Dating is at a Record Low: Another Dating Thread

[Costa Fierro]

Apples to oranges. That article compares "bromances" to romantic relationships specifically (i.e. their girlfriends), not to all possible female friends. It is possible to be friends with someone of the opposite sex without it turning romantic; the majority of my friends have historically been female, even as a child before I even had any kind of sexuality.

It is not apples and oranges at all; while the comparison was made between male friendships and romantic relationships, the fact is that men prefer the company of other men. That suddenly doesn't decrease when you take away sexual intercourse. If anything it acts as a justification for preferring male friendships.

If men have better emotional support and expression, better conflict resolution, and are better able to share personal information with their male friends than with intimate partners, what makes you think that changes when you replace the intimate partner with a platonic acquaintance? That better emotional support and expression, better conflict resolution, and more openness still applies to male friendships, the same cannot be said for female friendships.

Jordan Peterson may be a kook, but he's right when he says men and women are different in terms of how they view and approach relationships, be it friendships or be them intimate ones. That doesn't change depending on whether or not you're engaging in sexual congress with that person every so often, those fundamentals still remain.

So it is therefore wrong to assume personal anecdotes are better than actual legitimate studies purely because they suit your opinion.

[Nakena]

Why don't you want to be friends with the other 50% of the population? There's nothing bad about having more friends.

It's not that I personally don't want to be friends with women, it's that male friendships are simply better for men. If men value their friendships with other men rather than intimate relationships with women, then why exactly would men want to be friends with women?

Or to put it in a different manner: who would you want a friendship with? The person whom you feel most at ease with, or the one that you feel like having to meet certain expectations all the time? If I had the choice, I would choose the former.

So when the former happens to be male friendships, and there is clear advantages and benefits in this, it isn't wrong to make this judgement, it isn't even wrong to make the statement that male friendships should be the default choice for any man. It is common sense.

What about transwoman/queer etc though? Ya know. What is the Costa Fierroian take on this?

[Crysuko]

At least they're largely isolated to the internet where their wingnuttery is at worst an annoyance. No actual government would let those lunatics in knowingly.

Not as isolated and neither exclusively on the internet I am afraid. TERFism has strong allies in moralistic feminist left-wing circles. Specifically SWERFism is getting popular among european feminists.

Call me when they do something other than impotently screech.

[Ghost Land]

Apples to oranges. That article compares "bromances" to romantic relationships specifically (i.e. their girlfriends), not to all possible female friends. It is possible to be friends with someone of the opposite sex without it turning romantic; the majority of my friends have historically been female, even as a child before I even had any kind of sexuality.

It is not apples and oranges at all; while the comparison was made between male friendships and romantic relationships, the fact is that men prefer the company of other men. That suddenly doesn't decrease when you take away sexual intercourse. If anything it acts as a justification for preferring male friendships.

If men have better emotional support and expression, better conflict resolution, and are better able to share personal information with their male friends than with intimate partners, what makes you think that changes when you replace the intimate partner with a platonic acquaintance? That better emotional support and expression, better conflict resolution, and more openness still applies to male friendships, the same cannot be said for female friendships.

Jordan Peterson may be a kook, but he's right when he says men and women are different in terms of how they view and approach relationships, be it friendships or be them intimate ones. That doesn't change depending on whether or not you're engaging in sexual congress with that person every so often, those fundamentals still remain.

So it is therefore wrong to assume personal anecdotes are better than actual legitimate studies purely because they suit your opinion.

Except it is apples to oranges, and my personal anecdote does not relate directly to this study (and there have been so many pop-science "studies" done recently by so many different people it's hard to know which ones to believe). The study simply proves that men get more value out of "bromances" (very close male-male friendships) than their girlfriends, for the reasons laid out in your post. While that by itself is a fair point, there are two independent variables: gender of the other person, and type of relationship. If we controlled type of relationship, we could see whether men are on average happier in straight versus gay relationships, or whether they get more value out of male versus female friends (which is what you're conflating the results of this study with). Anecdotally, I can agree with the study results, saying, "no crap, of course I'm gonna tell my friend Mike* about it if my girlfriend and I run into problems", but you're twisting "male-male friendships versus heterosexual relationships" into "male-male friendships versus male-female friendships", which I've already explained is an incorrect conclusion. You're implying that all male-female relationships, whether platonic, romantic, or strictly professional, are the same and that there's the same value to be gained from any of them. So yeah, my best friend at age 9 and I were totally shagging in the schoolyard before mommy picked me up. Friendships and romantic relationships are inherently different; within our dating culture, a huge portion of couples are never friends before starting to date, and it's rare that "staying friends after breaking up" actually works out. If they weren't different, why would "he/she's just a friend" be one of the most common lines used to deny infidelity?

