I've given up dating

[Murakami_1]

I see dating as pointless since I'm undateable.

Why? Undateable I mean

 

[blackdot]

Why? Undateable I mean

I don't know why it is that I am undateable. I just am.

 

[user 190541]

I don't know why it is that I am undateable. I just am.

Top 10 relatable moments.

 

[user 188685]

Are you asking that to me?

Yes

 

[Xpendable]

Spaces for meeting (young) people are also in extinction. women don't approach, men are afraid of being "exposed" by just staring at a woman, and the perception of value has been completely destroyed. And it will get worse.

 

[user 190541]

Yes

I have. Both virtually and personally. The 3 girls I mentioned in this post I met all through dating apps/sites. One of them was actually a school friend who had a crush on me when we were kids, but I didn't even remember her. It was her who remembered me, only to reject me afterwards, which seems a little strange, given that we shared a long history together, even if we didn't spoke in that meantime (we went exactly to the same schools 3 times and lived in the same neighborhood, in fact, just a few meters apart). But dating outside of dating apps was a lot easier to me, I've only been encountering difficulties doing it online. My theory is that once in a dating app/site environment, women get too picky, even a little cocky. They love the attention they get, I'm sure. Some are not even there to actually meet potential mates, only to be the center of men's attention. I'd very much prefer to approach women outside of the internet, but I don't go anywhere that would be appropriate for that. I don't go to college anymore, nor parties, nor the gym etc.

 

[ardour]

Spaces for meeting (young) people are also in extinction. women don't approach, men are afraid of being "exposed" by just staring at a woman, and the perception of value has been completely destroyed. And it will get worse.

It's getting worse. I read through a 1000 + comment fb post recently on what counted as inappropriate in the gym. The consensus was that a short glance might be okay but if someone's in your field of view you're obligated to lower your gaze, and women had the right to shout in a man's face if they felt leered at. Someone even claimed private sexual thoughts counted as "sexualization."

Reminded me of the fundamentalist religious discussion forums I used to frequent in the 2000s.

 

[TropicalStarfish]

It's getting worse. I read through a 1000 + comment fb post recently on what counted as inappropriate in the gym. The consensus was that a short glance might be okay but if someone's in your field of view you're obligated to lower your gaze, and women had the right to shout in a man's face if they felt leered at. Someone even claimed private sexual thoughts counted as "sexualization."

Reminded me of the fundamentalist religious discussion forums I used to frequent in the 2000s.

You read through 1000 comments on facebook? Man are you a masochist? lol

 

[ardour]

This seems like a non hateful take on things

 

[MrLonely86]

21.st century is the most stupid century for dating.
Change my mind.

 

[TropicalStarfish]

21.st century is the most stupid century for dating.
Change my mind.

Seems like a thread starter more than a post..

 

[WillPower]

This seems likw well-reasoned, non hateful sort of explanation.

Very interesting video. Thanks for posting this. I like these types of discussions that dive into this. Like the guy in the video said, when we have these discussions, too often people are quick to accuse the guys who are discussing this of blaming women. And that's not the case at all. Many guys just want to know what women want so they can improve in those areas. If guys get shut down from even talking about these things for fear of offending women, then we are never going to progress.

As far as the video itself, I'm going to slightly disagree with it. I think his explanation of women who are college educated and have a good job wanting guys who are older and and equal or better than her only is a small part of the reason why more guys are single these days. Many guys who are single (as evidenced on this forum) are guys who are educated and have good jobs and are in their 30's. I am all of these things. I have a college degree and a good job. I'm in my 30's. And it hasn't gotten any easier for me to find a relationship than when I was in my 20's.

I’ve noticed a lot of dating experts on social media who charge a lot of money have clientele made up of mostly Asian or Indian men who fit this mold. I’m not surprised either. Having grown up with Asian American immigrant parents and that culture, I can see how the parents often over-emphasize academics and career/wealth beyond all else. In that arena of education, their children usually do well and go on to make a great living. Yet along the way, they are told to neglect “distractions” like socializing, going to parties, making friends, and practicing social skills. What ends up happening is they end up playing catch-up in that skill set because they’re socially undeveloped and painfully awkward or socially unaware. (I’m not going to elaborate further since this story has been beaten to death and told by many people, so you’re already familiar with it likely. The point is that Asians often aim to get an A+ in career/education yet they should aim to get an A+ in life. Also, yes, it is a generalization to illustrate a point; there are exceptions and Asians we all know who are pretty social or aren’t financially successful.). Many Asian parents think that all guys need to do is study and get a good job, and then finding a wife will be easy. Once you have money, the women will follow. And this is a flawed way to look at things.

