Welcome to Sanctioned Suicide!

This site is a pro-choice suicide community that discusses mental illness and suicide from the perspective of suicidal people, as well as the moral implications of the act.

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Signup Now!

"Holy Shit, Look What I Started"

Nessie

Nessie

Cynical
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
228
So it's also unlikely we will see questions about the relative sexual 'value,' of men and women and their consequences.
Let's raise the questions then! I'm all for asking the questions!
What is sexual "value", really? What are your opinions?

Women's groups cannot exist without benevolent sexism, and (more importantly) they know most women like it.
Why is it not possible for them to exist without it?

I think anybody, guy or girl, who has to do all these things when they are watching others just sort of flow happily through relationships is a breeding ground of resentment by this necessity alone
I think the impression that others are "flowing happily through relationships" and can easily achieve the idealized relationship incels desire is a very heavy factor in breeding resentment. Incels seem to feel like they are the only ones unfairly locked out of the perfect world where people that "won genetic lottery" can have ideal relationships, which sure can make one feel mistreated and resentful. Realistically though, most people either settle with non-ideal relationships and/or casual sex, often not with the person they would ideally desire to have next to them, and have to put in effort to achieve even that, or settle with being single and/or celibate for an indefinite period of time until "the right person comes along".
 
woxihuanni

woxihuanni

Angelic
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Messages
2,365
I think the impression that others are "flowing happily through relationships" and can easily achieve the idealized relationship incels desire is a very heavy factor in breeding resentment. Incels seem to feel like they are the only ones unfairly locked out of the perfect world where people that "won genetic lottery" can have ideal relationships, which sure can make one feel mistreated and resentful. Realistically though, most people either settle with non-ideal relationships and/or casual sex, often not with the person they would ideally desire to have next to them, and have to put in effort to achieve even that, or settle with being single and/or celibate for an indefinite period of time until "the right person comes along".
It is a moot point if the couples they observe are in non-ideal relationships: If incel cannot settle down for something that doesn't fit their requirements (inflexible) and somebody else is flexible, then that person is 'luckier' just as much as a better-looking person is luckier. Here the problem is that relationships become an issue for them more than it is so for other people. Same as eating becoming issue, one diet after another. When basic things become issues to work on, it is not possible to have no resentment about that.

There is a more extreme version: zealous buddhists or other 'spiritual' missionaries for whom living is an issue. They are always 'working' on achieving some level of existing. Which means, though they will never confess it: They are not acceptable as they are, and everybody else is not acceptable because they are not even 'working'. This is different from a natural flow of life where everybody is doing more or less to become a better version of themselves. It is an encompassing issue.

The problem with inceldom is, though, they don't have the same control over their issue that they can have over any other. You can choose to stop making eating or living an issue in the latter examples, but if for whatever reason you cannot find someone you can be happy with, you cannot magic a partner out of thin air by dint of decision or hard work.
 
After The End

After The End

The lily whispers, “I wait.”
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
151
Let's raise the questions then!
Happy to answer, but we will achieve nothing.

Why is it not possible for them to exist without it?
Because in a sexist society, which we are, the main, perhaps only, force that motivates men to do things for women (that is specifically doing things for women because they're women, not because they're friends, partners, expect reciprocation, etc) singly or en masse, is benevolent sexism. Women's groups literally appeal to people's sense of benevolent sexism all the time in order to gain support, publicity, funding, etc.

Let's raise the questions then! I'm all for asking the questions!
What is sexual "value", really? What are your opinions?
It's more about the value of people's bodies as socio-political commodities. At the macro-level women have children. This is politically valuable. It's why, in many first-world countries, the female demographic can exist as a net loss to the government, subsidized by men, yet still receive more social spending and gratuity across the board. If people actually believed men and women were equal they would not tolerate this sort of arrangement for a nano-second. The reality is they just don't. That the word 'equality,' has become a mantra for stupid people means nothing. Such cognitive-dissonance is not new or novel.

