The rise of Incels

[Emily Lake]

Of course, the above isn't a strict rule and many men get laid for a variety of reasons and in a variety of contexts. But at a bare minimum if someone is attractive there is at least one trait present which would help their offspring procreate themselves, be it physical appearance, strength, confidence, or character. If someone lacks all four of these traits, be it man or woman, they're going to have a hard time.

This is where the evolutionary angle of sexual selection comes into play. Attraction is generally going to be different for males versus females of almost every mammalian species. For males, 'make good children and don't die in childbirth' is a core reproductive drive. For females, who bear the burden of childbirth, it's more like 'make good children and protect me while I gestate and then provide for and protect me and my children while I rear them'.

I think this is Christian nonsense. It's not even old. It's Victorian nuclear family post industrial Christian nonsense.

Our instincts and drives for sexual attraction developed when we were hunter/gatherers. Our brains have not changed much since the.

1) A man's ability to take care of his woman and the child is a non-factor in a tribal society. Since they all help each other out. All the moms of the tribe, in effect act as a single super mom. All the dad's act as one super dad. They all take care of each other.

2) Who you have sex with is everybody's business. Since the number and ages of children has an impact on the mobility of the tribe. This would be true no matter if people understood the link between sex and pregnancy. Since it can be subconscious/instinct control.

3) Primates use sex for a range of things other than getting babies. Our closest relatives, the bonobo, use sex primarily for social bonding and social control. By limiting sex and punishing slutty females the matriarchal alpha-female group maintains control of the entire tribe.

There's also stuff that assumes tribalism. Like domestic violence. When we were hunter/gatherers I assume it was a non-issue since other men would instantly stop men who beat their wives. As would women stop women engaging in toxic behaviours.

I think the men collectively were a stronger bonded group with each other than they were with their wives. As were women bonded with each other more than with their men. And the emotional life we have is evolutionarily designed to compensate for that. To quickly create strong bonds, assuming that your opportunities to strengthen them were limited.

Not to mention that our social emotional brain is adapted for limited new people. It assumes a stable social group where everybody knows each other incredibly well and they know that we're all stuck with each other.

You've stuck together a post from me and a post from rousseau. I don't know which of us you're responding to here.

 

[WAB]

If that were so then there would be no prostitution and little (much, much less) infidelity.

A lot of so-called infidelity is consensual, as you of course know. And a lot of non-consensual (meaning one of the legally married or socially committed partners is not in-the-know) infidelity is pleasurable [to the one in the know that is, as well as the one not in-the-know, at least with respect to the other's pretended ignorance]. A cuckold, for example, albeit a willing one, even a sneaky, divisive one, who feigns ignorance). A crafty cuck could, I suppose, though they could also be the one fooled as well as the one doing the fooling (around, lol), be the architect of a lover's triad, or a lover's orgy, or whatever the hell any of it all is.

Yeah, see, the problem with that is the unlikelihood of any of it being healthy.

For even the barest assumption of healthyness, consent has to happen, even if it's later obscured behind a safe word or "role behaviors", and at some point the roles must be put aside and the "role behaviors" reviewed maturely.

These are pretty important rules, and those who shirk them will most assuredly suffer for it.

It can most certainly be a game, even a game whose stakes are the relationship itself... But not giving people a choice of whether to play or a knowledge of what game is being played... That's just fucking shitty.

Agreed.

Cue Sting song:

"If you Loooooooooooooooove somebody, set them free. Free, free. Set them free."

 

[Derec]

I also don't see it as a problem. This is a market place. If you want to get laid, then put in the effort.

Of course you would not see it as a problem. You do not have an issue getting women.

But for many, no amount of effort would do the trick.

 

[Derec]

think it's fair to say that most women don't relish being thought of like an item on a drive-through menu, to be ordered up for consumption then tossed aside once the dude's appetite has been sated.

Unless by a guy they find attractive, of course.

I know too many musicians who always have an attractive girlfriend.

Of course you do. Women are attracted to musician types.

 

[Bronzeage]

think it's fair to say that most women don't relish being thought of like an item on a drive-through menu, to be ordered up for consumption then tossed aside once the dude's appetite has been sated.

Unless by a guy they find attractive, of course.

I know too many musicians who always have an attractive girlfriend.

Of course you do. Women are attracted to musician types.

Well, there you go. You now have two ways to get a girlfriend. Either earn a lot of money, or learn to play the bass. Both are within your reach, if you apply yourself.

 

[TSwizzle]

Call me crazy, but maybe, just maybe... there are so many guys not getting laid because their entire objective is nothing more than to get laid. And while there are exceptions, I think it's fair to say that most women don't relish being thought of like an item on a drive-through menu, to be ordered up for consumption then tossed aside once the dude's appetite has been sated.

And don't forget lesbians. When I was single you would not believe the number of lesbians I encountered.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Well, there you go. You now have two ways to get a girlfriend. Either earn a lot of money, or learn to play the bass. Both are within your reach, if you apply yourself.