Do women care about a guy who is college educated and can provide resources to settle down with? Yes, I'm sure they do. But none of this helps if you can't get your foot in the door first and get that initial attraction to show off these qualities. And that's what I think many men are struggling with.

The part I will really agree with him on is where he talks about having to make a lot of male friends and have lots of experiences. That right there is social proof, and women will take notice of that. I think what a lot of guys who struggle with women lack growing up are male role models. They don't know how to be masculine. I’ve learned that false belief systems prevent us from getting the results we want but we cling onto them hoping our results will change. I discovered that our beliefs came from a mixture of possible factors including radical views that demonized male traits like assertiveness or dominance, lack of male role models and friends growing up, having few male teachers, past trauma with interactions with other men, and the rise of cities to replace towns.

This modernization of the world has removed vital parts of what we genetically need to become attractive, functional men in society. Our happiness and social skills could be low because of a lack of a tribe to develop strong, recurring relationships. Our extreme views on assertiveness and expressing sexuality could cause so much shame that we never stand up for ourselves or express romantic interest. Our lack of strong friendships could dramatically cripple our dating lives, emotional intelligence, and mental health.

 

[ardour]

As far as the video itself, I'm going to slightly disagree with it. I think his explanation of women who are college educated and have a good job wanting guys who are older and and equal or better than her only is a small part of the reason why more guys are single these days. Many guys who are single (as evidenced on this forum) are guys who are educated and have good jobs and are in their 30's. I am all of these things. I have a college degree and a good job. I'm in my 30's. And it hasn't gotten any easier for me to find a relationship than when I was in my 20's.

Does it occur that maybe we're still near the bottom of the barrel, and that, combined with inexperience has caused too much damage and social stunting to function romantically with someone. I applies to here and on the reddit loneliness subs. Lost causes.

I’ve noticed a lot of dating experts on social media who charge a lot of money have clientele made up of mostly Asian or Indian men who fit this mold.

So have I, but I've noticed in my own city/country Asian men don't seem to struggle as much. Asian women have a strong preference to stay within their community here. Indian men really do seem to struggle though because the stereotypes around creepiness abound.

Do women care about a guy who is college educated and can provide resources to settle down with? Yes, I'm sure they do. But none of this helps if you can't get your foot in the door first and get that initial attraction to show off these qualities. And that's what I think many men are struggling with.

You need to be masculine in combination with the aforementioned.

The part I will really agree with him on is where he talks about having to make a lot of male friends and have lots of experiences. That right there is social proof, and women will take notice of that.

Yes it's incredibly important, and for remaining mentally stable. Dating without first having a social circle isn't going to work. And a life without friends really isn't worth living anyway.

I think what a lot of guys who struggle with women lack growing up are male role models. They don't know how to be masculine. I’ve learned that false belief systems prevent us from getting the results we want but we cling onto them hoping our results will change. I discovered that our beliefs came from a mixture of possible factors including radical views that demonized male traits like assertiveness or dominance, lack of male role models and friends growing up, having few male teachers, past trauma with interactions with other men, and the rise of cities to replace towns.

Sadly often the only consistent interactions with other men are through bullying and abuse. My male teachers were mostly useless by the way. Teaching is not a respected occupation for a man so it attracts those who don't care.

 

[user 190541]

The part I will really agree with him on is where he talks about having to make a lot of male friends and have lots of experiences. That right there is social proof, and women will take notice of that. I think what a lot of guys who struggle with women lack growing up are male role models. They don't know how to be masculine. I’ve learned that false belief systems prevent us from getting the results we want but we cling onto them hoping our results will change. I discovered that our beliefs came from a mixture of possible factors including radical views that demonized male traits like assertiveness or dominance, lack of male role models and friends growing up, having few male teachers, past trauma with interactions with other men, and the rise of cities to replace towns.

This modernization of the world has removed vital parts of what we genetically need to become attractive, functional men in society. Our happiness and social skills could be low because of a lack of a tribe to develop strong, recurring relationships. Our extreme views on assertiveness and expressing sexuality could cause so much shame that we never stand up for ourselves or express romantic interest. Our lack of strong friendships could dramatically cripple our dating lives, emotional intelligence, and mental health.