On the second point for an assortment of reasons that aren't worth getting into (likely a combination of genetic, cultural and social factors) female sexuality is innately valued in a way male sexuality is not. In fact far from being valued male sexuality is frequently seen as toxic and dangerous. This provides certain women with many social, and some professional/financial advantages, but the cost is not small. For one thing when sexuality is commodified like this it becomes something to be obtained by hook or by crook and when men must 'score,' with women in order to validate their, otherwise worthless, sexuality not only will many do coercive, even abusive things to get it, rejection can result in violence. Finally people are far more likely to view a woman's looks as the totality of her being. A classic example of the benevolent/hostile sexism dichotomy here being the way attractive women are treated with largess and beneficence simply for existing, while objectively ugly women tend to be scorned and demeaned simply for existing. A follow on is that as women get older they tend to become more socially and professional disenfranchised regardless of their achievements.
 
Dr Iron Arc

Dr Iron Arc

Into the Unknown
Joined
Feb 10, 2020
Messages
523
Happy to answer, but we will achieve nothing.



Because in a sexist society, which we are, the main, perhaps only, force that motivates men to do things for women (that is specifically doing things for women because they're women, not because they're friends, partners, expect reciprocation, etc) singly or en masse, is benevolent sexism. Women's groups literally appeal to people's sense of benevolent sexism all the time in order to gain support, publicity, funding, etc.



It's more about the value of people's bodies as socio-political commodities. At the macro-level women have children. This is politically valuable. It's why, in many first-world countries, the female demographic can exist as a net loss to the government, subsidized by men, yet still receive more social spending and gratuity across the board. If people actually believed men and women were equal they would not tolerate this sort of arrangement for a nano-second. The reality is they just don't. That the word 'equality,' has become a mantra for stupid people means nothing. Such cognitive-dissonance is not new or novel.

On the second point for an assortment of reasons that aren't worth getting into (likely a combination of genetic, cultural and social factors) female sexuality is innately valued in a way male sexuality is not. In fact far from being valued male sexuality is frequently seen as toxic and dangerous. This provides certain women with many social, and some professional/financial advantages, but the cost is not small. For one thing when sexuality is commodified like this it becomes something to be obtained by hook or by crook and when men must 'score,' with women in order to validate their, otherwise worthless, sexuality not only will many do coercive, even abusive things to get it, rejection can result in violence. Finally people are far more likely to view a woman's looks as the totality of her being. A classic example of the benevolent/hostile sexism dichotomy here being the way attractive women are treated with largess and beneficence simply for existing, while objectively ugly women tend to be scorned and demeaned simply for existing. A follow on is that as women get older they tend to become more socially and professional disenfranchised regardless of their achievements.
What do you think of the robots idea? Would that hopefully allow for people to stop being held back by their urges and preexisting gender roles? Or do you think virtual reality would be better for preventing humans from being able to harm each other?
 
Raven Moon

Raven Moon

See my heart I decorate it like a grave
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
1,083
Incels are virgins. He couldn't have had a girlfriend and also been an incel.
I don't feel like arguing about this topic and im trying to. I'm just giving perspective from the other side of the issue. this is my last comment...but the ex Was a virgin at the time in highschool who decides to rape me to get his first experience with sex. And he identified as incel I later found out.
 
Last edited:
B

BipolarGuy

Wizard
Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
624
Is Richard Branson's Virgin Experience Days secretly targeted at "incels"?

It's possible.


I don't feel like arguing about this topic and im not am I trying to I'm just giving perspective from the other side of the issue. this is my last comment...but the ex WAS a virgin at the time in highschool who decides to rape me to get his first experience with sex. And he identified as incel I later found out.
Don't worry, you don't need to justify yourself to anyone :)
 
Last edited:
C

checkouttime

Illuminated
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
1,071
I think human beings need to quit making weird labels and shit.
everything has to have a tag or name nowadays. I was a naughty little shit when i was younger. today i'd be branded every fucking illness out there ( which i could also have) and be pumped full of meds!