You're assuming everyone can learn to play a musical instrument. I have never tried but I'm sure it would be a total failure--I can't follow the beat of music, there's no way I could keep time with other players. (I don't know what it is beyond genetic--my father had the same problem.)

 

[Bronzeage]

Well, there you go. You now have two ways to get a girlfriend. Either earn a lot of money, or learn to play the bass. Both are within your reach, if you apply yourself.

You're assuming everyone can learn to play a musical instrument. I have never tried but I'm sure it would be a total failure--I can't follow the beat of music, there's no way I could keep time with other players. (I don't know what it is beyond genetic--my father had the same problem.)

I am sure anyone can learn to play a musical instrument. As Hamlet said, It's as easy as lying. The only necessary quality needed to play an instrument is the desire to play one.

I often get asked to sit in on writer's workshops, especially for young writers. They are young enough to think talent is a critical element to good writing. When it's my turn to talk about writing, I stress that talent is over rated. The key ingredients to good writing are the desire to write and the will to keep writing, rewriting, editing, and then rewriting again. By that time, talent is a very small part of the finished work.

This is a thread about men who have declared themselves undesired by women. Some blame themselves and some blame women. For every incel who can identify the cause of his involuntary celibacy, one can quickly find a dozen men in the same condition who are in relationships of varying satisfaction. It's one of those conditions which seems completely immune to good advice. It seems to be like anorexia, where telling the anorexic they are not fat is simply not sufficient, even though it is the truth.

It's a misperception of reality, which really sucks, because perception is reality.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Well, there you go. You now have two ways to get a girlfriend. Either earn a lot of money, or learn to play the bass. Both are within your reach, if you apply yourself.

You're assuming everyone can learn to play a musical instrument. I have never tried but I'm sure it would be a total failure--I can't follow the beat of music, there's no way I could keep time with other players. (I don't know what it is beyond genetic--my father had the same problem.)

I am sure anyone can learn to play a musical instrument. As Hamlet said, It's as easy as lying. The only necessary quality needed to play an instrument is the desire to play one.

You're assuming somebody with no impairment to their ability to learn. I can't keep time to music other than in some trivially easy cases. While that wouldn't be a big deal alone I think it would be pretty much a show-stopper in a cooperative situation. It's like color vision--it doesn't matter how much I study, I can't read the color codes on electronics because my color vision is flawed. (I can read resistor codes if I have a cheat card I can hold up next to the component. I can't read capacitor codes even with a cheat card.) (On the flip side--I was in my early teens before I understood the concept of camouflage--nature programs would talk about lion hiding in the grass when it was perfectly obvious to me, what's this hiding they're talking about???) (I know my color vision is flawed, but an awful lot of people with my level of impairment have no idea it's anything more than that they're bad with color. My former employer gave a color vision test to all new hires--20% failed and most of them had no idea they weren't seeing color right.)

This is a thread about men who have declared themselves undesired by women. Some blame themselves and some blame women. For every incel who can identify the cause of his involuntary celibacy, one can quickly find a dozen men in the same condition who are in relationships of varying satisfaction. It's one of those conditions which seems completely immune to good advice. It seems to be like anorexia, where telling the anorexic they are not fat is simply not sufficient, even though it is the truth.

It's a misperception of reality, which really sucks, because perception is reality.

Just because an obstacle doesn't stop everyone who faces it doesn't mean it's not a substantial obstacle. Sometimes proximity turns into something more--a different path to a relationship that will have different obstacles and thus might circumvent an obstacle that stops most people in a similar situation. However, it's a low enough probability scenario that it's not a solution.

Personally, I suspect that a lot of the incels are on the autism spectrum.

 

[Bronzeage]

Well, there you go. You now have two ways to get a girlfriend. Either earn a lot of money, or learn to play the bass. Both are within your reach, if you apply yourself.

You're assuming everyone can learn to play a musical instrument. I have never tried but I'm sure it would be a total failure--I can't follow the beat of music, there's no way I could keep time with other players. (I don't know what it is beyond genetic--my father had the same problem.)

I am sure anyone can learn to play a musical instrument. As Hamlet said, It's as easy as lying. The only necessary quality needed to play an instrument is the desire to play one.

You're assuming somebody with no impairment to their ability to learn. I can't keep time to music other than in some trivially easy cases. While that wouldn't be a big deal alone I think it would be pretty much a show-stopper in a cooperative situation. It's like color vision--it doesn't matter how much I study, I can't read the color codes on electronics because my color vision is flawed. (I can read resistor codes if I have a cheat card I can hold up next to the component. I can't read capacitor codes even with a cheat card.) (On the flip side--I was in my early teens before I understood the concept of camouflage--nature programs would talk about lion hiding in the grass when it was perfectly obvious to me, what's this hiding they're talking about???) (I know my color vision is flawed, but an awful lot of people with my level of impairment have no idea it's anything more than that they're bad with color. My former employer gave a color vision test to all new hires--20% failed and most of them had no idea they weren't seeing color right.)

