The rise of Incels

[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.