Record high amount of young men not having..ehm you-know-what.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

IceForce:
These figures are strange. Does this mean more women are preferring to have sex with each other? That's one way to explain the discrepancy...

That or the men actually getting laid sleep around more than women do.

Abomination:
It... is?

I thought it was the term given to the new interconnected nature of national economies on a global scale, or how some businesses now also operate on a global scale, and even influence economies on a global scale.

What is the new acceptable term to use when discussing the current global economic situation where nations are co-dependent on one another?

It is.

The acceptable term, I suppose, is "global economic situation," no?

Johnny Novgorod:

IceForce:
These figures are strange. Does this mean more women are preferring to have sex with each other? That's one way to explain the discrepancy...

That or the men actually getting laid sleep around more than women do.

There is clearly an infestation of Pick Up Artists. /s

Abomination:

Johnny Novgorod:

IceForce:
These figures are strange. Does this mean more women are preferring to have sex with each other? That's one way to explain the discrepancy...

That or the men actually getting laid sleep around more than women do.

There is clearly an infestation of Pick Up Artists. /s

That is actually not that far off . When I go clubbing or to watch bands play ect, you always have guys who will walk up and hit on every woman in the place until one of them finally says yes. How many times have they done this to how many different women on how many different nights? They likely keep doing it because eventually they will find someone who will sleep with them. So yea, those numbers will add up. The same thing of course happens on dating sites where women are greatly outnumbered by men.

Kyle Gaddo:

Abomination:
It... is?

I thought it was the term given to the new interconnected nature of national economies on a global scale, or how some businesses now also operate on a global scale, and even influence economies on a global scale.

What is the new acceptable term to use when discussing the current global economic situation where nations are co-dependent on one another?

It is.

The acceptable term, I suppose, is "global economic situation," no?

"Globalist", not "Globalism". There isn't even a single word in there that refers to a specific demographic.

The word was used to describe the current global economic situation before the Cheeto in Charge ran his stupid fat mouth. But now he spouts it with supposed dog whistling intent it's anti-Semitic?

The "global economic situation" is presently globalism, as opposed to nationalism, or isolationism, or federated economies.

Finally, contextually, is this implying that The Lunatic was accusing... Jews of being responsible for the supposed reduction in sexual intercourse experienced by men? Because I assure you they were not.

I am not from the US, when I use the term Globalism I use it without even thinking of Jews except in the sense that they are included as part of the... globe.

I'd say part of it is that more people are on minimum wage and living in their parent's basements, which kills the romance.

Abomination:

Kyle Gaddo:

Abomination:
It... is?

I thought it was the term given to the new interconnected nature of national economies on a global scale, or how some businesses now also operate on a global scale, and even influence economies on a global scale.

What is the new acceptable term to use when discussing the current global economic situation where nations are co-dependent on one another?

It is.

The acceptable term, I suppose, is "global economic situation," no?

"Globalist", not "Globalism". There isn't even a single word in there that refers to a specific demographic.

The word was used to describe the current global economic situation before the Cheeto in Charge ran his stupid fat mouth. But now he spouts it with supposed dog whistling intent it's anti-Semitic?

The "global economic situation" is presently globalism, as opposed to nationalism, or isolationism, or federated economies.

Finally, contextually, is this implying that The Lunatic was accusing... Jews of being responsible for the supposed reduction in sexual intercourse experienced by men? Because I assure you they were not.

I am not from the US, when I use the term Globalism I use it without even thinking of Jews except in the sense that they are included as part of the... globe.

I sent this to Kyle in a separate PM since I wanted to avoid derailing, but since we're here anyway... I decided to waste a chunk of time (started with 30 minutes, extended to an hour later on), and I have no idea where the claim made in the noted article above came from.

I found the exact same one during my first google sweep, but if you start digging into those links attached to declarative statements, they just go to news stories that don't really cite anything. So I dusted off the old wikipedia and fired up the uni accounts to have a deeper look. All told I found basically one sentence in one wikipedia article attributing the use of globalism as an antisemetic word to Henry Ford and his pamphlets, which I searched and could not really find reference to (aside from his general discussion about how Jewish people are showing up on the word stage and his strong feelings about that). The extra time noted above was from me attempting to dig up something roughly related in the humanities section of the uni library - because of the way those are titled and the abstracts are written it can be very hard to dig up articles about topics this specific - but I couldn't find anything. That's not to say it doesn't exist, but I'm not doing a lit review of claims the US news has made if I can't even get a straight answer out of wikipedia.