This is a thread about men who have declared themselves undesired by women. Some blame themselves and some blame women. For every incel who can identify the cause of his involuntary celibacy, one can quickly find a dozen men in the same condition who are in relationships of varying satisfaction. It's one of those conditions which seems completely immune to good advice. It seems to be like anorexia, where telling the anorexic they are not fat is simply not sufficient, even though it is the truth.

It's a misperception of reality, which really sucks, because perception is reality.

Just because an obstacle doesn't stop everyone who faces it doesn't mean it's not a substantial obstacle. Sometimes proximity turns into something more--a different path to a relationship that will have different obstacles and thus might circumvent an obstacle that stops most people in a similar situation. However, it's a low enough probability scenario that it's not a solution.

Personally, I suspect that a lot of the incels are on the autism spectrum.

Why should lack of ability impair someone's desire to play a musical instrument? I never said anyone had be proficient at it. Some obstacles are more of a barrier than others, but an obstacle can't be declared an absolute barrier if most people go over or around it.

There are probably a lot of incels on the autism spectrum, but I suspect it's more of a body image/self assessment issue, along the lines of anorexia.

 

[Metaphor]

Why should lack of ability impair someone's desire to play a musical instrument? I never said anyone had be proficient at it.

What a bizarre statement to make. Part of the beauty of creation is that you create something good. And part of the appeal of (male) musicians to females is that they are producing good art.

 

[bilby]

 

[Swammerdami]

And don't forget lesbians. When I was single you would not believe the number of lesbians I encountered.

I don't see a smiley-face. Surely you know the "Lesbian" excuse is often a ploy to turn off would-be suitors.

I've deleted the attribution from the following quote, for fear that with all the nesting I'd get it wrong.

It's like color vision--it doesn't matter how much I study, I can't read the color codes on electronics because my color vision is flawed.
...
Personally, I suspect that a lot of the incels are on the autism spectrum.

Incels should seek out Miss Violet? Am I dating myself if I recall the politically incorrect "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly"?

 

[Bronzeage]

Why should lack of ability impair someone's desire to play a musical instrument? I never said anyone had be proficient at it.

What a bizarre statement to make. Part of the beauty of creation is that you create something good. And part of the appeal of (male) musicians to females is that they are producing good art.

Are you making the claim you understand the elements of attraction between men and women? If so, please tell us how good the art must be to get a girlfriend. I'm sure a 1 to 10 scale would be sufficient.

 

[Metaphor]

Why should lack of ability impair someone's desire to play a musical instrument? I never said anyone had be proficient at it.

What a bizarre statement to make. Part of the beauty of creation is that you create something good. And part of the appeal of (male) musicians to females is that they are producing good art.

Are you making the claim you understand the elements of attraction between men and women? If so, please tell us how good the art must be to get a girlfriend. I'm sure a 1 to 10 scale would be sufficient.

Did you have to think about this misrepresentation of my statement, or did it come to you easily?

Do you think a man who is not proficient (that is, not competent or skilled) at playing a musical instrument is more desirable to a woman than a man who doesn't attempt to learn any instrument?

Lots of men get girlfriends without producing any art at all. But if you are relying on producing art to get you a girlfriend, you ought produce something decent. I think it's very bad advice to tell men having artistic impulses without artistic talent or skill will make them more desirable to women.

 

[Swammerdami]

Might there be a political component to the incel "problem"?

In the 2016 election 52% of men voted for Trump compared with 41% for Clinton; while among women this was reversed: 39% for Trump and 54% for Clinton. That's a very big difference. When restricted to White voters, the difference was even starker: Among white men, Trump led by a whopping almost 2-to-1 margin (62% to 32%) while white women were almost evenly split, 47% to 45%. If partisan alignment is a factor in romantic attraction, left-wing men and right-wing women would be "in the driver's seats."

50+ years ago, when War protesting was the rage, a slogan was "Girls say 'Yes' to boys who say 'No.'"

Could this be part of the problem? Hot Bolshevist babes are not attracted to greed-oriented empathy-lacking racists opposed to Women's Choice? Yes, there are millions of women who did vote for Trump, but maybe even right-wing incels find AOC more lust-worthy than they find MTG. (I'll admit that I can't think of a right-wing female politician even as "hot" as Nancy Pelosi!)

On the Other Message Board, one incel told us that he deserved a taxpayer-funded sex robot! There was no smiley-face, but might he have been a right-wing incel being sarcastic about the welfare state?

 

[Bronzeage]

Why should lack of ability impair someone's desire to play a musical instrument? I never said anyone had be proficient at it.

What a bizarre statement to make. Part of the beauty of creation is that you create something good. And part of the appeal of (male) musicians to females is that they are producing good art.

