume that if that particular belief spreads to other people, that individual will be left all alone with no one to support them. To me if you truly believe in something STAND in it, by YOURSELF. Live your truth the way you see it, and leave everyone else out of it. If no one wants to stand with you, you don't need them.
Well right, but there are only 7.6 billion people on this planet right now. You won't be standing alone.
But (obviously) I've had mixed feelings about this whole subject. I can agree that these articles are silly. But I will disagree with the idea that anyone really has any obligation to push back against them. I don't really think that silly articles, which are abundant, are persuading massive shifts in human behavior like a flock of little birds wheeling in this direction or that one.
Here's an article or "news story" that I scoffed at when it came up a few years back:
When I first saw it I think it was during my time as an actual polyamorist, but the very premise in the title is BALONEY! Just because some people are able to openly do this, doesn't mean, "Well, if we accept people being free to so such things, then before ya know it, everybody is gonna want to, and then where will we be as a society?" It is set up to generate a reaction from some people who see it, it's more than a bit sensationalist, and I feel like the articles cited here are, too. I see plenty of people seeking and finding marriage. I don't think that there is a sweeping epidemic in this regard, at least not here.
Honestly I am far more concerned about generations of kids growing up immersed in screens, and many of them struggling to figure out how to even interact with other human beings. I see this as one of the driving factors in what we do hear about young people not having as much sex or relationships. Relationships require engaged attention and quality time. You can't do that if your eyeballs are fastened on your phone or computer screen to the extent you won't set it aside to interact with another person. And they require emotional intelligence and resilience that we don't learn from interacting with tech, either. So to whatever extent there's a problem...I think that may be a big part of it.
As skeptical as I am about many true singles (not in relationships or altogether celibate) being happy, I haven't browbeaten anyone in this thread.
Agenda? I'd like to counter the false belief that marriage is bad for women and maybe sway a few of the many people who are ambivalent.
Re the false belief, I was right that there has been at least one study that involves health and middle-aged women. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...are-healthiest
It's more scientific than I thought, but still it seems to be making a big deal of minor differences and the columnist writing about the research is the same pro-singlehood woman I mentioned earlier.
All you can do is present your case and let people read for themselves. I myself am single. I'm not the happiest, but I imagine that I would be even more unhappy in a relationship (if I rushed and made the wrong choice).
To be honest, I don't hear that much about marriage being "bad for women". If anything, I've heard stories from a --*ahem* certain group of men, that have been burned by a divorce and been cleaned out by their wives.
To be honest, especially in this age, the chances of being happy in a marriage are not that huge. I mean you have to work through the players, the narcissists, the sociopaths, etc.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to believe that marriage is bad for both men and women.
As skeptical as I am about many true singles (not in relationships or altogether celibate) being happy, I haven't browbeaten anyone in this thread.
I wasn't talking about you primarily, but about where discussions about this topic invariably lead. I'm also pointing out that browbeating and harassment are the operative words.
Quote:
Agenda? I'd like to counter the false belief that marriage is bad for women and maybe sway a few of the many people who are ambivalent.
If you want to refute research that you believe is flawed, that's fine. But from there, people make their own decisions.
You say that you're pro-marriage. Would it also be accurate to say that you're anti-single?
If I understand correctly, you wrote that article on the Catholic website. If so, are there religious motivations behind your pro-marriage (and maybe anti-single) stance?
And the have-nots, the growing percentage that hasn't had sex, probably would also have some discomfort at the thought of a close, long-term relationship.
"Discomfort at the thought of a close, long-term relationship." I can see how those who engage in superficial sexual relationships wouldn't like the thought, because "the feels" means the end of playtime...either because they feel the urge to commit, ending the field-playing, or because one partner isn't interested in getting emotionally invested.
As a have-not, though, I don't feel discomfort at the thought. Some do (and some on here have), and the inclination seems to be based on a level of self-loathing...apprehension at "inflicting" themselves on someone else. But speaking for myself, the thought that brings me discomfort is that there's something fundamentally wrong or inadequate about me, and that my years of being ignored romantically and sexually are evidence of that...that since the normal human gets to experience those things, that I must not be normal, which is a terrifying thought to me.
A New Normal?
But to expand on that (and go off on a tangent), that not getting to participate in that part of the human experience makes me less normal, you mention the "growing percentage that hasn't had sex", and I've read the same thing, with one study showing that nearly 30% of men between the ages of 18-30 not having sex in the last year, a number that has tripled in the last 10 years. (Women in the same age bracket stand at 18%.) The same study posted that male virginity is probably also on the rise, with 27% of men between 18-30 reporting no female sex partners at all, a number again that has tripled in the last ten years.
My question is, if those numbers are growing like that...who is to say that experiences like mine aren't the new normal? Obviously numbers around 30% are still in the minority. But, there has been a massive cultural shift to make LGBTQ people feel normal and accepted, and the high-end estimate for the number of adults in the country that category encompasses is about 5%. (Note that I'm not trying to make a social or political commentary one way or another on that, I'm just listing it as a fact and drawing attention to the recent efforts to accept and normalize people who identify as LGBTQ compared to past decades.) Compared to that, numbers of male virginity/sexlessness of around 30% and female sexlessness of 18% are HUGE, and would certainly qualify as "culturally normal" if LGBTQ does as well.
Sexual selection and the single's sex life
A corollary also is the disparity in the number of sexless men in that age bracket (28%) vs. women (18%). Men are ten points higher...so who are women having sex with? The article I linked above takes a stab:
Quote:
Whether it’s because the small number of not-terrible men are skewing things by having a disproportionate amount of sex, or more women are having sex with each other instead—or, more likely, both—for most of the men out there, she’s just not that into you.
