A quarter of Americans are Involuntarily Celibate

Started by mike brown12 pages

Discuss all you want. I really don't see how my question prevents you from discussing anything. But maybe I just don't know my own power.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Tbh, that's a bit of a national crisis. Nobody is owed sex, but we really have to examine what factors lead to 25% of your goddamn male population not getting laid or being unfit for sexual consideration. Because that probably correlates to a host of issues. Whether it's obesity, addiction to online pornography etc.

Like, that should be a discussion Senate panels have as silly as it sounds. Too bad no one is mature enough to discuss this even at a leadership level.

Women are hypergamous, so 80% of them will chase 20% of the top males or something of the sort which is how we filter for the top performers but once that gets to 90/10, yeesh.

Whatever, sucks to suck. I just feel bad.

This is what the thread is about Mike not the ideology of Incels.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus

Women are hypergamous, so 80% of them will chase 20% of the top males or something of the sort which is how we filter for the top performers but once that gets to 90/10, yeesh.

^^This reeks of bro-sociology, tho

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
^^This reeks of bro-sociology, tho
Yes it does, that aside though it's talking about the topic as intended, whether you or I agree with the psychology, which we don't.

But .. that post is laced with incel ideology lol.

For the record I understand what the thread is about I'm just asking where your fascination with incels comes from. If you don't want to answer just say so.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Yes it does, that aside though it's talking about the topic as intended, whether you or I agree with the psychology, which we don't.
yes it is definitely relevant, it wasn't my intention to drag him over it. Just seems really lopsided and incomplete, blaming it all on women; especially since men often aim way out of their league as well, and stay alone because of it.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Tbh, that's a bit of a national crisis. Nobody is owed sex, but we really have to examine what factors lead to 25% of your goddamn male population not getting laid or being unfit for sexual consideration. Because that probably correlates to a host of issues. Whether it's obesity, addiction to online pornography etc.

Like, that should be a discussion Senate panels have as silly as it sounds. Too bad no one is mature enough to discuss this even at a leadership level.

Women are hypergamous, so 80% of them will chase 20% of the top males or something of the sort which is how we filter for the top performers but once that gets to 90/10, yeesh.

Whatever, sucks to suck. I just feel bad.

Unless you are extremely good looking, successful or have a great and charming natural personality (like I do), it can take a lot of work and effort to get to a point where you are comfortable talking to women, and usually, this also goes with many failures. It can be a scary thing if you're not used to it, no one likes failure, but you have to just push on and keep trying, like anything.

I think the biggest problem is that a lot of these people don't really want to put out the effort to learn or improve themselves in any meaningful way. It's easier for them to just sit there and vaguely blame women for not flocking to them for being "nice guys" while they sit behind their keyboards eating Cheetos than it is to actually go out and talk to women, get rejected, learn from that rejection, and talk to others until you find one you mesh with. People are used to instant gratification in today's world, and a good woman will not give you instant gratification. It's ironic because we now live in a world of Tinder/Bumble and other free services that will essentially match you up with a date without even leaving your house, but like in real life, on these, it takes a great deal of effort and time, and honestly a little luck.

I think your last point is too simplistic and doesn't give women enough credit. They are no different than men, they want the best they can get. The key is to make a woman think you are that, even if by most metrics, you are not. If you act confident and successful, and are able to make her laugh, that's 90% of what you need to do in order to get your foot in the door. Honestly, I find women to be much less superficial than men when it comes to who they date. I see extremely attractive and beautiful women with guys who are overweight, short, bald, or just overall not very good looking, which should be great news for these guys who can't get laid. It means the problem probably isn't their looks, but their personality or the effort they are willing to put out, or their cowardice.

This doesn’t bother me. It doesn’t even register on important matters, all things considered. So what if they’re not having as much sex? Good in them for knowing restraint on not contributing to overpopulation.

Originally posted by mike brown
@ Surtur

I'd rather you let Putin answer for himself, tbh. I understand you're giving me your perception of it but that will only serve to bring everybody into battle mode. If rather hear from him why the fixation on incels which, so far as i can tell, goes beyond throwing pot shots at other members. And now I have to solitude cause it seems this might derail the thread after all, where as that wasn't ever my initial intention. I was asking Putin, not anyone else.

I'll say that I've had groups like ISIS that intrigue my interest more than they probably should. What is it about incels you find so interesting Putin?

He can answer for himself, but I can already tell you how he will respond. He'll feign ignorance and act like he has a legit concern over this. I guarantee it.

Only question is if you fall for it, but then again to do so you'd need to flat out ignore the sheer number of incel threads these sad souls make.