Abomination:
"Globalist", not "Globalism". There isn't even a single word in there that refers to a specific demographic.

The word was used to describe the current global economic situation before the Cheeto in Charge ran his stupid fat mouth. But now he spouts it with supposed dog whistling intent it's anti-Semitic?

The "global economic situation" is presently globalism, as opposed to nationalism, or isolationism, or federated economies.

Finally, contextually, is this implying that The Lunatic was accusing... Jews of being responsible for the supposed reduction in sexual intercourse experienced by men? Because I assure you they were not.

I am not from the US, when I use the term Globalism I use it without even thinking of Jews except in the sense that they are included as part of the... globe.

This is not up for debate.

EvilRoy:
I found the exact same one during my first google sweep, but if you start digging into those links attached to declarative statements, they just go to news stories that don't really cite anything. So I dusted off the old wikipedia and fired up the uni accounts to have a deeper look. All told I found basically one sentence in one wikipedia article attributing the use of globalism as an antisemetic word to Henry Ford and his pamphlets, which I searched and could not really find reference to (aside from his general discussion about how Jewish people are showing up on the word stage and his strong feelings about that). The extra time noted above was from me attempting to dig up something roughly related in the humanities section of the uni library - because of the way those are titled and the abstracts are written it can be very hard to dig up articles about topics this specific - but I couldn't find anything. That's not to say it doesn't exist, but I'm not doing a lit review of claims the US news has made if I can't even get a straight answer out of wikipedia.

There is a known conflation of these terms.

Kyle Gaddo:

Abomination:
"Globalist", not "Globalism". There isn't even a single word in there that refers to a specific demographic.

The word was used to describe the current global economic situation before the Cheeto in Charge ran his stupid fat mouth. But now he spouts it with supposed dog whistling intent it's anti-Semitic?

The "global economic situation" is presently globalism, as opposed to nationalism, or isolationism, or federated economies.

Finally, contextually, is this implying that The Lunatic was accusing... Jews of being responsible for the supposed reduction in sexual intercourse experienced by men? Because I assure you they were not.

I am not from the US, when I use the term Globalism I use it without even thinking of Jews except in the sense that they are included as part of the... globe.

This is not up for debate.

No politics except certain politics. Got it.

Abomination:
No politics except certain politics. Got it.

Antisemitism qualifies as hate speech and is against our code of conduct.

Kyle Gaddo:

Abomination:
No politics except certain politics. Got it.

Antisemitism qualifies as hate speech and is against our code of conduct.

Yes, I would never show cultural bigotry towards Jews/Israelis.

Nobody in this thread mentioned them, even in passing, until your reminder of this policy.

Abomination:

Kyle Gaddo:

Abomination:
No politics except certain politics. Got it.

Antisemitism qualifies as hate speech and is against our code of conduct.

Yes, I would never show cultural bigotry towards Jews/Israelis.

Nobody in this thread mentioned them, even in passing, until your reminder of this policy.

It is used as a dog-whistle to mean some Jewish conspiracy or other, and has been for a while. Yeah, it doesn't make sense, but then, racist conspiracy rubbish.

OTOH, it's not solely used as a racist dog-whistle. Well, most dog-whistle aren't, otherwise they wouldn'r work, but lots of people do use it to legitimately mean an aspect the global economic and financial situation.

Thaluikhain:
It is used as a dog-whistle to mean some Jewish conspiracy or other, and has been for a while. Yeah, it doesn't make sense, but then, racist conspiracy rubbish.

OTOH, it's not solely used as a racist dog-whistle. Well, most dog-whistle aren't, otherwise they wouldn'r work, but lots of people do use it to legitimately mean an aspect the global economic and financial situation.

I was just using it to refer to the state of communication and social interaction we have these days compared to the previous generation.

