Why does it seem so many young men can't accept themselves and accept rejection these days?

[L50LasPak]

As it turns out, those who have already commented have been able to address a lot of what I would have. One thing I haven't seen, though, is the matter of investment.

The way young men are told to pursue intimacy is effeminate and unbecoming of men, which makes sense when you consider that it's the sum of what women tell them to do and what they glean from movie narratives that don't well-establish that they're more concerned with the actual variable part about the wacky adventures than they are with the granted ending of "he gets the girl", or-- in particular-- Disney movie narratives that present over and over again idealized, linear relationships where the man performs some grand gesture(s) to convince the woman to "love" him and they get to live "happily ever after" without even the discussion of their continued relationship, possible marriage, whatever kids they end up having, etc.

The idea that circulates among less assertive/aggressive boys is that they should start out as friends with the girl that they like, and then-- effectively-- attempt to seduce her through the development of that relationship. In the first place, this is a time sink with no guarantee of success, but the greater issue lies with the "inflection point" of such a relationship (if there's any at all, since perhaps mutual attraction does form but the lack of distinction in the relationship means that they find themselves in an awkward relationship phase where they're simultaneously friends and lovers but will have their relationship dissolve as though it were a friendship even as it hurts as if they were lovers).

There's a chance that admitting infatuation (let's be frank, too many young people these days have no sense of love/how to be lovable) can yield favorable results, but it doesn't always end up that way, and the implication of that is that the guy spent all this time and energy (months or even years worth, in some cases) devising a seduction strategy that went out the window in a couple minutes. It's a tough pill to swallow, and it's also why the advice of becoming the friend of someone you like (instead of outright telling them that you're infatuated with them in the first place) is a terrible strategy for men that... also only really benefits women, because-- if only during that friendship-- they have access to special privileges at the hand of this man trying to woo her without any need on her part to do anything (if you think I'm reeing about women here, just remember that this is the most primitive form of simping).

This is my main problem with this thread. Everyone has all of these horrendously long essays about how women and men do this or that or are entitled to think like this or trained to do that when there's literally nobody out there who approaches relationships in this kind of dimwitted instinctive way. This bullshit really affects very few people in the scheme of things.

I'm telling you guys the majority of that dating pool you see staying out of relationships is apathetic at best. There's no modern source of information that can even give a straight answer on what the benefits of getting into a relationship even are. Its just a bunch of bloviating about true love and or touting the benefits of sex. Meanwhile the detriments of getting into a relationship are widely known. Dangerous or psychotic exes, being cheated on, or worst of all having kids with somebody you don't love, which always ends poorly. People are quite literally afraid of commitment because the stakes are needlessly high. I'm not the only one who feels that way either.

The entire premise of this thread is flawed. The reason people can't form proper relationships anymore is because they've lost faith in the idea that such a thing exists. For every success story there are hundreds of failures. Even if they didn't/couldn't end in divorce I can't count the number of horror stories I've heard about getting stuck with a spouse that's a nutcase or shitheel. You know maybe humans just aren't made for long term relationships, because we seem to be spectacularly bad at maintaining them.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

I'm telling you guys the majority of that dating pool you see staying out of relationships is apathetic at best. There's no modern source of information that can even give a straight answer on what the benefits of getting into a relationship even are. Its just a bunch of bloviating about true love and or touting the benefits of sex. Meanwhile the detriments of getting into a relationship are widely known. Dangerous or psychotic exes, being cheated on, or worst of all having kids with somebody you don't love, which always ends poorly. People are quite literally afraid of commitment because the stakes are needlessly high. I'm not the only one who feels that way either.

The thread prompt isn't "why does it seem like people aren't getting into relationships nowadays", it's

Why does it seem so many young men can't accept themselves and accept rejection these days?​

Make no mistake, the premise of this thread is flawed-- immensely so. Still, even if the comprehension of what's discussed in the prompt is bad, and the presumed scope is inaccurate, the fact that there hasn't been much in the way of challenging the premise means that there's some experience that can be related to what the thread prompt highlights.

 

[RMQualtrough]

This has birthed all these ''black pill'' ''red pill'' ''whatever pill'' subcultures. You guys know what I'm talking about with these huge subcultures of people who complain about being romantically rejected and about their looks. It used to be a notoriously female thing to concentrate on physical flaws but I've never seen so many men getting into this themselves.

View attachment 2199040

What has caused this? years back average looking or unattractive men didn't really care about their looks and they didn't have this type of defeatist mentality about it either when it came to opposite sex rejection.

Years back men dated unattractive partners. Nowadays the media pushes onto you that you need a partner who fits a certain box else you've failed in life.

This is on both men or women. If your partner does not look like X or Y it is considered detrimental to your social standing.