...Also possible is that women are having sex with men who fall outside of that age bracket, which, given men's proclivity towards that age bracket no matter their own age, and also many women's willingness to date older men, is just as likely.
But, there's an interesting tidbit in that quotegrab that will make these next two paragraphs pretty dangerous for me: "The small number of not-terrible men skewing things by having a disproportionate amount of sex." That's dangerously close to incel logic, and while I utterly reject the misogyny of incels, I think there may be a grain of truth to that sex-focused logic. Anyone who has stepped out the door of online dating knows that it tends to be dominated by men looking for sex...many times more men looking for easy hookups than women.
If one wants to use online dating to find a hookup, sheer market forces dictate that a woman will have a much easier time than a man, and a woman will have a broader selection of available men. Logically, men that women find more attractive will be picked more often than men who are less attractive. (And yes, I know that attractiveness is subjective and broad, but I think it's a given that there are certain characteristics that are generally found more attractive by more people than other characteristics.) I don't think it's a stretch to say this trend would apply in every-day life as well...more men looking for relationship-less sex than women, means the men who are subjectively more attractive will be selected more often than less attractive men.
That could account for at least a part of the disparity in the number of sexless men vs. sexless women. Also, if one is able to find meaning and happiness in life outside of a relationship, but also counts a healthy, active, fulfilling sex life as part of their general well-being, relationship or not, then I can see how it's possible that more women than men find happiness outside of relationships, given that I believe that women are generally able to find sex partners more easily than men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodheathen
I think there's another factor, one that is hard to blame on feminism, the increasing ease of communicating with mom. If mom and daughter are awake, they can communicate from almost anywhere. Why wait to open up to a husband late in the day?
I think that's a factor that isn't explored very often. I think that in general women are able to find emotional support more easily than men due to the sociological embargo on male pathos and vulnerability. Think social media feeds...if you see an emotional post, be it happy, sad, introspective, whatever, chances are it came from a woman. Women have girlfriends, sisters, coworkers, moms, dads even, that they feel comfortable talking to about emotionally heavy issues. Guys, usually don't, and the ones they open up to tend to be women. So, I can sure see how some women would resent being used as an emotional sponge for men in a relationship. That must get frustrating, having to bear the brunt of all their emotional pain and frustration, particularly if the man isn't willing to return the favor. It's also another way that I can see how women have an easier time finding happiness outside of a relationship than men.
I wasn't talking about you primarily, but about where discussions about this topic invariably lead. I'm also pointing out that browbeating and harassment are the operative words.
If you want to refute research that you believe is flawed, that's fine. But from there, people make their own decisions.
You say that you're pro-marriage. Would it also be accurate to say that you're anti-single?
I'm against childless people being single and in practice disinterested in relationships. Well, okay, I personally don't mind if men drop out. Makes my life easier.
Quote:
If I understand correctly, you wrote that article on the Catholic website. If so, are there religious motivations behind your pro-marriage (and maybe anti-single) stance?
Lol, this "heathen" doesn't write for any Catholic websites.
Why would you even say that? You don't know her at all.
Insulting those who disagree is what you do when you're out of intellectual ammo.
Okay, but some caveats: that wasn't browbeating her for being single, she'd made a seemingly derisive statement about men's wants and needs, and ultimately it appears I was right about her being inclined to unilateral divorce and genuinely felt the need to say that relationship might be doomed.
As skeptical as I am about many true singles (not in relationships or altogether celibate) being happy, I haven't browbeaten anyone in this thread.
Agenda? I'd like to counter the false belief that marriage is bad for women and maybe sway a few of the many people who are ambivalent.
Re the false belief, I was right that there has been at least one study that involves health and middle-aged women. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...are-healthiest
It's more scientific than I thought, but still it seems to be making a big deal of minor differences and the columnist writing about the research is the same pro-singlehood woman I mentioned earlier.
I reread one of my posts and it reads wrong. I didn't mean you had a certain agenda.
...ahh, nevermind. I can't figure out how to word things these days.
I'm against childless people being single and in practice disinterested in relationships. Well, okay, I personally don't mind if men drop out. Makes my life easier.
I find this interesting, especially the bolded, and one (not me) might be inclined to ask why.
"Discomfort at the thought of a close, long-term relationship." I can see how those who engage in superficial sexual relationships wouldn't like the thought, because "the feels" means the end of playtime...either because they feel the urge to commit, ending the field-playing, or because one partner isn't interested in getting emotionally invested.
As a have-not, though, I don't feel discomfort at the thought. Some do (and some on here have), and the inclination seems to be based on a level of self-loathing...apprehension at "inflicting" themselves on someone else. But speaking for myself, the thought that brings me discomfort is that there's something fundamentally wrong or inadequate about me, and that my years of being ignored romantically and sexually are evidence of that...that since the normal human gets to experience those things, that I must not be normal, which is a terrifying thought to me.
[skipping past a long tangent I probably agree with]
Quote:
I think that's a factor that isn't explored very often. I think that in general women are able to find emotional support more easily than men due to the sociological embargo on male pathos and vulnerability. Think social media feeds...if you see an emotional post, be it happy, sad, introspective, whatever, chances are it came from a woman. Women have girlfriends, sisters, coworkers, moms, dads even, that they feel comfortable talking to about emotionally heavy issues. Guys, usually don't, and the ones they open up to tend to be women. So, I can sure see how some women would resent being used as an emotional sponge for men in a relationship. That must get frustrating, having to bear the brunt of all their emotional pain and frustration, particularly if the man isn't willing to return the favor. It's also another way that I can see how women have an easier time finding happiness outside of a relationship than men.
Yes. I didn't mean the ability to communicate as much as wanted with others instead of an already present husband. I meant that removes some motivation to find a man or to open up in a budding relationship.
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.
