~ archived since 2018 ~

After romantic rejection, men feel less positive emotion and hold shifted socio-political attitudes. Women do not follow the same pattern.

September 6, 2022
181 upvotes

New research indicates that romantic successes and failures can have profound impacts on how men think

A man’s popularity in the dating market can influence his sexual attitudes and even his views about socio-political issues, according to new research published in the scientific journal Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology. The study offers new experimental evidence that being unpopular with the opposite sex can shift heterosexual men’s views about the minimum wage and healthcare.

TheRedArchive is an archive of Red Pill content, including various subreddits and blogs. This post has been archived from the subreddit /r/PurplePillDebate.

/r/PurplePillDebate archive

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

Post Information
Title After romantic rejection, men feel less positive emotion and hold shifted socio-political attitudes. Women do not follow the same pattern.
Author smallstarseeker
Upvotes 181
Comments 283
Date September 6, 2022 12:03 PM UTC (5 months ago)
Subreddit /r/PurplePillDebate
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/after-romantic-rejection-men-feel-less-positive.1129879
https://theredarchive.com/post/1129879
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/x78tl5/after_romantic_rejection_men_feel_less_positive/
Comments

[–]Filmguy000 17 points18 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not too sure about this. I mean it can certainly be possible for a percentage of incels but those guys are the minority that may suffer from other psychological issues. And unfortunately the combination of how those types are being portrayed in the media and being a generally unattractive male causes these men to be more alienated.

I myself am in my late 30s and was never popular with women. I have had a couple girlfriends but never even came close to anything casual. Being a man, I can it admit that living a mostly sexless life can be pretty depressing. Women tend to not get it (because they truly can't wrap their head around the male experience with no sex) and sexually successful men have no frame of reference on my life so they think its utterly and completely my fault (Just World Fallacy).

As far as political leanings, I am very much libertarian. Looking back maybe my lack of sexual success had some factor. You have to understand, just because I was not a sexually attractive person, I still participated in society. I have worked full time since I was 15. I graduated with multiple degrees. And I recently bought my own home. But the fact that I am now very much a loner makes people (including family) kind of look at me as some sort of loser. And over time I found myself less interested in people because not having women had a snowball effect on my image (especially being in my late 30s).

And despite that, I always did have an active social life and had many friends (men and women) over the years. People, in general, liked me as a person because despite being introverted, I always liked hanging out am an overall chill person. I have had other incel friends but a lol of them are too negative and have crab bucket mentality. Many women really have no idea and seem to just dislike men like me just for being late 30's, having a steady income, having money in the bank, and owning a home (almost as if saying, "no, you are totally not my type, but fuck you for not being with a woman). And other people are a combination of all these things.

Being unsuccessful with women, for me, was caused by many factors (including physical, being very introverted, being raised by an overbearing religious single mom). And now I really find myself not really caring anymore about love and romance. But yet, people still look at me with some sort of suspicion or resentment. So it's like, you don't want to date me and/or you can't think of anyone who would want to date me, yet you are still mad at me about something?

At the end of the day, being a sexually unsuccessful man is a very lonely place to be. And I can totally see how it can drive many off the deep end emotionally. Because as I stated before, even though I am otherwise pretty well adjusted and stable, people consider me selfish and even an outcast. And as a result I really did stop caring a lot about society because I came to the conclusion that most people are basically hypocritical and dumb. I am libertarian because I think we should all live as we see fit. I'll leave you alone. And I expect the same from everyone else. But unfortunately, most don't like to see a guy like me have a far more stable and peaceful life than most "successful people". So no matter what, I will probably always face a large degree of social rejection/alienation.

[–]TheElusivePeacock 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I can’t fathom how anyone thinks your “selfish”, like what the hell.

[–]Filmguy000 12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's because most people can't relate. So when they see me living a comfortable/stable life on my own, they think I'm some sort of cheat. But at the same time they see me as a loser for not having anyone. Rarely do people look at me and think, "well, he didn't find much luck with love, but he still held it together and he's living a productive life".

And it's funny. I was recently talking to a girl that I've known for a while and she kind of grilled for being in my late 30's and not settling down. I then asked her if she knew anyone that was single that I can meet. She smiled, shook her head and said "no, I don't". Fair enough. But then later in the party, there was a better looking guy (who is known to have anger issues) mentioned and she was asked the same question about having any friends willing to meet him and she said, "oh yeah, I do". Not gonna lie, kind of soul crushing.

[–]CosmicBioHazard 15 points16 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I mean, I can’t really argue on a personal level; I’ve seen a lot of rejection in my life and ended up fairly conservative, but I have a hard time believing that an uptick in success with women now would change that.

Also, for every right-wing incel I’ve seen I can also think of several loser men who go from there to full male feminist. I have to wonder, though, whether those guy’s support for casual sex and socialism is something they think will benefit them getting laid. Like I can see the logic: sluttier women will have lower standards and if the government provides for you other men lose their financial advantage. What benefit does cutting social spending have for loser men? I guess like “lower social assistance widens the gap between me and the competition when and if I manage to outearn them”, but still…

I would expect the ‘gets no bitches right’ to be made up mainly of men who are confident they can at least get one woman to like them, regardless of how long it takes. Right wing values are made by and for the nuclear family and an incel with a chance knows casual fun is out of the question and is probably preparing for the day he ends up with no choice but to marry the first woman to sleep with him.

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 20 points21 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

For some reason everyone assumes that inc3ls are fat neckbeards with no education living in a basement and working minimal wage at McDonalds.

Male sexlessness rises with the education! Most sexless guys are at the college or they have a degree.

[–]Nihi1986 9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The more educated the more complicated you make it. Some of the dumbest guys I know just hit on every woman and (this is wrong) even touch or flirts excessively regardless the clues she's giving. It's amazing how they don't even realize how annoying they are when the girl isn't interested, they are just too dumb to realize it, don't understand how she and everyone else feels and the consequences.

Meanwhile, the educated guy is thinking something smart and funny to say and considering how direct his approach has to be and more often than not he ends up doing nothing.

[–]Exciting-Necessary-5 12 points13 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Male sexlessness rises with the education! Most sexless guys are at the college or they have a degree.

Lol, women on here will never believe this because it would make the female narrative look bad.

Women need to project negative attributes on sexless men otherwise it would make them look like they aren't making good choices in mate selection.

[–]ast01004 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean they can afford the expensive VR rigs for Porn.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Makes sense.

I went to a small town college, and in my freshman year, out of the four of us that shared our dorm, (each of us had our own bedroom and there were two bathrooms) there was really only one guy in there who was sexually successful on campus. If I’m extrapolating that across my thee dorm rooms, I’d imagine there may have only been one to a few dorm rooms in our building in particular that would’ve been housing all successful guys. It was roughly like that across the board.

I’d say at least 50% of the male population at any given school is not sexually active. And, no, getting lucky once a semester is not sexually active.

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

In the media students spend all their time having frat parties and banging, but...

My college experience. Male dominated and female dominated fields. Dorm is separated into male and female parts, I shared a room with three other guys. Most of my energy and time was spent on college.

For a majority of students sex life was getting lucky sometimes. Some guys had GF's, some guys didn't fuck anything for years.

After drooping out, for one year I worked a minimum wage job at McDonalds, lived with roommates, had my room. I was basically trash, but fun to be around. I slept with 5 or 6 different women on that one year alone.

[–]Cataclysma324Purple Pill Man 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

And, no, getting lucky once a semester is not sexually active.

actually that kind of is. If a man can get that kind of success then he must have limited free time if he isn't getting more.

whereas "gets lucky once his whole time as an undergrad" might as well be a virgin

[–]andrejusilva123 53 points54 points  (36 children) | Copy Link

Unpopular men reported less support for casual sex than popular men.

Unpopular low mate-value women reported more support for casual sex

This is in tact with surveys that attractive men and ugly women have the highest numbers of casual sex partners.

Women changing their socio-political attitudes have more to lose because they benefit more from them than men and the money for these things mostly comes from men.

Here is a study that when woman is rejected by an attractive man she becomes more bitter towards an accepting man who is unnatractive. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550615584196?journalCode=sppa

[–]NationalistGoy 51 points52 points  (35 children) | Copy Link

Basically, unpopular men tend to support traditionalism because it increases their odds of getting a woman, while popular men do not support traditionalism because it would limit the number of women they can have sex with.

[–]AcanthocephalaNew947 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That actually makes perfect sense… interesting.

[–]truthfullyVividbased and cringepilled 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Um... I'm against traditionalism because it's literally other people telling you how to live your life.

[–]Nihi1986 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

True, though the non traditional people will also do exactly that but telling you different things.

[–]truthfullyVividbased and cringepilled -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not nearly as many, or as organized. Not to mention, they might be fine with you thinking for yourself-- whereas traditional institutions like churches do not want that. It's definitely not an equivalent, but you're right to an extent.

[–]SantarpiosPizza -3 points-2 points  (26 children) | Copy Link

How does this have to do with the minimum wage?

[–]warramite 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Income impacts men's sexual access.. Rich men are obviously women's preference

[–]Yupperdoodledoo 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The study showed that the rejected men became less supportive of min wage increases.

[–]SantarpiosPizza 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So, an incel is more likely to support the minimum wage?

[–]andrejusilva123 1 point2 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

Women drive 85% of the consumer purchases and care more about money than men.

[–]CrystalMethMyBFF 5 points6 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

care more about money than men

Eh, more like they care about for different reasons. There's just as much vain men who care just as much about money, clout, and reaching the top of the social hierarchy as women do.

[–]truthfullyVividbased and cringepilled -2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Uh, the world is still run mostly by men... and it's currently being destroyed without remorse or thoughts of the future-- for money.