Men are expected to be more attractive in modern day. But even women. If you see old timey dating infomercials, even the men are interested more in personality (preferring someone who is a fun date to a bitchy hot girl who's stuck up).

Dating was also very social circle oriented. People met through friends of friends or family. In these situations looks do not matter as much. Nowadays people meet through Tinder (100% looks) or nightclubs (heavily based on looks). I have one friend married through Tinder, and another with a baby and long term partner through it.

Fortunately the real thing to remember is that a person cannot be better than their best self. Period. You can get surgery and such but the effect is generally moderate and only major in deformed people...

If your best self is not good enough for what you think you need then that is how it is. If you don't like anyone in your league then live alone with a cat.

Nobody is incel, they just refuse to date the people on their level. So you have ugly men and ugly women angry and alone always wanting the best because they prefer having nothing to having each other. They'd rather eternally struggle for a model tier partner than date each other and admit defeat, to admit they don't fit the images on TV and are average.

 

[Mr. ShadowCreek]

A lot of meeting today is done online. With all the dating sites out there people like to take a whip at them. I think dating sites worst fault is what their primary goal is; which is to find a soul mate. Finding your true love isn't easy. You think think someone is your true love because they look pretty and have similar interest. But they might not be interested in you. In the old days people used to accept your differences when you dated. This might include music, foods, hobbies, and maybe even politics. These days not so much. Everyone has to look for their mirror self. If you have something they don't like they will probably skip you and vice versa. Most guys try to look for someone who looks like Emma Watson and is into gaming. Most women try to look for someone who likes like Brad Pitt and make over $50,000 or more a year. If you as so much have small breast, slightly crooked teeth (guilty), a few extra pounds, a big forehead, or whatever else a lot of people on those sites won't give you a second glance. You might have similar interest but that one off feature is what sets you off. Because of Covid real dating in the past year has been difficult and online became the norm But even then you might get rejected because of something.

I've tried some dating sites in the past year and I've had no luck. I do get some likes or messages but they are often miles away or very fat (guess I'm a hypercrite). Most of the messages or likes I've sent went ignored. You now what I did? I moved on. It was clearly not meant to be. It sucks to be rejected so many times but doing nothing but moping about it and blaming them won't get me anyone.

Personally I'm not sure if it's I'm just not attractive or if it's the way I approach women. I think rejection usually has to deal with one of those.

 

[Haim Arlosoroff]

This has birthed all these ''black pill'' ''red pill'' ''whatever pill'' subcultures. You guys know what I'm talking about with these huge subcultures of people who complain about being romantically rejected and about their looks. It used to be a notoriously female thing to concentrate on physical flaws but I've never seen so many men getting into this themselves.

View attachment 2199040

What has caused this? years back average looking or unattractive men didn't really care about their looks and they didn't have this type of defeatist mentality about it either when it came to opposite sex rejection.

Population density is not just a national level statistic, through TV and internet as well as local population booms in city centers, it can be the primary statistic of individual health. What does this mean? Masculinity and Femininity must compete not just on relative merits but on social expectations of average virility and fertility. This has caused women to Socio-sexually form a union and strike. However subpar masculinity at first competed, then segregated, then reduced itself to violence in order to strengthen their mating chances, and then finally you got the self-rejects. The Pretty Ones emerged. These are the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer, Curious, Asexual, Pansexual, Gender-non-conforming, Gender-Fluid, Non-binary, and Androgynous (or LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA and you can decide if that is a parody or a serious acronym) and the Hetrosexual Sleep, Moisturize, Eat, Game, Masturbate, Anguish cycle.

These hypersexuals whose personality is sexual politics, much as the Weed smoker and fetishist before them, walks around our society and talks a lot like ourselves but inwardly they are NPCs. They hyper-conform and try to out-do their social competitors always trying to be 'the man in the relationship' but women quickly find them out. They're weak-willed and push-overs when they aren't extremely bitchy and angry. They try too hard, they force the relationship by lying, and they lie about their positions and feelings until they'll end the relationship over a cataclysmic fight if the woman doesn't realise who she's with.

The Turbo-Incel will actually cease dating altogether and either Elliot Roger, Pickup artist, or Manosphere. Each of these are a cope for stagnating in life by not finding a mate as evolution wired us to do. These are the Pretty Ones, and a sign of the social apocalypse because they are the loud failures that stand-in statistically for the larger group of failed lives.

 

[Shiversblood]

One time when I was in high school there was a girl who i didn’t know and I walked up to her and said hi, and she Immediately says, “I’m not going to date you.” And then I just started screaming saying, “I DONT KNOW YOU! I DONT KNOW YOU! I DONT KNOW YOU!” And then I walked away. I never talked to her again.