*I don't actually have a friend Mike; that is an example name.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

You definitely need to be friends with women for an intimate relationship. At least, a functional long-term intimate relationship where you don't dump kids into the foster system.

You don't though, that's the thing. A lot of people don't even want to find someone that they find to be like a friend, because friends lack the certain kind of intimacy necessary for a romantic relationship. You don't have children with a friend, you do with a partner/wife.

You definitely need your wife to be above all else a friend.

[Novus America]

In my opinion, there are 2 main reasons that dating/sex is so low

The Rise of Technology

Political Correctness/ The New liberal wave - also known as the me too movement

besides, remember, there is no longer a such thing as just a girl, because gender is malleable. Some men dont want to go find a woman and find out that its actually a guy

There actually is: Gwen Stefani.

Also, this. These are what I consider the two main reasons also.

And as for the discussion of friendship on page 53, of course you shouldn't marry or reproduce with someone you're not friends with. My rule is that I want to know a person for at least 4-5 years before marrying her, as a few weeks or a few months is not enough time to gauge personal compatibility as people outside the bedroom fully. I understand there are exceptions (people who meet, get married really quickly, and then stay together), but there are people I've known for a decade whom I still feel I don't actually know that much about. Making huge life decisions with someone I know little about doesn't make sense to me.

It's not that I personally don't want to be friends with women, it's that male friendships are simply better for men. If men value their friendships with other men rather than intimate relationships with women, then why exactly would men want to be friends with women?

Or to put it in a different manner: who would you want a friendship with? The person whom you feel most at ease with, or the one that you feel like having to meet certain expectations all the time? If I had the choice, I would choose the former.

So when the former happens to be male friendships, and there is clear advantages and benefits in this, it isn't wrong to make this judgement, it isn't even wrong to make the statement that male friendships should be the default choice for any man. It is common sense.

Apples to oranges. That article compares "bromances" to romantic relationships specifically (i.e. their girlfriends), not to all possible female friends. It is possible to be friends with someone of the opposite sex without it turning romantic; the majority of my friends have historically been female, even as a child before I even had any kind of sexuality.

Besides it is not like you can only have one friend. You can be friends with both men and women.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Yes a friendship with a woman, may, on average be different than a friendship with a man, that does not mean different is also valueless.

Even if you assign a “lower” total value to one thing you can still have it. A house is more valuable than a car, but you can have a house AND a car.

Costa seems to be arguing that aggregate average correlation between X and Y means X=Y without exception and that this also means Z cannot possibly exist.

[Novus America]

Rejecting friendship with women just because they are women makes no sense.

Why are you assuming it's because they're women?

What? Why assume rejecting friendship with all women is because they are women?
Are you being deliberately obtuse?

And no, misinterpreting that one source to say “women provide less friendship value” is still rejecting women because you think that means all women are valueless as friends, which is still rejecting women for being women.

This is like saying “I am not anti Semitic, I only never am friends with Jews because Jews have no value as friends not because they are Jews”.

[Felt Karpit]

You don't though, that's the thing. A lot of people don't even want to find someone that they find to be like a friend, because friends lack the certain kind of intimacy necessary for a romantic relationship. You don't have children with a friend, you do with a partner/wife.

You definitely need your wife to be above all else a friend.

^ like you should know someone before you get married. And ideally they become the person you are closest too. Like I cant wrap my head around it being any other way. My partner will always be my best friend, and I couldn't have it any other way. Like the emotionally aspect of a relationship is so good. It so rewarding to have someone you can tell everything to and can get to know you better than you know yourself. I love doing things with them that I would also do with people I consider friends because I love being around them. The only difference is, I love them romantically and they are the only person I also have a physical relationship with.

[Nakena]

Not as isolated and neither exclusively on the internet I am afraid. TERFism has strong allies in moralistic feminist left-wing circles. Specifically SWERFism is getting popular among european feminists.