[–]stoic4343 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Based on what.

[–]NationalistGoy 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Based on deez nuts.

[–]Laytheblameonluck 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Then why do new parents shift toward traditionalism and "benign sexism", including and especially women?

[–]ThorLivesSkeptical Purple Pill Man 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

unpopular men tend to support traditionalism because it increases their odds of getting a woman

It could be more complicated than that. It could be "why should I give a shit about other people when other people don't give a shit about me". It's just simple reciprocity towards how society has treated them.

[–]Karmangerಡ ͜ ʖ ಡ Clown Pill 27 points28 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Heterosexual participants (N = 237) reported their trait mate value. Participants then recorded a video of themselves and received video responses from five opposite-sex peers, each consisting of either positive or negative romantic feedback—forming the manipulation (popularity: from low to high). Afterwards, we measured participants’ attitudes to traditional gender roles, casual sex, minimum wage and healthcare, and implicit sexual and political attitudes.

If I'm understanding this correctly, what this is saying is.... The subjects rated themselves on a trait mate value (which the article doesn't define what that is).... Then they recorded a video of themselves (saying what? an introduction? their politics?)

Then forming the manipulation... what does that mean? are they admitting to manipulating the subjects feelings or emotional state on purpose? did they determine from the start who they wanted to be popular? How did they measure some ones attitude did they ask direct questions or did they do inferring questions..

The study only used 237 people and didn't say how they collected the subjects.... so they could all be college students.... they could have gotten all the men from Alabama and all the women from NYC (unlikely but I'm proving a point).

I would take this with a grain of salt due to the unexplained methods.

[–]ruthofhades 11 points12 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The researcher is from Canada, and the subjects are most likely Canadian. Don't they already have a lot of socialist policies? I do think things would be different with US subjects.

[–]Karmangerಡ ͜ ʖ ಡ Clown Pill 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If that’s the case that makes it even worse, a far right canadian is different from a far right U.S citizen.

[–]WattaBrat 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unfortunately with trump on the scene the gap isn’t as wide as it used to be. Canada has their share of latent fascists.

[–]shydude92 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's using scientific language, which can become a little bit awkward at times.

Reported trait mate value=mate value as a trait, as reported by the subjects

It's not defined how that was reported, but most likely as a subjective score on say a 10-point scale, where 1 was the least desirable and 10 the most desirable as a partner. Of course, different men may have assigned different weights to the various factors in determining where they stand. For example, some men may rate looks as more important than money in desirability, or vice versa.

Then forming the manipulation= the manipulated variable, i.e. the one being varied to measure effect.

What probably happened is the responses weren't supposed to be honest, but the men told that they were. In the control condition, the women rated them more or less as they did themselves, while in the experimental groups, the men were told they were either more or less desirable. All three groups would then be reassessed to see if there had been any change in their sociopolitical attitudes.

[–]Karmangerಡ ͜ ʖ ಡ Clown Pill 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

That makes it sound like, they expected the men to not be bitter or aggravated after getting a rejection. I don't know too many people who are happy to be turned down.

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq. 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s behind a paywall from what I can tell. More specific methodology/definitions would be expanded upon ln the full study

[–]NockerJoePervert Palpatine 77 points78 points  (168 children) | Copy Link

I mean it seems kinda obvious just by looking at the opinions these guys hold on a broad scale. They want dating to have some sort of sorting system where they get placed with a match because its "fair" but on every political issue they lean hard right. Or else they're very easily swayed to weird fringe beliefs that don't have a lot to do with sex or relationships. There's a reason influencers in that sphere so often seem to ping pong between being a pickup coach or a traditionalist advocate since their viewpoints aren't a logically constructed consistent belief system so much as they're reacting to the general mood of their audiencd.

But at the same time, why would they support those things? The kind of guy who has these issues rarely makes minimum wage and is the demographic least likley to go to a doctor. Once they hit adulthood if they do 't have kids they don't really need to care about public education with any immediacy or urgency. They're also way less likley to work for public service or in the medical industey or any of the fields these policies actually impact.

As weird as it is to say, human relationships are essentially the buy in price for many men to really care about a lot of social issues, because those are the only way they'll ever be impacted by those issues directly in most cases, whereas they'll still see the taxes come out of their pay every time regardless. This is just kinda the political systems problem to solve since they either need to get people paired off or else give them another reason to get engaged, and in a world where most people are generally apolitical and we live in a world where reactionary politics run big.

[–]JumboJetz 9 points10 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I like your theory of relationships with women being a “buy in” price for some men to start caring about certain issues.

I’m not sure it’s completely true but it does have a logic to it that’s quite interesting.

[–]MrCamel0 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The data doesn't really support the theory. It shouldn't surprise people, but the data seems to indicate that married people are more conservative than single ones.

http://www.inquiriesjournal.com/articles/127/the-effect-of-marriage-on-political-identification

[–]JumboJetz 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This actually is a great counterpoint. However it might also be said that many extremists are single unmarried men.

[–]howdoiw0rkthisthing 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Having a wife and kids gives you something to lose. If you have something to lose then you care about what’s going on in the world.

[–]EulenWatcher 50 points51 points  (147 children) | Copy Link

There's also "make them all suffer" kind of attitude. Like some guys who can't get laid support abortion bans just because they want women to suffer.

[–]That__ESTPurple Pill Woman 35 points36 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I agree with this. But if they were to look a step further, it makes men suffer with paying child support for the next 18 years. Honestly now that I think about it, I wonder if it's more that they want Chad to pay. It feels better to have the idea that you're not fucking of you think that there's a downside to it.

[–]yamb97 16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well it’s both, they really are super bitter and jealous so they hate anyone that gets laid whether that be Chad or Stacy

[–]stoic4343 -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not true. They don't want to fund their poor decisions.

[–]EulenWatcher 16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well, they're sexless so they don't care about it.

[–]Exciting-Necessary-5 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, they're sexless so they don't care about it.

Are they supposed to care about it?

[–]returning_op2 5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

But if they were to look a step further, it makes men suffer with paying child support for the next 18 years.

How are they going to pay child support? I mean it's pretty easy to call into question fatherhood if you didn't have sex with that woman or barely any in your life.

Honestly now that I think about it, I wonder if it's more that they want Chad to pay.

Yup that's basically it. Banning abortion, the pill and any contraception is going back to the old days. Yes there was a chad in the 50s who got the hottest girl in school, but one night out and one accident later, chad was forced to marry that girl and get a job to support that new family. There was no way the rich hot sports super star chad would be able to get his n-count even into the double digits.

Btw, this may be better for a stronger society, where men have roots in it and will develop and defend it. Personally though, I think of that as slavery that might get me killed in a war in a country I can't even pronounce. I'm absolutely against trad-rp. The minute I smell shit going down I'm going to run, last thing I'll do would be defending this place I have no roots in and I think I'm better off thinking this way.

[–]That__ESTPurple Pill Woman 8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes there was a chad in the 50s who got the hottest girl in school, but one night out and one accident later, chad was forced to marry that girl and get a job to support that new family. There was no way the rich hot sports super star chad would be able to get his n-count even into the double digits.

You're right. And he might cheat on his wife, but society frowns on it. I think you're absolutely right about this.

[–]WhenWolf81 13 points14 points  (67 children) | Copy Link

It's more like, "because I have to suffer then why should I do anything to help your situation."

Maybe that's a distinction without a difference. But people often forget these lonely/incel men are victims too.

[–]EulenWatcher 13 points14 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

It's not just a lack of help, but the active support for abortion bans. Also celebrating women's death, rape etc.

[–]WhenWolf81 14 points15 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I've seen vocal support. They are suffering, so they celebrate people getting a taste of it. Like a, "welcome to my world" mentality.

Do i agree with it? No. But i feel like people misrepresent, fail to understand or just strawman these groups to justify crazy positions.

[–]JollyFawn90 6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Exactly. Instead of sympathizing with them, they are the most shamed people on the planet. Is it any wonder they are over it? Maybe if people stopped trying to find a group they must hate, we can try to be understanding of peoples situations. Incel is literally used as a slur now, as if you should kill yourself for being lonely or not good looking enough. It’s a disgusting mindset and only pushes people to become more radical. But if history is any lesson, I don’t know if people are capable of that. There’s always the in group and the outgroup, and right now most males are in the out group. People sure love to have the people they can hate on.

[–]WhenWolf81 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup, it's really sad situation and you make a great point. It's easier for society to just change who's considered socially acceptable targets to hate then it is to actually address the underlying hatred. It's unfortunate and something I worry about since it seems we're only heading further into these extreme polarized conditions.

[–]bunnakaybirth control pill 7 points8 points  (23 children) | Copy Link

Dude, I would be absolutely thrilled if those men simply left it at not wanting to help me. But don't pretend that's the case.

[–]WhenWolf81 7 points8 points  (21 children) | Copy Link

But don't pretend that's the case.

Why do you believe they secretly want to help you? Because that's what your comment implies. Are you trying to imply that they still want something from you?

[–]Ok-Stretch7499 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

gjy

[–]AntWillFortune15Treacherous Snake 💜 2 points3 points  (19 children) | Copy Link

Victims how?

[–]WhenWolf81 9 points10 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Do you believe in the idea that people become products of their own environment? These people were not born this way but instead shaped and pushed into it. They are the end result to how society mistreats and dehumanizes people who don't fit or follow the standard. One could argue they lack a lot of privileges others take for granted. Making them societies outcast.

[–]TheElusivePeacock 0 points1 point  (12 children) | Copy Link

Victims of what? Not being able to have a harem of women to fuck doesn’t make you a victim.

[–]bottleblank 5 points6 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Victims of literal abuse, physical and emotional, often through no fault of their own.