Are you making the claim you understand the elements of attraction between men and women? If so, please tell us how good the art must be to get a girlfriend. I'm sure a 1 to 10 scale would be sufficient.

Did you have to think about this misrepresentation of my statement, or did it come to you easily?

Do you think a man who is not proficient (that is, not competent or skilled) at playing a musical instrument is more desirable to a woman than a man who doesn't attempt to learn any instrument?

Lots of men get girlfriends without producing any art at all. But if you are relying on producing art to get you a girlfriend, you ought produce something decent. I think it's very bad advice to tell men having artistic impulses without artistic talent or skill will make them more desirable to women.

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

 

[Metaphor]

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

What women want in a man is not a secret and those things have already been discussed on this thread.

I simply challenged your notion that "anyone" can learn to play a musical instrument. It's just not true.

Also, I am friends with a number of heterosexual women and the poetry writing abilities (or lack thereof) of men hasn't come up.

 

[Bronzeage]

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

What women want in a man is not a secret and those things have already been discussed on this thread.

I simply challenged your notion that "anyone" can learn to play a musical instrument. It's just not true.

Also, I am friends with a number of heterosexual women and the poetry writing abilities (or lack thereof) of men hasn't come up.

Okay, to recap how we got here:

Claim: Women are attracted to men who have money.
Challenge: I know musicians who have girlfriends.
Counter claim: Women are attracted to musicians.
Claim: Anyone can learn to play a musical instrument.
Challenge: Women are attracted to good musicians and not all men can be good enough.

This brings us back to the question of what women find attractive, which thanks to this thread, is not a secret.

I claim anyone can learn play a musical instrument well enough to attract a woman, just as anyone can accumulate enough money to do the same.

As for poetry, if you're expecting a woman to say, "If you want some of this, cough up some verse, Ginsburg", that's not how it works.

Use this one. I won't mind.

You are my light and eyes
For with you I see no shadows.

After that, it's yours to lose.

 

[Metaphor]

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

What women want in a man is not a secret and those things have already been discussed on this thread.

I simply challenged your notion that "anyone" can learn to play a musical instrument. It's just not true.

Also, I am friends with a number of heterosexual women and the poetry writing abilities (or lack thereof) of men hasn't come up.

Okay, to recap how we got here:

Claim: Women are attracted to men who have money.
Challenge: I know musicians who have girlfriends.
Counter claim: Women are attracted to musicians.
Claim: Anyone can learn to play a musical instrument.
Challenge: Women are attracted to good musicians and not all men can be good enough.

This brings us back to the question of what women find attractive, which thanks to this thread, is not a secret.

I claim anyone can learn play a musical instrument well enough to attract a woman, just as anyone can accumulate enough money to do the same.

Well, I think the bolded claim is unevidenced and also wrong.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And don't forget lesbians. When I was single you would not believe the number of lesbians I encountered.

I don't see a smiley-face. Surely you know the "Lesbian" excuse is often a ploy to turn off would-be suitors.

I've deleted the attribution from the following quote, for fear that with all the nesting I'd get it wrong.

It's like color vision--it doesn't matter how much I study, I can't read the color codes on electronics because my color vision is flawed.
...
Personally, I suspect that a lot of the incels are on the autism spectrum.

Incels should seek out Miss Violet? Am I dating myself if I recall the politically incorrect "Bad Boys Rape Our Young Girls But Violet Gives Willingly"?

Knowing the colors doesn't mean I can read them. I was presenting that as an example of something that can't be overcome by trying. Is that band blue or violet? Is it red or orange? With a reference right there to compare them against I can tell them apart, but faced with a lone band I can't reliably tell those pairs apart. And anything dot-coded, forget about it. Likewise, I can't crimp Ethernet because to me two of the wires look the same.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Might there be a political component to the incel "problem"?

In the 2016 election 52% of men voted for Trump compared with 41% for Clinton; while among women this was reversed: 39% for Trump and 54% for Clinton. That's a very big difference. When restricted to White voters, the difference was even starker: Among white men, Trump led by a whopping almost 2-to-1 margin (62% to 32%) while white women were almost evenly split, 47% to 45%. If partisan alignment is a factor in romantic attraction, left-wing men and right-wing women would be "in the driver's seats."

Interesting point--I wouldn't be surprised if that's part of it. I wouldn't say it's so much a factor in romantic attraction as a cause of not wanting to be with the person regardless of physical attraction.

 

[Bronzeage]

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

What women want in a man is not a secret and those things have already been discussed on this thread.

I simply challenged your notion that "anyone" can learn to play a musical instrument. It's just not true.

Also, I am friends with a number of heterosexual women and the poetry writing abilities (or lack thereof) of men hasn't come up.

Okay, to recap how we got here:

Claim: Women are attracted to men who have money.
Challenge: I know musicians who have girlfriends.
Counter claim: Women are attracted to musicians.
Claim: Anyone can learn to play a musical instrument.
Challenge: Women are attracted to good musicians and not all men can be good enough.