Call me when they do something other than impotently screech.

I will telegram you for rapid response deployment.

[Rojava Free State]

In my opinion, there are 2 main reasons that dating/sex is so low

The Rise of Technology

Political Correctness/ The New liberal wave - also known as the me too movement

besides, remember, there is no longer a such thing as just a girl, because gender is malleable. Some men dont want to go find a woman and find out that its actually a guy

This is why I'll forever miss being a teen. At least back then you knew what you were getting. Now that I'm in my 20s, I gotta be careful.

[Saiwania]

Or to put it in a different manner: who would you want a friendship with? The person whom you feel most at ease with, or the one that you feel like having to meet certain expectations all the time? If I had the choice, I would choose the former.

I feel at ease with most women. If you feel under pressure to comform to their expectations, it's probably because you're trying too hard be attractive enough for them to want to sleep with you, but if you're not trying to have a relationship with them that's too deep; but are merely open to different possibilities with them- it's different.

What you need is a tomboy. A woman who is just like one of the guys in terms of personality. I have one such woman as a Discord pen pal but problem is- she's Black. I've known her for too long however, and she's told me that she wouldn't mind having sex with me purely for fun. She's an adventurous spirit that likes to try new things. She likes to tease me that I'm not quite man enough to want to "go all the way" and when I agreed to that assessment to try to stop her interest in me, she replied that maybe one of those days she could tempt me enough for something to happen.

She's cool to talk to, just that because she's Black- she should be devoted to just Black men in my mind, and that she's a bit sexually loose. I'm fairly certain she practices safe sex however. She has a virgin fetish and I happen to be one. If she were to visit me in person, I can't guarantee that she wouldn't be able to break me- but I'd do my very best to keep anything between us chaste. It'd be cool to hang out with her, but I also fear what she could try to pull- if she were too forward with me in person.

She doesn't want a romance thing with me strictly speaking, but probably does want me to be a friend with benefits.

[The Emerald Legion]

Honestly, it's not too hard to maintain friendships with women.

[Thepeopl]

My spouse and I were friends in university. There was this friends group of 5 males and 1 female.
All the males spilt their secrets with the girl. Not with eachother. That was because the girl was caring and interested in you. Conversation just naturally flowed into areas where you normally don't speak about. Like suicide, dementia, vulnerability.
And yes we share a lot. We both like cooking, reading, sf, rpg, gardening, walks in nature, gaming, crafting, technical work and experimenting in bed.

[Costa Fierro]

It's not that I personally don't want to be friends with women, it's that male friendships are simply better for men. If men value their friendships with other men rather than intimate relationships with women, then why exactly would men want to be friends with women?

Or to put it in a different manner: who would you want a friendship with? The person whom you feel most at ease with, or the one that you feel like having to meet certain expectations all the time? If I had the choice, I would choose the former.

So when the former happens to be male friendships, and there is clear advantages and benefits in this, it isn't wrong to make this judgement, it isn't even wrong to make the statement that male friendships should be the default choice for any man. It is common sense.

What about transwoman/queer etc though? Ya know. What is the Costa Fierroian take on this?

Don't know, never known a trans person.

[Costa Fierro]

Except it is apples to oranges, and my personal anecdote does not relate directly to this study (and there have been so many pop-science "studies" done recently by so many different people it's hard to know which ones to believe).

So in other words, you're claiming that the study is wrong because you had something different and therefore that disproves legitimate scientific inquiry? What next, you've looked at the sea for 20 years and don't think it's rising, therefore it isn't?

The study simply proves that men get more value out of "bromances" (very close male-male friendships) than their girlfriends, for the reasons laid out in your post. While that by itself is a fair point, there are two independent variables: gender of the other person, and type of relationship.

They're not independent variables. If men experience more emotional support and emotional freedom in a friendship with another man, that does not change. It is a constant.

If we controlled type of relationship, we could see whether men are on average happier in straight versus gay relationships, or whether they get more value out of male versus female friends (which is what you're conflating the results of this study with).

It isn't a conflation. If men do not feel at ease with intimate female partners, it doesn't take much to imagine that they would not feel at ease with female friends. And because you've disagreed with this, you've decided that both this and the study are wrong, because your anecdote matters more than legitimate scientific inquiry.