Autism, mental health difficulties, bullying, domestic abuse, potentially years of being treated like animals, being exposed to terrible behaviour from others, being made to think that they are worthless human beings unworthy of respect or intimacy from anybody.

The sex thing is a side-effect of that. They were deprived of the chance to build the skill-set that they needed to make friends, find partners, engage in and retain healthy relationships. They've never been shown that they can be loved, only that they can be - and are - hated.

You can't build a house on unstable foundations, and if someone keeps adulterating the concrete you're trying to lay those foundations with, you're just left with a pool of sludge and no house to live in.

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 24 points25 points  (62 children) | Copy Link

If my neighbor has a luxurious truck and I have to use public transportation, then I feel like shit. If we all have to use public transportation... I'm OK.

This brewing desire for collapse. It's not due to some powerfantasy of being a mighty warlord. It's simply the only perceived way for powerless people to achieving equality.

[–]purplish_possum 13 points14 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If my neighbor has a luxurious truck and I have to use public transportation, then I feel like shit.

I loved it when I lived in Berkeley and took public transportation to work in SF's financial district. I'd get on the Transbay bus at the last Eastbay stop and smile as we bypassed all the cars waiting at the Bay Bridge toll plaza.

Also, I'd laugh if a neighbor spent 75K on a truck Ford/Chevy/Ram built for 25K. Dumb ass.

[–]bigtoasterwaffle 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

And I bet in that moment, as they watched the tram go by while stuck in gridlock, they were wishing your public transportation was slower too. People are jealous

[–]EulenWatcher 7 points8 points  (48 children) | Copy Link

It isn't a power fantasy, sure, it's a just a revenge fantasy.

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 2 points3 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

If that makes you feel better sure.

[–]EasternDog4196 4 points5 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

Interesting how it's "revenge" when men pull for equality but virtuous and stunning and brave when women pull for "equality"

[–]UniverseCatalyzed 5 points6 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Someone not wanting to fuck you =/= you don't have equality.

What happened to the right wing belief that equal outcome is not the same as equal opportunity? We all have the equal opportunity to enter the free dating market and get laid, the market just rejected you.

[–]smallstarseeker1 points [recovered] (9 children) | Copy Link

I was talking generally, so if your critique was directed at me... well frak off :)

If you ask me, right wing and left wing are all messed up because they are cherry-picking what suits them. That is probably the only consistent thing they are doing.

I myself am an libertarian or an socialist, whatever the fuck... just make the rules consistent accro0ss the board.

[–]SantarpiosPizza 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not really.

[–]ThorLivesSkeptical Purple Pill Man 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Or it could be seen as a form of reciprocity: if women treat him badly, then he's less willing to have support for women's problems. Why should he go out of his way to help people who rejected him? In general, people behave with reciprocity towards other people, and this is just another example of reciprocity.

[–]EulenWatcher 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Again, I'm talking not just about "not supporting", but actively supporting measures harming women or other people in general. Also celebrating such measures or some terrible news about people getting raped or killed.

[–]SuperSaiyanAssHair 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

There's also "make them all suffer" kind of attitude. Like some guys who can't get money support weatlh redistribution just because they want successful people to suffer.

[–]EulenWatcher 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Nah, the rich don't suffer from higher taxes.

[–]SuperSaiyanAssHair -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I wasn't trying to make a political statement, just trying to show how what you said can be made to parallel other arguments

[–]JoeRMD77 -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What guys can't get money? I've known a lot dumber men than me who make more than me just because they're more hardworking than I am. My brother didn't even graduate high school and makes 40k a year as a trim carpenter after 15 years. Meanwhile, I've barely made 20k a year since 18 (almost 38) now and I'm just now going back to school to finish my degree.

If my dumbass brother and I can reach 50k, then so can most other men of our caliber, or lack thereof.

[–]purplish_possum 10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

They want dating to have some sort of sorting system

These guys want it to be like school. The bullies may torture them in the hallway but in the end, they're the ones who go to university.

Unfortunately for them, the dating marketplace is more like the hallway than the classroom.

[–]warramite 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The bullies may torture them in the hallway but in the end, they're the ones who go to university.

Most people support that notion, hence why majority of dating advice boils down to "Be a 'good guy' not a misogynist and women will want you"

[–]Inside-Lynx-5032 12 points13 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Pretty much As it stands men contribute more to taxes and tae back very litte interms of health care and retirement benefis. We dont take care of ourselves, we dont argue for our well being and ironically we retire later ( and only allowed to retire later) even though we die faster. A more fair way to do things would have been to extend the mandatory retirement age for women beyond men or reduce ,mens retirement age by 5, but no... that would imply we give a damn about the average guys quality of life. A man is only valuabe as long as he is working

[–]houstongradengineer 9 points10 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

I mean, men have interpersonal relationships with their sisters and cousins and nieces and plenty of people, right? Men don't have to have sex to care about people.

However, baby boomers in the US have cultivated this mentality of "I won't help watch my grandkids, the parents need to worry about that. I don't want to pay taxes and support affordable things, the parents need to worry about that." If anyone has a reason to need an interpersonal relationship for a "buy-in," it is women who need a romantic relationship to buy into caring about things like increasong the fertility rate. Instead of fixing the necessary elements, conservative elements have simply decided to overturn Roe and go with forced birth to fix the problem no matter what women think.

There is a stark difference in the 2 scenarios. If conservatives need a buy-in to care, why be a pro-birther? Why slutshame? I think it goes beyond not caring, or not being able to help. I think misery just loves company.

[–]yamb97 13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

“Misery loves company” you’ve hit the head on the nail here, “crabs in a bucket” is another apt analogy. Essentially getting better outcomes is really hard and it’s much easier to want/cause others’ suffering then it is to confront any shortcomings of your own. It’s also why these men are so focused on looks, something they don’t have much power over changing.

[–]HODL_monk 13 points14 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

The far right has little or no connection to the incel culture. The right is all about trying to defend the status quo in relationships and marriage, even though that horse had already left the stable a decade ago. The right also defends the tax and child support system as it exists now, which incels see as pure BS. Popular culture likes to connect the two to smear the right for occasional murder/suicides from incels, but that connection is just not a strong as they think, as incels are a lot more lying flat than january 6th.

[–]NockerJoePervert Palpatine 10 points11 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I would say incels go with the far right in the same way those little sucker fish go with a great white shark, or how those little birds will peck at the scraps in an alligators mouth. They aren't nearly the most dangerous element of it but they can keep the rest of it healthy and provide bonuses for tthe larger whole.

If you got incels in a room with a presumed average lifetime republican voter they would have nothing in common. They don't live even vaguely resembling the same lifestyles. But the far right picks up a lot of tricks from spaces Incels occupy much more frequently. Qanon was a concept that got traction on 4chan when it was arguably the most incel heavy it ever was. Reddit has always had an incel issue and they arguably got more prominent when subs like The Donald became prominent. You go on Twitter and the venn diagram between far right and incel audiences is basically a circle in many instances. Theres a really obvious pattern where once incels have been around it doesn't really take much for the far right to get the same or an adjacent audience.

[–]HODL_monk 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Q anon is definitely the weirdest part of the far right. I'm not sure if because it came from the depths of the internet if its incel based, but it could be. Some people are just surprisingly easily and strongly influenced by really strange things.

[–]houstongradengineer1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

The far right has little or no connection to the incel culture.

Lol did you even read the top post?

The right also defends the tax and child support system as it exists now, which incels see as pure BS.

Nah, I'm pretty sure both incels and the right are for reducing taxes and not spending any of said taxes on helping real people. Pretty sure that's consistent. Unsure about child support, I suppose. No one isn't really proposing a system that helps in the US tbh. Maybe Bernie, but fat chance of that.

[–]keine789 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

there is a connection wanting less government in the economy

[–]AidsVictim 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Instead of fixing the necessary elements, conservative elements have simply decided to overturn Roe and go with forced birth to fix the problem no matter what women think.

Overturning Roe does almost nothing to "fix" the fertility rates nor was that ever the main motivation of conservatism which saw it in a moral-religious context.

If anyone has a reason to need an interpersonal relationship for a "buy-in," it is women who need a romantic relationship to buy into caring about things like increasong the fertility rate.

There is nothing that's going to make modern Western women care about the birth rates. They will be replaced by religious women.

[–]AidsVictim 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

They want dating to have some sort of sorting system where they get placed with a match because its "fair" but on every political issue they lean hard right

Who exactly are we talking about? Tons of "incels" are left leaning, TRP is more right leaning in general but mostly in a shallow way where it's basically just some dime store libertarianism.

[–]JoeRMD771 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

#cope

Left-leaning people support the minimum wage and also are more likely to identify as feminists. That's literally the opposite of the right-leaning incel who doesn't want the minimum wage raised and also doesn't think women should be promiscuous.

[–]EasternToe3824 25 points26 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The study itself states that they still have to separate correlation and causation.

[–]MonsieurRavioli 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No study implies causation

[–]Overarching_Chaos 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

In order to infer causation, you'd have to perform a diffrences-in-differences experimental study, which takes years to complete and is quite expensive.

[–]midwesternMDNo Pill 5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Mid-30s man here.

I haven’t read the paper. But at face value, I would agree, as it has been my experience. And I find that disturbing.

I was raised fairly liberal, and I still ascribe to generally liberal/left leaning belief systems. But, if I feel like I’m being left in the dust romantically (some days I do), I don’t have the emotional bandwidth to give a shit about the plight of women. Any of it. In those moments, I don’t care about wage inequality, I don’t care about sexual harassment, I don’t care about sexual assault, I don’t care about reproductive rights, etc. In those moments, I don’t care about any of that because I am more preoccupied with my romantic life.

