Shy Hard 2: Shy Harder

[HickoryDickory]

Thanks for the replies! I'm currently in page 80, but I'm shocked that none of them has mentioned Leonard Lake and Charles Ng. Lake's manifesto seems like fschmidt's cuppa tea.

 

[Marvin]

Thanks to this thread, I have now discovered the existence of Love-shies.

Quick questions before I continue reading the thread, but do a majority of love-shies want an actual interpersonal relationship or are they just hung up on sex? Is sex on a pedestal as the ultimate goal, and after sex is there an endgame? I tried reading Holden's thread, but it was a complete wash and I had no idea what he was trying to convey. (And I assume he's the exception and not the rule)

I think they treat the relationship itself as an unimportant detail that they can gloss over. They wouldn't be satisfied with a hooker, or even a one night stand: they need a real girlfriend. But once they have that girlfriend, they think liking the girl as an individual person is something that'll mostly come along of its own accord.

 

[mooooo]

Thanks to this thread, I have now discovered the existence of Love-shies.

Quick questions before I continue reading the thread, but do a majority of love-shies want an actual interpersonal relationship or are they just hung up on sex? Is sex on a pedestal as the ultimate goal, and after sex is there an endgame? I tried reading Holden's thread, but it was a complete wash and I had no idea what he was trying to convey. (And I assume he's the exception and not the rule)

The trend tends to be that the incels are more sex focused and the love-shies more relationship focused. LS is an engrained fear that your sexuality will be seen as shameful, so typically they're sensitive to the emotional state of others, with a slightly unhealthy desire for approval. They also tend to romanticise things.

Those who are incel but not love-shy, depending on how you define incel, usually can hit on girls, but get rejected. They seem to aim more for getting laid. But both camps use the "incel" term as a kind of substitute for DSR in general (dating, sex, relationships), a kind of broad category, since a lack of sex also generally implies being alone, and being alone usually implies lack of sex.

 

[DuskEngine]

But generally "socialising" is a general term, and thus "social anxiety" is also a general term. It would be like saying you have a specific fear of walking because you're scared of walking down alleys...

A lot of types of social anxiety deal with specific situations in a social context, as I understand it. For example, a pretty common thing people get socially anxious about is eating in public- but that's considered social anxiety, not an eating disorder.

People with social anxiety may not be shy at all. They can be completely at ease with people most of the time, but particular situations, such as walking down an aisle in public or making a speech, can give them intense anxiety.

 

[mooooo]

A lot of types of social anxiety deal with specific situations in a social context, as I understand it. For example, a pretty common thing people get socially anxious about is eating in public- but that's considered social anxiety, not an eating disorder.

At least those examples are general social situations. I'm not sure if all displays of sexuality could be classified as such.

 

[CatParty]

incels

no such thing

 

[Positron]

Thanks to this thread, I have now discovered the existence of Love-shies.

Quick questions before I continue reading the thread, but do a majority of love-shies want an actual interpersonal relationship or are they just hung up on sex? Is sex on a pedestal as the ultimate goal, and after sex is there an endgame? I tried reading Holden's thread, but it was a complete wash and I had no idea what he was trying to convey. (And I assume he's the exception and not the rule)

I'd say it is hard to generalize. Some of them seem to be after female friendship rather than (or at least more than) sex -- I suspect you can put Chris in this camp -- while others see women as nothing more than semen-disposal units. However, the latter group is much more vocal, has a much more entitled attitude, and are in general much more insane, so they draw more attention.

What I notice however, is that, no matter their stance on sex and relationship is, they hardly talk about commitments and responsibilities. Even the more innocent "female companion needed" group seems to be fixated on the nebulous "sweet love" stage, so it is hard to be sure if they have an "endgame" in mind.

 

[SU 390]

There's a new member on the LS forums(I wonder if it's one of you guys....hmmmmm). Anyway here's something interesting to read.

Spoiler: From the A New Voice thread

APrettyLady wrote:
Sooo.... y'all act like assholes & wonder why people don't wanna hang out with you?
Large scale trends may be more relevant than one person's opinion, but one person is capable of changing another view of the world. It seems y'all have pretty effectively scared off non-incels who want to help but I still have put myself out here, up for y'alls abuse, despite this obvious fact.

Let's try this a different way shall we?

The people you are meeting on this forum have come to the conclusion that women simply aren't interested in them. We are a subset of men who are excluded from romantic interaction with women primarily due to tired obsolete traditions and bad legislation. This has led to a great deal of animosity and distrust of women; as many seem incapable of relating to the difficulties we face.