Originally posted by BackFire
Unless you are extremely good looking, successful or have a great and charming natural personality (like I do), it can take a lot of work and effort to get to a point where you are comfortable talking to women, and usually, this also goes with many failures. It can be a scary thing if you're not used to it, no one likes failure, but you have to just push on and keep trying, like anything.

I think the biggest problem is that a lot of these people don't really want to put out the effort to learn or improve themselves in any meaningful way. It's easier for them to just sit there and vaguely blame women for not flocking to them for being "nice guys" while they sit behind their keyboards eating Cheetos than it is to actually go out and talk to women, get rejected, learn from that rejection, and talk to others until you find one you mesh with. People are used to instant gratification in today's world, and a good woman will not give you instant gratification. It's ironic because we now live in a world of Tinder/Bumble and other free services that will essentially match you up with a date without even leaving your house, but like in real life, on these, it takes a great deal of effort and time, and honestly a little luck.

I think your last point is too simplistic and doesn't give women enough credit. They are no different than men; they want the best they can get. The key is to make a woman think you are that, even if by most metrics, you are not. If you act confident and successful, and can make her laugh, that's 90% of what you need to do to get your foot in the door. Honestly, I find women to be much less superficial than men when it comes to who they date. I see extremely attractive and beautiful women with guys who are overweight, short, bald, or just overall not very good looking, which should be great news for these guys who can't get laid. It means the problem probably isn't their looks, but their personality or the effort they are willing to put out, or their cowardice.

This is solidly the correct answer.

I can only imagine Surt is somehow trying to make himself a victim in a thread about some people not having sex.

He should read the wise words above.

Originally posted by BackFire
Unless you are extremely good looking, successful or have a great and charming natural personality (like I do), it can take a lot of work and effort to get to a point where you are comfortable talking to women, and usually, this also goes with many failures. It can be a scary thing if you're not used to it, no one likes failure, but you have to just push on and keep trying, like anything.

I think the biggest problem is that a lot of these people don't really want to put out the effort to learn or improve themselves in any meaningful way. It's easier for them to just sit there and vaguely blame women for not flocking to them for being "nice guys" while they sit behind their keyboards eating Cheetos than it is to actually go out and talk to women, get rejected, learn from that rejection, and talk to others until you find one you mesh with. People are used to instant gratification in today's world, and a good woman will not give you instant gratification. It's ironic because we now live in a world of Tinder/Bumble and other free services that will essentially match you up with a date without even leaving your house, but like in real life, on these, it takes a great deal of effort and time, and honestly a little luck.

I think your last point is too simplistic and doesn't give women enough credit. They are no different than men, they want the best they can get. The key is to make a woman think you are that, even if by most metrics, you are not. If you act confident and successful, and are able to make her laugh, that's 90% of what you need to do in order to get your foot in the door. Honestly, I find women to be much less superficial than men when it comes to who they date. I see extremely attractive and beautiful women with guys who are overweight, short, bald, or just overall not very good looking, which should be great news for these guys who can't get laid. It means the problem probably isn't their looks, but their personality or the effort they are willing to put out, or their cowardice.

👆

I chose to be celibate once, with some factors forcing it on me first, and there was nothing wrong with that.

Spent 9 months in Afghanistan in my first deployment, then I spent the last 6 months willingly not watching porn nor masturbating.

Even now, i sometimes chooses not to have sex. Went 3 months willingly, and there was nothing wrong.

So I don’t see what’s so wrong if one person chooses not to have sex for X amount of time.

^ this.

The topic is involuntary celibacy. (Involuntary is when you have no choice. JFC)

Originally posted by Eon Blue
^ this.

really?

Maybe if I make a million threads about Trump, and 20+ sock accounts a year the ladies will love me

Well you love me, so I guess it works

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
^^This reeks of bro-sociology, tho
Originally posted by Putinbot1
Yes it does, that aside though it's talking about the topic as intended, whether you or I agree with the psychology, which we don't.

Not really. It's based on real-world data.

...the bottom 80% of men (in terms of attractiveness) are competing for the bottom 22% of women and the top 78% of women are competing for the top 20% of men.

https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guys-unless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wasting-your-2ddf370a6e9a

Online dating sucks. Almost all the women are liars. They are almost all fat or take overwhelmingly flattering pictures. Every now and then, you find a great one, though. 🙂

Man that is some sad shit. Women can basically catfish good looking guys and get away with it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Not really. It's based on real-world data.

https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guys-unless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wasting-your-2ddf370a6e9a

Online dating sucks. Almost all the women are liars. They are almost all fat or take overwhelmingly flattering pictures. Every now and then, you find a great one, though. 🙂

I can't see the size of the sample group, who carried the study out, nature of selection etc. For data to be worth anything, it needs those. Otherwise, it's just h1a8 maths. It doesnt rven say wjo carried out the research.