Again, I find this deeply disturbing.

On some level, it makes sense. If you exhaust your emotional reserves to cope with a shitty situation, you won’t have the capacity to care about others. But I have noticed that at times, I go past not caring, and even see a lot of positives to some values that I generally feel are more regressive. And that’s disturbing. Because I can bitch and moan about not getting laid because I’m short, fat, not white, not a celebrity, or whatever other nonsense of the day. In general, I know and accept that getting laid and being in a happy relationship happens in the context of a world in which people have free will, and who I think is a good match may feel that I’m not a good match, and that’s okay. But I’m also not an idiot. I know that I’m blessed with a strong family network, high paying/historically respectable career, and good health. If someone like me is going to struggle despite having those advantages, you’d better believe that I want to cling on to every advantage I’ve got. So I recognize that perpetuating a wage gap, for example, at least doesn’t reward women (in general) for ignoring me. It’s a bit childish, and not fully rational/logical, but it is what I feel.

And if someone like me, who has the benefit of being educated and the luxury to think/reflect (as opposed to someone who needs to worry about their next paycheck), can think like that at some times, then I can completely empathize and easily see how masses of single men can start to easily skew their political viewpoints conservatively.

I don’t see a solution here. But I do think that the crux of what this paper is trying to illustrate is a real phenomena. At the very least, I know that when I’m in a sufficiently long dry spell, I can embrace and even sometimes empathize with red pill, manosphere content, conservative ideologies, etc.

But, I’m human, and I think it’s okay to do that. It’s just a disturbing thought process. And I’m fortunate to be desirable enough that none of those thoughts have had a chance to become entrenched in my psyche. But if another man struggles for years, I could easily see him going full redpill/manosphere/extreme conservative. And I don’t think I could fault him for that. After all, he and society failed to provide him with an environment in which he could succeed as a man, start a family, etc. What allegiance should he have to that society? What allegiance should be have to himself?

[–]Overarching_Chaos 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I was also raised by liberal parents and would generally say that I am closer to the left politically (social-democracy), however I am fairly anti-PC/ anti-modern feminism and often watch conservative speakers (ex. Jordan Peterson) and TRP because I feel like many of their arguments resonate with me.

I am in favour of equity between men and women, however I'm against a society that tries to enforce equality of outcome, like gender quotas. I find it hypocritical to say we need more female CEOs but not more female builders, roadworkers, miners etc. Men still do most of the manual labour in the modern world and are not recognised. Also focusing all of one's endeavours into trying to diminish the gender wage gap, which was never a real problem to begin with, since men and women tend to make different career choices, is detrimental imo.

Moreover, the PC/feminist crowd has derailed the Left and its purpose. Now most leftists instead of focusing on the rising wealth inequality in the West, which is a very real problem with serious economic consequences, spend their time arguing whether inproper pronoun use is a hate crime...

[–]AcanthocephalaNew947 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Thank you for such an honest response. It’s appreciated and I’m sure it will get through to some.

[–]flakybottom 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I wish more people understood this. 33 yo autistic virgin here, grew up super liberal, I was really politically active and into volunteering and community service when I was younger. Now, I just really don't care. I'm not conservative by any metric, but trying to drum up motivation for any altruistic stuff is damn near impossible.

[–]jacare_o 44 points45 points  (45 children) | Copy Link

So the concept of "big d**k energy" is true?

Anyway, the men getting laid less or zero times have a vote too. They are free to exercise it as they see fit.

If you want to keep them contributing to society when they get nothing out of it is like slavery.

[–]House-MDMA 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Maybe sorta, the energy might exist but I never understood why it's called Big dick energy, it's not like having a big dick is gonna make you super confident like being super handsome would be it just means your not worried about your dick being too small and some bitch laughing at it.

Anyways it definitley has some cons like no quickies and never getting an actual proper bj. And trust me when I say having a huge dick really doesn't help with getting women at least not too much thatd itd actually be a noticable difference , and if you don't believe me go to r/bigdickproblems. Most of those people me included don't really have bde despite having a bd, so idk if I'd say bde is really real it's more handsome chad energy.

[–]KirthWGersen 8 points9 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Well, they get education, healthcare, the rule of law, pensions, unemployment benefit, roads, street lighting, freedom of speech, and the ability to choose their careers, etc. just like everyone else.

No-one gets sex in return for their contribution for society. You are more likely to get it by not doing what society expects of you.

[–]NockerJoePervert Palpatine 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

By the time they're voting age they're done with public education, the demo least likley to use healthcare, decades out from pensions, and the rest exists mostly in a vague academic sense.

They aren't having sex in exchange. They just have no reason to give a shit about public schools if theres no chance their kids will go there and no care for hospitals they probably aren't entering regularly because they're resaonably healthy young adults who are generally not at risk of anything.

But the thing is, if you want the kind of family that would have you generally use public infustructure to that degree that generally also comes with having a sexual relationship as the starting point.

[–]jacare_o 11 points12 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Well, they get education, healthcare, the rule of law, pensions, unemployment benefit, roads, street lighting, freedom of speech, and the ability to choose their careers, etc. just like everyone else.

If these things are not that important to them, and sex mattered more to them (not talking about getting a government issued woman, but a decent chance of being seen as a mate) would you be OK with them stopping the contributions to the country that they are in and leaving for somewhere else?

[–]prodigalsouls 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Pausing contribution or leaving to another country doesn’t increase their chances for sex though lol. People can want whatever they want… money, sex, success… doesn’t mean they’re entitled to it whatsoever.

[–]jacare_o 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Location can increase chances. For example, white men have a higher chance in countries like Philippines, Thailand, etc. There are also some countries where prostitution is legal (Colombia).

There are also countries with less taxes. If they are paying high taxes, and what they are getting in return for that is not worth much to them, they can leave.

No one is entitled to anything. But they can take steps to increase their chances, including voting, and leaving.

[–]KirthWGersen 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If that is their priority then they should go wherever they can achieve that, instead of moaning about their lot in life. Being exotic to a place can sometimes be a plus, after all.

But they probably won't, because if they had sufficient get-up-and-go they would be just fine where they are.

No-one has to contribute to society. Plenty of people drop out. That is one of the wonderful opportunities we have nowadays.

[–]ex_red_black_piller 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You are also not entitled to their vote, just fyi.

As long as they follow the law, they don't owe society anything else.

[–]UniverseCatalyzed 7 points8 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

A single woman contributes just as much as a single man if they earn the same amount so I don't really know where this is coming from.

[–]jacare_o 8 points9 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

What if what they are getting wasn't that important to them, compared to having a decent chance at mating?

If this is the case would you be OK with them stopping the contributions to the country that they are in and leaving for somewhere else?

[–]UniverseCatalyzed 5 points6 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Sure? Women can leave too if they don't want to support the jurisdiction they're in - see women leaving conservative states to avoid abortion bans in the USA.

But having things like roads, electricity, and fire departments is good regardless of gender or relationship status so I'm still not sure why taxpaying is suddenly considered a massive burden on single men.

[–]stoic4343 -2 points-1 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Men pay the burden of taxes

[–]jacare_o -2 points-1 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

But having things like roads, electricity, and fire departments is good regardless of gender or relationship status

Maybe finding a mate is more important to them than these things.

[–]chalkandapples 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think if some people want to check out of society, they should and I support it. We honestly have enough people contributing to society already.

[–]pookiecombs 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I would like to see a psychologist or psychiatrist come in and read these threads and see what they have to say about them.

[–]RedditsOlderBrah1 points [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

Ladies, and averagely-well-adjusted gentlemen. May I present, the top post in this thread!

expensive purple curtain is raised revealing a flood-lit text box with the following message

YOU BETTER WATCH OUT MOTHERFUCKER. THERE ARE 100,000 OF US ON THE MOST POPULAR WEBSITE ON THE FUCKING PLANET SPREAD OUT OVER DOZENS OF COUNTRIES. AND IF WOMEN DON'T START FUCKING US, WE WILL VOTE FOR TERRIBLE POLICIES THAT HAVE NO BASIS FOR EXISTENCE IN EITHER SCIENCE OR REALITY. THAT'S RIGHT, JUST ABSOLUTELY OBJECTIVELY DOG SHIT AND REALLY DUMB POLICIES FROM THE STUPIDEST MOTHERFUCKERS RUNNING. FUCK YOU. FUCK ME.

[–]purplish_possum1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Brilliant satire!

[–]Yupperdoodledoo -1 points0 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Not getting laid is like slavery now? Lol.

[–]TheElusivePeacock 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

They also compare to starving children. Their dry dicks are just as important as hungry dying children lol. The entitlement is crazy

[–]jacare_o 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

If you want to keep them contributing to society....

[–]Yupperdoodledoo 4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I don’t even know what you mean by "contributing to society?" How does some random dude deciding to stop working hurt me? He’s the one who suffers if he just drops out. And again, not getting sex isn’t slavery.

[–]jacare_o -1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I don’t even know what you mean by "contributing to society?"

It's a quote from what I initially wrote.

How does some random dude deciding to stop working hurt me?

Less people doing the male dominant jobs, such as garbage collectors, mechanics, military, police, firefighters etc. Also the government can't collect taxes from their salaries.

He’s the one who suffers if he just drops out.

He'll just collect welfare, or work in a low wage job that doesn't demand much time or effort. He's not getting laid anyway, so why work?

[–]Smooth_Mod -3 points-2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Maybe the solution would be to stop men and women who don't get laid from voting.

Especially if they harbour negative feelings

[–]jacare_o 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Isn't that slavery? Especially if you want them to keep contributing to the economy.