Rather than be scared off. Try to understand things from our point of view.

Many of us simply cannot grasp the concept of asserting ourselves toward a woman. Women are bombarded with attention from men everywhere. However, we don't particularly stand out as men who would interest these women. Those of us who gather the courage to try to interact with women are unanimously rejected or ignored; often in rude humiliating ways. Those of us who don't give up, are STILL unanimously rejected or ignored. If we are polite, sensitive or generous, we are not respected. If we are assertive, aggressive or direct, we are seen as brutes, creeps, or pervs and quickly rejected/dismissed. Bottom line; we have absolutely no way to affect our ability to succeed with women; as you all judge men by characteristics that are completely out of our control.

The dating scene is a joke and a bad one at that. We spend our early adult years being tricked into spending time, effort and money on dates with women who have no intention of ever seeing us again. We have to deal with all the hypocrisy, unrealistic expectations and sense of entitlement that most women exhibit as well as competition from other men. If (when) we fail to meet these expectations and outshine the competition, we are promptly shown the door. Meanwhile, we have to listen to women complaining that "there are no good men left" when we are just as good as any other man, yet we are rejected/ignored.

The men here are beyond any concept of emotional suffering you or any other woman can understand, as society is set up to shield women from all forms of disadvantage at our expense. As such, because you are a women, you will be regarded as an uninformed agitator until you demonstrate otherwise. Attributes that will help you here include intelligence, curiosity, sincerity, self-awareness, an open mind and the ability to explain your views through facts and observations rather than beliefs or opinions. Finally, it helps if you understand just how ridiculous our society's mating 'rules' really are.

Welcome to the forum.

Spoiler: Page 2 from the same thread

APrettyLady wrote:
Cerebral_barrier, seriously, you stated that so well I can't not respond.
I agree that many women have this "I'm too good for you" attitude & instead of letting men off easy, they'd rather humiliate them for their own schadenfreude. But I hope it's recognized there are plenty of good women out there, just like I'm sure some of y'all are good men who just haven't yet been found.
I'd really appreciate it if you'd expand on the idea that women are sheltered from disadvantage at your expense. I'm trying to grasp that concept but perhaps intelligence is not my strong point, although I work on the others
Also, perhaps it's bc I am female (& love breaking rules), I've never considered these "dating rules" & am not sure what they entail.

With regard to sheltering at our expense...

Women have come a long way in the past 50-60 years. You now have the right to vote, just as you have the same educational and employment opportunities as men. Programs like affirmative action enure that women are given preferred status in schools and for employment candidacy. In theory, this was supposed to elevate women to the same social and financial statuses as men so obviously there was plenty of support for this and new laws were passed. Unfortunately, there was a price to pay for women's new found success.

With so many women now being included in the workforce. The workforce has effectively doubled while the number of available jobs stayed the same. Affirmative action ensures that a woman is given stronger consideration (for quotas) for a job even if there is a qualified male candidate available. Since nearly all women are hypergamous by nature, they refuse to mate with any man whose wealth, earning potential, social status and attractiveness are below her own. Since loveshy men are typically low in social status we cannot win women over with our personalities. We also tend to live less ambitiously which translates to less wealth/earning potential. Women are psychologically conditioned to "marry up" and we (love-shy men) represent the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum.

There are exceptions to this but even if we are handsome, charismatic and financially successful, our archaic mating rules require men to assume all the risks associated with dealing with women. Love-shy males learn early on that rejection is psychologically painful. We often give up after being burnt one too many times and let love just pass us by. It sounds weird but it's a lot simpler than you might think. You see, when a man approaches a woman for romance, it's because he wants to mate. He doesn't care about flowers, scrap-booking or watching TV with you. He doesn't care about having kids or getting married and he probably thinks The Notebook is a crappy movie. No matter what front he puts up to earn your trust and keep you interested, his ultimate goal is to get you in bed; either now or later and hopefully repeatedly. We know this and YOU know this. But rather than do what feels natural, women give into society's sexually repressive culture and play mind games with men (even when they like the man). Love-shy men are less equipped to handle women's games and tests so we end up looking awkward, clueless and thus we remain alone. The kicker: Ironically, women seem to be even worse at handling rejection than men since they never have to approach men. Society is set up so that women bear very little risk and almost no responsibility with regard to mating.