People find partners across the globe at a significantly higher rate during this generation than any other time in history.

Thaluikhain:

Abomination:

Kyle Gaddo:

Antisemitism qualifies as hate speech and is against our code of conduct.

Yes, I would never show cultural bigotry towards Jews/Israelis.

Nobody in this thread mentioned them, even in passing, until your reminder of this policy.

It is used as a dog-whistle to mean some Jewish conspiracy or other, and has been for a while. Yeah, it doesn't make sense, but then, racist conspiracy rubbish.

OTOH, it's not solely used as a racist dog-whistle. Well, most dog-whistle aren't, otherwise they wouldn'r work, but lots of people do use it to legitimately mean an aspect the global economic and financial situation.

The swastika has been a positive religious symbol for Native American tribes for thousands of years, all it took was for Nazi's to adopt it to taint it's meaning forever. That pretty much applies here as well.

Thaluikhain:
I'd say part of it is that more people are on minimum wage and living in their parent's basements, which kills the romance.

Poor people still have sex. Living with parents never really stopped teenagers from having sex, but I think depression induced by the stress from the pressure from current society may play more of a role in sexual activity than just economic issues on their own.

Abomination:
Yes, I would never show cultural bigotry towards Jews/Israelis.

Nobody in this thread mentioned them, even in passing, until your reminder of this policy.

I have to be conscious, because it's used often enough that it is a cause for concern.

The Lunatic:
I was just using it to refer to the state of communication and social interaction we have these days compared to the previous generation.

People find partners across the globe at a significantly higher rate during this generation than any other time in history.

I appreciate your clarification. Please be cautious/elaborative of your terminology so we don't run into this confusion in the future.

Thaluikhain:

Abomination:

Kyle Gaddo:

Antisemitism qualifies as hate speech and is against our code of conduct.

Yes, I would never show cultural bigotry towards Jews/Israelis.

Nobody in this thread mentioned them, even in passing, until your reminder of this policy.

It is used as a dog-whistle to mean some Jewish conspiracy or other, and has been for a while. Yeah, it doesn't make sense, but then, racist conspiracy rubbish.

OTOH, it's not solely used as a racist dog-whistle. Well, most dog-whistle aren't, otherwise they wouldn'r work, but lots of people do use it to legitimately mean an aspect the global economic and financial situation.

I think one could reasonably say that the significant majority of people use it in the global economic and financial situation.

Semites have nothing to do with it.

Lil devils x:
The swastika has been a positive religious symbol for Native American tribes for thousands of years, all it took was for Nazi's to adopt it to taint it's meaning forever. That pretty much applies here as well.

Right, but... that was a genuine political organisation that had a literal uniform applied in a military and conquest manner. The only relationship the two scenarios have is that Semites were targeted. The SCALE and organisation between the two scenarios is galaxies apart.

Kyle Gaddo:

EvilRoy:
I found the exact same one during my first google sweep, but if you start digging into those links attached to declarative statements, they just go to news stories that don't really cite anything. So I dusted off the old wikipedia and fired up the uni accounts to have a deeper look. All told I found basically one sentence in one wikipedia article attributing the use of globalism as an antisemetic word to Henry Ford and his pamphlets, which I searched and could not really find reference to (aside from his general discussion about how Jewish people are showing up on the word stage and his strong feelings about that). The extra time noted above was from me attempting to dig up something roughly related in the humanities section of the uni library - because of the way those are titled and the abstracts are written it can be very hard to dig up articles about topics this specific - but I couldn't find anything. That's not to say it doesn't exist, but I'm not doing a lit review of claims the US news has made if I can't even get a straight answer out of wikipedia.

There is a known conflation of these terms.

Well, kind of, although I don't know if you're using that quite right, and its not what those news articles were generally referring to. That said, as I meantioned in my pm, its your prerogative how you want to identify hate speach. All I ask is you give us non americans a glossary, because I'm not gonna start watching US news just to keep track of new slurs as they're identified/developed in your country.

Abomination:

Thaluikhain:

Abomination:
Yes, I would never show cultural bigotry towards Jews/Israelis.