I was quite partial to going nuts when i had orange squash and blue smarties lol
 
After The End

After The End

The lily whispers, “I wait.”
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
151
What do you think of the robots idea? Would that hopefully allow for people to stop being held back by their urges and preexisting gender roles? Or do you think virtual reality would be better for preventing humans from being able to harm each other?
Maybe? Nobody is ever going to gain, or feel a sense of social approval, or feel validated within the context of their gender-paradigm for having sex with a robot though. Those who can still compete will and even if a large swathe of men effectively quit the field I'm not sure it will make much difference. Hell, this has more or less happened already in some places. Competing and spending and working for the privilidge of being able to date has been replaced with porn, video games, visits to sex workers, etc. We've already found a kind of (semi-functional) equilibrium in which stable relationships have more or less become a middle-class privilege.

But it is a mistake to think people want sex because the act of coitus is physically pleasurable. Humans can have orgasms all day by themselves if they want, often far more reliably than when relying on someone else who they probably had to get drunk to talk to, and can't talk to in many respects.

There is a complex mess of emotional needs involved and when people talk about sex they're throwing all this into a basket. The sex act itself is a trivial item in comparison. Hell, ask a sex worker for example how often clients come in, pay them, and don't end up having sex, but who are instead simply paying for someone to pretend to be their girlfriend for a while.

A girlfriend is often a man's only source of intimate companionship and social validation. The absence of which (unlike sex) is mentally and physically damaging. Unless they pay a sex worker to pretend to be their girlfriend. But then again there is a lot of correlation here with poverty, and sex workers are expensive.
 
Dr Iron Arc

Dr Iron Arc

Into the Unknown
Joined
Feb 10, 2020
Messages
523
Maybe? Nobody is ever going to gain, or feel a sense of social approval, or feel validated within the context of their gender-paradigm for having sex with a robot though. Those who can still compete will and even if a large swathe of men effectively quit the field I'm not sure it will make much difference. Hell, this has more or less happened already in some places. Competing and spending and working for the privilidge of being able to date has been replaced with porn, video games, visits to sex workers, etc. We've already found a kind of (semi-functional) equilibrium in which stable relationships have more or less become a middle-class privilege.

But it is a mistake to think people want sex because the act of coitus is physically pleasurable. Humans can have orgasms all day by themselves if they want, often far more reliably than when relying on someone else who they probably had to get drunk to talk to, and can't talk to in many respects.

There is a complex mess of emotional needs involved and when people talk about sex they're throwing all this into a basket. The sex act itself is a trivial item in comparison. Hell, ask a sex worker for example how often clients come in, pay them, and don't end up having sex, but who are instead simply paying for someone to pretend to be their girlfriend for a while.

A girlfriend is often a man's only source of intimate companionship and social validation. The absence of which (unlike sex) is mentally and physically damaging. Unless they pay a sex worker to pretend to be their girlfriend. But then again there is a lot of correlation here with poverty, and sex workers are expensive.
That all was accounted for by me hoping that 1) the robots are free and 2) they are advanced enough to be able to fulfill emotional needs just as much as physical ones. Assuming AI gets advanced enough they could be better therapists than humans one day. Granted, it’s all a pipe dream and I don’t know anything when it comes to actually creating artificial intelligence but the end result is at least an exciting prospect.
 
Nessie

Nessie

Cynical
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
228
A girlfriend is often a man's only source of intimate companionship and social validation. The absence of which (unlike sex) is mentally and physically damaging. Unless they pay a sex worker to pretend to be their girlfriend. But then again there is a lot of correlation here with poverty, and sex workers are expensive.
It is understandable to an extent.
But it's not like it's somehow different for women in terms of damage from the lack of companionship or social validation, is it? Yes, female sexuality is treated differently, but not in a way that being sexually available and not awfully unattractive automatically allows women to get in a relationship. Yes, an attractive, sexually available female will have an advantage over an unattractive male - but not bigger than her advantage over an unattractive female. While is inceldom is considered to be an exclusively male issue nowadays?
 
catalepsy

catalepsy

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2020
Messages
71
everything has to have a tag or name nowadays. I was a naughty little shit when i was younger. today i'd be branded every fucking illness out there ( which i could also have) and be pumped full of meds!

