On The Distribution of Spouses

[Keliall]

I think crime would rise, more people married to random people means your putting people who might be the complete opposite to each other together. What if you marry a rapist or a violent person with someone? I think this law would create more bad then good.

[Garden at 6th Mile Road]

Oh, hell no.

For this life, I am very well aware and decided that I don't want a child. If I am too dumb to take care of myself at times, I don't want anything bad to happen to my kid. As for the spouse, lottery system is not all right, at all. The government may allow it, but what if your parents, or her parents' doesn't like it for whatever reason (too rich, too poor, different faith, that particular attitude that they find nasty, etc.)

As many has stated, I would appreciate it if the government would butt out of my love life. If they want more young people in this generation, they can always give us an incentive like what RL Singapore did with Baby Bonus.

[The Yeomanry]

RL Singapore has a collapsing TFR. Baby Bonus didn't work.

[Garden at 6th Mile Road]

RL Singapore has a collapsing TFR. Baby Bonus didn't work.

Add that to the fact that their campaign "Stop at Two" from decades ago worked so damn well, that the TFR is still going down. And also because raising a kid here is very expensive.

With all that said, you can see why the lottery thing is a bad idea. I don't want to raise a kid for the sake of it.

[Ethel mermania]

Experience shows it's more of the former than the later.

Or in this instance, you're once again pulling things that are pure fiction and claiming that they're fact.

Disabled kids manage to hook up all the time, and some simply wouldn't know what to do with a girl friend even if one were assigned to them.

In the United Kingdom, for example, three percent of adults with a learning disability had a relationship in 2005. This says 50% of adults with disabilities are not in relationships. This says having a physical disability not only increases the likelihood of being single, it also increases the chances of being depressed.

How about you take the time to consider your response.

And living increases your chances of dying every single day.

Everyone has things to overcome, if you are happy to sit in your momiess basement and just whine about no one wants to love you, as opposed to working at making it better , you deserve the ridicule you get.

All that saidx his thread is not about the disabled.

[Saiwania]

RL Singapore has a collapsing TFR. Baby Bonus didn't work.

There are plenty of approaches that haven't been tried before but might probably work better in reversing population decline. I propose that the power of religious fundamentalism or extreme social conservatism be wielded. You basically look at the particular groups of people who're having the most kids statistically speaking, and researching into what it is about their lifestyle that is causing it, and nudge the rest of the populace towards it temporarily until it is no longer a problem and things can go back to "business as usual."

Any and all children who're in K-12, are ripe for indoctrination into almost anything, the earlier and younger- the better. The Quiverfull movement for example, are basically a bunch of dumbasses who have more children than they can afford, for the sake of having a large family because they take Psalm 127 to heart a bit too much. They believe that they're building an "army of God," so why not exploit their flawed thinking for ulterior motives?

Groups such as they, can perhaps be targeted by the state to "pick up the slack" for the people who aren't conceiving for whatever reason.

[Costa Fierro]

And living increases your chances of dying every single day.

Everyone has things to overcome, if you are happy to sit in your momiess basement and just whine about no one wants to love you, as opposed to working at making it better , you deserve the ridicule you get.

Well no, there's a lot more to some of the obstacles that people face than simply "working hard to overcome it". It's no different to suggesting that someone in a wheelchair should get up and do some exercise.

All that saidx his thread is not about the disabled.

It's not about the disabled, this is true. But the OP didn't specifically exclude disabled people from this either.

I propose that the power of religious fundamentalism or extreme social conservatism be wielded.

No. Keep you and your fossilised social beliefs away from my penis.

[Trumptonium1]

RL Singapore has a collapsing TFR. Baby Bonus didn't work.

Kind of did in Japan, Russia and Poland. But there's more factors than just financial help. Although Poland has taken financial help to the extreme as you can buy a Maserati on credit with the baby bonus. Russia has gone quite a long way as well, and also gave families with children extra public holidays from work every year.

Not sure what Japan has done other than give a financial bonus, but that is quite substantial as well in nominal USD terms. I know that Japan has a 'progressive' child benefit system with increasing financial reward for each baby. The first gets you $1000, the fourth gets you $10000. I think four is a cut-off but I know they're discussing an increase to 5.

Still, the most successful policies in raising the birth rates were the Romanian and Soviet Childless Man taxes. But that had a lot of side effects.

[Salandriagado]

In relationships there is more rejection than win.

The point was that online dating is very much skewed in favour of women. Most reasonable looking men don't get any attention because they're not deemed attractive enough. It's not so much rejection, it's invisibility. Which, if anything, is worse for one's self esteem.

It seems to me that if someone is making their decision based on looks, then that isn't a person you want to be in a relationship with.

[Scomagia]

If you can't get a mate on your own, why should we appoint one to you? So your poor little feelings don't get hurt? Fuck that noise. Buck up and compete. If you fail to get a partner, tough shit. Life is full of losers in all areas. Sublimate your failure into success in another endeavor, like art. Don't bitch and moan about your inadequacy and don't demand that the world reshape itself to make you successful.

Yeah fuck people whose lives are bad.

That's not what I said. "Fuck people who wail about their failure" is a more accurate and charitable interpretation of my post. There's nothing wrong with failure but there absolutely is something wrong with failing and gnashing your teeth about how competition is unfair. Sexual competition is a biological fact of our species and competition is inherently unequal. Not everyone can win, nor should they. Is it unfortunate that sexual competition is largely biased in favor of immutable or semi mutable traits? Absolutely. Does that mean we should flaten the field for the least competitive so that they don't have to compete? Absolutely not. The least competitive, like incels, have to work harder.The intentional development of certain characteristics, like humor and kindness, can absolutely leverage a less competitive individual into a more appealing mate. It's not easy and it won't always work but it's a damn sight better than moaning about how disadvantaged you are when it comes to sexual competition.

[Thama]

They're either unlucky, lack social skills, are shitheads or just simply don't fit on their crushes' mold of what they want in a partner. It is not, however, the fault of the people who aren't dating them. Claiming so would make one a weirdo and is a pretty good indication as to why they haven't been able to get into a relationship.

It could be down to any number of things, including mental illness, or, as I said, just plain bad luck in the genetic lottery (being ugly). That doesn't mean they deserve to be mocked and blamed for not being able to find a partner.

If someone has a mental illness that makes it so they are not fit to be someone else's partner, then they're not fit to be someone else's partner.

Psychopathy is a mental illness. That doesn't mean we let psychopaths get away with things they do because of their psychopathy.

People are not entitled to partners. Nobody is mocking you by saying it's a fucking awful and idiotic idea to assign people random partners. You are not fucking entitled to anything besides your human rights, and those do not contain the right to a partner.

Ugly people get partners all the time. This is because people are actually attracted to personalities. Just like hot people with awful disgusting personalities end up single all the time as well.

You should consider looking at people discussing incels: often times the looks of the incels will be discussed, and often times there will be a consensus that these men aren't actually physically unattractive. They're just disgusting self-entitled assholes.

[Scomagia]

The point was that online dating is very much skewed in favour of women. Most reasonable looking men don't get any attention because they're not deemed attractive enough. It's not so much rejection, it's invisibility. Which, if anything, is worse for one's self esteem.

It seems to me that if someone is making their decision based on looks, then that isn't a person you want to be in a relationship with.

Everyone factors appearance into their choice of partner, consciously or not. Using appearance as the sole metric is pretty foolish, however.

[United Muscovite Nations]

It could be down to any number of things, including mental illness, or, as I said, just plain bad luck in the genetic lottery (being ugly). That doesn't mean they deserve to be mocked and blamed for not being able to find a partner.

If someone has a mental illness that makes it so they are not fit to be someone else's partner, then they're not fit to be someone else's partner.

Psychopathy is a mental illness. That doesn't mean we let psychopaths get away with things they do because of their psychopathy.

People are not entitled to partners. Nobody is mocking you by saying it's a fucking awful and idiotic idea to assign people random partners. You are not fucking entitled to anything besides your human rights, and those do not contain the right to a partner.

Ugly people get partners all the time. This is because people are actually attracted to personalities. Just like hot people with awful disgusting personalities end up single all the time as well.

You should consider looking at people discussing incels: often times the looks of the incels will be discussed, and often times there will be a consensus that these men aren't actually physically unattractive. They're just disgusting self-entitled assholes.

First of all, psychopathy isn't a professionally diagnosed thing, it exists only in the criminal justice system's mind, and there exists no diagnostic criteria for such an illness.

Secondly, most people with mental disorders are more likely to be victimized for their disorder than they are to victimize others.

Again, I haven't argued for the OP's system at all in this thread, what I'm arguing for is that there should be some kind of system to help people find partners if they struggle in that area, because such a system would ensure that fewer people are left behind by society.

[Chessmistress]

OP left me speechless, I can only say: no, just no.

[New Emeline]

If someone has a mental illness that makes it so they are not fit to be someone else's partner, then they're not fit to be someone else's partner.

Psychopathy is a mental illness. That doesn't mean we let psychopaths get away with things they do because of their psychopathy.

People are not entitled to partners. Nobody is mocking you by saying it's a fucking awful and idiotic idea to assign people random partners. You are not fucking entitled to anything besides your human rights, and those do not contain the right to a partner.

Ugly people get partners all the time. This is because people are actually attracted to personalities. Just like hot people with awful disgusting personalities end up single all the time as well.

You should consider looking at people discussing incels: often times the looks of the incels will be discussed, and often times there will be a consensus that these men aren't actually physically unattractive. They're just disgusting self-entitled assholes.

First of all, psychopathy isn't a professionally diagnosed thing, it exists only in the criminal justice system's mind, and there exists no diagnostic criteria for such an illness.

Secondly, most people with mental disorders are more likely to be victimized for their disorder than they are to victimize others.

Again, I haven't argued for the OP's system at all in this thread, what I'm arguing for is that there should be some kind of system to help people find partners if they struggle in that area, because such a system would ensure that fewer people are left behind by society.

Isn't psychopathy just the pop-psychology name for ASPD?

[Costa Fierro]

The point was that online dating is very much skewed in favour of women. Most reasonable looking men don't get any attention because they're not deemed attractive enough. It's not so much rejection, it's invisibility. Which, if anything, is worse for one's self esteem.

It seems to me that if someone is making their decision based on looks, then that isn't a person you want to be in a relationship with.

That's how online dating works though. You make a decision on how that person looks. Look at hookup apps like Tinder and Bumble, which allow users to swipe through profiles without actually having to read them. Not only that, according to this, most people lie about their age, height, weight etc., in order to appear more attractive.

[Salandriagado]

It seems to me that if someone is making their decision based on looks, then that isn't a person you want to be in a relationship with.

That's how online dating works though. You make a decision on how that person looks. Look at hookup apps like Tinder and Bumble, which allow users to swipe through profiles without actually having to read them. Not only that, according to this, most people lie about their age, height, weight etc., in order to appear more attractive.

The conclusion that we can draw from this is that Tinder and Bumble are not effective ways to meet people.

[Costa Fierro]

The conclusion that we can draw from this is that Tinder and Bumble are not effective ways to meet people.

They're not. Tinder has an estimated 50 million users but has 1.5 million dates a week. That sounds like a lot, but it only amounts to about six percent of users going on dates each week. That's an aggregate number, as it doesn't take into account users who are successful in getting dates every week or the amount of dates they go on.

However, doing it the "old fashioned way" is also not very effective. It's a common anecdote that the majority of men will get rejected. You only need to look at my attractiveness stats from a post on the previous page to see this, because first impressions are almost always going to be based on aesthetics.

[New Emeline]

The conclusion that we can draw from this is that Tinder and Bumble are not effective ways to meet people.

They're not. Tinder has an estimated 50 million users but has 1.5 million dates a week. That sounds like a lot, but it only amounts to about six percent of users going on dates each week. That's an aggregate number, as it doesn't take into account users who are successful in getting dates every week or the amount of dates they go on.

However, doing it the "old fashioned way" is also not very effective. It's a common anecdote that the majority of men will get rejected. You only need to look at my attractiveness stats from a post on the previous page to see this, because first impressions are almost always going to be based on aesthetics.

Don't people usually hook up starting from another relationship or connection, rather than "I met you at a bar and you look hot, let's start dating"?

[Costa Fierro]

Don't people usually hook up starting from another relationship or connection, rather than "I met you at a bar and you look hot, let's start dating"?

If you mean people who find their partners, not really.

[Salandriagado]

The conclusion that we can draw from this is that Tinder and Bumble are not effective ways to meet people.

They're not. Tinder has an estimated 50 million users but has 1.5 million dates a week. That sounds like a lot, but it only amounts to about six percent of users going on dates each week. That's an aggregate number, as it doesn't take into account users who are successful in getting dates every week or the amount of dates they go on.

However, doing it the "old fashioned way" is also not very effective. It's a common anecdote that the majority of men will get rejected. You only need to look at my attractiveness stats from a post on the previous page to see this, because first impressions are almost always going to be based on aesthetics.

High rejection rates are not a sign of low effectiveness. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[New Emeline]

Don't people usually hook up starting from another relationship or connection, rather than "I met you at a bar and you look hot, let's start dating"?

If you mean people who find their partners, not really.

39% through friends, that sounds like starting from another connection.

[Salandriagado]

Don't people usually hook up starting from another relationship or connection, rather than "I met you at a bar and you look hot, let's start dating"?

If you mean people who find their partners, not really.

Assuming I'm adding up right, 79% of those people met their partners starting from another relationship or connection.

[Thama]

Isn't psychopathy just the pop-psychology name for ASPD?

It is indeed and that's what I meant by it

I'm not a licensed psychologist and I'm not gonna use technical terms when speaking to my peers.

First of all, psychopathy isn't a professionally diagnosed thing, it exists only in the criminal justice system's mind, and there exists no diagnostic criteria for such an illness.

Secondly, most people with mental disorders are more likely to be victimized for their disorder than they are to victimize others.

Again, I haven't argued for the OP's system at all in this thread, what I'm arguing for is that there should be some kind of system to help people find partners if they struggle in that area, because such a system would ensure that fewer people are left behind by society.

What we need is better education about respect and about relationships, to ensure people stop growing up full of entitlement and believing in incel bullshit and having toxic relationship expectations. We also need better mental health resources available for at risk people.

We don't need a system to help timid and/or conventionally asocial people get laid. We need a system that ensures people who can be otherwise aren't needlessly timid and asocial.

[Costa Fierro]

High rejection rates are not a sign of low effectiveness. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I see it as the opposite. If you're trying to find someone, high rejection rates are a sign that you're not attractive enough to be considered as a potential partner, which effectively renders the whole process ineffective and thus inefficient.

Assuming I'm adding up right, 79% of those people met their partners starting from another relationship or connection.

39% through friends, that sounds like starting from another connection.

Depends on how one defines a proper connection or relationship.