Nobody in this thread mentioned them, even in passing, until your reminder of this policy.

It is used as a dog-whistle to mean some Jewish conspiracy or other, and has been for a while. Yeah, it doesn't make sense, but then, racist conspiracy rubbish.

OTOH, it's not solely used as a racist dog-whistle. Well, most dog-whistle aren't, otherwise they wouldn'r work, but lots of people do use it to legitimately mean an aspect the global economic and financial situation.

I think one could reasonably say that the significant majority of people use it in the global economic and financial situation.

Semites have nothing to do with it.

Lil devils x:
The swastika has been a positive religious symbol for Native American tribes for thousands of years, all it took was for Nazi's to adopt it to taint it's meaning forever. That pretty much applies here as well.

Right, but... that was a genuine political organisation that had a literal uniform applied in a military and conquest manner. The only relationship the two scenarios have is that Semites were targeted. The SCALE and organisation between the two scenarios is galaxies apart.

I don't think that is the case, this is more widespread rhetoric in the US than you may realize, not only from jerks like Alex Jones, but the GOP itself has spread this BS here. We literally have US congressmen sending this crap out ranting about Soros and the New world order BS in emails to constituents. The scale and organization in the US is much larger than you seem to understand.

I really should start keeping the emails Ted Cruz and jeb Hensarling have sent me. They are pretty nuts.
https://www.texasobserver.org/greg-abbott-ted-cruz-dan-patricks-obsession-george-soros-weird-kind-dangerous/

Lil devils x:
I don't think that is the case, this is more widespread rhetoric in the US than you may realize, not only from jerks like Alex Jones, but the GOP itself has spread this BS here. We literally have US congressmen sending this crap out ranting about Soros and the New world order BS in emails to constituents. The scale and organization in the US is much larger than you seem to understand.

I can understand that some people might misuse language in that way... but that doesn't mean that every utterance of the word is anti-Semitic. It's like someone owning a Swastika adorned Buddha, and another person with a red armband, white circle, and black Swastika goosestepping down the street with an arm extended, palm down.

One hopes an individual can determine the difference between the two and how the existence of one does not mean the other is also guilty by association - especially when the innocent party existed before the offending.

Abomination:
I can understand that some people might misuse language in that way... but that doesn't mean that every utterance of the word is anti-Semitic. It's like someone owning a Swastika adorned Buddha, and another person with a red armband, white circle, and black Swastika goosestepping down the street with an arm extended, palm down.

One hopes an individual can determine the difference between the two and how the existence of one does not mean the other is also guilty by association - especially when the innocent party existed before the offending.

Context is not always readily apparent.

Lunatic already clarified.

This discussion is concluded.

Abomination:

Lil devils x:
I don't think that is the case, this is more widespread rhetoric in the US than you may realize, not only from jerks like Alex Jones, but the GOP itself has spread this BS here. We literally have US congressmen sending this crap out ranting about Soros and the New world order BS in emails to constituents. The scale and organization in the US is much larger than you seem to understand.

I can understand that some people might misuse language in that way... but that doesn't mean that every utterance of the word is anti-Semitic. It's like someone owning a Swastika adorned Buddha, and another person with a red armband, white circle, and black Swastika goosestepping down the street with an arm extended, palm down.

One hopes an individual can determine the difference between the two and how the existence of one does not mean the other is also guilty by association - especially when the innocent party existed before the offending.

Native American tribes, including my own, voluntarily chose to stop publicly using the Swastika due to how it was perceived out of respect for others because not causing other's distress is more important than a desire to use a certain word or symbol. Right now, when we have a rise in racist extremism, it would be naive to think that people can always tell the difference when so much of the Rhetoric promoting these things has been normalized. Some may see it as an overreaction to refrain from using words or symbols, but in reality it has been the under reaction that has caused the extremism to become as widespread and normalized as it has been. When we now have the President of one of the most powerful nations in the world saying racist Nazis marching in the streets with torches are "very fine people" and hate crimes increasing 226% in counties where the President holds rallies, it has become apparent this was ignored for far too long and allowed to get way out of hand. We have to start addressing the actual rhetoric and showing it for what it is or this will only get worse. People ignoring it and normalizing it are what allowed this to happen.