I was quite partial to going nuts when i had orange squash and blue smarties lol
I'm working on fixing the unfortunate incel determination I might incidentally fall into. I figure it'll take a few days and I'll be innotcel again, and all will be well with the world. I'll still be hypomanic and bipolar bordering on psychotic, but at least I'll always have Paris. :devil: <---- this is my stress demon, his name is bojangles and he maketh it rain and maketh me manic, both at the same time. He's a polymath of weather neurosis.
Maybe? Nobody is ever going to gain, or feel a sense of social approval, or feel validated within the context of their gender-paradigm for having sex with a robot though. Those who can still compete will and even if a large swathe of men effectively quit the field I'm not sure it will make much difference. Hell, this has more or less happened already in some places. Competing and spending and working for the privilidge of being able to date has been replaced with porn, video games, visits to sex workers, etc. We've already found a kind of (semi-functional) equilibrium in which stable relationships have more or less become a middle-class privilege.

But it is a mistake to think people want sex because the act of coitus is physically pleasurable. Humans can have orgasms all day by themselves if they want, often far more reliably than when relying on someone else who they probably had to get drunk to talk to, and can't talk to in many respects.

There is a complex mess of emotional needs involved and when people talk about sex they're throwing all this into a basket. The sex act itself is a trivial item in comparison. Hell, ask a sex worker for example how often clients come in, pay them, and don't end up having sex, but who are instead simply paying for someone to pretend to be their girlfriend for a while.

A girlfriend is often a man's only source of intimate companionship and social validation. The absence of which (unlike sex) is mentally and physically damaging. Unless they pay a sex worker to pretend to be their girlfriend. But then again there is a lot of correlation here with poverty, and sex workers are expensive.
I was single for about ten years, no problem. It didn't do much damage to me except in those rare vulnerable moments. I always seemed to bounce back. And here I am today, hanging out with a wonderful lady whose former boyfriend is a psychopath, whom she has just finished breaking up with, and I shall now be making a move upon her like a dumbass. Her ex will most likely try to murder me at some point in the near/distant future. I do know better, but if there's hope for me, there's hope for anyone, even sans robots or sex workers. Albeit those are good alternatives, I suppose, real human beings aren't as hard to come by as all the psychologically locked folks might convince themselves they are. I work with a guy who chews tobacco on a continual basis, all day long.. it's so disusting I get nauseous thinking about it... he's functionally illiterate and doesn't seem to know how to drive without acquiring several new tickets in the process, and yet this guy has two girls fighting over him. Not unattractive girls, either. I've met some of the gnarliest looking guys you could meet, and they are almost all attached to someone else, almost as though it were a natural law. All the criteria we use to weigh whether someone is fit for a relationship or not is basically nonsensical and exists purely between the ears.
 
Last edited:
C

checkouttime

Illuminated
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
1,071
I did wonder why not just go to a 'knocking shop' they don't turn people away!!!
 
After The End

After The End

The lily whispers, “I wait.”
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
151
But it's not like it's somehow different for women in terms of damage from the lack of companionship or social validation, is it?
No, it's not, but the issue does not effect them to the same degree. Firstly people are much more comfortable being close to and showing affection to women with whom they're not in a romantic relationship. Secondly far fewer women are romantically or socially invisible. This is mathematical. Women aren't attracted to most men. Men are attracted to most women. There are lots of explanations, but the disparity is only getting worse.

I was single for about ten years, no problem.
This is what we call survivorship bias. However we're not simply talking about being single, but being devoid of companionship and social validation and or isolation. It is empirically obvious that most people are not fine with these things. Prisons and cults use them as tools to enforce compliance for example and they're scarily effective.

People get PTSD from long periods of social/physical isolation, it can have deleterious effects on your brain and cognitive faculties.

if there's hope for me, there's hope for anyone...
And this is what we call a false-equivalence : P

I'm not going to kill myself anytime soon. Does that mean no one else on the forum needs to?