[–]Smooth_Mod 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Probably, but I think society functions best when it has a demographic that can't succeed in life and that we can look down upon.

[–]ex_red_black_piller 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol you said the quiet part loud.

[–]drew8311 -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

For women it would need to be the ones who can't get a relationship, since they are usually a bit unstable anyway.

[–]Ok-Stretch7499 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

yeah good luck casting that into law

[–]pookiecombs 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

We don’t have a right to happiness in our country we have a right to pursue happiness. We work for food and shelter. That’s what most people get out of society, man or woman unless you’re economically privledged.I don’t see how whining about not getting laid contributes to society and how are they contributing any more or different than the average working person to feel entitled to continuous flings?

[–]jacare_o 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The problem is that the pursuit of happiness is not producing results.

So I don't see how whining about men not contributing to society is going to help. They are doing what's logical. They are voting for their interests, checking out or leaving.

[–]AidsVictim 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

“It may seem farfetched to say that an individual’s dating life can influence the individual’s socio-political attitudes. Yet, it is becoming more evident that romantic successes and failures in our everyday dating life can have profound impacts on the ways we think and act,” said study author Francesca R. Luberti, a postdoctoral research fellow at Nipissing University in North Bay.

It doesn't seem far fetched at all. Rather the inverse is true - it would be unexpected if one of the most fundamental elements of human socialization did not affect their politics. Thinking that it wouldn't is only "common sense" in a profoundly alienated society.

[–]Inside-Lynx-5032 40 points41 points  (107 children) | Copy Link

Its amazing that i can see why this would be the way it is and most of you ( women especially) can just chose to mock. Like i get it, you want to continue to benefit of their backs as you always have but you want them to be happy about it.them being unhappy about it makes you uncomfortable but the rationalize it away by thinking " they are all terrible people anyway " because if they are terrible people they deserve to be unhappy

We should try to build a world where boys and girls can expect kindness and help. When their life is distrust and hostility why would you expect them to be anything but selfish.

You are surprised that the abused dog bit you

[–]Nihi1986 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, I'm more open minded when my dating life works (exists?) than when it's a failure and become more conservative than my grandpa who served the army under a catholic fascist dictatorship 🤔

Jokes(?) aside, this was very obvious by just looking at the incel community.

[–]Acceptable_Parking96 3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women don’t get rejected and in the rare case they do they can find someone else in 10 minutes who will simp for them

[–]DrinkItInMan11Tate & Bugatti Pilled 21 points22 points  (44 children) | Copy Link

Funnily enough it wasn't rejection that made me lean towards taking the Red Pill. It was wanting a change on my dating scene, I grew tired of being the guy women wanted for relationships, basically the consolation prize guy, and I wanted to be the hookup guy.

I got what I wanted.

[–]Kitchen_Winter_1850Blue Pill Man 13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well if you wanted to be the hookup guy, and couldn't be... wouldn't that still be the result of rejection?

Consolation prize guy sounds like someone who gets rejected most of the time atleast initialy.

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman 4 points5 points  (26 children) | Copy Link

How is relationships the consolation prize?

[–]Purple317 9 points10 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

This has always been so strange to me. That long term relationships / marriage / children are a “price” that all but the hottest guys have to pay in order to get sex on tap.

A woman can truly love a guy, be faithful to him, and give him beautiful children. And he secretly would trade it all to bang a different 20 year old every night if given the chance?

[–]JumboJetz 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

It’s interesting. Speaking as a man, I do want children at some point I think so I don’t see that as a price and I think a lot of men do want children in some imagined future time.

But you are right banging a different 20 year old every night does sound more appealing than marriage in some ways.

Now I think part of the issue is that the benefits of having a stable partner only really manifest more in down times than in good times. In good times where you are healthy, employed etc. having tons of casual sex seems great because you don’t need anyone. But if you get very sick, disabled or lose your job and can’t find another, having a partner is a huge edge.

I am kindof in this scenario right now where I swing so drastically between what I want.

[–]Purple317 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Now I think part of the issue is that the benefits of having a stable partner only really manifest more in down times than in good times. In good times where you are healthy, employed etc. having tons of casual sex seems great because you don’t need anyone. But if you get very sick, disabled or lose your job and can’t find another, having a partner is a huge edge.

See, this is so strange to me as a woman. If a genie appeared before me and said you can pick one of two options: 1) An unending string of super hot guys to have fun, casual flings with your entire life or 2) one reasonably attractive man who you love and will love you back and be faithful to you forever….I would pick #2 without even a second thought. No question.

But you’re saying as a man, the only upside to monogamy is to raise children and have someone take care of you when you’re old and sick and can’t do any better?

[–]CosmicBioHazard 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think ultimately, a secure relationship with a good woman is better, but it’s subject to anxiety.

Dudes are not secure people, if she’s got experience you’re constantly worried you’re being compared. Every time she makes a change that improves her appearance it’s like “oh dear is this the change that makes her too good for me?”

A new 20 year old every night avoids that issue entirely, so I can see the appeal. I mean, that and the benefit of variety.

[–]DrinkItInMan11Tate & Bugatti Pilled 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because being chosen as the hookup guy means more to a man, it means you get the prize without having to commit to them. Even better if it's multiple women at once.

[–]LoudPiece6914 7 points8 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I’m assuming if you don’t like women as human beings but are sexually attracted to female anatomy that would make sense. But I would much rather have a stable partner.

[–]DrinkItInMan11Tate & Bugatti Pilled 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I love women as people, I'd say I've got more chick friends than guy friends at this point, but I value being wanted sexually over being wanted emotionally.

[–]GhostofCamus 6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

A guy can respect women, and still want to feel lusted after. A lot of dudes don't seem to get that out of relationships though, and it leaves them feeling settled for. A few have the right amount of luck, smarts, and game to maintain a ltr with a woman that makes him feel desirable; more often a chick treats that dude like a vending machine that doesn't give back change. She's going to put just enough kissy tokens in until he dispenses a relationship, and not a penny more.

[–]LoudPiece6914 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

😪you are right.

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman 5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Women prefer romance and relationship over casual sex, so a relationship to a woman is more significant. I don't seem why you would see that as lesser if it is more to her. Unless you see women as numbers to knock off, like you said, I guess. I don't think any woman truly wants casual sex in our current set up, unless they're partiers that are drunk 3/4 of the time or single divorced older women that already had all the kids they want and are winging it.

[–]SuperSaiyanAssHair 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't seem why you would see that as lesser if it is more to her.

Let me see if I can explain. Have you ever called a man an incel? And if not, surely you have seen it used on this subreddit as an insult?

[–]FlyV89 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women prefer romance and relationship over casual sex, so a relationship to a woman is more significant.

I just ended hearing a co-worker say she slept with a good looking guy on Saturday, they met at the night club, had some shots, they went to his place and he basically fucked her brains out. All this with a level of detail that it's surprising for someone that claims to be drunk during all the process.

She says she feels terrible, but you know... I don't believe her.

She says she wants a relationship with a good man, that she doesn't want to do hook ups, that this and that... But I don't believe her.

I don't seem why you would see that as lesser if it is more to her.

Why would a woman have casual sex if a relationship means more to her? I really want a good explanation, because I'm having a hard time trying to understand why this girl would say one thing and do another.

I'm single at the moment, we are both good looking people. Somewhere down the road, maybe, I would have considered to ask her out and see where it goes, and I Heard her lots of times saying she wanted a relationship, she felt alone and sad, hell I even thought she was hitting on me, but today something just made a click, it's like, well, she's kinda like any other girl around. Not my type at all. I may invite her for some drinks thou, because I do want something from her...

But it's definetly not a relationship now.

The same happened two years ago with another girl I work with. We had gone on a few dates and all, I was actually thinking we could match, but one day while having a small chat with a male coworker the dude said she had been having a "thing" with another guy from job who's married and have kids.

I remember that weekend when I went out with this girl something had changed. She even talked about "relationships" and what she wanted in life, to met someone special, and all that jazz... Like if she was trying to push the convo in that direction...

Somewhere during the night I just asked her casually if she had dated someone from work and well, kinda she confirmed it.

OF COURSE, she felt horrible. He was a jerk. She also grew out of that phase, and wasn't that kind of woman anymore. She was at a really bad place at that moment... You know... The usual.

So she tried to go back to normal, being the cute girl again and all, but she wasn't the girl I had been thinking to get serious with anymore. Something, again, clicked in me. I stoped talking to her a few months after.

And when guys go out and all they see is women hooking up, when women at your uni are hooking up, when your coworkers and friends tell you about this and that guy they hooked up with...

Then you start to take women, as a whole, not that seriously.

The thing is, if women want relationships, then they would focus on relationships.

I don't think any woman truly wants casual sex in our current set up

I don't think women want relationships when all I see them do is hooking up with other men.

What buggs me the most honestly is not them having sex, it's them saying one thing and doing another.

It confuses me, and it hurts this image I have from women being good and kind, and at the end, deserving of love and worthy of sacrifice.

It seems, to me at least, that they are all just decievers.

And I say this as a guy who's seeing three different women right now. You can call me a hypocrite if you want, but that doesn't change the fact that I can't date "casual" women. It's nor my thing, and it seems, other men think the same.

Relationships are a lot of work, specially for the men, and there is no much in it for us unless we want kids. And even then, it's a LOT more work.

What am I going to get from a relationship that I can't get from casual sex?

That's why men envy the guy that gets casual sex. That guy is getting what HE wants without putting any effort. Simple. Does it matter to him what is more important to women? Not really. He's getting what he wants without putting any. That's what men can see.

You know, men, unlike women, are pragmatic.

Women say they want relationships, but then go hook up with a rando (who sometimes is married with kids).