I am not sure what exactly would be effective at curbing this, but doing nothing has obviously not worked.

Thaluikhain:
I'd say part of it is that more people are on minimum wage and living in their parent's basements, which kills the romance.

Apparently that's the issue Japan is having(I'd need to dig up the source again) where women aren't interested in dudes who don't have proper careers, which are becoming harder and harder to get into in Japan.

I wouldn't be surprised if something similar weren't at play here, at least partially.

Globalism may have started as being antisemitic but now that there's an issue about globalization and automation I think it's safe to say most people who use it are either unaware of or at the very least don't mean to include antisemitism in their point. They're talking about stuff like companies shipping jobs off to poorer countries so that they can pay the workers low wages and stuff like that.

It comes off as a disingenuous way to deflect and protect the status quo to liken that type of concern in any way at all with antisemitism. If you're so worried about that, you wanna police terms like "the women's march" much more strictly than "globalism", but something tells me that's not happening any time soon. (and imo, policing either thing is very silly, but if I had to police one, that'd be the one)

Dreiko:
Globalism may have started as being antisemitic but now that there's an issue about globalization and automation I think it's safe to say most people who use it are either unaware of or at the very least don't mean to include antisemitism in their point. They're talking about stuff like companies shipping jobs off to poorer countries so that they can pay the workers low wages and stuff like that.

It comes off as a disingenuous way to deflect and protect the status quo to liken that type of concern in any way at all with antisemitism. If you're so worried about that, you wanna police terms like "the women's march" much more strictly than "globalism", but something tells me that's not happening any time soon. (and imo, policing either thing is very silly, but if I had to police one, that'd be the one)

I said the discussion was concluded.

Dalisclock:

Thaluikhain:
I'd say part of it is that more people are on minimum wage and living in their parent's basements, which kills the romance.

Apparently that's the issue Japan is having(I'd need to dig up the source again) where women aren't interested in dudes who don't have proper careers, which are becoming harder and harder to get into in Japan.

I wouldn't be surprised if something similar weren't at play here, at least partially.

It's cause in Japan being a housewife is still very common so if you don't have a proper career you can't afford being married. Especially if you plan on having a kid, since the cost of schools is insane. (I read this one story about a year ago regarding this public school ordering school uniforms from some fancy designer that cost close to 1000 bucks for each student, that their parents had to pay for, this is just the uniform too, never mind the other stuff, the reasoning being something about teaching kids to value their belongings and treat them with care)

Lil devils x:

That is actually not that far off . When I go clubbing or to watch bands play ect, you always have guys who will walk up and hit on every woman in the place until one of them finally says yes. How many times have they done this to how many different women on how many different nights? They likely keep doing it because eventually they will find someone who will sleep with them. So yea, those numbers will add up. The same thing of course happens on dating sites where women are greatly outnumbered by men.

Based on my totally unscientific personal experience I'm going to go with this. I have a friend who's a specialist in picking up women (and not only at the club or concert, tinder, gym, bar, everything goes) and if i'd make some stats he's probably at 20 different women a year on average. Which means that while he counts as 1 guy having sex over the year he adds 20 women to the stats on the other side. On the other hand I've this gut feeling there are much less (succesful?) female pick up artists.

Thaluikhain:
I'd say part of it is that more people are on minimum wage and living in their parent's basements, which kills the romance.

Shouldn't that also apply to women? Or are men less "classist" than women?

IceForce:
These figures are strange. Does this mean more women are preferring to have sex with each other? That's one way to explain the discrepancy...

Yes.

Women Over 30 Are Leaving Their Husbands and Boyfriends For Other Women
https://www.instyle.com/lifestyle/late-life-sexual-fluidity

Kyle Gaddo:

Dreiko:
Globalism may have started as being antisemitic but now that there's an issue about globalization and automation I think it's safe to say most people who use it are either unaware of or at the very least don't mean to include antisemitism in their point. They're talking about stuff like companies shipping jobs off to poorer countries so that they can pay the workers low wages and stuff like that.