Other examples of advantages modern society extends to women instead of or at the expense of men are as follows:
- Men are expected to pay for dates despite the fact that women now possess equal or superior financial capabilities to their male counterparts
- Standards for physical capability in the military are significantly lower for women in the military than for men. I am a U.S. veteran so I can testify to this personally.
- Women have the right to abort, adopt or put up for adoption a child without approval from the father. Men do not have this option.
- Women have more than a dozen forms of birth control. The only male options are condoms, abstinence and vasectomy.
- Women cannot be charged in paternity fraud and child support for illegitimate children is rarely overturned. For an added bonus, google "equitable paternity"
- Women are nearly immune to allegations of domestic abuse, sexual harassment, and sexual assault; the exception being child molestation.
- The family court system is heavily biased in favor of women with regard to divorce and child custody/support cases. One of my closest friends lives was ruined by the courts.
- Women have increased protection from physical harm by the law and bystanders alike. One of our forum members risked his life to assist a woman being attacked by a mugger.

As you can see, being a woman has its advantages. To be blunt, some men are getting sick of this system. We feel ignored, abandoned and betrayed and there is no perceived 'light at the end of the tunnel' for most of us. There is a lot more going on below the surface of this issue but hopefully you get the basic idea.
_________________
When you are disadvantaged, prosper... When you are threatened, survive... When in doubt, WIN...

 

[kookerpie]

There's a new member on the LS forums(I wonder if it's one of you guys....hmmmmm). Anyway here's something interesting to read.

Did you write these?

 

[SU 390]

@kookerpie

No. I wasn't the thread creator. Plus, copy and paste works wonders.

 

[kookerpie]

Are you a loveshy? Look at your previous comment.

It's a combination of wanting companionship with the opposite sex without it being a huge ordeal, not being flaked on, and not doing an 180 personality shift on them.

 

[melty]

There's a new member on the LS forums(I wonder if it's one of you guys....hmmmmm). Anyway here's something interesting to read.

So they start out trolling and end up agreeing with them? What is the endgame here? Or am I reading this wrong and the second reply wasn't the thread op?
I'm a little surprised threads like that get replies and aren't deleted on site, I just assumed these forums get a lot of "chads" and "pretty ladies" trolling.

 

[HickoryDickory]

The trend tends to be that the incels are more sex focused and the love-shies more relationship focused.

Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying that. People seemed to be using the terms interchangeably and it's difficult to keep it straight.

Y'know, speaking from experience, these guys/girls would do a lot better in life if they actually got off the internet and sought help for their problems instead of projecting it on to others. I have high anxiety, depression and a couple other issues, but what helped me greatly was taking an 8 week group therapy on anxiety and coping. (I also took ones regarding relaxation and social interactions, plus more -- Don't think they're overnight miracles tho. I've been in therapy for 16 years and counting)

Starting small and expanding is what it's all about. A part of the therapy was also holding other peoples hands or arm/shoulder to get comfortable touching other people in positive ways. There was also lessons on practicing correct eye contact and a breakdown of mannerisms that are negative or show fear, as well as positive ones. -- Not also to mention having to at least approach at least one person per day and compliment them in some way. It's probably easier for me to do since I'm female, so I'd go up to people and compliment them on their purse, hat, jacket, etc. It made me feel confident, especially when a lady would smile and get chatty about where they got their purse and how much it cost, etc.

Due to all my hard work breaking away from being a hermit, I've been employed for the past 6 years and made nice friends and acquaintances at work and taking up art classes twice a week for more interaction. Sex was never the end goal for me as I'm asexual, but the feeling with going out with the girls once in a while is all I really wanted.

 

[Saney]

Are you a loveshy? Look at your previous comment.

It's a combination of wanting companionship with the opposite sex without it being a huge ordeal, not being flaked on, and not doing an 180 personality shift on them.

He is, yes. We actually have several Loveshy members, including one of their former admins.

So they start out trolling and end up agreeing with them? What is the endgame here? Or am I reading this wrong and the second reply wasn't the thread op?
I'm a little surprised threads like that get replies and aren't deleted on site, I just assumed these forums get a lot of "chads" and "pretty ladies" trolling.

You'd think that, but believe me, it's much harder to get into these days. It takes days to get your membership accepted, and they only seem to take on a small number of people. Because they're paranoid.

 

[mooooo]

Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying that. People seemed to be using the terms interchangeably and it's difficult to keep it straight.