Men want sex. We may want a relationship down the road with a girl who's worth the effort... But what do we see?

Women hooking up. Then what are we going to look for? Hook ups. Not rocket science really.

So what do you think men are going to do when a girl walks to them and say "I want a relationship"? Exactly, we just get the hell out of there, because we are looking for sex, not relationships, and we know there are women out there having sex without requiring any attachment.

At the end, I'm getting exactly what I want from women, which is sex, so I'm not complaining here, just trying to figure out things, honestly curious about it.

Why all women have casual sex if all they say they want is relationships and everlasting love?

Can't just women... You know... Keep it in their pants or what? I thought only guys were like that, but even then we don't lie to anyone, and definetly not to ourselves.

That's the biggest problem I think. Everytime I hear a woman say "I want to be in a relationship", all I can see is a cheater trying to play some mind games.

After almost 18 years of dating and having met lots of women, at my 33 years old, I just can't take women seriously anymore, it's weird.

[–]Fentonious8 1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Because the woman in this scenario isn't getting with the man because she desired him and they're really compatible. She got with him because she already had her fun with other guys and gave them what they wanted, so now she figured she'll pick a safe guy who possibly makes a good living in order to extract resources for herself, meanwhile, she'll feel like she's already given her fun self so she'll be more restrained with the husband. So he gets used and doesn't get her at her best

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

That's not necessarily true though. People try to find life partners based on love and sexual attraction too, not just safety. I am madly in love with my fiancè and have never been as attracted to any man as much as how attracted I am to him. My ex boyfriends and casual relationships before him just taught me exactly what I didn't want. In fact, I was giving a chance to many men I wasn't too sure of for the sake of being kind and open-minded. You learn boundaries as you mature. I think this perspective of younger women dating is small-minded and comes from FOMO and a tendency to romanticize other people's experiences if you feel youre missing out on something.

Young women arent all having the time of their lives riding the carousel, some are generally just lost and unsure of themselves and trying to find their place in a world where men constantly throw themselves at them, left, right and center.

[–]Fentonious8 3 points4 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

From my experience, I've seen so many of my peers do the exact cliche of spending their 20s in these patterns of hooking up with more attractive guys, guys that show no more interest in them than just as a sexual object, the very thing women claim they don't want to be seen as, yet reward those men that do see them as that. Meanwhile, the less attractive, less upwardly social men who want relationships and are looking for a forever partner get rejected for a decade or so, only to be considered once the woman doesn't get as much attention from those other types of men. Or once they figure that instead of just having fun, they want someone who has built independence for himself. Only then did they get chances. Somehow, women want a man to have his shit together despite being emotionally neglected through their formative years. It's like expecting to adopt a trained puppy that has been left to rot alone in an abandoned house. They want the rewards of a successful man, without putting in the work to help build up that success.

[–]FlyV89 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Young women arent all having the time of their lives riding the carousel, some are generally just lost and unsure of themselves and trying to find their place in a world

That's the problem. May be it's a good way to find your place in the world, but not a good way to convince men women really want relationships.

Glad your fiance understands that but for me, well, it looks quite the opposite, not gonna lie.

[–]warramite 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women treat hookup guys better than relationship guys.. They dont play games with hookup guy

[–]HealthyUmpire564 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The "hookup" guy can get relationships too if they want them. The relationship guy cannot necessarily get casual sex if they wanted. The hookup guy has choice.

[–]TheElusivePeacock 4 points5 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

I love this comment. I like when men say this on here whenever they try to bs other women they it’s not just sex for them and they want love and intimacy and a relationship and all that bullshit. No y’all don’t. Y’all just want sex. Which I’m cool with, but if men just want sex, women should only have it with attractive men. If men all just want sex and love and relationships are a consolation prize, might as well just have sex with the hottest and ignore the uggos who think being with you is settling.

[–]NockerJoePervert Palpatine 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You've clearly never been in a relationship with someone who didn't actually want you.

[–]TheElusivePeacock -2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why in the hell would I be in a relationship with someone who doesn’t actually want me? What kind of weird ass statement is that?

[–]bottleblank 1 point2 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

What you just said right there is justification enough for anybody to say that all women are (some rude word). Useless generalisation, pointing to one guy that justifies your view, and concluding that he represents every man and that any man who disagrees is being disingenuous, two-faced, and manipulative. Way to raise the standard of discourse.

[–]TheElusivePeacock 3 points4 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Men generalize women all the time on here. I’ll tell you like I tell them when they say what you said. I don’t give a fuck if you generalize women. Do it. Don’t. Don’t care. You men never tell other men that love and relationships and intimacy are just as important to men when they spend all day on here saying it. You only spew this shit to women. Women on here aren’t fooled.

[–]bottleblank 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

I'd rather not generalise, frankly, and I would hope for the same standard of discussion from others.

I don't want, and have never wanted, casual sex. Simple as that. You can choose to believe me or not, but we're out here, trying to be respectful, not "demanding" or "feeling entitled", not feeling women up in clubs, not pretending to be their bestie because we think it'll get their underwear off. If you choose not to believe that then I can't really change that, but I would hope for the sake of everybody's mental health prospects that you, and others like you, can acknowledge that men aren't all like that poster above.

[–]csn924 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Allow me to raise the "standards of discourse": behold, comments from this subreddit (and all different people!):

  • Just lol at all the women here that get it twisted and say "then stop trying to have sex with us, if you hate us so much!" Listen lmao, my biology compels me to fk you, not respect you. I'd fk a pornstar if I had the opportunity, this does not mean I respect them. 😂😂😂😂😂
  • biology isn't allowing it, keep me attracted to [women]. Which so much that i was gay....Lucky bastards they dont have to deal with the most egoistical beings on earth..
  • (Answering the question, "if you hate women so much, why do you want to be with a woman?") Sex. The relationship is just a means to that end because it allows sex and usually better sex. The only other reason could be children, and you know how you get these.
  • Well yah. Most guys are only interested in women because we see them as potential dating partners. I'm surprised you're on this sub and don't know this lol. A comment above that responded to me summed it up pretty well.

  • If a woman does not think I am good enough to want me to fuck her she now has a quality that makes her not good enough for me to want to have anything to do with her. Simple
  • Except there's no sex. So I rather do all those things for a woman who actually wants to be with me.

  • My take: Female friendships are generally of no value when sex is off the table I.

  • If we're being real: women are generally no fun to be around. Personality wise most women are empty shells of human beings and they also usually have no skills(besides sex stuff) that make them worth keeping around. A woman can't fix my car at a discount, a woman won't help me move heavy shit out of my apt, etc.
  • When they cut off sex, it makes it hard to justify keeping them around.
  • So I'm supposed to be friends with a woman who I still have feelings for while some other guy gets to have sex with her? No thanks. Maybe if it's put in that perspective more of the women who have a problem with men acting like this would understand.
  • Most women don't understand that they are shitty friends and the only reason other people tolerate their behavior is their vaginas.

[–]bottleblank 1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

OK?

That doesn't mean the rest of us shouldn't strive to be more respectful and productive. I speak for myself, I don't speak for those people, and they don't speak for me. I'm not perfect, but I don't see what those comments have to do with what I've said, no matter how cheap they are.

[–]MadLad-AnthonyWayne 10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Women don't get rejected - they're the ones doing the rejecting. Anthropologists are pseudoscientists btw

[–]Powerful_Skill1847 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think they are social scientists.

[–]Stunning-Potato-1984 5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Groundbreaking /s

[–]KingWhoCared86 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

As pretty much a textbook definition of an incel, I would say that my political leanings have slowly become more conservative over the years. And also a more pessimistic and sometimes slightly hostile worldview toward others. But I guess having a catholic upbringing more or less compels me to always help out whenever possible even when I truly have no desire to.

[–]resultsmatter1 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Given what’s happened the last decade or so in the dating market, I’m not surprised. The rise of neofeminism and liberalism has hurt the average man and below in the dating market.

I’ve found my own political beliefs changing as well. I used to be very liberal and all my friends and family still think I am. But as my income increased, I’m less a fan of economic policies put out by democrats and sociopolitically am all for rights and freedom to choose but the woke movement has gone too far.

Think how much we’ve changed as a society, if the office was on tv today the entire cast, crew, and studio would be cancelled.

[–]OhmaygahhGeriatric GigaChad 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not surprising. I definitely shifted my own thoughts of government help and directed monies from very liberal to more fiscally conservative, don't you dare use the money I am forced to pay taxes on to fund single women who birthed multiple children by multiple men.

[–]Valuable-Marzipan761 4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

So "incel" is a legitimate insult then if it has a significant impact on their personality.

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You could say the same for "slut".

[–]Valuable-Marzipan761 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The study doesn't mention that.

[–]AcceptableJury6561 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

No surprise. People who are feeling down are resentful of happy people and thus desire to extinguish the happiness of others. "If I'm unhappy, no one deserves to be happy!"

[–]Nihi1986 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Kinda, though they also perceive that certain politics and ideologies harm them while others would be helpful with their problems.

[–]ThorLivesSkeptical Purple Pill Man 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

People often behave with reciprocity. If you're nice to someone, they'll be nice back if you're mean to someone, they'll be mean back.

On some level, it's just a form of reciprocity: "if women and society reject me, then why should I be kind back to them? Why should my tax dollars go to making their life better?"

[–]ruthofhades 5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I highly doubt the validity of this study. You people are willing to believe anything just because it is called a "study", no wonder we have a replication crisis. Francesca Luberti from Nipissing U, not even a professor yet just a postdoc at a no-name university? Has anyone looked her up? Hardly an impressive pedigree, and her personal views make it quite clear this was done with an agenda.