All the criteria we use to weigh whether someone is fit for a relationship or not is basically nonsensical and exists purely between the ears.
Such criteria exists. It is well-supported by surveys, and studies. Most people simply never take the time to learn about the subject because it's not very flattering or hopeful. It's also obvious most people are not really aware of their own criteria but they are aware of the post-facto rationalisations they make after they realise they're attracted to people. Rationalisations which are inevitably formulated both to flatter and to convince us we are in control of our choices.

I did wonder why not just go to a 'knocking shop' they don't turn people away!!!
1. Sex workers regularly turn down clients for a host of reasons.

2. It's phenomenally expensive, generally speaking people who have this sort of money to throw around probably aren't that desperate for companionship to begin with.

3. It's an exploitative con. The more desperate you are for companionship the more vulnerable you are to being taken for a ride and ending up broke as well as lonely.

4. It's fake. That works for some people. For others it's worse than nothing.
 
C

checkouttime

Illuminated
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
1,071
1. Sex workers regularly turn down clients for a host of reasons.

2. It's phenomenally expensive, generally speaking people who have this sort of money to throw around probably aren't that desperate for companionship to begin with.

3. It's an exploitative con. The more desperate you are for companionship the more vulnerable you are to being taken for a ride and ending up broke as well as lonely.

4. It's fake. That works for some people. For others it's worse than nothing.
I'm not going to pretend i totally understand it all. Its just from what i have read on here

1. I know their are sex workers that cater for all people though, disabled etc

2. I wouldn't say £40 for sex,was phenomenally expensive. i imagine alot less if they were on the streets and not a brothel. If you want things in life you have to be prepared to make sacrifices. so if someone wanted it that bad,they can get it just save up a little.

3. How can it be exploitative, you pay someone ,have sex and you leave. so you are getting what you are looking for aren't you....which is sex??

4. yes their isn't love involved, but i thought the whole point was they think they cannot get sex.when actually they can.

now if they are looking for love,thats a whole differnet think. but you aint guarenteed to get love by sleeping with a girl you meet in a bar.

I thought the point was they think they cant get sex and no women want them?? is this not correct, its a question rather than i know the answer??? If thats the case i don't believe it to be true.
 
Nessie

Nessie

Cynical
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
228
Firstly people are much more comfortable being close to and showing affection to women with whom they're not in a romantic relationship.
That is, indeed, very true. I do believe that the general public perception of how it's odd for men to be affectionate with anyone but people that are in a sexual relationship with them is very damaging.
Secondly far fewer women are romantically or socially invisible. This is mathematical. Women aren't attracted to most men. Men are attracted to most women.
That's an interesting theory, but how come most heterosexual men end up in a relationship at some point in their life then? If most men are unattractive to women, how are they able to get in a relationship with them at all?

Such criteria exists. It is well-supported by surveys, and studies. Most people simply never take the time to learn about the subject because it's not very flattering or hopeful. It's also obvious most people are not really aware of their own criteria but they are aware of the post-facto rationalisations they make after they realise they're attracted to people. Rationalisations which are inevitably formulated both to flatter and to convince us we are in control of our choices.
I'm not sure which studies and which criteria you refer to... But how broad the criteria have to be, to truly be universal, yet for most people to be able to "pass" and end up in a relationship at some point in their life?
 
After The End

After The End

The lily whispers, “I wait.”
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
151
That is, indeed, very true. I do believe that the general public perception of how it's odd for men to be affectionate with anyone but people that are in a sexual relationship with them is very damaging.
But useful.