Anecdotally, I can agree with the study results, saying, "no crap, of course I'm gonna tell my friend Mike* about it if my girlfriend and I run into problems", but you're twisting "male-male friendships versus heterosexual relationships" into "male-male friendships versus male-female friendships", which I've already explained is an incorrect conclusion.

It isn't incorrect. All you're doing is outright dismissing it by saying it's irrelevant, because you claim to have experienced something differently.

You're implying that all male-female relationships, whether platonic, romantic, or strictly professional, are the same and that there's the same value to be gained from any of them.

It's not an implication at all, it's straight up fact. Men and women are different. Men and women view interactions with each other differently and acknowledge that through different methods of interpersonal relations. For someone who seems to be pushing the narrative that I'm treating all relationships between men and woman as the same, you seem to be pushing the idea that men and women are the same and therefore have no problems being friends or working professionally with each other.

So yeah, my best friend at age 9 and I were totally shagging in the schoolyard before mommy picked me up.

Facetiousness isn't going to help you.

Friendships and romantic relationships are inherently different; within our dating culture, a huge portion of couples are never friends before starting to date, and it's rare that "staying friends after breaking up" actually works out. If they weren't different, why would "he/she's just a friend" be one of the most common lines used to deny infidelity?

I haven't said friendships and intimate relationships are the same. You've made that up.

[Costa Fierro]

What? Why assume rejecting friendship with all women is because they are women? Are you being deliberately obtuse?

You're making the assumption that I reject friendship with women because they're women, not because of other factors.

And no, misinterpreting that one source to say “women provide less friendship value” is still rejecting women because you think that means all women are valueless as friends, which is still rejecting women for being women.

No it isn't. It is recognising that men provide better emotional support, among other things, and choosing to associate with people based on that.

This is like saying “I am not anti Semitic, I only never am friends with Jews because Jews have no value as friends not because they are Jews”.

It isn't. That is a deliberate misinterpretation.

[Costa Fierro]

I feel at ease with most women. If you feel under pressure to comform to their expectations, it's probably because you're trying too hard be attractive enough for them to want to sleep with you, but if you're not trying to have a relationship with them that's too deep; but are merely open to different possibilities with them- it's different.

What you need is a tomboy. A woman who is just like one of the guys in terms of personality. I have one such woman as a Discord pen pal but problem is- she's Black. I've known her for too long however, and she's told me that she wouldn't mind having sex with me purely for fun. She's an adventurous spirit that likes to try new things. She likes to tease me that I'm not quite man enough to want to "go all the way" and when I agreed to that assessment to try to stop her interest in me, she replied that maybe one of those days she could tempt me enough for something to happen.

She's cool to talk to, just that because she's Black- she should be devoted to just Black men in my mind, and that she's a bit sexually loose. I'm fairly certain she practices safe sex however. She has a virgin fetish and I happen to be one. If she were to visit me in person, I can't guarantee that she wouldn't be able to break me- but I'd do my very best to keep anything between us chaste. It'd be cool to hang out with her, but I also fear what she could try to pull- if she were too forward with me in person.

She doesn't want a romance thing with me strictly speaking, but probably does want me to be a friend with benefits.

What you need is an opinion that doesn't belong in the garbage can.

[Ghost Land]

-snip-

If you can't look back critically at your own posts and realise that you actually are using this study to claim there is nothing to be gained by a man in a male-female friendship (just LOOK at your OWN posts on the last couple of pages), and that you are ignoring the differences between platonic and romantic relationships, I'm not going to dignify your comments with a response. It's getting late here anyway.

[Novus America]

What? Why assume rejecting friendship with all women is because they are women? Are you being deliberately obtuse?

You're making the assumption that I reject friendship with women because they're women, not because of other factors.

And no, misinterpreting that one source to say “women provide less friendship value” is still rejecting women because you think that means all women are valueless as friends, which is still rejecting women for being women.

No it isn't. It is recognising that men provide better emotional support, among other things, and choosing to associate with people based on that.

This is like saying “I am not anti Semitic, I only never am friends with Jews because Jews have no value as friends not because they are Jews”.

It isn't. That is a deliberate misinterpretation.

As I said:
“Besides it is not like you can only have one friend. You can be friends with both men and women.
The two are not mutually exclusive.
Yes a friendship with a woman, may, on average be different than a friendship with a man, that does not mean different is also valueless.