I'm just doing a quick run through of the results and this is what I see:

The pairwise contrasts showed that men reported significantly more support for casual sex than women did when men and women received 0–2 negative feedback videos out of 5, but the sex difference was not significant when men and women received 3–5 negative feedback videos out of 5. The slopes of the effect of negative feedback on PC2 were significantly different for women and men. For women, the slope was not significantly different from 0, whereas for men the slope was significantly different from 0 and negative. These results suggested that there was no main effect on women. Instead, men led to believe they were unpopular with opposite-sex peers reported significantly less support for casual sex than men led to believe they were popular.

So you can already see how it is kind of being twisted. Even if her results were accurate, what is happening is men show a high support for casual sex when they get it, while women don't. At the same time, men and women were pretty much the same when they got negative views. But of course since men showed an increase when they got casual sex, the delta difference would be higher for men so Luberti is misrepresenting it as men show a negative response when they are unpopular when the actual result is that they just hold the same views as women under those conditions. And that is just what I found in 2 seconds, I'm sure there's much more stuff if you read the whole study.

[–]houstongradengineer 15 points16 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

Teehee I knew my socialist husband was a Chad XD

[–]None0fYour8usinessNo Pill, No Problem 15 points16 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

socialist

chad

Sure

[–]houstongradengineer 8 points9 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The science doesn't lie lmfao

[–]bunnakaybirth control pill 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

My husband is also socialist Chad!

[–]ex_red_black_piller 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I hope he reads this comment.

[–]bunnakaybirth control pill 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

He's not on Reddit (I don't think).

[–]Inside-Lynx-50321 points [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Puke

[–]houstongradengineer 15 points16 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ain't no point in getting married and making love to a man if I can't appreciate him. My effort means something in my life.

[–]Ilarva -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

fy

[–]yamb97 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Well yeah have you noticed all these rejects somehow have the most bitter attitudes, do their own moms even like them ???

[–]houstongradengineer 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think most young men, including many rejects, start out having a positive relationship with their mother. Hard to tell where the attitude starts to bleed over from being angry at some unrelated women to taking it out on their families. I can't pretend that I understand it myself.

[–]Historical-System972 10 points11 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Most women will never face romantic rejection once in their lifetime - how did they come this conclusion?

[–]MadadeppPurple Pill Woman 14 points15 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s very common men pretend that they love a woman just to have sex and then when they have it just ghost them

[–]Weedrill2 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

ive been rejected 4/5 times ive tried to shoot my shot

[–]jcdbionicman273 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

The average guy gets rejected 9/10 times

[–]Weedrill2 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

well i havent asked out 10 people so i wouldnt know how accurate it is in my case

[–]EventSea8621 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

yeh no shit, ive been rejected enough to not even try anymore, i also think we should be able to choose where my tax money goes as opposed to single mothers spreading their legs and woman's birth control/abortions.

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman 20 points21 points  (67 children) | Copy Link

"Men are the more rational/logical gender" is one the biggest shitting lies that still gets told.

[–]throwaway164_3 30 points31 points  (47 children) | Copy Link

On average (I.e. population distributions not at the level of individuals), I think it may be true though.

For example, women are statistically more likely to believe in pseudoscience like Astrology and horoscopes.

Whether that’s an artifact of culture or something innate/biological, I don’t know.

[–]webernickethy/thoust/them'st've 14 points15 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Each gender has its irrational hobbies.

Women are more into Astrology, energies and crystals. Men are into conspiracy theories, alternative history and broscience.

[–]darkmoon09 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What's broscience?

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman 8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

For example, women are statistically more likely to believe in pseudoscience like Astrology and horoscopes.

I've known more men that believe in it. However that "belief" is sorta overstated. Its more of a "fun" belief than a, "I am going to bet my life savings on this" belief.

[–]yamb97 11 points12 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Right “belief” is very loose here, my friends and I all read horoscopes for a good chuckle but have any of us actually made full on life decisions due to them?? Obv not.

[–]napthaleneneens 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Yet men invented religion - the craziest psychobabble of all. All the lunatic prophets, self-proclaimed demigods and messiahs are male. Men have no trouble believing in talking snakes and bushes. Or driving planes into buildings over their god. Astrology is just a traditional practice. Vedic astrologers (i.e. the pros) in foreign countries are both male and female and usually older. They’re trained in what they do. The West and specifically white women may have made a mockery of astrology but in other places, it’s tradition to use it for match-making and figuring auspicious times.

[–]GhostofCamus 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

There's no record of who invented religion.

[–]Pizdamati6969 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Most most likely men who felt the need to control the masses.

[–]krich8181 -1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Women are more religious than men on average in basically every religion but Islam lol.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2016/03/22/the-gender-gap-in-religion-around-the-world/#:~:text=An%20estimated%2083.4%25%20of%20women,in%20192%20countries%20and%20territories

Try again.

Edit: Also don't try to position astrology as any more sensible than religion in general. It's fine when people decide their wedding date when using it or whatever, but some people outright reject or accept partners off of it and that's just dumb.

[–]napthaleneneens 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Males still invented the horseshit that is religion and males still fill up the pews of churches and worship on the mats of mosques. All major religious leaders are males. Extremists are mostly male. And I’m well aware traditional women are retarded enough to be devoutly religious and follow men’s lies but that doesn’t change the fact it came out of men’s anuses. You’re the ones that shat it out and conjured up the myths and stories. Take accountability for that.

And yeah, astrology isn’t a religion or anything to close to it. That was literally my point. Its a non-issue, a minor traditional practice that bothers perpetually rejected males to death. Because it’s bad enough you might be born with a chode or shorter than 6’0”, now you’re also screwed if she finds out you’re an effeminate Cancer or whiny Sagittarius. I for one support women friendzoning males for whatever reason, even planets, for the simple reason it’s hilarious watching males get suicidal over rejection.

[–]Warm_Gur8832 -3 points-2 points  (27 children) | Copy Link

Men are more likely to believe in the stock market though. Just as much validity.

[–]mandoa_sky 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

nah you mean crypto (stupidly unregulated) and NFTs (it's called right click and copy) ;)

edit: EFT to NFT

[–]HODL_monk 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think you mean NFT's, ETF's are actually real investment things, and there is no crypto ETF yet.

[–]throwaway164_3 11 points12 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

The stock market is based on some economic theory (e.g. P/E ratios, earnings reports, etc), unlike astrology/horoscopes/chakras which is just total bullshit.

In fact, there’s a reason why quant firms hire a bunch of math and physics PhDs to do time series modeling and analytical predictions.

The comparison you want is with Joe Rogan type “bro-science” dudes. I’ll admit that’s as unscientific as the new age spiritual woo.

[–]RedditsOlderBrah -4 points-3 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

The stock market is based on some economic theory (e.g. P/E ratios, earnings reports, etc), unlike astrology/horoscopes/chakras which is just total bullshit.

This is just incredible.

In fact, there’s a reason why quant firms hire a bunch of math and physics PhDs to do time series modeling and analytical predictions.

Yeah it's the maths and physics PHD's that make the money. I'm raising my own flock of PHDs as we speak, and once the team is assembled we will become a massive conglomerate. What? You think that their success in the market is due to accumulated wealth and a stock portfolio so massive legislators and regulators do not apply to you? Wrong. And I will prove it with my team of east-Asian geniuses.

[–]YourAverageTurkGuy 10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You're mistaking a competition with a belief.

Stock Market is a competition and make no mistake there are men who win. Most lose. Still doesn't discredit the fact that it is a skill that can be cultivated.

Astrology and horoscopes are so different than the stock market.

[–]Warm_Gur8832 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

You can totally make good money at astrology and being a psychic or something.

If winning is the measurement, astrology and shit can do that too

[–]GhostofCamus 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

People rise through ranks in church. They still believe a bunch of bullshit.

[–]Pizdamati6969 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Wait, is the stock market a fairy tale?

[–]Warm_Gur8832 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Pretty much

[–]RottingVillain666 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Stock market is valid. Been making money since 2008 by shorting alot of companies.

[–]Temporary-Drawing212 -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Choosing to believe in astrology or horoscopes has zero to do with being logical or rational. You do understand that people hobbies and interest are not all guided by if it's logical or not. Most are based on if you enjoy the activity or how it makes you feel.

[–]houstongradengineer 0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

It's called showmanship, not belief.

I'd argue that the vast majority of even the more popular organized spiritual practices amount to some kind of manipulation/showmanship.

[–]throwaway164_3 2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

My point is, they’re all inconsistent with science and reality. Exactly like religious beliefs, and even there more women tend to be religious than men.

Again, I don’t know if it’s cultural or biological

[–]houstongradengineer 4 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Being a pro-birther is inconsistent with science and reality, too, but men on this sub will take that stance. It's not even gendered, but showmanship might be.

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

For example, women are statistically more likely to believe in pseudoscience like Astrology and horoscopes.

I've known more men that believe in it. However that "belief" is sorta overstated. Its more of a "fun" belief than an "I am going to bet my life savings on this" belief.

[–]Johnny_Autism 15 points16 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

FDS/pinkill couldn’t even articulate themselves without entirely borrowing jargon from the manosphere.

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman 5 points6 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

FDS seems to be have been created direcrly to satire a gender-flipped manosphere and isn't anywhere near as huge.

[–]ConvolutedMaze 2 points3 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

It's not huge because women didn't have to be "woken up" to believe those things they already did. That's the difference.

[–]Salt_Mathematician24Purple Pill Woman -1 points0 points  (12 children) | Copy Link

Women didn't have to be woken up because women already understand men because it's a man's world and everything is from a man's perspective. Men "woke up" to realizing they didn't understand women because they were too busy sucking their own dicks for the last millenia and once women got more freedom, they realized couldn't get away with doing it anymore so instead of actually trying to understand or fix this problem, due to their pride, they made up a shittonne of debunked pseudoscientific claims which always, without fail, ensure that they are right and superior and its all women's fault. And it's as ridiculously funny as it is complete hogwash.