 

[Zero Day Defense]

One time when I was in high school there was a girl who i didn’t know and I walked up to her and said hi, and she Immediately says, “I’m not going to date you.” And then I just started screaming saying, “I DONT KNOW YOU! I DONT KNOW YOU! I DONT KNOW YOU!” And then I walked away. I never talked to her again.

You know, that happened to me in high school, too, except I was so dumbfounded I didn't say anything as she walked away.

 

[PaleTay]

In Canada there is a disproportionate murder rate for indigenous women that I know of for certain. It is a combination of racism in Canada towards First Nations people and economic conditions that make these women vulnerable as well as intergenerational trauma brought on by our residential school system which continued up into the 1990’s and forcibly broke up the families and communities of these people. The worst part also is that with our oil and gas economy it does put a lot of man camps nearby these communities and this is where some of that violence occurs.

I find that really interesting, I had not heard of this from the MRA’s but I have heard indigenous people say the MMIW should also be expanded to include boys and men which makes sense boys and men have also been brutalized. I was told too that it’s not just white men or whatever doing this there is also a problem within indigenous communities where abusers have been protected by their own institutions and chiefs. Generally speaking there are problems with corruption and a cycle of inter generational trauma where some of those who have grown up being abused and traumatized as children in the residential school system by Catholic priests and nuns have turned into abusers themselves. Sadly it’s something that happens sometimes with abuse and trauma.

Actually there isn't, the murder rate of indigenous men is roughly 2.5 times that of women, even if you compare the difference in violent crime victimization between men and women it's still a larger increase relative to the population (7 times more versus 6 times),

Population density is not just a national level statistic, through TV and internet as well as local population booms in city centers, it can be the primary statistic of individual health. What does this mean? Masculinity and Femininity must compete not just on relative merits but on social expectations of average virility and fertility. This has caused women to Socio-sexually form a union and strike. However subpar masculinity at first competed, then segregated, then reduced itself to violence in order to strengthen their mating chances, and then finally you got the self-rejects. The Pretty Ones emerged. These are the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer, Curious, Asexual, Pansexual, Gender-non-conforming, Gender-Fluid, Non-binary, and Androgynous (or LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA and you can decide if that is a parody or a serious acronym) and the Hetrosexual Sleep, Moisturize, Eat, Game, Masturbate, Anguish cycle.

These hypersexuals whose personality is sexual politics, much as the Weed smoker and fetishist before them, walks around our society and talks a lot like ourselves but inwardly they are NPCs. They hyper-conform and try to out-do their social competitors always trying to be 'the man in the relationship' but women quickly find them out. They're weak-willed and push-overs when they aren't extremely bitchy and angry. They try too hard, they force the relationship by lying, and they lie about their positions and feelings until they'll end the relationship over a cataclysmic fight if the woman doesn't realise who she's with.

The Turbo-Incel will actually cease dating altogether and either Elliot Roger, Pickup artist, or Manosphere. Each of these are a cope for stagnating in life by not finding a mate as evolution wired us to do. These are the Pretty Ones, and a sign of the social apocalypse because they are the loud failures that stand-in statistically for the larger group of failed lives.

I've always viewed that as a response, as I've seen many hypersexuals in university because they have to hyperconform to have a normal life. Even if you agree 80% with your average millennial woman she'll turn into a screeching harpy about the 20%.

 

[Haim Arlosoroff]

I've always viewed that as a response, as I've seen many hypersexuals in university because they have to hyperconform to have a normal life. Even if you agree 80% with your average millennial woman she'll turn into a screeching harpy about the 20%.

For me, back then, it was all psychopathic status chasing and emotional highs because they want to ignore what they themselves know to be true about them. However, I avoided those once I learned about their power games. Unstable women have to be avoided, they must be cataloged locally and guys have to be able to know their behavior before they go with the hot/crazy girl over the cute/oddball girl. However women have always pushed men around and its about men losing the ability to, in absolute calm, explain their emotional state. Never show a woman your emotions, always explain calmly how you see things and how you feel about them. Tell, never show.

Don't let her get preachy about women's politics, ask her what that has to do with her and you. Ask her if any women feel the need to lie to her in order to avoid a fight, and use her harpy behavior as the example of why she probably hurts women. Be detailed but not an inch unfair. Ask questions, always ask your points as a question which you actually want to know the answer to. Take nothing personally when she is just trying to hurt you. Don't ask rhetorical questions to a screaming broad, shes not a lady and she's not going to let you wax philosophical. Don't take an insult without asking how long she's continued the relationship thinking that about you.