This brings us back to the question of what women find attractive, which thanks to this thread, is not a secret.

I claim anyone can learn play a musical instrument well enough to attract a woman, just as anyone can accumulate enough money to do the same.

Well, I think the bolded claim is unevidenced and also wrong.

I've seen it done, and if you haven't, you haven't been paying attention.

You still haven't given me a 1 to 10 rating of how good a musician has to be in order to get a date. After that, we can discuss a minimum amount of expendable income.

 

[Metaphor]

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

What women want in a man is not a secret and those things have already been discussed on this thread.

I simply challenged your notion that "anyone" can learn to play a musical instrument. It's just not true.

Also, I am friends with a number of heterosexual women and the poetry writing abilities (or lack thereof) of men hasn't come up.

Okay, to recap how we got here:

Claim: Women are attracted to men who have money.
Challenge: I know musicians who have girlfriends.
Counter claim: Women are attracted to musicians.
Claim: Anyone can learn to play a musical instrument.
Challenge: Women are attracted to good musicians and not all men can be good enough.

This brings us back to the question of what women find attractive, which thanks to this thread, is not a secret.

I claim anyone can learn play a musical instrument well enough to attract a woman, just as anyone can accumulate enough money to do the same.

Well, I think the bolded claim is unevidenced and also wrong.

I've seen it done, and if you haven't, you haven't been paying attention.

No, you haven't seen it done, because to have seen it done you'd either need to have seen evidence that everyone can do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'anyone' can do it.

I know people--accomplished in non-musical fields, who cannot perceive the difference between notes a semitone apart. Some people have no natural aptitude and to tell them they can just get good enough is not right. Many people cannot sing--they can't even control the most natural instrument it is possible to control - they can't make the right notes and they can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes.

You still haven't given me a 1 to 10 rating of how good a musician has to be in order to get a date. After that, we can discuss a minimum amount of expendable income.

I don't know.

 

[Bronzeage]

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

What women want in a man is not a secret and those things have already been discussed on this thread.

I simply challenged your notion that "anyone" can learn to play a musical instrument. It's just not true.

Also, I am friends with a number of heterosexual women and the poetry writing abilities (or lack thereof) of men hasn't come up.

Okay, to recap how we got here:

Claim: Women are attracted to men who have money.
Challenge: I know musicians who have girlfriends.
Counter claim: Women are attracted to musicians.
Claim: Anyone can learn to play a musical instrument.
Challenge: Women are attracted to good musicians and not all men can be good enough.

This brings us back to the question of what women find attractive, which thanks to this thread, is not a secret.

I claim anyone can learn play a musical instrument well enough to attract a woman, just as anyone can accumulate enough money to do the same.

Well, I think the bolded claim is unevidenced and also wrong.

I've seen it done, and if you haven't, you haven't been paying attention.

No, you haven't seen it done, because to have seen it done you'd either need to have seen evidence that everyone can do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'anyone' can do it.

I know people--accomplished in non-musical fields, who cannot perceive the difference between notes a semitone apart. Some people have no natural aptitude and to tell them they can just get good enough is not right. Many people cannot sing--they can't even control the most natural instrument it is possible to control - they can't make the right notes and they can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes.

You still haven't given me a 1 to 10 rating of how good a musician has to be in order to get a date. After that, we can discuss a minimum amount of expendable income.

I don't know.

You don't know how skilled a musician must be in order to get a date, but then insist you know the skill too low to get a date and and set it at zero.

You readily offer a definition of zero skills for singing, which is kind of harsh, but a person who "can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes" would have no inhibitions about singing and thus sing with all atonal glory, simply because he desires to sing, and catch the attention of a woman who has the same musical disability. By your own standards, you cannot refute this claim because you need to have seen evidence that everyone cannot do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'no one' can do it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I've seen it done, and if you haven't, you haven't been paying attention.

You still haven't given me a 1 to 10 rating of how good a musician has to be in order to get a date. After that, we can discuss a minimum amount of expendable income.

A musician basically has to be good enough to be worthy of a public performance before it's even relevant to getting a date.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I know people--accomplished in non-musical fields, who cannot perceive the difference between notes a semitone apart. Some people have no natural aptitude and to tell them they can just get good enough is not right. Many people cannot sing--they can't even control the most natural instrument it is possible to control - they can't make the right notes and they can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes.

I've never tried it in any sort of calibrated sense but I know that when two notes are close I can hear they are different without being able to tell which is higher. It's never been important to know exactly what I don't know with tone, I know better than to try anything that requires it and that's that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You readily offer a definition of zero skills for singing, which is kind of harsh, but a person who "can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes" would have no inhibitions about singing and thus sing with all atonal glory, simply because he desires to sing, and catch the attention of a woman who has the same musical disability. By your own standards, you cannot refute this claim because you need to have seen evidence that everyone cannot do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'no one' can do it.