It comes off as a disingenuous way to deflect and protect the status quo to liken that type of concern in any way at all with antisemitism. If you're so worried about that, you wanna police terms like "the women's march" much more strictly than "globalism", but something tells me that's not happening any time soon. (and imo, policing either thing is very silly, but if I had to police one, that'd be the one)

I said the discussion was concluded.

Thing is, on a forum you don't really get to say "this discussion is concluded" simply because of the way the platform operates. People have memories, and will bring it up in future no matter what you say. It's better to let a healthy debate play out than to try and kill it and start a Streisand effect.

Good on you for actually pilling citation links to back up your interpretation of the rules though, that already puts you head and shoulders above most former CMs on this site.

generals3:

Lil devils x:

That is actually not that far off . When I go clubbing or to watch bands play ect, you always have guys who will walk up and hit on every woman in the place until one of them finally says yes. How many times have they done this to how many different women on how many different nights? They likely keep doing it because eventually they will find someone who will sleep with them. So yea, those numbers will add up. The same thing of course happens on dating sites where women are greatly outnumbered by men.

Based on my totally unscientific personal experience I'm going to go with this. I have a friend who's a specialist in picking up women (and not only at the club or concert, tinder, gym, bar, everything goes) and if i'd make some stats he's probably at 20 different women a year on average. Which means that while he counts as 1 guy having sex over the year he adds 20 women to the stats on the other side. On the other hand I've this gut feeling there are much less (succesful?) female pick up artists.

Sounds about right. There will always be those PUAs that are either too awkward by nature or are just starting out that don't have much success, but the others tend to do pretty regular business. I've noticed that girls on a night out looking for no-strings adventure sex are far more likely to hook up with well presented, outwardly confident PUAs than the guys that amble around just hoping for something to happen.

And if the popularity of Tinder with both sexes is anything to go by, there is a whole lot of non-relationship adventure sex going on out there. And that's the type women tend to be least likely to want to talk about beyond their immediate friends. And you can't really blame them, either.

Squilookle:

Sounds about right. There will always be those PUAs that are either too awkward by nature or are just starting out that don't have much success, but the others tend to do pretty regular business. I've noticed that girls on a night out looking for no-strings adventure sex are far more likely to hook up with well presented, outwardly confident PUAs than the guys that amble around just hoping for something to happen.

And if the popularity of Tinder with both sexes is anything to go by, there is a whole lot of non-relationship adventure sex going on out there. And that's the type women tend to be least likely to want to talk about beyond their immediate friends. And you can't really blame them, either.

There's probably some truth to this. There are far more men then women looking for temporary sexual contacts, which means that a woman who wants to "fuck and forget" has it a whole lot easier in that she's much more likely to find a man who has the same plan.

In a broader perspective, we must not forget that men have fewer close friends, spend less time hanging out with friends that are not family and tend to put more stock in workplace friends then women do. A lot more men then women find themselves without any close friends and with barely any contact with their co-workers. There have been several theories to why this is, but the one I still find most likely is that women are raised to be social and outgoing and to remember that they must be pleasing (both in looks and personality) if they want to find a partner, either temporary or long-term. Many men are still raised without any particular focus on social skills and are instead told that they'll get a partner if they have money, career success or simply never told how to get a partner at all.

With that in mind, the 10% difference number of men and women having sex can somewhat be attributed to the number of men who are simply not "on the market" at all. Remember that incels and mgtow (men going their own way) are growing movements and these are men who are unlikely to be in places and situations where they could find a partner. Women do not have similar movements and tend to have life routines that puts them in situations where they can meet a partner more often. It is a terrible shame that we don't do a better job at teaching our sons how to function in social situations, because it leaves a lot of them behind.

vallorn:

Kyle Gaddo:

I said the discussion was concluded.

Thing is, on a forum you don't really get to say "this discussion is concluded" simply because of the way the platform operates. People have memories, and will bring it up in future no matter what you say. It's better to let a healthy debate play out than to try and kill it and start a Streisand effect.

If we let stuff 'play out' as you say, then we get accused of being complacent and allowing people to "derail" threads.

So, pick your poison.

So, let's talk about online dating.