Women hate men getting more emotionally expressive than them, but women calm down when you coldly explain that you would rather miss her for a month then be disrespected by her. If you sigh when they get shrill, and say what it was that made you really like them but then say that when they act like that you are just frustrated and only wish that they were emotionally mature enough for a relationship. Don't get angry and freely talk down to them if they're out of control, there is never a point in continuing a relationship with a woman who cannot keep any of her men and has either never been told why or just doesn't accept all her men telling her the same thing. If you are not a desperate loser, if you have value, then argue with her that the trade of your value for hers in the relationship makes no sense if this is how she's going to act. You wanted a relationship but you don't need relationships which don't help you get anywhere in life because she is just a leech. If no man does it then women think its normal.

The problem is men are desperate and some women will just float around campus like a Nigerian email scammer because being a loud whore, who's better than all the sane ladies, is utterly without consequence today once they get to their next guy. Men have always fixated on dating the one and never give in that the relationship is doomed because they're walking on eggshells constantly. They think they have to date, and wind up floating in the circles of dramatic women trying to get laid. Some women leech off that hard. Men used to warn each other about "that one" and her neediness to be on top 24/7. Some women prey on proud men, and there should be consequences.

There are good women, mine was a bookworm that I met at a party by pure happenstance. I had a fantasy about meeting a homesteader lady, turns out she wanted to be one too and escape the city for a modest property with a cow. Didn't ever get a cow, but the fantasy bonded the two of us together and we live rural outside the suburbs and the city. We talked a lot about relationships and their rules right at the start too, and something about her just felt different. It felt easy, and that I could be myself. She was emotionally vulnerable with me in private and I felt the need to protect that side of her.

 

[Vince McMahon]

Population density is not just a national level statistic, through TV and internet as well as local population booms in city centers, it can be the primary statistic of individual health. What does this mean? Masculinity and Femininity must compete not just on relative merits but on social expectations of average virility and fertility. This has caused women to Socio-sexually form a union and strike. However subpar masculinity at first competed, then segregated, then reduced itself to violence in order to strengthen their mating chances, and then finally you got the self-rejects. The Pretty Ones emerged. These are the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer, Curious, Asexual, Pansexual, Gender-non-conforming, Gender-Fluid, Non-binary, and Androgynous (or LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA and you can decide if that is a parody or a serious acronym) and the Hetrosexual Sleep, Moisturize, Eat, Game, Masturbate, Anguish cycle.

These hypersexuals whose personality is sexual politics, much as the Weed smoker and fetishist before them, walks around our society and talks a lot like ourselves but inwardly they are NPCs. They hyper-conform and try to out-do their social competitors always trying to be 'the man in the relationship' but women quickly find them out. They're weak-willed and push-overs when they aren't extremely bitchy and angry. They try too hard, they force the relationship by lying, and they lie about their positions and feelings until they'll end the relationship over a cataclysmic fight if the woman doesn't realise who she's with.

The Turbo-Incel will actually cease dating altogether and either Elliot Roger, Pickup artist, or Manosphere. Each of these are a cope for stagnating in life by not finding a mate as evolution wired us to do. These are the Pretty Ones, and a sign of the social apocalypse because they are the loud failures that stand-in statistically for the larger group of failed lives.

STOP USING CALHOUN'S "STUDY"! FOR FUCK'S SAKE, HE BASICALLY TORTURED RATS AND THEY WERE HELD IN UNSANITARY CONDITIONS. I AM PURPOSEFULLY WRITING THIS IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE YOU DOOMER FAGGOTS ARE OFTEN USING IT TO JUSTIFY HOW EVERYTHING SUCKS.
JOHN B CALHOUN IS ETHNOLOGY'S JOHN MONEY.

GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR FUCKING ASS.

 

[Haim Arlosoroff]

STOP USING CALHOUN'S "STUDY"! FOR FUCK'S SAKE, HE BASICALLY TORTURED RATS AND THEY WERE HELD IN UNSANITARY CONDITIONS. I AM PURPOSEFULLY WRITING THIS IN ALL CAPS BECAUSE YOU DOOMER FAGGOTS ARE OFTEN USING IT TO JUSTIFY HOW EVERYTHING SUCKS.
JOHN B CALHOUN IS ETHNOLOGY'S JOHN MONEY.

GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR FUCKING ASS.

Do you believe that in the finite space of cities, that there isn't growing to be such unsanitary and hostile conditions? Are you arguing the rats didn't make their shitty conditions?

"Our success in being human has so far derived from our honoring deviance more than tradition. Template changing always has gained a slight, though often tenuous, lead over template obeying. Now we must search diligently for those creative deviants from which, alone, will come the conceptualization of an evolutionary designing process. This can assure us an open-ended future toward whose realization we can participate." -John B. Calhoun

"For too long in this society, we have celebrated unrestrained individualism over common community." -Joe Biden

You can either see the cracks beginning to form socially where you and I are trading barbs over the other's arguments which themselves feel tired and over-used, or you do not. I'll only say that if everything is as fine as you believe, you might be calmer and happier. All things will be well even though I relentlessly doomfag, will they not?