That's an interesting theory, but how come most heterosexual men end up in a relationship at some point in their life then? If most men are unattractive to women, how are they able to get in a relationship with them at all?
Imagine if I said to you that people with no qualifications and experience fare worse in the job-market compared to those who do possess such things, that they're generally not desired by employers. Pointing to those who are currently employed, and noting that - over a lifetime - most will, if they devote enough resources to the search, eventually find some sort of work is not a counter-argument unless you've simply erased the failed and generally unsuccessful from your consideration, are ignoring how much they struggle relative to those who are more employable, or you assume that people only ever employ people they consider desirable employees.
 
pannazidofski

pannazidofski

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
79
The thing about the incel community is that it sounds welcoming at first. A place for the lonely people having trouble dating and having sex. If you are at that position all you see are open doors and arms for you. I just can't understand how it goes from that to "women are the root of all evil of the world".
Easier than you'd think, I don't want to harm women, but its gotten to the point where simply seeing them having fun in any shape or form causes great anger and jealousy within me. Even my own mother inspires such thoughts and feelings as disgusting as that sounds. Condemned to live as I do while they live great lives. Obviously not all women live good lives, like rape victims or ones with depression, but if you deny that society is far kinder to one side than the other, you're being oblivious.
 
Nessie

Nessie

Cynical
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
228
But useful.
Possibly. I'm not sure who's benefiting from it, but maybe someone does.

Imagine if I said to you that people with no qualifications and experience fare worse in the job-market compared to those who do possess such things, that they're generally not desired by employers. Pointing to those who are currently employed, and noting that - over a lifetime - most will, if they devote enough resources to the search, eventually find some sort of work is not a counter-argument unless you've simply erased the failed and generally unsuccessful from your consideration, are ignoring how much they struggle relative to those who are more employable, or you assume that people only ever employ people they consider desirable employees.
I do not doubt that there is a part of a population that can generally be considered undesirable and will have a harder time getting in a relationship. What confuses me is how it is possible for them to be the vast majority. Continuing the job-market analogy, I don't see how it is possible to have a functional system where number of positions to be filled roughly corresponds to the number of candidates for those positions, yet for most of the employers reject most of the candidates. The criteria of who is a desirable candidate, even for the same type of a job, vary depending on the job-market and what kind of candidates are generally available.

Obviously not all women live good lives, like rape victims or ones with depression, but if you deny that society is far kinder to one side than the other, you're being oblivious.
I am pretty sure that for every example of cruelty and unkindness aimed at men I can give you a counter example of cruelty and unkindness of the same scale aimed at women.
 
Last edited:
C

checkouttime

Illuminated
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
1,071
Easier than you'd think, I don't want to harm women, but its gotten to the point where simply seeing them having fun in any shape or form causes great anger and jealousy within me. Even my own mother inspires such thoughts and feelings as disgusting as that sounds. Condemned to live as I do while they live great lives. Obviously not all women live good lives, like rape victims or ones with depression, but if you deny that society is far kinder to one side than the other, you're being oblivious.
Can i just ask, do you think this way about men as well. Im trying to understand it abit better thats all. I'm a man by the way, im just interested. you don't have to reply!
 
pannazidofski

pannazidofski

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
79
Can i just ask, do you think this way about men as well. Im trying to understand it abit better thats all. I'm a man by the way, im just interested. you don't have to reply!
No, I don't feel the same way about men, it's always been the jealousy of how freely they seem to be able to express themselves in pretty much any fashion without the fear of disapproval, and on the same coin, how much easier making friends plus having resources available to them seem to be. I will admit that it's childish, but I have no clue how to get rid of the feelings. I'm just tired of it all.

I am pretty sure that for every example of cruelty and unkindness aimed at men I can give you a counter example of cruelty and unkindness of the same scale aimed at women.
Logically I understand this, but mentally at the same time I have much trouble keeping those thoughts in check.
 
C

checkouttime

Illuminated
Joined
Jul 15, 2020
Messages
1,071
No, I don't feel the same way about men, it's always been the jealousy of how freely they seem to be able to express themselves in pretty much any fashion without the fear of disapproval, and on the same coin, how much easier making friends plus having resources available to them seem to be. I will admit that it's childish, but I have no clue how to get rid of the feelings. I'm just tired of it all.