[–]HODL_monk 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Men are usually better at suppressing their emotions than women, but we are both emotional creatures at heart. However, in hard math and science careers, it really doesn't matter how much you believe the bridge struts should not oscillate in the wind, that stuff has to work in the real world, so its a little more constrained by reality than a job in child services or psychology.

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

At the core we are all guided by emotions and feelings.

Like if you take the most rational and logical engineer, he became an engineer because as a kid he wanted to create some cool gadget.

[–]Railgunner79 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Wow. Is that supposed to be a shock to anyone? I don’t think a scientific study to figure that out. Men and women are different. More importantly women have much more sexual opportunity than men and that makes a big difference on their outlook than men.

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I heard a lot of women suggesting that guys end up single because of their right socio-political views.

It seems it's the other way around.

[–]Railgunner79 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I don’t know. I think politics has gotten so polarized and radicalized that both men and women are making it one of their criteria they are looking for.

[–]yep20193 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not sure how we can regard anything as conclusive from a sample of 237 people . I'm of the opinion its not necessarily dating success but how disagreeable/agreeable they are.

[–]herefortheparty01 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

So we’re mocking unlucky men. Ok. Just wanted to be clear

[–]smallstarseekerDogs don’t deserve us. ❤️[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The only reason why I had posted this article is because a lot of users suggest that right-wing men can't find love because they are right-wing. But it would seem that men become right-wing because they can't find love... my intention wasn't to mock.

Offcourse some users will simply mock men whenever they can't. Same users which cry when their problems are not taken seriously.

[–]RedditsOlderBrah1 points [recovered] (25 children) | Copy Link

Incredible. I would never have thought that the traditionally emotionally volatile gender (men) would turn into massive fucking pussies when a girl ticks 'no' on their do u lik me? note. They will fly into a rage so hysterical that they will oppose minimum wage rises and your ability to not die of preventable conditions.

“We also found that unpopular men reported lower positive affect (positive emotions such as happiness, enthusiasm, and pride) than popular men, and in turn men with lower positive affect reported less support for casual sex, as well as less support for increasing the minimum wage and access to healthcare, than men with higher positive affect.”

Incredible.

[–]EulenWatcher1 points [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Men are the rational gender, yeah.

[–]RedditsOlderBrah1 points [recovered] (21 children) | Copy Link

Good sir, have you considered that men are human?

We are not 'pussies'. We are human beings that have a high probability of being socialised to be emotionally immature. That socialisation has a side effect of resulting in the relative inability to express complex and powerful emotions - with the exception of anger, which is 'masculine'.

Men need help. And empathy. We need to be freed from the shackles that stunt our emotional growth so that we can weep at the sight of beauty as Alexander once did at the sight of his enemies arranged for battle, and get on with performing masculinity unencumbered by stupid bullshit. That's right. We need to dismantle the patriarchy.

[–]God_Hand_97641 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Why are you having a conversation with yourself? Forgot to switch accounts?

[–]houstongradengineer1 points [recovered] (16 children) | Copy Link

I'm not so sure that men would suddenly care about human rights and the betterment of society if they could only learn to express themselves. When I hear threats and people dehumanizing ME (it doesn't just happen to men), I tend to feel pretty terrified. It's hard to trust, at that point, that the only problem is rheir poor feelings. What makes it even more difficult is that I see men who have sex still struggle to care about others, or their own mother and sister. That's gotta be a sign of some deeper problem than a communication issue.

[–]RedditsOlderBrah1 points [recovered] (14 children) | Copy Link

In my hubris I thought that being socialised to identify and express emotions promptly and appropriately might help. I guess I was hoping one of the emotions might be empathy. Combining empathy with the protective and territorial nature of the vicious male might lead to them being empathetic and protective towards... humans.

I was a fool.

[–]houstongradengineer1 points [recovered] (13 children) | Copy Link

Oh, it's a great thing to try, but it's not a guarantee. I especially have to weigh the risks of engaging with full-grown adult men who are vicious and territorial in the vain hope of changing their feelings. Perhaps a zero-tolerance policy for vicious anger among strong, adult men is part of the improved socialization process. The rest might just have to be up to them and therapist, because I'm so not qualified to help anyone unpack 25 years of trauma. I'll be a good aunt to my young nephews, though, I got you there.

[–]southern_dilettanteNo Pill 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Austrian school shills in a nutshell

[–]SylvestorTalone 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You say that like Austrian school economics is not being proven right in real time as we speak. Buckle up for more inflation, because it's only going to get worse.

[–]AppliedAutism 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women starting to learn that actions have consequences heh.

[–]SeveralSadEveningsThe heart of man is the Seventh Gate of Hell 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Makes sense, my husband was the biggest slut I know but he's also a diehard socialist.

[–]ruboyuri -4 points-3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I guess men are the illogical gender swayed by emotions not facts, lol

But we already knew that

[–]dysonRing 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No, men are still more emotional than women, we are not robots though.

There was no shift in female opinion because they know it is BS, they know they can just ask and get casual sex.

If you were to shift it back before affirmative action and men would have shrugged off a job rejection while women would turn feminist and argue that they are being discriminated in real life.

I think inceldom is a huge problem due to its terrorist tendencies, they need to be on a terrorist watch, but I will not put on kids gloves for women, your deep shallowness is the main reason this is a problem in the first place.

Basically only Chad is a saint lol.

[–]AutoModerator[M] -1 points0 points  (22 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]Lysa_Bell 14 points15 points  (17 children) | Copy Link

Unpopular, rejected men turn bitter. I think this sub and many others have already provided the proof for that without this study.

[–]infinitofluxo 6 points7 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

Yes, and also women that can't marry Chads.

No one is on the better side.

[–]RedditsOlderBrah 7 points8 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

No shit, if this entire sub seriously adopted the position of 'both genders have it rough' this community would cease to exist in a week.

The existence of this place is dependent on a victim complex so massive that by sheer quantum probability it becomes self-perpetuating.

[–]infinitofluxo 7 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Agreed.

My only interest here is to see how my fellow dudes are seeing it and women admitting to the behaviors that make it impossible for me to be with them/loved by them.

But it certainly feels like a bubble of bitterness that I can't base my future decisions on. But still explains why I'm treated badly by the attractive women I sometimes meet. The crap comes all from the same place, bitterness and lack of self-analysis.

[–]ConvolutedMaze 4 points5 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Acknowledging that both sides have it tough doesn't equalize the dating market though. Changing behaviors does. There's only one side here who needs to lower their standards if they want to get married. Your guess is as good as mine...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nah it’s both genders

[–]SmilesLikeMardiGrasseriously, like have you seen my silhouette SHEESH 7 points8 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

so you can actually tell a man is a loser from his views?

[–]Johnny_Autism 10 points11 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Its more like Marie Antoinette telling the starving plebs to eat cake.

[–]SmilesLikeMardiGrasseriously, like have you seen my silhouette SHEESH -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

how is it like that? like whats your logic in relation to my comment

[–]Lift_and_LurkNo Pill 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

“Ok bro, we are going to go over there and say hi. What are we going to do if she says no?”

-vote!

“What? No!”

-Join a political organization and start making posts about women needing to be more TradCon

“Wait, what the hell?! No your just going to say thank you then go talk to-“

-that guy over there with the alt right pin in the corner who also looks sad and lonely and spend all night complaining about how men like us were the ones that built everything?

“Built what?! Bro we work at Best Buy”

-go home and jerk off to right wing political podcasts and go on Reddit and complain about Radical Feminists?

“Ok, fuck it: I’m out. I’m gonna go say hi to that brunette over there. you do whatever, bro”

[–]Yuo_cna_Raed_Tihs -2 points-1 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Only incels oppose Universal healthcare and minimum wage increases 😎

[–]EasternDog4196 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Depends on who woman is getting rejected by.

[–]riverden 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I feel like the study is being reductionist and idealist blaming an entire social issue on a simple concept that being rejection. I don't think a rejection or string of rejection can actually shift someone's political views. I was always against casual sex because I didn't even knew it existed until college not because I was rejected by women. In fact getting rejected by women did not change my political views or make me hate women. I even tried to remain good friends with the girls and women who rejected me. now what I think might be the case is that rejection made men who already held right wing views strengthened their position in some aspects. Plus I think one study is not enough to make a solid conclusion as to why people hold negative attitude towards casual sex which I think is much deeper than getting rejected. Again look at me I don't think I will get a gf in my life time but I do get happy when I see other people in relationships and see romance in media. I never blamed women for rejecting me and I have even tried to remain good friends with them. But I still hold negative attitude towards casual sex namely hook up culture which I am not going to debate anyone on here about. So how do you explain me, what makes me an outlier in all this?

[–]FutureBannedAccount2 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This doesn’t make sense. They gave these people random positive/negative videos of feed back then quizzed them on their social views? How do they know these people changed based on the views of the video and didn’t already believe these things prior?

Where are the actual results at?

[–]Laytheblameonluck 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

What is a man's popularity in the dating market?

The problem with this study is the implied sexual dichotomy expressed upon men, written into the paper as a given.

[–]Purplepeeps1 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Probably because women don't feel entitled to a relationship.

It's just pushed on women to be with men.

[–]kenshn1 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

So they just ignored any conclusions for women in their results statement "Unpopular low mate-value women reported more support for casual sex than popular low mate-value women."

[–]noodlespinelrandom asexual 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

be happier then /j /nsrs

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2023. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter