NationStates

Galloism wrote:And you should, but let's face it - not everyone is going to find someone, and saying "you're a sucky person if you can't 'get' a woman" isn't helping. It's part of that feedback loop that i briefly referenced.

Person is unlucky or has a disability, and has trouble finding love.
Society says "You suck."
You isolate yourself from society because no one likes being told they suck.
The are even more unlucky.
Society says "you suck so bad it's not even funny."
You isolate yourself from society even more, but because all humans need some kind of interaction, you look for someone who will actually not tell you you suck.
You find an incel forum.
Society says "You suck and you're DANGEROUS!"
Incel forum says "it's not all you, society just sucks"
You find an ally against society telling you you suck all the time.


This is actually how extremism happens, and doubling down on "you suck" doesn't break the cycle of extremism - it reinforces it.

Galloism wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:It also goes the other way and is self-reinforcing. If someone is single there must be something wrong with them, or so it goes, which means people are less likely to consider them, even if they don't care themselves.

The difference between stigma and self-stigma.

There's some really dystopian things people do on this front.

I knew a guy in flight school who bought and wore a wedding ring even though he wasn't married and didn't even have a steady girlfriend. He swore it helped him hook up easier.

We stopped hanging out.

Galloism wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:It also goes the other way and is self-reinforcing. If someone is single there must be something wrong with them, or so it goes, which means people are less likely to consider them, even if they don't care themselves.

The difference between stigma and self-stigma.

There's some really dystopian things people do on this front.

I knew a guy in flight school who bought and wore a wedding ring even though he wasn't married and didn't even have a steady girlfriend. He swore it helped him hook up easier.

We stopped hanging out.

Galloism wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:It also goes the other way and is self-reinforcing. If someone is single there must be something wrong with them, or so it goes, which means people are less likely to consider them, even if they don't care themselves.

The difference between stigma and self-stigma.

There's some really dystopian things people do on this front.

I knew a guy in flight school who bought and wore a wedding ring even though he wasn't married and didn't even have a steady girlfriend. He swore it helped him hook up easier.

We stopped hanging out.

Mojave Confederation wrote:Also, just want to point out, why does long-term relationship and fidelity matter? Bezo fuck, with whatever means he have, making him not an incel and not part of the epidemic. If Incel problem is just the rate of which they're fucking, they should not be also taking a problem of not having long term relationship partner or monogamous partner. The more women fucking, the more the chance they fuck incels, right? It's simple logic.

Grapasia wrote:

Mojave Confederation wrote:Also, just want to point out, why does long-term relationship and fidelity matter? Bezo fuck, with whatever means he have, making him not an incel and not part of the epidemic. If Incel problem is just the rate of which they're fucking, they should not be also taking a problem of not having long term relationship partner or monogamous partner. The more women fucking, the more the chance they fuck incels, right? It's simple logic.

no gf

Grapasia wrote:

Bear Stearns wrote:
We are more sexually dimorphic than chimps (our closest relatives) but less so than gorillas, iirc.

There are also slight differences in sexual dimoprhism among human populations.

It must have to do with how much hierarchy is piled onto sex, same reason chimps have bigger balls than us, they're more promiscuous, whereas gorillas have small testicles because there isn't competition between multiple gorillas gangbanging to inseminate the female like there is with chimps. Humans, being monogamous a majority of the time but polygynous some of the time and with designed male expendability, are somewhere inbetween. It makes sense now that sexual liberals want to exist in a world where men and women are exactly the same, and most monogamy worshipping tradcucks secretly want to exist in a world where women are fleshlights stuck to dishwashers

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Pre-selection is a thing and its been studied.

Des-Bal wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Pre-selection is a thing and its been studied.

And using psychology to try and get your dick in someone is gross.

Des-Bal wrote:

Galloism wrote:And you should, but let's face it - not everyone is going to find someone, and saying "you're a sucky person if you can't 'get' a woman" isn't helping. It's part of that feedback loop that i briefly referenced.

Person is unlucky or has a disability, and has trouble finding love.
Society says "You suck."
You isolate yourself from society because no one likes being told they suck.
The are even more unlucky.
Society says "you suck so bad it's not even funny."
You isolate yourself from society even more, but because all humans need some kind of interaction, you look for someone who will actually not tell you you suck.
You find an incel forum.
Society says "You suck and you're DANGEROUS!"
Incel forum says "it's not all you, society just sucks"
You find an ally against society telling you you suck all the time.


This is actually how extremism happens, and doubling down on "you suck" doesn't break the cycle of extremism - it reinforces it.

I'm not saying "you suck" I'm saying "you're doing something terrible." The problem isn't your height, it's not your hairline, or the size of your penis. It's something you're doing. It's the way your meeting people, it's the way you're approaching people, or it's the way you're talking to people. You are not meeting enough people, you are not interacting with people enough, or some aspect of your interaction is terrible. The problem isn't that all women want the same thing it's that nobody wants what you're doing. The solution is to do something different, go new places, try new things.

If it's caused by a disability fine but the only thing you can do is seek treatment but wallowing in the idea that all the stacys just want chads isn't going to do shit for you.

Des-Bal wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Pre-selection is a thing and its been studied.

And using psychology to try and get your dick in someone is gross.

Grapasia wrote:

Harkback Union wrote:

based
I remember rping with you a while back, I think pt2m is easily the least pozzed forum here

Des-Bal wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Pre-selection is a thing and its been studied.

And using psychology to try and get your dick in someone is gross.

Harkback Union wrote:
Hmmm... Grapasia, doesn't ring a bell. Were you running under another nation?

Anyway, I'm just looking for excuses for posting moar graphs...

(Image)

Neder Brum wrote:

Des-Bal wrote:
And using psychology to try and get your dick in someone is gross.

How so? Everybody manipulates everybody.

Galloism wrote:
"You're doing something terrible" is not far removed from "you suck". Becoming a manager has led me to learn to use negative language more reservedly, as it rarely leads to good results. There's plenty to be said about improving yourself in this scenario, and I'm not saying there's no room for self improvement. We all have room for self improvement.

But awkward people have a very hard time, and if you do actually ask for improvement tips on your approach, then you're automatically labelled someone trying to become a pick up artist, and you're terrible for that.

If you're awkward or disabled, all social paths have land mines. This is a problem, as we need a clear track or couple of tracks for self improvement that won't result in society reinforcing "you suck".

Of course not, but that's after this feedback loop has already occurred a few hundred or thousand times. It's time to break that feedback loop.

The South Falls wrote:I mean, as a last resort, I can't argue with it. Unless your using someone for their money or something.

Neder Brum wrote:How so? Everybody manipulates everybody.

Galloism wrote:

Des-Bal wrote:
And using psychology to try and get your dick in someone is gross.

That's why I think makeup should be banned.

Des-Bal wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Pre-selection is a thing and its been studied.

And using psychology to try and get your dick in someone is gross.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Galloism wrote:That's why I think makeup should be banned.

Already made this point. Apparently it's different for some reason.

Psssst.
Internalized misandry.

Des-Bal wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Pre-selection is a thing and its been studied.

And using psychology to try and get your dick in someone is gross.

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Why?
Because women have told you it is and you've internalized that idea?

Des-Bal wrote:

Galloism wrote:
"You're doing something terrible" is not far removed from "you suck". Becoming a manager has led me to learn to use negative language more reservedly, as it rarely leads to good results. There's plenty to be said about improving yourself in this scenario, and I'm not saying there's no room for self improvement. We all have room for self improvement.

But awkward people have a very hard time, and if you do actually ask for improvement tips on your approach, then you're automatically labelled someone trying to become a pick up artist, and you're terrible for that.

If you're awkward or disabled, all social paths have land mines. This is a problem, as we need a clear track or couple of tracks for self improvement that won't result in society reinforcing "you suck".

Of course not, but that's after this feedback loop has already occurred a few hundred or thousand times. It's time to break that feedback loop.

I'm not pulling my typical bluntness, they're doing something that sucks.

There should totally be ways for people to improve their social skills.

The South Falls wrote:I mean, as a last resort, I can't argue with it. Unless your using someone for their money or something.

Neder Brum wrote:How so? Everybody manipulates everybody.

I am literally a professional manipulator, being successful in my field means knowing how to psychologically control people's decision making with neatly defined terms and parameters. If I brought that arsenal into my social life I would be a monster.

Galloism wrote:

Des-Bal wrote:

I'm not saying "you suck" I'm saying "you're doing something terrible." The problem isn't your height, it's not your hairline, or the size of your penis. It's something you're doing. It's the way your meeting people, it's the way you're approaching people, or it's the way you're talking to people. You are not meeting enough people, you are not interacting with people enough, or some aspect of your interaction is terrible. The problem isn't that all women want the same thing it's that nobody wants what you're doing. The solution is to do something different, go new places, try new things.

"You're doing something terrible" is not far removed from "you suck". Becoming a manager has led me to learn to use negative language more reservedly, as it rarely leads to good results. There's plenty to be said about improving yourself in this scenario, and I'm not saying there's no room for self improvement. We all have room for self improvement.

But awkward people have a very hard time, and if you do actually ask for improvement tips on your approach, then you're automatically labelled someone trying to become a pick up artist, and you're terrible for that.

If you're awkward or disabled, all social paths have land mines. This is a problem, as we need a clear track or couple of tracks for self improvement that won't result in society reinforcing "you suck".

If it's caused by a disability fine but the only thing you can do is seek treatment but wallowing in the idea that all the stacys just want chads isn't going to do shit for you.

Of course not, but that's after this feedback loop has already occurred a few hundred or thousand times. It's time to break that feedback loop.

Kowani wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
Already made this point. Apparently it's different for some reason.

Psssst.
Internalized misandry.

Intent makes it different.