Logically I understand this, but mentally at the same time I have much trouble keeping those thoughts in check.
I appreciate the honesty. You see you have a little bit of 'light at the end of the tunnel' as you say you think its childish. I'm not judging you on what you believe.if you have had these feelings for a long time,it totally wouldn't be easy to change the way you think.

thankyou for being honest though and helping me understand a bit better
 
After The End

After The End

The lily whispers, “I wait.”
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
151
To pannazidofski, have you had many female friends? In my own experience this is helpful. Also it helps to direct your frustration and anger at the socio-cultural conditions that cause these issues. Men and women both take advantage of whatever cultural gratuity they can, but then again some anger is justified. I have anger, and resentment towards those who prop up or defend sexist cultural norms but am more disappointed by those who - in taking advantage of them - perpetuate them, but it goes both ways as men are equally at fault.

Possibly. I'm not sure who's benefiting from it, but maybe someone does.
Men must be motivated, somehow, to work most of their lives, while giving a large proportion of what they earn to women either directly or via the government and then die soon after they stop earning without soaking up too much state money for our social system to be tenable. Love it or hate it this is a mathematical fact and currently the biggest motivating factor for men is earning the requisite social status and acquiring enough resources to be able to have a family. Access to women, social approval, and passing on one's genes is the carrot. Social and physical isolation are part of the stick.

Anything that makes the stick hit harder is collectively beneficial to women whether they realize, or will admit it, or not. Though it likely causes some individual women anguish on a personal level.

What confuses me is how it is possible for them to be the vast majority...
This clears things up. All I said was that men find the majority of women attractive, but the opposite is not true. I'm not saying the vast majority of men are repulsive to women.

I am pretty sure that for every example of cruelty and unkindness aimed at men I can give you a counter example of cruelty and unkindness of the same scale aimed at women.
While I'm not saying women have no issues, or have it easy I doubt you can actually do this without resorting to false-equivalencies such as pointing to the travails of women in the third world.

Don't get me wrong here though.

It's not a simply either-or dichotomy in which one group or the other is the one who 'has it bad,' and the other, 'has it good.' Our society and culture is complex enough for life to be both unfair to men and women at the same time.

That said mathematically speaking I can come out and say that women do, as a whole, face more problems as a result of conditions in the developing and third world, but while I sympathize, and wish it was not so, it is not relevant to my experience. It does not mean women in my culture enjoy benefits I do not, and I would challenge anyone to show me that - on the balance - it is not men here who face more challenges. Two of the biggest being organizational and conceptual in nature in that men simply have no meaningful political or social advocates (while those for women often do their best to excise men from consideration outright) and that it has become a meme - an article of faith almost - that women are oppressed everywhere.

Such thinking is especially prevalent in the social sciences (see The conceptual penis as a social construct for an example of institutional anti-male bias in academia, and know that 'prank' papers like this have been published numerous times) which bleeds into the media and politics. It sets the cultural tone.

Heck I just recently came across someone on this forum discussing sexual violence as if it were a women-only issue. This sort of lack of awareness is everywhere. Note as well men being sexually assaulted is not super-rare. According to my government's own data the ratio is about 3:1 (the 1 in 70 figure publicized by feminists in the US was calculated propaganda based on a legal loophole in the definition of rape as an act of penetration, legislation they've fought to keep in the past) and note that in almost every other violent crime that ratio is reversed in favor of women, but in none of these situations are women ignored, written outof the narrative, let alone excluded outright from social support as male victims of sexual (don't even get me started on domestic violence) are.
 
Nessie

Nessie

Cynical
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
228
Men must be motivated, somehow, to work most of their lives, while giving a large proportion of what they earn to women either directly or via the government and then die soon after they stop earning without soaking up too much state money for our social system to be tenable. Love it or hate it this is a mathematical fact and currently the biggest motivating factor for men is earning the requisite social status and acquiring enough resources to be able to have a family. Access to women, social approval, and passing on one's genes is the carrot. Social and physical isolation are part of the stick.