I wouldn't say the issue is the world becoming more modern, rather that it's becoming more modern in a specific way. I wouldn't use the word modernization for this purpose. Instead, I'd say the issue is that the way relationships work is changing in order to above all best fit the material premises of society. Marriages are short-lived (and getting shorter), people in general favor superficial qualities in potential mates precisely because long-term relationships, in which deeper qualities would prove to be more important, are becoming increasingly less common. Singleness, on the other hand, is becoming more common. All of this is consistent with women's achievement of freedom from domestic servitude, by which they are reduced to being nothing more than housewives, women's participation in labour and the attainment of equal pay, equal rights etc., but all of these things alone do not suffice to explain this process of change. You have to add to the mix the liberal, capitalistic economy that tries to profit from anything and everything, including relationships, and only then you'll get the reality in which we live. The truth is that traditional relationships (in which the man plays a dominant role, and the woman is generally subservient and eventually gets bounded to the home in order to take care of domestic duties and the kids) are just not as profitable as the new types of relationships, in which both (or all, if they're more than 2) parts involved get to work, consume by spending the money aquired through their work, and overall be a fully functional part of the economic system. Eventually, what we nowadays still see as traditional relationships will be abolished entirely, not as the result of a decree or any type of tyrannical endeavor, but because it's going to simply become obsolete. I believe the same is true for what some people call heteronormativity.

 

[blackdot]

Years ago, one of my coworkers hated that I had never slept with anyone so he proceeded to drag 8 different women to my desk (I only knew one of them). He would tell them I had never slept with anyone and asked them to give me advise on how to find someone to date. Every one of them had the same advise:
1.) Find someone you have nothing in common with.
2.) Find someone you can't stand being around and you always argue with.
Not shockingly, every one of the women were divorced.

My biggest issue is that I'm too nice to date. Plus I can make women laugh and they frown on that. Doesn't help that they didn't teach dating when I was in school so I have no idea what the processes and procedures are.

 

[user 190556]

I feel kind of disconnected from this, but in a way I relate to it. I have never dated anyone because I have never really wanted to date anyone. This notion that women can scream at you if you look at them and such - I think that's not real. Maybe in america. Women are by nature feminine. If you are assertive enough, they will usually be submissive. I am not an expert on women ofc lol - but I don't think women are that difficult/aggressive. If women don't approve of me, well, maybe I need to be more humble, realise my faults, work on them, and grow more comfortable in my own skin. This is my thought process. But I am only 19 years old, and I don't have much experience.

I think social media is really exaggerated about how women act (and how men act too.) Nobody acts the way people act in social media, the internet is fake. It's also hard to just "connect" with someone through meeting them only one time, or through a dating app. The easiest way (from my point of view), to get to know someone is to go to the same place regularly and get to know the people who are there. And just relax. It sounds hard and it is. But if you can develop good coping strategies, it of course becomes easier.

Does it occur that maybe we're still near the bottom of the barrel, and that, combined with inexperience has caused too much damage and social stunting to function romantically with someone. I applies to here and on the reddit loneliness subs. Lost causes.

So have I, but I've noticed in my own city/country Asian men don't seem to struggle as much. Asian women have a strong preference to stay within their community here. Indian men really do seem to struggle though because the stereotypes around creepiness abound.

You need to be masculine in combination with the aforementioned.

Yes it's incredibly important, and for remaining mentally stable. Dating without first having a social circle isn't going to work. And a life without friends really isn't worth living anyway.

Sadly often the only consistent interactions with other men are through bullying and abuse. My male teachers were mostly useless by the way. Teaching is not a respected occupation for a man so it attracts those who don't care.

Also, I agree with almost everything in this post

The one thing I will say is, I don't think bullying and abuse are the most consistent interactions between men. At least not from my experience. I have made many good connections with other men, in church and in certain online communities. If you have the same interest/hobby and you go to the same place, it's easy to get to know someone and have a decent relationship at least, from my experience.

 

[ardour]

Years ago, one of my coworkers hated that I had never slept with anyone so he proceeded to drag 8 different women to my desk (I only knew one of them). He would tell them I had never slept with anyone and asked them to give me advise on how to find someone to date. Every one of them had the same advise:
1.) Find someone you have nothing in common with.
2.) Find someone you can't stand being around and you always argue with.
Not shockingly, every one of the women were divorced.

My biggest issue is that I'm too nice to date. Plus I can make women laugh and they frown on that. Doesn't help that they didn't teach dating when I was in school so I have no idea what the processes and procedures are.

Not the slightest bit obvious about it.