Even if you assign a “lower” total value to one thing you can still have it. A house is more valuable than a car, but you can have a house AND a car.

Costa seems to be arguing that aggregate average correlation between X and Y means X=Y without exception and that this also means Z cannot possibly exist.”

Yes, deciding that you should never be friends with women just because friendship with a woman, is on aggregated average, different, that it has no value at all is yes rejecting women because they are women.
Even if, on average, they are less able to provide a certain type of emotional support, this would not preclude having a friendship with them. You do not seem to understand statistics at all.

By your logic if the majority of people vote for party A, party B cannot exist.
It is not just this issue. For example you could not process that just because on average countries with a higher birth rate are poorer, that in many cases richer countries still have higher birthrates.

Also you assume things are mutually exclusive when they are not. Again even if a house is superior than a car in many ways, the car is still valuable. And you can have both.

[MGTOWia]

Dating is not worth the risk. Having ANY relationship with a woman is not worth the risk. Men who do so are just setting themselves up for false "sexual assault" charges, baby blackmail, divorce court rape, career destruction and life-long poverty. If you simply must scratch that itch, go escort. Otherwise, go monk. #MGTOW

[Ethel mermania]

Dating is not worth the risk. Having ANY relationship with a woman is not worth the risk. Men who do so are just setting themselves up for false "sexual assault" charges, baby blackmail, divorce court rape, career destruction and life-long poverty. If you simply must scratch that itch, go escort. Otherwise, go monk. #MGTOW

Because happy marriages and long term relationships are non existent.

[The Rich Port]

Dating is not worth the risk. Having ANY relationship with a woman is not worth the risk. Men who do so are just setting themselves up for false "sexual assault" charges, baby blackmail, divorce court rape, career destruction and life-long poverty. If you simply must scratch that itch, go escort. Otherwise, go monk. #MGTOW

Ayy lmao, but nah.

Did you even try, considering your concerns are this bizarre?

[Saiwania]

What you need is an opinion that doesn't belong in the garbage can.

If I'm not liberal enough for your tastes, that is too bad. It isn't an issue for the people I talk to, who aren't necessarily aligned with me politically. My advice is to talk to women with no expectations beforehand. Don't put any one woman or women in general, on a pedestal. Women hate that. It is unbecoming if you're going too much out of your way for them. But this isn't an excuse to behave as a jerk to the ladies either.

Just carry yourself well enough, and treat people as you want to be treated, and chances are, you can have more success than if you're behaving in a way that could paint you as having hidden ulterior motives and thus untrustworthy.

If you have to tell a woman no, it's perfectly fine to say no to whatever it is that they want from you. People are often more impressed if you have boundaries than if you don't- such as saying Yes all the time as one example, people will only take advantage of that if you let them.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

My spouse and I were friends in university. There was this friends group of 5 males and 1 female.
All the males spilt their secrets with the girl. Not with eachother. That was because the girl was caring and interested in you. Conversation just naturally flowed into areas where you normally don't speak about. Like suicide, dementia, vulnerability.
And yes we share a lot. We both like cooking, reading, sf, rpg, gardening, walks in nature, gaming, crafting, technical work and experimenting in bed.

My husband and I started as friends here in NS. 10 years on...

Life’s weird that way.

[Novus America]

What you need is an opinion that doesn't belong in the garbage can.

If I'm not liberal enough for your tastes, that is too bad. It isn't an issue for the people I talk to, who aren't necessarily aligned with me politically. My advice is to talk to women with no expectations beforehand. Don't put any one woman or women in general, on a pedestal. Women hate that. It is unbecoming if you're going too much out of your way for them. But this isn't an excuse to behave as a jerk to the ladies either.

Just carry yourself well enough, and treat people as you want to be treated, and chances are, you can have more success than if you're behaving in a way that could paint you as having hidden ulterior motives and thus untrustworthy.

If you have to tell a woman no, it's perfectly fine to say no to whatever it is that they want from you. People are often more impressed if you have boundaries than if you don't- such as saying Yes all the time as one example, people will only take advantage of that if you let them.

Well sure you have a right to say no. But if your story is true your reason for doing so is still silly, although you have a right to things for silly reasons. we have a right to point out we think it silly as well.