Anything that makes the stick hit harder is collectively beneficial to women whether they realize, or will admit it, or not.
I don't know...I honestly can't think of a way I've ever been, or am ever going to be, financially subsidized either by the government or individuals, that wouldn't be accessible to me if I was a man. Even if I distance from my personal experience and look at the society as a whole, the only female-exclusive source of financial support I can think of is the support for the brief period surrounding childbirth, and even that is more of subsidizing the baby than the mother. I've been under an impression that women that are provided for by men are pretty rare in developed counties and get gradually less common as the time passes. Am I wrong?
All I said was that men find the majority of women attractive, but the opposite is not true. I'm not saying the vast majority of men are repulsive to women.
Do you really imply that most women are genuinely desirable to men, and not just barely acceptable for the lack of better alternative?
While I'm not saying women have no issues, or have it easy I doubt you can actually do this without resorting to false-equivalencies such as pointing to the travails of women in the third world.
Why would it be a false-equivalency, though? Aren't we having a discussion about men and women in general, rather than men and women living in certain countries?
In that case, what measure is irrelevant? Where do we draw the line between countries that are relevant to the topic and the ones that aren't?
 
After The End

After The End

The lily whispers, “I wait.”
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
151
I don't know...I honestly can't think of a way I've ever been, or am ever going to be, financially subsidized either by the government or individuals, that wouldn't be accessible to me if I was a man.
The issue is women in aggregate. In the same way, for example, men in aggregate commit the majority of violent crime. Plenty of men aren't criminals. Plenty of women are hard-working and do not want to be supported by anyone. That said countless examples of money being thrown at women, or women's causes do in fact exist, but I can admit that's not the biggest cause of disparity. The simple fact is women work less, live longer, and avail themselves of state support more.

Consider for example that in most progressive countries aged care is the number one welfare expense period. Then you have things like free-to-payer healthcare. Though women do benefit from, and have access to resources men do not the biggest difference in terms of cost to the taxpayer is that they go to the doctor way more frequently.

Do you really imply that most women are genuinely desirable to men, and not just barely acceptable for the lack of better alternative?
It's not a static thing. In their teens, twenties and early thirties most women who aren't considerably overweight or physically repulsive are attractive to most men. I used to have a graph that showed relative attractiveness and will see if I can find it, and the sources, but it comes close to intersecting at about 40 yet women are always slightly ahead, and by a gigantic margin in their teens and twenties. In fact men rarely reject anyone prior to having sex with them. For women, who do most of their rejecting almost immediately, the primary barrier is whether or not men will commit after sex but for men it's whether or not women will interact with them period. While there's plenty of unfairness and hurt to go around at least In the context of being starved for companionship and validation this is a pretty huge difference.

I've been under an impression that women that are provided for by men are pretty rare in developed counties and get gradually less common as the time passes. Am I wrong?
The male breadwinner and housewife concept may mostly belong in the past (save among the very well-off) however men continue to be the majority earners in most households, and if you take Catherine Hakim's research at face-value the desire, among women, for a man who is financially better off is more marked now than it was in the 1950s. Men also tend to direct a large proportion of their discretionary spending towards women, and any man paying tax is in some respects supporting women financially; women only grants, programs, university departments, health centers, and all the general social welfare of which they avail themselves more often is not being funded by women's tax dollars because they're collectively in deficit.
 
Nessie

Nessie

Cynical
Joined
Aug 23, 2020
Messages
228
So, to conclude, the only solution would be either for all women to accept universal innate responsibility for being expensive in aggregate and to be distributed as a commodity, or there can be no solution since women are harmful just by existing... That's depressing.
 
After The End

After The End

The lily whispers, “I wait.”
Joined
Jul 31, 2019
Messages
151
So, to conclude, the only solution would be either for all women to accept universal innate responsibility for being expensive in aggregate and to be distributed as a commodity, or there can be no solution since women are harmful just by existing... That's depressing.
I don't think individuals need to atone for collective issues. I don't have an implementable solution. I can't even convince most people of the salience of the issue, which is not that women cost too much but that sexual equality remains a chimera.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Underscore Story Does the Pope shit in the woods? Offtopic 2

Similar threads

Top