There's the occasional people who do this on the loneliness reddit subs like this, however nobody cares that much since they've used to being made fun of, and really, the joke's on the person who bothered to type that out and troll a space barely anyone normal visits.

 

[WillPower]

Does it occur that maybe we're still near the bottom of the barrel, and that, combined with inexperience has caused too much damage and social stunting to function romantically with someone. I applies to here and on the reddit loneliness subs. Lost causes.

So have I, but I've noticed in my own city/country Asian men don't seem to struggle as much. Asian women have a strong preference to stay within their community here. Indian men really do seem to struggle though because the stereotypes around creepiness abound.

You need to be masculine in combination with the aforementioned.

Yes it's incredibly important, and for remaining mentally stable. Dating without first having a social circle isn't going to work. And a life without friends really isn't worth living anyway.

Sadly often the only consistent interactions with other men are through bullying and abuse. My male teachers were mostly useless by the way. Teaching is not a respected occupation for a man so it attracts those who don't care.

Yeah, I think inexperience and past failures play a big role. I think there's a mental block there for those who have failed so much in the past. It's like a fat person who loses a lot of weight and looks great but thinks they still look bad. Plus, women can sense when a guy doesn't have a lot of experience. If I could have just one success, it would be like a snowball effect. The more success someone has, the more confidence they have. That's another problem. Women like confident guys, but if you don't have any success, how are you supposed to gain confidence? It's like people who first graduate from college. Employers want experience, but how are you supposed to get experience if you don't get hired in the first place?

Hmmm....that's really strange. I think it's the opposite in the US. I find over here, Indian women have a stronger preference to stay within their community. Not sure why. Maybe Indian parents are more strict in wanting their children to marry within their race. While Asian parents would probably prefer that as well, I think they are less strict on that.

Yeah, I've been trying very hard to improve my social circle. I don't think I've suffered that much abuse from other guys. More like exclusion. I find it hard to relate to most guys in a masculine way. Like with football for example. I'm not into most sports like that. And that's how many guys connect.

I wouldn't say the issue is the world becoming more modern, rather that it's becoming more modern in a specific way. I wouldn't use the word modernization for this purpose. Instead, I'd say the issue is that the way relationships work is changing in order to above all best fit the material premises of society. Marriages are short-lived (and getting shorter), people in general favor superficial qualities in potential mates precisely because long-term relationships, in which deeper qualities would prove to be more important, are becoming increasingly less common. Singleness, on the other hand, is becoming more common. All of this is consistent with women's achievement of freedom from domestic servitude, by which they are reduced to being nothing more than housewives, women's participation in labour and the attainment of equal pay, equal rights etc., but all of these things alone do not suffice to explain this process of change. You have to add to the mix the liberal, capitalistic economy that tries to profit from anything and everything, including relationships, and only then you'll get the reality in which we live. The truth is that traditional relationships (in which the man plays a dominant role, and the woman is generally subservient and eventually gets bounded to the home in order to take care of domestic duties and the kids) are just not as profitable as the new types of relationships, in which both (or all, if they're more than 2) parts involved get to work, consume by spending the money aquired through their work, and overall be a fully functional part of the economic system. Eventually, what we nowadays still see as traditional relationships will be abolished entirely, not as the result of a decree or any type of tyrannical endeavor, but because it's going to simply become obsolete. I believe the same is true for what some people call heteronormativity.

That's an interesting take. But are you saying these new relationships where men aren't dominant are not sustainable? Is that why you think relationships are going to become obsolete?

My biggest issue is that I'm too nice to date. Plus I can make women laugh and they frown on that. Doesn't help that they didn't teach dating when I was in school so I have no idea what the processes and procedures are.

Wait, what? Why would women frown on a guy who can make them laugh. Most women say they love a guy who can make them laugh.

The one thing I will say is, I don't think bullying and abuse are the most consistent interactions between men. At least not from my experience. I have made many good connections with other men, in church and in certain online communities. If you have the same interest/hobby and you go to the same place, it's easy to get to know someone and have a decent relationship at least, from my experience.

I have gotten better at making relationships with other men through meet ups as well. But it's been very difficult. I think it's easy to make surface relationships with other males or acquaintances. But deeper friendships where you are consistently hanging out has always been hard for me.

 

[user 190541]

That's an interesting take. But are you saying these new relationships where men aren't dominant are not sustainable? Is that why you think relationships are going to become obsolete?