I think everyone knows that online dating is a bit shit. But it's shit in very different ways for different people.

A friend of mine once did a social experiment where she made a dating profile with nothing but a photograph of her cleavage as a profile picture, but all text in the profile was just out of context quotes from Slavoj Zizek in what sounded like an incomprehensible and actually kind of worrying rant.

It began to recieve messages. A lot of messages. Many of them were just what you'd expect (i.e. gross and creepy stuff) but she also began to notice something weird. A lot of the people sending messages to this fake Slavoj Zizek tits account were seemingly quite sincere about seeking a relationship. In fact, quite a few had already sent exactly the same messages to her actual profile.

Think about that. A significant proportion of the men who were messaging my friend on her real profile had either just looked at her picture and sent a stock message because they liked her physical appearance, or were so indifferent to her sincere desire for a relationship that they considered that profile interchangeable with one that ranted about being a communist phone but had a pair of tits on it.

And it's not just my friend. This is a very common online experience for young "conventionally attractive" women. This is why women stop replying to men online, why they don't feel safe to put things like "I'm into casual sex" on their profiles and why they don't generally want to meet men for casual hookups. It's because the way men behave online (and often enough in person that it's something you always have to consider) is fucking terrifying. I get this myself from gay men, which is why I've generally stopped dating them or having casual sex with them, because I've had some actually scary experiences hooking up with men, experiences which genuinely triggered that "oh shit, I'm going to be found dead stuffed in a hotel closet" kind of impulse, and I consider myself very naive for getting myself in those situations because experience has shown me you can't trust men you don't know. Heck, statistically you can't even really trust men you do know.. you just kind of have to sometimes because what's the alternative?

Incels and red-pillers have built an entire philosophy around the fact that the "desirable females" they want to date don't message them back on dating sites, assumed massive demographic trends and generally convinced themselves into an absurd universe where having the wrong shaped skull or thin wrists means you're some kind of monster who will never know human love or happiness, or that loving sexual partners will inevitably take your money and cheat on you with "Chads", or where you have to be a manipulative borderline rapist to try and "trick" female psychology into accepting them you as an "alpha".

But stop for one second, and actually think about this from the opposite perspective. Think about how exhausting and threatening it would be to recieve dozens of messages from people who clearly have zero interest in you other than the fact they can put their dick in you. Sure, it might be fun or "complimentary" the first few times it happens, and you might even get a little thrill out of it, but by the hundredth, the thousandth? What about the first time someone goes off and degenerates into a stream of insults because you respond to them with anything less than "oh yes, please come and fuck me daddy"? How many times is that supposed to happen to you before you just decide you don't need this shit and it's not worth the risk of replying at all, and this is ignoring the position of women who are overweight, or disabled, or otherwise considered conventionally unattractive, because I'm not even going to touch the stuff men send to them.

When I was younger, I had a lot of casual sex, some of which was with women. Probably far, far more than most people who self-identify as "pick up artists", and I think I can tell you a little secret to being able to do that successfully. The secret is not to try and live up to the abusive, rapey ideal of what you think a "real man" or "desirable man" is. The secret is to be extremely safe, and I say "be", not pretend to be. This means being a known quantity. You can't expect to lurk online sending people dick picks and have them want to fuck you. Join a community of people who are actually into casual sex and make yourself a known quantity within that community, be visible and open to public scrutiny, be respectful of people and their boundaries, excercise the same non-judgement you expect people to excercise of you.

In some ways, PUAs (at least, the better class of them) do have the right idea that the way to meet poeople for casual sex is to get off the damn internet, because the internet and online dating can be a great tool, but it can also be incredibly dehumanizing.

Gethsemani:

In a broader perspective, we must not forget that men have fewer close friends, spend less time hanging out with friends that are not family and tend to put more stock in workplace friends then women do. A lot more men then women find themselves without any close friends and with barely any contact with their co-workers.

Where are you getting this from? Is this a cultural difference thing because just about every man I know has several close friends they met years ago while their wives tend to drop/lose friends and make new ones depending on circumstances in their life.

Lil devils x:

Poor people still have sex.

That should totally be against the new code of conduct. Can't stop shuddering.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here