You're coming at this from a standpoint that all roadblocks are in the mind.

With vision we have figured out that a lot of people have impaired color vision. No amount of effort can overcome this. Why do you not understand that there are almost certainly many other impairments that haven't been decoded sufficiently to prove they are physical in nature rather than simply having no color sense.

 

[SigmatheZeta]

...some of them look kind of cute, actually.

So...I will never understand people that are looking for casual sex at all. It is minimal, uncertain gratification and a lot of drama and judgment and shaming. While I think that religious zealots were wrong to try to outlaw fornication, I have a philosophy, "just because outlawing it is a bad idea doesn't mean that doing it is a good idea, either." As a society, we really need to come to grips with this understanding.

 

[RVonse]

On the Other Message Board, one incel told us that he deserved a taxpayer-funded sex robot! There was no smiley-face, but might he have been a right-wing incel being sarcastic about the welfare state?

I don't think this should be regarded lightly at all. As Loren pointed out earlier in this thread, technology has probably exerbated the dating experience for many men. With that assumption perhaps the situation can be corrected with technology as well.

In any case if the choice is sex starved incels becoming outcast and violent due to evolutionary urges versus using tax funds for sex robots..... I'd be in favor of spending the tax money on the robots. For the general benefit of society.

 

[Bronzeage]

You readily offer a definition of zero skills for singing, which is kind of harsh, but a person who "can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes" would have no inhibitions about singing and thus sing with all atonal glory, simply because he desires to sing, and catch the attention of a woman who has the same musical disability. By your own standards, you cannot refute this claim because you need to have seen evidence that everyone cannot do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'no one' can do it.

You're coming at this from a standpoint that all roadblocks are in the mind.

With vision we have figured out that a lot of people have impaired color vision. No amount of effort can overcome this. Why do you not understand that there are almost certainly many other impairments that haven't been decoded sufficiently to prove they are physical in nature rather than simply having no color sense.

I'm surprised you haven't offered up a one armed bass player or a man in a long term coma.

This thread is about men who believe themselves to be not attractive to women. This includes various beliefs that oneself cannot overcome perceived inabilities and deficiencies.

Belief and perception, by definition are a phenomena of the mind.

For myself, I've never learned to play a musical instrument or have ever amassed any great amount of money. In spite of that, for the past fifty one years, I've been in a series of sexual relationships with women, with very short intervals between one and the next, with some overlap. Of course, I believe this can be attributed to being a poet.

 

[Metaphor]

I think you don't actually understand anything about why a woman finds any particular man attractive, so it was silly of me to pursue the discussion any further.

However. I will share one tip with you. Women are really attracted to poets and it doesn't matter if they have any poetic talent at all.

What women want in a man is not a secret and those things have already been discussed on this thread.

I simply challenged your notion that "anyone" can learn to play a musical instrument. It's just not true.

Also, I am friends with a number of heterosexual women and the poetry writing abilities (or lack thereof) of men hasn't come up.

Okay, to recap how we got here:

Claim: Women are attracted to men who have money.
Challenge: I know musicians who have girlfriends.
Counter claim: Women are attracted to musicians.
Claim: Anyone can learn to play a musical instrument.
Challenge: Women are attracted to good musicians and not all men can be good enough.

This brings us back to the question of what women find attractive, which thanks to this thread, is not a secret.

I claim anyone can learn play a musical instrument well enough to attract a woman, just as anyone can accumulate enough money to do the same.

Well, I think the bolded claim is unevidenced and also wrong.

I've seen it done, and if you haven't, you haven't been paying attention.

No, you haven't seen it done, because to have seen it done you'd either need to have seen evidence that everyone can do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'anyone' can do it.

I know people--accomplished in non-musical fields, who cannot perceive the difference between notes a semitone apart. Some people have no natural aptitude and to tell them they can just get good enough is not right. Many people cannot sing--they can't even control the most natural instrument it is possible to control - they can't make the right notes and they can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes.

You still haven't given me a 1 to 10 rating of how good a musician has to be in order to get a date. After that, we can discuss a minimum amount of expendable income.

I don't know.

You don't know how skilled a musician must be in order to get a date, but then insist you know the skill too low to get a date and and set it at zero.

I don't know if there is some threshold of musical ability that will get you a date (we haven't even defined what we mean by a date), but I do know that whatever threshold you decide, some people will not have the aptitude to reach that threshold.

You readily offer a definition of zero skills for singing, which is kind of harsh, but a person who "can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes" would have no inhibitions about singing and thus sing with all atonal glory, simply because he desires to sing, and catch the attention of a woman who has the same musical disability. By your own standards, you cannot refute this claim because you need to have seen evidence that everyone cannot do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'no one' can do it.

I did not call that level 'zero'. I explained one particular, permanent barrier to getting good at singing.