Absolutely not, they are perfectly sustainable. Not only are they sustainable, they'll eventually become the norm. That's so because this situation is a necessity brought about by the development of productive forces within a contemporary capitalistic framework. The reason liberal forms of sexuality get so much attention in the media and by corporate brands is because it's just so marketable, it's highly lucrative, specially in comparison to traditional forms of sexuality, and as a set of behaviours it's perfectly compatible with present day labour conditions, in which labour rights have suffered a setback. It's widely known that, for instance, women, by joining the workforce, have dragged the value of labour down, decreasing wages. From a capitalistic point of view, this is positive, but it doesn't stop there. Working class people from Western countries who are engaged in relationships with multiple people are certainly less likely to want to have or adopt kids than working class people from said countries who are engaged in traditional relationships, and you have to remember that not wanting to settle down and raise kids is always a positive thing from a present-day capitalistic point of view. Similarly, a lesbian or gay couple, even if they wanted to have kids, would have to adopt them, something which exempts them from the more tiresome stages of childrearing, those associated with infants and the earliests stages of life. Simply put, to settle down and spend time raising kids is to waste potential labour that could have been employed for the benefit of capitalist production. This is so because, again, from a capitalistic point of view it's preferable to employ immigrants, where they're available (Europe and the USA, for instance), as they drag the value of labour further down and their use in the productive process eliminates the implicit cost of the reproduction of labour power, which, as Marx ascertained, is factored into the value of wages.

This is only to elaborate a bit further on why some, not all, relationships are, I believe, going to become obsolete. I don't see relationships in themselves becoming obsolete anytime soon, simply because it's a basic human need to seek some type of sexual or romantic companionship, but the shape of relationships is going to change drastically in the near future.

 

[TropicalStarfish]

Absolutely not, they are perfectly sustainable. Not only are they sustainable, they'll eventually become the norm. That's so because this situation is a necessity brought about by the development of productive forces within a contemporary capitalistic framework. The reason liberal forms of sexuality get so much attention in the media and by corporate brands is because it's just so marketable, it's highly lucrative, specially in comparison to traditional forms of sexuality, and as a set of behaviours it's perfectly compatible with present day labour conditions, in which labour rights have suffered a setback. It's widely known that, for instance, women, by joining the workforce, have dragged the value of labour down, decreasing wages. From a capitalistic point of view, this is positive, but it doesn't stop there. Working class people from Western countries who are engaged in relationships with multiple people are certainly less likely to want to have or adopt kids than working class people from said countries who are engaged in traditional relationships, and you have to remember that not wanting to settle down and raise kids is always a positive thing from a present-day capitalistic point of view. Similarly, a lesbian or gay couple, even if they wanted to have kids, would have to adopt them, something which exempts them from the more tiresome stages of childrearing, those associated with infants and the earliests stages of life. Simply put, to settle down and spend time raising kids is to waste potential labour that could have been employed for the benefit of capitalist production. This is so because, again, from a capitalistic point of view it's preferable to employ immigrants, where they're available (Europe and the USA, for instance), as they drag the value of labour further down and their use in the productive process eliminates the implicit cost of the reproduction of labour power, which, as Marx ascertained, is factored into the value of wages.

This is only to elaborate a bit further on why some, not all, relationships are, I believe, going to become obsolete. I don't see relationships in themselves becoming obsolete anytime soon, simply because it's a basic human need to seek some type of sexual or romantic companionship, but the shape of relationships is going to change drastically in the near future.

People who have children are much more avid consumers than people who don't. When you have even one child, you're spending A LOT more than you would, if you didn't have any children. Just watch a mother of five on an average day at walmart..

Capitalism wants people to have children. Preferably poor children, born out of wedlock, into broken homes, who will be forced to work jobs they can get, because they themselves now have children they need to provide for. And the cycle repeats...

Then they constantly stream conflicting messages of aggression, confusion, outrage, stupidity, and fear, to keep people from organizing politically, and as unions, to secure bargaining rights with employers for better conditions.

Pretty simple, actually. And they have so much money, power, and influence, it's just business as usual for them.

What, 'capitalism,' doesn't want, is single people, and people in relationships, who 'aren't,' having children. No children means far less consumption. Raising children makes consuming necessary. Living for yourself makes consuming, largely optional, aside from rent/real estate, oil, food, and the occasional household good or luxory item; but children REQUIRE: diapers, food, schooling, medical treatment, etc.. etc.. etc..

So, 'Capitalism,' offshored to Japan and then China, India, etc.. etc.., and eventually will replace the low wager workers with robots, who they won't have to pay, and when that goes south... who knows.