Y'know, speaking from experience, these guys/girls would do a lot better in life if they actually got off the internet and sought help for their problems instead of projecting it on to others. I have high anxiety, depression and a couple other issues, but what helped me greatly was taking an 8 week group therapy on anxiety and coping. (I also took ones regarding relaxation and social interactions, plus more -- Don't think they're overnight miracles tho. I've been in therapy for 16 years and counting)

Starting small and expanding is what it's all about. A part of the therapy was also holding other peoples hands or arm/shoulder to get comfortable touching other people in positive ways. There was also lessons on practicing correct eye contact and a breakdown of mannerisms that are negative or show fear, as well as positive ones. -- Not also to mention having to at least approach at least one person per day and compliment them in some way. It's probably easier for me to do since I'm female, so I'd go up to people and compliment them on their purse, hat, jacket, etc. It made me feel confident, especially when a lady would smile and get chatty about where they got their purse and how much it cost, etc.

Due to all my hard work breaking away from being a hermit, I've been employed for the past 6 years and made nice friends and acquaintances at work and taking up art classes twice a week for more interaction. Sex was never the end goal for me as I'm asexual, but the feeling with going out with the girls once in a while is all I really wanted.

The "pure" incels as we call them don't have any anxiety per se, and the love-shies would require a form of therapy that is not available. For a love-shy to improve, they'd need exposure to situations that convince them that others won't find their sexuality or romantic intentions disgusting. But simulating it through hired help wouldn't work, because they'd know it wasn't real. I guess volunteers might work, since they're choosing to do it, and not deriving obvious material benefit for it.

Personally, I am LS enough that I've never asked out a girl in person before, and if a girl showed signs of interest I couldn't act on them, because the signs were subtle enough that I wasn't completely sure of them. But if a girl had just asked me out, I could have said "yes" ok. So, for a lot of the milder cases of LS, they don't even "need" treated as such, if girls would just be slightly more accommodating. Most girls assume all guys are sexually aggressive and will actively pursue a subtle hint of interest. If he doesn't, he musn't be attracted.

It's that stereotype and gender role that girls are so comfortable with maintaining that makes things harder for us than it needs to be. I've had girls cry to their friends about how they must be ugly because they gave me a friendly greeting and I didn't latch onto them like a constrictor and relentlessly break down their defenses until sexual submission was achieved. I mean, maybe that's an exaggeration/dramatisation but you get the idea.

 

[Durable Mike Malloy]

This whole thing you call "loveshy" is really just general shyness. If you are so socially awkward or withdrawn you never approach anyone, obviously you'll be single for a very long time unless you somehow luck out. In order to get a partner, one needs to be at least somewhat social.

I'm not sure this is always so; it's possible for social anxiety to be a life-limiting problem despite narrow situational scope. Specific social phobia is a thing, after all.

Spoiler: storytime

At university, I became splendid friends with a classmate who was intensely charming and quite socially adept, except around single women whom he found attractive, at which point he was a massive offputting weirdo.

My friend ended up getting over this problem by challenging himself more in all areas of life, basically figuring out ways to trigger his social anxiety and fear of failure outside of a narrowly romantic context. Before that happened, though, we had a tremendous falling-out over the fact he had started treating me like a fake girlfriend and not a real friend.

I was not single and not generally attracted to men, so faffing around with me let him feel like he was addressing his problems when he was actually avoiding any real self-improvement. It was bad for him and made me feel really gross.

@mooooo , I believe that volunteer surrogacy idea is absolutely terrible. It seems like a daydreamy fantastical notion that would be a miserable failure in practice; just another displacement activity to avoid the scary work of actual self-improvement. Moreover, I think it is pretty fucking insulting to tell people they require a form of therapy that is not available - doubly so if it discourages them from pursuing self-improvement via avenues that actually exist.

 

[mooooo]

I'm not sure this is always so; it's possible for social anxiety to be a life-limiting problem despite narrow situational scope. Specific social phobia is a thing, after all.

Spoiler: storytime

At university, I became splendid friends with a classmate who was intensely charming and quite socially adept, except around single women whom he found attractive, at which point he was a massive offputting weirdo.

My friend ended up getting over this problem by challenging himself more in all areas of life, basically figuring out ways to trigger his social anxiety and fear of failure outside of a narrowly romantic context. Before that happened, though, we had a tremendous falling-out over the fact he had started treating me like a fake girlfriend and not a real friend.

I was not single and not generally attracted to men, so faffing around with me let him feel like he was addressing his problems when he was actually avoiding any real self-improvement. It was bad for him and made me feel really gross.

@mooooo , I believe that volunteer surrogacy idea is absolutely terrible. It seems like a daydreamy fantastical notion that would be a miserable failure in practice; just another displacement activity to avoid the scary work of actual self-improvement. Moreover, I think it is pretty fucking insulting to tell people they require a form of therapy that is not available - doubly so if it discourages them from pursuing self-improvement via avenues that actually exist.