There is a musical-aptitude analog to IQ that somebody can take, and that test has a bell-curve distribution like many distributions of aptitude in the population.

 

[Bronzeage]

You readily offer a definition of zero skills for singing, which is kind of harsh, but a person who "can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes" would have no inhibitions about singing and thus sing with all atonal glory, simply because he desires to sing, and catch the attention of a woman who has the same musical disability. By your own standards, you cannot refute this claim because you need to have seen evidence that everyone cannot do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'no one' can do it.

I did not call that level 'zero'. I explained one particular, permanent barrier to getting good at singing.

There is a musical-aptitude analog to IQ that somebody can take, and that test has a bell-curve distribution like many distributions of aptitude in the population.

I suppose it is fortunate for musically inhibited incels (at least those that want a woman) that your opinion of their singing will not be a factor, as few women will be seeking your counsel when deciding to accept a date, however it is defined.

 

[Metaphor]

You readily offer a definition of zero skills for singing, which is kind of harsh, but a person who "can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes" would have no inhibitions about singing and thus sing with all atonal glory, simply because he desires to sing, and catch the attention of a woman who has the same musical disability. By your own standards, you cannot refute this claim because you need to have seen evidence that everyone cannot do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'no one' can do it.

I did not call that level 'zero'. I explained one particular, permanent barrier to getting good at singing.

There is a musical-aptitude analog to IQ that somebody can take, and that test has a bell-curve distribution like many distributions of aptitude in the population.

I suppose it is fortunate for musically inhibited incels (at least those that want a woman) that your opinion of their singing will not be a factor, as few women will be seeking your counsel when deciding to accept a date, however it is defined.

I have no problem with the advice 'improve yourself'.

I have a problem with the advice 'anybody, including you, has the ability to get good enough at some musical endeavour to get a date with a woman.'

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This thread is about men who believe themselves to be not attractive to women. This includes various beliefs that oneself cannot overcome perceived inabilities and deficiencies.

Belief and perception, by definition are a phenomena of the mind.

For myself, I've never learned to play a musical instrument or have ever amassed any great amount of money. In spite of that, for the past fifty one years, I've been in a series of sexual relationships with women, with very short intervals between one and the next, with some overlap. Of course, I believe this can be attributed to being a poet.

You are taking it as a given that you are right.

 

[southernhybrid]

...some of them look kind of cute, actually.

So...I will never understand people that are looking for casual sex at all. It is minimal, uncertain gratification and a lot of drama and judgment and shaming. While I think that religious zealots were wrong to try to outlaw fornication, I have a philosophy, "just because outlawing it is a bad idea doesn't mean that doing it is a good idea, either." As a society, we really need to come to grips with this understanding.

I feel the same way about casual sex. It sucks and not in a good way. But, I have female friends who loved casual sex and I also know a woman who brags that she has fucked just about every soul artist from the late Otis Redding to James Brown. This of course was a long time ago, when those men were still alive. B, as I'll call her had a thing for famous soul singers. Maybe, like some men do, she was just bragging, but apparently she enjoyed either the fantasy or the real thing. It's true. If a man is a talented musician, especially a famous one, he can get usually laid whenever he wants. When it comes to sex, men are just easy, generally speaking of course.

If we are talking about most women, women who have gained a little maturity from their life experiences, most woman are simply looking for a man with some self esteem, and a good sense of humor, who is also generous and kind. If a woman is looking for a relationship and not just a one night stand, she wants a man who is loyal and preferably compatible with her in other ways. I found one of those over 40 years ago. Good find! I think after being a woman for a long time, and having tried out various types of sex, from casual to loving, I probably know more about what women want than men do . You do realize that we women talk about these things, no?

Women are usually far more interested in personality, then in looks or money, the exception being some beautiful women who are at the tope of the food chain but usually have shallow personalities, generally referred to as trophy wife material. To each her own. Point being that women come in a variety of styles and interests. As a cis heterosexual female, I can't speak for women in all categories, but those like me, enjoy stability with a little passion thrown into the mix. Casual sex? No thanks. Satisfying myself is much better. At least I care about the person who I'm making love to.

But, this thread is both dreadful and hilarious. First of all, is Bronzeage just fucking with Metaphor? Or is he totally serious? Why is a gay man arguing about what attracts a straight woman to a straight man? And, why is he even interested in this conversation? I'm ashamed to say that every time I promise myself I will not look at this thread again, it draws me in. I just can't tell if y'all are serious or just talking bullshit? So, what's wrong with me? But you all taught me a lot about how easy a woman is if a man can play a musical instrument. Oh wait! Was the term musical instrument code for a particular female body part? It does help if you understand our body parts. So many unanswered questions with so few clues.

 

[Metaphor]

But, this thread is both dreadful and hilarious. First of all, is Bronzeage just fucking with Metaphor? Or is he totally serious? Why is a gay man arguing about what attracts a straight woman to a straight man? And, why is he even interested in this conversation?

Am I forbidden from gathering data on a social phenomena that I don't participate in? Back during my psychology degree, would you have said I had no business investigating heterosexual dating preferences?

Why shouldn't I be interested? I have two psychology degrees - that is surely a credential that human behaviour interests me?? Also, I'm a sexual human being. Also, most of my friends are straight.

But you all taught me a lot about how easy a woman is if a man can play a musical instrument.

No. I'm disputing that
* any man has the ability to get good enough with a musical instrument to do that
* also, whilst some men could get good enough to attract some women, it might not be the women they want to attract.

So I think it's bad advice and I called it out.

Oh wait! Was the term musical instrument code for a particular female body part? It does help if you understand our body parts. So many unanswered questions with so few clues.

I admit I did not consider anything other than bronzeage recommending literal musicianship. If he is recommending men become better sex partners by improving their sex techniques, he is putting the cart before the horse.

 

[bilby]

This of course was a long time ago, when those men were still alive

I was worried for a moment there...

 

[rousseau]

You readily offer a definition of zero skills for singing, which is kind of harsh, but a person who "can't even hear that they aren't making the right notes" would have no inhibitions about singing and thus sing with all atonal glory, simply because he desires to sing, and catch the attention of a woman who has the same musical disability. By your own standards, you cannot refute this claim because you need to have seen evidence that everyone cannot do it, or you've seen such a wide cross-section of backgrounds and aptitudes from wunderkind to dunce to confidently say 'no one' can do it.

I did not call that level 'zero'. I explained one particular, permanent barrier to getting good at singing.

There is a musical-aptitude analog to IQ that somebody can take, and that test has a bell-curve distribution like many distributions of aptitude in the population.

I suppose it is fortunate for musically inhibited incels (at least those that want a woman) that your opinion of their singing will not be a factor, as few women will be seeking your counsel when deciding to accept a date, however it is defined.

This is one of those times where our forum needs private feedback again. This exchange is the best thing I've read in a while.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This of course was a long time ago, when those men were still alive.

Skeletons have bones. Being alive isn't a requirement!

 

[SigmatheZeta]

...some of them look kind of cute, actually.

So...I will never understand people that are looking for casual sex at all. It is minimal, uncertain gratification and a lot of drama and judgment and shaming. While I think that religious zealots were wrong to try to outlaw fornication, I have a philosophy, "just because outlawing it is a bad idea doesn't mean that doing it is a good idea, either." As a society, we really need to come to grips with this understanding.

I feel the same way about casual sex. It sucks and not in a good way. But, I have female friends who loved casual sex and I also know a woman who brags that she has fucked just about every soul artist from the late Otis Redding to James Brown. This of course was a long time ago, when those men were still alive. B, as I'll call her had a thing for famous soul singers. Maybe, like some men do, she was just bragging, but apparently she enjoyed either the fantasy or the real thing. It's true. If a man is a talented musician, especially a famous one, he can get usually laid whenever he wants. When it comes to sex, men are just easy, generally speaking of course.

If we are talking about most women, women who have gained a little maturity from their life experiences, most woman are simply looking for a man with some self esteem, and a good sense of humor, who is also generous and kind. If a woman is looking for a relationship and not just a one night stand, she wants a man who is loyal and preferably compatible with her in other ways. I found one of those over 40 years ago. Good find! I think after being a woman for a long time, and having tried out various types of sex, from casual to loving, I probably know more about what women want than men do . You do realize that we women talk about these things, no?

Women are usually far more interested in personality, then in looks or money, the exception being some beautiful women who are at the tope of the food chain but usually have shallow personalities, generally referred to as trophy wife material. To each her own. Point being that women come in a variety of styles and interests. As a cis heterosexual female, I can't speak for women in all categories, but those like me, enjoy stability with a little passion thrown into the mix. Casual sex? No thanks. Satisfying myself is much better. At least I care about the person who I'm making love to.

But, this thread is both dreadful and hilarious. First of all, is Bronzeage just fucking with Metaphor? Or is he totally serious? Why is a gay man arguing about what attracts a straight woman to a straight man? And, why is he even interested in this conversation? I'm ashamed to say that every time I promise myself I will not look at this thread again, it draws me in. I just can't tell if y'all are serious or just talking bullshit? So, what's wrong with me? But you all taught me a lot about how easy a woman is if a man can play a musical instrument. Oh wait! Was the term musical instrument code for a particular female body part? It does help if you understand our body parts. So many unanswered questions with so few clues.

I just need comfortable chemistry.

 

[repoman]

We NEED to talk about Jack Murphy and how his downfall can be turned into a good thing.

 

[repoman]

This is hilarious and could actually help incels get some perspective and self effacing humor if used in the proper way.

 

[Rhea]

Wow, that was entertaining. Those two boys did a good job with him. Tugging, one by one.