You haven't given a reason why it wouldn't work. Why is it avoiding it, when it's addressing it in the most direct way possible? Ever since I've had a few online successes I've improved a fair bit, because I was able to interact sexually with girls IRL who were attracted to me, and from having my advances accepted I came to not view my sexuality as shameful. I'm not sure if I could ask a girl out yet that I don't know, but I've initiated the first kiss a few times, which is progress. The first girl initiated the first kiss. And, in my current relationship, I can casually express sexuality in a playful way without difficulty now, like I can walk past and slap her ass and know she'll enjoy it, usually do the same in return. So now sexuality feels like a natural part of relating to her, and not something to hide.

 

[Durable Mike Malloy]

Ever since I've had a few online successes I've improved a fair bit, because I was able to interact sexually with girls IRL who were attracted to me, and from having my advances accepted I came to not view my sexuality as shameful. I'm not sure if I could ask a girl out yet that I don't know, but I've initiated the first kiss a few times, which is progress. The first girl initiated the first kiss. And, in my current relationship, I can casually express sexuality in a playful way without difficulty now, like I can walk past and slap her ass and know she'll enjoy it, usually do the same in return. So now sexuality feels like a natural part of relating to her, and not something to hide.

This sounds like normal relationship behavior.

[T]he love-shies would require a form of therapy that is not available. For a love-shy to improve, they'd need exposure to situations that convince them that others won't find their sexuality or romantic intentions disgusting. But simulating it through hired help wouldn't work, because they'd know it wasn't real. I guess volunteers might work, since they're choosing to do it, and not deriving obvious material benefit for it.

This sounds like a fantasy world where "dating" can be set on a weird sandbox mode, in which participants would ultimately become less healthy and excessively dependent on institutional care. Also how would this "volunteer" notion play out in practice?

Help me out here, buddy. I don't get you.

 

[HickoryDickory]

The "pure" incels as we call them don't have any anxiety per se, and the love-shies would require a form of therapy that is not available. For a love-shy to improve, they'd need exposure to situations that convince them that others won't find their sexuality or romantic intentions disgusting. But simulating it through hired help wouldn't work, because they'd know it wasn't real. I guess volunteers might work, since they're choosing to do it, and not deriving obvious material benefit for it.

Not true. There is something obviously wrong with "incels" that make them "incels". From the videos posted of them, it is PAINFULLY obvious why the opposite sex is creeped out by them. The "incel" gives off an air of desperation and awkwardness that is NOT attractive and anyone (Man or women) can see that a mile away. These people need therapy in self-awareness and realize that it is THEM with the problem, not the world. Also, no one in their right mind thinks that others looking for relationships is "disgusting". It's natural to want human contact.

As for "volunteers", it would still not be real. It would be pity.

Question:

If these guys are so smart and know everything about women, why they are single? (Do not include physical appearance as a factor)

So, for a lot of the milder cases of LS, they don't even "need" treated as such, if girls would just be slightly more accommodating. Most girls assume all guys are sexually aggressive and will actively pursue a subtle hint of interest. If he doesn't, he musn't be attracted.

No one should have to be more "accommodating" to someone else's ego... Especially if the person with said ego has very warped world views not based in reality.

It's that stereotype and gender role that girls are so comfortable with maintaining that makes things harder for us than it needs to be. I've had girls cry to their friends about how they must be ugly because they gave me a friendly greeting and I didn't latch onto them like a constrictor and relentlessly break down their defenses until sexual submission was achieved. I mean, maybe that's an exaggeration/dramatisation but you get the idea.

1) Not all girls are fine with gender roles, otherwise there wouldn't be feminism.
2) A girls choice to be whatever she wants to be (Astronaut or housewife) are not making things harder for you. YOU are what's making it harder for YOU by ignoring the obvious and lacking self-reflection and analysis.
3) Yeah, I do believe you are exaggerating. A lot.

 

[mooooo]

This sounds like normal relationship behavior.


This sounds like a fantasy world where "dating" can be set on a weird sandbox mode, in which participants would ultimately become less healthy and excessively dependent on institutional care. Also how would this "volunteer" notion play out in practice?

Help me out here, buddy. I don't get you.

I was listing what would theoretically work, not what would necessarily be practical or a good idea to try and instantiate for real. I mean, the volunteers would eventually have to become like sexual surrogates, or participate in a quasi-relationship with them. I say it more for an understanding of what they need, than what should be given.

It comes back to what they need is a patient girl who is willing to do most of the initiating at first, but most girls expect guys to take the lead, hence the issue.